No Hard Feelings - Film Review

Director: Gene Stupnitsky

Writers: Gene Stupnitsky and John Phillips

Starring: Jennifer Lawrence and Andrew Barth Feldman

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Plot: ★★★☆☆ 3/5

Cinematography: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Character Arc(s): ★★★☆☆ 3/5

---

Persian Lessons – Movie Review

Directed by:  Vadim Perelman

Written by:  Ilja Zofin

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

Runtime:  127 minutes

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ah, if only he knew Farsi. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

Flamin’ Hot – Movie Review

Directed by:  Eva Longoria

Written by:  Lewis Colick and Linda Yvette Chavez

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

Runtime:  99 minutes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

Other People’s Children – Movie Review

Directed and written by:  Rebecca Zlotowski

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

Runtime:  101 minutes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Still, is it enough?

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

So, will this relationship work?  

Do we want it to work?  

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

Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

The Boogeyman - Movie Review

Dir: Rob Savage

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

1h 38m

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

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

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

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

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

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

Monte's Rating 

2.50 out of 5.00

---

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

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

Writers: Phil Lord, Christopher Miller, and Dave Callaham

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Plot: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Cinematography: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Character Arc(s): ★★★★☆ 4/5

---

Kandahar – Movie Review

Directed by: Ric Roman Waugh

Written by: Mitchell LaFortune

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

Runtime: 120 minutes

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

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

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

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

Who can say?

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

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

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

How do we know this?

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

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

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

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

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

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

For crying out loud, Tom!

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

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

Jeff’s ranking

1.5/4 stars

---

The Little Mermaid - Film Review

Director: Rob Marshall

Writers: David Magee

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

Loaded to the Gills with Re-imagined Fins and Fun

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Plot: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Cinematography: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Character Arc(s): ★★★★☆ 4/5

---

Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie – Movie Review

Directed by:  David Guggenheim

Written by:  Michael J. Fox

Starring:  Michael J. Fox and Tracy Pollan

Runtime:  87 minutes

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

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

The year was 1985. 

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

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

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

Surprise, surprise!  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jeff’s ranking

3.5/4 stars

---

Carmen - Film Review

Director: Benjamin Millepied

Writers: Loïc Barrere, Alexander Dinelaris, and Lisa Loomer

Starring: Melissa Barrera and Paul Mescal

Beautiful and bold, but questionable romance 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Plot: ★★☆☆☆ 2/5

Cinematography: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Character Arc(s): ★★☆☆☆ 2/5

---

Polite Society - Film Review

Director and Writer: Nida Manzoor

Starring: Priya Kansara and Ritu Arya

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Plot: ★★★☆☆ 3/5

Cinematography: ★★★☆☆ 3/5

Character Arc(s): ★★★☆☆ 3/5

---

Sisu – Movie Review

Directed and written by:  Jalmari Helander

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

Runtime:  85 minutes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Too bad for the Germans. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jeff’s ranking

3.5/4 stars

---

Judy Blume Forever – Movie Review

Directed by:  Davina Pardo and Leah Wolchok

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

Runtime:  95 minutes

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

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

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

“Blubber” (1974)

“Forever…” (1975)

“Tiger Eyes” (1981)

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

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

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

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

Ms. Blume broke boundaries and norms. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

Chevalier - Film Review

Directed by: Stephen Williams

Screenplay by: Stefani Robinson

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Plot: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Cinematography: ★★★☆☆ 3/5

Character Arc(s): ★★★★☆ 4/5

---

Everything Went Fine – Movie Review

Directed by:  Francois Ozon

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

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

Runtime:  113 minutes

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

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

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

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

The 50-something siblings meet at the hospital.  

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

Thankfully, he’s stable.  

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

End his life.  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

Showing Up - Film Review

Directed by: Kelly Reichardt

Screenplay by: Jonathan Raymond and Kelly Reichardt

Starring: Michelle Williams and Hong Chau

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Plot: ★★☆☆☆ 2/5

Cinematography: ★★★☆☆ 3/5

Character Arc(s): ★★☆☆☆ 2/5

---

Paint – Movie Review

Written and directed by:  Brit McAdams

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

‘Paint’ doesn’t inspire

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We’re rooting for this couple, I suppose.  

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

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

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

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

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

Jeff’s ranking

1.5/4 stars

---

The Super Mario Bros. Movie – Movie Review

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

Written by:  Matthew Fogel

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

Runtime:  83 minutes

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

Mario and Luigi! 

These siblings are worldwide household names.  

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

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

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

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

And hey, the game was fun!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jeff’s ranking

2/4 stars

---

Inside – Movie Review

Directed by:  Vasilis Katsoupis

Written by:  Vasilis Katsoupis and Ben Hopkins

Starring:  Willem Dafoe

Runtime:  105 minutes

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

Breaking and entering.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Locked inside.

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

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

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

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

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

Still, the principles are the same. 

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

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

What pitfalls will Nemo discover?

How will he creatively deal with them?

What will be his fate? 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jeff’s ranking

2.5/4 stars

---

Rye Lane - Film Review

Director: Raine Allen-Miller

Writers: Nathan Bryon and Tom Melia

Starring: Vivian Oparah and David Jonsson

Not only romantic but hilarious!

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

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

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

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

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

Should Yas join Dom’s lunch? 

No. 

Well, she is going to join anyway. 

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

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

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

Plot: ★★★☆☆ 3/5

Cinematography: ★★★★☆ 4/5

Character Arc(s): ★★★★☆ 4/5

---