Biography

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

Posted on by Jack Drees

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted on by Jack Drees

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Song Sung Blue (2025): Pack Up the Babies and Grab the Old Ladies, and Everyone Else For That Matter

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Song Sung Blue” is directed by Craig Brewer (Dolemite Is My Name, Coming 2 America) and stars Hugh Jackman (X-Men, Real Steel), Kate Hudson (You, Me, and Dupree, Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery), Michael Imperioli (The Sopranos, Oh Canada), Ella Anderson (The Glass Castle, Henry Danger), Mustafa Shakir (Brawl in Cell Block 99, Love Hurts), Fisher Stevens (Succession, Key West), and Jim Belushi (According to Jim, Saturday Night Live). Inspired by true events as well as a documentary of the same name, this film is about Lightning and Thunder, a husband and wife Neil Diamond tribute act. The story explores the couple’s relationship and adventures in performing.

Courtesy of Focus Features. ©  – © 2025 Focus Features, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

I was first alerted to “Song Sung Blue” by my mom, back when she told me she wanted to see what she referred to as “the Neil Diamond movie.” Color me shocked and surprised, I figured if there were a Neil Diamond movie, I would have known about it. Not that I am huge Neil Diamond fan or anything, but I figured I would have seen a trailer or even read an article about it through Variety or some other outlet. While I was not surprised to find out there was no Neil Diamond biopic coming soon, I was surprised, however, to see that we were getting the movie that we would come to know as “Song Sung Blue.” I thought the concept for this was somewhat refreshing.

We live in a world where we frequently get some variation of a musician biopic like “Bohemian Rhapsody” or “Elvis” or “Back to Black.” While it is fun to see how select big name musicians rose to fame, there was a novelty to the concept of “Song Sung Blue,” because it is not about Neil Diamond and rather two people paying tribute to him. On the surface, this film felt like a small wonder. Granted, it also has two big name leads, so there is that. Then came my screening of “Jay Kelly,” where I saw the trailer for the first time. While I did not think the movie would reinvent the wheel, the trailer made the movie come off like it would be loads of fun. I was planning to see it when it came out on Christmas, but my aspirations did not quite work out, hence the late review. That said, there is a saying that good things come to those who wait. Not to say that I had low expectations for “Song Sung Blue,” but it is still amazingly better than I thought it would be. This film is a rollercoaster in every sense of the word. I was fully engaged for its two-plus hour runtime and it is simply one of the best experiences I had watching a film revolving around music.

When it comes to music-based films, “Song Sung Blue” may not go down in history for being as masterful as “Whiplash,” but its script allows for loads of fun while also allowing time to put the audience’s emotions through the ringer. I went to see this film at an 11:15 am screening, where I was more than likely the only person there under 30. That said, this movie knows no age. I mean… Who doesn’t like Neil Diamond? Or, even if you do not like Neil Diamond, I would even argue this movie is ball, because it revolves around two completely likable, sometimes quirky characters. After all, name me an artist who is not quirky.

I am not going to pretend all of the dialogue is Oscar-winning, granted, a lot of it is really good, but there is a cheesy line here and there. If anything, the script contains dialogue that made me believe that these characters themselves were real. It is dialogue that made me think that this is exactly how these characters would talk. Maybe they differ slightly from their real life counterparts, but even if they did, they allowed me to believe that they could exist. The sometimes exaggerated dialogue is part of these characters’ charm. It is part of who they are as storytellers, artists who are trying to give joy to those around them. It reminds me of myself as an artist sometimes.

© 2025 Focus Features, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

The screenplay, by itself, is a compelling idea. Although its execution is just as good, if not better. One thing that separates this film from those aforementioned musician biopics is that if you look at those films, we see certain artists showcase their talent and find great success and riches out of it. “Song Sung Blue” focuses on two people who are simply trying to get by. They do not have loads of money. They do not have a nice house. Seeing their constant struggles to make ends meet only made both of these people more relatable and likable. Sure, they were chasing after fame and fortune, but they came off as people who found joy in each little moment they had, even if they were not Hollywood hotshots.

While I really enjoyed this film, I also realize some creative liberties were taken for the sake of telling a particular narrative. I had not seen the documentary prior to checking this movie out, nor did I know much about this couple in advance. That said, I do not have that much of a problem with this movie and the way it tells its story. For the record, given how much I enjoyed the movie and the story behind it, I ended up checking out the documentary of the same name the day after I saw the feature film. First off, I fully endorse the documentary. Check it out if you get a chance. The film does a good job at presenting a fascinating slice of the main couple’s lives. Second, having watched both the feature film and documentary, I recognize that the feature film takes some creative liberties. For example, the documentary features a story about its subjects’ relationship to smoking. “Song Sung Blue” is PG-13, therefore it should not be a huge surprise that smoking does not play as significant of a part in the film’s story. Alcoholism does play a notable role in Mike’s journey, however, and I thought the film does a good job with that particular aspect. The film sees Mike attending AA meetings as well as celebrating “sober birthdays,” or anniversaries celebrating the end of his alcohol consumption.

