The Baker – Movie Review

Directed by: Jonathan Sobol

Written by: Paolo Mancini and Thomas Michael

Starring: Ron Perlman, Emma Ho, Elias Koteas, Joel David Moore, and Harvey Keitel

Rated: R

Runtime: 100 minutes

‘The Baker’ is a stale vigilante story despite some curious ingredients

“So, who are you? Are you some special forces guy or something?” “I’m just a cook.” - “Under Siege” (1992)

“Are you a cop?” “I’m a baker” – “The Baker” (2022)

The aforementioned 1992 action film is arguably Steven Seagal’s most memorable movie. Casey Ryback (Seagal) is a cook on a United States battleship, the USS Missouri, when mercenaries take over the boat. However, Ryback is no ordinary cook. He’s a former Navy SEAL, so look out, baddies.

In director Jonathan Sobol’s “The Baker”, Ron Perlman plays the title role. Donald Gilroy (Perlman) owns Pappi’s Bake Shop, and Sobol’s camera captures our culinary hero kneading dough quite serenely.

Namaste, y’all.

However, Don has a secret, violent past, where he was surrounded by enough guns to recognize when a .38 caliber is fired just by listening to the shot. Well, his peaceful existence in the food industry is disrupted when his son Pete (Joel David Moore) witnesses a bloody and lethal clash between drug dealers. Pete leaves with a gym back full of drugs, the latest rage called Pink, but the head dealers want the sack of narcotics back.

So, Don cooks up an old recipe filled with ruthless aggression and vengeance in this indie action film where the 73-year-old Perlman convincingly bludgeons those who boil his blood pressure. Unfortunately, the story is as stale as month-old bread despite some curious choices, like a croissant with wasabi filling. (Not literally)

Still, diehard Perlman fans will probably enjoy watching their hero sauté screen time for 100 minutes, where he beats ruffians with bravado and grills gruff exchanges, and Elias Koteas and the legend Harvey Keitel sport supporting performances, so there’s that.

In the first act, Pete shows up at his dad’s place and asks him to watch his 8-year-old daughter Delphi (Emma Ho) for a bit while this chauffeur by trade hopes to drive into financial security. However, when Pete’s plans are poached, and he’s pounded into a pulp, Don needs to find his son’s whereabouts and shred the men responsible.

This one-man wrecking crew could confidently handle the collection of crooks on his own, but the problem is he needs to protect Delphi with one hand while thumping villains with the other.

From a top-down perspective, “The Baker” plays out like every vigilante movie you’ve ever seen. Donald’s baker profession barely works into the story, other than he uses a loaf of bread to hide “something” valuable. Geez, wouldn’t it be great if he suffocated his miscreant opponents with dinner rolls or frosting, or delivered a closing line before landing some vicious blows to a troublemaker?

“The Baker says you’re done!”

Sure, these ideas are campy, but at least they add some flavor to the narrative.

Sobol, screenwriters Paolo Mancini and Thomas Michael, and Ho portray Delphi as difficult, which – unfortunately - feels completely contrived. She devours our cook’s creations and leaves messes at the shop. Delphi is also mute, so Donald can’t communicate with her. Still, he regularly addresses Delphi as, “Hey, Brat.” As one might guess, their relationship becomes more cordial over time, as Don finds time to read a book to her and recall a memory when her dad and he engaged in a mushroom hunt in the woods.

Searching for mushrooms in the wild?

Whether he loses patience with Delphi or finds spaces for endearing grandpa-granddaughter time, her safety is paramount. Although she accompanies him on his hazardous trip all over the tropical locale, one filmed in the Cayman Islands. He’ll tell Delphi to wait in his food truck while he steps into a seedy bar or miserable apartment complex and combats a Ukrainian mobster who sports metal teeth or a dopey small-time dealer.

So, Delphi, lock the door and stay put. At one point, Don says, “Some things might happen. Some things you don’t wanna see,” so he instructs her to wear a virtual reality headset to block out any potential ugly sights or noise.

The movie isn’t particularly noisy – outside of the brutal slugfests – and because of Delphi’s silent temperament, Perlman is forced to have one-person dialogues throughout the film. He’s not quoting Shakespeare, and granted, we don’t expect him to be Hamlet, but Don fluently speaks multiple languages.

Still, he’ll occasionally bark, “Get me a chocolate bar, no peanuts,” but also fix the girl’s shoe without a second thought. He’s a good cop, bad cop, cobbler, vigilante, and baker all rolled into one.

“The Baker” adds some silly ingredients, like a CGI-created cockroach and hitmen walking around hospital rooms with their intimidating rifles out in the open, but the movie has some inspiring ones: defibrillator paddles used as a weapon and a black and white costume ensemble for the prime antagonist and his henchmen, a reverse color scheme of Darth Vader’s and the Stormtroopers’ attire.

Again, Perlman fans might gladly sit at the table and ask for seconds, but unlike Seagal’s cinematic turn as a gastronomic lead, “The Baker” isn’t the most palatable movie.

Jeff’s ranking

1.5/4 stars

---

Barbie - Movie Review

Dir: Greta Gerwig

Starring: Margot Robbie, Ryan Gosling, America Ferrera, Kate McKinnon, Issa Rae, Simu Lui, Michael Cera, Will Ferrell, and Ariana Greenblatt

1h 54m

The introduction for Greta Gerwig's vibrant live-action film "Barbie" features a film homage from one of the greatest science fiction films ever. It's the most unlikely of openings for the pretty-in-pink Mattel toy icon but, surprisingly, suits the silly yet sincere effort that creatively brings to life a witty and subversive story of changing times and shifting cultures. Director Greta Gerwig demonstrates a keen command of style and satire throughout the film, crafting a summer blockbuster that asks all the questions both admirers and naysayers of the most famous doll want answers for.  

Barbie Land is a world inhabited by the Barbie's being played with by humans. And, in Barbie Land, everything is perfect. The weather is always beach-appropriate. Dream houses are perfectly curated. And the fashion is runway approved. On top of everything, society functions effectively and peacefully with various influential Barbie's throughout history playing critical roles in every aspect. One Barbie (Margot Robbie) lives harmoniously with daily hangouts at the beach, nightly highly choreographed dance parties, and constant admiration from the Ken's, specifically one Ken (Ryan Gosling) who is determined to win Barbie's appreciation.

One morning, after having a distressing thought the night before, Barbie wakes up, and things are different. Her shower isn't refreshing. She falls off her house. And she quickly realizes that her heels are touching the ground! After meeting with Weird Barbie (Kate McKinnon), who is always in the splits and has permanent marker lines on her face, she journeys to the real world to find her owner and return things to normal in Barbie Land. 

Greta Gerwig understands that crafting a storytelling segue to connect Barbie meaningfully to the real world is the hardest part. Like other toy crossover films, "G.I. Joe" and "Transformers" come to mind; creating a meaningful story with engaging characters is always the most challenging aspect and often makes or breaks a film's success. Greta Gerwig and co-writer Noah Baumbach ingeniously bring Barbie to visually stunning life with a story centered on female empowerment, historical changes influencing gender roles, and the evolution of a cultural icon. The film does this all with a heavy dose of satirical humor and genuine sincerity for the representation of Barbie in the lives of young children. These topics are played with abundant fun through memorable musical setups, amusing dance choreography, and wonderfully constructed designs that feel transported into the Barbie Dream House. Gerwig curates Barbie Land with fascinating designs that are equally silly but inventive. 

Margot Robbie is sublime as the lead Barbie. The slow transition of the character, which starts as blissfully ignorant and morphs into self-aware confidence, is an excellent composition for Barbie's realization that the real world is cruel towards women and that the many identities women must embody are unfairly complicated. Robbie perfectly embodies the emotional arc. 

The supporting cast is also terrific throughout the film. Ryan Gosling hilariously portrays Ken as a hopelessly devoted heartthrob who arrives in the real world, learns about patriarchy, and returns to Barbie Land to make it his "Kendom." Gosling is having so much fun in this role. Kate McKinnon portrays Weird Barbie with perfect oddball qualities, Michael Cera is deadpan funny as Ken's forgotten buddy Allan, and America Ferrera grounds the comedy with a tender portrayal of a mom trying to reconnect with her daughter and manage the many facets of the world women must traverse.

The film moves with ease, maintaining a level of undeniably charming fun. As Gerwig begins to explore more in-depth what Barbie means in the cultural landscape, whether the representations are good or bad for young girls, the narrative shifts with an abundance of equally thought-provoking and extremely confounding ideas. While moving through these narrative discussions and on a path towards the eventual solution for Barbie's conundrum of new challenges and emotions in the real world, the film balances ideas that struggle to find a clear direction for the character. The answer to the question of Barbie's good or bad representation is ultimately positive but not without proposed complications. 

"Barbie's" third act soars with ideas, moving towards a finale that struggles to find a good place to end. Still, the film finds a way to conclude with a pitch-perfect punchline. Greta Gerwig found a way to make a Barbie movie that surprisingly honors the legacy of the toy doll while also providing heartfelt and humorous meta-commentary concerning the negative and positive representations found throughout shifting cultural times. "Barbie" is a journey of self-discovery at its core, one that, in the expert care of Greta Gerwig, proves to be a joyous display of female strength and solidarity.

