Itโs an understatement that Disneyโs reign over the Star Wars empire has been contentious. The Force Awakens went from well liked reboot to symbol of corporate cynicism within a couple of years of its release. The Last Jedi defines the term divisive. The Rise of Skywalker was disliked by just about everyone. The Mandalorian started out beloved before slipping into cultural irrelevancy. Andor is adored by most who watched it, but not that many watched it. Rogue One and Solo have their fans (the former more than the latter), but nobody is holding them up as a patch on what George Lucas did in the โ70s and โ80s. And thatโs not even touching on the overblown controversies surrounding The Acolyte or Obi-Wan Kenobi.ย
The great promise of a Star Wars renaissance that everyone bought into around 2015 has largely turned out to be a mirage. The new, post-prequels era that literally opened with the line โthis will begin to make things rightโ has, in the eyes of many, done the exact opposite. And while Disneyโs products have floundered, the films that they were originally positioned as a corrective to have experienced a renaissance. The once dominant opinion that the Star Wars prequels were a childhood ruining disaster stopped being the cultural consensus some time ago.
This is down to several factors. The kids who grew up with the prequels came of age and got more comfortable admitting how much they loved those movies. The Clone Wars TV show gave new context to the characters and plotlines. Meme culture turned flaws into fondly remembered foibles. As opinions warmed, a broader reappraisal started to happen, celebrating the ambition and inventiveness rather than mocking the awkward comedy and stilted dialogue.
Which begs the question; could the same thing happen to other, similarly derided prequels? ย See, what isnโt remarked on or discussed as frequently as you might think is that both The Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter, two of the only franchises that could rival Star Wars for popular success, followed in its footsteps with their very own underwhelming prequel trilogies.ย
Itโs not a one-to-one comparison. The Hobbit films started as a mooted adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkienโs childrenโs book prelude, ballooned to two films in development and then had a third unceremoniously tacked on during production. The Fantastic Beasts films, meanwhile, were conceived as a five-part series that ended up providing a conclusion after three due to declining box office, a growing pile of controversies surrounding key creatives, and obvious audience apathy.
Neither trilogy lacks for ambition. Peter Jackson tried to expand the story of The Hobbit beyond the relatively childlike fairy tale constraints of the novel into a more epic set up for his Rings films, while the Fantastic Beasts movies built on the tonal and thematic darkness of the latter Potters, with which they shared director David Yates.
But thereโs a strong argument that this very ambition accounts for much of how these films were received. The Hobbit trilogy is overflowing with videogame-style action scenes (think the mind-numbing barrel sequence or Legolas running up falling rocks), dwarves breaking into spontaneous songs about somebody they only just met, and plenty of broad, silly humor. All of which might have rankled fans of the darker, grittier Lord of the Rings movies, but was either present in the source material, or was at least largely true to its tone. However, it becomes harder to accept this stuff when weโre also subjected to Lake Town politics, the bureaucratic struggles of the White Council and, in the Extended Editions, graphic scenes of orc heads being turned to pulp by bladed chariot wheels.ย
The Beasts movies are even less consistent. For every charming venture into Newtโs creature packed suitcase or jauntily scored scene of magical monster hijinks, thereโs Grindelwald ordering the murder of a child, or a convoluted reflection on the rise of wizard fascism. It begs the question of who exactly the films are meant for; older fans who grew up with the originals and might crave something meatier, or a new generation of kids. While you might argue that no ten-year-old is going to be engaged by Grindelwaldโs attempts to hoodwink the magic UN by infiltrating the German ministry, critics said the exact same thing about all the senate scenes in the Star Wars prequels and itโs precisely the generation who grew up with them that has spearheaded the reappraisal.
All three trilogies share a creative tension, a sense that what those telling these stories want to do isnโt what the stories themselves more naturally are. Maybe this was part of the problem โ returning filmmakers craving the chance to do new things in an old playground.
The lack of risk in modern blockbuster filmmaking has been detrimental to the landscape, so it can sometimes feel counterintuitive to be overly critical to big budget movies that do take wild swings. The relative redemption of the Star Wars prequels proves that it can take time for those risks to pay off. But similarities in foibles donโt guarantee similarities in outcome. Without equivalent time having passed, itโs difficult to judge whether the Hobbit or Fantastic Beasts movies could be met with their own reappraisals, but the early signs donโt point to yes.ย
If it took a disappointing franchise return to stoke audience fondness towards the Star Wars prequels, then The Lord of the Rings has already had that. Itโs rare to find anyone enormously enthusiastic about Amazonโs The Rings of Power, but while that series was met with its fair share of dislike it never felt like anyone was using it as a chance to announce that the Hobbit movies were secretly good all along. Itโs true that The Rings of Power is not technically part of Jacksonโs franchise, but with Amazon doing everything legally in its power to evoke his movies, your average viewer wonโt be aware of that. Plus, the delineation hasnโt remotely halted the angry YouTube comparisons โ although interestingly, more to the Rings films than the Hobbit ones.
The Potter franchise, meanwhile, is allegedly rebooting with a multi-season television adaptation of the books, but there arenโt any prominent voices proclaiming this as either the fix that Potter needs or an injustice to the unfinished saga of Newt Scamander. We canโt gauge what effect the series might have on the Beasts filmsโ legacy until it emerges, but it doesnโt seem like there are strong enough feelings on those movies for general audiences to much care either way.
And that, possibly, is the biggest tell when it comes to how these various trilogies might be evaluated in the future. The Star Wars prequels prompted rage and debate and spitting fury. Did anyone adopt such a hardline position on The Hobbit or Fantastic Beasts? Passion pointed in either direction means thereโs been an impact. An impact means something will be remembered and discussed and as long as that remains true thereโs always the chance of a different perspective.ย
Neither of the two newer prequel series has a Jar Jar Binks or a Palpatine, a Duel of the Fates or an โI donโt like sandโ. The Star Wars prequels are loaded with moments that are iconic and memorable for both the right and wrong reasons. Itโs hard to think of anything in the Hobbit or Beasts movies that might endure in the same way.
This isnโt to suggest that those films arenโt worth discussing. Neither trilogy is quite the cynical brand extension that Disney now specialises in, but nor are they the result of a singular, unfettered creative vision. The Star Wars prequels represented a popular auteur operating without oversight or restriction in his own invented universe. The only real comparison is James Cameronโs ongoing Avatar projects, but those films have never swung as wildly, never hit quite the same dizzying heights or confounding lows of Lucasโ second trilogy.
Itโs also worth touching on Ridley Scottโs unfinished Alien prequel series, despite it being a) not a trilogy and b) aimed at a more explicitly adult audience than any of the above franchises. Both Prometheus and Covenant grapple with heady, interesting ideas in often half-baked ways, but the fact that the grapple at all has earned them a burgeoning fan respect. With the upcoming Romulus seemingly promising a โback-to-basicsโ approach, it could well be that audiences find themselves missing the bolder choices of Scottโs newer films in ways that invite renewed mainstream appreciation.
Itโs impossible to argue a case based on something that hasnโt happened yet, but one thing that makes the Star Wars prequels so unique is that what followed them promised a return to what audiences claimed to want but ultimately provided an unflattering comparison between bold-but-flawed filmmaking and a surface-level facsimile of old favorites. Only time โ and further franchise entries โ can really answer the question of whether a previously derided cycle of movies can find a new appreciation. But itโs fascinating to speculate and in doing so, to question why something might or might not achieve it.ย
No comparative works really mirror the extremely specific circumstances ofThe Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith. Itโs unlikely any will ever have the same tortured and tangled journey through popular perception or prompt the same impassioned and divided discussion years after their release. Moreโs the pity.
When a frantic call to rescue her grandson turns out to be a con, 93-year-old Thelma embarks on a revenge mission. June Squibb, armed with her stolen electric scooter fanny pack and life alert button, isn’t saving the world, but in her own ever-shrinking sphere, righting this wrong is a Herculean task.
Thelma’s stunt coordinator, Ryan Sturz, relished the opportunity to tackle authentic small-scale action, allowing him creative control and more involvement on set. The result is a collaborative experience Sturz adored, and a finished product he speaks of with great pride.
Thelma is now available on all VOD platforms. Read InSession Film’s complete interview with stunt coordinator Ryan Sturz below:
Shadan Larki: Ryan, welcome to InSession Film! Stunt coordinators and stunt workers are having a moment of long-overdue appreciation. There’s been much conversation about what you all do and how you contribute to cinema. Tell me about yourself and your journey to where you are today.
Ryan Sturz: I grew up in the Caribbean in South America and Germany on a steady diet of American movies. John Wayne Westerns, John Ford movies, you name it. And I think just growing up as a boy, I always wanted to break stuff, and the idea of getting paid to break things, crash cars, and all that seems really appealing.
I moved to the U. S. in the, in 1999. I went to film school at USC. I studied film. I learned about camera angles and editing and all that. I learned how to put an action scene together. And that’s been my genesis. I was road racing motorcycles right out of film school. And I thought that I was interested in motorsports. And so I got into the stunt driving aspect of it. I like cowboy work and horses. So, I worked on Westerns and did a lot of horse horseback stuff, but because I had that film school background. I got into the stunt coordinating thing early on.
Pretty early in my stunt career, producers and directors realized I could put a scene together, bringing me on to coordinate.ย So, otherย folks might have a performer career for 15 to 20 years before they start to choreograph.ย For me, it wasย kind ofย simultaneous.ย I started performing and then choreographing almost at the same time.ย
SL: How do you approach your role as a stunt coordinator and your collaboration with your director?
RS: I like to serve the story first. Somebody will send me a script, and I’ll read it. And I’ll have a pretty good idea of what the action should look like.
For example, a script might say there’s a car crash. But the car crash can be a big flaming ball of fire or just a car in neutral coasting down the road and hitting a tree. If the story calls for the one, I can’t start to set up the other. So, I start to do my stunt breakdown upon first reading. Then, I might even read the story a second time before I talk to the director. I take my notes and know how I would approach things.
When I come up with ideas for how to approach things, I look at them from a creative perspective and also from a financial perspective. How much would I spend on this if I had an unlimited budget, and how could I make this work creatively if we don’t have an unlimited budget? Then I talked to the director and said, โOkay, what is your vision for all this?โ
The director might agree with me in some scenes and, in other scenes, might say, โNo, I see this differently.โ And ultimately, he or she is the captain of the ship. So, I will defer to them. There may be a bit of back and forth and a little creative discussion, but typically, the director has an idea of what they want. So, I’ll try to give that to them. Then I have to talk to the assistant directors, and the ADs will give me a schedule. based on that schedule and the discussion I had with the director, I will create a budget, which will go to a producer who will say, โOkay, that’s approved.โ Or they’ll say, โYou don’t have the money.โ
Then I have to go back to the director and say, โOkay, we can’t do this because of such and such, but here’s an alternative solution. What do you think?โ So, how do I see my role as a stunt coordinator? I’m the liaison between the creatives and the money people, and I just try to make everything work the best possible. I tried to give the director what they wanted within our budget and make it safe at the same time.
SL: What I loved about Thelma is that this is her Mission Impossible, but it’s Mission Impossible without the explosions and hanging off of buildings. I think, unfortunately, many audiences, when they think of stunts, they think of big action, they think of those crazy sequences, but many times it’s not. Can you talk about doing stunt coordination in a way that’s still creative and interesting but on a smaller scale?
RS: I like the smaller-scale stuff. I’ve done quite a few of them. I did some Disney shows, and Rescue Rangers comes to mind. When you think of Rescue Rangers, you don’t think of action.
But if you look at it closely, there is quite a bit of action, but nobody dies, which I’ve come to like; I’m a little older now. I have children. I have young daughters, and I have to stop and think about how much time in my career I have spent thinking about killing people. It’s a little worrisome, and I want to escape that. I want to do fun action. I want to do the Smokey and the Bandit action of the 1970s, which is a more innocent action. Maybe you might have a car chase and even have a fistfight here and there, but it’s all innocent. Nobody gets hurt. It’s all good fun. I like that.
I told you I grew up in South America and Germany, and as a young boy, I remember watching these movies. I understood the concept of play-acting. I understood the concept that it’s theater on a screen. And the thing that intrigued me most was the magic of it all. The illusion. They were crashing cars for real, but nobody was dying. It was a sleight of hand, a magic trick. And that’s what I liked. And that’s what I like about something like Thelma.
