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.

David Lynch Tribute: The Little Things

With the passing of David Lynch last month, the world lost a wonderful weirdo. A man who saw beauty in the dark and the surreal in the everyday. For Twin Peaks Day this year it seemed fitting to discuss the man and take a deeper look at his art. With most artists it is not just the broad strokes, but the little happy trees that make their work so singular. So, let’s take a look the little Lynchian things.

Lynch had several directorial trademarks: highways at night, surrealism, electric surges, doppelgangers, creepy jazz music, casting singers, actors in dual roles, reusing the same actors, lip synching, and cryptic men and women. All of these tend to get brought up when the concept of “Lynchian” is discussed. It makes sense those are forefront in people’s minds. But, like that early zoom into the grass and ants in Blue Velvet, the world that Lynch creates is just as focused on the smaller things as the large. These may not get as celebrated but nonetheless are traits that made him David Lynch. 

Even in Dune, his personal least favorite, had all these ornate sets.

By the way, anyone else think that the Guild Navigator looks like the baby from Eraserhead grown up?

Tell me you don’t see a resemblance.

These sorts of details are what create a fuller reality, even when it isn’t like our reality. Though it is true that actors, set designers, and others actually do a lot of the creation work. Film is a collaborative process, but Lynch was still the curator of all these parts to form his unique vision. World building no matter how minute. These moments of flair add a dimension and flavor to his works. Here are some of my favorites. No spoilers, but some familiarity will be needed.

The shadow of this industrial machine in Blue Velvet.

Unsure what this is supposed to be, but it adds something to the seedy underbelly that is Lumberton. The town is not particularly large, yet there is this industry and crime despite the picket fences.

The picture of Montgomery Clift Sandy has in her room in Blue Velvet.

This is an interesting detail for the character of Sandy, and why she is attracted to Jeffrey. Of course there is the obvious, but her having this picture of Montgomery Cliff tells us that she likes a man with secrets, which might be why she forgives Jeffrey in the end. 

Something that happens in several of his movies is random people in the shot that could add a sense of reality, but that somehow make it surreal. It makes sense that there would be other people out and about in the world, but Lynch tends to let stuff go just a bit different.

Like this guy walking his dog at night wearing sunglasses in Blue Velvet.

This man walking by Sailor holding a red pole in Wild at Heart.

Or this this dancing student in the Twin Peaks pilot.

Once you know these things are there, it is a lot of fun to seek them out.

Then there are moments of mundane reality that add surrealism too. The best example is probably this extended shot of this guy sweeping in Twin Peaks: The Return.

I think Lynch’s weather reports come from this sort of energy as well.

Lynch also trusted his actors. He was reportedly not much for going off script, but encouraged and his supported his actors to do a few unusual things. One could argue Nic Cage wouldn’t be Nic Cage were it not for Wild at Heart. That snakeskin jacket was actually owned by Cage. Again though, the little moments can create more sur-reality. Take these two line readings.

“Just cut them up like regular chickens?” from Eraserhead.

The way Detective Williams confirms what Jeffrey found in the field in Blue Velvet. (2:14 in the above video).

But what might be my favorite little Lynch moment is the way Crispin Glover stands enjoying, let’s say a little secret, in Wild at Heart.

It is hard for me to say who my favorite director is, but Lynch is certainly near the top if not the top for me. I am sad that we now live in world without him. His art, however, is forever. His bizarre love of life, the beauty in the darkness, and a profound yet strangely grounded optimism will live on.

So have some cherry pie and coffee and think of David today.

~Andrew

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

2024 in Review

2024 does not seem to have shaped out to be a particularly great year in film. To be fair, the deck was not stacked in its favor. Last year’s (quite necessary) strikes affected many productions and not a whole lot got out. However, that does not mean that there were not great films this year.

2024 Releases

Anora is on a lot of best of lists, so you don’t need me to tell you it is one of the best, but you can read my review HERE. but here are a couple more from this year I enjoyed.

I Saw the TV Glow

This might be my favorite film of the year. A creepy coming of age drama about two teens and their love of a TV show, albeit with deeper subtexts. I reviewed this when it came out (read HERE), and it became the movie that I kept thinking about. Though trans members of the audience will likely get more out of it, I think it can resonate with many. The performances add to the eeriness and Schoenbrun nails the vibe of all the 90s TV influences. I can tell you right now that I did not expect Fred Durst to be in one of the best films of the year.