Monte's Rating 

3.50 out of 5.00  

---

Oppenheimer – Movie Review

Directed and written by:  Christopher Nolan

Starring:  Cillian Murphy, Matt Damon, Emily Blunt, Robert Downey Jr., Florence Pugh, Jason Clarke, Tom Conti, Josh Hartnett, Matthew Modine, and Kenneth Branagh

Rated:  R

Runtime:  180 minutes

‘Oppenheimer’ works but not without misgivings

“Oppenheimer” – “It worked.” 

It did.  

J. Robert Oppenheimer (Cillian Murphy) was a physicist teaching Quantum mechanics at the University of California, Berkeley when United States Army Corps of Engineers Major General Leslie Groves (Matt Damon) taps him to lead The Manhattan Project at Los Alamos, N.M., a mission to develop the first working nuclear bomb in a race against the Nazis during WWII.  

History proved Oppenheimer was successful, as the U.S. first crossed the ominous finish line with the plutonium-based Trinity Test on July 16, 1945.  Less than a month later, the U.S. dropped two atomic bombs on Japan, and WWII was over.  

The moral implications of U.S. President Harry Truman’s actions on Japan will be questioned forever, and director/writer Christopher Nolan’s new film “Oppenheimer” explores the ethical dilemma about J. Robert and his team’s work in New Mexico versus the application of their invention.  

Well, the film explores this idea for a portion of his 180-minute runtime. 

In typical Nolan fashion, “Oppenheimer” is a technically gripping production.  He presents his familiar signatures of playing with time and frequently introduces rapid-fire edits that whisk the audience to and from wildly different locales and instances.  

However, Nolan also obsesses over political and bureaucratic theatre that entangled J. Robert after the war.  Yes, these events (or versions of these events) occurred and are part of the man’s legacy, but these moments digress (or are tangential at best) from the core story, which is the building of the first nuclear bomb.  

After watching the film twice, I estimate that the aforementioned administrative after-the-war muddle captures about 60 to 75 minutes of screentime, and this extended theme – indeed – grants a larger perspective of Oppenheimer.  However, ultimately, its inclusion feels like unneeded noise that bloats the runtime to three hours, where the last 50 minutes becomes a puzzling space of office infighting, backroom dealings, paperwork, and ambient lighting.  There is a method to Nolan’s madness, and he does close a loop introduced during the first act.  Debating Oppenheimer’s role in the upcoming atomic arms race – after the war - raises pacing issues and additional scope that feels better suited for a series.  How about a 6-hour, 6-episode series? 

Nolan based his screenplay on the 2005 biography “American Prometheus” by Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin, and the big-screen creation covers The Father of the Atomic Bomb’s life in three ways.  

• The man’s career through his university education, teaching at the University of California, Berkeley, and the Manhattan Project

• His personal life, including his relationship with his wife Kitty (Emily Blunt), a love affair with Jean Tatlock (Florence Pugh), his brother Frank (Dylan Arnold), and all their connections with the Communist Party 

• The political fallout after the war, especially his entanglement with Lewis Strauss (Robert Downey Jr.), a United States Atomic Energy Commission member 

The film brushes an artistic flair in spots, and the moments are welcome sights.  For instance, the picture’s second shot features raindrops falling on a puddle while our lead stares at their impact.  Nolan and cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytema repeatedly display similar examples on the screen, like lit embers floating from fiery explosions in space or Oppenheimer simply tossing drinking glasses into the corner of a room to witness the spread of the crystal shrapnel.  It takes a beyond-brilliant mind to lead the United States in Quantum mechanics, and Nolan and Van Hoytema use these visual tools to communicate the scientist’s thoughts.  

The pair also shift the on-screen events between color and black and white throughout the picture.  Quite frankly, it’s difficult to determine the reasoning, but the answer – that I found afterward - is online.  Still, I recommend watching the film without this knowledge and seeking it out after you leave the cinema. 

Conversely, Nolan leaves less to the imagination when Jean and J. Robert engage in a couple of raw sex scenes, ones that solidify the film’s R-rating.  These moments may be new territory for a Nolan picture, but they demonstrate Oppenheimer’s more primal urges.  He was a flawed man with his infidelities, and these scenes pragmatically indicate his indiscretions rather than have the audience wonder with interpretations. 

Otherwise, Nolan makes the audience work.  During the first two hours, Oppenheimer advances from student to professor to Manhattan Project director while frequently connecting with Frank’s communist friends, Jean, and his soon-to-be wife Kitty.  Meanwhile, he needs to design this impossible engineering puzzle, let alone solve it, so he meets dozens of academic experts, scientists, and engineers to map out a plan that ultimately costs two billion dollars over three years.  (Incidentally, Google says that’s 37.4 billion dollars in today’s money.)  

It's a whirlwind of faces, which are easy to remember, and names, which prove more difficult to recall, as they collectively design the specs and, of course, the dangers.  

From an actor’s perspective, Kenneth Branagh, Josh Hartnett, Rami Malek, Tom Conti, and Matt Damon (Groves) play vital parts in Oppenheimer’s career and in designing and constructing the Los Alamos facility and the bomb.  It leads to the infamous Trinity Test, which Nolan recreates on screen.  The 20-minute sequence, quite frankly, is the only reason to see this movie in the IMAX format, as the anxiety during the countdown and the detonation is a stressful horror show through the emotional anticipation, jump scares via wicked booms, and the frightening fireball awe. 

Nolan and Murphy also deal with this invention’s destructive force and future implications that “will outlive the Nazis.”  After three years of mathematical, scientific, and engineering toil, the implausible goal is achieved, and our film director and lead display the dichotomy of Oppenheimer’s achievement as the Father of the Atomic Bomb while he also realizes that he’s “The Destroyer of Worlds.”

Two brief, highly effective scenes drive home this infinitely important point, as we see a hero’s welcome that feels straight out of Maverick (Tom Cruise) landing on the aircraft carrier at the end of “Top Gun” (1986) versus Oppenheimer’s guilt over the victims in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.   

The ethical implications of Oppenheimer’s invention are the emotional pulls of the film.  Still, Nolan detours into broader issues, specifically, the escalation of the hydrogen bomb program, a subject handled in the most uneventful and dry collection of office discourse.  

The first two acts devote plenty of minutes to this subject.  Still, Robert Downey Jr. – inexplicably – seems to receive the most screentime during the movie’s last hour in a puzzling way to conclude an Oppenheimer biopic.  Eventually, Nolan gets to the point during the film’s final five minutes, but witnessing courtroom drama with Downey Jr., Jason Clarke, James D’Arcy, Dane DeHaan, Casey Affleck, and more doesn’t seem the best use of anyone’s time, especially after Nolan churns our insides with stress during the Trinity Test. 

Oppenheimer and his team are in a race to beat the Nazis to the bomb, but we never feel the stress of the contest.  Never.

However, Damon should consider himself in the Oscar race next spring, as he gives – hands down – the film’s best performance.  Damon’s Groves is Oppenheimer’s never-ending and constant caustic push from above to complete the job, but he almost always sprinkles in traces or heaps of humor while barking orders.  Oscar chatter will probably speak Murphy’s way as well, although this critic isn’t completely convinced.  Murphy looks nearly as thin as Christian Bale in “The Machinist” (2004), and he convincingly portrays, through poise and delivery, an incredible intellect who attempts to stroll in between the raindrops of Communist friends, sexual temptation, and governmental roadblocks to build the world’s most dangerous weapon.  Unfortunately, the man gets wet.  Curiously, during the second half of the film, someone chastises J. Robert about his several character flaws, however, other than Oppenheimer’s infidelity, we don’t see this list of imperfections portrayed on-screen.  Instead, we see an ambitious man performing his job while navigating the choppy waters around him.  So, I don’t know if Murphy communicates this intended range.  

As for the film, this critic wished that Nolan shortened his range to wrap up this story in 120 minutes and cut out all of the Lewis Strauss story.  All of it.  Instead, the film spends too much time diving into editing and storytelling choices that feel like Oliver Stone’s “JFK” (1991), but debating theories and clues of John Fitzgerald Kennedy’s demise are inherently more compelling than discovering who attempts to remove J. Robert Oppenheimer’s security clearance.  This is especially true when the latter built the first nuclear bomb.  There’s too much at stake to needlessly tangle the narrative into a paperwork tale as an extended epilogue.  

However, Nolan, his team, and the actors pour prodigious efforts into retelling Oppenheimer’s personal life, career direction, the planning and the building of the bomb, and the moral comeuppance.  So, overall “Oppenheimer” is an important film, and it works.  

Yes, it worked…but not without misgivings.  

Jeff’s ranking

2.5/4 stars

---

The Miracle Club - Film Review

Diretor: Thaddeus O’Sullivan

Writers: Joshua D. Maurer, Timothy Prager and Jimmy Smallhorne

Starring: Maggie Smith, Kathy Bates, Agnes O’Casey and Laura Linney 

What would you do for a miracle?

Four women lived in Ballygar, Ireland. All of them hope to gain a miracle from going on the pilgrimage to the sacred French town of Lourdes. 

Viewers in all range of religious belief will grow to understand why each woman seeks a miracle. Lily (Maggie Smith) lost her son to the sea when he was nineteen, and has grown old with Eileen (Kathy Bates) who fears a lump on her breast while living with an ungrateful husband in a household with six children. Agnes, a young mother and friends to both Lily and Eileen, fears she has wronged her son and has caused his muteness. 

