Director: Shannon Alexander Stars:ย Ashley Roland-white, Javier Vega, Chris DeFlorio
Synopsis: A Brooklyn wife and mother of 5 who’s been beset by supernatural entities since the age of 11, attempts to rid her house of malevolent spirits now afflicting her children.
Documentary filmmaking has come a long way from traditional interview-driven formats. It now includes animation, reimagining, docufiction, experimental, immersive, and more. In her second documentary feature, director Shannon Alexander brings to the forefront a story of exorcism, a haunting, motherhood, and belonging.
Itโs Coming is a supernatural documentary about Ashley, a mother of 5 who has been haunted since she was a little girl. As she visits the familyโs ancestral apartment in Brooklyn, she starts experiencing manifestations of strange entities and discovers that she passed down her transparency to the paranormal world to her children. Whether they are spirits or demons, Ashley seems certain about the nature of her hauntings, and enlists the help of local priests to resolve that issue for her. But as the viewers, we keep wondering what is happening. And when is the proper time to enlist the help of the Winchester boys?
This documentary presents the thrill of voyeurism, watching other people recount their scary experience, knowing I am safe and sound at home while they talk about their personal, supernatural horrors. It fills my critical heart with both dread and excitement. How often do we get a chance to peer at the suffering of others from a safe distance, while going on a safe ride with them from behind our screens? Itโs both guilt-ridden but also pleasurable, and without an adept director, this wouldโve been in shambles.
Alexander meticulously frames his subjects. The close-ups are powerful and statement-inducing. They transport viewers into each speakerโs eyes, which become portals into the terrified souls confronting something they cannot understand. He creates that mood of eeriness, an uncanny presence that sometimes presents itself as a documentary subject in the room, even if invisible to the naked eye. Having that kind of omnipresent existence and knowing how to capture it on camera, is a testament to his skill as a director and how it transcends space and time. His light and shadow play is also on point, using low-key lighting to create silhouettes and obscured faces in dimly lit corridors.
He interviews Ashley and three of her children, Javier, Alexis, and Selena. But what sets apart those interviews is how Alexander keeps the camera rolling, and makes each and every subject at ease. He sensitively handles subjects of different ages. Ashleyโs voice can be heard in the background at all times, a detail that suggests how carefully he protects the children. This critical observation speaks volumes of how careful he is not to alienate those vulnerable children from the main safety figure in their lives: their mother, and itโs a testament to the importance of ethical documentary filmmaking, especially when dealing with sensitive topics.
But what is it about our tech-obsessed and digitally-driven modern life -now increasingly shaped by our enslavement to highly intelligent machines- that attracts such belief and attention? What is it about higher powers and supernatural apparitions that continues to pique peopleโs curiosity when they can throw whatever theyโre concerned about in the mouth of their loyal AI companion? Is it the remaining survival instinct from the Paleozoic era, still ingrained into our subconscious? Or are people slowly losing faith in technology as the ultimate savior from the unknown, thus returning to the instinctive search for answers beyond the rational scientific.
Even though it sounds difficult to explain, Itโs Coming truly terrified me. Why so? Iโm not one of the Vega kids and I havenโt had a profound experience like them, but as a firm believer in the paranormal, and a recurrent guest of chance encounters with the other side, the film left me wondering about the inhabitants of our universe. Does every corner in our houses contain a spirit, a lost soul wandering those dark corridors at night? Or are we projecting our fear of the unknown, and our incapability of dealing with grief, loss, poverty, and sickness on fragments of the deadly macabre?
With Crystal Lake, the prequel series to the Friday the 13th franchise, releasing this week on Peacock, I had the opportunity to briefly speak with some of the cast and crew of the show at the Toronto International Film Festival โLinda Cardellini, William Catlett, Cameron Scoggins, Devin Kessler, and creator-showrunner Brad Caleb Kaneโ on how the story came to be and what were some of the inspirations going into the show.
Question: I actually wanted to build off on that a little bit, because we’re talking about a legacy of a franchise that’s existed for so long. And then, as you said, you’re also working on Welcome to Derry at the moment. When you’re going into a project like this, what was the first anchor that in your mind goes โthis is what I want to hone in on and immediately, I want to expand upon this particular ideaโ, something that was perhaps introduced in the franchise before something that you wanted to see, a little bit more of and think that could be interesting for audiences?
Brad Caleb Kane: Well, I’m like a big time movie nerd, and every genre I love. I always say, I make no distinction between high and low art besides what gives me pleasure. So you know, I can appreciate a horror movie like The Exorcist because it is like the highest part of the craft while also loving something like extra, you know, which is also my favorite. I mean, I’ll go deep, you know, I’m not gonnaโ(laughs)
Shaurya Chawla: you can just give me one, yeah (laughs)
BCK: โbut so, so for me, it’s like attacking something like this, you have to look at other movies of the time period. And again, in talking about the show, I talk a lot about the time period from where, you know, Pamela was born, and how she became who she became. One of my favorite filmmakers, a guy named Paul MazurkiโI don’t know if you guys ever heard of Paul Mazurskiโbut he made a very famous movie in the โ70s called An Unmarried Woman with Jill Clayburn and it’s, you know, it’s very much sort of a feminist touchstone of that time, and so going back, and looking at these movies about women in the โ70s, women in the โ60s, you know, the awakening, that was happening. That was very much an aspect that I wanted to explore, you know, the time period through panels that’s part of it.
Q: I just wanted to start off with talking about the approach to the show because we’re building on a part of characters that we’ve only briefly seen or heard about in movies before, in the legacy of that I was just curious, like going into the project. What was the first aspect that for you guys was like, โthis is the aspect that I’m most interested in exploringโ, when it comes to your characters?
Linda Cardellini: I think for me, because you get to meet her so briefly, but she makes such an impact, people love Betsy Palmer, and that performance, and then you know her, the sweater coming back in too, and the head, you know, all of those things, it was important for me to sort of watch those to know who that is, know thatโs where my character ends up, but also just be so excited about there’s so much runway before that. So what Brad had to, you know, to what he offered me as a role was so juicy, and so much fun. So but in that there’s also the grief and getting to know Jason, as this vulnerable, sweet kid, and that to me was interesting, because it makes all the other stuff make sense.
William Catlett: Listen, in my preparation, I looked at Sydney Poitier. I said, okay, that’s a good base to start from and what all Levon would go through, and then Levonโs not in the movie so I hadn’t lived any kind of create that image, so I would look at Linda’s photo. It’s like, okay, I think she will fall in love with this man here (laughs). And thatโs how Levon was born!
SC: Absolutely. Thank you so much. Oh, and congratulations on your Emmy, by the way!
LC: Thank you, thank you!
SC: Fantastic show as well.
LC: Thank you, I appreciate that.
Later, I also had the opportunity to briefly speak with them on the red carpet as they were heading into the premiere and ask them a couple of questions.
Q: What are your thoughts heading into the premiere at the moment, and is there anything in particular you are excited for audiences and fans to discover as they watch the show?
BCK: I’m excited to see how audiences react to it. You know, I hope they feel like it’s a good ride, and I hope they experience it the way I experienced these movies when I was younger. Laughing, jumping out of their seat, you know, pointing at the screen โI can’t believe what I’m seeing right now!โ So I hope it’s just a fun ride for everybody. I hope it’s as gory as they want it to be and as thrilling as they want a Friday the 13th television show to be.
CS: Yeah, I’m very excited to see everyone’s reactions to kills or comedy or whatever is coming. I just hope they feel satisfied. I know it’s been such a long wait for people who are fans of this franchise. I think we’re justโฆwe’re just really excited to finally be coming out and to hopefully be giving people everything they want and also trying to bring a new generation of people into the Friday the 13th franchise with the story!
WC: I’m excited to see the show! So I’m an audience member, too. I haven’t seen anything, so I’m excited to sit and watch people jumping and, you know, the screams. And he (Brad) really cares about the fans, andโฆyou got someone that’s at the helm that really cares about it.
Devin Kessler: Excited for people to see it! You know, it’s something that we all work really, on, something that we love doing. Brad’s baby, and now it’s yโallโs. It’s something for you all to enjoy and hold here. Brad has landed so many Easter eggs in this series. I think any true fan that’s, like, knows the series backwards, forwards, like the palm of their hand, like โoh, wait, I didn’t know that was thereโ type thing. From the machete to the actual, like, we shot on location. I don’t want to spoil anything, but there’s just so many Easter eggs for y’all!
LC: It’s a wild ride. And I think there’ll be some interesting reactions to things. I think, you know, maybe a little fear, maybe a little laugh, maybe. Hopefully some moving moments. I’m excited to see what happens. I have a favorite moment at the very end of one, and I think it really shows the relationship between Pam and Jason. That is sort of what makes the story work.
Synopsis: The Clock family consists of three four-inch-tall people who live incognito among humans, borrowing only what they need to survive. Their quiet life changes when their teenage daughter, Arrietty, is discovered.
A missing button, a teaspoon that has mysteriously disappeared, or a treasured item that seems to have vanished overnight might not be the result of a messy household after all. What if somebody tiny had simply borrowed it? Studio Ghibliโs Arrietty takes that childhood curiosity and turns it into a beautifully realized adventure, reminding us that even the smallest stories can leave a big impression.
Based on Mary Nortonโs beloved childrenโs novel, โThe Borrowers,โ Arrietty first came to screens in 2010 under the direction of Hiromasa Yonebayashi, with Hayao Miyazaki and Keiko Niwa working on the screenplay. The film follows the Clock family, a group of tiny people who live secretly beneath the floorboards of a human home, surviving by borrowing the things they need. Their carefully protected existence changes when Arrietty, the confident daughter, is discovered by Shawn, a human boy living in the house.
The premise will sound familiar to anyone who grew up with The Borrowers, including Peter Hewittโs 1997 live-action adaptation starring John Goodman, Jim Broadbent, Celia Imrie, Hugh Laurie, and a young Tom Felton. That film brought Mary Norton’s miniature world to life with inventive sets, practical effects, and plenty of family-friendly adventure. This film approaches the material with a different sensibility. Rather than leaning quite so heavily on comedy and frantic adventure, Studio Ghibli gives the story a gentler, more contemplative quality. The danger of being discovered remains very real, but the film is clearly interested in exploring and understanding the beauty of their everyday life.
One of the film’s greatest strengths is its ability to make ordinary household objects feel extraordinary. A sewing pin becomes a weapon, a leaf becomes a shelter, and the journey across a room can feel like an expedition through a vast wilderness. From a human perspective, a kitchen is a simple place to make food; from Arrietty’s perspective, it is a landscape filled with obstacles, discoveries, and potential danger.
The animation from Ghibli is always a recognizable delight. The attention to natural detail gives the film a tactile quality, from the movement of grass and flowers to the play of sunlight across a room. There is a lovely sense of patience to the filmmaking, allowing us to appreciate details that a faster, noisier adventure might rush past.
Arrietty herself is a strong central character. She is curious, courageous, and understandably frustrated by the restrictions placed on her life. Her friendship with Shawn introduces an emotional dimension that goes beyond the novelty of two people of radically different sizes meeting. Both characters experience forms of isolation, and their connection offers a glimpse of a world that might be less frightening if its inhabitants could learn to understand one another. There is also something refreshing about seeing a film whose central conflict is not about saving the world but protecting a home and finding a way to coexist.
That said, Arrietty is not without its limitations. Its measured (borderline slow) pace and understated approach mean that some stretches feel more interested in atmosphere than forward momentum. The story is relatively simple, and viewers expecting action, drama, or elaborate twists may find the narrative less eventful, and might disengage. I also think the emotional restraint, while often a strength, occasionally leaves certain developments feeling a little underexplored.
