Home Blog Page 181

Poll: What is your favorite superhero team-up movie?

Ever since the Avengers saved New York City back in 2012, Hollywood has loved teaming up Earth’s mightiest heroes. But this has been going on way beforehand, from Mr. Incredible and his family to Professor X and his band of weirdos (sorry, I mean mutants). Not all of these attempts at the superhero team-up have been successful, but those that have been are widely regarded as the best of the genre; and by the looks of it, James Gunn’s The Suicide Squad (coming out this weekend) may join the club.

So let’s pit team against team. What is your favorite superhero team-up movie?


Podcast: The Green Knight / Top 3 1980s Fantasy Films – Episode 441

This week’s episode is brought to you by the InSession Film Store. Get your ISF gear today!

This week on the InSession Film Podcast, we discuss David Lowery’s The Green Knight and our Top 3 fantasy films from the 1980s! Plus, a few brief thoughts on Disney’s Jungle Cruise.

As you’ll hear in the review, we are big fans of Lowery and The Green Knight has been one of our most anticipated films going back to last year. And it was quite the treat to finally see its friendly Christmas games. Given its symbolism and ambiguity, there’s plenty to talk about and we did our best to decipher what it all means. We also had a ton of fun looking back to the 1980s as well. All in all, a really fun show this week.

On that note, check out this week’s show and let us know what you think in the comment section. Thanks for listening and for supporting the InSession Film Podcast!

– Movie Review: The Green Knight (5:47)
Director: David Lowery
Writers: David Lowery
Stars: Dev Patel, Alicia Vikander, Joel Edgerton, Sean Harris, Ralph Ineson

– Notes / Jungle Cruise (1:02:05)
We didn’t have many other films to talk about in a meaningful way, however, JD did catch up with Disney’s Jungle Cruise and gave some brief thoughts on it. As we mentioned last week, we also reiterate that we are giving away t-shirts to the first five listeners who leave us a review on iTunes (take a screenshot of your review and either email us or DM on social media).

[divider]

RELATED: Listen to Episode 423 of the InSession Film Podcast where we discussed The Tree of Life!

[divider]

Top 3 1980s Fantasy Films (1:21:01)
We’ve talked about our favorite action movies from previous decades, so it made sense to do the same thing for other genres as well. The 1980s isn’t just a nostalgic era for us, but it’s chock full of fantasy films that make for a rich conversation. Some of these films permeated the culture in ways that still resonate today. Others of the time may not hold up, but either way, there was plenty to mine for this exercise and we had a lot of fun with it. That said, what would be your top 3?

Show Sponsor: First Time Watchers Podcast

– Music

You Do Smell Like You’ve Been At Mass All Night – Daniel Hart
The NeverEnding Story – Limahl
Path of the Wind – Joe Hisaishi
The Return of the Eagle – Atli Örvarsson

Subscribe to our Podcasts RSS
Subscribe to our Podcasts on iTunes
Listen on Spotify
Listen on Stitcher
InSession Film Podcast – Episode 441

[divider]

Next week on the show:

Review: The Suicide Squad
Top 3: TBD

[divider]

Help Support The InSession Film Podcast

If you want to help support us, there are several ways you can help us and we’d absolutely appreciate it. Every penny goes directly back into supporting the show and we are truly honored and grateful. Thanks for your support and for listening to the InSession Film Podcast!

VISIT OUR DONATE PAGE HERE

Op-ed: The Ship Can’t Sink Any Further: More Film Productions Off The Rails

This is my third (maybe fourth) piece on disasters in filmmaking because they are both funny and horrifying. It is where a director’s ego and the studio’s pocketbook collide, lighting on fire promising movies and resulting in really bad box office receipts and responses. Of course, some films such as Apocalypse Now and The Revenant may turn out well in the end, but in most cases, the films end up in the bin. So, no surprise, here are more stories of chaos behind the camera in the last few decades.

The Last Movie (1971)

Before he made Easy Rider, Dennis Hopper had sought to make his story of a film production gone berserk (ironically) his directorial debut, but studios did not give it the green light because it was confusing. Then, his counterculture picture was a smash, and despite problems making that picture, Universal gave Hopper $1 million to go to Peru and shoot it. However, Hopper decided to improvise scenes rather than use the script he co-wrote and cast friends including Kris Kristofferson, Dean Stockwell, Michelle Phillips (of The Mamas & The Papas fame), and director Samuel Fuller as, well, a director making the movie within the movie. 

After shooting countless hours of footage, Hopper took the reels back to his home in New Mexico where he prevented everyone from even seeing what he was doing. He then presented it to his friend, experimental Chilean director Alejandro Jodorowsky (The Holy Mountain), who didn’t like it and dared Hopper to recut it and make it completely unconventional. Under the influence of drugs and alcohol, Hopper didn’t finish his final cut until six months after the deadline. Not surprisingly, the film was a failure, but it has become a cult hit and critics have given it a second watch, which is certainly redeeming for Hopper’s directorial legacy. 

Pirates (1986)

Fresh from Chinatown, Roman Polanski sought to make his swashbuckling adventure that was opposite of what he had made beforehand. Problems arose from the start with casting and distribution – not to mention that other thing that forced him to relocate back home to France – and constant pull-out financial pull-outs that did not let him start shooting the film in 1984. Instead of Jack Nicholson, Polanski settled on Walter Matthau, who only took the role because his youngest son asked him to. Delays in constructing the mammoth galleon in Tunisia forced shooting five months later than scheduled, but then major storms swooped in the summer to make it even more difficult and impossible. 

When he first partnered with Paramount in ’75, the budget was $15 million. At the start of principal photography, it was a $25 million budgeted feature with MGM agreeing to distribute. By the time the shoot was over, it had cost $40 million and MGM bought itself out of distributing this mess, which was then taken on by the now-defunct Cannon Group. Critics panned it and the film made only $6.3 million worldwide. In 2010, co-star Charlotte Lewis, aged 16 when she was cast, said Polanski told her she would be given the role if she slept with him. As Matthau said later, “For character and atmosphere I would give it four stars. I would not give it four stars for plot and action.” In short: a shipwreck.

Alien 3 (1992)

David Fincher, one of the best directors in the business today, did not have the best of debuts ever. He even disavowed the movie, saying, “No one hated it more than me; to this day, no one hates it more than me.” Certainly, what happened was not totally his fault; even James Cameron and others from the previous films spared Fincher of blame. Immediately after the success of Aliens, 20th Century Fox greenlit the third film of the franchise immediately. Multiple writers and directors were hired, but the story kept changing and Fox spent $7 million (some sources say $13 million) on just pre-production before Fincher, already successful in music videos, was given the director’s chair. He was 28 years old and discovered quickly that he had five weeks to prepare with a partially completed script. 

Somehow, Fincher squeezed every ounce of what the story had to complete it. Having to learn on the fly, Fincher’s pushiness and perfectionism alienated him from the crew. (I don’t think he shot a scene 99 times as with The Social Network.) But then again, he got great special effects for the movie, which earned an Oscar nomination. However, with the producers interfering all the time with constant changes and strict deadlines, it was too much for Fincher. It was critically panned, but a financial success; a so-called “Assembly Cut” was produced and released in 2003 without Fincher’s participation and fans of the series have warmed to the alternative version. 

World War Z (2013)

The zombie apocalypse got favorable reviews and made a profit when it was released, but the story about its troubled production was already well known at the time. Brad Pitt and Plan B Entertainment were taking on a blockbuster production, the biggest they had done before or since. Marc Forster was hired to direct with only Quantum of Solace as his previous big-budget film, even though many felt he was not suited for such projects. The writing process then grew completely away from Max Brooks’ book, too little footage was shot per day, and principal photography snowballed past its original budget. Forster clashed with his crew and Pitt clashed with Forster. The Hungarian government seized the film’s weapons because they were not cleared by customs. And then there was the third act, which was virtually nonexistent.

Damien Lindelof and Drew Goddard were then brought to watch what they had shot and rewrote the script with a proper third act. The reshoots were made and Paramount was happier with their product, but they weren’t happy with a budget that some sources say went high as $269 million before marketing and advertising, which cost $160 million itself. After a year’s delay, the film came out and thankfully did not become a Waterworld. But the story did not end there as Paramount had previously planned a sequel. Once again, there was a lot of time spent on pre-production with David Fincher as director, but after several delays, the entire project was canceled. Probably for the best.

Follow me on Twitter: @brian_cine (Cine-A-Man)

Classic Review: Reckoning with Elephant, 18 Years Later

Released in 2003, “Elephant” covers a fictionalized version of the Columbine school massacre through the perspectives of ten students who witness two of their classmates commit a school shooting. The title of the movie comes from the idiom “the elephant in the room”, which refers to an enormous and obvious problem that everyone refuses to address because of how controversial it is. In the years following “Elephant”’s release, many more school shootings would follow, including Virginia Tech in 2007, Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, and Marjory Stoneman Douglas and Santa Fe High-Schools in 2018. As someone who graduated from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High-School in 2014, I was curious to see how well “Elephant” would hold up in 2021 after the high number of mass shootings in the United States in recent years.

“Elephant” understands that school shootings are an enormous issue and that no movie can give its viewers closure to the horror and tragedy of these real-life events. There are tens of thousands of victims with vivid real-life connections to these tragedies so it is difficult to make a film that properly reflects on every victim’s unique perspective of a school shooting. There are many personal and valid ways to describe the realities of a school shooting and “Elephant” acknowledges that it is important to always remain open to the experiences of other people affected by gun violence. 

