A24

Eternity (2025): Romance Isn’t Dead in This Clever Take on the Afterlife

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Eternity” is directed by David Freyne (Dating Amber, The Cured) and stars Miles Teller (Whiplash, Top Gun: Maverick), Elizabeth Olsen (Avengers: Age of Ultron, Godzilla), Callum Turner (Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, The Boys in the Boat), John Early (Search Party, At Home with Amy Sedaris), Olga Merediz (Blockbuster, Orange is the New Black), and Da’Vine Joy Randolph (The Holdovers, People of Earth). This film is set in an afterlife where people are presented with endless realms called eternities, one of which they can choose to remain for as long as they are dead. The story revolves around a love triangle in which a woman named Joan is forced to choose between spending the rest of her afterlife with her first love who died at war, or the man with whom she built the rest of her life.

Prior to watching “Eternity,” I have not seen a single trailer for the film. Anytime I go into a film without having seen a trailer, part of me gets a pep in my step, as blindness can often lead to a great surprise. I ended up checking out “Eternity” about a week before its release. The film had a press screening in Boston, a city from which I live 20 minutes north. I thought I would take advantage since I had a free Thursday night.

I am pleased to say that “Eternity” is quite good. It is not my favorite film of the year, and there are some notable problems I will bring up during the review. But it is a film that keeps a good pace, contains a likable cast, develops its characters nicely, and offers a fun take on what may happen after people die.

“Eternity” is not the first story I have seen brought to the screen that focuses on the afterlife. The film does tend to remind me a bit of other takes on it I have seen. This film reminds me of is the NBC series “The Good Place.” While I have not seen the whole series, the production design feels very similar with lots of bright colors filling the frame. As for both properties’ takes on the afterlife, that is where some of the differences start to come in. For instance, “Eternity” gives people some options on how exactly they spend their afterlife. There is a whole area of tents set up advertising all sorts of places where people can go spend the rest of their afterlives, and the possibilities feel nearly infinite. “Eternity” also establishes that there is not exactly a “Hell” or some equivalent to it where people wind up when they die. Everyone gets a chance to pick their eternity, and if they try to leave, they get chased down and sent to this film’s closest concept to Hell, which is a black void. More on that later… Also, one thing to note about these distinctions… It should not come as a surprise that there is no Hell because some of the eternities are based on seemingly unattainable desires, or bad habits. There is even an eternity dedicated solely to cigarette smoking!

A24 is a distributor whose movies always tends to get a reaction out of me, and “Eternity” is no exception. As I watching “Eternity,” a thought popped in my head that I do not tend to experience that often. Of all the A24 movies I have seen, “Eternity” may have the most franchise potential. Sure, A24 has the “X” trilogy and “The Souvenir” has two parts, but there is some really good world building and lore establishment in this film to the point where if another story in its universe were announced, I would be onboard. This film ends in a way where its main trio might not have much more of a story to tell, but I would not mind seeing another installment featuring new characters. This movie focuses on a love triangle, but it would be interesting to see what it is like for someone who never found love to have a chance to do so once they enter the afterlife. This could even spin off into a TV show. Maybe each new episode could feature the staff dealing with new people who are dying each day. They could probably make a whole season about someone who died if they wanted to go in that direction.

This film does not have a major antagonist. The biggest problem our characters face throughout the movie is that Joan is forced to choose between two men she’s loved at certain points of her life. That is the everlasting dilemma affecting our main trio. Although as mentioned earlier in the review, if someone leaves their eternity, they have to go on the run and avoid getting placed in a black void. Frankly, I think this movie would be better off if it did not have this consequence. It basically shames people for making the wrong choice even if they had the best of intentions while making it. For those who read my review for “Bone Lake,” sorry if this comment sounds familiar, but it works here too. The consequence sounds like something brought up during an episode of YouTube’s “Pitch Meeting” series, where the Executive Guy asks why a particular concept is a thing, to which the Screenwriter Guy responds “So the movie can happen!”

That said, “Eternity” is still pretty funny. In fact, this whole movie feels like an extended “Simpsons” episode. I cannot tell you every single joke or sight gag in this film, but for the most part, the movie seems to be running at a mile a minute. If you like that kind of humor, I think you will dig “Eternity.” This movie might be worth watching a second time to see if there are any jokes I missed.

Overall, this film is quite creative. There is a whole world built around what happens when people die. It gives its characters a week to choose where they would like to spend the rest of their time. I like how the film establishes there being a whole staff that has to acquaint dead people to their new environment. That said, when it comes to being a romcom, that is where things become a little more familiar. When it comes to the breakdown of how Joan navigates her dilemma, I could see certain key points of her journey coming from a mile away. That said, never once did I get the sense that any point in her journey was broken, and I do think said journey was slightly enhanced by both men being in her actual life. She had someone she was getting to know, but lost too soon. Then she had another man with whom she spent more than sixty years. It is a compelling dilemma and makes for a great story. All three of the main characters are layered and give all the exposition the audience needs to know for the rest of the movie to play out exquisitely.

In the end, “Eternity” is not only funny, but it made me think. I am 26 years old and I have never had a partner. If anything, this film made me not only think about what happens after I die, but it makes me wonder what is going to happen throughout the rest of my life. If the afterlife somehow ends up being similar to what this film presents, it makes me think much harder about any crucial life decisions I am going to make. Also, one last note, this film proves that Da’Vine Joy Randolph is a comedic force. I would love to see her as the lead in a comedy one day. I loved her in “The Holdovers.” She is also fantastic in “Eternity.” She is incredible at what she does. I am going to give “Eternity” a 7/10.

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

© Universal Studios. All Rights Reserved.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Wicked: For Good!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Sentimental Value,” “Zootopia 2,” and “Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery.” 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 “Eternity?” What did you think about it? Or, if you could choose to spend the afterlife in one place, real or imaginary, where would it be and why? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Smashing Machine (2025): Dwayne Johnson Stars in a Quirky Bore

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Smashing Machine” is directed by Benny Safdie (Uncut Gems, Good Time) and stars Dwayne Johnson (Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, Central Intelligence), Emily Blunt (Edge of Tomorrow, The Girl on the Train), Ryan Bader, Bas Rutten (Paul Blart: Mall Cop, Kevin Can Wait), and Oleksandr Usyk. This film is about mixed martial arts fighter Mark Kerr and his life in and outside of the ring.

“The Smashing Machine” is maybe my most anticipated film starring Dwayne Johnson in a long time. I like The Rock, but he is not a thespian. He is beyond charismatic, but I never imagined him potentially holding an Academy Award in his hand. That is until this movie happened. If you are familiar with this film’s director, Benny Safdie, then this may remind you of one of his previous films.

Remember “Uncut Gems?” That film starred Adam Sandler, a talented comedian. However, when it comes to his film roles, he lacks range. The reception of his then recent films like “Pixels” or the “Grown Ups” franchise did not help things either. Having Johnson lead this film results in what one could describe as a departure from his typical fare where he simply plays himself.

This movie has a likable actor leading it, and a solid filmmaker directing it. So my question after seeing it is, “Why did I not enjoy this more?”

Admittedly, I am not much of a sports guy. And I do not know squat about MMA. Maybe that has something to do with it. But I am capable of enjoying other movies about combat sports like “Fighting with My Family,” which interesting enough, literally features The Rock playing himself… Or “Cinderella Man,” an engaging underdog story set during the Great Depression. So, what was missing with this flick? If I were to compare this film with those other two, the first thing that comes to mind is that the lead in this film is not exactly someone I cared for. Both “Fighting with My Family” and “Cinderella Man” have admirable lead characters that I could root for. Even if those films had some cliches, they felt like experiences.