So why bring it back to cinemas now? For one thing, there is a real pleasure in rediscovering animation made with this level of care on a proper cinema screen. Especially with the rise of shoddy CGI and AI, itโs nice to see the art that can be made in the right hands. The 2026 re-release presents Arrietty in a new 4K remaster, with UK and Ireland audiences also getting the opportunity to experience it in IMAX for the first time. The additional clarity should bring even greater definition to the film’s tiny details and carefully composed environments, contrasting the miniature and human worlds.
Ultimately, Arrietty remains a charming, visually rich piece of animation, even if its quiet storytelling occasionally comes at the expense of momentum. It may not have the dramatic sweep of some of Studio Ghibli’s more celebrated adventures, but it possesses a personality and tenderness of its own. The best reason to see it again is also the simplest: Arrietty makes the familiar feel new. It invites us to look closer at the world around us and imagine what might be happening beyond our line of sight. And if a film can make us reconsider something as ordinary as a teaspoon, itโs earned another visit to the cinema.
This week on Episode 709 of the InSession Film Podcast, inspired by the release of You Can See Everything this weekend, we thought it would be fun to dive into our Top 5 documentaries of the 21st century! With all of the hype around You Can See Everything, one has to wonder if it will eventually land in this conversation. It goes without saying, but there have been some profoundly stirring documentaries over the last 25 years. Some of them simply being the best films of their given years. When done right, nothing hits quite like a stirring documentary, which made this a really fun and rewarding exercise. That said, here are our lists:
(Note: Please keep in mind that we each had different criteria for our selections)
JD
1) The Act of Killing / The Look of Silence
2) Dick Johnson is Dead
3) Stories We Tell
4) No Other Land
5) Man on Wire
Megan
1) No Other Land
2) Cameraperson
3) The Painter and the Thief
4) Kedi
5) Bring Your Own Brigade
Honorable Mentions (Combined) Grizzly Man, Faces Places, This is Not a Film, Tower, Four Daughters, Flee, OJ Made in America, Waltz with Bashir, The Truffle Hunters, Senna, I Am Not Your Negro, All That Breathes, Citizenfour, Fire of Love, All the Beauty and the Bloodshed, Time, 20 Feet From Stardom, Soundtrack to a Coup d’Etat, Won’t You Be My Neighbor?, Some Kind of Heaven, Best of Enemies, Exit Through the Gift Shop, Minding the Gap, Virunga, Jane, Amy, The Central Park Five, The King of Kong, The Imposter, 13th, Bowling for Combine, Murder on a Sunday Morning, Gunda, Stay, Welcome to Leith, After Tiller, Trapped, Sugarcane, Solo, Every Little Thing, The Perfect Neighbor, In the Same Breath, Blackfish, Sirens
Hopefully you guys enjoyed our lists. If you agree or disagree with us, let us know in the comment section below. There are obviously more documentaries of the 21st century that we didn’t have time to mention (or they’re blindspots for us), so if your list looks very different than ours, we totally get it. That being said, what would be your Top 5? Leave a comment in the comment section or email us at [email protected].
For more lists done by the InSession Film crew and other guests, be sure see our Movie Lists page.
Synopsis: A notorious prison, an invisible force starts killing inmates brutally, compelling enemy gangs and corrupt guards to work together as they try to survive the mounting bloodshed.
Once you begin to get an idea of what Joko Anwarโs Ghost in the Cell is doing, itโs very easy to get on board. While it might begin as a supernatural gorefest, the film shifts into a goofy comedy. The result is a genre mix that will please a multitude of audiences.
Taking place primarily in Labuhan Angsana prison in Indonesia, a group of prisoners attempt to survive constant threats of violence, corrupt officers, and harsh conditions. Anggoro (Abimana Aryasatya) is the de facto leader of a group of prisoners including Six (Yoga Pratama), who claims to see ghosts, the devout Muslim Wildan (Mike Lucock), former professor Pendi (Lukman Sardi) and Irfan (Danang Suryonegoro). The arrival of journalist Dimas (Endy Arfian), who is accused of murdering his boss, precedes a string of violent deaths among the wildest inmates.
Six can sense the auras of all the prisoners, and says the reddest auras foretell the deaths by an unseen force. While the group attempts to navigate the accusations from other prisoners, they also turn to whatever they can in order to avoid the red aura. At the same time, Anggoro hopes to get back to his children outside of prison while Dimas wants to solve these murders to clear his name.
When it comes to the violent staging of these murders, itโs about as gross and gnarly as you can imagine. Each body is destroyed and mutilated in ways reminiscent of Hannibal. One prisonerโs death rips him to pieces following a series of stabbings, and then is made into an ornate shower piece. The film spares no disgusting and bloody detail when it comes to these deaths.
That being said, the film turns to utter hilarity in the middle acts. The prisoners realize they need to adjust their attitudes away from pure anger and fury in order to avoid being a victim. As a result, they randomly pray, sing, or dance in the heat of a furious battle. The filmmakers clearly draw influence from the rubber-faced action comedy of Stephen Chow, combining action and slapstick comedy.
Anwar isnโt content just focusing on blood or laughs. The director adds continuous not-so-subtle jabs at the bureaucracy and politics of Indonesian society. While some prisoners very obviously need to be in jail, most prisoners are incarcerated due to corruption, or standing up to powerful people. Even the most powerful prisoners are put in a separate wing and allowed to leave whenever they please. While it might be specific to Indonesia, this message extends to a multitude of other countries.
The entire cast sinks into the ensemble, without attempting to outdo each other. Aryasatya might be the โstarโ of the film, but he is mostly the head of the group without acting like the leader. The entire prison group is excellent at carving out their own little characterization. Yuhang Ho gives the most memorable performance as a particularly disgusting and creepy prisoner. No one actor doesnโt give their absolute all for what the film asks of them.
Ghost in the Cell carves out a unique niche as a combination of gross-out horror, slapstick comedy, prison drama, and political intrigue. Itโs like nothing else in cinemas today.
Happy fright season everyone! This year I was lucky enough to cover Fantastic Fest 2026. I was able to put my eyes on four films from the festival in between my day job and time with my family. My full review for Kung Fu Deadly is out now (https://insessionfilm.com/movie-review-fantastic-fest-2026-kung-fu-deadly/) but this article is for the other three movies that I watched. Thereโs something weird for everyone in between the surveillance state in Compliance, the deadpan and off kilterness of Girl in the Night,and the yearning for love and futuristic cinematography in The Squirrel. The genres of films that play at Fantastic Fest vary from sci-fi, action, horror, comedy, etc. Take a look into what I was able to check out.
Compliance – Kyle Mangione-Smith
Compliance is a movie that will be very divisive. What interested me most was the way itโs filmed and edited. The screenโlife filmmaking style always grabs my attention because I enjoy seeing the computer desktops, phones, and other digital interfaces woven into the storytelling. In Compliance, we follow Sam (Megan Wilcox), a PR team member assigned to speak with a woman who was sexually assaulted on a property owned by the tech startโup she works for, UVisit. After an emotionally draining day, Sam learns that UVisit wants to sweep the tragedy under the rug and pay off the victim to keep quiet. What follows is so stupid and asinine that a realโlife tech company could use clips from this movie in a training video.The sexualโassault scenes werenโt necessary, and the writer/director couldโve found a better way to kick the plot into high gear. The movie is ultimately about big tech companies being bad and how weโre all living in a surveillance state. I also believe the organizations opposing UVisit are just as bad as UVisit itself. There are multiple spy/espionage sequences that are so silly I couldnโt hold in my laughter.The screenโlife filmmaking is cool, but itโs not enough to make this movie a hit overall.
Girl in the Night – Luka Marฤetiฤ
Talk about a movie that caught me by surprise. Girl in the Night is about a guy named Rok (Urban Kuntariฤ). Rok is a complete loser. Better yet, heโs a loser and a kleptomaniac. Rok enjoys the thrill of stealing things but he does his crimes in the most irresolute ways. At his night job in a gas station, heโs so bored that he starts stealing chocolate bars. Unfortunately, he goes one step further and steals the bike of a young woman named Iza (Lara Wolf). Rok begins to hang out with Iza and she reveals to him that she has superpowers and that she can fly. The weirdness and the deadpan comedy really kept me engaged for this 95 minute movie. I couldnโt help but to think of directors like Jared Hess and Wes Anderson. Theyโve made movies like this but not with such bleak characters and post apocalyptic atmosphere. The entire movie is set at night time so audience members can feel the loneliness and despair of the characters such as Rok, Iza, Rokโs roommate Kremen, the mysterious bike lady, etc. Surprisingly, this movie won the Best Picture award at Fantastic Fest 2026. I hope that the movie becomes more popular once itโs acquired by a studio and is released to general audiences because it’s just that good.
The Squirrel – Markus Lehmusruusu
Think ahead. Think of a world in which nature and animals donโt exist anymore. A world in which people canโt have sex anymore. Sounds horrific, doesnโt it? Well the scifi, drama, rom-com The Squirrel paints a broad picture of this world and how one man is shaken to his core by an animal that shows him that heโs longing for something that he never thought he would, love. Our lead, Pasi (Miro Lopperi), is a designer of synthetic animals, similar to Gemma in M3gan. Pasi doesnโt have a social life outside of work and just to receive pleasure he takes sexual favors from a machine. One night during a shift, Pasi finds a squirrel in the trash behind the building. He takes it home so that he can do some tests on the little guy and actually feel some sort of way about him. As time goes by, he starts to become emotionally attached to the squirrel. He treats him as if heโs a pet that he can keep around. Investigator Emilia (Mimosa Willamo) is on the case of this suspicious thing thatโs roaming around their space. Pasi meets Emilia for the first time and heโs smitten. Throughout the filmโs sweet spot of a runtime (95 minutes) we watch Pasi become hopeful about life, sad that his new buddy is depressed because heโs not in his element anymore, and find love in an unexpected place. The cinematography and production design are sleek and futuristic. The colors pop off the screen and theyโre vibrant depending on the type of scene theyโre in. I enjoyed the chemistry between the two actors in the scenes that we have of them. Their characters are just so bored in their day to day lives. When itโs time for the two of them to be together they canโt keep their hands off of each other.
My first Fantastic Fest was kind of let down due to the small amount of films that I was able to watch. I am considering going to the actual festival in Texas next year just for the experience. A lot of my peers have told me that the events and parties are a good time and that theyโre a plus to the festival besides watching the movies that are playing.
This week on the InSession Film Podcast, inspired by You Can See Everything, we discussed our Top 5 documentaries of the 21st century! Plus, JD gives us his thoughts on Her Private Hell, The Christophers, One Night Only, Once Upon a Time in Harlem and The History of Concrete!
– Her Private Hell / The Christophers (8:33) We begin the show this week with JD talking about some movies he’s recently caught up with, including Nicholas Winding Refn’s latest Her Private Hell and Steven Soderbergh’s highly overlooked movie The Christophers. Say what you will about Refn’s bizarre storytelling, he sure does know how to make an evocative looking movie. And Soderbergh is a favorite around here for a reason.
– Once Upon a Time in Harlem / The History of Concrete (20:04) In the theme of this episode, it only made sense to then talk about a pair of incredible documentaries. Shot in 1972 and finished 50+ years later, Once Upon a Time in Harlem is an extraordinary film and certainly one of the best docs we’ve seen this year. As for The History of Concrete, it’s exactly what you’d expect from John Wilson (very complimentary).
– Top 5 Docs of the 21st Century (36:46) With all of the hype around You Can See Everything, one has to wonder if it will eventually land in this conversation. It goes without saying, but there have been some profoundly stirring documentaries over the last 25 years. Some of them simply being the best films of their given years. When done right, nothing hits quite like a stirring documentary, which made this a really fun and rewarding exercise. With that said, what did you think of our lists?
