Kandahar – Movie Review

Directed by: Ric Roman Waugh

Written by: Mitchell LaFortune

Starring: Gerard Butler, Navid Negahban, Ali Fazal, Bahador Foladi, Tom Rhys Harries, and Nina Toussaint-White

Runtime: 120 minutes

Our heroes need to catch a plane in ‘Kandahar’, but this pedestrian action flick never takes off

These days, if you look up the latest releases arriving at the local cineplex and see Gerard Butler’s name appearing in the credits, you can bet a dollar that the man is tied to an action movie. Granted, this critic hasn’t seen most of his films. Still, Gerard has developed a Liam Neeson-like reputation for consistently stepping – or running – into the genre.

Director Ric Roman Waugh – who worked with Mr. Butler on “Angel Has Fallen” (2019) and “Greenland” (2020) - helms “Kandahar”, a film that doesn’t change Gerard’s current filmography trajectory, but this Middle Eastern escape adventure might be the most pedestrian action flick that I’ve seen in quite a while, possibly since Mr. Neeson’s “Memory” (2022), a movie that should be forgotten.

Although Waugh’s film – written by first-time screenwriter Mitchell LaFortune – begins with an intriguing premise, it quickly falls into tired, monotonous discourse between government bureaucrats and military types that unfortunately fill the screen during the next 35 or 40 minutes. After that, the film finally steps into a cat-and-mouse picture, however, it doesn’t dash, scurry, or sprint. Instead, it trots, slogs, and saunters through routine chase scenes – involving some trucks, military vehicles, a helicopter, and a motorcycle through parched Iranian and Afghanistan deserts. Although, if you look carefully, a Vespa or an electric skateboard might make a subtle appearance too!

Who can say?

Anyway, the movie – filmed in Saudi Arabia – opens with Tom (Butler) and Oliver (Tom Rhys Harries). They are communication engineers for Siblixt Communications Ltd. and are fixing an underground internet line. It sounds like an everyday job in suburban Phoenix, Kansas City, or Toronto, but Tom and Oliver are working outside the city limits of Qom, Iran, and about a half-dozen armed Iranian soldiers are watching their every move, or so they think.

You see, Tom and Oliver are spies – contracted by the CIA – and their mission isn’t to bump up internet speed for Qom households but to destroy a hidden nuclear warhead facility.

This is a big-time mission, similar to the one in “Top Gun: Maverick” (2022), however, that’s the only parallel between the fabulous Tom Cruise-led sequel and “Kandahar”. Within about 10 minutes (of runtime), Waugh and LaFortune finish this treacherous assignment. Tom can thankfully fly home to the United Kingdom, just in time for his daughter Ida’s (Olivia-Mai Barrett) graduation.

How do we know this?

Because Tom speaks to his wife Corrine (Rebecca Calder), and she pleads, “Just please be safe, will you? And please be on the flight.”

Oh, Corrine also asks him to sign their divorce papers too, but regardless, Tom had better be on that plane!

Of course, he doesn’t get on the said flight from Dubai to London’s Gatwick Airport because his handler in the field offers him another job in the 11th hour, and for this movie to exist, Tom inexplicably takes it. Naturally, this second mission goes sour faster than you can say, “I figured that would happen.”

Now, Iranian agents flood the desert near the Iran and Afghanistan border, so Tom and his new partner/translator Muhammad (Navid Negahban) need to make a break for Kandahar, where a plane can ship them back to the U.K. and U.S., respectively. This modern-day Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid must dodge the Iranian military, the Taliban, ISIS, and Kahil (Ali Fazal), a Pakistani special forces agent from the ISI.

However, except for two stand-out moments - when Kahil and Tom eventually face off and one menacing caravan shot that briefly and gleefully reckons back to “Mad Max: Fury Road” (2015) – the overall lackluster pursuit throughout the rest of the picture doesn’t generate thrills or chills, as Waugh, the visual effects team, and the stunts department lean into ordinary standard affairs of gunplay and some occasional explosions.

Perhaps, devout Gerard Butler fans will feel more invested in Tom’s and Muhammad’s fates, but then again, our hero did make the braindead decision of leaving the Dubai International Airport for another go-round instead of just walking aboard his scheduled flight.

For crying out loud, Tom!

Well, this critic didn’t “cry” throughout this movie because Waugh and LaFortune do carve out substantial time in developing backstories for Kahil and an opposing military operation leader Farzad (Bahador Foladi). The filmmakers’ efforts deliver a message that governments create wartime conflicts, but the individual combatants – no matter which side they support – have universal commonalities and families or loved ones at home. It’s a bit refreshing that the filmmakers do not frame the other side(s) as faceless enemies, which helps lessen potential audience warfare with “Kandahar”.

There’s no need to go to war with this film. Indifference may win the day.

Jeff’s ranking

1.5/4 stars

---

The Little Mermaid - Film Review

Director: Rob Marshall

Writers: David Magee

Starring: Halle Bailey, Jonah Hauer-King, Melissa McCarthy, and Javier Bardem

Loaded to the Gills with Re-imagined Fins and Fun

Hans Christian Andersen, the writer of the literary fairy tale “The Little Mermaid” in 1837, once wrote “But a mermaid has no tears, and therefore she suffers so much more.” This quote opens the re-imagined tale of the 1989 animated version of the film on a scene of churning ocean waves. 

The audience is quickly taken into the realistic conversations between shipmates passing along stories of the ‘Sea King’ and ‘Coral Moon.’  Little did they know that just under their ship, King Triton (Javier Bardem) was summoning his daughters from various places in the sea. Giving viewers their first taste of underwater magic in this film.

Now, prepare to be astonished for the first glimpse of these beautifully CGI-scaled mermaids. Personally, I would have gladly spent the entire 2 hours and 15 minutes of the film underwater, just to glimpse more of the brightly colored merfolk. Luckily, with the classic song “Under the Sea,” audience members of the new film will be able to view the many glorious aspects of life under the sea with singing and dancing sea creatures, with Sebastian (Daveed Diggs) and Ariel (Halle Bailey). 

This leads us to the well-known and beloved character, Ariel, played by actress and composer Halle Bailey. Audiences held their breaths to hear each heartfelt note of the classic “The Little Mermaid” songs, sung by Halle with the same musical cords and integrity, but with different layers of emotion to provide nuance to the lyrics. Added songs that portray the feelings and experiences of Ariel captivate the audience both in and out of the water. 

Prince Eric, played by Jonah Hauer-King, was given plenty of depth not before seen in the underwater storyline. With a background of adoption and goals of exploration, viewers are able to depict the effort from Prince Eric as a person with sacrifices to make. Allowing his character to align more with Ariel, who -before meeting the prince- has experienced plenty of changes and lost part of her own world to be on land.

Similar to many of the classic characters receiving new songs and backgrounds, the plotline of this 2023 version fills many gaps in the storyline that were previously unnoticed. Audiences are provided with lore and life under the sea; the tales of the Coral Moon, King Triton’s sibling relationship with Ursula (Melissa McCarthy), Ariel’s power of the siren song, Prince Eric being adopted, etcetera. 

With all of the new information, Ariel’s mission to fall in love with the prince through a kiss is continued, but with a slight twist. The emphasis on a physical connection comes second to the notion of learning more about the other person. Ariel and Prince Eric are found connecting over maps and the idea of exploration long before they wind up on a dreamy boat ride.

One of the most interesting changes in romantic attraction is during a parallel of the animated 1989 version of the film. When King Triton discovers Ariel’s attachment to the world above the waves and destroys her special treasure trove. The human statue has only one part remaining; in the animated version a face, but in the live-action version, Ariel is left holding the hand of the statue. 

Viewers will discover the importance of the hand, and the actions, that allow Ariel and Prince Eric to remain close by the end of the film. 

Plot: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Cinematography: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Character Arc(s): ★★★★☆ 4/5

---

Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie – Movie Review

Directed by:  David Guggenheim

Written by:  Michael J. Fox

Starring:  Michael J. Fox and Tracy Pollan

Runtime:  87 minutes

 ‘Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie’ is a moving document

“Doc, are you telling me that you built a time machine out of a DeLorean?”

The year was 1985. 

The United States enjoyed prosperous economic times.  The country reelected Ronald Reagan in a landslide in 1984.  Yes, The Cold War still hovered like a dark cloud that could drop nuclear warheads rather than raindrops, but it waned during its last couple of years.  Meanwhile, teens from the free-love and free-wheeling 1960s grew up, became responsible parents, and moved to the suburbs.  Some of their children turned into card-carrying Republicans. 

As Talking Heads frontman David Byrne famously sings, “Well, how did I get here?”

No other television show depicted the aforementioned phenomenon better than the wildly popular NBC sitcom “Family Ties” (1982 - 1989).  Producers cast Meredith Baxter as its star, as the show was supposed to be designed around the Keaton parents, Steven (Michael Gross) and Elyse (Baxter).  

Surprise, surprise!  

Instead, millions of households tuned into this current slice of Americana each week because of Alex P. Keaton, played by Michael J. Fox.  

This 5-foot-4-inch Edmonton native excelled in high school drama class and local acting projects, and Michael convinced his father to drive him from Canada to Los Angeles to pursue his thespian dreams.  The rest is history, as Fox became – arguably - the United States’ biggest entertainment draw in 1985 with “Family Ties” and his turn in the hilarious and thrilling time-machine tryst, Robert Zemeckis’ instant classic “Back to the Future” (1985).

