Weekend Watch - Y2K
On some level this is a smart film, but on all other levels, it’s incredibly dumb, but don’t let that stop you from seeing it, as it’s still one of the funniest new films I’ve watched this year.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is the late 90s, early 2000s nostalgia-fueled teen horror comedy from SNL alum Kyle Mooney and production studio A24, Y2K. The disaster movie about what could have happened if the machine apocalypse really was triggered by the turnover from 1999 to 2000 stars Jaeden Martell, Rachel Zegler, Julian Dennison, Daniel Zolghadri, Lachlan Watson, Fred Durst, Kyle Mooney, Eduardo Franco, Mason Gooding, and The Kid Laroi. The film opened in theaters this weekend to middling reviews from both audiences and critics. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: D+; giving this film any rating higher than this would feel wrong, but it does some things really well, depending on your take on it.
Should you Watch This Film? Obviously not, right? Unless… there’s some moments in this film that are truly some of the funniest moments this year (often unintentionally). It’s not good, but it might be fun enough to warrant a watch.
Why?
Y2K on paper is a film full of clunky dialogue, odd skips in scenes, a marked lack of internal logic for its premise, and an aggressive amount of homages to the cringeyest parts of late 90s and early 2000s culture. If you’re watching it as a conventional high school horror comedy, you’re going to be frustrated with the seeming randomness of the way that story beats unfold – the story is the loosest skeleton, relying almost entirely on convenient plot points to move from scene to scene and moment to moment – and the horror never really hits beyond some moments of gore and some solid practical effects for a B-movie. However, by the end of the film, I was able to appreciate what the film was doing because it becomes readily apparent that the film and actors are in on the joke. No one in this film, by the time it made it to the big screen at least, seems to be seeking to make something “good”. Rather, the film feels like one big troll and/or parody of the 90s and 2000s nostalgia that has been seeing a resurgence in the last year or so. The first twenty minutes of film will hit like crack for people looking for those old references within a high school comedy, and it’s probably objectively the best part of the film; however, once things start spinning out of control, the film leans into the odder parts of 2000s culture – coding, niche rap, Limp Bizkit – and you start to realize that you can either lean into the jokes and laugh at the fact that people once lived like this or sit back and get mad that the film isn’t behaving at all like a typical high school, horror, or nostalgia film. On some level this is a smart film, but on all other levels, it’s incredibly dumb, but don’t let that stop you from seeing it, as it’s still one of the funniest new films I’ve watched this year. I don’t know that everyone should see this film, and I don’t know that it really was as intentionally constructed as I’m giving it credit for. What I do know is that my wife and I both laughed a lot while agreeing that it's a very dumb movie. Check it out in theaters if you want to, or don’t. It’s up to you.
Weekend Watch - Saturday Night
While the film struggles with thematic cohesion like an episode of the show that inspired it, the performances and stylistic choices that Reitman makes still make Saturday Night a film worth watching.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Jason Reitman’s film adaptation of the 90 minutes leading up to the airing of the first episode of SNL, Saturday Night. The film stars an ensemble cast as the show’s ensemble of players and writers, including Gabriel LaBelle as creator and writer Lorne Michaels, Rachel Sennott as Michaels’s wife and show writer Rosie Shuster, Cory Michael Smith as Chevy Chase, Ella Hunt as Gilda Radner, Dylan O’Brien as Dan Aykroyd, Emily Fairn as Laraine Newman, Matt Wood as John Belushi, Lamorne Morris as Garrett Morris (no relation), Kim Matula as Jane Curtin, Nicholas Braun as Andy Kaufman and Jim Henson, Cooper Hoffman as Dick Ebersol, Andrew Barth Feldman as Neil Levy, Willem Dafoe as Dave Tebet, and Matthew Rhys as Dan Carlin. The film, which chronicles most of the behind-the-scenes goings on of the sketch comedy show’s first night, opened this weekend. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: B-; this is a good film, not a great one that could have been great with just a little bit more fine tuning.
Should you Watch This Film? If you are a huge fan of SNL and consider yourself an expert in the show’s history, you’ll probably love this film and what it does. If you have some knowledge of and interest in SNL, then you can find something worth watching in it. If you have no interest in the show, I don’t know what this film does that’ll endear it to you.
Why?
Saturday Night is a mildly disjointed passion project from a director in Reitman who clearly loves and knows way too much about his subject matter. The actors all do a phenomenal job playing these iconic figures of comedy history, marking the film’s real high point. Story-wise, though, it feels like Reitman had too many fun facts that he wanted to include to really create a satisfyingly cohesive narrative, jumping between business drama, drug comedy, relationship dramedy, biopic, and celebration of SNL without any clear sense of direction until the final sequence, which suddenly becomes this feel-good underdog drama. If it was going for the disconnected feel of an episode of SNL, highlighted more by the entertainment that comes from watching talented people do what they do best than by any sense of message or stance, then it might still work, but I’m not convinced that that’s really what Reitman was going for here. Like an episode of SNL, there are some bits that hit and others that fail to resonate at all and you’re left wondering whether everything you just witnessed in the last hour and half plus was really anything more than an excuse for the performers to put their talents on display. The 16mm film cinematography looks really good, also lending itself to that style over substance that the film seems to be going for. Ultimately, it’s an entertaining but empty film with talent that still deserves to be seen.
While all of the actors playing their various characters do great jobs in their roles, playing the comedy titans faithfully and skillfully, it’s the performances from the behind-the-scenes characters that really stand out as more than just phenomenal impressions. Rachel Sennott gives us a compelling look at the complex marriage between Lorne Michaels and Rose Shuster, playing Rose as this capable and self-aware woman who made the show possible. Cooper Hoffman gives an admirable performance as the young executive who supported Michaels and his show, Dick Ebersol, punctuated by a strong scene where he finally reveals the precarious situation that the show is in to Lorne in a seedily lit stairwell. It really is LaBelle, though, who holds the whole film down, carrying it with a portrayal of Lorne Michaels as I’m sure Michaels would like to see himself, a young idealist who can’t imagine failing regardless of what practical knowledge might suggest. Gabriel LaBelle is a rising talent, and I’m glad that he does such a great job in this leading role.
While the film struggles with thematic cohesion like an episode of the show that inspired it, the performances and stylistic choices that Reitman makes still make Saturday Night a film worth watching, though mostly for fans of the show and its history as opposed to a truly broad audience. It takes some unique swings, and some of them even hit. You can find this film in theaters right now if it sounds like something you’d like to check out. I’ll leave that up to you.
Weekend Watch - Inside Out 2
Inside Out 2 is an excellently crafted animated film that unfortunately fails to deliver on what people actually love about the other Pixar films – authentic emotion, which is unfortunately ironic for this sequel.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Pixar’s latest theatrical release (their first since Lightyear), Inside Out 2, the sequel to 2015’s Best Animated Feature winner. The sequel sees the return of voice actors Amy Poehler, Phyllis Smith, Lewis Black, Diane Lane, and Kyle MacLachlan as the voices of Joy, Sadness, Anger, Mom, and Dad, joined this time by Kensington Tallman as Riley, Maya Hawke as Anxiety, Liza Lapira as Disgust, Tony Hale as Fear, and Ayo Edebiri as Envy, just to name a few of the new names and faces. The film follows Riley and her emotions as they move from childhood into adolescence with the complications of starting high school, fitting in, and puberty bringing a whole new set of issues to reckon with. The film opened this weekend to relatively positive reviews. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: B; it’s not saying anything wrong; I just don’t know that what it’s saying carries the weight that I want it to.
Should you Watch This Film? If you want a good movie to see with your kids or are a fan of the first, this is worth checking out. Otherwise, you can definitely wait to stream this one later on when you’re catching up on all the Oscar nominees.
Why?
Inside Out 2 does a lot of things right as a sequel, building on the world of the last film while telling an original story with a positive message, memorable characters, and a few good laughs. Unfortunately, it also suffers as a product of the current Disney/Pixar machine (the first after the infamous announcement that they’ll be moving away from autobiographical stories like those in Turning Red and Luca), and in its quest for “universality” (whatever that means), loses most of the emotional (ironic, I know) resonance that they’ve become so well known for. I felt more emotional connection to the characters and stories of every Pixar film since 2020 (besides Lightyear) than I did watching Inside Out 2. They’ve given us an important message with solid characters that somehow manages to avoid actually getting the audience at all invested in the characters that they’re watching on the screen. The film’s story feels like it’s been designed around getting to a couple of key points in the film’s third act, and the result is a sense of manufactured emotion rather than genuine connection (unlike the authenticity of Turning Red, Luca, Soul, Onward, and even the first Inside Out).
