Adventure

Project Hail Mary (2026): A Spectacular, Awe-Inspiring Adaptation of Andy Weir’s Hit Novel

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Project Hail Mary” is directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller (Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, The LEGO Movie) and stars Ryan Gosling (La La Land, Blade Runner 2049), Sandra Hüller (Anatomy of a Fall, Zone of Interest), James Ortiz (Cryptid, The Woodsman), and Lionel Boyce (Loiter Squad, The Bear). This film is based on a novel by Andy Weir, who also wrote the book “The Martian,” which has since been adapted into a hit movie starring Matt Damon. “Project Hail Mary” follows a middle school teacher-turned-astronaut by the name of Ryland Grace who is put on a mission to stop a mysterious substance from destroying the earth’s sun.

I am not that much of a reader. Although there have been rare occasions where a movie would come out and I would read the book sometime before seeing it. I did this years ago for “The Martian,” by Andy Weir, which has become one of my favorite reads. The movie, while not as good as the book, is utterly amazing. Much like the book, I found the movie to be extremely funny and endlessly engaging. As someone who found myself to be a fan of Andy Weir’s writing style, I thought I would give the “Project Hail Mary” book a shot. I barely finished it before I saw the movie, but I really liked the book. It maintains the humor that Weir mastered in “The Martian,” while delivering something more complicated and adventurous. I think “The Martian” is the superior read, but both books are winners.

The hype train was real going into “Project Hail Mary.” Not just because it was based on a well received book… Not only because I happen to concur with those who say the book is great… Not just because I am a sci-fi junkie… Not just because it stars Ryan Gosling… Not just because it is directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller… But the trailers and the footage leading up to the movie, for the most part, looked incredible. The effects were pure eye candy. The sets looked great. The camerawork looked awe-inspiring. The film was even shot in true IMAX… Granted, it is technically digital. But still.

Maybe I am overexaggerating my excitement a bit. If there is any movie this year I would have been looking forward to more than any other, it would be “The Odyssey,” but “Project Hail Mary” was up there based on everything that I have seen, heard, and read prior to checking it out, including the overwhelmingly positive reviews.

Ladies and gentlemen, believe the hype. Actually… No. The hype might actually be too small.

“Project Hail Mary” is the best movie I have watched in years.

It has not been since “Godzilla Minus One” that I walked out of a movie buzzing so excessively.

As previously mentioned, I have read the book. I thoroughly enjoyed the book. I thought the way Weir told the story was unique. I think I prefer the movie. If you told me that Steven Spielberg directed this film, I would believe you. I said this some time ago with “Arco,” but I meant that more as a statement on the film’s style rather than its quality. This not only reminds me of some of Spielberg’s past movies, but it is just as watchable as some of his greatest hits. My dad, who for the record did not read the book, saw the movie with me. He had a great time. He said the movie reminded him of “Close Encounters of the Third Kind.” To me, “Project Hail Mary” feels like “E.T.” for a new generation. Only this time around, not as much of the story is set on earth.

Honestly, there are a number of filmmakers whose work I could compare this to, and I mean that as a positive. This film reminds me of some of my favorite projects said filmmakers have done. In addition to this film delivering Spielberg vibes, it comes off as what would happen if a Christopher Nolan epic had a baby with a James Gunn adventure. It has the scope and ambition of one of Nolan’s blockbusters and the humor and fun of Gunn.

This movie is a pure bundle of joy. I should not be surprised, as this movie is done by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, who have produced some of my favorite films of the past decade like “The Mitchells vs. the Machines” and the “Spider-Verse” movies.

They have also done “The LEGO Movie,” which is so much better than it should be. If I ever have a conservations with people discussing my personal favorite films of all time, I am proud to say “The LEGO Movie” and “Project Hail Mary” will both likely be part of said conversations.

No, seriously, who is Ryan Gosling’s agent? Because his resume, especially over the past ten years, is filled with banger after banger after banger, with this film being the latest example. “La La Land” is extravagant and otherworldly. “Blade Runner 2049” was amazing despite not doing so hot at the box office. “First Man” was moving. “Barbie” was not just a good movie, but Gosling practically stole the show. When I think of the best actors working today without an Oscar, Gosling is somewhere close to the best of the best. After seeing “Project Hail Mary,” I am convinced that not only is Gosling capable of being nominated, but also of winning an Oscar next year. Granted, it is only spring. The Oscars are practically a year from now. But I have a feeling that Gosling’s performance can sit well with people through the coming months as he is given lots to do and handles all of it with excellence.

It also helps that he plays such a likable character. There is a line in this film where Ryan Gosling’s character, Ryland Grace, says he puts the “not” in astronaut. As corny as that may sound, that line solidifies his entire journey. I do not want to spoil everything that happens in this movie, but the narrative constantly unfolds bits and pieces of the character as it goes along through its clever non-linear format. Much of the film is set in space, but there are portions that take place on earth, and those portions are surprisingly engaging. Grace is a middle school teacher, which only adds to his likability. Remember “Interstellar?” Arguably the biggest drive Cooper has in that film that allows him to try to save earth are his children. Grace does not have any kids, but his middle school class, while temporary, almost comes off as a set of children he never had.

In a multitude of other possible movies, Grace would be the star of the show. But one character constantly steals the spotlight, and that is Rocky. Much of the film features these two in close quarters as they learn about each other, their worlds, their backstories on how they found each other, to the point where they end up working together not only to save earth, but Rocky’s own planet.

Remember the Grogu craze when “The Mandalorian” came out? It felt like for months that Grogu fever, and by extension, merchandise, was everywhere. Heck, I own a pair of Grogu socks that are worn out, but I cannot get rid of them. They’re comfortable, and I like the design. There is a fine line that a film rides with a “merchandisable” character, which I would say Rocky just so happens to be. For me, to get me to buy a character’s merchandise, I would prefer to realize I like said character before wasting my money. Thankfully for this film, Rocky is a riot. Having read the book, I had no clue how they were going to portray him in the movie, but I was actually surprised with how much I loved his first moments on screen. He is adorable, but also rather smart. Rocky is a winning combination. James Ortiz does an excellent job on the voice. Given how Rocky is an alien, the communication styles vary significantly between him and Grace, but I enjoyed getting to see how the movie showcases both characters as they learn how to communicate back and forth.

Rocky also has the best line in the movie, and without giving any context to the situation, all I will say is that it involves a guy named Mark. You will know it when you hear it.

I said before that this film reminded me a lot of “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial” and I could sum up the basic reasons… Both films heavily feature bonds between a human and an alien. Both have inspiring musical scores. Both have characters who want to do what they can to get home. But the real reason why I find this to be “E.T.” for the next generation is that the film is an incredibly emotional experience. I did not cry during “Project Hail Mary,” but I would not be surprised to be sitting during this film again and seeing other people wiping tears off their faces. This film has everything that reminds me of why I love the movies. Well-realized characters with their own quirks… A great story that enlightens the soul… Stunning visuals and audio that excite on every level.

Some could argue that I am rather predisposed to liking “Project Hail Mary.” Not only did I read the book and like it, but if you know me well, you would know that sci-fi is my preferred genre. It does not mean every science fiction tale is great. I have seen a few “Star Wars” movies I would rather forget. In fact, having read the book, I recognize that not everything from the source material is going to find its way into the film. It is too long, and I think the general audiences can only take so much technical and scientific jargon. Are there things from the book that I am disappointed are not in the movie? Yes. There is a pinch of backstory involving Stratt towards the book’s end that moved me. But these are two separate things. I am not going to let the dismissal of that material affect my verdict of the film, because as a general movie, regardless of what it was based on, this was one of the most unbelievable experiences I have ever had.

