Ian Thomas Malone

Yearly Archive: 2025

Wednesday

3

September 2025

0

COMMENTS

‘Downton Abbey: The Grand Finale’ review: a satisfying victory lap for the Crawley family

Written by , Posted in Blog, Downton Abbey, Movie Reviews, Pop Culture

Change has always been at the core of the Downton Abbey franchise. There is a certain natural contrast between its themes of navigating the post-Edwardian era and the reality that much of the best drama occurs within the trappings of that old world audiences know and love. After fifteen years, six television seasons, and three movies, the time has finally come to say goodbye, for presumably the last time.

Set at the beginning of the 1930s, not all that long after the events of the final season, Downton Abbey: The Grand Finale centers its narrative on Lady Mary (Michelle Dockery) as she assumes command of the estate. Lady Mary’s ascension has been a long time coming, first discussed in season four. The death of Lady Mary’s husband Matthew (Dan Stevens) upended both the planning for Downton’s future within the show, as well as the series itself, which had to work around Stevens’ unexpected departure.

For the second half of the series, Lady Mary spent much of her narrative consumed with new suitors. After spending most of seasons four and five caught between two men, writer/series creator Julian Fellowes threw a curveball at the tail end of season five with the introduction of Henry Talbot (Matthew Goode). Lady Mary and Henry enjoyed a truncated romance throughout much of season six before marrying at the tail end of the series.

There was always a certain irony in Mary ending up with a car enthusiast after her first husband perished in a car accident during the season three Christmas special, an event that spoiled many viewers’ holiday. Three movies in, one can’t shake the feeling that déjà vu occurred once again while casting Mary’s spouse. One might have thought that the most important consideration for picking Mary’s second husband would be availability for the films that were an open secret by the show’s final season.

Instead, Fellowes settled on Goode, a highly sought-after actor with a schedule far too busy to play arm candy to Lady Mary. In some ways, this ended up working out kind of well. Henry’s minuscule part in the first Downton Abbey film and complete omission from the second two films might be disappointing for those who enjoyed the awkward pairing of Mary and Henry, but his absence gave the films some natural drama missing from the show finale’s preoccupation with tying everything in a neat little bow.

The Grand Finale largely focuses its narrative on the fallout of Mary’s divorce from Henry. Banished from London society, Mary seeks solace in her familiar Yorkshire, which is not immune to snobbery of its own. Set not long after the events of Downton Abbey: A New Era, Lord Grantham (Hugh Bonneville) is still reeling from his mother’s death, unsure of his place in the world he’s given his life to preserving, resisting the gentle guidance of his wife Cora (Elizabeth McGovern) to relax in his old age.

Cora’s own mother passed away offscreen in between films. Expecting some of her inheritance to cover construction on the estate, Cora is shocked when her brother Harold Levinson (Paul Giamatti, reprising his role from the season four Christmas special) arrives in London with a poor financial outlook. Harold also brought his enigmatic financial advisor, Gus Sambrook (Alessandro Nivola), to explain his poor business dealings, which has been a recurring pattern for him since season four.

The final chapter has much more modest trappings than its cinematic predecessors. There’s no marquee event like a visit from the King or a mysterious French villa gifted to a dying octogenarian anchoring the narrative. Instead, Fellowes’ modest intentions serve as more of an extended episode of the series, a well-deserved victory lap.

Fellowes takes great care to ensure that each member of the franchise’s large ensemble gets a moment to shine. There are a few storylines that harken back to the show’s early days. Major events like World War I and the Spanish flu happened during the series, alongside more modest conflicts, like stomping out favoritism in the village Flower Show or whether a lady’s maid could still prepare a restorative broth. The Grand Finale manages to recapture some of the fun of the show’s early days as it wraps up storylines for over a dozen characters.

The shadow of the franchise’s matriarch and apex predator Violet Crawley looms large over the film. Maggie Smith is sorely missed. While nobody can replace her searing wit, Fellowes includes several tributes to the Dowager throughout the narrative. Fans of her frequent sparring with Isobel Crawley, the new Lady Merton (Penelope Wilton) will find much to enjoy.

While the film finds space for the whole cast, The Grand Finale is a lot less forcibly egalitarian than the first two films. This is Lady Mary’s film. Edith (Laura Carmichael) and Tom (Allen Leech) see their roles drastically reduced, the latter functioning in little more than a cameo. There’s a few touching moments for the older servants approaching the age of retirement, though the film conveniently forgets all that time spent on bed and breakfast investments from the final two seasons.

