“How to Train Your Dragon” – Movie Review

Directed by:  Dean DeBlois

Written by:  Dean DeBlois, based on Cressida Cowell’s book

Starring:  Mason Thames, Nico Parker, Gerald Butler, Julian Dennison, Naomi Wirthner, and Nick Frost

Runtime:  125 minutes

This ‘How to Train Your Dragon’ live-action remake is not necessary, but it honors the original story and soars during the biggest moments

“The reign of the dragons ends right here, right now.”  - Stoick (Gerald Butler)

“Everything we know about dragons is wrong.” – Hiccup (Mason Thames)

In 2010, the thrilling, uplifting, and soulful animated feature “How to Train Your Dragon” garnered two Academy Award nominations for Animated Feature Film and Original Score.  “Toy Story 3” (2010) and “The Social Network” (2010) won those Oscars that year, respectively, but in no way does that diminish the marvelous work of directors Dean DeBlois and Chris Sanders, composer John Powell, the crew, and the voice actors led by Jay Baruchel, Gerald Butler, America Ferrera, Craig Ferguson, and a host of others.  

For sensitive animal lovers, Hiccup (Baruchel) - the awkward, “120-pound”, pacifist teenager who thinks out of the box and uses his heart and ingenuity to befriend a dragon named Toothless, a cordial, loyal, and ferocious (when needed) charcoal gray flying buddy with expressive green eyes - is your hero.  

Granted, the intimidating opening scene and some dicey moments during the third-act battles might have some adults question the PG rating, but “How to Train Your Dragon” (2010) – based on Cressida Cowell’s 2003 children’s book - is a lovely family film.  

It’s a modern-day classic that’s worth enjoying time and time again.

Fifteen years later, director DeBlois creates another way to relish the experience with a live-action version of “How to Train Your Dragon”, and he and his team’s new vision honors the original animated feature.  

“Dragon” (2025) is essentially the same story as the 2010 movie, or one might argue that they are nearly identical.  So many times, scenes play out beat for beat and word for word.  Both films’ tones and life lessons are consistent.  

However, the 2025 movie runs for 125 minutes, while the 2010 original lasts 98 minutes. This new iteration certainly feels longer.  Note that “Dragon” 2010’s end credits – as shown on HBO/MAX - begin at the 89-minute mark.  Still, it’s not easy to discern where the additional 27 or 36 minutes originate.  Perhaps, the opening battle on the Isle of Berk and the concluding conflict last for a few more minutes each, and one of the Viking teens often looks for fatherly approval that isn’t a plot point in the 2010 flick.   

DeBlois includes Butler to reprise his fierce role and composer John Powell, whose emotive score soars in both theatrical renditions.  Baruchel, 43, has aged out of the live-action role, but 17-year-old Mason Thames (“The Black Phone” (2021)) is perfectly cast as the new Hiccup, who wonderfully captures the lead’s uneasiness, warmth, and resourcefulness.  

Nick Frost fills in nicely for Craig Ferguson as Stoick’s indispensable right-hand man, Gobber, and Julian Dennison, Nico Parker, and Naomi Wirthner as Fishlegs, Astrid, and village elder Gothi, respectively, are other standouts.  

If you are a “How to Train Your Dragon” newbie, there is no need to see the animated film first, and here is the basic premise.  

The Vikings residing on the Isle of Berk, located somewhere in the North Sea, attempt to live peacefully, but they are under frequent attack by fire-breathing dragons who burn their homes and steal their sheep.  Sometime in the past, a dragon killed Stoick’s wife (and Hiccup’s mother), so this ongoing war has led to hundreds of Vikings and thousands of dragons losing their lives.  Stoick, a burly, bearded alpha male and village leader, hopes to find the elusive dragon’s nest and end this ongoing human-dragon campaign for good.  

Meanwhile, a group of teenagers are thrown into dragon-slaying training, including Hiccup, who previously and desperately wished to kill a dragon.  (“Wished” is notably in the past tense.)  However, he meets and befriends Toothless, an elusive Night Fury dragon who Hiccup actually injured with a catapult contraption the evening before.  When they first meet, both Toothless and Hiccup are equally frightened, and dragon and human each swallow their anxiety and learn to trust one another. 

Hiccup is a quick study, and he soon learns Toothless’ behaviors and employs these discoveries to confront the dragons humanely during training rather than swing a club and stab with a sword.  Will Hiccup’s gentle approach resonate with Stoick and the rest of the village? 

For Hiccup and the audience, we actively hope our lead’s example will spread to everyone, but his efforts effectively feel like an extreme uphill climb, like to the top of Berk’s highest peak, especially since Stoick’s years of dragon battles, the pain of losing his wife, and the man’s imposing presence stand in Hiccup’s way.

In contrast to the ongoing stress of Berk’s overall off-putting outlook against the fearsome flying lizards, the special effects team conjures some hilarious, goofball dragons during several training sessions, and the kids don’t really feel in danger during those sequences.  

Still, the movie’s absolute best moments are all the on-screen minutes, seconds, and milliseconds with Hiccup and Toothless as they cooperate and lean on each other to form the North Sea’s most inspirational team.   Cinematographer Bill Pope, Powell, and the visual effects team get all the magic right during the pair’s introductions, rousing flights, and hazardous third-act fights against some capable studio backgrounds and the on-location shoots in stunning Iceland and the Faroe Islands.   The sound design team and DeBlois and Pope’s camera also focus on Hiccup’s shifting gear contraption “at the feet” of his left foot, which is essential for Toothless’ flying.  

So much so, that moviegoers in theatres everywhere might simultaneously shift their left feet to help adjust Toothless’ flight patterns along with Hiccup. 

No question, Toothless’ visual appearance is a flawless and endearing reimagination of the animated dragon, and he and Hiccup’s heroic labor and friendship capture similar vibes with its 15-year-old predecessor.  

Yet, is a live-action take on a modern-day animated classic a necessary cinematic endeavor?  Admittedly, no, and in our current world of sequels and remakes, “How to Train Your Dragon” (2025) does feel like a redundant experience, except for the intense and lengthy third-act colossal clash that seems more ferocious than its animated ancestor.  Is this movie too much for small children?  Possibly, although a friend opined that his six-year-old son would probably embrace the dragon fights because, hey, kids love dragons!  Fair enough.  

There might be good reason to love “How to Train Your Dragon” (2025) or at least like it because DeBlois and his team know a lot about dragons.  They have the right stuff. 

Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

Materialists - Movie Review

Dir: Celine Song

Starring: Dakota Johnson, Chris Evans, Marin Ireland, and Pedro Pascal

1h 56m

Who doesn't like a good romantic comedy? In "Materialists," a woman must choose between the perfect guy and the imperfect ex-boyfriend. This simplistic synopsis, however, a prototypical and overused Hollywood construct, is rebuilt into a somewhat anti-rom-com, mostly romantic drama by writer/director Celine Song. "Materialists" attempt to handle the idea of finding love in modern society with maturity for the complications seen in any love while also indulging in the impossible fantasy of perfection. Celine Song, whose last film, "Past Lives," was a brilliant analysis of love and longing, builds excellent chemistry between a trio of exceptional actors to support a story that initially crafts thought-provoking questions but ultimately takes the path of easy compromises. 

Lucy (Dakota Johnson) is an elite relationship matchmaker working with wealthy clients looking for specific kinds of love in New York City. Lucy prides herself on "checking all the boxes" that compose the list of must-haves for the often lonely yet supremely privileged clients who want partners who make 250K annually before taxes, are women who are mature and accomplished but also 27 years old or younger, and men who are no less than 6'2" and have perfect jobs. 

At the wedding of a recently matched client, Lucy meets Harry (Pedro Pascal), an exceptionally wealthy and charming man who spares no expense or compliment to convince Lucy to go on a date with him. Lucy, who identifies Harry as a "unicorn" for his rare attributes of good looks, wealth, and height, tries instead to match him with one of her clients. The pair, whose chemistry is palpable, are interrupted by Lucy's ex-boyfriend John (Chris Evans), a cater waiter who has money troubles, but the spark between these old flames is instantaneous. 

For much of "Materialists," Song composes two romantic suitors that both feel worthy of Lucy's choice. Pedro Pascal as Harry is fantastic, a perfect, everything man with charm to spare. Pascal chews up the scenery at every opportunity. Chris Evans is the somewhat flawed John, a supportive and emotionally attentive ex-boyfriend who still yearns for a second chance. However, this is where the romantic comedy underpinnings hinder the character-driven story, as by the final chapter of the film, it's hard to care who Lucy chooses because the story loses focus on what it wants to convey. The antiquated ideals of the fairytale romance are initially critiqued, but as Lucy mulls over the choice between the two men, "Materialists" eventually falls back into the simplistic motivation of the routine romantic comedy. 

Celine Song juggles the balancing act of tone and performance throughout the run of "Materialists." From the introduction of the film, which features the courtship ritual between ancient humans that showcases the beauty inherent in the survival of daily life during this time, to the modern world and a different kind of daily survival in the concrete jungle of New York City, characterized by transactional engagements in relationships. Song utilizes this metaphor of courtship in various ways throughout the film to discuss how we find love, how relationships evolve, and ultimately, how much is given by both people when they choose to embark on a journey together. It's a clever introduction for a film that appears to be a romantic comedy but is more a drama about romance. 

"Materialists" attempts to subvert romantic comedy tropes, presenting a world of privilege and style while offering commentary on how love has become a luxury item, an agreement reduced to checked boxes and superficial commodities. For a moment, Song does an engaging and entertaining job of indulging in this idea provocatively. Unfortunately, the film evolves into a highly stylized story that fails to convey much about the complexities of relationships and sometimes the sadness that comes with opening one's heart and letting another in.  

Monte's Rating

2.50 out of 5.00

---

“Ballerina” – Movie Review

Directed by:  Len Wiseman

Written by:  Shay Hatten

Starring:  Ana de Armas, Ian McShane, Gabriel Byrne, Angelica Huston, Catalina Sandino Moreno, Lance Reddick, Norman Reedus, and Keanu Reeves

Runtime:  125 minutes

‘Ballerina’ may not take many complicated steps, but the movie and de Armas hit their action-film marks.  Encore!

“What a pleasure to see you again.”  - Winston Scott (Ian McShane)

Winston, the longtime manager of New York City’s The Continental Hotel, welcomes Eve Macarro (Ana de Armas) to his opulent, urban lodge.  He last saw Eve, perhaps 12 or 15 years ago, when she lost her dad to a vicious firefight in their home.  

Eve travels to New York and visits Winston for a favor.  She wants to find the mob-like organization that murdered her father and take vengeance.  

If the names Winston and The Continental ring a bell, yes, that’s right, they both live in the “John Wick” movies.  In addition to Eve, it’s a pleasure to see Winston, his hotel, and the John Wick Universe again. 

“Ballerina” stars de Armas in the title role.  Eve is a trained assassin, a one-woman killing machine on a singular mission to find the mercenaries that she only knows by a scar-marked “X” on their wrists.  The leader of this “cult,” as Winston speaks of it, is The Chancellor (Gabriel Byrne), in a delightfully violent and entertaining John Wick spinoff that includes Angelica Huston and the late Lance Reddick, and Wick newcomers Norman Reedus (“The Walking Dead” (2010 – 2022)) and Catalina Sandino Moreno (“Maria Full of Grace” (2004)).  