With hope for winning, the three women sing together at their church’s talent contest as ‘The Miracles.’ And in one way or another, by perhaps even a miracle, all three women and Agnes’s son are able to attend the pilgrimage.

The hiccup? Chrissie, whose mother’s recent passing brought her back to Ballygar after 40 years strikes tension within ‘The Miracles.’ Unfortunately, Lily and Eileen are less than grateful to be joined by their late friend’s daughter. Audiences must ride the tension of a hidden past to discover if these women will be able to forgive themselves and their pasts. 

Academy Award Winners Maggie Smith and Kathy Bates, and Academy Award Nominee Laura Linney, captivate audiences once again in their performances as three women with an intertwined and sorrowful past. Actress Agnes O’Casey stuns with her own performance as a young mother, and doubles her role as an open-minded force that aids in bridging the relationship between Lily, Eileen and Chrissie.

The roles that each actress delves into acknowledges the struggles of motherhood. This created an overarching plotline about the emotional depths of families that each actress carried out with precision. Lily is a grieving mother, Eileen an overworked mother, Agnes a self-doubting mother, and Chrissie an at-the-time fearful, young mother. 

Director Thaddeus O’Sullivan ensured that each character had a close-up and moment to shine, working with the raw emotion of the written plot and acting to connect audiences in an intimate manner to the role of motherhood. Other captivating moments came from the frame of the women’s eyes, holding reflections of their surroundings. One particularly well-done scene included the reflection of a cross in Lily’s eyes as she declared her pilgrimage to Lourdes a necessary one.

Each frame kept audiences enraptured with the screen to not miss any meaning within this heartfelt comedy film.

Leaving many audiences to believe in the “strength to go on when there is no miracle.”

Plot: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Cinematography: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Character Arc(s): ★★★★☆ 4/5

---

Joy Ride – Movie Review

Directed by:  Adele Lim

Written by:  Cherry Chevapravatdumrong and Teresa Hsiao

Starring:  Ashley Park, Sherry Cola, Stephanie Hsu, and Sabrina Wu

Runtime:  95 minutes

‘Joy Ride’:  Grab your friends and enjoy this uproarious trip, an instant comedy classic, but maybe leave your easily offended Aunt Edna or sheltered Cousin Sheldon at home.  Maybe.

Have you ever grabbed some friends and organized a road trip?  Who hasn’t, right? 

Think back to that ride to the ballgame, amusement park, beach, or “the second largest ball of twine on the face of the Earth” (a “National Lampoon’s Vacation” (1983) reference).  

Did all your plans go perfectly?  

Of course not; mine rarely do, if ever.  

Going through the memory Rolodex of foolishness, I can recall:

• severely burning the top of my head – for the first time - at an all-day outdoor concert

• football stadium security throwing out a buddy for alcohol possession

• a friend leaving his wallet on top of our rental car, and of course, we drove off

• and attempting to golf 18 holes with a 30-mph wind whipping around the course during a Vegas bachelor party weekend  

Well, when comedic road trips go sideways on the big screen, just about every audience member can empathize with the protagonists.  Still, we can also laugh at the collection of on-screen calamities. 

First-time director Adele Lim (who wrote or co-wrote over a dozen projects including, “Crazy Rich Asians” (2018) and “Raya and the Last Dragon” (2021)) maps out and drives – along with writers Cherry Chevapravatdumrong and Teresa Hsiao – into wild, uproarious Rated-R hilarity in “Joy Ride”.

“Joy Ride” is an instant comedy classic, and I haven’t laughed out loud that much in a movie theatre since “Jackass Forever” (2022) and the off-the-wall horror short “Gnomes” (2023).  Admittedly, you will need a twisted sense of humor for the latter, but I digress.

The story centers around two BFFs, Audrey (Ashley Park) and Lolo (Sherry Cola), who met 25 years ago as, basically, the only Asian kids (their age) living in White Hills, a suburban community near Seattle.  

After a few on-screen minutes, Lim, Park, and Cola fly us to the present day.  Audrey is a lawyer, fast-tracking to becoming a partner, and Lolo is a talented artist with questionable tastes.  Her ceramics and sculptures – shaped of genitalia - belong in the Robert Mapplethorpe wing of a modern-art museum rather than her family’s restaurant.

These besties are opposites, an “Odd Couple”, if you will, but they love one another despite their differing outlooks and career trajectories.

Speaking of trajectories, Audrey’s boss assigns her to close a big-time business deal in China, and she takes Lolo along.  Audrey was adopted, and her birth mother is from China, so Lolo insists that her pal should seek her out.  This is Audrey’s opportunity to connect with her family and heritage, especially since she can’t string together two sentences of Mandarin.

The ladies soon gain two more comrades as the socially awkward Deadeye (Sabrina Wu) tags along, and they meet Audrey’s college roommate, Kat (Stephanie Hsu), who has become a household name in The Middle Kingdom as a famous actress. 

Admittedly, one needs to suspend disbelief that the quartet actually links up during Audrey’s critical business trip, but the four actresses share persuasive comedic chemistry, so swat away the semi-forced semantics.  

Lolo’s quick-witted, direct, matter-of-fact sensibilities frequently clash with Audrey’s snug comfort zone.  Our X-rated sculptor also rekindles her rivalry with Kat, as the two vie for the I’m-Audrey’s-True-Best-Friend-Forever title.

Metaphorically, think of this triad dynamic as Lolo convincing Audrey and Kat to skydive with her, but our artist removes our thespian’s parachute just before heaving her out the airplane door at 13,000 feet.

Meanwhile, Deadeye – and yes, we find out, through hilarious fashion, the reason for her nickname – is a constant source of goofball, inelegant discourse.  She’s always trying to fit in with the crowd but can’t quite work with life’s square pegs and round holes.  

If Lolo, Audrey, and Kat fly on this fictional plane, Deadeye will superglue herself to the wing so that she won’t be left behind.

Since “Joy Ride” is a boisterous comedy with female friends leading the way, “Bridesmaids” (2011) might be the first comparison film to come to mind.  Both flicks are wickedly funny, but Paul Feig’s movie runs over two hours, and you feel the length of that winding journey.  

While “Joy Ride” slides in at just 95 minutes, and before you know it, this roller-coaster ride is over.  The movie goes straight for the comic jugular during the opening minutes and doesn’t let up through oodles of physical stunts, sexual and bodily fluid gags, illicit banter, and some hard narcotics for good measure, and nearly all of it lands effectively.  

Lolo frequently attempts to direct traffic in China with her resourceful street smarts, but Kat’s past and Deadeye’s inelegance trip them up, while Audrey’s best-laid plans teeter on the edge of the abyss.  Even though Audrey plays a risk-averse, “Steady Betty”, Park has gifts for comedy, including a miraculous impression of a famous film and literary character. 

That’s just one of several surprises, including appearances by a real-life pro athlete and a memorable performance by Ronny Chieng, the most engaging actor in “M3GAN” (2022).

If I had to compare “Joy Ride” with other comedies tonally, “The Hanover” (2009) meets “There’s Something About Mary” (1998) comes to mind, but Lim’s film stands on its own, and she finds room for genuine heart through all the beautifully juvenile madness. 

This critic shed some tears during the – otherwise - 95 zany minutes, and I’m sure I wasn’t alone.  

But don’t go by yourself to “Joy Ride”.  Grab some buddies and enjoy the funniest film of the year…so far.  Just maybe leave your easily offended Aunt Edna or sheltered Cousin Sheldon at home, and your cinematic road trip should stay on course. 

Jeff’s ranking

3.5/4 stars

---

In America – Movie Review

Directed by:  Jim Sheridan

Written by:  Jim, Naomi, and Kirsten Sheridan

Starring:  Paddy Considine, Samantha Morton, Djimon Hounsou, Sarah Bolger, and Emma Bolger

Runtime:  105 minutes

The Oscar-nominated ‘In America’ is a pragmatic, heartfelt, and magical immigrant story

“No matter who you are or what you look like, how you started off, or who you love, America is a place where you can write your own destiny.” – former U.S. President Barack Obama

"Our nation is the enduring dream of every immigrant who ever set foot on these shores, and the millions still struggling to be free…this idea called America was and always will be a new world.” – former U.S. President George H.W. Bush

“We came to America because we had to get away from things.” – Christy Sullivan (Sarah Bolger)

The year is 1982, and the Sullivan family – Johnny (Paddy Considine), Sarah (Samantha Morton), and their two pre-teen daughters, Christy (Bolger) and Ariel (Emma Bolger) – hope to cross the Canadian border and into the United States.  Mom and Dad inform the girls that their Irish clan’s official story to the border guards is, “We’re on holiday.” 

Not true.  

The Sullivans are on a one-way trip to New York City.  They soon arrive in The Big Apple.  Johnny hopes to become a theatre actor, and Sarah can teach to help pay the bills.  

They move into a dilapidated apartment building, one with a broken elevator, hallway walls with peeling paint and graffiti, and a few drug addicts casually but seemingly always linger outside the front door.  Linger, not loiter, because the said gentlemen reside in the same crumbling abode.  