One of Fellowes’ finest achievements in the series was his portrayal of the Crawleys as quiet allies of the gay community. Series archvillain turned sympathetic hero Thomas Barrow (Robert James-Collier) struggled to accept his sexuality for much of the franchise, ultimately finding acceptance with actor Guy Dexter (Dominic West) in the previous film, resigning his role as butler of Downton. At a time when LGBTQ rights are under immense attack around the world, Fellowes finds ample beauty in his portrayal of the 1930s aristocracy as far more accepting than their modern counterparts.

Acceptance is an issue at the heart of The Grand Finale. Used to being the center of attention, Lady Mary struggles with her new outcast status as a divorcee in a world governed by tradition. Lord Grantham struggles to accept that his old world is gone. 

There is a little awkwardness to be found at the heart of the drama. Mary is exiled from London society, yet expected to take the reins of an estate from her still-living father. There is a small acknowledgement that earls are no longer treated like village kings and queens, but Fellowes crafts a story that’s pretty damning to the concept of primogeniture amidst a narrative that still upholds the idealistic nature of country estate life.

Downton Abbey has always favored soapy storylines instead of serious drama, but missing from this film is an implicit defense of Downton as an estate. The series spent most of its run defending Downton as a place of employment, something even the first film managed to squeeze in late in its runtime. Free of her occasional nastiness, Fellowes firmly establishes Mary as a figure worth championing, but is Downton itself a cause worth championing? The film leaves a lot of food for thought on that front.

The pacing is a bit off throughout much of the film. Characters blow through scenes, speaking their lines without much of a chance to breathe. The 124-minute runtime is nearly identical to the first two films, only a bit longer than the Christmas specials that bookended each season after the first. An additional ten minutes would’ve given several scenes a much-needed chance to breathe.

As a franchise, Downton Abbey started wrapping itself up all the way back in season five. With that in mind, The Grand Finale didn’t have a ton of loose ends to tie up, besides the strands of plot that came loose from the last finale. Life is messy.

Downton Abbey took some turns that were out of Fellowes’ control, cast members whose absences had immutable effects on the narrative. Like its characters, the show managed to adapt. The Grand Finale is a triumph for the franchise and all its characters we’ve grown to love. Above all else, it’s a lot of fun to spend another few hours in this delightful world.

Tuesday

26

August 2025

0

COMMENTS

Classic Film: Metropolitan

Written by , Posted in Blog, Movie Reviews, Pop Culture

There is a period of time in many young people’s lives where they grapple with the mechanics of the society around them, often interjecting the material they studied in school into their idealistic view of how society should work. Much of it is nonsense. The exercise often grows old around the same time you realize that the kids at the kegger don’t care about some long-dead French socialist.

Whit Stillman’s 1990 debut film Metropolitan centers its narrative around an odious, mostly harmless group of college students bored on winter break. Tom Townsend (Edward Clements) is a middle-class outsider making his way through Princeton. Tom hates high society, particularly debutante balls, but attends one anyway. A chance encounter lumps Tom in with a social group known as the Sally Fowler Rat Pack, who mostly attend balls and spend all night talking about philosophy and other idle musings.

Tom begins to shed his anti-bourgeoisie feelings as a result of the newfound attention bestowed on him by members of the SFRP, who largely adopt him into their group out of boredom, and a shortage of male escorts for the ball. Tom looks up to Nick Smith (Christopher Eigeman), one of the more outspoken and opinionated members of the group, who paints a bleak outlook for their generation. One girl in the group, Audrey (Carolyn Farina) grows attracted to Tom, who’s still hung up on his ex, Serena (Ellia Thompson), a friend of many of the women in the SFRP. Tom’s introduction into the group is met with suspicion by a few, namely Jane (Allison Parisi), who is extra defensive of Audrey.

Produced with a budget of just over $200,000, Stillman largely relies on his script and his actors to propel the narrative. Most of the scenes take place in apartments or on the peripherals of debutante balls. Eigeman and Parisi propel much of the story, both possessing large personalities capable of finding ample nuance in largely repetitive scenes. Clements, who never acted again aside from a small role in Star Trek IV: The Undiscovered County, fully embodies the awkward, aloof Tom, a young man who struggles to get enough of the very thing he claimed to hate.

The work of Jane Austen supplies a steady backdrop for Tom and the rest of the characters. Audrey is a huge Austen fan. Tom dumps on Austen’s work without having read it himself, instead relying on literary criticism to supply him with the opinions he thinks he’s supposed to have, without any sense of irony.

Stillman finds plenty of subtleties that elevate Metropolitan above a standard comedy of manners, able to engage earnestly with the concerns of youth without ever bending to the self-importance of his characters. The members of the SFRP are all experiencing their first small taste of freedom. That kind of liberation can go to one’s head rather easily. Stillman doesn’t fall for the superficialities of youth, instead opting for a more subtle approach that manages to supply some meaning for all the time spent discussing philosophy in the middle of the night.