And yes, John Wick fans, Keanu Reeves plays a small supporting role in the de Armas-led action picture. 

Director Len Wiseman’s (“Underworld” (2003), “Live Free or Die Hard” (2007), “Total Recall” (2012)) “Ballerina” plays into the related themes and tone as the “Wick” flicks, such as imaginative and jaw-dropping/arm-breaking close combat choreography and the protagonist’s singular, Terminator-esque focus on claiming retribution, no matter the legions of daunting, faceless hit men and hit women throwing punches and firing bullets in Eve’s path.  

In the original “John Wick” (2014), our lead begins his revenge after a Russian crime syndicate kills his dog.  Similarly, Eve is set on her merciless path after the same fate befalls her dad. 

Suddenly orphaned, a preteen Eve meets Winston, and he whisks her off to The Director (Huston), the devilish, intimidating force who runs the Ruska Roma, a Russian crime society where kids and young adults vie in rigorous preparation to become killers for hire, an idea employed by other recent action movies, like “Red Sparrow” (2018), “Anna” (2019), and “Black Widow” (2021).  Used as a cover, the executioner candidates, including Eve, also partake in ballerina training.  Eve’s dad gave her a ballerina music box encased in glass, and these are the only pure references to the movie’s title. 

While Eve learns the pirouette, plie, and port de bras for a brief montage or two, she readily studies martial arts, loading and firing pistols, and breaking and entering.  These are real dance steps for her upcoming hired-gun career.  

She is soon thrown into the blender for her first assignment, and before you can say, “It’s go time,” the movie is set two months later, with Eve gaining murderous experience in the field.  She soon diverts her attention away from her 9-to-5 job to a side hustle:  tracking down the X-marks-the-spot cult despite objections from The Director and warnings from Winston.  However, verbal counsel won’t sidestep Eve! 

Furthermore, de Armas – who had action-picture training in Daniel Craig’s last 007 flick, “No Time to Die” (2021) - is convincing as Eve.  She fires firearms and dispatches hand-to-hand pugilism with resolute purpose and masters nimble movements when danger arises, like in a crowded club with a floor constructed of ice and an unassuming coffee shop with plenty of unassuming serving plates that could be used as weapons.  

Ana, 5’ 6”, has an athletic, svelte build, but Wiseman and de Armas don’t portray Eve as an unstoppable, indestructible killing machine.  Eve suffers horrific knocks, jolts, and swipes along the way.  Larger adversaries throw her around like a muppet and into concrete walls or through glass on occasion, which helps build a realistic portrayal of this newbie contract killer who is also a 120-pound woman.  She’s not overpowering 300-pound men with the greatest of ease.  Eve is vulnerable but awfully capable.

However, the audience doesn’t gain much insight into Eve’s character, as Wiseman, screenwriter Shay Hatten, and de Armas don’t delve deeply into our leads’ thoughts and feelings other than lethal retaliation.  Then again, John Wick received the same treatment, especially in his first film.  

The script also randomly introduces a new family member (to Eve), which feels forced and a bit unnecessary.  The breathtaking third-act small village location is a wonder, but we don’t learn much about the locals or The Chancellor, and no, the main plot never really rises into intricate nuances.  

“Ballerina” is a straight-up, simple revenge picture, but Wiseman, Hatten, and the stunt and visual effects teams dream up some flat-out astounding action-packed sequences and kills – including creative uses of a television’s remote control and various grenades - that caused this critic to verbally curse and take the Lord’s name in vain a few times during the frequently compelling 125-minute runtime.  That’s a good thing, by the way.  

It's also a good thing that the John Wick Universe has room for another assassin, and it will be a pleasure to see Eve again.  “Ballerina” may not take many complicated steps, but the movie and de Armas hit their action-film marks.  Encore!

Jeff’s ranking

2.5/4 stars

---

Bring Her Back - Movie Review

Dir: Danny Philippou and Michael Philippou

Starring: Sally Hawkins, Billy Barratt, Sara Wong, Jonah Wren Phillips, and Sally-Anne Upton

1h 44m

Filmmakers Danny and Michael Philippou's much-anticipated follow-up to the 2023 genre hit "Talk to Me" is a chilling domestic horror thriller that, while less structured than their debut, is still an undeniably effective second feature for two impressive storytellers. "Bring Her Back" explores themes of unresolved trauma and grief through an unflinching lens of violence, featuring a stunning performance from Sally Hawkins as a menacing foster parent. With "Talk to Me," the two directors crafted an unpredictable supernatural story, expertly composed with scares. "Bring Her Back" showcases the filmmaker's growth through a character-driven drama that evokes dread in more ways than expected. 

Andy (Billy Barratt) and Piper (Sara Wong) are siblings who experience the trauma of losing their father unexpectedly. Andy, struggling with nightmarish visions of his deceased father, desperately pleads with the social worker (Sally-Anne Upton) on their case to stay with Piper, who is blind, until he can take custody of her when he turns eighteen. The siblings find themselves in the care of Laura (Sally Hawkins), a former social worker who cares for her son Oliver (Jonah Wren Phillips) and is trying to build a happy foster home, all while trying to recover from the unresolved pain of the tragic drowning of her daughter. Laura's true demented motivations come to light, and Andy and Piper must escape before it's too late.  

The mystery surrounding Laura's intentions, along with the constant dread seeping into the atmosphere of the film, establishes a story that builds towards a terrifying reveal. Whether a creepy cult ritual stored on a grainy video cassette or the odd behaviors of Oliver, who remains locked away most of the day, "Bring Her Back" patterns the film with a little bit of every horror characterization one could count. Children in peril, an evil parent, strange rituals, a possessed child, and a squirm-worthy scene of violence are just a few of the building blocks for this film. There are a few moments where all these inspirations come together successfully, but more often, many of these scare tactics get in the way of the fascinating characters. 

Sally Hawkins is the anchor for the entire film, delivering a performance that draws a strong comparison to the character of Annie Wilkes, played by Kathy Bates in the 1990 film "Misery." Hawkins has a kind smile, and early in the movie, the motherly gentleness of her character is a welcome contrast to the spooky happenings. Billy Barratt and Sara Wong have great chemistry as brother and sister. Barratt, whose character is manipulated throughout the film by Laura, does a great job of shifting between being self-conscious, stemming from the trauma of finding his father dead, and becoming self-aware of everything happening to his sister. Wong is charming and the sole vessel of what little humor is instated into the relationships between the characters. As the film builds to its bleak and cruel climax, it's these characters and their relationships that make the final moments so effective. 

"Bring Her Back" struggles to connect all the ideas it introduces. However, the composition of characters and the performances of the actors build emotional drama that makes the visuals of violence and ominous atmosphere more effective than they might have been otherwise. It is undeniable that Danny and Michael Philippou are voices to acknowledge and filmmakers to watch in the world of horror filmmaking. 

Monte's Rating

3.50 out of 5.00

---

“Bono: Stories of Surrender” – Movie Review

Directed by:  Andrew Dominik

Starring:  Bono, Gemma Doherty, Kate Ellis

Runtime:  86 minutes

‘Bono: Stories of Surrender’ seems like a ‘Beautiful Day’ for a live audience, but the on-screen version is not ‘The Sweetest Thing’.

“Hello, hello!  Hola!  I’m at a place called Vertigo.”  

U2 recently enjoyed a Las Vegas residency at The Sphere at The Venetian Resort from September 2023 to March 2024.  Although this critic has yet to attend a show at The Sphere, a few friends have described the venue and U2’s performance at the locale as awe-inspiring and larger than life.  The 875,000-square-foot, 366-foot-tall, 20,000-seating/standing capacity spherical marvel showcased Bono, The Edge, Adam Clayton, and Larry Mullen Jr., along with surreal visuals on its inner walls.  And yes, one pal said that vertigo could accompany spectators placed in the highest seats.  

In “Bono: Stories of Surrender”, based on his 2022 book, “Surrender: 40 Songs, One Story”, the U2 frontman performs at New York City’s Beacon Theatre, capacity 2,600, for an intimate one-man show, in which he articulates his various life accounts through a spoken monologue while interspersing several of his band’s hits.  

He declares, “Welcome to my quarter-man show!” 

Bono (a.k.a. Paul David Hewson) sings portions of his famous songs except one performed in its entirety late into the production.  The musical segments of the 86-minute documentary feel like a 1990s MTV Unplugged concert with grander production values.  Bono is partnered by Gemma Doherty on the harp and Kate Ellis on the cello on stage, but yes, one U2 member (who will not be revealed in this review) joins the acoustic trio, too.

For diehard U2 fans, “Bono: Stories of Surrender” is a grounded, understated compliment to the band’s sprawling and spectacular concerts, like their 2001 Slane Castle show, Super Bowl XXXVI appearance, recent Sphere performances, and hundreds and hundreds (or it is thousands?) of live events in between.  “Surrender” is a movie for U2 enthusiasts who enjoy consuming every form of the Irish legends on-screen and in person, as well as for those who wish to learn about Bono’s inspiration, struggles, and pivotal life events.   

However, for more casual fans or non-fans, the sluggish pacing, the lack of U2’s traditional pomp and circumstance and showmanship, and the conversational nature of the medium itself make “Bono: Stories of Surrender” an unfortunate concession as a curiosity, rather than a must-see documentary.  

Director Andrew Dominik (“Chopper” (2000), “Killing Them Softly” (2012), “Blonde” (2022)) competently films Bono, his on-stage companions, and the Beacon audience in (almost) entirely in black and white with an arthouse elegance.  Dominik offers many close-ups in which Bono’s face fills the screen.  Other times, he captures harmonizing glimpses of Gemma and Kate, as well as silhouettes of Mr. Hewson’s back as he’s flushed against the Beacon live audience.  

The upstage includes a metallic apparatus, which magically and interactively parades hundreds of small lights, that resembles a modest version of the enormous electronic display presented in U2’s 2015 “Innocence + Experience” arena tour, and the luminosity tenders a worthy cohort to Bono’s tales and songs from both his unassuming and illustrious past.  

The 65-year-old Dublin native recounts a particular medical problem, the birth of his first child, meeting a world-famous tenor, and more, but the most intimate and connecting moments are when he speaks of his parents, Brendan Robert and Iris Hewson.  

Like most children who ache for their late parents, their deaths impacted Bono.  Regret and the unforgiving thief known as Father Time are emphasized via subtle and overt approaches through spoken word and music.  His recurring reimagined caucuses with his dad in a pub called The Sorrento Lounge are the most affecting.  

Bono also reveals small details about his (over) six decades on Planet Earth, such as his first home that he shared with his wife, Ali, and broader views, including his thoughts about poverty. 

“Poverty is not natural.  It is manmade and can be overcome.” 

Despite the generous insights, clever camerawork, and intimate nature of the performance, the on-screen experience keeps an emotional distance between Bono and moviegoers, despite this rock star standing so close to the edge of the stage and the cozy and supportive Beacon Theatre audience.  