Elephant gives a fair and non-biased perspective of its fictional school shooting by showing the shooting from the perspectives of over ten students each involved in the shooting.  This is an important storytelling choice because none of the students are meant to be small background characters to be killed to raise the stakes for the main characters. Every student has something important to contribute because the viewers learn the different personal experiences each of the students get from the same tragic event. Over the course of the film, “Elephant” shows one student driving to school, another student playing football, and another student taking photos of his friends. This slow approach allows viewers to learn what the students’ regular personal lives are like before the horrific shooting starts. “Elephant”’s style of filmmaking asks viewers to always remain receptive to the perspectives of other people and to place themselves in the position that these kids are in. 

As a Stoneman Douglas graduate, I was able to easily identify with the kids in “Elephant” because of how normal they are and how much time the movie spends on these kids doing regular things. “Elephant” focuses a lot of time on kids walking around the school, going to class, and meeting with their friends. Scenes of these kids walking around the school take up to three to four minutes each with little to no dialogue. Some people might complain “Elephant” is a boring movie because it spends so much time on something as normal as a kid walking to class. However, real-life school shootings like the one at my high school also took place during normal school days and did not contain any dramatic climax before the shooting started. The lack of epic action before the shooting along with the presence of regular high-school kids makes it easy to see these kids as real people in a real-life tragic situation and not stereotypes used for entertainment.    

However, some of the scenes in “Elephant” will likely be perceived differently by people in 2021 than when the movie was first released in 2003. Viewers in 2021 might get confused before the shooting actually starts as to why most of the kids do not seem to care that two of their classmates are walking around school carrying guns. One kid even raises his camera and takes a picture of the shooters. The reason for this is that at the time of Columbine shooting in April 1999, the idea of a school shooting was almost unheard of. There were almost no news reports, no movies, and no tv shows that showed what a school shooting would be like to the American public. Most of the characters in “Elephant” ignore the shooters like an “elephant in the room” because in 1999 no one expects a school shooting or knows how to address it.

In contrast to 2021, the idea of a school shooting is unfortunately very vivid in the minds of the American public due to the massive amount of school shootings that have been publicized all across the news and social media. Most people in 2021 will immediately know that something is wrong as soon as the shooters walk up to the school wearing all Camo clothing and carrying large backpacks. Modern viewers also probably will not get tricked by the little distractions in the movie meant to conceal the appearance of the shooters. One shot in the film tries to distract the viewers by showing a student playing with a cute dog in the foreground while the armed shooters walk towards the school in the background. As a Stoneman Douglas graduate, the distraction did not work on me and I noticed the shooters right away. Modern viewers will also likely get annoyed that most of the adults and kids in the movie are not taking the clear threat of a school shooting seriously. The lack of awareness in the characters is not an inherent flaw in the movie though. It is more just a product of the time that Elephant was released.

The ending of “Elephant” also holds up incredibly well in 2021. Without spoiling the specific plot details, the film ends with a moment of silence for the killed victims. Elephant’s moment of silence does not provide the viewers with any easy answers or closure. Instead, Elephant ends by asking viewers one final time to reflect on the horrible violence that has happened. The silent ending personally reminds me of Emma Gonzalez’s six minutes and twenty seconds moment of silence at the March for Our Lives Protest in Washington DC following the Stoneman Douglas shooting in 2018. The moment of silence is an extremely powerful way to end the movie while still being respectful for the victims of real-life school shootings. 

“Elephant” is a great film for high-school and college students pursuing a future in journalism, law, and politics to better understand the issue of school shootings in the United States. Although, “Elephant” can also be an extremely uncomfortable watch for some viewers and should only be seen if viewers are prepared for the difficult subject matter. “Elephant” does not sugar coat any of the realities of school shootings and the ending of the film is chillingly similar to the outcome of many real-life school shootings. “Elephant” is extremely relevant in 2021 and an important movie that future journalists, politicians, and filmmakers should see to understand America in the 21st century.

Movie Review: ‘The Boy Behind the Door’ is a Predictable Thriller that Should Be a Short Film


Directors: David Charbonier, Justin Powell
Writers: David Charbonier, Justin Powell
Stars: Lonnie Chavis, Ezra Dewey, Kristin Bauer van Straten, Micah Hauptman, Scott Michael Foster

Synopsis: After Bobby and his best friend Kevin are kidnapped and taken to a strange house in the middle of nowhere, Bobby manages to escape. But as he starts to make a break for it, he hears Kevin’s screams for help and realizes he can’t leave his friend behind.

[/info]

There’s a lot of promise early on the new Shudder Original thriller The Boy Behind the Door, written and directed by David Charbonier and Justin Powell. The opening shots set a strong and ominous mood, and the first scene with two twelve-year-old best friends Bobby (Lonnie Chavis) and Kevin (Ezra Dewey) is a good one—they take a slow walk through the woods and talk about their dream of fleeing their small town and going to California. The abduction of the two kids that follows a moment later is terrifying, and there’s a sense that Bobby and Kevin are going to be put through the wringer by the time this narrative reaches its climax.

But despite a few satisfactory shocks throughout and a menacing final twenty minutes, The Boy Behind the Door is a mixed bag of tricks we’ve all seen before in better movies and ultimately feels like a terrific twenty-minute short film stretched way too long to a feature-length ninety minutes.

What makes this child abduction film a little different than some others is that both boys aren’t immediately locked up and have to spend the rest of the movie trying to find a way to escape. Kevin is removed from the trunk of a car and yanked inside a middle-of-nowhere farmhouse while Bobby is kept in the trunk, where he struggles to breathe. When he finds a way out, he runs for his life—only stopping when he hears the loud cries of his friend from the house, and he heads back to save him. At this point Kevin becomes a supporting role in the film, only seen or heard occasionally while we spend most of the time with Bobby as he does everything he can to find his friend and protect his own life in the process.

These earlier scenes also work fine of Bobby making the courageous choice to locate Kevin, with Charbonier and Powell employing an effective editing technique of cutting to that California beach the two young boys talked about exploring one day, Bobby now unsure if they’ll ever be able to touch their toes in that warm water. The house he walks through is dark and unpleasant, and there’s a chance of him bumping into a madman around every corner. There’s an eerie silence in this early part of the film I enjoyed, very little dialogue or music playing, the camera staying on Bobby as works his way through this maze of a home.

When the kidnapper appears, the tension amps up big time, but then what happens next is too easy and unlikely, and a lot of the suspense drains from the movie especially for the next half-hour, not enough of a threat in the second act to keep us scared or invested in the story. I’m all for thrillers that move slowly, but The Boy Behind the Door comes to a crawl in many scenes while at the same time not giving us enough complications in the plot or a significant raising of the stakes. Bobby knows where Kevin is. He struggles to get him out. And with seemingly no more kidnapper nearby to put either kid in jeopardy, there’s little happening to keep us engaged.

Another problem is the overall look of the movie, which eventually devolves into a constant too-dark sameness, nothing creative or imaginative being done with the cinematography or editing. I love those great early flashes to the California beach that show the sad loss of a dream, but after that there’s little of interest on a technical level, especially when we stay in the house for most of the running time with endless shots of Bobby tiptoeing around corners and looking scared. The music is fairly perfunctory too, and the use of silence, which is so great in the early scenes, is replaced with lots of banal dialogue in the second half like this gem: “I’ve got something for you. Say goodnight!”

Kristin Bauer van Straten from True Blood livens things up in the second half as Ms. Burton, and despite her playing a fairly one-note character who gets bad dialogue, cliched situations, and a thankless nod to The Shining in a shot of her staring through a broken door, she is an actress that oozes charisma in everything she does. Lonnie Chavis and Ezra Dewey are additionally both terrific young actors who make the film work as well as it does, and not one but two emotional moments they share at the film’s conclusion have power and depth. (I was also thrilled to see that the black-and-white movie playing in the house wasn’t the public domain Night of the Living Dead for once!)

The Boy Behind the Door isn’t a bad film by any means, and it might be worth a look for horror fans, especially if you subscribe to Shudder. But when it was all said and done, the film felt like an exercise that goes through familiar motions rather than something striking and original to haunt the viewer for days to come. It should be scarier than it is, more raw and unnerving, with genuine tension in that middle half that makes us terrified for Bobby and Kevin. Instead, we get something far too predictable that, again, probably would’ve worked better as a short film than a feature.

Grade: C+

Movie Review: ‘Batman: The Long Halloween Part 2’ Brings The Mystery To A Satisfying Conclusion


Director: Chris Palmer
Writers: Jeph Loeb, Tim Sheridan
Stars: Jensen Ackles, Troy Baker, and Naya Rivera

Synopsis: The killer known as Holiday continues to stalk the Falcone crime family while a new class of costumed criminals rises in Gotham City. Batman suspects that a former ally might be the serial killer.

[/info]

As I covered part one of the most beloved graphic novels, I was starting to get worried because I couldn’t help but shake the fact the reveal of the killer Holiday would emerge to be lackluster. This experience stems from when the animated adaptation of Batman: Hush was released in 2019. I was eager to witness how Warner Bros. animation would tackle that story and unfortunately I was left dissatisfied. I understand that comic book adaptations are meant to mimic plots from the original material, but I wasn’t a fan of how they handled the narrative. Nevertheless Batman: The Long Halloween Part 2 has gone above and beyond the call of duty.

This film starts a few months after the jaw-dropping cliffhanger of part one and starts the ball rolling with a mind-twisted scene. Unlike Part one I was invested more so into the climax, reveal, and conclusion of the ladder half of the story. The stakes appear to have more weight as the story advanced. Part two balances the action and dialogue-heavy scenes successfully and like with every animated batman film, it is flooding with fan-favorite supervillains such as the joker, scarecrow, poison ivy, and the infamous two-face who plays a crucial role as foreshadowed in part one.