“Project Hail Mary” presents a universal problem, as a mysterious creature is causing the sun to die. On the surface, one would think this film is about saving the world. And in a way, it is. But as soon as Rocky is brought into the picture, the film basically gets to the point where both he and Grace think bigger. The journey these two go on together as friends is truly something. I could honestly watch a weekly sitcom starring these two. But the film, as fun and joyous as it is, is simultaneously sad. You have this protagonist who minute by minute is trying to remember every little thing about himself. He finds out he is alone. He is tasked with mankind’s most important mission, and his only escape appears to be Rocky. And you might think he has people back on earth to save. Sure, he has the people he knows from his school. But he has no lover, no pets. Nobody. All he has is himself, the children he will likely only see for portions of his life, and Rocky. But the film manages to balance the sadness with more optimistic moments, hilarious lines, and a satisfying ending. This is the kind of movie that I can see a lot of people going to multiple times, bringing new people with each go. Heck, I am already thinking about who I would bring for a second viewing. If you are still reading this and have not seen this movie, please stop what you are doing and go check it out. Do not pirate the film. Go to a theater. See it on a big screen. Do it as soon as you possibly can.

In the end, I cannot stop thinking about “Project Hail Mary.” I read the book before checking out this movie, but I have to say I enjoyed the movie more than I did the book. There are certain scenes in this film that honestly play out ten times better as visuals rather than text. I have a pretty active imagination, but even I have to say some of these scenes were better than how I interpreted them. Ryan Gosling gives the performance of a lifetime. James Ortiz is fantastically cast as the voice of Rocky. Sandra Hüller does a great job as Stratt. Overall, the cast brings their A-game. The musical score is riveting. The cinematography is easy on the eyes. Phil Lord and Christopher Miller deliver a spectacle for the ages. Everything in the story from the beginning to end had me hooked. It is a longer film at two hours and thirty-six minutes, but it is never boring! Please go see this movie. It will make you laugh. It may even make you cry. Amazon does not have a long history as a film distribution company, but this is easily my favorite film they have put out thus far. If you are reading this review around its publication, do not wait for Prime, if there is a prime time to go see “Project Hail Mary,” it is now. I am going to give “Project Hail Mary” a 10/10.

“Project Hail Mary” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! I want to remind everyone that in honor of Scene Before’s 10th anniversary, I started a new series called Movie Requests and if you would like, you can now check out my latest episode, where “Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back” star Jason Mewes requests I talk about “House Party.” And if you want to see future episodes, please consider subscribing to my YouTube channel that way you can see them as soon as they drop!

My next review is going to be for “Ready or Not 2: Here I Come!” Also, coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “They Will Kill You,” “You’re Dating a Narcissist!,” “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie,” and “The Drama.” 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 “Project Hail Mary?” What did you think about it? Or, did you read the “Project Hail Mary” book? What did you think about that? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Hoppers (2026): A Dam Good Animation

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Hoppers” is directed by Daniel Chong (We Bare Bears, We Baby Bears) and stars Piper Curda (A.N.T. Farm, Teen Beach 2), Bobby Moynihan (Saturday Night Live, The Secret Life of Pets), Jon Hamm (Mad Men, Keeping Up with the Joneses), Kathy Najimy (King of the Hill, WALL-E), and Dave Franco (Together, The Disaster Artist). This film is about a young girl named Mabel who uses a new technology to allow her consciousness to hop into a robotic beaver. Despite discouragement from those working on the tech, Mabel uses her newfound beaverhood as an opportunity to save a glade from being replaced by a freeway.

You ever hear the saying “Just another Tuesday?” Well, that phrase applies to Pixar. Specifically, when it comes to describing their ability to pump out one solid movie after another. Not every one is perfect, but the studio has unleashed a ton of hits over the years, including a couple all-timers like “The Incredibles” or “Inside Out.”

Watching a new Pixar movie always feels like an event, because while they are not the only group dedicated to making animations, I always see Pixar as the gold standard. It has come to the point where I find inferior Pixar projects to be better than most movies. Do I think “Elio” is a masterpiece? No. But did I enjoy it and take something from it? Absolutely. Even with “Elemental” turning out to be lackluster, I continue to find myself onboard Pixar’s train for whatever they have in store.

As much as I look forward to seeing what Pixar brings to the table with franchise extensions including “Toy Story 5” and “Incredibles 3,” I am often more engaged when I find out about one of their original projects, including “Hoppers.” That said, while the movie did look fun and hilarious based on what I saw in the marketing, I will admit that the movie did turn me off slightly even while watching the trailers, as they admit how much their concept sounds like “Avatar.” Although in fairness, if you break down “Avatar,” it has ripped off quite a few other films like “Pocahontas” and “Dances with Wolves.”

Despite the film’s self-admitted ripping off of sorts, there is plenty in it to enjoy. In fact, I think it is just about as enjoyable as the first “Avatar.” Much like how I think “Avatar” is not James Cameron’s best work, I would have to say the same is true for “Hoppers.” Nevertheless, both movies are worth watching. These two stories just so happen to play around with similar ideas beyond just having someone take on the form of another living thing. They both highlight how humanity tends to mistreat other creatures, intentionally or not. “Hoppers” also taps into the idea that humans often fail to realize that they are not the center of the universe. As humans we are taught to appreciate nature, but in the past couple hundred years we have become so reliant on convenience and industrialization to the point that we forget to care for other animals.

I saw this film with a couple friends, and one of those friends said this film is Pixar’s closest cousin to “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.” I would partially agree with them as, like that film when put next to others in its franchise, is not exactly the best one. But also, like “Temple of Doom,” there are some surprisingly dark moments. There is a particular death that comes in this film. Wow. Characters die in a movie. What a spoiler. But without specifying, there is one death involving a clap that caught me by total surprise. You will know it when you see it. If you saw the trailer, you would know that a good chunk of the movie is dedicated to other creatures trying to “squish” humans for everything they have done. That said, the trailers make this film look totally lighthearted. It was a bit darker than I anticipated. There are some segments involving the animals’ aspirations that lead to some eerie visuals or concepts. I do not want to spoil much, but the end of the movie has some “facial expressions” if you will, that I cannot stop thinking about.

Speaking of things I cannot stop thinking about, I like the film’s protagonist, Mabel. She comes off as smart, though a bit rebellious. Yet she is not necessarily pushy. The movie does a great job at creating someone whose passion for nature is as strong as her desire to preserve it. While this film is not as emotionally charging, there are some sentimental moments between Mabel and her Grandma Tanaka that felt reminiscent of watching earlier moments of “Up.” Much like that Pixar classic, “Hoppers” works so well because not only is Mabel doing what she’s doing for herself, she is thinking of the people in her life each step of the way. She is an individual who clearly wants something to go her way, but oftentimes cares enough about others during her journey to see said thing play out.

Story-wise, this film reminds me of a lot of other movies, including some of Pixar’s own like “Up,” “Ratatoullie,” or “A Bug’s Life.” This film is not exactly the same as all of these, but it borrows a lot of elements from their stories like large insect casts, the “humans are dangerous” cliche, or the general appreciation of nature. “Hoppers” is far from Pixar’s best film. To me, it is mid-tier Pixar, which is still better than a lot of movies. I would probably put it in the same boat as “Onward” or “Inside Out 2.” Yet “Hoppers” borrows a lot of traits from some of Pixar’s most memorable stories and creates a fun remix out of them.