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!
Anora made history by becoming one of the lowest-budget films to win the coveted Best Picture award at the 2025 Oscars. Made for $6 million, the film did wonders for indie filmmaking, putting it back on the map and paving the way for smaller budgets to deliver massive returns; films like Obsession further prove that audiences want to see interesting films regardless of the money put into making them. It wasnโt just how Anora was made that made it so special, but the story it told, too: a gritty, at-times slapstick Cinderella story about a New York stripper who marries the son of a Russian oligarch, only to find out the world is more messed up than she imagined. Mikey Madison starred as Anora, delivering a deeply heartbreaking performance as a girl who had the world and tried so hard to hold on to the life she deserved, only to fall flat every step of the way. At only 25, Madison became one of the youngest Best Actress Oscar winners in history, cementing her place in the history books.
Over the almost 99 years of Academy Awards, 33 women have both a nomination and a win in the Best Actress category, with 28 earning a nomination after their first win. Narrow that list to actresses who have won multiple Oscars in this category, and the number drops to 15; narrow it further to actresses who were nominated for their first role after their win, and the number drops to just one. That one person is Luise Rainer, who won in 1937 for The Great Ziegfeldand then won again in 1938 for The Good Earth. Winning an Oscar is already hard enough; just ask Glenn Close, but winning an Oscar and then following it up with at least another nomination right after is a feat that, frankly, never happens.
Following her win, Madison was able to be more picky with her choice of projects, and when a quasi-sequel to The Social Network – not just one of the most well-regarded and impactful movies of the century, but maybe of all time – that was written and directed by the same person who put pen to paper 16 years ago blipped on her radar, it almost felt like a no-brainer. The film I am referring to is The Social Reckoning, in which Madison plays Facebook engineer and whistleblower Frances Haugen. She plays a role that asks her to do many different things than she did as Ani in Anora. Writer/director Aaron Sorkin is a dialogue master, creating scenes that let the words do as much, or more, than the performance. As Ani, Madison was asked to be physical, using her body to speak as much as her words, whereas The Social Reckoning will force her to drive home dialogue-heavy scenes and depict real-life events. As an Oscar-winning actress, it wouldn’t shock me if she executed her scenes flawlessly; however, will that be enough for voters to bring her back after giving her the win?
Being a former winner is one hurdle; the filmโs middling reviews are another. As of writing this, The Social Reckoning has a 57% on Rotten Tomatoes, a score that has only lowered since its premiere. Low scores can still earn nominations; Hillbilly Elegy has a 24%, and Glenn Close was still nominated, but they indicate that a film might not be as well-awarded as people thought. While The Social Reckoningโs score falls in the middle, Madison is one of the highlights. Sorkin films have been able to overlook muddling ratings in favor of strong performances – Being the Ricardos got three acting nominations with a 68% – now the question is whether Madisonโs performance is enough to overlook some of the factors playing against it.
At this point, my answer is no. This isn’t to say a nomination is out of the question, but the category’s strength makes it hard for me to find a spot in the final five. First up: Julianne Moore for The Debut. Moore is a beloved actress with 5 Oscar nominations, including a win, but she hasnโt been nominated since her 2015 win for Still Alice. Moore pairs with Jesse Eisenberg, who previously willed Kieran Culkin to an Oscar win for A Real Pain, and stars as a housewife who finds herself after being cast in a bit part at a small community theater. She stars opposite Paul Giammati, who is seeking a nomination and his first win, and has received a large share of the overwhelmingly positive reviews so far. Olivia Wilde isnโt just aiming for a Best Director nomination for her hit film The Invite; she’s also eyeing a Best Actress nod.
Two-time Oscar nominee Ryusuke Hamaguchi is back in the awards conversation with his latest film, All ofa Sudden,and Virginie Efira is right there with him. Efira already has a win for Best Actress at this yearโs Cannes Film Festival. While that win might not be the most compelling case for an Oscar nomination – the winner of this award has only gone on to be Oscar-nominated 4 times over the last 26 years, including twice in one year for Emilia Perez – she still has a win under her belt and remains well in the conversation. Renate Reinsve was just nominated for her role in Sentimental Value, and she looks to follow up that nomination with another for Fjord, the Palme dโOr winner. The Palme dโOr winner has received at least one Oscar nomination each of the last four years and preceded Best Picture nominations in 2022, 2023, and 2024. Fjord is well positioned to earn multiple nominations across the board, including in acting, where both Reinsve and co-star Sebastian Stan look like real threats.
Then you have the biggest wildcard of the bunch, Inde Navarrette. Navarrette burst onto the scene this year in the hit indie horror filmย Obsession, and her committed, horrifying, and deeply sad performance could earn her an Oscar nomination. We saw last year, when Amy Madigan won Best Supporting Actress forย Weapons,ย that if a performance is good enough, nominations and wins can follow, even in a horror film. However, it is important to note that Madigan was already a well-established actress who earned her first nomination in 1986 forย Twice in a Lifetime, and Navarretteโs best-known work beforeย Obsessionย was playing a side character in CWโsย Superman & Lois; nevertheless, like Madiganโs Aunt Gladys, Navarretteโs Nikki has placed herself in horror movie lore and has already become a character in Universalโs Halloween Horror Nights. A marketable character is important for the Academy to take horror seriously, and both she (she has already landed major roles, including Rogue in the Marvel Cinematic Universeโsย X-Men) and her character have been among the most marketable figures this year.ย
So while Madison has a shot, and itโs almost impossible to count out a filmmaker as beloved as Aaron Sorkin, she’s currently on the outside looking in unless The Social Reckoning performs better than anticipated. Outside of the top five, you still have Sandra Hรผller, who is having a massive year and could be in the race in this category for her performances in both Rose and Fatherland, as well as the Supporting category for Project Hail Mary. Sian Heder won Best Adapted Screenplay for CODA, a film that also won Best Picture, and she is back with Being Heumann, a film that could propel Ruth Madeley into the race as well. Emily Blunt is still a real possibility for her turn in Steven Spielbergโs Disclosure Day; while the hype died off quickly, the film is still highly reviewed, and Spielberg is a force to be reckoned with at the Academy Awards.
Synopsis: Celebrated as a prophet and vilified as a terrorist, Palestinian-American scholar Edward Said was Americaโs most outspoken critic of the West and Palestineโs fiercest advocate. Twenty years after his death, Said guides viewers through the untold history of Palestine through a kinetic assemblage of footage, recordings, and newly digitized archives.
One of the first things we hear Edward Said say in Maiken Bairdโs illuminating new documentary, Edward Said: Between Worlds is perhaps the best way to encapsulate just what made him so important: โI was born in a country that doesnโt exist anymore. Itโs called Palestine.โ He then details his experience applying for a passport, where he wrote โJerusalem, Palestineโ as his birthplace, only for his official passport to arrive reading โJerusalem, Israel.โ His argument, though one he shouldnโt have had to make, was that he wasnโt born in Israel. When he visited the passport office to rectify the error, noting that Israel didnโt exist when he was born, he was given a โfixedโ document, one that simply read โPlace of birth: Jerusalem.โ There was no nation listed; just a city. The passport, shown in the film, notes that it was issued in 1982. Today, if you Google Saidโs name, the abridged summary that populates on the right side of your screen reads โBorn November 1, 1935.โ Where the city and country should be is a single word: โJerusalem.โ
Though it was far from the first moment Said ever had of being labeled a man without a country, it serves as a cornerstone in a life that was dedicated to advocating for Palestineโs recognition, a fight that remains ongoing more than 20 years after his death. The origins and evolution of Saidโs chosen purpose โ as well as his never-ending pursuits of knowledge and culture, and the harsh consequences he faced due to his wholly justifiable words and actions โ are Bairdโs focus with Between Worlds. How the film stands apart from the majority of modern documentary portraits is the kicker: Rather than pushing its subject into the background as interviewees proffer their own opinions on their legacy, practically the only voice present here is Saidโs. โBetween Worldsโ consists almost entirely of footage from Saidโs speeches, appearances on news broadcasts, narration of his own writings, and other videos from the familyโs archives. The libraryโs worth of excerpts and clips are woven together by co-editors Jay Arthur Sterrenberg, Plummy Tucker, and R.A. Fedde to chart the expansive history of a great thinkerโs many thoughts. Itโs a daunting effort, and its seamless execution is a filmmaking triumph.
Is Between Worlds a film crafted in memoriam? In hopes that audiences new and old can discover and/or reengage with Saidโs work, from the most revered (his 1978 book โOrientialismโ) to those lesser known (his 1968 essay โThe Arab Portrayedโ)? Is it coming now, in 2026, due to the fact that the word โPalestineโ is one that seems to be on everyoneโs lips in contexts both humane and vile? According to Baird, all three could be considered the projectโs jumping off point. โI thought his voice was so lacking in our current world, and his humanity, and his understanding, his own personal experience of Palestine, and his ability to speak about it,โ she told IndieWire ahead of the filmโs premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival. โIt was a no-brainer. After October 7th, I thought, โletโs bring it back.โโ
Courtesy of GoodKind PR
In bringing it back, Baird and her collaborators have done their part in showing the world just who Edward Said is, and โBetween Worldsโ should land with audiences for which he is a household name and for those who only know the man exists because his eponymous documentary was programmed at their favorite film festival. (It is currently making the rounds in search of U.S. distribution, and most recently screened in the 64th New York Film Festivalโs Spotlight section.) Indeed, it arrives amidst Israelโs genocide in the Gaza Strip, as the nation attempts to rid the world of every trace of Palestineโs existence. And like its fellow NYFF selection, Naza, Between Worlds raises Israel prime minister Benjamin Netanyahuโs longstanding vitriol for Palestine and its people, specifically in how Netanyahu refused to speak with Said because, in the formerโs words, โhe wants to kill me.โ Where Between Worlds especially excels โ not more than Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szorโs documentary, but in an entirely different way โ is in showing Said on the defensive, even growing increasingly frustrated when berated with nonsense from those who deny his homeโs validity.
โYou get angry because itโs obviously meant to be intimidating and to threaten you,โ Said said. โThe overall feeling that I have is one of astonishment that the depth of hatred towards me by American Zionists is so great.โ To be both clear and fair, Saidโs โdefenseโ takes a composed, informed shape, not one of fury or denial. Itโs precisely in moments like these, however brief, where Between Worlds diverges from your typical silver-screen biography, often cradle-to-grave narratives that hit the facts and nothing else. And though Baird and co. certainly maintain a simple approach โ one that intermittently causes these proceedings to feel formulaic by nature โ what matters is not the framework in which Saidโs testimonies are further immortalized. At a time when there are masses only just learning that his homeland technically no longer exists, what better way to sustain his legacy than to let him tell us why it was significant in the first place?
Edward Said: Between Worlds screened at the 64th New York Film Festival. It is currently seeking U.S. distribution.
Directors:David Greaves Writer:ย William Greaves Stars:Romare Beardon, Arna Bontemps, Ida Mae Cullen
Synopsis: A decade post-death, filmmaker William Greaves reveals his final work: footage of a 1972 gathering he arranged with Harlem Renaissance legends, which he deemed his most significant capture.
Learning from history should be the most basic of lessons that everyone should agree with, regardless of background. We have a myriad of sayings about this fact, including โThose who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it.โ Despite this, we live in a time in which many ignore truth, and especially history that is not white, straight, male. Every once in a while, we receive a reminder that, not only have we had these discussions before, but we have forgotten and need to be shook up by voices from the recent past. From beyond the grave (and thanks to his family), William Greavesโ footage from an important meeting comes to life in Once Upon a Time in Harlem.