I pitched a shot that Josh Margolin, the director, ended up using: We see Thelma (Squibb) go up the stairs.
And then she rounds the corner. She leaves the frame for just a second. We switch her out with a stunt double. When she enters the frame again, we see her feet walking up the stairs. We’re on a close-up of the feet, and it’s a stunt double, and the stunt double trips on the stairs, right? But it’s that sleight of hand, and we pulled it off to make it look like the actress June Squibb is walking up the stairs and tripping. That’s what I’m interested in. I take great joy in that. And so, it doesn’t matter how big the stunt is. I take joy in things like the little things. How can we make the audience think that we have a 94-year-old character falling down a flight of stairs? And make it look real.
SL: What other sort of movie magic tricks were you able to pull off that you’re excited about?
RS: Well, Thelma is riding her scooter through traffic. That’s more dangerous than youโd think, especially in Los Angeles, because people don’t pay attention. We put stunt drivers in cars around her to keep her safe, so the stunt drivers created a buffer between June, and live traffic.
In the retirement home we had a little bit of a scooter chase and crashes, and that was fun. And we could pull it off to where June got to crash a scooter a little bit, you know? So, the stunt double did a big crash, and then June did a little crash, but she was really into it.
She wanted to hit Richard. She was excited about it.ย I thinkย Richard Roundtree was excited to return to his action roots. We all had a good time.ย
SL: One of my favorite sequences is when Thelma goes to visit her friend. She’s trying to get something from her house, and she’s having to climb on the bed to reach the thing, and then the gun goes off accidentally. Can you talk about how you make these scenes playful, yet grounded in reality?
RS: You know, that was all Josh. I was there, for sure. But I was there primarily because the bed was squishy, and we were worried about June having to stand on it and maybe falling off. The stunt double did quite a bit, having to jump on and off the bed and all that stuff. The gun was a non-firing replica, so we didnโt have to worry about that.
So, that was all Josh. That’s to his credit; that was his direction to June, and his selection of camera angles, and the feeling for that sequence came off from him. I was simply there. We call that babysitting in the stunt world. I was there simply to babysit and ensure that June didn’t bump her head or get too tired from jumping up and off the bed. That was the extent of what I did on that. Josh did everything else. So, if you liked that scene, that’s for Josh’s credit.
SL: You mentioned the back and forth with a director and the discussions of how things work. Can you discuss a scene where you and Josh worked together to reach a consensus and how that impacted what we ended up seeing?
RS: A scene did not end up making the movie. It was for cost reasons, but there was a big car sequence where Ben (Roundtree) gets into a car and peels out, and skids turn into traffic. That was supposed to be a big drift, a peel-out, and tire smoke. At an intersection, cars were supposed to skid to a halt and maybe even crash into each other. You can see how, on our budget scale, that was just not conceivable. When I first read that, I went to Josh and said, โSo, how do you see this particular sequence?โ
You could play it for comedy, or you could play it straight. And I think we should play it straight because I like straight action comedies. I think it’s funnier. And Josh and I agreed on that. And then we just had to talk about the logistics of how we would do that inside our budget scope.
Producers Chris Kaye and Zoรซ Worth got involved. And they were all very, very supportive. And we, we tried for a couple of weeks, I think, to make this work. And I kept coming back with different solutions, different combinations of stunt drivers and background drivers and actors. And in the end, it just wasn’t feasible. But that scene was, even though it never made the movie, a great example of a collaboration between the creative Josh and the technician, myself and the producers and trying to make something work that ultimately didn’t work.
But I had good fun working with all of them: Josh, Zoรซ, and Chris. It was a super collaborative effort.
SL: The film ends with a big climactic sequence with Thelma and the villain of the film, a surprise of sorts. How did you coordinate that?
RS: We cast a stunt double to double the actor. The double ended up being a really good match. I talked a lot to the art department. It was a conversation between [production designer] Brielle Hubert, Josh, and me about how the location should look. Brielle and I recommended where we should hang lights that we could break into. Brielle had an idea of how many she could provide and how many lights we could break.
I recommended where we should place him and the camera to have the biggest impact. Then, we just walked the path with the stunt double a few times. Josh had some ideas for making it a bit more dynamic, and I had some ideas for cutting it. We rehearsed it for half a day and then shot it. And then, if I remember correctly, we had a stunt double for Richard, but in the end, I believe Richard did the hip check part. He wanted to do that himself, and it worked out well. And that’s why having a good stunt double is important: one can play off another actor and keep the actor safe. Sometimes, suppose two actors are fighting or bumping into each other. In that case, they get into character and get a little bit too aggressive with each other, inadvertently, and they’ll end up hurting each other. So, it’s nice to have a stunt guy who will keep the actor safe.
SL: What’s struck me in our conversation is the level of creativity that’s involved in stunt coordination, not just in obviously the planning, but then having to think on the fly and having to come up with multiple options to fit the budget or how things change day to day. Can you talk a little bit more about that? The average moviegoer might not grasp all of those intricacies because you do your job so well, right?
RS: Yeah, you’re exactly right. I think it’s really interesting that you picked up on that. We try to plan, right? But a lot of times, we don’t have the money to plan. Thelma ran very, very well. Chris and Zoรซ were very supportive from the beginning. They brought me on early. They said, what do you need? I told them what I needed, and they did their best to give it to me. Sometimes, unfortunately, stunts are brought in too late. We are looked at as the technicians, the guy that crashed cars, you know, they think, โOh, some guy’s going to come in and crash a car and walk away.โ
Well, if you bring us in early. We can get creatively involved. If you give us the leeway, we can tell you a better way to do it. We can have creative input.ย We can say that ifย you put the camera over here, you get this result, and we can helpโif we’re asked or brought in early enough. I cannot stress the importance of rehearsals, even for little things andย smallย scenes, because, as you observed, once you get on set, everything changesโtime constraints, the actor has a different idea, or the director has changed their mind, or there’s a camera limitation, light, or whatever the case may be. Something will change every time, and the better prepared you are, theย more easilyย you can roll with the punches and come up with a solution on the fly. So yeah, you’re exactly right.ย I thinkย aย lot ofย creativity goes into making a movie, and it’s not just on my part.ย It’s a collaborative effort, which is another reason why I like to work on these smaller films: because you create that family atmosphere.
You know, sometimes, if you work on these 200-300 million dollar superhero movies, you’re just a cog in the corporate machine. They just look at you as a number. But if you work on a smaller movie, you’re part of a family. You’re all pulling towards this common goal, and then you can go to your buddy, the art director, and say, โHey, I messed up; I forgot something. Can you help me out?โ Or you can tell the lighting technician, โHey, I have an idea here for a lighting gag. What do you think? Should we pitch that to Josh?โ You know, so that’s why I want to be in this business. I like that collaborative and creative environment. I like to be able to solve problems on the fly, on the day. There’s nothing better, especially when it all comes together.
And you wind up with a movie likeย Thelma, where you feel, โOkay, this was worth it. This is something that I can show to my kids and be proud of.โ
SL: The big reason why I wanted to do this interview is because I love this movie, and also, I just want more movies like this. I want more movies that are just delightful and on a smaller scale and show somebody’s life. I don’t think we get enough of those, and I think that’s a shame.
RS: I feel the same way. I’m a stuntman, so people think Iโm going to want to watch action movies, but I’m so tired of action for action’s sake, you know, I’d much rather see action that comes out of a real character moment.ย Like Thelma jumping on or off the bed or riding her scooter through town. That’s what I’d like to see.ย
SL: Did you get an opportunity to meet theย realย Thelma?
RS: I have not. I’ve been to her house. We filmed in Thelma Post’s house. But I never got to meet her in person. I, I regret that. I will talk to Josh about it and maybe meet her for coffee someday.
SL: We have to figure that out! Ryan, as I let you go, is there anything we haven’t talked about that we should touch on briefly?
RS: I had a blast working on this. I enjoyed the process. Josh, Chris, and Zoรซ were amazing to work with. Those are the kinds of people that you want on your team. I hope to do it again soon. I hope to work with them again, and I can’t wait to see what the future holds for all of them. I think we made something cool here. This is special. As you said, we want to see more movies like this.
On this episode, Brendan is joined by the great Ryan McQuade to discuss Lee Isaac Chung’s latest film Twisters! We’ve been looking forward to this one for some time now, but sadly it may end up as one of the year’s biggest disappointments. There’s some good things from Chung and Powell is magnetic as always. On the whole, though, it’s a bit of a mixed bag.
Review: Twisters(4:00) Director: Lee Isaac Chung Writers: Mark L. Smith Stars: Daisy Edgar-Jones, Glen Powell, Anthony Ramos
Director: Lee Tamahori Writers: ย Michael Bennett, Shane Danielsen, Lee Tamahori Stars: Guy Pearce, Tioreore Ngatai-Melbourne, Antonio Te Maioha
Synopsis: A lay preacher arrives at a British settlement in 1830s. His violent past is soon drawn into question and his faith put to the test, as he finds himself caught in the middle of a bloody war between Maori tribes.
Lee Tamahoriโs historical epic The Convert is the story of Thomas Munro (Guy Pearce) โ a lay preacher who, in 1830, arrives in Aotearoa to take up a position in the new colony town of Epworth. The Convert is a much larger story, one of the pernicious effects of colonization, but Tamahori cuts his canvas down to it coming from the point of view of Munro, the stoic heroic type who has seen too much of the darkness in the hearts of men.ย
Kedgley (Dean OโGorman) a trader and ship captain points to a shore and says to Munro, โNever has perdition been so pretty to the eyes.โ For the white colonist, the idea that the land they are on is either paradise or hell is spoken of often. โIf you have come here to bring souls to Jesus, youโll be very busy,โ Kedgley laughs. Heโs not only referring to the Mฤori iwi who are in the midst of the Musket Wars, but also of the unsurprisingly racist and vicious townspeople of Epworth, for most of whom being termed โcivilizedโ is laden with hypocrisy.
Before Munro even reached Epworth (an area which would later expand into Auckland), he witnessed the slaughter of a group of Mฤori warriors by Akatarewa (Lawrence Makoare). Munro intervenes and narrowly avoids being killed himself because Kedgley steps in and Uenuku (Ariki Salvation-Turner) Akatarewaโs son has been sailing with him.
Munroโs intervention saves the life of Rangimai (Tioreore Ngatai-Melbourne), who later becomes his charge in Epworth where her chieftain father Maianui (Antonio Te Maioha) leaves her to become the Mฤori voice among the Pฤkehฤ. Along with the gentle young Pahirua (Duane Evans Jr.), Rangimai becomes embedded in the settlement, much to the open disgust of most there. Munro finds himself becoming an outsider within the township along with Charlotte (Jacqueline McKenzie), a woman already positioned as a pariah because of her association with the Mฤori people and her ability to speak their language.
The โgood Christian peopleโ of Epworth reveal their true colors soon enough and Munro, Charlotte, and Rangimai enter Maianuiโs Pฤ. Charlotte and Munro are tolerated by Maianui for their role in caring for his family. However, Maianui is not willing to hear of the ways of the Pฤkehฤ God; nor does he seek to be told that his hapu must give up their belief in utu โ the balancing of retribution and payment.ย
There is a pat familiarity to The Convert which borders on clichรฉ. Munro is a man seeking redemption through peace and finds himself in a world of war โ to ensure some manner of peace for the Mฤori people he will need to go to war. The full weight of the Musket Wars is never properly conveyed because it skips too quickly to resolution.
Tamahoriโs commitment to showing authentic Mฤori culture on the screen is where The Convent finds its footing. Thus, it is a shame that so much of the film is devoted to Munroโs spiritual and emotional journey instead of hewing to the people who are being devoured by the influence of Europe. Seeing more of Uenuku and his relationship with his father, Akatarewa could have stopped the movie being almost always under the auspices of Munroโs experience and perspective. Contemporary audiences are canny enough they donโt require a constant โinroadโ character. Even if they did, there is an equally good one in Charlotte โ an Irish convict whose understanding is built on experiences Munro could only imagine.
As good as Guy Pearce is โ and he is good, he doesnโt hold a candle to Tioreore Ngatai-Melbourne who blazes with bravery and intelligence. The performances are across the board solid, but Ngatai-Melbourne, Te Maioha, Evans Jr., and Marris Collins as a Kapu elder are magnetic.