He often refers to Ali, his bandmates, and his parents by holding or pointing to empty chairs that sit on the lonely stage.  Although they seem appropriate when speaking of his late parents, generally speaking, the chairs appear to be unneeded props and don’t enhance the presentation.  In fact, they may oddly remind some viewers – including this one – of Clint Eastwood’s infamous 2012 Republican National Convention speech, where the cinematic legend spoke to an empty chair. 

Another reminder of a different sort is that Martin Scorsese filmed the Rolling Stones’ absolutely fabulous and wildly energetic 2008 concert film, “Shine a Light”, at the Beacon, and that immersive experience radiates Mick, Keith, and the band’s enthusiasm, along with the in-tune on-screen audience’s fervor to moviegoers.  Due to the Stones’ masterclass musicianship and pure energy, the intimate setting, and Scorsese’s kinetic multicamera harmonies, the movie feels as close to a live concert experience in a movie theatre as one might ever experience.   It’s an all-timer!

The comparison between “Shine a Light” and “Surrender” is, admittedly, a bit unfair.  However, since Bono (mostly) sings portions of the massive U2 hits, the connections between his verbal accounts and his glorious tunes don’t carry enough emotional weight as they should.  

The abbreviated versions of the classic songs repeatedly clip our emotive relation to the familiar material, as Bono then stops singing and moves on to another tale from his past.  Meanwhile, the Beacon audience appears completely engaged in these moments.  Bono may or may not perform the entire songs in person.  Still, either way, the Beacon fans seem to enjoy a notably more gratifying encounter with one of rock’s most charismatic lead singers than this particular audience member, whether that’s due to the documentary’s editing, the abbreviated songs, or the natural distance of an on-screen encounter versus a live one. 

Still, after experiencing “Bono: Stories of Surrender”, one might find the “Desire” to buy a ticket to enjoy a “Beautiful Day” with a live performance of Bono’s “quarter-man show” to absorb such a vulnerable, personal discussion/concert in a renowned and cozy venue.  

Unfortunately, the theatrical/streaming version doesn’t translate as “The Sweetest Thing”. 

 Jeff’s ranking

2/4 stars

---

“Jane Austen Wrecked My Life” – Movie Review

Directed and written by:  Laura Piani

Starring:  Camille Rutherford, Charlie Anson, Pablo Pauly, Alan Fairbairn, Liz Crowther, Alice Butaud, and Roman Angel

Runtime:  94 minutes

‘Jane Austen Wrecked My Life’ will not wreck yours.  It’s a lovely rom-com.

“It isn’t what we say or think that defines us, but what we do.” – “Sense and Sensibility” by Jane Austen

“I’m not afraid.” – Agathe (Camille Rutherford)

“Sure, you are.” – Felix (Pablo Pauly)

Director/writer Laura Piani’s charming rom-com “Jane Austen Wrecked My Life” centers around Agathe Robinson, a 30-something bookseller (and amateur writer), who adores her chosen profession, her sister Mona (Alice Butaud) and nephew Tom (Roman Angel), her best friend Felix, and Jane Austen novels. 

Agathe loves Austen so much that she can relate a book and a character to anyone, including herself.   For instance, Agathe believes that she’s Anne in “Persuasion”, “an old maid” and “let life pass her by.” 

Due to a tragic event, Agathe has been stuck in neutral and only comfortable in limited spaces for six years, and she hasn’t recovered from the trauma.   But unbeknownst to her, Felix submits her writing to the Jane Austen Residency, and in turn, the residency invites Agathe to their English chateau for a two-week writing retreat!  

How about that? 

She initially refuses to indulge the thought of leaving her Parisian store, Mona, and Tom to galivant to England for this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, but her closest confidants convince her to proceed.  

For Austen fans, Piani and Agathe warmly sling several direct nods to Jane’s work during the first act to parade our heroine’s dedication to the celebrated late 18th-century/early 19th-century writer’s work, but the screenplay diverts from this on-screen practice during the second and third acts.  Instead, while attending the writing workshop, Piani places Agathe in an Austen-esque state of affairs.

When the setting turns to the gorgeous British estate, the focus becomes less on Agathe’s composing and more on our lead coping with her insecurities and shaky love life.  Fortunately, the residency has a bit of a support system.  It’s run by Austen’s descendants, a polite but eccentric elderly gentleman, Todd (Alan Fairbairn), his thoughtful wife Beth (Liz Crowther), and their grown son, Oliver (Charlie Anson).  

Oliver – who could easily pass as Hugh Grant’s nephew – is Austen’s great, great, great, great nephew (although Agathe calls out that he’s only three greats away from Austen during a phone conversation with her sister).  This literature professor reluctantly works at the residency to help his dad, who has fallen into an unnamed type of dementia.  

Agathe and the three other authors on-site have one evening caucus in a study concerning writing theories and objectives.  However, the triad of other guests have forgettable names, make random, sparse appearances as friends (or, in one case, as a frenemy), and generally fade into the background without much character development, other than we learn of one writer’s struggles with IVF and another mentions a brief love affair.

Instead of working, Agathe frequently calls home, checks her voicemail, and socializes with Todd, Beth, and hesitantly with Oliver, and Piani and cinematographer Pierre Mazoyer offer countless shots of the beautiful locale, which includes a rustic garden, traditional English breakfasts, and ornate décor with hand-sized crystal bottles and floral wallpaper with matching comforters.  The residency seems like a beyond-ideal spot for inspiration, but Agathe attempts to cope with her emotional hiccups while possibly stumbling into love. 

Rutherford is lovely as Agathe, a vulnerable, shy intellectual.  Our beautiful, statuesque lead abundantly carries the movie on her slender shoulders, and she’s utterly convincing as Agathe, an introvert also tormented by a dreadful one-time circumstance.  She’s a woman stymied by her “invisible chains” but could enjoy life’s riches by being willing to break those binds.  The film’s title states that Jane Austen wrecked Agathe’s life, but Ms. Robinson’s troubles are due to her own outlook.  

Still, no matter what path Agathe chooses, her awkward nature will probably always be a feature, as evidenced by her run-in with a pair of alpacas and her clumsy inspiration from Billy Idol’s 1981 hit, “Dancing with Myself”, although without the accompanying actual track.  Indeed, a Billy Idol (who is a British native) song would help liven up Agathe’s circumstances, but composer Peter Von Poehl’s classical work delightfully fills the cinematic experience in key spots, especially a soft piano at the ferry dock and traditional orchestras during a long dance scene.  Agathe jumps on the piano bench herself on more than one occasion, too!  

Agathe may long for love but won’t be ready until she works on herself.   Thankfully, Piani doesn’t cast doom and gloom for the entire 94-minute runtime.  For sure, Agathe expresses her shortcomings and the internal churn accompanying them, but “Jane Austen Wrecked My Life” offers many light and comical moments, especially between Agathe and Oliver, who begin – literally and figuratively - on the most graceless of left feet and with her BFF, Felix, a man who happily calls out her hogwash.  Anson and Pauly are enjoyable co-stars opposite Rutherford, as their characters challenge Agathe and supply gentle, caring touches.  All three actors share sincere chemistry.

Admittedly, some comedic moments don’t land, like Todd’s recurrent mental lapses, but most intended jokes do.  The audience can also enjoy several endearing interactions, including the caring relationship between Agathe and Tom, Beth’s ever-sympathetic ear, and a profound poetry reading when we least expect it. 

The film may not play into Jane Austen’s references and history as often as one might hope, but Agathe lives an Austen-like tale in the modern day, complete with a charming ball at the residency and two potential suitors.  

Agathe mentions, “I’m not living in the right century.”  

Then again, maybe she is.   

 Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

“We Were Dangerous” – Movie Review

Directed by:  Josephine Stewart-Te Whiu

Written by:  Maddie Dai and Josephine Stewart-Te Whiu

Starring:  Erana James, Nathalie Morris, Manaia Hall, Stephen Tamarapa, and Rima Te Wiata

Runtime:  83 minutes

‘We Were Dangerous’ is a convincing, captivating, and concerning coming-of-age tale

“Te Motu School for Incorrigible and Delinquent Girls” 

A bearded workhand named Barry (Stephen Tamarapa) runs, as a one-person welcoming party, toward a group of teenage girls and the headmaster (also called The Matron (Rima Te Wiata)).  

He carries a sign that spells out the aforementioned school name. 

Of course, this declaration is the furthest from hospitable, even though the locale is a beautiful, rustic spot  – a tiny island off New Zealand’s coast – where tourists might spend thousands to travel for a secluded, relaxing vacation and drink fruity drinks that carry teeny umbrellas.

Alas, rest and relaxation are not the reasons for Nellie (Erana James), Louisa (Nathalie Morris), Daisy (Manaia Hall), and about seven other teens’ visit.  

They now reside in cramped huts in director/co-writer Josephine Stewart-Te Whiu’s “We Were Dangerous”, a drama set in 1954 at an oppressive school.   

Based on a formal order, a segment of New Zealand’s government ships the teenagers (and The Matron) to the isle as an end-of-the-line solution for their kids’ reform, but, quite frankly, The Matron and the school’s “engineers” don’t demonstrate much hope for the “dangerous” young ladies and their futures.  

Te Wiata delivers a memorable and domineering performance.  She might be best known as the empathetic but rugged foster mom in “Hunt for the Wilderpeople” (2016).  Indeed, the Matron is rugged, but she lacks compassion for children.

The on-screen administrators don’t share sympathy for the schoolgirls, but Stewart-Te Whiu and writer Maddie Dai certainly do.  They capture the girls’ naivety, comradery, and indelible, youthful spirits while the teens are placed under despotic, unfair bureaucratic rule during a prudent and effective 83-minute theatrical runtime.  

The film offers countless moments in which the girls divulge their limited worldviews but also worldly opinions about their shared predicament.  Meanwhile, The Matron also doubles as a narrator and articulates Nellie, Louisa, and Daisy’s diverse histories before landing on this island of misfit toys.  Nellie and Daisy came from humble beginnings.  Louisa enjoyed an affluent upbringing, but all three still end up in the same troubling spot.  Almost immediately, they demonstrate that there’s no “i” in “team”, as the trio collaborate to fix their leaky roof during a torrential rainstorm.

Stewart-Te Whiu’s refreshing camerawork features the ladies lining up – in blue sweaters and gray skirts - for formal attendance counts, disciplinary rants, and more casual moments.  On their own time, the girls lay down in wispy fields or huddle in a hut, intertwined with one another and their adolescent giggles, like in “The Virgin Suicides” (1999) or “Mustang” (2015), and not-so-coincidentally, the girls in those movies also (attempted to) cope with dictatorial environments.  

Nellie and the younger Daisy might be the closest when stepping onto the island, but Louisa’s new, encouraging presence helps form a rebellious and empathetic triad, as James, Hall, and Morris feel like natural on-screen BFFs.  Nellie and Louisa exude older sister vibes towards Daisy, a girl who frequently refers to the Bible but doesn’t know how to read.  

The classroom is a frequent setting, and The Matron fills her condescending lessons with pious testimonies and Miss Manners training while a notice stating “From barbarism to domestication” sits above her blackboard.  

