Dìdi - Review: Spending Quality Time with Little Brother

 

In the long tradition of the cinematic language, there are few things as treasured and longstanding as the coming-of-age film. They’ve existed for decades and are able to touch viewers almost regardless of background and childhood, while also being able to maintain a unique vision and personal experience. In recent memory, there have bene plenty of fantastic examples of the genre, from the like of “Lady Bird,” “Eighth Grade,” and “The Edge of Seventeen,” and we now have another great addition to the modern classics of the genre: “Dìdi.” 

Set in 2008, the film follows Chris Wang, played by Izaac Wang (“Good Boys,” “Raya and the Last Dragon”), a 13-year-old boy dealing with teenage crushes, an older sister Vivian, played by Shirley Chen (“15 Cameras”), leaving for college, and a freshman high school year on the horizon. In between butting heads with his mother Chungsing, played by Joan Chen (“The Last Emperor,” “”), he finds himself making internet videos, enduring summer tutoring, and filming videos for a group of older skateboarders. 

As the feature directorial debut for writer/director Sean Wang (“Nǎi Nai & Wài Pó”), the film radiates a kind of genuine energy that feels almost impossible to create in the current age, especially with the specific focal point of the film. Creating a tale of a childhood on the cusp of the constant documentation that’s come from the internet and social media is incredibly tricky, but Wang crafts a warm and calm approach to the material. It works so well thanks to the universality that he drills into. Yes, there might be new things and technology for kids to obsess over, but the broad emotions stay the same even as the years change. 

Izaac is utterly fantastic in that kind of perfectly normal way. It’s the kind of performance that seems almost too realistic, leaving you wondering where the actual acting comes into play. That’s simply how good the performance is, and he’s an absolute delight. Chris is a ball of teenage angst and childishness in a way that never smooths over his inappropriate behavior but does highlight his own growth and the moments when he shows his sweeter side and insecurities. Shirley is also fantastic, so much so that she almost feels underutilized by the film as a whole. She and Izaac absolutely nail the sibling dynamic of constant irritation with deep-rooted love at the center of their relationship. It’s a painfully realistic portrait of a sibling bond that’s made all the more bittersweet in how underutilized it is by the end. 

Arguably the star of the film, or at the very least the scene stealer, is Joan Chen. Chris’s mother is instantly endearing and lovable, and it's not hard to be brought to tears at numerous points thanks to her story and performance. Joan is an absolute revelation and it’s difficult to imagine the film being remotely as good as it is without her in it. As Chungsing and Chris’s stories begin to really collide in the film’s third act, Joan and Izaac’s performances build to one of the most honest and heartbreaking portrayals of parental love and hurt and understanding since “Lady Bird.” 

Within all of the emotional familial and teenaged drama, there’s a remarkably strong technical production backing up the film. Cinematographer Sam A. Davis (“Trap Jazz”) works with Wang to have their vision of the mid-2000s lit in a warm glow, with film grain and a dreamlike haze surrounding everything. It’s a very retrospective kind of presentation, giving the effect of remembering one’s own childhood with rose colored glasses. The way Wang and his team showcase the internet and its effect on Chris and his friends, as well as Chris’s own imagination in seeing the world, give the film its own unique vision and buckets of charm. 

“Dìdi” means “younger brother” in Chinese, and the film itself could easily be described as resembling all the archetypes of a younger brother. It's rambunctious and loud, while still harboring a secret sweetness in its core. Izaac Wang and Joan Chen absolute carry the entire film among a talented supporting cast, anchoring the deep familial emotions and love in a sense of fun and mid-2000s nostalgia. It’s easily one of the best films of the year, but in a way that feels effortless and warm, and stakes a claim as one of the best coming-of-age films in recent memory. 5/5

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Twisters - Review: Prepare To Get Swept Up

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sing Sing - Review: I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings

 

In 1996, Katherine Vockins founded the Rehabilitation Through the Arts program at the Sing Sing Correctional Facility in New York, creating a program that would allow those incarcerated at the facility to engage in workshops focusing on art, dance, music, poetry, writing, and theatre in the hopes that these programs could help improve their lives. The program has even resulted in original published theatrical works, one of which is at the center of “Sing Sing,” a film detailing the production of a stage play for a group of individuals within that program. 

