Cailee Spaeny

Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery (2025): The Weakest Film of the Knives Out Trilogy

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery” is directed by Rian Johnson and this is the third film in his ongoing “Knives Out” franchise. This film stars Daniel Craig (Casino Royale, Logan Lucky), Josh O’Connor (Challengers, The Crown), Glenn Close (The Wife, Fatal Attraction), Josh Brolin (Avengers: Infinity War, Weapons), Mila Kunis (Family Guy, Jupiter Ascending), Jeremy Renner (The Avengers, The Hurt Locker), Kerry Washington (Scandal, Little Fires Everywhere), Andrew Scott (Sherlock, Ripley), Cailee Spaeny (Priscilla, Civil War), Daryl McCormack (Good Luck to You, Leo Grande, Bad Sisters), and Thomas Haden Church (Spider-Man 3, Wings). This film shows what happens as Benoit Blanc investigates the death of priest who passed during a Good Friday service.

“Wake Up Dead Man” is one of those films that I really should be more excited about. I did not make a most anticipated films of the year list this past January. Frankly, I do not know if I ever will make one of those lists again. But if I did do one for this year, chances are I would have put “Wake Up Dead Man” on it. I really enjoyed the last couple of “Knives Out” movies, especially the original. This film franchise comes off as a passion project for Rian Johnson behind the camera and Daniel Craig in front of it. That said, I kept forgetting that this third film was happening. I knew that a third film would happen at some point. But I feel like the hype machine for this film was miniscule compared to the previous ones. The first film, while definitely somewhat familiar as far as the mystery genre goes, was one of 2019’s freshest and most exciting originals. “Glass Onion” appeared to piggyback off of the first film’s success while still delivering something new and what I thought to be a solid sequel. It also surprisingly implements the COVID-19 pandemic quite well. There were quite a few 2020-esque callbacks that had me laughing. I did not see that coming. “Glass Onion” even got a wider theatrical release than most Netflix projects, as it should have. I could not believe I had the opportunity to watch a Netflix movie at an AMC, but it happened!

Meanwhile, “Wake Up Dead Man” also had a release in theaters, but it appears to have similar treatment to a lot of Netflix’s other movies that end up in cinemas. “Wake Up Dead Man” ended up playing a few locations, but none of the major chains. Not AMC. Not Regal. Not Cinemark. I took advantage of the limited opportunity to catch “Wake Up Dead Man” in cinemas, and part of me is thankful for it. Like the past couple films, “Wake Up Dead Man” has plenty of laughs. It was exciting to see this film play in front of an occasionally audible crowd. That said, of the three “Knives Out” films, I found this one to be the least funny.

Courtesy of Netflix – © 2025 Netflix, Inc.

One of the biggest positives I can give “Wake Up Dead Man” just so happens to be one of the biggest positives I’ve acknowledged through the last couple of “Knives Out” movies. Daniel Craig looks like he is having a ball in every single scene. Benoit Blanc is a perfect balance between being a voice of reason while also teetering to a point where he is practically a complete goofball. He has such a knack for theatricality and a lust for shenanigans all the while being in complete focus to simply solve whatever case is in front of him. This is Craig’s third outing as Blanc and he continues to shine. Of course, Craig surrounds himself with plenty of star power. This film’s ensemble cast includes big names like Mila Kunis, Josh Brolin, Thomas Haden Church, Kerry Washington, and Josh O’Connor to name a few.

“Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery” feels the most Netflix-esque of the “Knives Out” movies so far. Granted, this statement may be unfair, considering the first one is not a Netflix original. It was distributed by Lionsgate. But of the three movies, this is the one that feels the most disposable of the bunch. I hate to stereotype Netflix films, but when I think of Netflix’s filmography, much of what comes to mind is “content.” These are stories designed to be consumed as soon as it drops, only for them to be quickly forgotten. “Wake Up Dead Man” undoubtedly has some memorable moments, but I would not be lying to say it is the most forgettable film of the trilogy so far.

That said, there are some things that this film does to separate itself from the previous two. Like the last couple of films, the story revolves around a large ensemble cast. However, this story involves a group of people who are to a certain degree, constantly in a tight knot, but we also see them constantly separated. Specifically, people who work within and go to a specific church. Sure, we see the cast of first film split up through town, but much of the picture sees a large family gathering in one home. The second film sees a big group of friends coming together at an unusual abode. This film goes bigger and many of the crucial story moments happen from one place, followed by another. It is not like multiple people are dying in the same home similar to the second movie.

“Knives Out” so far has remained a consistent franchise for the most part. All three films are directed by Rian Johnson, and his touch has been exquisite with each go. Every film to a certain degree feels like a throwback set in modern times. All the films run at a smooth pace and have laugh out loud humor. That said, this film let off a particular vibe that the other two did not. As this film reaches the end, it felt draggy. There is a moment in this film where this huge revelation is unveiled. Of course, it is eloquently explained by Daniel Craig’s Benoit Blanc. The film’s timing with its edits, shot choices, and music also play a role in such mastery. While Craig seems to be having fun on set, I had less fun watching him and the surrounding characters during this scene. The revelation is incredibly drawn out, perhaps on purpose. Regardless of the intent, watching this scene occasionally felt tedious. The climax of this film felt rather underwhelming compared to the other two.

