Comedy

The Instigators (2024): Wicked Average

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Instigators” is directed by Doug Liman (The Bourne Identity, Jumper) and stars Matt Damon (The Martian, Good Will Hunting), Casey Affleck (Manchester by the Sea, Gone Baby Gone), Hong Chau (Kinds of Kindness, The Menu), Michael Stuhlbarg (Call Me by Your Name, The Shape of Water), Paul Walter Hauser (Cobra Kai, Inside Out 2) Ving Rhames (The Garfield Movie, Mission: Impossible), Alfred Molina (Raiders of the Lost Ark, Spider-Man 2), Toby Jones (Frost/Nixon, W), Jack Harlow (White Men Can’t Jump), and Ron Perlman (Hellboy, Pinocchio). This film is about two men who go on the run with a therapist after a heist does not go as planned.

As someone who has lived in Massachusetts all his life, it should not come as a surprise that I have a few Boston-based movies under my belt. Movies like “The Departed,” “Good Will Hunting,” “Spotlight,” “Ted,” “Patriots Day,” “Stronger…” Granted I still have not seen everything like “Mystic River,” “Black Mass,” “Gone Baby Gone…” Still waiting to get around to those. But as someone from this area, I feel it is my duty to check out a Boston-based film when possible, which is one reason why I saw “The Instigators” recently.

Sadly though, I cannot say I was that excited for this movie. The trailer failed to impress me, and I did not think this movie was going to do that well.

There are times where I almost forgot I had to review this movie, which is really weird when you consider my experience with it. This is a true story… When I saw this film on opening Thursday night, I am not making this up, my theater was decked to the brim with “The Instigators” posters. If this were my bedroom, you would think I have an unhealthy obsession with this movie. That should probably give you some indication as to how my experience went down.

For the record, I do not despise “The Instigators,” but I also cannot say it is worth your time either. This is one of those movies that barely kept me awake as it went. Does it have a good pace to it? Sure. Do I like the cast in the movie? Sure. Do I think the movie has some clever moments? Sure. But everything about the overall experience of the film just screams middle of the road. There is nothing outright amazing about “The Instigators,” especially when compared to other Boston titles like “The Departed.” If I was in a Boston mood and I wanted to truly pay attention to every single detail on screen, I would simply turn on “The Departed.” But as for “The Instigators,” the situation in which I most likely see myself watching this movie again in the future would probably be when I just need some background noise. Part of me wants to say that I could maybe catch the movie on cable and just leave it on, but I highly doubt that Apple is going to allow that to happen. I do not think they are in that kind of business.

Now as someone who resides on the North Shore of the Bay State, I do fit into some local stereotypes. I do enjoy Dunkin’, I buy a ticket to a ballgame at Fenway, I have used the term “Storrowed” every once in a while, and I have even had the privilege of seeing a couple Boston Marathons in person. When I was in college the Boston Marathon route went right by my campus, so I took advantage of my commuter parking pass and got to see the event play out a couple times. Heck, I went to see this movie IN THE ONLY THEATER TECHNICALLY IN BOSTON, not any of its suburbs, selling tickets for it! But I have to be real with you, as much as I try, to varying successes and failures, to maintain my local roots, I have to admit this movie does a good job linking itself to the Greater Boston culture. When I say this however, I should also say, the movie almost does… TOO GOOD of a job. Sometimes the outcome this movie provides when it comes to its Boston tributes, if you can call them that, is almost pornographic. Whether it means Alfred Molina randomly showing up with Dunkin’, getting Rob Gronkowski of all people to make a rather gratuitous cameo, or having Hong Chau’s character mention she’s from Lynn during a chase and having the other characters say “Lynn Lynn the City of sin” just because. Though I must admit, there is a scene in the movie where we see a protest outside of Boston City Hall and I almost burst out laughing as soon as I saw a sign that read “FIX THE MBTA!”.

It is almost as if the crew behind this movie decided to ingrain themselves so heavily in Boston culture to the point where they sort of built a decent atmosphere for the film, but did not have the brains on how to make the film as entertaining as can be. Because as I look back at this film, I find to be uneventful, unmemorable, and minimally engaging. I cannot say I hate any of the characters on screen, but I am not going to remember their names in six months.