In some ways, I think you would be forgiven if “Hoppers” also reminded you of a recent DreamWorks film, specifically “The Wild Robot.” For one thing, both films, on a technicality, primarily feature “robots” as their main characters. These “robots” if you will, are their respective universe’s fish out of water. Both Roz and Mabel have to adapt to the ways of the wild. They take on completely different adventures and carry completely different motivations, but on the surface, both films would seem like distinct cousins if watched back to back. This is especially true when you consider both films suggest that humans the reason why the world is changing for the worse.

Overall, “Hoppers” is a hoot. It is quite funny, wonderfully ridiculous, and like a lot of other Pixar fare, beautifully animated. The studio has only gotten better at making their films look as crisp as can be through the years and “Hoppers” is just the latest example.

In the end, I recommend “Hoppers.” This is not going to end up being my favorite film of the year, but it is one that I think is fun for all ages. It does get a bit dark, but it is not the first film of its kind to do so. The mostly star-studded voice cast brings their A-game. The story is a lot of fun, but also important. For the younger viewers, the film offers positive lessons about environmental preservation and not messing with nature. The film is fast-paced, never boring, and an overall good time. I am going to give “Hoppers” a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! If you like this review, I have more coming including for “Project Hail Mary,” “Ready or Not 2: Here I Come,” “They Will Kill You,” “You’re Dating a Narcissist!,” and “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie.”

Also, if you have not done so already, please check out my latest episode of Movie Requests featuring special guest Jason Mewes, who asked me to review “House Party.” If you enjoy the episode, leave a like on YouTube, and subscribe to my channel so you can stay tuned for more episodes as they drop!

If you want to see 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 “Hoppers?” What did you think about it? Or, if you could experience life as another living creature? What would it be and why? For me, I would pick a mayfly. Their lives are short, but they sound interesting, as they only tend to live one or two days as soon as they become adults. Let me know which creature you’d want to be down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

GOAT (2026): A Traditional Sports Animation That Dribbles at a TikTok Pace

Posted on by Jack Drees

© 2025 – Sony Pictures

“GOAT” is directed by Tyree Dillihay (Bob’s Burgers, Good Times) and Adam Rosette (Harvey Girls Forever!, The Mr. Peabody and Sherman Show) and stars Caleb McLaughlin (Stranger Things, The Book of Clarence), Gabrielle Union (Think Like a Man, Bring it On), Aaron Pierre (Mufasa: The Lion King, Krypton), Nicola Coughlin (Derry Girls, Bridgerton), David Harbour (Stranger Things, Black Widow), Nick Kroll (Big Mouth, Sausage Party), Jenifer Lewis (Think Like a Man, Black-ish), Patton Oswalt (King of Queens, Young Adult), Jelly Roll, Jennifer Hudson (The Jennifer Hudson Show, Dreamgirls), Sherry Cola (Joy Ride, Shortcomings), Eduardo Franco (Stranger Things, Booksmith), Andrew Santino (The Disaster Artist, Mixology), Bobby Lee (Inside Job, Kickin’ It Old School), and Stephen Curry (Holey Moley, Mr. Throwback). This film is about a goat named Will Harris who gets the unique opportunity to follow his dreams and play roarball with much bigger, stronger, and faster animals.

When I think of the gold standard of animation, my mind tends to dart towards Pixar. As for Sony Pictures Animation’s place in this medium, I am kind of iffy about them. As much as the “Spider-Verse” movies are masterpieces, they also come from the studio that is responsible for “The Emoji Movie,” one of the most unforgivable abominations made by man. The quality is not the most consistent from one project to the next.

I was not exactly sure what to expect with “GOAT.” I had some idea, but not quite a full picture. The film certainly looked like it took some inspiration from “Spider-Verse’s” fast-paced animation style while also finding a way to bring its own personality to the table. That said, from what I saw through the marketing, this film looked cliche in more ways than one. Having seen the movie, I can definitely say it is cliche. Depending on how many movies you have seen, some of this film’s structure is going to feel quite familiar to you. A protagonist wants to be the best at something despite what the odds suggest and what other people have to say. I have said on this blog that cliches are fine as long as a project can effectively utilize them. Having made that point, I wish “GOAT” was a better movie.

This is not to say the movie is the worst I have ever seen. In fact, when it comes to establishing characters like the scrawny Will Harris (McLaughlin) and his much stronger mentor figure Jett Fillmore (Union). The movie takes time to give them a splendid dynamic that plays out perfectly on and off the court. Their connection unleashes some cliches, but they are, again, cliches that are handled decently. You have the young, eager student willing to learn from a wiser figure who is supposedly becoming more washed-up with each passing minute. It is a traditional storytelling method, but it works.

“GOAT” is very much a product of the 2020s. In some ways, it does a good job at shining a light on people’s weaknesses and problems that define the decade. There is one gag in the film involving a character who is way too attached to their phone. I could see a joke like this playing well with parents in the audience. That said, at my screening, the person next to me, who happened to be an adult, was on their phone numerous times. I wonder how they took this lesson.

By the way, if this has not been made clear already, please put your phone away at the movies. That said, I understand not everyone carries a watch nowadays, so I have no problem if you want to check the time as long as you do not go any further to wreck my time. Turn the brightness down. Peek in your pocket. Don’t flash it heavily for everyone to see! You got it? Good. Let’s move on.

While the movie positively defines the 2020s in some ways, it also manages to define it in less stellar ways. One of my biggest problems with this film is the pacing. Granted, the movie is all killer, no filler. It dives into each and every point without skipping a beat. But for a movie that is about basketball, part of me wishes I could have seen more of it. Thankfully, unlike another so-called sports movie that goes by the name of “Him,” which I reviewed last year, “GOAT” actually dedicates a lot of time to its focal sport. That said, part of me wishes we could have spent a little extra time on the games. I am not saying that we need to see all 48 minutes of the film’s players running up and down the court, but by the time the film gets to the big game at the end, it feels much smaller in scale than it should be. It feels rushed. It feels like it wants to end before it starts. The film literally breezes through its first couple of quarters of the climactic game in about as much time as it would take me to swipe through a few YouTube shorts. There are some occasionally thrilling moments in these games, but they would probably be more exciting if the movie drew things out. “GOAT” tells a lot in a 100 minutes. I just wish I had the chance to digest the material a little more.

One reason why I tend to favor stories told by studios like Pixar is that unlike Sony, their films feel a lot less commercialized. Sure, “Toy Story” uses a lot of real life toys, “Cars” uses real life vehicles, and “Wall-E” has ties to “Hello, Dolly” and Apple. Yet those projects feel like stories rather than extended advertisements. Even in some of Sony’s better animated productions, I always notice they find a way to sneak in a commercial for one of their products. When it comes to product placement, “GOAT” is utterly shameless. The movie spends quite a bit of time showing off the PS5, creates its own 2K sports games based on roarball, makes the card game Uno a core concept of the plot, and even spends quite a bit of time featuring Doordash.

Just because this movie feels commercialized, does not mean it lacks creativity. Instead of basketball, the movie features the sport of roarball. Like basketball, it features players going up and down a court trying to put a ball through a hoop. The two sports have their differences. We do not see humans playing roarball and rather tons of different animals taking up the sport. The universe within “GOAT” seems to have a similar layout to “Zootopia” as there are no humans.