The characters in Metropolitan often feel like a stretch of winter break is the most important part of their lives. Stillman handles them with grace without expecting his audience to buy into their nonsense. Metropolitan is not exactly life-changing cinema, but there’s a lot of heart in Stillman’s examination of the junior members of the bourgeoisie.

Tuesday

26

August 2025

0

COMMENTS

‘Last Summer’ review: a haunting treatise on lust

Written by , Posted in Blog, Movie Reviews, Pop Culture

One of film’s disquieting pleasures is the way the medium offers its viewers the chance to experience a life that they themselves would never lead. The thought of an adult woman sleeping with her stepchild is wrong on so many levels. As director Catherine Breillat demonstrates in her 2023 film Last Summer (original French title: L’Été dernier), subjects that repulse on a visceral level can still elicit feelings from unexpected places.

Anne (Léa Drucker) is an attorney who works with at-risk children. Anne lives in a quiet town outside Paris with her husband Pierre (Olivier Rabourdin) and two adopted children. A self-proclaimed “gerontophile” (attracted to older people), Anne seems to enjoy her comfortable life, even with a little obvious distance from her husband, until Paul’s troubled seventeen-year-old son Théo (Samuel Kircher) comes to live with them.

Théo is the polar opposite of Paul, anti-social, mischievous, and charming. Théo bonds with the children while getting on Anne’s nerves, especially with Paul’s frequent work-related absences. Théo’s magic eventually takes hold, leading the adult woman to make the very bad and irresponsible choice to sleep with her stepson.

Based off the 2019 Danish film Queen of Hearts, Breillat revels in the uncomfortable. Last Summer has numerous spicy scenes, played with an energy that orbits the realm of passion without ever really touching the surface. Something is clearly missing from Anne’s idyllic country life. Drucker plays Anne with such precision, a woman intoxicated by the thrill of the hunt without ever losing sight of the obvious destruction caused by her decisions.

Anyone can conjure up an image of the perfect life. Each of us might need to swap out some pieces to match the reality we can make for ourselves. Some of us don’t have much money, or the ability to have kids of our own. Sometimes the love we once shared with our spouse withers and dies. Breillat is fascinated not just with power dynamics, but with decay.

Kircher plays Théo with a perfect blend of charisma and tediousness. Théo’s boyish looks never compensate for the reality that he’s a clueless young kid. The justifications for Anne’s infatuation with him exist in her own head. Breillat never tries to defend her protagonist’s horrid behavior.

There is something weirdly alluring in watching the drama unfold. Théo’s penchant for drama precludes him from discretion. Anne’s excuses are hardly believable to anyone, except for those so caught up in the idea of the idyllic life that they’re willing to ignore the reality right there in front of them.

Drucker is agonizing. Anne is a truly tedious character, obsessed with the gaze that men, usually older, have bestowed upon her all her life. Stuck in a boring, quiet town, with nothing to amuse her beyond the children she adopted to fulfill that very purpose, she begins to fall apart, until the very second that the gaze returns. It’s ugly, but deeply human at the same time.

Life doesn’t always go the way we planned. You can’t control the actions of others, only the way that you choose to receive them. Breillat produces the film’s most compelling work when she homes in on that reality. Last Summer is an uncomfortable ride through its 104-minute, but there’s a lot of food for thought. You can piece together the model of an ideal existence fairly easily, but it takes much more effort to make it come alive.

Friday

15

August 2025

0

COMMENTS

‘Shin Godzilla’ review: Hideaki Anno’s bizarre gem has only improved with age

Written by , Posted in Blog, Movie Reviews, Pop Culture

All the way back in the 1950s, Godzilla began as a metaphor for nuclear weapons. The horrors that the giant lizard could wreak on downtown Tokyo were nothing compared to the atrocities that mankind could inflict on itself. Many decades and dozens of films later, the franchise has managed to evolve and encompass new real-world parallels without straying too far from its original message.

The 2016 film Shin Godzilla was recently re-released to theaters, enjoying an expanded North American market fresh off the heels of 2023’s blockbuster hit Godzilla Minus One. Shin Godzilla dedicated much of its runtime to a satire of the Japanese government’s response to the Fukushima nuclear accident in 2011. Nearly ten years later, it’s hard to believe that directors Hideaki Anno and Shinji Higuchi’s work could have another timely parallel on their hands in the COVID-19 pandemic.

The narrative largely centers around Rando Yaguchi (Hiroki Hasegawa), a Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary in the Japanese government. The Coast Guard responds to news reports of an abandoned yacht in Tokyo Bay, and blood pouring into the Aqua-Line, though the government remained skeptical of anything nefarious. Only Yaguchi and a few others in the crowded cabinet meeting take the threat of a creature causing the chaos seriously.