“Song Sung Blue” may have my favorite concert scene in film since “Belle.” I will not spoil the movie, partially because you should see it, but not only is the scene itself immersive when it comes to the sound mixing that perfectly blends the music and the audience reactions together, but there is so much going on in this scene in terms of conflict. Something happens to Mike, also known as Lightning, prior to the concert and it makes what should be an incredibly fun scene, also arguably the scariest thing ever. I was so nervous as to what was about to go down.

With this film being about lesser known artists, it does feel somewhat ironic that Hugh Jackman and Kate Hudson were cast to play their characters. That said, I have no problem with it. Both actors by themselves are talented. As for their work in this film, both are on their A-game, and their chemistry as a couple is terrific. Kate Hudson in particular gives my favorite performance in the movie, because her character, Claire, also known as Thunder, is going through so much more than her artistic struggles. The film gives Hudson some compelling material to work with around the halfway point based on a significant injury. I am not saying any other actor would have been incapable of playing these characters, but these two stars give some of the best possible performances that a story like this could allow. Both Jackman and Hudson are equally adorable and even make the film’s cheesier moments feel earned.

Depending on which part of the movie we are talking about, watching “Song Sung Blue” is like watching a really good “Spider-Man” movie. In addition to the story being a whole lot of fun, the musicians it chooses to center around are some of the most relatable that I can recall seeing in a film. The script sometimes feels goofy, but in a charming way. In fact, the movie starts with Mike, showing off his jacket with a lightning bolt on the back. When he puts that jacket on, he sort of feels like a superhero. In fact, doesn’t the name Lightning and Thunder sound like a heroic duo? Also, like some of my favorite “Spider-Man” movies, like “Spider-Man 2” or “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” the film is perfectly paced and is capable of delivering on the emotions. When I look back at “Song Sung Blue,” I will remember it for being one of the most gleeful cinematic experiences I had in 2025. But I am not going to pretend that the movie is a happy watch from beginning to end. Towards the film’s final moments, there was some noticeable sniffling in the audience. If you cry easily, make sure you have tissues. You’ll thank me later.

© Focus Features

In the end, “Song Sung Blue” is a film that has surprised me with each passing moment. When I first heard about the concept, I thought, “Okay…” When I saw who was in the movie, I dug it a bit more. Then I saw the trailer, and I was onboard, even if it looked a little cheesy and cliché. Then I saw the movie, and while I was not wrong about parts of the film feeling cheesy and cliché, I found myself wishing I had been able to check it out sooner. This is one of my favorite films of 2025, and I did not think I would come to that conclusion a month ago. All of the characters are likable, it delivers a rollercoaster of emotions and vibes, and I contend that even if you are not that big of a Neil Diamond fan, I still think you might be able to appreciate this film as a story. The highest highs of the film make for some smile-inducing moments to remember while the lowest lows are haunting as can be. “Song Sung Blue” is in fact, “so good, so good, so good,” and I am going to give it a 8/10.

Also, one last note, this film opened the same day as “Marty Supreme,” which is also a really good film. While the movies vary in terms of tone, style, execution, and the state of their protagonists, they are both really solid flicks about dreamers. If you want a really good double feature, check if your theater is playing both of these movies right now. If they are, take advantage of the opportunity and check out both in the same day. Both flicks are great in their own way.

“Song Sung Blue” is now playing in theaters and is also available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Mercy” and “Send Help.” Stay tuned!

In the spirit of dreams, I want to thank 10 people for making my dream come true, and those are my guests in the upcoming series Celebrity Movie Requests! I just dropped a teaser trailer showcasing hints about each special guest. Their actual names will be revealed sometime soon. Be on the lookout. The link for the video is above, which I posted on YouTube. Be sure to give it a like and subscribe to my channel so you can know more about the series and watch it when it drops!

And on Sunday, January 25th, be on the lookout for the nominations of the 8th Annual Jack Awards. The show that celebrates the best of 2025 in film! It is yet another edition of arguably the most over the top awards ceremony in movie blogging history. If you want to see all of 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 “Song Sung Blue?” What did you think about it? Did you know about Lightning and Thunder before this movie came out? If so, tell me what you think about them, and if you got to see them perform, what was that experience like? Also, have you seen the documentary “Song Sung Blue?” If not, go check it out. It is free on YouTube. Tell them in the comments section that Jack Drees sent you! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

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

Posted on by Jack Drees

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Avatar: Fire and Ash!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, stay tuned for my thoughts on “Is This Thing On?” and “Marty Supreme.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Hamnet?” What did you think about it? Or, have you ever read the “Hamnet” book? What did you think about that? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

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

Posted on by Jack Drees

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

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

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

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

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

Courtesy of A24 – © A24

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Lost Bus (2025): Matthew McConaughey Gets Into Gear in This Engaging Disaster Movie

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Lost Bus” is directed by Paul Greengrass (News of the World, The Bourne Supremacy) and stars Matthew McConaughey (Interstellar, Sing), America Ferrera (Barbie, How to Train Your Dragon), Yul Vazquez (Midnight, Texas, Russian Doll), Ashlie Atkinson (The Gilded Age, Mr. Robot), and Kate Wharton (Matty Paz Is a Noob, The Bold and the Beautiful). Inspired by Lizzie Johnson’s book “Paradise: One Town’s Struggle to Survive an American Wildfire,” this film tells the true story of school bus driver Kevin McKay, whose normal day on the job suddenly turns into an all out mission of rescue and survival when he comes face to face with the deadliest fire in California history.