All of the “Knives Out” films exceed a two hour runtime including credits. While “Wake Up Dead Man” is the longest “Knives Out” film statistically, it is perhaps the only “Knives Out” movie where I could feel the runtime, almost to the point where I thought the movie was longer than what the runtime said it was. This is the first time I watched a “Knives Out” movie wondering it would end. I was far less invested in this film than I was the other two. Is the film clever? Sure. Is it well made? Sure. But it lacks the oomph that the other two movies have delivered. This may be because I found the screenplay or characters to be less compelling this time around, or perhaps that the formula is not as novel as it was in 2019. As much as I respect Rian Johnson, I would be curious to see what another filmmaker could bring to this franchise in the future. I feel like they could bring a breath of fresh air. This is not a horrible movie, but it is the least palatable of the trilogy so far and by its conclusion, I kept wondering when it would roll the credits.

Courtesy of Netflix – © 2025 Netflix, Inc.

In the end, “Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery” feels like a step down for the franchise. I walked out of the first couple of “Knives Out” movies buzzing. Even though I gave “Glass Onion,” a 7/10, which is good, not great, I found the film to be a memorable experience. The first two films had nonstop laughter, engaging plots, and likable characters. While there is still plenty of humor in “Wake Up Dead Man,” I found myself less attached to the story and cast. Sure, Jud is a solid protagonist, but I found the supporting cast to not stand out as much as those from the previous installments. There is no Chris Evans in the cast or Dave Bautista. I cannot name that one character who had one or two extremely quotable lines that I will be thinking about for a long time. Sure, this film gets plenty of big names, but I do not think they were used as well as the actors from the last movies. Maybe I will rewatch the film on Netflix one day and have a totally different opinion, but for now, I am going to give “Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery,” a 6/10.

Little sidenote, this is not sponsored, but if anybody wants to watch a really fun “Knives Out” parody, this is your chance. Netflix, who not only distributes “Knives Out,” but also airs new episodes of “Sesame Street,” released a new short called “Forks Out.” The 5 minute story features the cast of “Sesame Street” trying to figure out who ate the Cookie Monster’s pie, with some help from Detective Beignet Blanc, inspired by Daniel Craig’s Benoit Blanc from the movies. Go check it out. It’s a take on “Knives Out” with puppets. How can this not be funny?

“Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery” is now playing in select theaters and is available on Netflix for all subscribers.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Jay Kelly!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Bugonia,” “No Other Choice,” “Fackham Hall,” “Scarlet,” “The Secret Agent,” and “Hamnet.” 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 “Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite film in the “Knives Out” trilogy? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

On the Basis of Sex (2018): Felicity Jones Shines as RBG in This Surprisingly Decent Biopic

Posted on by Jack Drees

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! It is time to continue Scene Before’s Election Days review series. Unusually, this review is being posted on a Monday! I intended this series to be updated weekly on Tuesdays, but to be frank, I have a commitment tomorrow. I am not sure if my schedule would allow me to finalize this post then, so I thought I would get it out today. Speaking of unusual, unlike the last two movies I reviewed, “The Campaign” and “W.“, this review regards a movie about someone whose seat is determined by elected officials, not necessarily by the people of the United States on Election Day. Today we are going to focus on the prominent Supreme Court Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Having joined the Court of Appeals in 1980 during the Jimmy Carter administration, not to mention appointed to the Supreme Court in 1993 during Bill Clinton’s time as the U.S. President, she has maintained a reputation as a trailblazer. This film focuses on a time in her life before all that happened. Is the movie worth watching? I will share my thoughts below and you can find out for yourself.

“On the Basis of Sex” is directed by Mimi Leder (Deep Impact, Pay it Forward) and stars Felicity Jones (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, The Amazing Spider-Man 2), Armie Hammer (Cars 3, Nocturnal Animals), Justin Theroux (Mulholland Drive, The Girl on the Train), Sam Waterston (Law & Order, The Newsroom), and Kathy Bates (The Waterboy, Misery). This film is about Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who must overcome various obstacles to help herself, her family, all the while trying to establish a career in a competitive, everchanging climate.

Despite coming out more than half a decade ago, I missed “On the Basis of Sex” when it came to theaters. After all, there were so many films coming out at the time that I could only get to a certain number of them. I was mainly focused on what insiders were projecting to be the major awards contenders at the time and “On the Basis of Sex” did not seem to be one of them. I was intrigued by the premise, but I had a bit on my plate. My motivations even caused me to miss “Bumblebee,” a blockbuster I was curious about at the time. By the way, I do not have a review for it, but it is a good movie! I eventually ended up buying a used copy of “On The Basis of Sex” on Blu-ray for $3.99, so I thought it would be worth checking out some time. And worth checking out, it is.

I knew “On the Basis of Sex” would be good, but I did not expect it to stand out the way it does sometimes. I want to quickly address the pacing of this movie. I am not surprised when I watch say an action movie or a comedy movie and find myself immersed in those environments to the point where time moves at supersonic speed while watching those. There was a point where I checked how far the movie was into its runtime and to my surprise, we were almost halfway through and I thought to myself, “Wow! I guess I’m really enjoying this!” It reminds me of when I watched “The Post.” It is shocking and delightful to know how immersed you can get in a story from time to time that is almost non stop talking.

“On the Basis of Sex” starts off on a high note. Perhaps literally. Partially because the song choice in the beginning perfectly sets the tone for the movie. It is loud and grabs your attention, kind of like the fight for equal rights this film often tends to highlight. But not only does the movie start well from an audio perspective, but the opening sequence set at Harvard is finely edited and shot. The movie starts off with this gigantic sea of men, therefore illustrating how there is a lack of women in Ginsburg’s position. The men are also all wearing suits and jackets. Each jacket looks almost like the other. They’re grey, they’re black. It is a limited and somewhat uninviting color palette. Then you look at Ginsburg in her light blue outfit. I am sure if she were wearing similar colors to the men surrounding her we could identify Ginsburg just fine. But her outfit, most notably due to its vibrant color choice, easily grabs your attention. I thought the costuming is top notch here, as it is for the remainder of the film.