Money is scarce for this fresh-faced foursome but not love.  This loving family care for one another, but they circle the wagons a bit.  They are coping with tragedy, as Christy and Ariel’s brother (and Johnny and Sarah’s son) Frankie recently died.  Frankie passed off-camera before we meet the Sullivans.

However, they hope to write a different destiny and reach new dreams in director Jim Sheridan’s “In America”, an immigrant story and a considerate and soulful arthouse film filled with on-point tonal choices and five beautiful performances, including the Oscar-nominated Djimon Hounsou’s, as the Sullivans’ neighbor, Mateo.  

Written by Sheridan and his daughters, Naomi and Kirsten, “In America” is semi-autobiographical, as Jim moved from Ireland to Canada and then to New York City during the 1980s.  Sheridan’s younger brother Frankie died when Jim was 17, and he dedicates this film to him. 

(Morton and the Sheridans were nominated for Oscars as well, Best Actress and Best Original Screenplay, respectively.)

The Sheridans’ writing easily translates to the big screen, as Considine, Morton, and the Bolger girls all feel in tune with their characters’ authentic bonds.  Credit the actors for understanding the assignment, as the Sullivans collectively deal with grief, each one specifically highlighted.  Thankfully, these strangers in a strange land are supportive of one another and grateful for their blessings.  

For instance, Sarah can’t obtain a teaching position, so she works at a local ice cream parlor without complaint while Johnny struggles to land a role.  They live in a massive space, but their apartment is filled with random pigeons, and a bathtub that sits in the middle of the open floor plan.  They walk on uneven floorboards and hope for the best for hot water while pipes creak behind the plaster. 

It isn’t a lot, but all the Sullivans pitch in to make their household a presentable home, and their resiliency is infectious.  Straight away, the script establishes this emotionally and financially struggling family as earnest and vulnerable, and we’re instantly applauding their small victories and cursing their setbacks.  

For instance, Jim dramatically raises the stakes with this audience-character connection during Johnny’s attempt to win a high-wire carnival game in an immensely stressful scene crafted so skillfully that you’ll need to check a mirror when the film ends to determine if your hair turned white.  

“In America” is a slice-of-life movie with one exception, a significant plot point centered around Sarah and her health. 

Otherwise, Johnny’s auditions, Sarah’s work, and the Sullivans acclimating to NYC life soon fall away.  The film does focus on one moment where the girls struggle to fit in with their new Catholic school, but primarily, Mom, Dad, and the daughters challenge and counsel themselves within their four walls to settle on the past while pushing toward their future.  

Mateo – an artist known as “The Man Who Screams” and who paints “KEEP OUT” on his apartment door - plays a role in their healing, and the Sullivans, especially the girls – who aren’t afraid of him – return support through pure kindness.  

The new relationship between the Sullivans and Mateo is fostered on trust, and we hope it won’t break due to Johnny’s ego or potentially false impressions of the artist’s intentions.  Hounsou effectively plays Mateo as a loose cannon, a wildcard, and a gentle soul.  

Will their friendship last forever? 

Forever is a long time, but “In America” gives us about a year in New York City, where Sheridan references a particular magical 1982 movie throughout the picture.  Christy – 11 or 12 - narrates the film, which nods to the Sheridan sisters’ efforts and overlays a mystical, fairy-tale vibe on the family’s pragmatic stress and emotional churn.  

Not every immigrant story is magical, but this one and this movie are eternally captivating.

Jeff’s ranking

4/4 stars

---

Asteroid City - Movie Review

Dir: Wes Anderson

Starring: Jason Schwartzman, Scarlett Johansson, Tom Hanks, Jeffrey Wright, Tilda Swinton, Bryan Cranston, Ed Norton, Adrien Brody, Jake Ryan, Grace Edwards, Margot Robbie, and Steve Carrell

1h 44m

One-of-a-kind filmmakers like Wes Anderson are so unique in today's media-saturated world. The auteur's latest film, "Asteroid City," is a deeply satisfying mix of meticulously designed visuals, charming world aesthetics, and oddly fascinating characters, all the elements fans of Anderson have come to expect. The film is a maze of ideas that follows a stage play adapted for television that morphs into a film that switches between the behind-the-curtain workings of a stage production while a movie unfolds on stage. Confusing? Yes, it is. Charming and thought-provoking? Beyond all expectations. 

War photographer Augie Steenbeck (Jason Schwartzman), his three adorable daughters, and intelligent son Woodrow (Jake Ryan) are heading to Asteroid City to celebrate Asteroid Day. This celebration commemorates the day a meteor crashed and left a crater near the city. Woodrow is one of a few brilliantly minded young people invited to the small town, which consists mainly of a diner, an inn, and a gas station, for a science fair-like competition. Midge Campbell (Scarlett Johansson), a Hollywood starlet, is also in town with her daughter Dinah (Grace Edwards), who cutely finds a connection with Woodrow during an extraterrestrial event that traps the visitors in the small town by outside government forces. 

But that's only part of the picture. As the film opens in stark black-and-white photography on a 1950s-era television soundstage, a solemn narrator (Bryan Cranston) introduces the viewer to Conrad Earp (Ed Norton), a writer preparing a stage play for a television broadcast. In the hustle and chaos of theater preproduction, the committed cast of actors, who will eventually perform in the play, is introduced. Anderson, operating in two distinct moods initially, will eventually switch between the stage and film production of Asteroid City by the latter half of the film. 

While this narrative setup may sound like a complicated machine of moving parts, a metaphor for the beautifully orchestrated chaos that stage performances encompass, Wes Anderson handles " Asteroid City with expert care. In many ways, this film demonstrates how effortlessly the director composes the difficult balancing act of engaging his often-copied but seldom-matched style. The quirky yet emotionally complicated storytelling. And the ultra-specific performance motions for the actors. These all identify the Wes Anderson brand of filmmaking. 

"Asteroid City" is a town filled with very recognizable faces. Anderson has always stacked his films with notable names; this film is no different. Besides those mentioned in leading roles, Tom Hanks plays a supporting role as father-in-law to Augie, pistol firmly in the waistband. Tilda Swinton is a wild-eyed scientist involved with monitoring the cosmos. Jeffrey Wright is a stern military official in charge of keeping secrets. Steve Carrell is the bewildered manager of the motor inn. Margot Robbie arrives as an actress contemplating the art of performance. The entire cast is excellent in their performances.

While the composition within the frame and the dedication of the cast are both exceptional and are entirely reminiscent of Wes Anderson's distinctive style, the construction of the story, also written by the director, is the highlight of the entire film and a standout amongst the filmmaker's catalog of work. Anderson has always analyzed the human condition, especially the contemplations of desire, love, fear, and hope in an upside-down world. In a world where a lobby boy must adhere to a standard of prestige while falling in love, all against dramatically changing times in history in "The Grand Budapest Hotel." Or, amid a love triangle at a private school, a student must seek understanding between love, friendship, and a vendetta during changing teenage and adult times in "Rushmore." In "Asteroid City," the threats of the unknown, whether an extraterrestrial hovering over the earth, motivations of life after encountering death, or the journey of understanding that complicated word called "art," are analyzed in numerous ways with thoughtful curiosity and fascinating questions. Even during its messiest, chaotic search for the meaning of these themes, "Asteroid City" exudes immense heart and charm through a creative lens and within a structured style that displays Wes Anderson's artistic heart and contemplative mind working in fantastic balance. 

Monte's Rating

4.25 out of 5.00

---

Elemental - Movie Review

Dir: Peter Sohn

Starring: Leah Lewis, Mamoudou Athie, Ronnie del Carmen, Shila Ommi, Wendi McLendon-Covey, and Catherine O'Hara

1h 43m

Pixar continues to explore the realms of emotions, both simplistic and complicated, with their progression of animated films targeted at young audiences, recently, however, focusing on a more mature youth demographic. "Elemental" is the newest film from the beloved animation studio, and the target narrative themes revolve around love, diversity, inclusion, and pursuing your passion. While these topics have their exploration in other Pixar films, like "Up," "Inside Out," and most recently "Turning Red," "Elemental" is the first to function and embrace the qualities of a bonafide rom-com. While the structure of this genre characteristic doesn't allow for many surprises or, like the best of Pixar animations, the thoughtful emotional dives that engage children and adults, watching a romantic comedy with shades of "Romeo and Juliet" without the tragedy, told through the vessels of animated elements of fire and water, is fascinating. 

Element City is a special place where a mix of Fire, Water, Land, and Air residents live together. These elements coexist within the city, working and commuting together, except those residing in Fire Town. Ember Lumen (Leah Lewis) is a feisty and confident fireperson on the verge of taking over the family business from her parents (Ronnie del Carmen and Shila Ommi), who emigrated from Fire Land before Ember was born. Ember has an anger issue; it's a trait Ember's father would like her to have more control over. After a fiery outburst, a water pipe ruptures in the middle of the biggest sale of the year for the business. Ember, desperately trying to fix the water leak, meets Wade (Mamoudou Athie), a water person who emerges from the ruptured pipe and works for Element City. 