The Convert is incredibly shot by Gin Loane bringing a vivid sense of place and time. The attention to detail of the artistry and specificity of a way of life struggling on multiple fronts is excellent. What the film lacks is the firm commitment to digging into that way of life on its own terms instead of through the arc of an outsider character.
The Convert comes close to being a vital and visceral historical epic but pulls itself back a little too often by not knowing where the focus should rest. Even with its flaws, the film is a glimpse into a moment in time rarely seen. It is not Tamahoriโs crowning achievement โ that still being the brutal Once Were Warriors, but it is good to see the director working in his own country once more.
When I think about a given year in film โ at the end of it, at its midway point, or on a Tuesday in October โ I tend to return to something the film critic Eric Kohn used to write during his days at IndieWire as an enduring principle: โAnyone who thinks this was a bad year for movies hasn’t seen enough of them.โ But 2024โฆ Well, letโs just say itโs had its pitfalls, the biggest of which it can blame on 2023. Last yearโs SAG-AFTRA and WGA strikes, having unfolded in tandem, created a natural cavity in this yearโs cinematic calendar. Films halted production, were temporarily shelved, pushed back their release dates, or went undated altogether. Some 2023 titles moved to 2024, while some that had initially targeted a 2024 release entered development hell. (Sure, most of those are Marvel movies, but we were never going to see Blade anyway.)
The films that have graced screens so far in 2024 arenโt all of the same caliber as early-2023 films like Knock at the Cabin, Showing Up, How to Blow Up a Pipeline, Beau Is Afraid, Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse, Past Lives, Asteroid City, and/or Mission: Impossible โ Dead Reckoning Part One, it would be silly to consider 2024 a โdownโ year thus far. Iโm not sure any year is a down year for film, just that some years are better than others. But thatโs the case with everything, isnโt it? Films themselves, included. And, as ever, anyone who feels theyโve struggled to find a great one so far in 2024 hasnโt seen enough of them.
To be included, films must have been released in theaters in New York or Los Angeles โ or on VOD/streaming โ on or before July 12. Festival premieres that have yet to receive a theatrical release are ineligible.
Honorable Mentions (in alphabetical order):The Animal Kingdom (Thomas Cailey); The First Omen(Arkasha Stevenson); Gasoline Rainbow(Turner Ross, Bill Ross IV); Hundreds of Beavers (Mike Cheslik); Kinds of Kindness(Yorgos Lanthimos); Music (Angela Schanelec); Robot Dreams(Pablo Berger); Snack Shack (Adam Rehmeier); This Closeness(Kit Zauhar); We Grown Now (Minhal Baig)
24. The Shadowless Tower
Will Bjarnar: The manner with which Zhang Luโs poignant 14th feature unfolds has been described in a myriad of ways โ as scenes โspilling into each otherโ; with a delicate touch; as a โmelancholic spell.โ But perhaps nothing is more accurate than Jessica Kiangโs wording: โin ellipses.โ For this simple tale of a food critic (Xin Baiqing) looking to rebuild a relationship with his long-distant father (Tian Zhuangzhuang) while navigating a potentially-romantic one with his younger photographer (Huang Yao) doesnโt formally end as much as it allows for its revelations on healing and love to continue on without completion, as those experiences tend to require time in order to reach resolution. Itโs a film about feelings, one that is wholly in touch with what it takes to have them, let alone to wrestle with what they mean.
23. Here
WB: The act of living life on lifeโs terms is front of mind in Bas Devosโ Here, and while its exploration of that idea is not exactly vast, itโs also far from diminutive. Instead, itโs individualized, both for the characters under Devosโ microscope and every unique viewer. Emotions are subtly conveyed in this film about a Romanian man working on construction sites in Brussels coming into contact with a doctoral student of moss just before he leaves the country for summer break. But those emotions are immensely felt; thatโs what really matters. A lesser work might trigger an emotional outburst of some kind in an effort to prove to audiences that the characters they have invested time in are capable of feeling as deeply as they are. Here, however, is a film that values its charactersโ interests and desires almost as much as they do, and thus commands the audience to do the same. If youโve never cared about moss before, youโll almost certainly never look at it the same way.
Alex Papaioannou: With her debut feature film, Janet Planet, playwright Annie Baker writes and directs one of the most delightful films youโre likely to see all year. There are many factors that contribute to the warmth that basically pours off the screen, but the most apparent is immediately clear. Itโs Zoe Zieglerโs performance as Lacy, the young girl around which this film is structured. โฆ [For] Lacy, being away from her home and her mother appears to have been the breaking point. I too have called home from a sleepaway camp and begged to be picked up, and what should be exciting and refreshing becomes something far worse. Itโs a clear-cut indication, at least in my mind as a child, that the universe was telling me I wasnโt supposed to be there. I was supposed to be back home, watching television or making up games to play in the backyard. We are all looking for some semblance of familiarity at that age to calm us, rather than venture out into the unknown journey of growing up and growing apart. And Janet Planet is interested in what it means to slowly lose that sense of familiarity. Whether or not itโs for better or for worse, is left to us to be decided.
Dave Giannini: Importantly, the [filmโs three lead] performances are stunning, and all in different ways. Hardy continues to be at the top of his game, especially in the space between lines of dialogue. His use of silence, facial expressions, and head movement to change the perspective of powerful moments puts him in a league of his own. Comer is the steadying force in this film, a challenge she more than meets, along with keeping a difficult accent with copious amounts of speech. And Austin Butler. I wasnโt convinced of his movie stardom quite yet, but count me in now. It is not just his introduction, which is a masterclass in gazing at a leading man from cinematographer Adam Stone. The forced lack of emotion in Butler is deeply important to the narrative structure and the character arcs of The Bikeriders, and he never wavers.
WB: If Dev Patel did indeed break several toes and his hand over the course of Monkey Manโs production, one can only imagine how many injuries the punch-happy ensemble of Kill procured throughout filming. The 40-plus fighters on writer-director Nikhil Nagesh Bhatโs train ride from (and, perhaps, to) hell spend the majority of the action-thrillerโs runtime taking hit after hit, stab upon stab, and every wound that could possibly be inflicted in between. Best of all: Itโs all done in the name of our entertainment. Cinema is alive and well; sometimes, the more alive a movie is, the harder those within the film in question are trying to murder each other.
M.N. Miller:AlexGarlandโs Civil War is a truly visceral experience that shows how to play both sides of the fence by allowing the viewer to tap into the filmโs meticulous ambiguity, allowing the viewer to interpret which side you gravitate towards. Is the President a version of Donald Trump because he wears a red tie and heโs a White man in power? Are the good guys the ones fighting and brutally and ruthlessly killing soldiers in camo? Then why are the prisoners of war being executed with a ferocious machine gun by people wearing the same clothes? โฆ Thatโs what makes the film experience of the Civil War so provocative, inflammatory, and dangerous. Anyone left in a dark room watching Garlandโs film can be left on their own devices to come to their own conclusions. His tenacious, riveting, and staggering vision isnโt the American dream. Itโs an American nightmare.
18. Do Not Expect Too Much from the End of the World
Hector A. Gonzalez:After delivering what I consider his worst work to date with the Golden Bear-winning Bad Luck Banging or Looney Porn, Radu Jude corrects his wrongs with an ambitious, complex, and experimental (even somewhat moving in its latter half) picture in Do Not Expect Too Much From the End of the World, which might be one of his best works to date. It is playful and testing in its satirical nature while implementing some metatextual passages that comment on capitalism, the 2020s influencer era, and Romaniaโs history (both past and present) without feeling self-righteous or overly pretentious.
WB: When presenting Green Border at 2023โs 61st edition of the New York Film Festival, director Agnieszka Holland made a habit of quasi-warning the audience before each screening. โI’d tell you to enjoy the movie, but that would be inappropriate,โ she said, and itโs a fitting assessment. Green Border, a two-and-a-half-hour epic that tackles the European refugee crisis head-on as it actively unfolds internationally, is not a film to be enjoyed, but a film to be studied. Its unforgettable images and its heartbreaking story of four different groups of people, each navigating the uncertain realities of their respective situations, make for a tense must-see that is as pivotal a work youโll see this year. Enjoyment might be a stretch, but to not admire it is impossible.
16. Love Lies Bleeding
AP: Rose Glass introduces the principal characters of Love Lies Bleeding to her audience in the most telling way imaginable. When meeting Lou (Kristen Stewart), she is elbow deep into a toilet thatโs beyond clogged. Jackie (Katy M. OโBrian) is drowned out by a constant barrage of gunfire as she is brought around the local shooting range. Immediately, she proves her mettle in the sense that she mocks the use of guns, as her preference lies more in the realm of up-close-and-personal. JJ (Dave Franco) is unfathomably repulsive, and would remain as a simply irritating man-child if he wasnโt a serial abuser to his wife, Beth (Jena Malone), who is also Louโs sister. And finally, we meet Lou Sr. (an unhinged and wild-looking Ed Harris) who is caring for his oversized bug collection. The visual language of Love Lies Bleeding not only looks beautiful, but delivers expressive meaning with each new scene. And if this film is anything, itโs expressive. โฆ But if one were forced to sum up the film in a single word, I believe the best term would be sultry.
WB: With sincere apologies to Robot Dreams and not-so-cordial condolences to Inside Out 2 and Despicable Me 4, the best animated film of the year so far is about an eight-year-old girl who really, really wants her mother to make chicken with peppers for dinner. Yes, thatโs what Chicken for Linda! is ostensibly about, but in full, it is a far more intricate story about loss and youth, all of which is animated with a gorgeous paintbrush-esque style and vibrant colors, the likes of which we have yet to see this year. Not to mention: It fits perfectly in the Pixar mold of playing well for both kids and adults, the former of which will laugh while the latter weeps. Plenty of fun (and feelings) for the whole family.
14. Made in England: The Films of Powell and Pressburger
WB: Itโs fitting that the two men Scorsese has championed the most over the years, Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, are the first to receive such treatment from the man himself in the form of David Hintonโs Made in England: The Films of Powell & Pressburger. Scorsese narrates a sprawling history of the duoโs collaboration as he viewed it: with enthusiasm and adoration. His singular connection to Powell & Pressburgerโs work turns what might otherwise serve as a by-the-numbers documentary about a legendary filmography into a far more personal tour through an inimitable yet influential body of work. And sure, it helps that Scorsese just so happens to be one of the seminal filmmakers of his generation, if not le grand fromage; all the more reason to enjoy the journey.
Matt St. Clair: When I saw the short film Femme at the 2021 SXSW Film Festival, I remember being shaken both by its striking filmmaking and its story involving a drag queen experiencing discrimination that plays into the struggles drag queens face in real life, whether itโs in the form of attempted anti-drag club legislation or physical altercations. The newest feature-length film of the same name, by directors Sam H. Freeman and Ng Choon Ping, adapting their own short, is a more heightened experience in terms of tension. โฆ Similarly lush in visual aesthetic as the short of the same name, Femme enriches the source material by offering a deeper exploration of gender identity and putting a queer spin on the heteronormative noir genre as its central lead engages in sensual double-crossing. Sexy, discomforting, and visually sumptuous, Femme makes its case as one of the yearโs best movies.
HG: How to Have Sex is much more than an exceptional directorial debut from London-based cinematographer-turned-filmmaker Molly Manning Walker and a showcase of Mia McKenna-Bruceโs acting talents. This is predominantly an evocative conversation starter. It is occasionally difficult to watch due to the unsentimental glimpse at the female experience, but it is so rewarding once it reaches its closing moments. โฆ How to Have Sex has a strong identity and sense of importance that might cause audiences from various age groups to gather around and start a conversation about similar events, whether you have gone on a similar holiday or not.
Zach Youngs:Ghostlight is a film about many things, but itโs very much a film about developing empathy through acting. From the perspective of Dan (Keith Kupferer) weโre transported into a community of actors. Actors who see and feel in a completely different way than Dan is used to. Being with those people, giving himself to the process brings out what Dan hasnโt been willing to say, or think, or feel as he deals with his grief. Writer Kelly OโSullivan has built a deeply layered film. She slowly, beautifully creates the narrative in stages, calling our attention to details, feeding our brains pieces of a puzzle that our heart begins to work out through context. This isnโt a film of grand exposition, preamble, or aside. Ghostlight is a film that gives us everything we need when we need it and not a second sooner. You can see the ghosts, the small ideas written into the script, on the screen in a way thatโs magical. Itโs a story that will unfold in your head for hours after watching it as your brain stitches together the brilliance of the nuance in every scene and every word spoken. Not enough can be written or said about it. Itโs a film that goes beyond what you think a film like it can be. Itโs perfectly paced, superbly acted, and it is one of the best written films of the decade. There is nothing else like it on screens now and it must be seen.