The film follows Divine G, played by Colman Domingo (“@Zola,” “Rustin”), a participant in the program who’s risen within to become a respected writer and actor within the facility alongside his best friend Mike Mike, played by Sean San José, and the program’s director Brent Buell, played by Paul Raci (“Sound of Metal,” “Perry Mason (2020)”). After production begins on a new show, he finds himself at odds with new member Divine Eye, played by Clarence "Divine Eye" Maclin, who seems apathetic to the program. The pair begin to butt heads and nurture their relationship with each other, all while both have parole hearings that will determine the fate of their sentences. 

In case you didn’t pick up on it in that description, yes, Divine Eye the character is played by Divine Eye the man, and most of the cast consists of formerly incarcerated members of the RTA program. Some play themselves and some play fictional characters, but they all bring a depth to this material that strengthens it at every turn. Whether it's a small detail of mannerisms or a definitively different perspective, it adds so much to the little details of the film that make it come alive. 

Domingo is absolutely phenomenal, which almost comes across as faint praise given how consistently excellent, he’s proven to be. He’s almost outdone by Maclin, who not only manages to hold his own against the veteran actor but also turns in an Oscar worthy performance of his own. The pair have fantastic chemistry together, and the entire film hinges on their slowly burgeoning friendship. It comes across so naturally that it almost makes the facade of the fictional film vanish as a result. San José provides ample amounts of comic relief and steals plenty of his scenes, but that comedy never betrays the underlying pain at the center of plenty of these men’s lives. 

Director/co-writer Greg Kwedar (“Transpecos,” “Jockey”) and co-writers Clint Bentley (“Jockey,” “Transpecos”), Maclin, and the real-life John "Divine G" Whitfield put forth remarkable effort in destigmatizing the treatment of these men within Sing Sing and their prison lives in general. This is not the sensationalized portrait of prison life seen in works like “The Wire,” but a deeply humanizing work instead. While the scenes outside of the rehearsal process do a great deal of work in this regard, the sequences on stage do a great deal in that humanization. It’s a double duty of both showcasing how a group like this would approach performing a theatrical exhibition, as well as using that theatrical exhibition to showcase their changes as people. 

Cinematographer Pat Scola (“Pig,” “Monsters and Men”) goes a long way in expanding the life within the compound by constantly flipping between the larger open areas of the rehearsal space and the outdoors yard with the indoor, confined cells and hallways. There’s an almost fish-eye perspective to the indoor moments, adding a layering of voyeurism to the events. It bolsters the idea that the film slowly moves from us observing these men in a place of enclosure to letting them free both figuratively through the arts and physically. 

It would be easy to slap “Sing Sing” with the cheap label of being a film about “the healing power of theatre” and move along, but that would betray the additional level the film is working on. By not only showcasing that healing, but by using the concept to broaden the viewers perceptions of these men, it results in a work that’s about far more than men in prison putting on a play. Gorgeously show, and lead by a pair of excellent, award worthy performances, “Sing Sing” truly sings. 5/5 

MaXXXine - Review: Fame Can Be Killer

After the absolute success of “X” and “Pearl,” two ultra-low-budget horror slashers with unique perspectives and riotous performances from Mia Goth (“Suspiria (2018),” “Infinity Pool”), writer/director Ti West (“In a Valley of Violence,” “The House of the Devil”) has taken a few years off to come back with his grander and more expensive trilogy capper. Jumping ahead by a few years and jumping locations from rural Texas to Hollywood, it’s a film that, like its main character, has its sights set on grander ambitions. The question is whether or not it achieves them. 