Thirty-eight years later, Michael looks back at the past and square at the present in “Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie”, a frank, celebratory, and sober recollection of the man’s life.  He and director David Guggenheim don’t pull any punches, as Fox’s Parkinson’s disease, an affliction that shocking began when he was just 29, has expectedly progressed, as he sits today at age 61. 

Fox sits directly in front of Guggenheim’s camera, and the first word of the movie’s title becomes a recurring callback throughout this engaging 87-minute documentary.  The movie begins at an unlikely locale in 1990.  Through a reenactment – a frequent and effective tool used in this film – Michael wakes up in a pink Florida hotel that resembles Wes Anderson’s Grand Budapest lodging.  

Soon after, the doc dials back to Michael’s humble, Middle North America upbringing and moves chronologically as Fox narrates the extreme highs and lows of his 61 years on Planet Earth, much of it under the bright lights of the big city.  

When MJF burst onto NBC’s stage in 1982, his boy-next-door charm and impeccable comedic sense was a charisma concoction that called to men, women, boys, and girls of all ages.  Alex P. Keaton was cool, and this critic looked up to him too.  He was a teenage Arthur Fonzarelli who could stand up to anyone with his words and know-how but donned a tie and sport coat instead of a t-shirt and leather jacket.  The world loved Alex P. Keaton, and we hung onto his every word.  

We hang onto Michael’s every word in this doc too, as he reveals his surprising turns in elementary and high school.  He was no Boy Scout, as rules and norms were causalities of his adolescent wars.  

As a young actor, he didn’t prove to be an immediate doctor of Hollywood either.  For years, he coped with a horror show of struggles that might persuade legions of wannabe actors and actresses – from Dubuque to Albuquerque to Tallahassee - to keep their day jobs rather than risk suffering a financial and emotional hellscape.  

Better times were ahead with “Family Ties”, “Teen Wolf” (1985), the “Back to the Future” series, “Doc Hollywood” (1991), “Stuart Little” (1999), and more, but Fox reminds us of the leaner career times that we might have forgotten.  

In fact, throughout this documentary, Guggenheim and editor Michael Harte drop in oodles of clips from Fox’s film and TV repertoire that fit perfectly into the actor’s real-life, behind-the-scenes narrative.  Most of these big and small-screen excerpts are not from Fox’s grandest hits either, which is a refreshing choice and will trigger wonder from MJF’s fans everywhere, who may have previously thought they’ve seen all his work.  

Fox reveals his alcohol problems (secrets born from his successes) and – in plain view - his constant fight with Parkinson’s.  Fans, admirers, and everyone else haven’t seen this work either.  

Michael is an open book here, showing no fear in casting the light of day on his everyday grind.  He boldly addresses his vulnerabilities and wishes to tell his story while he still can, making it abundantly clear that seeking pity is not his driving force.  His backbone – literally and figuratively - is also supported by his loving wife Tracy Pollan and his children.  Fox asserts, explains, and proclaims that Tracy is not just a good wife but an extraordinary one.  

This film – a pleasing nostalgia trip and a difficult divulge of reality - reminds us why Michael J. Fox always enjoys an invitation into our living rooms and movie theatres.  

Prepare for laughter, tears, and admiration because “Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie” is a moving document.

Jeff’s ranking

3.5/4 stars

---

Carmen - Film Review

Director: Benjamin Millepied

Writers: Loïc Barrere, Alexander Dinelaris, and Lisa Loomer

Starring: Melissa Barrera and Paul Mescal

Beautiful and bold, but questionable romance 

There is no denying the eye-catching scenes throughout ‘Carmen.’ Ranging from vast desert scenery to groups of people dancing, audiences will be pleased by the fast-paced nature of the film which leads us to the introduction of our two main characters. 

Carmen (Melissa Barrera) and Aidan (Paul Mescal) meet under distressing circumstances. 

After her mother’s passing, Carmen decides to migrate to the United States without the proper documentation. She travels with a group, including children, during the night. Everyone watching these scenes will feel the fear and tension of the situation. Carmen’s caring nature is highlighted when she sings for one of the children. Yet the endearing, and abrupt, song downplays the fear and exhaustion that accompanies the migration across the Mexican and United States border. 

Cut to Aidan, forced to be the ‘eyes’ of the desert and report back any suspicions to border control. Sent out with Mike, the trigger-happy partner, audiences will be shocked by Mike’s lack of humanity and compliance with the rules of his job. Instead of reporting back the discovery of many people crossing into the United States, Mike begins shooting and chasing the group. Killing many and capturing Carmen, Mike juxtaposes Aidan. So much so that Aidan decides to shoot Mike. Allowing Carmen to escape and steal Aidan and Mike’s truck, forcing Aidan to jump in the bed of the truck before he is left in the unforgiving desert with Mike’s body.

This is where the film really begins to pick up as Carmen and Aidan end up on the run together from U.S. authorities for two vastly different reasons. The plot continually moves forward as they run, keeping a central need present. Then, the smaller, more intimate details about Carmen’s grief for her mother and Aidan’s PTSD as a marine, provide insight to each of the characters. 

But the romance that blossoms between Carmen and Aidan feels more out of place as it grows. Viewers are caught off guard by the intimacy that is followed by Carmen’s grief for her mother. The priority for love in replace of other emotions seems to impede Carmen more than her counterpart. Especially since their runaway statuses have incomparable crimes, with Aidan possibly facing charges of murder, which places Carmen in more danger. The bounds of love that developed throughout a couple of days appear to be a result of circumstance instead of choice. Especially as Aidan is benefitting from their relationship through the safety and shelter of Carmen’s family friend, meanwhile Carmen must find emotional peace from grief through her mother’s friend Masilda (Rossy de Palma).

‘Carmen’ has an undeniable visual appeal for viewers that is paired with music and bold dancing. Where audiences may fall out of sync is within the context of love and the boundaries between two newly-met people.

Plot: ★★☆☆☆ 2/5

Cinematography: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Character Arc(s): ★★☆☆☆ 2/5

---

Polite Society - Film Review

Director and Writer: Nida Manzoor

Starring: Priya Kansara and Ritu Arya

The Khan sisters. Lena Khan (Ritu Arya); a dropout art student, and Ria Khan (Priya Kansara); a future stunt woman, portray the multiple angles of sisterhood. Both the love and support for each other and the laugh-out-loud battles when they step on each other’s toes. Actresses Ritu and Priya connect with viewers through a sheer emotional performance that rivals, in realism, the cinematic fight scenes. 

Every fight scene was part of a cinematic feat by director Nida Manzoor. Completely exaggerated, the slowed-down cutaways with bursts of expertise skills, that one can only imagine, kept viewers giggling throughout the film. The fights, specifically revolving around Ria the future stunt woman, can be interpreted as her inherent belief in her skills no matter how outrageous these fights may be. Yet, audiences know how dedicated Ria is to her future as a stunt woman because of the many emails she sends that depict her inner thoughts and frustrations on her journey to complete her ‘training.’

Besides the action-packed fight scenes, Manzoor takes on another, quite realistic, mode of cinematography that depicts the Khan family's struggles, and Lena’s impending marriage. After only knowing her fiance for one month, everyone in the family is excited for Lena, except for her sister, Ria. The storyline continues moving forward with quite a few twists and turns that feature the action and comedy genres well. 

Starting with enough humor to make audiences laugh out loud, Ria’s sisterly antics lack just enough logic to make the audience cringe at her actions. Like Ria planting lotion-filled condoms in the bed of her sister’s fiance. The overall direction of the film moves fluidly, even including a mystery plotline that leaves audiences with mouths gaping. 

The movement of the plotline is everything at once, funny, sad, cringy, mysterious, and action-packed, but the few main themes help the audiences keep track of all the changes. The overarching themes are the choices of the Khan sister’s future careers and Ria’s devotion to keeping her sister from jumping head-first into marriage with a man she barely knows. 

The film provides a well-rounded ending that closes the plot and concludes the character arcs of the Khan sisters. While Ria was quite stubborn and viewers watched her fall more into place with her lot in life, on the opposite scale was Lena. Known for going to art school, dropping out, and not particularly knowing what she wants, there is an open, yet comforting solution waiting for viewers.

Of course, an action film wouldn’t be fully complete without the ‘bad guy.’ While most people are jokingly scared of their mother-in-law, disapproval would probably be easier than what Lena faces in this film. 

Plot: ★★★☆☆ 3/5

Cinematography: ★★★☆☆ 3/5

Character Arc(s): ★★★☆☆ 3/5

---

Sisu – Movie Review

Directed and written by:  Jalmari Helander

Starring:  Jorma Tommila, Aksel Hennie, Jack Doolan, and Mimosa Willamo

Runtime:  85 minutes

‘Sisu’:  Run, don’t walk, to 1944 Finland and this fabulous and bloody midnight-madness flick

“My advice to you, my violent friend, is to seek out gold and sit on it.” – The Dragon says to Grendel in author John Gardner’s “Grendel” (1971)  

In director/writer Jalmari Helander’s fabulous, entertaining midnight-madness flick, “Sisu”, the year is 1944 and nearly the close of WWII.  He sets this story in Finland.  The Moscow Armistice is signed, and Finland must remove the German military presence from their land. 