The Substance

Hollywood satire-horror that is the most bizarre look at self-hatred in some time. Demi Moore stars as an fitness star who is cast aside for someone younger. Not to be deterred she finds out about the titular substance that creates a younger pseudo-clone. Margaret Qualley plays the other self, and we’ll just say there are side effects. It isn’t exactly Sunset Blvd. meets Society, but that kind of gives you an idea.

There are other films from this year that I am looking forward to seeing. Having read Colson Whitehead’s book, I am most excited to see Nickel Boys. The Brutalist, with its built-in intermission, is a close second. And being a big Pedro Almodovar fan, I am looking forward to his first English language feature, The Room Next Door.

New Discoveries

Repeat Performance

A woman murders her husband just as the new year is being rung in. She goes to speak with a friend about what she has done and then finds out that she is now reliving the whole year again. Meaning her husband is still alive. Not exactly a film noir Groundhog Day, but she does try to better her year in hopes of avoiding the turn of events that caused her to shoot her husband.

Dinner in America

No idea how I missed this. Probably the pandemic. A punk rock anti-rom-com. An on the lam punk rocker stows away with one of his fans, but she doesn’t know he is the lead singer of her favorite band. When I heard 90s throwback, I did not expect this to be a mix of Greg Araki and Todd Solondz, with a splash of Harmony Korine. Had this existed when I was in college it would have been one of my favorites.

Skeletons

Movies I somehow had not yet gotten around to watching and feel a little bad about it.

Dirty Harry

Pauline Keel has some points about this that are right, but I got to admit it’s quite the ride. Eastwood at is anti-hero best. Don Siegel uses San Francisco amazingly. The politics have not aged well, but it is easy to see why this is a classic.

Beverly Hills Cop

A much different kind of cop. We covered this in the podcast (listen HERE), and I am a little surprised I’d never gotten around to seeing more than just a couple of scenes. You can really see how Eddie Murphy was so huge here. Even though there was a legacy sequel that came out this year, one adventure is enough. Why spoil a good thing?

Vampire’s Kiss

Being a bit of a cult film aficionado, it’s strange I hadn’t gotten around to this meme-worthy performance of Cage’s. Demented is possibly the best word to describe it. If it isn’t Moonstruck, then this is the beginning of that Nic Cage. He plays a yuppie who goes on a date with a vampire, Flashdance’s Jennifer Beals, and things start to get weird. It isn’t exactly what I would call a good movie, but it is fun and weird.

Final Thoughts

This may not have been the best year, but there was still a lot of interesting films to seek out. It does look like I’ll be spending much of the next couple of months catching up though.

~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

I Saw the TV Glow

2024 ‧ Horror/Drama ‧ 100m

I Saw the TV Glow uses fandom, otherness, and coming-of-age tropes to horrifying affect. Jane Schoenbrun’s follow up to We’re All Going to the World’s Fair is not as internet focused, but still has a creepypasta feel.

On Election Day 1996, while his mother votes at the local high school, 7th grade loner Owen (Justice Smith) finds 9th grader Maddie (Brigette Lundy-Paine) reading an episode guide for The Pink Opaque. They strike up a friendship and decide to meet up to watch the show together the next Saturday. The show is a Nickelodeon­­-esque horror fantasy about teens who fight evil. The two bond over the show for a couple of years until one day Maddie disappears. The years go by and Owen lives his life, working at movie theater. Suddenly Maddie returns, and she has something to tell him about the show they loved growing up.

Memory and belonging are constant, however toxic fandom and nostalgia are major themes. Schoenbrun is interested in showing how fandom can enmesh into one’s identity. The pluses and minuses of loners finding each other weighed too. Both Maddie and Owen are easily established as being “weird kids.” They share somethings in common, which Schoenbrun shows how that can be a great thing, but not always. Anyone who feels marginalized or othered will likely relate to the two. The performances are somehow both understated and intense, establishing the mindsets of Owen and Maddie. Even though much of the characters’ logic does not hold up to scrutiny, it’s easy to stay invested.

There is a surreal tone that is quite affecting, some calling it Lynchian. However, this term is not the often derisive meaning “so weird it’s hard to understand.” Schoenbrun, like Lynch, uses surrealism as a way to convey feeling and emotion, not to necessarily move a logical plot. Again, like Lynch, you may find yourself absolutely terrified, but you can’t completely figure out why. It gets under the viewers skin and requires one to process it. Those looking for traditional horror scares will likely be disappointed, but existential foreboding is the ambient hum of Schoenbrun’s film. There’s been some comparison with the creepypasta Candle Cove, and both stories share the “haunted by a childhood tv show” trope, but that is about it. I Saw the TV Glow probably shares more DNA with Slender Man. Schoebrun’s first feature was a docu-collage film about that internet phenomenon and one can see similarities with this film.

