Biography

Reagan (2024): A Discombobulated and Dull Tale of an Actor-Turned-Politician

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Reagan” is directed by Sean McNamara (Soul Surfer, The King’s Daughter) and stars Dennis Quaid (Frequency, The Day After Tomorrow), Penelope Ann Miller (The Artist, Kindergarten Cop), Robert Davi (Showgirls, Profiler), Lesley Anne-Down (Sunset Beach, The Bold and the Beautiful), and Jon Voight (Midnight Cowboy, Mission: Impossible). This film is about the life of Ronald Reagan from his childhood to his acting work to his political career.

Of all the movies I could have seen this year, “Reagan” was not a movie I was genuinely anticipating. The marketing made it look unbearably generic. In a sense, it came off as if it was made for television. And the only reason why it got a theatrical release is because of the actors on screen like Dennis Quaid. But what do I know? I went to go see this film less than a month ago at my local cinema, on opening weekend. And while I do not recall the theater being full, it actually got quite a large audience. Granted, the auditorium was on the slightly smaller side. But it showed there may have been more interest in this film than I expected.

But as for the movie itself, it is, as I thought it would be, bad. It is not the worst movie of the year, but it is definitely one of the most discombobulated and convoluted.

In fact, would you like to know how convoluted this movie becomes by the very end? Well, you do not even have to watch the movie to find out. Just go to the Wikipedia page! If you are reading this page years down the road, I have no idea if anybody will make any dramatic changes to the page, but as of this writing, if you go to the “Plot” section, there is a warning that reads, “This section’s plot summary may be too long or excessively detailed.” Even Wikipedia says this movie is overstuffed! The most unreliable reliable source on the Internet agrees with me! And calling Wikipedia the most unreliable reliable source is not an error! It is not inaccurate! Much like Wikipedia, Scene Before is written by some random moron on the Internet, so you can trust me!

During my time in school, history was a mixed subject for me. There are times I would do well in history, but as I got into high school, that’s where things started to fall apart. But one thing I would remember about history is the textbooks. Remember how huge those things were? Granted, time is enormous. There is a lot to go over. I can gladly say that “Reagan” is slightly more entertaining than a by the numbers history textbook. Something that amazingly could not be accomplished with the ambitious Czech film “Medieval.” But despite the massive size of history textbooks, they cannot quite cover every minor detail of an event. Much like a history textbook, I learned something. Granted, I knew Reagan was an actor. But I did not know how much of an impact he had on the Screen Actors Guild. Knowing his background as that union’s president makes sense considering his future in politics. As someone who was not alive during Reagan’s time as president, I thought I would learn something from this movie. I did not think it would be that.

With that in mind, “Reagan” does remind me of a history textbook because it goes over a lot in such little time. And in the same way, you could also say “Reagan” reminds me of CliffsNotes, which if you are a teacher reading this, is something your students are probably using to pretend they read “King Lear.” It feels like we are flying faster than the speed of light from one important moment of Reagan’s life to the next to the point where the impact of whatever moment came before is less than it should be.

There is one particular moment in this movie, particularly during the 1976 RNC, where such a lack of impact is noticeable. Let’s just say it presents a moment involving Reagan’s political ambitions, where he cannot quite make it to the top, only to have a much more monumental moment be presented to us several minutes later. The pacing between these scenes is too fast and lessens the depth of the Reagan character. It does not give enough time to sympathize with him during his lowest low. The movie just says, bop-da-le-skiddly-bop, onto the next scene!

At times, this movie does not really know what it wants to be. I mentioned the marketing makes “Reagan” look generic. Having seen the film, I can confirm it is quite generic. But it is not all generic. If anything, the thing that sets this film apart, is probably its most bewildering element. On top of the mostly linear story that we get regarding the life of Ronald Reagan, we also get several scenes between two men in present day Moscow. Those two men are Russian agent Andrei Novikov and KGB agent Viktor Petrovich, both fictional characters by the way. The duo spend some time in the latter’s home discussing why the Soviet Union fell. Now I get it. The Soviet Union and Russia were a hot topic during Reagan’s life and his time as presidency. Despite that, I honestly do not see how the movie benefits from any of the scenes between these two. This movie is already over two hours long, and boy did I occasionally feel the runtime. Do we really need to see these two on screen? No we do not! In fact, one of those fictional Russian characters, Viktor Petrovich to be specific, is played by Jon Voight. Part of me is convinced those scenes were kept just so you could have Jon Voight’s name on the poster! As for the duo’s performances, while not quite as comedic as an “SNL” sketch, they lacked a certain authenticity. Although Voight’s accent in particular is not doing him any favors.

As for the lead performance, I will not deny that Dennis Quaid had a monumental task in front of him. He had to play a well-known world leader. He had to play said world leader during various portions of his life. But his performance to me was a bit of a mixed bag. At times, he embodied the nature of Ronald Reagan. At others, he overemphasized his accent and presence. And at others, he was somewhat unconvincing. Again, I recognize the challenge at hand, but it does not change the fact that watching this performance on screen resulted in Dennis Quaid trying a bunch of different things only to have them all combine into something average at best. If you want to see a more convincing lead performance by someone who plays the same character in multiple parts of their life, just go watch Zendaya in “Challengers.” I did not love the movie, but I will not deny Zendaya did a great job in her role. But most of the performances in “Reagan” range somewhere between overdone, unmemorable, or mediocre. There are no performances in this movie that I would imagine to be nominated for an Oscar. Maybe one or two will get nominated for a Razzie, but it is hard to know whether they are going to be nominated simply because the performances are bad or because it is funny to nominate performances in political movies. This is, after all, the same awards body that nominated several members of the Donald Trump administration for their “performances” in the 2018 documentary “Fahrenheit 11/9.” I try to avoid talking about my political views on Scene Before unless it is absolutely necessary, but if you must know my thoughts on “Reagan,” they are quite simple. Just say no.

In the end, “Reagan” is dull, bland, and all over the place. As fast as this movie moves, it oddly feels kind of slow. Occasionally, it gives you little time to take in one scene before quickly waltzing straight onto the next. The performances are nothing to write home about. You could literally take out all the scenes between the men in Moscow and dramatically improve the film’s substance. There are no positives in this film that stand out, but at the same time, I cannot say the film is incompetent. It is well shot, well lit, and the locations are okay. But the movie itself is kind of forgettable. It is almost kind of propaganda-like in its presentation. Some of the lines just feel oddly preachy and over the top at times. Maybe that was the intention. Maybe not. But again, if you want to know about my thoughts on “Reagan,” I wonder if my score of 5/10 will give you any hints.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “It Ends with Us,” the brand new film starring Blake Lively. 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 “Reagan?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie heavily involving a U.S. President? I’ll even count fictional ones. Shoutout to “Air Force One” for being totally awesome! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Young Woman and the Sea (2024): Daisy Ridley Swimmingly Stands Out in the Latest Live-Action Effort from Walt Disney Pictures

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Young Woman and the Sea” is directed by Joachim Rønning (Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil) and stars Daisy Ridley (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Chaos Walking), Tilda Cobham-Hervey (Hotel Mumbai, The Lost Flowers of Alice Hart), Stephen Graham (Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, Kim Bodnia (Killing Eve, The Witcher), Christopher Eccleston (Thor: The Dark World, True Detective), and Glenn Fleshler (Boardwalk Empire, Billions). This film is inspired by the book of the same name and is about the competitive swimmer Trudy Ederle, who makes a daring attempt to swim across the English Channel.

One of the benefits of being in a “Star Wars” movie is having such a massive franchise be part of your resume. But regarding the more recent films, particularly the prequel trilogy and the sequel trilogy, it feels interesting to note that a few of its leads are, unsurprisingly, mostly known for their “Star Wars” roles, but not really making rounds since. Sure, Hayden Christensen did “Jumper.” But who religiously and fondly remembers that movie? What else has he really done since “Revenge of the Sith” that has stood out? As for Daisy Ridley, who I adore as Rey in the “Star Wars” franchise, I hope she can find some enormous success outside of the “Star Wars” franchise that way she does not remain a one hit wonder of sorts. I liked her in “Chaos Walking,” but I recognize that movie is not perfect, even though I did have fun with it. That, and COVID-19 definitely affected its box office performance. Yes, I am aware Ridley did other things too. “Murder on the Orient Express,” the “Peter Rabbit” movies, “The Marsh King’s Daughter…” But I have not seen any of those.

While I cannot legitimately recommend any of those movies, I can say Daisy Ridley’s latest film, “Young Woman and the Sea” is definitely worth the watch. Not only is it a solid story, but one thing that favors the film is the timing of which it released. After all, it is summer. Therefore, it is basically swim season. The Olympics are around the corner. It is the perfect time to get in the water. Maybe you will not want to venture the same waters as this movie’s lead, but still.

But even if you do not want to venture those same waters, you may feel inspired to do other great things. I am a straight white male, so I cannot speak for everyone, but I have a feeling that a lot of people who check out this movie are going to feel empowered, they’re going to feel inspired. Everyone loves a good story of this nature, and it is perhaps a bonus if the lead is a woman like it is here.