Much of the first act of Shin Godzilla plays like a political satire. Godzilla wreaks havoc on Tokyo while the politicians shuttle from meeting to meeting, only to decide that the correct course of action requires more meetings. Whenever somebody manages to cut through the red tape, either the Japanese or American government demands a swift cover-up. The citizens are routinely lied to about the danger that Godzilla presents. Only when Yaguchi forms an off-site group to focus solely on defeating Godzilla does anything productive actually happen.

Anno, best known for his work with the Evangelion franchise, puts forth a delectably postmodern take on Godzilla. Anno’s kaiju is hideous. Its initial form looks like a lizard with googly eyes. There’s a lot of humor, pointed on a direct collision course with the horrors on full display. The narrative whiplash works well for the genre. Even when you can guess what’s going to come next, the results are genuinely surprising.

The incompetence of the government often competes with Godzilla for the most horrifying aspect of the film. Humanity may not face an imminent threat from an ocean-dwelling leviathan, but we’ve lived through recent crises where the strength of our civic institutions has been tested, and often found wanting.  With people who willfully deny scientific evidence and basic reality in positions of power, who can truly say which is worse?

The narrative does start to lose a bit of steam in the third act. The first half of the film is so laser-focused on political satire that it never really gives much time to developing its human characters. Yaguchi himself often functions as a stand-in for the lead character in the absence of anyone else who meets the description. Hasegawa does an admirable job endearing the audience to his character, but Anno and Higuchi don’t have a lot of interest in exploring humanity beyond the failures of the government.

The 120-minute runtime is a bit excessive, especially when the second half is light on Godzilla in parts where more of the big guy might have been welcome. Anno delivers a singular take on Godzilla that’s bound to stick with its audience long after the credits roll, a damning indictment on government incompetence that’s only improved with age. Fitting for its director, Shin Godzilla is a strange narrative, quite uneven at times. For the 31st entry into a decades-old franchise, perhaps the biggest achievement is the film’s delivery of something that feels genuinely fresh. There’s never been a Godzilla quite like this before.

Monday

11

August 2025

0

COMMENTS

Classic Film: Summertime

Written by , Posted in Blog, Movie Reviews

Summer vacation possesses one allure that looms large over all the rest. Whether you travel to an exotic location like Venice, or even plant your feet up in your backyard for a few days off at home, summer provides the one thing we all need from time to time. What’s life without a little escapism? The 1955 film Summertime examines the life of a woman who perhaps waited a little too long for some release from her otherwise mundane existence.

Jane Hudson (Katharine Hepburn) is a single middle-aged woman traveling alone to Venice, Italy. A dream trip that she saved up years to go on, Jane is an upbeat woman who wears her emotions on her sleeves. She bonds quickly with the fellow guests at her pensione, but grows lonely when they all head out for their own adventures, leaving Jane to take in the marvelous city by herself, occasionally joined by a young street urchin Mauro (Gaetano Autiero).

Jane stumbles into an antiques shop, where she purchases a red goblet. Renato (Rosano Brazzi), the shopkeeper, quickly takes a fancy to Jane. Jane spends much of the next day infatuated with the thought of Renato, who returns her affection later that evening with a visit to her pensione. Jane quickly falls in love with Renato, though a conversation with his nephew reveals that Renato is a married man, estranged from his wife. Rather than express remorse for the deception, Renato attempts to flip the script, claiming that Italy operates by a different set of rules, chastising Jane for resisting lowering her standards.

Based on the stage play The Time of the Cuckoo, director David Lean shows off his penchant for epic cinematography, later displayed in his classics The Bridge on the River Kwai and Lawrence of Arabia, with his awe-inspiring depiction of Venice. Venice is essentially its own character in the film, an intoxicating playground for the disaffected in search of something to break the mundanity of life. Making great use of the city, Lean’s depiction of Venice looks breathtaking in Technicolor.

Hepburn carries the rather clunky screenplay, co-authored by Lean and H.E. Bates. Jane has an understated complexity to her character, a social butterfly who can’t shake the feeling that time has passed her by. While her obvious star power radiates in every scene, Hepburn elicits great sympathy for Jane through the subtle moments of profound sadness, the immutable sting of loneliness still resonating seventy years later.

The story starts to unravel by the third act. Renato is a mess. Brazzi plays him competently, but the sleaziness of the deception and his pitiful defense of his actions leave a bad taste that Lean does little to wash away. The 100-minute runtime overstays its welcome, though it’s hard to tire of the beautiful Venetian scenery. The subject matter is probably a little too complex for the remnants of the Hays Code era. 1955 was not exactly the best time to try to make the case for an adulterous summer fling.