As much as I appreciate the story beats, the jury is still out about the art style they’ve chosen to move forward with current Dc animated films. In my part one review, I mentioned that the animation felt robotic and stiff and still hold to that. It reminds me of the animation style of the tv series Archer which is known for its bold outlined technique. It’s not a terrible route but during the dialogue-heavy sequences, you start to notice how out of place it looks for a superhero tale. I personally welcome the approach of amazon videos Invincible animated series, Young Justice, or that of Avatar: The Last Airbender (which definitely shows my age). 

The action is where the new animation style shines. It blends well with the world of Gotham and is edited beautifully. It was easy to follow along with what was happening on screen. Even though I am not a fan of art style I believe that it will sit well with future DC animated projects. As I mentioned before stakes have more weight as the story advances, and this leads to a lot of hauntingly beautiful interactions between the characters and the big reveal of who the serial killer known as Holiday really is.

The adaptation of this story is so well crafted and brings the persona of the serial killer to life. This is the most engaging Batman film we have received since The Dark Knight Returns. The two halves of this tale are merged into one hell of a satisfying conclusion. One can hope that future DC animated projects follow this method moving forward.

Grade: A-

Movie Review: ‘Jungle Cruise’ is a family adventure through familiar, albeit shallow, waters


Director: Jaume Collet-Serra
Writer: Michael Green, Glen Ficarra, John Requa
Stars: Dwayne Johnson, Emily Blunt, Jack Whitehall, Jesse Plemons, Paul Giamatti, Veronica Falcón, and Edgar Ramírez

Synopsis: Based on Disneyland’s theme park ride where a small riverboat takes a group of travelers through a jungle filled with dangerous animals and reptiles but with a supernatural element.

[/info]

Of all fiction literature, the action-adventure genre has a direct link to my heart that none other do. From films, books, and video games, my love for this genre can only be compared to the obsession of many of our favorite archeologists. And it is with a heavy heart that I inform you that Jungle Cruise is not an adventure worth watching.

Jungle Cruise, Disney’s latest journey into the action-adventure genre, is a film best left unthought about. Directed by Jaume Collet-Serra, the film follows siblings Lily and MacGregor Houghton as they search for the mythical tears of the moon believed to have the power to cure anything. Along the way, they run into Nazi generals, river tour guides, and cursed conquistadors protecting the jungle. However, even with the promise of a fun journey through the Amazon with the charming duo of Dwayne Johnson and Emily Blunt, Jungle Cruise fails to dive deeper than the surface of the shallow waters and leaves behind a forgettable experience.

Jungle Cruise is a film carried by the ever-so-charming duo of Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson and Emily Blunt. While their characters are only as deep as the Amazon itself, their personalities pull you into the film. Blunt plays Lily Houghton, a bright young lady that pushes the gender norms of the early 20th century, through her desire to wear trousers and go on adventures. Contrasting Lily, Johnson plays as Frank Wolff, a skipper for the local river tour, who seems to have more experience running cons rather than rapids. And while these characters are fun to watch throughout the film, with Frank’s corner puns being a favorite of mine, the chemistry between Johnson and Blunt is surprisingly missing. The sincere style of Blunt clashes with the wink-and-a-nod style of Johnson and leaves the impression that they worked on two separate films. However, it still can be a charming adventure enjoyed by all.

That accessibility is the other strength of Jungle Cruise. Unlike other stories in the genre, Jungle Cruise is made to be enjoyed by an audience of all ages. The Amazon is portrayed beautifully in the film, with vibrant colors and some great establishing shots. The transitions often utilize a hand-drawn effect that left me breathless and amazed, and that beauty will ensnare all ages, young and old. Along with this, the film doesn’t contain much of the swearing, scares, or violence that are often found in the genre, making it a great starting point for younger audiences.

However, beyond the charm of its leads, there is no temple of ornate riches to be found in this film.

Whereas adventurers like Indiana Jones, Lara Croft, or Nathan Drake often find themselves pulled into a journey that challenges the importance they place on finding lost artifacts, the adventurers of Disney’s Jungle Cruise are left without having to change their behaviors or beliefs. And the lack of any thematic depth at the center of this film left me wanting more from the film.

Jungle Cruise boasts a sizeable cast of characters, from the academics of London to the native tribe of the Jungle. However, many of these characters are used to solely move the plot along and have a habit of stealing screentime from the core characters of the film. MacGregor Houghton, Lily’s gay brother, is brought to life by Jack Whitehall but has little to do in the film. MacGregor is often relegated to being a gag, or a McGuffin, for the sprawling narrative. His one sequence with Frank has little to do with the story or the plot, instead used to explain why he came along with Lily despite his unenthused demeanor. As for Lily and Frank, much of their character development is rushed, as they begin to have feelings for the other at the end of the second act. It creates a screenplay that feels unbalanced, with an extended introduction to these characters and little time left for organic development to take place.

As for the extended supporting cast, each character has both too much and too little screen time to feel impactful to the greater story. Characters like Nilo, Prince Joachim, Aguire, and Trader Sam often work as obstacles for our lead characters, but each has little to do with one another and little impact on the narrative at large. Some of these characters are guides for our central characters, but they often arrive too late to add much to the story. Despite the eccentric acting of Jesse Plemons, Paul Giamatti, Veronica Falcón, and Edgar Ramírez, these characters fail to be memorable.

However, the action in an action-adventure film can be a saving grace. Unluckily for Jungle Cruise, the set pieces are less like a hard floor, and more like the spike pits in Square Enix Tomb Raider games. They don’t carry any weight. A large part of this is due to the editing and cinematography, by Joel Negron and Flavio Martínez Labiano respectively. The cutting is done rapidly, comprised of different angles, which leads to a watching experience that is jarring and tiring. Accompanying this is the cinematography of each action set piece, with each shot done entirely in close-ups. When combined together, it creates setpieces that are entirely forgettable, and unintentionally hilarious. These sequences have more in common with the work of Charlie Chaplin than that of Steven Spielberg, and it heavily impacts the tone of the film.

While the action-adventure genre has often used comedy to soften the intensity of its setpieces so that they can be enjoyed by all people, Jungle Cruise fails to balance the effect of the jokes with the stakes it sets up. Whereas the sarcasm of Nathan Drake heightens the intensity of any situation, the quippy puns of Jungle Cruise rarely work to increase the awareness of the stakes. And the visual effects of Jungle Cruise don’t help in establishing an intense tone either. Compared to the cursed pirates from Pirates of the Caribbean, the conquistadors are all poorly brought to life. And the animals in Jungle Cruise also don’t completely seem natural, which removed much of the terrifying nature of these beasts.

Taken as a whole, Jungle Cruise is a fun, but disappointing adventure. Like the myths that inspire each adventure, Jungle Cruise will be forgotten, due to the shallow characters, and mishandled action sequences.

Grade: C

Podcast: Lost Highway / Jungle Cruise – Extra Film

This week on Extra Film, Ryan and Jay continue their David Lynch Movie Series with horror thriller Lost Highway and they discuss the newest adventure film from Disney,Jungle Cruise!

Following up their conversation on Wild at Heart, the Extra Film boys return to discuss Lynch’s new phase of his career, in which he took a look at more modern, seedy settings in Los Angeles. Billed as a noir thriller, Lost Highway plays more like a horror film about reincarnation and Lynch’s issues with the film industry. Both hosts still don’t know what this movie is completely saying, but they both love it, and it leads to a very good conversation.

In the back half of the episode, the guys review the new Disney live-action adventure, Jungle Cruise. Propped up to be the new Pirates of the Caribbean hit for Disney, they assemble two of the best leading actors working today to team up in Dwayne Johnson and Emily Blunt. But the problem is, Jungle Cruise is so much a mess and so uninspired, they can’t save this ship from sinking. Truly one of the most disappointing films of the year Ryan and Jay have reviewed.

Thanks for listening!

– Movie Review: Lost Highway (3:30)
Director: David Lynch
Screenplay: David Lynch, Barry Gifford
Stars: Bill Pullman, Patricia Arquette, Balthazar Getty, Robert Blake

– Movie Review: Jungle Cruise (52:51)
Director: Jaume Collet-Serra
Screenplay: Michael Green, Glenn Ficarra, John Requa
Stars: Dwayne Johnson, Emily Blunt, Édgar Ramírez, Jack Whitehall, Jesse Plemons

– Music
I’m Deranged – David Bowie
Nothing Else Matters – Metallica
The Return of the Eagle – Atli Örvarsson

We try to make this the best movie podcast we possibly can and we hope you enjoy them. Subscribe today on iTunes, Spotify, or Stitcher, and please leave us a review on iTunes. You can also find us on Soundcloud, PlayerFM, and TuneIn Radio as well. We really appreciate all your support of the InSession Film Podcast.

Subscribe to our Podcasts RSS
Subscribe to our Podcasts on iTunes
Listen on Spotify
Listen on Stitcher
Lost Highway / Jungle Cruise – Extra Film

[divider]

To hear this Extra Film episode and everything else we do, download our apps on the Amazon Market for Android and the Podcast Source app on IOS devices. The mobile app covers all of our main shows, bonus podcasts and everything else relating to the InSession Film Podcast. Thanks for your wonderful support and for listening to our show. It means the world to us.

Movie Review: The Green Knight is a magical experience and absolutely slays

<info>

Director: David Lowrey
Writer: David Lowrey
Stars: Dev Patel, Alicia Vikander, Sarita Choudhury, Sean Harris, Kate Dickie, Ralph Ineson, Barry Keoghan, Erin Kellyman, and Joel Edgerton.