AP: Last Summer [marks] Catherine Breillatโs return to filmmaking after a decade. The auteur filmmaker has been away from cinema for a while, but one thing is apparent: the provocative nature of her films has not lessened during this hiatus. With her latest, Breillat confronts her audience with a taboo subject, but is also able to interject a palpable sense of youthfulness and beauty into a story that will have many doing all they can to block the on-screen images from their minds. The film is centered around Anne (Lรฉa Drucker) and Pierre (Olivier Raboudin), and the seemingly calm and affluent life they live with their young daughters. Her stepson, Thรฉo (Samuel Kircher), moves into their home after getting in trouble at school, and the lens of the film immediately shifts. Breillat composes nearly every frame with Anne firmly rooted in the center of it all. In the hands of Drucker, this performance soars into a realm of intrigue. … [And] with Last Summer, Breillat, after four decades of filmmaking, proves that a compelling secret being withheld is always a lively cinematic experience; even if the lie in this case is meant to repulse and shock us on some level.
WB: If you had a Japanese NFT as being one of 2024โs best films on your bingo card, I suggest you check your lottery numbers; you might just be a whole lot richer than you were yesterday. As is anyone who indulges in the sadistic pleasure of Kiyoshi Kurosawaโs cinema, Japanโs foremost filmmaker in the horror genre. And while his 45-minute film Chime โ which you can rent (or non-funge?) exclusively on Roadstead โ may not be as rewarding nor as purely terrifying as Cure and Pulse, Kurosawaโs masterworks, it is just as unsettling, if not more so. As the titular noise begins to urge the filmโs characters to commit unseemly acts in rapid succession, we as viewers begin to wonder if weโre going insane ourselves; if we canโt hear this chime, what does that make us? Innocent bystanders, or complicit onlookers? Sometimes, nothing is as terrifying as a film that refuses to answer a crucial question, precisely what Kurosawa tends to go for when he grants us the chance to delve into his increasingly-dark worlds.
8. I Saw the TV Glow
AP: After the major buzz of their last film, Weโre All Going to the Worldโs Fair, filmmaker Jane Schoenbrun became quite the genre filmmaker star. Any possible doubt regarding their talent will be instantly quelled with I Saw The TV Glow. Prior to the world premiere of the film, the director stated their vision for the film prior to the first day of shooting. With I Saw The TV Glow, they โtried to make a movie that would play at midnight screenings at the IFC Center for 20โ30 years to come.โ It only takes a few minutes to realize that their vision is basically set in stone, but furthermore, it shows that Schoenbrun has absolutely no thoughts of slowing down their complete commitment of bringing bold filmic visions to audiences.
WB: Startlingly prescient and wholly original, The Beast โ which Bertrand Bonello loosely adapted from Henry Jamesโ 1903 novella, โThe Beast in the Jungleโ โ could feasibly be reduced to a drama about star-crossed lovers, but its complications make it a significantly more curious piece to gnaw on. Indeed, Gabrielle (Lรฉa Seydoux, having quite the year) and Louis (George MacKay; him, too) appear to have known each other for some time, but the early revelation that they seem to have been in one anotherโs orbit for centuries, across timelines and in different forms of themselves, elucidates the notion that not only are these beautiful, curious figures entangled in more ways than one, but that their lives will never not be entwined. Whether thatโs for worse or for better isnโt much of a question by the time Bonelloโs latest mindfuck concludes on a perfect, volatile note, but the other questions it posits linger with a level of intensity most auteurs would kill to achieve. Itโs not just about fear and love, but the fear of love; itโs a depiction of the terrors of possibility, and the inevitably of terror, a masterful one at that.
WB: How do you follow-up your own masterpiece, not to mention the best action movie ever made? If youโre George Miller, you go back to the same well that made Mad Max: Fury Road so epic to tell the curiously-heartfelt yet still wholly maniacal origin story of Furiosa (Anya Taylor-Joy). As it unfolds in five parts, spanning from a young Furiosaโs (Alyla Browne) kidnapping by the big-nosed, brash Dementus (Chris Hemsworth) to her rendezvous with the noble Praetorian Jack (Thom Burke) to her eventual independence in the filmโs closing moments, Furiosa never fails to make good on its challenging task. It may not live up to Fury Road in terms of narrative depth nor action-packed prowess, but itโs a worthy companion piece that sees a 79-year-old madman remaining consistent with his uproarious worldbuilding and elevating further beyond what we believed to be the peak of his powers with his War Rig-centric scene of the year. Furiosa is still playing in a number of theaters, if you have any interest in helping a near-masterpieceโs box office prospects.
Maxane Vincent: Hit Man shows exactly how modern-day romantic comedies should be: incredibly funny (with a keen eye on societyโs warped priorities, through sharp jokes on cancel culture and Americaโs fโed up obsession with the Second Amendment) and impeccably sexy, with two impossibly beautiful leads giving the romantic tension needed for us to keep wanting to spend time with them. Yes, it helps that Powell and Arjona know how to act and modulate emotions, which makes their characters feel far more alive in the hands of Linklater than in some of his previous (failed) efforts. As a result, Hit Man is Linklaterโs best movie since School of Rock, his greatest achievement.
AP: It took Ryรปsuke Hamaguchi around 40 minutes before he dropped the title card in his 2021 Oscar-winning film Drive My Car. A magnificent film regardless of that type of specific heat check, the renowned Japanese director seems particularly aware of how his next film might be perceived. In that case, he sheds any notion of playfulness by opening the film with the title card at frame one: Evil Does Not Exist. And as soon as thatโs out of the way, Hamaguchi offers his hand to his audience to guide them somewhat aimlessly through a forest. Lush trees slowly creep in and out of the frame as we look skyward, unsure of where we are, how we got there, where weโre going; but itโs soothing, especially when treated to the rich score of Eiko Ishibashi, which will most certainly be a talking point for audiences after the film. But over time, as the credits interject themselves into the serene images of greenery, the leaves are replaced with empty branches and decay. Now, this could be due in part to the time of year, but if thereโs anything about Hamaguchiโs films that become immediately clear, itโs that every image is clearly calculated to invoke a thought or emotion in the viewer. And within mere minutes, the standard act of letting credits roll becomes a thesis statement in its own right. Thereโs nature, thereโs the people that inhabit nature, and thereโs the people who invade it.
Nadine Whitney:Luca Guadagninoโs Challengers is sweaty, sizzling, and so sexy โ itโs also a masterpiece of hyperbole. Itโs hilarious, deliberately over the top, and forces people to get into its deliciously perverse groove. The soundtrack by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross is employed to amp up the crowd, but also to camp up the film. Sticky short shorts, wet designer tennis shirts being discarded to reveal the male [Mike Faist, in this case] form, banana eating in one bite. Slow motion, tennis ball camera, Josh OโConnor in ruffled beast mode, psychosexual tension in spades and the final โmoneyโ shot [featuring a primal scream from Zendayaโs Tashi Duncan] bring Challengers to its orgasmic ending. Love is a blood sport and Guadagninoโs titillating tennis is game-set-match. Juicy, sticky, and horny as hell โ Challengers is dynamite. Itโs the love triangle film of the year and possibly one of best films about carnal and professional drive, ever.
WB: โTo be, or not to be: That is the question,โ reads Clarence โDivine Eyeโ Maclin for a group of his fellow inmates during their allotted rehearsal time at Sing Sing Correctional Facility. Though heโs performing the iconic speech from William Shakespeareโs โHamlet,โ this rendition comes at a pivotal point in โBreakinโ the Mummyโs Code,โ an original production being put on by the prisoners at Sing Sing, specifically their Rehabilitation Through the Arts program. This play, written by the theater companyโs director, Brent (Paul Raci), not only includes Hamlet and an assortment of mummies, but gladiators, time travel, and whatever else a man with only his imagination as solace could dream up. In โBreakinโ the Mummyโs Code,โ the question isnโt โto be, or not to beโ so much as it is โwho or what else can we be?โ
Directed by Greg Kwedar from a script by Kweder and Clint Bentley, Sing Sing is as gentle, special, and wholly alive as any film Iโve seen so far in 2024, a feat aided by career-best work from Colman Domingo as John โDivine Gโ Whitfield, but far more captivating thanks to a supporting cast that almost entirely features formerly incarcerated actors that participated in Sing Singโs RTA program while in prison. Their performances lend a unique authenticity to a film that is already overflowing with it, a beautiful and humane work that highlights the creative process actors of all kinds and stations go through just as brilliantly as it depicts how vital that process can be when practiced by those in need of an escape the most. I tend to agree with our own Benjamin Millerโs review: โSing Sing is not the type of film you expect, and certainly not one you will ever forget. Not only is it a one-of-a-kind prison movie, itโs one of the best films of the year.โ Iโd go so far as to say itโs nearly perfect.
WB: In terms of scale, no 2024 film can come close to Denis Villeneuveโs second cinematic installment in Frank Herbertโs Dune universe. But thereโs more to a movie than how massive it can be, a call that Dune: Part Two answers in every sense. Picking up exactly where Villeneuveโs Dune left off in 2021, Part Two is a sneaky tale of fate and deception that accomplishes its goals at an astonishing level. Its very existence is astonishing, the unadaptable having been adapted as meticulously as anyone can get to the source material without veering the worm off the side of the sand dune. Not only does it take the path laid out by Part One and elevate it, but it does something few sequels have ever been capable of doing: it elevates its genre to unprecedented heights that all sci-fi films in its wake will be chasing. As M.N. Miller wrote in his review, โItโs the science-fiction epic that will blow you away and is the one we have been waiting for.โ Now, all we have to do is wait for the next one. If itโs anything close to Part Two โ by far the best film of 2024 thus far โ said wait will have been worth its weight in spice.
On this episode, JD and Brendan discuss Nicole Riegel’s latest film Dandelion, starring the great KiKi Layne! We are suckers for a great music film, with the likes of Once, Blaze and Inside Llewyn Davis, for example, being some of our favorite movies. So we were excited to check out Dandelion and how it fits within the music film canon.
This week on the InSession Film Podcast, we discuss some 2024 films we’ve recently caught up on and haven’t had a chance to review on the show! We also talk about the Gladiator II trailer and JD shares a Midnight Special story.
Check out this weekโs show and let us know what you think in the comment section. Thanks for listening and for supporting the InSession Film Podcast!
– Midnight Special (1:27) To start off this week’s show, JD tells us the story of his recent rewatch of Jeff Nichol’s 2016 masterpiece Midnight Special. Long time listeners of the show will know that it’s one of his favorite films of the 2010s, and as a result it wasn’t too shocking to hear how this viewing affected him.
– Gladiator II and Captain America: Brave New World Trailers (12:52) Given our love for Ridley Scott, we had to talk about the new trailer for Gladiator II and its epic potential. It looks really great, especially when you consider the turnaround time from Napoleon to something as bold as doing a sequel to a beloved Best Picture winner. We also talk about the new trailer for Captain America: Brave New World, a film that could potentially swing the MCU’s favor back to being positive.
– Box Office / Horizon: Chapter 2 Pulled (30:14) In this segment, we talk about the continuing momentum of the box office after Neon’s huge weekend with Longlegs. Say what you will about the film, but it was Neon’s biggest opening by far and things have shifted mightily since May. One disappointment, however, is that we will not seeing Horizon: An American Saga – Chapter 2 hit theaters after all. At least for now. It appears they want to see how Chapter 1 fares on VOD before making a decision on Chapter 2.
– 2024 Catch-Up (50:59) For our main segment this week, we wanted to talk about some films we’ve caught up with over the last few weeks and months that we haven’t had a chance to talk about yet. We, of course, can’t review everything, so we wanted to save some space to talk about those movies we’ve seen and where we land on them.