Now I know you’re asking how this film got even a B rating after all this negativity, and that’s because it really is a well-made film. The animation remains beautiful both in the real world and in Riley’s mind with some new techniques on display that really impressed me and made for some fun world-building and comedy. The new characters add some fun new wrinkles to the world of these films, with both Anxiety and Envy being the standouts. There’s a few jokes in here that really work well, even if too many feel more tailored to the younger audience that filled my theater, who for the most part weren’t laughing as much as I might’ve expected. The sound design and Andrea Datzman’s music do a solid job of creating tension and atmosphere. Even the film’s message is one that checks that Pixar box of being relevant for both adults and children – that anxiety is something that can easily come to define us if we don’t monitor how we’re framing our situation, and that’ll always lead to disaster. All of that speaks to the success of the new Pixar method in theory. On paper, this is an excellent film, but in practice, it’s missing that personal element that’s made modern Pixar so successful – the autobiographical stories of Turning Red and Luca, the family narrative of Coco, the friendship narrative of Toy Story 4, etc. Inside Out 2 tries to create those personal moments by telling a story about anxiety, growing up, and friendship, but none of the beats of those stories feel authentic enough (besides an excellently realistic panic attack) to create the resonance that it wants to – maybe that’s also because most of the development in this story happens to Riley herself rather than the emotions in her mind, who are supposed to be the main characters.
Inside Out 2 is an excellently crafted animated film that unfortunately fails to deliver on what people actually love about the other Pixar films – authentic emotion, which is unfortunately ironic for this sequel. It looks good, sounds good, and even feels pretty good, but it fails to deliver in its biggest moments. If you liked the first film, you’ll probably still enjoy this one, but I don’t know that it’s a film that everyone needs to go see immediately in theaters.
Weekend Watch - Bad Boys: Ride or Die
Bad Boys: Ride or Die feels like the ideal summer blockbuster to revitalize the box office, heavy on fairly impressive action and funny comedy, light on themes and commentary, with plenty of star power and supporting players to win over the whole audience.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is the latest installment of the Will Smith and Martin Lawrence action/comedy series, Bad Boys: Ride or Die. The film picks up some time after the events of Bad Boys for Life and follows Mike Lowrey and Marcus Burnett as they become embroiled in a plot to frame the deceased Captain Howard as a contact for the cartel. The film sees the return of Will Smith and Martin Lawrence in the leading roles along with Joe Pantoliano as Captain Howard, John Salley as Fletcher, Jacob Scipio as Armando, Dennis Greene as Reggie, Paola Nuñez as Rita, Alexander Ludwig as Dorn, and Vanessa Hudges as Kelly along with an influx of newcomers Eric Dane, Ioan Gruffudd, Melanie Liburd, and Tasha Smith. Bad Boys for Life directors Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah return to the helm for this installment along with writer Chris Bremner and newcomer to the series Chris Beall (Aquaman). The film opened this weekend and looks to take the top spot on a potentially revitalizing start to the summer box office. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: B; nothing about the Bad Boys movies screams art film, so don’t expect it to be on the same level as an awards-bait, critically acclaimed piece of cinema, but this one checks most of the boxes you want in an action/comedy.
Should you Watch This Film? Absolutely! While its predecessor was a bit of a misfire in terms of the series, not hitting quite as many of the right notes, this one gets right back into the Bad Boys stride with jokes and action at 100.
Why?
Bad Boys: Ride or Die is a true return of the Bad Boys franchise to its former greatness (obviously, we’re talking entertainment here and not so much the social commentary or anything else). The jokes are hitting, the action feels fresh and fun, and the characters are fantastic. The biggest drawbacks for this “fourquel” are its occasional reliance on callbacks in its humor and plot points and its fairly problematic storyline, given the state of American politics in this moment. Smith and Lawrence continue to be a fantastic duo; Hudgens and Ludwig remain two of the best “requel” additions to a franchise in the last ten years, and even the supporting players – familiar faces like Fletcher (John Salley) and Reggie (Dennis Greene) and cameos like DJ Khaled and Tiffany Haddish – shine in their featured moments.
The film’s primary driving force is a dynamic shift between Mike and Marcus, with Smith’s Mike becoming the worrier as a result of his lack of commitment to any kind of real therapy for his past losses and Lawrence’s Marcus becoming the overconfident macho man, believing he can’t die after a near-death experience. It makes for a fun twist on the usual dynamic between the two, and the comedy and action certainly benefit from it, remaining fresh even in this fourth iteration. While not every joke landed, most of them did, and every action sequence had something in it that felt new and exciting – there’s a first-person sequence at one point that was particularly fun.
At the same time, with a more critical eye, the copaganda and problematic messaging of the film’s plot becomes a bit clearer. These are films about cops who basically operate with a license to kill, shooting first and only occasionally asking questions later. This particular sequel also features a plot that revolves around cartels and government officials secretly working together to protect the “borders” from terrorists as long as the cartels get to bring their drugs into the U.S. It sounds like something off a 4chan conspiracy board, but there are people who will eat that plot up without a second thought. I don’t think this or any other film in the franchise should be taken too seriously in terms of its social “commentary”, but it warrants pointing out that there are definitely some people who will.
At the end of the day, Bad Boys: Ride or Die feels like the ideal summer blockbuster to revitalize the box office, heavy on fairly impressive action and funny comedy, light on themes and commentary, with plenty of star power and supporting players to win over the whole audience. It might not be the best film in the franchise, but it hits the formula well and should be an easy one to get into for fans of the originals. Newcomers might be a bit confused at the significance of certain moments and events, but the overall structure of the film makes it easy to just sit back and enjoy it. Check it out in theaters while you can.
Weekend Watch - Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire
All told, Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire is a decent sequel that stays true to the formula and atmosphere of the original films that unfortunately gets bogged down in nostalgia and excessive storylines, limiting its overall impact.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is the latest of the rebooted Ghostbusters films, Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire. The film is the follow-up to 2021’s Ghostbusters: Afterlife and sees the return of many characters from that film and from the originals, including Paul Rudd, Carrie Coon, Finn Wolfhard, McKenna Grace, Celeste O’Connor, and Logan Kim reprising their roles from Afterlife, with Dan Aykroyd’s Ray Stantz taking a more prominent role this time around, and the additions of Kumail Nanjiani, Patton Oswalt, and Emily Alyn Lind to fill out the main cast. This one is directed by Afterlife writer Gil Kenan who is again joined in the writing room by Afterlife director, and son of the original Ghostbusters director, Jason Reitman. The film opened in theaters this weekend. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: C-, a weak third act and overstuffed first bring down what is otherwise a fun and well-crafted movie sequel.
Should you Watch This Film? Maybe, it’ll probably please fans of the first reboot film, and doesn’t really have anything that’ll upset die-hard classic fans too much either. If you aren’t about that Ghostbusters life, though, I doubt this film will win you over.
Why?
After taking a break from its usual haunt of the Big Apple in Afterlife, the Ghostbusters saga returns to NYC and the old red brick firehouse in Frozen Empire. An abundance of practical and digital effects return New York to its old, haunted self, in need of rescuing by a new generation of Ghostbusters. The characters, old and new, bring plenty of heart, if not necessarily humor, to this latest iteration of the films, which continues in the vein of its predecessor with McKenna Grace’s Phoebe Spengler taking center stage in the film’s narrative, again a solid choice, though weakened a bit by her continued fourth-place billing in the credits and attempts to create stories for the abundance of other characters filling out the film. Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire is a film that fits the visual feel and overall vibe of the franchise with fun characters and cool, nerdy technology and ghost stuff, but it trips itself up by getting too convoluted for its fairly breezy hour-and-fifty-five-minute runtime.
One thing you can certainly say in Frozen Empire’s favor, which goes a long way toward how much I liked this film, is that it maintains that same sense of practicality in all of its props, sets, and visuals that made the originals and Afterlife such successes. Obviously, not everything is practical, nor was it in the original, but their practical and digital effects alike remain very on-brand for the franchise. Slimer still looks like a weird puppet; there’s a lot of new ghosts that use that blend of practical and digital to great effect – some terrifying and others goofy or endearing; there’s a fantastic scene in the third act with one of the proton packs sparking up in the back that’s probably a simple effect, but it achieves this cool factor that gets you excited for what’s about to happen even if the story getting you there hasn’t. You can tell that Kenan and Reitman both care a lot for the franchise and that everyone who worked on the film wants to stay true to the originals.
Unfortunately, love for the old films and past iterations keeps Frozen Empire’s story mired in an excessively long first act that’s mostly just exposition and setup interspersed with nostalgia grabs and reveals of new gadgets and/or ghosts. It’s a textbook first act, except for the fact that it takes up almost the entire first hour of the film. This leads into a fun second act, though, that jumps between storylines fairly fluidly and keeps you engaged with payoffs from the setups in the first act. The pace picks up and you start to remember why you like these films in the first place. However, by the time we get to the film’s final act, there’s only about twenty minutes of the film left, and we get a regrettably rushed climax that misses out on much of its tension and emotional weight by rushing things that could otherwise have had extended scenes devoted to them had it not taken half the film to get everything rolling. Couple that with an astounding amount of shoehorned nostalgia for the sake of trailer spots, and you’re left with a conclusion that feels just a little too empty to justify the amount of time spent setting it up.
