The Running Man and a Year of Four Kings

2025 ‧ Dystopian Action/Adventure ‧ 133m

Edgar Wright hones the action skills he developed in Hot Fuzz and Baby Driver with a new adaptation of The Running Man, the fourth Stephen King adaptation of this year.

In an alternate 2025, a media company known simply as The Network controls a totalitarian government. There is rampant poverty and The Network offers free television programing to squelch any uprising. Keep the people entertained and they won’t be upset enough to organize and take back the government. One popular program is The Running Man, wherein a contestant must survive 30 days while being hunted by The Network’s Hunters. They get money for every day they survive and if they make the full 30, they will be given one billion dollars. Regular citizens can win money if they tip off The Network to the contestant’s whereabouts. Ben Richards, played by Glen Powell, has been black-listed from many jobs due to insubordination and attempts at forming a union. Unable to find work, his wife works many hours to make ends meet. Their daughter Cathy is sick, and they need money for medicine. In an act of desperation, Richards auditions for The Network’s gamut of programming, assuming he would be picked for a different show where he could win a small but helpful sum for Cathy. His angry persona strikes a chord with the interviewers and he is selected to be on the titular show. With his own skills and the aide of a few underground revolutionaries, Richards soon finds himself dodging the Hunters and becoming a media sensation.

Glen Powell is engaging as Ben Richards, though sometimes his anger is a little hammy. This is likely a satirical choice, but it does not always work. Fans of his multiple disguises in Hitman will enjoy seeing him flex that skill again here. Josh Brolin is slimy as Killian, the Network exec behind the program, but still fun to watch. Michael Cera plays an underground revolutionary who aides Richards. The role is actually quite fitting for Cera and it is one of the more memorable and entertaining elements of the film. Coleman Domingo is a treat as the host of the show, though one can not help but wonder how Ryan Seacrest would have been. Though perhaps that would have been too much like the 1987 adaptation with Richard Dawkins.

Edgar Wright is probably more known as a comedy or horror director, but his action is typically a major element in his features. Hot Fuzz may lampoon the Police Action genre, but it required the Michael Bay level skills to pull off. The Running Man is a satire, but action sequences are not usually the butt of the joke. It shares more satirical DNA with Robocop than Hot Fuzz. Though funny, and at times cathartic, much of the satire is unsubtle. The Network’s big N has an obvious real-life inspiration. And sub-textually, it is extra hilarious that Paramount released this film with all that is going with them in 2025. Not that Wright could have planned that. The media critique is not especially deep, but in an era of waning media literacy, perhaps it is to be expected. The film is still fun and entertaining.

The Running Man is a fun actioner with an albeit unsubtle satirical bite that audiences will likely find enjoyable. Just as one hopes The Long Walk will one day feel less revenant, one hopes that someday this film feels less cathartic.

Grade: B-

Stephen King fans, or Constant Readers as they are called, have had quite the year to enjoy King at the cinemas. King has been a media presence for over 50 years and there are often several adaptations, both film and television, that are released each year. 2025 however had the rare treat of four major release adaptations in the calendar year: The Monkey, Life of Chuck, The Long Walk, and The Running Man. Sadly the release schedule did not have one film each season, evoking King’s collection Different Seasons, but it almost did.

This is not exactly like twin films, but the 4 films can be easily paired. Dytopic Bachman films, movies based off books “by” King’s pseudonym Richard Bachman: The Long Walk, and The Running Man; and Death films:  The Monkey, and Life of Chuck. Though death is a factor in all the films, The Monkey and Life of Chuck both deal with Death the concept, Death with a capital D. Interestingly, both Death films were released by Neon. One could also pair the two films with Mark Hamil as a set: Life of Chuck and The Long Walk, though it would make for a more jarring double feature.

Both Bachman films also take place in worlds with authoritarian governments. One a fascist military regime, The Long Walk, and a fascist corporate one, The Running Man. Genre films, especially horror and sci-fi, tend to reflect the anxieties of the times they are made. When King wrote the Bachman books, he was exorcising his fears about Vietnam and Nixon. These stories still resonant, even if the analogy is not one-to-one. We have different politicians and are now reckoning more and more with gun violence within the US. The adage “History doesn’t repeat itself but it sure does rhyme,” comes to mind.

The Death films have a much more evergreen feel to them because Death is always something in our lives. Oz Perkins’s The Monkey is a processing of how loved ones’ death and  how that grief affects us when we are younger, and Mike Flanagan’s Life of Chuck is about one facing Death head on. Death is playful, absurd, but still tragic in Perkins’s film. Somewhat fitting when you know how his real life parents died. Flanagan, ever the philosopher with his signature ponderous monologues, looks at Death as a culmination of life. Fearful, but not necessarily scary. The end of little moments that make a life fulfilling and completes someone. It’s a rumination of Death, and in that sense highlights the tragedy more that The Monkey.

These four films, even with their pairings, showcase an interesting sampler of all things Stephen King. There is his famous horror, but also his deep characters, views on America, small town life, and just life in general. Perhaps the most interesting aspect is that there is something superlative about each title.

 Best Use of Mark Hamil: Life of Chuck.

Most Entertaining for non-King Fans: The Running Man

Most Entertaining for King Fans: The Monkey

Best, in general: The Long Walk

Constant readers, and movie-goers may not get a year like this for a while. Though mileage is going to very, each of these films offers a great representation of Stephen King the man, the author, and the cultural icon.

~Andrew

For the reviews of the other 2025 Stephen King films, click HERE for The Monkey,

HERE for Life of Chuck, and HERE for The Long Walk.

Reevaluating 1931's Dracula

1931 ‧ Horror ‧ 74m

October is a great excuse to watch horror movies in general, but it s an even better excuse to reevaluate the classics. Regal decided to screen 31 older films this month for audiences to experience in cinemas. A new one for each day through Halloween. Tod Browning’s Dracula was one of the selections and the opportunity to see it on the big screen was too good to pass up.

I have been a Universal Monsters fan since I was 6 years old. It started with a Phantom of the Opera interest. I got a copy of the Claude Rains version for Christmas one year. The VHS had this promo for the other Universal Monster titles at the beginning, and I was hooked.