Courtesy of A24 – © A24

Rather than experiencing “The Smashing Machine,” I felt like I was observing it. To my lack of surprise, Dwayne Johnson is excellent as Mark Kerr. It has to be his greatest performance to date and I can see him being nominated for an Oscar this season. But as I watched this character, very rarely was ever able to attach myself to him. The screenplay has the makings of a masterpiece on paper, but the execution sometimes feels flat. The film is based on true events and the story itself is intriguing as a concept, but it does not stick the landing.

That said, Johnson is not the only standout performance in this film. I came for “The Rock,” but you are like me, chances are you will stay for Emily Blunt, who has fantastic chemistry with her on-screen partner. This should not come as too much of a surprise because the two have previously starred alongside each other in Disney’s “Jungle Cruise,” so they probably have a feel for each other’s rhythm. Thankfully, unlike “Jungle Cruise,” “The Smashing Machine” dives more into each star’s chops in conversational, sometimes heavily physical scenes, rather than having them play a small part in a special effects-heavy adventure.

Going to back “Uncut Gems,” if you really enjoyed the style in which that movie was presented, “The Smashing Machine” is not exactly presented in the same manner, but the two projects feel very similar. I say this because both films are not always the most comfortable to watch. When I watched “Uncut Gems” I found the film to be fun and hilarious despite its constant chaos and ridiculous pace. However, fun is not a word I would use to describe “The Smashing Machine.” Sure, like usual, The Rock has charisma, but the story is often serious. Mark Kerr spends quite a bit of time making those around him uncomfortable, and it thereby made me uncomfortable. Both films’ protagonists also have their clear vices, whether its Howard Ratner’s gambling, or Mark Kerr’s substance abuse.

The scores also feel like cousins. I cannot confirm that is a good thing, because this film’s musical score felt very out of place. Personally, I would have preferred something a bit more rock and roll or on the traditional orchestra side. Some of the tunes sound like they belong in a nightclub from another dimension. Overall, it would be inaccurate to call the music in “The Smashing Machine” incompetent, but it feels like it belongs in something much more psychedellic. Maybe it would work if someone were to make a more low budget version of “2001: A Space Odyssey” and shot it in 16mm instead of 65mm.

Speaking of which, much of this film was shot on 16mm film. I cannot say much of “The Smashing Machine” is ingrained in my memory, but I will remember this film because of its vibe. Even during scenes where things are supposed to feel big, the camera often helps bring things down to earth. Never once does this film feel overly explosive. Sometimes it works and lets the film shine in its core character moments. But things do not always work in the rest of the movie.

“The Smashing Machine” barely had an IMAX release, which kind of shocks me. Sure, “One Battle After Another” and “Tron: Ares” came out at similar times, and both are notable films. “One Battle After Another” has prestige and is shot in VistaVision, and “Tron: Ares” is a big budget Disney flick. But “The Smashing Machine” literally contains a scene shot in IMAX, and I know that from behind the scenes info, as well as watching the movie itself. As the film enters its final scene, the aspect ratio changes, even in regular theaters. Traditionally, when an IMAX-shot film changes to its namesake ratio, I find it to be incredibly riveting. But not this time.

Much of the film was shot in 1.85:1, which is close to the traditional 16:9 widescreen seen on most modern programming. To see the film cover my theater screen in this ratio for a majority of the runtime and then suddenly jump to 1.43:1 was completely jarring. Maybe if I watched this film in a proper IMAX I would have felt different, because those screens are designed for scenes like the one at the end of the film. But the transition in my traditional AMC screen made this scene feel less satisfying, and to add another dose of disappointment, less immersive. It is a small thing to point out, and from a character arc perspective, I feel like the film’s technical specs played a part in describing Mark Kerr’s mood at the time. From that point of view, I get why the film was shot and presented the way it was, but it does not change the fact that the on-screen result of all this feels poorly executed.

In the end, “The Smashing Machine” is one of the biggest disappointments of the year for me. I am probably not going to remember much about this movie in the coming months. And that is kind of sad, because this film could have represented something else for me. It could have simply represented a shift in Dwayne Johnson’s career. In the realm of cinema, Johnson is well known as the big, buff, blockbuster guy. Should he stick to that? Judging by how much money this movie made, he might end up doing that. Although, if he wins an Oscar, that could change. “The Smashing Machine” is by no means an incomprehensible mess. But this movie was not for me. Benny Safdie is by no means on my hate list. I cannot wait to see what he can bring to the table as Bowser Jr. in “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie.” That said, this is not his best work. I am going to give “The Smashing Machine” a 4/10.

“The Smashing Machine” is now available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for a movie I have been looking to talking about for the past four years, “Shelby Oaks,” directed by first time feature director Chris Stuckmann. If that name sounds familiar, then chances are you have seen him through his film reviews on YouTube. Stuckmann played a part in inspiring me to write on this blog, so I look forward to finally talking about this film. Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on Guillermo del Toro’s “Frankenstein,” “Good Fortune,” and “The Running Man.” 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 Smashing Machine?” What did you think about it? Or, in the spirit of the Safdie brothers, are you looking forward to Josh Safdie’s “Marty Supreme?” The film looks as kinetic as can be and I am here for it. Let me know your thoughts down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

If I Had Legs I’d Kick You (2025): Rose Byrne Expertly Conveys the Chaos of Motherhood in This Anxiety Trip of a Film

Posted on by Jack Drees

Courtesy of A24 – © A24

“If I Had Legs I’d Kick You” is directed by Mary Bronstein (Round Town Girls, Yeast) and stars Rose Byrne (Neighbors, Bridesmaids), Conan O’Brien (Late Night with Conan O’Brien, Conan), Danielle Macdonald (Unbelievable, The Tourist), Christian Slater (Mr. Robot, The Wife), and A$AP Rocky (Zoolander 2, Monster). This film is about a woman named Linda whose life and sanity hangs on by a thread as she has to deal with her child’s illness, her job, her husband, and a missing person.

I saw the trailer for “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You” during my screening for “Eleanor the Great,” and I was quite impressed with how much drama and stakes that piece of marketing was able to show off in just a couple of minutes. It gave a good tease to the movie’s tone, particularly endless anxiety. That may sound a little overdramatic. The world is not ending in this film. No evil force is trying to take over the universe. But that does not mean the film is incapable of showcasing the constant struggle that stands in the protagonist’s path.

I also noticed in the trailer, not to mention the poster, that this movie stars Conan O’Brien. Odd choice for a dramatic role, but it is cool to see him getting work. We’ll get back to him later.

As for the movie itself, this is one of the best of the year. “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You” is basically 2025’s “Uncut Gems.” The story is not exactly the same, but a lot of the visuals, shots, and edits feel like they come out of that 2019 thriller. It should not be a surprise, considering this film is also being distributed by A24, and Josh Safdie just so happens to be a producer. The two movies feel like they have similar DNA. There was one visually trippy sequence about 5 to 10 minutes in containing voiceovers that kind of reminded me of the scene from the beginning of “Uncut Gems” where we are flying through the gem. Even in scenes where the dialogue is a bit slowed down, there is often a breakneck pace. Part of this is because of everything Rose Byrne’s character, Linda, has to deal with.

I am not a parent. I do not know if I will ever be a parent. We shall see. But this film does a great job showcasing the constant stress of being a parent. Granted, Linda’s situation is a bit more extreme considering her child is ill. At the same time, her husband’s basically out of the picture, and her home is falling apart. As a result of the latter, she has to find a place to stay until things get better. Even as someone who does not have kids, I have massive respect for parents and everything they do for their children. This film in particular reinforces my appreciation for them, especially moms. Every mom’s journey is different, but for Linda, several curveballs are being thrown into her path at once. It is almost impossible for her to catch them all.

“If I Had Legs I’d Kick You” may star Rose Byrne, but she is not the one who sold me on this movie. That would be Conan O’Brien.

Yes, that one. Which one would I be referring to? How many Conans do you know personally?