One negative of learning about movements through a history class is the lack of life and a funneling of many people and personalities into one general idea. As someone who learned about The Harlem Renaissance from a text book, this could not be more true of this particular time in history. Put simply, although it should not be, The Harlem Renaissance was a cultural, artistic movement of Black creatives in the 1920s and โ30, focused in the Harlem area of New York City. This description completely flattens the output of dozens of talented people into a simple, general idea, and thatโs a damn shame. Among many other positives, one of the greatest that Once Upon a Time in Harlem has to offer is a feeling of being in the room and understanding the myriad of personalities and passions. It should be noted that the footage was filmed in the early 1970s, so it also has the benefit of looking back through a half century of history. Given that The Harlem Renaissance occurred around a century ago, the signposts of the โ70s is helpful so we understand that none of this happens in a silo, art echoes through the annals of history.
The film opens, appropriately, with an invitation. This meeting of the minds (and hearts and souls) takes place at the home of Duke Ellington, and hosted by the man who shot the film, William Greaves. There is a certain feeling of destiny at work, as Greaves himself was born during The Harlem Renaissance, and became an artist himself. What an incredible way to give back to the artists who paved the way forward. Showing them both looking back at their accomplishments and forward to what may come next honors them, and him, in a way that could not be accomplished by anyone else. Much of the film travels through the party and moves between conversations in the same way one might at a party to which they were invited. Greaves interjects minimally, but you do feel his guiding hand. Additionally, he pulls individuals in for side interviews to delve in deeper ways than a party with many people talking concurrently could afford.
As this gathering took place over four hours, the editing of this film is stunning and worthy of repeated mention. At no point does the film stay with one thread too long, and we always feel the energy of the room. Lynn True, Anna de Mare, and the Greaves family all play a part in the incredible forward momentum of the film, pushing the conversation at just the right moments. In particular, the focus on the photographic work from James Van Der Zee not only shines a light on an artist some may not know, but also provides context for the numerous other artists introduced.
That introduction is desperately important because these Black men and women have not only created art, but struggled through the hideous history of racism in this country. The light should shine on them, especially now. But importantly, this documentary is not simply laudatory. From the outside, it would be easy to assume that Black creatives of that time (or any time) would likely agree on political and cultural ideals. But these conversations, many of them heated, allow us to see the individuals as just that, and not a generalized version focused on background or race.
Everyone here has an agenda, and that is understandable given their long history both with one another and as representations of this movement. In a particular powerful moment, Ida Mae Cullen (the widow of poet Countee Cullen), points out that the women of the movement have not been spoken of enough. This not only gives her the opportunity to alter the focus, but also for the men to sit back and listen. This only lasts for a moment, as several men chime in with memories of women like Zora Neale Hurston, but the beat continues long enough to be memorable. There are additional scenes filled with tension, especially when discussing Marcus Garvey and the โBack to Africaโ movement. In just a few minutes of footage, Greaves is able to imbue decades of shared history without pressing people into full on arguments.
Frankly, that is Once Upon a Time in Harlemโs lasting legacy. This is a living document, a history distilled down to a few hours that entertains, educates, and primes us to want to know more. Whether it be the images of Van Der Zee, the music of Duke Ellington, the poetic words of Langston Hughes (who sadly died 5 years before this event), or the stunning images of Romare Bearden; Once Upon a Time in Harlem not only reminds those of us with previous knowledge, but welcomes those in who have not yet learned. The Greaves family has not only threaded that needle, but left us with a beautiful gift, a blessing that will inspire and push us forward to a better world, if we would only listen.
Directors:Rob Savage Writer: Nathan Elston Stars:Jessica Chastain, Arabella Olivia Clark, Jay Duplass
Synopsis: Young Bela forms a relationship with a sinister entity in her home that looks uncannily like her own mother, drawing her into a terrifying and increasingly dark world.
One of the ever-present reasons why the horror genre continues to thrive even in its roughest of patches is because of how many avenues it can delve into that can add a new flavor to what are largely seen as tropes. Look no further than the success of the genre in this year alone with Obsession, Backrooms, or even smaller hits like Buddy and Undertone being able to stride their own unique tonal wavelengths to entertain and thrill audiences alike. Director Rob Savage himself has had a great handle on how to send pure shivers down a viewerโs spine with his found footage, COVID set horror flick Host all filmed via Zoom, which makes the plethora of issues within Other Mommy all the more baffling. Itโs not that Other Mommyโs central concept isnโt intriguing as sinister doppelgรคnger plotlines have been a part of storytelling for years and there exist enough wiggle room in the concept to make it fresh, the problem is that Other Mommy can never decide what lane it wants to pick both tonally and narratively. Does it want to spook? Does it want to dip its toe into camp? Is it an all thrill no fill genre set piece ride? Does it want to actually sit with the thematic nuance behind a childโs reaction to familial strife? All concepts and ideas that Savage and writer Nathan Elston throw at a dart board that never register because of how quick the film wants to move on towards the next half-baked idea. The result is a sporadic mess that borders on incoherent at every turn no matter how many creepy smiles Jessica Chastain flashes at the camera.
The film starts with a look into the life of the Martin family as we mainly follow the perspective of young Bela (Arabella Olivia Clark) and her care under her two parents, Ursula (Chastain) and Russell (Jay Duplass). From the get-go when the parents are putting Bela to bed in the filmโs opening, we see a clear rift within the family dynamic with Bela, more often than not, lacking a connection to her mom which weโll later see is due to some marital problems in Russell and Ursulaโs relationship. One place where Bela has found solace, however, is through an apparent bond that sheโs formed with a demonic entity that sheโs dubbed โOther Mommyโ on account of her taking an exact appearance to her mother. Of course, throughout her many visits to her bathroom door to get Other Mommy to appear, the shapeshifting entity has a more insidious agenda for attaching itself to Bela so closely and it leads to the family being under extreme peril to find a way to rid themselves of the evil.
Other Mommy essentially peaks at its opening jumpscare sequence, right before the title card drop which you may or may not have been spooked by when seeing the trailer in front of a showing for The Odyssey back in July. The rest of the film essentially plays as stitched together setpieces following the family in their attempts to run away from Other Mommy by traveling from location to another location, and the central issue with this is just how repetitive both the filmโs structural and filmmaking techniques become as it follows these beats. There’s nothing wrong with your movie being a bunch of escalating horror sequences, as long as you know how to structure them as properly built up within your narrative like Resident Evil accomplished just last month, but the investment breaks when the audience realizes each horror scene offers very little new from across the board. Once youโve seen one bad looking CGI Jessica Chastain popping out for the same loud noise jumpscare, youโve seen ’em all, and even aspects like the filmโs creative techniques of transitioning from scene to scene become trite when it’s used for the 5th time.
Nearly every single scene that Other Mommy moves on to, as this family treats the threat of this entity as a minor inconvenience, the movie takes a complete 180 in what type of horror it’s trying to invoke. One minute youโll see a genuine attempt to make the audience jump, the next youโll witness scenes like Other Mommy talking to Bela while sheโs on the toilet (????) and question whether the film is genuinely taking what’s currently on the screen as completely serious since it’s played that way. The film tries to, more or less, invoke touches of Nightmare on Elm Street, Coraline, and ITโsvibe across its reality bending sequences where the entity entraps Bela in these heightened dream sequences that only she can witness. None of it registers as something that’s truly part of the movie though since the breakneck speeds at which it moves to get to its next scene leave you with zero time to sit with anything it’s attempting to accomplish.
Most emblematic of this is when the movie decides to turn into an Insidious flick with ghost hunters led by Lois (Dichen Lachman) about half way through where every single problem previously stated is at its most egregious of a film that has not a single clue of what it wants to be. Of course, we can forget about the familial trauma at this filmโs center (how could we have a new horror release without it?) and like with nearly everything else in Other Mommy, the themes of childhood manipulation and reaction to marital complications are lost at sea within a simultaneously predictable and ever clunky narrative. Alas, if these one silver lining to be found, itโs aspects of Chastainโs admittedly fun performance as sheโs clearly down for whatever insanity is being thrown at that wall, pulling eerie smiles that would make Pearl from Pearl uneasy, but there is only so much she can do in a film thatโs so unsure of itself.
The best I can possibly muster for Other Mommy is that it’s not the most miserable the genre has been within this year (as my review for The Strangers: Chapter 3 has a thing or two to say about that), but it isnโt that far off from the bottom of the rung either. It’s a tonally and structurally confused mess that has no idea what lane of scares or silliness it wants to showcase for its audience. No matter how many flashy transitions or ambitious spurts Other Mommy throws at you the film ends up feeling like a top ten best jumpscares of Blumhouse youtube video of sequences from completely different films being stitched together, and not a single one of them is particularly noteworthy.
On this episode, JD and Megan discuss Aaron Sorkin’s new film The Social Reckoning! While Sorkin has always been a robust writer, his time in the director’s chair has been dubious and perhaps never more so than with this sequel.
Review: The Social Reckoning
Director: Aaron Sorkin Writers: Aaron Sorkin Stars: Mikey Madison, Jeremy Allen White, Jeremy Strong
Directors:Chuko and Arie Esiri Writer: Chuko Esiri Stars: Sophie Okonedo, David Oyelowo, India Ria Amarteifio, Toheeb Jimoh, Ayo Edibiri
Synopsis: A Lagos society wife prepares for a party while reflecting on her youth and the choices that led her to marry a respected man instead of her poet boyfriend.
Did we ever get an answer to the age-old question โwhoโs afraid of Virginia Woolf?โ Not concretely, though the best answer may exist in the great authorโs own writing: Her characters, more than likely. High-class intellectuals of all ages, Woolfโs creations were written to walk a psychological tightrope above a field of emotionally disruptive land mines rather than mere thorns. Their lives, routinely thrown for a loop by the feelings of those in their circles, presented as challenging primarily in the context of interpersonal relationships, as well as oneโs connection to the world around them. None of Woolfโs novels did it quite as successfully (nor famously) as Mrs. Dalloway, the tale of a society woman who reflects on choices that have led her to her present existence while dating back to her teenage years, those of long summers and young, complex love. Itโs a text that is practically begging to be adapted; it has inspired precious few attempts and even fewer successes.
It was probably the appropriate time for that trend to be bucked, and for it to come in the form of a reimagining as elegant and sharp as brothers Chuko and Arie Esiriโs Clarissa is a gift one shouldnโt reject based on its apparent quietude nor simple pleasures. The Esiriโs second feature โ following 2021โs criminally underseen Eyimofe: This Is My Desire โ certainly has those qualities in spades, but what it lacks in volatility it more than makes up for in gentle consideration of its characters to the point where they are tangible beings, not realizations left on the page. Much of what made Woolfโs novel such a beguiling, renowned text was its uncanny ability to turn a style that mirrors oneโs stream of consciousness into a universal experience. The Esiri twins expand that framework into something uniquely cinematic and contemplative; their vision of Mrs. Dalloway is one propelled forward by what its characters are not saying more than what they are, internal monologue or not.
Played as an adult by the ever-transcendent Sophie Okonedo and as a young woman by an enchanting India Ria Amarteifio, our titular character evolves from a teen basking in the spoils of a semi-charmed life to a woman of the house tasked with the tedious to-dos of party preparation, though her exasperation at said tedium appears to be preinstalled, a symptom of a life still charmed but hardly exciting. In her youth, Clarissa was curious and well-read, a lethal combination that drew the similarly creative Peter (Toheeb Jimoh) to her orbit like a moth flutters toward a flame; in the present day, having married the more sensible man (Jude Akuwudike) and leaving her childhood will-they-wonโt-they (David Oyelowo plays adult Peter) to forever wonder โwhy didnโt they,โ Clarissa is at a loss, but not one sheโs willing to express in words. Itโs her attitude that leaves her emotional state vulnerable, whether sheโs snapping at her household/kitchen staff or trudging through the day with regard only for the errands that need completing before the guests arrive.