In my daily life, I use Windows computers and an Android phone. Nevertheless, I am not too much of a scaredy cat to admit that Apple has made its presence known in the film industry. It is not a perfect presence, but I will note that they have a few fine feathers in their cap between their Academy Award Best Picture winner “CODA” as well as this summer’s smash hit “F1: The Movie.” The studio has made top talent a priority, having released projects made by directors like Joseph Kosinski, Martin Scorsese, and Ridley Scott. The end results of these projects had varying degrees of success, but it does not change the fact that these are typically trustworthy names. Another name on that list is “The Bourne Supremacy” director Paul Greengrass.

While I do not hold Paul Greengrass amongst my favorite filmmakers of all time, I will not deny his ability to make a great movie. In fact, one film I remember fondly reviewing was the western “News of the World,” a road film featuring an unlikely duo. I thought the story was captivating and has arguably become more relevant with time.

Finding out about Paul Greengrass’ role behind the camera got me in the door. Love it or hate it, I will admit, his shakycam techniques work here. There are several kinetic shots around the second half that added to the tension and atmosphere of what is ultimately a well done disaster film. While Greengrass may be behind the camera, those in front of it kept me engaged too, most especially stars Matthew McConaughey and America Ferrera.

There are some films that have star power and fail to stand out for any reason other than that. “The Lost Bus” is not one of them, because the film is a scary, exciting ride. I watched this film on the first day of October, and despite “The Lost Bus” not being a horror movie, it honestly set the tone for the month. Few things are scarier than seeing children enter imminent doom, and this film is not short on such nightmare fuel. “The Lost Bus” is based on true events, and while there are parts that definitely feel blown up for the sake of theatricality, the film works so well because of how intense it ended up being. “The Lost Bus” is basically this year’s “Deepwater Horizon.” It is a film revolving around an everyday white dude with black hair and a distinctive flair, who must go beyond the call of duty to save himself and those around him, even as the worst case scenario of a disaster comes to fruition. I do not think the film is as good as “Deepwater Horizon.” “The Lost Bus,” in a sense, takes some time to get going. I would argue that maybe the second half of the film is better than the first. That said, once it gets to said second half, it goes full throttle and never stops.

Matthew McConaughey’s character, Kevin McCay, is beautifully fleshed out, as he should be. We know a lot about him, his family, and the personal problems of his life and career. We see him having trouble maintaining relationships with loved ones, as well as a sense of work-life balance. He comes off as a genuinely likable guy, but one who is noticeably flawed. I also liked getting to know some of McCay’s family members. They all seemed to have lifelike chemistry, which makes sense because some of McConaughey’s real life family, including his son Levi and his mother Kay, have major roles in the film.

The film industry is no stranger to nepotism. It is a concept that has its ups and downs, but if the project works, I do not tend to care as much. That said, I do not have as much of a problem with McConaughey’s son and mother being cast because they perfectly play their roles. While their screentime is not as long as say America Ferrera, who does a great job playing a school teacher trying to make it through the fire, I thought both Levi and Kay McConaughey did a great job. If they were cast in another film down the line, I would be interested in seeing them again.

Unfortunately, with this being an Apple movie, this did not get the most proper of theatrical releases. I was lucky to catch this film while it was playing at my local Showcase Cinema, and I am glad I did not miss out because this film is, to my surprise, super effective with its camerawork and incredibly immersive. I am not the biggest fan of shakycam, but as I hinted previously, it works for this story. I can see some people watching this movie and maybe not being a fan of the way it was shot, but for me, I thought the rapid camera movement put me in the middle of several scenes. It gave me the illusion that there was fire spreading around me rather than watching a group of people simply trying to survive a fire themselves. This film is shot by Pål Ulvik Rokseth, a name I did not know that well, but I was impressed to find out he also filmed a short and chilling IMAX spot that I occasionally caught inside their theaters. I am glad to see he is getting more work.

In certain ways, “The Long Bus” is kind of like “The Long Walk.” Both films present the most basic premise where our characters are in seemingly never-ending danger and they must survive to the end. Only in the case of “The Lost Bus,” this is more of a man vs. nature tale rather than one of man vs. man. Is this film as good as “The Long Walk?” Not really. But that is also a bit of an unfair comparison because I can think of very few films released this year that are. If you want to see a compelling narrative that shows people doing everything they can to protect themselves, protect others, all while dealing with something as dangerous as a wildfire, then “The Lost Bus” may be your jam. The fire itself may be the main event of the film, but the story is surprisingly not short on characterization. Said characterization is probably enhanced by the fact that this film is based on a true story..

In the end, “The Lost Bus” is an engaging tale of survival. Matthew McConaughey and America Ferrera make for an excellent duo. From a visual perspective, this movie spares no expensive between the excellent shaky camerawork and the eye-popping fire effects. There are some liberties taken with this story. One teacher attached to the original tale declined to be involved with this film. However, this tale was beautifully adapted. It is one of those stories that shows the best of humanity. It shows the good people are willing to do in the worst of times. This movie is two hours and nine minutes. Frankly, it feels quite a bit shorter than that. It flies by. Especially in the second half. If you have Apple TV and you have a couple hours to kill, this is a good time. I am going to give “The Lost Bus” a 7/10.