Once Ember and Wade connect, their relationship quickly transitions through the familiar rom-com tropes; they move from misguided enemies to fast friends and eventually to a romantic couple. It's amusing to watch all these conventional genre setups take place through the characterization of two talking elements, a beautifully composed flickering flame for Ember and a glistening droplet of water for Wade. The story rarely strays from its blossoming love plot line; however, within the relationship-building scenes where Ember and Wade grow closer, "Elemental" soars with amusement surrounding the unique ways these characters interact with the environment around them, most sweetly, how fire and water are inherently connected even though tradition wants to keep them separated. 

The artistic composition of Element City, along with the residents living within, is elegantly rendered. Pixar continues to push their creativity in animation design, "Elemental" is no different as almost every character has a consistently unique, meticulously constructed arranged motion throughout their form. In one of the best scenes, Ember and Wade go to a sports arena and watch a game called Air Ball; the animation throughout this scene uses all the specific characters abilities, even allowing Wade to organize a literal wave with the screaming home team fans.

It's fun watching Pixar compose such a universally familiar cinematic story. Romantic comedy films have many renditions, modified through changing societal, political, and cultural lenses worldwide, but the core characteristics remain the same. Two lovable people met either cleverly or disastrously. They find common ground, which leads to a budding romance. Some situational force is applied to pull them apart, the couple realizes they can't live without one another, and amidst some calamitous final obstacles, a happy ending arrives against the odds. It's a formula that Pixar engages throughout "Elemental" that allows for the indulgence of metaphors surrounding race relationships, cultural misunderstandings, immigration, and socioeconomic inequalities. With these underlying narrative commentaries, the story paints a surface-level world where acceptance and love conquer all, where our differences shouldn't cloud the emotion of love for family, community, or that special someone in your life. It's only as the film moves further into its world-building, where Fire people hate Water people for perplexing reasons, where cultural identifiers are introduced, when the metaphors implied by the world and characters start to feel muddled. Still, as Pixar leans into the romantic comedy, it's hard not to get wrapped up in the feel-good qualities of watching two people find friendship and love in a complicated world.

Monte's Rating

3.50 out of 5.00

---

The Flash - Move Review

Dir: Andy Muschietti

Starring: Ezra Miller, Michael Keaton, Sasha Calle, Michael Shannon, Ron Livingston, and Maribel Verdú

2h 24m

Barry Allen, a young man blessed yet burdened with the superpower of immense speed, follows the archetype of many comic book heroes. In that, tragedy almost always defines and drives the motivation of the pursuit of justice against evildoers for these heroic characters. At the beginning of director Andy Muschietti's "The Flash," Barry Allen, an intelligent goofball with super speed powers, supports the Justice League and performs death-defying feats, like saving a crumbling hospital full of plummeting infants. However, there is one tragic event Barry yearns to alter, the untimely death of his mother. Muschietti, working off a script written by Christina Hodson, imbues "The Flash" with an energetic and humorous spirit supported, even amidst immense controversy surrounding its lead star Ezra Miller, with multidimensional fan service that does just enough to hide the issues with a messy script and problematic visual effects.

The story begins with Barry Allen (Ezra Miller), the happy-go-lucky speed demon Flash, playing second-fiddle to Justice League partner Batman (Ben Affleck). Barry, struggling to understand his role within a group of superheroes who seem to take their task of delivering justice with significantly more seriousness, is trying to find a way to change a traumatic event from his childhood. After a moment of heightened emotion, Barry realizes he can move fast enough to alter time. With the realization that his super speed can help course correct his life, returning the ones he has lost by simply changing one small element of the past, Barry returns to his childhood and saves his parents (Ron Livingston and Maribel Verdú). But toying with the delicate fabric of time comes with consequences, and Barry, trying to achieve a perfect balance of adjustments to the timeline of his life, gets stuck in the past with a teenage version of himself. 

"The Flash" does an exciting job of retelling an origin story. Instead of the obligatory flashback scene, Mushietti reverse-engineers the tale of how Flash got his powers and places two versions of Barry Allen, an older, more responsible version and a younger, more foolhardy version, on a journey of discovery. It's a fun narrative mechanism that allows for a few introspective character development moments that assist in making this hero's journey resonate with a stronger emotion. At the center, underneath all the spectacle, is a story of a young man and the relationship he lost with his mother. When "The Flash" engages with this aspect, which unfortunately is far too minimal, the film offers a superhero movie searching for something greater than simplistic fanfare. 

The DC Cinematic Universe has promised some big surprises with its multiverse mania. And there are a few jaw-dropping surprises that rival what Marvel has done with their recent adventures into the multiverse. One of the film's highlights comes from the addition of actor Michael Keaton returning to the role of Batman from 1989. Keaton, who arrives nearly unrecognizable, is retired from his days as the Caped Crusader but returns to assist the Barry's with their time-traveling journey and keep his realm of the Universe safe from an invading General Zod, played by Michael Shannon from 2013's "Man of Steel." Keaton is terrific, playing a surprisingly significant role throughout the film's latter half and adding wit and charm underneath a gravelly voice that made his original Batman so engaging. 

"The Flash" starts with flare, fizzles, and then finishes with a chaotic, overloaded finale that will either amaze or disappoint, depending on your love for DC Comics. While there are moments when the film moves at a fun and frantic pace that allows The Flash to utilize the entire cinematic scope to engage in a superhero spectacle, it also depends too heavily on elements of nostalgia to cover up the issues with its underdeveloped narrative. Still, director Andy Muschietti and team compose an easy summer popcorn film with enough fan service to entertain comic book movie fans.

Monte's Rating 

3.00 out of 5.00

---

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny – Movie Review

Directed by:  James Mangold

Written by:  James Mangold, Jez Butterworth, John-Henry Butterworth, and David Koepp

Starring:  Harrison Ford, Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Mads Mikkelsen, John Rhys-Davies, and Ethann Isidore

Runtime:  154 minutes

‘Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny’ points downward, as the film disrespects and damages our beloved hero

“Just go ahead.  I’ll follow you.” – Indiana Jones (Harrison Ford) says to Helena (Phoebe Waller-Bridge)

It’s been 15 years since audiences have last seen Dr. Henry Walton “Indiana” Jones, Jr. on the big screen in “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” (2008), and 42 summers since Harrison Ford first donned the famed brown fedora and cracked a bullwhip in “Raiders of the Lost Ark” (1981).  

This critic was 11 years young in 1981, witnessed Ford’s first Indy appearance in theatres, and was dazzled by the actor’s swashbuckling alter-ego who raced against Nazi Germany and Rene Belloq (Paul Freeman) to recover the Ark of the Covenant.  Only three movies mattered to this Gen X kid at that time: “Raiders”, “Star Wars” (1977), and “The Empire Strikes Back” (1980).  

That’s it.  That’s the list.  Well, until “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan” (1982) invaded cinemas the following year.   

Let’s just say that Ford’s stature – playing both Han Solo and Dr. Jones – towered as lofty as Dear Old Dad’s.  Still, did Pops fly the Millennium Falcon or duke it out with a hulking Nazi mechanic on top of a plane?  (Granted, the said plane hadn’t taken off yet.) 

This critic has captured permanent reverence for Ford and Indy for four decades and counting.   

So, it brings me great sorrow to report that “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” is an ordinary and (sometimes) misguided adventure that attempts to recycle landmark beats – with its action set pieces, a mystical artifact, and John Williams’ score – and the film is undercut by a rambling runtime and outright disrespect towards its iconic character. 

In short, I’m sorry that I watched this movie.  

However, it doesn’t begin that way.  

The picture opens in 1944, and the Nazis are collecting a treasure trove of relics.  A 40-something Dr. Jones and his colleague Basil Shaw (Toby Jones) confront seemingly dozens of soldiers and officers, and the two become tangled in their adversaries’ grand theft.  Complete with impossible escapes, clever misdirection, and a daring brawl on top of an enormous moving vehicle, Jones and Shaw attempt to secure the Lance of Longinus, otherwise known as the blade that allegedly stabbed Jesus Christ, and something called the Antikythera, a device constructed by Archimedes, the Greek mathematician born in 287 BC.  

The VFX de-aging technology applied to 80-year-old Harrison Ford looks great.  The technical know-how is on its way to almost feeling authentic, but yes, the illusion is flawed when Indy speaks.  

Despite the realistic but admittedly imperfect images of a middle-aged Indiana and also the final confrontation looking manufactured in a lab, this 21-minute opening sequence feels like the DNA of a classic Indy adventure, as the nostalgia and joyous action-adventure accolades return.  

The pacing and thrills are on-point!

But the warm, enjoyable feelings don’t last. 

The emotional gulf between 1944 Europe and the film’s sudden shift to 1960s New York City feels as jarring as Indy securing the Chachapoyan Fertility Idol versus the tiny podium sinking, triggering pandemonium and a giant rolling boulder in “Raiders”.  

The earnest, heartfelt memories – permanently etched in our brains – of this virile and brilliant hero of three big-screen adventures – and yes, begrudgingly, a lackluster fourth too – dramatically crash into this late 1960s reality that director/co-writer James Mangold and writers Jez Butterworth, John-Henry Butterworth, and David Koepp conjured. 

Dr. Jones wakes on a recliner in his cramped NYC apartment, attempts to get organized, tramps to his 20-something neighbors’ abode to complain about the noise (in a stereotypical “get off my lawn” moment), and leaves to teach at a nearby college.  Hunter College, I believe, but only after Mangold’s camera reveals that Marion (Karen Allen) issued divorce papers.  