That said, this film is led by Matt Damon and Casey Affleck, and the two, to my lack of surprise, have decent chemistry in their roles. They both do a good job as two guys from Quincy, and even though I admit their journeys in this film fall into some pits of predictability, I enjoyed seeing their motivations play out and their personalities come to life. But when you have these two leading a movie like this, I kind of expect something more from the script or the plot, or even the direction.

Heck, this movie is directed by Doug Liman, whose resume partially includes “The Bourne Identity” and “Edge of Tomorrow,” which like those movies or not, you would probably agree with me when I say they look pretty cinematic. This movie honestly looks like it was made for television between its lighting that appears as if the crew forgot to brighten the bulb a tad occasionally. Yet at other times, it has some unusual camera tricks that try to appear cinematic, but only manage to feel jarring the longer I gaze my eyes upon them.

If I had to pick a performance in the film that stood out to me the most, it would probably be Ron Perlman as Mayor Miccelli. At a glance, Perlman very much looks the part of a politician. He has this look to him that like some politicians, you question yourself in the back of your mind on whether or not to trust him. His presence in the film made for some good scenes, especially towards the end.

And you know what? This is a poetic transition. If I had anything else to say that is positive about the film, I must admit, I was not 100% thrilled with all that it had to offer, but there are several scenes where you can easily be entertained by these characters. The entire cast oozes charisma, even if they are playing characters whose names you will probably erase from your memory after leaving the theater. Is part of it because some of the actors in the cast are recognizable? Perhaps. Why do you think I am going about this review referring to the actors names but not acknowledging their respective characters? But like some of their previous work, those recognizable actors play their parts well here. However, for me, this film was missing something. If anything the film is almost too stereotypical and lacking in any oomph that will make audiences remember it for years to come.

In the end, “The Instigators” is a somewhat entertaining movie, but it is not one that had me engaged the entire time. As the heist goes down, I am interested in what is going on. But I cannot say there are any standout moments in this film that will cement it as one of my favorites of the year. Does everyone in the cast do a good job? Again, sure. But they are not Oscar-worthy. This movie is on Apple TV+, and I can frankly see why. I have to be real, their record has not been working for me. Other than “CODA,” which is amazing, I cannot say I have seen one movie from Apple yet, and I include “Killers of the Flower Moon” in this thought, that has totally floored me. If you were planning on watching “The Instigators,” I am here to tell you your time will not be completely wasted, but you can probably use that time to do other things that would be more exciting. I am going to give “The Instigators” a 5/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! If you want to see more reviews like this, I have more coming! Stay tuned for my thoughts on “Sing Sing,” “Borderlands,” “Skincare,” “My Old Ass,” “Reagan,” and “It Ends with Us.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Instigators?” What did you think about it? Or, since I clearly have no faith in their service, what is something you recommend on Apple TV+? Yes, I know they’ve got shows like “Ted Lasso,” “Severance,” “For All Mankind,” but I want to specifically ask if there are any movies from them that you enjoyed. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Kinds of Kindness (2024): Kinds of Forgettable…

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Kinds of Kindness” is directed by Yorgos Lanthimos (The Lobster, Poor Things) and stars Emma Stone (The Amazing Spider-Man, Poor Things), Jesse Plemons (Civil War, Game Night), Willem Dafoe (Spider-Man, Platoon), Margaret Qualley (Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Drive-Away Dolls), Hong Chau (The Menu, Downsizing), Joe Alwyn (Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk, Catherine Called Birdy), Mamoudou Athie (Jurassic World: Dominion, Elemental), and Hunter Schafer (The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes, Euphoria). This film contains three separate stories starring the same cast that all share loose connections.

“Kinds of Kindness” is one of those movies that is going to get several butts in seats. Well, maybe not everyone’s butt. That said, if you are of a certain audience, chances are this movie got your attention. After all, some of the people who are connected to this film have are hot off the recent award circuit. “Poor Things” dominated several bodies last year, earning a few Oscar wins, including Emma Stone’s beyond deserved accolade for Best Actress. It was also nominated for a multitude of Critics Choice Awards, BAFTAs, Golden Globes, and even a couple SAGs. When they dropped the trailer for this movie earlier this year, and I saw the names “Emma Stone” and “Yorgos Lanthimos” attached, my first thoughts were “Wow! That was fast! I did not think they’d crank out another movie that quickly!” And given how recently “Poor Things” won me over, I was excited to see what this dynamic duo could do with a film like this. But there was something missing from the marketing… I did not really know what the movie is about.