 Though anyone could get something out of the film, millennials will likely resonate with the popular culture examined. The Pink Opaque scenes certainly have Buffy similarities, but there’s also some Are You Afraid of the Dark? elements as well as The Adventures of Pete and Pete. In fact, the actors who portray the titular Petes cameo. So does Buffy actress Amber Benson. The Smashing Pumpkins’ “Tonight Tonight” has an influence as well, Melies notwithstanding. All these influences almost make the film a sort of 90’s Nickelodeon version of Videodrome. It is PG13, so it doesn’t quite go to Cronenberg depths. And that rating may explain who this will affect more. That is not to say that I Saw the TV Glow is “kiddie horror” like the The Pink Opaque is portraying. More that younger audiences are frightened by different, but no less mature elements.

Schoenbrun makes a fascinating and surprisingly adult film that is haunting and unusual. It will be very interesting to see what they do next.

Grade: B

~Andrew

Twin film review: Immaculate and The First Omen

2024 ‧ Religious Horror ‧ 89m (Immaculate) and 119m (The First Omen)

This review contains light spoilers for The Last Omen.

Twin films happen occasionally. Two films with similar plots or subject matter are released, usually within a year of each other. Some famous examples are Deep Impact and Armageddon; recently Elvis and Priscilla; and on the podcast Dr. Strangelove and Fail Safe were discussed. It is rare though for both films to be so closely released that one could double-feature them in the same multiplex. Such is the case with Michael Mohan’s Immaculate and Arkasha Stevenson's The First Omen.

The twinning aspect of both films can be simply stated as: an American nun travels to Italy and through a church-driven conspiracy, must deal with an unwanted pregnancy. There are some differences, of course. Immaculate takes place in the present day, whereas The Last Omen is in the early 1970s. It needs to align with the 1976 Richard Donner film it prequels, after all.

Immaculate is an independent production with a smaller scale which aids a more gothic tone. Sister Cecilia, played by Sydney Sweeney, has come to a convent where elder nuns spend their last days. The convent is cloistered away in an old building with relics, dark corridors, and secret rooms. Soon Cecilia becomes “immaculately” pregnant, much to the surprise and the joy of everyone there. Sydney Sweeney had apparently been wanting to do this project since 2014, and her performance is quite harrowing. She does an excellent job of conveying the body horror of pregnancy, especially when juxtaposition to the others. Mohan’s director is tight and moody.

The Last Omen is a studio-backed IP connected work, so the scale is a little larger. There is money for scenes of student riots and pyrotechnic effects. There’s more CGI and also Bill Nighy, in a marquee-value only role. Such casting is in-keeping with The Omen franchise. Sister Margaret, played by Nell Tiger Free, arrives in Rome to help at an orphanage. Her childhood priest, Nighy, got her to the position. She learns her way around the orphanage and soon becomes connected with a teenage orphan named Carlita. In-keeping with the franchise, strange things start happening and Margaret starts having hallucinations. Soon she becomes privy to a plan to bring about the birth of the Anti-Christ. Nell Tiger Free’s performance is engrossing and Stevenson’s direction is haunting, particularly the hallucinations.

Both films have intriguing stories, good performances, direction, and mood. One of the places Immaculate excels is runtime. At 89 minutes, it is very lean and impactful. The two-hour runtime for The First Omen feels a little excessive, especially because of the screentime for certain elements that only seem to be for franchise continuity’s sake. We didn’t really need an “It’s all for you” scene again. One wonders what this could have been like if all connections to the Donner film were more muted. Or if instead of The First Omen it was called Sister Margaret and we didn’t get any clues about an Omen connection until Gregory Peck’s picture shows up at the end. Such secrecy is basically impossible today, and would only help the second week box office and not the all-important first.

These two films also share something in common with two other twin films from 2020, the drama Never, Rarely, Sometimes, Always, and the comedy Unpregnant. Both of those are also about unwanted pregnancies. In those films, both protagonists need to cross state lines to find an abortion clinic. These two films and their horror counterparts show what a difference 4 years can make. Horror is often a reflection of modern societal fears, and these post-Dobbs decision films showcase those fears, albeit in not particularly subtle ways. Not exactly a recommended quadruple feature, but it is interesting to see how very real concerns can permeate into film. Unpregnant and Never, Rarely, Sometimes, Always showed how difficult things were before, and The First Omen and Immaculate show how it is now. Both horror films are clearly influenced by the pre-Roe v. Wade film, Rosemary’s Baby. Abortion isn’t really an option for either protagonist.