Set in 1985, the film follows the semi-titular adult film star Maxine Minx, played by Goth, as she attempts to break into mainstream film by auditioning for a horror film directed by Elizabeth Bender, played by Elizabeth Debicki (“The Great Gatsby (2013),” “Widows (2018)”). All the while, she navigates the underbelly of the Hollywood porn world accompanied by her best friend and video store employee Leon, played by Moses Sumney (“The Idol”), fellow porn star Tabby Martin, played by Halsey (“Sing 2”), and her entertainment lawyer/agent Teddy Knight, played by Giancarlo Esposito (“Breaking Bad,” “Do the Right Thing”). However, while she’s attempting this, a serial killer known as The Night Stalker lurks throughout the city, killing defenseless youths in the night. These killings result in Maxine being targeted by two hotshot LA detectives Williams and Torres, played by Michelle Monaghan (“Gone Baby Gone,” “The Path”) and Bobby Cannavale (“Win Win,” “Homecoming”) respectively, and private investigator John Labat, played by Kevin Bacon (“Footloose,” “Apollo 13”). 

“X” and “Pearl” were fairly light on story, coasting by on vibes and production design to B-horror film glee. “MaXXXine” on the other hand has its sights set on a bit larger scope and story, which is absolutely understandable. Most films that go from small budget success to larger budget finales have an increased scope, but the problem is that while the scope is expanded, the story hasn’t grown to match. You simply cannot coast by on vibes for the third film in your trilogy, especially the final film. Maxine doesn’t grow or change as a person, and the supporting cast around her is pretty one note as well. The actors playing those roles are clearly having a lot of fun, maybe too much, but their roles don’t result in anything meaningful by the end. Most disappointing of all though, the film plays its central mystery/twist as a grand and completely unexpected moment. Yet virtually anyone who’d been half paying attention is likely to have guessed that twist twenty minutes in. 

Goth is a great as she’s ever been, but she’s saddled with a story that squanders her talents, turning Maxine into a passive observer rather than the cutthroat badass we saw in “X.” It’s a bizarre neutering of a character that captured attentions effortlessly initially, and Goth can only do so much within those constraints. Debicki is fairly subdued, playing a stereotype of the “holier-than-thou" director that works well. Bacon is absolutely playing things up to eleven, bordering on parody with a thick Louisiana accent and cartoonish style. Esposito is great in his limited screentime, blurring the line between his larger-than-life comedic stylings and the intensity from his darker roles. Sumney and Halsey meanwhile feel completely forgettable, both in terms of runtime and character impact. Monaghan and Cannavale’s completely seriously played detective duo meanwhile occupy a bizarre space where they’re both exceptionally well-acted and yet so insanely silly and cliche riddled they feel like living jokes. 

There’s nothing inherently wrong with any of what’s mentioned above: a protagonist who doesn’t change much, overly comedic supporting characters, minor cast members used for killing fodder. These are all classic slasher movie cliches. The problem is that film just lacks any sense of memorability. The kills feel flat, the pacing is fine but uneventful, and the atmosphere just feels like bog standard 80s set dressing. Most surprising of all, given the overt violence and sexual content that was a part of the personality of “X” and “Pearl”, “MaXXXine” feels absolutely tame by extension. It’s not that it isn’t there, it’s still rated R, but it feels here out of obligation. Which is especially bizarre for a film that literally has three Xs in the name. 

In a vacuum, there’s a chance that “MaXXXine” would feel far better than it does but given the long shadow of “X” and “Pearl” hanging over it, it’s hard to imagine anyone feeling satisfied with this conclusion. A bizarrely tame, predictable, and weirdly unmemorable film that traps some playful performances and a leading lady who can clearly do and be better than she is here. “MaXXXine” is far from the worst film of the year, but unlike its lead character, it fails to make any kind of impact. 2.5/5 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A Quiet Place: Day One - Review: Sound Off for a Prequel

 

Less than a decade ago, the first “Quiet Place” film leapt into cinemas as a bold and fresh horror/thriller film that worked shockingly well and took the world by storm. Now, we have the series’ third film and first prequel, “A Quiet Place: Day One,” which shifts focus and locations completely to take us back to the day this invasion first began. 