I started buying and watching the tapes and I became a life-long fan. Monster lovers often debate which films ought to be included, but the core films of the Universal Monsters are typically these eight: Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy, The Invisible Man, Bride of Frankenstein, The Wolf Man, Phantom of the Opera, and Creature from the Black Lagoon. There are various films connected to these eight, some of which I talk about in a podcast HERE. Throughout the years, I would be able to see them on the big screen at various revival screenings or Fathom type events. I have seen two with a live score, and I have seen Creature from the Black Lagoon in 3D three times. The third time thanks to Regal’s program this year.

Dracula was the last one of the core eight I had not seen in the cinema. Part of this was  the opportunity had not arisen, but I was also just not as interested. Dissatisfaction was the main reason. Compared to the James Whale films that came out after it, I found Dracula too stagey and hammy. The concurrently shot Spanish version was more atmospheric and technically interesting. I found Lugosi cool and engaging, but the rest of the movie was somewhat lacking to me. I felt that Browning, the director, had not quite figured out how to make talkies yet, and that was why Dracula did not have the impact expected. I appreciated it, I respected it as important, but it would never be a favorite.

Turns out just watching it on the small screen is what made Dracula suck a little, pardon the pun. I had seen it on televisions on various formats throughout the years, but it was always at home and never in a cinema. With this big screen experience, I was able to easily see what sparked the Universal Monsters movement. Lugosi’s hypnotic performance becomes much more captivating. Browning’s camera work becomes more noticeable and thus easier to appreciate the artistry. Readers are likely thinking it is obvious that the film would be better on the big screen. However, I did not expected what were faults on the small screen to become strengths in the big. Lugosi and Frye’s hammy portrayals somehow fit in a darkened room. The cliché “larger than life”-ness really does add to the overall experience. Browning’s direction still shines in the dialogue-less scenes, but the micro-movements in the dialogue scenes become more moody and full of dread. There are still faults though. The ending feels rushed and the last lines of dialogue are still perplexing. Not all the plot threads are tied up, and let’s face it, the bats are even more unconvincing on a 50 foot plus screen. Perhaps some of these faults play into the charm.

Not everyone can see this on the big screen, but finding the largest television, in the darkest room with the 4k of Dracula is fairly assessable. Give yourself a real treat and see how a whole horror movement got its start.

Old grade: C+

Reevaluation grade: B

~Andrew

The Long Walk

2025 ‧ Dystopian Coming of Age/Horror ‧ 108m

The third major Stephen King adaptation of the year comes to us from Francis Lawrence, the director of the Hunger Games sequels and prequels. Another story about young people in a fatal competition.

Set in a totalitarian America after a devastating war, The Long Walk follows Ray Garraty and his experience in the titular contest. One teenage boy from each state is chosen to compete from hundreds of volunteers. They must continually walk on a paved road for miles and miles, keeping an average speed of 3 miles an hour. If a walker slows down below that threshold, they get a warning. The warning can be erased by walking an hour at the set rate. Get three warnings, and the walker will “get his ticket.” Meaning he will be executed by the soldiers following the walkers. The last one walking will win a hefty cash prize and one wish of his choosing.  Ray quickly makes friends with three other walkers: Hank Olson, Art Baker, and Pete McVries. The four help each other out often during the walk, but in the end only one can win.

When Suzanne Collins’s The Hunger Games was first published, there were many accusations that she plagiarized from the Japanese film and novel Battle Royale. There are indeed similarities, but that was not the case. Stephen King seemed to be the biggest influence on her concept. Collins’s book meshed the ideas of two of King’s Richard Bachman novels, The Long Walk and The Running Man. King himself even had a quote praising The Hunger Games on the paperback edition. Having Francis Lawrence helm this adaptation, with all his experience in Collins’s dystopia, makes a lot of sense. Making a film of The Long Walk has been attempted several times since the book’s debut in the 1970s. Many directors had been trying to adapt this for decades. Most famously George A. Romero and the great King adaptor Frank Darabont. Lawrence may not have the legendary status of those directors, but he certainly has the right skills for the job.

Lawrence had been confined to PG13 violence in his previous YA films, here he leans hard into the R rating. The walkers are dispatched in brutal, graphic, and visceral ways. Early in the film, Ray and Pete have a haunting exchange after the second or third death: “I hope that gets easier,” “I hope it doesn’t.” As the film progresses, it does not get easier. The bond of the characters becomes so strong each death has an emotional resonance. Even the more supporting roles. Lawrence reportedly made the smart decision of shooting the film in sequence. And when a character died, the actor went home. This builds authentic bonds in the cast. All this young male bonding makes the film feel like a dark inverse of another King adaptation, Stand by Me.

The film is quite literally a lot of talking and walking, with regular bursts of violence. For this to work the ensemble must quickly connect with each other and the audience. Cooper Hoffman as Ray and David Jonsson as Pete quickly become the central relationship of the film and watching them bond is quite endearing. This performance is something quite special, and one of the main reasons to watch. It is the central friendship that anchors the film and informs the additional bonds the two have with the other walkers. Tut Nyuot as Baker and Ben Wang as Olson are great at complementing the central duo, but they also give the characters a full personas. Charlie Plummer as the misanthropic Barkovitch and Garrett Wareing as Stebbins are fantastic foils. Judy Greer stands out, as always, in the few scenes she has as Ray’s mother. Mark Hamil, as the imposing leader known as The Major, might skirt toward caricature, but the character himself is somewhat larger than life and cartoonish. His years of voice work serve him well here. Fans of the original novel may balk at some of the changes screenwriter JT Mollner made in his adaptation. However, each choice to deviate makes for a stronger story here in the film.

Horror films, though this may barely qualify, often process the fears society is experiencing. King very much was writing about the Vietnam War when the original book was written. That war aspect is present in Lawrence’s adaptation, but so is the looming threat of fascist authoritarianism and the ever presence of gun violence. Lawrence and King are not trying to exorcize these fears, but to help audiences sit with them and perhaps find some catharsis, if only short lived. The Long Walk is a tragic and bleak film, one that audiences may have difficulty watching. It is layered in such a way that once they get passed the horror, viewers will be rewarded with many themes and ideas to ponder.

One hopes for a time when this film feels less relevant.

Grade: B+

~Andrew

For the reviews of the other 2025 Stephen King films, click HERE for The Monkey

and HERE for Life of Chuck.

Honey Don't!

2025 ‧ Black Comedy/Neo-Noir ‧ 89m

Ethan Coen releases his second solo effort in a planned trilogy, Honey, Don’t! Much like his previous Drive-Away Dolls, Margaret Qualley stars in what Coen calls a “lesbian B-movie.”