As one of the Phoenix Film Society members pointed out during a May 8 “We Were Dangerous” screening, the movie draws parallels to 20th-century Native American boarding schools, where assimilation into Western culture was the primary objective.  In the movie, indigenous dance and languages are prohibited, and cutting off long hair is a punishment. 

This specific story is a fictionalized account, but in a March 19, 2024 hammertonail.com interview by Bears Rebecca Fonte, Dai says, “There are a lot of true historical elements.” 

The film is also inspired by Stewart-Te Whiu and Dai’s families. 

Stewart-Te Whiu adds, “And my dad actually, his whole childhood, was in a state care home, a boy’s home in New Zealand, so (it is) very real.” 

Additionally, Dai’s “great-grandfather or great-great-grandfather” was imprisoned on an island.

In the film, the students bond and test authoritative and cultural boundaries, sometimes with playful tones during the first act, but the second and third acts introduce a graver destination for the girls that infuses despair and hopelessness on-screen and for audiences.

Stewart-Te Whiu and Dai’s story pits our youthful protagonists against the system, religion, colonialism, and The Matron’s rigid taskmaster methods and bitter persona.  

Yes, irresistible forces face an immovable, disdainful object as ”We Were Dangerous” effectively builds wonder and anxiety through its heartfelt and troubling performances, Michelle Crowley’s both confining and beautiful art direction, Dai’s astute script construction, and Stewart-Te Whiu’s stewardship.  

Granted, the third act does strain the suspension of disbelief with one aspect (which will not be revealed in this review), but otherwise, “We Were Dangerous” is a convincing, captivating, and concerning coming-of-age tale. 

 Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

Thunderbolts* - Movie Review

Dir: Jake Schreier

Starring: Florence Pugh, Sebastian Stan, David Harbour, Wyatt Russell, Hannah John-Kamen, Julia, Louis-Dreyfus, Olga Kurylenko, and Lewis Pullman

2h 6m

The “Thunderbolts*,” Marvel’s super team of fallen heroes, deadly assassins, and reformed villains, assembles to close Phase 5 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Director Jake Schreier utilizes every trick and trope in the comic book movie handbook to add something new and unique to the formulaic blend of recent superhero movie fare. While the story here continues to be unsurprisingly bland, the emphasis on character development, the chemistry between the ragtag team, and the introduction of a fascinating supervillain create an amusing, charming, and, at times, touching story of existence. 

The characters in “Thunderbolts*” are all previous rogues and rebels to the Marvel superheroes. U.S. Agent John Walker (Wyatt Russell) is the ‘could-care-less’ antihero who once held the role of the new Captain America in “Falcon and the Winter Soldier.” Ava Starr (Hannah John Kamen), the wall-phasing baddie also known as Ghost, was last seen in “Ant-Man and the Wasp”. Yelena Belova, the Red Room-trained assassin and sister of Black Widow, found purpose working with heroes in the television series “Hawkeye.” These contracted assassins have been working for CIA director Valentina Allegra de Fontaine (Julia Louis-Dreyfus), a power-hungry figure under investigation and intertwined in the business of superheroes, cleaning up the mess of a super-soldier program that went sideways. Yelena, Agent Walker, and Ghost are also part of that mess and become targets against each other. 

Knowing that their efforts and skills are better suited together rather than separate, and adding Yelena’s father and limo-driver Alexei Shostakov/Red Guardian (David Harbour) and Senator Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan), the former Avenger now traversing the political realm to fight evil, the group join forces to fight Valentina and her new weapon, Bob (Lewis Pullman), an all-powerful superhuman who struggles with negative feelings and memories of terrible events. 

While the “Thunderbolts*” is a team-up, this film belongs to and is rightfully focused on the fantastic performance of Florence Pugh and the already well-established character of Yelena Belova. Pugh’s charm and emotion build a great foundation for the reintroduction of the other characters. Director Jake Schreier and screenwriters Eric Pearson and Joanna Calo emphasize the characters and their interactions with one another, using them to expand the story and creating connective tissue between them that holds what little emotional stakes the tale tries to construct. 

The story of betrayal and the play for power from Allegra de Fontaine are formulaic, nothing new in superhero cinema. However, the introduction of Bob, a failed experiment from the super soldier serum program, utilizes a few narrative and character devices that make the latter half of the film more interesting than it otherwise would have been. Bob, a young man with a history of depression and drug abuse, is pushed into the role of a superhero. The newfound power creates a dissection, turning the unstable Bob into a malevolent alter-ego called The Void. The metaphor created using this character, along with the character motivations of Yelena, adds a nuanced portrayal of mental health and the private struggles these heroes are dealing with. It’s a subtle touch that adds much-needed depth to the otherwise systematic narrative. 

“Thunderbolts*” may not live up to the scale and spectacle of other Marvel superhero films, but that’s a good thing. The emphasis on character and the chemistry between the reluctant heroes, along with committed performances from Florence Pugh, Wyatt Russell, and David Harbour, anchors the film. The unexpected approach to critical commentary on mental health within the storytelling only further lifts director Jake Schreier’s “Thunderbolts*” above the recent, lackluster standard of Marvel movies.

Monte’s Rating

3.00 out of 5.00

---

“Bonjour Tristesse” – Movie Review

Directed by:  Durga Chew-Bose

Written by:  Durga Chew-Bose, based on Francoise Sagan’s book

Starring:  Lily McInerny, Chloe Sevigny, Nailia Harzoune, Aliocha Schneider, and Claes Bang

Runtime:  110 minutes

‘Bonjour Tristesse’ isn’t as satisfying as the 1958 original, but say ‘Hello’ to this reflective psychological drama

“Everything is about listening.” – Elsa (Nailia Harune) 

Elsa takes an opulent summer holiday with her boyfriend, Raymond (Claes Bang), in the south of France on a sizable seaside estate (filmed in Cassis, just 30 kilometers from Marseille).  They and Raymond’s 18-year-old daughter, Cecile (Lily McInerny), spend their days lounging in the sun or contemplating when to butter their next slice of toast or pour a cup of tea or glass of wine. 

Elsa and Cecile share a warm, respectful relationship and friendship, and Cecile listens to Elsa’s comment, as noted above.  However, director Durga Chew-Bose’s debut feature film “Bonjour Tristesse”, translated into English as “Hello, Sadness”, is also defined with non-verbal cues, in addition to the spoken word, especially with the sudden arrival of Anne (Chloe Sevigny).  

Anne makes a 6-hour drive from Paris at Raymond’s request.  His longtime friend, a successful fashion designer, draws upon some time at Chateau Raymond.  With three women vying for the attention of one man, Chew-Bose introduces a troubling, competitive atmosphere in paradise.

With a 110-minute runtime primarily (but not entirely) in one location – the domicile, surrounding grounds, and the scenic coastline - Chew-Bose, who also wrote the screenplay, fashions a leisurely pace where Cecile, Elsa, and Anne subtlety calibrate their bearings in relation to one another and, ultimately, with Raymond.

Cordial conversations – emanating from the three women - primarily rule the days and evenings but with frequent undertows of deliberate arrangements to leverage position, especially from Anne.  On other occasions, Chew-Bose choreographs crowded spaces in this massive home, including when Anne and Elsa share the same patio chair.  

Even though Cecile and her summer fling, a young man named Cyril (Aliocha Schneider), share some romance, the story is primarily a psychological drama.  Elsa and Anne contest for Raymond’s affections but under polite, gracious circumstances, while Cecile wonders about her fate between congenial Elsa and pragmatic, parental Anne.  

Elsa is a stunning French beauty who could be mistaken for Cecile’s mother.  The French national is younger and more carefree than Anne.  Still, this American expatriate and Raymond share a history, so they both wield influence over Cecile’s father, a wealthy, untroubled widower who seems to always live in the moment.

Chew-Bose revels in the surrounding scenic beauty as an ever-present character, with fabulous shots of the inviting Mediterranean Sea, spectacular cliffs, and gentle, winding pathways not designed for punctuality for their human travelers.  In addition, she (or someone on her team) chose peppy, snappy music choices – like “Come Softly to Me” by The Roches and “Felicita” by Al Bano - when our leading players step out to mingle in town.

Durga relaxes the audience in the lap of luxury while initiating conflict with regal formalities, but casual, loose pacing might wane interest for moviegoers at times, as wishes for the promised emotional struggles to finally appear at this particular spot in Cassis, France.  While mesmerized by the exquisite backdrop of nature, patience is tested with simultaneous thoughts of the human co-stars delivering skilled performances but standing in place instead of moving the plot forward.  

This 2024 film is a remake of director Otto Preminger’s “Bonjour Tristesse” (1958) starring David Niven, Deborah Kerr, Mylene Demongeot, and Jean Seberg, based on Francoise Sagan’s 1954 book.  Both movies follow the same narrative, but the 1958 flick, at just 94 minutes, is a more satisfying, more palpable film, especially with Cecile (Seberg) narrating and reminiscing in Paris about that fateful summer one year before on the coast.  

Still, Chew-Bose’s adaptation carries on (almost) entirely in the here and now with an affecting message, but it’s probably best to watch the 1958 movie first.  Then, absorb this 21st-century coming-of-age chronicle, which devotes more time to the surrounding backdrop and lingers on the everyday complexities of those listening, watching, and enacting under one roof. 

 Jeff’s ranking

2.5/4 stars

---

The Surfer - Movie Review

Directed by: Lorcan Finnegan.

Written by: Thomas Martin.

Starring: Nicolas Cage, Finn Little, Rahel Romahn.

Runtime: 100 minutes.

Nicolas Cage catches a wild wave in darkly comic ‘The Surfer’

Imagine Nicolas Cage going full lunatic, beating rats to death his bare hands in a sunburnt daze as he undergoes the trials of Job in the parking lot of an Australian beach, facing off against an organized surfing gang. You’ve just imagined “The Surfer,” an impossible-to-categorize gnarly new Cage joint that’s either as fun or as bad as you think that summary sounds. 

It’s not exactly a fun time at the movies (there are too many lingering shots of animal excrement for that to be the case), though it is a darkly funny one if you’re inclined to meet Cage on his deranged wavelength. His unnamed, American-accented protagonist, the titular Surfer, arrives at lovely Luna Bay, a sparkling stretch of Australian beach, with his teenage son (Finn Little) in tow, board in hand. He’s eager to catch some waves in his old haunt as he waits for a call from his realtor to close the deal on a cliffside house overlooking the scenic beach. 

But a “locals only” sign proves to have teeth, and the Surfer and his son are soon accosted by the Luna Bay Boys. “Don’t live here, don’t surf here,” the golden surf gods threateningly intone. When he dismisses their warning, the Luna Bay Boys knock him down and take his beloved surfboard, displaying it as a trophy above their off-limits beach shack. 

You don’t cast Cage in a movie for his character to quietly accept defeat; you cast Cage to berserk mode. It’s a credit to Cage’s charisma that he’s able to hold your interest through what’s largely a single-location film as a series of mishaps and escalations between the Surfer and the Luna Bay Boys in a beach parking lot strips the beleaguered man of everything he has – his possessions, his dignity, his sanity – in his single-minded pursuit to reclaim what was taken from him.

