Month: December 2025

Marty Supreme (2025): Josh Safdie’s Fast-Paced Flick Following a Lean, Mean Ping Pong Machine

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Marty Supreme” is directed by Josh Safdie (Uncut Gems, Good Time) and stars Timothée Chalamet (Wonka, A Complete Unknown), Gwyneth Paltrow (Iron Man, Shakespeare in Love), Odessa A’zion (Until Dawn, She Rides Shotgun), Kevin O’Leary (Shark Tank, Project Earth), Tyler, the Creator (Piece by Piece, Jackass Forever), Abel Ferrara (Body Snatchers, Fear City), and Fran Drescher (The Nanny, Hotel Transylvania). Loosely inspired by true events, the film follows Marty Mauser, a shoe salesman who aspires to be a ping pong pro and will do anything, no matter the cost, to make his dream a reality.

Courtesy of A24

The Safdie Brothers have quickly become two of the biggest names working in Hollywood today. Their work together behind the camera has brought forth some excitingly fast-paced films including “Good Time” and “Uncut Gems.” I had the pleasure of rewatching the latter earlier this year, and while it is sometimes hard to keep up with every minute, I appreciate the film’s commitment to delivering one of the most anxiety-inducing cinematic experiences of all time. It is not my favorite film of 2019, but it is certainly one of the most unique.

While the Safdie Brothers may not be working together this year as directors, it allows for both to release their own projects at different points of the year. “The Smashing Machine,” directed by Benny Safdie, released in October. I thought it could have been better. Fast forward a couple months later, that is when Josh Safdie’s “Marty Supreme” hits the big screen. The two films have a couple things in common. Both star big name actors and involve sports. “The Smashing Machine” stars Dwayne Johnson and involves mixed martial arts. “Marty Supreme” on the other hand stars Timothée Chalamet and involves table tennis. These two films have some things in common.

Although one significant difference between “The Smashing Machine” and “Marty Supreme” is that the latter is a much better movie. I walked out of “Marty Supreme” feeling somewhat similar to how I walked out of “Uncut Gems” after seeing it for the first time. While it is not going to be my favorite film of the year, it will be remembered as a one of a kind adrenaline rush featuring a complicated protagonist.

Courtesy of A24 – © A24

To say Timothée Chalamet plays Marty Mauser would be a disservice because I think the more accurate thing to say is that Chalamet transforms into Marty Mauser. It is quite possible that Chalamet has given the performance of the year, and it is gratifying to end 2025 on such a high note. I had a conversation with a friend in recent weeks and we both agreed that Chalamet has undeniable range between his work in “Dune,” “Wonka,” and even more recently, “A Complete Unknown.” With each and every role he takes on, Chalamet continues to showcase an extreme sense of charisma. But if you go into “Marty Supreme” expecting Chalamet to deliver something as happy go lucky as his lead performance in “Wonka,” prepare to have those expectations subverted. Chalamet’s character is by no means a role model.

Through its marketing and execution, “Marty Supreme” sort of plays out like a classic hero’s journey. Marty wants to get out of his ordinary life as a shoe salesman and will stop at nothing to see his ping pong dreams through. He does not care who he has to push out of the way. He does not care how much money it costs to make something happen. Unlike a real hero, Marty is noticeably self-absorbed. If anything, Marty Mauser is the equivalent of Lightning McQueen from “Cars” if that movie were not filtered for a G-rating. He is a narcissistic brat who wants things to go his way. He clearly passionate about his dreams, but maybe to a sick degree.

As I watched “Marty Supreme,” I could not help but think about “All the Right Moves,” the 1983 film starring Tom Cruise as a high schooler looking for a football scholarship. I found some parallels in my experiences of watching both films. Not only are their protagonists athletic, but they are kind of bratty. That said, “Marty Supreme” manages to present a much more likable lead, at least to me. The protagonist from “All the Right Moves,” Stefen Djordjevic, comes off as a jerk on so many levels. Marty Mauser is also kind of a jerk, but there are moments that despite his selfish tendencies, he has a heart. Though even if he did not have a heart, the movie has such a wild immersion factor that enhances Marty’s journey, as well as those of the supporting characters. I felt completely invested in everything this film had to offer from start to finish.

Speaking of the supporting cast, that aspect of the movie stands out simply because there are some surprising names attached to the project like magician Penn Jillette and venture capitalist Kevin O’Leary (above), the latter of whom plays one of the most significant parts in the project. While “Marty Supreme” may not have my favorite cast of the year, I will give the film props for putting in some eccentric, but nevertheless spot on talent.

That said, while Kevin O’Leary does do an okay job in the film, if you know enough about Kevin O’Leary, chances are you are probably going to walk out of this movie thinking that he played an alternate version of himself. O’Leary’s character, Milton Rockwell, is an influential businessman.

Similarly, Gwyneth Paltrow is also in the film. She puts on a good show as Kay Stone, a retired actress. Paltrow’s role, like O’Leary’s, feels kind of derivative considering Paltrow herself took a break from acting. While O’Leary and Paltrow both play their parts well, they do not hold a candle to Chalamet as the lead, who, as I said earlier, basically transforms into Marty Mauser.

This film, from start to finish, maintains a consistent sense of atmosphere. This film is set in the 1950s, and the production design to match the time spares no expense. The movie is also shot mostly on 35mm film, giving it a somewhat dirty, but also neatly colored look. It kind of reminded me of the look of “Uncut Gems,” which again, Josh Safdie directed. Both films are even shot by the same cinematographer, Darius Khondji. I have to give credit to both of these people because they play a part in taking a sport as simple as ping pong and presenting it as if it happened to be a gladiator match. Not every shot showcases every little bit of action, but there is a breakneck pace to each of the film’s sporting events. I also have to give props, once again, to Timothée Chalamet. His talent leaps off the screen, and it should not be a surprise. Chalamet spent years training for this role by taking lessons and even replacing his living room furniture in his home with a table tennis setup.

On the surface, “Marty Supreme” seems like a sports drama about an aspiring ping pong player, and it is. But the reality is that the film is much more than that. It is about someone who thinks beyond reason. It is about someone whose aspirations are so high to the point where his behavior and actions to achieve the goals he wants to see through become unpredictable. If you want a role model protagonist, this might not be the movie for you. But if you are okay something rough and tough, “Marty Supreme” may be up your alley.

In the end, “Marty Supreme” is a fast-paced thrill of a flick featuring one of the best lead performances of the year. This may be Timothée Chalamet’s greatest demonstration of his acting chops to date, and that is saying something because his portrayal of Bob Dylan in last year’s “A Complete Unknown” is unbelievable. The film packs in a lot of threads, showcases a ton of characters, and never becomes boring throughout its two and a half hour runtime. That said, and not that this is a huge dealbreaker, I wish the movie maybe had a smidge more ping pong, but the ping pong we do get is kinetic and entertaining. That said, I will give credit to “Marty Supreme,” as far as this year’s sports movies go, this is much more of a ping pong movie than “Him” is a football movie. I am going to give “Marty Supreme” a 7/10.

“Marty Supreme” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! With my thoughts on this movie out of the way, that means my next posts are going to be for my top 10 BEST and WORST movies of 2025. I saw nearly all the movies I wanted to see this year. I still have not seen “Song Sung Blue,” “Ne Zha II,” “Sisu: Road to Revenge,” and “Blue Moon.” I only have so much time so I could not quite fit everything in. But some of the movies I did see will be acknowledged in the coming days. If you want to see posts like my upcoming countdowns 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 “Marty Supreme?” What did you think about it? Or, between Benny Safdie’s “The Smashing Machine” and Josh Safdie’s “Marty Supreme,” which film do you think is superior? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Is This Thing On? (2025): Bradley Cooper’s Compelling Dramedy on Why People Fall In and Out of Love

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Is This Thing On?” is directed by Bradley Cooper (A Star is Born, Maestro), who also stars in the film as Balls. Joining him is a cast including Will Arnett (The LEGO Movie, Arrested Development), Laura Dern (Jurassic Park, Marriage Story), and Andra Day (The Deliverance, The United States vs. Billie Holliday). This film is about a couple, Alex and Tess, agreeing to separate, as well as the new adventures and challenges that come their way as a result. Meanwhile, Alex develops a hobby as he turns to the New York comedy scene.

If you have followed this blog for a while, you would know that I am a child of divorce. Having such a background immediately made me intrigued by the premise of “Is This Thing On?”. The fact that it also has stand up comedy as a significant thread of the plot also had me hooked. In the past number of years, I have been fascinated by the art of standup. I personally do not take part in standup, but when I am not watching movies or game shows, standup comedy is probably the other option in which I regularly immerse myself. Even if I did not have these potential biases intact, chances are I would still be excited for “Is This Thing On?” as it is directed by Bradley Cooper. While I have come to admire him for his acting career, he has also turned himself into a solid director. His version of “A Star is Born” is excellent. His follow-up, “Maestro,” is a slight step down, but was still very well made.