“The Lost Bus” is now playing in select theaters and is available on Apple TV for all subscribers.

Photo Courtesy Warner Bros. Pictures – © Warner Bros. Pictures

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “One Battle After Another.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You,” “Tron: Ares,” “Bone Lake,” “A House of Dynamite,” “The Smashing Machine,” and “Shelby Oaks.” If you want to see this review and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Lost Bus?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a film you enjoyed recently that is based on a true story? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

I’m Still Here (2024): Fernanda Torres Carries This Moving Drama

Posted on by Jack Drees

“I’m Still Here” is directed by Walter Salles (Central Station, The Motorcycle Diaries) and stars Fernanda Torres (Love Me Forever or Never, The House of Sand), Selton Mello (A Dog’s Will, Lisbela and the Prisoner), and Fernanda Montenegro (Sweet Mother, Central Station). This film is based on a memoir of the same name and is about a mother who deals with the forced disappearance of her husband, former politician Rubens Paiva, who opposed Brazil’s military dictatorship.

In an effort to catch all of this year’s Best Picture nominees before the Oscars, I had to find a way to check “I’m Still Here” off my list. One key difference when it comes to this nominee in particular compared to say “Anora” or “Wicked” or “Dune: Part Two” is that I went into this film knowing nothing about it. All that I really knew was that it was a Brazilian movie, the characters speak Portuguese, and it was getting a lot of critical acclaim. I went in completely blind, having barely come across as much as a poster. Safe to say, I did not know what to expect.

Thankfully, I came out of this movie feeling satisfied.

“I’m Still Here” is not an easy watch. Some of my audience might think I say such a thing because this is a film not made in the United States or a film where English is not the primary language used in the dialogue.. That is not my point. Though I can see why those two things could turn some people off upon a first impression. Instead, this film deals with a serious subject matter that I imagine would be tough for some viewers. The film is dramatic, yet grounded at the same time. It is perfectly balanced in its attempt to be both an inviting slice of life story and an engaging political thriller. The film is like life itself. It has its happy moments. It has its sad moments. And in the long run, it is worth seeking out.

One of my favorite things about this film is how it handles the importance of family, especially when you consider the protagonist’s point of view, as well as the many obstacles she must face just to be with them, or do what is best for them. We see her trying to protect them under their respective political landscape, as well as do anything and everything she can to uncover her husband’s whereabouts. The film shows what it means to stay connected even in the darkest of times.

The family itself is well written and decently cast. There is not a single person on the lineup I found to be out of place, and I thought everyone’s personality shone through. Honestly, the entire cast of the film serves their purpose and does a good job. I cannot name a bad apple on the tree. But Fernanda Torres is on another level with her performance here.

There is a reason why Fernanda Torres was nominated for an Academy Award. She is the film’s soul and I cannot see anyone else playing her. Every moment, every line, every facial expression, she sold me. Torres is commanding in every scene. The movie gives her a lot to do and she handles all of her material very well. I have been doing some research online to see what everyone is saying about this film, and just about every other person I am coming across is losing their mind over Torres. I may not be adding anything new to the conversation that has not already been said, but she is easily the best part of the movie.

This film is based on true events. On that note, the story features real life politician Rubens Paiva (left). I do not know a ton about the real events that inspired this film, but I did some research on Paiva following the film and I have to say kudos to whoever cast Selton Mello, because he looks the part. Granted, acting ability is arguably more important, and thankfully, he has that in spades.

One of the reasons why I have come to realize “I’m Still Here” has some of the best collective acting in 2024 cinema is likely because of the way the film was shot. If you know how movie productions tend to work, not every project is shot in chronological order. “I’m Still Here” is an exception to the rule. I think this move paid off, because it allowed the talent to experience the sense of immersion in their story that viewers like I did while watching it unfold.

On that note, “I’m Still Here” is quite an immersive movie. “I’m Still Here” has more in common with a slice of life tale than a large scale epic, but the movie sometimes feels as large as life itself. Whether I was at a family gathering, the beach, or the inside of a home, I felt like I was a part of this film’s world. Such a sentiment is also true for a prison, which does not emit the most pleasant feeling, but every scene in this film, like it or not, had a sense of verisimilitude. The film takes time to showcase the beauty of life, but also keeps things real by reminding people of the extreme obstacles our characters constantly encounter.

At times, this movie is the definition of the idea that life goes on. An integral part of your life may cease to exist, but as long as you are still around, it is up to you to decide how to navigate things going forward. You could remember your past, run from it, choose to reinvent yourself. Sometimes that integral part may leave you in a literal sense, but deep down, it will always be with you.

The movie ends on a satisfying note. The final scene is exquisitely acted and well directed. It also goes to show the power of silence. Filmmaking is a visual medium, and any opportunity that can be taken to let the visuals do the talking allows for great scenes like this one. I will leave the details undisclosed for now and let you see the proper craftsmanship for yourself.

