Animal Farm (2025): Four Legs Good, This Movie Bad.

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Animal Farm” is directed by Andy Serkis (The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Star Wars: The Force Awakens). He also stars in the film as a rooster named Randolph and has an uncredited role as Farmer Jones. Joining him in the cast is Seth Rogen (Sausage Party, Knocked Up), Gaten Matarazzo (Stranger Things, Honor Society), Steve Buscemi (Miracle Workers, Fargo), Glenn Close (The Wife, 101 Dalmatians), Laverne Cox (Doubt, Orange is the New Black), Kieran Culkin (A Real Pain, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World), Woody Harrelson (The Edge of Seventeen, The Glass Castle), Jim Parsons (The Big Bang Theory, Hidden Figures), Kathleen Turner (Romancing the Stone, The Virgin Suicides), and Iman Vellani (The Marvels, Ms. Marvel). This film is based on George Orwell’s book of the same name and is about a group of animals whose farm-based revolution results in a pig-led dictatorship.

There are a few major texts I was assigned to read in my English class during my freshman year of high school. One of those includes Homer’s “The Odyssey,” which is being adapted into a film coming out this summer. Another one happens to be George Orwell’s “Animal Farm,” which is now an animated film directed by Andy Serkis. What’s next? Is “Of Mice and Men” getting another film adaptation?

Regardless, “Animal Farm,” through its book and interesting to say the least adaptations, left an impression on me. When the book was a major studying point in school, the class often focused on Orwell’s material linking to the U.S.S.R.. The book presents a fascinating allegory on the dangers of leaders becoming power hungry and bending the rules to their benefit.

The idea of someone like Andy Serkis taking on “Animal Farm” left me intrigued. He has shown his talents in the VFX and directing spaces, and I thought “Animal Farm” would be a fine fit for his skill set.

Then I saw the trailer…

While I thought the trailer overall made the film look cheap, it did end with one note that left me interested, which is that it was recommended for ages 11 and up. While the MPA gave this film a PG rating, which can be seen as okay for many younger audiences, the marketers essentially sent a message saying this might not be for the youngest crowds. Having read “Animal Farm,” that makes sense.

Frankly, after seeing this movie, I have no idea who exactly this is for. It is definitely not for “Animal Farm” purists, as there are some major changes made to the material. For instance, Old Major is not in the movie. There are some characters who are not in the book. No, unlike the 1999 adaptation, the main character is not a dog this time around.

Despite the movie being recommended for ages 11 and up as the trailer suggests, the film has plenty of jokes that feel like they were designed for the under five crowd. I do not know what George Orwell would think of this movie, seeing as he is no longer with us. But I think he and I would agree that toilet humor and “Animal Farm” do not mix. Maybe the conversation would be different if the trailer said the movie was recommended for “all ages,” However, that’s not the case. I would let it slide if this movie resorted to one fart joke, but I remember counting at least five or six instances of jokes related to bodily functions. It would also be forgiven if those jokes made me laugh. But they failed to do so.

This is not to say that I do not think younger viewers should not be exposed to a story like “Animal Farm.” I think it is an important tale, and the more that we experience corruption in power the more it is going to matter. In the case of “Animal Farm” 2026, this is a more modern telling of the tale compared to its mid-20th century source material, as it focuses on capitalism as the big bad. Despite happily living in the U.S. all my life, I think this idea has potential to work. One of the core antagonists of the film is a boss lady who essentially owns all the land in her sight, but she is not satisfied, as she wants to add Animal Farm to her collection.

In this film, Napoleon is played by Seth Rogen. …Okay? What is it with Seth Rogen’s voiceover roles lately? I always thought he was a weird choice for Donkey Kong, but this is another level. And much like Donkey Kong, Seth Rogen often sounds like he is playing himself when sounding off every other line. In fact, one could argue the performance is kind of meta, as there is a scene where Napoleon does the infamous Seth Rogen laugh, and he follows that up with “please do not make fun of my laugh.” Is it just me, or is Seth Rogen’s laugh one of the most recognizable laughs of all time? If I had to make a top 5 list in that regard, Rogen would be up there with Jimmy Carr, SpongeBob SquarePants, Peter Griffin, and J. Jonah Jameson during that one scene from “Spider-Man 2” where Peter asks him if he can get paid in advance.

That said, there is something there with Seth Rogen’s material. As immature as the writing often sounds, there is one scene between his character and a gender-swapped Snowball (Laverne Cox) where the latter is explaining her plan concerning the farm that stood out to me. Every other second, Napoleon, who is not afraid to showcase his opposition to the plan, is constantly mocking Snowball, sometimes calling her boring while they are in front of a large crowd. Again, the material itself comes off as borderline cringeworthy, but the more I think about it, the more it reminds me of the current state of politics in the U.S.. I try to keep my mouth shut in regards to that topic on here, but Napoleon is essentially Donald Trump. He is loud and quite limited in his vocabulary. He calls others names to their faces. And as we have seen in the 2016 and 2024 elections, his biggest rivals tend to be, whether you agree with their policies or not, well-meaning women.

Although there is one woman that Napoleon tends to get along with, and that is the recently mentioned “boss lady,” Frieda Pilkington (Glenn Close). A billionaire who essentially wants everything and will stop at nothing to get it. She owns a giant company that I would perhaps sum up as this universe’s equivalent to Amazon, as it seems to have their fingertips in just about every industry. Her character is by no means broken, but her one-dimensionality definitely stands out.

In fact, this movie is chock-full of big stars. From Jim Parsons to Kieran Culkin to Steve Buscemi. One rising star who I am glad to see in this film is Iman Vellani, who I adore as Ms. Marvel in the MCU. Her roles, and yes, she has more than one, does not give her as much to work with compared to Marvel, but I am glad to see she is getting more work.

Another standout in this film is Woody Harrelson as Boxer. While the film does have its many differences from the source material, the way Boxer was written and executed feels similar to how I would have imagined reading the book as a teenager. Harrelson is a good pick for the role. It is hard to say that “Animal Farm” is one of the most heartfelt films ever made, but I would not deny that Boxer is perhaps the emotional core of the story, even if he is a supporting character.

While this is based on a famous text, “Animal Farm” is not the best when it comes to screenwriting. By the way, it is written by Nicholas Stoller, whose “Muppets” films I did enjoy, but I will also acknowledge his resume also contains duds like “Sex Tape,” “Dora and the Lost City of Gold,” and “Zoolander 2.” Despite Stoller’s best efforts, the jokes do not work. I do not mind “Animal Farm” having jokes, as long as they stick the landing. They did not. Some of the jokes play a part in the film’s clashing tones. At times this film tries to be ridiculous and go for a laugh, and at others it tries to pull the heartstrings or make you shed a tear. Pixar has proven that their films can both be funny and emotional. “Animal Farm,” which is a collaboration between Aniventure and The Imaginarium, tends to fall flat in both categories. The end of the film feels kind of like a Marvel movie, almost as if the climax is aiming too high.

I have nothing against people making changes to source material. I think “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory” is one of the greatest movies of all time, even if it made some significant alterations from Roald Dahl’s classic tale. This adaptation of “Animal Farm,” like the others that have been brought to the screen, has its differences from the book. Although I went back to watch the other two adaptations and those tended to maintain the tone and spirit that the book was going for. Neither one was particularly groundbreaking or IMDb top 250-worthy, but they did their job in more ways than one. This movie does not feel like “Animal Farm” in the most accurate sense. That would be fine if I liked the movie, but between the bad comedy, several characters lacking dimension, weird editing choices, and some scenes feeling rushed, “Animal Farm” reminded me that not all movies are equal. Some are just plain bad.