Up to this point as a director, Bradley Cooper was 2 for 2. But not anymore. He is 3 for 3. “Is This Thing On” is amazingly well done.

I have seen the teaser trailer for “Is This Thing On?” a few times before watching other movies and I was always intrigued by its basic premise. Essentially it teases that a man going through a separation turns to standup, and bases his material on his personal journey. It taps into the classic ideas of writing what you know and that you often cannot have comedy without first experiencing tragedy. Basically, every bit of Alex’s material from the getgo is about his relationship. Not all of it is based on truth. Every once in a while he will make up a character for a bit, but the material all traces back to his struggle. Other characters respond to Alex’s material with praise. The praise is not exactly for the humor, but rather for the material’s therapeutic nature. Standup is practically Alex’s way of relieving stress through a tough time.

Despite prominently featuring standup as part of the plot, one could argue that “Is This Thing On?” is not exactly a comedy. If you were to ask me, I would argue it is to a certain degree. There are laughs to be had, including at some of the material offered by Alex and additional comedians in other scenes. But it is not a pure comedy in the way that “Splitsville” would probably be. Both films deal with separation and the complication of relationships in some way, but “Splitsville” seems to have more lighthearted fun with its premise whereas “Is This Thing On?” keeps things more grounded. The film in no way feels confused in its tone. Separation is not an easy concept to deal with, and the film makes sure that message is seen through. We see the couple struggling. We see their children and loved ones asking questions and needing to give their two cents on aspects of their relationship. We see the impact their own separation brings upon other people. The film keeps its tone serious while balancing things out with a few jokes here and there.

“Is This Thing On?” has a lot to say about relationships, marriage, and how those things can affect personal lives. The film paints divorce not necessarily as the end of a relationship, but perhaps a new beginning in some ways. We see Alex diving into standup, while Tess puts a major focus on volleyball. For the latter, this is something we find out was once a part of her life, but she had put it on the backburner.

The film also brilliantly highlights why Alex and Tess coupled up in the first place, why Alex in particular fell in love with Tess when she was younger. There is a fantastic scene where Alex reveals a piece of décor in his new place. Said piece has a specific link to Tess. Once Tess realizes what this piece is, she is upset by it. I understand both sides of this issue. Alex even defended his idea by suggesting that the children will appreciate the piece because it will show how awesome their mom is. The piece does a phenomenal job at encapsulating the idea that people fall in love with a certain version of someone. I am single and do not have a lot of relationship expertise, but this film seems to tell its audience that with commitment comes change. Not just in the status of the relationship, but the members of the couple themselves. Whether it is the way they look, the way they act, or what they do. While that change may be great for one person as they are making it, the other may not feel the same way. The film seems to paint separation or divorce as a proper path to change oneself for the better, but also recognizes that even at the end, there is still sometimes a sense of love and appreciation between both members of the couple. However, those feelings are not as strong as they were at one point.

Also, Bradley Cooper’s directing style in this is top notch. I was not sure if after “A Star is Born” that Bradley Cooper would simply be a one trick pony, but he kills it behind the camera, getting magnificent performances out of everyone, but most especially Will Arnett and Laura Dern as Alex and Tess. I bought into their relationship, not to mention its slow but steady decline. Never once did I feel either character overplayed any of their emotions. Every reaction that could have been an extreme is dialed down just enough to avoid becoming over the top. Some of the couple’s dialogue back and forth also hit me, most especially at the one scene involving where Tess says she is upset about Alex’s new décor. The scene, and one that quickly follows it, are among my favorites of the year. They make for dialogue-driven mastery both in front of and behind the camera.

But the cast does not just stop at Arnett and Dern. Bradley Cooper himself has a role in the film as Balls. This should not be too big of a surprise considering Cooper also starred in his last two films. Only difference is this time around, he is not THE star, and playing a supporting role. He has a lot less spotlight this time around, but he knows his place as his character and I thought he did a good job. The film only gets more star-studded from there, as former NFL pro Peyton Manning plays a notable role in the movie. And while she did not have a monstrous amount of screentime, I was more than happy to see Amy Sedaris showcase her lively personality while playing the small role of Kemp. Much like “Friendship” earlier this year, “Is This Thing On?” made me laugh and also made me think. It is not as hilarious as “Friendship,” but I do not think that Bradley Cooper was trying to make a movie as laugh out loud funny as “Friendship.” If that was the goal, I would say he succeeded while still committing to comedy at times.

In the end “Is This Thing On?” is easily one of my favorite flicks of the year. After seeing “Maestro,” I was not sure what Bradley Cooper was going to do next as a director, or if he even wanted to helm a third film for that matter. I am more than glad to see that this was the idea he had up his sleeve, because “Is This Thing On?” blew me away. I was expecting the film to be good, and I came out thinking it was a gem. Of the three Bradley Cooper directorial efforts, this is easily my favorite. Granted, I have some potential biases that could play a factor. Although I am sure even if I did not have those biases, I would have still fallen in love with this film. I admire the characters. I dig the story. I found the pacing to be perfect. The film successfully balances comedy and drama. There are predictable parts, but much like “Godzilla Minus One,” which was my favorite film of 2023, even the moments I saw coming felt earned. “Is This Thing On?” is definitely not going to be as big as “A Star is Born,” but I hope enough people go check this out in theaters to the point where it becomes a box office success like that film did, because the movie is compelling from start to finish. I am going to give “Is This Thing On?” a 9/10.

“Is This Thing On?” is now playing in select cities. Tickets are available now!

Courtesy of A24 – © A24

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Marty Supreme!” Stay tuned! Also, be sure to look forward to my end of the year countdowns! I will be reflecting on my top 10 BEST and WORST movies of 2025! If you want to see these posts 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 “Is This Thing On?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Bradley Cooper film? I will accept anything where he is in front of or behind the camera. Heck, even in films where he is behind the camera, he is still in front of it. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Avatar: Fire and Ash (2025): James Cameron’s Third Smurf Theme Park Ride

Posted on by Jack Drees

Photo by 20th Century Studios/20TH CENTURY STUDIOS – © 2025 20th Century Studios. All Rights Reserved.

“Avatar: Fire and Ash” is directed by James Cameron (The Terminator, Titanic) and stars Sam Worthington (Clash of the Titans, Man on a Ledge), Zoe Saldaña (Guardians of the Galaxy, Star Trek), Sigourney Weaver (Alien, Ghostbusters), Stephen Lang (Don’t Breathe, Public Enemies), Oona Chaplin (The Longest Ride, Game of Thrones), and Kate Winslet (Titanic, The Reader). This is the third installment in the “Avatar” franchise and once again follows the Sully family as they deal with grief and cross paths with an unfamiliar Na’Vi tribe, the Ash people.

Photo by 20th Century Studios/20TH CENTURY STUDIOS – © 2025 20th Century Studios. All Rights Reserved.

After the 13 year wait between the first two “Avatar” movies, it is clear that the hype for this franchise has not died down. Say what you want about the “Avatar” property, but when you have a first film that ends up being the biggest theatrical release of all time, and a second film that also ends up making a couple billion bucks at the box office, it is a sign that things are not over yet. That is where “Avatar: Fire and Ash” comes in. One big difference going into this film is that the wait for it was much shorter than the wait for “Avatar: The Way of Water.” However, that wait may have played a small part into the shrinkage of hype I had for “Avatar: Fire and Ash.”

Another part that played into my low expectations was the result of the last movie. For those who missed my “Avatar: The Way of Water” review, I found the film to be middle of the road at best. It was a step down from the original “Avatar,” which was not revolutionary in terms of structure or story, but at the time, it was technically impressive. It arguably upped the standard for how 3D should look after the first film blew audiences away back in 2009. The CGI makes fantasy come alive. The color palette is incredibly easy on the eyes. So, it is unfortunate that all of this technical splendor was in the same place as a watered down, formulaic, boring script.

I went into “Avatar: Fire and Ash” with about as open of a mind as I could offer. The film, in some ways, met my expectations. Each frame looks dazzling and packs itself with glamour. The style is, unsurprisingly, pleasing. The substance, to my shock, improved somewhat slightly from the last film. Granted, it does require some significant suspension of one’s disbelief. For example, Quaritch is back. Because it is not “Avatar” without Quaritch for whatever reason. By itself, the idea of bringing Quaritch back peeves me because it lessens the stakes of this franchise. But they already revived in him in the second movie, so it is perhaps only necessary keep up the tradition in the third.

That said, once the movie leaps past this logical barrier with this character, it actually gives him some good material to work with. I liked seeing Quaritch, the big bad in the previous two movies, sort of cater to the savagery of the Ash people by presenting them with weaponry. Of all the Na’Vi that have been introduced throughout the three movies, the Ash people are by far the wildest and most untamed.