But above all, I find the roarball courts to be more interesting than anything else the sport has to offer. If you ever go to an NBA game, you would notice that each arena has its own individual quirks and home teams, but each court follows a similar structure to the next. The courts that we see through this film’s professional league sort of play like a video game. There are moments where characters have to make their way through rising surfaces, ice, fire, and so on. Honestly, if Nintendo wants to make a “Mario Basketball” game sometime soon, I think this movie would be a solid piece of inspiration.

In the end, “GOAT” is not the greatest flick. It has glimmers of goodness. Although those glimmers are rather thin. The voice cast is pretty talented and bring a lot to the table. Despite clearly being similar to basketball, the concept of roarball has sparks of creativity. While there are a couple decent moments, most of the scenes in this film feel so rushed to the point where I cannot fully appreciate the characters within them. Also, the product placement feels kind of over the top, especially considering this film is animated. As someone who is in his 20s, I sometimes think about what would happen if I had kids and I took them this movie. I think they would have a fun time with it, and for all I know it could age somewhat decently for them, but I do not know if it is going to age like a fine wine. Time will tell. As for this 26 year old loser, I think “GOAT” is a one and done for me. I am going to give “GOAT a 5/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “EPiC: Elvis Presley in Concert!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Send Help” and “The Bride!”. Also, this is my first film review I have published since Scene Before officially turned 10 years old. I want to thank everyone who has wasted their time reading my above average material over the past ten years.

If you want to see a video-based film review I have done, check out the first episode of Movie Requests, where I discuss Lars von Trier’s film “The Idiots,” as requested by actress Bryce Dallas Howard. It is available now on my YouTube channel, and you should absolutely positively subscribe!

If you want to see 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 “GOAT?” What did you think about it? Or, what an animated sports film you enjoy? Sticking with the topic of basketball, you should totally check out my review for “The First Slam Dunk.” It is a great movie, give it a watch. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Arco (2025): Back to the Future – Reimagined for the 2020s

Posted on by Jack Drees

Before we begin this review of “Arco,” I would just like to remind everyone that “Movie Requests” begins this Saturday, February 28th! “Movie Requests” is my upcoming film review series where I ask prominent people to request films for me to talk about, and I give my thoughts on their suggestion. A new promo is out now for the first episode, featuring Bryce Dallas Howard! You can watch it by clicking the video below!

And if you want to see the new episode when it drops, please subscribe to my YouTube channel! Otherwise, if you are following Scene Before with an email or WordPress account, you can be notified shortly after the video is uploaded! Now, on with the review!

“Arco” is directed by Ugo Bienvenu and Gilles Cazaux and stars Swann Arlaud (By the Grace of God, Anatomy of a Fall), Alma Jodorowsky (Blue is the Warmest Colour, Kids in Love), Margot Ringard Oldra (Fortune de France, Along Came Love), Oscar Tresanini (La rebelle, les aventures de la jeune George Sand, Mini-Court), Vincent Macaigne (Diary of a Fleeting Affair, Cicadas), Louis Garrel (Little Women, A Faithful Man), William Lebghil (Soda, Some Like it Veiled), and Oxmo Puccino (In Your Dreams, Athena). This film is set in the future and follows a young girl who sees a boy fall from the sky, only to find out this boy has the ability to travel through time. The two do what they can to help each other, while trying to get the boy back to his own time.

Just an FYI before we get on with the rest of this review. This is a French movie. Nevertheless, I watched the movie in English. I bring this up because when I review movies, I always attempt to watch them in their original language to get the most authentic experience possible. Even so, I watched the film in English as the film did not appear to be playing anywhere near me in French. Just know that I will not have any concrete thoughts on the film’s original cast. That said, the cast of the English version of the film did a good job. I do not really have any complaints. If you watch the film in English, and chances are you will if you live in the U.S. like me, I think you will have a solid experience.

“Arco” is one of those films where I went in nearly as blind as possible. I knew about the film a couple months before its release. Having followed Natalie Portman on Instagram, I was made aware that she was in the English version. I have also been made aware about the film receiving noticeably positive reviews. Having seen the film myself, those positive reviews were justified. This is not my favorite animated film of 2025. But it is a finely crafted remix on a familiar time travel concept.

Some people believe that they do not make movies like they used to. While everyone’s definition of this phrase may vary, “Arco” feels like an answer to that philosophy for those looking for something like they got in the 1980s. “Arco” is essentially “Back to the Future” for a new generation. Not only because the plot heavily involves time travel and someone’s intentions to get back to their specific time following a mishap. But the film also captures a specific kind of wonder that movies like “Back to the Future” can easily evoke. During my earliest viewings of “Back to the Future,” which has now become one of my all time favorite films, I was always marveled by everything that went into the climax of that film between the actors’ line delivery, the sound mix, the lightning effects, and Alan Silvestri’s iconic score. If I watched “Arco” as a child, perhaps even as a teenager, it could have inspired me to pursue filmmaking or animation. It is a film that comes with a concept that not only sounds clever, but plays really well on screen. Even the method of time travel feels like a sibling of “Back to the Future.” If you have seen “Back to the Future,” you may recall Doc saying he turned a Delorean into a time machine to “do it with some style.” Much like that 1985 classic, there is a sense of style brought to the time travel in “Arco,” where we see characters utilize such a fantastical concept through rainbows. I cannot come up with many cooler ways to travel through time more magical than that.

This film is the feature-length debut from Ugo Bienvenu, and I think anyone’s efforts should be commended should they direct a feature film for the first time. Although Bienvenu’s in particular had me perplexed, because throughout the film, I was under the impression I was watching the work of a longtime veteran. The 2D animation style feels very Studio Ghibli-like with some of the film’s occasionally vivid landscapes, strong colors, and cozy locations. If you told me that this film were being directed by Hayao Miyazaki, chances are I could believe you. If this film were live-action, based on all the 1980s movies talk from before, you could have convinced me Steven Spielberg put something like this together. That said, if you want to get technical, Steven Spielberg has done an animated film before, specifically “The Adventures of Tin-Tin,” but these films do not quite feel the same. I enjoyed that movie, but still.

As a story, “Arco” is incredibly tight. Clocking in just short of an hour and a half, “Arco” delivers a simple concept met with brilliant execution. I stared at the screen in awe of the vision that was on display. Unlike some time travel stories, which are set close to the time the story comes out, this film takes place, as of this review’s publication date, entirely in the future. This allows us not only to play around with the idea of people traveling through time, but simultaneously tap into the continued evolution of technology and the earth’s climate. In the case of addressing climate change, I found “Arco” to come off as less obvious in its messaging than “The Wild Robot” and “Flow” did when those two films came out in 2024. Maybe that is just a me thing. I would not be surprised to find out that some viewers feel different when it comes to that matter. That said, the film not only does a good job at entertaining, but also serves as a reminder to take care of the planet.

Much like “Back to the Future,” “Arco” is a film that I can see playing really well with families. In fact, I think some parents may be more comfortable showing “Arco” to their children considering it has significantly less foul language. The film may be animated, which some adults may find to be a turnoff, but “Arco” often feels more Pixar or Studio Ghibli-like rather than something out of the more obnoxious Illumination. The movie is bright and colorful. Heck, any movie heavily involving rainbows should be. But there is a perfect balance that makes the film feel grounded yet imaginative. The film is likely going to entertain younger viewers while also delivering important messages. “Arco” seems to indicate that no matter what time you live in, everyone has their own problems. Nobody’s perfect.