For whatever reason, they were trying to do too much. Much as I enjoyed the comedy of Kumail Nanjiani’s character, his inclusion and arc felt out of place and rushed alongside the rest of the film. It detracted some from both the screentime and character development of Phoebe, which in turn detracted from the overall impact of the film, since she’s the main character. On the other hand, relegating Finn Wolfhard’s Trevor to the role of comic relief might have been the best call they could have made – his arc in Afterlife wasn’t overly engaging, and he is absolutely the funniest part of this film, which gets me excited to see him do something more in that vein as his career develops. Carrie Coon and Paul Rudd get to fully step into the parenting roles (which Coon had in the first film as well), creating some odd tensions at certain points in the first half but paying off with some of Paul Rudd’s best scenes in the back half, so I’m mixed on that choice. Aykroyd getting some additional screentime probably shouldn’t have worked as well as it did, and don’t get me wrong, it’s no Blues Brothers or even O.G. Ghostbusters, but he makes for a passable secondary protagonist as Ray seeks purpose in his later years. Again, though, all of these extra plots and conflicts make that first act drag, when really all the film needed to work was the Spenglers (Grace, Wolfhard, and Coon) working with Gary as Ghostbusters for Ernie Hudson’s Winston Zeddemore, focusing on Phoebe’s relationship with Ghostbusting and her family, and it could have been a complete film. Everything else is fluff that drags this film’s potential down.
All told, Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire is a decent sequel that stays true to the formula and atmosphere of the original films that unfortunately gets bogged down in nostalgia and excessive storylines, limiting its overall impact. It definitely could have been better, but thanks to the care put into the details by the filmmakers and the actors, it manages to stay out of the abysmal territory of most of the films from the first quarter of the year so far. See it in theaters if you want, or don’t. I don’t have overly strong feelings on this one either way.
Weekend Watch - Argylle
Argylle builds on the long tradition of Lethal Weapon, Charlie’s Angels, and even Vaughn’s own Kingsman films with a completely contrived, convoluted, action-packed mess of an action film that will still leave you smiling when you leave the theater.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Matthew Vaughn’s latest theatrical release, Argylle. The film, written by Jason Fuchs and directed by Vaughn, follows a spy novelist as she discovers that her novels have been predicting real events in the espionage world and that opposing forces are after her latest manuscript to get ahead in the game. The film stars Bryce Dallas Howard, Henry Cavill, Sam Rockwell, Bryan Cranston, Dua Lipa, Ariana DeBose, Richard E. Grant, John Cena, Catherine O’Hara, and Samuel L. Jackson. The $200 million film opened this weekend to the worst critical reviews for any of Vaughn’s films but still looks to win the weekend box office. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: C+; this movie should be so much worse than it actually is, and for that, I’m giving it a passing grade.
Should you Watch This Film? If you’re looking for an easy watching piece of pure entertainment at the movies, I don’t know that there’s any film currently out that will scratch that itch more than this one, so probably yes.
Why?
The bad action movie is back with a vengeance! Argylle builds on the long tradition of Lethal Weapon, Charlie’s Angels, and even Vaughn’s own Kingsman films with a completely contrived, convoluted, action-packed mess of an action film that will still leave you smiling when you leave the theater. The cast’s commitment to the many bits of this film is what should make it a lasting success in the proverbial Spike TV movie specials (I guess it’s probably FXX now or something along those lines). The crossover of Elly Conway’s (Bryce Dallas Howard) fictional universe and the real-world spy action makes for some really fun rug pulls, and there’s plenty of twists and turns to keep you on the edge of your seat. Is it the most cohesive or clean or grittily real spy thriller ever made? Absolutely not, and it’s not going to floor you with anything groundbreaking, but it is fully committed to its own bit, and that’s incredibly refreshing in a big budget studio film.
All of the main cast feel like the right fit for their respective roles. Bryan Cranston looks and acts the part of shady spy corporation head, channeling just a bit of that old Heisenberg into a few of his scenes, while also getting to show off some of his comedic timing as well. Catherine O’Hara is the perfect skeptical mom, giving plenty of iconic reactions to her daughter’s increasingly ridiculous involvement with her work. Henry Cavill (even with one of the worst haircuts I’ve ever seen) plays the part of Bond knock-off excellently, nailing the physicality and suave that his role demands. It’s always fun to see John Cena and Dua Lipa in cameo roles that fit them, and that’s no different here as they bring just the right amount of star power to the film’s wild opening, mirroring the L.L. Cool J cameo in the start of Charlie’s Angels (2000). Bryce Dallas Howard brings a commitment to the role of unwilling protagonist, nailing the cat lady forced into espionage that the role demands, giving us a fun take on the reluctant hero in the process. The person most at home in his role has to be action-comedy veteran Sam Rockwell (Charlie’s Angels and Mr. Right). He again brings that unassuming charm and hidden action hero style to his role as the real-life spy who tasks himself with keeping Elly safe from the more sinister elements that are after her.
Of course, the action sequences have the requisite Matthew Vaughn flair for the unrealistic with colorful and ridiculously high-paced action that may or may not be everyone’s cup of tea. There’s one particular sequence involving ice skating that feels so ridiculous that you can’t help but marvel at the director’s willingness to try new things (even when they’re so ridiculous in their execution). Unfortunately, the flipside of Vaughn’s films is their story struggles, and with Jason Fuchs (Wonder Woman and Pan) taking on the writing duties this time, the story feels even weaker than usual. An abundance of twists and turns keeps the story engaging, but most of its reveals and surprises feel more unearned and heavy-handed than actually well-choreographed and satisfying. In recent years, it’s become popular to say that certain big budget films are good as long as you can turn your brain off while you watch it, and I’ve never seen that sentiment so blatantly on display as it is in Argylle.
There’s enough creativity in the action sequences and commitment from its star-studded ensemble to help Argylle overcome its vast screenplay shortcomings to be an entertaining, if not overly substantial, time at the theaters. It’s definitely not a waste of money at the theaters because of how ridiculous and over-the-top it is, which works well on the big screen, but I don’t know that I’d call it a must-see film. It’s more of a solid excuse to go to the theaters if that’s something that you’re looking for.
Weekend Watch - Saltburn
A brilliant cast of characters, some truly gorgeous visuals, and plenty of wild story beats keep Emerald Fennell’s sophomore outing fresh and entertaining even as the themes it explores feel a bit overdone in modern popular media.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Emerald Fennell’s highly anticipated sophomore feature Saltburn. The film follows a scholarship Oxford student as he spends his summer holidays at the estate of one of his wealthy schoolmates and slowly inserts himself into that world of wealth. It stars Barry Keoghan, Jacob Elordi, Archie Madekwe, Paul Rhys, Richard E. Grant, Rosamund Pike, Carey Mulligan, and Alison Oliver and opened last week to a strong response from audiences even if its critic reviews are only a bit mixed. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: A-; so much of the film’s themes have been gone over time and again, but it executes them in such innovative fashion that you can’t help but be enraptured.
Should you Watch This Film? Maybe: filmgoers interested in a film that blends The Talented Mr. Ripley with Babylon are sure to be thrilled. People who find either or both of those films off-putting are probably in for a bad time, though.
Why?
Saltburn delivers on its promises of exploring the excesses of the British aristocracy and the lengths that people will go to attain wealth through a twisted series of events. Fennell has delivered a depraved but highly entertaining story about class, education, and desire that is at its best when its actors get to show off the fullness of their characters’ idiosyncrasies and sociopathy. The film takes the premise of “eat the rich” to a whole new level that ultimately reads as much as a critique of middle-class social climbers as it does of the aristocracy that it puts on display. Keoghan, Elordi, Madekwe, and Pike, in particular, stand out in their performances, bringing the sexiness that the film requires to hold its audience’s attention as it dives deeper and deeper into the lifestyles of the denizens of Saltburn and into Keoghan’s Oliver’s need to be part of it all.
In terms of its actual story, Saltburn is fairly reminiscent of Anthony Minghella’s The Talented Mr. Ripley, following a gifted middle-class college student who inserts himself in increasingly aggressive fashion into the life of his rich schoolmate and his friends and family. Keoghan’s Oliver Quick is perhaps more chilling than Damon’s Tom Ripley simply on his ability to lurk while hot, giving a more disconcerting lead performance than Damon’s obsessive one. The twist that kicks off the film’s third act comes only as a mild surprise, and Oliver’s final reveal (no, not that one) might leave too little to the audience’s imagination. Overall, though, the story works because of how fun it is to watch Oliver and his machinations play out, even when you’re pretty sure you know where it’s all headed.
In addition to the film’s fun – at times, disturbing – story beats, the cast of characters keep things compelling as well. Archie Madekwe, who continues to have himself a year with his supporting performance here, perfectly plays the spoiled, but broke, American cousin of the Cattons, Farleigh Start. He plays smug and confident with so much smarminess that you can’t help but love to hate him. Even toward the film’s end, when his arc becomes more tragic, he brings just enough ridiculousness that you feel he deserves whatever comes, and he manages to never get shown up by any of the film’s “bigger” names. Jacob Elordi also happens to be putting up career numbers this year, and in Saltburn, his Felix Catton is aloof enough to draw the audience in and jealous enough to make them stay. His charisma and sex-appeal ooze from every scene he’s in, and you almost empathize with Oliver’s blend of obsession and frustration with the rich young socialite. Rosamund Pike, though secondary in the film’s cast of characters, gives a scene-stealing performance as the matriarch, Elspeth Catton. Her deadpan delivery of some truly wild lines brings an element of unexpected humor to many of the film’s tensest situations, and she plays so well off of every character she sits across from – Richard E. Grant’s Sir James, Keoghan’s Oliver, Elordi’s Felix, and even Carey Mulligan’s Pamela – elevating every scene that she’s in because you never know exactly what she’s going to do next, raising the whole cast up to her incredibly talented level. Obviously, though, Barry Keoghan carries the bulk of the film on his back, playing that unnerving little dude just as well as he ever has here as Oliver Quick. In every moment, his decisions, however uncouth and out-there they might be, feel true to the desperation of his character, and the actor feels like the perfect casting for such a uniquely depraved performance. I never doubted his willingness to fully send, and he full sends many MANY times in this film.