In the end, “Animal Farm” is not as bad as I hear other people claim it to be, but to call it good is definitely a stretch. There are parts of the movie that exceeded my expectations, and I am probably being generous with that statement. While I definitely found Rogen’s interpretation of Napoleon to be rather annoying, I do think the way he was written worked in terms of matching the current political climate. He is not the smartest, nor the most calculated leader. But if you ask certain people today what they think about the current U.S. President, they would probably say the same thing. The animation was passable, but not exactly revolutionary. The soundtrack of this film is also kind of weird. Including a rap version of “Old McDonald Had a Farm” is most certainly a choice. The book is definitely more serious than this movie, and I thought when this film tried to be funny, it did not always work. Although there was one gag involving E=mc² that did make me chuckle. This is probably not going to be my least favorite movie of the year as there are glimmers of positivity to be found, but I hope to see a superior version of this tale brought to the big screen one day. I am going to give “Animal Farm” a 4/10.

“Animal Farm” is now playing in theaters and is available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! I am happy to announce that the next guest in my ongoing web series, Movie Requests is none other than Brian O’Halloran! You may know him from several of Kevin Smith’s films, including the “Clerks” trilogy! By the way, he is not the first guy from said trilogy I featured in the series, as a couple months ago I took a request from Jason Mewes, AKA Jay of the Jay and Silent Bob duo. As for Brian’s request, that review will be available on Sunday June 7th! You can check it out here on Flicknerd.com, but if you want the fastest method of watching the review, do yourself and I favor by subscribing to my YouTube channel!

My next review is going to be for “Mortal Kombat II!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “The Sheep Detectives,” “In the Grey, “Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu,” “I Love Boosters,” and “Backrooms.” If you want to see these review and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Animal Farm?” What did you think about it? Or, did you read the “Animal Farm” book? What are your thoughts on it? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Deep Water (2026): Plane Crashes and Sharks. What Could Go Wrong?

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Deep Water” is directed by Renny Harlin (Cutthroat Island, Deep Blue Sea) and stars Aaron Eckhart (The Dark Knight, Midway), Angus Sampson (Insidious, Mad Max: Fury Road), Ben Kingsley (Iron Man 3, Hugo), Lucy Barrett (Skincare, Charmed), and Molly Belle Wright (Omaha, The Best Christmas Pageant Ever). This film is about a group of people who are on a plane flying from Los Angeles to Shanghai, whose flight happens to go by the wayside as they crash in the middle of the ocean. As if things could not get any worse, the group is surrounded by sharks and must do what they can to survive.

It is now time to talk about “Deep Water,” not to be confused with the movie of the same name starring Ben Affleck and Ana de Armas, which is entirely different in premise and execution. Unlike that straight to streaming flick, this is a theatrically released thrill ride that involves a very simple, but intriguing premise.

Last year was the 50th anniversary of “Jaws,” which to this day, remains the best shark movie ever made by a clear mile. But just because “Jaws” is so great, does not mean that other shark movies do not have the potential to work. “Deep Water” is not quite a shark movie, but when the marketing showed sharks, I was sold. This looked eerie, intense, and entertaining. It is definitely a popcorn flick. Though I skipped the popcorn on this movie.

“Deep Water” does not reinvent the wheel when it comes to filmmaking or storytelling, but the film nevertheless delivers a satisfying package. Is it perfect? Absolutely not. But it does not change the fact that the film is worth watching at least once.

When it comes to the overall premise of the film, it keeps things simple. A bunch of people are on a flight from Los Angeles to Shanghai, then next things next, they make an emergency landing in the middle of the ocean. It is at this point where everyone must work together to survive. Although, getting everyone on the same page is not the easiest task.

This film contains a fairly sizable cast of characters, some of whom are played by well-known names. I am quite shocked that some of the names accepted their roles. Their paychecks must have been enormous. Although upon learning that this film had a $40 million budget, maybe not. Plus, this film is directed by Renny Harlin, who has helmed some well known films including “Cliffhanger” and “Die Hard 2.” Then again, he also directed “The Legend of Hercules,” a film so bad that I think it might as well have been better off staying a legend.

That said, while I remember some of the faces in this movie like Ben Kingsley, it is not as easy to remember the characters. Part of it is due to having so many of them, so the movie does what it can to allow everyone to have their moment, but only a particular few stand out. If you were to ask me if I am going to remember these characters in a year from now, I would probably guess not. Heck, I am having trouble recalling some of them even less than a month after seeing the movie. Do I have my favorite characters from the project? Sure.

Is this movie predictable? Perhaps. But I do not mind it being that way, because what it offers is undoubtedly entertaining. We get to know a bunch of people who are on a plane. Everyone from the crew to some of the core passengers, the plane makes an emergency landing in the ocean, and all of the characters who we got to know on the plane have some ongoing effect towards the story from here on out. Sharks appear every now and then, causing all kinds of trouble for the survivors, who realize their journey has only begun. Having said that now, it makes me appreciate this premise more. The only way this movie could have been crazier is if it went full “Snakes on a Plane” and decided to put the sharks on the plane as it was in the air. But as someone who likes logic, I am glad they did not go in that direction. It would just spawn bad memories of torturing myself while watching the “Sharknado” movies.

This movie combines two of my biggest apprehensions. Planes and sharks. For the record, I like planes. I really do. I find air travel fascinating, even if the modern air travel market is an overpriced scam. I do not fly super often, but I do take a plane one to a few times per year, and in the back of my mind I am always nervous about crashing. This movie reminds me of that fear. I always fly out of Boston, whose airport is right next to the Atlantic, a place that has sharks! Of course! Thanks, movie!

This film reminded me of another thing to be afraid of, and that happens to be lithium-ion batteries. They are everywhere. Like planes, I do not outright hate the concept of lithium-ion batteries. I understand their purpose, but the movie essentially kicks into gear because of something that happens to a lithium-ion battery. If you have ever seen a news story involving some kind of a device that contains a lithium-ion battery, I think you can imagine what that incident is. I am a little frightened as I write this review on my laptop, which I will remind you, has a lithium-ion battery inside of it that could blow up if I make one wrong move. There is a reason why people working at airports ask if you have anything with lithium-ion batteries on you before your flight!

Movies are experiences, and to say I experienced fear in “Deep Water” is an understatement. Is this the best movie of the year? No. The characters could be a little deeper (not literally), but it is never boring. It gives the bones of the characters and makes them likable enough. The shark action is sometimes fun to watch. It is not the best I have ever seen. It is not like I am watching “The Shallows” starring Blake Lively, which I still fondly remember about a decade after its release. That said, this film is not 100% camp. It has campy moments, but the plane crash, which goes on for more time than I was anticipating, felt rather dramatic. There happened to be a sense of stakes as the plane was falling down. You could feel the emotions and the nerves running through the characters, and those emotions and nerves stuck around as the sharks came out to play. This movie is thrilling, well-paced, and engaging.

© Arclight Films

In the end, “Deep Water” is a solid plane crash movie, on top of being a solid shark movie. It takes two disastrously bone-chilling scenarios and neatly combines them into one premise. This is not Shakespeare, but it is also not something that deserves to be tossed aside either. It is a decent movie that allows you to munch popcorn while watching tons of people figure out how not to die. Is this film the next “Jaws?” No. But it is a good watch. I am going to give “Deep Water” a 7/10.

“Deep Water” is now playing in select theaters. Tickets are available now!

Thanks for reading this review! I would like to take a moment to remind everyone that my next episode of Movie Requests is going to feature “Clerks” actor Brian O’Halloran! He has appeared in all three installments of Kevin Smith’s retail-based trilogy, and in the next couple of weeks, I will be reviewing his film of choice. That review is SUPPOSED TO BE HERE on Sunday June, 7th. If you have not done so already, please check out my review for “High Noon,” requested by “Battlestar Galactica” star Katee Sackhoff! If you want to see more reviews throughout the series as soon as they are uploaded, please consider subscribing to my YouTube channel! I will also share them here, but subscribing to my channel is the fastest way you can check them out. Life is short, you know. Might as well spend your time wisely.