In the end, “I’m Still Here” was kind of a last minute purchase for me. I probably would not have seen this film if it were not for the word of mouth it racked up during this awards season. And I am happy to have added to it. This film is full of great performances, gripping scenes, and solid chemistry amongst its cast. Of course, Fernanda Torres is the standout, but the supporting actors also add quite a bit to the final product. It is not an easy watch, but I think if you can handle the material, this movie could be worth your time. I am going to give “I’m Still Here” a 7/10.

“I’m Still Here” is now playing in theaters and is available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! I have reviews on the way for “Riff Raff,” “Nickel Boys,” “Mickey 17,” and “Locked.” Stay tuned!

And coming on March 30th, look forward to the 7th Annual Jack Awards! The most important awards show in the history of movie blogs! Why? Because I said so! This is a reminder that you have the power to vote for this year’s Best Picture! You can do so by clicking this link and choosing one of the ten nominees. And click this link if you want to know what films are nominated for this year’s ceremony! Unfortunately, “I’m Still Here” was not nominated for any awards this year, but if I were to add a sixth candidate for Best Actress, Fernanda Torres would probably earn that spot. It was a very close call. But rules are rules. I did see this movie before announcing the nominations last week, but Torres’ honestly goes to show how great acting has been across the board for several performers over the past year. If you want to see this upcoming show 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 “I’m Still Here?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the saddest film you saw in the past year? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Maria (2024): Pablo Larraín Completes His Unofficial Prominent 20th Century Woman Trilogy

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Maria” is directed by Pablo Larraín (Jackie, Spencer) and stars Angelina Jolie (Eternals, Kung Fu Panda), Pierfrancesco Favino (Night at the Museum, Angels & Demons), Alba Rohrwacher (The Wonders, Hungry Hearts), Haluk Bilginer (EastEnders, Halloween), and Kodi Smit-McPhee (Memoir of a Snail, X-Men: Apocalypse). This film is about opera singer Maria Callas, and is most prominently set during the week leading up to her death.

Courtesy of Netflix – © 2024 Netflix, Inc.

When it comes to film directors, if you were to ask me if I knew who Pablo Larraín was before this review, chances are I would say no. Although upon research after seeing this movie, it turns out, I have experienced his previous filmography. For the record, this is my first film of his I am reviewing. More than a year ago I watched “Jackie,” which I thought had stunning production design, killer camerawork, costuming, and a great lead performance by Natalie Portman. I ended up enjoying the film overall. Is it a masterpiece? No. But it is a compelling watch that I recommend checking out if the chance comes by. It also turns out that “Maria” is part of an unofficial trilogy. This is Pablo Larraín’s third film regarding notable 20th century women. 2016’s “Jackie” was the first, followed by 2021’s “Spencer,” which for the record, I did not see, and now “Maria.”

Having seen both “Maria” and “Jackie,” I can confirm that they contain similar positives. Both feature talented leads who give really good performances. The dialogue is particularly well executed and properly placed. There is not a line in the film that comes to mind that feels like filler. The sets and locations in both films feel noticeably extravagant. If I have one thing to say, I personally prefer the overall look to “Jackie” to “Maria.” The color choices between the on-set items feel more rugged and have more character, whereas I look at “Maria” and somehow the frames continuously emit a greater sense of perfection. It is almost to the point where some of the set design feels oddly artificial. But if I am going to remember one of these films within the next year, I think “Jackie” is the one. I recall it having more of an impact on me by the end than this film did. I am not going to pretend I remember that movie through and through, but whereas “Jackie” drew me in through its flair, “Maria” feels like a borderline snoozefest at times.

Courtesy of Netflix – © 2024 Netflix, Inc.

Despite what I said about the look though, there is no doubt that “Maria” at least provides a sense of immersion. Between the detailed costumes, excessive use of wallpaper, and extravagant sets, the film is easy on the eye, even if some of it looks somewhat unreal.

There is a good movie somewhere in “Maria,” but it is not doing the best job at unveiling itself. “Maria” feels less like a story and more like a series of events that are loosely connected together. It all amounts to a bit of a bore. As I write this review, I am having trouble naming what I found to be the best parts of the film. The events in this film are all wound properly and maintain a sense of consistency, but I am not going to pretend I was moved or compelled by all of them.

Courtesy of Netflix – © 2024 Netflix, Inc.

The one thing that is saving these moments are the performances. Angelina Jolie, again, does a good job with the lead role, though I am disappointed to know that a lot of her singing scenes were lip-synced. Her most prominent moments are simply driven through spoken dialogue. That is weird to say because this film has a pace to it where the dialogue is used rather sparingly. Interesting enough, this film is about an opera singer, and I would say that there is a bit less singing in this film than I probably expected going in. If you are looking for singing in this film, it exists. But if you take into consideration what this film is actually about, a woman who is essentially losing the ability to sing, then it would not be a surprise to realize that this film is not a a marathon of vocals.

I also liked a lot of the supporting performances. Haluk Bilginer does a good job as Callas’ partner, Aristotle Onassis. Pierfrancesco Favino is a standout as Callas’ servant, Ferruccio. That character plays a major part in the film despite the greatest highlight of his performance likely extends to him just being in the room.