The film opens with a woman walking down to a fatal car accident near Bakersfield, CA. The woman takes a ring off the deceased driver’s finger and leaves. The police come and the homicide detective (Charlie Day) calls in a private investigator, Honey O’Donahue (Qualley). Leaning toward accident or possible suicide, he asks if the driver was a client of hers. Honey says no and leaves the scene. It is true that the driver, a woman named Mia Novotny, was not Honey’s client. Yet. She had a meeting set up with Honey later that day. Honey proceeds to investigate into Mia’s murder and finds herself dealing with a sex-crazed reverend (Chris Evans), a new lover (Aubrey Plaza), and missing niece (Tailia Ryder).

As expected with either Coen brother, the sense of humor is one of the film’s strengths. It is wry and wonderfully bizarre, but it still has the dark crime edge. Honey Don’t! is more Burn After Reading and Raising Arizona than Fargo. The setting adds to the humor. Coen does a fine job of making Bakersfield seem hot, boring, but also a profoundly strange place. The characters are fun to watch and the music complements the action and whimsy well. Qualley’s performance is quite good as the titular private investigator. Coen wrote this with his wife, Tricia Cooke, who edits this and worked on many Coen brothers’ films in the past. They are trying for a certain tone, the aforementioned “lesbian b-movie,” and generally succeed. It will not be to everyone’s taste, but if one goes in with the right mindset, they will find much to like here.

The film’s weaknesses, however, are in the central mystery. There are many red herrings, plot points that do not follow through, and the third act is almost non-existent. It would seem rushed, but it is possible that Cooke and Coen are being subversive, actively going against neo-noir expectations. There is an element of satire to that, and it is somewhat clever and amusing, however that does not make the final product particularly satisfying. It feels lacking as the credits roll. Like the film was a condensation of a short season of a television series in 89 minutes.

There are fun elements in Honey, Don’t! but it does not fully gel into a cohesive film. It is enjoyable, but winds up disappointing.

Grade: C-

~Andrew

Eddington

2025 ‧ Black Comedy/Western ‧ 149m

Ari Aster goes west with his fourth feature, Eddington. The story of a sheriff and his contentious relationship with the town’s mayor during the early stages of the COVID lockdown in the titular small town.

Joe Cross, Joaquin Phoenix, is the sheriff of the small desert town of Eddington, NM. Mayor Ted Garcia, Pedro Pascal, has implemented the governor’s orders for mask mandates and lockdown and is up for re-election. In May 2020, tensions rise in the already fraught connection between the two men. Sheriff Cross is an asthmatic and hates wearing facemasks and disapproves of Mayor Garcia’s dealings with a tech company wanting to build a data center in town. After an altercation in the grocery store about masks, Cross makes a social media post declaring his candidacy for mayor against Garcia. Adding to all this, the teenagers in town are taking on progressive causes and protesting, a mentally unwell man is disturbing the peace, and Cross’s wife seems to be joining a cult.

Aster utilizes the New Mexican landscape well, showing the isolation, but also the beauty of the area. Aster grew up in New Mexico, so it makes sense he knew how to use it as a setting. All the performers here are quite good, and Aster holds the Altman-esque ensemble together well. But Phoenix is who really shines as the bumbling, sincere, but still crooked sheriff. Aster writes Cross as a Jim Thompson character by-way-of the Coen brothers. A just as weird protagonist in a sea of weirdos. Phoenix takes on the role well with empathy and understanding, even when Cross makes some evil choices.

Eddington’s best strength, and perhaps also its biggest weakness, is how well it portrays the certain mindset that permeated during early lockdown in 2020. Aster does his best to not really pick a side in debates, which is frustrating, but the right choice for this story. It isn’t about solving the problem, it is about presenting the problem, and Aster captures that quite well albeit through somewhat absurd means. To be fair, it was quite an absurd time. 5 years may not be quite enough distance. As the years progress, we will likely forget a lot of details, feelings, and events of that time. This film wants to capture that before the details get too fuzzy, at the expense of the audience’s easement. Perhaps Aster is trying to say too much. He aims to hit a lot of the major issues of the time in the 2-and-a-half-hour runtime and as-such cannot go too deep. The personal freedom debate, conspiracy theories, Big Tech, and George Floyd and the Black Lives Matter movement are all wrapped up in anxiety and paranoia. Aster does a great job of capturing that overwhelm, which will not be a pleasant recollection for many.

All these elements are difficult to gel together, and in the end, they barely do. The fact that there is cohesion in portraying one of America’s least cohesive times showcases Aster’s mastery of filmmaking. Eddington is messy, but it is not a mess. It’s a rough, but rewarding, watch.

Grade: B-

~Andrew

Life of Chuck

2024/5 ‧ Drama with Fantasy and Sci Fi Elements‧ 110m

Director Mike Flanagan returns to features films after a long sojourn in television with another Stephen King adaptation, Life of Chuck.

Based off the novella of the same name, the story of Chuck Krantz is told in three acts in reverse order. Act three features Chiwetel Ejiofor and Karen Gillan as a divorced couple facing a looming apocalypse. All the while ads celebrating Chuck, Tom Hiddleston, are going up all over town and playing on television. Act two has Hiddleston in an extended sequence where he finds himself drawn to public dancing by the beats of a busking drummer. Act one is about Chuck as a young boy growing up and being raised by his grandparents, who are played by Mia Sara and Mark Hamil. Though presented in three sections, it is not anthological. Each section relates to the larger story in different ways.

This is Flanagan’s third King adaptation, after Gerald’s Game and Doctor Sleep. The previous novels were considered somewhat unfilmable. Gerald’s Game is mostly in the mind of a woman tied to a bed and Doctor Sleep had to find a way to be faithful the novel while also being a sequel to Kubrick’s infamously unfaithful (but still great) The Shining. When readers got their eyes on King’s 2020 novella, Life of Chuck, many thought it too was unfilmable. Flanagan finds a way, as he has before, though this film might be a little too faithful. Still, Flanagan knows how to elicit emotions in his audience. He often is described as the king of “hug me” horror, which might be why he is so adept at Stephen King stories. He strikes a positive tone and maintains it through the three sections, even though each segment is almost a different genre. First an apocalyptic drama, then a musical, then a coming-of-age story, albeit also with some more dancing. The extended musical sequence seems a little padded, especially compared to the other acts.