While this movie is about Trudy Ederle, I thought it also did a good job with its supporting characters. I really enjoyed the scenes early on in the film where we see Trudy learning to swim and getting to know the others inside the building, in addition to one tradition they share. In addition to Trudy’s journey as she navigates the English Channel, I was simultaneously engaged with what was going on back at home. We see the family’s perspective, how nervous they are, and I think plenty of people can relate to those events playing out. It is natural for a parent to worry about their kid in a multitude of scenarios. Heck, my mom constantly worries about me getting to work on time. Granted I have to be there at 2 a.m…. But still. A good movie can make you care for its lead and their progression throughout the runtime, but that good movie could potentially be better, like this one, if you somehow also care about those who tend to express their worries about the lead.

One of the unsung standouts of “Young Woman and the Sea,” and I perhaps mean that literally, is the music. This film’s score is done by Amelia Warner, whose work I have not heard previously, but the orchestral power of this film leaves me curious as to what she has up her sleeve next. Each instance of the music adds to the tension, adventure, and sometimes joy of each scene. It is easily one of my favorite musical compilations this year. “IF” still remains my favorite score perhaps, but this trails only slightly behind.

Production value-wise, this film is as inviting as can be. The shots look beautiful. Every time I look at the water in this movie, it makes me want to go by the sea. It truly strikes a proper mood. It was also soothing to see the film’s various environments accompanied with a 1920s vibe. The film is chock-full of impeccably designed interiors. Probably some of my favorite I have seen this year. “Young Woman and the Sea” is quite a picturesque movie that is easy on the eyes. A lot of the frames that pass by as I am watching our hero navigate the English Channel are enchanting to gaze upon.

If I had any real critiques that come to mind regarding “Young Woman and the Sea” it would probably be that the film seems a little played up for what it is trying to be. Granted it is nowhere near as played up as the last movie I reviewed, “Summer Camp,” but it is sometimes over the top. The performances in the film are all over the place. It is not to say they are bad, but they seem to clash with each other tonally sometimes, as if they belong in a couple different movies. The actors all do a good job, even if their collective performances are not quite a perfect match. This film is a term I do not use often, but it feels appropriate to use here. If there were a word to describe this film at times, it would be “Hollywoodized.” This is a story that on paper, would make a good movie. A woman taking on a dangerous mission of swimming across a body of water makes for a great story, especially considering this one is true. But some of it is perhaps pushing the boundaries of reality. It sometimes feels familiar in terms of its story and its beats. This film is released under the Disney banner, and even though the two movies are not quite the same, “Young Woman and the Sea” reminded me of another Disney live-action effort, “The Finest Hours,” another story highlighting a dangerous time in the water. That film also felt played up and perhaps overly glamourous. I think “Young Woman and the Sea” is much more engaging, but both movies share similar flaws. They are presented as these glorious tales, and to some degree, they can be defined as such. But the movies tend to push the limits in terms of how glorious they actually are.

In the end, the real question is, should you watch this movie? Absolutely. Give “Young Woman and the Sea” a shot if you have the time. It is played up and sometimes cliche, but it is nevertheless charming and inspiring. I liked all the characters in this movie. The chemistry we see between Trudy and her sister, who is wonderfully played by Tilda Cobham-Hervey, is quite good. Performance-wise, despite being a bit on the hyper side, I admired Sian Clifford as Charlotte, Trudy’s swimming trainer. Every time she is on screen she has a commanding presence. If there is any performance I remembered the most from the movie, aside from Daisy Ridley’s, it is hers. “Young Woman and the Sea” is probably not going to be on my top 10 of the year, but it is a movie that I am glad I saw. It is an effective, inspirational story of determination, feminism, and going for the impossible. I am going to give “Young Woman and the Sea” 7 seas out of–

Wait, that doesn’t sound right… I’m going to give the movie a 7/10. There, that’s better.

“Young Woman and the Sea” is unfortunately not playing in many places right now, and as of writing this, the film is not currently available to watch at home. But if it is somehow playing near you by some miracle, check the movie out if you can.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Inside Out 2,” one of the biggest films of the year so far. I cannot wait to finally talk about this one. Also coming soon, I will have reviews for “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga,” “Thelma,” “Daddio,” “A Quiet Place: Day One,” and “Maxxxine.” 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 “Young Woman and the Sea?” What did you think about it? Or, do you enjoy swimming? Tell me where your favorite place to swim happens to be! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Back to Black (2024): A Captivating Performance from Marisa Abela Carries This Musical Biopic from Start to Finish

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Back to Black” is directed by Sam Taylor-Johnson (A Million Little Pieces, Fifty Shades of Grey) and stars Marisa Abela (Industry, She is Love), Jack O’Connell (Unbroken, Money Monster), Eddie Marsen (Ray Donovan, Atomic Blonde), and Lesley Manville (Maleficent, Phantom Thread) in a musical biopic chronicling a large segment of the life of Amy Winehouse and her journey to creating one of the most successful albums of the 21st century.

While they may not be my goto genre, musical biopics are often a type of movie that manages to garner my attention when it comes out. Not only do they tell stories about famed artists people have come to know and love like Elton John in “Rocketman” or Freddie Mercury in “Bohemian Rhapsody,” but those movies often get a lot of attention around awards season. In addition to these actors getting attention during shows like the BAFTAs or the Oscars, if you have ever checked out the 1st or 5th Annual Jack Awards, you would know that some of the acting awards went to lead roles in biopics based on a musician’s real life. One of my favorite lead performances that comes to mind in all the movies I have seen is Jamie Foxx as Ray Charles in the 2004 movie “Ray.” While Foxx’s singing in the movie is limited, he did all of his piano playing. Not to mention, there is a certain physicality to his performance. Same goes for Rami Malek in “Bohemian Rhapsody.” Much like Foxx as Ray Charles, Malek did not do all of his own singing as Freddie Mercury. But looking back at some of the real Live Aid concert and the one they make for the movie, it is insane how close of a resemblance Malek is to Mercury himself in terms of physicality. If I have to be real, “Bohemian Rhapsody” was above average, but Malek’s performance carries the film.

Similarly, that is how I feel about “Back to Black.” Do I think the story is good? Yes. Do I like all the characters? I would say so. I think everyone in the movie has their moment. But what sells this movie for me from start to finish is Marisa Abela as Amy Winehouse.

One of the best compliments I can give an actor, is that I cannot imagine anybody else in their role. And when it comes to Marisa Abela as Amy Winehouse, that thought came across my mind a couple times. Maybe Jenna Ortega could play the role just because she has a certain look to her that personally sells me. But when this movie was shot, she was not even of legal drinking age in the U.S.. That said, I am fairly happy with what we got here. To be real though, it is not my favorite lead performance in a biopic. There is not as much of an oomph factor here to the performance that I have seen from say Austin Butler as Elvis Presley. Some of Abela’s performance feels played up and almost in the realm of fantasy, but there are also a fair share of grounded moments to balance out those exaggerated ones. The performance is not perfect, but there is a lot of good to it.

I also really liked the movie’s attempt to show the chemistry between Winehouse and her love interest, Blake Fielder-Civil, played finely by Jack O’Connell. If anything, I thought the scenes between these two were some of the best parts of the movie and I honestly wouldn’t mind seeing these actors on screen again in another project.

One of the things I will remember most about “Back to Black” is that from start to finish, there was always this consistent tone to the movie, and it seemed to match the tone that comes to mind when I think or talk about Amy Winehouse herself. I do not listen to her music. Frankly, I do not care for her music. Having seen this movie, I do not think I am going to go back and listen to her music. But as I watched the movie, even in its lighter moments, there was always this bittersweet nature to it. If you were to ask me to talk about Amy Winehouse, I will probably say what a lot of other people say and note that her life was taken too soon. We likely missed out on someone who could have built a humungous legacy. Similarly, as I watched this movie, there seems to be this lingering gloom. Granted, there are several moments where that feeling is minute, but it is still there. I must also add the movie’s greyish and bleak color grading, which is practically noticeable in almost every scene, may have an effect on said gloom as well.

When it comes to these musical biopics, I often seek these movies out with my mom. These are some of her gotos. This one is no exception. When she walks out of these films, she often talks about how much she liked hearing the artist’s music as shown in the final product. Knowing the title of this film, we get to hear a good portion of Winehouse’s discography. My favorite of the songs brought to life would be “Rehab.” Again, much of this movie is about not just Amy Winehouse’s rise as an artist, but it also dives into her personal life, and her struggles with drugs and alcohol. This song, not to mention its performance in particular, connects the movie’s ideas together beautifully. The scene in the film is beautifully timed, edited, and as highlighted already, portrayed by Marisa Abela herself.