Okonedo is astonishing here. Only half the film is hers, given the Esiriโs eloquent toggling technique that seamlessly shifts from one time period to the other and back again, but her air reverberates throughout. Even as we watch her younger counterpart navigate adolescent confusion about what and who is right for her โ an inner conflict that is only intensified by the connection she shares with Sally, played by Ayo Edibiri and Nikki Amuka-Bird in the two timelines โ we long for Okonedoโs interpretation of how the past has impacted her in the present. Her time on the periphery is not a weakness of the film, rather a recognition of an undersung performerโs immense talent. That the Esiris know precisely when and how to wield her poise is an even greater asset, something only Janet Planetโs Annie Baker has adequately done in recent memory.
Even stronger is how the co-directors weave in the elemental presence of Septimus (played by the revelatory newcomer Fortune Nwafor), a young military officer whose post-traumatic response to a violent conflict with the jihadist group Boko Haram while serving in the Nigerian army has left him vacant, a soul housed within a body yet maintaining no connection to one another. That Nwafor hardly says anything in the film makes the performance that much stronger, and his unspoken link to Clarissa haunts an otherwise dreamlike picture like an indescribable nightmare. Often donning a tank top and glistening with sweat, Nwaforโs physical turn works wonders with Jonathan Bloomโs 35mm cinematography, an actor and a craftsman playing off one anotherโs gifts like partners in a dance routine. This tends to go for how Bloom films the entire cast, like when Amarteifio and Jimoh are in close proximity and the choreography turns sensual with the perfect touch of restraint, but itโs particularly astonishing when Septimus is our focal point.
It would be expected for a film called Clarissa, similar to a novel called Mrs. Dalloway, to only allow its nominal subject to ever truly take center stage, yet Chuko Esiriโs intricate screenplay affords opportunities for all. The sophomore feature would not nearly be as strong without it, though its resounding sense of connectivity should also be credited to its movement from London to Nigeria, from a community dominated by individuals to one populated by families, blood or otherwise. The essence of Mrs. Dalloway and Woolfโs sensibilities remain, but Clarissa is entirely a story of its own merits. One can only hope that the Esiri brothers carry the eloquence of their ambitious effort here into the future, but it’s worth basking in the present for a while. The past will always be there, but in the end, moving forward is all we have.
Clarissa had its U.S. premiere at the 64th New York Film Festival. NEON will release it in limited theaters on Dec. 11.
Director: Jordan Firstman Writer:ย Jordan Firstman Stars:ย Jordan Firstman, Cara Delevingne, Kirby Howell-Baptiste
Synopsis:ย ย A hard-partying New York City club promoter sees his whirlwind lifestyle upended by the arrival of the 10-year-old son he never knew he had.
By the end of Club Kid, Jordan Firstmanโs directorial debut, the title has taken on two meanings as far as it is concerned: on one hand, it refers to its main characterโs brash and loud nightlife where all he is doing is going from one party to another, one club to another and living it up without any hesitation. The other meaning is the literal kid at the center of the story, whose life for all intents and purposes, takes form in the club through his experiences. What is most unexpected about Club Kid, however, is just how emotionally powerful it ends up being, and some of the places it goes to in realizing its central relationship. Also, in extremely funny directions.
The plot is simple: Peter (Firstman) is a party promoter and partygoer in New York who lives for the night scene and the company it brings. Along with his crew of close friends, they hit every major club in town, every other night, all the way till the wee hours of the morning. Things take a drastic turn, however, when Peter finds out about Arlo (Reggie Absolom), a son that he didnโt know he hadโdoubly surprising to him, given he is gay, which the movie does address, yesโand suddenly, he has to be a father to him and get his act together. As the movie progresses, this bond becomes stronger, and Peter finds himself balancing not only being better with Arlo as a father, but being better in his professional life as well.
From its very first minute, Club Kid is bursting with a tremendous amount of energy and vibrance. Dazzlingly brought to life by Adam Newport-Berraโs terrific cinematography, who is two-for-two this year after equally brilliant work on The Invite, Firstmanโs New York feels as much a character of the movie as the rest of the cast does as you head into one loud nightclub after another, with the experiences being increasingly more booze and drug-addled with each passing night. Firstmanโs direction throughout is incredible, confidently bringing the story to life with a hand that feels more learned than the debut work it is. Being how so much of the movie revolves around clubbing and partying, the needle drops that accompany many of those thumping moments are expertly chosen, making up a wonderful soundtrack to sift through long after the credits have rolled. It is also a testament to the screenplay that almost every scene is loaded with visual and spoken gags, and not a single one of them zips by, each bit further cementing their memorability.
What is also rather effective throughout Club Kid is its celebration and embracing of the movieโs queer characters and nightlife presented throughout. Every scene highlighting these aspectsโof which there are manyโis done in such a colorful, accepting and loving manner, giving each character a chance to shine in the overall narrative and leave a lasting impression, such as Peterโs roommate Nicky (Eldar Isgandarov), a writer from Azerbaijan who wants desperately to be a famous philosopher, who walks away with some of the funniest moments of dialogue in the entire movie, and even some charming moments from some of Peterโs friends like Saffron (Saturn Risin9), a DJ who even teaches Arlo a bit about her work, and Almi (Miss Benny), who has some of the movieโs funnier line deliveries. Other memorable supporting turns from Diego Calva, Cara Delevingne and Kirby Howell-Baptiste are equally well-captured.
At its core, the story of Peter and Arlo is beautiful, packing an emotional punch to balance its humor seamlessly. Firstman is exceptional at writing and acting out the scenes where he begins to connect with his son, understanding that he needs to put in his best efforts to care for him, which means putting much of his clubbing life on hold and coming to terms with all the things keeping him from maturing. These moments are often hilarious too, with more than one joke highlighting some of the less kid-friendly aspects surrounding Peterโs home (watch out for one Bjork t-shirt one morning) and the conversations between him and Arlo that are filled with quick back-and-forth moments of comedy. Absolom is sensational in the role, bringing a sweetness and charm to every second of Arlo and his time with his father. Eventually, he brings his own knowledge and love of music to the table as well, even creating a playlist with Peter that has a slew of excellent tracks to bop your head to.
Is Club Kid entirely unpredictable and surprising? Perhaps not. At its core, a father-son bonding storyline where the two learn to be better from each other after connecting for the very first time, is one many have seen before, and some of its plot turns in later parts of the movie are somewhat expected given some of the preceding events that lead to them. By the end, however, it hardly matters. There is so much energy and heart in Firstmanโs script and each performance beat from the cast, that it more than overcomes some of these minor gripes that arise throughout its 2+ runtime, which moves at a very brisk pace till the end. The result is an exceptional debut from Firstman as a director, and one of the most impactful and heartwarming/heartwrenching movies of the year, and one that comes highly recommended.
The 85th Academy Awards had a slew of Best Picture contenders that appealed to every demographic of the Academy. We got a new spin on the Western genre with Django Unchained, a political thriller riddled with controversy in Zero Dark Thirty, and an epic musical being adapted for the big screen with Les Misรฉrables. But the Best Picture prize went to Ben Affleckโs Argo, which ended up sweeping the whole season winning at Golden Globes, Criticsโ Choice Awards, BAFTA, and Producers Guild of America. However, the filmโs director was nowhere in sight in the Best Director category at the Academy Awards.
How is it that a film like Argo swept the televised awards for Picture and Director, yet Ben Affleck still missed the latterโs lineup at the Oscars? Even stars and directors, like Bradley Cooper and Quentin Tarantino, from other Oscar-nominated films were baffled by this decision. So, with Ben out of the race, who else was going to take the prize?
In a shocking turn of events, Ang Lee nabbed his second Oscar for Best Director for his box-office hit, Life of Pi. And Iโll be frank: I personally found the film to be pretty to admire, but I could never get emotionally attached to the story. When Ang Lee was announced as the winner, I was honestly shocked that he managed to win the category. Then again, when you have the quote unquote โfrontrunnerโ that swept the major precursors for Best Director out of the race, almost any of the five in the field that ended up winning it would stun you. In this article, I want to dissect this Best Director race and discuss how Ang Lee managed to sideswipe the competition to get this Oscar.
Before I go any further, I want to bring up that this was the last time (so far) in which the Directorsโ Guild of America only had aligned with the Oscars in two nominees: Ang Lee for Life of Pi and Steven Spielberg for Lincoln; the other nominees at the guild included Ben Affleck for Argo, Kathryn Bigelow for Zero Dark Thirty, and Tom Hooper for Les Misรฉrables. I would argue that while Hooper did receive a DGA and Criticsโ Choice nomination for Best Director, itโs not the type of directing that the branch would nominate. It also falls into the more recent trappings of remakes/reimagining a known source material for a modern audience being shunned by the branch. The only two remakes to get in for Best Director during the preferential ballot era were True Grit and West Side Story; both of which had more known and respected auteur filmmakers behind the camera.
As for Zero Dark Thirty, Iโd have to imagine that Kathryn Bigelow missed this time as the film didnโt have enough time to build momentum for a Best Director nod like her previous film, The Hurt Locker. Keep in mind that The Hurt Locker had a world premiere at Venice the year before it actually came out in 2009. That hype as well as the Summer release date was able to projectile itself into the Best Director conversation. Whereas Zero Dark Thirty had its film come out in December for a limited theatrical run, so it can qualify for the Academy Awards. So, maybe it was kicked out for not being able to hype itself up in time to get a spot even though it made it in for the televised precursors? Itโs honestly a headscratcher how that one missed.
As for Argo, Iโd have to imagine that the directing branch as a whole either didnโt see Affleck as an auteur director like Lee or Spielberg. Or worse they assumed he was safe for a spot, but voted for a more favorable contender from the picky group. Either way, Iโve never witnessed such a baffling decision like this, where the supposed โfrontrunnerโ in the race wins all of the televised groups but still gets kicked out of the club.
Instead, the directorโs branch decided to nominate Michael Haneke for Amour, Benh Zeitlin for Beasts of the Southern Wild, and David O. Russell for Silver Linings Playbook. Haneke played for the more international side of voters, as well as having a successful campaign by Sony Pictures Classics. It also helped that Amour had won the Palme dโOr prize at the Cannes Film Festival earlier that year, cementing his chances at some awards buzz.
Benh Zeitlin not only had critical acclaim for his directorial debut, but even won a few prizes along the way for Beasts of the Southern Wild. The Fox Searchlight contender started its way from Sundance, where it won the Grand Jury Prize: Dramatic category and ended up being screened at Cannes, winning the directorial debut prize, the Camรฉra d’Or (aka โGolden Cameraโ). There was also a breakthrough performance by Quvenzhanรฉ Wallis that was getting recognition by critics and voters, resulting in an Academy Award nomination for Best Lead Actress.
Now for the elephant in the room: David O. Russell was a highly respected and beloved filmmaker, who had a comeback with The Fighter. Not only did that prove he could direct a big ensemble film, but Silver Linings Playbook showcased that he can still do comedy for a broader audience. It also helped that he wrote the adaptation of Matthew Quickโs novel, which is a factor the branch has been favoring more as the years have gone by. Add in the fact that Silver Linings Playbook had Harvey Weinstein campaigning the film and you got yourself a Best Director nominee in play.
As for Steven Spielberg, Lincoln was a much stronger contender than his last Best Picture nominee, War Horse. Not only did this have the support in the below-the-line categories, but the film had acting support, getting three nominations for Daniel Day-Lewis, Sally Field, and Tommy Lee Jones in for their respective categories. The film was also written by a more respected writer by the name of Tony Kushner, who was previously nominated for co-writing Munich.