Flanagan brings in his troupe of players. Fans of his work will recognize many faces from other films and shows. Hiddleston and Ejiofor are great additions to the troupe in their respective roles. Mark Hamil goes full loveable weirdo grandpa here, which suits him quite well. Seeing Mia Sara again is an absolute delight. Nick Offerman is a joy to hear as the narrator, but he is heard too much for the sake of the story. Flanagan’s brand of sentimentality is also going to be too sweet for many. That said, it can also be refreshing. Sometimes folx need a crowd-pleaser.

Flanagan’s trilogy of King adaptations, this is not the best, but it is still a fascinating film of dark hope.

Grade: C+

~Andrew

Bring Her Back

2025 ‧ Horror/Drama‧ 104m

The Phillippou twins follow up their sleeper hit Talk to Me, with a story of two foster children moving in with a new mother. She is hiding something sinister.

After their father dies in a horrific accident, 17-year-old Andy and his visually impaired younger sister Piper are going to be put in the foster system. Initially they are to be separated, but after some convincing they are taken in by Laura, played by Sally Hawkins. Laura is a counselor that used to work in the foster office and is still grieving from the death of her own daughter Cathy. Cathy was also visually impaired, so Laura’s house is already equipped for Piper. When they arrive, Laura is quite welcoming. There is another child at the house, Oliver. He has selective mutism and displays some unusual behavior. Life with Laura seems okay at first, but soon things start getting strange for Andy. Making him think that Laura has some other motive behind bringing them to her home. Bring Her Back is a horror film, so Andy is not wrong. Without spoiling too much, Laura has a plan to bring back her deceased daughter. Hence the title. That plan involves Piper and Oliver, and Andy is going to be in the way.

The Philippous know how to create a terrifying atmosphere and how to showcase truly unpleasant visuals. It is not the most extreme when it comes to gore, but it will certainly push it for some. There is a lot of violence toward children, and that can be a lot. It goes places many films will not. Sally Hawkins’ performance is quite good as Laura, but it is pretty easy to not trust her the moment we meet her. The younger actors also hold their own quite well. Sora Wong, who plays Piper, is visually-impaired in real life. Another stand-out performance is Jonah Wren Phillips as Oliver. Admittedly Oliver mostly lurks around menacingly, but Phillips has a presence most scary kids in horror films lack.

The major fault of the film is the uninspired screenplay. It is not exactly cliché but the grief and trauma tropes, similar to The Babadook and Hereditary, feel more tiresome than interesting. In the spectrum of grief horror, this is closer to The Other Side of the Door. The occult aspect of the story does not completely work. The Philippous do however allow the audience to fill in the holes themselves, which is appreciated. Execution is great, but ideas are lacking.

As a follow-up to the success of Talk to Me, Bring Her Back is a little disappointing. Still, the Philippous know what they are doing and can craft a great atmosphere and chills.

Grade: C 

~Andrew

Sinners

2025 ‧ Historical Horror/Drama/Musical‧ 138m

Ryan Coogler ventures out of franchises and cinematic universes for the first time since Fruitvale Station with his new period horror film Sinners. A historical drama/musical, with vampires.

1932. Mississippi. Sammie “Preacher Boy” Moore, played by new-comer Miles Caton, is the son of preacher (hence the name) who works in a cotton field. His real passion is the blues, something of which his father does not approve. His cousins Smoke and Stack, both played by Michael B. Jordan, return from their time in Chicago. They had some success there and now wish to open their own business. They buy an old sawmill to turn into a juke joint. They want their cousin Sammie to be the entertainment. That night folks come in and have a wonderful time. Until a trio of folks posing as musicians, who are not what they seem, asked to be let in and join. Things do not go well from there.

It is disappointing when an interesting indie director gets swept up in the franchise world instead of making original projects. Coogler did, however, put an undeniable mark on his Marvel films and Creed entry. That success enabled him to have Warner Brothers gave him creative control and a fantastic deal for Sinners. It seems to have paid off, both financially but artistically as well. His return to non-IP storytelling shows how and what he learned from those movies. Coogler found a way to use elements of those blockbusters and add it to his own original story. On paper a period horror musical about vampire sounds like a difficult task, but Coogler is able to mesh the genres well. The film is a slow burn at first, ramping up once the vampires show up to the juke joint. That slow build up creates a world with well-connected characters with rich details. Sinners takes its time and by doing so the narrative becomes so much more layered. Viewers will find something new and interesting to think about days after watching. Race, family, poverty, colonialism, assimilation, faith, community. Coogler tackles so much in the film’s runtime, but it never feels overpacked.

Michael B. Jordan gives probably the best performance of his career as the twin brothers, Smoke and Stack. His mannerisms for each brother make them easy to distinguish as separate characters, even if they are outwardly identical. Jordan might be the top billed, but the film’s actual protagonist is Sammie and Miles Caton is engaging and enthralling . Caton is also the musical backbone of the film as the aspiring bluesman. Hailee Steinfeld as Mary, Stack’s old flame, shows a side of her audiences have not seen yet and Wunmi Mosaku’s Annie adds much needed heart.

Seasoned horror fans are unlikely to find much in the way of scares here. The film has few faults, most of which stem from the tried tropes and rules of vampires. Tired as they might be, Coogler plays with these in a fun and fascinating way. It does not exactly breathe new life, but it uses the tropes well. The juke joint setting, brotherhood, and later vampire action will remind horror fans of From Dusk ‘til Dawn. But ultimately Sinners is about as similar to Rodriguez’s film as much as Anora is to Pretty Woman. There is also a moment, reminiscent of John Carpenter’s The Thing, where the characters eat garlic to determine if someone is secretly a vampire. This is not done in a mugging way that a lot of movies do today. Perhaps Coogler’s MCU and Creed involvement taught him what not to do when doing fan service. The mid and post credit scenes also showcase his mastery of the concepts he got from those franchises. Stay through the credits, everyone.

It’s still a little early, but Sinners is a clear frontrunner for the best of the year. See it on the biggest screen you can.

Grade: A-

~Andrew

Mickey 17

2025 ‧ SciFi/Comedy‧ 137m

Bong Joon Ho’s follows up Parasite with another social commentary film, Mickey 17. Dipping back into Bong’s sci fi and creature feature roots, the film stars Robert Pattison as the titular clone on a far-off planet as an “expendable.” It is based off the novel Mickey7 by Edward Ashton.