Felicity Jones plays Ruth Bader Ginsburg in this film. Jones does a decent job portraying a rather commanding figure. When I think of RBG, I think of someone who is motivated, someone who takes charge. This is not her most notable lead role in the last decade, but I must say between this and the much more popular “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story,” Jones does a decent job playing strong women while also gracefully showing the weaknesses of said characters. When I watched “Rogue One,” I thought Jones did a good job at highlighting Jyn Erso’s uncertainty on screen. I remember when she was leading people into battle and I could feel her timidness, even though she was not showing it. In the case of RBG, I could tell Jones was showing more confidence this time around. After all, the movie shows she is still learning new things, but she is mature and certain as to what she wants. As to how to get it, that is occasionally the obstacle. At times, the obstacle exists just because of how other people see her.

The film dives into the sexism that women deal with, even today. We see a man telling RBG to smile more, change her tone. There is a moment where we see Ginsburg and her daughter walking through the street and some construction workers are catcalling them. We see Ginsburg, reservedly tell her daughter Jane, played by Cailee Spaeney, to just keep walking. But the daughter is not having it, she yells at them, signaling their actions are not okay, and then hitches a cab. This leaves her mother surprised and impressed, showing the progression of how women are opening up as to how they prefer to be treated. It is a memorable scene and does a good job at highlighting how far women’s rights have come generation after generation, even if it is shown through something as small as this.

The film also shows Ginsburg, despite being a star student in law school, struggling to find work. And while the job market can prove to be competitive in a number of contexts, for Ginsburg, she struggled to find work because of her identity. Multiple law firms turned her down because they did not want to hire a woman. We find out Ginsburg ends up taking a position as a professor at Rutgers Law School, which initially tends to bewilder her husband, Martin Ginsburg. Through the tone of the dialogue and various visual cues as Ruth reveals such news to her husband, it is emphasized that maybe this is not the outcome both sides were expecting. Even so, the two recognize the small victory. It is a decent scene showing the bumpy road that it is life. Once several doors close, another one may open that you were least expecting.

Despite how much I enjoyed “On the Basis of Sex,” it is not without its flaws. “Hollywoodized” is a term I have used on Scene Before in the past, and it fits here too. At times, this movie’s dramatization is rather obvious and almost distracting. While the movie is based on true events, there are certain moments during the showcasing of said events that feel like they would only exist in the context of a dramatized film.

Although if there is one thing that pipes itself up throughout the movie that really kept me interested, it is Mychael Danna’s score. Having watched lots of films over the years, I have had my fair share of scores I liked, but there are a certain amount that I would revisit on my own time. “On the Basis of Sex,” to my surprise, seems as if it could end up being one of those scores. Maybe I will eventually play it while writing my reviews.

As far as biopics go, I am not going to pretend “On the Basis of Sex” reinvents the wheel. There are moments where we see Ginsburg’s life play out that were beyond fascinating to learn about but the structure of the film does have a been there done that feel at times. If you can handle some predictability, cliches, and overdramatization every once in a while, you might like this movie.

In the end, “On the Basis of Sex” surprised me. I mean, I was not surprised the movie played out the way it did in parts. There is definitely a noticeable formula that I thought was met. But Felicity Jones carries this film as the lead. Although that does not mean there are no other standouts in the cast. Some include Armie Hammer, Kathy Bates, and even Cailee Spaeney as Ginsburg’s daughter, Jane. What did surprise me was how fast time flew as the movie progressed. I cannot say I felt bored or uninterested, so I have to give credit to the movie for keeping me awake. I am going to give “On the Basis of Sex” a 7/10.

“On the Basis of Sex” is now available on DVD, Blu-ray, Digital, and VOD. As of this writing, the film is available on Netflix for all subscribers.

Thanks for reading this review! I have one more review coming up next week in the ongoing Election Days series and it is going to be for the Amazon Studios film, “Elvis & Nixon.” I have not seen this film before. I just watched the trailer. It seems to promise a lot of fun. I figured after a couple of heavier films, and yes, I include “W.” as an example even though it has comedic elements, I thought it would be fun to maybe end with something on the lighter side. Stay tuned for that review. As for newer releases, stay tuned for my thoughts on “The Apprentice,” “Anora,” “Here,” “Gladiator II,” “Red One,” and “A Real Pain.” 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 “On the Basis of Sex?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie you watched that you feel went by much faster than you were expecting it to? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Civil War (2024): Alex Garland’s Most Dramatically Immersive Film Yet

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Civil War” is directed by Alex Garland (Ex Machina, Annihilation) and stars Kirsten Dunst (Spider-Man, Wimbledon), Wagner Moura (Elite Squad, Puss in Boots: The Last Wish), Cailee Spaeny (Priscilla, Pacific Rim: Uprising), Stephen McKinley Henderson (Dune, Lady Bird), Sonoya Mizuno (House of the Dragon, Devs), and Nick Offerman (Parks and Recreation, The Founder). This film is set in a dystopian future United States and centers around a group of people trying to make it to Washington, DC before rebel factions descend upon the White House.