That said, having seen a lot of movies, it is tough to argue that “Arco” is, by definition, original. If anything, the film reminds me a lot of “Colossal,” which puts a completely unique spin on the classic monster movie. In fact, that movie was even described by its own director to be “the cheapest ‘Godzilla’ movie ever.” Despite maintaining a noticeable degree of freshness, “Arco” does a good job at reminding me of some of the great movies I watched in the past that appeal to multiple age groups like “E.T.” or “Spirited Away.” It makes me want to go back and revisit those movies. Yet at the same time, I can see “Arco” having some replay value sometime in the future. It is hard to say that “Arco” is my favorite animated film of 2025, but it is one that gives me great joy the more I think about it.

In the end, “Arco” is a swell time travel flick that brings some originality to the table while also delivering vibes that are familiar from some of the most beloved films of all time. I keep comparing “Arco” to “Back to the Future,” partially because both movies involve time travel, but because they both handle such a concept in a somewhat similar fashion. Not just in terms of structure, but also quality. Is “Arco” as good as “Back to the Future?” Honestly, no. “Arco’s” technical aspects could arguably age better, but as a story, “Back to the Future” is superior. That said, if you are looking for something that delivers on entertainment and commentary, “Arco” is a solid pick. I am going to give “Arco” a 7/10.

“Arco” is now playing in select theaters, and as of this publication, is available to preorder on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Solo Mio.” Stay tuned! Also, coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “GOAT” and “EPIC: Elvis Presley in Concert.” 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! And one last reminder, please subscribe to my YouTube channel to catch my latest videos, including the upcoming series “Movie Requests,” which begins this Saturday, February 28th! I want to know, did you see “Arco?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite animated film of 2025? For me, I would have to go with “Scarlet.” I thought it a was clever, fantastical concept done with excellence! 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!

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!

Zootopia 2 (2025): Zoo Fast, Zoo Furriest

Posted on by Jack Drees

Disney/Disney – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

“Zootopia 2” is directed by Jared Bush and Byron Howard, both of whom had their share of credits on the original movie. This film stars Ginnifer Goodwin (Big Love, Once Upon a Time), Jason Bateman (Game Night, Ozark), Ke Huy Quan (Love Hurts, Everything Everywhere All at Once), Fortune Feimster (Bless the Harts, The Mindy Project), Andy Samberg (Saturday Night Live, Hotel Transylvania), David Strathairn (The Bourne Ultimatum, Godzilla), Shakira (The Voice, Jennifer Lopez: Halftime), Idris Elba (Pacific Rim, The Suicide Squad), Patrick Warburton (Family Guy, The Emperor’s New Groove), Quinta Brunson (A Black Lady Sketch Show, Abbott Elementary), Danny Trejo (Machete, Storks), Alan Tudyk (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, Wreck-it Ralph), Nate Torrence (She’s Out of My League, Hello Ladies), Don Lake (Watching Ellie, Space Force), Bonnie Hunt (The Bonnie Hunt Show, Cheaper by the Dozen), and Jenny Slate (Everything Everywhere All at Once, Big Mouth). This film once again centers around its main bunny and fox duo Judy Hopps and Nick Wilde as they take on a new case and pursue Gary Da’Snake, the first reptile widely seen in Zootopia in ages.

“Zootopia” released on March 4th, 2016. That is just days after I launched Scene Before. Based on this information, it is possible that I could have made the film my first ever review. Unfortunately, that never happened. Instead, I decided to a make singularly paragraphed and grammatically unsound post on why I was not a fan of the “Ghostbusters” reboot trailer. I am proud of my blog over the years, but if I could go back in time, part of me wishes I could have done a “Zootopia” review as my first ever post, because that would have meant I could have spent time talking about something that gave me joy, rather than something that triggered my apprehension.

If I did not make myself clear, I thought “Zootopia” was a load of fun. Like a lot of animated fare aimed towards families, it packs in a lesson, and I thought it was nicely implemented. “Zootopia” has fantastic commentary on racism, the importance of inclusion, and like a lot of Disney films, it also tells people to follow their dreams. Judy Hopps is an admirable protagonist and a great role model for children. A lot of these ideas were reinforced upon my recent rewatch of the film.

Disney/Disney – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

As for this sequel, I was quite excited to see where things could go. Much like the first film, the tone definitely felt kid-friendly, but it also looked like something that adults could watch without feeling like they wasted their time and brain cells. Thankfully, that is what I got with “Zootopia 2.” Does this film match the quality of the original? In some ways, yes. In others, not so much.

The biggest standout for this film to me is the humor. “Zootopia 2” sort of plays out like a late night talk show. If you watch a late night talk show like “The Tonight Show” or “Jimmy Kimmel Live!”, you will notice that there are often several attempts at humor every minute. Not every single one lands, but every once in a while either the host or the sidekick or even one of the guests will deliver something that will have the audience rolling out of their chairs. This is most definitely the case for me with “Zootopia 2.” The film has an endless supply of jokes. Some had me laughing out loud. Others had me chuckling. Others had me silent. And others had me almost rolling my eyes. Comedy is subjective, however, so chances are the jokes could someone laugh nonstop from start to finish. That said, to me, a lot of the jokes work, but there are quite a few that miss the mark and if it were not for this film’s handle on the commentary, which we will get to later, this would probably knock my score down a few points.

One of my favorite jokes, surprisingly, has to do with the song “What Does the Fox Say?”. I have never understood how that song ever became popular, but for whatever reason, there was a moment where someone references the song and it gave me arguably my biggest laugh of the film. I have no idea how that joke is going to land with others, but for whatever reason, it worked for me.

The film includes a fair amount of movie references too. Of course, there are tie-ins to other notable Disney-owned properties, including some under the 20th Century banner like “Alien.” If you pay very close attention, there is a clever cameo from Michael J. Fox that pays tribute to one of his most popular projects. There is a joke that pokes fun at the state of Hollywood and Disney’s ambition to make endless sequels and remakes. …Even though this is, after all, a sequel… The film even inserted a reference in the climax that felt totally out of left field, the children watching will likely not get it, but I think a lot of the adults will. Out of all the movies I thought “Zootopia” could reference as part of an elaborate visual gag, I was not expecting “The Shining.” But here we are.

Is there anything in this film as genuinely gutbusting as the DMV scene? No. Although that is a bit unfair to say because that scene achieves a level of comedic genius greater than God. I rewatched the film a day prior to checking this new one out, and I laughed just as hard, if not harder than I did during my initial watch of the movie in theaters.

Disney/Disney – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

“Zootopia 2,” like its predecessor, provides some excellent commentary that could not be more fittingly timed. I do not like to talk about politics on Scene Before, but the film sort of reminds me about how some people are feeling about the current position of the United States. I will not go into specific detail as I will probably spoil the movie, but there is a key part of the story that taps into the importance of history. This is something that you would have to watch the movie to see come to fruition because me saying more would diminish the commentary’s impact. If you know your history, or are living in a certain state of awareness right now, “Zootopia 2” might stick with you upon leaving the theater. The film also showcases the importance of working together while also serving as a reminder that people might not always be on the same page with their partner. Part of working together sometimes means compromise and this film heavily leans into that idea.

The film does not break new ground story-wise, but delivers familiar beats in an entertaining way. If you watched the first film, you would know that the story mainly revolves around a bunny and a fox, an unlikely duo. While that film taps into how unlikely such a duo is, this sequel heavily expands upon that idea to the point where it allows both characters to grow. Parts of the film are rather predictable, but there are moments where we see the tension growing in Judy and Nick’s partnership that hit me. There is one moment on a mountain involving a particular object that felt earned at the exact moment it happened.