I have a buttload of written reviews coming soon! My next reviews are going to be for “Animal Farm,” “Mortal Kombat II,” “The Sheep Detectives,” “In the Grey, “Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu,” and “I Love Boosters.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Deep Water?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie that reminds you of some of your personal fears? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Michael (2026): A Middle of the Road Michael Jackson Greatest Hits Album

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Michael” is directed by Antoine Fuqua (The Equalizer, Training Day) and stars Jaafar Jackson, Nia Long (Missing, Boyz in the Hood), Juliano Valdi (Arco, The Loud House), KeiLyn Durrel Jones (Better Call Saul, Succession) Laura Harrier (Spider-Man: Homecoming, BlacKkKlansman), Jessica Sula (Recovery Road, Skins), Mike Myers (Shrek, Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery), Miles Teller (Whiplash, Top Gun: Maverick), and Colman Domingo (Sing Sing, Wicked: For Good). This film is about Michael Jackson’s rise to stardom, chronicling his growing up, family life, and the rising conflict he faces as an artist.

The last movie I reviewed on the blog is “Lorne,” and now I am doing “Michael…” 

Ladies and gentlemen… We missed a grand opportunity to make the next “Barbenheimer” happen. LORNE MICHAEL? The name writes itself!

Anyway, “Michael” has been on my radar for some time, not necessarily because I was looking forward to it. Not that I thought the movie would be the worst I have ever seen, but Michael Jackson is not my goto artist. Sure, I like hearing “Thriller” every now and then, especially around Halloween. But keep in mind, this guy is called “the king of pop.” I am generally not a pop guy. I am more rock and roll, classical, jazz, heavy metal… Those genres speak to me more.

To be frank, the real reason why I am reviewing this movie is not because it heavily interests me, but rather because it seems to be of interest to so many other people. Some are projecting that this could end up becoming the highest-grossing musical biopic in box office history. I have family members and relatives who grew up with Michael Jackson who wanted to see this ASAP. I do not despise Michael Jackson. I think as a musician he knows his stuff, but he is not the first person I would pick to listen to in my spare time.

Also, some people have nicknamed me “Jackson 5…” So that’s a bonus.

Here is some seemingly shocking news… I have never seen an Antoine Fuqua movie. I have always been meaning to check his work out. My dad has expressed his approval for “The Equalizer” and “Shooter” for example. I just have not had the time or motivation. But given how popular I projected “Michael” to be from the getgo, I felt the need to check this movie out for myself.

Having seen “Michael,” it is better than I figured it would be in some ways, but the movie is not without its faults.

I am not a Michael Jackson fanatic. Again, I recognize his talent, but he is not my jam. That said, I have a feeling that in some way that a lot of Michael Jackson fans are going to see this film as a personal love letter, showcasing some of his greatest hits and career highlights. In that sense, the film feels overstuffed, which is really weird to say given how the film itself plays out.

Do not get me wrong. “Michael” has a story. In fact, when it comes to executing its story, or, based on several factors, as much of the story as it is willing to unveil, I thought it did a better job than the recently released “Super Mario Galaxy Movie.” Interesting enough, I find both movies to be quite similar. Both are based on cultural behemoths, they are aiming towards family demographics to a certain degree, and there seems to be a divide between the critics and audiences as to whether or not the movie is good.

Another thing that puts these two in the same boat is that they seem to rely on nostalgia. If you grew up in the 80s, you may have been playing “Mario” or listening to Michael Jackson. Perhaps both. When I was watching “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie,” I found myself needing more than nostalgia to keep me entertained. That is also the case when it comes to “Michael,” and the case arguably has more merit this time around, as, again, he is not my artist of choice. Of course, I have heard several of the songs in this movie… “Thriller,” “Beat It,” “Billie Jean,” but when they played, I do not think they hit me in the way the crew would have hoped.

What I liked about “Michael” is not so much the music, but rather the journey as to how we got some of the music. “Michael” reminds me a bit of “A Complete Unknown,” because that film seems to explore an artist who wants to play music based on what he is passionate about, and there are obstacles standing in his way of doing that. For Bob Dylan, the protagonist of “A Complete Unknown,” the obstacle was the audience, who put the artist in a box. For Michael Jackson, the biggest obstacle is his family. In some ways, the film highlights the importance of Jackson’s family, but it also sets up his father as an antagonist. We see Michael begin as a member of the Jackson 5 with his siblings, but the more the movie progresses, the more we see Michael feel the need to tread his own path. The only problem, his father wants him to keep making music under his supervision and with his siblings.

I am not going to pretend that “Michael” is the best movie of the year, but there is a decent movie in here somewhere. Is it familiar? Sure. But it is sometimes engaging. When I am watching “Michael,” I do not see myself watching a film about an aspiring performer who became a huge success, even though that idea does play a part in the story. If anything, I found myself mostly invested in the protagonist’s personal conflict of being his ultimate creative self. Yes, the movie presents Michael Jackson’s eccentricities. For example, we see his relationship with his pets. And these are not your typical dogs and cats. These are the kind of pets that Veruca Salt would beg for after finally getting her hands on a golden goose.

Not all of the concert scenes are exactly memorable, but I will not deny that there are some that stood out to me. There is one scene in particular that is shot and edited less like a movie and more like a televised special, or an actual “concert film.” I thought it was kind of clever. The sound mixing is also quite good, and I had a feeling it would be from the getgo, where the movie opens to a crowd chanting “Michael’s” name over and over again. The auditorium was almost shaking at that point.

Perhaps the biggest standout in “Michael” is… Well, Michael himself. Or more specifically, Jaafar Jackson, who plays him. In real life, Jafaar is Michael Jackson’s nephew, so I would have been shocked to say that his performance was not good. Thankfully, he is excellent. It is too early to tell if his performance is awards-worthy, but Jackson brings a flair to his uncle that feels similar to how some would probably imagine the artist in real life. Jackson does a great job at capturing the character’s ambitions and kineticism. It is clear that Jackson did some major studying behind the scenes to capture his uncle’s essence.

“Michael” is Jaafar Jackson’s first movie acting credit. My question is, and I say this as someone who found this performance to be excellent, what is Jaafar Jackson’s future in film? Is he just going to play Michael Jackson and call it quits? I would be interested to see him in another role, as long as it is something completely different than the one he played in “Michael.” I would like to see some range should he continue acting. This is also the biggest factor as to why he may not win an Oscar next year. As great as Jaafar Jackson is, he is playing someone who has a somewhat personal attachment to him. Jackson is superb, but unlike Rami Malek as Freddie Mercury or Austin Butler as Elvis Presley, his performance feels less transformative in comparison.

This does not take anything away from Jackson’s ability to capture the character and bring him to life. I will not deny that he did exactly that. In fact, if there is one positive that I will continue to think about regarding this movie, Jaafar Jackson may be it. All due respect to everyone else involved, including the super talented Colman Domingo as Joseph Jackson, but Jaafar steals the show.

As I watched this movie though, I found parts of it to drag, especially around the middle. For a movie whose trailers promise something exciting and kinetic, I was kind of surprised to find myself bored during certain scenes. I think about 10 minutes of the runtime could have been trimmed just to provide something tighter.

In the end, “Michael” is not the worst film I have ever seen, but it is occasionally bogged down by somewhat poor pacing, feeling somewhat incomplete in the story it is trying to tell, and the concert scenes not having the oomph that I was expecting. For a movie about the King of Pop, it works in some places, but overall, it does not quite pop. This movie is likely going to go down as a success at the box office, and I partially played a factor in that. I cannot say my experience of watching it, however, was exactly the best. Did I have a decent time? Perhaps barely. But I do not see “Michael” having any replay value down the road. I am going to give “Michael” a 6/10.