There’s a metaphor here, beyond the Job-like nature of the Surfer’s tribulations – a brief phone call with his wife (that is, soon-to-be ex-wife) hints at deeper pain, as does his obsession with this cliffside house and no family to put in it. Is it really the surfboard he’s trying to reclaim? 

It’s also a testament to Cage’s command of the screen that the point at which the movie loses its mystique is when the peripheral characters come into focus. The Surfer’s suffering is more interesting unexplained; as a masculinity-crisis hazing ritual that’s a little bit “Fight Club” meets “Falling Down” with Aussie flair, it becomes silly. 

“Before you can surf, you must suffer” is a line that can only be taken so seriously, and so in the end “The Surfer” is a movie that can only be taken so seriously. But if you can catch Cage’s wave, it’s still a wild ride. 

Barbara’s ranking

2/4 stars

---

“On Swift Horses” – Movie Review

Directed by:  Daniel Minahan

Written by:  Bryce Kass, based on Shannon Pufahl’s book

Starring:  Daisy Edgar-Jones, Jacob Elordi, Will Poulter, Diego Calva, and Sasha Calle

Runtime:  117 minutes

‘On Swift Horses’ might win, place, or show as a series

Muriel (Daisy Edgar-Jones) and Lee (Will Poulter) live in a one-horse town in Kansas just after the Korean War, but they gallop toward big plans. 

Well, Lee is.  Muriel is content to live in her Kansas-rooted ranch home, which she inherited from her mother.  

Lee and his younger brother, Julius (Jacob Elordi), planned on building a life in California.  Julius arrives in Kansas to rendezvous with his kin and Muriel, and he emits alluring vibes with the young, attractive homeowner, especially at first sight, sitting in the front yard without his shirt.  

Director Daniel Minahan immediately introduces a potential romantic conflict, but “On Swift Horses” ponies up into different relationship mysteries that consume the thoughts of two of the three co-leads.  The story – based on Shannon Pufahl’s 2019 book and written for the screen by Bryce Kass – delves into secrets and explorations that break conventional 1950s norms, and the characters cope with the tolls that are taken. 

Edgar-Jones, Poulter, and Elordi are convincing players in this 20th-century romantic drama.  Muriel feels lost and trapped in unwanted prospects, while Lee doesn’t notice and constantly pushes positive energy into his hopes forged by American ideals. Meanwhile, Julius lives a lie, and his line of work basks in falsehoods too.  Cinematographer Luc Montpellier, costume designer Jeriana San Juan, and production designer Erin Magill beautifully and compellingly capture a period when the Greatest Generation conjured possibilities and realized them through ambition and golden opportunities.  

For instance, a few thousand dollars can buy you a plot of land and a homestead on a spacious Southern California prairie, “lightyears” before 2025’s suburban sprawl, freeway gridlock, and “dead shopping malls (that) rise like mountains beyond mountains” (thank you, Arcade Fire).  

Unfortunately, “On Swift Horses” suffers from its own construction as the film devotes (relatively) equal time to two primary narratives, but these distinct threads don’t satisfyingly intertwine or deliver on “promised” payoffs (at least, eluded payoffs) during the first act.  

Muriel and Lee reach SoCal to start anew, but Julius stops in Las Vegas instead, where both parties spend the vast majority of the 117-minute runtime.  

Granted, Kass’ screenplay ensures that in-person contact transpires between the three again, but these limited, unsatisfying touchpoints disappoint rather than reward.  Muriel and Lee (as a couple) and Julius struggle in their separate individual journeys, as Minahan frequently alternates between California and Nevada throughout the picture.  

Meanwhile, the potential for a collective emotional tussle under the same roof or at least in the same state feels like a better choice for this two-hour picture, especially with a compelling, conflicting start in Kansas.  

In California, Muriel resigns herself to following Lee into a suburban existence.  Although she works “9-to-5”, this is a divergence from the era’s stereotypes.  She suffers in silence to get along.  Lee isn’t an ogre.  Far from it, but their home life is his aspiration, not Muriel’s.  She reaches out from her mundane world to find sparks in the form of betting on horses at the track and a new friendship with their neighbor, Sandra (Sasha Calle in an intriguing supporting performance).  Muriel trots into these new emotional spaces, the most dynamic plot points in “On Swift Horses”.  

Conversely, Julius wanders into Vegas without direction on his faulty and undependable moral compass, as this disreputable gambler never knows when to stop unless it’s to accept responsibility.  He seems doomed for inevitable failure, and working in a Las Vegas hotel doesn’t seem to bode like a career that will change his fortunes.  

Although Muriel and Julius reside in separate states and storylines, they discover taboo relationships (during the Eisenhower administration), and keeping these connections private raises the primary theatrical tension in both locales.  

This critic didn’t read Pufahl’s book, but it seems better served as a series with episodes spent entirely in either SoCal or Sin City to let the material and relationships breathe and deliberately muddle through this bygone era’s institutional resistance.  In an 8-hour small-screen project, the prospects of dramatic confidences becoming revealed could ebb and flow, as could the sway between the triad’s imperfect bonds.  

The “On Swift Horses” film version delivers its intended emotive messages but with too many pages seemingly left out of the theatrical experience, as the movie’s pacing oddly feels too leisurely.  Then again, in one scene, Julius suddenly and randomly appears with an arbitrary four-legged companion, a horse, in a possible attempt to link to Muriel’s racetrack experiences and also the movie and book title.  Instead, this moment tracks with all the authenticity of Monopoly money at a poker table, and so does the clumsiest ending of 2025 so far. 

Well, “On Swift Horses” does finish its two-hour race with value and good intentions, but it might win, place, or show as a series.  

Jeff’s ranking

2/4 stars

---

“The Wedding Banquet” – Movie Review

Directed by:  Andrew Ahn

Written by:  Andrew Ahn and James Schamus

Starring:  Bowen Yang, Lily Gladstone, Kelly Marie Tran, Han Gi-Chan, Youn Yuh-jung, and Joan Chen

Runtime:  102 minutes

‘The Wedding Banquet’ serves thoughtful romantic-drama dishes and a few rom-com ones too

“Long-term relationships, the ones that matter, are all about weathering the peaks and the valleys.” – Nicholas Sparks

Two couples – Chris (Bowen Yang) and Min (Han Gi-Chan) along with Lee (Lily Gladstone) and Angela (Kelly Marie Tran) – enjoy long-term relationships, but a pair of recent emotional storms have consumed their thoughts while they live in Lee’s home in Seattle. 

Min’s visa is soon to expire, and marrying Chris would solve his citizenship woes, but coming out as gay would rattle his grandparents.  In addition to his relatives’ shock, his wealthy kin – living in South Korea - would cut him off from the family money.  

Meanwhile, Lee and Angela are desperately trying to have a child, but In vitro fertilization attempts have painfully failed, and their current financial crunch is crushing their hopes of becoming parents. 

However, Min – out of the blue - proposes a ray of sunshine against everyone’s cloudy days: He will marry Angela to earn his green card and placate his grandparents, and in return, finance Lee’s IVF.  Yay (or “Ah-ssa” (pronounced in Korean)), everyone will be happy! 

Min and Angela would live a lie, but what’s “a little” fabrication to buy some happiness, right?   

As one can imagine, this decision has consequences, especially when Min’s grandmother, Ja-Young (Youn Yuh-jung), visits the Pacific Northwest to meet Angela in person.  

Director/co-writer Andrew Ahn’s “The Wedding Banquet” is a romantic comedy/drama that explores the hijinks of attempting an immense deception scaled-down inside one household while addressing outdated judgments against the couples’ queer lifestyles.  

With “Saturday Night Live” (1975 – present) current player Yang starring as a co-lead, one might assume that Ahn’s picture, with its hectic premise, would be an absolute riot, similar to “The Birdcage” (1996), but “Banquet” delves much more into relationship turbulence and strife – rather than laughs - over the 102-minute runtime.  Although the film does have a handful of hilarious moments, including one particular compromising position between two of the four co-leads, Angela’s mother (May (Joan Chen)) ever-present over-intrusive celebration of her daughter’s lifestyle, and Ja-Young’s frequent pragmatism.  

Still, Ahn and writer James Schamus’ screenplay is primarily conversational while delving into the essentials of the leads’ feelings throughout their initial troubles and complications arising from the marital ruse.  

Ahn’s movie is a remake of director/co-writer Ang Lee’s “The Wedding Banquet” (1993) (3.5 out of 4 stars), which earned a Best Foreign Language Film Oscar nomination.  Also co-written by Schamus, Lee’s film - set in New York City and based on a Taiwanese immigrant’s story – is more romantic drama-based than comedic, but the picture is groundbreaking for its time, 22 years before same-sex marriage became legal in the United States.  

The stigma against gay sexual orientation was additionally palpable in 1993, and Lee and the cast and crew dealt with these issues head-on and with care.  Watching 1993’s “Banquet” today, one can unquestionably still feel the weight of Wai’s (Winston Chao) burden of coming out to his parents, along with their strain, while also broadly coping with a judgmental societal outlook during this period throughout the film’s 106-minute runtime.

Setting a comparable story in 2025 needs some revision.  Hence, Lee and Angela’s IVF setbacks are included in this version.  Additionally, a more significant generational divide – grandparents rather than parents – helps bring credibility to Min’s dilemma because one might opine that Gen X parents of Millennials would be more accepting.

Lee and Angela’s storyline delivers the necessary gravitas to pull the audience into the dramatic orbit.  Gladstone and Tran offer tender and sympathetic moments in quiet, heartbreaking spaces for their characters.  Meanwhile, Lee, Angela, Chris, and Min’s nerves are strained due to this upcoming and unsound martial ceremony.  However, half of the 2025 “Banquet” stakes don’t feel terribly high because Min seems more concerned with staying on the payroll rather than hurting his grandparents’ feelings.  Granted, Ja-Young states that Min’s grandfather doesn’t have much longer to live, so some of Min’s guilt does exist.  

Youn Yuh-jung shouldn’t feel guilty about being a welcome scene-stealer, as Ja-Young is the most compelling character in the film, especially when she arrives in Seattle around the 48th minute because Min and company need to impress and convince this one person that Min and Angela’s soon-to-be-marriage is legit.  

The movie offers a small traditional Korean wedding ceremony that serves Min and Angela’s purpose rather than a separate feast.  See Lee’s 1993 picture for a big, beautiful pomp and circumstance banquet.  Still, the 2025 film serves enough thoughtful big-screen dishes to root for a happy ending as Chris, Min, Lee, and Angela weather their current relationship valleys. 

Jeff’s ranking

2.5/4 stars

---

Sinners - Movie Review

Dir: Ryan Coogler 

Starring: Michael B. Jordan, Hailee Steinfeld, Miles Caton, Jack O’Connell, Wunmi Mosaku, and Delroy Lindo 

2h 17m

“Lord, it’s one kind favor I’ll ask of you / See that my grave is kept clean.” 