Both The First Omen and Immaculate are entertaining religious horror and are more layered than one might think. If one is edges out over the other, it is Immaculate. It has a better use of its runtime, and has a more satisfying ending. The First Omen’s biggest problem is that it needs to be an Omen movie and not its own thing. Such is the plight of prequels, and thus to the success of Immaculate.

Grades:

Immaculate B-

The First Omen C+

~Andrew

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire and a life-long fan’s internal struggle

2024 ‧ Supernatural Comedy ‧ 115m

The Spengler family return to New York City in a new installment of the Ghostbusters franchise. The remaining members of the original team help out as a new threat comes to the big apple.

 The Spenglers have set up shop busting ghosts in the 3 years since the events of Ghostbusters: Afterlife. After a lot of collateral damage occurs during a routine bust, Mayor Walter Peck threatens to shut them down. Phoebe, a minor at fifteen, is sidelined from the business until she is old enough. She spends time at Ray Stanz’s occult bookstore with her friend Podcast. Ray has started a video series where people bring in their potentially haunted objects and he runs a test to see if it is haunted or not. A Haunted Antiques Roadshow if you will. One day a man comes in with an orb whose spectral presence is off the charts. It is taken to Winton’s lab for further study. It is determined to be imprisoning a apocalyptic ghost wishes to take over the world via fear and freezing. Inevitably it gets out and once again something strange indeed is in the neighborhood and who you gonna call?

This entry has more laughs than Afterlife. The ghosts are creepier, though not nightmare inducing. McKenna Grace is basically the lead again, and she makes Phoebe a fun and compelling character. Dan Aykroyd is probably the heart of the film. You can tell he relishes playing Ray Stanz, even if he isn’t the one in the writer’s chair. Like Stallone in the Creed movies, he is eager to foster and guide the next generation. Other alumni show up as well, like in Afterlife. Ernie Hudson is getting more to do here, which is nice to see. Kumail Nanjiani is quite funny as the orb owner who gets swept up in it all. Paul Rudd does what is expected of him.

Pun intended, but some will find the pacing to be glacial. Though understandable, it is also fun to “hang out” with these characters. Both the old and the new. There are probably too many characters though and it doesn’t quite gel to a real ensemble. Finn Wolfhard and Carrie Coon feel like they are missing from the action often. Pacing tastes aside, the only real issues Froze Empire stem from trying too hard to be the 1984 film. The nostalgia feels a little less weaponized than the last entry, but still overdone. If Afterlife was a 9 on the overly nostalgic scale, Frozen Empire is 7.5. The mini-pufts did not need to return. Nor did the library ghost. The score also could stop being recycled so much.

Frozen Empire is an enjoyable entry for the lamentably contentious franchise. There are laughs and ghosts are busted. And that is probably enough.

Grade: C+/B-

It is difficult for me to be objective when it comes to Ghostbusters. The original 1984 film is my favorite movie. I cannot tell you how many times I have seen it. I had the toys, I watched the cartoon religiously, I have been to Hook & Ladder 8 more than once, and I once saw a print of the original in the cinema twice in one day. I smuggled in twinkies for the second show. In many ways Ghostbusters is my Star Wars.

The ensuing years since Ghostbusters II were not the best for fans. There was a cartoon revival in the 90s, but that was about it. Merchandise would wax and wane. In 2016, the remake happened. I had fun, ghosts were busted, and it was funny enough for me. Though I was a little let down with the movie, I had already ascribed myself to that expectation when Harold Ramis died. Like Ghostbusters II taught us, it was never going to have the magic, so the new cast seemed a fair idea. However, a vocal collection of fans were very unhappy. To say the least. That vocal contengency, though not all fans, hurt the franchise for me. So when the news of Afterlife came about and it was going to be a GB II sequel, I was skeptical. It felt like those fans were being kowtowed to and that bothered me. Nonetheless, I was going to see the next film.

When I walked out of Afterlife I had a bad taste in my mouth. The use of recycled concepts, tropes, and jokes had the film rightfully and derisively compared to The Force Awakens. The villain was Gozer again, and a similar plot happens, just this time in Oklahoma. What upset me the most was the copy/pasting of the score from ’84 film. And perhaps the most disappointing was that Afterlife wasn’t that particularly funny. Not that they didn’t have funny moments, it was just few comparably from previous GB movies, including the remake. At risk of spoilers, I’ll simply say the ending felt exploitative. I know they did the work to make it feel less so, but I found myself thinking of the adage: “Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.” I did like the new characters though, so much so that bringing in the old Ghostbusters felt more obligatory than necessary. Annie Potts as Janine probably could have been enough. So when I heard that we were going to have a new one, and this time it would be in New York, I was cautiously pessimistic. Pretty sure I was going to be more annoyed than entertained, but I am a die hard fan.