I may be letting some personal fanaticism get in the way, but if I see Conan O’Brien’s name on something, I instantly become more curious about it. Even for a project like this, which was probably one of the last things I would expect him to take on. O’Brien is naturally funny and kinetic. But in the case of “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You,” the late night host-turned podcaster seems to be taking a page from say Jordan Peele, who went on to make horror movies like “Get Out.” After all, both are known for their comedic talents, and if there is one thing many comedians know about, it’s timing. I laugh super hard at Conan O’Brien’s work not only because of the things he does, but when he does those things. This is also true for his role in this film. Despite the story being serious, the movie managed to get laughs out of me. One big laugh was courtesy of O’Brien himself. There is a scene where his and Byrne’s characters are sitting in a room together at a therapy office. Byrne’s getting something off her chest and O’Brien slowly takes in Byrne’s rant, then says… “Okay…” There are very few instances where the use of the word “okay” as a full statement has ever been funnier. The film definitely feels more dramatic than comedic, but Conan O’Brien’s character, much like his real life persona, is naturally hilarious through his presence and choice of words.

Heck, this film also has A$AP Rocky in it, whose acting experience appears to be rather limited. I still need time to think about what my favorite cast in a 2025 film happens to be. But I will verify that “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You” is certainly one of the most unique casts I’ve come across in a film released this year. Despite some unexpected names on the lineup, there is not a single bad performance in this film.

“If I Had Legs I’d Kick You” is a couple hours of complete and total chaos. It only offers a few moments to breathe, and if it were not for its talented cast led by Rose Byrne, it probably would not work as well as it did. Major credit also has to go to the work done behind the scenes. Lucian Johnston’s edits are as smooth as butter, despite them belonging in a film as dramatic as this. The shots brought to life by cinematographer Christopher Messina are meticulously framed. I also have to give kudos to Mary Bronstein, who not only wrote the film, but also directed it.

This feels like a singular vision. I could have never come up with a movie like this myself. And the movie is all the better because someone like me was not in charge of it. If this movie were written or directed by a man, I can guarantee it probably would not be as good as it is. This movie comes off as if it was written by a mother, most likely for mothers. I am not saying this movie is exclusively to be enjoyed by mothers. But I think a lot of mothers will appreciate this film in one way or another. That said, Bronstein is a mother herself. To top things off, while not entirely based on true events, the film is in fact inspired by Bronstein’s time caring for a sick child. This film is written from the heart and just so happens to be powerful enough to send chills down my spine. I have no idea how much money this film is going to make, but I highly encourage anyone reading this to give this movie a chance. It is a raw, thrilling story that may not be every mother’s personal experience, but is likely something close to every mother’s worst nightmare.

In the end, “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You” is more than just one of the best movie titles of 2025. It just so happens to be one of the best movies of 2025. As an experience, this film is incredible. Despite its unique cast, it offers some of the year’s best performances. Mary Bronstein offers a vision that only a mother like her could give. And the movie maintains a neverending level of anxiety liken unto “Uncut Gems.” I am going to give “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You” a 9/10.

“If I Had Legs I’d Kick You” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Tron: Ares.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Bone Lake,” “A House of Dynamite,” “The Smashing Machine,” “Shelby Oaks,” and Guillermo del Toro’s “Frankenstein.” 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 “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie you really enjoyed about parenting? On that note, if you guys have not seen last year’s brilliant animated film “The Wild Robot,” please give it a chance whenever you can. Although some of you reading this probably have seen it because it did win Best Picture at the 7th Jack Awards. If you have not seen it, listen to those people who voted and give the movie a shot! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Materialists (2025): Love and Money Blend Together in This Middle of the Road Romance

Posted on by Jack Drees

Courtesy of A24 – © A24

“Materialists” is directed by Celine Song, the director behind one of 2023’s best films, “Past Lives.” This film stars Dakota Johnson (Fifty Shades of Grey, Madame Web), Chris Evans (Captain America: The First Avenger, Lightyear), and Pedro Pascal (The Last of Us, The Mandalorian). This film is about a matchmaker from New York City who finds herself in a personal conflict between her ex and a new love interest.

One movie I am mad at myself for skipping while it was in theaters was “Past Lives.” I did not review the film, but I was able to catch it by the end of 2023. I adored it so much that it ended up among my best movies of the year. The chemistry between the three leads was impeccable. Each role was perfectly cast and I was hooked from scene one. I thought the film was cute and heartfelt. Naturally, when I first saw the trailer for “Materialists,” I did not get excited by the film because big Hollywood stars like Chris Evans or Pedro Pascal would be in it. Although I do like those two actors. But what sold me was finding out that this was Celine Song’s next film following “Past Lives.”

I missed “Past Lives” in the theater but ended up loving it. Unfortunately, I had the opposite experience watching “Materialists.” Honestly, I was rather disappointed watching Song’s latest outing on the big screen.

What makes this effort somewhat sad is the fact that not only did the film’s director carry some weight, but as someone who lives in the U.S., and not South Korea, the actors have a ton more star power than Song’s previous project. You have Dakota Johnson, whose resume is hit and miss, but nevertheless prolific. Then there’s Pedro Pascal, who has had a large hand in the geek culture spheres in recent years between “Game of Thrones,” “The Mandalorian,” and “The Last of Us.” Also, there’s Chris Evans… Captain America himself! Need I say more? It would be one thing to see a disappointing Celine Song movie, but to have these well known actors in the mix makes it worse.

And honestly, I wish I could say that all the actors do a good job in this film despite the… (sigh) material. But I thought Dakota Johnson, while not horrible in this film, is sometimes stiff. Every other line out of her character, Lucy, feels flat. Watching Dakota Johnson in this film is like playing roulette. Every time there is a line out of her, I had no clue if it was going to be delivered decently or poorly. The gap separating the quality of her lines feels significant. Dakota Johnson can give good performances. Just go watch “Daddio.” But not only is Johnson sub-par in this film, I got the impression at times she was playing the same character she’s played in other films like “Madame Web” or “The High Note.” Despite the range of her line delivery in this film, I am starting to think Johnson herself has limited range as a performer.

That said, I thought the film’s two main male leads were okay in their roles. Pascal is a well built, rich, successful man. Or, as he is sometimes referred to throughout the film, a unicorn. I thought Pascal was perfectly cast. I never met Pedro Pascal myself, but from what I imagine, he must be a charming, handsome person.

Chris Evans on the other hand is a little less perfect of a human being. He self-admittedly has anger issues, he struggles with maintaining a steady career path as well as his financial stability. But despite his problems he seems like a decent guy. I liked Evans’ performance. He felt down to earth and inviting. Not preppy, not over the top. Just a genuine guy.

“Materialists” is a fairly grounded narrative. But unfortunately the script is where its tonal inconsistencies lie. Much of the film’s dialogue is quite good. Parts of it made me think about life. But there are quite a few cheesy lines that do not feel like they belong in a movie like this. I am not denying that people have said something cheesy at some point in their life. But the rate in which it happens in this film does not feel authentic.

There is a message in “Materialists” that makes for a good story. While a lot of people date and eventually marry for love, there are some people who want more out of a relationship. They want the partner to be attractive, have money, have a nice place and so on. As the film progressed, and this should be no surprise given the title, the film successfully presented itself as an allegory about how certain people find others’ possessions more attractive than the person they are dating. I will not go into spoilers, but there is a line towards the end of the film that could almost double as the film’s slogan. The film suggests that some people are simply attracted to success. Yes, someone could be the nicest person on earth. But for some people, they would be turned off if they found out the person they were dating happened to be poor.

Given this film’s message, I found it interesting how Lucy was written. Lucy works with a dating agency. Customers, some of whom are clearly desperate for a relationship, give this company good money to find a partner. The film asks questions as to whether love can be bought or if it is simply something you have to find yourself. The film shows the potential dangers of trying to follow a perhaps unachievable dream but also reveals how one can find life unappealing if they were to give their dreams up and settle.