For Aatami Korpi (Jorma Tommila), a Finn, he’s done with the war.  This 60-something, gray-bearded loner now roams the desolate plains of the Finnish Lapland – along with his trusty horse and an adorable Bedlington Terrier - and searches for gold.  Korpi’s ultimate goal is to live out his “golden years” with comfort and serenity. 

However, his sparkling plans are temporarily halted when Aatami meets a well-armed platoon of Nazi soldiers – possibly 30 – complete with two trucks, a tank, and a Zundapp-looking motorcycle with an accompanying sidecar.  

With the war entering its waning days, the film’s narrator explains that the Germans are destroying “all roads, bridges, villages, and towns in their path.”  

Even though this rash force looks a bit winded, they are itching for a fight when they encounter Korpi, his horse, and pooch.

Thirty versus one.  These marauders threaten and provoke Korpi, a man who now declares war on Commander Bruno Helldorf (Aksel Hennie) and his men.

Too bad for the Germans. 

You see, our lead protagonist – who seems, at first, to be a pacifist – is a one-man killing machine, and he uses straight-up brutality and keen ingenuity to even the odds in his quest for survival while punching, kicking, stabbing, and slashing his adversaries to death. 

Helander’s imagination conjures seemingly endless ways to exhibit brutal, visceral butchery but with uninhibited glee.  This theatrical carnage-concert connects with its audience in a couple of ways.  

In a Herculean physical role, Tommila delivers as the silent killer who primarily communicates with his fists and bloodlust.  The pure visual of Korpi’s grandfatherly appearance masks his dangerous and deadly skills.  When he first springs into action, it completely surprises the Germans and us.  His continued and never-ending imaginative battleground methods will not cease to amaze over the film’s 85 minutes, a runtime that races by…in seemingly 45.   

However, the movie isn’t all gunplay and fisticuffs because “Sisu” has some sedate minutes, but they are equally as compelling.  For instance, Korpi stops roaming the countryside during one scene to sew up and cauterize his wounds in a hypotonic moment of machismo that would make John J. Rambo stand up and applaud.  

By and large, the pacing of “Sisu” moves so quickly because it doesn’t get bogged down in exposition.  From the get-go, Tommila starkly draws up sides, so we immediately land on a foundation of villains versus the lone hero (although, please note, Korpi finds some well-placed allies on his trek) that has a feel of an old-school western.  There are no broader issues to ponder because this superb, illustrious spectacle concocts an array of carefully constructed sequences that reveal themselves one after another. 

There is no time to think...just absorb.  

Absorb the cartoonish, physics-defying violence – with high production values - that brilliantly feels like a Wile E. Coyote and the Road Runner episode-John Wick flick mashup.  

“Sisu” is only missing the on-screen onomatopoeia from the “Batman” (1966 – 1968) television show with its delightful displays of “Pow!”, “Whammm!”, and “Splat!”

Still, Korpi and his lethal deeds speak for themselves in a unique action film that pays off in spades with twisted, rip-roaring bloodbath-moments.

Just remember, the ace of spades is the death card.  

Jeff’s ranking

3.5/4 stars

---

Judy Blume Forever – Movie Review

Directed by:  Davina Pardo and Leah Wolchok

Starring:  Judy Blume, Tayari Jones, Justin Chanda, Randy Blume, Larry Blume, and George Cooper

Runtime:  95 minutes

‘Judy Blume Forever’:  Judy and this documentary have lasting impacts

“I could be fearless in my writing in a way that maybe I wasn’t always in my life.” – Judy Blume

“Are You There God?  It’s Me, Margaret.” (1970)

“Blubber” (1974)

“Forever…” (1975)

“Tiger Eyes” (1981)

“Here’s to You, Rachel Robinson” (1993)

These five book titles are just some of the novels – written by the world-famous children’s and young adult author Judy Blume – that directors Davina Pardo and Leah Wolchok remember, explore, and celebrate in their festive documentary, “Judy Blume Forever”. 

Ms. Blume, 85 (but 83 during the filming), sits directly in front of Pardo and Wolchok’s camera and tells her story with a bright smile, vigor, and enthusiasm, but she isn’t alone.  Several authors and publishers – like Jacqueline Woodson, Mary H.K. Choi, Justin Chanda, Tayari Jones – and a few prominent Generation X actresses gush over her work.   

According to Google, Judy has sold over 82 million books, and this enjoyable and revealing film is a must-see for her fans, especially because of the movie’s exploration into the woman’s pioneer spirit.  

Ms. Blume broke boundaries and norms. 

Earlier this month, “Time” named Judy as one of “The 100 Most Influential People of 2023”, but admittedly (and sadly), this movie critic – a Gen X man who feasted on sports, Atari 2600, heavy metal, and science fiction during his adolescence - never heard of Judy Blume before “Judy Blume Forever” was announced as a showcase movie for the 2023 Phoenix Film Festival.

So, learning about this prominent author - over the film’s 95-minute runtime - was a brand-new and enlightening experience.  However, early in the movie, I realized why Judy’s work wasn’t in my orbit.  Her young adult novels – that took off in the late-1960s and the 1970s during the Women’s Liberation Movement – were primarily (but not entirely) written for pre-teen and teenage-girl audiences, and in some cases, female readers who wondered about puberty, masturbation, and relationships with boys. 

So yes, this was all a surprise to this naive male Gen Xer!  

During the film, Ms. Blume evokes frank, honest discourse about her motivations, including writing about questions that she had as a kid.  

Ms. Blume was a trailblazer in exploring these topics in print, and she dared to take these brand-new literary steps!

Judy also recalls the societal and business obstacles that stood in her way in getting her first narratives published.  She didn’t get much support at home during her first marriage, and Judy reveals a heartbreaking fact about her ex-husband.  Although, her children – Randy and Larry – offered fabulous encouragement in heartwarming respects for their mom. 

Her can-do attitude shines throughout the movie, and fans – who aren’t famous writers, publishers, or actresses – equally praise Judy’s positive influence in their lives.  Judy reads some of her fan letters, but more importantly, a couple of these devotees appear on camera and tell their remarkable relationships with her, which have lasted for decades.  These particular moments punctuate Ms. Blume’s vast impact and are the most curious tales (outside of Judy’s, of course) that Pardo and Wolchok reveal. 

The filmmakers present the material with familiar documentary styles with plenty of B-roll, interviews from years past, lots of childhood photos, what-Judy-is-doing-now disclosures, and linear storytelling.  From a construction standpoint, it’s a standard affair, but Pardo and Wolchok do a lovely job of reaching out and proudly presenting this icon as a gift for old fans and a learning experience for new ones.  

Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

Chevalier - Film Review

Directed by: Stephen Williams

Screenplay by: Stefani Robinson

Starring: Kelvin Harrison Jr., Samara Weaving, Lucy Boynton, and Ronke Adekoluejo

A thrilling retelling of Joseph Bologne; beautiful, bold, and beyond moving

The Chevalier de Saint-Georges, Joseph Bologne (Kevin Harrison Jr.), faced many challenges on his path to becoming a well-known composer in 18th-century French society. Audiences can expect to be entirely captivated by ‘Chevalier.’ This film, based on the untold true story of Joseph Bologne, depicts his journey to becoming the “true son of France” as both master of the sword and maestro of the bow. 

While still based on Bologne’s life, the jam-packed scenes full of emotion are more intriguing in their exaggerated nature than any classic documentary-style film could offer. The musical passion can be heard from theaters away, and the expressions on the actors’ and actresses’ faces show how deeply in tune they are with the music piece. 

The music in and of itself is both fast-paced to keep the audience engaged with every swell and symbolic of the various points in Joseph’s life; the added dissonance to the music during times of hardship especially helps the audience connect to the music, no matter their background level in classical music. 

As viewers are led through Joseph’s life, we are easily distraught by the challenges he faced since childhood. Born a slave to a French plantation owner and African enslaved mother, Nanon (Ronke Adekoluejo), the audience picks up key moments of Joseph’s childhood through well-timed flashbacks. The 18th-century cruelties of slavery and racism impact Joseph throughout the film. Yet,  despite the challenges, Joseph was titled Chevalier by Queen Marie-Antoinette (Lucy Boynton). 

From there, the plotline of ‘Chevalier’ is established quickly, with Joseph’s goals moving each scene forward in a spectacular whirlwind of drama, romance, and ambition. Director Stephen Williams combined visual and audio effects to keep the audience engaged and emotionally invested throughout the hour and 47-minute film. 

The scene coordination, from challenging Mozart to Joseph reuniting with his freed mother, draws audiences in, especially with the addition of drama and arrogance in nearly every scene. When given flashbacks of Nanon, Joseph’s mother, attempting to escape every day to find her son, the audience is tearful but lacks a true understanding of a mother losing her child. The gaps between the scenes with Nanon further draw the audience's attention away from the notions of slavery, escape, and grief. 

Audiences are drawn in next by Joseph’s motivation to compose the best opera. In the process, setting his eyes Marie-Josephine (Samara Weaving) as his singer, but Marie-Josephine is the wife of the oppressive Marquis De Montalembert (Marton Csokas). 

Risking their lives for a forbidden romance, viewers are filled with dread as their love progresses, and for good reason. 