Courtesy of Netflix – © 2024 Netflix, Inc.

This film is not a typical biopic as much as it is a short series of events with tons of flashbacks. The film does have some elements one might expect out of a biopic. A summary of a star’s success, an emphasis on the same star’s downward spiral, and a highlight into the star’s substance abuse. We see Callas taking drugs during the film and how it affects her down the road. What separates this biopic is not only its contained feel, as it primarily treks itself through a specific time period, but also a noticeable use of flashbacks. If you are not into non-linear stories, this film may not be for you. That said, the way this film is told, I would argue it would be worse if it were linear. That kind of says something though because the film as is failed to impress me.

If I have any other notable highlights I have not gone over yet, there is one scene that stuck with me because of how much it makes me think about our ongoing celebrity culture. There is one scene where Maria is in public and someone comes up to her that he was going to her show, but she never showed up. At this point, Maria firmly tells him she was sick. Looking back, maybe she was a bit harsh in her response to this individual. But I think it also taps into something I think we often forget about as a society. We expect so much from celebrities to the point where we forget that they are human beings. Some debate as to whether stars are just like us. But if there is a way they are like us, it is through the idea that stars are not perfect.

There is also a little Easter Egg in this film for those paying attention. As mentioned in the beginning, this film is from the same director who did “Jackie,” which is about Jackie Kennedy. Turns out this film has a rather noticeable Kennedy connection. You will know it when you see it.

Courtesy of Netflix – © 2024 Netflix, Inc.

In the end, “Maria” is a film that I could see being a highlight in certain aspects during this awards season, but it is not perfect. It is a film that I am probably going to forget by next year. I expect that from a Netflix title to be frank, but for something like this, this feels shocking to say. Angelina Jolie definitely carries star power in the lead role, but it is not the best performance I have seen in a 2024 film. If you want something pretty, this film will do. But if you are looking for something memorable, look elsewhere. I am going to give “Maria” a 5/10.

“Maria” is now playing in select theaters and is available to stream on Netflix for all subscribers.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the brand new horror film, “The Damned!” Stay tuned! If you want to see this review and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Maria?” What did you think about it? Or, what are your thoughts on Maria Callas as an artist? Let me know down below! Scene before is your click to the flicks!

A Complete Unknown (2024): Timothée Chalamet Shows His Range One of His Most Complicated Roles Yet

Posted on by Jack Drees

“A Complete Unknown” is directed by James Mangold (Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, Logan) and stars Timothée Chalamet (Dune, Interstellar), Edward Norton (The Incredible Hulk, Fight Club), Elle Fanning (The Neon Demon, Maleficent), Monica Barbaro (FUBAR, Top Gun: Maverick), Boyd Holbrook (Narcos, The Sandman), Dan Fogler (The Goldbergs, The Walking Dead), Norbert Leo Butz (Bloodline, The Exorcist: Believer), and Scoot McNairy (Halt and Catch Fire, Nightbitch). This film is set in much of the 1960s and centers around a young Bob Dylan as he establishes several relationships and creates a series of songs.

Bob Dylan is to music what the “Star Trek” franchise has been over the years to television and movies. He has been relevant since the 1960s, produced a lot of material that has been well regarded, and has somehow managed to maintain even the slightest hint of relevancy up until now. Much like the “Star Trek” franchise, I cannot say that I have the deepest appreciation for Bob Dylan. It is not that I hate Bob Dylan, or “Star Trek” for that matter, it is just that I never find myself circling around to Dylan’s music despite having many options for the taking.

You may remember there was an Amy Winehouse biopic in the middle of 2024 called “Back to Black,” which I gave a positive review. I do not think it was particularly striking or memorable, but I ended up leaning positive on it. It has its moments of fun and does a good job at capturing the darker side of Winehouse’s life. I also said that even though the movie presents the artist’s songs well, I would not claim to be an Amy Winehouse fan. I was not one before the movie. I am still not one after the movie. The same is true with Bob Dylan. I still appreciate his music, but I am pretty much in the same position as I was going into a “A Complete Unknown.” I am a Bob Dylan appreciator. Not a Bob Dylan fanatic. In regards to my appreciation, it is perhaps greater for him now than it was before, but still. I also think “A Complete Unknown” does a great job showing Dylan’s impact on the music industry by the time the movie’s over.

Is the film entirely accurate? No, it is not. If you know your Bob Dylan lore, you would know that he had a girlfriend in the 1960s by the name of Suze Rotolo. That is not the case in this film as Dylan himself requested her name would be changed. Therefore, we see Elle Fanning play a character by the name of Sylvie Rotolo (left). Regardless of accuracy, Fanning does a good job with the role. She has spot on chemistry with Chalamet’s Dylan. Speaking of chemistry, Chalamet also has quite a spark with another love interest in this film, Joan Baez, played by Monica Barbaro.

Overall, it is easy to say that the acting in “A Complete Unknown” is a standout element. This extends to more than just love interests. Edward Norton does a great job playing Pete Seeger. Dan Fogler plays one of my favorite characters in the film, Dylan’s manager, Albert Grossman. I thought of the entire cast, he was the one that delivered the most laughs. He had plenty of good material in the script to keep him busy. Boyd Holbrook oozes with charisma as Johnny Cash.