“Michael” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you want to see more of me, and by that I mean, literally see me, check out my latest episode of Movie Requests, featuring special guest Katee Sackhoff! She requested I should watch “High Noon,” and I was more than happy to do so! To hear my thoughts, click the video above! Give it a like if you enjoyed it! If you want to see more episodes down the line as soon as they come out, please subscribe to my YouTube channel!

My next review is going to be for “Deep Water!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, be on the lookout for my thoughts on “Animal Farm,” “Mortal Kombat II,” “The Sheep Detectives,” and “In the Grey!” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Michael?” What did you think about it? Or, what are your thoughts on Michael Jackson as a performer? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Lorne (2026): Morgan Neville Puts Up Another W with This Insightful Look at the Creator of SNL

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Lorne” is directed by Morgan Neville (Won’t You Be My Neighbor?, Piece by Piece) and is about Lorne Michaels, the creator of “Saturday Night Live” and founder of Broadway Video. This documentary taps into Michaels’ life as a creator, as well as what he likes to do when he is outside of the constant chaos of creating comedy.

Few of my reviews over the years have been for documentaries. Though I have nothing against them. In fact, one of my earliest documentary reviews was for “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?”, which ended up being one of my favorite films of 2018. While the name is not the first that pops in my mind when it comes to listing my favorite filmmakers, Morgan Neville has somewhat been on my radar given his track record. A year and a half ago, I saw the incredibly creative “Piece by Piece,” which is not as good as “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?”, but is nevertheless a one of a kind documentary that I could not have imagined coming to life.

For those who have seen “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?”, you would know that the documentary centers around Fred Rogers, who I thought was a great subject matter with an interesting background, especially as someone who is into film and television. While Rogers was a notable presence on camera for “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood,” “Lorne” focuses on just as crucial of a presence behind the camera for other productions, most especially “Saturday Night Live.”

If you have watched just about any episode of “Saturday Night Live” during its 50-plus year run, you would know that Lorne Michaels has had an impact on them in some way. He created the show back in 1975 and has long served as its producer.

The group that ends up sitting down for interviews is incredibly stacked between former “SNL” employees to some of the most famous comedy personalities working today, some of whom got an early boost in their career thanks to “Saturday Night Live” like John Mulaney or Conan O’Brien. Those interviews stood out to me for reasons beyond simply admiring both of those people. Not only did the movie end up using a decent amount of footage of these two comedians in particular, but it is weird to think about how these are just a couple of people whose careers had a monumental impact because Michaels let them do their thing. If you look at the cast for “Saturday Night Live,” not every season is like the other.

“Saturday Night Live” is a home to many voices, each and every one with a story to tell. As Lorne Michaels is the subject of the documentary, the camera spends a significant amount of time telling his story too. Everything from his beginnings in Canada, to his time in the United States, and what he likes to do when he is not producing television. Though the thing that stands out about Lorne Michaels is that the way his programming is formatted, it has allowed so many different visions and stories to be brought to life. That is partially why Michaels’ philosophy of everyone’s story needing to be heard stood out to me, even if the story is bad.

To me, “Lorne” sort of plays like an “SNL” episode, which the more I think about it, may not be the most effective comparison. There have not only been so many “SNL” episodes, but when it comes to the show in general, there are nights where the sketches hit, miss, or fall somewhere in between. If I were to be most accurate, if this were an “SNL” episode, this would be one where I like the guest host and the stars, but there are some times where I find the material to be better than others.

The movie kept my interest, but it did drag a little towards the end. It almost overstayed its welcome. But I found the movie’s approach to be rather creative. The narration is effective and intriguing. There are some animated scenes that play well. And as I would hope, it presents the story of Lorne Michaels, who is most definitely an interesting man, in a way that is equally as interesting. Keep in mind that I said “interesting,” because as a producer, he has a say on who hosts “Saturday Night Live,” and he seems to stand by his more controversial choices like Donald Trump or Elon Musk. The choices definitely generate conversation, but not everyone in the audience jumps out of their seat for them.

While the film does not outright accuse Lorne Michaels of, say, his controversial host choices, it is actually nice to see the documentary to at least address that aspect of his career. The film does not suggest that Michaels is right for making those choices, but it does acknowledge that Michael stands by them. The movie goes into Michaels’ other failures, including some he has encountered before “Saturday Night Live” was ever a thing. I enjoyed getting to know more about his work on Canadian television.

When it comes to humanizing Michaels, the movie does a decent job. There is a part of the film that takes place in Maine, where Michaels goes to for some peace and quiet. If anything, I sort of felt the way he wants to feel during his trips there, because as he explains in the film, New York City is quite obnoxious. I know, I have been there. It is practically a second home to me. But the quietest, most calming parts of the movie are, fittingly, in Maine, where Michaels often finds himself in the middle of nowhere.

That said, this movie follows in another project’s footsteps. 2024’s “Saturday Night,” a feature narrative directed by Jason Reitman. I frankly think it might be my favorite film of his. Sorry, “Juno.” While the two movies differ significantly, I think the more interesting and compelling Lorne Michaels story, even if it is fabricated, is in “Saturday Night.” It is more entertaining, fun, and chaotic. But I will not accuse anyone should they decide to watch “Lorne” with me on a Friday night. Heck, even a Saturday night.

In the end, “Lorne” is not Morgan Neville’s best documentary, but it is still a good movie. Lorne Michaels is a fascinating figure, so it is not surprising that he has gotten feature and documentary treatments in the past couple years. Sure, I prefer the feature presentation we got showcasing his perspective on making the first “SNL” episode through “Saturday Night.” Yet “Lorne” is full of fantastic interviews, touches on a variety of interesting topics, and offers clever transitions from one scene to the next that frankly feel like they belong on an “SNL” episode. I am going to give “Lorne” a 7/10.

“Lorne” is now playing in select theaters and is available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! If you have not checked it out already, take a gander at my latest episode of Movie Requests, which I posted on May the 4th, AKA “Star Wars Day.” To fit the occasion, I took a request from “The Mandalorian’s” own Katee Sackhoff! She requested I should talk about the western “High Noon.” Click the video above to see what I thought about the movie! I will have another episode coming soon, I have not determined a date just yet. But if you would like to see that episode as soon as it drops, be sure to subscribe to my YouTube channel to get the notification ASAP!

My next review is going to be for “Michael!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Deep Water,” “Animal Farm,” “Mortal Kombat II,” and “The Sheep Detectives.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Lorne?” What did you think about it? Or, since it is on topic, has anyone seen the 2024 movie “Saturday Night?” Tell me your thoughts on that! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Normal (2025): Nobody Should Miss Bob Odenkirk’s Latest Action Flick

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Normal” is directed by Ben Wheatley (Meg 2: The Trench, Free Fire) and stars Bob Odenkirk (Nobody, Breaking Bad), Henry Winkler (Happy Days, Arrested Development), and Lena Headey (300, Game of Thrones). This film centers around a sheriff who has a history of taking temporary jobs in one town to the text. His latest gig is in a small town by the name of Normal, Minnesota, where things go haywire as soon as he finds himself trying to deal with a bank robbery.

Remember “Nobody?” Remember how sick that movie was? Turns out Bob Odenkirk is not done being an action star. Sure, he came back for a sequel, but frankly, I think a man of his talents deserves better. This is no diss on Bob Odenkirk. He can do no wrong. He is a fine actor with quite a bit of range. As much as I like “Nobody,” I was interested to see that Odenkirk was headlining a brand new movie, “Normal.”

What makes “Normal” stand out is its quieter vibe. Whether it has to do with the wintry backdrop or the occasional delight that rises due to seeing Ulysses solve minor issues or obstacles for the town’s citizens, the film, despite being violent, simultaneously feels cozy.