The film does not shy away from highlighting appealing and thought-provoking topics. I just wish that the package that contains such topics was a little more appetizing. I wish it had better dialogue. I wish I liked some of the acting better. And I wish it were a little more tonally consistent. The film is shot well, has good music, and contains a couple decent scenes, but for me, I wanted more. I guess I am a bit of a materialist myself.

In the end, I do not think the “Materialists” and I are that great of a match. There are plenty of other fish in the sea, thankfully. Maybe the film will find its audience somewhere else. Honestly, I found this film disappointing. It is decently framed, the production design is nice, and some of the acting is okay. But there are plenty of elements that bog the film down between the tonal inconsistencies, Dakota Johnson’s sometimes stiff performance, and the cheesy dialogue. I still think Celine Song has a promising future as a filmmaker. I just hope her next project is much better than this one. I am going to give “Materialists” a 5/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on Pixar’s latest film, “Elio.” Stay tuned! Also, you can look forward to reading my reviews of “Jurassic World: Rebirth,” “M3GAN 2.0,” and “F1: The Movie.” 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 “Materialists?” What did you think about it? Or, have you seen Celine Song’s directorial debut, “Past Lives?” If you did, tell me your thoughts on that! Leave your comments down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Friendship (2024): The Funniest Comedy of the 2020s

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Friendship” is written and directed by Andrew DeYoung and this is his feature-length directorial debut. This film stars Tim Robinson (Chip ‘n Dale: Rescue Rangers, Detroiters), Kate Mara (Fantastic Four, House of Cards), Jack Dylan Grazer (Shazam, It), and Paul Rudd (The 40 Year-Old-Virgin, Dinner for Schmucks). This film is about a suburban dad who attempts to develop and maintain a friendship with his neighbor.

If there is one genre that I wish had better treatment at the movies, that would be comedy. There are not many cases where comedy films are marketed for the cinema anymore. Do not get me wrong, like all other kinds of movies, the comedy genre can have their duds. Just ask anyone who made “Jack and Jill” over a decade ago. But comedies are not only one of my favorite kinds of films to watch, but if done right, they can play well in front of a large audience in a theater. Maybe they do not have the explosions of an action film or have the financially safe mass appeal of a family-oriented animation, but nothing is better than a ton of people laughing at the same time.

To quote Ron Burgundy, “It’s just science.”

The film of discussion today, “Friendship,” is not the most prominent comedy of all time. It is from the consistently growing distributor A24. While it does have some notable names like Paul Rudd and Kate Mara, its star power could arguably be bigger. But for me, the on-screen talent did not sell me. If there was something that got me in the door, it would be the positive press the film has racked up since its September 2024 premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival. Based on the reviews I saw in advance, I had a feeling “Friendship” was going to be good. But I was not prepared for just how good this film was. This cinematic experience blew my socks off.

“Friendship” might be the funniest comedy I have seen in years. I say that knowing that I have reviewed a couple comedies this decade that I adore like “Joy Ride” and “Bottoms.” I particularly remember issuing high praise to those two movies. But I cannot say I laughed as hard during those two films as I did with this latest one. When it comes to “Friendship,” I genuinely do not recall laughing as hard as I did at a comedy film, maybe since first watching “The Hangover” with my dad as a teen.

I recall having big laughs during select films I have seen in the past ten years like “Avengers: Infinity War,” “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood,” “Anora,” or “The Mitchells vs. the Machines.” But one can argue that those are films featuring comedy as opposed to being pure comedies. If you were to ask me what genre “Friendship” is, comedy would be the answer. And I would imagine I am not alone in this particular claim.

I saw this film in an auditorium that could fit 35 people. Most of the seats were taken. I honestly wish it could have been hundreds, because this is the kind of film that reminds me of why I love the moviegoing experience. There are multiple times in this film where I reflect on certain parts and imagine hundreds of people in the same room laughing their butts off. Seeing this film with an audience is a feeling unlike any other. I would guess if I did see “Friendship” in an auditorium with hundreds more people sitting around me, the laughter would be nonstop.

As someone who has seen a lot of comedies, the jokes from one movie to the next can feel been there done that. The jokes in “Friendship” sometimes feel cliche, but if you have been following Scene Before for a long time, you may have noticed me say that I do not mind cliches as long as they are done well. I am going to try to be as secretive as possible here, but when this movie gets to a gag involving a glass door, my sides were in orbit.

There are very few complaints I have about the film. Although one that comes to mind is simply based on personal experience. Around the first quarter of the film, there is a scene that takes place on a news set that feels a tad played up. I get that it might have been done that way to make the story flow, but I work on a morning news team and while it is a tense environment, there is an exchange between Austin and a news anchor that feels a bit overplayed. I did not buy it. Granted, this is a comedy movie so suspension of disbelief is inevitable in some places, but as someone who works in a newsroom, this scene was too over the top.

I also appreciate how the movie handles its characters. I am not going to pretend that I agree or root for the film’s protagonist, Craig Waterman (left), 100 percent of the time. But even when that is the case, I still appreciate the way he was executed. I saw Waterman, who is excellently portrayed by Tim Robinson, as a stereotype for someone going through a mid-life crisis. At various points we see Craig become jealous of Austin’s car, his social circle, as well as him having cool-sounding interests.

In fact, you can almost say Paul Rudd’s character, Austin (right), is in a somewhat similar boat. Going back to that car of his, having seen it myself, it is a pretty sweet ride. Some would say the chicks dig it. But throughout the film, we see a pattern. Austin possesses select objects or hangs with certain people to compensate for getting older. There is one particular reveal regarding Austin that comes out of nowhere, and not only does it make sense for who the character is, but I was laughing up a storm as the reveal came into frame.

I said before that comedies are one of my favorite kinds of films to watch. This is partially because they are so accessible no matter my mood. I could get home from a long day of work and put one on to pass the time. It could be bright and sunny out and I need a colorful-looking flick to match the mood. I could be up for a quick laugh with someone I know. I refuse to turn off my brain during movies, but comedies are as close as I get to turning my brain off because if the movie makes me die laughing, I can forgive some of its other flaws. “Friendship,” like another recent comedy I enjoyed, “Joy Ride,” not only made me laugh, but also made me appreciate its depth when it came to the script. I would like to watch this film in 10, 20, 30 years.. I am only 25 right now, but I am curious to see how this film ages for me as I get closer to the points where the main characters reside.

In the end, “Friendship” is peak comedy. I love to laugh, and this movie made me do what I love to the point where I thought I was almost rolling on the floor. Not only is it funny, but it is also a decent commentary on the work that goes into maintaining friendships and how it is important to remember to be appreciative for what you have. “Friendship” is one of the funniest movies I have ever seen. Period. End of sentence. End of review. I am going to give “Friendship” a 9/10.

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

Courtesy of Lionsgate – © Lionsgate

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the brand new “John Wick” spinoff, “Ballerina.” Stay tuned! Also, look forward to finding out my thoughts on “The Phoenician Scheme,” “The Life of Chuck,” “Materialists,” and “Elio.” 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 “Friendship?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the funniest movie you have ever seen? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Bring Her Back (2025): Another Clever, Scary Outing from the Philippou Brothers

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Bring Her Back” is directed by Danny and Michael Philippou, the directing duo behind “Talk to Me.” This film stars Billy Barratt (Kraven the Hunter, Responsible Child), Sora Wong, Jonah Wren Phillips (Human Error, How to Make Gravy), and Sally Hawkins (The Shape of Water, Paddington). This film centers around Andy and Piper, a brother and sister who are placed under the care of an eccentric woman and find themselves part of a terrifying ritual.