A brilliant cast of characters, some truly gorgeous visuals, and plenty of wild story beats keep Emerald Fennell’s sophomore outing fresh and entertaining even as the themes it explores feel a bit overdone in modern popular media. The big swings taken by the filmmakers certainly won’t land with all audiences, but those looking to see a well-acted film that innovates and takes risks in the modern landscape of film are sure to be rewarded for their watch. Saltburn is currently showing in theaters around the country if you’d like to check it out while it’s still there.
Weekend Watch - Bottoms
Bottoms is a refreshingly original take on the high school comedy genre, bolstered even higher by some solid comedic performances, excellent humor, and a story that never feels tired and never loses its pacing, making this one of the must-see films of 2023.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating and review. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Bottoms, the high school comedy from Emma Seligman and Rachel Sennott, starring Sennott alongside Ayo Edebiri, Ruby Cruz, Havana Rose Liu, Kaia Gerber, Nicholas Galitzine, Miles Fowler, and Marshawn Lynch. The film follows lesbian best friends (Sennott and Edebiri) as they start a fight club to try to hook up with their crushes. It opened last weekend to wide acclaim (critical and fan-based) and jumped immediately onto Letterboxd’s list of the top-rated 250 narrative feature films on their site. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: A; this is legitimately the most laugh-out-loud funny film I’ve seen in theaters in a long time, and with the addition of some solid performances and writing in between jokes, it’s an excellent film.
Review:
Bottoms puts together a perfect blend of quirkiness, heart, high school hijinks, and pure comedy to insert itself into the conversation for the best modern teen comedy. The comedic performances from Edebiri, Sennott, and Lynch stand out from the crowd with perfect timing, playing excellently off each other in what ends up being a brilliantly paced, quick hitting high school comedy. Sennott and Seligman put together a fun premise with memorable characters and goofy situations that feels unquestionably original and fresh, aggressively self-aware and thoroughly entertaining from start to finish.
Ayo Edebiri is in the midst of a huge come-up right now, with voice performances in the Ninja Turtles and Spider-Verse films that came out this summer, an Emmy nomination for her performance in The Bear, and now the co-lead in one of the most popular comedies of the year so far. Her turn here as Josie is probably the most complex character, and she plays the awkward but driven young woman charmingly. Rachel Sennott follows up her critically acclaimed 2020 partnership with Seligman in Shiva Baby with yet another mildly unhinged, uproariously funny turn as PJ, the ringleader of the impromptu girls’ fight club. Marshawn Lynch is the not-too-surprising stand-out of the supporting characters, playing the girls’ history teacher, Mr. G, arguably the film’s funniest character, holding his own in the film across from these two incredibly talented actresses, even outshining them in some scenes.
While I am very aware that I am not Seligman and Sennott’s target audience as a straight white guy, I still found their film to be highly enjoyable and never unapproachable in its humor or storyline. The caricaturized version of high schoolers that they present in the cheerleaders, football players, outsiders, and nerds makes for a quality satire of the high school experience, specifically for girls, but one that is easily recognizable for anyone who’s been to an American high school in at least the last twenty years. The story of girls with crushes looking for love is nothing new, but its execution with the comedy, situations, and ultimate over-the-top climax that brings it all together is on a level of originality that you just rarely see in your mainstream modern comedies.
Bottoms is a refreshingly original take on the high school comedy genre, bolstered even higher by some solid comedic performances, excellent humor, and a story that never feels tired and never loses its pacing, making this one of the must-see films of 2023. Seligman, Sennott, and Edebiri represent a talented group of rising stars in modern Hollywood, and I’m excited for them to have this film under their belt as a classic comedy to look back on as their success continues to climb. Marshawn Lynch might be the most unironically funny athlete-turned-actor to date, and he gets to put that on full display here; I look forward to seeing even more of that. The originality and representation in Bottoms also goes a long way in moving the film industry in a positive direction as well. All-around, this film represents a huge step in the right direction for the American film industry, and I’m glad that it exists and that I got to see it this weekend.
Weekend Watch - Haunted Mansion
With an ensemble cast that brings a solid blend of heart and humor to the familiar (and maybe a bit too rushed) story, plenty of nods to the ride that inspired it, and just enough mild and goofy horror moments, Haunted Mansion is a passable and fun time at the movies.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating and review. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Haunted Mansion, the latest of Disney’s films based on rides from their parks. This film is in no way related to the Eddie Murphy film from the early 2000s except in its inspiration coming from the same ride. The current film stars an ensemble cast of LaKeith Stanfield, Rosario Dawson, Owen Wilson, Tiffany Haddish, Danny DeVito, Jamie Lee Curtis, Chase Dillon, and Jared Leto. It focuses on Dawson’s Gabbie and her son Travis (Dillon) who have bought a new home outside of New Orleans with the goal of turning it into a bed and breakfast and have discovered that it is haunted, leading them to turn to a series of experts – a physicist, medium, historian, and priest played by Stanfield, Haddish, DeVito, and Wilson respectively – to rid themselves of their ghost problem. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: B-; this film isn’t “good” like last week’s slate of excellence, but it knows its lane and delivers a solid film for its genres and target audience.
Review:
Haunted Mansion is every bit the Disney ride adaptation that we’ve come to expect, never quite hitting the highs of the first Pirates film, but delivering a quality blend of goofy effects, Easter eggs for the devoted fans, and light comedy in the midst of serious stakes. For me, I’d say this film outperforms the more recent ride adaptations – Jungle Cruise, Tomorrowland, The Country Bears, and The Haunted Mansion – thanks to better comedy, better acting, and a simpler story.
The humor can be hit and miss, but for my wife and me, it was certainly more hit than miss – even if the rest of the audience didn’t quite seem as tickled by a lot of it. This can’t come as much of a surprise, considering writer Katie Dippold’s track record – writing such hits as Parks and Rec’s “Indianapolis” and “The Set Up” but also flops like Ghostbusters (2016) and Snatched. The jokes and characters all feel very trope-y in an endearing way that keeps the film familiar even if it’s not overly original. With a story that does a good job of establishing characters and connections, including a fun heist-esque montage of recruiting the various players, the film is at its best in the first two acts with a third act that rushes a bit to get the characters to a conclusion that only feels satisfying for one of its characters but leaves you happy enough with the outcome.
The actors help to make their archetypes work well, introducing unique flairs to their characters to help them stand out against the familiarity. Dawson plays maybe the most familiar character in Gabbie, the unsuspecting homeowner and mother who gets caught up in a haunting. She plays her with the right amount of heart and backbone to hold the unlikely team together. Dillon’s Travis plays an interesting addition/sidekick to Gabbie’s character, struggling with his recent disconnection from his father (Gabbie’s husband). Dillon brings a lot of fun to the son character while still giving a deep enough performance to make his character arc interesting. Stanfield’s Ben Matthias has the most depth of the film’s players, struggling with an inner grief that he portrays in a surprisingly heartfelt and moving way for such an otherwise simple and comedic film. His acting far outweighs the rest of the cast for most of the film, but he manages to tone it down enough in the funny moments to get some laughs for himself as well. Wilson, Haddish, and DeVito deliver the most laughs of the film as the supporting cast, each with their own unique takes on the familiar character tropes. Wilson’s priest with a shady background, Father Kent, brings that familiar Owen Wilson squirrely charm to the typical unorthodox priest character. Haddish’s medium, Harriet, gets the most laugh-out-loud moments and lines in the film, coming across as a fraud with just a hint of authenticity, keeping the energy very light as we’ve come to expect from the skilled comedienne. DeVito’s historian, Bruce Davis, mostly exists to give some exposition, but he also gets some moments to be the funny, irreverent old man that DeVito so often embodies these days.
With an ensemble cast that brings a solid blend of heart and humor to the familiar (and maybe a bit too rushed) story, plenty of nods to the ride that inspired it, and just enough mild and goofy horror moments, Haunted Mansion is a passable and fun time at the movies that won’t necessarily break any new ground in its genres but should please the crowd. It far outshines some of the more recent live action Disney outings, but it also won’t be making anyone’s top-10 family or horror or comedy films any time soon. Go in hoping for a lighthearted good time that won’t make you think too hard, and you won’t be disappointed.