We have a really fun surprise on the next Main Show
Help Support The InSession Film Podcast
If you want to help support us, there are several ways you can help us and we’d absolutely appreciate it. Every penny goes directly back into supporting the show and we are truly honored and grateful. Thanks for your support and for listening to the InSession Film Podcast!
Directors: Jeff Zimbalist, Maria Bukhonina Writer: ย Jeff Zimbalist Stars: Angela Nikolau, Ivan Beerkus
Synopsis: A daring couple travels worldwide to climb the 118-story megatall skyscraper, Merdeka 118, in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, attempting a bold acrobatic stunt on the spire to salvage both their career and relationship.
We have reached a point in the cinema timeline where documentary films have become akin to scripted reality television. At the very least, that is what Skywalkers: A Love Story feels like, to the extent that almost every non-sky-scraper image seems staged. I couldnโt shake this feeling as the camera continued to capture random shots of the subjects walking through airports and parks and gazing out of windows as if caught in thought.
As one of the subjects of the Netflix Documentary Skywalkers: A Love Story states, everyone keeps their eyes on the flyer, not the catcher. In this equation, directors Jeff Zimbalist and Maria Bukhonina want us to keep our eyes on their daredevil stunts’ highly stylized lyrical artistry. However, the overproduced and overwritten subplots in between make for a forced drama by the catcher that has less authenticity than youโd expect.
In short, how can such a dangerous subject of a film play it so safe?
For instance, the two subjects of the documentary, Angela Nikolau and Ivan Beerkus, consistently film scenes where they hide in a secured building from construction workers or security. Despite being in hiding, they film and keep bright lights on, even when we are led to believe people are just a few feet away. Itโs implausible that no one would notice the bright lights that shouldnโt be there, just around the corner.
Additionally, there are several scenes where they are running away through stairwells and tripping, making it difficult to discern their location. This lack of context does not help the viewer understand the situation or build the necessary trust to create suspense. In scenes meant to generate excitement, the filmmakers have the stars explicitly tell us what they will do before they do it, which undermines the suspense.
The approach feels scripted even in the more personal moments, such as discussing their relationship struggles and showing a disagreement during a high-rise stunt. Let us, the audience, experience the journey with them rather than feeling like we are reading a script in a read-through.
That being said, Skywalkers: A Love Storyhas its moments, and some are truly exquisite. The awe-inspiring and breathtaking cinematography is breathtaking, and the director of photography teamโRenato Serrano, Pablo Rojas, Beerkus, and Nikolauโdeserves plenty of credit for their work here. It may be the best from a documentary since the Academy Award-winning Free Solo.
There will undoubtedly be those who take exception to how the filmmakers, using Zimbalist’s reality-television treatment of a script, glorify highly dangerous and exceedingly unlawful acts. While I donโt necessarily have a massive issue with this, the film lacks a disclaimer. Additionally, and probably my main complaint, the documentary does not do a good enough job portraying anything beyond superficial reasons for the stunts.
However, the depth and themes of directors Jeff Zimbalist and Maria Bukhonina’s film are nothing more than a social media reel or post that Nikolau and Beerkus do daily.
Thatโs not to say Skywalkers: A Love Story may not be worth your time because, at the very least, the film is entertaining. However, you might hesitate to recommend it, given the filmmakers’ higher expectations. Ironically, the filmโs love story feels flat and contains the same clichรฉs found in any romance depicted on screen. This includes the predictable resolution of their differences by the end of the second act, allowing them to continue their goal. I wish documentaries like this one hadnโt become reality dating shows. Yet, we know films usually evolve with the times. We can still admire the sheer art and ambition of Skywalkers: A Love Story while being honest about its faults.
Director: Lee Isaac Chung Writer: Mark L. Smith, Joseph Kosinski, Michael Crichton Stars: Daisy Edgar-Jones, Glen Powell, Anthony Ramos
Synopsis: A retired tornado-chaser and meteorologist is persuaded to return to Oklahoma to work with a new team and new technologies.
While watching Twisters, I found it funny that people have such reverence for films decades later. The original Twister, which many enjoyed, was praised for its special effects and panned for its story. (My favorite quote to describe the Jan de Bont film is by Roger Ebert when commenting on all the tornadoes in the movie, “It was a real good day.โ) Yes, Twister was a movie that made a huge chunk of money because they decided to digitize a cow caught up in a tornado.
You see, Twister has had a resurgence in critical praise, with nearly half the reviews on Rotten Tomatoes coming since 2020, giving a remarkable positive resurgence to the Bill Paxton and Helen Hunt vehicle. That’s because the audience, not the critics, always decides a movie’s place in history. So, imagine my surprise at the complaints about the dumb Twisters story.
My question is, what exactly did you expect going in? They’re chasing tornadoes, people. Let your mind go, and just enjoy the ride.
The story follows Kate Cooper (Where the Crawdads Singโs Daisy Edgar-Jones), who grew up in the Great Plains and has a haunting past from a devastating encounter in college. She works at the National Weather Center and is approached by her old friend, Javi (In the Heightsโ Anthony Ramos), who has been developing state-of-the-art storm-tracking technology that will forever change tornado safety precautions in Oklahoma.
Kate returns for a week only of storm chasing. She is a straight-arrow character, and she is about to meet her wise-guy counterpart in Tyler Owens (Top Gun: Maverickโs Glen Powell), a charming social media superstar who chases storms and shares them with the world. (I half expected Powellโs character to tell Kate, โYou donโt chase the storm; the storm chases you.โ) Of course, Kateโs team of eggheads and Tylerโs cowboy crew clash, but they soon realize they must work together to prevent a weather phenomenon the world has never seen.
But donโt worryโthey are all equipped with pickup trucks, charisma, belt buckles, and their wits to survive, or it wouldnโt be as much fun to watch.
Directed by Minariโs Lee Isaac Chung, working from a screenplay by The RevenantโsMark L. Smith, Twisters is more of a remake than a sequel, with significantly superior (and more common, as will be explained later) special effects and better-looking actors. Iโm not sure if Edgar-Jones and Powell have chemistry or itโs the fact Powell can have chemistry with anyone on screen.
Frankly, Smith has had a declining trajectory in his scripts since the Academy Award-winning film mentioned above. Besides the enjoyable Overlord, his filmography is littered with disasters such as The Marsh Kingโs Daughter, The Midnight Sky, and The Boys in the Boat, all of which were box office and streaming failures. The characters are paper-thin and wooden, akin to beautiful mannequins, and the film is rife with action-film clichรฉs.
I will say that many characters and scenarios are not carbon copied, but reproduced from the first. You have the opening tragic situation. One of the supporting characters is just like Philip Seymour Hoffmanโs Dusty Davies. You have an incredible amount of scenes where people are going out to public events during the tornado storm of the century, so common sense would think that softball, movies, and bull riding would be off limits.ย
However, the thing is, Twisters is so much damn fun! Yes, movies can be a transformative, artistic experience, but there is a reason people look back at films like Speed, True Lies, and The Rock. These films have compelling stories, well-executed action sequences, and engaging characters. (Yes, they are retreads, but characters like Kate and Tyler give the older audiences the nostalgia factor, and younger ones wonโt know any better.) Where else can you get a โfirenado,โ twin twisters, and a movie screen being ripped from the wall so the character can watch a real disaster flick for the ultimate disaster experience?
Yes, I will admit that Twisters is exactly what you think itโs going to be. However, Man (or woman) versus nature movies can be water cooler films if done the right way. Twisterswill elicit that type of talk in droves with its thrilling whirlwind of nonstop action and jaw-dropping special effects. Then, with its charismatic cast, let’s face it, Glen Powell is the new Tom Cruise and made to entertain the masses.
For God’s sake, power your brain off, and just enjoy the ride.
Director: Alfred Hitchcock Writer: Ernest Lehman Stars: Cary Grant, Eva Marie Saint, James Mason
Synopsis: A New York City advertising executive goes on the run after being mistaken for a government agent by a group of foreign spies, and falls for a woman whose loyalties he begins to doubt.
We’re used to seeing cramped, claustrophobic tension in Alfred Hitchcock films with a handful of people around in any given scene. North by Northwest, from the first build of Bernard Hermann’s tremendously frenetic score, shows us New York City as a place absolutely covered in people. Every inch of sidewalk is a flowing river of humanity, the bumper to bumper cars never seem to get anywhere, but are always in a constant block of motion; buildings spew and consume people in a near constant flow giving us a startling grip of our own anonymity in the grand scheme of humanity. That awareness turns into anxiety as we watch a man’s very persona called into question.
Ernest Lehman’s script hums with the fear of this scenario. We’ve all had a situation in which we were perceived or accused of being someone or doing something we didn’t do, but the extreme to which North by Northwest takes this brings the fear to an entirely new level. Our entire life and being could be completely undone by a hand gesture seen across a room. No matter what Roger Thornhill (Cary Grant) says or does, he will be persecuted. Even when he thinks he’s safely out, when he decides he’s going to do a bit of digging on his own, he just falls ever deeper into the morass of geopolitical espionage. The script adds layer upon layer to the subterfuge, threading each needle carefully and stitching it all together in a sinister quilt. It’s an utterly terrifying concept and may be the most devious plot Hitchcock has ever taken on.
The complicated plot doesn’t lack the Hitchcock visual flair either. From wide shots of the cavernous U.N. building lobby, to a bird’s eye view of Roger exiting the building like an ant on a toy model, Hitchcock and frequent collaborator, cinematographer Robert Burks, build a visual language that is unparalleled. Their crowning achievement as collaborators has to be North by Northwest‘s most indelible and incomparable scene, the crop duster chase.
As Roger stands in the almost literal middle of nowhere, chasing a lead from Eve’s (Eva Marie Saint) supposed conversation with the real George Kaplan, he starts to suspect he’s been led astray. It’s not until he speaks with a man who he assumes is Kaplan that he realizes he has been set up. The man points out that the crop dusting plane that has been in the background of the scene the whole time isn’t actually dusting any crops. It’s then that the plane turns and makes its true purpose known. There are a couple of strafes by the plane before Hitchcock sets up a shot that will thrill people long into the future. Roger sees the plane as it makes its diving run. He turns and rather than a cut or a pan, Roger runs forward as the camera dollies backward as if the plane chases Roger and Roger chases the camera. The plane and Roger are captured in the same shot, the plane growing closer, until Roger falls in order to avoid the bullets coming at him from the plane’s gun.
That’s only a piece of the truly thrilling and brilliant sequence, capped by Roger running into the road to stop a fuel tanker. Editor George Tomasini struts his incredible skill as he cuts between shots of Roger in the road with the truck coming for him, then the truck hitting the brakes, and finally Roger falling backward landing somewhat safely under the truck. All of Tomasini’s edits show the power of the position and how well the skill can craft a beautiful work of art.
As inventive and mind blowing as that crop duster sequence is, it does highlight that the two major set pieces of North by Northwest, the other being the climax on Mt. Rushmore are utter nonsense in terms of plot. Why would a traitorous spy leave the assassination of his rival to such incomprehensible means? Why would someone launch their international escape from landlocked South Dakota? The only answers that could be are that these sequences make for exciting and excellent set pieces. Otherwise they’re fluff, unfortunately like much of the plot involving Eve Kendall (Eva Marie Saint).
It’s obvious that without the strictures placed on films under the Hays Code that Eve would have been a much more interesting and nuanced character. She definitely starts off that way, but slowly peters out to another of Hitchcock’s blonde damsels in distress by the end. Eve’s introduction is bold. She manipulates the situation so that Roger ends up sitting at her table and she proceeds to bluntly and very effectively seduce him. She takes him back to her private car and gently guides and switches their positions against the wall, so she’s pinning him with her kiss in a dominant position. This bold sexuality is exciting to see in a film like this where, previously, the man is always the aggressor. It’s a pity then that this character could only have so much confidence for one subterfuge at a time. Her true motivations or feelings are too muddy and the grand romance we are to believe she’s experiencing rings so false. It serves the plot to keep Roger in her orbit, but one wonders what could have been if she were allowed to have taken the reins more fully.
In spite of a few flaws, North by Northwest remains an unqualified triumph. It’s got some of the best humor, dark and otherwise, in any Hitchcock film and it never lags for a second of its run time. North by Northwest is a top notch thriller that demands repeat viewings if only to try and piece the plot together again for what feels like the first time, every time.
Another month, another great opportunity to check in on the Best Sound awards race as it stands about halfway through the year.