Disney/Disney – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Like the first film, which features “Try Everything,” “Zootopia 2” has an original song from Shakira called “Zoo.” Frankly, I am not as big of a fan of this song as I am of “Try Everything.” The song, while by no means incompetent, has a lot less personality than “Try Everything.” Sure, in context of the movie, one could say it is used in conjunction with celebrating 100 years of Zootopia. Although if that were the case, I wish the song would have a had more of an oomph for such a momentous occasion. It lacks splendor and diversity in its beat. Again, the song is not the worst I have ever heard, but I thought it could have been better. I have not gone back to listen to “Try Everything” since “Zootopia” came out. The song, like this one, is a bit too poppy for my taste. But I think the song is perfectly used in the film and the lyrics could not be a better match for what the story was trying to shoot for. The lyrics in this song are okay, but I found “Try Everything” to be inspiring whereas “Zoo” did not leave much of an impact. That said, the day after seeing the film, I was at another cinema waiting for my screening of “Wake Up Dead Man,” only to see a mother and son walking out of their “Zootopia 2” screening, at which point the mother starts singing the lyrics of the song, so what do I know? It’s catchy, perhaps.

“Zootopia 2” features plenty of returning characters, but the film also makes room for new cast members, including Ke Huy Quan as Gary Da’Snake, Generic name aside, the character is likable. While Ke Huy Quan is an incredible action star as seen through films like “Everything Everywhere All at Once,” his high-pitch voice makes it very easy to sympathize with his character. Da’Snake often evokes a friendly presence and ends up playing a notable part throughout the film, which unlike the original, has reptiles.

The film also features the great Patrick Warburton as Mayor Winddancer. It is funny how Warburton can use the same voice for every character and yet carry so much personality each time. It is kind of like Brad Garrett, his normal voice is sometimes the best voice for the role. Even though I think J.K. Simmons is the slightly better performer, I think Warburton’s Mayor character is a slight step up from the original movie’s Lionheart. I liked getting to know about Winddancer’s background as a movie star. If anything, Winddancer is perhaps Zootopia’s closest comparison to Arnold Schwarzenegger, who many know as the Terminator, but he also spent years serving as the Governor of California.

Also, I know not everyone is eager to stay for the end of a Disney animation, but if you have time, you may want to stay for the credits. If you pay close attention at the end, you will notice something of importance.

Disney/Disney – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

In the end, “Zootopia 2” may not match the quality of its predecessor, but it is a fun, entertaining, and gorgeous-looking sequel. It does a great job at showcasing the continued journeys of its core characters we have come to know while solidly expanding the universe. Ke Huy Quan is a great addition to the cast, and so is Patrick Warburton. Those two actors in particular stand out. There is a lot of humor in “Zootopia 2,” which does lead to a lot of laughs, but it does not mean that there are no duds in the mix. I will give the writers an A for effort though. It seems like the team had a lot of fun coming up with the jokes. The film is a blast for kids and adults alike. I am going to give “Zootopia 2” a 7/10.

“Zootopia 2” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Jay Kelly,” “Bugonia,” “No Other Choice,” and “Fackham Hall.” 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 “Zootopia 2?” What did you think about it? Or, which of the two “Zootopia” movies do you like better? For me, the original gave me one of my all time biggest laughs as a moviegoer with the DMV scene, so I have to pick that one. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Running Man (2025): Edgar Wright Delivers a Supersonic Ride

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Running Man” is directed by Edgar Wright (Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, Last Night in Soho) and stars Glen Powell (Twisters, Anyone But You), William H. Macy (Fargo, Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes), Lee Pace (Foundation, Guardians of the Galaxy), Michael Cera (Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, The LEGO Batman Movie), Emilia Jones (CODA, Locke & Key), Daniel Ezra (A Discovery of Witches, All American), Jayme Lawson (The Batman, Sinners), Sean Hayes (Will & Grace, The Three Stooges), Colman Domingo (Sing Sing, Rustin), and Josh Brolin (Avengers: Infinity War, The Goonies). This future-set film is based on the book by Stephen King and follows Ben Richards who is put on a game show where he has the chance to become a billionaire by surviving for 30 days against hunters.

The 2025 adaptation of “The Running Man” is my first true exposure to the property. Yes, I have long been aware that Arnold Schwarzenegger starred in a previous adaptation years ago. It took me a while to realize that said adaptation was based on a Stephen King book. That said, I was onboard for this 2025 film just for the fact that Edgar Wright was helming it. I love his fast-paced directing style utilized in films like “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World” and “Baby Driver.” He has a knack for sick action scenes.

That said, compared to those movies, “The Running Man” does not hold a candle. Yet at the same time, like I often say about Pixar, an inferior Edgar Wright project can still equal a good movie, and a good movie “The Running Man” is.

While I have not seen the original “Running Man” film, I am aware that former “Family Feud” star and record-breaking lady kisser Richard Dawson played Bobby Thompson, a charismatic game show host. I cannot say much about Dawson’s performance given my lack of experience with the 1987 movie, but I can see why he was cast to play the character. Flash forward to 2025, where we have Colman Domingo, who last I checked, let me check my notes here =flips papers= hosted ZERO game shows. But Domingo’s performance as Bobby T makes me think he could easily kill it as a game show host in real life I would love to see what he could do on perhaps a reboot of “1 vs. 100” if that ever comes back. In fact, at times, that’s what part of “The Running Man” game show feels like, at least before “The Running Man” gets started. Maybe it is because both concepts involve one person trying to fend off a group of people.

Domingo says his role was inspired by Jerry Springer, and I can see where he is coming from, because if you watch those kinds of talk shows, even ones like “Maury” or “The Steve Wilkos Show,” there is a sense of heightened reality that those hosts are responsible for bringing to the table. In fact, when it comes to Domingo’s line delivery and the production design that often matches perfectly alongside it, it reminds me of something I and others would often compare “The Jerry Springer Show” to, specifically wrestling. The theatrics on “The Running Man” are much more extravagant than most real life game shows. At times it makes “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?”, a show that partially succeeds on its elaborate production design, seem insignificant.

“The Running Man,” like many films set in the future, paints a dystopian, bleak picture of what’s to come. To my surprise, I found quite a bit in common with “The Running Man” and “Idiocracy.” Granted, people are much smarter in “The Running Man,” but if you look at the state of television in both films, you would notice that both heavily feature programming that focuses on people’s pain. Sure, we have that now. One of my all time favorite game shows is “Wipeout,” which features people falling from great heights in each episode. But it is on a different level in this film. Life in “The Running Man” has gotten to a point where gambling is supposedly dominating the world. For Ben Richards, getting on a game show means everything to him. Not necessarily because he likes the shows, but because those shows are a means to make a quick buck. He wants a better life for himself, his family, and game shows are a fast and easy way to get to that point.

Overall, I thought Ben Richards was a likable protagonist. The movie gives him one obstacle after another. He cares about the people he loves. I like the film indicating his distaste for being on “The Running Man” despite doing all he can to make it through. If I had one thing to say though, I feel that of all the characters in this film, Ben Richards is the most likely candidate to receive the title “character that could be played by almost anyone.” I have nothing against Glen Powell. Each role of his proves he is a movie star in the making. Powell has charisma, and he even impressed me in the neither romantic nor funny “romcom” some like to call “Anyone But You.” But as I look back at Ben Richards, I feel that this is maybe the least Glen Powell-esque the actor has been thus far. Through the films in which I have seen him, this is the most “everyday” Powell has come off.