This film is written by Derek Kolstad, whose previous credits include the “Nobody” films, and before that, the first three “John Wick” titles. Those two franchises carry a similar DNA considering they are fast-paced, obnoxious, and star somewhat older men who know how to shoot. This is not to say “Normal” is not in any way similar to those movies. In fact, speaking of fast pace, this movie is incredibly tight. There are also plenty of gun fights, not to mention creative kills. If anything, the kills are almost the selling point of this movie. Those are the parts of the film that if I were a general moviegoer and I saw this in the middle in its run, would have me flocking down the streets yelling about it. Perhaps I would look like a lunatic that promotes violence, but I am sure that people will understand what I am talking about once they see the film.

Unfortunately, this film, which has been out for several weeks now, has not received the widest audience. It had a soft opening weekend, and has only made about a quarter of its budget back. The film so far has made more than $5 million, but its budget appears to be less than $20 million. I hope the film has a boost on its way, perhaps on PVOD or through a streaming service, perhaps even cable, because as someone who got to see this in a theater with a large crowd, which I do not think a lot of people can say, it is an experience.

I had the privilege of seeing this movie at a giant theatre during the Miami Film Festival, and so many people were having a blast watching everything play out. I have no idea about the people around me, but I was quite surprised with how much flair this film delivered by the end of it. This film is as exciting as can be. If you are coming to “Normal” solely to watch Odenkirk kick all kinds of butt, this film gives you that in spades. If you are coming for a little bit more than that, there are some aspects that are properly delivered.

Not to say that “Normal” is by any means the comedy of the year, but there are quite a few laughs to be had in this movie. Some of those laughs are due to the kills. If you told me that Quentin Tarantino stepped in to direct a few scenes just to get some of the sickest violence one could possibly put into a frame, I would believe you. The film has a knack for more conventional attempts at humor too. One of my favorite gags in the film involves Henry Winkler’s character of Mayor Kibner, who despite living in this film’s titular small town for years, says he never saw a moose. In fact, we find out that Odenkirk’s character, Sheriff Ulysses, saw a moose, and told him about it, thus infuriating him.

“Normal” is, fittingly, set in the fictional town of Normal, Minnesota. This small town tends to play a large part in the film. It is basically a character of its own. One of my favorite things about it is its welcome sign that reads, “We like it here.” The name almost comes off as a joke considering the film’s concept, which sees the town’s newcomer, Ulysses, realize that there is something abnormal afoot in what seems to be a humble, tiny community. As for what that thing is, I will keep it vague, but the film does a good job at giving the sense that its community is proud and tight-knit. You get a sense of hometown pride in “Normal,” whether it is easy to side with such pride is another story.

Going back to what I said about this movie being tight, it is kind of a blessing as there is very little fluff. And whatever fluff there is, happens to work. I immensely enjoyed this film’s climax as it brings a lot of people into the same room, slowly builds up the tension, and gets into the chaotic violence fest I was hoping to see. I did not get popcorn for this movie. I am not even sure if my venue even had popcorn. Miami traffic sucks, so I almost missed the start of the movie, so I did not even have time to check if the place had a concessions stand. But if I had a bucket of popcorn in my seat, I would be shoving it in my mouth like a madman because this sequence is quite entertaining. Again, this movie feels like a blessing. But some things with blessings have curses too. Yes, “Normal” is a fun watch, but I wish it went on longer. If anything, it means Ben Wheatley and crew did a good job with the material. It left me wanting more. This does not necessarily mean I want a sequel to this movie. Though if a “Normal 2” were to happen, or perhaps another story featuring Ulysses in a different town, sign me up.

In the end, “Normal” is anything but. It is chaotic, it is bloody, it ever so slowly builds its excitement. I felt the same way watching this movie that Odenkirk did while navigating the small town. It seems quiet at first, but along the way, things just crank up. While not exactly the same kind of movie as “Nobody,” “Normal,” which also has Bob Odenkirk as the lead, sometimes gives off a similar feel. If you like Bob Odenkirk, as well as “Nobody,” then “Normal” is a nice addition to your watchlist. If you are ready for some bonkers action, you will not be disappointed. I am going to give “Normal” a 7/10.

“Normal” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available in select locations. If you cannot catch it in a theater, please make an effort to check it out on VOD starting May 18th.

Thanks for reading this review! I just want to remind everyone that my latest episode of Movie Requests is now available to watch! In this episode, I ask “The Mandalorian” star Katee Sackhoff what movie she thinks I should watch, and she picked the 1952 western “High Noon.” I had never seen it. Frankly, despite my love for all kinds of cinema, my western game could be stronger, so I thank her for the recommendation! What did I think of the movie? Watch the episode to find out! And if you enjoy the video, leave a like, leave a comment, and subscribe to my YouTube channel that way you can catch more episodes of Movie Requests down the line.

My next review is going to be for “Lorne!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Michael,” “Deep Water,” “Animal Farm,” and “Mortal Kombat II.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Normal?” What did you think about it? Or, have you seen “Nobody?” Perhaps even “Nobody 2?” Tell me your thoughts on those movies! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

MOVIE REQUESTS – Katee Sackhoff Requests HIGH NOON (1952)

Posted on by Jack Drees

Hello, and welcome to another episode of Movie Requests! This is a series where I ask prominent people for their film suggestions, and I review their movies of choice!

Last year, I asked ten people for their film suggestions, and in this episode, like all the others, you will get to see one of those people list the film they think I should talk about. So far, I have taken requests from Bryce Dallas Howard, Jason Mewes, and Joel David Moore, and I enjoyed each one of their picks. This series has been successful in terms of allowing me to see movies I would not usually see, not to mention finding new films I really like.

This is episode 4 of the series, and today we are going to honor a property that all started with “Episode 4.” In honor of May the 4th, Star Wars Day, it is only appropriate that I take a suggestion from a guest who is from the beloved science fantasy franchise!

You may know this guest from films including “Oculus” and “Riddick,” as well as the 2000s “Battlestar Galactica” TV series. She is also known as Bo-Katan in the “Star Wars” franchise. You can find her interpretation of the character through television shows like “Star Wars: The Clone Wars,” “Star Wars: Rebels,” and “The Mandalorian.” I am talking about none other than Katee Sackhoff!

Please click the video at the top of the page to hear Katee Sackhoff’s suggestion, as well as my thoughts on her movie of choice, “High Noon.” To see who else is in the series through previous episodes as well as upcoming ones, check the poster below! Thanks for your viewership. To those who agreed to be in the series, a very special thanks also goes to you.

Exit 8 (2025): A Subway Snooze

Posted on by Jack Drees

© Neon

“Exit 8” is directed by Genki Kawamura (A Hundred Flowers, Duality) and stars Kazunari Ninomiya (Letters from Iwo Jima, Assassination Classroom), Yamato Kochi (Vivant, Brothers in Arms), Naru Asanuma (A Calm Sea and Beautiful Days with You, The Night After the Divorce), Kotone Hanase (Suzume, The Parades), and Nana Komatsu (Silence, The World of Kanako). This film follows a man who finds himself trapped in a subway station and must complete a puzzling mission in order to escape.

Turns out “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” is not the only film coming out in April that is based on a video game, because “Exit 8” just so happens to originate from the same medium. The two games, and by extension, films, are quite different. “Mario” is much more family-friendly and adventurous, while “Exit 8” takes a more intimate and scarier route. The differences also happen to extend to my relationship with the games. While I have played many of “Mario’s” titles from different eras, I have not once sat down and played “The Exit 8.” To be fair though, the game is a somewhat recent indie title and way less popular than “Mario.”

Although my ability to enjoy a film should not be factored by how popular or recognizable the concept happens to be. As a wise woman from an ESurance commercial once said, “That’s not how it works. That’s not how any of this works.” Speaking of not working, I wish that were not the case for this movie, because it is one of the biggest bores I have seen all year.