Weekend Watch - The Flash
The Flash is a bit of a mess narratively and tonally that works best when it’s not taking itself too seriously – not the worst superhero film of the year but nowhere near the best either.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers is The Flash, the latest offering (and last of the most recent iteration) from the DC cinematic universe. This film is the first to star Ezra Miller’s version of the speedster as its titular hero and also features Ben Affleck’s and Michael Keaton’s versions of Batman/Bruce Wayne alongside Michael Shannon reprising his villainous role of General Zod and the newcomer Sasha Calle playing Supergirl/Kara Zor-El. With an increasing amount of superhero fatigue around seemingly throwaway films and the coming reboot of the DC Universe with James Gunn and Peter Safran at the helm, the film has underperformed so far at the box office. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: C; this is a totally acceptable superhero film that you can see if you need to scratch that itch.
Should you Watch This Film? If you are firmly invested in seeing a Flash movie, I’m not sure when the next one will be coming on DC’s slate, so this might be your best choice. Otherwise, you can probably skip this and won’t be missing too much in the grand scheme of things – culturally and in the film universe.
Why?
The Flash offers audiences a film that, at this point, we’ve stopped asking for and only cared slightly about to begin with, doing a fine job of showcasing its characters and story but leaving everyone wondering why exactly it exists, particularly with its box office returns being as poor as they have been so far. It feels like a poorly informed cash grab in the vein of Morbius but with slightly better story, action, and characters. For a film that embraces the story of Zach Snyder’s Justice League, this film departs strongly from the vibes and vision of that drab, plodding superhero film. Instead, The Flash presents audiences with a brightly colored, poorly CGIed superhero action comedy with more unearned fan service than should be allowed in a single film.
Let’s talk highs first. As a standalone superhero comedy, The Flash works just fine. Ezra Miller has never really made it as a dramatic actor, so letting them go full manic comedy seems like the right choice for this film. It’s a film that never tries to be anything but itself, and for that I applaud them. The comedy hits most of the time even when it feels like a strong deviation from any superhero formula that we’ve yet seen. The jokes keep the whole film fairly light and keep the pace moving, rushing you through the film’s almost two-and-a-half-hour runtime at a pace that feels closer to an hour and forty-five minutes. Now, the levity does have one major drawback – it removes any feeling of drama and suspense that you might normally have given the situations unfolding onscreen. There’s so much humor that I never felt fully invested in any of the conflicts (that might also be because we know the universe is getting a reboot after this anyway) and the more emotional beats of the film only halfway landed.
Performance-wise, Ezra Miller does the best with what they’re given, leaning hard into the multiple Barrys thing and delivering well on the comedy. Are they the best iteration of Flash ever brought to screen? No way, but I found them enjoyable enough to keep the film watchable in their role. Ben Affleck’s limited screentime works out fine, as this might be his most phoned-in Batman/Bruce Wayne performance yet, understandably so with it being his last time in the role as far as anyone knows. Michael Keaton is a welcome addition to the cast, and his Bruce/Bat makes a lot of sense in the film, given its lighter (borderline campier) tones. He gets to do more than Affleck, and that’s not a bad thing. If anything, The Flash actually helps cement Keaton’s take on Batman as my second-favorite behind Robert Pattinson’s. (That’s not a statement about any of their films, just how I feel about their interpretations of the Caped Crusader.) Calle’s Supergirl and Shannon’s Zod feel almost more like throwaway plot points than actual characters, through no fault of the actors, more due to the writing, but they work in their roles. Obviously, Shannon is a great actor, and his Zod is probably the best villain from this saga of DC films. Calle does great in her action sequences but isn’t given much to do in terms of character work, so I’m curious to see whether she gets to come back in the new universe or not – it could be good.
The Flash is a bit of a mess narratively and tonally that works best when it’s not taking itself too seriously – not the worst superhero film of the year but nowhere near the best either. If you need that itch scratched or are just deeply committed to seeing Ezra Miller’s Flash on the big screen, this is the film for you. Otherwise, you can definitely skip its theatrical run and might even be okay avoiding it entirely. Tragically, in a world full of superhero universes, films that lack legitimate consequence within those universes end up being fairly skippable.
Weekend Watch - Book Club: The next Chapter
Book Club: The Next Chapter doesn’t offer anything new or inventive to the world of film and lacks a bit in the story department, but it makes up for its shortcomings by showcasing some familiar performers having a great time and showcasing some solid self-aware comedy.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Book Club: The Next Chapter, the sequel to 2018’s film, Book Club, about a group of women of a certain age who rediscover their sexuality by reading Fifty Shades of Grey in their book club. This film again stars Jane Fonda, Diane Keaton, Candice Bergen, and Mary Steenburgen as they take their club on a trip to Europe to celebrate Vivian’s (Fonda) engagement. The women are joined again by Andy Garcia, Don Johnson, and Craig T. Nelson with the additions of Giancarlo Giannini, Hugh Quarshie, and Vincent Riotta rounding out the supporting cast. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: D; this is a perfectly fine film for what it is – there are laughs and it’s true to the characters from its predecessor. That doesn’t mean it’s great or even good, but it’s not the worst 107 minutes ever put to screen.
Should you Watch This Film? If you’ve never seen the first Book Club, there’s absolutely no reason to watch this one, as it is a fairly direct continuation of the stories from the first with the same level of humor and acting. If you did see the first, there’s some decently satisfying conclusions to some of the open endings from the first that you might enjoy. And if you need something to see with your mom for Mother’s Day, go see Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret. instead.
Why?
Book Club: The Next Chapter carries on with everything that made the first film as fun as it is, but they really are films with a fairly specific target audience whose entertainment value is going to be limited for anyone outside of that target audience. The comedy of Book Club: The Next Chapter relies almost exclusively on elderly people being self-aware about their age and making jokes about it and about their love lives at that stage of life. It works well enough to get some laughs, and the performers are familiar enough that you might be able to get past the predictable plot and simple writing, but this film is not a must-see theatrical experience – it accomplishes what it sets out to do and that’s about it.
The biggest thing holding The Next Chapter back is its nature as a sequel – relying on plots and character beats from the first film to build its emotional and romantic connections. For a romantic comedy, most of its romance actually came in the first film, and this one just has some romantic tensions with very limited payoff for the stories that start in this film. Most of this film’s story involves the four women getting into trouble in various Italian cities, which is fun and funny enough to keep you watching, but it doesn’t provide much actual plot or character development worth mentioning – exemplified by the final act’s reversion to closing out the plots from the original film rather than engaging at all with any of the side plots from this film.
Book Club: The Next Chapter doesn’t offer anything new or inventive to the world of film and lacks a bit in the story department, but it makes up for its shortcomings by showcasing some familiar performers having a great time and showcasing some solid self-aware comedy. It’s by no means a must-see, but fans of Fonda, Keaton, Bergen, and Steenburgen and/or the first Book Club will find something endearing about this getaway comedy from the group. Most people are probably okay skipping this one or waiting until it hits streaming to watch it.
Weekend Watch - Renfield
Renfield delivers the memorable Dracula performance that you want from Nic Cage, some decently comedic moments, and really fun action sequences in the midst of an otherwise generic story and at-times cringe-worthy script, making it a bad action film at best.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is the Nic Cage, Awkwafina, and Nicholas Hoult starring action/comedy/horror film, Renfield, which opened in theaters nationwide this weekend. The film also features a supporting cast of Ben Schwartz, Shohreh Aghdashloo, Brandon Scott Jones, Camille Chen, and Adrian Martinez as it tells a modern story of Dracula and his titular familiar Renfield. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: C; this film delivers on all the levels that a bad action comedy should; it just struggles in most other areas.
Should you Watch This Film? Maybe: Nic Cage fans will be happy with his performance, and people who enjoy an excessively gory action/comedy will have that itch scratched. I don’t know that it’s a must-see in theaters for anyone though.
Why?
Renfield’s highs are honestly surprisingly high, while its lows are almost abysmally low. It’s got a few performances that have really sold out to their roles, delivering wildly memorable performances, and some really fun and creative violent action sequences that almost look like something out of Deadpool or (for those who will get the reference) Happy Tree Friends with their levels of insanity and cartoonish gore. On the flip side, the writing – especially the “inspirational” moments – comes across as aggressively cringey in most scenes, and the comedy only hits about half the time if you haven’t been drinking excessively before you come in (speaking for the group of guys in front of me at the theater who laughed late and loud at just about every joke, no matter how small). So really, your enjoyment of Renfield depends entirely on what you walk into the movie looking for.
Performance-wise, there’s a few worth noting in this film who took some mediocre writing and turned it into solid acting. Nicholas Hoult as the titular anti-hero (at least in this iteration) does what the script requires and delivers yet another solid man-who-has-never-fully-expressed-his-emotions-before-and-is-now-on-a-journey-of-self-discovery performance to add to his repertoire (see Warm Bodies, X-Men: First Class, and Mad Max: Fury Road for more examples). Awkwafina’s Officer Rebecca Quincy is given a lot of expository dialogue, hampering her character somewhat, but she fully delivers on every single comedic line she’s given, quickly becoming a crowd favorite as the film progresses. Ben Schwartz is once again playing a slightly eviler Jean-Ralphio Saperstein, and since he’s lived in this lane for so long, it makes sense to see him play the skeevy son of a crime boss in his side villain role as Ted Lobo. Brandon Scott Jones gets to have maybe the most fun in the film, playing the sponsor of the codependent relationship support group that Renfield attends, Mark, as the comedic MVP of the film, playing just the cheesiest version of a group sponsor you could possibly imagine – so out of place but so great in the midst of this otherwise dark comedy. Really though, the best performance in this film is given by Nicolas Cage as Dracula. He benefits from some great makeup work, but even without it, his acting would speak for itself as he brings just the right blend of menace, cruelty, and aloofness to the world’s most famous vampire. It’s his performance that truly elevates the film from generic to memorable, making it worth watching in my book.