- Blind Lemon Jefferson (1927)

The blues is a cornerstone of musical heritage, an expression of cultural identity, and a statement of resiliency and resistance. The history of hardship and suffering, the rebellion and fortitude played and sang with heartbreak and sadness, pride and passion, all saturate every note and tune of the music. Blues singer, songwriter, and guitarist John Lee Hooker said it best, “The blues tells a story. Every line of the blues has a meaning”. 

“Sinners,” the new film from writer/director Ryan Coogler, tells the story of twin brothers Smoke and Stack, played expertly in both roles by Michael B. Jordan, returning to their hometown in Clarksdale, Mississippi, to open a juke joint in 1932. The blues, often called “the devil’s music,” is the heart of Coogler’s film, the soul that evokes the ears of evil on the club's opening night. Coogler’s storytelling here is filled with depth and complexity, an analysis of the Black experience told through heartfelt music and fascinating characters. “Sinners” is a bold and authentic genre film that bleeds delta blues and pays homage to the power of music for culture and community. 

Returning after some years of learning the business of gangsters in Chicago, twin brothers Smoke and Stack (Michael B. Jordan) return to their hometown in Mississippi with cash, booze, and a hustler’s mentality. Smoke and Stack buy an old sawmill on the edge of town and plan the opening night for their juke joint that same evening. The juke joint is a space for their people to be free after their hard day's work, a place to drink, eat, listen to, and dance to music. The brothers enlist the talents of their cousin, Sammie (an exciting introduction to Miles Caton), a young musician who sings the blues with a deep and soulful voice, the support of elder bluesman Delta Slim (the ever-interesting Delroy Lindo), and the guidance of Smoke’s longtime love Annie (a confident Wunmi Mosaku) who cooks and provides spiritual guidance. 

The opening night brings out the entire community, ready for a good time. It also brings unwanted guests, a trio of musicians seemingly called in the night by the music played so beautifully by Sammie. The guests, who make it abundantly clear that they must be invited into the gathering, don’t just come for the blues; they have also come for blood.

Ryan Coogler’s story of the factual and fictional horrors of the Jim Crow South is a remarkable intertwining of culture, history, and music told through the lens of genre film. The horror here revolves around vampires, a subgenre of horror so well-worn in film history that it resembles how blues influenced the landscape of rock n’ roll music. Coogler’s intent throughout “Sinners” is to craft a metaphor, evoke satire, and draw social commentary while creating a bombastic clash of imagery, music, and character. Whether the strong metaphor of Black musical artistry that is being preyed upon by outsiders who crave the soul of life experiences put to tune or the more subtle analogy of the lore of vampirism as a symbol of freedom and slavery. It’s all expert storytelling crafted in ways that will resonate differently with every viewer, just like blues music. 

Michael B. Jordan, in a highlight performance of his career, plays Smoke and Stack as distinct yet separate characters. Each character's southern drawl, unique swagger, and costuming let Jordan ease into the personalities. Smoke is the leader; he is more confident and imposing but also tender and more in tune with the emotions of everything happening, especially his relationship with Annie. Stack supports Smoke’s leader, who is more impulsive and aggressive but charming with a hint of kindness that comes out with interactions with Sammie. Support characters like Delroy Lindo, who shines as the alcohol-influenced, harmonica and piano-playing bluesman, and Hailee Steinfeld, as the one-time love interest of Smoke who is adopted into the community family because of the kindness of her mother, round out the depth of the storyline. 

Ryan Coogler continues to impress with the skill behind the camera; the quality of the filmmaker's work here is singular in both its voice and vision, a true testament to the artist’s growth over the years. “Sinners” may feel familiar in its genre execution, but its story and characters are unmatched for horror films in recent memory. Watch it on the biggest screen because, just like the juke joint in the movie, this film deserves to be seen, heard, and experienced in a unique space with a community. 

Monte’s Rating 

4.00 out of 5.00

---

"Warfare" - Movie Review

Directed:  Ray Mendoza, Alex Garland

Written by:  Ray Mendoza, Alex Garland

Starring:  D'Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai, Will Poulter, Cosmo Jarvis, Joseph Quinn, Jake Lampert, Aaron Mackenzie, and Alex Brockdorff

Runtime:  95 minutes

Garland and Mendoza’s ‘Warfare’ is a miraculous, distressing, and must-see whirlwind. 

“Alpha Two, we might have guys starting to move on our position.”

This position is located at a home in Ramadi, Iraq.  On November 19, 2006, Alpha One, a Navy SEAL team, occupies a residence in a residential neighborhood and soon identifies subtle Iraqi rebel movements from across the street.   

What began as an initially benign encounter then escalates into a ferocious confrontation between U.S. troops and Iraqi insurgents, placing the audience squarely in the middle of the visceral, perilous circumstances alongside the SEALs in “Warfare”, one of the most stressful war films in recent memory.

Directors Alex Garland (“Ex Machina” (2014), “Civil War” (2024)) and Ray Mendoza’s “Warfare” is based on an actual 2006 clash and the memories of the soldiers who fought for their lives, their country, and each other on that day.

Mendoza was one of those men who battled in this particular melee.

Ray pulled from his memories, and in an April 10, 2025 NBC interview, he explained that he reached out to other combatants on-site that day.

“I wanted to make (the film) as accurate as possible, which is where all the other guys come in:  their memories of what it felt like, what it looked like, what color were things, what it smelled like, the emotional components.  You name it.  Everything,” Mendoza said.

Garland and Mendoza’s camera hovers within feet or sometimes (what seems like) inches from Ray (D’Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai), Erik (Will Poulter), Elliot (Cosmo Jarvis), Sam (Joseph Quinn), and others as they take fire that pierces through windows.  The men shoot back at the enemy combatants, who sometimes seem invisible.  During other moments, the adversaries peak or peer on opposing rooftops. 

What is clear for Ray, Erik, and the rest of the team is that they cannot simply step out of the nondescript residence and march back to the base on foot.  They need bulletproof transports to help escort them out of the deadly hornets’ nest.   

With a succinct runtime of 95 minutes, Garland and Mendoza’s picture is mostly set in one location for, perhaps, 80 or 85 minutes.  The film reaches outside the aforementioned house for brief periods with moments of street exchanges, broader shots of the surrounding neighborhood, a bird’s-eye view from U.S. aircraft at God knows how many thousands of feet in the air, and one wildly distinctive scene in which perfectly healthy troops celebrate their brotherhood and youth with a specifically alluring and (almost) other-worldly music video from 2004. 

However, inside the locale for 80 or 85 on-screen minutes, celebrating is the furthest sensation from the SEALs’ minds.  Instead, shooting the obscure snipers, radioing for backup, maintaining their survival, and caring for the wounded dominate their thoughts amongst the chaos outside and inside. 

Cinematographer David J. Thompson and the makeup department do not pull punches in physically revealing the agony of war.  The movie exposes ghastly injuries in plain sight during repeated instances.  These shocking images trigger an instant horror show, and with the surrounding confusion and duress, real-life mistakes can happen. 

Even worse, screams of unadulterated anguish pour out of the theatre speakers.  At the same time, the sounds of gunfire, attempts at rational discourse, giving orders, and the roar of an occasional jet bleed in and out and over one another.   

If the 2025 calendar year ended today, “Warfare” would win the 2026 Oscar for Sound. The 14-member department offers a maze and myriad of layered human utterances and combat-familiar gunfire; they are leveled at varied tones, and silence and muffled moments accompany war’s bombastic clashes and crashes.

With frenzied sounds, gruesome sights, and convincing performances set in a tumultuous predicament, Garland and Mendoza’s recreation of that November 2006 day is a distressing theatrical experience.  Audiences are bound to squirm in their seats for most of the picture but also sit up straight at times while observing pure courage as the men fearlessly step out onto a balcony and into the streets in the middle of harm’s way just after brief utterances of “cover me” or at least the motions to do so. 

No question, it’s challenging to recall the exact details in this dizzying, miraculous whirlwind of a war film while feeling the palpable trauma during the fog of war and the pure awe of soldiers’ authentic brotherhood to leave no man behind on an – otherwise – ordinary Ramadi street. 

Jeff’s ranking

3.5/4 stars

---

“Novocaine” – Movie Review

Directed:  Dan Berk and Robert Olsen

Written by:  Lars Jacobson

Starring:  Jack Quaid, Amber Midthunder, Jacob Batalon, Ray Nicholson, Conrad Kemp, Evan Hengst, and Betty Gabriel

Runtime:  110 minutes

 ‘Novocaine’ sinks its teeth into the gruesome glory that everybody physically hurts except for Nathan Caine  

Nathan Caine (Jack Quaid) feels no pain!

“If you’re on your own in this life.  The days and nights are long.  When you think you’ve had too much of this life to hang on, well, everybody hurts sometimes.  Everybody cries.  Everybody hurts sometimes.” – “Everybody Hurts” (1992) by R.E.M. 

Nathan (or Nate for short) wakes at 6:30 a.m. to start his day.  He’s a 30-year-old assistant manager at a San Diego bank.  Nate gets himself together, makes a smoothie, and drives in the roadway traffic on his way to the office in a scene that seems a lot like Peter’s (Ron Livingston) soulless freeway trip in “Office Space” (1999). 

R.E.M.’s aforementioned track on “Automatic for the People” escorts Nathan during this sequence, capturing his state of mind and emotional aches.  He’s a capable, educated fellow, but we soon discover that he doesn’t have a girlfriend, and his primary engagement with the planet outside of his workspace is with one online video game pal, Roscoe (Jacob Batalon).  

Of course, they’ve never met in person.  

Nate’s communal distance is rooted in his condition.  It’s called congenital insensitivity to pin or CIP.  The man cannot feel physical pain, which one might think may come in handy during an MMA bout, a car accident, or just a simple slip on an otherwise perfectly innocent-looking sidewalk.  

Not so fast.  Nate could become seriously or even gravely injured, and he wouldn’t know it. 

Directors Dan Berk and Robert Olsen, who collaborated on several features, including “Significant Other” (2022) most recently, and screenwriter Lars Jacobson seize upon Nate’s disorder and exponentially explore insane bludgeoning possibilities for our good-natured banker in their wild action comedy.  “Novocaine” shoots into this premise for 110 minutes and provides a proper prescription – in the most improper ways - for audiences who love the creative pugilism genre, such as “Nobody” (2021) and “The Shadow Strays” (2024).  

Mr. Caine’s violent venture begins when three threatening robbers (Ray Nicholson, Evan Hengst, and Conrad Kemp) – dressed as Santa Clauses because it is December 24 – infiltrate the bank, steal from the place, and take Sherry (Amber Midthunder), a teller, hostage.  Naturally, Nate’s blood pressure rises due to the theft, but he made a hopeful connection with Sherry the day before, and this lonely heart may have found love with this charming 20-something.  So, her capture during the robbery immediately sets Nathan into rescue mode, no matter the jeopardy he might face, including stealing a police car and encountering a menacing, burly tattoo artist and the three crooks, each with deadly mean streaks. 

Nicholson, Hengst, Kemp, and the filmmakers effectively and immediately introduce a sense of menace as the terrifying trio willingly blaze bullets into or press punches onto anyone who stands in their way of financial freedom.  Hence, they gladly present fearsome foes for Nate and transgress his and Sherry’s safety. 