At one point, Jane remarks that it’s better to leave a party before it ends. However true that may be, Renato is not much of a party. Summertime is a bit of a mixed bag. Lean’s filmmaking is always a sight to behold, and Hepburn is in peak form. The film is practically worth watching for those reasons alone. If only the story at the heart of the narrative received as much care as Lean gave to his gorgeous depiction of the city.

Tuesday

5

August 2025

0

COMMENTS

Classic Film: Pump Up the Volume

Written by , Posted in Blog

There’s never been an easier time for disaffected people to make their voices heard. Social media and podcasts provide outlets for anyone to amass large followings spouting vagaries against the system, irrespective of the merit of any of their arguments. As we’ve seen with the right-wing echo chamber known as the “manosphere,” having a large platform does not instill a sense of responsibility to be careful with such power and influence.

The 1990 film Pump Up the Volume often plays like a stereotypical Gen X high school film, rife with angst towards the previous generations that stifle their individuality. Mark Hunter (Christian Slater) is a high school student who recently moved to a suburb of Phoenix, Arizona for his father’s job. Mark is a socially awkward loner with little social contact throughout the day. At night, he broadcasts a pirate FM radio show under the pseudonym “Hard Harry,” playing music and raging against the machine that is his local high school.

Mark’s show attracts little notice at first, rising in popularity as students at his school sell bootlegs of his show. The faculty starts to take an interest after a student commits suicide shortly after appearing on Mark’s show. Another student, Nora De Niro (Samantha Mathis), discovers Mark’s identity, urging him to use his voice to lead his fellow students in protesting the school, whose principal, Lorretta Creswood (Annie Ross), is doing her best to manipulate test scores to secure additional funding.

Slater showcases a remarkable range as Mark, who often plays like a clueless rebel without a cause. Much of Hard Harry’s musings are generic fluff without much substance, carrying the same level of intellectualism as high school freshmen getting stoned in their parents’ basement for the first time. The film doesn’t put much weight behind the school’s “problems” until late in the third act, a half-baked premise that frequently undercuts its own message.

What sets Mark apart from the shock jocks he tries to emulate is the sin for which he’d be cast out from the manosphere if the film were made today. Mark cares about the ramifications of his words. Mark’s show radicalizes his fellow students to take action against the school. While people like Nora encourage him to keep going, Mark pauses to consider the implications of his power.

Mark is also quite different from many leading bad boys of his time. Mark lacks the effortless cool factor that defined the likes of John Bender and Ferris Bueller, only coming out of his shell behind the comforts of anonymity provided by his show, where he uses a harmonizer to mask his voice. It takes Nora embodying peak manic pixie dream girl to break through his anti-social security blanket, Mathis commanding every scene she’s in, often through mere facial expressions.

Writer/director Allan Moyle’s work takes itself too seriously at times, consistently bailed out by Slater’s mesmerizing performance and an exceptional soundtrack anchored by Leonard Cohen. The chemistry between Slater and Mathis is the most interesting dynamic in the film, but Moyle rarely gives them the runway. The character work constantly plays second fiddle to the atmosphere, much to the film’s detriment.

Social media often makes a person feel like they’re screaming into the void, irrespective of follower count. Engagement-driven algorithms seek to teach us that nothing is worth saying unless somebody is listening. You’re meant to believe that if you don’t get likes, you are not liked.

Despite a lackluster screenplay, Pump Up The Volume stands out from its contemporaries through its earnest sincerity. Disaffected youth don’t want to hear that it gets better. Slater found a way to reach them anyway. The film is hardly Gen X’s greatest cinematic triumph, but one that remains particularly relevant in today’s uncertain times.

 

 

Friday

25

July 2025

0

COMMENTS

‘The Fantastic Four: First Steps’ review: Marvel plays it safe with one of its best movies of the post-Endgame era

Written by , Posted in Blog, Movie Reviews, Reviews

For all the talk of comic books having a steep learning curve, the editors at publishers like Marvel and DC take great care to make sure that readers can follow along with the story, no matter if they missed the last issue, or if they’re reading the book for the first time. Spider-Man: Homecoming was the first MCU film to follow this rubric, eschewing a traditional origin story in acknowledgement of one simple truth. Some heroes need no introduction.

The Fantastic Four have had a rocky on-screen history. After a 1994 low-budget adaptation went unreleased, two further efforts were made to introduce Marvel’s First Family to the general public on screen. While the two entries of the Ioan Gruffudd-led team in the 00s have a certain charm, an attempted 2015 reboot landed with a grimdark thud, a strong contender for the worst superhero movie of the 2010s.