Synopsis: A fantasy re-telling of the medieval story of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.

</info>

It’s hard to believe in magic and to really lose yourself inside a film because we are so much savvier about technology. We carry supercomputers in our hands every day and, often smugly, can point out the seams of most computer-generated imagery. Yet, The Green Knight feels so much like magic. The film is an alchemy of rich myth and modern storytelling that mixes together and forms a unique cinematic experience.

If this film had been made as most myths and legends are adapted for the screen, there would have been much more. More violence, sex, clever retorts by a sidekick, and endless talking by everyone on screen whether it serves the plot or not. The myth wouldn’t have been able to breathe or embrace the fatalistic nature of the text. The Green Knight gives us a hero with fear, doubt, melancholy, and apprehension, stripping the swagger away for three dimensionality.

David Lowery finds those places within the myth to let his film breathe with sparse necessity before overwhelming pomp. The anticipation and agony of a setback is far more important and given greater weight here than in films like it. The anxiety we feel for our hero is a palpable object, a breath lodged in our throat. Lowrey, as editor, along with cinematographer Andrew Droz Palermo build that tension within the depth and scope of the camera’s lens. The way the camera moves in intricate tracking shots, pans, wide vistas, and low angles that give a sense of scope and epic scale that never feels like a façade. The camera captures so much. It’s an intoxicating and a perfect point of view on this world that envelops us and brings us into it wholly.

Though, if Lowrey has one failing in the endeavor to tell The Green Knight, he lacks accessibility in all his imagery. Sir Gawain and The Green Knight is one of the, arguably, more accessible of the medieval Arthurian myths. It’s still not as widely known or allusory as many of the others. That’s no fault of the filmmakers, but in this case, they should have put more time into the more obscure adaptations from the text. As much as, the imagery of the braided, blindfolded, old woman is arresting and haunting, it would have been better with a small explanation why. Her movements and her presence are fascinating but completely cryptic. She and other “olde magicks,” leave a feeling in the back of the mind that that image should be obvious or known, but is impenetrable without the context. Yet, these small inaccessibilities never feel too dense to not enjoy the film.

This interpretation of the original text benefits greatly from the film’s modern visual style. The awesome special effects, the incredible locations, and the eerie, effective lighting that shifts in color and richness creates a mood that builds our understanding of this world. The Green Knight‘s immersive production design, sets, and costumes draw the eye to every corner of the screen and demand at least a second viewing to catch it all. The reason to adapt a text is to give a visual palette to what is only imagined by an author. Lowrey and his team’s interpretation is like a beautiful dream that supersedes the need to understand the full breadth of what a reader would at the time the text was written.

Though, none of that matters if the acting isn’t excellent and believable. The performances of the cast of The Green Knight are utterly brilliant. Especially, the purveyor of the best ASMR rasp in the biz, Sean Harris as the King. Yet, the most indelible performance is from Gawain himself, Dev Patel. Patel is an actor who, while excellent with words and timing, has a fabulously expressive face. One of the final sequences of the film is so haunting because it is nearly dialogue-free and features Patel running through a gamut of emotions. He smolders, broods, loves, ignores, seethes, and becomes resolute. It’s a performance that sheds the auspices of audience watching an actor and becomes a character in the body of the actor on screen.

The Green Knight is a cinema experience like few others. It is magic upon the screen. It’s an experience that will make you forget that it isn’t real. It takes you, all of you, for two hours and gives you back to the real world with a new sense of yearning to experience magic like it again. The power of film is on full display in The Green Knight.

Grade: A

Op-ed: Animated Movies and the Adult Critique

“I think I’ve seen it before, but I don’t remember any of it” wasn’t a good enough response to my Atlantis: The Lost Empire reference that my best friend didn’t seem to get. 

Film snob is not precisely how I would describe myself because when I learn that a person has never seen a film before, I don’t shame them for it. Instead, I harass them about watching it (usually with me) until they do. Some bullying is good, I suppose. 

A three-way video call on Instagram between friends, a makeshift movie theater since the pandemic forced us to turn our living rooms into AMCs and Regals, and one damn-near thirty-year-old watching her other damn-near thirty-year-old friends’ react to her favorite Disney movie that I didn’t think many people had seen. It didn’t take much harassing or guilt-tripping, however, to get them to watch the film. Especially after I showed them many other movies, they never thought to watch before (Rise of the Guardians) and ended up loving or ones their parents refused to let them watch for whatever ungodly reason. 

I stole some glances as they watched the scenes unfold like children zombified in front of an episode of Peppa Pig. There was laughter, commentary, and overall satisfaction when the credits rolled. And it made me wonder why there weren’t as many die-hard Atlantis fans as there were for Frozen (don’t come for me, Frozen aficionados). I beg the question, “Was it ever a bad movie, or did adults just tell us it was?”

Around the twentieth anniversary of the Disney animated film Atlantis: The Lost Empire, I found my tribe of people who also favored the movie despite it flopping at the box office. In 2021, Atlantis finally had its fanbase. I logged on to a particular bird app to find people tweeting about how spectacular it was and how it makes no sense on Earth to the Lost City itself that people back then didn’t love it as much as we do now. Even the incomparable Cree Summers (the voice of Kida) retweeted my post dedicated to the film’s anniversary. Yes, THEE Cree Summers. The goddess of voice acting herself even commented how this was one of her favorite roles. 

https://twitter.com/IAmCreeSummer/status/1404801228572401669?s=20

So where was all this hype when the movie first came out? 

Video essays and think pieces have been written on the matter, but it all tugs at a common thread: adult audiences.

The Disney Renaissance was history. 2001 was a new era for Disney’s animated credits. However, the adults who took their kids to the theaters and the critics expecting cookie-cutter musicals were not yet over underage damsels in distress marrying the first man they met in the woods and talking woodland creatures. They wanted princesses in ballgowns getting swept off their feet by charming princes and animated dance numbers. So when an 8000-year-old princess -excuse me- QUEEN Kidagakash “Kida” Nedakh graced the screens in her tribal garb, moonlit white hair, and air nomad-like tattoos, the Disney moms and dads were clutching their imaginary pearls. I guess the scrawny nerd protagonist, a mineralist that refuses to bathe, a grumpy demolition expert, a backtalking, tomboyish mechanic, a medical doctor of African and Native descent (something very uncommon in Disney movies at the time), and an antagonist more complex and human than the typical Disney villain didn’t help much either. 

Don’t believe me? Atlantis sits at a disappointing 49% on Rotten Tomatoes with a 53% audience score. Other Disney movies with rotten or mediocre scores are A Goofy Movie and The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Yes, the same Goofy Movie millennials never fail to remind the world that it is one of the best and most underrated Disney animations of all time. We are still waiting on that Powerline world tour. 

The past week, I couldn’t get online without seeing some discourse over Space Jam: A New Legacy. You would think it was a film graduate’s dissertation the way the movie was trending. People couldn’t decide if it was a lousy movie or if it was only intended for children. Still, it reminded me how daunting it was to hear growing up that Atlantis and A Goofy Movie weren’t some of Disney’s best projects ever released when most kids played them both religiously, annoying our parents in the process. 

Most animation with a PG or G rating is usually created with a younger demographic in mind. The kicker about animated movies, however, is that anyone can and is expected to enjoy them. 

It would be one thing if movies like A Goofy Movie, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, and Atlantis did not hold up after all these years and were, in fact, just as bad as critics in 1995, 1996, and 2001 claimed. Try convincing Powerline stans that the movie isn’t criminally underrated. And yet, they do hold up. They aren’t just movies intended for children. They, among countless others, are films that served the purpose of entertaining us as in our adolescence and still managed to be even better than we remembered them to be when we rewatched them as adults. 

The idea of asking a panel of children to review a movie for the masses is not likely. It’s not like critics would listen to them anyway. But perhaps the conversation requires more nuance than we lead on. Children and teens can be the target audience for a film, and it can still tank. With that same thought in mind, a film can be award-worthy but overlooked because a particular audience refuses the lens or gaze needed to appreciate it. Two things can be true. 

It is less of an argument of whether adults can enjoy animated movies as much as their younger counterparts. Still, the timing, era, moods, and societal circumstances critics are dealing with at the time of the critique will inevitably affect how a movie is rated, animated or not.

And if you think this is me trying to bully you into watching Atlantis: The Lost Empire in all of its mold-breaking, stunning visuals, cliche-free glory, and hilarity, then yes. Thank me later. 

Classic Review: ‘Once Upon a Time in the West’ Is A Visual Feast

Director: Sergio Leone

Writers: Dario Argento, Bernardo Bertolucci and Sergio Leone

Stars: Claudia Cardinale, Henry Fonda, Jason Robards and Charles Bronson

Synopsis: Frank (Henry Fonda) decides that he wants to strike it rich by building a railway station. In order to do this, he needs to murder the husband of Jill McBain (Claudia Cardinale) and find a way to get her to sell her land to him. His plans are thwarted by Cheyenne (Jason Robards) and Harmonica (Claudia Cardinale).

 

Once Upon a Time in the West (1968) represents Sergio Leone fully moving into the mainstream. He was given a massive budget, legendary movie stars, and the imprimatur that comes with the backing of Paramount Studios. It has many of the virtues of his earlier, slightly rougher work, but it does lose some of the charm that came through in For a Few Dollars More (1965). I’m not claiming that Leone’s previous efforts were tiny little indie movies that had been made by a down on his luck director with no resources. I am aware of the fact that Italian cinema became wildly popular on an international scale in the 1960s, and the films in the Dollars trilogy did receive a lot of attention in the United States. However, I think it’s impossible to argue that Once Upon a Time in the West does have more of a Hollywood flavor to it.