Plot: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Cinematography: ★★★☆☆ 3/5

Character Arc(s): ★★★★☆ 4/5

---

Everything Went Fine – Movie Review

Directed by:  Francois Ozon

Written by:  Francois Ozon and Philippe Piazzo, based on Emmanuele Bernheim’s memoir

Starring:  Sophie Marceau, Andre Dussollier, Geraldine Pailhas, and Charlotte Rampling

Runtime:  113 minutes

‘Everything Went Fine’: Marceau and Dussollier and more than fine in this challenging French family drama

Emmanuele Bernheim (Sophie Marceau) is typing away on her PC in her Parisian apartment on an ordinary day when she’s interrupted by a call from her sister, Pascale (Geraldine Pailhas).  

Emmanuele immediately stands up and says, “Where are you?  Be right there.”  

She rushes out the door and heads down the stairs, which seem blurry because she forgets her contacts.  So, Mme Bernheim stops, marches back up the stairs, puts in her contacts, finally leaves her place, gets on the Metro, and is captured with worry.  

The 50-something siblings meet at the hospital.  

Their father, Andre (Andre Dussollier), suffered a stroke, and the 80-something senior is in bad shape.  The right side of his face is contorted.  He has trouble speaking, and his right arm is immobile.  

Thankfully, he’s stable.  

After a few days and Emmanuele’s frequent trips to visit her dad, he drops a bombshell by calming and clearly stating, “I want you to help me end it.”

End his life.  

Even though Andre is laid up in bed and feeling helpless, “Everything Went Fine” is about Emmanuele’s journey, a film based on the real Emmanuele Bernheim and her memoir.   Bernheim – a screenwriter who passed away in 2017 - co-wrote “Swimming Pool” (2003), “Five Times Two” (2004), and “Ricky” (2009) with writer/director Francois Ozon, who co-writes and directs this film adaptation of her book.  

Ozon mainly sets his movie in Paris, and Marceau’s Emmanuele doesn’t physically travel great distances except for an out-of-town getaway over a few days.  However, her father’s illness and morbid request have Emmanuele running the equivalent of an ultra-marathon to Toulouse.  She is mentally and physically exhausted as Ozon frequently shuffles Emmanuele back and forth between various medical facilities.  

It’s a bit dizzying for her and us, as doctors regularly update her about Andre’s improving health, while she knows his true wishes for assisted suicide.  In between stops at museums, her healthy relationship with her partner, Serge (Eric Caravaca), she carries the brunt of her father’s care and destiny.  Even though Pascale offers advice and a lending hand, she has motherly duties with her son, so Emmanuele leans into an unwanted lead role with her dad’s affairs.  

Emmanuele’s mother, Claude de Soria (Charlotte Rampling), is dealing with her own ailments and is largely absent from the movie (sorry, Rampling fans).  So, Emmanuele places herself within these tight emotional spots.  Ozon’s camera is unforgiving by frequently filming closeups in small rooms, where several long sequences feature father and daughter alone, their only companions are awkward silences and candid discourse.  These challenging moments are raw and inescapable for our lead, featured in nearly every scene, and Marceau and Dussollier deliver masterclass exchanges of discomfort throughout the 113-minute runtime.  

Meanwhile, the movie’s makeup department – a team of four – conjures up realistic effects to depict Andre’s affected facial features.  No question, Andre suffers tremendous turmoil, but since he’s incapacitated, the parent-child roles become reversed, which might sound familiar to many Generation X and Baby Boomer moviegoers who are currently managing or have managed the issues around aging mothers and fathers.  

To complicate matters, Ozon and co-writer Philippe Piazzo offer snippets of Emmanuele’s childhood with key flashbacks, revealing that Andre wasn’t the greatest of fathers.  No, young Emmanuele’s relationship with her dad wasn’t dreadful, but her emotional scars haven’t entirely healed either.

“Everything Went Fine” is an ironic title for this story, but with life, we sometimes face massive obstacles, shrug our shoulders, and do our best.  

Well, Sophie Marceau and Andre Dussollier are more than fine in this challenging French family drama.

Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

Showing Up - Film Review

Directed by: Kelly Reichardt

Screenplay by: Jonathan Raymond and Kelly Reichardt

Starring: Michelle Williams and Hong Chau

‘Showing Up’ takes flight with a female lead but lacks the voice of a seasoned artist.

In a rendition of an artist’s imbalanced life, director Kelly Reichardt depicts the struggles that Lizzy (Michelle Williams) must face, even though some issues she creates for herself. 

Reichardt moves the film forward through near-silent scenes of Lizzy sculpting with clay. The scenes captivate, in a sense, as viewers try to understand Lizzy’s artistic choices. But, the repetition and lack of internal dialogue from Lizzy, left the audience craving more. Without the meaning of the all-female clay figurines portrayed through introspective scenes, the mystery of Lizzy, and why her artwork is meaningful or purposeful, is left unknown. 

On the flip side, when Lizzy’s inner emotions are revealed, they are often during times of stress or anger. Who wouldn’t be upset not taking a shower for days on end? Or when spending over $150 caring for a pigeon someone else wanted to save? It adds to the notion that Lizzy has learned composure but is not as impassive as she acts. When handed the rough end of the stick one time too many, Lizzy crumbles under the pressure and calls out the people in her life. 

With an impending art show on Monday, Lizzy attempts to reach out to her family for their attendance. Revealing subtly the disarray of her passive-aggressive mother, hair-brained father, and uncaring bother. Other exposition about how Lizzy was raised or how she came to be an art student is left to the viewer's interpretation with guidance from the screenplay.

Lizzy can’t seem to catch a break since she’s renting from a fellow art student and friend, Jo (Hong Chau), who neglects to repair the water heater. Leaving Lizzy unable to take a shower. With family and home life a mess, the last thing Lizzy needs is another pet.

Yet, after Jo decides to save a wounded pigeon, the responsibility of care lands on Lizzy. Disrupting her ability to work on her art for the show on Monday. 

It is fair to say, Lizzy and Jo are opposites. Causing tension to buzz between them, until audience members disagree with the behavior of both. 

The apartment water heater repair, wounded pigeon, and art show are the driving forces that lead the plot. The water heater and pigeon could both be resolved if Lizzy communicated and handled these issues with Jo face-to-face, and the art show is merely a moving timeline. 

Lizzy, as a more composed character, did not grow or change her behavior to gain more out of her life. Making it difficult to understand her choices and overall behavior throughout the course of the film. 

Plot: ★★☆☆☆ 2/5

Cinematography: ★★★☆☆ 3/5

Character Arc(s): ★★☆☆☆ 2/5

---

Paint – Movie Review

Written and directed by:  Brit McAdams

Starring:  Owen Wilson, Michaela Watkins, Ciara Renee, and Stephen Root
Runtime:  96 minutes

‘Paint’ doesn’t inspire

“Let’s decide.  Maybe there’s a happy tree, an evergreen tree, and he lives right there.” – Bob Ross

“That tree was probably too tall.  Brace yourself.  You are going to get some calls about that.” – Carl Nargle (Owen Wilson)

Carl Nargle regularly paints nature scenes on a canvas for a local PBS Burlington, Vt. station.  With his tall, brown curly locks and calm, soothing demeanor, the similarities are obvious between this on-screen fictional character and the late Bob Ross in “Paint”, a comedy from writer/director Brit McAdams.   

“Yea, (my character) is inspired by Bob Ross.  I think (for) Carl Nargle, his personal life is in a little bit more disarray than Bob Ross’ (life), but for sure, (Carl) was kind of inspired by (Bob).” – Owen Wilson on Jimmy Kimmel Live, March 2023

As our movie opens, Carl has it made in the shade, under the sometimes-sunny Vermont skies.  (For the record, the picture was filmed in Upstate New York.)

Most days, he films his show, “Paint with Carl Nargle”, where our artistic hero dabs and coats images of evergreen trees, streams, rocks, blue skies, and Mount Mansfield, a regular staple in Carl’s pieces.

Carl is successful (although not financially) and embraced by the Burlington community or those who regularly watch PBS.  However, the station manager, Tony (Stephen Root), realizes that his 50-something TV star is too comfortable in the role.  Worse yet, the station is losing money, so he hires a young, energetic artist named Ambrosia (Ciara Renee) to help shake things up. 

Instead of welcoming this new talent, Carl feels threatened.  Ambrosia brings a fresh new approach and branches out (pardon the pun) from Carl’s Mount Mansfield landscapes, like her resourceful and striking splattering of a spaceship laying waste to a tree, an image with just a touch of irony. 

So, Mr. Nargle is forced to face some realities, like keeping his TV gig and taking inventory of his life.  His leisurely personality doesn’t create enough momentum to take quick action, so Carl fumbles with change.  

Someone needs to hand the man “Who Moved My Cheese?”

Rather than take an energetic, slapstick approach, the film rides subdued and restrained tones and focuses on character introspection and visual cues for laughs.  McAdams seems to channel his inner Wes Anderson as the film leans into an oddball station worker, some eccentric shots of the local municipality, a muddled, failed romance, and Carl’s unique hairstyle.  

Unfortunately, barely any on-screen happenings are funny, which is a shame, although I do recall chuckling a couple of times.  As the minutes tick, the movie audience realizes that Carl is a sad sack and a one-trick pony with his art.  He can’t create other representations outside Mount Mansfield and its accompanying nature costars. 