Remember the happy ending of “Crystal Skull”?   Well, forget it.  This introduction spells out Dr. Jones’ sad life.  Why would the filmmakers and Lucasfilm portray our hero this way?  Is this how diehard and casual fans dreamt of Indy’s golden years?  

Oh, while he lectures at school in front of a smattering of uninterested students who would all rather be navigating on their phones if it was 2023, memories of his class during “Raiders” seem like a million and a half years ago.  

You know the scene.  

A student wrote “Love You” on her eyelids and blinks slowly, so our hero could see her artwork.   Go back and watch that moment.  As Steven Spielberg pans across the classroom, every young woman is transfixed, even mesmerized by every word spoken by a 30-something Indy!   

So, the deliberate, striking contrast between the classrooms is all by design.  

No question, the filmmakers and Lucasfilm want to portray that Dr. Jones’ life is in misery.

Drudgery. 

Indiana is now a relic.  

Enter Helena (Phoebe Waller-Bridge).  

She’s 30-something years young, Basil’s daughter, and Indy’s goddaughter.  Dr. Jones hasn’t seen Helena in a couple of decades, but she’s here for a purpose:  to find clues to locate Antikythera, otherwise known as the Dial of Destiny, and even better if Indiana possesses half of it!  This ancient item could wield incredible power, and Helena – a scientist or at least an immeasurable study of the Dial – looks to sell it and make some cold, hard, black-market cash.  

Wait?  Doesn’t she want to follow in her late dad’s archeologist footsteps?  

Well, a small band of well-armed villains – led by former Nazi, Dr. Jurgen Voller (Mads Mikkelsen)  - want the Dial at any cost and are willing to pay for it by leaving a hefty body count.  They appear out of nowhere, and Indy and Helena are on the run in The Big Apple.  The script doesn’t give Voller much to say - other than one sinister, memorable exchange with a New York City hotel worker - or do.  

(I can’t recall a second Voller line either.  He’s the opposite of Hans Gruber (Alan Rickman) from “Die Hard” (1988).)   

Still, he and his baddies are consistently ever-present.  They routinely materialize out of thin air, like magic, or after taking extensive lessons from Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem) from “No Country for Old Men” (2007) or the T-800 (Arnold Schwarzenegger) from “The Terminator” (1984), so there’s that.

Anyway, Indy also chases after Helena, and as a detour, he takes a horse ride in the subway system to showcase an eye-rolling, silly sequence.  

Eventually, they both arrive across the pond in Morocco (and other locales) to secure the Dial’s other half.  However, Indy is forced to continue to trail her for a while because this is Helena’s journey for the money or, perhaps, altruistic reasons down the line.    

During the 1st act, Helena attempts to convince Indy that finding the Dial’s other half could be one last triumphant adventure for him.  Then again, she leaves him for dead at one point.  

Really?   She’s not a very thoughtful goddaughter. 

What we do know is that Helena is exceptionally smart and athletic.  She can fire a gun with deadly accuracy, ride a motorcycle, and leap onto a plane without breaking a sweat.  Helena, however, has some help.  Teddy (Ethann Isidore), a proficient teenager, is her right-hand man in helping her navigate out of precarious predicaments.  Still, the script doesn’t build opportunities for friendly chemistry between Teddy, Indy, and Helena, despite the young man possessing a never-ending reserve of ingenuity. 

Even though “The Dial of Destiny” has Indiana Jones in the title, the plot is centered around Helena’s pursuits.  For some stretches, Indy feels like HER sidekick.  Meanwhile, Indy’s advanced age is verbally and physically raised frequently, including Helena zipping by him while climbing up a rock face.  

For the record, where is Dr. Jones’ son, Mutt (Shia LaBeouf)?  The screenwriters – in a cheap trick - ensured that Mutt won’t return in this movie.  

Imagine a Tarzan film where the Lord of the Jungle is in his golden years, his late 70s.  Jane breaks up with him off-screen, and Boy is no longer in the picture.  Meanwhile, a new 30-something heroine – who we had never met before – arrives.  First, she antagonizes him.  They reluctantly form a team, but she swings on Tarzan’s old tree vines toward her destination while he follows close behind.  Although walking would be a better option because he regularly has back pain.

That is essentially the mojo of “Dial of Destiny”. 

The 1960s action scenes are competently drawn up but seem like derivatives from past films, such as a haphazard but ineffectual auto rickshaw dash across narrow streets, yet another creepy-crawly critters reveal, and a scuba gear dive complete with eels instead of snakes.  During the scuba sequence, we can’t see Helena’s, Indy’s, or a special cameo’s faces behind the masks, and this fact siphons the suspense.  Again, these moments (and more) were competent but not engaging, no matter how many times Williams’ score kicked in.  To be fair, the final reveal of the Dial’s power earns a genuine surprise, but it occurs very late in the 3rd act, after an awful lot of running around.  

(I should also mention that a certain miracle occurs sometime during the 154-minute runtime that doesn’t endure through cinematic magic but through the screenwriting sorcery of a ridiculous plot contrivance.)

Ford – in his late 70s during the filming – doesn’t possess the dexterity of his 39-year-old self in 1981, so from a physical perspective, playing more of a supportive role in this film makes sense.  Age comes into play in a real way.  For instance, one of Voller’s henchmen, a humongous sight with the imposing size of Alan Ritchson, takes a swing at Indy, and one might wonder if one punch would kill our beloved doctor.  

Granted, Harrison is in tremendous shape, as shown during the opening shot of the 1960s Indy.  We should all be grateful to be in his physical condition at 80 years young.  

However, why not have Indy pseudo-cater to a character we know, like Mutt?  Recast Mutt if including Shia is a problem.  

Okay, why not pair him with Short Round (Ke Huy Quan)?  After the success of “Everything Everywhere All at Once” (2022), failing to cast Ke is an unbelievable missed opportunity.  

How about an Indy-Short Round adventure? 

Raise your hand if you’d like to see THAT movie!

How about de-aging Harrison for the entire film?  

Here’s a novel idea:  don’t greenlight this movie at all.   

“Dial” is not an awful movie, but the filmmakers made some dreadful decisions, including an exchange during the 3rd act when Helena and Indy engage in the most shameful moment in the entire series, and there’s not a close second place.  

A moment so egregious and appalling, I set down my notebook and held my head in utter disbelief.  This scene significantly damages and – as mentioned earlier - disrespects this character.   

So, should fans watch this final installment of Ford playing his legendary role?

Go ahead if you want, but this critic won’t follow.

Jeff’s ranking

2/4 stars

---

No Hard Feelings - Film Review

Director: Gene Stupnitsky

Writers: Gene Stupnitsky and John Phillips

Starring: Jennifer Lawrence and Andrew Barth Feldman

She may not have a car, but she can drive you crazy

With her life in shambles, Maddie Barker (Jennifer Lawrence) needs a quick fix for her carless status. No Car = No Money. As an Uber Driver for summer vacationers, Maddie needs the job to pay off the taxes on her late mother’s (now her) home.

On the other side of the wealth scale are Mr. and Mrs. Becker. These helicopter parents are willing to give away their old car in exchange for a woman’s ability to teach their son the ways of the world. Of course, the son in question, nineteen-year-old Percy Becker (Andrew Barth Feldman) will not make this easy, even though he’s unaware of the curated dating scheme that Mr. and Mrs. Becker have planned with Maddie.

While Percy’s choice to wear a formal blazer and tie… with shorts… will surely have every audience member full-out belly laughing; especially as Percy and Maddie continue to clash on screen like never before seen. Director Gene Stupnitsky kept this 1-hour and 43-minute film moving from scene to scene with R-rated comedy content that will make you gasp. From outfits to awkward close-ups of Maddie attempting to get close to Percy, Stupnitsky keeps humor alive in the visual intensity of a small, two-person, focal point.

Helping with the visual intensity are Jennifer Lawrence and Andrew Barth Feldman, who both dominate the screen, with or without clothes on. They grapple with the romantic, platonic, and familial ideologies that audiences are pleased to find in many current films. In ‘No Hard Feelings’ the romance is silly, and the platonic relationships develop over time, but the familial issues and personal worries are offputting from the rest of the film because of their realism.

The big shifts from funny to serious are just that, big. While enjoyable and filled with comedy gold, the film does take a turn when adding in the personal struggles that both Maddie and Percy separately face. At times, it felt that there could have been more content or dialogue added to the issues that the characters faced. However, audience members are still given plenty of time to digest the heartfelt matters of family dynamics in-between laugh-out-loud scenes.

Within the plot, it is hard to agree with some of the decisions that Maddie makes throughout the film. Whether her decisions are fake-dating a nineteen-year-old or speeding away from a police officer, Maddie is bold and eye-catching with a lot of secrets beneath the surface.

In truth, Maddie may not be written as the most ‘loveable’ character, but viewers may come to love her final decisions.