Photo by 20th Century Studios/20TH CENTURY STUDIOS – © 2025 20th Century Studios. All Rights Reserved.

I never reviewed the first “Avatar,” but if you recall my review for the second, you may know despite my negative opinion regarding the film, I did appreciate it from a technical perspective. The third film is no exception to the rule. Like the past two films, the 3D will dilate your eyes. Like the past two films, the sound editing will energize your ears. It is something that in a sense you have to see and hear to believe. But it would be a lot more exciting if this were not a third installment showcasing tricks we have seen a couple times already.

In fact, “Avatar” is starting to remind me of what has happened in the past decade with Michael Bay’s “Transformers” movies. Like those movies or not, each and every one seems to follow a noticeably similar story and formula. This “Avatar” movie, like the previous ones, introduces a new group of Na’Vi, tries to explain why humans may be monsters, and has big climactic battles with birds flying all over the screen. It is not to say that some of what I described is not enticing, but there is less of a sense of novelty this time around compared to my experiences in 2009 and 2022. Maybe the 13 year gap had something to do with it, but still.

Photo by 20th Century Studios/20TH CENTURY STUDIOS – © 2025 20th Century Studios. All Rights Reserved.

One thing that was featured in the second movie that reappears here is the high frame rate. For those who do not know, most movies are shot and presented in 24 frames per second. “Avatar: Fire and Ash” is a rare exception, as it is shot and presented in 48… Some of the time… “Avatar: Fire and Ash” has some scenes, particularly the more action-centric ones, in 48 frames per second, while the slower, more dialogue-driven scenes are in 24. This kind of reminds me of some filmmakers in recent decades shooting their projects in IMAX, where in the final product, the aspect ratio switches in select scenes. Only in most cases when that happens, the switch does not tend to feel as jarring. Maybe I am just used to that technique, which when it does happen, I often find myself marveled by it. Including this year during “Sinners” and “The Fantastic Four: First Steps.”

I found the switch between the two frame rates to be incredibly distracting. I remember when the movie started and we see the opening logos and there is a scene where characters are flying in the air. All of it is in 48 frames per second. So, when the movie decides to suddenly switch to 24, it felt somewhat jolty. For a movie that prides itself for its immersion factor, this is something that immediately took me out of it.

As I watched “Avatar: Fire and Ash” I immediately thought about Martin Scorsese’s comments about Marvel movies, specifically about them being theme park rides. This sentiment is one I would personally give to the “Avatar” movies at this point. It is really weird to say because I think James Cameron can tell a good story. I love the first two “Terminators.” I love “True Lies.” While I find “Titanic” to be overrated, I do like the chemistry between Jack and Rose. These “Avatar” movies, while they do make a lot of money, feel incredibly cookie cutter and predictable by now. Not to mention, its casts do not stand out as much as the ones in Cameron’s other movies. I do not think it is a bad thing for a franchise to have similar movies. It makes it easy to tell you are watching separate things in the same universe. But I also think there is a little room for variety. Sure, instead of introducing Water Na’Vi, this movie is introducing Ash Na’Vi, but the nuts and bolts of the story feel almost entirely identical to what’s been told before.

Photo by 20th Century Studios/20TH CENTURY STUDIOS – © 2025 20th Century Studios. All Rights Reserved.

Sigourney Weaver once again makes an appearance in this film, and her character, Kiri, stood out to me for a couple reasons. First off, if you pay close enough attention, the film does have an Easter egg to Ripley from the “Alien” franchise, specifically one of her most iconic lines. Second, like the last film, Weaver herself, who is in her 70s, has a tremendous age gap with her teenage character. I am not going to pretend that “The Way of Water” hid this age gap the entire time, but I thought “Fire and Ash” did an inferior job at keeping it hidden. Weaver’s voice sometimes sounds too wise and deep for a 14 year old. I sometimes found this performance to be a tad distracting. I love Weaver. I think she is a phenomenal actress. But the more I watched this film, the more I felt Cameron should have cast someone who was younger to play her character. Perhaps someone unknown.

It may sound like I hate “Avatar: Fire and Ash.” But the truth is that I liked the film more than the last one, which I thought was mediocre. As much as I think the film feels like it plays the hits, it sometimes plays them well. I thought the characterization was also better this time around. Again, once this film finishes jumping the shark with Quaritch’s death in 2022’s outing, I like the direction in which they took him. I also thought this film gave some fascinating material for Spider. I thought the way he was handled in “The Way of Water” was rather questionable, but I like some of the ways he was developed in this film, particularly in regard to his overall connection with the Na’Vi. There is also a gripping scene in the second half of the film where his character serves as a crucial subject of the film’s larger message. We see Jake Sully trying to determine the best of two difficult choices, both of which involve Spider’s character. I thought the scene was excellently dramatized and may be one of the better character moments this franchise has offered.

Speaking of the Sully family, I thought they were another positive in this film. I found myself to care more about the children this time around than I did in the previous outing. I thought them dealing with the loss of one of their own gave each member some substance, including Neytiri, who establishes her opposition for humanity. But if you were to ask me what stood out to me in this film as a positive, I would find it difficult to come up with immediate, definitive answers. There are things I liked, but nothing that I truly loved. Part of me wants to say the CGI and the 3D are great, but “Avatar” can only offer the same thing so many times before it feels less fresh than it did before. If we get an “Avatar 4,” I am slightly more onboard for that than I was for this film. But I am still worried about this franchise becoming an old dog that can no longer learn new tricks. But, what do I know? This franchise makes buttloads of money, and people keep watching them. That is how the business works.

Photo by 20th Century Studios/20TH CENTURY STUDIOS – © 2025 20th Century Studios. All Rights Reserved.

In the end, if you were to ask me if you should go see “Avatar: Fire and Ash,” chances are I would answer yes. That said, it may be a specific yes. I would say to go see the movie, but I would not commit to seeing it at night. Settle for a matinee showtime when it is cheaper. “Avatar: Fire and Ash” sometimes feels like more of the same, but sometimes the repetitive parts work. I also thought the characterization was improved from the second movie. I found myself bored with that experience at times. With a three hour and 17 minute runtime, “Avatar: Fire and Ash” may be five minutes longer than “The Way of Water,” but this threequel comes with a much more engaging, faster pace. I cannot say I found a moment during the film where I wanted to drift off to sleep. In terms of the storytelling, I was surprisingly hooked. “Fire and Ash” does a not great, but good job with that. That said, if they are going to do the high frame rate in “Avatar 4,” I hope the film stays at 48 frames per second the whole time. I think 24 frames per second looks cooler. It makes things look more dramatic. But that is just me. Regardless of how many frames this film handles in a second, the switches honestly jarred me. If anything, it made the high frame rate come off as more of a gimmick. I will give this “Avatar” installment, as well as the others, props for the stunning 3D, which I often find gimmicky in other projects. But the high frame rate? Forget about it. I do not think it needed to be there. I do not give this film the highest of recommendations, but in no way am I going to disapprove of it either. I am going to give “Avatar: Fire and Ash” a 6/10.

“Avatar: Fire and Ash” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Photo by Courtesy of Searchlight Pictures – © Searchlight Pictures

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Is This Thing On?” and “Marty Supreme.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be unveiling my picks for my best and worst movies of 2025! I enjoy doing both lists. It has become an annual tradition. It is always fun to keep up with it. If you want to see these upcoming posts 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 “Avatar: Fire and Ash?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite of the “Avatar” movies? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Hamnet (2025): Chloe Zhao’s Latest Vision Breaks Your Heart and Puts it Back Together

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Hamnet” is directed by Chloé Zhao (Eternals, Nomadland) and stars Jessie Buckley (Wild Rose, Men), Paul Mescal (Gladiator II, All of Us Strangers), Emily Watson (Hilary and Jackie, Chernobyl), and Joe Alwyn (The Brutalist, Kinds of Kindness). This film showcases what happens as Agnes and William Shakespeare deal with the loss of their son, inspiring the latter’s play, “Hamlet.”

I was not aware that Chloé Zhao was working on a movie this year, but after seeing “Nomadland” and “Eternals” earlier this decade, I found her directorial efforts to be delivered with a sense of grace. There is something wholesome and calming with how her work is executed. Maybe it is because of the stories she chooses to tell. “Nomadland” is in a sense an inviting tale about real people. “Eternals” may be a Marvel movie with tons of CGI and fast-paced action, but it has a set of likable characters. I found Sprite’s arc in particular to be quite compelling. When I saw the marketing for “Hamnet,” I was less interested in the concept of the story as opposed to who was telling it. When I saw Chloé Zhao’s name pop up in the trailer, I was onboard. Is this film worth the hype? I would say so.