We pity Carl, and since he doesn’t have the immediate wherewithal or spirited inertia to improve his current standing, most of the 96-minute runtime follows his aimless journey.  To be fair, part of the movie’s allure is to root for Carl to break out of his long-standing routines, but to get there, the film buries us with casual, humdrum conversations over TV station budgets, cubical politics, and a random date at a fondue restaurant.  

The movie’s best moments are between Carl and his ex-girlfriend, Katherine (Michaela Watkins).  Still, a lot of their story is told through occasional flashbacks that the film drops in without warning.  

We’re rooting for this couple, I suppose.  

Well, we’re rooting for Katherine to be happy…with or without Carl. 

Carl is also stuck in the 70s.  He dons collared shirts with small paisley designs, carries a pipe, and drives an orange van that resembles the Scooby-Doo Mystery Machine.  The film could easily and actively mock his 70s persona with modern-day sensibilities and conveniences, done with great effectiveness in Betty Thomas’ “The Brady Bunch Movie” (1995), but here, the differences are usually implied and not called out for comedic effect.  

Rather than model Wes Anderson, a Peter and Bobby Farrelly slant would probably work better for “Paint” and Carl, as the brothers’ chaotic, knockabout physical comedy helps lighten and brighten the moods that surround their down-on-their-luck leads.  Just relive “Dumb and Dumber” (1994), “Kingpin” (1996), “There’s Something About Mary” (1998), and “Stuck on You” (2003) as prime examples.  

Look, Lloyd (Jim Carrey) and Harry (Jeff Daniels) getting pedicures with an electric sander, and Mary (Cameron Diaz) finding a new hair product might not be your cup of tea, but you won’t be bored watching those old Farrelly brothers’ movies. 

I can’t say the same for “Paint”, no matter how cool Carl Nargle’s hair is. 

Jeff’s ranking

1.5/4 stars

---

The Super Mario Bros. Movie – Movie Review

Directed by:  Aaron Horvath, Michael Jelenic, Pierre Leduc, and Fabien Polack

Written by:  Matthew Fogel

Starring:  Chris Pratt, Charlie Day, Anya Taylor-Joy, Keegan-Michael Key, Jack Black, Fred Armisen, and Seth Rogen

Runtime:  83 minutes

‘The Super Mario Bros. Movie’ is super-nostalgic but not super-fun

Mario and Luigi! 

These siblings are worldwide household names.  

Literally, because millions of kids – and adults – played Super Mario Bros. on Nintendo video game consoles, beginning in the 1980s. 

Mario’s first appearance was 1981’s Donkey Kong, an arcade staple during the Ronald Reagan years, but Nintendo Co., Ltd. also created several home gaming offshoots featuring the famous animated brothers. 

The home game presented the mustached fellas running through a never-ending wonderland of blue skies, walking mushrooms, and cubes of bricks suspended in the air.  

Excelling in this game took months of repetition to determine the timing of specific jumps, mapping out starts and sudden stops, and gathering coins and superhuman abilities.  No question, teens and 20-somethings gladly sat in front of television sets for habitual 6-hour sessions to help guide these heroes on their bizarre journey.  We (and yes, include me in this group) were addicted, and Mario and Luigi became cultural icons like Madonna and Michael Jordan.  

And hey, the game was fun!

Forty-two years after Donkey Kong’s video-arcade arrival, Universal Pictures, Illumination, and Nintendo released an animated adventure, “The Super Mario Bros. Movie”, a film that pits our heroes on a trek that begins in brick-and-mortar Brooklyn and delves into a fantasy world of mushrooms, castles, a princess, a dragon, and…bricks.  

Directors Aaron Horvath, Michael Jelenic, Pierre Leduc, and Fabien Polack and writer Matthew Fogel offer a light tale where struggling plumbers Mario (Chris Pratt) and Luigi (Charlie Day) stumble into some sort of bizarre vortex via a drainage pipe, are split up, and must save Princess Peach (Anya Taylor-Joy) from a delusional dragon named Bowser (Jack Black).  

Bowser believes that he’s engaged to Princess Peach, and in this universe, dragon-human marriages are a thing.  Okay, sure. 

We meet bluebirds who throw snowballs, a Mushroom Kingdom filled with petite people that sport mushrooms for skulls, a bleak netherworld called The Darklands, and a gorilla village home to a famous arcade-game star.  

Horvath and company offer plenty of sights and sounds from the Super Mario collections, and avid gamers will discover vastly more references and Easter eggs than this critic.  Still, Super Mario novices will recognize the filmmakers’ efforts to send audiences back to yesteryear and trigger warm memories of this dynamic duo’s on-screen agility.   

Despite the nostalgia, colorful settings, and terrific cast (including Pratt, Day, Taylor-Joy, Black, Keegan-Michael Key, Fred Armisen, and Seth Rogen), “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” just isn’t super-fun.  

The paper-thin, predictable script will entertain second graders, but it’s a paint-by-numbers tale that could fit into any ordinary Saturday morning cartoon show.  There’s nothing groundbreaking, innovative, or profound here, as this straight-up story runs through the motions but with recognizable stars.  Then again, do small children know these characters?  Perhaps, or the project possibly serves as a marketing opportunity for a Mario Renaissance.

Even though – back in the day - adults enjoyed non-stop Mario stints, the film runs a scant 83 minutes, which reflects the flimsy plot.  Still, the short runtime is a blessing.  To help keep parents’ attention, Universal Pictures found the budget for 80s and 90s hits from Beastie Boys, A-ha, AC/DC, and also a theme song from one of Quentin Tarantino’s biggest films.  Mr. Black finds some minutes to sing as well. 

Will “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” speak to moviegoers and compel them to go back and play these classic diversions?  Maybe.  The on-screen sounds of “beeps” and “boops” could spark joys from decades past and might start a flood of online searches for Mario cartridges, or mom and dad may ask their kids if they could join them for a Mushroom Kingdom match.  

That’s certainly possible, even though they probably won’t “jump” at the chance to watch this film a second time. 

Jeff’s ranking

2/4 stars

---

Inside – Movie Review

Directed by:  Vasilis Katsoupis

Written by:  Vasilis Katsoupis and Ben Hopkins

Starring:  Willem Dafoe

Runtime:  105 minutes

Dafoe brings out a courageous performance in ‘Inside’, a troubling, solitary story

Breaking and entering.

It’s a crime, and Nemo (Willem Dafoe) commits this moral and legal sin during the opening minutes of “Inside”.  

The 60-something Nemo – wearing a blue-collar jumpsuit (literally blue), one that Michael Myers from the “Halloween” series might don - enters a massive, posh New York City penthouse.  He’s assisted by an unseen partner who communicates over a portable CB as the crooks attempt to heist a pricey artwork collection.  

No one is home!  Then again, these experienced thieves already knew this crucial fact, and Nemo has free rein to run through the spacious flat and start a one-man dodgeball match, if he wishes.  Still, time is of the essence. 

Get in and get out with the art pieces that will land a fortune for Nemo and company. 

However, this felonious act is no childhood game, and – without warning – Nemo’s immediate circumstance becomes a nightmare that John Carpenter may have dreamt up but sans butcher knives and a creepy mask.  

Nemo sets off an alarm, and now he’s trapped.  

Locked inside.

Vasilis Katsoupis’ claustrophobic thriller is set in the said locale for nearly the entire 105-minute runtime, and Dafoe is primarily (but not entirely) the only actor who appears on-screen.  

Admittedly, “Inside” is a gimmick film, and moviegoers will either buy into the experience or not.  

It’s a man-versus-his-surroundings story.  

This critic hosted a March 8th Phoenix Film Society “Inside” screening, and my co-host correctly compared the movie’s premise to the events in “Cast Away” (2000) with Tom Hanks and “All is Lost” (2013) with Robert Redford.  Like Hanks (during the island scenes, anyway) and Redford, the camera solely points at the lead as Nemo is forced to face his daunting, life-threatening setting and use ingenuity to discover a reprieve:  freedom!  

Chuck Nolan (Hanks) and an unnamed boat captain (Redford) dealt with confounding natural elements.  Here, Nemo copes with the (in)conveniences of an urban venue filled with technological advances that prove to be just as formidable as Mother Nature’s creations.  

Still, the principles are the same. 

Katsoupis conjures up a nerve-racking, tangled, hi-tech web and introduces several sticky obstacles for Nemo, which do not appear all at once.  This review will not march through the laundry list of impediments, but know that they are stressful, like an incessant car alarm.  

The narrative doesn’t waste time because we’re compelled to ask three questions during the opening 20 minutes (or so). 

What pitfalls will Nemo discover?

How will he creatively deal with them?

What will be his fate? 

This initial construct presents itself, and then it’s up to Dafoe, Katsoupis, his co-writer Ben Hopkins, cinematographer Steve Annis, composer Frederik Van de Moortel, and the rest of the creative team to keep us engrossed.  

It’s not an effortless task, but the filmmakers offer an abundance of sights and sounds, including the concrete and steel palace that ironically feels like an elaborate art project on its own.  Other times, Nemo meets ordinary fixtures, like a refrigerator but one that features a curious warning system when the door remains open too long.  