Plot: ★★★☆☆ 3/5

Cinematography: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Character Arc(s): ★★★☆☆ 3/5

---

Persian Lessons – Movie Review

Directed by:  Vadim Perelman

Written by:  Ilja Zofin

Starring:  Nahuel Perez Biscayart, Lars Eidinger, Jonas Nay, Alexander Beyer, and Leonie Benesch

Runtime:  127 minutes

‘Persian Lessons’:  This WWII concentration camp story speaks to compelling, stressful cinema

In director Vadim Perelman’s WWII film, Klaus (Lars Eidinger) insists that Reza (Nahuel Perez Biscayart) teach him Farsi.  After the war, Klaus wishes to move to Tehran and open a restaurant, so speaking the local language – obviously - would be helpful. 

Here’s the problem.  Reza doesn’t know Farsi.  It’s not his native language, and even though Reza claims to be Persian, he isn’t.  

Why does Klaus insist on Reza becoming his tutor?  Why is Reza playing a charade?

“Persian Lessons” isn’t a traditional battlefield WWII picture, but Reza is forced to play a battle of wits, and his life will surely end if he makes a mistake.   

You see, Reza is a Jewish Frenchman.  The Germans capture him, and he confronts a mindless, on-the-spot execution in the middle of a forest.  In a last-ditch effort to survive, Reza falsely declares that he’s Persian.  Luckily for him, the SS soldiers knew Deputy Commandant Klaus Koch’s hopes of finding a Farsi instructor.  Reza’s life is miraculously saved…for the moment.

Ah, if only he knew Farsi. 

Now, our entrapped lead will attempt to teach – to him - an unknown language in close quarters, one-on-one, facing a face of evil who could slay Reza faster than you can say, “heartless murder.”  

The screenplay, written by Ilja Zofin, was adapted from Wolfgang Kohlhaase’s short story, “Erfindung Einer Sprache” (which translates to “Invention of a Language”), and Reza does precisely that.  He needs to invent his version of Farsi each day, which seems impossible.  How can he instantly conjure up words one afternoon and then remember them exactly – the way he made them up - the next day, the day after, and the day after that?  

What noun, verb, adjective, adverb, preposition, or indefinite article did he randomly supply to Koch last month? 

Would Koch immediately kill Reza if he discovers the truth?   Absolutely.  Perelman and Eidinger reinforce this point with our introduction to Koch – very early in the first act - as he shouts, berates, and belittles a subordinate on her messy penmanship.  

The film pits Reza and the movie audience into a suffocating, stressful quandary over 127 minutes.  When Commandant Koch asks Reza (whose real name is Gilles) the Persian word for bread, fork, spoon, tree, or anything else, we hang on every millisecond of the prisoner’s thought process and response.  Sometimes, the waiting game can be agonizing, like walking into a minefield and wondering when the next step will be Reza’s last.  

You can cut the tension with a Nahkampfmesser, and these frequent encounters create frightening and compelling cinema.  Eidinger and Biscayart feed off each other’s characters in this inequitable, unjust dynamic, and their relationship transforms a bit.  A reverse Stockholm syndrome somewhat emerges.  Koch develops a reliance on – and finds value in – Reza, more accurately, value in his work, a unique thought from a SS officer.  Reza performs an indispensable, transactional service.  Koch shows appreciation by offering Reza some old apparel but adds that they no longer fit (him) because he’s gained weight while running this camp.  It is a particularly telling and insensitive comment because this critic recently visited Dachau concentration camp, and the guide stated that prisoners received about 200 calories of food a day.

And if Koch discovers the truth, his shattered faith will only escalate his ire.

Zofin’s screenplay doesn’t solely focus on these Persian lessons, as the story dives into the internal politics between the German officers and soldiers, which is a curious choice.  Although, these subplots and exchanges highlight Koch’s colleagues’ doubts about Reza’s heritage, another pillar of doom for our lead. 

While the Germans - Max (Jonas May), Elsa (Leonie Benesch), or the Camp Commandant (Alexander Breyer) - discuss Reza and debate demotions and camp command structures, our thoughts also linger with worry on Reza’s next linguistic lecture.  

Cinematographer Vladislav Opelyants lathers this isolated dwelling of death with dank, dusty, and depressing browns, grays, and greens, reflecting the lack of hope for Reza and the others.  However, we don’t meet other prisoners, except for a pair of brothers from Italy. 

Still, executions transpire without warning, and on one random day, filled bunks are suddenly emptied.  Death or the threat of it surrounds Reza, and his only possible recourse is convincing Koch that he’s genuinely learning Farsi.  For how long? 

Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

Flamin’ Hot – Movie Review

Directed by:  Eva Longoria

Written by:  Lewis Colick and Linda Yvette Chavez

Starring:  Jesse Garcia, Annie Gonzalez, Dennis Haysbert, Tony Shalhoub, and Matt Walsh

Runtime:  99 minutes

‘Flamin’ Hot’ is a warm, inspirational, and stand-up-and-cheer underdog story

“I’ve got a PhD.  I’m poor, hungry, and determined.” – Richard Montañez (Jesse Garcia)

Audiences should feel physically hungry and emotionally satisfied after watching “Flamin’ Hot”.  You see, Richard, a long-time janitor at Frito-Lay’s Rancho Cucamonga factory, convinced the company to push his spicy snack food idea, Flamin’ Hot Cheetos, to market, in director Eva Longoria’s film, a biopic about Mr. Montañez and his success.  

“When I first read the story, I cried four times.  How do I not know this story?  I’m Mexican American.  This guy’s a hero from my community.  I want to shout this story from the highest mountaintop,” Longoria says in an April 2023 interview with IMDb.  

Longoria and writers Lewis Colick and Linda Yvette Chavez do call out Richard’s narrative, but the movie unfolds at ground level in a personal, touching account of a family’s love, support, and heritage. 

The 99-minute flick moves linearly, and we see Richard’s entrepreneurial spirit at a young age.  Born in Ontario, Calif., he became popular in elementary school by selling burritos at lunchtime, bringing smiles to his classmates and himself.  However, the harsh realities of instilled racism of the 1970s struck down his enthusiasm.  Richard drops out of high school, turns away from education, and spins to mischief and criminal pursuits.  

Thankfully, Judy (Annie Gonzalez) – his loyal and steadfast girlfriend and then wife – sticks by Richard and continuously coaches him out of crooked careers and towards honest, earnest choices.  

A quote from another film comes to mind when thinking about Richard’s crossroads. 

“I always knew what the right path was.  Without exception, I knew.  But I never took it.  You know why?  It was too damn hard,” – Lt. Col. Frank Slade (Al Pacino) from “Scent of a Woman” (1992)

With Judy’s ever-present moral compass and wells of encouragement, Richard does choose the right path, despite emotional and economic adversity.  Their road is too damn hard, but they still place one foot in front of the other.

Jesse and Annie are dynamite as an on-screen couple.  Colick and Chavez’s script and the two leads dedicate several touching moments where Judy offers caring words or frank sermons about his and their family’s constructive direction.  

(For the record, cheers to the hair department for offering several hairstyles for Judy over the movie’s 20-year (or so) timeline.  Their thoughtful efforts have not gone unnoticed.)

It’s not entirely clear, but Judy – this critic believes – works in retail.  Richard applies for work at the local Frito-Lay plant as a janitor.  The couple’s partnership – in landing his job - shines on full display, like Las Vegas Blvd. on a Saturday night in two moments that will elicit empathy and playful chuckles, respectively. 

Richard starts his new gig, and – straight away - he discovers the corporate caste system but forms friendships and dodges internal antagonists as best he can.  Dennis Haysbert delivers a welcomed performance as Clarence C. Baker, the factory’s lead engineer, as the actor’s commanding presence offers a grounded gravitas of business sobriety but also streaks of hope for Richard.  Our lead doesn’t wish to mop floors until his deathbed, and he begs and borrows but doesn’t steal for Clarence’s friendship and guidance; he even dives into his patented move from grade school!

The narrative regularly volleys between work and home as Richard pushes for advancement (that will seemingly never come) and maintains a happy household despite financial strains, and Longoria doesn’t shy away from them.  She drops in mentions like “the name brand corn flakes” is a luxury.  Also, the Montañez children deal with racism like their parents did as kids, and money and bigotry problems are simply part of their daily lives.  Although the Montañez family copes with trying realities, the film doesn’t always wade in somber pools, as some well-placed and hilarious dream sequences land with some big-time laughs, and veteran comedic actor Tony Shalhoub sports a winning supporting role as Roger Enrico, the company’s CEO.  Shalhoub plays Enrico straight, but he gladly dives into the aforementioned alternate-reality moments.  

With all the talk about at-home struggles and a daunting corporate ladder laced with barbed wire and thumbtacks, “Flamin’ Hot” is also about perseverance, ingenuity, and reaching into your everyday cultural loves to discover the next big idea!

Richard, Judy, and the boys find it, and the youngest Montañez, Steven (Brice Gonzalez), sums up their breakthrough by exclaiming, “It burns good!”  

So does this movie.  Well, more accurately, “Flamin’ Hot” is a warm, inspirational, and stand-up-and-cheer underdog story.

Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

Other People’s Children – Movie Review

Directed and written by:  Rebecca Zlotowski

Starring:  Virginie Efira, Roschdy Zem, Callie Ferreira-Goncalves, Yamee Couture, and Chiara Mastroianni

Runtime:  101 minutes

You’ll gladly accept ‘Other People’s Children’, a nuanced, impactful French romantic drama

“Can’t you see I am getting attached to her?” – Rachel (Virginie Efira) 

Rachel has developed healthy attachments in several aspects of her life.  This attractive, attentive 30 or 40-something adores her schoolteacher job, her sister, and her father, and Rachel falls for Ali (Roschdy Zem) shortly after their guitar lesson, as the two enjoy a budding romance in Paris.  