If I have any real negatives with “Back to Black,” I would say there are parts of the film that are more memorable than others. I would not be able to tell you the name of every character that is in the movie, perhaps some minor details that are in the movie, or every song that is in the movie. Then again, I already mentioned I am not the biggest Amy Winehouse fan. The movie itself, while it is really good, does not have many moments where I am going to look back and label it iconic, or some similar degree that would indicate prestige. As a biopic, this is a decent look into Amy Winehouse’s life with a good amount of tonal consistency. And even though I will say the movie does have an everlasting glimmer of gloom throughout, the gloom never gets to a point where I feel truly heartbroken as a viewer. There are tragic, unfortunate things happening throughout this movie. Sadly, I don’t think I am feeling the melancholy this movie wants me to feel at times. It’s not like when I watched “Priscilla” and was unspeakably riveted by Cailee Spaeny as Priscilla Presley. Here’s an analogy my fellow “Django Unchained” fans would understand, “Back to Black” had my curiosity, but when it comes to keeping my eyes and ears glued, “Priscilla” had my attention, if that makes any sense. “Back to Black” is not going to end up in my top films of the year. If anything, it will wind up somewhere in the middle. But there are plenty of pros to this film that could potentially make a one time watch justified should you decide to check it out.

In the end, “Back to Black” is engaging, but there is not much to it that truly individualizes it. It feels wrong to call a movie like this ordinary, even though you can say it has some familiar beats from other titles of its kind. “Back to Black” has neat production value, good acting, and a fine pace to it that rarely had me disinterested. It’s good, but not great. Now if you are an Amy Winehouse fan, it is hard for me to say whether or not I recommend this film, partially because, again, I do not listen to her music. For the record, going back to Abela’s performance, she does all of her own singing. From a straight up commitment perspective, I admire Abela’s efforts here. As for whether her singing translates well for the average Amy Winehouse fan, that is for them to decide. I must also note that I was 11 when Winehouse died. I was not as in touch with trends, culture, and goings on at the time as I am now. But as a pure movie and story, it gets a thumbs up from me. Not a strong one, but a thumbs up nevertheless. I am going to give “Back to Black” a 6/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the new comedy “Summer Camp.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Young Woman and the Sea,” “Inside Out 2,” “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga,” and “Thelma.” 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 “Back to Black?” What did you think about it? Or, who is someone whose life you feel was taken too soon that you would have like to have seen live longer? For me, Chadwick Boseman. Between his time in the MCU, an Oscar nomination, and his ability to put on killer performances, I would like to see what other projects he would have done had he not passed in August 2020. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Bob Marley: One Love (2024): Every Little Thing Is Gonna be Boring

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Bob Marley: One Love” is directed by Reinaldo Marcus Green (We Own This City, King Richard) and stars Kingsley Ben-Adir (Secret Invasion, One Night in Miami…), Lashana Lynch (No Time to Die, Captain Marvel), and James Norton (Happy Valley, Flatliners). This film follows the titular reggae musician in his journey in music and to overcome his difficulties.

When I surf the Internet or have conversations in my social circles, one thing that sometimes comes up just so happens to movie trailers. Specifically, the idea of seeing the same trailer over and over again at the movie theater. I remember a colleague of mine saying that this happened to them for “Argylle.” And I can say that is one I remember seeing quite a bit as well. But if I had to name a trailer or marketing campaign that has done such a thing for me recently, it would be the one for “Bob Marley: One Love.” To be fair, they put the first trailer out months in advance, so it had the opportunity to be shown plenty of times. But almost every time I went to the movies, it flashed on the screen.

Based on the unlimited exposure “Bob Marley: One Love” has given me alone, I hoped it wouldn’t suck. Partially because, well, “Argylle” did. When you play a trailer enough times to equal a short movie, then I kind of hope by the time I see it, I don’t feel duped. That said, the movie did not look like the next big thing, but by no means did it look awful. There was potential between factors such as the story and Ben-Adir playing the lead role.

Unfortunately, when it comes to films about musicians or music in general, this failed to hit the right notes for me.

To be frank though, it made me question my intelligence. I understand a lot of movies. Sometimes I understand movies will mean certain things to certain people. Sometimes I get that art in general can be open-ended. “Bob Marley: One Love” seems for the most part, straightforward, but it reminded me of one of my weak spots. Languages.

I am not saying I refuse to learn or understand foreign languages, what I am saying is that whenever I am tasked with doing so, say for when I was in school, I found it to be incredibly difficult. But I am always thankful whenever movies have subtitles because they help me understand what is going on. “Bob Marley: One Love” is in English, but a lot of it is spoken through Jamaican accents, which I do not usually hear every day. There is nothing wrong with that. In fact, I appreciate the authenticity. I just wish, and this harkens back to my struggles, I could have been more engaged with it.

I am NOT asking people from this movie to sound like they’re from Ohio. I am just saying that if I were able to see the future, I probably would have asked for a different fate where I could have subtitles flashing on screen throughout the film. Simple as that. It is sad that an issue like this is detracting from my overall experience, but facts are facts.

Ever since “Parasite” director Bong Joon Ho won the Golden Globe for Best Motion Picture, International Feature during the 2020 edition of the ceremony, there is one quote I have often used in regards to watching certain movies.

“Once you overcome the one-inch-tall barrier of subtitles, you will be introduced to so many more amazing films.” -Bong Joon Ho

That quote specifically applies to foreign flicks or films not mostly executed in my native language, which would be English. But a part of me thought Bong Joon Ho’s quote could be applied to “Bob Marley: One Love” as well. The movie is part of the Hollywood system and heavily marketed to North American audiences, but as I watched the film, I had trouble deciphering some of what’s being said. Now, maybe my hearing is deteriorating. Maybe I watched “Oppenheimer” one too many times and now I’m paying the price. But it is also possible that I just was trying my best to understand every word that was being said by certain characters, and for whatever reason, it just wasn’t coming through. There is nothing wrong with authentic accents or voices that link to a certain part of the world. That said, if I were to go back and watch “Bob Marley: One Love” a second time, which I am probably not going to, I’d want subtitles.

I am going to give props to “Bob Marley: One Love” for perhaps delivering an authentic, lifelike experience when it comes to several characters interacting with each other or talking with one another. But if we are simply going by first impressions, I felt a little lost watching this film. A bit disengaged perhaps. Because for all I know, I could latch onto a number of the conversation scenes during this movie, but I could not pick up on everything the characters are saying. I remember a few years ago when I saw the 2021 remake of “West Side Story” for the first time and they had a few scenes where they had characters speaking in Spanish, and there were no subtitles on screen. For the record, I dropped out of Spanish I in high school a couple weeks into the class, so I’m no expert on the language. But even I got a sense of the context of what was going on without subtitles. Now when I look at “Bob Marley: One Love” it feels weird knowing that I am going from comprehending a language I do not speak, to not getting a clue of what was going on in this movie in English. I know not every movie can be universal to everyone. But my lack of understanding of what was going on through the dialogue severely hindered my experience. It could have been a lot better.

Even with my complaints, I will not deny that Kingsley Ben-Adir was a good pick to play the titular role. I thought he had charisma, pizzazz, and he also looked the part. And it is almost hard to imagine other people filling in the shoes of this role. When it comes to the overall chemistry in the film, Ben-Adir does a good job with latching onto just about every other character in sight. I am not saying this performance is going to win an Oscar, but as far this movie goes, he does a good job. And honestly, while there are no abominable performances in the movie, there are no other real standouts either.

But if there is another standout, I would have to say the soundtrack is sometimes pretty good. Obviously, this is a music-based film so this should not be a huge surprise, but the moments where we end up hearing Marley’s music make the film a tad better.

Although I want to talk about the part of the movie that for me, really let me down. The ending. It is not heartbreaking per se. It is not offensive to other people. It is by no means a crime against humanity. But the best way I can describe this ending, primarily from a filmmaking and cinematic perspective, is “lazy.” Because I came into this movie with a certain expectation, and once we get to the end, once it feels like we are getting to that point, the movie stops and delivers such an expectation in a way that honestly feels slapped together. I do not know how to talk about this moment without saying the words “spoiler alert,” which come to think of it, would be a weird thing to say about a movie based on real people and true events. But as we got to the ending, my pupils lit up, and my dilation nearly became an eyeroll. The movie started, to some degree, getting better. Or so I thought. It put a massive dent on what I already thought was an underwhelming experience.

The potential is there for a good story regarding this material in particular. I think it is a story that could make a figure like Bob Marley attach to a great span of this world. It would get a lot of people to feel bad for him and root for him. But there are so many little things in the movie that left me unsatisfied. The acting is okay, but I just wish I could have been more attached to the characters. Pacing-wise, “Bob Marley: One Love” is an enigma. The movie is somehow too long to catch my absolute interest. Yet as soon there are crevices where something actually manages to catch my interest, it does not take long for the movie to become boring. This movie came out the same weekend as “Madame Web,” which I saw first. “Bob Marley: One Love” is not “Madame Web” bad, but it is still not good.