Now, for those who did not see this movie, I am going to try my best to not give a ton of info away, but this film is three stories all done by the same cast. They all somewhat relate in tone and theme, but they also have their differences. This was something I knew going in, but I found out from someone else who saw the movie. I did not get this from any marketing, any trailers, nothing. And as much as I do not want to spoil the whole movie, I think there are some people who would at least like to know what to expect going in…

Now I was able to remember this information going into the theater, but as for the movie itself, it is not as memorable. In fact, some of the parts I do remember, failed to win me over.

I want to be real with you… “Kinds of Kindness” is one of the worst film experiences I had in the past several years. To be clear, I do not think it is even close to being the worst movie of said years. Granted it is not exactly good… But during my screening, my projector had multiple instances of technical difficulties. So much so that the theater had to issue passes for a free screening. But not only did I have a bad experience by watching a movie that I did not enjoy for the material that the filmmakers made, but it was sullied even more by outside factors. I cannot even tell you precisely how this movie, and by that I mean the third movie within the movie, ends. Sure, I saw how it ended. But this film was so slow, so uninteresting, and yet, out of nowhere, my theatrical experience reached a lowest low to make an unmemorable ending even worse.

I just want to remind you all, this movie and its three stories star recent Oscar winner Emma Stone. Her efforts in this movie are not quite to the level of a Razzies nominee. Not even close. In fact, I would say everyone in this film is rather competent, but there is a reason why this film is releasing in the middle of the year as opposed to the end of the year. It feels really weird to say this because I have a couple Yorgos Lanthimos films under my belt, and every other one I have seen, I feel like he is getting the best performances out of each one of his actors. While the actors in this film do a good job, none of the performances this time around feel Oscar-worthy. At best, they meet some gap between an okay performance in a big budget summer blockbuster and an arthouse performance that would be considered for a nominee but is missing some sort of spark.

Admittedly, some of the stories from a conceptual perspective, are intriguing. I like the ideas for all three of these stories, but by the time they get to the end of each story, it falters at some point. Not only are they similarly titled by having “R.M.F.” in each name, but they do feel somewhat similar to each other when it comes to the execution. Each one delivers a somewhat sinister vibe and features some sequences where part of me wants to look away because they are not always easy to watch. Interestingly enough, “Kinds of Kindness” just so happens to be paced in such a way that makes it not always easy to watch. Talk about a slogfest. What can be worse than one bad movie? Ha! I know! Three bad movies in one bad movie! It’s bad movie-ception!

I admire each short story for having some daring scenes and moments, and they did catch my attention, but that is one of the only compliments I can truly give this film. It pushes some boundaries and those scenes stood out to me. There are also some scenes that turned me off, perhaps to a degree where I almost wanted to stop watching the movie altogether, so this movie has a balance of its positive and negative moments.

The way that these mini-stories are structured, the way they are written, the way they are brought to life, they should to some degree be able to stick with me after leaving the theater. But in all honesty, they were not able to do that. If anything, these stories were amusing to watch. I think there are a couple scenes that are very well directed and realized, but it does not make up for all the other moments that made me roll my eyes. Is this film incompetently made? No. It is just one that did not work for me. For all I know, this could win some people over, but I am not one of those people. This is the kind of movie that was going for a reaction, and I was definitely able to give one during some scenes. But I wish said reaction was slightly different sometimes. Honestly, if you were to ask me to recommend a Yorgos Lanthimos movie to watch, I will just recommend the film he did prior to this one, “Poor Things.” It’s fun, it is comedic, and a wacky vision brought to life. And unlike this recent outing, “Poor Things” left me thinking a bit more after leaving the cinema. The only thought on my mind after leaving “Kinds of Kindness” is that I never want to watch the movie again.

In the end, while I did enjoy “Kinds of Kindness” a bit more than “The Favourite,” it was a rather off and on experience for me where some of the turnoffs tended to stand out. Honestly, if you are looking for a recent movie from a filmmaker with an auteurist approach containing a few decent short stories, I think Wes Anderson’s “The French Dispatch” is a slightly better watch. Granted it is not a perfect movie either. It is far from Wes Anderson’s best work, but it definitely has its moments. “Kinds of Kindness” likely has an audience. It had some laughs, it has good production design, and respectable direction. But it does not have the oomph for me to call the movie great, and the experience is only worsened by several moments that left me questioning why I was watching them or why they were even put in the film in the first place. I am going to give “Kinds of Kindness” a 5/10.