But of course, the real star of the show is Timothée Chalamet as Bob Dylan. Chalamet has been killing it for the past year or so. In 2023, he starred in “Wonka” as the title character. While I did not love the film, he does a phenomenal job with the role. I criticized “Wonka” for having unmemorable music sequences, but it does not mean Chalamet did not do his best with them. He has proven himself to be a solid singer, and therefore it is no surprise that Chalamet ends up lending his own voice to Dylan’s songs. Not only that, but Chalamet also plays the guitar in this film. I love Chalamet’s overall commitment to the role and he looks like he is having fun with it. If I had one thing to say though, there are some scenes where Chalamet has a bit of an accent to his character that feels kind of played up. It is a little over the top. Not quite over the top enough to sound like something out of “Saturday Night Live,” but at times it was a little distracting.

As an artist, I always appreciate when a movie has something to say about art itself. “A Complete Unknown” does this very well. Not only does the film highlight a portion of Bob Dylan’s career, which by the way, given how much Dylan has done over the years, I think it is wise of the filmmakers to just corner the story into just a small chunk of his life. It is worth noting within this small chunk of Dylan’s life we get to know a bit about his influence on the music industry and his rise to becoming an icon. With these elements in mind, this presents Dylan with a problem. While he is known for his music, deep down, he would like to be more than the identity in which society has given him. He wants to try new things and experiment. This film builds to a point where we see such a monumental shift come to fruition. Bob Dylan has built a reputation as a storytelling folk artist with a calming vibe. But we find out later on that he wants to implement electric instruments into his repertoire. The extended scene where we see this play out is easily my favorite part of the film. Not only is this sequence entertaining and presents significantly more stakes than we have seen throughout the story’s prior points, but we see Chalamet successfully channel his character’s happiness and indifference in regard to what others think of him.

This movie is more than just the rise of a popular musician, but it is also the story of an artist who just wants to make art. This is a consistency in every scene. Dylan sometimes tends to put his art before the people in his life, whether he knows them personally or they just so happen to be fans. It is his greatest passion in life. The movie shows the balance of making art to impress people intertwined with the complication of making art for yourself. It showcases the hurdle of shattering audience expectations. When you watch a movie, a shocking twist is sometimes warranted and can often be done well. But when is the shift too significant? That is a question this movie tries to answer and I think the overall response has resulted in an entertaining and exciting climax to a solid flick.

In the end, “A Complete Unknown” is not my favorite film of the year, but it has a series of strong moments and performances. Additionally, it has great production design, good direction by James Mangold, and a cozy vibe. I walked out of this awards contender feeling similar to how I did walking out of an Oscar-winning film I watched in 2023, specifically “The Holdovers.” “A Complete Unknown” is a movie that emits a sense of coziness. The movie practically puts you in a warm blanket. Again, this movie did not transition me into becoming a Bob Dylan fan. I am not going to go on YouTube just to listen to his music on a regular basis. But the musical sequences where we see Dylan’s folk songs come to life are most definitely comforting. If this movie is playing near you, give it a shot. I am going to give “A Complete Unknown” a 7/10.

“A Complete Unknown” is now playing in theaters everywhere. tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! And that is the last of the movies I saw in theaters in 2024! Coming soon, I will be talking about my top 10 best and worst movies of the year. Like the past couple years, I will be starting with the worst. Stay tuned! If you want to see these countdowns and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “A Complete Unknown?” What did you think about it? Or, what are your thoughts on Bob Dylan as an artist? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Apprentice (2024): Sebastian Stan Shines as Controversial Businessman Donald Trump

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Apprentice” is directed by Ali Abbasi (Holy Spider, The Last of Us) and stars Sebastian Stan (Captain America: The First Avenger, The 355), Jeremy Strong (The Big Short, The Gentlemen), Maria Bakalova (Borat Subsequent Moviefilm, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3), and Martin Donovan (Insomnia, Tenet). This film follows a young Donald Trump in the 1970s and 80s and examines his career as a businessman.

I will be honest, I was extremely hesitant to watch and review this film. Part of it is because I do not typically want to dive into politics on Scene Before. Well, maybe except for this month with my Election Days reviews. By the way, go check out my thoughts on “The Campaign,” “W.“, and “On the Basis of Sex” if you want to see me talk about some slightly older films. I mean, they are not that old, they are from the 21st century. That said, I will remind everyone that it is November 2024, therefore it is the culmination of an election year in the United States. Marketing-wise, it would make sense to release a film of this nature around the latter half of the year. But as a viewer, I was also weary of checking it out because regardless of my political views, election season is already anxiety-inducing on its own. But of course, I thought this would be a good film to talk about given the time of year, really the time in society in general. For the record, I am going to do as best as I can to stray away from my personal views on Donald Trump as a politician.