“Hamnet” is not my favorite film of the year. Though I have fiddled with at the least, making it an honorable mention on my best list this year. Spoiler alert, it is probably not going to make the list. I think select scenes throughout the film lack memorability compared to others. A number of factors play into this claim, because I found the atmosphere to be inviting. I thought the story, while it may not be the most thrilling, to be moving. But most of all, this film may have, collectively, the best acting I have seen in a film this year. The cast may not be the most recognizable, but every performer here is on their A-game. The chemistry between Jessie Buckley and Paul Mescal as Agnes and William Shakespeare is unbelievable, and the drama that is hankered in from their families also make for some compelling scenes.

The child actors were also incredible, and not just by the standards of “child actors.” They are so good that they honestly rival the grown-ups. In fact, as I watched this movie, I got the sense that just about every scene was presented in somewhat of a child-like spirit. It is a weird way to describe this movie, but every scene feels energetic. Even ones that are clearly drawn out. If a scene goes on for a while, it is supplemented by a satisfying dramatic effect. Part of this spirit is likely enhanced by the film’s location choices. Every place on camera looks gorgeous and I would not mind escaping into each one if I had the chance. Speaking of child-like spirit, I really enjoyed getting to see specific scenes from Hamnet’s youth. Seeing him swordfight with his dad emitted oodles of joy.

Before going to see “Hamnet,” I was told by friends who had already seen it that Jessie Buckley gave what may have been the best performance of the year. This set the bar really high for me. But even I was not prepared for the acting chops Buckley was bound to unleash. She is given so much to do in this film. You see her character, Agnes Shakespeare (left) through multiple portions of her life. You see her when she finds love, becomes a parent, deals with tragedy. Of course, she is no ordinary woman, as the film reveals she is a healer. Yes, there is quite a fantastical element to this story. After all, it is based on a fictional book. This is not my first film featuring Buckley that I have seen, but much like my previous review, “The Secret Agent,” this film does for Buckley what “The Secret Agent” did for Wagner Moura. It took someone I have seen in other movies and liked in other movies, but now that I have seen them in this one, it essentially put their name on the map for me. Buckley previously starred in Alex Garland’s “Men.” I barely remember that movie but I do remember Buckley giving her all in each scene. “Hamnet,” however, is a different animal entirely. I think this performance will be studied for quite a long time.

Of course, this is also a film about William Shakespeare (right), played brilliantly by Paul Mescal, and his portion of the story is not only compelling, but it sometimes paints him as a loving, but also imperfect father. I would not go as far as to say Shakespeare is a jerk. In fact, I often get a calming vibe from his character. But there is a fantastic scene between Agnes and William where the two argue and Agnes reminds her husband that he misses important life moments. The scene plays out in a way where I feel bad for both people.

There are many great films in recent years that do a good job at not just telling a marvelous story, but honoring storytellers while doing so. A lot of these have noticeably been about movies themselves, as seen in projects like “Babylon” and “The Fabelmans.” But “Hamnet” proves that there is room to pay tribute to the stage. The film sort of takes elements from “The Disaster Artist,” where a sequence of events happen, granted such events that happen in this story follow a significantly different structure. Then, instead of showing a movie at the end, “Hamnet” has a scene where a large crowd gathers to watch a play. The film reinforces a motto that I hear a lot when it comes to storytelling, specifically to write about and tell the stories you know. Seeing William Shakespeare tell the story of “Hamlet” really hits emotionally given the background the film offers through every moment leading up to said scene. In fact, there are multiple moments, especially towards the end, where the film plays out as if it was trying to make one tear up.

There is one music choice I was not expecting at the end of the film, but as soon as I recognized the song, it only made the scene hit that much harder. I am not saying the scene would not have hit without it, because that part of the movie by itself is as heavy as it is fulfilling, but the music choice was a bonus. If you know the name of this film’s composer, Max Richter, and one particular piece he crafted, you are in for a treat.

In the end, “Hamnet” is a beautifully done movie. Upon walking out, I debated as to whether this was my favorite Chloé Zhao film. Given time to marinate, I would probably give “Eternals” the edge at this point. But that does not mean I cannot appreciate her efforts here. The acting is some of the best I have ever seen, and I would not be surprised if this film dominates the SAG Awards. The film has brilliant cinematography, it is decently paced, and also finds time to both break your heart, then suddenly put it back in one piece. The film is definitely not for everyone, but I think if you are in the right mood, this movie could hit you where you live. I am going to give “Hamnet” a 7/10.

“Hamnet” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Photo by 20th Century Studios/20TH CENTURY STUDIOS – © 2025 20th Century Studios. All Rights Reserved.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Avatar: Fire and Ash!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, stay tuned for my thoughts on “Is This Thing On?” and “Marty Supreme.” 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 “Hamnet?” What did you think about it? Or, have you ever read the “Hamnet” book? What did you think about that? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Secret Agent (2025): Wagner Moura Excels as the Lead in This Drawn Out Thriller

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Secret Agent” is directed by Kleber Mendonça Filho (Aquarius, Bacurau) and stars Wagner Moura (Puss in Boots: The Last Wish, Narcos), Carlos Francisco (Bacurau, A Strange Path), Tânia Maria (Bacurau), Robério Diógenes (As Tentações do Irmão Sebastião, Onde Anda Você), Alice Carvalho (New Bandits, Love is a Knife), Gabriel Leone (Dom, Your Heart), Maria Fernanda Cândido (My Hindu Friend, The Traitor), Hermila Guedes (Second Call, New Bandits), Isabél Zuaa (Good Manners, Joaquim), and Udo Kier (Blade, Don’t Worry, He Won’t Get Far on Foot). This film, which is set towards the end of Brazil’s military dictatorship, is about a technology expert who returns to his hometown seeking peace, only to realize it may not be the right place take refuge.

If you read my review for “No Other Choice,” you’d know that my experience with Korean cinema is fairly limited. But at least when it comes to that nation’s output of movies, I at least knew who Park Chan-wook was prior to checking out his latest flick. I have a similar situation with Brazilian cinema, only worse. While some of this film’s cast has achieved international fame, I could not honestly say I recognized their faces going in. I had no idea who the director, Kleber Mendonça Filho, was before watching this movie. The only reason why I checked out this film is because of all the praise it appeared to be getting ahead of awards season. I never watched a trailer. I never saw a commercial. In fact, I went to see the film at one of the two theaters in my area playing it at the time. Was it worth the trip? I’d say so. The film is not bad, but it is far from my favorite of the year.

“The Secret Agent” is a great watch, but not the easiest watch for a number of reasons. Although one can say the film is rewarding if you can sit through all of it. The movie draws itself out pretty heavily and several scenes go on for what can best be described as a snail’s pace. Films like “Blade Runner” prove that a story can move slowly and still keep you hooked, therefore making the pace come off as a positive. “The Secret Agent’s” pacing often had me checking the time, and it made me less invested in the supporting characters than I probably should have been. However, that is not to say I disliked any of them.

On the surface, “The Secret Agent” is a solid narrative. But it is one that is probably at its best at the beginning and the end. The middle is where the film’s slowest and least engaging points tend to come up. The film starts off with a great hook, introduces a neat concept, and lets us get to know some admirable characters. The end, while not larger than life, is pretty killer with very little filler. The middle is by no means a bad watch, but the film’s highlights for me happen before and after said point. People often talk about how some audiences these days have very short attention spans, and I wonder, fairly or unfairly, how this movie would sit with people who are watching at home for the first time, or looking at their phones. When people think of movies that are best experienced in a theater, people will often lean to adventure, fantasy, or sci-fi blockbusters. “The Secret Agent” is a bit more grounded, but like those more expensive and flashy pictures, I think this film crafts a unique cinematic experience of its own.

“The Secret Agent” oozes an atmosphere like no other. Again, this film is slow, but if anything, it allowed me to carefully take in just about each scene one at a time. This film is often quiet, but it only allows me to suck myself into its environments. The film starts off in the middle of a desert. With the drawn out editing and lack of music, part of me felt like I was stranded in the middle of that desert. Part of the atmosphere is also highlighted by the production design. This film is set in 1977, so it felt classy to see a bunch of old cars in every other frame.

The cinematography, perfectly executed by Evgenia Alexandrova, is also a standout. Granted, going back to the desert at the beginning, having decent locations definitely helps. But each frame allowed those locations to shine. There is also a really cool POV shot involving blood towards the end of the film that blew me away. Each frame also weirdly goes against the film’s vibe. Every second of the film involves our protagonist trying to seek safety. Yet at the same time, nearly all the film’s frames feel bright and colorful. I am not mad about it though. The film looks incredibly picturesque. Another weird technical choice if you had to ask me involves the film’s music. For the most part, I thought the film had decent music choices that matched every scene. Then in the climax, there is a song choice that is oddly happy sounding for a chase sequence where our protagonist could die at any point. To me, this almost rubbed me the wrong way. If I were in charge, I would have picked a different song. Then again, the “Challengers” score left me with a headache and people seem to love those tunes, so what do I know?