As soon as American icon Henry Fonda appears on screen, as the villainous Frank, we can sense that Leone wants to make a statement about the brutality of American Capitalism. He also plays around with a prototypical hooker with a heart of gold, known as Jill (Claudia Cardinale), but he seems far more intrigued by the charismatic villain that he has created. The feud between Jill and Frank arises from the fact that he murdered her husband, Brett McBain (Frank Wolff), in order to stop McBain from building a railway on the land that he owns. Frank was under contract to Mr. Morton (Gabriele Ferzetti) and is a ruthless, cold-blooded killer who is purely driven by a desire for power and money. He tries to pin his crimes on Cheyenne (Jason Robards) and then chooses to purchase McBain’s land for himself. Cheyenne and Jill have to team up to take him down and they also find an ally in the form of Harmonica (Charles Bronson), a mysterious bandit. 

It has a typical Western set-up and its plot serves as a framework to display the highly stylised imagery that Leone always specialised in. His real genius seems to be in staging shots that are so improbably extravagant and over the top that you find yourself wanting to laugh, before admiring the audacity of a man who would dare to create something so unabashedly dramatic. He doesn’t care about realism, and he wants to imprint his own style on every frame of the picture. It’s an approach that often pays dividends because he is so fiercely committed to it. Maybe there were a few too many scenes in which he provided extreme close-ups of Fonda’s eyes, but I can’t deny the fact that there was something splendorous about the sight of so many endless vistas. Nobody quite captures wooden planks in the way that he does, or manages to make sweating temples look oddly beautiful. If you’re a fan of his directorial trademarks, Once Upon a Time in the West will offer the opportunity to gorge yourself on his stylistic flourishes. 

I think he put a foot wrong in casting Robards as Cheyenne. This is because there is a difference between movie stars and actors and, on a meta level, we expect actors of a certain stature to face off against other performers who are in their league. Fonda is well cast as the terrifying villain with a fearsome reputation. The role allows him to play off of his typecasting as a representation of all that is good and wholesome about America. His standing as one of the most beloved and respected leading men of Hollywood’s Golden Age also gives him a degree of gravitas that Frank sorely needs. Because Fonda is such a monumental figure, you need to have him face off against an equally iconic star. If Cheyenne had been presented as a bum who isn’t quite tough enough to put up a fight when Frank attacks him, it might have made sense to cast a non-movie star. When Cheyenne is presented as a gunslinger with enough chutzpah to go toe to toe with his enemy, you do need somebody who is on Fonda’s level. 

I am fully aware of the fact that Robards was a highly respected actor with two Academy Awards under his belt, appearances in several iconic films and a legendary stage career. I’m not knocking his abilities as a performer or implying that I’m not aware of the high regard that he was held in by industry professionals and fellow actors. I do think it’s fair to argue that he never quite became an iconic leading man. He made appearances in respectable, awards bait films that weren’t necessarily seen by the masses, and showed up as a character actor in supporting roles during the last three decades of his career. Perhaps audiences members felt some fondness for him, but they wouldn’t have automatically recognized one of his physical features in the way that they would notice Fonda’s eyes. He doesn’t have the screen presence or the gravitas to stand up against the reputation that his co-star possesses, so scenes in which it should have felt like two titans of cinema were clashing, end up feeling disappointingly flat.

This isn’t quite the masterpiece that it could have been. It does have its flaws and appears strained in ways that The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (1966) doesn’t. At times it becomes difficult to ignore the fact that there are so many missed opportunities on display. All of this doesn’t take away from the wonder of being transported into the world that Leone creates. It is rare to find a Western that is so immersive, even when the characters aren’t as complex as they could be. 

Rating: B-

Op-Ed: 100 Years…100 Passions – ‘The Sheik’ (#80)

I will be watching and reviewing all of the films included on AFI’s 100 Years…100 Passions list. The list contains the 100 greatest love stories in American cinema and I plan to consider how our views on romance and social issues have changed over the years as well as judge whether the romances in these films actually made me swoon. As a fan of the romance genre, I expect to love each and every one of the nominees but I also don’t know if I would consider all of them romantic.

When a film begins with an inter-title that informs you that Arabs live in “Happy ignorance that civilisation has passed them by” you know that it was written by some extremely racist individuals. The world was a very different place in 1921 but even by the standards of the era, this feels exceptionally wrongheaded and hateful. It helped to popularise the trope of the ‘Latin Lover’ and was sold on the star power of matinee idol Rudolph Valentino. He was a heartthrob at the time and his appeal came from the fact that he was more dangerous and aloof than other leading men of the era. Alongside the athletic, jolly Douglas Fairbanks, he appeared to be an entirely different breed of leading man. He was tormented and mysterious, so naturally, girls decided that they wanted to mother him and tend to his every whim. This film weaponises his persona in order to support several racist myths about Arabs being dirty savages and it is very difficult to stomach the intolerance presented on screen. 

He plays Sheik Ahmed Ben Hassan, a half-British, half-Spanish man who was adopted as a child by the Sheik of Biskra. He’s enigmatic and exotic but finds himself growing weak in the knees when in the presence of Lady Diana Mayo, Agnes Ayres. She’s a spoilt heiress who loves the idea of being independent. When she is kidnapped by the Sheik, she begins to experience Stockholm syndrome and falls in love with her captor. He is delighted by the fact that she loves him and after he survives a serious injury, they declare their intention to be together forever. 

The film is horrifying on two levels, as it exploits racist stereotypes while also reinforcing harmful ideas about women wanting to be kidnapped and roughed up. In the first case, it supports the idea that white people naturally assume positions of power within every society because they are physically and mentally superior in every way. For colonialists, this sets up the fantasy of two white Europeans having unlimited rule over a non-white population of people who essentially have to serve as slaves. It’s almost funny that the American makers of the film express such disgust over the cultural practice of arranged marriage, when this practice still existed in Britain. There is no awareness when it comes to the double standards that they apply and they glamourise the idea of Mayo, a young girl who makes poor decisions all the time, being able to ‘civilise’ the native population. She is going to introduce all of her English ways to this society and wipe away all traces of Algerian culture. They seemingly haven’t considered the fact that the Sheik is also European and could presumably Europeanise this society but I suppose there is also a streak of anti-Spanish racism that runs through this film. Only lily-white English people should be able to lead. 

The whole idea of a ‘Latin Lover’ is also rather disturbing. Most of the appeal of this stock character is meant to be derived from the fact that they are exotic. In recent decades, they have become more overtly sexualised but this film also attempts to excite audience members with the prospect of the Sheik violently ‘taking’ the woman who is under his care. He barely touches her but we are meant to sense that he is more violent and uninhibited than the effete British men that Mayo has been spending time with. There are so many contradictions posed by the way that this wraps up, as there is never a scene where he harshly smooches her or touches her in a vaguely risqué manner. Everything remains above board and, by the end of the film, she has tamed him and turned him into a carbon copy of the British men that had bored her so greatly. It seems as though things had to end this way because audiences wanted to flirt with the idea of doing something risky before reassuring themselves that their way of life was best and there was no use in trying to understand other cultures. It was easier to get a voyeuristic thrill out of briefly observing their practices and then destroying them in order to increase the amount of power that you hold. 

I find myself reflecting on the reactionary politics that The Sheik (1921) supports because there isn’t much else to reflect upon here. This exists as a curiosity piece in modern times because it can tell us about racism in the 1920s. When we consider True Heart Susie (1919), we think about Lillian Gish’s transcendent performance and D.W. Griffith’s unexpected turns towards a minimalistic style of filmmaking that favoured immersion in a pastoral environment over spreading a message about the human condition. We tend to consider the sexism that mars the eventual statement that it makes about Susie’s contentment with small town life, but it seems insignificant in the face of the technical mastery and entertaining performances that are on display. When George Melford’s direction is decidedly unremarkable and Ayres feels like a low rent knock-off of Gish, there is no way to defend this on artistic grounds. 

Are AFI voters really backwards enough to see this as romantic? This is one of those times where I want to give them the benefit of the doubt and accuse them of having not seen most of the nominated films. From a moral standpoint, it is far more tolerable to imagine them selecting the film because they were faintly aware of Valentino’s legendary reputation. If they sat through this and still thought it was a film with any value, I think we should be asking more questioning about the taste level of this organisation’s members. 

List: Top 3 M. Night Shyamalan Scenes

This week on Episode 440 of the InSession Film Podcast, inspired by our review of Old, we discussed our favorite M. Night Shyamalan scenes. Say what you will about him as a filmmaker, but he’s directed some great films and has some iconic moments on his resume. Even recently, while his work doesn’t quite live up to his early years, there are some great scenes in his movies to consider here. No one makes movies like Shyamalan, and that’s what makes this exercise particularly exciting. His eye with the camera, the way he toys with genre tropes, the characters he’s written the last two decades, for better or worse he makes intriguing cinema. And boy did we have fun talking about that for our lists. That said, here are our lists:

(Note: Please keep in mind that we each had different criteria for our selections)

JD

1) Cole / Lynn Conversation in Car – The Sixth Sense
2) Asthma Attack in Basement – Signs
3) Creature Attacks Village – The Village

Brendan

1) Creature Attacks Village – The Village
2) Dinner Scene – Signs
3) Dr. Staple Interrogates Kevin, David, Elijah – Glass

Brian

1) Cole / Lynn Conversation in Car – The Sixth Sense
2) Ending – Unbreakable
3) Video Tape Funeral – The Sixth Sense

Honorable Mentions (Combined)

Train Station – Unbreakable
Opening Scene – Unbreakable
Weightlifting – Unbreakable
Son Points Gun At Dad – Unbreakable
I See Dead People – The Sixth Sense
Stuttering Stanley – em>The Sixth Sense
Birthing Stories – Signs
Merrill Reacts to Alien on TV – Signs
Pantry Sequence – em>Signs
Elders Argument about Ivy – The Village
Silvertide Playing – Lady in the Water
Betty Buckley – The Happening
Ending – The Visit
Oven – The Visit
James McAvoy – Split
Zombie Dance – Split
Ending Reveal – Split
Casey’s Backstory – Split
Ending Battle Sequence – The Last Airbender
Sand Castle – Old
Guy Responds with Love – Old
Ending Scene – Wide Awake
The Race – Wide Awake
Revelation of Friend – Wide Awake

Hopefully you guys enjoyed our lists and if you agree or disagree with us, leave a comment in the comment section or email us at [email protected].