All of those performances shone in the film despite its regrettably by-the-numbers plot and often cheesy dialogue. Sometimes the cheese worked with the film, edging it closer to the campy vibe that it goes for – especially with its opening homage to the classic 1930s Dracula, which starts you down a road that never really reaches that desired destination. Unfortunately, most of the cheese feels more forced than organic and serves to take you out of the experience rather than getting you to laugh along with it. Bringing the writing down another notch is its simple and predictable plot that feels like it could have been so much better with just a few tweaks here or there. For the most part, the plot feels like a device to move the audience from one fun action set piece to another, but those moments in between feel so familiar and generic that the film loses a lot of its flair in those moments. Hints at werewolves that never actually come to fruition, vague explanations of Rebecca’s dad being a hero cop that never receive any fleshing out, and middling emotional beats that don’t do anything to actually develop the characters are all points that could have been improved with a few extra rewrites and elevated this film from mostly generic to a true standout.
Renfield delivers the memorable Dracula performance that you want from Nic Cage, some decently comedic moments, and really fun action sequences in the midst of an otherwise generic story and at-times cringe-worthy script, making it a bad action film at best. If that’s all you’re looking for, I can basically guarantee that you’ll have a good time. If you wanted an iconic horror-comedy with just the right blend of camp and gore, this’ll probably leave you a little bit disappointed. At the end of the day, it’s all about what you want out of the experience and what you go in expecting.
Weekend Watch - 80 for Brady
Four actresses having a great time as football fans in a film with plenty of celebrity cameos to keep its target audience engaged, 80 for Brady is by no means a perfect or Good film, but it is a good movie that accomplishes what it sets out to do.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is 80 for Brady, the sports comedy about four elderly Patriots fans trying to get in to watch Super Bowl LI, Tom Brady’s last with the Patriots. The film stars Lily Tomlin, Jane Fonda, Sally Field, and Rita Moreno and features cameos from Tom Brady, Guy Fieri, Rob Gronkowski, Billy Porter, and Harry Hamlin. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: C+; realistically, it’s probably worse, but I went in with zero expectations and had a decently entertaining time.
Should you Watch This Film? I’d personally wait for this to hit streaming, but if you’re looking for a simple comedy where everyone looks like they’re having a great time, this is a solid new offering.
Why?
Look, 80 for Brady is a simple lady friends comedy movie with four incredibly talented actresses carrying the whole thing with pure charisma. The story doesn’t do anything unexpected and often strays into the unbelievable to sell the comedic and emotional beats of the film, but again, I don’t know why you would go into this expecting anything else. I said this to my wife when we left the theater, “Not every movie has to be this big awards-bait new and creative thing. Sometimes we need those familiar comfort films to just have a good time,” and I think 80 for Brady checks that box of familiar comfort movie – something easy to throw on during a lazy Saturday afternoon that you don’t have to pay much attention to and can still get some laughs and feel-good energy going.
In addition to its four leading ladies, 80 for Brady relies heavily on cameos to keep the audience engaged. Obviously Tom Brady plays a heavy side role, often breaking through his interviews on television to speak directly to Lily Tomlin’s Lou. The now-retired(?) quarterback does a fine job delivering the equivalent of huddle pep talks and does help sell one of the more touching scenes at the end of the film when the ladies actually get to meet him in person. It’s not Kevin Garnett in Uncut Gems, but it’s also definitely not Michael Jordan in Space Jam, so a just fine performance from the superstar. Guy Fieri plays a larger role in the film than I initially expected but still doesn’t have a lot of acting to do – playing himself has its perks, and he serves more as a comedic bit than a true character in the film. It’s funny because it’s Guy Fieri, but it’s nothing to write home about. For whatever reason, Billy Porter is in this film as the halftime choreographer who befriends the four women. Again, his role is more of a cog in the machine that gets the ladies into the big game, but he does the most with it, as he does with most of his roles. It’s fun to see these side characters all having a great time just basically being themselves in the film.
As for the ladies, what else is there to say other than they had a great time in this film? Each one has a role to play as part of the friend group, and each one plays it with a clear sense that they are here for a good time. Tomlin’s Lou serves as the “quarterback” of the group with probably the most emotionally deep character arc, putting off talking to her doctors about some tests she had done before going to the Super Bowl and having to come to terms with living life in the present, not worrying about the past or future (just like Tom Brady has to do in his comeback against the Atlanta Falcons). Fonda’s Trish is the hot one who never settled down and gets a romantic arc in the film where she has to decide whether she’s willing to give love a try after being burned so many times. Moreno’s Maura is working through grief over losing her husband a year ago but also serves as the primary comic relief of the group after inadvertently taking some drug gummy bears and joining a high-stakes charity poker game – it’s the performance with the widest range but also least depth. Finally, Field’s Betty acts as the group’s “responsible one” who has been married for fifty years, has grandkids, and also happens to be a retired mathematics professor from MIT. Her relationship with her husband serves as the main story arc for the character, culminating in a touching phone call where she finally decides to take some time for herself at the big game.
Four actresses having a great time as football fans in a film with plenty of celebrity cameos to keep its target audience engaged, 80 for Brady is by no means a perfect or Good film, but it is a good movie that accomplishes what it sets out to do – make you laugh, remind you of the power of friendship, and showcase Tom Brady’s acting “talent”. I’m not going to call this a must-watch film, but as feel-good easy watches go, this one is a nice time with minimal stress for when it hits streaming.
Weekend Watch - M3GAN
M3GAN’s ability to embrace its blend of horror, childishness, and fresh takes helps it overcome quite a bit of its shortcomings in the horror department.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Blumhouse’s latest horror cult classic in the making, M3GAN. The film released last weekend to surprisingly great reviews (a 72 Metacritic score and 95% Certified Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes) considering its genre, marketing, and the month of January. The film about an A.I. doll that gains increasing levels of sentience, leading to drastic actions in pursuit of its prime directive of protecting the child Cady, stars Allison Williams, Violet McGraw, Ronny Chieng, and Amie Donald and is now showing in theaters. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: B; it’s definitely not “good” but by embracing its ridiculousness it triumphs, nonetheless.
Should you Watch This Film? Absolutely! It’s a great time, a welcome escape for a quick hour and forty-two minutes with enough heart and story to keep everyone entertained; though you can probably wait for this to hit streaming if you’d rather.
Why?
Move over, Child’s Play, we’ve got a new scary doll movie that might just be about to make some franchise waves. M3GAN lets you know from the jump exactly what kind of experience this is about to be – irreverent, on-the-nose, and surprisingly tame in terms of its violence. This film has no desire to be in the same club as Get Out or Hereditary or even writer James Wan’s The Conjuring and does a phenomenal job carving out its own niche among the more under-the-radar horror comedies like Happy Death Day or The Cabin in the Woods. In this case, M3GAN’s niche happens to be that of toy horror and its modern evolution out of haunted/possessed dolls into threatening A.I. The film delivers all that you could want from a PG-13 version of this film, with a solid combination of build-up and jump scares, a touching story about family and coming to terms with loss, and so many payoffs you’d swear the writers studied under Chekhov himself.
As surprising as M3GAN’s success has been, I should also note here that the film is by no means perfect. For January, it might be the closest we’re ever going to get to a perfect wide release, but M3GAN still has its issues. For starters, its PG-13 rating keeps the elements that could have made it a great slasher at a minimum. With no major gore or physical horror to speak of, the film feels a bit muzzled in the horror department. When she finally goes on her rampage, M3GAN only actually kills two characters, neither of which felt overly impactful to the lives of the protagonists. The film’s total body count, including animals and people not killed by the robot, comes to a grand total of seven – not the most violent, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be.
M3GAN makes up for some of its lack of horror with plenty of (I think intentional) comedy. My theater was laughing out loud noticeably in at least four distinct moments in the film that I can remember, and I found myself and/or my wife chuckling to ourselves in at least ten or twelve others. Ultimately, the film’s embrace of its comedic nature is what has endeared it to audiences and made it one of the most commercially successful January releases in quite some time. A doll singing Sia after it makes a kill, doing a dance as a threat to a potential victim, and running through the woods after a kid on all fours are only a few of the moments that stand out as prime examples (all of which featured in the trailer, so this avoids spoilers) of the filmmakers going full-send on their film’s wild premise. Any film that is so unapologetically itself as M3GAN is deserves recognition and appreciation, and I’m glad to offer it here.
M3GAN’s ability to embrace its blend of horror, childishness, and fresh takes helps it overcome quite a bit of its shortcomings in the horror department, launching the film on what I anticipate will be a franchise-starting path. It’s currently showing in theaters if you can’t wait to go see it. Otherwise, it’ll probably hit streaming around March, and I definitely recommend giving it a watch.