Ali is a tall, handsome car designer and a divorcee with a four-year-old daughter, Leila (Callie Ferreira-Goncalves).  He shares custody with his ex, Alice (Chiara Mastroianni).  So, to maintain a relationship with Ali, Rachel willingly accepts – and loves - Leila as a package deal.  

Writer/director Rebecca Zlotowski packages and focuses her nuanced, impactful film on her lead.  However, Rachel’s current circumstance isn’t unique, as broken marriages and fastened new connections – that come along with kids - are commonplace in 2023.  Even though Zlotowski and Efira dive deeply into Rachel’s feelings about positively charging into a new relationship, making earnest attempts to bond with Leila, and facing the cruel realities of her dwindling chances of having a baby of her own, the film’s title addresses a relatable dilemma, broadly speaking, for modern-day audiences.  Hence, the movie is called “Other People’s Children”, not “Another Person’s Child”, and Zlotowski’s thoughtful script and Efira’s charismatic and compassionate performance heighten our gaze on Rachel’s quandary while concurrently raising sympathy for others out there in the universe who try to “have it all.”

Set in The City of Light, “Other People’s Children” doesn’t hesitate to embrace its Parisian setting, complete with several street scenes amongst the Haussmann architecture, stops in traditional cafes, and a pop onto the Metro.  Now, the film doesn’t bathe in the lavishes of the city as eye candy, like “Before Sunset” (2004) with that movie’s long, leisurely walks on cobblestone streets and a lovely boat ride on the Seine.  Ali and Rachel are locals, so this beautiful locale simply sets in the background, and much of the narrative’s critical swathes are spent in living rooms and bedrooms as our couple and child iron out their journey through frank discourse.  Fans of French romantic dramas – including this critic – will, no question, feel right at home here and embrace the active, on-the-move pacing as we follow Ali’s, Leila’s, and Rachel’s steps over a couple of years, perhaps a tad longer during the film’s 101-minute runtime.  

Through defined milestones and intimate, tender moments, Zlotowski and cinematographer George Lechaptois frequently pause their camera with close-ups on Rachel to soak in her feelings of both joy and dismay.   The film’s beating heart is our lead, and Virginie commendably carries this production.  

Even though Rachel copes with the aforementioned happenings, the primary roadblock to reach her bliss is gaining complete acceptance as part of Ali and Leila’s family.  Rachel is not Leila’s mom; she doesn’t try to replace anyone.  Still, she’s forced to exude more effort, more energy, and make more compromises to meet Ali and Leila halfway, and they don’t often meet her in the middle.  

It's heartbreaking, mainly because Efira establishes her amiable and winning protagonist from the get-go, whether Rachel goes the extra mile for a troubled student, supports her younger sister, spends time with her aging father, or works to be a Jane Q. Citizen in every aspect of her life.  

Still, is it enough?

While our eyes land with constant admiration for Rachel, Zem admirably balances Ali’s duality as a loving partner and an uncomfortable, crowded manager of his two worlds.  Harmonizing shared custody and accepting Rachel into every corner of his life proves problematic.  

So, will this relationship work?  

Do we want it to work?  

No matter what, we’ve formed an attachment to Rachel during this film and long after the end credits have rolled.  

Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

The Boogeyman - Movie Review

Dir: Rob Savage

Starring: Chris Messina, Sophie Thatcher, David Dastmalchian, and Vivien Lyra Blair

1h 38m

One of my first encounters with the iconic Stephen King was through a collection of short stories from the 1978 novel "Night Shift." Within the terror-filled pages lies an assortment of King's early efforts, nightmare-inducing encounters with various creatures, terrible humans, and anomalies of nature. Many of these stories have been adapted for television, "Sometimes They Come Back," and film, "Children of the Corn" and "The Mangler." Director Rob Savage, who helmed the ingenious pandemic-influenced entity story "Host," tackles King's tale of Lester Billings and his encounter with a monster-in-the-closet with "The Boogeyman." 

"The Boogeyman" opens with a scary scene of old-school horror filmmaking; it proves that familiar tropes, when organized with the proper care and attention, can still induce terror and the fear of the dark. The film focuses on the Harper family, teenager Sadie (Sophie Thatcher), younger sister Sawyer (Vivien Lyra Blair), and their therapist father, Will (Chris Messina). The family is only a few months separated from tragedy, which has created rifts of emotional turmoil for everyone in the family. Will, who holds space for his clients in his home office, struggles to talk with his daughters about the feelings associated with the death of their mother, forcing them back into the school routine, which proves a terrible decision for Sadie, who is unprepared for interactions about her loss. 

After a strange interaction with one of Will's clients, Lester (David Dastmalchian), unexplainable things happen throughout the house, specifically with young Sawyer, who pleads with her older sister that there is a monster in her closet. Sadie soon encounters the evil force, which reveals a slender, blackened creature lurking in the darkness.

The atmosphere of "The Boogeyman" has a near-pitch-black frame with slivers of light from bedroom nightlights or, in a creative choice, a glowing moon that can be rolled down dark hallways for maximum fright effect. In the beginning moments, director Rob Savage composes a tight and terrifying horror show reminiscent of haunted house tales. During the early lingering spells of scare tactics, one that honors King's knack for putting children in peril, "The Boogeyman" composes a familiar story cleverly designed with well-executed scares. 

As the film moves into an analysis of a family in mourning and, ultimately, a monster story, the narrative struggles to find a purposeful mythology for its bumps in the dark. While the performances, especially from the young actors Sophie Thatcher and Vivien Lyra Blair, do an excellent job of adding complicated emotions to a story connected between fear and grief, the story seldom takes advantage of the opportunity to engage the rich characters. Instead, side characters like David Dastmalchian's eerie stranger or Marin Ireland's surprise appearance as a monster hunter ask the most interesting questions about their character's connection with the boogeyman. 

Stephen King, whose superior skill for composing atmosphere and utilizing emotion to influence the shared fears experienced by people, built a terrifying short story in the 1978 collection that lingers long after the book closes. While Rob Savage and team do an excellent job of creating tension and an ever-consuming anxiety of dark spaces, "The Boogeyman" struggles to find a balance between its haunted house vibe and creature feature structure, leaving a film with some exciting setups and set pieces but ultimately missing the deeper elements that made King's story so memorable these many years after reading.

Monte's Rating 

2.50 out of 5.00

---

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse - Film Review

Directors: Joaquim Dos Santos, Kemp Powers, and Justin K. Thompson

Writers: Phil Lord, Christopher Miller, and Dave Callaham

Starring: Shameik Moore, Hailee Steinfeld, Oscar Isaac, and Luna Lauren Velez

The Newest Spider-Man Film Brings Eye-Catching and Heartfelt Content

‘Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse’ met fans’ expectations as an action-packed and emotionally driven sequel to the 2018 film,  ‘Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse.’ Viewers reconnected with Miles Morales (Shameik Moore) and Gwen Stacy (Hailee Steinfeld), separated in their respective universes. Spider-Gwen provides more than just background, as her narration depicts her life after closing the multiverse, and how she is somehow fighting a villain from another dimension. 

That’s right… King Pin’s collider was not completely destroyed, so portals to other universes continue to exist. This brings us to our weak, or perhaps not-so-weak, villain. 

The Spot (Jason Schwartzman) is, well, spotted with portals. Portals that can take him to other dimensions, and destroy the connecting webs of the Spider-Verse. At first, Miles brings the Spider-Man silly-goofy action as he attempts to capture The Spot, but is splitting his time between duty and being a son. 

The interpersonal challenges that Miles, and nearly every other Spider-Person, has to overcome blends seamlessly into the overarching plot to defeat The Spot. Begging the interpretation of the so-called ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ ways to handle situations. 

But… Miles has other things to worry about. Like preparing for college, and more dauntingly, trying to get his parent’s to understand him. The film offers something for all ages in this way. We are provided various viewpoints from youth, the concern (and love) from parents, and the actions of heroes. Audiences from all generations can expect to pick up a small tidbit about family and friend dynamics, possibly with a few tears.  

The action truly starts to pick up when Gwen rejoins Miles in his universe… which she isn’t supposed to do. And for good reason, because once Gwen leaves, Miles follows. Catapulting him into the universe of Miguel O’Hara Spider-Man (Oscar Isaac) where a (massive) team of Spider-People fix anomalies and protect the Multiverse.

Directors Joaquim Dos Santos, Kemp Powers, and Justin K. Thompson and writers Phil Lord, Christopher Miller, and Dave Callaham fill viewers’ eyes with countless creatively re-imagined Spider-People. Providing limitless ideas for audiences about who is under the mask. After all, Stan Lee once said he liked the Spider-Man costume because people “...in any part of the world can imagine that they themselves are under the costume.” In this film, viewers can truly believe that anyone, including themselves, can be a hero.

So, prepare to suit up for an amazing time at the theaters as you join Miles and Gwen (plus hundreds of other Spider-People) across the Spider-Verse!

Plot: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Cinematography: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Character Arc(s): ★★★★☆ 4/5

---

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

---