I am not going to deny that “Exit 8” has potential. In fact, once I heard the concept, it gave me a weird sense of nostalgia. I am at the point now that I drive to work, partially due to the public transit in Boston not running overnight. But when I was in college, I took public transit everywhere, including the subway. As someone who has taken the subway so frequently, I appreciate the filmmakers’ intentions to make the concept scary. Because when I was taking it in Boston, it sometimes was. You are riding a germ-infested car with a bunch of strangers that sometimes squeaks like there is no tomorrow. Shoutout to the Green Line for reminding me of why I hate having sensitive ears, especially when it stops at Boylston and Government Center.

This movie, to my lack of surprise, dives into some common annoyances of riding the subway. The crowds… The occasional lack of cell service… The noise… The film starts in a clever way by showing the world through the protagonist’s eyes and ears. We see him riding the subway, and when he has his headphones off, he hears a baby crying, he does nothing about it. Though someone else, who is fed up with the noise, is telling the mother how annoyed he is. Of course, there is nothing the baby can do about it, and the mother, who has way more tact than she should, apologizes to the irritated rider.

The movie sometimes succeeds when it comes to atmosphere. The subway, despite extending quite far, does feel kind of otherworldly between the loud trains, strange halls, and depending on the case, large crowds. This movie occasionally goes beyond the everyday eeriness of the subway by implementing unusual characters, chilling sound effects, and some occasionally spooky effects. There is one moment involving eyes on posters that I will remember for some time.

That said, this movie becomes dull very easily. In a way, I almost felt as trapped as this film’s own protagonist. The film does a good job at showing how much the protagonist learns in a specific period of time, but it does not change the fact that the film feels as repetitive as can be. I think this could have been paced a lot better as a short film rather than a feature. There is a decent movie in here somewhere between the suspense and immersion factors, but very rarely did I find the story intriguing or the scares all that horrifying. When I watch a horror movie and I am not scared, that is a problem.

In fact, after watching this movie, I was searching its Wikipedia page, and I found out that the director, Genki Kawamura, ended up cutting a scene that he deemed too scary to show. I really want to see that scene now. At best, this movie is mildly eerie, but I cannot name a single moment during the runtime that had me pacing a just a little. I hate saying this, especially as someone who has taken the subway on a regular basis, so I have come across my share of interesting characters and sights. Although the more I think about it, I wonder if that is part of why I am not so scared by this movie. I have taken the subway so regularly back in the day, and I still take it sometimes today, to the point where what could have once been strange is now familiar or expected.

Granted, while this film does ground itself when it comes to showcasing the horrors of the subway, it also tries to blend in some more fantastical elements as well. I am not saying those could not have worked, but I do wish they were improved.

Also, I have no idea how many other people are going to complain about this, but the dialogue in this film irked me. I could only hear The Lost Man (Ninomaya) repeat the same things over and over so many times. I get that repeating his words is perhaps his way of understanding his surroundings, but as a viewer, it only makes every scene featuring said character feel almost the same as the last. If there is any variety to be found, it feels scarce. I found myself surprisingly frustrated with this character’s progression as he tries to escape.

“Exit 8” is kind of like “Groundhog Day” or “Edge of Tomorrow” as we constantly see the Lost Man doing the same things over and over and trying to complete a major task in the process. Maybe the movie was trying its best to suck me into the atmosphere of the subway, but if anything I found myself more annoyed that I had to go through various parts of the movie in real time. Or in this movie’s case, as real as time can be in its specific context. On the other hand, “Edge of Tomorrow” will sometimes trim out the fat while not removing anything essential from the story. If I found “Exit 8’s” short list of characters more intriguing, this would be moot. But I did not, so here I am, complaining like a madman. I wish I cared more about the Lost Man’s personal dilemma regarding his love interest. I wish I cared more about the Boy. I wish I cared more about everyone in this movie. Unfortunately, however, I cared so little to the point where I cannot see myself watching this movie ever again.

In the end, I am surprised to say this… If I were to recommend a video game-based movie to watch in theaters right now, I would shockingly pick “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie.” Yes, I have complaints with the movie, but I feel like it did a slightly better job at accomplishing its goals, even with a lack of story. “Exit 8” has a story, but I cannot say it is the best story. Despite being a horror flick, I found nothing about it that scary. I did find it atmospheric. It did remind me of times when I would walk through long subway tunnels or find myself in a sea of people on the Orange Line riding through Boston. The acting is not bad either. I have no problem with the cast, but I wish they were given superior material to work with. I am probably in the minority when it comes to my opinion. Both critics and audiences seem to be raving about the film over on Rotten Tomatoes. This film is not a complete trainwreck, but if I were ever presented with the opportunity to watch “Exit 8” a second time, I could see myself going to the next stop. I am going to give “Exit 8” a 4/10.

“Exit 8” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! Special reminder that my next episode of Movie Requests drops Monday, May 4th! That is Star Wars Day! Therefore, it is only fitting that Katee Sackhoff, known for her work as Bo-Katan Kryze, will end up being the guest of the next episode! You can catch the episode here on Flicknerd.com, or you can subscribe to my YouTube channel to see it as soon as possible!

And if you want to check out my last episode of Movie Requests featuring “Avatar” actor Joel David Moore, you can click the link above and watch it for yourself. If you enjoy the video, leave a like! It helps me out!

My next review is going to be for “Normal.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Lorne” and “Michael,” which sounds like a gigantic missed opportunity to form the next “Barbenheimer.” LORNE MICHAEL! Come on, guys! If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Exit 8?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie involving trains? If it is not “Spider-Man 2,” we need to talk. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Drama (2026): Zendaya and Robert Pattinson Kill it as a Couple Caught in Personal Chaos

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Drama” is written and directed by Kristoffer Borgli (Dream Scenario, Sick of Myself) and stars Zendaya (Spider-Man: Homecoming, The Greatest Showman) and Robert Pattinson (The Batman, Tenet) as a couple who are preparing for their wedding. While the two get ready for their big day, they have a conversation with some friends that ends up becoming much bigger than any of them could have anticipated. When Emma reveals a key part of her past, it changes the way everyone sees her, including her future spouse, Charlie (Pattinson).

“The Drama” has one of the best trailers I have seen in recent memory due to its quick pace and effective messaging of the film’s main idea. Add a pinch of star power, and you have a recipe for hype. Zendaya and Robert Pattinson not only have busy years ahead of them, but they are in a few films together, including this one. Naturally, I was excited for this movie.

I am not saying skip the trailer before you see the movie, because, again, it is a great piece of marketing. It got me in the door. But if you want my two cents, the trailer does not even do this movie justice. It does a great job giving a spec of the main idea, and what unfolds from said main idea is completely bonkers. This is a film that is likely to inspire conversations, make people think, and whether for good or bad, could potentially ruin a relationship.

I am a believer that nobody, including myself, is perfect. Everyone does something stupid at some point in their life. This movie does a great job at showcasing the dangers of having your past come back to haunt you in the worst possible way. This is done through a simple conversation where two couples talk to each other discussing the worst things they have ever done. It is an innocent game where harsh truths come to light, but everyone seems to take the information and brush it aside. That is until Zendaya’s character, Emma Harwood, reveals something she has not even told her partner. I am not going to say what she did, as I had no idea what it was prior to watching the movie, but this ruins her friendship with the couple across from her, and puts a bad taste in her partner’s mouth.

Harwood’s revelation sets the tone for what’s next, and could not come at a worse possible time. Throughout the film we see her and Charlie Thompson (Pattinson) get ready for their wedding. Planning for a wedding, as exciting as it can be, is already stressful enough between getting people together, choosing and setting up the venue, making sure everyone assumes their role, and now it has become ten times harder.