Weekend Watch - The Menu
The Menu’s blend of thriller, dark comedy, and food, delivered by a satisfying ensemble cast, will leave audiences full and satisfied by the time the credits roll, even if not every bit of the meal lands perfectly.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is The Menu, starring Anya Taylor-Joy, Ralph Fiennes, Nicolas Hoult, Hong Chau, and many others in an ensemble dark comedy. This social commentary set in the world of high-end restauranting hit theaters this weekend. The Mark Mylod directed film has been creating quite a buzz since it was first announced. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: A-; it’s the most fun I’ve had at the theater in a while, but there’s a few things to nitpick.
Should you Watch This Film? Absolutely! Unless you’re the third grader that came with his family to our screening who I don’t necessarily think was old enough to appreciate how good this film is.
Why?
The Menu combines elements of a lot of different films to create a unique meal all of its own. From the eerily subtle horror elements of Midsommar to the intense kitchen shots of Chef or Burnt or Boiling Point and the on-the-nose social commentary of The Big Short or Succession, each piece of this film feels a bit drawn from elsewhere, but in the end, it is undoubtedly its own film, making something relatively new out of its old parts. Its thrilling elements play well with the darkly comedic releases of tension, keeping the audience in an ebb and flow of intensity and relief as we unravel what the evening has in store for the twelve dinner guests and their cooking hosts. At certain points, the film drifts a bit further toward the absurd than it might need to, creating discomfort with the film rather than with its characters, but it never goes so far afield as to be unable to reel its audience back in. By the time the meal’s story (and that of the film) has been told, the audience is left with a combined sense of disgust, satisfaction, and awe, just as Chef Slowik (or is it director Mark Mylod and writers Seth Reiss and Will Tracy) intended.
Aiding in the film’s delivery of its assortment of film styles is its ensemble cast, mostly of faces you’ll recognize but can’t quite put names to and a few big hitters to supplement it all. Ralph Fiennes leads the kitchen as Chef Slowik, bringing all the menace of his Voldemort performance while maintaining a bit more humanity, keeping the audience sure that he’s not the one to root for but not convinced that he’s the one to root against. Anya Taylor-Joy brings mystery and intrigue to the evening as Margot, a last-minute fill-in as Nicolas Hoult’s Tyler’s date to the dinner. She shines as a burgeoning scream queen here (though not really screaming, more as the ideal “elevated horror” final girl), exploring the mysteries of the restaurant’s staff and consistently going against the grain of the rest of the guests in satisfying fashion. Hong Chau (who you might know from Downsizing or HBO’s Watchmen) brings a worthy combination of comedy and intensity to her role as the restaurant’s hostess, Elsa, a matter-of-fact second-in-command to Slowik whose character arc is just as mysterious and complicated as the leads. The rest of the guests, headlined by Nicolas Hoult as an annoying Instagram influencer and John Leguizamo as a washed-up actor looking to rebrand as a travel host, bring the rest of the flavor to this menu, each bringing his or her own brand of flawed wealth to the screen exactly as you’d want an ensemble to work, accentuating the film’s central themes with performances just memorable enough to be unique without overshadowing the film’s main characters.
The Menu’s blend of thriller, dark comedy, and food, delivered by a satisfying ensemble cast, will leave audiences full and satisfied by the time the credits roll, even if not every bit of the meal lands perfectly. Watching it in a theater with plenty of other viewers certainly adds to the experience, and I recommend it if you are able to make it. If not, when this comes to streaming, it should definitely hit the top of your watchlist. Check it out when you can.
Weekend Watch - Wendell and Wild
Wendell and Wild’s weak story detracts from its stellar animation and resonant message to create a film that is somewhat underwhelming, bolstered only by its more compelling side characters.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s subject, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Netflix’s latest stop-motion animated film Wendell and Wild. The film features the voice talents of Lyric Ross, Keegan-Michael Key, Jordan Peele, Angela Bassett, James Hong, Sam Zelaya, and Ving Rhames. It tells the story of Kat, an orphaned girl who makes a deal with two demons (Wendell and Wild) to bring them to the world of the living in exchange for her parents’ resurrection. It’s an interesting film that has been getting some awards buzz in recent days, so let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: C+, there’s a lot to like here, but it ends up being a little underwhelming.
Should you Watch This Film? If stop-motion animation or films about the prison industrial complex are your particular cup of tea, this film is for you. Otherwise, there’s not a ton to write home about.
Why?
Wendell and Wild is an animated film that has both style and substance but is lacking in the department that brings those two elements together – its story. For starters, there are a lot of fun things going on in the animation department. The colors, the textures, the movements, and the sets all look great and craft a really fun world for the film to explore, both in the underworld and on the surface. Fans of the stop-motion style of animation who enjoy finding the little details in each shot will be rewarded with plenty of easter eggs to keep them happy on multiple rewatches. The film’s overall message and themes are surprisingly heavy, dealing with issues of privatized prisons, coping with the death of loved ones, and the evolving role of parents in the lives of their children. By the end of the film, I was able to say that I agreed with the film’s message and that it felt fairly relevant. Unfortunately, the film’s story does not have a whole lot going for it to make the delivery of its message feel worthwhile. The plot progresses via convenient development after convenient development with few of the film’s conflicts providing any kind of actual issue for the film’s protagonist and her friends. In addition, Kat, the protagonist, ends up being one of the film’s least compelling characters. She is the archetypal troubled teen, lacking in much complexity aside from some very questionable decision-making skills. Wendell and Wild also fail to live up to the typical charm of Key and Peele, ending up feeling more like childish caricatures than fully fleshed-out characters. The film’s most compelling character and its high point, in my opinion, is Kat’s friend Raoul. Raoul’s hesitancy to trust the demons and drive to help his mother discover the culprits that ruined their hometown serves to make him the film’s most interesting character with ties to both Kat’s present and her past and his own story of seeking acceptance within their school community. At the end of the day, Wendell and Wild’s weak story detracts from its stellar animation and resonant message to create a film that is somewhat underwhelming, bolstered only by its more compelling side characters. This film is currently streaming on Netflix, so if you need an okay spooky season watch in the next couple of days, check it out.
Weekend Watch - Amsterdam
Amsterdam’s strengths – strong acting, good comedy, a relevant message, and decently interesting piece of American history – fail to coalesce with its weaknesses – uneven pacing, odd writing, unnecessary rabbit trails, and a preachiness that comes close to putting Don’t Look Up to shame – and the film ends up being one big disappointment.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, the topic is David O. Russell’s historical whodunnit that had its wide theatrical release yesterday, Amsterdam. The film stars Christian Bale, John David Washington, and Margot Robbie as three friends in the 1930s who are framed for murder and in the process of clearing their names uncover a much larger plot involving the U.S. government (which did really happen). They are supported in the film by a wide cast of characters played by the likes of Robert De Niro, Anya Taylor Joy, Raimi Malek, Taylor Swift, Chris Rock, Zoe Saldana, Mike Myers, Timothy Oliphant, and Michael Shannon. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: D+, somewhere in here, there’s something good, but it’s hard to get at.
Should you Watch This Film? I have no reason to recommend you see this in theaters unless you’re incredibly bored, have money to blow, and have seen 70% of the other films currently showing in theaters. Once it’s streaming, maybe.
Why?
Amsterdam is a conglomeration of strong and weak pieces that somehow ends up weaker than any of the parts on their own. The film’s strengths – strong acting, good comedy, a relevant message, and decently interesting piece of American history – fail to coalesce with its weaknesses – uneven pacing, odd writing, unnecessary rabbit trails, and a preachiness that comes close to putting Don’t Look Up to shame – and the film ends up being one big disappointment, considering the general skill of director David O. Russell and the many actors involved in the film. The clunkiness of the script is almost overcome by Bale’s and Robbie’s skill at fully committing to whatever role they are asked to play, but even Washington’s cool factor cannot quite mask the awkward stringing-together of deep one liners that is this film’s script. (It often sounds like the Tumblr equivalent of the Star Wars Prequels with the amount of talking past each other that the characters are asked to do here.) The moments of comedy sprinkled through the film are its true highlights, as the actors and script break away from the usual awkwardness and allow the audience to embrace their funnier side. In particular, Anya Taylor Joy shines in a much lighter supporting role than I have yet seen her play, bringing some much-needed comic relief to the scenes she participates in. Ultimately, I think the film’s true failing lies in forgetting who its audience is. The take-home message of the film, while relevant, is very nearly force-fed to its audience in the third act. Though I agree with the statements about the corrupt nature of the moneyed elites and the dangers of using a demagogue to persuade patriotic, but easily manipulated, veterans to undermine the democratic processes of America (or any Western democracy), I feel like most people seeing this film share those sentiments and don’t need such a heavy-handed delivery as the filmmakers bring to this film’s message. Also, people who don’t agree and do see this film probably won’t change their minds because of the use of Nazis, which will cause them to miss the whole point. In the end, Amsterdam is a poorly crafted mix of good actors, decently funny moments, and a relevant message with weak scripting, pacing that doesn’t quite make sense, and a preachiness that only serves to frustrate rather than persuade its audience. Check it out if you want to, but don’t tell them I sent you.