In the end, “Bob Marley: One Love” is off-key. I was bored. I was disengaged. I wanted to leave. Now, the film is by no means the worst I have ever seen, but there is nothing that stands out about it that makes me want to watch it a second time. As conventional as say, “Bohemian Rhapsody” may appear, I was more engaged with that film and how it handles its characters. I thought it was a story where I could latch on from start to finish. Additionally, as much as I liked Ben-Adir’s lead performance, it is a far cry from Rami Malek as Freddie Mercury. “Bob Marley: One Love” tries to take a compelling concept to the finish line. But in terms of execution, I felt it needed to pick up the pace just a bit. Maybe a second viewing with subtitles would make the experience better, but I was not riveted enough in my first viewing to warrant a second viewing. I am going to give “Bob Marley: One Love” a 4/10.

“Bob Marley: One Love” is now playing in theaters and is available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for my most anticipated movie of 2024, “Dune Part Two.” Does it live up to the hype? You’ll have to wait and see. Also coming soon, I will have reviews for “High Tide,” “Kung Fu Panda 4,” “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire,” “Snack Shack,” and “Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire” 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 “Bob Marley: One Love?” What did you think about it? Or, who is an artist whose story would make for a good biopic? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Maestro (2023): Bradley Cooper’s Sophomore Directorial Effort is a Step Down from A Star is Born, but Is Delivered with Undoubted Passion

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Maestro” is directed by Bradley Cooper (A Star is Born, Guardians of the Galaxy) who also stars in the film as Leonard Bernstein. Alongside Cooper is Carey Mulligan (She Said, Promising Young Woman) as his love interest, Felicia Montealegre. This film is about Leonard Bernstein’s journey through life as he spends it focusing on his greatest passions. Composing music and his relationship with his partner.

Actors who become directors is nothing new. In recent years we have seen it with James Franco, Jonah Hill, Olivia Wilde, Jordan Peele, and John Krasinski to name a few. The results have from these people have varied across the board, but another man on that list is Bradley Cooper. His previous outing was the 2018 remake “A Star is Born,” which became one of that year’s most celebrated titles that thrust a popular original song, “Shallow.” I thought the film was very good. Maybe a tad overrated as time went on, but I found it to be well done. And much like that film, Cooper’s directorial followup, “Maestro” also features him as the star. This film was not completely on my radar. Partially because Netflix is traditionally terrible at marketing their originals most of the time, but I at least knew about the film because the Internet has its way of feeding information to me. I was not completely sure what to think, but I was onboard with the concept. Bradley Cooper is currently 1 for 1 in the director’s chair, so I wanted to see if he could make it 2 for 2.

And he certainly scores here.

Overall, “Maestro” is a step down from “A Star is Born.” I don’t think I will be thinking about “Maestro” for as long or as heavily as I did after seeing “A Star is Born” back in 2018. I have not gone back to rewatch the film since, but I praised the film for its music, its acting, its screenplay, and display of what happens to creatives once they are given tools from big names. I still think the idea that people would make fun of Lady Gaga’s nose is unconvincing to the tenth degree, but the movie’s gotta movie.

If anything, Bradley Cooper almost directs this film better than he acts in it, and that is saying something because he is quite a good actor. There is a long orchestra scene more than halfway through that had me fully engaged. The entire film is set in the 20th century, but with that in mind, a lot of the film’s earlier scenes heavily immersed me. But I also think part of why he directs this film so well is because the acting in this movie is so good. One of the key aspects of directing is making sure your actors give the best performances possible. Given Cooper’s acting background, he uses that to his advantage as I felt several characters honestly could not be played by anyone else. Even if I was not a fan of some of the script choices or dialogue the characters had to utter, each character managed to make me escape from my chair into the screen. While this film is based on true events, it felt like a world that was different than my own.

Going back to Bradley Cooper’s acting, I think his acting here is also a slight step up from “A Star is Born,” because it is more chameleon-like here. Yes, factors like makeup, costuming, and others come into play here. But if I have one thing to say about this movie that makes his performance better here than “A Star is Born” it is that when I hear Bradley Cooper talk or look at his face, I see Cooper himself. In “A Star is Born,” he comes off as a movie star sometimes. It does not mean his performance sucked. Not one bit. It just means that felt like I was watching a variation of the actor as I also watched the character. Here, all I see is Bernstein. It is one of the best lead performances of the year and undoubtedly one of the finest of Cooper’s career.

The film is also one of the best edited pieces of the year, it starts kind of fast, but there are plenty of slower scenes to balance everything out. But as we get to the climax, there is a lot of breathing room that allowed the emotions of the scene to sink in. It allowed me to perhaps successfully feel the emotions this movie was going for.

The film is written by Bradley Cooper in addition to one of the finest screenwriters of this generation, Josh Singer (Spotlight, The Post). When it comes to the latter, this is one of his weaker scripts, but there is a lot to like about it. I think the first two acts have their off and on moments. Certain portions of the story worked better than others, but the third act made the film worth watching. The film is a slice of life piece to some degree and very much highlights both its beauty and misfortune. Once we find out a certain revelation about the character of Felicia, I was riveted. The way the scene plays out once the revelation kicks in is nothing short of emotional. I almost teared up. If I took one thing from this film, without going into spoilers, it is the idea that life is short so you should enjoy it however you can. Some of the happenings throughout the film cement that idea to a high degree.

The film is of course called “Maestro” meaning it is about Leonard Bernstein. But at its core, it is a love story. If anything, I think “Maestro” is quite a good love story. Bradley Cooper has a knack for romance between this film and “A Star is Born,” and part of that is because of the chemistry he maintains with his co-lead. This time around it is Carey Mulligan. Both actors and their characters have natural on-screen chemistry and this is shown in every era this film flies through. Speaking of the eras, the film manages to transition very naturally between each timeframe. Not once do I feel like we are spending too much or too little time in one place or another.

“Maestro” is unfortunately from Netflix. I say unfortunately because that means most theaters will not be playing it. I thankfully got to see it in a theater, and I have no regrets. This is a film that is worth seeing in theaters just to take in every little detail from the cinematography, the production design, and to hear the music perhaps the way it was intended. Again, going back to the orchestra scene more than halfway through the film, that was glorious to watch in a theater. It is the holiday season, meaning that there is a chance that you are with loved ones and may be looking for an excuse to get out of the house at some point. This is not a film for everybody, but if there is a theater near you playing this, take advantage of that opportunity and take your partner, take your spouse. take your parents, take your grown children. Have a night out on the town, get some food, and go see this movie. You might not regret it.

Or of course you could order takeout and watch Netflix in your pajamas, your call.

In the end, “Maestro” is a step down for Bradley Cooper’s directorial resume, but that is like comparing winning 200 bucks on a lottery ticket and then scratching another ticket moments later to win 150. Both clearly deliver a sense of satisfaction. One is just clearly greater than the other. That said even with “Maestro” being a lesser film than “A Star is Born,” I would not be against watching it a second time just to study it. The cinematography looks really good, it is well directed, and the editing is top notch. Technically, there is a lot to like about it. And as a love story, it is solid. Both leads are fantastic and make the movie worth watching. Overall, an easy thumbs up from yours truly. I am going to give “Maestro” a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Wonka,” starring Timothee Chalamet as a younger interpretation of the iconic chocolatier. I just had a chance to watch the film earlier this month in IMAX, and I will have my thoughts on it soon. Also stay tuned for my reviews for “Migration” and “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom.” 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 “Maestro?” What did you think about it? Or, which of Bradley Cooper’s directorial efforts do you like better? “A Star is Born?” Or “Maestro?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Ferrari (2023): Adam Driver Shines in a Flick That Cannot Quite Get Into Gear

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Ferrari” is directed by Michael Mann (The Last of the Mohicans, Heat) and stars Adam Driver (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Marriage Story), Penélope Cruz (Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, Nine), Shailene Woodley (Divergent, Dumb Money), Sarah Gadon (Enemy, Dracula Untold), Gabriel Leone (Dom, Hidden Truths), Jack O’Connell (Skins, Godless), and Patrick Dempsey (Enchanted, Grey’s Anatomy). This film is a biopic about Enzo Ferrari’s mission to keep his auto company from failing as he puts it in a treacherous territory. A thousand mile race in Italy.

Sport movies have not always been my forte. Then again, sports in general have not always been my forte. But if you guys have been following me for a bit then you’d know that one of my favorite sport films I reviewed on this blog, not to mention one of my favorite sport films that come to mind, is James Mangold’s “Ford v Ferrari.” That film is an adrenaline-fueled race to the finish if there ever was one. And that is cemented by great performances, stunning soundwork, and a narrative that had me on the edge of my seat. It was easily one of the best films of that year and it ended up scoring a couple Jack Awards as well.

But with another awards season on the rise, it is time to recognize one of its fiercest contenders, “Ferrari.” I had little interest in “Ferrari” until I saw the trailer. This looked like a hard-hitting story that would fire on all cylinders and deliver on drama and tension. Adam Driver looked like he was going to dominate the lead role and I was there. That said, I did not know when I would end up seeing it because it comes out in December and there are so many things to which in the span of that time. Plus I have to get my best and worst movies of the year lists out the following month, I am doing work on the next Jack Awards, and it is heavily triggering my average at best multitasking skills. But I had the privilege of checking out a free early screening in Dolby in Boston recently, so I got to see the film long before it hits theaters.