Set in the hustle and bustle of New York City, the film follows Samira, played by Lupita Nyong’o (“Black Panther,” “Us”), a jaded cancer patient who travels into the city one day with her therapy group and group leader Reuben, played by Alex Wolff (“Hereditary,” “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle”), for pizza and a puppet show. That day just so happens to be the day of the alien invasion that kicks off the apocalyptic events that these films follow. Now, Samira finds herself wandering a freshly abandoned New York City in a desperate bid for survival, accompanied by only her cat and apathetic businessman Eric, played by Joseph Quinn (“Stranger Things,” “Dickensian”). 

Unsurprising to anyone who’s ever watched a film starring either of the two leads, Nyong’o and Quinn absolutely carry the entire film together. Even as things progress and the action and events get more generic, their central performances elevate the material and do a great deal to keep the viewer locked into this world. Nyong’o in particular continues to showcase her talents and ability to bring a sense of life to any role, regardless of genre. Her eyes in particular remain one of her best assets and are utilized to chilling effect here. Quinn is also excellent, and he rides the very thin line between making Eric hapless and accident prone without turning him into a sad puppy. 

Given the fact that this is the third film within this world, many of the unknown aspects of the horror have gone by the wayside. Whereas in the first film, the creatures were teased and weren’t even fully shown until the very end, this one has them leaping and running across cityscapes with reckless abandon. It’s an interesting choice from writer/director Michael Sarnoski (“Pig (2021)”) and co-writer John Krasinski (“Promised Land,” “IF (2024)”) as it almost completely removes any aspect of horror from the film. There are plenty of effective chase sequences throughout the city, and it's shot with a very detailed eye by cinematographer Pat Scola (“Pig (2021),” “Sing Sing”), but it means the film is more thriller than horror sa a result.  

This creates an issue as these moments, while certainly not boring, feel particularly average compared to the rest of the action/thriller genre. And despite being excessively detailed, the creatures just aren’t particularly scary in that context, coming across more as generic four-legged monstrous things than anything more memorable. Also lacking is the film’s central premise. Despite literally being called “Day One”, not much happens on the first day of the invasion, and the film is hardly concerned with it outside of the first twenty minutes. Yes, it's still the early days of this invasion, but once the film actually gets going, there’s little to distinguish it from the previous two films, which took place years into the conflict. 

Outside of the action-packed sequences, there’s a film about two lost and broken people finding solace in each other and a broken world. It cannot be overstated how fantastic these scenes between Nyong’o and Quinn are, and even if you actively hate the film’s action sequences, they’re worth getting through for these character driven moments. The quality spikes so much as to entirely give the film its reason for existing. A gorgeous musical score from Alexis Grapsas (“Pig 2021),” “Big Shot”) keeps these moments grounded and real, leading to a particularly cathartic last five minutes that make everything prior worth it. 

“A Quiet Place: Day One” is certainly the weakest of the series thus far. There’s a lack of compelling scares and the action sequences can’t really hold a candle to other great examples of the genre. It also fails to compellingly utilize its title concept, but the character work from Nyong’o and Quinn truly transform the work and make the film worth watching. It’s a bumpy road, but one that’s well worth seeing to the end with these two leads. 3.5/5

Kinds of Kindness - Review: Three is Not a Magic Number

 

A little over six months after the release of his previous film and Oscar darling “Poor Things,” writer/director Yorgos Lanthimos (“The Favourite,” “The Lobster”) and his now frequent collaborator Emma Stone (“La La Land,” “Poor Things”) have reunited in an anthology film that retains the style of Lanthimos’s previous works, while stretching out the length to almost three hours and plopping it directly into a distinctly simplistic reality compared to his previous works. This is “Kinds of Kindness.” 