This is a film that fires on all cylinders in act one, keeps up the pace in act two, and while it does not fall apart in act three, if I had to name a “worst act,” it is easily the third. By the time the film reaches its end, I found it to be overstuffed, too long, and close to tonal inconsistency. The third act sometimes feels slow, and slow is the last adjective I should be using to describe a movie called “The Running Man.” The movie is 2 hours and 13 minutes long, and for the most part, it is paced well. That said, the third act has a pacing problem. Certain moments of the third act feel rushed and slapped together, while others tend to drag. It lacks the personality of the acts that came before. It is not the worst schlock I have seen this year, but I do not think it is up to the standards of Edgar Wright, who is generally praised as a filmmaker. This is not Wright’s finest outing, but it does mean the movie is bad. I would still recommend it if you want a fun action-adventure.

In the end, “The Running Man” is worth checking out. The film looks great, sounds great, and at times, it feels like Edgar Wright’s passion for the material shines through. That said, there are quite a few scenes in this film that are noticeably superior to others. “The Running Man” paints a future that I can see happening. It has traces of our present with the popularity of reality TV, gambling, and humanity’s noticeable desire to see others fail for the sake of entertainment. I am going to give “The Running Man” a 7/10.

“The Running Man” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Eternity!” Stay tuned! Also, look forward to my thoughts on “Wicked: For Good,” “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 “The Running Man?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Stephen King film adaptation released this year? As for me, I have not seen “The Monkey” yet, so I am not sure if I can validly answer that question, but I must declare that “The Life of Chuck” is a must see if you have not gotten the chance to check it out already. Leave your thoughts and opinions down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Tron: Ares (2025): Disney’s Threequel Does Not Compute

Posted on by Jack Drees

Photo by Disney/DISNEY – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

“Tron: Ares” is directed by Joachim Rønning (Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil) and stars Jared Leto (Morbius, Blade Runner 2049), Greta Lee (Russian Doll, The Morning Show), Evan Peters (Invasion, X-Men: Days of Future Past), Jodie Turner-Smith (A Big Bold Beautiful Journey, The Last Ship), Hasan Minhaj (Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj, The Daily Show), Arturo Castro (Narcos, Broad City), Gillian Anderson (The X-Files, Sex Education), and Jeff Bridges (The Big Lebowski, True Grit). This is the third film in the “Tron” franchise and is about the rivalry between ENCOM and Dillinger Systems as both corporations attempt to bring digital entities into the real world.

Photo by Disney/DISNEY – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

“Tron” is a franchise that I do not think about much these days, but as a teenager, these movies were my jam. When it comes to special effects, both of these films are marvels. I never had a chance to watch “Tron: Legacy” in a theater when I was 11 years old. While I still had not watched the original “Tron” by that time, I am jealous of those who got to watch “Legacy” on the big screen, especially in IMAX 3D.

In preparation for “Tron: Ares,” I went back and watched both “Tron” and “Tron: Legacy.” While neither film is perfect, they both hold up. Sure, the effects in the original might not fly today, but they have such a vintage charm. They have an aesthetic I do not find in many other films, new or old. Between the prior two installments, I was a little more pleased with the look of “Tron,” which I found to be more vivid and appealing in terms of color. As a story, I also found it to be better paced. Not to say that “Tron: Legacy” is bad, but I found Kevin Flynn to be more inviting as a protagonist than Sam.

But the thing about “Tron” and “Tron: Legacy” is that both movies have protagonists whose adventures and character arcs I can fondly appreciate and remember, even if I liked one more than the other. “Tron: Ares,” across the board, has flat characters in comparison. Few, if any, kept my attention. And when one of them did have my attention, their dialogue felt fairly cookie cutter. Am I going to remember Julian Dillinger? Probably not. Elisabeth Dillinger? Don’t think so. Eve Kim? I don’t know. In fact, if I had to name a favorite character in the movie, it would be a monumental undertaking. I would have to get to the point where I would have to name aspects of the film that are not characters as my top dogs.

The best characters in “Tron: Ares” are as follows… Kevin Flynn, played by the legendary Jeff Bridges who is back once again to reprise his role… The Nine Inch Nails… for providing some killer tracks that are not quite on the level of Daft Punk’s “Legacy” music, but manage to hold their own… And of course, the CGI… It is full of detail and eye candy both in the real world and beyond. If I am referring to music and special effects as my favorite characters, it is a telltale sign that “Tron: Ares” is not a good movie. In fact, this is easily the weakest of the three “Tron” movies so far, and maybe ever depending on how well this film does financially. As of publishing this review, the movie’s been out for almost a month and it has not made its budget back.

Just because the movie is weak, does not mean it is lacking in cool moments. But to be honest, I do not know if this movie is best designed for newcomers. On the surface, one could argue “Tron: Ares” is newcomer-friendly due to most of the cast and characters not appearing in the prior two installments. It is to a certain degree, a clean slate. But the movie also noticeably relies on fan service and nostalgia. Admittedly, as someone who has seen the prior two movies, there are select instances where I was shaking in my chair like a rocket ready to blast off.

The more I think about “Tron: Ares” the more it reminds me of “Jurassic World: Dominion.” “Tron: Ares” is significantly more appealing, but the film’s negatives tend to match, partially because both films sell themselves on the hook that its threat is “coming to the real world.” Granted, the dinosaurs in “Jurassic Park” have always been part of the real world, but they have been closed off from towns and cities whereas beings from inside the Grid are exiting their digital society and entering our own. That said, I will give “Tron: Ares” an enormous edge against “Jurassic World: Dominion” because the former actually seems to commit to its idea of digital beings entering the real world, whereas the execution of the dinosaurs entering the real world in the latter feels like an afterthought at times.

Even though I find “Tron: Ares” to not be that good of a film, I do think there are glimmers of decency to be found. While the story of the film itself ends up being a bore, I do think the plot of “Tron: Ares,” which involves companies racing against each other in bringing digital constructs to reality, feels somewhat reminiscent of how tech companies today are heavily pushing artificial intelligence. Part of the similarities are also revealed when the movie exposes a significant flaw regarding the Ares character. The movie not only reminds me of how much these companies seem to be pushing AI, but they will likely go so far to brush away or hide drawbacks that could heavily affect the product or the consumer.

“Tron: Ares” continues to prove that Jared Leto cannot catch a break. He often finds himself in one of two unfortunate situations… Situation one, he is in a movie that does not do well in terms of box office. Situation two, he is in a movie that does not do well in terms of the reviews. He is particularly doing a lot of damage in geek culture. In the past decade, he’s received an off-screen death in the DCEU, bad reviews for his movie in Sony’s Marvel universe, low box office returns on “Blade Runner 2049,” and now, it looks like another science fiction franchise has been met with the curse of Jared Leto. Do not interpret this as me hating on Jared Leto. He is a phenomenal actor and can give a solid performance when cast in the right role. In fact, he is great as Ares. He kind of reminded of a Sheldon Cooper-type. There are one or two scenes from this film where I internally replaced Leto’s face with that of Jim Parsons. To be clear, and this is nothing against Jim Parsons, I am glad they cast Jared Leto instead. It’s best for all parties involved. After Parsons finished “The Big Bang Theory,” I would imagine the last person he’d want to play is a Sheldon Cooper-wannabe.

Whether you see this movie in 2D or 3D is your call. I will defend either choice, but as someone who traditionally does not care for 3D as much as I did when I was 13, 14 years old, I will admit the 3D upcharge for this film is completely justified. Between select sequences where the entire screen is covered in digital effects, to some pretty cool action scenes, this movie makes the extra cost for the glasses worthwhile.