Throughout the film, we see Thompson writing his wedding vows. We see him tinker with the document where he has them stored. It is not just a matter of giving a speech from the heart. It is a matter of knowing his partner. The revelation essentially turned things upside down for Thompson. He does not feel like he knows her the way he did before. He sees an entirely new side to her. The longer the film goes on, the more we find Thompson in a sense of personal debate. Does he know his partner? Or is she a complete enigma? What else does he not know?

This movie kind of makes me glad I am single. What if I end up doing something stupid that I will have to bring up to my partner one day? Will they accept it? Or perhaps vice versa? What if I am dating someone and I find out they killed a guy? I find myself to be quite an accepting person, but if I find out my partner killed a guy, I think it would be an understatement to suggest that idea gives off a bad vibe.

I also dig the start of the movie. The movie begins with our main couple meeting each other in a cafe, where Thompson notices Harwood reading a book and tries to win her over by saying he loves said book. We find out early on that Harwood is deaf in one ear. The way the movie establishes this point is rather cute.

Perhaps the biggest strength, arguably to no one’s surprise, is the on-screen talent. Of course, Robert Pattinson and Zendaya lead this film, both of whom are great actors on their own. But this film does them favors by putting them together. I buy that these two are a couple from, as mentioned recently, the moment they meet in a cafe, to their eventual decline. As good as they are together, the two are not alone when it comes to showcasing tour de performances.

While Zendaya and Robert Pattinson are naturally going to be the first two people that come to mind when I think of this movie, trailing ever so slightly behind them is Alana Haim, who plays Rachel, Emma’s maid of honor. The movie easily allows her to shine due to the already excellent material she is given, but it also helps that Haim takes said material and goes to town with it. Everything from finding out about her personal revelation, which as much as the other characters seem to let it slide, made me gulp in my throat a bit, to what she ends up doing as the film gets to the big wedding itself. This film is called “The Drama” for a reason, and as it progresses, Rachel often accentuates it.

While there is a somewhat grounded feel to this movie, if there is any character that most resembles a cartoon, Rachel would probably be the closest candidate. This is not meant to come off as a dig. If anything, her exaggerated tendencies seem to stand out. As much as I did not like “Licorice Pizza,” one thing is for sure, it put Alana Haim on the map for me. She did a terrific job in that movie. Not only does she do just as swell of a job in “The Drama,” but it also helps that the movie itself is just as riveting.

In the end, “The Drama” is one of those films that you kind of have to see to believe. Just about everything in this film stands out in some way. The acting. The location choices. The dialogue. The direction. Everything in this movie works. I do not think “The Drama” is going to end up being the best movie of the year. In fact, part of me thinks it could have been slightly shorter. But it does not change the fact that “The Drama” lives up to its name. It is a film that for better or worse, is going to make you think. I am going to give “The Drama” an 8/10.

Also, I would like a personal note. Between this movie and “Dream Scenario,” both of which are helmed by Kristoffer Borgli, the filmmaker seems to have an attachment to setting his work in Massachusetts. It seems like a minute point, but I am glad Borgli is not only making good movies, but manages to do so while shining a spotlight on my home state. If Borgli is ever in the Boston area again, let me know if you’re up for some candlepin bowling.

“The Drama” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! I have an update regarding my ongoing video series Movie Requests, where I take film suggestions from other people and talk about them. I am pleased to announce that the fourth episode is coming soon and it is going to feature none other than “The Mandalorian” star Katee Sackhoff! She suggested a movie for me to review last November, and I am finally going to talk about it on May the 4th, otherwise known as “Star Wars Day.” How appropriate. What movie do you think she requested? Leave your comments! You can catch the video as soon as it drops on Flicknerd.com or my YouTube channel, which you should absolutely and positively subscribe to. You’ll get it faster that way.

And if you have not done so by now, please check out my last episode of Movie Requests, featuring “Avatar” actor Joel David Moore! He requested I should watch “Force Majeure.” What did I think about it? Click the video and find out for yourself!

My next review is going to be for “Exit 8.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Normal,” “Lorne,” and “Michael.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Drama?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie about a couple who happen to be in a not so perfect relationship? If you want my two cents, please go check out “Marriage Story” if you have not done so already. It is on Netflix, but if you prefer your physical media, like me, it is available on the Criterion Collection. Give it a shot. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Super Mario Galaxy Movie (2026): A Collection of Nintendo References That Barely Resemble a Story

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” is directed by Aaron Horvath and Michael Jelenic, and co-directed by Pierre Leduc, all of whom helmed 2023’s “The Super Mario Bros. Movie.” This film stars Chris Pratt (Guardians of the Galaxy, The LEGO Movie), Anya Taylor-Joy (Emma., The Northman), Charlie Day (It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, Fist Fight), Jack Black (Kung Fu Panda, A Minecraft Movie), Keegan-Michael Key (Toy Story 4, Key and Peele), Benny Safdie (Happy Gilmore 2, Uncut Gems), Donald Glover (Atlanta, Solo: A Star Wars Story), and Brie Larson (Captain Marvel, The Glass Castle). This film follows Mario as he ventures through space, facing new challenges and enemies along the way.

“The Super Mario Bros. Movie” is the very definition of “acceptable.” By no means am I ever going to watch the movie again, unless I one day have kids and we end up watching it together or something. This is a movie that, if I were to have children, I would not be mad at them for watching, but it is far from the greatest family film ever made. My biggest problem with “The Super Mario Brothers Movie” is that just about everything about it screams “cliche.” There is nothing in it that I felt like I have not seen in other movies over the years.

The banality of “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” frankly soured my expectations for what would be known as “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie.” I hate to say this, as I love the “Mario” games. I grew up playing them as a child and I continue to enjoy them to this day. Of all the “Mario” games I played, the original “Super Mario Galaxy” just so happens to be my favorite due to its unique style, immersive gameplay, epic orchestral score, and clever worlds. I was definitely curious to see how Illumination would adapt my favorite game in the franchise, but I also tempered my expectations. The marketing was nowhere near perfect, but had its moments.

Now that the movie is here, I can very much say it reminded me of the last one.

In some ways, this can be seen as a positive because it means that the movie is on brand. If you liked “The Super Mario Bros. Movie,” then there is probably a decent chance you will enjoy “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie.” Only thing, I barely enjoyed “The Super Mario Bros. Movie,” so it should not be a surprise that I happen to find my experience watching its sequel to be just as middle of the road.

The movie is not all bad. The biggest boast it carries happens to be the visuals. While I am not the biggest fan of Illumination, I cannot say their attention to detail when it comes to animation has ever let me down. Even if the content within said details happens to be incredibly brain-numbing. The film is colorful, polished, and for the most part, faithful to Nintendo’s games. If I were to watch this film with the sound off, it would be an “A.”

That said, I watched this film in IMAX, so the audio was not only on, but quite loud. That is another aspect that “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” often nails through faithful sound effects and score that do a great job at bringing some of the game’s greatest hits to cinema. Brian Tyler, much like the last film, does an excellent job composing the music.

But unlike a galaxy, the positives of “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” can only reach so far. This film has a problem some other video game-based films run into. The characters and story feel rather thin. I was not exactly fond of how the previous movie decided to have its characters follow the most basic story structure imaginable, but at least it had a story. To say that “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” does not have a story would be a lie. But to suggest it has a coherent story is also a stretch.

The movie is paced like a TikTok video. The film is designed to give as much information as possible in as little time imaginable. Do not get me wrong. I like a good, fast-paced flick. And like a lot of fast-paced flicks, the film packs in a couple decent action sequences. The first encounter between the Mario brothers and Bowser Jr. is quite entertaining, well choreographed, and has a rather cool use of slow motion. Though sometimes the film goes so fast that it is not always easy to digest the information that is in front of you.