What Weโve Seen
Our two biggest contenders that have been discussed already are Denis Villeneuveโs Dune: Part Two and Alex Garlandโs Civil War. Dune has precedent, the first installment winning Best Sound in 2022. The team has only built on their achievements this time around. The craft on display here covers the sweeping, overwhelming sound that pulls people in. In the case of Civil War, Garland and his team play around with huge, booming sounds and silent moments, all captured on camera by the war journalists at the center of the film. Admittedly, itโs likely that voters will only remember the heights of Dune: Part Two as it racks up nominations in all the technical categories, leaving Civil War by the wayside as other contenders emerge later this year.
An Emerging Contender
The release of George Millerโs fifth installment in the Mad Max franchise, Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga, has thrown another major contender into the mix. The previous film in the saga, Fury Road, won the prize for sound in 2016, so the precedent is there for this kind of work. Granted, it did not have quite as stiff competition in the form of another science fiction franchise sequel with a Sound victory under its belt, but that prior result still carries weight. The sound design team for this film has so much to work with, really showing off their skills in a couple of chase sequences along Fury Road that replicate the heights achieved in 2016.
A couple of things are going against Furiosa, not just the Sound race but most technical categories as well. The first hurdle the team will have to clear is the box office performance and the publicโs interpretation. Furiosa has only managed to collect just under $68 million domestically on a $168 million budget, which prematurely sent the filmgoing community into an existential crisis at the end of May. Of course, these numbers speak nothing to the quality of work being done in the filmmaking and technical realm, and that is where the other hang-up is. 30 years separate the release of Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome and Mad Max: Fury Road, which allowed for unprecedented technological advancement that made the latter a phenomenon in the mid-2010s. Only 8 years separate the most recent installments, and there hasnโt been enough technological progression for Furiosa to stand out. The combination of these factors could make its stock fall in the eyes of voters and may even knock it out of the category entirely.
Looking Ahead
At the midway point of the year, there have only been two surefire contenders in the form of Dune 2 and Furiosa, with Civil War likely not having enough goodwill to make it to the awards season conversations at the tail end of this year. Assuming these two films are taking two of the five nominations right now, most of the category remains to be filled out. Something the Academy seems very willing to recognize is a successful musical, and we have a couple of possibilities to look forward to later this year. Joker: Folie A Deux, the much-anticipated follow-up to Todd Phillipsโ 2019 critical and commercial success, has added Lady Gaga joining Joaquin Phoenix as he reprises the role that won him Best Actor just a few years ago. And apparently, itโs a musical? It remains to be seen what kind of musical it will be and just how much this will involve, but if they can replicate their success it could receive a nomination in many technical categories like the original. Another highly anticipated musical is the film adaptation of Wicked, the stage musical that has taken the world by storm for the better part of the 21st century. This type of film could either be incredibly successful and celebrated or get widely panned if not done well, and thereโs no result in between.
Some other contenders include Steve McQueenโs WWII drama Blitz starring Saoirse Ronan, Ridley Scottโs Gladiator II, and Lee Isaac Chungโs Twisters. All three have the potential to showcase some truly awesome sound effects and designs, with big action set pieces leading the charge to cement them in the running for technical awards aplenty. Twisters is the only one we will get to see relatively soon, with the other two coming in the last couple of months of 2024.
This race is proving to be one that could take all year to make a definitive call for, but at this point, it seems to be Dune: Part Twoโs to lose. The quality, scale, and widespread appeal of the work done in this film are simply head and shoulders above anything else released thus far, and it would take some major momentum to catch up to it. The long awards season offers ample time for this to happen, but films released in November and December will be competing with Dune when all is said and done.
Polish filmmaker Agnieszka Holland has made a career out of confronting the biggest taboos within Polish society. Her own personal history, as the daughter of a Holocaust survivor who was deeply embedded within leftist intellectual circles, has informed much of her art and imbued her with a deep feeling for the highly specific social milieus that are brought to the screen in her films. In the past, she has dared to address subjects as complex and wide-ranging as the German invasion of Poland, false imprisonment in the Polish Peopleโs Republic and domestic abuse. Her career has also been marked by struggles against censorship and sweeping criticisms from members of the ruling class.ย
Her latest film, Green Border (2023), has inspired particularly harsh rebukes from right-wing Polish government officials – who have gone so far as to compare her to a Nazi propagandist. With its focus on the Belarus-European Union border crisis and the treatment of refugees in modern-day Poland, the film pushes back against many of the xenophobic, highly reactionary narratives that have been constructed by the right-wing political establishment in Poland. In spite of all this, the film continues to open in theatres across the world and find an audience.
Zita Short had the opportunity to speak with Ms. Holland about the political and social significance of Green Border.
Zita Short: This film places a heavy emphasis upon the role that bureaucratic procedures can play in complicating the process that refugees are asked to go through in order to legally gain certain rights and privileges. As with many of your other films, it casts a weary eye upon the dominant narratives that surround this practice. What value do you think there is in questioning these narratives?
Agnieszka Holland: I hope that it can open some peopleโs hearts and minds because the issue of migration is such a huge issue – politically, socially, culturally, economically. It has become one of the most important issues in the modern world. More and more, the people in wealthier parts of the world see refugees as being part of this anonymous wave of aggressive arrival that endangers their peace, security, and comfort. We donโt see the people behind the narratives and reduce them down to aggressorsโฆwe come to accept very easily the violence that is used to respond to waves of immigration. Refugees and migrants arrive from war-torn countries, especially in Poland, and it is very easy to use terms like โhybrid warโ to discuss immigration. Immigrants are dehumanized and the richness of their humanity is lost. You have the educated and the illiterate, you have Muslims, you have Christians, you have Buddhists, you have atheists, you have childrenโฆ
You also have young men who are delegated by their entire family or entire village to go to Europe and prepare for the arrival of the rest of the family. You have people who are escaping war, you have people who are escaping persecution, famine. You also have people who simply want a better life and hope that their children can grow up in a secure location. I wanted to give voices and faces to these people and show that this issue is not only about them. It is important for our humanity. It is also for people who have been blessed to be born with the right passport and grow up in a country that offers security and prosperity.ย
ZS: The film has sparked an intense backlash in Poland, where it has been condemned by several government officials; with some even invoking Nazi propaganda in an attempted smear campaign against the film. What methods do you think Polish artists can use to limit the impacts of this form of censorship?
AH: I think that the main duty of the artist is to go against censorship and not be influenced by the political agendas of the ruling class. You have to see behind the momentary interests of politicians. Societies are so polarized nowadays that when you touch on the subject of immigration, which is used by politicians to further their own agendas, it becomes very controversial. Many people cannot accept it. For many people, it is the opposite. They are grateful to see human faces instead of political propaganda. I am experienced enough to know what I am touching on. It was a deliberate decision to tell the story of people who have to make these important choices. I think we are delegating our free will and our conscience to these parties. We are also encouraged to conform to the general public opinion. I think that artists should be able to create spaces in which they are free and do not have to feel afraid. They should be able to touch subjects and artistic languages which are controversial and not palatable to everybody.
ZS: In the past, you have noted that, somewhat paradoxically, you felt that you were working with a relatively high degree of artistic freedom in Communist Poland. How has your view of this turbulent period in your countryโs history evolved and changed over the years?
AH: I hated the Communist regime and I was the happiest person when it fell apart and when democracy arrived. However, democracy is fragile. We can change the victims to the perpetrators if we are not careful. I think that what is necessary is to be aware of oncoming problems. I think an artist needs to be free to do their work. I can vouch for different political options and when I am making my film I have some kind of duty to another side of the creative process.ย
ZS: Your film also comments upon the fact that the dehumanization of refugees and migrants has unfortunately become normalized. Why do you think itโs important to address such controversial issues in your art?
AH: I made several films about the Second World War and the Holocaust. I spent about ten years researching that period of history and preparing, writing and shooting those films. When I first started working on these projects and speaking to people with first-hand experience as part of my research process, people werenโt talking about these things. I feel very strongly that if it happened, it can happen again. It is not over. We have to be very careful to see the warning signs before we start heading down a dark path.
We are living in a time when fascism is starting to take hold and we know this because they are successfully dehumanizing a vulnerable group of people. They have also inflicted acts of violence upon this group and subjected them to humiliation. There is also the risk of them being killed, imprisoned or pushed out of the country altogether. Sadly, we are at a very bad stage. You can feel it in America, with the situation in Mexico, and you can feel it in Poland. You can also feel it in Tunisia, where people donโt have the money of the European Union and are left to die in the desert. In Ethiopia the refugees are killed in their thousands. My father was a Holocaust survivor and I made films about those crimes because I understand that humanity is capable of the worst atrocities.
Director: S. Shankar Writers: ย S. Shankar, B. Jeyamohan, Kabilan Vairamuthu, Lakshmi Saravana Kumar Stars: Kamal Haasan, Siddharth, Bobby Simha
Synopsis: Senapathy, an ex-freedom fighter turned vigilante who fights against corruption,ย returns to India to aid a young man who has been exposing corrupt politicians in the country through videos on the internet.
โCorruption causes cancer to the nation. Corruption kills.โ
These words are spoken at the top of S. Shankarโs Indian 2 before any image is shown, setting the stage for Senapathyโs (Kamal Haasan) grand return to the screen twenty-eight years after the original Indian, which solidified Haasanโs star prowess within Tamil cinema. The film had a troubled production that lasted five years due to multiple delays attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic (two main actors passed away from COVID-related complications during filming), an accident that caused the death of three crew members, and Shankar taking on new directing responsibilities through his Telugu-language debut, Game Changer, starring RRRโs Ram Charan after Haasan signed on to star in Lokesh Kanagarajโs Vikram while waiting for production on Indian 2 to resume.ย
The first Indian tackled the subject through Haasanโs dual performance as Chandrabose (โChandruโ), who has to face his father, Senapathy, after bribing his way to become a brake inspector, giving a safety certificate to a bus with defective brakes, which leads to the death of over 40 schoolchildren during a tragic accident. Chandru attempts to redeem himself, but Senapathy has been on a vengeance-fueled path of getting rid of Tamil Naduโs corruption problem, with many high-ranking officials taking bribes from people who barely have anything to live by. This confrontation leads to a shocking climax, in which Senapathy kills Chandru for having bribed his way into not facing justice for his corruption before the vigilante perishes in a massive explosion.
Senapathy survived, mind you, and has been in exile ever since. Theoretically, he should be dead, with the first film set in 1996 and extended flashbacks in the second half revealing that he was a freedom fighter who upheld the ideologies of Subhas Chandra Bose during World War II. That means that, in Indian 2, he should be over 100 years old. The fact that he is not only in top physical form and can ride a Unibike without any problems at such an age will require you to suspend your disbelief. However, itโs the least of the filmโs problems, which, in all honesty, doesnโt much matter since the prosthetics on Haasanโs face have always been hokey and look just as bad in this film as in Shankarโs Indian.
Senapathy is also a practitioner of the Tamil martial art Varma Kalai, which is real but has been stretched to inexplicable magic powers in the sequel. That could explain why he doesnโt look a day over 75, since many martial arts practitioners believe a daily routine slows down the aging process (especially when focusing on the meridian lines designed to heal the body). In the first film, Senapathy used these techniques to paralyze โ and ultimately kill โ his victims. By crossing his index and middle finger, Senapathy knew which points to hit on the body so their heart (or brain) would stop functioning. Shankar may be stretching the limitations of Varma Kalai a bit, but itโs nowhere near as far-fetched as in the second film, in which he presses a point to block a personโs blood from flowing and transforming them intoโฆa girlโฆand a horse.