There are plenty of gadgets and surprises, but no matter how many widgets and thingamabobs that the filmmakers throw at the screen, this movie – ultimately - lives or dies with Willem’s performance.

Of course, Dafoe is absorbing in the role and delivers an awfully physical thespian-concert.  He’s all by his lonesome but musters up courageous eye-openers by Nemo playing off his environment and internalizing the trauma.  Dafoe carries a svelte frame, but - throughout the film - Nemo copes with mental and tactile challenges that stress the mind and body.  His initially lean appearance morphs into an increasingly gaunt and fragile state, and with an extended period of solitude, ordinary cognition begins to mutate into cerebral disarray.

Does anyone recall the shelter-in-place days of COVID? 

This picture did not initially remind me of those taxing times, but the pandemic parallels seem apparent after the fact.  Actually, this maddening, solitary affair offers some shades of Michael Haneke’s twisted and stormy “The Seventh Continent” (1989), an arthouse compliment but not a ringing endorsement for a first-date trip to the movies.   

“Inside” isn’t a sweet and soothing date-night movie, but missing Dafoe’s valiant performance might be a crime. 

Jeff’s ranking

2.5/4 stars

---

Rye Lane - Film Review

Director: Raine Allen-Miller

Writers: Nathan Bryon and Tom Melia

Starring: Vivian Oparah and David Jonsson

Not only romantic but hilarious!

Admittedly, meeting someone in a public restroom is not ideal, but for Dom (David Jonsson) it’s exactly what he needs. Yas (Vivian Oparah) has a bright personality that makes conversation easy. Even when the time isn’t exactly appropriate. This is how Dom ends up sharing with Yas the tragic background of his relationship and “the breakup;” when Dom’s at-that-time girlfriend cheated on him with none other than his best friend. 

The audience picks up on a lot of nuances in Dom and Yas’s outlook on the world as they walk through the Rye Lane Market. The spontaneous Yas is socially adept and can compliment anyone on the street. The breeze will take Yas anywhere, but she may need more stability to achieve her career goal of working in the fashion industry. Meanwhile, Dom is anxious and self-pitying. Making him a stay-at-home son to a loving mother and father. 

Jonsson and Oparah captivate the audience’s attention throughout the film through the portrayal of two juxtaposed characters. Most audience members will feel like they’ve met Dom or Yas, or possibly are like them, as they navigate through challenging relationship changes and life expectations. 

Director Raine Allen-Miller breaks down the barriers by utilizing point-of-view shots that allow Dom and Yas to retell their breakups alongside their past selves. While past-Dom discovers his girlfriend’s cheating tendencies, present-Dom and Yas are there watching. Of course, chatting casually and comedically about their failures. Allen-Miller moves away from the one-note version of flashbacks —that only feature the breakup— to take the viewing experience to another level. 

Now Dom is on his way to meet his ex-girlfriend and her new boyfriend for lunch.

Should Yas join Dom’s lunch? 

No. 

Well, she is going to join anyway. 

And goodness, does she join with a complete facade. Not only is she now pretending to be Dom’s girlfriend, but they met at karaoke night pumping up a ‘large’ crowd with their musical genius. The conversation quickly changes to put Dom into a new, and more flattering, light. Giving him the confidence to move out of the sorrows of a breakup. 

After lunch, Dom and Yas are attached at the hip. Making it easier for them to learn more about each other and go on an incredulous adventure to get back Yas’s copy of her favorite record from her ex’s place. Writers Nathan Bryon and Tom Melia planned a thoughtful storyline that takes viewers throughout South London. While some parts are hilarious and unexpected, there’s a believable quality to the actions of the characters and their reasoning. 

During the film, Dom and Yas break out of their respective shells. This is easy with Yas’s advice: sometimes you just have to let things happen because “it’s good for the soul.” 

Plot: ★★★☆☆ 3/5

Cinematography: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Character Arc(s): ★★★★☆ 4/5

---

Scream VI - Movie Review

Dir: Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett

Starring: Melissa Barrera, Jenna Ortega, Jasmin Savoy Brown, Mason Gooding, Hayden Panettiere, Jack Champion, Liana Liberato, Dermot Mulroney, and Courteney Cox

2h 3m

"What's your favorite scary movie?" It's been 26 years since the phone rang, and this question introduced Wes Craven's iconic film "Scream," a film that shifted the landscape of slasher cinema from the 80s into the 90s with an understanding of horror movie culture that both pokes fun and pays homage to the foundations of the genre. "Scream VI" takes the terror to the Big Apple. A new Ghostface looks to amend unfinished business between the latest generation of Woodsboro survivors. Directors Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett deliver an old-fashioned slasher flick with a welcome change of location that adds a fresh perspective and a hyper-aggressive masked killer who feels unstoppable. "Scream VI" doesn't stray far from its formulaic storytelling, which functions as a regurgitation of past ideas. Still, the few changes it does establish make it an easy and pleasing horror experience.  

The movie opens with a film professor waiting patiently for a blind date to show up at a packed bar. While providing directions and disobeying every scary movie red flag possible, the film professor comes face-to-face with Ghostface, uniquely establishing its metropolitan location and horror motivations. Woodsboro survivors Samantha (Melissa Barrera), now cautious about every single interaction, and her sister Tara (Jenna Ortega), who is trying to move away from her traumatic past, is confronted once again by the masked villain who will stop at nothing, even attacking in public places like an occupied bodega and a crowded subway car, to enact revenge. 

"Scream VI" is full of energy from its beginning moments, doing its best to subvert expectations with the introductions that have become a familiar formula for each film since Drew Barrymore answered the phone in 1996. Writers James Vanderbilt and Guy Busick move quickly, maintaining a frantic pace motivated by their monster. Ghostface moves intensely, jumping from dark alleyways, chasing across crowded streets, and smashing through doors. In one of the establishing set pieces early in the film, the masked killer pursues the two sisters into a crowded convenience store, wildly slashing at anyone who stands in the way. At one moment, after disarming the store owner, Ghostface picks up a loaded shotgun and uses it. Using the firearm, which rarely happens in slasher cinema, disrupts the rules of this specific subgenre just enough to make the villain feel more threatening. These small touches in design keep "Scream VI" moving at an entertaining rhythm.

The filmmakers implement some fun set pieces, a ladder stretched across two apartment buildings, and a subway stalking scene are exceptional. The tone established is aggressive. This Ghostface feels hellbent on destruction. Unfortunately, the narrative consistently needs help finding its path as it cycles through characters and attempts to construct a mystery. Characters from previous films make cameos again. Journalist, Gale Weathers (Courteney Cox), is pulled into the middle of everything. Kirby Reed (Hayden Panettiere), who survived the mayhem in "Scream 4," is an FBI agent who has dedicated her life to the Ghostface murders. The script doesn't allow much time to develop the supporting characters besides running and screaming. The emotional connection between the two sisters, who are dealing with social media negativity and still working through the trauma of the brutal incident in Woodsboro, is utilized nicely in a few early scenes to convey how disconnected they are from one another and how they are dealing with the world around them. Unfortunately, the film rarely returns to these moments as it quickly turns into an extended chase scene, fleeing toward the finale. 

"Scream VI" proves that Ghostface can still be scary; here, the villain is a daunting force that enlivens the terror in ways past films haven't been able to do. A few set pieces are franchise highlights; the subway setup is old-school horror movie fun, and the brutal chase through an apartment and onto a ladder is terrifying. The film keeps close to its established formula, which unfortunately runs out of surprises, and suffers from a third act that falls flat with its big reveal. Still, these aspects don't keep the filmmaking team from trying new things. "Scream VI" doesn't have a great story but operates the genre's tools in fun and engaging ways.

Monte's Rating

3.00 out of 5.00 

---

Luther: The Fallen Sun – Movie Review

Directed by:  Jamie Payne

Written by:  Neil Cross

Starring:  Idris Elba, Cynthia Erivo, Andy Serkis, Dermot Crowley, and Lauryn Ajufo

Runtime:  122 minutes

‘Luther: The Fallen Sun’:  This sinister crime story carries a bleak two-hour forecast

Who is Luther?

He’s not Lex Luthor.  Different surname. 

Detective Chief Inspector (DCI) John Luther (Idris Elba) works for a London law enforcement division.  However, during the first 10 minutes of “Luther: The Fallen Sun”, a serial killer (Andy Serkis) digs up dirt on our lead, and the police arrest John and throw him in a maximum-security prison.   

You see, David Robey (Serkis) leaves a baffling crime scene on a local motorway, where he blackmailed a random cleaning man.  

Luther arrives and declares, “This scene is-.  It’s unusual.” 

So, Robey – fearing that John will soon follow the breadcrumbs on his odd and wicked trail – gets on his phone and says, “I want his shame,” and faster than you can say, “Lock him up,” Luther finds himself disgraced and incarcerated.  

Don’t be too concerned about spoilers because these sordid events occur before the opening credits end.  

Now, Robey has free rein to commit more atrocities in The Big Smoke.  He’s a mix of Hannibal Lecter (minus the cannibal tendencies), Jigsaw, and The Joker.  He seems to want to “watch the world burn.”  

As mentioned, Robey spends time on the phone, and he must have a fantastic unlimited talk plan.  He’s a master of technology with access to IP addresses, possesses a bloodlust to terrorize anyone he chooses, and sits on massive amounts of cash.  