As I have said on this blog before, some of my favorite directors working today include Christopher Nolan, Damien Chazelle, and Quentin Tarantino. Those are usually the big three that come to mind. Although one director I happen to admire somewhere down that list is Alex Garland. I love his directorial debut, “Ex Machina.” A film that has become increasingly relevant and captivating with age. Looking back at his sophomore directorial effort, “Annihilation,” I think that film is a slight step down. But there is a lot that works in that film. Visually, it is uniquely stunning. Natalie Portman does a great job in the lead role. As an experience, I found parts of the film trippy, intriguing, and even a little terrifying. Looking back, it also has one of the better musical scores of the past decade. As for Alex Garland’s next movie, “Men,” I cannot say I hated it… In a thumbs up, thumbs down world, it is a thumbs up. The actors do a good job. The color palette and overall aesthetic pops. But it felt like there was something missing from that film. It lacked an oomph of sorts. Naturally, I was curious about “Civil War.” Even with that in mind, I was not fully sure where to set my expectations. I thought this movie could go one way or another. It was either gonna stand out in such a positive way or in such a negative way. Turns out, it does both.

“Civil War” is not a movie I am going to recommend for everyone. If you are looking to have a good time, then maybe go see something else. I am not saying that “Civil War” is a terrible movie. It is far from being bad. But if anything, it reminds me of when I watched say “12 Years a Slave,” which to a certain degree, is not the happiest watch. The two movies are completely different in terms of plot and execution, but they deliver similar feelings of uneasiness. This movie made me feel genuinely uncomfortable. There are scenes in this film where I am tittering in my seat because the context of said scene is frankly disturbing to say the least. And honestly, and I mean this as a compliment in regards to “Civil War,” some of those scenes feel real. Or if not real, genuine enough to the point where I believe it could happen. This is especially true for one scene that has caught my attention since first watching the trailer.

If you saw the marketing for “Civil War,” you have probably seen Jesse Plemons on screen. He plays an ultranationalist and he owns the role to the tenth degree. I am sure Plemons is the nicest of guys in real life, but I would never want to come across this character in my travels. His portrayal of this character, simply known as “Soldier,” is delivered with subtlety, but even his calm mannerisms pack a punch. Whenever he is on screen, I am simply waiting to hear a pin drop, or anything else that would get me to jump out of my chair. I know I just saw “Abigail,” which by definition, is a horror movie prominently featuring a vampire. But I have to be real, compared to Abigail, Plemons’s character is nightmare fuel.

The strongest point for “Civil War” is how easy it is for me to feel like I’m in the middle of the action. I saw this movie in IMAX, and of the IMAX experiences I had, this is one of the more interesting ones. Because when I go to IMAX, I go for the thrills, the chills, and the excitement that, like the opening countdown suggests, CRYSTAL CLEAR IMAGES and EARTH-SHATTERING SOUND can bring. This movie was almost too loud at times, but I also think that from Garland’s point of view, that was on purpose. The gunfire, explosions, and all the other ruckus of war were dialed up to an 11 to the point where I felt like I was there. Part of me assumed I was actually in the moment with Kirsten Dunst or whoever else was on screen at the time.

Kirsten Dunst plays Lee (left rear), a photojournalist. When it comes to defining a main character for “Civil War,” it seems as if there are limited solid options on the table. This movie is a controversy generator, but I will note that when it comes to selecting a main character, a photojournalist like Lee is a smart choice. Lee is active enough to the point where she is technically involved in the war, but her job basically keeps her from picking a side. Dunst is well cast in the role and delivers quite a performance. She does a good job.

The film may be called “Civil War,” but at its core, you could argue that this film is essentially a road trip movie. It is about a group of characters trying to get from point A to point B with the intentions of running into as few obstacles as possible. Along for the ride is Wagner Moura as Joel (right front), a Reuters journalist. Stephen McKinley Henderson as Sammy (left front), a New York Times journalist and Lee’s mentor, and Cailee Spaeny as Jessie Cullen (right rear), an aspiring photographer. All of these actors fit into their roles nicely and have good chemistry. Casting-wise, this movie hit the jackpot.

As I said earlier, “Civil War” is a movie that stands out to me in both a positive and negative way. In addition to the balance between the thrills and all around discomfort this movie brings to the table, this notion also stands true for its technical aspects. I have already talked about how the sound does its job while also coming off as one of the movie’s drawbacks. But much like the sound, the film editing has my brain driving itself in circles.

There are points in this movie that had me thinking to myself that the editing is not just great, it is a contender to win an Oscar next year. In fact, the editing in this film, in addition to being perfectly paced, spectacularly highlights the power of photojournalism. This is something that is personal to me as someone who has spent the past year working in news, but also as someone who has taken journalism classes in college. But if I have one thing to say about the final edit, it is that there are a couple of music choices that are about out of left field. I think the film’s music, for the most part, works. But there are one or two instances where I found myself perplexed.

As for the film’s reflectiveness of our society, obviously there are moments that feel genuine enough that remind me of the world we live in today. But as for the idea that California and Texas could unite in war anytime soon, I found that to be a bit of a fantasy. At the same time though, I do not entirely care that they are in this war together. If this film felt more genuine than it is, chances are it would generate more controversy than it already unleashing amongst its audiences. I went to see a movie with a friend of mine in March. One of the trailers was for “Civil War.” Based on what she saw, she thought this movie should never have happened. Based on her words, I gathered she thought a movie like this could potentially be dangerous. Personally, I can see where she is coming from. This is why, again, if you are looking for are a looking for an escape, maybe this is not the movie for you. As for me, I think “Civil War” is one of the better films of the year. It is not quite on the level of say “Dune Part Two,” but much like that recent science fiction masterpiece, “Civil War” is technically powerful and delivers a one of a kind experience.