In the future, Mickey Barnes and his business partner Timo get into trouble with a loan shark. To escape the debt, and the violence associated with not paying, they join up on an expedition trip to the far-off planet Nifheim. Timo has skills as a pilot, Mickey does not have a lot to offer, so he signs up as an expendable, allowing him to be a guinea pig to determine if the atmosphere is safe to breathe and other new planet perils. When Mickey dies, a new clone is “printed” and he goes back to work. After being left for dead in a chasm, the titular Mickey is rescued by the planet’s native creatures called Creepers. He makes his way back to the ship only to find that another Mickey has already been made, and there are strict rules about multiples. The Mickeys must figure out what to do next.

Pattison, as both Mickeys. is the reason to check this out. He is able to not just sound a little different as the two Mickeys, but also to look different even though obviously the Mickeys are identical. It is how he emotes the two characters. Other performances are also fun to watch. Mark Ruffalo as Marshall, a former congressman and leader of the expedition, follows the vein of scummy but hilarious roles like Poor Things. Toni Collette seems a little under utilized as Ruffalo’s wife, who doesn’t quite get to Lady MacBeth status.

Bong’s social commentary is still present, but Mickey 17 is probably more like The Host and Snowpiercer than Parasite. Ruffalo’s former congressman has a cult following. Many of his supporters wear red hats, which might be a little on the nose. Viewers are not likely to get a lot of nuance, or anything particularly profound, in the commentary here. Bong is good at crafting a fun and interesting film, even if the themes are simplistic. The creature work on the Creepers balances the delicate line between scary and cute quite well. The characters are fun to watch and the story itself is entertaining and fairly unique. Though viewers may find themselves reminded of other clone stories along the way. Unfortunately, there is not much new to say about the clone identity concept in Mickey 17. As often with sci fi, the script has a lot of exposition and makes the runtime feel a little bloated. There is more than one sequence that probably could have been cut.

Mickey 17 has a lot to offer. It has an interesting world, neat creatures, and it is funny, but Pattison is the real draw here.

Grade: C+

~Andrew

The Monkey

2025 ‧ Horror Comedy‧ 98m

Less than a year after Longlegs, Osgood Perkins returns with another horrific delight. Based off the Stephen King story, The Monkey, is about a twin boy who discovers the titular toy in a closet of his absent father’s belongings. “Turn the key and see what happens” it says.

Death is what happens. Bizarre Rube Goldberg-esque death

After a quick tone setting cold open with the aforementioned father, grown up Hal (played by Theo James) tells the story of how he and his twin Bill dealt with the monkey when they were children in 1999. When they find it, Bill turns the key and the monkey starts to act like it is going to bang its drums but then it seems to be stuck. Convinced it is broken, they put the monkey aside and go to a restaurant with their babysitter Annie. Almost telepathically, Hal hears the monkey’s drum and Annie suddenly meets a gory and bizarre death. When you turn the key, someone will die. In an unusual manner. Hal figures this out and turns the key again with a specific person in mind, but regrets the decision after what happens. The two boys place the monkey in a dry well, hoping it will leave them be. 25 years later though, it seems the monkey is back and a grown-up Hal must face it again, this time along with his own son.

The Monkey is without a doubt Oz Perkins’ funniest film. Longlegs was not humorless, but laughs were certainly not a main priority. Perkins strikes the difficult tone of horror and comedy early on and basically sustains it through the runtime. The laughs are often in the edit, and that is quite masterful. Theo James in the dual roles of the grown-up twins Hal and Bill is quite good, though he seems more comfortable in the Hal role. His younger counterpart, Christian Convery, plays both young twins and might be the most impressive performance of the movie.

King fans will be pleased that this is a faithful enough adaptation. On the spectrum of King movies, this is perhaps slightly more faithful than Kubricks The Shining but less than its sequel Doctor Sleep. The original story is fairly slight, so Perkins does well in building upon the story’s ideas. In that sense, things might be a little padded. There are characters that could be excised, but then the body count would not be as high and then so would the laughs. The elaborate systems that lead to someone’s demise are in many was the star here. Fans impatient for the next Final Destination film will find a lot to like here.

Viewers familiar with Perkins’ family and events will be tempted to read into the themes of the film along those lines, and there might be something there. This is also the second film in a 3-picture deal after Longlegs and before Keeper. Though not much is known yet about Keeper, the trailer at the end of The Monkey suggests it will be heavy like his other films. Perhaps Perkins just needed to have a little fun before going back into the dark depths.

The Monkey is a gory pitch-black comedy best seen with an audience. The kills and laughs are quite crowd-pleasing. The film may not be especially ambitious, but it knows what it is and does it pretty well. It would make a great Midnight Movie.

Grade: B-

~Andrew

Click HERE for Andrew’s Longlegs review.

The Brutalist

2024 ‧ Drama‧ 215m

Adrien Brody stars in Brady Corbet’s epic about an immigrant architect coming to America, reuniting with his wife, and rebuilding his life after World War II.

Told in two parts, with a built-in intermission, Brody stars as László Tóth, a holocaust survivor from Budapest who is coming to America to live with his cousin in Philadelphia. He had been separated from his wife and niece during the war and suspects they are dead. When he arrives in Philadelphia, his cousin gives him a letter from his wife, proving they are still alive. The plan is they will eventually come to America as well. László needs to find his footing in his new country. He works in his cousin’s furniture shop, through that he gets a job designing the library of Harrison Lee Van Buren, a wealthy industrialist played by Guy Pearce. At first the Harrison is unhappy, but in time sees the beauty of the work and wants to hire László for a community center project. With this new connection to wealth, László can now figure out how to get his wife and niece to the states. The second part of the film focuses on their reunion and the building of the community center. Corbet creates an interesting story looking at class, immigrant plight, and the desire to create something.

It is rare to see this kind of cinematic ambition these days. The two-part structure, VistaVision, and the intermission, give The Brutalist a feeling like the American epics of the era portrayed. A grandiose spectacle, that is somehow endearing instead of pretentious. Corbet and cinematographer Lol Crawley use the VistaVision framing superbly and the composition of shots are some of the best in years. The production design captures the look and color of the era quite hauntingly. Such lovely mid-century greens. Daniel Blumberg’s score expertly goes from subtle to grand and back. Brody’s performance as László is deserving of all the attention and Guy Pearce gives a nuanced performance to a larger than life character. Felicity Jones may be the MVP of the cast as Erzsébet, László's wife. She only acts in voice over for the first part of the 3 and-a-half hour epic, but she is still a presence that sticks with the viewer, mirroring her effect on László.