Now, there is a certain thrill that comes with getting to see a movie this early. And the fact that the studio is letting people watch it this long before the release date says a lot about their faith in the project. Having seen “Ferrari,” I am sure it will hit a lot of people the right way. But it doesn’t mean that was the case for yours truly.

“Ferrari” is by no means an awful movie, but if we were to make a comparison, I would easily recommend “Ford v Ferrari” over this new Michael Mann effort. That said, I do not think Michael Mann would be completely insulted with this sentiment. After all, in addition to his efforts here, he is an executive producer on “Ford v Ferrari.” He gets to brag about having both movies on his resume.

My biggest problem with “Ferrari” is the characters. I did not outright hate anyone on this film’s roster, but much of the film involves a series of racers participating in the 1957 Mille Miglia. Ultimately, we end up spending a good amount of time with them, so it disappoints me to say that I failed to find myself attached to any one of them. I know this movie is not called “The Drivers of the Mille Miglia” but when the movie features them as prominently as it does, I hope to find myself endlessly attached to at least one driver. Much of the film is about Enzo Ferrari, and some of it lends itself to fascinating storytelling, whereas other moments tend to fall by the wayside.

That said, even with the character flaws in mind, I will not deny that the film puts the pedal to the metal and brings forth some of the best acting I have seen in a movie this year. Of course the film has recognizable stars like Shailene Woodley, Penelope Cruz, and Patrick Dempsey, all of whom are really good. But the film, to my lack of surprise, is as good as it is because Adam Driver gives it his all in the lead role. I could honestly see him getting an Oscar nomination this year for his efforts. Of Driver’s resume, this performance is one of his more chameleon-esque efforts. And a lot of it not only has to do with his mannerisms, his voice, his presence, part of it has to do with the attention to detail given to him on his costuming and makeup. Much like some of my other favorite actors, Driver has always oozed charisma on screen, even when he is in an inferior “Star Wars” movie. But of Driver’s roles, this is one of the first I remember seeing where he does not completely look like himself. I’ve seen him in a number of films. “Lincoln,” “The Man Who Killed Don Quixote,” “Marriage Story,” “The Last Duel.” He has often maintained a certain look to him that I tend to notice from one role to the next. Even in his better performances, I am reminded of how much I enjoy Driver’s presence once I see his recognizable face. In this film, I don’t necessarily see Driver. I see someone else.

When it comes to the film, Adam Driver is quite literally the driving force in more ways than one. He is really good in the lead role and he is surrounded by competent performances all around. But the story itself failed to garner any ongoing emotion and interest from me. There was a center of the movie per se, but not so much a core. Despite those words being similar, I think there is a difference here. The movie centers around Enzo Ferrari, but it does not give me a core reason to admire anyone on screen. Or at least not one that remained on my mind long after leaving my screening.

Much like “Ford v Ferrari,” the sound in “Ferrari” is quite good. Not as good if you ask me, but it appears to take a different approach. The way I interpreted the sound between its editing and mixing in “Ford v Ferrari” is something equivalent to a fantasy. The movie is based on true events, but when I heard that sound, it almost came off like a hyperactive reality. The sound, not to mention atmosphere, of “Ferrari” feels comparatively grounded. Of course the cars sound audible as anything, but they lack a certain oomph to them that “Ford v Ferrari” gave in its final product. That is not to say they sound bad, it is just different.

In the end, “Ferrari” is two different movies wrapped into one. But neither of them exactly surpass the distinction of average. If anything, “Ferrari” is a painfully average, not to mention disappointing time. Because while I did not do a deep dive into the film’s marketing campaign before going to see it, I can you tell you the trailers are on another level. The trailers are honestly much better than the movie. It’s kind of sad, really. Much “Killers of the Flower Moon,” I will not doubt “Ferrari” will get some attention this awards season. But much like “Killers of the Flower Moon,” “Ferrari” might not be my cup of tea. There are plenty of good things in it, but I honestly find the movie quite forgettable and ultimately lacking in any reason for me to watch it a second time. Maybe I could give it a second chance eventually because some positives stand out, but for now, I am going to give “Ferrari” a high 5/10.

“Ferrari” arrives in theaters everywhere December 25th. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! I have plenty more reviews coming in the near future as the year comes to an end! I will be sharing my thoughts on “The Boy and the Heron,” “Dream Scenario,” “Maestro,” “Wonka,” “Migration,” and “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom.” Stay tuned! If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Ferrari?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie with Adam Driver in it? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Napoleon (2023): A Historical Epic with a Tall Runtime that Falls Short of any Level of Engagement

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Napoleon” is directed by Ridley Scott (The Last Duel, House of Gucci) and stars Joaquin Phoenix (Gladiator, Joker), Vanessa Kirby (Mission: Impossible – Fallout, The Crown), Tahar Rahim (A Prophet, The Mauritanian), and Rupert Everett (My Best Friend’s Wedding, An Ideal Husband). This film is about the rise and fall of French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte, diving into many aspects that define the individual, in addition to his relationship with his wife, Josephine.

I was looking forward to “Napoleon” as I am a fan of Ridley Scott. The trailers undoubtedly looked epic and it delivered a similar vibe to another historical epic Scott mastered in his time of making it, “Gladiator.” And of course, with a prominent, talented thespian like Joaquin Phoenix at the forefront, I thought we could be in for something special. Unfortunately, when the reviews started coming out for this film, that is when I decided to lower my expectations, as it seemed to stray away from historical accuracy. But as someone who looks for entertainment in his movies, I can live with a little bending of history as long as you can make a good movie out of it so I tried not to get too concerned. Unfortunately, I walked out of “Napoleon” almost half asleep. And that is really weird to say because one of the positives I have about this movie is the immersive sound mix. It is an enormous aid during the battle scenes. As much as I love Ridley Scott, I think this film is quite a dud.

This film feels rushed, and yet, it somehow managed to bore me with a two and a half hour runtime. I can sit through a two and a half hour movie. Some of my favorite movies are longer than that. But this was painful. I think the one redeeming quality of this movie was watching the uncomfortable relationship between Napoleon and Josephine. But when I say that is a redeeming quality, I must also note that it is like watching a car crash at times. There are certain moments between these two that are intriguing, but there are others where the intrigue comes in, but in a such a haphazard manner that I would feel as if I am doing myself a disservice if I look away. Now to be fair, the chemistry between Joaquin Phoenix and Vanessa Kirby is admirable in regards to how their characters are written and performed.

As we age, there is a tendency that people define themselves over who they surround themselves with, their legacy, how things will be carried on after they’re gone. And when it comes to displaying Napoleon’s desire to keep things afloat and continue his legacy to the next generation, these traits are emitted with passion on Joaquin Phoenix’s part. My favorite parts of the movie, or at least the ones I cannot stop thinking about, all involve Napoleon’s burning desire to have a child. I think the way the movie handles this segment of the story is surprisingly decent, even if it does get a little over the top.

Speaking of over the top, that is one of my biggest negatives of the film. Phoenix and Kirby shine in their individual roles, but there are plenty of other individuals on screen, and their acting ability has me questioning whether I was actually watching something from a director as renowned as Scott. There are select lines from certain characters that feel like they came out of a high school TV production class. Sometimes those lines are delivered with passion, but they are delivered with a certain passion that would probably be best used in an animation or a comedy as opposed to a somewhat grounded drama. In fact, the movie sort of crosses a line at times into comedy that I have no idea if it was actually intended. There are select scenes that play out in a much funnier manner than I would have imagined them. It almost spirals into a “so bad it’s good” territory, which is a phrase I was not expecting to use when reviewing a Ridley Scott movie.

Even with my issues, I must admit, “Napoleon,” like many of Ridley Scott’s films, is easy on the eyes. Dariusz Wolski’s cinematography, like usual, is beautiful, even if some of the shots feel a tad rushed in the final edit. The locations are excellent, fit their scenes, and bring life to the production. The production design from one of Scott’s regulars, Arthur Max, is outstanding. The costumes have notable detail. The film is a crisp step back in time. But just because “Napoleon” nails its style, does not mean the same can be said for its substance.

I was bored immensely with the film’s pacing, its story. Everything. There are several moments where I kept asking myself if the movie was over. And the worst part is knowing that this is not a complete product. This is just a lackluster Cliffs Notes edition of a larger tale, because it has been revealed that this production will have a four hour extended version. I kind of get why you would not want to release a four hour movie in theaters, but I would sit through one if I had the time if it meant the pace and story would bring more appeal. Here, it kind of feels rushed and it lacking in engagement.