That mindset is probably the saving grace for this entry. Looking at other critiques, that are not wrong, I find myself not as bothered by them. I went in just wanting a funny flick where ghosts are busted, and I got that. It isn’t amazing, but I didn’t expect it. Unlike Afterlife, I find myself wanting to watch it again soon. The highest compliment I can give Frozen Empire, and this really is high praise, is that it made me a little more okay with being a Ghostbusters fan again.

~Andrew

2024 Oscar Nominated Shorts

The short films nominated each year are typically a great way to learn about up-and-coming filmmakers. Additionally, established artists can experiment and expand their craft. The short form nominees can be an interesting glimpse into film innovation. Here is a rundown of this year’s nominated shorts.

Animated Shorts

Our Uniform

Our Uniform

From Iran, a woman reminisces about her school uniform and other gender related issues in Tehran. It is mostly presented as drawings on clothing. Innovative, informative, and quite real. Of the animated nominees, this is probably the best and most deserving to win. Grade: A-

Letter to a Pig

From France and Israel, a holocaust survivor tells a classroom of children about a time a pig saved his life while fleeing Nazis. One of the children has a particularly artful dream about the story and humanity in general. The art is a mixture of realistic and abstract. Fascinating, but might be a little muddled in the dream sequence. Grade: B+

Pachyderm

From France, a woman recalls a summer visit to her grandparents. It is darker than it sounds, but at the same time not unexpected. The animation is fairly traditional. Grade: C

Ninety-Five Senses

The filmmakers behind Napoleon Dynamite present the story of a man recollecting upon the end of his life through his senses: touch, taste, etc. Tim Blake Nelson narrates as the man and different animators tackle each sense. This is one of the stronger nominees, though it plays a little folksy. Grade: B

WAR IS OVER! Inspired by the Music of John and Yoko

Two men in opposing sides of a war are playing a game of chess via carrier pigeon. The style is typical 3D CG animation, not unlike Illumination or Pixar, but lacks flair. The story is nice, but the inclusion of the titular song really sinks the short. Grade: C-

Live Action

The Wonderful World of Henry Sugar

The After

After his wife and daughter are murdered, a London corporate worker (David Oyelowo) becomes a ride-share driver to support himself while he mourns. On his daughter’s birthday, he picks up a family whose daughter reminds him of his own. Oyelowo acts extremely well, but ultimately it feels like the first part of a longer film. This is something that seems to happen more often with live action shorts. We are given a snippet and not a fully formed story. Currently on Netflix. Grade: C+

Red, White, And Blue

Faced with an unwanted pregnancy, a single mother (Brittany Snow) must drive nearly 8 hours from Arkansas to Illinois to get an abortion. There’s more to it than that, but it would be difficult to explain without spoilers. Shares a lot in common with Never Rarely Sometimes Always. A line of dialogue near the end falls real flat, and some will find it ham-fisted, but like Never Rarely Sometimes Always this short should be required viewing for all men. Grade: B

Knight of Fortune

From Denmark, a man is having a difficult time viewing his recently deceased wife at the chapel. He meets a man who seems to be having the same issue himself. It’s actually quite funny despite the mournful premise. The short shows an aspect of grief that rarely gets screentime: the weird things we do when we grieve. Grade: B+

You can even watch it here:

Invincible

From Quebec, the film shows 48 hours of the life of Marc, a teenager in a detention center. Marc is a bright boy focused on his freedom. An interesting character study that functions great as a short, but could easily expand without becoming too extraneous. Grade: B+

The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar

Probably the most entertaining of the nominees, Wes Anderson adapts Roald Dahl again with a star-studded cast including Benedict Cumberbatch, Sir Ben Kingsley, and Ralph Fiennes. This is one of four Dahl shorts Anderson released last year for Netflix. It has that layered narrative that Anderson often utilizes. Anderson fans will find much to love. It is a fun short, but at 37 minutes it may overstay its welcome a little. Grade: B

It is difficult to say which live action short seems the most deserving to win. Each of the nominees brings something to the table that is fascinating and/or thought provoking. With the exception of The After, any of the them could win and it would not be a surprise.

~Andrew