For the entire podcast, click here or listen below.

For more lists done by the InSession Film crew and other guests, be sure see our Top 3 Movie Lists page.

Poll: What is your favorite “medieval” film?

For those who ever attended Medieval Times Dinner and Tournament, wasn’t it just the most exciting thing ever when you were a kid? I think for many of us, that excitement came from our own nostalgia having watched epic fantasy and historical films growing up. You know, the ones for children, as I’m sure none of us grew up with Braveheart or the works of Ingmar Bergman. But it is fascinating to see how many great films have either been set or took inspiration from the Middle Ages, including the new release of David Lowery’s The Green Knight, prompting this discussion.

Whether fantasy or history, let’s take a trip back in time. What is your favorite “medieval” movie? (Use of quotations is to acknowledge that it may be a loose term for some)


Podcast: Old / Top 3 M. Night Shyamalan Scenes – Episode 440

This week’s episode is brought to you by Warby Parker. Sign up today and get a 5 day Home Try-On, complete with 5 pairs of glasses to choose!

This week on the InSession Film Podcast, Brian Rowe joins us to discuss the beach thriller Old and our Top 3 M. Night Shyamalan scenes!

Big thanks to Brian for joining us on the show this week. It’s been a pleasure to feature his work on the site, but equally rewarding to hear his voice as we talk about all of the good and bad that comes with Shyamalan. Old has sparked a lot of discourse and memes, and there was no shortage of fun as we dove into it as well.

On that note, check out this week’s show and let us know what you think in the comment section. Thanks for listening and for supporting the InSession Film Podcast!

– Movie Review: Old (6:55)
Director: M. Night Shyamalan
Writers: M. Night Shyamalan
Stars: Gael García Bernal, Vicky Krieps, Rufus Sewell, Thomasin McKenzie, Alex Wolff

– Notes / Discussion (59:17)
No other films to talk about this week. We do, however, have some fun talking about the Extra Film boys Ryan and Jay. We also mention that we are giving away t-shirts to the first five listeners who leave us a review on iTunes (take a screenshot of your review and either email us or DM on social media).

[divider]

RELATED: Listen to Episode 423 of the InSession Film Podcast where we discussed The Tree of Life!

[divider]

Top 3 M. Night Shyamalan Scenes (1:21:05)
Say what you will about M. Night Shyamalan, but he’s directed some great films and has some iconic moments on his resume. Even recently, while his work doesn’t quite live up to his early years, there are some great scenes in his movies to consider here. No one makes movies like Shyamalan, and that’s what makes this exercise particularly exciting. His eye with the camera, the way he toys with genre tropes, the characters he’s written the last two decades, for better or worse he makes intriguing cinema. And boy did we have fun talking about that for our lists. That said, what would be your top 3?

Show Sponsor: First Time Watchers Podcast

– Music

Old – Trevor Gureckis
The Village – James Newton Howard
Flow Like Water – James Newton Howard
The Return of the Eagle – Atli Örvarsson

Subscribe to our Podcasts RSS
Subscribe to our Podcasts on iTunes
Listen on Spotify
Listen on Stitcher
InSession Film Podcast – Episode 440

[divider]

Next week on the show:

Review: The Green Knight
Top 3: TBD

[divider]

Help Support The InSession Film Podcast

If you want to help support us, there are several ways you can help us and we’d absolutely appreciate it. Every penny goes directly back into supporting the show and we are truly honored and grateful. Thanks for your support and for listening to the InSession Film Podcast!

VISIT OUR DONATE PAGE HERE

Top Ten: M. Night Shyamalan Films (as of July 2021)

Tell anyone the name M. Night Shyamalan, and the typical response will sadly enough not be one filled with joy or immense praise. A phenomenon around the time of his three landmark suspense hits—The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, and Signs—Shyamalan ultimately spent the next decade languishing in flops and disappointment, only to finally make a return to greatness with a one-two punch of slick terror in The Visit and Split. With his newest film Old now in theaters, it’s time to discuss his ten best movies! And they are…

Hear me out: why The Happening isn&#39;t a bad movie | Mark Wahlberg | The  Guardian

10. The Happening (2008)

So what goes last on the list? Is it his talky debut 1992 feature Praying with Anger, which never got a proper theatrical release? Is it his universally reviled 2010 adaptation The Last Airbender? Is it his disastrous star-not-making for Jaden Smith 2013 action film After Earth? Or is it the film he released in 2006 that almost got me to get up and walk out of the theater—the dreadfully dull Lady in the Water? No, those titles go on a separate list, one never to be written or published. For me the best of his worst movies is 2008’s The Happening starring Mark Wahlberg and Zooey Deschanel that at least has some effective scenes of tension and horror, along with a terrific supporting turn by the great Betty Buckley. This was Shyamalan’s attempt at a return to form after two disappointments, but it wouldn’t be until 2015’s The Visit that his suspense chops came back in full force.

Wide Awake (1998) - IMDb

9. Wide Awake (1998)

So many people think Shyamalan made his big, splashy film directing debut with 1999’s The Sixth Sense, but that was actually his third film, and before that he directed two non-genre movies—his 1992 film festival calling card Praying with Anger, and his butchered 1998 drama Wide Awake, which I just watched for the first time a few nights ago. Somehow this one had eluded me throughout the years, but it’s not half-bad, an entertaining if mostly inconsequential coming-of-age story about a ten-year-old boy searching for meaning in his world after the death of his grandfather. Rosie O’Donnell is mostly wasted in a supporting role, but a young Joshua Cross is excellent in the lead, another example of Shyamalan’s gift for directing children in his movies.  You can see ideas and themes Shyamalan would later explore to better success in the following year’s The Sixth Sense (especially the last scene!), but word is Wide Awake was greatly ruined by its producer Harvey Weinstein during post-production, and so I’d be intrigued to see a Wide Awake director’s cut from Shyamalan.

The Village: M. Night Shyamalan&#39;s Misunderstood Love Story - IGN

8. The Village (2004)

With the release of Shyamalan’s newest film Old currently in theaters, many critics have been going back and re-assessing The Village and calling it his underrated masterpiece and possibly his best ever film and yada yada yada. We can re-assess this one all we want, but despite a lot of excellent craft and genuine suspense in the first hour, the movie goes so far astray in the ridiculous final act that most of what’s come before flounders, at least for me. A strong cast that includes Joaquin Phoenix, Sigourney Weaver, and Bryce Dallas Howard (one of the big acting discoveries at the time) all do what they can with a fairly thin story, but I’ll never forget the intense disappointment I felt seeing this one opening night in 2004 with a big group of friends as the slow realization settled in that the “twist” ending I had predicted an hour ago was indeed going to be the real ending. It’s not a terrible film, but in a way this was the beginning of Shyamalan’s low period that would continue with Lady in the Water.

Review: &#39;Glass&#39; Is M. Night Shyamalan&#39;s Most Disappointing Movie

7. Glass (2019)

There was a great sense of anticipation in seeing a true sequel to 2000’s Unbreakable with both Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson returning to those rich characters and that astonishing world I know and love. Split ended with a neat tease, but this was the real continuation, and yet since seeing Glass opening weekend in January 2019, I haven’t thought about it much since. There seemed to be something rushed and slightly off about the whole production, the movie feeling at times like a shrug-worthy epilogue to Unbreakable than a compelling new installment that built on what Shyamalan had developed before. I’m happy it exists, and it’s one I might revisit at some point, but it felt like a step down from 2017’s Split, which is a much better example of Shyamalan firing on all cylinders as a writer/director.

The Twist Is That M. Night Shyamalan&#39;s The Visit Actually Works

6. The Visit (2015)

This was the comeback film of all comeback films in the mid-2010s. I think we all had written off Shyamalan at this point, after the expensive back-to-back action catastrophes of The Last Airbender and After Earth. His name in a trailer was now a reason to snicker, not an excuse to get excited. Clearly, he understood that the way back to audience’s good graces was to go back to his roots and do something small, low-budget, clever, and ultra-terrifying, and that’s what he gave us with The Visit, a stellar if unmemorable chiller that might be slight at times but always entertaining, with terrific performances from the cast and a sense of playfulness from the director we hadn’t seen in years. I remember putting it on months after its release with zero expectations and by the end so jazzed and excited that I had finally seen a return to form for a director I had admired so greatly when I was in high school. Shyamalan was back, baby!