The Fantastic Four: First Steps assumes that most of its audience is familiar with the basics of the family of space explorers who gained their powers after exposure to cosmic rays. Reed Richards (Pedro Pascal), Sue Storm (Vanessa Kirby), Johnny Storm (Joseph Quinn), and The Thing (Ebon Moss-Bachrach) need little introduction, but the film does a good job presenting the fundamentals to any newcomers to the theater. The film takes place in a retro-futuristic 1960s on Earth-828, the only heroes on their planet in the multiverse.

Four years into their superhuman careers, the team has found a solid work/life balance, which meets a curveball in the form of Sue’s unplanned pregnancy. While Reed frantically works to explore every possible outcome for their newborn child, and the potential complications from their abilities, Galactus (Ralph Ineson), the Devourer of Planets, sends the Silver Surfer (Julia Garner, playing the Shalla-Bal version of the character) to notify Earth that he plans to gobble it whole. When The Fantastic Four arrive on Galactus’ spaceship to parlay, Galactus takes a special interest in the unborn child.

Director Matt Shakman moves quickly through a relatively brisk 114-minute runtime. There’s never a dull moment in First Steps, though the film’s frantic pacing often forgets to breathe. The eager cast rarely get a chance to truly define their roles. Pascal is patient and thoughtful, even when anxious, bringing a lot of depth to Reed, something that eschews the comics when Mr. Fantastic leans too heavily into his mad scientist trope.

Kirby is the real core of the film, though the narrative often dulls the shine of the Invisible Woman. There’s a core dilemma in the story that presents about as dark a portrayal of the general proletariat as we’ve seen in the MCU. Rather than letting Kirby fully lean into a mother’s understandable rage, Shakman pivots to a wishy-washy sense of optimism that robs his work of its own humanity. We’re given slices of something interesting, but never enough to forget that at the end of the day, the MCU doesn’t want to stray too far from the comforts of safe corporate content. The humor is mostly out of place and terrible. The film’s sets are absolutely gorgeous, with some of the best set design in the franchise’s long history.

Garner carves out a nice niche for herself as the film’s secondary villain, doing fine work with the relatively blank metal palette that is Shalla-Bal. Galactus is a bit of a mixed bag. Ineson does his best with the apathetic apex predator, but the Devourer of Planet is not the most compelling major villain in the Marvel stable. He’s certainly a smart choice to be the big bad for The Fantastic Four’s MCU debut, but plenty of other superhero movies have handled what plays out on screen like a glorified kaiju.

Moss-Bachrach and Quinn make the most out of limited opportunities. The whole family dynamic is so interesting that it’s easy to question the extent to which Shakman handed over the runtime to the fairly paint-by-numbers story. First Steps is a lot of fun, and a very solid MCU debut for the Fantastic Four. It’s hard to shake the feeling that this film came close to being something great, if only its pieces had been arranged a little better

 

Friday

11

July 2025

0

COMMENTS

‘Superman’ review: James Gunn fixes most of DC Comic’s cinematic woes, a fun, light-hearted adventure

Written by , Posted in Blog, Movie Reviews, Pop Culture, Reviews

For all the talk of shared universes, DC has spent the past 15 years grappling with one core issue. Aside from a few bright spots, movies based on its comics haven’t been very good. The grimdark nature of the Snyderverse hardly bred corporate synergy for the brand’s other properties. Somewhere along the way, people forgot that the S that Superman wears on his chest stands for hope.

James Gunn kicked off his new DC Universe with Superman, an earnest film that eschews origin stories that everyone is familiar with by now in favor of something simpler. There’s no need to rehash the destruction of Krypton, or the arrival of its last son to Smallville, Kansas in a spaceship bassinet to be raised by a couple of farmers. Gunn throws his audience right into the action, quickly taking aim at the myth that Kal-El is just a tad too powerful to be relatable.

The film starts off with Kal-El (David Corenswet) suffering his first defeat, three years into his journey as Superman. After interfering with a war between two fictional nations, Boravia and Jarhanpur, Superman gets a whooping at the hands of the “Hammer of Boravia” back in Metropolis. Rescued by his rambunctious canine friend Krypto, Superman takes solace in the Fortress of Solitude, while Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult) is fast on his tail.

Luthor spends much of the film trying to get the government to sanction his crusade Superman, while secretly putting his thumb on the scale in the Boravia/Jarhanpur war. If domestic imperialism didn’t hit too close to home, Luthor also wields the media against Superman, quickly turning the masses against the Man of Steel by releasing the longform message that his Kryptonian parents left before their death. Having only previously seen a fragment of his birth parents’ last wishes, Clark is horrified by the urging to conquer Earth. To make matters worse for Clark, Lex Luthor has a secret weapon, “Ultraman,” that he can control remotely, having compiled a database with all of Superman’s moves in a battle of brains versus brawn.