Yes, in the pre-intermission scene, one of Senapathyโs victims becomes a horse and rides off into the sunset until his body canโt take it anymore, collapses, and dies. Unlike many viewers who nitpick at everything when movies represent a romanticized world in which anything is possible, I can easily suspend my disbelief when a 100-year-old character rides a Unicycle and does perfect jumps with it. Shankarโs movies also require you to suspend your disbelief. Itโs impossible to watch Enthiran โ and its sequel, 2.0 โ without distancing yourself from reality, as his visionary lens throws everything humanly possible to capture with eyes on the screen. That being said, I had a very difficult time doing so while watching someone become a horse in Indian 2, especially during a scene in which Senapathy confronts a horde of villains and transforms all of them into horses.ย
But the movieโs problems continued to add up, especially when Shankar returns to his anti-corruption cinema roots after a brief stint in the world of science fiction (with the Enthiran series), a remake of Rajkumar Hiraniโs 3 Idiots, and a cross between The Hunchback of Notre Dame and Beauty and the Beast with 2015โs I. When you open your film with โCorruption causes cancer to the nation. Corruption kills.โ (in replacement of the usual โSmoking killsโ advert placed in front of every Indian movie with tobacco use involved), youโre forcing the picture to be unabashedly bold with its presentation of how corruption is not only a cancer to ourselves and the people we affect but the world. When it is riddled with corruption, the world becomes further diseased when opportunistic individuals take advantage of people in dire need of help.
The film’s thesis is worth exploringโand recontextualizingโin the era of social media, especially since Shankar hasnโt made an anti-corruption picture since his masterpiece, 2007โs Sivaji: The Boss, way before Facebook, X, and Instagram became a part of our everyday lives. And itโs from that framing device that a group of content creators, known as โThe Barking Dogs,โ who expose corruption through a series of satirical videos, demand Senapathyโs return after a young woman killed herself when a corrupt official framed her for fraud. With the hashtag #COMEBACKINDIAN, they created a worldwide movement for Senapathy to resume his vigilante activities in Tamil Nadu, as corruption has metastasized to even more dangerous heights.
Senapathy has been on his own quest for anti-corruption while in exile and disguises himself to avoid being caught by the Tamil Nadu Commando Force and its officer, Pramod Krishnaswamy (Bobby Simha), the son of the inspector (Nedumedi Venu), who was on Senapathyโs tail in the first film. When his presence is demanded back in India so he can end the rampant corruption plaguing the country, he returns and is lauded as a hero as he makes a Facebook livestream to instruct his followers on how to eliminate this fast-growing cancer, once and for all. But The Barking Dogs soon realize there is a price to pay on going after corrupt individuals, especially if they are members of your own family, and thatโs when Shankar takes a rather emotionally manipulative direction with his story.
The filmโs first half isnโt very interesting. Visually, it looks as grandiose as every Shankar film (with particular attention to detail given to a gold-laden safe where a corrupt individual likes to do his business on a gold-painted toilet), and there are a few sequences where Haasan goes all out in riveting monologues that rival the television studio scene in the first Indian. It also has a deeply problematic scene in which, to fool the cops at the airport, Senapathy disguises himself as a Chinese martial artist. Yes, Kamal Haasan in yellowface.
And Iโve just learned, through film critic Pramit Chatterjee, that the actor did the same thing in K.S. Ravikumarโs Dasavathaaram. Upon further research, and in the same film, he also donned blackface and played George W. Bush??? Iโve said this in previous reviews: I wouldnโt call myself the foremost expert in Indian cinema โ I always have blindspots, even after seeing plenty of Kamal sirโs films. This does put the disguise in Indian 2 in a bit more context, but it is still deeply offensive and unacceptable, especially when so much progress has been made in our culture to confront the racist stereotypes of the past by positively representing different cultures through their artistic lens.ย
This disguise acts as a bad omen for the rest of the film, which becomes essentially a parallel montage between The Barking Dogs, who catch family members in the act of committing corruption, and Senapathy continuing his mission to kill as many high-ranking (corrupt) officials as possible. The movie then reaches an inflection point in its post-interval scene, in which the dogsโ leader, Chitra Aravindan (Siddharth), learns a drastic piece of news about one of his family members, and makes their life even harder by doing what he thinks is right. This is where the movie becomes downright cruel, and its exploration of how vigilante justice may also corrupt the soul never goes deep enough to mean anything, especially when this moment (and somewhat poignant exchange) between Chitra and Senapathy isnโt resolved.
Oh yeah, did I forget to mention that the sequel has been split into two parts after the rough cut assembled by editor A. Sreekar Prasad was over SIX HOURS LONG??? Thatโs crazy โ even for Shankar. As a result, the 180-minute-long film has a dragged-out first half that sets up the return of Senapathy in a not-so-thrilling fashion and a second half that begins to ask questions on the relevance of โIndianโ coming back, only to abruptly end when the dramatic tension is at a maximum with an โIโll be backโ moment thatโs more reminiscent of Skeletorโs post-credit scene in Gary Goddardโs Masters of the Universe instead of the T-800 in James Cameronโs The Terminator.
Before that, though, Shankar culminates his picture with a bravura chase sequence involving Senapathy riding a Unicycle as he tries to escape the commandos and the villagers who now want him to return to where he came from. The use of FPV drones, in particular, is a real show-stopper to witness in IMAX, especially when cinematographer Ravi Varman dizzyingly moves his camera to sync with the Unicycle zigzagging inside a train, a construction field, and a small marketplace. It proves that, no matter how shoddy his screenplays might have gotten, Shankar still has the juice to dazzle with his camera and create larger-than-life sequences that are indescribable in words but so eye-widening to soak in on a large canvas. His direction of musical numbers has also improved, with Anirudh Ravichander creating a soundtrack that celebrates the legacy of AR Rahmanโs compositions with his modern spin on the material. โZagaZagaโ is a bop, and โCalendar Songโ is also pretty damn great. It doesnโt reach the same heights as Anirudhโs previous works, Jawan and Lokesh Kanagarajโs Leo, but it comes close to topping Rahmanโs music in the first. Fight me.
Like Kevin Costnerโs Horizon: An American Saga, Chapter 1 ended with a sizzle reel of Chapter 2, Shankar gives audiences a glimpse of whatโs to come with Indian 3. Haasaneven admitted in the press tour that he signed up to do Indian 2 only because he loved what he read for Indian 3. As soon as I saw an immaculately cathartic shot of two British soldiers decimated by an elephant with a pole, I didnโt need to see anything else. Iโm in, no matter how dull this one was. The intense bursts of action give me hope that Shankar will create a mass spectacle that rivals some of his greatest productions.
But when he directly cites Sivaji: The Boss on multiple occasions in Indian 2, while never matching (or further modernizing) the potent anti-corruption study he drew in his 2007 masterpiece, it only makes me want to leave the cinema and spend three hours with Rajinikanth instead.
Movies based on video games have been a common occurrence as early as the 80s, with a big
screen rendition of Nintendo hit Super Mario Bros. โ pre-Chris Pratt’s voice acting endeavors
โ released in 1986. Since then, thanks to the powers of CGI and developments, video game-
based movies have continued to grow in scale and frequency. Live-action films based on video
games also rose to popularity in the 90s and 2000s, when gamers and viewers witnessed iconic
video game characters like Lara Croft grace the big screen.
However, not all gaming-themed films are created and enjoyed equally. Unfortunately, some
video game-based movies tend to miss the mark or have trouble translating video game
narratives and lore to feature-length standards. In our Boy Kills World review, we highlighted the
movie’s promising premise and how it falls short of reaching that perfect blend between the
ultraviolence of 90s action flicks and elements from the video game world. Boy Kills World also
highlights a common problem of video game movies casting good actors in worlds that tend to
need a little more fleshing out.
Still, this doesn’t mean that all video game-based films are bad. In this post, we’ll take a closer
look at some gaming-themed films that simply get gaming right while not overwhelming their plot or script with pacing or world-building issues. While these may seem debatable to film
aficionados, the movies listed in this post are more love letters to gamers than anything:
Wreck-It Ralph
While not technically based on a real video game, Wreck-It Ralph excels in its world-building
while still paying homage to the world of gaming and arcades. Namely, the film focuses on the
bad guys we tend to meet in video games and even features a cheeky cameo from Nintendo’s
household villain Bowser. In building the weird and colorful world of Wreck-It Ralph, the film
aims to answer the very Toy Story-like question: What do video game characters do when we’re
not gaming?
Despite its seemingly simplistic concept and premise, Wreck-It Ralph has a lot of heart. The film
centering on video game villains also automatically creates that ragtag dynamic between its
characters, which the film’s equally loved sequel further explores later. More than anything,
Wreck-It Ralph succeeds in being a well-balanced video game film, even if the games it’s based
on are fictional.
The Family Plan
By no means a critically acclaimed film, The Family Plan is a Mark Wahlberg-led action comedy
film that heavily features the real-life first-person shooter game Valorant. Aside from being
central to the plot, the film’s use of Valorant is a crucial step forward in the history of video
game-based movie in that it features the esports side of gaming.
Esports is a rapidly growing segment of the video game industry and has quickly become its
own form of entertainment. As a result, the film was welcomed by the continually growing Valorant player count โ over 19.1 million monthly active players as of May 2024 โ 70% of
whom belong to Gen Z. By heavily featuring esports as part of the film’s story, the movie is a
shoutout to the modern gamer’s spirit and strays away from the usual bleak depiction of the
Cheetos-infused, basement-dwelling gamer (see: Thor in Avengers: Endgame). To ensure the
movie got esports right, they even cast real-life Valorant gamers and content creators.
Free Guy
Much like Wreck-It Ralph, Free Guy‘s success as a gaming-themed movie follows a similar
premise. Instead of focusing on the bad guys in video games, Free Guy explores the inner
workings of a video game’s non-playable character (NPC) and what happens when one goes
rogue.
In talking about Free Guy‘s world design, filmmaker Shawn Levy named real video games like Grand Theft Auto and Call of Duty as inspirations for developing the film’s video game world,
balancing the animated feel of video games with cartoony and outlandish gameplay. At the
center of it all, though, is an absurd love story between the NPC and a real player’s in-game
character, as well as the triumphant message that we can all become the main characters of our
story by taking control.
Scott Pilgrim vs The World
Finally, instead of taking you into a fictional video game world, Edgar Wright’s Scott Pilgrim
stands out by establishing that the movie’s world is a video game โ completely subverting the
subgenre. At the same time, Scott Pilgrim is also an homage to comicbooks, drawing on comic
visuals throughout its runtime. This resulted in a wacky, colorful, and quick-witted film led by a
star-studded ensemble, including entertaining performances from pre-MCU Chris Evans and
Brie Larson.
More than a decade after the film’s release, many still applaud the movie’s many moments of
mischief, like a supervillain ex-boyfriend exploding into coins after his defeat, as well as the film
โ and source material โ treating its villains like video games treat final bosses. Later, Scott Pilgrim would re-enter pop culture through a Netflix animated series, in which the original cast
returned to voice their cartoon characters, along with a significant twist in how Scott Pilgrim‘s
story is told.
Director: Marco Petry Writers: Claudius Plรคging, Andrej Sorin Stars: Dennis Mojen, Janina Uhse, Anna Maria Mรผhe
Synopsis: A young man meets his new girlfriend’s friends for the first time at their regular game night, putting him under pressure to make a good impression. But then suddenly, her ex shows up as well.
We can all relate to the all-encompassing nature of new romance depicted in the German Netflix comedy Blame the Game (Spieleabend). That desire for connection is now fulfilled by all the positive attention. The novelty of a new relationship is exciting and brings an intense focus. Soon, hormones like dopamine and adrenaline begin to release.
All the intense, all-consuming affection makes everything around you fade away. Oh, and you also feel that instant connection when each of your best friends, two adorable pooches, meet each other in a park and begin to hump each other with no shame at your favorite local dog park. At least, thatโs what the filmmakers of Blame the Game want us to think.
This makes it one of the more disingenuous comedies in recent streaming memory.
Written by Claudius Plรคging (Itโs Your Turn, Honey), the film is somewhat of a rip-off of one of the more overrated comedies of the past decade, Game Night. Here, after those delightful pups get together in the park, a local bike shop owner, Jan (Dennis Mojen), and a local canine photographer, Pia (Janine Uhse), reach that point in their blossoming romance where it’s time to meet her friends.
And what better way to do that than during the annual game night? Pia has an eclectic group of friends, to say the least. Her best friend, who lives with her, Karo (Anna Maria Mรผhe), is wealthy and owns a business that brings in over six figures annually. She and her husband, Oliver (Axel Stein), an emasculated man who loves to cosplay, hit on their maid, Gabriela (Alfonsina Bencosme).
Rounding out the group is Sheila (Taneshia Abt), who cannot get over a breakup with her ex-girlfriend. The same goes for Mathias (Stephan Luca), who is still in love with Pia and wants her back. Sheilaโs brother, Kurt (Maximilian Bretschneider), playing the role akin to Jesse Plemonsโs Gary, is a freeloader who continuously makes Jan uncomfortable. I will say that Bretschneider is by far the most amusing of the bunch, but the script needed more of him.