In the end, “Civil War” is not going to be a film I will end up watching on a Friday night anytime soon, but I am glad I checked it out. It is a film that is huge in scope, massive in world-building, but in terms of the overall premise, it is as simple as can be. The story is nothing more than just journeying from point A to B and making sure nobody dies along the way. The cast is well-rounded and marvelously put together. Jesse Plemons, despite not having an official credit, practically steals the show. Nick Offerman also does a good job as the President. I thought he fit the role perfectly. The film is not flawless. In fact, even the aspects of the movie that lean more positive have some glaring negatives attached. When it comes to ranking the Alex Garland movies, this is not as enthralling as “Ex Machina” or as exciting as “Annihilation,” but it is certainly more memorable than “Men.” I am going to give “Civil War” a 7/10.

“Civil War” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now!

Thanks for reading this review! While a lot of people ended up seeing “Civil War” when it came out, my next review on the other hand is for a film that practically no one bothered to watch. That my friends, is “Boy Kills World,” which only made a few million dollars at the box office. I am proud to be one of the lucky individuals that had the pleasure of watching this experience of a flick. I cannot wait to share my thoughts on it with you all. 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 “Civil War?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Alex Garland movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Priscilla (2023): A Hauntingly Brilliant Encapsulation of First Love and the Hesitancy of Letting Go

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Priscilla” is directed by Sofia Coppola (Lost in Translation, The Virgin Suicides) and stars Cailee Spaeny (On the Basis of Sex, Pacific Rim: Uprising), Jacob Elordi (The Kissing Booth, Euphoria), and Dagmara Domińczyk in a film about the young girl who meets Elvis Presley, falls in love with him, and how her life changes while connected to the rock and roll star. It is also based on “Elvis and Me,” a 1985 memoir co-written by Priscilla Presley and Sandra Harmon.

As indicated in one of my recent reviews, specifically, “Dicks: The Musical,” A24 is a wonderfully polarizing studio. It has delivered its fair share of huge hits and magnificent misses, but with just about every film they have done, I walked out of each one recognizing that something stood out about them. Whether it was the way they were shot, written, acted, edited, or an oddball combination of aspects that somehow make the project individualistic. Between that background, and the hauntingly beautiful trailer that was released in advance of this film’s release, I was curious as to what this film could deliver.

But little did I know what it was bound to deliver. “Priscilla” is easily one of the best films I have seen this year.

2023 has had plenty of bangers for me like “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse,” “Oppenheimer,” and “BlackBerry.” Of course there are other movies too, but “Priscilla” shares similar qualities to those movies in the sense that I could not stop thinking about it the moment I exited the theater. Because those films all had screenplays that continuously had me thinking about the themes, the ideas that went into the film. “Priscilla,” much like the recently mentioned latter films, is based on true events. Even if this film somehow managed to capture a Hollywoodized version of what happened, it was very effective in its efforts. Almost every other scene between the two leads, mostly in the later portion of the film, almost had me biting my nails. I did not know a whole ton about the relationship between Elvis and Priscilla, but this film sort of opened my eyes. In fact, it perhaps earns an additional ticket of certification as it is produced by Priscilla Presley herself.

While this film is a showcase of the romance between Elvis and Priscilla, it is something deeper at its core. It is really a marvelous depiction of what it is like to be an adolescent with a first crush. Even as you age, that idea sometimes fails to slip away. We see that as Priscilla and Elvis become romantically involved, she longs for his presence, and of course, Elvis comes with the bonus of being a bit of a status symbol. But even without Elvis in the mix, I think the movie does a decent job at showing what it is like to be young, experience love, or some feeling that resembles love, for the first time. This is mostly shown on Priscilla’s part, as she is the protagonist of the film, but it is also fascinating to see someone like Elvis Presley decide how he chooses this one young girl over the thousands of other screaming fans, not to mention celebrities alive at the time of his dominance. Their connection is one that is not easy to watch, but hard to look away from. It is ultimately a riveting, gut-wrenching romance that does not have me thinking the individuals involved are making the best choices, but it is one that I understand why it could happen. That is the foundation of this movie. Taking two young, beautiful, different people, and putting them together in a connection that is not exactly smooth-sailing. It kind of has its ups and downs along the way, but the downs become increasingly evident as the movie goes.

This movie made me ask myself what I would do had I slipped into Priscilla’s shoes. There is a moment in the film where Elvis and Priscilla are together, the former is doing an activity, and the latter seems uninterested in it. Elvis appears to catch on but informs Priscilla that there are a lot of people, particularly women, who would kill to do said activity with him. That moment basically summed up the whole movie and Priscilla’s character to a tee. We all have our celebrity crushes. I will be straight up and admit that one that instantly comes to mind for me, at least at this moment in time would have to be Ana de Armas. Now if I were given the opportunity to be with her if I found out she were single, my mind would instantly think “yes.” But the question that remains to be answered is whether I would stay with them once I get to know their various quirks. The question remains true for any potential partner, but I would have to imagine in some cases, when it comes to a high-profile celebrity like Elvis Presley, or in my case, Ana de Armas, it would be a lot harder to back out in a situation like that. It goes to show how deeply we value celebrity culture and how it influences us as a society. This movie basically sums up the whole “don’t meet your heroes” idea. Did meeting Elvis Presley and getting to know him disappoint Priscilla? Maybe not at first. But as the movie goes along, we see the two develop to a point where the relationship becomes controlling, one-sided, and toxic. Because of this, “Priscilla” is arguably the most uncomfortable I felt watching a movie in 2023, but I mean that in the most positive of statements. It felt raw. It felt immersive. It doesn’t hold back.