“Kinds of Kindness” is now playing in select theaters and as of writing this post in 2024, the film will available on Hulu Friday, August 30th.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, I have more coming! Stay tuned for my thoughts on “The Instigators,” “Sing Sing,” “Borderlands,” “Skincare,” and “My Old Ass.” 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 “Kinds of Kindness?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie that grossed you out so much that you cannot appreciate it? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Deadpool & Wolverine (2024): The MCU’s First R-Rated Outing Heavily Delivers on Fan Service, Action, and Humor

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Deadpool & Wolverine” is directed by Shawn Levy (Free Guy, Night at the Museum) and stars Ryan Reynolds (Free Guy, The Adam Project), Hugh Jackman (The Greatest Showman, Reminiscence), Emma Corrin (My Policeman, A Murder at the End of the World), Morena Baccarin (Firefly, Greenland), Rob Delaney (Tom & Jerry, Ron’s Gone Wrong), Leslie Uggams (American Fiction, Empire), Aaron Stanford (12 Monkeys, Nikita), and Matthew Macfadyen (Quiz, Succession). In this film, Deadpool is invited to have a place in the sacred timeline of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but he instead tries to find a variant of Wolverine to save his own universe.

There are no words in cinema in which I have opposed to a greater degree over the past number of years than comic book movie fatigue. And yes, comic book movies are cinema. End of story. While there have been bumps in the road in the comic book movie and television genre, I must admit that I have never once felt the need to jump ship. Despite the DCEU coming to an end, the final efforts of said cinematic universe were all quite fun from “Shazam: Fury of the Gods” to “The Flash” to “Blue Beetle.” That cinematic universe also gave me my favorite DC movie of all time, “The Suicide Squad,” which spun off into the incredible TV show “Peacemaker.” On the Marvel side, I do not give two squirts of urine about what anyone says here… I liked every MCU movie since “Endgame.”

Now the genre has had its downsides in recent years like “Wonder Woman 1984,” “Morbius,” “Madame Web,” and as much as I enjoy the MCU movies, I think some of the Disney+ originals pale in comparison. Although “WandaVision” is must-see TV. That said, the genre has delivered way more positives than negatives for me over the years, so I was excited for “Deadpool & Wolverine.” I love the first couple of “Deadpool” movies, I was excited to see what Kevin Feige, Ryan Reynolds and Shawn Levy can do with an R-rated MCU flick, so it was definitely going to bring some novelty to this ongoing saga. Admittedly, I never grew up with Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine unlike say Tobey Maguire’s Spider-Man. “X-Men” was just never a part of my household at the time. But I have seen a few of those movies, which I have mostly enjoyed. I think Jackman does a good job in the role, he is a fine actor, so it was going to be fun to see what he would bring to this role one more time.

Safe to say, “Deadpool & Wolverine” was one of my most anticipated films of 2024. So how did it turn out?

It is one of the best comic book movies of the past few years.

To some of you reading this, such a statement may either mean a lot or a little to you. Because again, unlike some of you, I have not been fatigued by this sub-genre. But I honestly think if some of you reading this were done with Marvel movies or comic book movies in general, this film could revitalize some of your interest in that realm of film. Now, is it the best MCU movie ever? No it is not. In fact, the biggest problem I have with “Deadpool & Wolverine” is actually the biggest problem I had with many other MCU titles. Particularly the villain. Though I will say the villain this time around is a bit of a step up from “The Marvels,” which again, I had fun with.

But this movie is not about the villain, it is about the heroes. It is about two comic book icons coming together at long last. In fact, this movie, to my lack of surprise, reminds me of “Spider-Man: No Way Home.” If you read my review for that film, you would know that I refer to that it as a love-letter to the Spider-Man character, and the multiple eras such a character represents. That is what “Deadpool & Wolverine” is in a different way. Because this film not only serves as a love letter to the Deadpool and Wolverine characters. It also manages to sprinkle some love to an era of comic book movies that means a quite a bit to a certain group of people, even if they managed to vary on their level of success and failure.