Weekend Watch - She-Hulk: Attorney at Law Episode 1
She-Hulk: Attorney at Law’s first episode sets the tone for a solid superhero origin story featuring a mix of likable original characters and familiar MCU favorites with some quality topical comedic writing thrown in to top it all off.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch, where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a review and recommendation. This week’s Watch, chosen by votes on the Instagram account, is about the new MCU Disney+ show She-Hulk: Attorney at Law whose first episode dropped this week and will run for another eight weeks on the streaming service. It stars Tatiana Maslany as Jennifer Walters/She-Hulk as well as featuring Mark Ruffalo, Ginger Gonzaga, Jameela Jamil, and Steve Coulter. Future episodes are also supposed to feature Tim Roth, Charlie Cox, Benedict Wong, Josh Segarra, and Griffin Matthews. The show follows the origins of She-Hulk and Jennifer’s efforts to maintain a normal professional and social life as she gains these new powers; let’s get into the review.
Letter Grade: A-; for what is essentially a pilot episode, this might be one of the MCU’s best so far.
Should you Watch This Show? I’m gonna say yes. This show feels like it has a lot of potential to take its characters in fun directions and it feels worth checking out.
Why?
This first episode of She-Hulk: Attorney at Law serves as the hero’s origin story. It starts as Jennifer is prepping her closing arguments for a case against some powerful individual. She then breaks the fourth wall (as the character often does in the comics) to cut and acknowledge that she is in fact a “Hulk” and then goes into the back-story. The origin involves a trip with her cousin Bruce Banner where she becomes a Hulk and then a long training journey where he teaches her how to be a Hulk. Along the way, we get a lot of development of both characters, delving deeper into Bruce’s connections to Tony Stark and Steve Rogers in some fun and even briefly emotional ways. At the same time, we see a little bit of what makes Jennifer tick, learning about her love for her job and her hesitancy to become a superhero in spite of her new powers. The threads that are set up in the flashback provide some nuggets for strong character development as the show goes forward. The CGI, which was a problem for many when the show’s trailers first dropped, has been touched up surprisingly well, especially for a T.V. show on a streaming service. It’s by no means perfect or “movie-quality” but it’s better than most of the other MCU shows for sure. I have seen people complaining about Maslany’s characterization of Jennifer and She-Hulk as too abrasive or “feminista” or whatever, comparing her to Brie Larson’s Captain Marvel/Carol Danvers, and I cannot disagree more. Yes, she has some talking points that should be expected in a show featuring a female superhero (only the fourth Marvel project to do so in a solo endeavor, I might add), but the character is legitimately funny and doesn’t feel overconfident or disingenuous at all to me. She is a New York attorney whose job is prosecuting powerful people (maybe even superpowered people), confidence and an ability to adapt on the fly are incredibly necessary in that world. I will also say, the show’s comedy harkens back to some of the more classic MCU days in a way that is highly reminiscent of the Iron Man franchise and even the first Avengers, and I didn’t hate it. In fact, this episode’s post-credits scene might be the best that Marvel has ever done, in terms of comedy; I was dying laughing when it went to black. Overall, She-Hulk: Attorney at Law’s first episode sets the tone for a solid superhero origin story featuring a mix of likable original characters and familiar MCU favorites with some quality topical comedic writing thrown in to top it all off. I’m excited to see where the rest of the show goes. Follow it as it releases each week on Thursdays on Disney+.
Weekend Watch - Bullet Train
Bullet Train is a wildly well-cast action comedy that delivers on those two promises without much story to hold them up.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television that recently released and give it a rating, review, and recommendation for watching. This week, as selected by the Instagram followers, we are taking a look at Bullet Train, the new action comedy from Deadpool 2 director David Leitch, starring Brad Pitt, Brian Tyree Henry, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Joey King, Andrew Koji, Hiroyuki Sanada, Michael Shannon, Logan Lerman, Bad Bunny, Zazie Beetz and Sandra Bullock. It’s a really good time, so let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: B, this film won’t win any awards, but that doesn’t make it unwatchable
Should you Watch This Film? Mostly yes, some younger viewers should maybe wait on this one, but it’s a good time otherwise.
Why?
Bullet Train falls in the same category of film as basically every R-rated action comedy that has released since the year 2000. It’s got strong language, fast-paced witty dialogue, intense gory violence, and homages to other action genres – everything that Edgar Wright, Matthew Vaughn, and Guy Ritchie have seemingly perfected. Bullet Train has all of that in spades and does most of it in what can only be described as entertaining fashion. With all of that eye-popping action and aesthetic, the film’s story takes a major backseat. I don’t mean this as a knock against watching the film, just if you’re looking for “real cinema” or “a Film”, this is definitely not going to be what you are looking for – I honestly don’t know what the overall message was, and the plot twists weren’t overly surprising. At the same time, the rest of the film is great! The cast works perfectly with the quick dialogue and the action, delivering their witticisms and intimate action sequences with equal skill. Brian Tyree Henry and Aaron Taylor-Johnson’s duo is the highlight of the film, as both are incredible actors working in really fun roles. Their back and forth carries large portions of the film when the action briefly slows down. Joey King is perfectly cast as the villain (at least for me). She has the worst vibes of just about any actress I’ve ever seen, and that comes through well for the audience as she is tricking the different men of the film to do her dirty work for her – it’s like watching a less talented, younger Cersei Lannister go to work. Brad Pitt has all the charisma that you want from an action movie lead, but he also brings enough dad energy in his older age to make the hesitant killer act believable. Even Bad Bunny, Zazie Beetz, and Logan Lerman bring their own flair to the small roles that they have to play. Bad Bunny makes the most of his limited lines of dialogue by communicating most of his character with the facial expressions and body language of an actor well beyond his experience, and then he sells the action sequence with Brad Pitt just as naturally. Zazie Beetz works well in her brief, unhinged role bringing a combination of humor and menace to her four minutes of screen time. Lerman continues to distance himself from Percy Jackson, this time by playing the incredibly useless son of the White Death crime lord and being enough of a jerk to make his death feel warranted. All told, Bullet Train is a wildly well-cast action comedy that delivers on those two promises without much story to hold them up – worth the watch but not necessarily a place among the greatest films ever made.
Weekend Watch - Minions: The Rise of Gru
If you can suspend certain expectations about story and plot holes, Minions: The Rise of Gru is a delightful family film that delivers solid comedy, well-developed 70s characters and settings, and a simple but relevant message.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give a brief review and recommendation. This week, we are taking a look at the first film to be selected by followers on the blog’s Instagram account: Minions: The Rise of Gru, the sequel to 2015’s Minions and prequel to the Despicable Me trilogy that released to record-breaking success at last weekend’s box office and continues to wow audiences. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: B; solid, definitely watchable animated family flick
Should you Watch This Film? Yes, it’s a mostly enjoyable if a little bit imperfect animated film. Kids will absolutely love this, as will fans of the Despicable Me/Minions franchise.
Why?
Minions: The Rise of Gru does not try to stray from its lane in the entertainment world and succeeds greatly for that. It gets back to the formula of the original Despicable Me, playing on a combination of rude and witty visual and verbal humor with original characters and worldbuilding all with a heartfelt message about family. What this sequel does well is comedy, setting, and message. As an adult with no kids, I went with my wife to see this film and sat down the row from a group of small children who were absolutely losing it at everything the Minions did, giving the film a more endearing film for sure, because it was succeeding with its target audience. However, I also found myself laughing at jokes and gags that definitely went over my younger peers’ heads and never felt that I had made a huge mistake in going to see what all the buzz was about (might’ve also helped that I went on a discount ticket day, idk). The setting of 1970s America comes through from the opening sequence and carries through in the different characters, vehicles, and situations for basically the entirety of the film; it is apparent that the animators and writers wanted this to stay true to the setting, and they achieved that. The message of the film is fairly simple, but effective: We need people to live life well and should treat other people well if we want to see that happen. It comes through in the young Gru’s relationship with the Minions that develops throughout the film from frustration to appreciation and care and is also reflected in the development of the relationships of the other villains in the film (all of which are very well-themed and fit the setting well). It’s a good message for both kids and adults to remember to treat the people around us well. With all of its high points, the film does struggle a bit on the story side. There are a lot of moments where things just happen in this film, especially in the film’s action-packed third act. I wish there was just a little bit more explanation of a certain object’s abilities before it got used, and I could also have used some more in between moments showing how the main Minions (Kevin, Stuart, and Bob) got to the final showdown. The final showdown itself is pretty entertaining; it’s just the moments immediately leading up to it that feel a little bit rushed. I feel like they could have added like five more minutes of content (barely breaking the 90-minute mark can’t be that cardinal of a sin) and made this an even more enjoyable film for the adults that will inevitably watch this. If you can suspend certain expectations about story and plot holes, Minions: The Rise of Gru is a delightful family film that delivers solid comedy, well-developed 70s characters and settings, and a simple but relevant message. Check it out in theaters, or wait for it to come to streaming, but this is definitely worth watching at some point.