If there is any lesson one hopes comes out of The Brutalist, it is directors and studios should consider more built-in intermissions. Especially if we are not going to try and economize duration and keep having more and more films over two-and-a-half hours.

Despite the length, the film does not feel like it drags, though the intermission probably helps. Around the 3 hour mark, however, is when things start to dip. Without going into spoilers, the story goes somewhere that although is in-character and makes sense, it also lacks any nuance and subtlety. Two traits that were quite strong in this film about immigration and the American dream. It does not sink the entire experience; the highs are much more than its lowest low.

In the end, The Brutalist seems a flawed masterpiece. A wonderous cinema-experience that wobbles on landing.

Grade: B+

~Andrew

Flow

2024 ‧Animated Drama‧ 85m

Lativan filmmaker Gints Zilbalodis follows up 2019’s Away with a tale about a cat and a flood with Flow (Straume). The animated adventure features no dialogue, but words are not needed for this multi-layered story.

The film’s protagonist is a black cat who lives in a house near a large forest. The cat spends the day roaming and meets a band of dogs that chase them through the woods. The cat evades the dogs, but soon sees them again, running away from a large herd of deer. The deer are themselves running away from a large tsunami that sweeps up the cat and the dogs. The cat finds their way back on land and to their house. However, the water is still rising. Soon the cat must flee its home, climbing to higher and higher ground. Eventually they climb aboard a boat with a capybara, no explanation as to how they got the boat, and together they navigate the calamity gaining other animals along the way in their makeshift ark: a lemur, one of the dogs, and a large secretary bird.

Zilbalodis does a good job of making a world that is believable and interesting to watch. The animation does not have that major studio sheen, but perhaps that serves the story best. There is a notable lack of humans in this world, and it is no reason is given. Ultimately it is not important because this story is focused on how nature itself reckons with disaster, albeit through the lens of a domestic cat. Said cat goes on a well constructed hero’s journey with their fellow animals on the boat. The flood is a call to adventure, and one of the boat mates serves as a mentor. Zilbalodis hits the familiar beats, but the cat is a fascinating hero to follow.

The animals are not anthropomorphized, and the lack of humans and dialogue allow for the audience to consider various metaphors and allegory that Zilbalodis may be making. What does the band of dogs represent? The lemur keeps hoarding even in times of crisis, what could be the idea there? This is one of the better aspects of the film, it invites the viewer to make up their own mind. It could just be a simple Incredible Journey-esque adventure, or an allegory for how humanity responds to a crisis. The films multiple layers means that children seeing this can revisit as they age and find something new. In many ways Flow could be a gateway art house film for the young. It is perplexing that this is rated PG, when it could easily have been G.

Latvia has submitted Flow as their entry for Best International Film at the Oscars this year. It likely stands a chance in that category, but one hopes it can snag a nod for Best Animated Feature as well.

Grade: B+

~Andrew

Anora

2024 ‧Drama/Comedy‧ 139m

Director Sean Baker makes movies about people in the margins. The Florida Project and Red Rocket have been praised for their humanity and interesting characters. His Palme d’Or winning Anora follows that trend.

Mikey Madison plays the titular character, preferring to be called Ani. She is a dancer and occasional sex worker at a Manhattan strip club. She seems popular with the clientele. One night she meets Vanya, who came to the club asking for a girl who speaks Russian. So begins a whirlwind romance where Vanya pays for several dates at his large mansion. He solicits her services for a whole week and flies her and his friends in a private jet to party in Las Vegas. While there, Ani and Vanya get married in a classic Vegas ceremony. They go back to New York, to his large mansion where soon word of his marriage have gotten to his rich and public Russian family. They are not happy. They send Vanya’s godfather and two goons to solve the problem. Ani’s whirlwind storybook romance becomes less fairy tale.

Mikey Madison’s performance quite exceptional as Ani. Though the character is not always “likeable” in the traditional sense, the audience is quickly on her side. Baker treats her life matter-of-factly and does not glorify or particularly judge. Madison adds an additional layer of empathy to a character that already has a lot of humanity written. The other standout performance is Yura Borisov as Igor, one of the goons. He too is adding an interesting layer to a typically one-dimensional brute and Baker plays around with their dynamic in a fascinating and funny way.

The pacing is going to be jarring for some. The first act of the film goes along at a nice clip, but once Vanya’s godfather and his goons show, things slow down.  Ani and Vanya’s meet-cute, subsequent romance, and marriage, something that takes the better part of a month, is the first act. The rest of the film, Ani dealing with Vanya’s family, takes two days in the world of the film. Baker slows down the pace here, but also brings up the screwball antics with the goons and godfather. This change is deliberate and reflects what Ani is experiencing. A wild ride with a drawn out decrescendo.

It is easy to see how this made such an impression at Cannes. Anora touches on economic disparity and the desire to better one’s life while subverting romantic-comedy tropes. Baker here, as with his other films, seems to be an anti-Horatio Alger. Though there is still a lot of hope in Anora. The last scene will likely cause a lot of debate. The good kind of debate that asks for deep analysis and understanding, something both Anora the character as well as Anora the film deserves.

Grade: B

~Andrew

Saturday Night

2024 ‧Historical Comedy‧ 109m

Saturday Night Live has gone down as one of the most important shows of all time. It just started it’s 50th season this year, and all that time has brought many legends. Lorne Michaels has been at the helm of all but 5 years of the show, and he too has reached a legendary status. Jason Reitman’s Saturday Night gives us the chaos and anarchy leading up to the first episode of SNL.

Lorne Michaels has been given a shot. NBC, who is currently quibbling with Johnny Carson, has decided to let him have a chance at 90 minutes of live television. Michals, his wife Rosie, and his producer Dick have gathered a rag-tag group of funny people. The idea isn’t fully formed yet, it feels like a collection of random bits: musical performances, sketches, stand-up, fake commercials, and Jim Hensen’s Muppets. Several things are not ready for the show. They don’t have a studio audience, the lighting hasn’t been figured out, the Muppets don’t have pages written for them yet, and John Belushi hasn’t signed his contract. To name a few. During all this, a network exec is there ready to pull the plug and rerun Carson if Michaels can’t convince him he knows what he’s doing.