What makes the release of “Deadpool & Wolverine” such a big deal is that it is one of the rare attempts at Disney making an R-rated film. This is a concept that is rather novel to the brand, particularly in its main line of films. Sure, Disney used to release films under Touchstone Pictures, which has its share of R-rated titles. Another defunct label of Disney’s, Hollywood Pictures, also had films with R-ratings. And now they have 20th Century Studios, which has not stopped with its mature slate. But this is the first R-rated Marvel Studios title. I honestly thought we would never see this day. Sure, DC has some R-rated titles in its own cinematic universe like “Birds of Prey” and “The Suicide Squad,” but neither of those films were particularly successful at the box office. That said, the first film came out just before a pandemic and the second film simultaneously released on HBO Max during a time when some people were weary about going to the cinema, so there is that. Yes, DC also has “Joker,” which was the first R-rated film to make a billion dollars at the box office, but I did not think something as popular as the MCU, which attracts a large audience, would have the guts to make something like this. In fact, if I were an executive at Disney, I too, would be somewhat weary of doing an R-rated film there. I would love it from a creative perspective, but from a financial and brand perspective, it is tough to justify.

But this film unleashes all the creativity it can, and judging by the box office total so far, it only helped the film financially. Conceptually, this film is quite clever. It manages to take certain portions of the Fox “X-Men” universe and sprinkle them over with things from the MCU and blend them together perfectly. This film has the DNA of the past two “Deadpool” movies, but it manages to make the universe feel more epic. It is a perfect hybrid of your typical MCU movie and your typical “Deadpool” movie. The tones never feel like they are clashing. It is like they took the first couple “Deadpool” movies and decided to put more money on the screen. The action sequences are incredibly stylistic and thrilling. Each one is as sweet and flashy as the last. This film has a marvelous opening sequence that could potentially make for the most exciting first five to ten minutes the MCU has ever done.

Also like “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” this film is also filled with moments that if you see this in a theater at a certain time and place, will likely result in audiences cheering and applauding. Only thing is, with “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” I was somewhat able to predict pretty much all the surprises that happened to be in those movies. The “Deadpool” movies have repeatedly mastered its marketing campaigns, and this one is no exception because it kept so many things under wraps to the point where certain moments happened that caught me totally off guard throughout the runtime. I would love to talk about some of these events, but I will let those of you who have not seen this movie enjoy the magic of checking them out yourselves.

But as for the things we know going in, Ryan Reynolds and Hugh Jackman have perfect chemistry as the titular characters. Knowing their relationship behind the scenes, this is a film that despite the existence of “Logan,” felt like a passion project these two wanted to do for years. I do not know what it took to get Hugh Jackman to play Wolverine one more time, but knowing how fun it is to watch these two together, it was worth it. This is primarily Deadpool’s story. The movie starts with Deadpool, features the character prominently in situations where he has to make tough choices and fight for the people he loves, but Wolverine gets a lot of screentime and every minute is well utilized.

Despite this being Deadpool’s story, we do not really get a lot of time with the characters from the past Deadpool movies like Colossus, Negasonic Teenage Warhead, Vanessa, Yukio… They are in the movie. But their roles in the film are minor. They do not have a ton to do on screen even though they play a part in the plot and outcome.

In fact, on the more mainline “X-Men” side, Wolverine is for the most part, the main character we see in regards to that universe. That is not necessarily a bad thing because the film focuses more on making a robust story for its main duo rather than shoehorning as many X-Men characters as possible. It feels more like a movie than a stale reunion special. The film honors the legacies of both of these characters while giving them both another story for audiences to love. Maybe even Hugh Jackman’s swan song… Until he decides to make a crapton more money.

As mentioned, “Deadpool & Wolverine” comes with many of the successes and failures of the other MCU films. While the titular characters shine, Cassandra Nova, played by Emma Corrin is a semi-lackluster villain. Now, she is not all bad. During the first half of the film, I did not have any problems with her. I thought she was rather menacing and intimidating. I think they did a good job at introducing her. But by the end of the film, she came off as cliche-riddled and power hungry. There was not as much depth as I would have wanted for a character like this. In fact, I am rather surprised to say that I left this movie liking Matthew Macfadyen’s performance as Paradox a bit more in comparison. Not that I think Macfadyen’s a bad actor, he is great. But despite his role being smaller than Cassandra Nova’s in the grand scheme of things, his scenes are more memorable on top of his charisma and personality.