I ended up going to see “Bring Her Back” mainly because of the films that were out in one particular weekend, it piqued my curiosity the most. Note my choice of words. I never said I was looking forward to this film. But I cannot say I was dreading it either. If anything, I was going to see “Bring Her Back” because of my past experience. If I saw any trailers for “Bring Her Back,” they likely flew over my head. That said, I saw “Talk to Me” one time a couple years back. I thought it was a respectable effort by filmmaking brothers Michael and Danny Philippou. While the film had its fans, I cannot say I thought it was perfect. Though I liked it enough to give it a thumbs up. There is a saying that you are only as good as your last project. The Philippou brothers’ last project got me in the door. So, how is their latest outing?

Out-freaking-standing, and I cannot emphasize my enthusiasm enough.

“Bring Her Back” is easily one of the best films of the year. It is a movie that is not quite committed to one genre. I have called it a horror film, and knowing what “Talk to Me” turned out to be, I was kind of expecting “Bring Her Back” to be in the same boat as that movie. While the film is creepy, I will say that one could easily put “Bring Her Back” in the category of psychological thriller. One can simply say it is a drama. Regardless of whatever genre you call it, it handles all of its mini-genres with excellence.

What makes “Bring Her Back” so great is my attachment to the core characters. We come to find out that they all have something in common. Specifically, they are all grieving over someone they lost. While it is traditional for people to grieve over someone’s death, these deaths are unlikely scenarios. For the two younger characters, Andy and Cathy, we see early on in the film that they lose their dad. Shortly after, they meet a new foster parent (Sally Hawkins), whose young daughter died after drowning in a pool. The movie made me feel bad for all three of these people, even if something seems off about one of them.

When these three people first met, it did not take long for me to develop a pit in my stomach. I knew we were in for a ride with Sally Hawkins from the moment I saw her. First off, like some of her previous projects, Hawkins does not phone it in whatsoever when it comes to her performance. She has so much range packed into one character. At one moment she is kind of a creep, then lovable, then flamboyant. Whatever she happens to be as Laura, Hawkins nails it. That said, even when she is those last two adjectives, there is a sense of creepiness to her that remains consistent.

There are some things Hawkins does throughout the runtime that not only made me hate her, but made me want to straight up punch her in the face. She is everything you can want in a solid antagonist. While I will give praise to Hawkins for her performance, I will not deny that her character is sometimes straight up unlikable despite her occasionally having a chill or “cool mom” vibe. And me loathing her is a good thing. All it got me to do is get behind the kids through their journey as it plays out. As wacky as this movie gets at times, I was able to buy into Laura’s motivation. I could see where she was coming from even if I ultimately thought she was a psychotic lunatic.

I would not call this a complaint, but this is more or less something I noticed through my experience of watching the film. Keep in mind, I found “Bring Her Back” to be quite scary. But I cannot say that there are many jaw-dropping individual scares in the film. If anything, I found the film to maintain a consistent eeriness. Going back to how this film balances itself between multiple genres, this is another example to support that case. The scariest part of this film is not any particular scene, but it is the everlasting sense that Laura is going to do something bonkers. And she ends up doing some bonkers things.

Structurally, “Bring Her Back” does not miss a beat. It has a great hook that gets you to care about the two younger kids. You have all the adventures these kids encounter alongside their new foster parent, and as the film gets to the climax, it means business. Again, Sally Hawkins is a fantastic performer. But by the end of the movie I would not have minded seeing her character splatter into bits. There is never a boring moment in this film. The story is captivating. The characters are well written, everything ends on a solid note, and the entire film has a pretty good soundtrack. There are some tunes that slide their way into the film that are perfectly placed.

Sally Hawkins is not the only standout amongst the cast, though she is by far the biggest name. That said, I must give credit to all the younger cast members as well. Billy Barratt does a solid job in the film as Andy. I thought he was on the money when it came to channeling his character’s apprehension in a variety of situations. Jonah Wren Phillips is not given as much to do as Oliver compared to some of the other characters, but what he ends up doing stands out. There is one particular scene in the film that involves him chewing an unusual object that will linger in my mind beyond the end of the year. And lastly, Sora Wong as Piper is adorable. This is Sora Wong’s first role and I am very pleased by how it turned out. I think she is going to have a great career ahead of her. I can totally tell how masterful the Philippou Brothers are as directors based on the efforts of the talent. Each actor feels perfectly in sync with the others around them and not a single performance feels off.

In the end, “Bring Her Back” is top tier filmmaking. I cannot believe we have been blessed with cinema as compelling as this. When I walked out of “Talk to Me,” I did so having had a good time with it. Flash forward a couple years later to “Bring Her Back,” I am genuinely onboard for whatever the Philippous can produce. I keep bringing up Sally Hawkins as a selling point, partially because she is a recognizable name. But everyone else in this film does a great job too. I have to give the entire cast credit for their work. If you like good storytelling, look no further, because I am going to give “Bring Her Back” an 8/10.

“Bring Her Back” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the brand new comedy “Friendship.” I have been looking forward to seeing and talking about this movie. And I finally get to discuss it in the coming days. Stay tuned! Also look forward to my reviews for “Ballerina,” “The Phoenician Scheme,” and “The Life of Chuck.” 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 “Bring Her Back?” What did you think about it? Or, which film did you like better? “Talk to Me” or “Bring Her Back?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Brutalist (2024): A Fantastically Constructed Three Plus Hours at the Cinema

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Brutalist” is directed by Brady Corbet (The Childhood of a Leader, Vox Lux) and stars Adrien Brody (King Kong, The Pianist), Felicity Jones (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, On the Basis of Sex), Guy Pearce (Memento, Iron Man 3), Joe Alwyn (The Favourite, Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk), Raffey Cassidy (Tomorrowland, Vox Lux), Stacy Martin (Vox Lux, All the Money in the World), Emma Laird (Mayor of Kingstown, A Haunting in Venice), Isaach de Bankolé (24, Black Panther), and Alessandro Nivola (Jurassic Park III, Amsterdam). This film is about a Hungarian-Jewish Holocaust survivor’s struggle to achieve the American dream.

“The Brutalist” was a movie that I have been trying to get to for nearly a couple months at this point. Unfortunately, I just never had the time to sit down for three and a half hours and commit to it. Thankfully, an opportunity opened up recently, and I went out of my way to a theater further away from home, because I wanted to get this movie under my belt before the Academy Awards. After all, despite the body’s questionable practices and relevancy, the film did win Best Picture – Drama at another awards show, the Golden Globes. Well that, and quite frankly, I was in much more of a rush to watch “The Brutalist,” instead of “Emilia Perez,” which won Best Picture – Musical or Comedy in the same show. That movie seems to have gotten a lot of praise during the 2024-2025 awards season. However, I have not seen as many people outside the core voting bodies share the kindest words about the film.

When you make a commitment to any movie, it has to be worth your money and time. That last part is extremely emphasized with a more sizable runtime. Thankfully, “The Brutalist” is worth both of those things.

Most of the movies I have reviewed on Scene Before are from the 2010s or 2020s, therefore I have not had the opportunity to talk about many titles that include intermissions. “The Brutalist,” released at the end of 2024, is one exception. An intermission itself is not a core part of a movie experience if you break it down, but in this case I thought it added to a nice, throwback feel.

That said, having an intermission introduces a problem that stood out to me, which is that if I had to pick one half of the movie to watch over the other, I would pick the second half almost every time. Granted, I understand why the first half exists. Without it, the movie would not work the way it does. But I found the second half to be better-paced. I found the characters to be at their most compelling. I thought the acting and atmosphere was upped a notch. I felt more passive watching the first half and more active in the second.

The movie was shot on 35mm, which for the record, is still a format used in modern movies. Last year’s “Twisters” is one such example. The film also used VistaVision, which I arguably did not experience to the fullest given how I watched the movie on digital projection. But the film itself, kind of like another Adrien Brody project, “The Artist,” has all these little touches of older cinema. The movie had all sorts of imperfections from frame to frame.