Rachel Sennott and Gabriel LaBelle have good chemistry as Rosie Shuster and Lorne Michaels respectively. The only flaw is that LaBelle seems a little young compared to his peers. Something that is easy to get passed, but it is there. LaBelle is still great to follow throughout the chaos. Reitman does well to not completely glorify Michaels much here, he often shows him over his head and floundering. Undoubtedly much of this has to be exaggerated, didn’t happen that night, or at all. However, Reitman still makes it believable.

Though Michaels is who we follow the most in the film, it’s the ensemble that really makes the film work. The cast might be the film’s greatest success. Not only do the players look like and sound like the Not Ready for Prime Time Players when they rehearse sketches before air, they also nail the quiet calm parts. As with most ensemble films, no one quite gets to shine here, and the audience is probably bring more depth with previous knowledge about the early SNL cast than what is provided by the film.

Despite the fact that the audience will already know the outcome, Reitman still creates and maintains this palpable tension all the way to the end. This tension and anxiety are greatly aided by Jon Batiste’s score, who also plays Billy Preston in the film. The comedy juxtaposed with the tension rivals another Rachel Sennott vehicle, Shiva Baby.  There are many “troubled production” films and audience members may be reminded of The Disaster Artist, Ed Wood, and Noises Off!  Saturday Night is like those films, but more like Altman’s Prairie Home Companion mixed with Scorsese’s After Hours. And given the importance of SNL, the ensemble nature, and all the walking-and-talking, we should be thankful that Aaron Sorkin was not involved in the making of this film.

Though likely not entirely historically accurate, Saturday Night is a fun and fascinating look into the beginning of a cultural phenomenon. Reitman walks the difficult line of tense and hilarious with ease and the performances make this a fun history lesson.

Grade: B

~Andrew

His Three Daughters

2023/4 ‧Drama ‧ 101m

One of the more lamentable aspects of this era of streaming is when well received festival fare debuts for regular audiences, a film can feel more disposable. Hopefully His Three Daughters, a new Netflix release from last year’s TIFF, does not suffer such a fate.

The titular daughters belong to Vincent. Mostly unseen, he is slowly dying. His monitor beeps informing the audience that he is still alive. Having taken a turn for the worst, his three daughters, Katie, Rachel, and Christina have all gathered at his apartment to be with him when he passes. Hospice workers come to give the daughters a break and to give updates on Vincent’s condition. The film begins with Katie saying that they need to get along during their father’s last days. That anything between them can wait. Rachel, his only non-biological daughter, has been taking care of him while Katie and Christina have been with their families. Inevitably familial tensions rise, and we see if these daughters can also become sisters.

The film is written, directed, produced, and edited by Azazel Jacobs. An independent director probably best known for 2020’s French Exit. Jacobs places the film’s action almost entirely in the apartment, so we are given a rich character study of the three daughters. Though Jacobs is a man, and neither daughter or sister (as is this reviewer), he creates genuine relationships that are engaging and ring true. His characterizations of them walk the thin line between archetypal and cliché but that nuance is readily served by the film’s ensemble.

Katie, the oldest daughter played by Carrie Coon, is the put-together one. Though we hear through one sided phone conversations that she is having difficulty with her own daughter. Rachel, the middle step-sister played by Natasha Lyonne, is portrayed as the screw-up. Often getting high and making sports bets to eke out a living. Her name is also on the lease of the apartment, so she is set to get the place when Vincent dies. An element that adds to the familial rift. Finally, Christina is the youngest daughter played by Elizabeth Olsen, with her own small child across the country. The actors take to their roles rather authentically, and one wishes there could be another vehicle for the three of them to act with each other again.

Jacobs does direct well, but the film does feel like a play. Or perhaps an adaptation of an “important” New York play that actors do scenes from in classes. Something college theater groups perform between semesters, like Three Tall Women. This is not a critique, it is the type of story Jacobs is telling and he does tell it well. There are some interesting choices in editing, that help illuminate the things not said between the characters. The only real fault that the film has is when the characters spell it out, instead of letting the audience get there on their own. These scenes give the film a 10th grade English class feel, but thankfully it doesn’t happen too often.

His Three Daughters is not easy viewing, and is likely not something one would readily select when cruising through their options on Netflix. It is still worth the watch. If not for the story itself, but for the performances of the main three actors.

Grade: B-

~Andrew

Classic Review: A Woman Under the Influence

1974 ‧Drama ‧ 147m

Though lately this site has been focusing on films from 1984, 1974 had its fair share of great films as well. Many films celebrating their 50th anniversary are currently playing in cinemas. John Cassavetes’ A Woman Under the Influence is seeing such revival. With the recent death of the film’s star, Gena Rowlands, now is a great opportunity to view the 70s masterpiece.

Mabel Longhetti (Rowlands) is a suburban housewife in southern California. She is married to Nick (Peter Falk), a foreman of a construction team, and they have three school age children. Nick works long hours and often Mabel feels neglected. Early in the film, he gets called into an all-night job and will thus miss a date night with Mabel, who has sent the children to her mother’s for the occasion. Annoyed, Mabel goes out for a night of drinking. The next day, Nick returns home with his team and has Mabel make them a spaghetti dinner. Mabel’s behavior seems unusual and strange during the meal. This behavior continues, reaching to a more concerning level at a children’s birthday party. After a night of further erratic behavior, Nick has a doctor friend come to sedate Mabel and she is committed to a mental health facility. The film’s crescendo is centered on her return home.

The film had its origin as a play for Rowlands, Cassavetes wife, but she didn’t think she could put herself through that kind of role 8 times a week. Cassavetes would finance it himself, with friends such as Falk investing. Eventually he would also distribute it himself. Sending it to film festivals and college campuses, often accompanied by Falk for post screening Q and As. A Woman Under the Influence is one of the few films that really can be called “fiercely independent.” That alone cements its importance to cinema, even before showcasing one of the greatest acting performances in film history.

The late Rowlands is the reason to see this, of course. Despite the limited release, Rowlands would be nominated for best actress. The limited release probably kept her from winning. When compared to what won best actress that year, Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore, both films deal with mothers and complex relationships. Rowlands’ role however gets to go to darker depths than Ellen Burstyn’s titular role in Scorsese’s film. Rowlands gives the performance of her career, in a role tailor made for her. Though great throughout, she really shines when Mabel returns home. A truly devastating and moving last 35 minutes.