Midthunder and Quaid offer earnest chemistry as two on-screen coworkers sharing intimacy outside the office, as Sherry helps break Nate’s “invisible chains” through her genuine attraction to him and sensitive grace. 

Quaid’s soft-spoken congeniality with Nate and the filmmakers’ imaginative avenues to desecrate a human being (which will not be revealed in this review) are the two cinematic drugs that make “Novocaine” a worthwhile, entertaining, and a bit sadistic trip to the movies.  Quaid’s performance leans into the loneliness of modern singles while not placing blame on social media but on Nate’s hang-ups due to his CIP.  

Nate’s arc has a million miles of runway to transform from zero to hero.  Berk, Olsen, and Quaid find plenty of asphalt for Nate to emotionally find his backbone through physically fighting against bullies while simultaneously absorbing absurd volumes of punishment and gore to the delights and grimaces of cheerleaders sitting in theatres.  

If human desecrations splattering on the silver screen do not inspire you to stand up and shout, this is not your film.  However, for the target audience, Berk and Olsen’s ferocious and funny flick is worth a shot and, perhaps, multiple viewings.  

Still, this big-screen medication wears off in places too.

Some interactions between Roscoe, Sherry, and a police officer (Betty Gabriel) in the kinetic third act will prompt eye rolls rather than eyes glued to the screen.  

The lighting frequently feels dark, and the settings almost always seem universally grimy, which is peculiar for San Diego.  

It’s also difficult to imagine that a bank vault simply has a three-digit combination lock, like your high school locker, but it does in this movie.  

In addition, the triad of crooks – Simon (Nicholson), Ben (Hengst), and Andre (Kemp) – might be frightening, but they don’t exude everlasting criminal charisma like Ganz (James Remar) and Billy Bear (Sonny Landham) in “48 Hrs.” (1982) or Neil (Robert De Niro), Chris (Val Kilmer), and Michael (Tom Sizemore) in “Heat” (1995).  Nevertheless, that’s not this movie’s mantra.  

Instead, “Novocaine” sinks its teeth into the gruesome glory that everybody physically hurts except for Nathan Caine.  

Jeff’s ranking

2.5/4 stars

---

Black Bag - Movie Review

Directed by: Steven Soderbergh.

Written by: David Koepp.

Starring: Michael Fassbender, Cate Blanchett, Regé-Jean Page.

Runtime: 93 minutes.

‘Black Bag’ brings back sexy Soderbergh spycraft

Who cares about plot when you’ve got a cast that looks this good?

“Black Bag” starts, as all respectable spy films do, with a very sexy dinner party. You’ve got Michael Fassbender and Cate Blanchett as married intelligence agents George Woodhouse and Kathryn St. Jean, burning hot for one another under a cool and collected British reserve working in modern English espionage. To their tastefully appointment townhome, they’ve invited fellow agency colleagues played by a shaggy and charismatic Tom Burke, his young and bratty paramour played by Marisa Abela, and mismatched lovers played by Naomie Harris and “Bridgerton” heartthrob Regé-Jean Page. 

The wine flows, animosities surface, and secrets start to spill. It’s hard at any moment to tell if these people want to sleep with one another or fight. Perhaps it’s both. 

The plot is mostly inconsequential, involving dangerous malware gone missing, possibly sold to enemies of the state. With thousands of lives and national security on the line, all signs point to a mole within the agency headed by dashing spy-thriller veteran Pierce Brosnan (his field days as former 007 are over; this is strictly a desk job). Someone at that dinner party is responsible; to George’s confusion and deep chagrin, Kathryn seems the most likely culprit. 

Fassbender’s George, utterly devoted to beguiling beauty Kathryn, misses nothing in his reserved observance – not the errant ticket stub in the waste basket or Kathryn’s sideways answers to pointed questions. Could his darling wife possibly be behind the missing malware? Worse than committing treason against her country, would she dare commit treason against him, a man who exposes secrets because he so abhors them, and risk their marriage?

Those seemingly high stakes are all secondary to the film’s surface pleasures, which flow as abundantly as the wine at a sexy dinner party. Soderbergh is having a gas here, driving in the same lane as films like “Out of Sight,” “Ocean’s Eleven,” and “Haywire,” with an assist from a snappy script by David Koepp (“Jurassic Park,” “Mission: Impossible,” “Spider-Man”). Everyone looks like a million pounds sterling in Soderbergh’s vision of sleek and corporate London espionage, with Fassbender and Blanchett a sharply tailored twosome commanding the screen. 

Sure, civilian lives are on the line, but more important to Soderbergh and Koepp is the messy in-fighting between an ensemble of beautiful people trying to outsmart, double cross, one-up, undermine and have sex with one another.

Spies are just people, after all. These spies just happen to be more beautiful and charismatic than the rest of us. 

Barbara’s ranking

3.5/4 stars

---

“There’s Still Tomorrow” – Movie Review

Directed:  Paola Cortellesi

Written by:  Paola Cortellesi, Furio Andreotti, and Giulia Calenda

Starring:  Paola Cortellesi, Valerio Mastandrea, Romana Maggiora Vergano, Emanuela Fanelli, Giorgio Colangeli, Francesco Centorame, Gianmarco Filippini, and Mattia Baldo

Runtime:  118 minutes

 ‘There’s Still Tomorrow’: Cortellesi has a bright directorial future after her fabulous debut feature

The title of director/co-writer/lead actress Paola Cortellesi’s post-WWII dramedy, set in Rome, could speak to optimism or procrastination. 

“Hey, today was a washout, but there’s still tomorrow!”

“Geez, I wasted so much time today.  My work isn’t nearly finished, but there’s still tomorrow.”

Delia (Paola Cortellesi) - a 40-something mother, housewife, and part-time nurse/seamstress/other paying professions – is neither an optimist nor a procrastinator.  This dedicated Jane of all trades – not unlike Cortellesi, who directs, co-writes, and stars in her fabulous first feature film - is constantly on the move.  Cooking meals for her husband, Ivano (Valerio Mastandrea), his father, Ottorino (Giorgio Colangeli), and three children, Marcella (Romana Maggiora Vergano), Franchino (Gianmarco Filippini), and Sergio (Mattia Baldo), cleaning the house, and worrying about her family is beyond a full-time job.  

Marcella, in her early 20s, embarrassingly comments that her mom always wears an apron, even when company visits.  

While Marcella, Ivano, and the young boys leave their basement apartment from 9 to 5, Delia makes her rounds around The Eternal City, earning 20 or 30 lira per stop during her modest collection of jobs throughout her days.  Industrious to a fault, she only has a few minutes a day for reflection, friendship, and laughter.   

Although her tireless efforts keep her children healthy and a roof (actually, a first floor) over their family’s heads, she finds little reason for enthusiasm.  

Delia married a tyrant.  

Ivano is a physically and mentally abusive monster.  In fact, he slaps her during their first scene together, and the blistering violence (or suggestions of violence) continues throughout the 118-minute movie.  He claims his pugilistic behavior is due to fighting in two wars, but he’s brought any bottled-up hostility on the battlefields into their home.  Still, one suspects that he possessed this aggression before the worldwide conflicts.

Delia and the kids live in fear.  

From the get-go, Delia’s dicey circumstances are on display.  Still, Cortellesi and cinematographer Davide Leone sometimes take alternative measures to lessen the violence, including filming Delia and Ivano literally dancing.  While he delivers beatings and chokings, bruises appear and then vanish on her body.  In other cases, the abuse is shuttled behind closed doors and windows, even though the audience struggles with knowing Delia’s repeated fate in those moments. 

“There’s Still Tomorrow” – winner of six 2024 David di Donatello awards, including Best New Director, Screenplay (Cortellesi, Furio Andreotti, and Giulia Calenda), and Actress (Cortellesi) – sounds like it might feel as dire as “Requiem for a Dream” (2000).  

Desperation does occupy this story, no question, but Cortellesi also – ironically - preserves a quirky, comedic touch as a cinematic throughline that strums amusing delights while enduring vicious hardship in Delia’s marriage.  

Filmed in glorious black and white to fit the period, Cortellesi and cinematographer Davide Leone’s camerawork and movie magic evoke 1940s working-class vibes, where communal courtyard chitchat about making ends meet, domestic dilemmas, and spicy gossip rule the days under sunny Roman skies. 

Delia’s BFF, Marisa (Emanuela Fanelli), complains about her dim but loyal, likable husband, and our lead shares that a handsome American solider, William (Yonv Joseph), was kind and that American men, in general, seem to have more of their teeth that their Italian counterparts. 

Still, this historical account, of Italy attempting to find its way after warfare defeat, spins modern vibes and records with The Jon Spencer Blues Explosion and OutKast uttering hip beats on occasion.  Delia struts about Roman streets with purpose and resolve, like the fellas from “Reservoir Dogs” (1992).  

Her boys, Franchino and Sergio, also frequently argue and curse at wholly inappropriate times to hilarious effect that wouldn’t fly in a Frank Capra production.

One cannot imagine Zuzu saying, “Every time a bell rings, an angel gets his f****** wings.”

Delia tries to be an angel to her closest friends and children, but her connection to Marcella endures as the most caring and robust.  Delia wishes happiness and financial comfort – two ingredients lacking in her own marriage - for Marcella and her beau, Giulio (Francesco Centorame).  Meanwhile, her daughter often gazes at her mom with frustration about staying with her dad. 

Delia remarks with an air of doom, “And where do I go?”  

This movie is set during an era when women’s limited life choices damage their dreams, but perhaps Delia may find some repair or escape toward a new beginning.  The odds are against her, but there’s still tomorrow.

Jeff’s ranking

3.5/4 stars

---

“My Dead Friend Zoe” – Movie Review

Directed:  Kyle Hausmann-Stokes

Written by:  Kyle Hausmann-Stokes and A.J. Bermudez

Starring:  Sonequa Martin-Green, Natalie Morales, Ed Harris, Gloria Reuben, Utkarsh Ambudkar, and Morgan Freeman 

Runtime:  98 minutes

‘My Dead Friend Zoe’ keeps a vital message alive

When movie audiences meet Zoe (Natalie Morales) in director/co-writer Kyle Hausmann-Stokes’ film, she looks alive.  Zoe is best friends with her fellow 30-something, Merit (Sonequa Martin-Green).  

The BFFs usually keep their banter light and casual, even though they attend a sobering support group for military veterans coping with post-traumatic stress disorder.  However, we soon discover that Zoe is Merit’s creation in the here and now.  

Zoe passed away, and Merit keeps her spirit alive by imagining her as she sets about her days.  

Merit’s ingenuity also results in full-blown conversations with her departed comrade, which are often bewildering to those within earshot, including Dr. Cole (Morgan Freeman), who runs the PTSD therapy sessions.  

Our heroine must work through her trauma inside and outside Dr. Cole’s assemblies.  For many veterans, Merit’s story is not unique.

Hausmann-Stokes is a five-year U.S. Army veteran, and “My Dear Friend Zoe” is autobiographical. 

In fact, during a February 2025 YouTube interview with Ashley & Company, Hausmann-Stokes says, “I keep telling people it’s 93 percent autobiographical.”