This movie also makes great use of color, or lack thereof in some cases. The film is not necessarily the most vivid, but despite the film’s grainy, dusty look, there are certain colorful objects in the film that stood out to me. There is a shot where two characters are hugging in front of a green bus that pops. This film also has really effective use of beige. There are some shots inside of a home where that color stands out. It is the little things that catch my attention in this picture. Speaking of shots, the opening of this film is one of the trippiest I remember seeing in recent memory, where we see an upside down shot of Lady Liberty. That part of the movie is ingrained in my memory not only for its unconventional yet immersive shot choice, but it is just the start of what “The Brutalist” stands for as a work of art.

When you break down “The Brutalist,” it is a representation of one’s journey and struggle to achieve the American dream. The movie starts off with a staple of that dream with the main character, László Tóth, a holocaust survivor and an architect, coming into Ellis Island, set for a better life. His journey comes with obstacles, such as leaving people he knows behind or sometimes taking jobs one can consider painstaking or filth-inducing.

I also find it interesting how the film is set in the 1940s to the 1980s. I did not see this at a festival or a special screening, but if I had a chance to talk to the film’s writers, Brady Corbet and Mona Fastvold, I would want to know if they think the idea of “the American dream” is still alive. This film does represent the continued aspirations of the American dream in regard to seeking a better life, but it begs the question as to whether the American dream is a thing of the past, or if it is still obtainable in the 2020s.

Pacing-wise, this film sometimes reminded me of “Blade Runner.” The film is very much a slow-burn. Combine that with a three and a half hour runtime, you have a recipe for a movie that I imagine will turn off a fair amount of the general audience upon their first impression. I say this because there are a lot of pauses between the characters’ utterances of dialogue. Very rarely do the characters actively respond to another individual right away. I thought this direction choice sometimes worked and tied into the film’s atmosphere, but at other times, was a bit distracting.

I liked Felicity Jones before watching “The Brutalist,” but she is a different kind of great in this film. She is not in the entire movie. But she ends up taking the spotlight in every scene towards the end. As the film culminates, she unleashes the most unhinged supporting performance I have seen in a 2024 film. I have not seen “Emilia Perez” so I cannot comment on Zoe Saldana’s performance. I am aware Saldana won the Best Supporting Actress category at the Oscars, but if I had to cast a vote, it would be for Felicity Jones because of not only how she represents her own pain, but also her urgency to relieve the pain of those around her. By the end of this film, I left thinking that I would do anything to avoid a screaming match with this individual. I did not know Jones had that kind of power in her.

In the end, “The Brutalist” is not my favorite movie of 2024, but it is one of the more well-crafted films of that year. Part of it has to do with the production design, but also the solid direction from Brady Corbet that has also led to excellent performances from actors like Adrien Brody and Felicity Jones. Breaking this film down, I found the film to pick up a bit in the second half compared to the first, but I still found the film as a whole to be worth watching. I know an Adrien Brody-led three and a half hour movie with an intermission set decades prior to its release shot on VistaVision sounds like the most pretentious movie that has ever pretentiated in the history of pretentiousness. Trust me, if you give it your time, you might enjoy it. The acting is great. The directing is even better. The story is one I think many people, especially those living in the United States, can relate to. I am going to give “The Brutalist” a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! Coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “I’m Still Here,” “Riff Raff,” “Nickel Boys,” and “Mickey 17.” 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 Brutalist?” What did you think about it? Or, should more movies coming out today have intermissions? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Babygirl (2024): “That’s Magic.” – Nicole Kidman

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Babygirl” is written and directed by Halina Reijn (Bodies Bodies Bodies, Instinct) and stars Nicole Kidman (Being the Ricardos, The Northman), Harris Dickinson (Beach Rats, Trust), Sophie Wilde (Everything Now, Boy Swallows Universe), and Antonio Banderas (Shrek 2, The Mask of Zorro). This film is about a CEO who puts her career and family on the line when she has an affair with a much younger intern.

I saw “Babygirl” at an AMC Theatres location. If you have been to an AMC in the past few years, you may know that Nicole Kidman has served as a bit of a mascot for the brand. I am not completely in love with this, as her spots make up part of the reason why the previews at AMC are so neverendingly long. Honestly, I would be happy if they get rid of the AMC spots containing Kidman altogether. Some see these spots as an anthem, but I find them to be an annoyance. Amazingly, during my screening of “Babygirl,” they did not play one of the Nicole Kidman spots on top of the other 26 or so minutes of theatre promotion and trailers and such. I was a bit perplexed. As much as I hate those ads, I think seeing one of them play before this film in particular would have set the mood.

That said, it does not change the fact that I was rather excited for “Babygirl.” The trailers I have seen for the film are well produced, and allowed me to have high expectations for what was to come. I had a sense of what the movie was about before going in. I think if anything, the trailers did a great job at letting the audience know what the vibe was going to be. The marketing looked fun, compelling, and perhaps most importantly, sexy. After all, desire plays a major part in this film’s narrative, particularly when it comes to the state of our protagonist, Romy.

“Babygirl” is going to end up being one of the more memorable movie experiences I have had this year. It is not my favorite movie of the year, but it is an experiential event. And it all starts at the beginning of the film when we see Romy’s major problem. The film impressively highlights Romy’s lack of desires with her husband (Banderas) and her struggle to fulfill herself in her sex life. We see this part of the story flesh itself out over time and it unleashes some great acting from both Kidman and Banderas. The two perfectly portray a couple who happen to be on a bit of a decline.

“Babygirl” delivers the vibes I was hoping I would get out of “Challengers.” A lot of people love “Challengers,” but I was not one of them. “Babygirl” is easily the steamiest film I have seen this year. This is a film that I would recommend watching, but I would think twice before putting it on when your parents, or especially your grandparents are in the same room. I think this could make for a hot movie to set the mood on date night. This is especially noticeable with the fiery chemistry between Nicole Kidman’s Romy and Harris Dickinson’s Samuel. Their boss/intern connection eventually develops into something not as necessarily safe for work. Several scenes between these two do much more than satisfy. They also beautifully fit within the context of the story. They help us get to know each of the characters. They remind the audience of Romy’s internal struggle. Both actors are completely believable as said scenes play out. Harris Dickinson was not on my radar previously. Although he had a role in 2022’s “See How They Run,” which I gave a positive review. Dickinson is not just good in this movie, I cannot see anyone else playing his specific character. I left this film wanting to see more of his work. If there is another Harris Dickinson movie coming out, consider me interested.

Now judging by what has been said so far, you might think that I will remember this movie for its eroticism. While that is definitely this movie’s top selling point, the film is layered when it comes to fleshing out its protagonist. I must reiterate, Nicole Kidman is a knockout in this film. She gives a powerful performance that I hope gets plenty of buzz in the coming months. But I love how this film manages to make its main character a CEO. We see Romy in a position of power at work. At home, she is busy raising a family and pleasing her husband to the point where she forgets to take care of herself. Additionally, this film is set around the holidays, which is traditionally a hectic time of year. Romy is busy being this wise, helpful presence in other people’s lives that when all of a sudden Samuel enters her own life, she cannot help but submit to him. I mentioned this film is steamy, but sex is just a selling point. As a character piece, “Babygirl” sings.

Though in more ways than one, “Babygirl” is easy on the eyes. The film has a clean look to it. The color palette looks like something out of an insurance commercial, but I mean that as a compliment. The film is certainly picturesque with some vibrant locations and sets. The camerawork is also very good. The shot choices consistently deliver on immersion. Select shots go on for extended periods of time, allowing me to take in and digest the actions of said shots. There is also one shot in the film that starts in the air and slowly navigates down to several of the characters as they walk through a yard. It is a breathtaking series of images.