That’s a nasty trifecta, and with Luther sitting in prison, no one in the local metropolitan area can corral Robey, a savage, sicko stallion.

“Luther:  The Fallen Sun” is not John Luther’s first on-screen appearance.  Elba has starred as the brilliant sleuth for years.  “Luther” (2010 – 2019) ran for 20 episodes over five seasons, and now, director Jamie Payne (who helmed Season 5) and series creator Neil Cross are focusing on a 122-minute movie. 

This critic hasn’t watched the television show, but apparently, Luther is “a man who felt entitled to take justice into his own hands.”

John Luther is a Paul Kersey or Harry Callahan type. 

However, if you’ve never watched the small-screen series, you might feel a bit behind without knowing the nuances of our lead.  

Imagine if a “Death Wish” or “Dirty Harry” TV show ran for five years, but your introduction to Kersey or Callahan was a feature film that already logged slews of cases without your knowledge. 

Still, Elba is believable in the role, one that’s physically demanding, as he dabbles in fisticuffs morning, noon, and night…and between meals too!  

Prison altercations can get ugly, but even the greenest moviegoers realize our hero will eventually escape.  On the outside, he ultimately teams up with a frenemy, Odette Raine (Cynthia Erivo).  She’s a straight-arrow police operative who’d rather never see – let alone work with – Luther again, but they both have the same goal.  

Erivo and Elba forge creative friction as Odette constantly resists her need to partner with John, but her steely ideals need to find malleable spaces for practicality’s sake.  

Naturally, their task - hopefully capturing Robey - presents daunting challenges, and audiences will need help to stomach this cruel narrative.  Payne, Cross, and Serkis almost seem to have placed bets with one another during the writing and filming processes to discover ways to deflate one’s hopes for humankind’s enlightenment.  Luther and Raine’s chief adversary bathes in a core, sinister belief to deal misery to anyone he chooses, and he – unfortunately – carries the means to execute his sociopathic desires.   

“Luther: The Fallen Sun” feels like “8MM” (1999) meets “The Silence of the Lambs” (1991), where depravity swims in pools of kerosene, and in this film, the said fuel actually emanates from a sprinkler system.  Even though Serkis presents a worthy villain, the twisted script doesn’t offer compelling turns, nor does it scribe memorable lines for Robey while he twirls his mustache.  Well, Serkis is sans facial hair and also without a banquet of “fava beans and a nice Chianti.” 

If you decide to dine on “Luther: The Fallen Sun”, it’s streaming on Netflix.  Hey, the production values are high, and Elba’s, Erivo’s, and Serkis’ performances are admirable, but make sure your television’s volume is in check.  With all the screaming and yelling and Lorne Balfe’s ominous score, the neighbors might call John Luther to investigate the commotion.

  Jeff’s ranking

2/4 stars

---

Champions - Film Review

Directed by: Bobby Farrelly

Written by: Mark Rizzo, Javier Fesser, and David Marqués

Starring: Woody Harrelson, Kaitlin Olson, Kevin Iannucci, Madison Tevlin, and Matt Cook

An underdog storyline enhanced through meaningful moments of understanding and personal growth.

Marcus (Woody Harrelson), while driving drunk and mourning the loss of his assistant coaching position, hits a police car stopped on the side of the road. Leading him to the ultimate court-ordered choice between community service coaching or incarceration time. 

Emotionally distant and ignorant of others’ hardships, Marcus begrudgingly accepts the community service. Pairing with the basketball team, Friends, created for players with intellectual disabilities. Noticing Marcus’s angst, the judge recommends that Marcus meet the team as any person would; starting with their names. 

Woody Harrelson captivates the audience with mere facial expressions as a character that isn’t particularly kind. Giving way to the expressive actresses Kaitlin Olson and Madison Tevlin, who —with their charismatic and hilarious dialogue and actions— challenge Harrelson’s character, Marcus, which creates a commentary on women’s roles and abilities in the world. These roles include challenging some of the “traditional” roles of women, like playing on gender-designated sports teams or an expectation to be married and moved out by their mid-twenties. 

In addition to the developed character roles, viewers experience coaching side-by-side with Marcus, which helps even the most non-sport-affiliated viewer to understand the goal of the sport. But with a lack of hope, Marcus makes this task difficult. After all, it is nearly impossible to coach well when you’re sitting on the sidelines staring at your phone. 

But their skills take a turn when Marcus sees the team as more than just players and as people with lives outside of the sport. With a team that is eager to learn and equally as funny, the introduction is needed for both Marcus and the audience. 

Director Bobby Farrelly visually guides the audience through the players’ lives on both a shallow level consisting of names and jobs and through a deeper level explaining their personalities and extracurricular activities. The background is narrated thoughtfully by Julio (Cheech Marin), who’s known the team throughout many basketball seasons. This helps guide viewers away from the possible misconception about people with intellectual disabilities. In this, Marcus realizes the importance of knowing about people’s lives, like Benny (James Day Keith) working at a restaurant or Johnny (Kevin Iannucci) volunteering with animals. 

As the film progresses, we meet Cosentino (Madison Tevlin), who is the motivator for Coach Marcus and the team members. Helping the audience realize how the parts of our lives that are unexpected can shape who we are today. Including Marcus’s unexpected life-goal changes that can be largely attributed to his relationship with the Friends and with women. 

“Champions” features growth in many of the characters —noted through the lens of Marcus as his messy life moves the scenes forward— but the underdog storyline has many heartwarming moments that make for a captivating film.

 Plot: ★★★☆☆ 3/5
Cinematography: ★★★☆☆ 3/5
Character Arc: ★★★★☆ 4/5

---

The Quiet Girl – Movie Review

Directed by:  Colm Bairead

Written by:  Colm Bairead, based on Claire Keegan’s novella

Starring:  Catherine Clinch, Carrie Crowley, Andrew Bennett, Michael Patric, and Kate Nic Chonaonaigh

Runtime:  94 minutes

The Oscar-nominated ‘The Quiet Girl’ is an emotional family story that speaks volumes.  Bring tissues.

“If you were mine, I’d never leave you in a house with strangers.” – Eibhlin (Carrie Crowley)

As director/writer Colm Bairead’s movie opens, it’s springtime in 1981, and Cait (Catherine Clinch), a bashful nine-year-old, lives in a bustling home but one without radiant, productive energy.  Cait lives with a few sisters and her parents (Michael Patric and Kate Nic Chonaonaigh).  Her mom (Chonaonaigh) is expecting a baby boy in a few months, towards the end of the summer.  However, downtrodden moods linger within these dreary walls that perch on a foundation of regrets.  

If any love exists in this remote farmhouse, it’s suffering on life support and hidden within a random crack in a forgotten closet.  Rather than boldly rise in stark opposition to her dismal surroundings, this thin, shy auburn-haired lass has absorbed nearly a decade of apathy and neglect.  Cait suffers in silence, struggles in school, and lives in fear of her father, a man who frequently gambles, drinks, and complains.  A trifecta of gloom and doom. 

Dan (Patric) never raises his voice (except, perhaps, when he loses a wager).  The man speaks softly while delivering barbs, insults, and jabs.  For some reason, he directs nearly all of them at Cait, as if she was the sole cause of his lifetime of disappointments.

However, life for Cait – suddenly - takes a positive turn.  With a houseful of mouths to feed and a baby on the way, Cait’s parents ship their “problem child” to another locale.  Eibhlin, a cousin who lives three hours away by car, and her husband Sean (Andrew Bennett) will look after Cait for the summer.  Eibhlin and Sean also run a farm, a dairy farmstead, and a relatively successful one, judging by their beautiful, warm home.  

They are an older, childless couple – in their 40s or 50s – and Eibhlin becomes instantly keen on Cait, doting on her from the get-go.  Meanwhile, Sean isn’t unkind, but he seems distant, like someone with fifty bricks strapped to his back, expending his entire daily exertion to keep his back upright for dignity’s sake.  The man could converse politely with their new houseguest, but the burden of his work prevents him from devoting more than a few words to Cait each day.  

Although, the emotional load may stem from somewhere else.  

Bairead weaves a straightforward tale – an adaptation of Claire Keegan’s 2010 88-page novella, “Foster” - of two starkly different households that directly speaks to the impact of parental love towards a child.  Specifically, “The Quiet Girl” contrasts the disconcerting damage when the aforementioned intention is missing and the blossoming wonder and joy when it endures. 

With a 94-minute runtime, Bairead and the cast don’t spend precious minutes with extraneous subplots and winding directions.  Most of the film basks on the two family properties, bastions for their respective opposing outlooks.  Admittedly, a majority of the activity occurs at Cait’s new summer home as the story eases into a hopeful transformation for the young girl, a child born into a destiny of self-doubt.  Perhaps, 10 short weeks with Eibhlin and Sean can change Cait’s fortunes, but can one season course correct years of disregard?  Especially when Sean provides a sturdy roof and food on the kitchen table but little else, at least during the first act.  

“The Quiet Girl” delivers its messages, not with lengthy exposition but with actions.  Bairead doesn’t tell us.  He shows us through simple gestures.  

For instance, Eibhlin brushes Cait’s hair with 100 strokes while counting along the way, and she takes Cait shopping for new clothes, as our interim matriarch looks tenderly towards a child who seems to have never worn original apparel in her life.  