This film is not just a potential revitalization of the MCU, it is not just a finale for the Fox “X-Men” universe, it is not just a love letter to several comic book movies that came before, but it is also one that is not afraid to make fun of the industry. If you have followed either of the cinematic universes this movie represents, know a little bit about how filmmaking works, or even followed movie news over the past number of years, this film may be able to hit you in some way. There is one moment where Deadpool sort of highlights the collective reaction of the ongoing multiverse saga, which even as someone who appreciates said saga, it made me laugh. This is arguably the funniest movie in the MCU. Humor-wise, it is up there with the first “Guardians of the Galaxy” and “Avengers: Infinity War.” Only thing, I would say those movies have jokes that stick the landing perfectly for general audiences, whereas the humor in “Deadpool & Wolverine,” while still likely to get large crowds laughing, is sometimes a bit more niche and maybe not for everyone. “Deadpool & Wolverine” is full of comedy gold from fantastic fourth wall breaks, excessive, yet well placed f-bombs, and some brilliant visual gags. There was no shortage of cackles in my screening. And if you go see this film in a crowded theater, I am sure you will have the same experience.

As far as the MCU goes, I would have say that “Deadpool & Wolverine” is definitely one of the better films. It is easily my favorite MCU installment post-“Endgame.” In the case of the proper “Deadpool” movies, I would still say the first film is my favorite, but this is a slight step up from “Deadpool 2.” I think it is a little bit funnier, a bit more action-packed, and has more memorable moments. “Deadpool & Wolverine” comes off as the most ambitious movie of its trilogy, and it shows. This has a slightly different feel from the past two “Deadpool” movies but manages to maintain what makes those predecessors great. If this is your genre, you have to see this movie as soon as possible. It is one that if you have friends or more mature family members in your circles, you have to watch with them just to see their reaction. Can you take a 10 year old to this movie? That’s a hard sell… Depends on the 10 year old. There are some things that are a bit tamer in this film compared to the original, but it is filled to the brim with excessive violence and foul language. I will let the world’s parents judge for themselves on whether or not they want to be remembered as the cool cats who gave their kids the memory of a lifetime.

As an entry point to this genre of movies and the MCU, there are definitely more accessible films like “Guardians of the Galaxy” or “Iron Man” or even “Ant-Man,” but I would say you’d be okay should you decide to skip the first two “Deadpool” movies, the “X-Men” films, or any of the MCU installments. Like all the other MCU followups, it definitely helps watching the past entries or even briefly brushing up on Wikipedia as you may be able to pick up on some nuance. But you can still watch “Deadpool & Wolverine” on its own and have a good time. The movie is stacked with fan service, so if you are hyperactively into these movies, chances are you will lose your mind in select moments of this latest installment. But if you are simply looking for a killer time at the movies, “Deadpool & Wolverine” is practically guaranteed to give you just that.

In the end, “Deadpool & Wolverine” is a blast that honors the past of the comic book movie genre. There is not a lot that I can complain about when it comes to the overall experience of this movie other than maybe how they handled the villain. But again, despite Cassandra Nova’s flaws, I will not deny that she had her moments and Emma Corrin did an okay job playing the character. If there is one movie that you should make an effort to see this summer, look no further than “Deadpool & Wolverine.” Great action, killer soundtrack, fun chemistry between the leads… It is a riot! “Deadpool & Wolverine” is now my favorite movie of 2024, and I am going to give it a 9/10.