To my lack of surprise, the Elvis Presley Foundation declined their approval for the film. After all, unlike last year’s “Elvis,” it features the iconic musician in a less positive light. It complexifies him to the point where he is a bit more arrogant. He may be nice in some scenes, but the movie is not afraid to highlight moments where he is a jerk. Therefore, while this movie did not get me to stop appreciating some of Elvis’s songs, I admire its approach in telling a story where someone so well known and respected is given a much darker background. Speaking of Elvis’s songs, and given what I just said this should not come as a huge shock, there are no Elvis songs in this film. That said, the film has a decent soundtrack that captures its respective setting beautifully. It has a nice throwback feel and I admire the film aspiring to the challenge of putting none of Elvis’s songs in a movie in which he is prominently featured. That said, he is not the protagonist. This is not his story. This is Priscilla’s story. And her story is glorious. It is a story I will continue to think about for ages. It is a story that says a ton on how we view our idols. How we will sometimes make sacrifices for the people we admire. How we feel when we experience love and don’t want to let it go, even if it may be for the greater good. “Priscilla” is an easy two-thumbs up.

In the end, “Priscilla” is one of the most hallowing tales of love I have ever seen. It is one of those movies that you kind of have to see to believe. “Priscilla” is not only one of the best movies of the year, it is one of the finest works A24 has put out in its short history. It is up there with “Room,” “Pearl,” and “First Reformed” as one of my favorite films the distributor has put out. Sofia Coppola brings amazing performances out of everyone in this film, especially its two leads, Cailee Spaeny and Jacob Elordi. Both of these two should be in contention for some big buzz this awards season. They do an excellent job with their roles. Regardless of how this film bases itself on true events, I think Priscilla Presley has one of my favorite character arcs in recent film. By the end, I was satisfied with her journey, but I left feeling icky. And mean that as a compliment. With each passing moment, Cailee Spaeny dominates the screen with her admirable presence and instant likability. If you told me in 2020 that in the next few years we’d be getting a movie from Warner Brothers about Elvis Presley, and follow that up next year with a movie from A24 about Priscilla Presley, I’d slap you across the face and call you crazy. If you told me after getting slapped that I would hate the Elvis Presley movie, and think the Priscilla Presley movie is a significant improvement over it, I might buy into your claim given how I think A24 tends to put out standout film after standout film. Yet at the same time, I would tell you to seek professional help. But here we are. “Priscilla” is one of the year’s best films and I am going to give it a 9/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the brand new anime “The Tunnel to Summer, the Exit of Goodbyes!” This film was not playing in too many places near me, but I did get a chance to catch a screening of it at an AMC, so I will have my review of the film as soon as possible. Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on Marvel Studios’ latest film, “The Marvels,” Disney’s newest animated feature, “Wish,” and Taika Waititi’s most recent directorial effort, “Next Goal Wins.” 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 “Priscilla?” What did you think about it? Or, if you have seen both films, I want to know which one you liked better… “Elvis?” Or “Priscilla?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Pacific Rim: Uprising (2018): This Year’s Independence Day: Resurgence?

Posted on by Jack Drees

*SPONSORSHIP ALERT* (although nobody’s payin’ me)

Before we dive into my review for “Pacific Rim: Uprising,” let me just take a moment to ask you, how ya doin’? How’s life? What’s going on? If it were around this time frame in 2016 and you asked what a couple named Genevieve and Paul what’s going on, one of them might respond saying, “A ton of s*it.” That’s because at the time, they were trying wicked hard to make a kid, but the overall task of doing so was an absolute nightmare. All of this is truthfully documented in their new web series, “What the IVF?!”

“What the IVF?” is about Genevieve and Paul’s journey to having a baby, where they discover that having a child is not all fun and games, it’s work! Not because of the child, but because they can’t make the child! Watch the couple as their life gets serious and begins to change dramatically as they face several challenges! Sex becomes less than sexy! Math apparently is now useful in real life! Trips to visit doctors are now more nerve-racking than ever! And needles are nothing but ungrateful sons of bitches! Then again, when were they not? Those pinches are killers! You can watch all of the content posted on the “WTIVF?” YouTube channel simply by going through the links down below and clicking on the one to the YouTube page. And speaking of YouTube videos, “WTIVF?” has an episode posted earlier this week! I won’t go into too much detail, but Genevieve refers to it as her favorite episode so far and as the video that highlights the moment that probably most dramatically changed her life. Be sure to watch the video listed above if interested, subscribe to the YouTube channel, hit the notification bell, that way you can get the latest “WTIVF” content before your friends who aren’t subscribed, who in which case, may become your enemies because they aren’t subscribed. Also, check out their website, and their other online pages such as Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, all down below! Also, be sure to tell them that Jack Drees sent ya!