Bairead and Crowley make Eibhlin’s kind intentions clear from the get-go.  Therefore, the story’s fulcrum pivots with Sean and Cait’s rapport, a non-existent one at first.  The question is:  Will Sean set aside his invisible bricks and turn towards this vulnerable and broken spirit?

This discreet review will not reveal this arc’s treasured details, but let’s say that the disparity between Dan (and his villainous nature) and Sean assuredly grows, as audiences may very well become captivated and constantly hope for continued moments of kind gestures, ones that may seem modest, but they are colossal movements towards repair and healing. 

Bairead and the film’s producers – including Cleona Ni Chrualaoi (who is Bairead’s wife) – made flat out brilliant casting choices.  Crowley and Bennett exude accessible charisma and sympathy as two on-screen guardians that double as guardian angels.  So much so, you’ll want to jump on a commercial flight to Ireland, stroll around their acreage, and enjoy a comforting supper topped with rhubarb pie.  Conversely, Patric and Chonaonaigh project a distressing concoction of indifference and callousness.  

The script draws clear divides between the Haves and Have Nots, however, Bairead laces the psychological and financial gulfs with irony because one couple is blessed with several children while the other longs for one.  

Cinematographer Kate McCullough will also tempt audiences to book flights to the Emerald Isle.  McCullough finds magical spots northwest of Dublin in County Meath, as towering, flourishing trees act as nature’s guides on country roads, and knotty wooden relics line walking paths that feel like we’re stepping into an ancient fable, even though Cait lives her childhood in the late 20-century.  

Here, farmers nurse calves with hand-held bottles while birds chirp, and casual hikes on lush grasslands under blue skies can last until 9:30 pm.  Meanwhile, composer Stephen Rennicks skillfully drops gentle melodies to instantly stir smiles or cause tears at just the right moments as we follow Cait on her journey to possible salvation. 

Catherine Clinch successfully carries the weight of this Oscar-nominated Best International Film on her slender shoulders.  Clinch’s Cait encompasses naivety, insecurities, and post-traumatic stress.  The movie could not work without this young actress communicating these painful feelings and letting them fall when Cait faces love and care. 

Oh, Catherine almost entirely accomplishes this feat through non-verbal cues. 

Jeff’s ranking

3.5/4 stars

---

Creed 3 - Movie Review

Dir: Michael B. Jordon

Starring: Michael B. Jordan, Jonathan Majors, Tessa Thompson, Wood Harris, and Mila Davis-Kent

1h 56m

The tagline for "Creed 3", the latest entry for the franchise started 47 years ago with "Rocky," is "You can't run from the past." Making his feature debut and third round playing the title character Adonis Creed, Michael B. Jordan doesn't run from the iconic past. Instead, "Creed 3" acknowledges the influence of the "Rocky" saga while stepping out from the shadow of Rocky Balboa with a film that stands firmly on its established trilogy foundation. Michael B. Jordan delivers a film with energy, allowing for excellent character development with a retired Adonis Creed and a new heavyweight contender played with nuanced menace by Jonathan Majors. Adding some flashy techniques to separate the boxing fight style from past films and "Creed 3" delivers consistently for 12 rounds.

Adonis Creed (Michael B. Jordan) has dominated the boxing world, leaving a legacy that sports enthusiasts honor while establishing a family life that no way near resembles his troubling upbringing as a youth. Creed owns a gym and mentors the current world champion while creating an outlet for up-and-coming fighters to train. Bianca (Tessa Thompson), Adonis' wife, is a successful music producer, and Amara (Mila Davis-Kent), their daughter, is tender and tough, just like her parents. When a childhood friend named Damien (Jonathan Majors), a boxing prodigy and mentor to young Adonis, is released from a lengthy prison sentence, Adonis feels compelled to help his old friend. Damien is ready to return to the ring. With nothing to lose, Damien is determined to reclaim what was taken from him at any cost, even when it means forcing Adonis out of retirement for another match.

"Creed 3" noticeably takes a decisive step to fight on its own, away from the "Rocky" franchise and without the iconic force of Sylvester Stallone to assist in any way. Aside from one mention of Rocky and a brief needle drop of the original score, "Creed 3" is its own story. And for the most part, it successfully builds an entertaining, if never too unfamiliar, arc of spectacle and emotion that lets Michael B. Jordan confidently own the character and directing responsibilities.

Jordan flexes his directing skills with the performers, specifically in scenes involving the primary supporting leads, Tessa Thompson and Jonathan Majors. Thompson may not have much to do on the page, but the actress brings a charm as a mom and confidence in scenes as a wife trying to understand the complicated trauma of her partner's past. Jonathan Majors steals the show throughout the film, playing a soft-spoken yet intimidating former friend to Adonis (who he calls "Donnie"). Majors is physically menacing both in and out of the ring; the actor consistently maintains an anxious and cautious posture, as if, at any moment, someone might attack him. As the film transitions, with Damien trading niceties for intimidations with his childhood friend, Majors' swagger turns tentative to threatening, making his villain the best of the "Creed" series.

In the ring, Jordan takes the opportunity to introduce a new style to the boxing composition. The flare with the fight scenes is inventive and action-packed, with slow-motion hits that make every punch feel like an explosion and cuts that keep the pacing frantic and unexpected for the viewer. There is even an artistic touch with the final bout in a ring shrouded in a haze of smoke and shadows intercut with flashbacks to emphasize the internal battle with the past for both fighters. It works in creating screen drama but takes away from the energetic emotion of the fight.

Michael B. Jordan proves a promising director to watch in the future. Jonathan Majors' performance is a big reason for the successful drama established for the film, and the family dynamic adds an emotional quality that makes the fight, in the end, have more significant stakes. "Creed 3" confidently moves with only a few knockdowns, establishing a film willing to fight its own match.

Monte's Rating

3.50 out of 5.00

---

Operation Fortune: Ruse de guerre - Film Review

Directed by: Guy Ritchie 

Written by: Guy Ritchie, Ivan Atkinson, and Marn Davies

Starring: Jason Statham, Aubrey Plaza, Bugzy Malone, Josh Hartnett, Cary Elwes,  and Hugh Grant

A film with captivating on-screen action, but the new weapon technology could have been bolder.  

Deadly operation ➢ Check

Weapons ➢ Check 

Quirky team ➢ Check

Hollywood star ➢ …check?

In this fast-paced action, Orson Fortune (Jason Statham) is the collected and composed lead special operations agent. Overcoming the challenge of working with new teammates, tech-wiz Sarah Fidel (Aubrey Plaza) and footman JJ Davies (Bugzy Malone), Fortune must complete this mission to save the world from dysfunction. 

Quirky and cohesive are two ways to describe the group as they utilize movie star Danny Francesco (Josh Harnett) as the ‘bait’ in an undercover mission to stop extravagant  billionaires, including Greg (Hugh Grant), from using a new technological AI weapon, nicknamed “The Handle.” But the operation never seems to go as planned when “Mike the Competition,” who -if the nickname didn’t give it away- leads the competing special operations team and constantly obscures Fortune’s plans. 

Phew! The film has a lot to cover in 1h 53m and does so in a variety of ways. In the beginning, the film places a lot of information on the viewers all at once, which can feel clustered at times, but I wouldn’t say this is uncommon for spy films that need to provide background information. Even with a lot of content, however, the execution is well-timed between scenes and there is plenty of concise repetition, like “Mike the Competition.”

Through the middle and end of the film, the informational release is more evenly paced, and of course,  includes incredible cinematography. Imagine two different scenes alternating on the big silver screen to give just the right amount of information on both topics. Including some of my favorite scenes between Sarah and Orson, as one finagles information from the web and the other smoothly breaks into a highly guarded area. Director Guy Ritchie purposefully includes transitions to give action-movie fans plenty to focus on. 

The characters, embodied through talented actors and actresses, felt consistent with the usual ‘mission impossible’ movie castings. Orson Fortune calmly leads the operation while receiving life-saving help from new partners JJ and Sarah. While Fortune possesses admirable qualities, like working easily with a completely new team, the bond between Fortune and his teammates isn’t particularly shown through actions as much as stated. 

The liveliness of the team is added through Aubrey Plaza’s well-rounded sarcasm as she acts the role of a hacker. However, as with many action films, Sarah fell into the background as a lead female character when her role doubled as the sexy, fake girlfriend who must downplay her intelligence in the presence of stuffy, rich people. Similarly, JJ conveniently aids Orson in life-threatening scenes but is on the back burner for the rest of the film.

Other characters that played the ‘bad guys’ were inconsistent in their resolve. At the slightest provocation, these characters were easily swayed from their world-changing plans. 

More nuanced roles and positions that deviate from the classic ‘lead spy,’ their ‘helpers,’ and fickle villains would better reflect and include the vast audience that is bound to see the film. 

While in consideration of the audience, the deadly new weapon technology that is part of Orson’s mission objective falls flat in our tech-heavy world. Our current understanding of ChatGPT, deep fakes, and calling for Siri/Alexa at any point has deeply influenced our forms of communication and will change our future. So, the new technological weapon in “Operation Fortune: Ruse de guerre” is underwhelming given the opportunity that our current basis of technology offers. 

Plot: ★★★☆☆ 3/5

Cinematography: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Character Arc(s): ★★☆☆☆ 2/5

---