When it comes to my time studying history, I was off and on as a student. In my opinion, “Napoleon” feels like reading a history textbook. And I do not use that comparison lightly. Basically this whole movie is one giant chapter or unit that I have to go through, and I am passively taking it all in to the best of my ability due to of my lack of interest. I cannot tell you everything that happened in the movie, so if you were to hand me a quiz I would probably not do so hot. And much like reading a textbook, I failed to find any entertainment value in what was in front of me. If I wanted Ridley Scott to entertain me with a slice of history, I will just go back and watch “Gladiator.” I will go back and watch “The Last Duel.” “Napoleon” just doesn’t do it for me. And I think a big part of it is because of how much the movie dives into. It feels like we are hopping from one place in time to another lickety split. With a movie like “The Last Duel,” one of my new favorites from Ridley Scott, there is a central idea the characters have to deal with that remains consistent. In fact, we see it play out a few times in different ways, which makes for a compelling narrative. The film is digestible despite being drawn out. So much happens in “Napoleon” that I would almost argue you need a longer runtime to actually appreciate it. Maybe this would be a good miniseries, but I think the spectacle aspect that is best witnessed in a cinema is probably what could have kept it from going in that direction. And if you are asking, no, I do not have plans to check out the extended cut of this movie. I have better things to do with my time.

In the end, “Napoleon” is a massive disappointment. This movie takes one of the most talked about historical figures of all time and wastes him in a dull, uninteresting, downtrodden mess that nearly put me to sleep. It is much less a story than it is a series of events that failed to capture my interest. The only real shining spot of the film are the performances given by Phoenix and Kirby as Napoleon and Josephine respectively. In fact, part of me wanted to see more of the Josephine character, I feel like she at times offered a more compelling presence than Napoleon did. I have seen movies like “Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure” and “Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian” handle Napoleon Bonaparte from a much more comedic angle. Somehow I continue to think about those attempts at showcasing the character in a much more positive light than I do with this two and a half hour historical so-called “epic.” Yes, it’s technically glorious. You know what was also technically glorious? “Jupiter Ascending!” But you don’t see me raving about the characters of that movie every now and again. I am going to give “Napoleon” a 4/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! If you want to see more of my Ridley Scott movie reviews, I just did a themed month called “Ridley Scottober” where I discuss four Ridley Scott films in depth. That said, feel free to check out my reviews for “Body of Lies,” “Gladiator,” “All the Money in the World,” and “Blade Runner.” My next review is going to be for “Godzilla Minus One,” and boy, I cannot wait to share this one with you all. But, I am going to have to wait. Because my next post is going to be an update on Blu-ray Movie Collection! Stay tuned! If you want to see this, 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 “Napoleon?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie about a historical figure? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Dumb Money (2023): A True Story Rich in Humor and Stars

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Dumb Money” is directed by Craig Gillespie (I, Tonya, Cruella) and stars Paul Dano (The Batman, The Fabelmans), Pete Davidson (The King of Staten Island, Big Time Adolescence), Vincent D’Onofrio (Daredevil, Full Metal Jacket), America Ferrera (Barbie, How to Train Your Dragon), Nick Offerman (Parks and Recreation, The Founder), Anthony Ramos (In the Heights, Transformers: Rise of the Beasts), Sebastian Stan (Captain America: The First Avenger, I, Tonya), Shailene Woodley (Divergent, Big Little Lies), and Seth Rogen (Neighbors, Sausage Party). This film is inspired by Ben Mezrich’s “The Antisocial Network,” a book based on true events. The story of “Dumb Money” captures ordinary people subverting the expectations of Wall Street and turning GameStop into the hottest company on the stock market.

I never got involved in the stock market in any capacity throughout my life. It is just something I have never gotten around to. But even as someone who has never gotten involved, there were times in 2021 where I could not scroll through social media without seeing something related to GameStop, or heck, even AMC Theatres. Both companies were the talks of the town at the time because a ton of people kept buying their stock, and on the surface, it felt like an ongoing joke, but for some people, it was more than that. This is a fascinating story. Therefore, I was surprised, but also delighted, that people were making a movie of this caliber on it as soon as they were. On the surface, the cast is fantastic. Many of them either had recent roles that were highlights of their respective works or have maintained careers that have kept my attention for a long time.

When I think of the GameStop stock story, part of me wants to laugh about it. I mean, come on! It is a physical media company that is as much the butt of the joke as it is synonymous with its own industry. If you live in an area where used game stores are a rarity, chances are you will, even with recent closures, have a GameStop or two within close distance. I am a GameStop customer and shop there multiple times a year. I don’t think all their business practices are great, but they usually provide a decent experience if you are looking for something in particular. In fact, I almost ended up working for GameStop in my teens. Having seen this film, I realize that as much as it highlights the people who are investing in GameStop, it is not afraid to joke about some of the things the company has done. Additionally, “Dumb Money” seems to satirize retail environments in general. I previously worked in retail. Not at GameStop, but still. And this kind of took me back in a way. One of my favorite segments of the movie is this bond between a GameStop employee and their boss. Each scene between them got a laugh out of me. This movie highlights, as I previously knew, the fact that GameStop remained open during the pandemic as an essential business. Sure, it sold certain technologies that people often used during the pandemic, but it is far from the most essential of businesses.

My favorite dig this movie does towards the large gaming chain is when they reference the idea of employees doing a TikTok dance challenge as part of a company contest. This is true by the way. The moment I heard that joke, I was in shock, and then in amazement. Because I nearly forgot that happened. Or more specifically, that it almost did. For those who don’t know, GameStop proposed a challenge to its employees to dance to a song on TikTok in the hopes of achieving extra hours on Black Friday week. This is the thing I love about “Dumb Money,” it is a film that balances humor and respect towards its subject matter. But at the end of the day, it is also a film that tells marvelous tales of underdogs.

There are several underdogs in this movie, and their stories are all compelling. In fact, one of those underdogs is a GameStop employee played by Anthony Ramos. If I did not suggest it already, I enjoyed his presence in the film and his character was well written. Meanwhile you have a couple college students trying to strike it rich. Both of whom are wonderfully played by Myha’la Herrold and Talia Ryder. On another side of the spectrum is a struggling nurse named Jenny, played by America Ferrera, whose presence oozed of charisma every moment she was on screen. But at the center of it all is Keith Gill, who spends his off time from his job on the Internet talking about stocks and Wall Street. The working man and family background of this character made him a compelling protagonist, in addition to Paul Dano’s acting method.

I like all the characters in “Dumb Money,” and I must say the antagonists of the film, specifically those more connected with Wall Street such as Seth Rogen’s Gabe Plotkin, are also fun to watch. At times, this movie basically spitballs who to root for, which is not a hard thing for me to do considering the personality traits and backbones of the antagonists. But there is one scene that perhaps over-embellishes the necessity to root against Gabe. This movie is set during the early-ish days of the COVID-19 pandemic. And one of the earliest things we learn about Gabe is that he and his family now own a new place in Florida so they could party hard during the pandemic. I was, and still am to a degree, one of those people who takes the recent events of the pandemic seriously. I am not perfect, but I still keep everything about it in the back my mind. I remember when the pandemic first started, my family and I had to balance our finances because of the way the economy flipped on its head. And I was primarily concerned about getting my grandparents sick. Meanwhile, this guy is more concerned about being able to party like an animal. The difference here is obvious.

“Dumb Money” is one of those stories that highlights the divide between classes. You have Wall Street up at the top and people like Keith Gill, who is not poor, but making chump change in comparison. It shows how even people at the top feel like they might not have enough despite their enormous success. Meanwhile, this GameStop story, whether it will be remembered more as a triumph for people outside Wall Street or as a silly meme that caught a lot of people’s attention, shows that there may be room for regular people when it comes to striking it big on the stock market. This is a story set in recent times that often delivers humor highlighting said times. I am wondering how well this movie is going to age as a comedy because some of its humor is COVID-driven, but there are plenty of other jokes emitting a more timeless feel to balance it out. “Dumb Money” is very funny, entertaining, and brings out a heck of a story. Before this movie, I looked at the GameStop stock trend as a silly fad, but this movie presents it as something more. And that’s probably the best thing about it. It added depth to this subject for me that I was not expecting. A job well done is in order to everyone involved with this movie.