The standouts to this film do not just extend to the technological elements, but little things like dialogue also pack a punch. “The Secret Agent” may not be my favorite screenplay of the year, but it most definitely has one of my favorite lines. When Marcelo says “I’d kill him with a hammer,” I felt that. There are few, if any lines of dialogue from a film released this year, that sent a chill down my spine like that one.

Also, Wagner Moura is fantastic in this movie. Moura is fairly well known internationally through the series “Narcos,” which I have not watched. Although I had the tremendous pleasure of seeing him play an infinitely haunting antagonist, specifically Death in “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish.” I love him in that movie, but “The Secret Agent” will be remembered as the film that made know his name. I cannot wait to see what roles he takes on next. Though this is no way of suggesting the supporting cast did not do a good job themselves. The two biggest MVPs in the supporting cast for me are Elza (Tânia Maria), whose charm knows no bounds, and young Fernando (Enzo Nunes) whose adorableness leaps off the screen.

In the end, I know there is a bit of hype going around for “The Secret Agent,” but frankly, I had the same reaction coming out of this movie that I had for “Sinners” and “Weapons.” I know both of those movies have their fans, and they are undoubtedly well made. If you read my reviews for those movies, you would know that I like both of them. “The Secret Agent” is not an exception to the rule. But I am not chomping at the bit to get an immediate second viewing of “The Secret Agent.” I would watch the film a second time, considering how much I liked the characters and production elements from the first watch. But I have personally seen more appealing films this year. I can see “The Secret Agent” winning a lot of people over, to the point where it is their film of the year. For me, it is a good watch, and I will leave it at that for now. I may revisit it in the future. I may not. Only time will tell. I am going to give “The Secret Agent” a 7/10.

“The Secret Agent” is now playing in select theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Hamnet” and “Avatar: Fire and Ash!” Stay tuned! 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 Secret Agent?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a film released this year that you like but also think is a tad overhyped? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Scarlet (2025): Revenge is a Dish Best Served in the Afterlife

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Scarlet” is directed by Mamoru Hosoda (Belle, Mirai) and stars Mana Ashida (Pacific Rim, Mother), Masaki Okada (Drive My Car, Confessions), and Koji Yakusho (Babel, Perfect Days). In this film, the titular princess, who lives in Medieval Times, is out to get revenge against her father’s killer. Unfortunately for her, the mission does not go according to plan, because she dies before completing it. Her quest continues in the afterlife, where the killer also happens to reside. In the meantime, she runs into a medical worker from the present day, whose views on violence and revenge strongly conflict with hers.

“Scarlet’s” wide U.S. release does not take place until 2026, but I had the unique opportunity to watch the film in 2025, as it received a very limited engagement in select IMAX theaters. One of those theaters happened to be 20 minutes from home, and given how much I was chomping at the bit to see “Scarlet,” I bought a ticket lickety split. That said, even if “Scarlet” were only playing one, two, three, or even four hours away from where I was, I would have still bought a ticket because the film is from someone who has become a favorite filmmaker of mine in recent years, specifically, Mamoru Hosoda.

If you have read this blog in 2022, or sometime after, you may have discovered that I have a very unhealthy obsession for Hosoda’s movie “Belle,” which I have made multiple posts about, and watched countless times. Since then, I have gone back to watch Hosoda’s other films including “The Girl Who Leapt Through Time,” which was clever and fun. “Summer Wars,” which is creative and full of likable characters. “Wolf Children,” which by the end, triggered all kinds of emotions for me. “The Boy and the Beast,” which I found to be an entertaining journey with a likable duo. And “Mirai,” which I think is the weakest of Hosoda’s filmography, but still charming and neatly animated. Even with his inferior films, Hosoda boasts an incredible resume, and I am proud to say that “Scarlet” just the latest success from the masterclass storyteller.

Every once in a while, there comes in a film that makes people say that such a story is something we need right now, and I would argue “Scarlet” is not just a story we need right now, it is story that we will probably continue to need for years to come. This is not so much a movie as much as it is a message about being kind. A message reminding people of the horrors of violence. A message concerning the importance of the human condition. I really enjoyed seeing the major differences between the film’s two main characters, Scarlet, a princess from medieval times, and Hijiri, a first responder from modern times. Both characters end up dying, meet up in the afterlife, and come to realize each other’s differences.

“Scarlet” is not the only afterlife-centric film I reviewed this year. If you have followed Scene Before recently, you would know I reviewed “Eternity.” Both of these films have clever interpretations on what happens after you die, but both films are likely to hit certain audiences differently. “Eternity” takes a more comedic approach to dealing with the concept of death and the uncertainty of what happens after one ceases to exist. “Scarlet” on the other hand, while it occasionally has a funny moment, is grittier, bloodier, and more violent. If you dig this more dramatic approach, this movie could work for you. One indication of how dramatic this movie can get at times is its messaging about war.

Technically speaking, this film sings. The sound mixing in this film blew me away. There are some lightning claps in this movie that shook me as soon as they emitted. Granted, I saw this film in IMAX, so it is not much a surprise that a lot of the sound effects end up packing a punch. Not surprisingly, like most of Hosoda’s work, this film looks beautiful. Granted, I will say unlike some of his past work like “Summer Wars” or “Wolf Children,” there is a lot less emphasis on color. The film is not only rugged in terms of its vibe, but it is often matched by its color choices, or lack thereof. Though I will note, between this film and “Belle,” Hosoda seems to like focusing on protagonists with pink hair. The animation style is not the easiest to explain in layman’s terms. It is almost “Spider-Verse“-esque considering the film’s mix of 2D and 3D elements. It is not quite on the same level, but at times “Scarlet” does remind me of those films.

The music in this film is also fantastic. There is one song that is original to the film called “A Celebration Song.” I thought it was perfectly timed and utilized around the story’s midpoint. The score, whose percussion elements stood out to me in particular, is composed by Taisei Iwasaki. While I do not think this is as memorable as his “Belle” score, his efforts here result in some chilling tracks.

The story does have elements that are familiar. In fact, “Scarlet” takes a bit from William Shakespeare’s “Hamlet,” but it does not mean it is not its own animal. Scarlet and Hijiri come from different times, different places, different backgrounds. But both note that they are no strangers to war and violence. Scarlet wants to get revenge on the person who killed her father. And Hijiri suggests that people like him are trying to keep the concept of war in the rear-view mirror, despite the difficulty of doing so. He also establishes that his very profession involves saving people from death, and that he has never become used to the idea of people dying despite what his job entails. Scarlet mocks Hijiri, calling him a do-gooder, but he simply wants there to be world peace. As these two navigate the afterlife together, it becomes clear that in a sense, this movie is practically a near two hour plea for pacifism.

I also found the ending quite satisfying. Granted, it does require some suspension of disbelief. But if you can get past the logic leap, then it might hit you in the same way it hit me. Then again, as I say that, I realize how much this film made me suspend my own disbelief. I have no clue what the afterlife is going to be like, but most of my interpretations of the afterlife over the years have a timeline that is almost parallel to the one we experience in “real life.” When someone dies, I sometimes think of them “looking down” at me, or somebody else. The thought has never crossed my mind that there could be another version of me that has already died, or that if I die, I would travel to a time so to speak long before the people I know are born. The afterlife in this film is undoubtedly creative, but it is kind of mind-numbing to think about, and if I did end up there after I died, I would be a bit bewildered. The afterlife feels very specific to the movie’s universe in order to tell its specific story, and it works here. But it does not feel like a place in which people would truly end up after death if you ask me.

I cannot stop thinking about this film’s afterlife, which is in part a good thing because it is clever, but also a bad thing because I sometimes question its logic. But that is not all that is on my mind upon leaving “Scarlet,” because the film reminds me of how I sometimes think about some of the bad things in my life and how I could at one point say to myself, “This is the worst timeline,” or “This is the worst time in history.” But in actuality, my time in history is probably as not as bad as some others. In fact, it is very likely that as I look back in the past, so many people felt that their specific time had an overwhelming amount of negativity attached to it. I look at our world today and there is so much war going on across the planet, but this film reminds me that even though war exists, my generation did not invent it. In fact, many people in my generation are trying to stop it. This film made me wonder what life would be like if I were born at a different time, all the while making me appreciate the good that we have in this current time. I need time to marinate, but “Scarlet” is likely my favorite animated film of the year. It looks pretty, has likable characters, and is also a bit of a thinker.

In the end, “Scarlet” is, to me, in the middle tier of Mamoru Hosoda’s filmography, which is another way of suggesting that I really dug this movie. Hosoda tells a fast-paced, riveting, emotionally satisfying story with a couple of fleshed out main characters. I liked getting to know about both of them. On top of that, the film is beautifully animated and has tons of great music. I am going to give “Scarlet” an 8/10.