At times, the movie is so focused on shoving as much as it can into its 98 minute runtime to the point where not all of it feels like it matters or comes off as substantial. “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” has some good ideas. But those good ideas did not receive the best execution.

Watching “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” is the equivalent of putting on Twitch and watching someone speedrun a “Mario” game. The only difference is that this cinematic experience does not come with a fun on-camera personality who feels like your pal from afar. The film is too fast and it almost made me furious.

Speaking of personalities, Chris Pratt is, unfortunately, back as the voice of Mario (right). I am still not accustomed to his voice. I honestly bought into his performance a bit more in his first go. Chris Pratt has proven to be a halfway decent voiceover artist through his performance in “The LEGO Movie.” Sadly, “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” does not live up to that. A lot of his lines feel flat and lifeless, especially compared to most of the other cast members. His presence feels nowhere near as animated as anyone else in the film. Charlie Day is often expressive and hyperactive as Luigi (left). Jack Black is over the top and loud as Bowser. Benny Safdie has such a psychopathic presence as Bowser Jr.. Brie Larson is incredibly inviting as Rosalina. Chris Pratt at times sounds like he is in a different movie than his castmates.

I have no idea how many of you are going to consider this a spoiler, but if you have missed out on the posters for this movie, then you might want to log off this post, as there is a potential detail afoot that could be described as a spoiler. You have been warned.

Not good enough? Okay. Here is a countdown.

3…

2…

1…

Going once…

Going twice…

Going thrice…

If you are still reading this and have not seen the movie…

You are wasting your time…

You have been warned…

You have been double warned…

Fox McCloud is in this movie.

Glen Powell voices the main character of the “Star Fox” franchise, and he does a pretty good job. I thought the idea of including him in a film where Mario goes to space makes sense. But he felt very minimal in the movie’s overall impact. Sure, he had a place in the story, but barely. He comes off more as an excuse to cater to a certain branch of gamers rather than to be of service to the story. In fact, I will not drop spoilers, but Fox is not the only non-Mario Nintendo character we see in this film. Does this mean we are getting a “Super Smash Bros.” movie anytime soon? Frankly, based on what they do with one or two of these characters, I am thinking the chances of getting that movie is highly unlikely. As a fan of those games, I am a bit disappointed. But as someone who thinks these past two “Mario” movies have been average, I think this might be for the best that way I do not end up underwhelmed with what a “Smash” movie could be.

Not to sound like a politician, but despite the movie’s faults, I felt at times it had “concepts of a plan.” In terms of characterization, the movie does not do the best job at developing the cast. If anything, I think of all the characters, Peach ends up going through the most change through her relationship with Mario and what we see through her backstory and how it plays into rest of the film. Also, I do like seeing Bowser reconnect with his son after some time apart. The two may be bad, but watching their relationship is quite good. Their connection also inspires my favorite conversation in the movie, which features the line, “Nothing’s more dangerous than a friend. When your armor’s down, they’ll stab you in the back.”

Some of you might defend “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” for not having the best story, possibly because not all the video games have much of a story. That is technically true. As much as I love “Mario Kart World,” I cannot say I am playing the game for the plot. I am playing the game to take down opponents with banana peels. The inspiration behind this movie, “Super Mario Galaxy,” may not have the deepest plot, but it introduces an interesting character in Rosalina while delivering mind-blowing gameplay. And that is the key word. GAMEplay. Keep in mind, this picture is called “The Super Mario Galaxy MOVIE.” The “Mario” games fall within a play-based medium. Even if the story is minimal, the game can still be fun as long as the gameplay works. When you are making a movie, the story becomes more important. But when you have a team that is more concerned about finding an excuse to randomly show off Toad in a penguin suit or build a security system with a presentation modeled after the art style of the “Super Mario Bros.” NES game, it gives me the impression that story is not a top priority. If anything it comes off as a commercial for the games. I am not saying a movie cannot also be a good commercial. Go watch “The LEGO Movie.” Sure, it is based on LEGO blocks, but the movie uses that concept and, no pun intended, builds a good story around it.

Also, if this movie were a commercial for the “Mario Galaxy” games specifically, it almost feels like false advertising, as we do not often see Mario in space. Not long after those stories begin, Mario ends up in space and stays there for the entire story. Sure, we see Mario venturing off into space at a certain point of the movie, but a surprising amount of Mario’s journey is spent closer to home, around the Mushroom Kingdom. I hate to be the guy who judges a book by its cover, but I would be fine if the crew called this film “The Super Mario Bros. Movie 2,” even if it is a bit of a mouthful. It probably would have lessened my complaint even by the tiniest amount.

But there is one positive note worth mentioning. This movie, like its predecessor, is more enjoyable than “Super Mario Brothers” from 1993. Yet if I were to go into the woods and film a Mario action figure jumping on mushrooms for a couple hours, that would also be more tolerable to watch than 1993’s “Super Mario Brothers.”

In the end, it is weird to say, but somehow prefer “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” over “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie.” I mean, it is almost guaranteed that putting something in space sounds cool, but even so, this sequel feels like more of the same. More references. More cookie cutter backstories and characterization. More TikTok-like scenes. The movie looks pretty and if I were in charge of a Best Buy, chances are I would consider using “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” as a demo on a big screen TV because some of the scenes are simply that easy on the eyes. But I can guarantee you I have no plans to watch this movie again. The “Mario” games have replay value. The amount of times I turned on “Mario Kart World” in the past year has to be somewhere in the double digits at minimum. I cannot say I am going to have the same attachment to “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” down the road. There are elements that work. Bowser Jr. is kind of fun. Donald Glover was a fine pick to play Yoshi. And the music is quite good, regardless of whether or not it is based on something that I have heard before. Each tune plays its part well. That said, it is not enough to make this movie worth my time past the initial viewing. I am going to give “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” a 5/10.

“The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you have not done so already, please check out the latest episode of Scene Before’s original video series, Movie Requests. This latest episode features “Avatar” actor Joel David Moore, who requested I should watch “Force Majeure.” My thoughts can be summed up in the video above! And if you would like to see more episodes, do me and yourself a favor by subscribing to my YouTube channel!

My next review is going to be for “The Drama!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Exit 8,” “Normal,” “Lorne,” and “Michael.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie?” What did you think about it? Or, what do you believe is the superior film? “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” or “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

MOVIE REQUESTS – Joel David Moore Suggests FORCE MAJEURE (2014)

Posted on by Jack Drees

Hello, and welcome to the third episode of Movie Requests! This is the series where I ask celebrities what movies they think I should watch and review!

So far, the series has been a success. I have already banged two requests out of the way. One from Bryce Dallas Howard, and another from Jason Mewes. Both requests resulted in two memorable and fun watches in their own ways. Both of those films were released in the 1990s. In this episode, we are moving forward to the 2010s…

For those who are new to this series, I asked 10 people what movies they think I should review. I will present each person’s request through individual episodes. While the series is being uploaded to my YouTube channel, which you should absolutely positvely subscribe to, this is also being done in honor of 10 years of Scene Before. I wanted to do something crazy to celebrate the occasion, and I figured this was just bonkers enough. And amazingly, 10 people made this crazy dream come true. So, for that, I am appreciative.

Our guest for today’s episode is an actor known for his roles in “Avatar,” “Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story,” “Grandma’s Boy,” “Forever,” and “Bones.” He is also one of the producers of an upcoming film called “The Leader,” which will be screened in the Tribeca Festival this year.

Please click the video at the top of the page to hear Moore’s suggestion, as well as my thoughts on his movie of choice, “Force Majeure.” And as a reminder of who has already appeared and will eventually appear in this series, you can take a gander at the poster below. Thanks for your viewership. To everyone who agreed to be in the series, a special thanks also goes to you.