While the film did score 12 nominations, Lincoln only walked away with two wins for Best Lead Actor and Production Design; the latter of which was considered a major upset. Outside of that, the Steven Spielberg-directed film couldnโt muster up another major win for its actors or Best Adapted Screenplay. Youโd think a movie about Abraham Lincoln directed by the three-time Oscar winner and had Daniel Day-Lewis in the titular role mightโve been an automatic lock for a Best Picture win.
In regards to Life of Pi, the film was adapted by Oscar-nominated screenwriter, David Magee, who was translating Yann Martelโs popular novel into this visual technical achievement film. This was also a project that was being passed around to various directors, ranging from the likes of M. Night Shyamalan, Alfonso Cuarรณn, and Jean-Pierre Jeunet. Eventually, the book landed in the hands of Ang Lee, whoโs been known for pushing the boundaries of visual effects with Hulk and would later direct Gemini Man.
It had its world premiere at the New York Film Festival as the eventโs opening film, which garnered critical acclaim and would go on to gross more than $609 million worldwide. After defying expectations on how successful the film would become to audiences and making a profit for 20th Century Fox, the question remained: can Ang Lee pull off a win for Best Director? The answer was revealed on February 24th, 2013, in which he managed to win the prize without winning a single televised prize.
How exactly did he do this? Well, Life of Pi not only scored 11 nominations, but it was favored to win a couple of technical categories, such as Best Visual Effects, Original Score, and Cinematography. The film itself is gorgeous to look at, and even offers a beautiful score by Mychael Danna. I have my own personal gripes in regards to the CG tiger, as Iโm always aware when itโs real and when itโs being imitated by computer effects. Iโm aware that there are rules and regulations in regards to training animals for a film set, but at that point you might as well resort to making the whole thing an animated movie as opposed to shooting it as a live-action/CG-hybrid film.
Putting my personal issues aside, I think another reason why Ang Lee managed to win was because he was the only nominee to have shown up at the precursors. Despite losing all of the Best Director prizes to Ben Affleck, Ang was still nominated at Golden Globes, Criticsโ Choice, DGA, and BAFTA. And if youโre nominated at all four precursors, your chances of winning the prize might help you in a fractured race.
I also believe that while the other directing contenders were lifted by their actors, Life of Pi works on the strength of its direction. If anything, itโs because of Ang Leeโs directing that we got a terrific debut performance by Suraj Sharma, as heโs working off of tennis balls on sticks and the actor putting all of his trust into the director. Without that trust being put into Lee, the performance wouldnโt be as good as what it is.
Something else to consider is that while Steven Spielberg couldโve been in the running for Best Director, itโs really challenging to win the category a third time; the only people whoโve done it were:
William Wyler [Mrs. Miniver, The Best Years of Our Lives, and Ben-Hur]
Frank Capra [It Happened One Night, Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, and You Canโt Take It With You]
John Ford [The Informer, The Grapes of Wrath, How Green Was My Valley, and The Quiet Man]
I do wonder if the fact that Lincoln wasnโt this towering, technical achievement is what mightโve prevented Steven from winning his third directing Oscar. And it is important to remember that Lee had only won one directing prize for Brokeback Mountain. Had Ang Lee won another Best Director Oscar with Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, I donโt know if he wouldโve been able to secure a third win with Life of Pi.
As Iโm wrapping up here, I wished I was more invested with Life of Pi like my colleagues have been over the years. I gave it another shot and came away from it still feeling the same way. Itโs a movie I admire for its ambitions and the technical work for the most part is pretty spectacular. I just wished I was more invested in the material, as I came away from it respecting it rather than loving it.
I do ask that everyone reading this article checks out the short documentary called Life After Pi. The film goes into the visual effects company, Rhythm & Hues Studio, that helped bring the movie to life only to declare Chapter 11 bankruptcy two weeks prior to winning the Oscar for Best Visual Effects. It also explores the rapidly changing landscape of visual effects artists, who are responsible for bringing our favorite TV shows and movies to life; some of their credits include Babe, The Golden Compass, and Game of Thrones. Even if you have seen this documentary, I encourage you to pass this movie along to everyone so that theyโre made aware of this situation.
If you havenโt had a chance, listen toย The Lone Acting Nominees podcast, hosted by Gordon McNulty, where Gordon and a guest discuss a film and performance where the acting nomination was the film’s sole Oscar notice. Iโve personally been a guest on eight episodes, while many of your other InSession Film favorites have appeared as well.
The podcast is nearing its conclusion after 250+ episodes, and it got me thinking about this year’s potential lone acting nominees. So letโs dive into the potential 2026 performers, from most likely to least likely, to be a lone acting nominee.
John Turturro, The Only Living Pickpocket in New York (Very Likely)
A film tailor-made for a lone acting nomination. Not only is the film decidedly small-scale, but Turturro has been receiving the only over-the-top notices. The film itself doesnโt seem to have the footprint to go anywhere with the Academy Turturro.ย This nomination would follow similar lone-acting nominees like Peter OโToole forย Venus, Richard Jenkins in The Visitor, and Robert Duvall inย The Apostle. The only barrier would be the likelihood of Turturroโs nomination, which is by no means assured in a crowded Best Actor field.
Inde Navarrette, Obsession (Very Likely)
While the Oscars have been hesitant to honor horror performances in the past, lone acting nominee Amy Madigan showed the Academyโs shifting tastes with a Supporting Actress victory forย Weapons last year. Navarette looks primed to repeat as a horror nominee in Best Actress, but will her film show up anywhere else? The small-budget indie might have been a runaway box-office and critical success, but Navarette seems like the only assured nomination.ย Best Picture and perhaps some technical nominations are possible, but Best Actress has a long history of lone acting nominations.
Andrew Scott, Elsinore (Very Likely)
Few films have fit more of the bill for a lone acting nomination thanย Elsinore. Scott is getting near-universal acclaim, while the film’s reception is a bit more muted. Scott has yet to receive Academy attention, but his performance as Scottish stage actor Ian Charleson checks many boxes for a nomination. The only threat to Scottโs lone acting nomination is co-star Olivia Colman, whose performance has been warmly received, but not as enthusiastically.ย Scott seems to be a shoo-in, while Colman is a long shot at best.
Robert Pattinson, Primetime (Likely)
Like Turturro and Scott, Pattinson stars in a film lauded more for the performance than the film itself. While the Primetimeโs chances outside of acting are a long shot, my reason for pausing is the potential for a Merritt Wever piggyback nomination. Despite the ample praise for Pattinson, Weverโs performance has gotten its fair share of notice, especially from critics. If they grab on to Pattinson (yet to be nominated), it would make sense to bring two-time Emmy winner Wever along for the ride as well.
Andrew Garfield, Artificial (Moderate)
Garfield has been receiving some of the warmest notices of his career for his turn as the devilishly stupid Sam Altman in Luca Guadagninoโsย Artificial. His official placement in the Supporting Actor category might help his Oscar chances, but what about the rest of the film? The notices have been warm, but not overtly enthusiastic. While no other cast members have stood out, the filmโs reception could lead it toward a screenplay nomination or even loftier hopes of Best Picture. Itโs 50-50 whether the film can rise above Garfieldโs performance, but he might still end up as the sole recipient of any accolades.
Sandra Hรผller, Rose (Moderate)
You will not count me among those who discount Hรผllerโs performance inย Rose, but the film’s very nature is unlikely to translate into a single nomination. You have black-and-white cinematography (which the Academy loves), facial prosthetics (ditto), and a foreign language element. If Huller is acclaimed enough to earn a Best Actress nomination, it makes sense for one of those tech categories to follow suit. More likely, the film would get a Best International Feature nomination. ย
Guy Pearce, Ink (Unlikely)
Danny Boyle films tend to be all or nothing with the Academy. Either you get nominations everywhere like he did with Slumdog Millionaire and 127 Hours, or you strike out. As a Best Director winner, Boyleโs films haven’t exactly lit up the Oscars scoreboard. In fact, Boyle has directed only three acting nominations (Michael Fassbender and Kate Winslet for Jobs, and James Franco for 127 Hours). If Pearce were to make the lineup, that would signal greater enthusiasm for the film itself. Itโs a period piece made with style and energy, which would normally signify technical nominations. Pearce might make it, but it probably wonโt happen on its own.
Sophie Okonedo, Clarissa (Unlikely)
Who knows what to make of the upcomingย Mrs. Dallowayย adaptationย Clarissaย from directors Arie and Chuko Esiri?ย While it may have received near-universal acclaim at Cannes and attracted Neon to distribute, what kind of awards reception will this film have? There is a world where the filmโs precursor run explodes and leads to loftier awards hopes. But the film is too widely acclaimed as a whole for a performer like Okonedo, a former nominee and the greatest potential beneficiary of acclaim, to be the sole standout from the cast.ย This seems more like an โall or nothingโ type film.ย I would venture Okonedoโs chances as a long shot, and even longer for the film as a whole.
Tom Cruise, Digger (Very Unlikely)
Rule number one for lone acting nominations: you have to be nominated.ย Whileย Diggerย might be proving polarizing amongst critics, if there is enough enthusiasm to get Cruise to the finish line, then there must be somewhere else for the film to be nominated.ย If Cruise manages to get caught in guilds’ and criticsโ notice, then Riz Ahmed, makeup and hairstyling, and production design are sure to follow suit. It makes very little sense to just single out Cruise for the awards with this kind of reaction to the film.
Anthony Ippolito, I Play Rocky (Very Unlikely)
Without discounting Ippolitoโs Oscar potential, this performance lacks the traditional markers of a lone acting nominee. If Ippolito makes it, that probably means a fair amount of critical lauding for his performance and the film itself. This film is sure to be a crowd-pleaser, so additional nominations like Makeup & Hairstyling, Screenplay, Production Design, and even Best Picture would most likely follow a Best Actor nomination. You never know with the Academy, but this feels like the least likely of the bunch.
Synopsis: Recorded live on Broadway, Fallen Angels is a champagne-soaked 1925 comedy by Noรซl Coward. The story follows two wealthy, upper-class best friends who, with their husbands away for a golf weekend, discover that the irresistible Frenchman they both had affairs with before they were married is coming back to town.
Staged productions are a completely different beast than a film. This may seem like an obvious statement, but it is also an important one. Critics often complain of a movie being โtoo stageyโ especially when it is a film based on a play. We ask ourselves, โwhy did this need to be a movie if it all appears like it takes place on one set?โ And this is a valid question, but it is sometimes one that is leaned on too hard. After all, some of the greatest stories ever told, the most dramatic, the funniest, originally were performed on a stage, in front of a live audience. This is the originator of the art form that would eventually lead to us sitting in a dark room, facing projected images in sound, in that communal space. In many ways, film is a recreation of that same feeling you can get in a crowded theater on Broadway, experiencing art together. As we laugh or cry with one another, there is a shared experience that can never be recreated. There are arguments to be made about the utility of filming staged productions to air in movie theaters. On one hand, there is a beauty in the singular experience of the live play. On the other hand, so few of us are given the opportunity to see some of the best performers in the world hold the audience in the palm of their hands.
Fallen Angels, the Tony-nominated revival from this last year, is now playing in theaters across the country, and what a gift that is to those of us who could not travel to New York to see it live. Fallen Angels, originally written in 1925 by Noรซl Coward, stars Rose Byrne and Kelli OโHara, both nominated for theaterโs highest awards, as best friends Jane Banbury and Julie Sterroll, respectively. The two plan to spend the weekend together while their husbands Willy Banbury (Christopher Fitzgerald) and Fred Sterroll (Aasif Mandvi) head off on a golf trip. But we soon find out that they have another purpose for this weekend, a possible visit from a mutual old flame, Maurice Duclos (Mark Consuelos).