In the end, “Dumb Money” is rich in excellence. It is not my favorite movie of the year, but when it comes to comedy, this movie has a ton of laughs, and as a drama, it is way more compelling than it needs to be. It presents all these individual stories from different walks of life and makes one big, masterful connection out of all of them. “Dumb Money” is neither short on stars or chuckles. Go check it out if you get a chance. I am going to give “Dumb Money” a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! Stay tuned because I have reviews coming for “It Lives Inside,” “Dicks: The Musical,” and “Killers of the Flower Moon!” But in addition to those reviews, I have my last review of the Ridley Scottober series dropping this week. If you want to read my reviews in the series so far, you can check out my thoughts on “Body of Lies,” “Gladiator,” and “All the Money in the World.” As for this last review coming up, I must claim it is a big one. I am talking about “Blade Runner!” Make sure you check out these reviews, past and future, when you get a chance! And you can do so by following Scene Before either with an email or a WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Dumb Money?” What did you think about it? Or, do you shop at GameStop? If not, what is your gaming store of choice? Do you even play video games? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

All the Money in the World (2017): Ridley Scott’s Mildly Thrilling Work Featuring Captivating (Non Kevin-Spacey) Performances

Posted on by Jack Drees

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Welcome to the third installment of the Ridley Scottober review series! It is a series where I will be talking about four Ridley Scott-directed films throughout the month of October. If you are interested in my first two reviews of the series, feel free to check out my thoughts on “Body of Lies” and “Gladiator.” The movie I am talking about today shares something in common with the last two I talked about. The fact that I have never seen it until now. That film in particular is “All the Money in the World,” whose name I have ton when it came out for a number of reasons. Now that I have finally gotten a chance to see what everyone is talking about, it is time to share my review.

“All the Money in the World” is directed by Ridley Scott (Alien, The Martian) and stars Michelle Williams (My Week with Marilyn, Manchester by the Sea), Christopher Plummer (Up, Beginners), Mark Wahlberg (Transformers: Age of Extinction, Patriots Day), and Romain Duris (L’Auberge Espagnole, The Beat That My Heart Skipped). This film is based on the events surrounding the kidnapping of John Paul Getty III, whose grandfather is the world’s richest private citizen, J. Paul Getty Sr.. When the kidnappee’s mother is unable to hand over $17 million for her son’s freedom, she does what she can to convince Getty Sr. to provide the money.

When it comes to Ridley Scott, he is usually a name that would get me in the theater. If he were sitting in the director’s chair, there is a good chance I am there. Granted that is not always true as I did not have a ton of interest in “House of Gucci” when it came out, but nevertheless. One of the reasons why I am very much looking forward to his next film, “Napoleon,” is because he is helming it. But when it comes to “All the Money in the World,” there is a particular name that was on my mind, even years after this film came out. But maybe not for the reasons the people behind this movie would desire. That name, is Kevin Spacey.

Ah… Kevin Spacey. How the mighty have fallen. A couple wrong moves in life and here you are. Your relevance is about as tiny as bacteria. Now this review is being done as part of a Ridley Scott series, and I will not deny that I was partially intrigued by this film because Scott’s name was attached to it. But if I were in the general audience months before this film’s release, there is a solid chance that Kevin Spacey would have gotten me in the door. I thought he was good actor with a decent resume. In fact, he just did “Baby Driver” earlier in the year, an incredible action flick with pristinely executed sequences and a killer soundtrack. Before this movie came out, all of his footage was shot, and he was going to play J. Paul Getty Sr.. Sounds interesting, right?

Well, fast forward to October 2017. News comes out reporting Kevin Spacey’s sexual misconduct allegations, and therefore “All the Money in the World” is in a world of hurt. Kevin Spacey was supposed to be a centerpiece of the film’s campaign, especially considering the arrival of awards season. AFI Fest was around the corner, and the movie was supposed to premiere there. That premiere was canceled, and everyone went back to work on the film. Kevin Spacey was recast with Christopher Plummer, and they shot his scenes over the course of nine days. I think this whole behind the scenes aspect is the highlight of the film. I am a production junkie. I work in production so I may be biased. But I know a thing or two about how hard it is to do something last minute, but if done right, the results can present themselves as fantastic.

Now if you pay close attention to the movie, and I did not know this upon my watch, there is one shot in the film that features Kevin Spacey getting off a train. The reason for that is because it would have been too expensive to redo. All the rest are of Christopher Plummer. I was amazed at this movie’s quick turnaround, even if the people behind it admit they could not achieve perfection.

I do not know what Kevin Spacey’s performance was like in this film, and frankly I do not care. What we got from everyone onboard was great. The recently mentioned Christopher Plummer, Michelle Williams, Mark Wahlberg, and Charlie Plummer (no relation to Christopher) all knocked their portrayals out of the park. All of them bring something exciting to the table with their characters and I cannot see anyone else, including Kevin Spacey, playing them. One of the reasons why Ridley Scott himself is a solid director is because he always manages to bring the best out of his talent. My favorite performance of 2015, and I sincerely apologize to the great Academy Award-winning Leonardo DiCaprio of “The Revenant” when I say this, is Matt Damon as Mark Watney in “The Martian.” Damon not only highlighted a constant survival instinct within his character from scene one, but did so with a sense of humor that I could only describe as irreplaceable. “All the Money in the World” clearly delivers different vibes, it is more dramatic, more serious, and LITERALLY more down to earth. “All the Money in the World” does a superb job at putting me into a world where we have all these people who would be hard to relate to 100% of the time, and yet I could sit in a room with them as a fly on the wall, intrigued by their actions.

But just because I am jumping up and down about the acting in “All the Money in the World,” does not mean it captivated me from beginning to end. There are moments of the movie that are more thrilling than others. There are moments where I had to struggle to pay attention. And there are also moments where I almost tuned out entirely. The movie is not bad, but much like “Body of Lies,” there is a certain spice that I wanted out this film that I could not quite achieve. It feels like I am going back to my watch of another thriller of his, “Body of Lies.” I think “All the Money in the World” is a better film with a more compelling story, fewer cliches up the wazoo, and more interesting characters. But if there is one thing both films have in common, there are select scenes in the film that had that had a greater span of my attention than others.

If there is another thing to note about “All the Money in the World,” it looks beautiful. The production designer for “All the Money in the World” is Arthur Max, who has worked a ton with Scott in the past on films like “Gladiator,” “Black Hawk Down,” and even as recent as “The Martian.” The two go hand in hand. Speaking of Scott’s usual suspects, the cinematography is done by Dariusz Wolski. He previously worked on “Exodus: Gods and Kings,” “The Martian,” and even “Alien: Covenant” which released months before this movie hit theaters. The lighting and framing make for a consistently perfect pair throughout “All the Money in the World.” There is a wide shot in Rome from the first few minutes that I wanted as a desktop photo. It is that good.

As a story, despite the film’s pacing issues, some characters standing out more than others, and select scenes not having as much of a pop as I would prefer, I am glad we got to see it. I think the movie presents a fascinating moral about wealth, and how even when you are rich, you feel that there is no breaking point. There are probably more people out there than we think that will put their riches before their family. I will not deny that having money is nice. And I am not going to pretend that I have as much as Christopher Plummer’s character. I found it fascinating, and kind of depressing, how his character seemed to think saving someone in his family was not worth even just a small portion of his wealth. J. Paul Getty Sr. stands out way more than he should as a character given all the controversy surrounding this film, but I guarantee that regardless of who is playing him, he is probably the character that would stand out most in the story, for good reason. But of course, at the risk of beating a dead horse, Christopher Plummer does an excellent job in the role.

In the end, “All the Money in the World” is not my favorite of Scott’s works. But much like “Body of Lies,” it stands as a film that I think a lot of people would kill to make. But if I have to be real with you, I think the history of this movie is more interesting than the movie itself. If it were not for all the controversy, this would just be a lesser film in Ridley Scott’s library. But with the way things are, it is a lesser film in Ridley Scott’s library with notable complications that came up around its release. It is not something I plan on watching a second time, but it is a film that I do not regret putting on. The performances are all standouts, the camerawork is some of the finest of its year, and when it comes down to it, it is an intriguing study of how wealth can affect people. Yes, at times it is a chore to watch, I will not deny that. But I think you would not be doing yourself any harm if you decide to check it out. I am going to give “All the Money in the World” a very high and generous 6/10.

“All the Money in the World” is now available on DVD, Blu-ray, and on various streaming services.

Thanks for reading this review! My final Ridley Scottober review arrives next week, and unlike the ones I have done so far, it is for a film I have seen.

Many times, actually.

For the final Ridley Scottober review, I am going to be talking about “Blade Runner,” the 1982 science fiction classic! It is a film that I have mentioned and talked about many times on Scene Before, but after many years of blogging here, I finally get to do a proper review of it. Stay tuned! If you want to see this 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 “All the Money in the World?” What did you think about it? Or, if you could replace any actor or actress in any movie in the history of time with Christopher Plummer, which one would it be and why? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Oppenheimer (2023): A World-Defining Film for a World-Defining Time

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Oppenheimer” is directed by Christopher Nolan (Interstellar, Tenet) and stars Cillian Murphy (Inception, Peaky Blinders), Emily Blunt (Edge of Tomorrow, Mary Poppins Returns), Matt Damon (Downsizing, We Bought a Zoo), Robert Downey Jr. (Iron Man, Chaplin), Florence Pugh (Black Widow, Don’t Worry Darling), Josh Hartnett (Cracked, Pearl Harbor), Casey Affleck (Manchester by the Sea, Gone Baby Gone), Rami Malek (No Time to Die, Bohemian Rhapsody), and Kenneth Branagh (Death on the Nile, Tenet). This film is about the adult life of J. Robert Oppenheimer, a physicist who would play a major role in changing the course of both science and history.