Gunn, known for his humor, was the perfect counterweight to the self-indulgent sense of seriousness that defined most of DC’s output for the past 15 years. Superman isn’t necessarily a barrel of laughs, but the film doesn’t take itself too seriously either. Corenswet is a calm, grounded Clark, still trying to find himself three years into his mission. Rachel Brosnahan shines as Lois Lane, ever-ready to challenge Clark’s perception of the world, and Superman’s obligations to it. Clark and Lois butt heads frequently, a refreshing change of pace from the “boy scout” accusations that often circle their corner of the DC universe.

As Luthor, Hoult rearranges the gravitational force of the film to center around him, not Superman. Channeling his inner Elon Musk, Hoult brings an “I alone can fix this,” mentality that makes him both effective and instantly detestable as the villain. Billionaires are not meant to be empathized with. Gunn does skirt some corners on Luthor’s overall characterization, an issue that does recur throughout the brisk 129-runtime.

Though franchise-building is far from Superman’s mind, Gunn does throw in three fun B-list heroes, Guy Gardner (Nathan Fillion), a Green Lantern than many in the audience would be unfamiliar with, Hawkgirl (Isabela Merced), and Mister Terrific (Edi Gathegi), who form a group known as the “Justice Gang.” Fillion brings fantastic jerk energy to Gardner, a fan favorite with perhaps the worst haircut in the history of comics. Gathegi is the film’s secret weapon, stealing every scene that he’s in, even when Mister Terrific isn’t the focus, the only hero unfazed by the film’s universe-shattering stakes.

The film does occasionally forget to breathe. Gunn is thoughtful in his effort to give each of the cast their moment to shine, sometimes coming at the expense of the principals. Audience familiarity with Kent, Luthor, and Lane, is not irrelevant, but the film does lean on knowledge of these characters to such a degree that it leaves Corenswet, Brosnahan, and Hoult with fewer opportunities to make their marks.

Gunn is perhaps too preoccupied with showcasing Superman’s vulnerability. Corenswet sells Clark’s natural charm that draws in everyone around him, but there’s a layer to the character that doesn’t really get pulled back with all the nonstop action going around him. Too often, Superman feels like the object of the film, not its primary driver.

The film does present a thorough case for the value of immigration and America’s role on the world stage, earning accusations of “wokeness” from far-right media despite leaving the character’s origin story largely unchanged since his debut in 1938, hardly the most progressive era in our nation’s history. Less can be said of journalism as a profession. Gunn tackles the ethical dilemma at play when Superman interviews himself. Lane takes a well-intentioned stab at the same conflict of interest, though failing to escape the optics of what some might reasonably refer to as fake news.

Gunn has plenty of confidence throughout the film, particularly in its third act, which lands well despite some pacing issues that undercut the drama at hand. There remains the sense that these characters are better suited for a follow-up story that fully allows them to dispel with any obligations toward being the first entry in the new DC Universe. But for now, it’s a fantastic start.

 

Tuesday

8

July 2025

0

COMMENTS

Classic Film: Summer with Monika

Written by , Posted in Blog, Movie Reviews, Pop Culture

The promise of summer is often as fleeting as a cool breeze on a hundred-degree day. The season offers plenty of natural escapism for those who want a break from their monotonous realities. The beach doesn’t exactly provide any answers for people in need of more permanent solutions for their broader sense of dread, a dynamic that Ingmar Bergman’s 1953 film Summer with Monika (original Swedish title: Sommaren med Monika) centers its narrative around.

The film starts off with the chance encounter between Harry (Lars Ekborg), an errand boy at a factory, and Monika (Harriet Andersson), a grocery store clerk. Harry quickly falls for the carefree Monika, who invites him to take her out for a movie. Sick of the abuse from her alcoholic father in their home full of kids, Monika urges Harry to help her run away. The two take shelter in Harry’s father’s boat, spending the summer camping around the Swedish Archipelago.

Their bliss starts to sour as the two return home, with Monika pregnant. The promise of summer wears off for Harry, who takes his work and studies more seriously in an effort to provide for Monika and their child. Monika does not find fulfilment from being a mother or a homemaker, wishing to resume her breezy existence and skirt her growing responsibilities.

Bergman does an excellent job using light to contrast the cold, stuffy nature of Stockholm City with the seemingly limitless escapism offered by the Archipelago. All of us are supposed to grow up at some point or another, but Monika certainly doesn’t want to. Andersson rarely plays Monika for sympathy, but you can understand her claustrophobia toward her dreary monotony when juxtaposed against the ephemeral nature of summer.

Harry and Monika are hardly a match made in heaven, but Ekborg and Andersson have the kind of natural chemistry that makes you understand how the two were a good fit for a season. Considered scandalous at the time, Bergman includes a few shots of Andersson’s bare buttocks while swimming, adding a layer of eroticism to Monika’s insatiable quest for fulfilment.