Now, anyone who has seen a typical comedy of errors, whether on stage or screen, and especially those of us who are familiar with Cowardโs work, will know that zaniness is just around the corner. Directed for the stage by Scott Ellis, and for the screen by Annette Jolles, Fallen Angels is a masterclass in comedic timing, wit, physicality, and balance. Given the structure of the play, something as simple as poor blocking or as complex as poor casting would doom this production from the outset. That original direction from Ellis seems to make every right choice. No joke goes on too long, no movement is wasted, and whoever made the casting decisions should be awarded handsomely.
Much has been made of the friendship on stage between Jane (Byrne) and Julie (OโHara), and yet, not enough has been said. The tried and true script takes the pair through not only their present friendship, but their long, shared history. And importantly, both of their performances, though individual, mesh perfectly with one another. They are both tremendous comedic actors, but in such different styles. Byrne, one of our great actors playing inebriated, manages to appear that way, always be understandable, and continues to be watchable even when making poor decisions, maybe especially then. OโHara, on the other hand, among other things is able to master the physical comedy necessary without ever being a distraction from the actual script and plot mechanics. Although much of this play is simply two women talking (and drinking a dangerous amount of alcohol), there is just enough interruption from supporting players, and no one ever misses a beat.
The distinct lack of awareness from their husbands and their mild arguments to set the scene in the first act allows us to find a way to root for all four of them, without ever taking a specific side. Saunders (Tracee Chimo), Julieโs new housekeeper is just outlandish enough to wrangle even more laughs, even when you think you canโt summon anymore. And this is the biggest selling point of Fallen Angels and should not ever be forgotten. It is really, truly funny. One might make the mistake of thinking that a piece written almost a century ago could not hold an audienceโs attention in 2026. You would not be more wrong, as you almost ache for an intermission to give your body a rest from the laugh-a-minute experience unfolding in front of you. If there is a negative in the cast, it is the eventual appearance of Maurice. The scene, as written, is wonderful, but Consuelos feels like a bit of stunt casting, and he doesnโt quite fit the mold. However, OโHara and Byrne, in various states of hilarious distress, carry those scenes with aplomb, avoiding a crash landing in the final moments.
Seeing Fallen Angels on a large screen, with a cackling cohort is an experience that you should not miss. Rose Byrne being both hilarious and fantastic is no surprise, as she has been creating amazing comedic and dramatic work on the silver screen for decades now. But for those who are not Broadway-inclined, this introduction to OโHara will be a true eye-opener. Fallen Angels is an absolute blast, truly side-splitting, and a laugh riot. But more than that, it is an opportunity to broaden our horizons to see a stunning (filmed) live production that most of us would never have the opportunity to witness. Do not miss this!
Director: Brad Bird Writer: Brad Bird, Matthew Robbins, Jeffrey Lynch Stars: Sam Rockwell, Scarlett Johansson, Tom Waits
Synopsis: In Metropia, a gigantic city in an alternate future, private eye Raymond Gunn is drawn into a case involving aliens, murder, and a multimedia star named Venus Nova.
Ray Gunn is Brad Birdโs long-gestating passion project that is finally being given the opportunity to see the light of day. And if anything is assuredly certain from this filmโs release, itโs that thereโs likely no character name in 2026 that can rival Ray Gunn(a perfect, pulled right from the โ50s vocal performance by Sam Rockwell). But this filmโs quality doesnโt merely end at this cool name or the effortlessly stylish demeanor of its titular character. In fact, thatโs only the first of countless hooks Bird uses to draw his audience into a film that has so much to offer in terms of both ideas and style. From the moment the film opens on Metropia, a futuristic cityscape pulling all its aesthetics from classically cinematic Art Deco styling, itโs difficult to imagine feeling the desire to spend two hours anywhere else. Thereโs a reason so much of Birdโs career remains synonymous with top-notch quality. And yet again, Ray Gunn feels completely indicative as to why that qualifier remains.
Every film of Birdโs exists within a world that feels wholly lived-in. Each one is ripe for exploration, as if the camera could venture away from the central driving force of its respective film, and still provide the audience with plenty to ponder or be entertained by. Luckily for us, Bird provides ample opportunity to both steep his audience further into the world of Metropia, while also bolting us in place with a riveting noir story that feels as if it was pulled right from the pages of a pulpy 1950s classic. One of the great achievements of Ray Gunn is Birdโs knack for familiarizing the audience with all the futuristic tech on display while never losing sight of the classically noir core driving the characters and their emotional stakes. Without a strong story to ground the entire thing, this film might have just become a series of pretty visuals to look at. Ray Gunn couldnโt be anything further from that, utilizing every moment of its audienceโs rapt attention to dazzle us with a genuinely refreshing homage that feels fully rooted in the past, while operating with all the fundamental traits of a contemporary blockbuster. The black-and-white noir look is replaced with vibrant pops of neon and fluid animation across the board. The film, frankly, looks amazing and lively beyond belief. Yet, the gray world of crime and shaky morals noir stories exist within is still present in the bones of this film, something no amount of dazzling animation or colorful characters could ever suppress.
And in fact, the colorful character work is one of this filmโs greatest strengths. The assortment of characters Bird introduces, from shady crime bosses and henchmen, to the classic femme fatale, the gumshoe, and his sidekick, all make up this wonderful collage that feels organic. Ray Gunn initially drops the viewer right into the middle of a case, and this prologue of sorts teaches us the core characteristics of both Ray and his alien sidekick, Eye-Ra (an exceptional, perfectly gravelly Tom Waits). From that point on, Bird and co-writer Matthew Robbins are off to the races, introducing the audience to a variety of settings from the glitziest penthouses to the shadiest of backroom offices and underground clubs. Each one is filled with distinct archetypes pulled from the pages of Raymond Chandler or Dashiell Hammett, only here Bird is able to put his own imaginative sci-fi spin on each. Thereโs nothing more enjoyable than being steeped in such familiar tropes yet remaining wide-eyed and surprised at just how silly some of these characters and their designs can become. Importantly, these characters never lose their edge despite the setting or rating of the film. This is a noir through and through, so genre fans can rest assured knowing the stakes match the setting. The tone of this can certainly be fun at times, given Birdโs penchant for pure entertainment, but thereโs a thematic weight to this film which is quite effective and never undercut by all the genre elements throughout the film.
One also gets the sense that every inch of Metropia has been deeply thought through. Of course, this is part of the reason Birdโs action sequences are historically top-notch; this film certainly isnโt the exception in his filmography. One sequence in particular stands out as one of the most inventive action setpieces of the year, and itโs topped with a clever idea that feels less like a cherry on top of the sequence, and more like a whole new sundae for audiences to gluttonously feast upon. Ray Gunn is a film that can immediately dial up the action at a momentโs notice. Each time itโs more thrilling than the last, and this escalation keeps the viewer on their toes for the entirety of its runtime. But perhaps the most enthralling element of this filmโs pacing is when it chooses to slow down completely, allowing its great voice cast to deliver, yet again, the classic sort of noir lines fans of the genre canโt get enough of. Despite its setting and contemporary filmmaking traits, this is a neo-noir film that is just as interested in exploring the malleability of ideas like true justice, corruption, moral integrity, sensuality, and desire. Another wonderful aspect of Ray Gunn is just how much the scuzziness of these characters brushes up against the neon lights of the futuristic Metropia to begin with. You truly get the sense that there is no bastion of pure good here, even in such a potentially utopian world. This weighs on the shoulders of Ray, who despite doing his best to remain on the up and up, also falls prey to the occasional temptation.
Yet Ray is such a wonderful character to explore as he interacts with such a variety of differing archetypes. While he, too, is essentially an archetypal figurehead, Rockwell breathes a lot of life into him through his voice performance. The same can be said about Waitsโ tired Eye-Ra, who remains a bit of an ethical foil to Ray while ultimately respecting his longtime partner and friend. One can imagine countless adventures between the two of them simply based on how effortless their banter comes across in the film. Itโs a delightful pairing for the film, with both characters sharing the spotlight a lot of the time. Itโs a decision that makes for a really balanced on-screen relationship. The same can also certainly be said about Venus Nova (Scarlett Johansson), the femme fatale who is thankfully granted more depth than the typical archetype sheโs inspired by might have been allowed decades ago. In many ways, Ray Gunn is a film exploring the necessary search for finding something genuine in a world shrouded by distractions and invasive practices, whether they be of the business variety or interpersonal. Bird is able to frame the constantly shifting relationship between Ray and Venus as a way to grapple with the difficulties of parsing through so much noise and confusion in ways that work wonderfully to the filmโs benefit. This shouldnโt be a shock considering Bird gave us the incredible dynamic between Mr. Incredible and Elastigirl in The Incredibles, but itโs also amazing to see just how tantalizing and sensual this film can feel whenever these two characters are flirting with one another. As intentions remain veiled or shockingly revealed, thereโs a genuine romance to this film beyond the characters’ love lives. The romance ultimately lies in the steadfast belief that truth, and some semblance of justice, can prevail despite so much around us telling us otherwise. Ray, alongside many of the characters in this film, might feel imprisoned within their own sets of beliefs and circumstances. But Bird takes that feeling of being stuck, and channels it into a truly delightful and creative tale about breaking free without losing your truest self.
Ray Gunn will be released in select theaters and on limited 70mm screens on December 4. It will be released on Netflix December 18.
On this episode of Chasing the Gold, Shadan is joined by Tom O’Brien to discuss this year’s Toronto International Film Festival and Digger‘s awards chances after its rough start at the box office! There is a ton to parse over all the great film’s shown at TIFF this year and how they will impact this year’s awards race. We had a great time breaking it all down.
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!
Believe it or not, some people call New York City the greatest place on the planet. This may come as a shock to the senses, dear reader. Unfortunately, my objectivity on this matter may be slightly biased having lived here my entire life. But I do feel fairly confident in the definitive nature of such a bold declaration. What is it about New York that makes its denizens so liable to scream it in the streets, from rooftops, or in bars or parks? The recent Knicks championship has only added to our sense of unshakable adoration for what this city has to offer. Itโs something much deeper than the amount of restaurants, cultural institutions, or walkable public spaces we have to choose from on any given day. Itโs instead rooted in the unifying principle that a city as varied and oversized as this offers its inhabitants the opportunity to be anything or anybody theyโd like to be. At any given moment, New York reciprocates the love people show towards it tenfold in expressive opportunity. But this city can also be unrelenting in its rapidly evolving nature. So many fall victim to the cruelty of those who hope to exploit the beauty of New York through greedy business practices or outright hatred for people freely living however they choose. At the 64th New York Film Festival, the New York Shorts program was made up of five short films, each linked by their explorations of freedom and change alongside a city that simultaneously exists as both transitory and eternal. The changes within the city seem to be occurring more rapidly by the moment, yet its storied streets, avenues, and neighborhood staples lost to the latest slop bowl peddler live immortally within the hearts and minds of the people who carry their legacies with them wherever they go.
The Peopleโs Beach
J. Worthamโs short film is indicative of New Yorkโs ability to offer space to all its residents. This documentary focuses on Jacob Riis Park in the Rockaways, described by one of its frequent regulars as โone-of-a-kindโฆ like a fantasy.โ Wortham uses this opportunity to create an archival piece of sorts highlighting Riis for all it offers its community. In first approaching this short film, Wortham felt as if they wanted to leave their own imprint on the fight for justice, as they saw various forms of community outreach and rally movements organizing. โThis was what I knew, Riis and the water.โ In turn, this short film divulges what Riis has represented for so long, in addition to exploring Riisโ potentially rocky future. A longtime haven for the Queer community, Riis is a public space that not only allows New Yorkers a direct connection to nature, but it offers a vital space for its beachgoers to be as free as theyโd like to be. These beachgoers can wear whatever (or as little) as theyโd like, do whatever they choose, or be whoever they feel most comfortable as. Itโs a wondrous delight to see Worthamโs crisp footage of beachgoers having a ball, whether itโs jumping around in the water, dancing all across the sand, or forming a runway in the middle of a crowd to find who has the best outfit on the beach. The infectious fun of the short film is its primary driving force.