“Scarlet” arrives in theatres Feburary 6th, 2026.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “The Secret Agent!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Hamnet” and “Avatar: Fire and Ash.” 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 “Scarlet?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite film from Mamoru Hosoda? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Fackham Hall (2025): Fackin’ Average

Posted on by Jack Drees

© 2025 – Bleecker Street

“Fackham Hall” is directed by Jim O’Hanlon (Coronation Street, Your Christmas or Mine?) and stars Thomasin McKenzie (Last Night in Soho, Joy), Ben Radcliffe (Pandora, Anatomy of a Scandal), Katherine Waterston (Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, Afraid), Emma Laird (The Brutalist, A Haunting in Venice), Tom Goodman-Hill (Baby Reindeer, Humans), Anna Maxwell Martin (Bleak House, Motherland), Sue Johnston (Downton Abbey, Coronation Street), Tom Felton (Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, The Flash), and Damian Lewis (Billions, Homeland). This film showcases the shenanigans and problems that ensue as a porter forms a bond with the daughter of a prominent family, just as said family is coming together for an extravagant wedding.

If I had to give a rundown of my most anticipated films of the year back in January, chances are “Fackham Hall” would not have made the list, partially because I had no idea it was coming out. In fact, I was first made aware of the film while watching trailers before the underwhelming horror flick “Bone Lake.” This film, like that one, is distributed by Bleecker Street, so it makes sense that the red band trailer, which played exclusively in theaters at the time, would be the last thing I’d see before the feature presentation. But if I were to go back in time and tell my younger self that “Fackham Hall” would be coming out in December, then maybe I would have considered putting it on the list. This is partially because I would tell my younger self that the trailer gave me the biggest belly laughs I have had watching a piece of marketing in years. I do not recall the last time I watched a trailer and nearly lost self-control from cackling as audibly as I did.

Unfortunately, “Fackham Hall” was not as good as I was expecting it to be. Do not get me wrong. It was not an automatic guarantee that this film was not going to work for me. This film is being marketed as “Downton Abbey” meets “Airplane.” As much as I enjoyed “Airplane,” “Downtown Abbey” never struck me as my kind of show. This is why you never saw me review any of the “Downton Abbey” movies. I never watched the show, so it would not make a lot of sense for me to watch the movies. Though I went into this film with an open mind because it came off as something that one could appreciate without necessarily needing to watch “Downton Abbey.” One can argue such a thing to be true.

Among the reasons why I was looking forward to this film, one of them is the the fact that comedian Jimmy Carr is attached to the project. If you know me, you would be aware that Jimmy Carr is one of my all time favorite comedians. I watch his specials on YouTube on a regular basis. I have seen him a few times when he’s performed in New England. I also like him as a game show host. In fact, he is one of the film’s five writers, making this his first screenplay. Carr also has a small role in the film as a vicar. He is only on screen for one to two minutes, but he plays his part to the best of his ability. This is not to say he did a bad job, but he played a character who basically has one running joke, specifically that he says things that sound taboo or wrong, only for him to pause and finish the rest of what he has to say. On paper, the joke is funny. But I have seen the trailer for this film and as someone who was looking forward to seeing Jimmy Carr on screen, I wish he had some variety in his material.

In fact, remember how I said the trailer was one of the funniest I have ever seen? It does not mean the movie is. I think part of that has to do with seeing the trailer in the first place. One of my biggest fears going into any comedy film is the possibility that they show all the best bits in the marketing, and based on what I have seen through “Fackham Hall’s” marketing in particular, I cannot name one joke in that stood out to me that was not in the trailer. Also, multiple jokes likely lost their intended effect since I already got to see them in advance. Other than that, there are a lot of jokes that feel too over the top, and that is saying something for a film called “Fackham Hall.” The film is filled with a lot of toilet and taboo humor. It often came off as if it were being written by a young child who just learned what the word “boobies” means.

Overall, the film has a lot of jokes. Therefore, those jokes trigger a lot of reactions. For a film that ultimately left me underwhelmed, I had a surprising amount of laughs. That said, I cannot really name a favorite joke. Also, with this movie having a lot of jokes, it also indicates that a good chunk of them fell flat. There are a few references to The Beatles and the works of J.R.R. Tolkien. While the jokes sound clever on the page, they feel less clever on the screen. I could see myself writing these gags down and amusing myself as I read them, but their delivery in the film did not do it for me. Lots of comedies have jokes that are better than others. Although in the case of “Fackham Hall,” the balance between good jokes and bad jokes is not exactly satisfying.

Also, once again, “Fackham Hall” is written by four people. I wish I could have been a fly on the wall to see the process of the screenplay being put together. I want to know who came up with the best jokes of the film, who came up with the weakest, and how everyone decided to tie the story together. The film comes very close to having an identity crisis. While the film is often smooth sailing, it introduces a mystery plot that makes sense within the context of the film, but it simultaneously feels tacked on.

For all I know, this movie could age well and find an audience over time. If anything, I blame myself for perhaps getting so overly invested in the film prior to its release. This film left such a lasting impression on me before it came out that it only increased the chances that I would be disappointed.

Do not get me wrong. My feelings about the film do not change my opinions about the people involved. Thomasin McKenzie is a great actress and it is nice to see her find work. I am proud of Jimmy Carr for expanding his horizons and doing something outside of standup and game shows. One of the film’s writers happens to be Jimmy’s brother, Patrick Carr. It is lovely to see family working together. Overall, the cast of the film, even the most minor of characters, all do a fantastic job with their roles. I just wish all this talent resulted in something more entertaining.

In the end, “Fackham Hall” is one of the most of the disappointing films of the year for me. Maybe I set my expectations too high, which could be part of the problem. But that initial trailer, to me, promised so much potential for laughter that my hype levels reached the sun. There were definitely laughs in “Fackham Hall,” just not to my desired degree. Once again, this film has five writers. I wonder if that played a part in this film’s pace, because by the time we get to the murder mystery portion of the film, it felt rather out of the blue. Not necessarily in a satisfying and twisty way, but instead it made me go, “Okay, so this is happening…” I would not avoid this movie like the plague, but I still would not recommend it. I am going to give “Fackham Hall” a 5/10.

“Fackham Hall” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Scarlet!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “The Secret Agent,” “Hamnet,” and “Avatar: Fire and Ash.” 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 “Fackham Hall?” What did you think about it? Or, what are your thoughts on “Downton Abbey?” Is it a good show? Are the movies worth watching? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

No Other Choice (2025): My First Park Chan-wook Film

Posted on by Jack Drees

“No Other Choice” is directed by Park Chan-wook (Oldboy, Decision to Leave) and stars Lee Byung-hun (Joint Security Area, A Bittersweet Life), Son Ye-jin (A Moment to Remember, April Snow), Park Hee-soon (My Name, Seven Days), Lee Sung-min (Golden Time, The Spy Gone North), Yeom Hye-rann (The Glory, The Uncanny Counter), and Cha Seung-won (Uprising, Believer). This film is based on a novel called “The Ax” and is about a man who quite literally decides to eliminate his competition in order to secure a job.

Courtesy of Neon – © Neon

My experience with Korean cinema is very limited. In fact, to this day, I have never once reviewed a Park Chan-wook film on Scene Before. I have not even seen one of his films. Of course, I have heard of some of his work, but I have never had the chance to watch any of it. However, when I watched “Shelby Oaks” at AMC in October, one of the last trailers that played was for “No Other Choice,” which immediately caught my attention. This trailer boasted its positive reviews in addition to its 100% Rotten Tomatoes score. As of this publication, the score stands at 99%, but this is still mighty impressive. The trailer also made sure to emphasize that the film was from Park Chan-wook, whose last feature, “Decision to Leave,” was nominated for two BAFTAs. Not to mention, his feature prior to that one, “The Handmaiden” actually won him a BAFTA for “Best Film Not in the English Language.” While Chan-wook may not have as much recognition in the States as Bong Joon Ho, I would not be surprised if “No Other Choice” brings him some extra publicity that could make him somewhat of a household name. After all, I got to the see the film a little more than a week ago, and I have to say I found it to be quite good.

I have no idea how this film is going to do with general audiences, particularly those in the United States, but I really hope it succeeds. That sounds like a moot statement. In actuality, I want just about every film that exists to succeed. But I really hope “No Other Choice” in particular does, because the film has themes and ideas I think a lot of people living in the United States, as well as other parts of the world, can relate to.

The film starts off by introducing its lead character, Yoo Man-su, who basically has it all. A good life, a happy family, a couple dogs, a nice house, a good job, even some awards recognition. However, there comes a point where his collective success begins tumbling like a flimsy Jenga tower. He loses his job, keeps applying for other ones in his field but he cannot find success, so he ends up working in retail. With the pay not high enough, Man-su’s wife, Lee Mi-ri, gets to a point where she takes up some part-time work. The family starts sacrificing some of their hobbies and possessions. For Man-su, his extended struggle gets to a point where he feels he has, no pun intended, no other choice, but to kill off his competitors.