“Deadpool & Wolverine” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review. My next reviews are going to be for “Kinds of Kindness,” “The Instigators,” “Sing Sing,” and “Borderlands.” 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 “Deadpool & Wolverine?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Marvel movie from the 20th Century Fox era? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Inside Out 2 (2024): A Bigger, Not Better, Yet Still Really Solid, Look Inside Riley’s Head

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Inside Out 2” is directed by Kelsey Mann (Party Central, Megas XLR) and stars Amy Poehler (Parks and Recreation, The House), Maya Hawke (Asteroid City, Do Revenge), Kensington Tallman (Drama Club, Home Sweet Rome!), Liza Lapira (NCIS, The Equalizer), Tony Hale (Veep, Arrested Development), Lewis Black (The Daily Show, Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law), Phyllis Smith (The OA, The Office), Ayo Edebiri (The Bear, Bottoms), Lilimar (Batwheels, Cleopatra in Space), Grace Lu (Fright Krewe, Super Wings), Sumayyah Nuriddin-Green, Adèle Exarchopoulos (Blue is the Warmest Color, Passages), Diane Lane (Let Him Go, Extrapolations), Kyle MacLachlan (Dune, Twin Peaks), and Paul Walter Hauser (Richard Jewell, Cruella). This film once again follows the emotions inside Riley’s head. As Riley enters puberty, the five core emotions of the previous movie face the reality that they could potentially be replaced with newer, more complex emotions. Meanwhile, Riley tries to properly navigate herself and fit in while attending hockey camp.

Pixar is one of those studios that I automatically associate with greatness. What Studio Ghibli likely is to Japan, Pixar is to the United States. A group of talented individuals making some of the most mature, watchable animation out there. When it comes to the Disney library, I tend to prefer Pixar’s work over their own in-house studio. That said, I still think “Raya and the Last Dragon” is one of the best animated films of the decade. While studios like DreamWorks and Illumination tend to have their place in moviegoing, when I watch an animated movie, chances are I am going to prefer it to be under the Pixar banner. Their track record over the past few decades has been astounding. With the exception of “Elemental,” I like every film they have put out so far. That said, when they greenlight a sequel, a part of me asks why. Granted, part of the answer is likely money. But even with that in mind, I question the creativity factor that would go into such movies like “Toy Story 4.” I felt the same way about “Inside Out 2,” which I was kind of intrigued by, but I was worried that it would not have the same impact as the first one. I thought the original installment was one of the best films of the 2010s. Then again, even though I thought “Toy Story 4” is the worst of the franchise, it is still an incredibly watchable, admirable flick. Maybe “Inside Out 2” would meet a similar fate.

To my lack of surprise, “Inside Out 2” is in fact a step down from the original. In fact, when it comes to the Pixar lineup, I would put “Inside Out 2” in the lower or middle tier. But as I have said before, Pixar movies that do not meet the higher tier are still, most of the time, solid enough to possess a level of quality that plenty of movies would kill to meet.

The good news is with “Inside Out 2” is that it does a nice job at evolving its characters. In this film we see Riley become a teenager, she is going through puberty, and we get a decent look into how that all plays out. Inside her mind, we see all the complexities of her emotions begin to rise as we meet new characters like Anxiety, Envy, Ennui, and Embarrassment, all of whom seem to serve their purpose. And these characters, on the surface, tend to accurately represent what a lot of teens probably go through at that time of their lives. Between their identity, seeing other people have things they do not, aging out of things that they may or may not actually want to age out of. If it did not properly represent me at that age, I am sure it will do so for somebody else.

On that note, Pixar usually does a good job with casting. Of course, Amy Poehler is back, and she brings a powerhouse performance as Joy. Phyllis Smith also does a great job as Sadness. Both characters continue to be the heart and soul of the franchise to some degree. Lewis Black also shines as Anger. But Maya Hawke as Anxiety is a serious contender to go down as the year’s most memorable voice performance. Not only is this character fantastically written and conceived, but she is performed at such a pace that I would automatically think of when it comes to Anxiety. Even if she is talking normally, her voice sounds like she is moving a million miles a minute. She is hyperactive, a little zany, but not too much. And there is one scene we witness towards the film’s climax where she is stunningly animated. Her movement in said scene very much fits her name. Her general design fits the role too. Anxiety is one of those characters that looks appealing, but kind of gets on your nerves once you get to know her. I say that in a good way of course, her purpose in the film is brilliantly realized. She is the closest character this film has to an antagonist, but I would not necessarily call her a villain. But much like some of the best villains or antagonists, Anxiety is someone whose perspective you can easily understand, possibly even appreciate. That said, I was still able to root for the core emotions throughout the movie. For Riley’s sake, I wanted them to get their way as the film went on.