Christopher Nolan is my favorite film director working today. I appreciate every single one of his films. “Interstellar” is my top film of the past decade, not to mention all time. “Inception” is a marvelous, trippy, dream-esque trip like no other. While they are not my favorite comic book movies, I think “The Dark Knight” trilogy is full of great action, characters, and performances. “Memento” is one of the better non-linear stories that comes to mind. I even liked “Tenet.” I have seen it four times in theaters. I do not know how many people can say that. While I call what I do critical, I will not deny that I am a Christopher Nolan fan. I look forward to every one of his films, including “Oppenheimer,” which I put amongst my most anticipated of the year. This film is a different angle for Nolan, who has created dark material, but he does so with a sense of joy sparkled in somewhere. For “Oppenheimer,” there is no joy. Only sour vibes. If you look at “Dunkirk,” which is set during a depressing time like World War II, the movie fails to earn a more mature R rating, instead of a PG-13, because there is a lack of blood and other things in it like excessive foul language. “Oppenheimer” is Nolan’s first R rated film since 2002’s “Insomnia,” a remake of a 1997 Norwegian film of the same name.

Safe to say, when it comes to the content of “Oppenheimer,” Nolan does not hold back compared to some of his other films. Much like “Dunkirk,” there is not much blood to be seen. There is not much violence either. However the film earns an R due to sexuality, nudity, and language. If you take out some of the sex or swearing, Nolan and crew probably could have earned a PG-13. Even with the sex and nudity, it honestly feels tame, especially when compared to another recent film, “Joy Ride.” There is nothing that comes off as super objectifying or over the top about it. In some ways, it feels everyday, but with some extra flair to it. Of all of the Christopher Nolan films, and this is not a diss on any of the others, this is some of his most lifelike work yet. Then again, having it be based on history definitely helps.

But overall, what did I think of the film? Well, as of now, I have seen “Oppenheimer” twice. That should tell you something you need to know by the end of this review.

In addition to being his most mature work yet, Christopher Nolan fires on all cylinders in “Oppenheimer” to tell a story that not only captivated me through showcasing history’s past, but also highlighting where we may be going. On the surface, “Oppenheimer” chronicles the life of a man who dedicated his life to his field, only to have his choices lead to monumental events. It is so much more.

For those who are often challenged when facing three hour films, I can tell you that this film is a heavy watch, but even with that in mind, those three hours are used brilliantly. There is a lot to see, and a lot to digest. Despite the long runtime, “Oppenheimer” is especially worth seeing in the theater. If you have a small bladder, plan wisely. Because if you are like me, you will enjoy much of what is in front of you.

“Oppenheimer” is told in a way that despite being non-linear, flows like a straight line. It is also told in a way that I think only someone resembling a Christopher Nolan-type could tell it. The film is heavy in flashbacks and storytelling shifts. The story may be called “Oppenheimer,” and it is ultimately a film about the titular character from start to finish. But it is not always told from his perspective.

Speaking of Oppenheimer, Cillian Murphy is gold throughout the picture as the title character. If the Oscars were tomorrow, he would be a serious contender for Best Actor. A lot of what makes Murphy pop is his subtleties. There are multiple signals throughout the film of what Oppenheimer was thinking, that may sometimes be highlighted by either something he says, or an expression on his face. In addition to Murphy’s mannerisms, he looks the part, and ultimately, feels the part.

Joining Murphy is a stacked cast whose talents know no bounds from Florence Pugh to Kenneth Branagh to Robert Downey Jr. in a bit of a departure from what he has been doing in recent years through his time in the MCU. I have seen users on social media say that Robert Downey Jr. is finally “acting” again. First off, he never stopped, he just played Iron Man so many times that it may feel like he is. Over the years he has done a great job as Tony Stark, and he also kills it here as Lewis Strauss. Like Murphy in his lead role, Downey Jr. is probably gonna be a frontrunner for Best Supporting Actor by the end of the year. But in all seriousness, look at this cast! Matt Damon! Emily Blunt! Rami Malek! That is not even the stretch of it! The cast is a murderer’s row of both star power and off the charts performances. It is like what “Amsterdam” was trying to be, even with an iconic, experienced director to back them up, but the difference here is the comparatively greater execution.

This film sort of reminds me of “2001: A Space Odyssey,” because “Oppenehimer” deals with weapons somewhat similarly to how “2001” deals with technology. Throughout history, mankind has had an obsession with tools. In a way, they made us stronger, they kept us alive, and in some ways, we refuse to live in a world without them. Technology and weapons continue to evolve, and therefore, there could be a breaking point. “Oppenheimer” begs to ask what happens if mankind not only gains enough power to destroy an entire group of people, but possibly themselves. When this film highlights the development of the bomb, there is a lot of talk about the weapon’s uncertainty. During its assembly, the chances of the bomb destroying the entire planet were near zero, but some would argue even that is too intimidating of a chance. When the bomb went off, it seemed like the weapon that made all others inferior. But like how there is always a bigger fish, there may also be a bigger weapon as time goes on.

I have seen a couple horror titles this year and I can say “Oppenheimer” is eerier than both titles. “Oppenheimer” may not come off as a horror movie at first sight, but it is certainly one by the end of it. Speaking of the end, to drive that point home, I will not say anything about what happens, but there is a final exchange in the film that I cannot stop thinking about. “Oppenheimer” is responsible for possibly the greatest last line in the history of film. It is up there with “Well, nobody’s perfect,” from “Some Like it Hot.” I am not going to give the line away, but it is a series of words that will stick with me, along with the hallowing shots that follow.

One of the reasons why Christopher Nolan is a favorite director of mine is that while his movies vary across the board, is that they are some of the most prominent examples of narratives that get me to think. “Interstellar” got me thinking about the earth’s future, in addition to my own. “Dunkirk” made me think that people are genuinely good at heart even in the worst of times. “Tenet…” Well, it certainly got me to think. Maybe think backwards sometimes. “Oppenheimer” is another one of those thinker kind of pictures, but it is making me think in ways where I am afraid that mankind may achieve a point of self-destruction. As a moviegoer, I often watch films for an escape from my problems. But not all films are created equal. Sometimes there is room, depending on the occasion, for a film that reminds you of your problems, or in this case, highlights problems that could haunt you for the rest of your life.

I was off and on as a history student in school, but there is a basic saying about history that justifies teaching even the darkest of tales. Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it. That saying is perhaps the backbone of “Oppenheimer,” no matter how you slice it. This film may tell the story of J. Robert Oppenheimer, and he is by all means the protagonist of this picture, but he is more of a notable presence than a “hero” in some ways. There are certain scenes where other characters may see him as such, but he is not entirely a proper fit for the description of “hero.” Understandably, “Oppenheimer” was not released in Japan. There is also no scheduled release there as of yet. That said, as I watched the film, there are moments where I got the notion that the film served as an occasional apology to the country. It is not necessarily in your face propaganda, but from start to finish, the film never comes off as an attack towards Japan or its people. If anything it comes off as a warning to anyone who desires mass destruction on a large group. And yes, that is all the while the movie highlights an event of mass destruction. But it says that if we get to a point in our history where we continue to fight, where we continue to destroy each other, we may ultimately destroy ourselves.

Again, “Oppenheimer” is a horror movie disguised as a three hour historical drama. If you think ghosts, ghouls, and goblins are the scariest things you will see this year, just wait until J. Robert Oppenheimer gives a speech to flag-wielding Americans in a gym. If I watch a new horror movie in theater around spooky season, there is a good chance that it will not leaved as haunted as I have the past two times I have watched “Oppenheimer.”

In the end, “Oppenheimer” is a hallowing time at the movies, but nevertheless a remarkable achievement of cinema. While I really liked “Tenet,” I think “Oppenheimer” is a step up from Christopher Nolan’s previous efforts. If anything, this may end up being a top 3 film of his for me. The film stands as a technical achievement that must be seen in a large format like IMAX. This is especially considering it was partially shot with IMAX film cameras by Hoyte Van Hoytema, who also used the camera to shoot three other Nolan titles and even Jordan Peele’s “Nope.” Additionally, it is a dramatic achievement that has been perfectly executed by its star-studded cast. Even with the haunting nature of this film, a good portion of the imagery is awe-inspiring, the music is captivating, and the sound is beautifully audible. That said, if I had a complaint with the film, the sound mix, despite the powerful audio and score, is not the greatest, which is not new for Christopher Nolan. Other than that, the movie stands as one of the director’s best. I am going to give “Oppenheimer” a 9/10.

“Oppenheimer” is now playing in theatres everywhere. The film is also available in select IMAX 70mm locations for a limited time. I had the grand opportunity to see it in one of those locations, and if you are thinking of taking the opportunity to see “Oppenheimer” in one of those locations, I highly endorse it. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon I will be dropping reviews for “Haunted Mansion,” “The First Slam Dunk,” “Barbie,” and “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem.” Stay tuned! Also, 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 “Oppenheimer?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the scariest non-horror title you have ever seen? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!