Seeing this plot play out is quite entertaining and results in some unpredictable moments. The screenplay weaves a lot of threads. Some some of those threads are more engaging than others. Admittedly, I felt the 2 hour and 19 minute runtime. If anything, that is probably the film’s biggest flaw. It is sometimes, not all the time, but sometimes, tediously paced. Yet it fails to change the fact that I was often intrigued by not just how much was going on, but the execution of all of it.

While “No Other Choice” will probably not end up amongst my top movies of the year, I do have to admit that it is absolutely one of the most technically beautiful movies I have seen in 2025. There are a lot of little quirks the film delivers that almost do not matter at all, but they nevertheless make the final product all the better. For example, there is a scene where we see one character holding a lighter, and there is a cartoony fire effect that comes up as said character flicks it. This is almost like something out of a graphic novel. The color grading in this film is extravagant. I got to see this film in IMAX laser, so I had a pretty bright projector in the auditorium, but I am sure even if it was not that bright, the film would still look incredibly poppy. The film is sometimes dark, but it takes a satirical route. It has a Tarantino vibe at times, so the color palette fits. Speaking of colors, sometimes the sun acts like a secondary character. There are a couple shots where the sun’s dropping or rising and it comes off as an Instagram influencer’s dream. The camerawork is also pretty solid. The film has maybe the sickest zooms I have seen since “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.” I dropped my jaw at some of these movements. The film is often grounded, but there are occasional moments where the vibe can feel animated, and yet those two moods mesh together perfectly to make something fulfilling.

Another standout in the technical department is the soundwork. I saw this film with a large crowd, about a five to ten minute drive outside of Boston. My screening was almost sold out. The film has plenty of laughs, including some moments that, again, arguably do not matter much, but the fact that they are there makes the project better. There is a moment in the film where Lee Mi-ri is going over the changes that the family has to make in order to save money. One idea she had was to cancel Netflix. Of course, one of the children excuses themselves from the dinner table with an electronic device and says they’re going to get one final stream in. Next thing we hear is Netflix’s well-known “Tudum” sound effect that plays either before one of their programs or when you log in. It got a much bigger laugh from the audience than it should have, but it was timed and mixed so perfectly that it was almost impossible not to laugh.

The other sound effect that could have gone sideways was a specific door chime. You know how when you walk into a store, you hear a chime when the door opens? There is one scene set at a shop where a chime almost plays on a loop. The more it played, the funnier it became. At least to me. The chime itself was rather funny-sounding to begin with, but the fact that it kept playing only added to the comedy. “No Other Choice” has a lot of little things to appreciate in what is ultimately an ambitious ride. It has laughs. It has drama. It has entertainment. It has everything one could want to make a solid flick and more.

Courtesy of Neon – © Neon

In the end, I have no other choice but to recommend this film. I would not be surprised if “No Other Choice” ends up speaking to a lot of people. These include people who lost their jobs, perhaps those close to someone they know who lost a job, or people simply trying to get by. The cost of living, depending on where you reside, is getting out of control, and that is if it has not done so already. This is my first Park Chan-wook movie, and I would not mind seeing more. At some point, I would like to check out some of his older projects, or if he has something new up his sleeve, that could be cool to see too. I am going to give “No Other Choice” a 7/10.

“No Other Choice” arrives in select theaters this Christmas and will have a wide release in January 2026.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Fackham Hall!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Scarlet,” “The Secret Agent,” “Hamnet,” and “Avatar: Fire and Ash.” 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 “No Other Choice?” What did you think about it? Or, do you have a favorite Park Chan-wook movie? Let me know your suggestions down below as I would love to get into more of his work. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Bugonia (2025): Bu-Go See Something Else

Posted on by Jack Drees

Courtesy of Focus Features – © Focus Features

“Bugonia” is directed by Yorgos Lanthimos (Poor Things, Kinds of Kindness) and stars Emma Stone (The Favourite, The Amazing Spider-Man) Jesse Plemons (Civil War, Game Night), Aidan Delbis, Stavros Halkias (Let’s Start a Cult, Tires), and Alicia Silverstone (Clueless, Batman & Robin). This film is based on the 2003 South Korean feature “Save the Green Planet!”, and it is about two cousins who capture a pharmaceutical company CEO and keep her in their home. One of the cousins, Teddy, is convinced the captive is secretly an alien who is killing earth’s honeybees.

Yorgos Lanthimos… We meet again.

On Scene Before, I make an effort to talk about the things I love. Unfortunately, sometimes this blog feels like work, and Lanthimos is a reason for that. So far, Lanthimos is one for three through the films of his I have seen. In 2018, I watched “The Favourite,” which despite its stunning presentation and solid performances, I found to be incredibly boring. Then his next feature, “Poor Things” shocked me beyond belief. I not only genuinely liked the film, I found it to be one of the funnier watches of 2023. Then came his 2024 movie, “Kinds of Kindness,” which I found kind of forgettable, kind of overly disturbing, and ultimately, kind of a chore to get through. While there are other films I have not seen from the director, my experience with him showcases why I have avoided “Bugonia” for as long as I did. I know people who went to see it as soon as the film came out, but I waited a little more than a month. The marketing came off as quirky, and so did the concept. I do not mind a quirkfest, as long as it is good. Sadly, “Bugonia” not only fails to be good, it nearly left me with a headache.

As I write this, I recognize that my review is going to come off as something in the neighborhood of a CBR opinion piece that challenges people to reconsider one of their all time favorite films. But I am nothing if not honest. And as much as it pains me to tell the truth, “Bugonia” may be my least favorite film I have seen from Yorgos Lanthimos so far. And if it were not for select redeeming qualities that I had time to think about post-viewing, I would have been so close to calling “Bugonia” the worst picture of the year.

Look… “The Favourite” was a bore. “Poor Things” surprisingly scored. “Kinds of Kindness” is a chore. But “Bugonia…” broke me to the core! This movie is deplorable! Is the movie made by people who are clearly trying hard? Trying their best? You can say that. The film is by no means incompetent. In fact, like one of this year’s most prominent talking points amongst cinephiles, “One Battle After Another,” it is shot in VistaVision. Therefore, the color palette sometimes feels fairly diverse. Although unlike “One Battle After Another,” never once does the movie feel as grand. Maybe that is unfair of me to say since I saw “One Battle After Another” in IMAX 70mm whereas I saw “Bugonia” on AMC’s laser system. Although for a movie that uses a high quality format, it feels surprisingly intimate. While there are several shots that feel like they come from the same crew that did “Poor Things,” I think the on screen results are a bit more picturesque and satisfying in “Poor Things.”

On top of the VistaVision, another Lanthimosianism makes a return, particularly Emma Stone. This is their fourth film in a row together, and I can see why. The two clearly work well as a team, and the results sometimes show on screen. I would even go as far as to say that Emma Stone’s lead performance in “Poor Things” may be the best display of acting I have seen so far this decade. Not surprisingly, Stone plays her part well. A lot of it has to do with her given dialogue and the specific direction Lanthimos gives her. A large chunk of the movie is set amongst three people, Stone’s character included. Although the characterization is something I find to be one of the film’s weak points.

Much of the movie involves the two male leads, Teddy Gatz (Plemons) and his autistic cousin Don (Delbis), as they keep Michelle Fuller (Stone) captive inside their home. Teddy appears to be heavily invested in conspiracy theories to the point where it is nearly impossible for him to escape his echo chamber. Don appears to be somewhat easily influenced by Teddy, even when he questions some of the choices he makes. While both pairs have their distinctions, the relationship between Teddy and Don kind of reminded me of George and Lennie from “Of Mice and Men.” Only in the case of George and Lennie, I found that pair through their respective story, whether it was told on the page or the screen, to be more likable and compelling, whereas I found “Bugonia’s” main pair to peeve me on a regular basis. Granted, as I say that, I more than likely reserve most of my despise towards Teddy, who is practically the captain of their respective duo. Don often seems to follow Teddy’s lead. Given their characteristics and quirks, it makes sense. I buy into their mannerisms, I just wish both characters were executed better. Teddy is not that compelling of a lead to me. In fact, at times, I think he is kind of a psychopath. Perhaps that is the point of such a character and maybe that is what Lanthimos is going for, but this movie genuinely made me uncomfortable. Everyone is the hero of their own story, but if that hero is downright insufferable, then their story is probably not worth my time. If I were not reviewing this movie, and I were strictly watching this for entertainment, I would probably have walked out of the theater because some of the things Teddy does on screen deeply turned me off.

With the VistaVision filmmaking, distinct colors, and prominent use of actress Emma Stone, this film is about as Lanthimosian as it gets. As for that last part, I will not deny that Stone gives a good performance. There is a sense of mystery to her character, particularly as to whether or not she is an alien. Without spoiling too much, I thought Stone’s specific tendencies matched that mysteriousness. This is not the best performance of her career, but I thought she handled the role well, and props to her for shaving her head.