That said, one thing I will note for people maybe looking to watch this movie, it is not about Trump’s political career. It instead contains itself to a time where he was more well known as a mogul, a New York personality. Also despite the title, this is not set in the 2000s or 2010s. I say this because, well, Trump hosted “The Apprentice” at the time. As slightly misleading as that title could come off, there is a reason why the movie has its namesake. For one thing, the film is about a younger Trump, and heavily explores the building blocks of his business, his love life, his family life. It sprinkles a lot into a two hour runtime but it is not a piece about Trump’s entire life. Since I was born in the late 1990s, I inevitably know Trump more as a politician as opposed to anything else. Having followed Trump through that realm in recent years, he has certain trademarks, words, and mannerisms that have become a part of his personality. Sometimes they are even used against him in a jokey manner. Sebastian Stan to my lack of surprise dives into some of these trademarks, and while the film is definitely somewhat grounded with its intimate camerawork, it also has a feel to it that is comparable to more comedic material in media.

To be real, Sebastian Stan is probably not going to win the Academy Award for his portrayal of Donald Trump, as much as some may be convinced “liberal Hollywood” will let him win out of spite of others. But I like his performance in “The Apprentice.” Like I said, some of Trump’s trademarks come up in the film, and I think Stan masters them without coming off as a cartoon. One thing I have noticed over the years about most of the Trump performances I have seen is that a lot of them come off as hyperbolic. But those performances traditionally tend to fall within a certain context. Maybe they’re on a variety show like “America’s Got Talent” or “Saturday Night Live.” They tend to work for what they are. But I was surprised to see Stan deliver on a much calmer interpretation of the well-known businessman. Regardless of how I feel about Trump as a person, seeing something like this is refreshing. Now having seen the performance in this movie, kind of like say Alec Baldwin’s portrayal in “Saturday Night Live,” I am sure that there is an audience that will look at this performance, perhaps even the screenplay behind it, and immediately find themselves turned off by it. To call this a pro-Trump film would be like calling “Deal or No Deal” a pro-banker game show. Am I surprised by this film’s leanings? Not really. But the fact is I found the film as a whole to be entertaining. It is well-paced, it is engaging, and I latched onto the characters.

What this film surprisingly reminds me of is the “Star Wars” movies. This could apply to a number of them, but perhaps the first that comes to mind is “Revenge of the Sith.” As I continued to watch the relationship between Trump and attorney Roy M. Cohn, their dynamic in this film showed similarities to that of Anakin Skywalker and Palpatine. In this case, Trump would be the Anakin and Cohn would be the Palpatine. After all, Cohn is a little older, a little wiser, and very much getting into Trump’s head throughout the film. The movie presents Cohn as a mentor figure to Trump, instilling him with all sorts of knowledge. Cohn even presents three rules to Trump: “always attack, never admit wrongdoing, and always claim victory.” This is a motto that the public has seen Trump live up to in recent years especially regarding his political career.

I also love the overall aesthetic of this film. It is practically a symbol of Trump as he builds himself. If this were set years down the road, maybe this movie would be presented as something that looks more professional, considering how he would have continued to establish and maintain his name. But this matches a story about a guy who is trying to live up to his family name while also assembling the building blocks behind a legacy of his own. Only he has not yet been able to make that happen. Trump may be one of the most prominent men in the world today, but like with anyone else, getting to that position takes time.

The film is sometimes shot and presented in such a claustrophobic manner. It puts in you the movie with its multitude of closeups, darker colors, grim lighting, and sometimes vlog-like style. The more I look at this movie, it reminds me of those home videos shot on older camcorders in say the 1990s or early 2000s if you gave the captured video a pinch of polish and a bigger budget.

In the end, “The Apprentice” fires on all cylinders. It is engaging, it is raw, surprisingly funny at times, and lets out the best from its solid cast. Sebastian Stan, to my surprise, was a decent pick for the lead role. “The Apprentice” is most definitely not for everyone. In fact, I not only say that thinking a certain group of people who like Trump will immediately be turned off by the film, but there is also some visual content that may be uncomfortable for some viewers regardless of your political leanings or thoughts on Trump himself. In hindsight, I can see why this movie did not make a ton of money. People often go to the movies to escape, and I do not know if “The Apprentice” would be one of those films that would allow people to do such a thing, especially at this time. But I also could see why certain people would find the film to be relevant. I cannot recommend this movie to everyone, and knowing the current landscape, it is hard to know how many minds in any direction will be changed once the film’s over. That said, I give the film a thumbs up. It has a compelling narrative, good direction, and fine acting. I am going to give “The Apprentice” a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review, my next review on the lineup is going to be for a film that is getting a lot of conversation right now, and that is “Anora.” I cannot wait to talk about this flick. Look forward to that review coming soon. Also on the lineup, I have reviews on the way for “Here,” “Gladiator II,” “Red One,” “A Real Pain,” and “Y2K.” Also, my final Election Days review is hitting the blog next week, and it is for the movie “Elvis & Nixon.” I just watched the film earlier this week and I cannot wait to talk about it. 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 Apprentice?” What did you think about it? Or, in the spirit of Donald Trump… Tell me your honest thoughts on “Home Alone 2: Lost in New York.” Personally, while it has its moments, it is a bit lazy in its structure, very much copying the recent success of its predecessor. Also, how you do get lost in New York? If you know numbers, you’re good as gold! Either way, if you have thoughts on “Home Alone 2: Lost in New York,” let me know those thoughts down below. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!