In many ways this is a fascinating, if disturbing, snapshot into mental health and misogyny of the era. 50 years later, one wonders how this would have played out differently today. Mabel has symptoms that suggest a bipolar disorder, but it could just be that the banality of domesticity and neglect is crushing her. Though Rowlands likely contributed, Cassavetes is the writer of the film and there is a noted feeling of focus on how this is affecting the men in Mabel’s life. That is one of the more dated aspects of the film. For what it is worth, Cassavetes treats Mabel with utmost empathy, and just because there is a focus on how it is affecting the men, does not mean he is condoning or saying it is Mabel’s fault.

Cassavetes films are generally character driven, and he was often seen as an “actor’s director.” He is known to general audiences as an actor, famously playing the husband in Rosemary’s Baby, so his focus on acting tracks. His directorial work can be difficult for audiences. His films tend to eschew traditional plot and pacing and instead focus on raw realistic portrayal. Not that his films lack plot and pacing, they are not as important and verisimilitude, nuance, and personal relationships. With this in mind, it is no surprise that many find his films difficult to get through. At 2 and a half hours, the high drama of A Woman Under the Influence might be difficult. It is, however, quite rewarding.

Grade: A

~Andrew

Longlegs

2024 ‧Horror/Crime ‧ 101m

Director Osgood Perkins returns with the serial killer thriller Longlegs. The film follows the investigation of a cold case going hot again, with the aid of a new FBI Special Agent.

For almost 20 years, a killer has been murdering entire families and leaving no trace. The only thing telling the FBI they are connected are the coded letters he leaves, signed Longlegs. In the mid-90s, Special Agent Lee Harker (Maika Monroe), who seems to have a second sense when it comes to killers, is brought onto the case after just “knowing” where the perpetrator was in her last assignment. Her superior, Agent Carter (Blain Underwood), shares everything he knows and soon an ice cold case is flowing again. As they delve deeper into the mystery, Carter starts to wonder if there is something deeper than just Harker’s hunches going on.

Atmosphere is something the director has a noted skill in. The film takes place in the winter and the icy atmosphere can be easily felt through Perkins’ direction. Though different in theme, Longlegs does share a similar mood and tone as Perkin’s 2015 film The Blackcoat’s Daughter. They could be easily viewed back-to-back. Kiernan Shipka from that film cameos here, and both films share a satanic panic element.

The performances pair well with Perkins’s atmosphere. Nicholas Cage is, as expected, quite creepy as the titular killer. Though Cage is barely recognizable as Longlegs, his voice is pretty unmistakable, so there is an added uncanny layer to the character. Cage is good, but one can’t help but wonder if someone with less of a name would be better, it’s difficult sometimes to separate “Nic Cage” from a performance. That said, why gamble when there can be a sure bet? Maika Monroe as Special Agent Harker easily brings the audience into the story. Her performance is haunted and understated.  Blair Underwood helps ground everything, as Harker’s likeable mentor and superior. Alicia Dewitt plays Harker’s mother, and adds another layer of dread, that gets somewhat undercut during the film’s resolution. Cage and Dewitt, and to a certain extent Monroe, create a compelling strangeness to Longlegs that makes it a unique experience. Perkins is able to take all of this and fashion a deeply scary film that maintains its formidable chill even through the underwhelming  resolution.

It is hard not to think of Silence of the Lambs given the subject manner. There are also some shots similar to Demme’s close-ups. Elements of Fincher’s Se7en and Zodiac as well come to mind, especially with the coded messages. The Special Agent aspect and the inclusion of Alicia Dewitt will no doubt remind folks of Twin Peaks. Longlegs does have enough originality to stand on its own, though fans of the aforementioned will undoubtedly get more enjoyment.

Longlegs probably won’t become a classic like the films it found influence, but it pays offs well for those looking for a horrifying, if often weird, serial killer procedural.

Grade: B-

~Andrew

Thelma

2024 ‧ Crime/Comedy/Drama ‧ 98m

After well-received screenings at Sundance, Thelma has now gone wide. June Squibb, Academy Award Nominee for Nebraska, leads the film as the titular role.

Thelma is 93 years old and lives alone, much to Daniel, her 24-year-old grandson’s worry. Daniel (Fred Hechinger) helps her out with computer needs, but like many her age it isn’t her strongest suit. One day she gets a call from someone pretending to be Daniel saying he’s been in an accident and needs money for a lawyer. She gathers up the $10,000 requested and calls everyone in her family, but they are all too busy or, in Daniel’s case asleep, to answer. Her family eventually does get back to her, but not before she mails the money. The police offer no help, and the next day she decides she is going to get her money back. Reluctantly enlisting an old friend, Ben (Richard Roundtree), they travel on his scooter to go where the PO box she sent the money to is located.

There have been a lot of films about seniors taking justice into their own hands, dominating despite age, but Thelma is not an action movie.  Instead, it focuses quite a lot on what aging does to someone. It often takes the time to show how difficult it can be to be older in modern society. Memory and body issues are always there in the background if they don’t make it to the foreground. Though this may sound somewhat dire, the film has a light tone that is quite enjoyable. The film is more comedy than anything else, but there are some moments of drama that are affecting. When looking to find help in her mission, Thelma goes through the contacts in her phone and realizes that many of her friends are dead. Though the scene is comical, it does have a dark bite that is consistent throughout the film.

Family relationships and generational divide are major themes in Thelma. Her Gen X daughter and son-in-law, Parker Posey and Clark Gregg, are often worried about her and the arrested development of their Gen Z son. In a more action driven version of this story, Thema’s family would have been an after-thought. Here them trying to find her and their relationship with each other are a secondary plot. Though heightened and humorous, it gives a sense of verisimilitude. Most filmmakers would just focus on Thelma’s mission, but having the caring family involved makes the stakes higher. First time director, Josh Margolin, offers a different layer to what could be a typical crime narrative.

Squibb’s performance is obviously the standout here. She is doing much more than the standard “Grandma” role or “old person out for revenge.” It is a comedic performance for the most part, but Squibb easily shows up her range throughout the film. Richard Roundtree gives his final feature film performance as Ben, who Thelma allows to join her mission. If only to use his scooter. His performance is the other standout. Oftentimes, casting someone who played as iconic of a role as Shaft could be a bad idea, but here it adds an extra layer to the story. Even John Shaft can get old and infrim.

Thelma plays like the sort of film you expect from Sundance, and fans of that will not be disappointed. Those looking for a funny, layered, and exciting film won’t be disappointed either.

Grade: B-

~Andrew