WTIVF? WEBSITE: http://www.whattheivf.com/

WTIVF? YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCILXSidkzWgwrQ5Oa1py78w/featured?disable_polymer=1

WTIVF? TWITTER: https://twitter.com/WTivF

WTIVF? INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/wtivf/

WTIVF? FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/What-The-IVF-288868031634125/

mv5bmji3nzg0mtm5nf5bml5banbnxkftztgwote2mtgwntm-_v1_

“Pacific Rim: Uprising” is directed by Steven S. DeKnight and stars John Boyega (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Detroit), Scott Eastwood (The Longest Ride, Suicide Squad), and Cailee Spaeny. This is the sequel to 2013’s “Pacific Rim,” directed by Guillermo del Toro, and if you are keeping up with the Academy Awards, this guy recently won Best Director for “The Shape of Water,” a movie which also won Best Picture. When it comes to “Pacific Rim: Uprising,” it revolves around John Boyega’s character of Jake Pentecost, the son of Stacker Pentecost, played in the first movie by Idris Elba. His character teams up with another character from the first movie, Mako Mori, played in the first movie by Rinko Kikuchi, and leads a team of new Jaegar pilots against a new Kaiju threat.

As far as the first “Pacific Rim” is concerned, I’ll say I personally enjoyed it. I saw it in IMAX when it came out, I had a good time, I got to see some kick-ass robot/monster fights up on the big screen, it was pure popcorn fun. I got connected to the human characters a little bit, the music was not half-bad, and Idris Elba gave a speech to remember.

“Today. Today… At the edge of our hope, at the end of our time, we have chosen not only to believe in ourselves, but in each other. Today there is not a man or woman in here that shall stand alone. Not today. Today we face the monsters that are at our door and bring the fight to them! Today, we are cancelling the apocalypse!” –Stacker Pentecost

I’ve only seen the movie twice, with last time being a month ago, but no matter when I watch it, I can imagine myself getting goosebumps just listening to that. The first “Pacific Rim” is definitely not a masterpiece, but certainly a good time. This movie, is the complete opposite. Not the opposite of definitely not a masterpiece, but the opposite of a good time.

Speaking of movies that aren’t masterpieces but also good times, remember “Independence Day?” That’s a fun movie. Remember the sequel? Yes? Unfortunately, I do too, I had to review that crap for y’all. I’m gonna go as far to say that “Pacific Rim: Uprising” is this year’s “Independence Day: Resurgence.” It’s an attempt to kickstart a new franchise and rely more on spectacle than proper storytelling. Ask me, do you remember many likable, intriguing moments from “Independence Day: Resurgence?” I don’t. And you know what? I’m gonna say that personally I found this movie to be worse than “Independence Day: Resurgence.” Heck, I watched the first movie literally the day before I went to see the second one in theaters. Someone I had a connection with wanted to see the then new “Independence Day” movie, and I was unfamiliar with the first one, so I watched it on HBO for free, but it was something that I just had on in the background. I actually had attention directed towards “Pacific Rim” and personal enjoyment from gazing at the pixels on the screen. “Pacific Rim: Uprising” currently has a 6/10 on IMDb, and it is receiving more positive ratings than negative ratings, so it clearly has people who like it. And I will say, I imagined in my head that there are certain types of people who will watch this movie and have a good time. Let’s go through the list.

GROUP 1:
Fans of the first “Pacific Rim” who don’t care what others have to say and are just happy this movie exists.

GROUP 2:
Fans of the first “Pacific Rim” who clearly know the lore or are interested to see what other lore can be developed.

GROUP 3:
Kids who like giant robots, monsters, fighting, or any combination of those things. Yes, anyone can fit in here, but I’m mainly imagining kids.

GROUP 4:
People who just want to see John Boyega in something new for whatever reason.

GROUP 5:
Judging by what I just said, I guess the select few people who happened to enjoy “Independence Day: Resurgence.”

GROUP 6:
Me on Opposite Day.

GROUP 7:
Michael Bay. Just… Michael Bay.

I mean, seriously, how does this not feel like “Independence Day: Resurgence” all over again?! This movie’s a sequel to a film with a character who some might say gave a terrific speech. A black character who is not present in this movie has a kid who plays a big part instead of them. Both sequels take place in a future far from its predecessor. Oh yeah? And did I mention that both movies suck? That’s another thing too, it’s kind of important!

I don’t care about any of the movie’s characters, but since it is now a cliche for me to talk about at least one character in detail with a big fat image listed above, I guess it’s time for me to inject myself with the poison in front of my ugly face. Let’s talk about John Boyega’s character of Jake Pentecost. Gah! Why do I have to do this?! I don’t even monetize this site! It’s not even worth it! Alright, just for the sake of having a good review, let’s tackle this bitch. Pentecost is a fine character, and by fine I mean, you don’t want to kill him by the end of the movie. But probably the main reason you’ll end up liking him or caring about him is that he’s John Boyega. If you have been a fan of the new “Star Wars” movies, you might end up rooting for this character because you know he’s Finn. By the time you walk out of the theater, you’ll probably end up forgetting this character and go back to your life where you buy tickets for, hopefully, better movies.

Moving onto the main girl in this movie, Amara Namani, played by Cailee Spaeny, I was watching the movie and I thought to myself that she reminded me of the young girl in “Logan.” I can’t say too much about that though. Because to be honest I haven’t seen “Logan.” My comparison would be invalid given how I’ve only watched the film’s promotional material. But from the way she looks, and seemingly, acts in the movie, I was given that thought at one point.

Let’s talk about Charlie Day in this film.

More like… Charlie Good Day Sir!

Like, NO! JUST NO! NO!

WHAT! THE! HECK! DID THEY DO WITH HIM?!