Photo by Disney/DISNEY – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

In the end “Tron: Ares” is far and away my least favorite “Tron” installment yet. As far as big budget films go, it is, thankfully, not as insufferable as “A Minecraft Movie.” Though that comparison may not be fair because I had no previous attachment to the “Minecraft” property before going to see the film, whereas with “Tron” I did. Despite the film’s flaws, the attachment did help when it came to the film’s fan service, which was sometimes borderline forced, but at others, it completely flowed. “Tron: Ares” often looks great and sounds great. I just wish it had a screenplay that was just as great. I am going to give “Tron: Ares” a 4/10.

“Tron: Ares” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Bone Lake!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “A House of Dynamite,” “The Smashing Machine,” “Shelby Oaks,” “Frankenstein,” and “Good Fortune.” 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 “Tron: Ares?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Tron” movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Bad Guys 2 (2025): DreamWorks Delivers a More Entertaining Caper Than the 2022 Original

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Bad Guys 2” is directed by Pierre Perifel and JP Sans, and stars Sam Rockwell (Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, The Way Way Back), Marc Maron (Maron, GLOW), Awkwafina (Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, Renfield), Craig Robinson (Ghosted, The Office), Anthony Ramos (Transformers: Rise of the Beasts, In the Heights), Zazie Beatz (Deadpool 2, Atlanta), Danielle Brooks (The Color Purple, Orange is the New Black), Natasha Lyonne (American Pie, Orange is the New Black), Maria Bakalova (The Apprentice, Borat Subsequent Moviefilm), Alex Borstein (Family Guy, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel), Richard Ayoade (The Watch, The IT Crowd), and Lilly Singh (A Little Late with Lilly Singh, Canada’s Got Talent). Struggling with acceptance from the general public, the Bad Guys, who have since turned “good,” are recruited for a job by an all-girl squad of criminals.

Kind of like Illumination, it is somewhat unusual for a DreamWorks animated property to not end up getting a sequel at some point. It was perhaps inevitable this would happen with “The Bad Guys.” The first film was well received by critics and was a hit with families. It is also based on a popular series of books. Naturally, it makes sense to create a “Bad Guys” sequel. As for my thoughts on the original film, I thought it was surprisingly fun, but also a bit disposable. There is also a problem I have with the film that, spoiler alert, I also have with this sequel. More on that later.

If you like “The Bad Guys,” chances are you will like “The Bad Guys 2.” I have my problems with “The Bad Guys” but I enjoyed it just enough to the point where I could say I had an okay time. “The Bad Guys 2” maintains everything that works from the original, and delivers it in a new, fresh package that I personally found to be more entertaining.

A lot of the original cast returns for this second outing. Of course you have the film’s big name stars including Sam Rockwell, Awkwafina, and Marc Maron coming back as some of the core characters. Like the original, they unleash tremendous charisma in each of their roles. I appreciated this sequel’s continuation of having Rockwell’s Mr. Wolf (top right) break the fourth wall. It adds a welcoming touch and sucks you into this film’s world.

The film even welcomes back my favorite character from the first outing, Misty Luggins (center), once again voiced by Alex Borstein. Between the two films, she has been promoted from Chief to Commissioner, which ends up becoming one of the script’s many gags. The gag is a simple one… Mr. Wolf repeatedly messes up Luggins’ position. As far as gags go, one could call this lazy, and I would not blame anybody for doing that, but it is saved by how the voice actors, most notably Borstein, deliver their lines. You could feel the ire coming out of Luggins with each misinterpretation.

I like my characters to have depth, but sometimes the simplest character can work if done right. Luggins is one example of this. Because in each scene, much like the previous installment, I got a sense of the character’s passion. Whether it is represented through something as simple as being acknowledged correctly, or as complicated as capturing the Bad Guys once and for all. Luggins feels like DreamWorks’ version of Wile E. Coyote. Between what we saw of her in these two films so far, part of me wishes she could have her own spinoff. Maybe we could see her trying to catch the Bad Guys time and time and time again, and failing. Or maybe a life in a day film showcasing some crazy story or case she has encountered. I think it would also be a great way to showcase Alex Borstein’s chops. She is fantastic in the role.

© DreamWorks Animation LLC. All Rights Reserved.

This is an animated film, so some suspension of disbelief is inevitable. But when the film gets to the climax, I felt the same way that I did during the climax of “Sisu.” The film spends a lot of time getting you immersed into this crazy, zany world, but things that happen on screen get dumber and less realistic by its conclusion. There is a whole concept involving gold that on the surface, sounds intriguing, but the resolution left me with a question regarding how this was handled according to the public eye.

Speaking of suspension of disbelief, much like the original film, I am left wondering why there are not more non-human characters in this world. If “The Bad Guys” were a video game, the only NPCs would be humans. No one else. There are plenty of non-human characters in the forefront, but not so much in the background. Why is this? If you look at a film like “Zootopia,” it has such a diverse group of creatures making up its universe. This film’s universe kind of feels less creative and lazy by comparison. This is not to say the film itself is lazily done. The animation style is stunning and unique. The script is sometimes clever, even if it does get a little too over the top.

© DreamWorks Animation LLC. All Rights Reserved.

When it comes to the DreamWorks Animation library, this is not the most memorable film of the bunch. But it is undoubtedly entertaining. One reason why I would love to go back to it one day is for the action scenes. The film has a couple of creative sequences that feel like they are straight out of a graphic novel. The scenes are flashy and full of life. There is one sequence that takes place in a wrestling ring that is a feast for the eyes.

Although this film is more than just style. As someone who experienced a little trouble finding work once graduating college, there are some scenes that I related to as it properly highlights the competition that comes with the job market. Although in the case of this film’s core group, it is much harder, because they are known for committing crimes, and therefore have a bad reputation.

Heck, they’re literally called the BAD guys! I wonder if Agent Burns from “Bumblebee” would have anything to say about this group.

Sure, the ensemble may have turned good, but their past does not appear to have gone over the general public’s head. Overall, the movie is a good lesson for younger audiences, reminding them to maintain a positive image, because one wrong move could change everything.

To my surprise, at the end of “The Bad Guys 2,” one of the first thoughts that crossed my mind is that I want to see another one. These characters are fascinating and seem to play off each other quite well. I would not mind hanging out with them one more time.

By the way, once the film gets to the credits, do not leave your chair, because there is a mid-credits scene that you might want to stick around for.

In the end, “The Bad Guys 2” is funny, brilliantly animated, and wonderfully paced. It is an all killer, no filler good time. “The Bad Guys 2” maintains many positives from the original and even improves upon some of them. Granted, it also contains some of the negatives. I still cannot get over the fact that there are not more non-human characters in a world like this one. Is that just a me thing? Is this not bothering anyone else? In all seriousness, I think families will have a blast with this film. It is filled with mile a minute humor and my theater, myself included, was laughing quite a bit. I am going to give “The Bad Guys 2” a 7/10.

Before I conclude this review, I would like to point something out in the film’s end credits. Just before the credits conclude, there is a short text that reads “This work may not be used to train AI.” I have no idea if that is a Universal Pictures policy, a DreamWorks policy, or if this was at the request of the director or a producer, but I fully endorse this. I understand that “the future is now,” but as an artist, I would prefer to see more work done strictly by people. We cannot have human stories without a human touch. Anything to have more human stories out there is always a good thing.

“The Bad Guys 2” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Courtesy of Paramount Pictures – © Paramount Pictures

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for another animated family film, “Smurfs.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “Together,” “Oh, Hi,” “Weapons,” “Freakier Friday,” and “Nobody 2.” 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 Bad Guys 2?” What did you think about it? Or, which installment of “The Bad Guys” do you prefer? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!