Again this movie is set around the holidays, and it does maintain a joyful look to it, even if a good portion of it is spent inside a corporate office. In a sense, kind of like the holidays, the movie has a vibe that meets somewhere in the middle of noticeable stress and occasional happiness. Every moment in this film maintains a brisk pace and there are scenes I practically leapt into the screen. There is one scene at a rave that is arguably worth the price of admission. Although fair warning, if you have trouble with flashing lights, I recommend maybe sitting this movie out. For all I know, “Babygirl” could become a Christmas tradition for some people. Maybe not with the family. But I think if you are either by yourself or with your partner, this could make for a great watch around the holidays. While the films have their notable differences, I think “Babygirl” could even serve as part of a double feature with “Eyes Wide Shut.” After all, both films are associated with sexuality, feature Nicole Kidman, and are set around Christmas! It’s perfect! Also, as the Movie Reviewing Moron, I do not endorse watching “Eyes Wide Shut” with the family either. That’s a no-no.

Courtesy of A24 – © A24

In the end, “Babygirl” is 2024’s sexiest movie. Nicole Kidman gives a standout performance as Romy. The rest of the cast is also quite solid. Harris Dickinson also notably plays his role to perfection. The film is a great balance between vibes and characterization. I do recommend this film under the right circumstances. Again, do not watch if your parents or grandparents are in the room. Same goes if you have kids. But if you are in the right place at the right time, “Babygirl” is a must see. I am going to give “Babygirl” an 8/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “A Complete Unknown,” the brand new movie starring Timothée Chalamet as Bob Dylan. If you want to see this 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 “Babygirl?” What did you think about it? Or, what movie do you watch every year around the holidays? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Y2K (2024): A Group of Teens Celebrate a Crappy New Year in This Rad Horror Comedy

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Y2K” is directed by Kyle Mooney and this is his directorial debut. The film stars Jaeden Martell (St. Vincent, It), Rachel Zegler (West Side Story, Shazam! Fury of the Gods), Julian Dennison (Deadpool 2, Godzilla vs. Kong), Lachlan Watson (Chilling Adventures of Sabrina, Chucky), Mason Gooding (Love, Victor, Scream), Fred Durst (The Education of Charlie Banks, The Fanatic), and Alicia Silverstone (Clueless, Batman & Robin). This film follows two teenagers who crash a New Years Eve party as the clock gets closer to 2000. When the clock hits midnight, the group of partiers must survive against an army of machines.

While it is not my top film I have been looking forward to all year, “Y2K” is a project that has been on my radar ever since the trailer dropped. The film looked like a crazy good time that answers a question that I have to imagine some people have asked over the past 24 years. What if Y2K actually happened?

This is not the first time Y2K has been played out through a form of entertainment. There is a great “Family Guy” episode that came out around the time said event was on the verge of potentially occurring. It is a funny watch, I highly recommend it. “Y2K,” interesting enough, sometimes plays out like a “Family Guy” episode. There is a lot of throwback humor. There are also a couple sights that might make certain audience members wince. The characters, while well thought out and decently portrayed, are somewhat stereotypical. You have Jaeden Martell playing Eli, a well meaning guy who does not really happen to be that popular. You have his quirky, hyperactive best friend, Danny, played by Julian Dennison. Rachel Zegler plays Laura, a character that fits somewhere within the “popular girl” stereotype. And because this is a movie and we need our hero to want something, we come to know that the unpopular kid, Eli, ends up with the desire to kiss the more popular Laura, particularly during the first moments of the year 2000. And adding a similarity to another Seth MacFarlane project, kind of like the 2012 movie “Ted,” there is a celebrity who appears in the film as themself and they play a bit of a bigger role in the film than a simple cameo.

There are three main elements of “Y2K” that make it worth the price admission for me. I ended up seeing this film at a free screening, so maybe that is not the best phrase to use. But if I were to pay to see this in a theater again, I have a few factors as to why. First off, going back to the actors, they all do a good job with the material given to them. Each character is full of energy to the point where they almost leap off the screen. I especially adored the connection between Jaeden Martell and Rachel Zegler. For the most part, they are believable. There is a bit of an out of the blue turn between them that almost comes off as forced, but I can forgive it somewhat because the two characters are likable and I was nevertheless engaged even in lesser moments between them. Of all the characters in the film, Jaeden Martell is the center of the story, so we get to see him crushing on Zegler for a good amount of the runtime. I thought the film did a great job at displaying that. It felt like something I would have experienced in say middle school or high school. Something so fantastical, yet it is real, but also seemingly hard to act upon. I have a feeling this connection would evoke a sense of nostalgia for some people watching this at a later age.

Speaking of which, this movie tends to handle its 90s nostalgia and timeframe fairly well. The movie delivers a decent soundtrack. There are a lot of good songs in the film that match their specific scenes. The movie starts off doing its best impression of “Searching,” where our point of view is presented through a screen on a computer. As that is going on, there is a moment where dial-up Internet can be heard in the background, and we are seeing a conversation play out in AOL. We also get some moments in a video store. The nostalgia in this film is definitely played up, but it appears to work within the context of the story.

The film is also a horror comedy, and while the film is not the scariest of all time, it contains some good kills, some of which are very funny. Seeing various pieces of technology in this film become completely unhinged is a definite highlight for me. “Y2K” is probably not going to be a movie for everyone, but if you are someone who likes creative attacks and kills, you might be entertained.

Despite containing a lot of positives, “Y2K” is not going to win any Oscars. The film works and is structurally sound, but there is not a ton in it that changes the game. I say this despite also feeling that “Y2K” has given me some of the biggest laughs I had at the cinema this year. I do recommend watching this movie with a crowd. I think it is a great one to see with friends. It would make for a fun night out. If anything, it is a solid first directorial outing from Kyle Mooney, a former “Saturday Night Live” cast member. This film shows he has potential as a filmmaker, and his best work has probably yet to come. But for a first time film, it seems to work. When you have first time directors in recent years firing on all cylinders like Ari Aster with “Hereditary” or Greta Gerwig with “Lady Bird,” it is easy to forget that not all first films have the potential to end up being that director’s best in the long run. When I see debuts like these two, I automatically get excited for the director’s next movie because I think their first film is not just good, but one of the best of the year in which it came out. Therefore, that introduces a problem of recency bias. They say when you do something so lackluster or outright terrible, the only way to go is up. Kyle Mooney’s “Y2K” is definitely far from terrible, but just like something terrible, Mooney has the potential to step things up in his sophomore effort, and I look forward to seeing if he can do that should he continue his directorial career.

In the end, “Y2K” is a mighty fine film. Some would even say it is the bomb. “Y2K” is a film that I would watch a second time if given the opportunity. It is really funny, violent, and contains a likable cast. I am glad to see Rachel Zegler continuing to get more roles. Her cinematic resume is small, but she is one of this generation’s youngest and brightest talents. I loved her in “West Side Story.” I am not really a “Hunger Games” guy so I do not know how she is in “The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes,” but I still think she is a great performer. She can sing. She can act. She can do it all. Hopefully she has a strong career going forward. While Kyle Mooney’s debut as a director is not perfect, “Y2K” carries its own sense of style. I think Mooney could have a future directing more movies. As far as this first movie goes, I had a great time. I am going to give “Y2K” a 7/10.

“Y2K” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Juror #2,” “Wicked,” “Smile 2,” and “Nightbitch.” 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 “Y2K?” What did you think about it? Or, if you lived during the transition from 1999 to 2000? What was that time like for you? For me, I was not even two months old so I could not tell you. But for those who do remember that time more vividly, leave your comments down below! Or, if you were born in 2000 or later, what is something associated with the 1990s you enjoy? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Sing Sing (2023): A Feel Good Drama Showcasing Light in the Darkest of Places

Posted on by Jack Drees

DISCLAIMER: Before we begin this review, I want to remind everyone reading this, while I do my best to keep certain details away regarding the film, there are parts of this review that involve some things in the movie that surprised me. I talk about those points in this review and chances are it COULD affect your viewing experience if you see them yourself. It is hard to call these points spoilers, because it does not necessarily have to do with the plot, but it does involve something that if you had zero idea about it going into this movie, I will probably ruin the reveal for you. All I will say is, if you want to see these surprises the way I did, click out of this review, and go see “Sing Sing” yourself. Otherwise, enjoy my thoughts on the movie!