“My Dead Friend Zoe” is an extension of his 14-minute 2022 short film, “Merit x Zoe” (2022).  In both films, Merit and Zoe are played by women, but the themes are universal.  The affecting messages ring true through Hausmann-Stokes and A.J. Bermudez’s screenplay and Martin-Green’s and Morales’ performances, and the actresses have gracious and deep on-screen chemistry.  

The grounded screenplay proudly marches in everyday discourse and humble settings.  Although the film’s material is taxing, the relatively calm tones allow for a welcoming space for audiences to ease into Merit’s (and Zoe’s) world.  Set in Portland, Ore. and nearby Molalla, a 10,000-person community that sits about 30 miles south of The Rose City, Merit lives in a small apartment in the former locale.  Her financial state is not topical, but she’s trying to get her emotional house in order.  She regularly stays home while Zoe watches television, like “M*A*S*H” (1972-1983) reruns, and Merit frequently rushes out the door for a run as a mechanism to shut out the world and her memories.  

Her daily patterns have her stuck in neutral, but her surroundings change – literally and figuratively – when she drives to Molalla, along with Zoe, to visit her grandfather, Dale (Ed Harris), who has early stages of Alzheimer’s.  Merit’s mother, Kris (Gloria Reuben), assigns her daughter to manage the logistics of placing Dale in an assisted living facility.  

Harris and Martin-Green have authentic grandfather/granddaughter vibes, and the gruff, by-the-book Dale keeps Merit on the right “page” (for the most part).  Still, there is love and admiration between the two family members, despite Dale’s complaints about the younger generation of soldiers.  Dale is a Vietnam vet. 

Martin-Green convincingly plays the emotionally wounded Merit.  She battles internal strife and avoids confrontation with external forces, as Hausmann-Stokes places human obstacles in the form of Dr. Cole, her mom, her grandpa, a potential love interest named Alex (Utkarsh Ambudkar), and Zoe. 

Throughout the picture, she procrastinates and sidesteps responsibilities to cope in the moment, as “My Dead Friend Zoe” mostly avoids violence save for one scene when Dale punishes a helpless garbage can.  The screenplay excludes physical clashes in the present day, which is an appreciative reprieve from possible expectations, but the 98-minute film includes recurrent flashbacks to Merit and Zoe’s shared lives in the Middle East.  

The soldiers are not on the front lines but “safely” within an American base.  Still, Zoe carries a specific object during several exchanges with her friend during their duty and in Merit’s current existence that foreshadows a past tragedy.  Yesterday’s heartbreak will eventually reveal itself, and this fact accentuates the thankful, long stretches of relative peace today.   

“My Dead Friend Zoe” is an empathetic film, one that – no doubt – is cathartic for our director/co-writer and most likely for other vets, too.  During the movie, the cast – led by Martin-Green and Morales – seems to gel gently and purposefully to tell Kyle’s story.  Additionally, the actors offer testimonies after the movie’s last scene, which confirms our sense of a positive thespian collaboration.   

It’s a film that keeps a vital message alive. 

Jeff’s ranking

3/4 stars

---

“Parthenope” – Movie Review

Directed and written by:  Paolo Sorrentino

Starring:  Celeste Dalla Porta, Dario Aita, Silvio Orlando, and Gary Oldman 

Runtime:  137 minutes

‘Parthenope’ is a gorgeously filmed picture, but the narrative’s beauty is in the eye of the beholder

“Are you aware of the disruption your beauty causes?” – John Cheever (Gary Oldman)

“I’m starting to suspect something.” – Parthenope (Celeste Dalla Porta)

Parthenope is a siren in Greek mythology and a city settled by the Greeks.  That municipal is now Naples, Italy, and it’s no coincidence that director/writer Paolo Sorrentino (“The Great Beauty” (2013), “Youth” (2015), “The Hand of God” (2021)) decided to make a film named after the seductress and locale.  

Naples is his hometown. 

“Parthenope” follows the journey of a breathtaking mortal (Porta) as the title character, who appears to have goddess-like powers of attraction.  She is – literally - born in the sea, the Gulf of Naples, in 1950, and Parthenope is connected to the city, water, and Greek siren throughout the eccentric, uneven, maddening-at-times, but beautifully filmed picture. 

Sorrentino merrily hops around Naples and places Parthenope in numerous welcoming circumstances and stuffy predicaments that don’t feel connected in the moment.  These individual scenes aren’t self-contained vignettes, but the situations and settings are wildly different for the audience and our lead, not entirely unlike Sorrentino’s exhibitions in his Oscar-winning “The Great Beauty”.  

We witness an imposing surf crash onto a singular figure dressed to the nines, a city bus with a bizarre steampunk apparatus that stops traffic, a regal carriage that sits on a barge and travels by horseback on a seaside road, a fetching light display that illuminates a neighborhood nook, and more.  

This cinematic celebration of indulgence overlays Parthenope’s encounters with men entranced by her beauty, slender 5’6” frame, flowing brunette locks, alluring eyes, and robust confidence. 

Sandrino (Dario Aita), the son of a housekeeper who works for her wealthy family, loved her his “entire life.”  John Cheever, an author who doubles as an alcoholic, is captured by Parthenope’s presence but doesn’t pursue romance.  Our heroine meets an affluent businessman, an attractive motorcyclist, a priest, and a knowledgeable professor.  The gentlemen employ varying degrees of interest as Parthenope attempts to write her own story as an independent, educated woman. 

Porta nicely balances Parthenope’s emotional tug of war between causing “disruptions” and pursuing a career.  She navigates this relatively uncharted territory during the feminist advancements of the 1970s.  Parthenope can easily fall back on her physicality to discover the finer things in life - outside of her prosperous family, of course – but she challenges the system and the men who appear in her purview to forge a hopeful path, which feels elusive and unclear at times for her.  

Sorrentino employs a relaxed pace over 137 minutes, allowing us to soak up Naples’ wonders, including the urban splendor and breathtaking coastlines.  The latter sparks lovely memories of Jean-Luc Godard’s “Contempt” (1963).  

However, the individual sequences carry sharp staccatos between one another, frequently pulling this critic out of an immersive experience and into an observational one.  Parthenope seems to cope with this same fate, even in her own narrative.  

Certainly, Sorrentino and cinematographer Daria D’Antonio offer irresistible visuals that showcase our lead, her metropolitan co-star, and its inhabitants, but also a few bizarre, off-putting ones.  In the end, many pieces fit – sometimes clumsily - into Parthenope’s odyssey, and perhaps all of them do.  However, possibly confirming that assumption requires a long night/evening of conversation at a 24-hour diner because a second viewing of this arthouse picture might be a tall order.  It depends on the person.  This narrative’s beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  

Jeff’s ranking

2/4 stars

---

Captain America: Brave New World

Director: Julius Onah

Cast: Anthony Mackie, Harrison Ford, Tim Blake Nelson, Danny Ramirez, Shira Haas, Carl Lumbly, and Giancarlo Esposito

1h 58m

In the television prequel, “The Falcon and the Winter Soldier,” the newly appointed Captain America, Sam Wilson (Anthony Mackie), begins to understand the harsh realities of carrying the superhero shield that represents a tarnished history of oppression and injustice for the sake of power and pride. In “Captain America: Brave New World,” Sam Wilson is still struggling with bearing the weight of the iconic superhero identity while battling a tumultuous political landscape with a newly elected, former Marvel antagonist, President Thaddeus Ross (Harrison Ford). 

Director Julius Onah builds this superhero story in the essence of a political, paranoid thriller akin to “The Manchurian Candidate” and “The Parallax View,” both exceptional cinematic exercises in dramatic suspense. “Captain America: Brave New World” exchanges the paranoia and suspense for a superhero spectacle and a big red Hulk. While it may not reach the narrative heights of “Captain America: The Winter Soldier,” one of the best films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Anthony Mackie, Harrison Ford, and Carl Lumbly provide compelling performances and, though it’s disappointingly never fruitfully explored, the new Captain America’s emotional journey creates a thoughtful lens to view current political reality. 

Sam Wilson is feeling more confident bearing the heavy burden of representing superhero America, working to move beyond comparisons of super soldier Steve Rogers as a non-genetically altered human hero. New elected President Thaddeus Ross, a wartime general who destroyed New York City chasing after The Hulk, has softened his temperament in hopes of unifying multiple nations to establish a truce in mining a miracle metal known as adamantium from a continent-sized Celestial body left in the Indian Ocean after the events of “The Eternals.” Ross invites Captain Wilson, the new Falcon Joaquin Torres (Danny Ramirez), and the ‘forgotten Captain’ Isaiah Bradley (Carl Lumbly) to a White House assembly to convince Wilson to reestablish The Avengers. During President Ross’ speech at the assembly, the chimes of The Fleetwoods’ “Mr. Blue” provoke a mind-controlled Bradley, along with other military personnel, to commit an assassination attempt. Bradley flees and is caught, unaware of his actions. He is sent back to prison, forcing Captain America to unravel the events and identify the true intentions of the assassination. 

Anthony Mackie is a great choice to play the embattled Captain America. Mackie’s emotional range is never utilized to its fullest potential, but during a few moments, especially with the wonderful Carl Lumbly, the depths of the character, two Black men of similar yet vastly different circumstances, are nicely layered to show the complicated nature of fighting for an America that often never fights people who look like you. Lumbly is superb throughout the film, both in moments of calm yet cautious optimism, a car ride to the White House with commentary about the importance of a good suit, and ultimate defeat and betrayal, surrounded by police officers ready to take him back to a prison Bradley never thought he’d survive. Harrison Ford is also well suited for the gruff and impatient role of Thaddeus “Thunderbolt” Ross, a longtime villain hoping for sympathy in his final years of life. Ford is provided with a few scenes that display the sole saving emotional grace for the character, a connection to his daughter Betty (Liv Tyler). 

The frustrating aspect of “Captain America: Brave New World” is the unrealized, often contradictory narrative that rarely understands where to place its intents. It tries to be a political thriller, one minute crafting an intriguing story of mind control and the next minute solving its mystery with two throwaway villains, Samuel Sterns (Tim Blake Nelson) and Serpent Leader Sidewinder (Giancarlo Esposito), that never feel threatening. The attempts at social commentary are loud and in-your-face, like a Red Hulk standing atop the White House waving a flag pole with the ol’ red, white, and blue hanging on for dear life (although I did laugh quite hard at this image). The approach to providing some sense of emotional depth and compelling conversation to topics like historical trauma, racial oppression, and the state of America’s misguided attempts at acknowledging past atrocities are entirely in the realm of possibility with this story. Unfortunately, it consistently returns to its superficial ideologies and primary role of being only a superhero movie. 

“Captain America: Brave New World” explores what it means to be a hero in a broken society. While the film takes a few moments to unravel the brutal truths behind the shield-wielding spectacle, it unfortunately never finds its harmony of themes. Anthony Mackie is a thoughtful actor and will hold the focus role of Captain America for future films, which is exciting and promising for both this version of the character and the actor's growth within it. 

Monte’s Rating

2.50 out of 5.00

---