The viewer’s natural sympathies drift toward Harry, the only one taking life seriously, but Monika carries an uncomfortable sense of realism that contributes to the film’s lasting appeal. It’s easy to dismiss Monika as selfish, until you consider her perpetual lack of agency. The inevitability of summer, its perpetual annual presence, cannot be clung to, for summer is finite. We all have to go back to the cruel world eventually. Reluctance to do so doesn’t necessarily make you a bad person, it just makes you human.

Monday

7

July 2025

0

COMMENTS

‘Jurassic World Rebirth’ review: a fun, highly derivative romp that entertains where it fails to impress

Written by , Posted in Blog, Movie Reviews

For all the ways that Jurassic Park changed the way we look at blockbuster filmmaking, the series hasn’t evolved much from its original premise. The whole formula can be pretty much boiled down to dinosaurs, moral quandaries, some comedy, and people being eaten. Some people might find the franchise stale after more than thirty years, but the success and failures of the series through seven cinematic entries mostly ebbs and flows with the execution of each individual film, not whether it actually brought anything new to the table.

Jurassic World Rebirth is not much of a rebirth. The plot is fairly simple. A covert team lands on an island full of dinosaurs to retrieve biomaterial samples that can potentially cure heart disease. Organized by the shady Martin Krebs (Rupert Friend), the team also includes Zora Bennett (Scarlett Johansson), a former military operative looking for a big payday to retire from being a mercenary, Dr. Henry Loomis (Jonathan Bailey), a paleontologist upset that people don’t seem to care about dinosaurs anymore, and Duncan Kincaid (Mahershala Ali), the team leader and a friend of Nora.

Given the scummy nature of the core group, Rebirth throws in a family out on a sailing expedition for good measure. Father Reuben Delgado (Manuel Garcia-Rulfo), daughters Teresa (Luna Blaise) and Isabella (Audrina Miranda), and Teresa’s boyfriend Xavier (David Iacano) were traveling around the island of Ile Saint-Hubert when their boat was shipwrecked by a mosasaurus. After some arguing among the mercenaries, Duncan rescues the civilians, bringing them along for the dangerous ride.

Director Gareth Edwards does an excellent job of pacing the paint-by-numbers thriller through all its expected twists and turns. The previous World movies borrowed heavily from the original Jurassic Park and its first sequel, The Lost World: Jurassic Park, but left the final piece of the first trilogy largely alone. Though initially critically reviled, Jurassic Park III laid out a fairly solid guidebook for future installments with its standalone story that prioritized thrills over ethics.

Rebirth takes much of its cues from III, interjecting some philosophical quandaries into the equation as Bennett and Loomis clash with Krebs’ capitalistic intentions for their findings on the island. Original JP screenwriter David Koepp puts forth a competent script with a brisk runtime of 133-minutes, which unfortunately leaves little time for character development. Johansson has great chemistry with Bailey and Ali, but none of them are fully fleshed out characters.

Jurassic World Dominion similarly struggled with a bloated cast, juggling the cast of the new trilogy with the trio of returnees. Rebirth handles this dynamic better than Dominion, largely by streamlining all human interaction into a collection of easily digestible cliches. Its methodology is a little rudimentary at times, but the results deliver more than any of the entries of the new trilogy.

Koepp’s script struggles with its awkward humor. The movie isn’t funny at all, but the cast does a great job selling the idea that you’re supposed to care about these people, aside from the obvious dinosaur fodder. Miranda, the youngest member of the cast, shines with her relationship with a baby Dilophosaurus she named Dolores.

Edwards delivers with the action sequences. Water was famously a challenge for the original film’s production thirty years ago. Rebirth supplies plenty of genuinely thrilling water scenes that mostly make you forget how generic this whole experience is. The new bioengineered dinosaurs are a little cartoonish, but that’s also to be expected by now in this franchise.

Jurassic World Rebirth brings nothing new to the table, but Edwards’ competent direction steers the ship away from familiar criticisms. People have been saying that the franchise is played out since The Lost World. The constant presence of John Williams’ score hardly helps, reminding the audience of better days when these movies had something new to say. The original movie already masterfully covered the ethical dilemmas at play in every subsequent installment. This film is great fun for people who thought III got a bad rap.

While there doesn’t appear to be any great intellectualism left to be mined from this franchise, Rebirth is solid popcorn entertainment. The paint-by-numbers approach won’t appeal to many Spielberg fans, but there’s a lot of fun to be had watching one-dimensional people run away from CGI abominations. The dinosaurs and the audience deserve better than this corporate content masquerading as cinema, but it’s far from the worst way to spend an evening.