“Bugonia” is not short on commentary. In addition to perhaps having something to say on humanity’s place on earth, this film is essentially a satire on echo chambers, conspiracy theories, and extremes. As a result, it also satirizes those who follow such things. But just because the film supposedly spends a couple of hours mocking its subject matter, does not make the end result comedic, entertaining, or satisfying. The lead character is either so deep in his echo chamber to the point where it is difficult for me to root for, care about, relate to, or even sit back and admire him. I like complicated characters, but there is a flavor to Teddy that feels too rotten for yours truly. He reminds me of Ernest Buckheart from “Killers of the Flower Moon,” there are very few, if any, qualities that appealed to me about this character. Both characters, deep down, come off as jerks. Sure, there are people these characters care about, but if I ran into both characters at the mall I would immediately speedwalk past them as I try to get as far away from them as I can.

I think I have come to the conclusion that Lanthimos and I have completely different personalities and artistic preferences. I often say on this blog and in life that art is subjective. Not everyone is going to think the same way, therefore not everyone is going to like the same things. But I did not think I could become less excited for whatever else Yorgos Lanthimos has up his sleeve. Sometimes being wrong just plain sucks.

In the end, “Bugonia” broke me. I must reiterate, my opinion of this film is obscenely unusual. Chances are it might work for you. Heck, as of writing this, the movie has Best Picture nominations from the Critics Choice, Golden Globes, and to my complete and utter amazement, it is one of AFI’s top movies of the year. I highly question and nearly gag at all of these accolades but that is just how the cookie crumbles sometimes. As far as I am concerned, “Bugonia” is not one of the top movies of the year, but rather a movie released this year. Are there good things about it? With some time to marinate on the film, I can conclude that there are. The film has a nice color palette. While I do not think the commentary works 100% of the time, I do appreciate the film for getting me to think about humanity’s place on this planet. Even though I am not a fan of Lanthimos’ style, I do think he did a fine job with the direction, particularly with getting effective performances out of the actors, most especially Emma Stone. I will also give some credit for the casting of Aidan Delbis. The actor, who has autism in real life, plays a character in this film who is also on the spectrum. I will give some points for authenticity and it shows in his performance. This is also Delbis’ feature film debut, so I hope this leads to him finding more work. Maybe if I watch the film a second time with a different mindset, chances are I could appreciate it more. But this first viewing, which nearly left me with a headache, gave me the sense that I would probably would not have any desire to put on this film for a second viewing anytime soon. I am going to give “Bugonia” a 3/10.

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

Courtesy of Neon – © Neon

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “No Other Choice!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Scarlet,” “The Secret Agent,” “Hamnet,” and “Avatar: Fire and Ash.” 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 “Bugonia?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a film released this year that everyone seems to love except for you? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Jay Kelly (2025): Movie Star George Clooney Terrifically Stars as a Movie Star

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Jay Kelly” is directed by Noah Baumbach (White Noise, Marriage Story) and stars George Clooney (Gravity, Ticket to Paradise) and Adam Sandler (Happy Gilmore, Billy Madison) in a film about an actor who reflects on his career, choices, relationships, and legacy.

Throughout the years, there have been cases where I would point out that an actor plays themselves in a movie. This could be in a literal sense like Kumail Nanjiani did in the hilarious and heartfelt “Big Sick,” or in a figurative sense like Dwayne Johnson playing some variation of a character he has portrayed before, or some version of their off-camera personality.

While the character of Jay Kelly is not based on George Clooney or any particular actor, it is interesting to see an actor of Clooney’s caliber take him on, and it results in one of the best performances of the year. A good chunk of the performance is enhanced by the screenplay, crafted by Noah Baumbach and Emily Mortimer. The former is already an acclaimed name through his work on 2019’s “Marriage Story,” and Emily Mortimer is known for her acting career, but this is her first feature writing credit, and may I say it is a fine one to have.

Courtesy of Netflix – © 2025 Netflix, Inc

It does not surprise me that Noah Baumbach would work on a film like this. Not just because it is great, which it is. But also because it appears to take slight threads from “Marriage Story.” If you go back and look at “Marriage Story” and some of the reasons why the main characters’ relationship falls apart, a lot of it has to do with their creative lifestyles. They were both artists, but happened to be after different goals. In “Jay Kelly,” we see the title character having a uniquely successful acting career, which ultimately puts a damper on the relationships between him and several people he knows. One of the movie’s most moving scenes happens between Kelly and one of his daughters. She reminds Kelly of one of his acting gigs as a loving father. She says she remembers watching that project in particular and did not understand how her actual father was not as caring and attentive as the character he played.

This scene furthers one of Kelly’s extended struggles. Kelly seems to find it easy and appealing to escape his own world and enter someone else’s. It is almost like Kelly has ADHD and constantly feels the need to daydream. Except in his case, he does not imagine himself in another world, he comes as close as he can to living it. In this sense, the movie seems to imply the importance of appreciating what you have. Kelly seems to love his job. So much to the point where it gets in the way of important people like those in his family.

“Jay Kelly” surprisingly sticks the landing, because this movie had the potential to make the main character look like a jerk. The screenplay instead does everything possible to make Kelly human. Kelly means well, but his flaws sometimes stick out like a sore thumb, either to the audience or to the rest of the cast. There are moments of unforgivable behavior, but the movie never once makes Kelly look like a complete psycho. Maybe it is because we spend much of the movie with Kelly’s manager, Ron Sukenick, played by Adam Sandler. While Sandler’s performance does not quite have the dramatic oomph of “Uncut Gems,” it is nice to see him continue to expand his range. Especially considering he just came off of “Happy Gilmore 2,” which I did not review, but if I had to say something quick about it, I thought it was, in a word, fine.

Sukenick plays a huge part in forwarding Kelly’s journey. Their relationship, and by extension, the movie, makes me think of Bob Sugar’s line from “Jerry Maguire,” specifically, “it’s not show friends, it’s show business.” I get the sense that these two people are close, but at times they feel more like partners than friends, if that makes any sense. That said, the two do seem to like each other and get along just fine.

Clooney and Sandler are not the only super-sized names in this film. Much like another recent Netflix feature, “Wake Up Dead Man,” the star power in this film is massive. For the most part, it is hard to pinpoint a bad performance in the film, but it is chock-full of talent including Laura Dern, Greta Gerwig, Isla Fisher, and Riley Keough just to name a few. Similar to how we see George Clooney playing an actor, the film’s director and cinematographer, Noah Baumbach and Linus Sandgren respectively, have cameo roles as, you guessed it, a director and cinematographer on one of Jay’s films.

I enjoyed getting to see Kelly’s work throughout various points of his career. One of these examples also happens to be the first scene of the movie, which does an incredible job recreating a backdrop of metro New York, particularly the area around the East River, Roosevelt Island, and Long Island City, complete with the Queensboro Bridge above it all. When I think of my favorite films this year in terms of production design, “Jay Kelly” would probably not be my first choice. But the way this set is laid out perfectly showcases the location itself, and when Kelly is on camera, it does a great job at maintaining an illusion. If I look hard enough at the backdrop, I can tell that I am not looking at the real New York, but the movie, as well as the movie within the movie, does a great job at making said backdrop feel as real as possible.

One of the film’s most memorable aspects is the relationship between Kelly and Timothy Galligan. The two start off as classmates in acting school. At one point, the two try out at the same audition, only for Kelly to steal his friend’s spotlight. It is at this point where everything changed for Kelly and his career essentially began. This is especially true when one particular storyline comes into play where Kelly is caught on camera doing something terrible to Timothy. If the footage of that moment is released, it could jeopardize his career. The way the film navigates this storyline is topsy turvy to say the least, but the way it closes out is surprisingly satisfying and carries some emotional weight for both Kelly and Galligan. “Jay Kelly” is some ways a comedy, some ways a drama, but those two genres mesh together to make something special. It is a fascinating character study and is likely to stand out in several regards this awards season.

In the end, “Jay Kelly” rules. I need time to marinate as to whether I like this more than “A House of Dynamite” but of the five Netflix films I have watched this year, “Happy Gilmore 2” included, “Jay Kelly” is easily my favorite. “Jay Kelly” showcases some of the finest displays of talent in any film released in 2025. Whether it is George Clooney in front of the camera or Noah Baumbach behind it. I am going to give “Jay Kelly” an 8/10.

“Jay Kelly” is now playing in select theaters and is also available on Netflix to all subscribers.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Bugonia.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “No Other Choice,” “Fackham Hall,” “Scarlet,” “The Secret Agent,” “Hamnet,” and “Avatar: Fire and Ash.” 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 “Jay Kelly?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Netflix release this year? Heck, I’ll count TV. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!