But importantly, the festivities and celebration of Riis never removes the weight of building anxieties revolving around what Riis might look like in the near future. The rapidly-expanding infiltration of private companies doing all they can to exploit public land has indeed set its sights on Riis. Old buildings which stood as testaments to the history of a place are being demolished in favor of ugly luxury buildings designed for those with obscene wealth. A situation like this doesnโt just make for an unfortunate eyesore, it allows for the erasure of New Yorkโs expansive history. Despite the unknown future, Worthamโs short seems optimistic, or at the very least, embracing of the fact that community can reside wherever people gather under the driving force of love and care for one another. In talking to subjects for the short who have been going to Riis for decades, Wortham noted โthey were doing the same things we are doing.โ Itโs an observation which feels indicative of the strange relationship New York has with the passage of time. The geography of this city is almost certain to change; if not by greedy developers, simply by the sheer force of nature. But itโs almost as if nothing can stop New Yorkers determined to live exactly how they choose to do so. Itโs a beautiful reminder of this city being a safe haven for any who choose to embrace its scope.
ee
Heather Landsmanโs short film begins by highlighting one of the more inconsequentially hellish aspects of contemporary society: the rampant proliferation of the speculative market. It would appear that not even the more niche corners of pop culture are safe from individuals and corporations intent on preying on the earnest passion fans have for everything from anime to video games. And so, collectible figures which likely cost pennies to make and were meant to adorn shelves as a personal form of expressive decoration now sit behind plexiglass boxes as collectors willing to spend hundreds of dollars fight for the possibility of owning it. They may not even be familiar with the property, let alone appreciative of it; they simply couldn’t care less aside from the status symbol. And so, any adoration of something slowly becomes warped through its unattainable prism. But that only encourages Landsmanโs film to feel all the more wrapped up in the allure of something we desire on such deep levels. The film feels akin to an exposed nerve, where we nervously wonder whether or not the people around us will notice the vulnerability and wreak havoc on our entire lives.
As Emma (Abby Griffith) gawks at a particular blind box collectible figure way out of her price range, the thought of the shop employees, Huey (Will Menaker) and Julie (Isobel Fox), watching her every move keeps her on edge. Unwilling to let Emma stew in her panicked anxiety alone, Landsman brilliantly utilizes every practical effect imaginable in order to elicit the same sort of paranoid panic in her audience. Largely captured on MiniDV format, this film looks how a nightmare feels. Thereโs a sense of broken reality at play, from its fish eye lens surveillance to the maximalist emotional responses inspired by the stylistic flourishes of anime. Itโs just one of the ways ee feels so spiritually indebted to Hideaki Annoโs mid โ90s anime masterpiece, Neon Genesis Evangelion. Landsman captures the innate emotional throughline of that show to the tee: the panic that sets in when we feel the darkest parts of ourselves have been revealed for all to see, yet we continue down the path regardless of that worry simply because it feels better on some fundamental level. That this short film also leans fully into the sensory assault editing style of anime imbues it with a breakthrough revelation of personal touch. It makes the hyperpop aesthetics all the more shocking and effective in their striking contrast. Landsman is able to blend all these disparate characteristics into a short film that feels completely unique, all the while showcasing a clear love and understanding of various pop culture staples that make this a wild and entertaining ride in just under 10 minutes. ee also effortlessly captures the thrilling wonders that are the little pockets of New York, which seem to exist in a liminal space for those who know how to find them. They represent the potential of infinite experiences being on offer, sometimes occurring in the most strange locations imaginable. Thereโs nothing like the discovery of such a gem that feels distinctly formed for us amidst all the chaos of the city, and the same can be said for a short film like this.
The House Call
Eliza Barry Callahanโs short film doesnโt take place within the city limits, but it does feel as if it remains indebted to New York City in some capacity. This story takes place in Saugerties, New York, a wonderful town thatโs just below the Catskills. Itโs essentially 100 miles out of the city; nearly the same distance as Philadelphia. And yet, for so many New Yorkers, they (perhaps a bit ridiculously) consider Upstate New York to be this vast wasteland of mystery and nothingness. This short film feels like itโs playing with those notions of city audiences. But it also feels like a metaphor for the beautiful opportunity an escape from the city, or just the stresses of our everyday lives, has to offer some people. Itโs a chance to get away from the shock of reality and perhaps be reminded of what matters most in our lives. Dr. Swan (Victoria Pedretti) experiences something a bit like that, although Barry Callahan goes about such a discovery in a fairly unsettling manner. This short film perfectly embodies the feeling that something we consider so standard has gone deeply and profoundly wrong. Most can likely relate to finding themselves in a situation which desperately needs to be exited yet not having the means of doing so. Dr. Swan unfortunately doesnโt have that ability either, and is instead pulled further into a waking nightmare shot so gorgeously by Hot Waterand Rebuilding cinematographer, Alfonso Herrera Salcedo. The foggy farm this tale takes place in just feels so unreal. Yet the unsettling tension of the scenario couldn’t feel any more fraught with genuine fright. What then plays out across the remainder of the story makes for a strange little gem of a short film. It casts a wide net when exploring topics, ranging from existentialism and veterinarianism to the sheer simplicity of emotional misunderstandings and frustrating mundanities. Itโs so easy to get lost in the inner workings of our lives and truly forget how freed we can feel by simply doing what we love, even if itโs only for a moment or two. Barry Callahan delivers a short that frankly looks stunning, captures the strange sensation of dread quite well, balances a lot of tones in a way that is oddly charming, and ends on the perfect note before threatening to overstay its welcome.
A Womanโs Place Is Everywhere
Thereโs a particularly cruel evil at work in Fanny Texierโs short documentary. And yet itโs an evil that is becoming all too familiar in the world, especially in New York. Most people in this city have likely dealt with a comically inept or downright villainous landlord that, frustratingly, remains faceless in their dealings with tenants. Their actions, which can often lead to devastating circumstances for tenants, are hidden behind blunt emails or posted notices that show little regard for the real people being affected by such loosely made decisions. This is the exact scenario identical twins Emilija and Ona Rygelis faced in the years they were being filmed for this short documentary. They have lived in an industrial Williamsburg loft their entire life, and shortly after the death of their mother, are barely provided any time to grieve in peace before their landlord begins serving eviction notices. They may have to deal with all the typical circumstances of New York City apartment living, but, as they describe it, the twins feel as if their motherโs being is โbaked into the DNA of this place.โ
With an indeterminate amount of time to shoot and a loose plan on what the structure of the documentary would be, Texierโs short film somberly and efficiently captures just how much of a life revolves around where our roots spread from. When it comes to a New York City apartment, the little space we have to call our own can fill up rather quickly and becomes integral to our sense of self. In the case of these twins, their perfectly located Williamsburg loft has a jaw-dropping amount of space that makes their legal issues all the more infuriating and worthy of a fight. Itโs made all the more rage-inducing knowing what this beautifully self-renovated, richly lived-in loft will ultimately become: another ugly, cheaply made, modern building with no soul that costs an exorbitant amount of money to rent. New York neighborhoods are being frustratingly pushed into the โfuture,โ all the while having their distinct souls drenched in history completely ripped out by developers looking to make every part of this city look like nowhere. The stories of these twins are undoubtedly but one of many, yet that fact makes their situation no less sympathetic. These twins are lovely, bringing a realistic quirky charm to their living situation that speaks to how endearingly close they are with one another. The emotional resonance of this short is made all the more potent by Texier including some stellar footage from a short, 1970s experimental film that just so happened to star these twins. It was a film made to explore the relationship of twins, and as such, it offers a clear look of what Williamsburg used to look like. Their mother is also featured, and Texier splices this footage into the present-day for an absolute gut-punch that perfectly synthesizes the emotional toil such a situation is wrapped up in. It leaves the audience with a crushing pit in our stomachs. And yet, it also causes us to think of all the stories that have been built atop throughout history. Itโs a notion that makes this documentary an essential piece of New York history. No matter what happens, this short film confirms that this loft was not only lived in, but imbued with a love that cannot be shattered even if it moves somewhere else or is torn down in the name of useless land development. The neighborhoods of New York may be rapidly losing character, but the characters within this city are still keeping it fresh and exciting as best they can. Itโs perhaps that spark in each of us that makes this city the most special.
New York Never Let Me Down
Charlotte Wells begins her short film with a shot of the city skyline overlooking a large, snowy hill. Itโs practically swallowing up the frame. Itโs a city that remains omnipresent, not just geographically and culturally, but emotionally. To live here for any extended period of time is to carry it with you in ways that we often canโt perceive until we are removed from it. To live here for an entire lifetime, with decades of stories and emotions to parse through, is to understand the true thankfulness that is the only thing required in return. For the subject of this short documentary, Paula Spiro, a woman with a million stories to tell, this tender gratitude is apparent from the moment we hear her speak to Wells. Wells merely points a camera at Spiro, now living in upstate New York, and aims to explore the more intangible qualities of what it was like to live in the city for so long. She wants Spiro to detail what the city sounded like, how it felt, what it embodied in her time living there. Itโs one thing to look at living in New York City and rattle off all the cool opportunities it grants its residents: whether it be the art, the culture, the food, the sights. And make no mistake, Spiro does have plenty of stories in those scenes that are jaw-droppingly cool.
From famous subway busking to teaching a variety of musicians who would go onto great acclaim, sheโs been around the scene and makes it sound like a wonderful thrill ride. But this all comes from a place of tender reflection with the aim of exploring the emotional imprint New York left on her first and foremost. A crucial element of this short film is Wellsโ brilliantly personal direction. Wells ensures thereโs no barrier between Spiro and the audience, zooming all the way in on her face during stories to capture every specific detail of her subjectโs facial features and mannerisms. She beautifully catches Spiro dancing or drumming through a stunning reflection or rich shadow caught in a window. One shot in particular catches Spiro from a far distance merely walking, with Wells slowly fading in an image of the nighttime skyline while riding the Roosevelt Island Tramway. All the while, Spiro is exposing her interiority through narration in a way that any lifelong New Yorker will feel deep in their soul. As much as Wells is obsessed with capturing Spiro in all her idiosyncratic glory, so too is the film and Spiro enamored with all that New York provided her, specifically in terms of its self-discovery and possibility. To lock into New Yorkโs wavelength is to accept the freedom to be anything we want to be. And anybody who truly cherishes New York is liable to be brought to tears by the unfakeable tenderness and sincerity on display by Spiro. She is thankful for all the time she spent in New York. While her current circumstances may not be the life she initially envisioned, the city seems to have imbued her with all the vital characteristics necessary to make living anywhere a truly distinct experience. Spiro never allows her story to fall into a depressing trap. She understands the sadness, embraces it for what it is, and lives on with a vigor that feels strong enough to inspire anybody listening to her story. This city is amazing, but sometimes the city isnโt nearly as fascinating as the people within it. Much like any parent, perhaps its purpose is to give us all the necessary tools in life, and if and when we eventually leave (or are effectively forced out), we can create our own wonderland based on the wonder and freedom the city provided us, wherever we may end up. To feel like we belong somewhere is perhaps the most important trait a location could ever provide us, and New York provides that in spades by granting each of its residents all they could ever want; we merely have to seize it.