The film tells three different tales: the first, “The Death of R.M.F.,” follows Robert, played by Jesse Plemmons (“Game Night,” “The Power of the Dog”), is being manipulated by his boss and lover Raymond, played by Willem Dafoe (“Spider-Man 2,” “Poor Things”), into living his life as he sees fit. When he decides to break those orders, his wife Sarah, played by Hong Chau (“The Whale,” “Downsizing”), leaves him, and he finds himself distraught and his life in shambles. The second, “R.M.F. Is Flying,” follows Daniel, played by Plemmons, who finds himself distraught after his wife Liz, played by Stone, returns home after seemingly being lost at sea. As time passes though, he becomes increasingly convinced she is not his actual wife. The third, “"R.M.F. Eats a Sandwich,” follows Andrew and Emily, played by Plemmons and Stone respectively, a pair of cultists looking for a woman who can bring people back from the dead. After sleeping with someone outside of the cult, Emily is banished by the cult’s leaders Omi, played by Dafoe, and Aka, played by Chau, and begins a quest to find the woman so she may be allowed back into the cult. 

When judging an anthology film, it can be difficult to give a resounding critique on the work as a whole given the sometimes varying number of actors, directors, writers, etc. involved. Luckily, since Lanthimos is the only director and co-wrote the whole thing with Efthimis Filippou (“The Lobster,” “The Killing of a Sacred Deer”) and each story shares the same cast of actors, it becomes a bit easier. However, make no mistake, these three stories are of varying quality based purely on their own writing. The script as a whole keeps Lanthimos’s typically stinted and deliberate dialogue, but each tale has disparate tones. “Death” feels almost like a classic sex-comedy, but with a modernized sense of thinking, yet somehow manages to be the most blase tale of the whole film. “Flying” meanwhile teeters into uncomfortable and confusing territory, and not in the playful kind that Lanthimos normally works in. “Sandwich” is the only one that really genuinely works, and it's not hard to see an entire film made out of just that one tale. It’s the most fleshed out, most interesting, and has the most for the actors involved to play with. 

Stone is great, but severely limited by the fluctuating quality of the writing she’s working with. Plemmons fairs much better given that he’s the lead in all but one, so his blend of puppy eyes and quiet menace can work its magic. Dafoe seems as though he’s just going through the motions, doing the same “Dafoe thing” he’s been doing for the latter half of his career. Meanwhile, Chau feels flatly underutilized, as do Mamoudou Athie (“Jurassic World Dominion,” “Elemental”) and Margaret Qualley (“Drive Away Dolls,” “Maid”), popping up only occasionally and making little impact when they do, save for Qualley in “Sandwich.” 

Given Lanthimos and cinematographer Robbie Ryan’s (“Poor Things,” “The Favourite”) previous works together, it’s alarming how flat all of “Kindness” looks. While there is plenty of great usage of natural lighting and lit cityscapes, especially in “Death,” the film as a whole looks remarkably bland, even taking Lanthimos other works out of the equation. The musical score from Jerskin Fendrix (“Poor Things”) is painfully monotonous, droning on without really adding anything to the material, simply drilling in emotions forced by its musical cues. 

Worse than all of this not working, it all has a painfully forced feeling of self-importance about it that makes it an example of some of the worst aspects of quote-unquote indie films. Especially odd is that, for a director who’s past two works featured sex and sexuality in a very mature way, the usage here seems more for either titillation or to add another layer of “wackiness” to some of the storylines. Weirdly enough, once again the only time this doesn’t really apply is with the third story “Sandwich,” as it simply seems like a more fleshed out tale than the rest. 

“Kinds of Kindness” might be a film about three different kinds of “kindness” being doled out to the people within the tales, but the resulting film is anything but kind to the viewer. While some of the performances manage to elevate the material, and the third tale manages to be better than the entire rest of the film period, it's a blandly shot movie with a script a times dull and others uncomfortable, telling tales of woe that acts as a bizarre follow up to Lanthimos’s previous two films and a bizarre latest chapter in the career of a director with plenty of bizarre chapters. 2/5

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Bikeriders - Review: Just Along for the Ride

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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