Directed by Marco Petry (How to Be Really Bad), Blame the Game is a cheap imitation of better ensemble comedies because the film lacks proper structure and moves the plot along with dozens of filler scenes that add nothing to the experience and just waste time. This means there was plenty of time to take bigger swings and risks. The experience feels cheap and forced when comedy should feel natural.
Then, when NetflixโsBlame the Game does take a big swing, the film doesnโt track or make sense. For example, the film takes a big jump by having two rivals play ping pong naked with little promotion and no explanation. There is simply nothing modern or new about the film or even the dating experience that the movie tries to portray.ย
Then, you have the ridiculous scene where Jan brings a game that is used to antagonize and torment characters and create tension within the group. That would all be fine and even acceptable, if Blame the Gameโs script is funny, which it is not. The humor is south of average, even mediocre, and while the characters are likable, Mojen and Ushe do have a flirty energy, thatโs not enough to recommend a stale comedy that feels too long at a sparse 90 minutes.
Director: William Wages Writers: Phillip Bellury, William Wages Stars: Beau Bridges, Rob Mayes, Sam Hennings
Synopsis: Wayne, a singer, meets washed-up legend Claude Allen. Together they go to Nashville to pitch a song, but the industry rejects them. Wayne figures out how to release the song publicly, not for himself but for Claude.
The real star of the film The Neon Highway, finally finding a home on the streaming giant Netflix after debuting with a minimal release on video on demand and a theatrical release in Nashville last spring, is the country music and the performance of Beau Bridges, who makes the most of his supporting screen time.
The film plays like an unintentional sequel to Beauโs older and more successful brother Jeff Bridgesโs film, Crazy Heart, where Bad Blake now mentors a younger generation after no one else will have him and finds happiness in mentoring. The final product is like a classic country song, filled with haunting memories, a few dashes of nostalgia, and, most importantly, a few honest moments of reflection.
Though, The Neon Highway cannot help itself from tripping into country cliches more than most.
Directed by William Wages, who wrote the script along with Phillip Rob Bellury, The Neon Highway stars real-life country music star and actor Rob Mayes (John Dies at the End, Thor: Ragnarok), who plays Wayne Collins, a down-on-his-luck, nine-to-five family man struggling to make ends meet for his family. Desperate to buy his family a new washer and dryer, he asks for an overtime shift.
However, Wayne’s boss politely reminds him that if he stopped playing around on his guitar, he would take him more seriously. Wayne was an up-and-coming country music star in Nashville who was about to be offered a solo deal from a major label, which would mean leaving his brother, Lloyd (Eat Pray Love’s T.J. Power), behind. However, all of that changes when Lloyd is killed in a tragic accident on a highway, altering Wayne’s life forever.
Fast forward two decades later, while on a job, he meets a weathered country legend, Claude Allen (Dreaminโ Wildsโs Beau Bridges), living in his deceased parents’ home. He may explode if he stands too close to an open flame, considering he looks like he has been soaking in some backwoods moonshine. As they talk, they realize they need each other. Claude needs Wayne for his songwriting ability, and Wayne needs Claude for his star potential to earn a big payday.
If you think you have heard this plot before, itโs not just from that very special episode of the Saturday morning Saved by the Bell wannabe, California Dreams, or any time Kris Kristofferson holds a guitar to scream. The one where the crusty, grizzled old timer works with a younger version of himself, trying to right the wrongs of their pasts.
Bridges’ performance is good, even funny at times, especially when young people come up to him and tell him how much their grandmothers adored him. Still, the script never lives up to the authentic and refreshing performance of the aging actor, who comes from a legendary acting family.
However, if you are a fan of the genre and country music in general, the film takes some chances with its script. It is not perfect and sometimes misses its mark, but it is refreshing enough to separate itself from the usual country drama fare. Not to mention, the filmโs core from Cuban-American Jazz musician Arturo Sandoval and the soundtrack performed by Lee Brice, sets the tone for the film that works harmoniously with the setting.
While I appreciate the thought and authenticity put into The Neon Highway, the whole could be better than the sum of its parts. The story feels stale and old. A country retread if there ever was one. Besides Bridges and a slightly above-average performance from Mayes, the film struggles to find its footing in a narrow genre with about the same broad appeal as a Kevin Costner western. For a much better film about a real country music star, seek out Ethan HawkeโsBlaze on Tubi. Otherwise, The Neon Highway is for diehards of the genre and the music it tries to lose itself in.
Director: Renato De Maria Writers: Patxi Amezcua, Alejo Flah, Luca Infascelli Stars: Annabelle Wallis, Riccardo Scamarcio, Massimiiano Gallo
Synopsis: A father, immersed in a difficult divorce process, embarks on a dangerous mission when his children disappear from their isolated country house.
Vanished Into the Night is the equivalent of a bad Lifetime movie with better packaging. The film is visually stunning, set in Italian villas, villages, and seaside towns. The actors are strikingly handsome and beautiful, and it’s easy to get lost in the eyes of each lead. However, the plot is paper-thin, and the script is as shallow as the Trevi Fountain.
Too bad no one made a wish to make a more competent film experience.
There is no depth to the story or themes, zero subtext, and the film needs a second act. Netflixโs Vanished Into the Night is the cinematic streaming equivalent of a storyboard put to digital cinema. I cannot believe anyone would recommend it, and if they did, they should never review the medium again. They are not just wasting your time but stealing it, not to mention your sanity.
The Italian Netflix thriller has some decent stars for such a poorly executed endeavor, and you have to feel bad for them landing in this lazy, contrived film. John Wick: Chapter 2โs Riccardo Scamarcio and Malignantโs Annabelle Wallis star in the Renato De Maria (Robbing Mussolini) film. Working from a script written by Francesca Marciano and Luca Infascelli with a thin plot, itโs hard to believe anyone would want their name attached to it.
Wallis plays Elena, an American psychotherapist who left her practice to help her husband Pietro (Scamarcio) follow his dream of opening a bed and breakfast in a sunny seaside town in Italy. However, the home they invested in, mainly with Elenaโs investment, is a money pit.
To make matters worse, Pietro has accumulated over 250,000 euros in gambling debts.
Elena is not perfect either; as Pietroโs lawyer brings up, she was addicted to opioids for years, making Pietro the primary caretaker of their children. Yes, itโs sufficient to say this marriage seems beyond recovery.
However, after a tense divorce mediation, Pietro has custody of the kids for the week while Elena returns to the States. His son, Giovanni, wakes up with bad dreams and mistakes the shadows of tree branches for monsters. Pietro soothes him back to sleep, where his adolescent daughter Bianca rests.
He closes the door, sips his drink, and watches a football game, only to discover that his children are missing from their room hours later. When Elena returns, she blames Pietro, and they receive a call from the kidnappers demanding 150,000 euros for their children’s safe return. This means he must consort with an old friend, Nicola (Massimiliano Gallo), in his shady dealings to find the means to get them back.
De Maria wants the audience to feel tension and suspense because of how far these characters, in particular Pietro, will go to ensure their children will come back safely and unharmed. The problem is that there is little suspense derived because itโs rather obvious who the villain is from the beginning and that he is the only one with true motivation.
The handful of red herrings, like the shady childhood friends and mobsters looking for their money, are nothing but fodder. The character decisions need to be more explicit, such as not calling the police for hours when your children go missing from home. Not to mention this lack of clarity persists when another character asks why this wasn’t done, and their response is, ‘You told me to stay and not do anything.’
Then, there is the issue of the second actโthere is none. There is one compilation, and as soon as you become aware of it, you know who the real villain is. Pietro experiences no tension, plot complications, conflict development, or turning point. Frankly, it’s an extended version of the first-act setup that doesn’t work and gives away the plot immediately because it is so painfully transparent.
When the movie reaches the big reveal in Vanished into the Night, the resolution is so matter-of-fact and clean that it insults the audience. The twist here is disappointingly conventional and expected, lacking the unsettling and bizarre nature the genre thrives on and fans crave. Regrettably, the story lacks the visceral impact and tense elements needed to create a truly memorable and gripping audience experience.
This week on Women InSession, we discuss the titillating, erotic films of Adrian Lyne! we discuss everything from Flashdance to Fatal Attraction to Unfaithful, and everything in between!
On that note, check out this week’s show and let us know what you think in the comment section. Thanks for listening and for supporting the InSession Film Podcast!
Director: Niclas Larsson Writer: Niclas Larsson Stars: Ewan McGregor, Rhys Ifans, Taylor Russell
Synopsis: Three children are brought together when their mother refuses to move from a couch in a furniture store.
Family dynamics tend to be messy. Itโs essentially a group of people you have no choice but to love unconditionally. Itโs a difficult circumstance; if there is any faltering, it could turn into something you canโt let go of. These themes in films have been discussed for years, but more recently, thanks to filmmakers like Ari Aster, a new approach has been taken, highlighting the weirdness and absurdities of the entire situation. In his feature debut, Mother, Couch, Niclas Larsson attempts to find the weirdness in family struggles and relationships. While some moments stand out, he ultimately comes up short with little characterization, a lack of focus, and a genuine emptiness.
Mother, Couch starts with David (Ewan McGregor) walking towards a furniture store across an empty parking lot. The emptiness here is palpable and can be seen as a look into the psyche of David, but as the film continues, it becomes a significant issue for the film as a whole. In the store, he finds Bella (Taylor Russell), who works the store, and his brother Gruffudd (Rhys Ifans) as they are looking for a dresser for their elderly mother. However, their mother (Ellyn Burstyn) is upstairs on a couch, refusing to move. David attempts to remove her from the couch and the store while also dealing with issues in his family and the struggle of holding onto his mom, who is slowly fading away, all while discovering his childhood relationships might not have been what he thought.
As mentioned, this is Niclas Larssonโs first feature film. A director with only a few shorts under his belt took on a project with a hefty subject and a loaded cast. The ambition of Mother, Couch was there as the similarities to Beau is Afraid are apparent, and the influences of directors such as Ari Aster and Charlie Kaufmann are all over this film. Larsson attempts to tell this story with the same zany, confusing, and sometimes horrifying style that the previous directors have spent so much time perfecting over their careers. The issue is that those other directors have made a career on confusing and wacky styles while always keeping the focus clear and concise. Even in their most eccentric work, there is an understanding and a journey; where Mother, Couch falters the most is in telling that journey. Most of the film felt odd for the sake of being weird; there wasnโt much to grasp, and even the film’s main character, David, wasnโt provided enough depth to stick out.
Not sticking out seemed impossible when you look at the cast’s star power, including Ewan McGregor, Rhys Ifans, Ellyn Burstyn, Taylor Russell, and F. Murray Abraham (playing two roles). All these performers have proven how much of a presence they can be on screen over their long or short careers. However, aside from brief moments from Ewan McGregor in this film, all actors seemingly give one-note performances. I donโt think it is the actors themselves, but the script does not allow any of them the chance to bring any sort of emotional depth. One of the significant throughlines of the film is the lack of relationship between the siblings, and the significant emotional payoff in the end comes from that lack of relationship. However, this theme is only referenced throughout and, like most of the performances, is never given the time to flesh it out into a real thought-provoking idea.
In the third act, Mother, Couch finally shines, and Larssonโs script and directing feel most comfortable in its weirdness. The moments make sense, and the performance given by Ewan McGregor becomes highly emotional and deep. The film’s themes are realized and explored in highly original and thought-provoking ways. Davidโs relationship with his mother has been a strain on him for his entire life and is now affecting the relationship he has with his wife and children. This sense of letting go that he must endure is nuanced, and the subtle choices that Larsson makes might be on the nose, but they finally work within the film. There is a good film from this director, maybe great, but it would be better if he continues to learn from the highs of Mother, Couch, as they just sadly came too late in the film.
Ewan McGregorโs performance and Christopher Bearโs score highlight what could have been original and worthwhile. I appreciate Niclas Larsson’s ambition in his debut feature, while Mother, Couch falls just short due to its lack of focus and emptiness in terms of themes. The solid third act saved this film from being an utter mess. This potential for greatness in Larsson’s work excites me and leaves me hopeful and optimistic for what’s to come.