Old Trailer Reveals More of M. Night Shyamalan&#39;s Creepy Thriller

5. Old (2021)

A lot of the success of Shyamalan’s newest film Old has to do with how best you’re able to suspend your disbelief and just go with the compelling, oddball premise of a group of vacationers who arrive on a secluded beach and find themselves rapidly aging as the hours quickly pass them by. For me this is easily one of Shyamalan’s best thrillers in years, a sense of dread building right from the opening scene and never letting up until the final few minutes. He makes some missteps along the way, like casting himself again in a crucial supporting role and delivering a so-so ending that feels like it goes on one beat too many, but for a good hour and fifteen minutes, Shyamalan draws us into this unusual world in a way only he can, with clever cinematography, fantastic performances from a game cast, and fantastic tension throughout. It’s a film that works as a gleefully entertaining work of suspense while also asking its audience difficult questions about mortality and how important it is to never take a moment for granted.

M. Night Shyamalan&#39;s Split Is Exploitative Trash

4. Split (2017)

If The Village showed signs of promise that Shyamalan’s career might no longer be on life support, Split was the applause-worthy return to form that blew all our minds with an amazing performance by James McAvoy that might have received more notices at awards time if the film hadn’t been released in January of 2017. This movie is scary and hypnotizing, always surprising the viewer as the film’s protagonist Casey, played by Anya Taylor-Joy, tries to outwit the villain with his split-personality disorder and find an escape from his madness. A clever twist at the end that ties the film’s events with the world of Unbreakable is a delicious cherry on top of an already loaded and delicious sundae. In a way, this one is almost McAvoy’s success more than it is Shyamalan’s, but regardless it’s a damn fun time at the movies.

The 5 Biggest Scares in M Night Shyamalan&#39;s SIGNS -

3. Signs (2002)

Despite some mini-successes from Shyamalan the last few years, there was no bigger and more exciting time for his career than the turn of the century, that much is for sure. His one-two-three punch of The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, and Signs was remarkable at the time, with his imagination on fire and his skills as a suspense writer and director already so honed when he was only in his late twenties and early thirties. For Signs he teamed up with Mel Gibson, still a huge movie star in 2002, and this marked one of the biggest hits for both men both critically and at the box office. I saw it opening night in a crowded theater, and it was unlike few experiences I’ve had before or since, with just constant raucous laughter and loud screams from the teen girls nearby and everyone aware they were watching something extraordinary. Oh, if only we had known he wouldn’t have a genuinely good film for another thirteen years. Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix are terrific, and even though the twist ending has always struck me as a tad corny, there’s so much that goes right in this one that it’s difficult to nitpick it too much. It’s not The Village we need to re-assess; it’s Signs, which is even better than we remember.

15 Twisted Facts About The Sixth Sense | Mental Floss

2. The Sixth Sense (1999)

If Signs was a thrill because we knew what kind of film we all were getting, The Sixth Sense was even bigger thrill because when I saw this one opening night, I had no clue what I was in for—only that it was a ghost story starring Bruce Willis. None of us had any idea that this movie would deliver in all the ways it did, with one of the best performances of a child actor ever on film in Haley Joel Osment, probably Willis’ best dramatic work ever, and not just solid scares throughout but countless haunting moments filled with powerful emotion, like the father who discovers his wife was slowly killing their daughter, and the truly amazing car scene between son and mother that rightfully earned Toni Collette her first (and amazingly enough still only) Oscar nomination. If the movie had ended in that scene, we’d probably still be talking about it today, but then the wow of a twist ending about Willis’ character comes, and it was so shocking and unexpected that many of us had to go back to see the movie a second time and put all the pieces together.

5 reasons why Unbreakable is one of the most important superhero movies  ever - SYFY Wire

1. Unbreakable (2000)

The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable almost tie as my favorite Shyamalan movie, but if I had to pick only one to take with me to a desert island, it’s his gorgeous, thrilling, immensely engrossing 2000 film Unbreakable, which was a slight disappointment at the box office and for some audience members at the time, but it’s this kind of restrained comic book origins movie I love best, one that takes its sweet time with scenes of somber family drama and unusual friendships and the slow realization that one man might be more powerful than he ever thought possible. This film marks one of Samuel L. Jackson’s best performances on film, his arc so chilling every time I watch it, the twist ending always filling me with so much dread, anger, and sadness. You can just tell the huge success of The Sixth Sense freed up Shyamalan to tell the story he cared about the most while at the same time evolve so beautifully as a filmmaker. The man has done some great work in the world of cinema in the last thirty years, that is for sure, but the movie that still works the best that he will likely never top again is Unbreakable, one of my favorite films from the turn of the century!

Criterion Releases: August 2021

This time, it’s only four films getting released. A masterpiece of Polish cinema involving a mysterious figure working underground as part of the Resistance against the occupying Germans. A live documentary on the making of a Broadway musical. A Japanese fantasy on what it may look like after death. Netflix’s first original motion picture release depicting child soldiers fighting for a warlord in Africa. These are the quad of movies coming into the collection.

Ashes And Diamonds (1958)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-0qoi4qylU

The Polish New Wave brought in some of the greatest directors the world has ever seen. Most notably, it was Roman Polanski and Andrzej Wajda that came out as the faces of Polish cinema. While Polanski made the move to Hollywood, it was Wajda who stayed home to make personal films about Poland’s time fighting the Nazis with his war trilogy: A Generation, Kanal, and the pinnacle of the three, Ashes And Diamonds. For the month’s only re-release, an underground fighter who sets up a plan to assassinate a Nazi leader must decide whether it is worth it to continue to risk his life in hiding or move on and follow the young woman he’s in love with. In tunnel vision, Wajda makes something out of the literal ashes of Poland for his more somber tale of war compared to his first two films.

Original Cast Album: “Company” (1970)

The broadway show Company would turn into one of the most successful productions of all time and certainly one of the greats from Stephen Sondheim. During the production of the album recording of the show, D. A. Pennebaker (Bob Dylan Don’t Look Back) brought in a camera crew to capture everyone going through the very long sessions and fights to get it all done the way they performed it on stage. It’s a documentary for Broadway lovers as it is a major document of a live congregation of personalities all working as a team to complete the work of their fantastic music as harmoniously as possible.

After Life (1998)

Years before the release of Still Walking (2008) and his Palme d’Or-winning Shoplifters (2019), Hirokazu Kore-Eda made his breakthrough with this enchanting fantasy about living a moment of your life for the rest of time. It’s about accepting death and preparing for the next adventure with what you have done in keeping that memory. Kore-Eda prepared his script by interviewing hundreds of people from different backgrounds and asking them this question and why. Mixing real-life with re-enactments, Kore-Eda constructs a theory about what people would want to keep with and avoids the heavy-handedness of the subject.

Beasts Of No Nation (2015)

Before No Time Tio Die, Cary Joji Fukunaga created stories of human suffering and the drive to survive, as in Sin Nombre. Here, in what was Netflix’s first foray into film distribution, a young boy in West Africa is forced to join a group of soldiers, all youths, led by a tyrannical commander (Idris Elba, who should have gotten an Oscar nomination) during a brutal civil war. It isn’t an action movie, but a realist story of savagery embedded in innocence before they have the chance to be a child rather than make decisions on the battlefield.

Follow me on Twitter: @brian_cine (Cine-A-Man)

Movie Review: ‘Jolt’ Wants to Spark, But Fizzles


Director: Tanya Wexler
Writers: Scott Wascha
Stars: Kate Beckinsale, Bobby Cannavale, Jai Courtney, Laverne Cox, David Bradley, Ori Pfeffer, Susan Sarandon, and Stanley Tucci

Synopsis: A bouncer with a slightly murderous anger-management problem that she controls with the help of an electrode-lined vest she uses to shock herself back to normalcy whenever she gets homicidal. After the first guy she’s ever fallen for is murdered, she goes on a revenge-fueled rampage to find the killer while the cops pursue her as their chief suspect.


A couple of weeks ago, Gunpowder Milkshake was released on Netflix and was marketed as a female-centric version of John Wick. Unfortunately, the film didn’t really work, as it felt busy setting up its sequel and related spin-offs that’ll likely never happen instead of establishing its characters and delivering a good story along the way. This week, Amazon Prime Video releases Jolt, which feels like a female-centric version of Neveldine/Taylor’s Crank, also suffers from the same problem. However, it’s marginally better than Gunpowder, mainly due to Kate Beckinsale stealing the show in one of the best roles.

She plays Lindy, a young woman suffering from Intermittent Explosive Disorder (as explained through pretty shoddy voiceover narration from Susan Sarandon), to which she can snap in a fit of violence at the sight of a mere annoyance since her body is filled with an unusual amount of cortisol. With the aid of Dr. Ivan Munchin (Stanley Tucci), a treatment comprised of self-administered shocks gave her the possibility to live her life as a normal person. She goes on her first date with Justin (Jai Courtney) and madly falls in love with him, thinking she is cured of her disorder. However, when Justin gets murdered by multi-billionaire Gareth Fizel (David Bradley), she decides to avenge the killer while two detectives (Bobby Cannavale & Laverne Cox) think Lindy is the suspect. That’s part of the story, but most of it serves as a backdoor pilot to a sequel (and, who knows, potential cinematic universe?) as Lindy is unaware she’s the subject of a stress-test/experiment by Dr. Munchin and a Woman With No Name (Sarandon) to examine whether or not she can successfully embrace her rage and become powerful.

I’ve honestly never seen Kate Beckinsale having so much fun during a film. This could very well be her best role yet, completely chewing up the screen in more ways than one. She not only has the funniest lines of the entire film but also has terrific chemistry with everyone else. Heck, its supporting cast also has a tremendous amount of fun, mainly due to the film’s quasi-ironic tone. When Detective Nevin (Cox) stops in the middle of a gunpoint intervention to make a rather sarcastic joke to Lindy, the overall tense atmosphere completely shifts to a silly tone, adopting the same hybrid mix of gritty action and ridiculously ironic comedy Crank (and its sequel) did. Tucci, Cannavale, and Cox are also excellent here, bringing some much-needed levity to the film with a fun, good cop/bad cop routine. Cannavale’s Detective Vicarss plays a more laidback, friendly figure to Lindy, whilst Cox’s Nevin follows protocol to the letter and is more “by the book” than Vicars. These actors make the film somewhat entertaining, as everything else feels half-baked at best.