For those of you who haven’t watched the first movie, Charlie Day was a character in it, and he went by the name of Newton Geiszler. He was a wacky scientist who studied the Kaiju during the whole war. Take Emmett Brown from “Back to the Future,” put him in a blender with JJ Abrams, maybe a pinch of the Cowardly Lion from “The Wizard of Oz,” and add in the voice of like, I dunno, let’s just say Michael Scott from “The Office,” and you get Newton Geiszler. I won’t talk too much about him in this movie, because I want to stay out of spoiler territory, but there was a point where the character of Amara was getting on my nerves a little, then all of a sudden something happened with Newton, and then my brain tried to find all the ways it could electrocute itself. Its reaction might as well have been this GIF featuring a clip from “Family Guy.”

Image result for family guy oh okay gif

Another gripe I’ve got with this film is that it’s just boring as f*ck! I mentioned how this movie relies more on spectacle than proper storytelling, the story itself bored me, and so did the character interactions. I’ll be honest, I’m a defender of the first Michael Bay “Transformers” film, and I didn’t mind the human characters. While in that movie, you came to see giant robots fighting and may have been disappointed due to forced human character storylines, a movie such as the one I saw, had us wanting to see giant robots and monsters fight, but also made me as an audience member suffer through unlikable humans communicating with each other. In fact, one thing that I’ll point out about the first “Pacific Rim” is that while the movie isn’t exactly reliant on you giving a crap about the characters, I still cared about them and possibly rooted for them. Here, I wasn’t doing that. If somebody received any sort of pain, I wouldn’t have cared. This movie felt too extended and dull, and it ended up being an hour and fifty-one minutes. There are so many movies that are longer than this pile of garbage that are better and more worth your time! Let’s give a list!

  • 2001: A Space Odyssey
  • Citizen Kane
  • Jurassic Park
  • Every Lord of the Rings movie (including Hobbit installments)
  • Star Wars
  • Braveheart
  • La La Land
  • Interstellar
  • Titanic
  • V For Vendetta
  • The Dark Knight
  • The Matrix
  • Lincoln
  • The Fifth Element
  • The Big Sick
  • Kingsman: The Secret Service
  • Ray
  • Once Upon a Time in the West
  • Metropolis
  • 12 Years a Slave
  • Inception
  • The Martian

And you know what? I don’t know how long this statement will hold up in my book, but at this point, I might say this is worse than all of the Michael Bay “Transformers” films.

This movie isn’t all negatives, in fact, one positive I can actually give the movie, is some of the cinematography from Dan Mindel, cinematographer of such films including “Star Wars: The Force Awakens,” the 2009 “Star Trek” reboot, and “John Carter.” Now don’t get me wrong, it’s not the best I’ve ever seen, but it almost comes off as one of the only things that can make this look like a film that is trying. But unfortunately, that’s sometimes ruined by occasional choppy editing! How wonderful! I didn’t come to the movie to admire the cinematography and editing, but it doesn’t mean both of those things can be bad!

In the end, when I’m talking about a big blockbuster that is SUPPOSED to entertain you and have you enjoy yourself while munching on popcorn for a couple of hours, and the only positives that come to mind include some of the shots and maybe tads of humor, that’s an epic fail! I really wanted to like the first movie. When the first trailer came out, it sold me. It prepared me for what was to come. I was somewhat pumped. The future bits of marketing were not as great, but I thought maybe the movie could be a chunk of fun. I think I’d honestly have more fun flying Spirit Airlines than I would watching this movie. At least Spirit Airlines, as much as they suck, and trust me, THEY SUCK, can take you to places you want to go. If I wanted to see all sorts of pretty lights and maybe watch some drunkards duke it out, Spirit could take me to Las Vegas. If I wanted to go see one of my best friends in person or make fun of the way people in Texas talk up close, Spirit could take me to Houston. If I bought tickets to go to a convention that might as well be an excuse to pay lots of money to stand in line after line after line, Spirit could take me to San Diego. “Pacific Rim: Uprising,” also took me to a place, and that place, is hell. I’m gonna give “Pacific Rim: Uprising” a 2/10. I admire John Boyega, and continue to hope some brightness shines throughout his career, but to say that he may have just been shown in a movie that is possibly worse than “The Circle,” is just unfathomable.

Thanks for reading this review! Next week I’m going to have my review for “Avengers: Infinity War,” because I already have tickets to see the movie opening night, and probably right after I get done watching that, the first thing I’ll do is get right in front of my computer, type like a maniac until perhaps three o’clock in the morning, and post my review for y’all to read! By the way, I’ll warn you in advance in case you read that review, I’ll do my best to make the review spoiler-free, for the sake of not feeding the trolls who throw spoilers around the Internet, and to avoid ruining the experience of going to see “Infinity War” for those who aren’t seeing it as early as I am. Not to mention, according Anthony and Joe Russo, the two directors of “Avengers: Infinity War,” Thanos demands my silence, so I might as well respect Thanos’ wishes.

#ThanosDemandsYourSilence

Also, stay tuned because pretty soon, I’ll have my review up for “Mission: Impossible II.” This review will be up by the month’s conclusion, and it will be the second entry in my “Mission: Impossible” review series leading up to “Mission: Impossible: Fallout.” So look out for that! Stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Pacific Rim: Uprising?” What did you think about it? Which “Pacific Rim” movie was better? The first one or the second one? And since it’s relevant, did you see “Independence Day: Resurgence?” Leave all your thoughts down below, and PLEASE remember, if you are making an early review of “Avengers: Infinity War,” #THANOSDEMANDSYOURSILENCE. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!