“Sing Sing” is directed by Greg Kwedar (Transpecos, Rising from Ashes) and stars Colman Domingo (Lincoln, Fear the Walking Dead), Clarence Maclin, Sean San José (Life Tastes Good, Dream for an Insomniac), and Paul Raci (Parks and Recreation, Sound of Metal). This film is set in a maximum security prison where a group of men who work on plays together do all they can to bring their latest production to life.

When you go to the movies as often as I do, chances are you will run into an endless barrage of trailers. Sometimes you might get anywhere between four to eight in a single screening. Despite my constant eyeing of the screen, I cannot say I am able to witness everything the studios are putting out. Heck, I recall only seeing a trailer for “Deadpool & Wolverine” in theaters once before it came out. Although if you count that little thing they did before certain movies with the two leads telling the audience not to use their phones, I guess you can say I saw some other marketing material for the film as well. But my point is, my experience with the marketing for “Sing Sing” is next to none. At least for what I recall. I say this despite knowing one of the problems of being a frequent AMC customer is that I get so many trailers in select screenings that it is sometimes difficult to remember them all. I heard about the concept of the “Sing Sing” and I figured it could be a pleasing time. But the only reason why I went to go see this movie in the first place is because the screening for it was free.

It feels nice going into a movie blind. Especially as someone who is so constantly exposed to everything the studios are trying to sell me. But of course, compared to some of the other movies out this summer, I did not have a ton of excitement for “Sing Sing.” Although that is for good reason, because I did not know enough about “Sing Sing” to get excited. However, I can confirm I am quite excited to discuss this movie because it was a great experience. This is one of those movies, kind of like “CODA,” that is going to stick with me emotionally months after leaving the theater. To be clear, I do not think this film is as good as “CODA,” but much like “CODA,” “Sing Sing” was wholesome, moving, and beautiful.

There is a saying that you should not judge a book by its cover. And “Sing Sing” sort of fits that idea. Because when I look at this title, I think of innocence, I think of unity, I think of community, I think of… Well… Singing… For those who do not know, and I did not know this going in, Sing Sing is the name given to a prison where this movie is set. The name is derived from a Native American tribe. Despite that, this movie shows how much the act of performing is in the blood of several people staying here. You have a set of people who take plays seriously, some who enjoy being comedic, and you also have people doing this in order to forget about their troubles. The reality is that as someone who has never set foot inside of a prison, I will never know what it is like to be incarcerated, to spend a night in jail, to do time. Nothing of that sort, but this movie presents the universal concept of escapism and does so through the lens of people who perhaps deep down hope to achieve it more than most. I go to the movies as often as I can, but I realize how lucky I am to be able to do that on a regular basis. These are people who have the plays at Sing Sing as one of their only ways to forget their troubles. Whether they are there for a crime they committed or put there for the wrong reasons, all of these people share a common bond, and it is nice to see here.

The star of this movie is Colman Domingo, and he easily shines in the lead role. He comes off as the serious one of the group sometimes, but I feel deep down he is willing to drive himself out of his comfort zone. Domingo has some memorable scenes as John “Divine G” Whitfield and it still feels too early to tell if this performance will be up for awards contention, but I think Domingo has given one of my favorites so far this year. This film is not the strongest at the box office. It has been out for weeks and only recently crossed the two million dollar mark. Granted, it never had a large number of showtimes, and it does not have the star power of say “Deadpool & Wolverine.” Colman Domingo is without a doubt the movie’s biggest name. The only other person I recognized in the cast, and it actually took me a bit to figure out what his name actually was despite knowing his face, was Paul Raci. Boy oh boy is it great seeing him here, because I loved his performance in “Sound of Metal” and he manages to bring a similar feel to his portrayal here. He comes off as the voice of wisdom of the bunch. Much like his outing in “Sound of Metal,” Raci brings a calming, welcoming presence to his character. I very much enjoyed seeing him in another role and hope this is not the last I see of him.

As mentioned, this film does not have the biggest stars. However, as far as I am concerned, I do not think that is a bad thing. Because “Sing Sing” manages to cast a group of people that may not have been my first choice, but seeing this film made me realize I would not want this cast to be any different than the way it is.

This movie reminds me a bit of “The 15:17 to Paris,” Clint Eastwood’s biographical drama about three men and their journey leading up to a train attack. For those of you who have not read my review, I can tell you it is absolutely insufferable and obscenely uneventful. But one thing I remember from that movie is that the main characters are played by the real people attached to the true event the movie bases itself upon. While creative, I could honestly tell they were not the greatest thespians. This leads me to one of my praises for this film, I am marveled by the performances given by some of the prisoners, especially because they are played by actual people who were imprisoned at Sing Sing. And while I may not be able to recognize these people compared to some of the big movie stars we see on screen today, when the credits rolled and the cast was revealed, I was taken aback by this group’s acting abilities. Granted, maybe I should not have been too surprised considering they have acting experience through plays, but I thought this was a professional group of people trying to be someone else. The definition of acting is playing pretend, that is traditionally what I would expect from most situations. Can you have people play themselves? Sure. There have been cases where it has happened and it has worked. But “Sing Sing” is not just a case where it worked, it is a case where I found myself heavily immersed into each performance on display.

Going back to “The 15:17 to Paris,” when the film was over, I looked at the actors on screen, thought their performances could have been better, and came up with my own interpretations of some more professional people that could take their place. That is not the case with “Sing Sing,” as every single person in the cast kills their respective role. It is hard to tell if these actors playing themselves are going to be contenders for awards in the coming months, but I think it would not just cool to see, but legitimately fitting, to see these people get a Best Ensemble nomination at the SAG Awards, because I bought the entire group, and I think you will too.

“Sing Sing” tackles a lot in one picture. It deals with people’s reputations, toxic masculinity, and the value of teamwork just to name a few topics. And all of these ideas are handled well. Above all, “Sing Sing” shows how art can bring people together. It also shows the value of escapism and being able to become the person you want to be. It is definitely a serious picture at times, but if you are looking for straight-up fun, this movie has a shockingly decent amount. I found myself smiling quite a bit during this film’s runtime.

One last thing, this regards the film’s ending. The film makes a certain choice at the end, and honestly, I was surprised by the direction they decided to take things. It almost felt unfinished and out of left field, like I was waiting for the big event to happen, only for the movie to tell me it is not happening. But as I saw what the film presents as an alternative, I thought it was a brilliant move. This direction was wholesome, it was lovely, and it was satisfying. As I said, I smiled quite a bit during this movie, and this was one of those times. This film is not all smiles and laughs, but I would recommend you check this movie out. Maybe it will bring out some emotions of your own.

In the end, “Sing Sing” totally sings. This is one of the better movies I have seen this year. While it is probably not my favorite, it is one that I will be thinking about as we get closer to awards season. Unfortunately, not many people saw this movie. Remember how I mentioned the rather low box office total for this film? Sadly, I could not contribute to it, I was able to see this film for free. But I urge you to check this movie out as soon as you can. Whether you are able to buy a ticket for this movie, watch it when it comes out on home video, or even at a free screening like I did, I hope you see it and enjoy it as much as I did. I hope more people spread the word about this picture. It is a must watch for sure. I am going to give “Sing Sing” a 9/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Borderlands,” the new film based on the video game of the same name. Also coming soon, I will share my thoughts on “Skincare,” the new thriller starring Elizabeth Banks as an aesthetician. And if that is not enough to satisfy you, I will also be talking about films like “My Old Ass,” “Reagan,” and “It Ends with Us.” 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 “Sing Sing?” What did you think about it? Or, is there any way that art has helped you in your life? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!