Whenever Millennium Media co-produces an action film, you can almost predict that it’ll contain poor stuntwork and bad CGI. Jolt is no exception. Most of its action sequences are passable, except an energetic car chase and a playful foot chase that incorporates elements from classic burlesque cinema. Likewise, virtually all of the film’s one-on-one fight sequences are drab at best, bogged down by rapid editing and jump-cuts to hide the fact that Beckinsale isn’t doing her own stunts. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but it’s the film’s job to make it convincing, which unfortunately isn’t the case. It doesn’t help that once these sequences start to incorporate inferior CGI explosions in the mix, it’s even worse than it initially was. Some action sequences do use a creative amount of lighting, such as an underground boxing match in which spectators light the scene with flashlights, but it’s a real shame that you can’t see most of it without trying to pause it frame by frame. Rapid editing is a sign of the intensified continuity of digital cinema, as described by David Bo. Still, it has also tarnished the way filmmakers shoot and edit action for the worse. (Side note: the backlot set acting as the film’s main city feels highly reminiscent of Sesame Street with how it’s staged and unconvincing it looks).

It also doesn’t help that the film’s main antagonists are quite underdeveloped. David Bradley is a wonderful actor and is terribly underused here, essentially acting like a classic James Bond villain who doesn’t do much aside from ordering his robotic group of henchmen around. Bradley is great, always, as he tries to make his character as interesting as it can be, yet its thinly-written arc fails its audience. A twist happens late during the film, which reveals the true villain behind Lindy’s revenge-fueled quest and, as predictable as it is, falls quite flat on its face and becomes quite silly. Not silly in the way of a Crank homage, but unintentional hilarity ensues as the movie decides to jump the shark and end as quickly as it can, hoping audiences will forget what they’ve seen.

But not so fast! As the film’s opening scene introduced Lindy and started world-building almost immediately to set up endless sequels, Jolt‘s ending bookends the dated trend of setting up the next chapter of a franchise that will likely never happen. Sure, if it would’ve adopted Crank’s race against time aesthetic or made the stakes feel more urgent, maybe the film’s sequel-bait would’ve been more anticipated than a viewer asking the question “why?” at the end of the film. It’s a shame for Beckinsale, who seems to have such a great time with the material, but Jolt didn’t need to fizzle out so quickly as it did. The potential was there, but the execution wasn’t. Oh well. Here’s hoping the potential sequel is better.

Grade: C-

Movie Review: ‘Joe Bell’ is a Confusing Emotional Rollercoaster


Director: Reinaldo Marcus Green
Writers: Diana Ossana, Larry McMurty
Stars: Mark Wahlberg, Connie Britton, Gary Sinise, Reid Miller

Synopsis: The true story of a small town, working class father who embarks on a solo walk across the U.S. to crusade against bullying after his son is tormented in high school for being gay.

[/info]

Joe Bell initially premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival in fall of 2020 under the title Good Joe Bell. Upon wide release the “good” from the title was dropped, a smart decision, considering the character Joe Bell in the film is not exactly depicted as someone who’s “good”. Joe Bell is certainly a roller coaster of an experience, with a multitude of positive aspects accompanied by just as equally negative characteristics, often coinciding and clashing with each other at the same time to make for an emotional journey that leaves you doing mental gymnastics afterwards.

Based on a true story, the film follows Joe Bell as he walks from La Grande, Oregon to New York City to help raise awareness for bullying after his son’s suicide, or as Joe Bell says in the movie “talking about bullying, for kids who might be different”. Joe’s journey is aimless and self-indulgent, as evidenced by the talks that he gives to people and his inability to enact any actual change when it’s truly important. It’s clear that Joe Bell doesn’t truly understand why he’s doing this, rather that he feels he must do something other than sit with his own grief at home. The first half frames Joe in an escapist fantasy, showing him walking alongside his son Jadin as if it’s a father/son hiking trip. It’s a strange choice for the film to put the plot point of Jadin’s death in the trailer, but it attempts to hide it in the film, not revealing that the son Joe has been walking with for half the film is just his own imagination of what his ideal son would be like.

Interspersed through this narrative are flashbacks to when Jadin was alive and facing the bullying that lead to his eventual suicide. Although these moments are incredibly melodramatic and cliche, they’re heavily based in reality and can be a bit triggering to LGBT folks watching who have had a similar experience. Certainly overdone, but they do a great job at portraying how difficult it is to grow up as an LGBT youth where you feel as an outsider to society and dealing with an unstable and unsupportive family. Ried Miller delivers incredibly tragic and authentic moments in these flashback sequences, somehow making the cliche dialogue feel so emotionally raw.

At the center of the film, Mark Wahlberg delivers an incredibly believable complex character in Joe Bell. Intensely unlikeable, Joe Bell is a man who deeply loves his family and his son but has absolutely no idea how to. It’s very obvious that his intentions are well meaning, but ultimately, he’s unsupportive and aggressive to his family, especially to Jadin while he’s alive. Joe Bell makes it clear throughout the movie that he loves his family, but it’s insanely clear that Jadin’s homosexuality makes him uncomfortable, and he doesn’t know how to properly deal with it or stand up for his son when Jadin needs it the most. Wahlberg somehow is able to take a character with so many abusive tendencies and layer them into a man who is just trying his best and failing miserably, creating a kind of anti-hero.

Wahlberg’s character narrative is easily boosted by what seems to be the intention of the filmmakers. It’s clear why this was originally titled Good Joe Bell, as it comes off as if the film is trying to get the audience to root for Joe and consider him a good father who’s just struggling. There are many scenes between Joe and Jadin on the road where they are able to communicate their problems with each other, as well as bond over simple moments that any gay son wishes he could have with his father. The end of the film delivers us a typical Hollywood cathartic emotional moment that feels like a forced character growth moment for Joe that needs to take place before the final blackout. As a character, Joe Bell doesn’t really get any kind of growth, but the film wants us to make us feel like he does somehow. The end of the film and the start create perfect bookends that are rocky and unsure of where they’re headed.

The cherry on top of the cake is the bonding moment that Joe shares with a sheriff near the end. It reeks of copaganda, and feels completely inappropriate in a film raising awareness for bullying against LGBT people, considering the history of violence that police share with the group along with other intersectional identities.

Joe Bell doesn’t really know what it’s doing, and honestly, I don’t really know what to make of it. There’s so much good the film is doing by showing how damaging bullying can be to LGBT youth, especially those living in unsupportive households. But there’s equally as much bad the film is doing by making itself almost entirely self-indulgent and focusing on a character that’s unlikeable and unchanging. The entire film is unfocused, creating a bit of a mess that left me rotating between rolling my eyes and having tears steaming out of them. Ultimately, audiences will be divided on this, or, like myself, will settle somewhere in the middle.

Grade: C

Podcast: Wild at Heart / Gunpowder Milkshake – Extra Film

This week on Extra Film, Ryan and Jay continue their David Lynch Movie Series with romantic epic Wild at Heart and they discuss the newest action film from Netflix Gunpowder Milkshake!

During the week of Cannes, the Extra Film boys return to discuss Lynch’s Palme d’Or winner Wild at Heart. With a mix of toxic romance, Elvis songs, and callbacks to The Wizard of Oz, Lynch makes a sexy, violent love story about the dangers of society set within the minds of two star-crossed lovers. Led by wonderful performances from Cage, Dern, and Ladd, Wild at Heart is a damn delight.

In the back half of the episode, the guys review the latest John-Wick ripoff, Gunpowder Milkshake. With boring action, terrible acting by the lead, and being way too long, this is a misfire for Netflix, who clearly want to start a franchise with this movie. The supporting actresses are good and the world are interesting but everything seems like a retread and Ryan and Jay didn’t go for it at all.

Thanks for listening!

– Movie Review: Wild at Heart (4:51)
Director: David Lynch
Screenplay: David Lynch
Stars: Nicolas Cage, Laura Dern, Willem Dafoe, Crispin Glover, Diane Ladd

– Movie Review: Gunpowder Milkshake (1:03:41)
Director: Navot Papushado
Screenplay: Navot Papushado, Ehud Lavski
Stars: Karen Gillan, Lena Headey, Carla Gugino, Chloe Coleman, Michelle Yeoh, Angela Bassett

– Music

Love Me Tender – Elvis Persley
It’s All Over Now, Baby Blue – The Animals
The Return of the Eagle – Atli Örvarsson

We try to make this the best movie podcast we possibly can and we hope you enjoy them. Subscribe today on iTunes, Spotify, or Stitcher, and please leave us a review on iTunes. You can also find us on Soundcloud, PlayerFM, and TuneIn Radio as well. We really appreciate all your support of the InSession Film Podcast.

Subscribe to our Podcasts RSS
Subscribe to our Podcasts on iTunes
Listen on Spotify
Listen on Stitcher
Wild at Heart / Gunpowder Milkshake – Extra Film

[divider]

To hear this Extra Film episode and everything else we do, download our apps on the Amazon Market for Android and the Podcast Source app on IOS devices. The mobile app covers all of our main shows, bonus podcasts and everything else relating to the InSession Film Podcast. Thanks for your wonderful support and for listening to our show. It means the world to us.