The best thing about these two “Inside Out” movies, in addition to many other entries to Pixar’s library, is that there is a lot for grown-ups to appreciate to a greater degree than children. There is a segment where we get deeper into Riley’s mind and visit some of her more archived possessions. Two of which include characters named Bloofy (Ron Funches) and Pouchy (James Austin Johnson). First off, from an animation perspective, I love how this movie seamlessly blends these 2D characters into its 3D environment. Second, if you ever seen an episode of say “Dora the Explorer,” either as a child growing up or as a guardian watching over somebody else, I guarantee the moments that these two are on screen are going to get a laugh out of you. I knew seconds after they came on screen exactly what they were going for. These characters even did the cliche where they’re breaking the fourth wall, asking the viewer what they think should be done. Points all around. This movie amazingly described a lot of people’s childhoods while they were sitting in front of the television. And going back to the animation style, these are not even the only two styles we see, because the film also introduces a character named Yong Yea, who very much has a design similar to the artstyle of characters from the “Final Fantasy” games. These styles complement each other beautifully and never come off as distracting.

If you must know, “Inside Out” has arguably my favorite ending in an animated movie. It is to some degree, one of the simplest climaxes in a major motion picture. But what goes down in said climax is nothing short of emotional. It hits me every time I watch it because it shows that sometimes in life, happiness and sadness can work together to make you feel whole. In this film, the stakes feel a little bit bigger. Not just inside Riley’s head, but also outside. That said, one thing that felt a little smaller in this film’s ending compared to the last one is the emotional impact. The ending is really good and makes complete sense. But it seemed to be missing a moment that I took with me as the movie ended. There is one moment, or more accurately, a repeated line, that I continue to think about. Each time it was said, it truly showed what Riley was going through, and how she was perhaps letting her emotions and desires get the best of her. But with the last movie, you have multiple moments that I will list among some of the greatest in cinematic history between “Take her to the moon for me,” and Joy and Sadness allowing Riley to have a second to shed a tear when she needed it most. There are no moments in “Inside Out 2” that quite reach that level.

The structure of this movie is one to admire. Because the film is partially about Riley trying to get on a hockey team. In reality though, as much screentime as we get out of it, you could argue it is a borderline B-plot. The A-plot is inside Riley’s head as the B-plot is happening. That plot being the fight to make sure Riley is mentally stable. Because the reality is if Riley does not make the team, deep down, she still, depending on the state of her emotions inside her, has her mental health. The emotions’ jobs are to make sure Riley is herself and in control. And if she ends up making the hockey team, that is just bonus points. But if Riley reaches an extreme that could alter the course of her life for the worse, then chances are they are failing at doing their jobs.

If you think “Inside Out 2” is better than the original, I could totally understand why. But I feel like the first does a slightly better job at addressing the problems Riley and her emotions go through. It also possibly benefits from its originality. At the time, I do not think I have seen any concept like it. The first film exemplifies what Pixar does best. Taking inanimate concepts and heightening them to the point where they can make you laugh, cheer, and cry. “Inside Out 2” takes a lot of what is great about the first movie and builds on it, but it is not quite as memorable or as impactful as the material we got back in 2015. That said, there is a reason why the film has made more than a billion dollars at the box office. Because it is quite watchable. Good for kids, good for adults, good for everybody. Much like “Wall-E” did for me when I was younger, I am sure young children will probably watch this in their childhood and see it one way, and maybe come back to it as an adult and watch it with a new, matured set of eyes. And it is possible they might enjoy it more at such an age.

In the end, “Inside Out 2” is, again, not the best Pixar movie. But it is still a really good watch. I definitely found more enjoyment out of it than their previous feature, “Elemental,” so that is quite a positive thought if you ask me. The emotions are all well written and performed. I even liked Liza Lapira filling in for Mindy Kaling as Disgust. I thought she did a great job. Tony Hale as Fear was also quite good. He was very expressive throughout the picture. Although I could tell there was a difference in his voice compared to Bill Hader’s. That said, it is a good thing he is putting his best spin on the performance as opposed to doing a crappy impression of the previous one. The score of these past two films tend to serve as a character of its own sometimes. It was touching in the first one, and the same can be said here. As soon as the music played in this start of the film, I felt like I was instantly transported back to this universe. But as usual for Pixar movies, this film is beautifully animated. And kind of like the first film does in its abstract thought scene, “Inside Out 2” manages to seamlessly diversify its animation style. It looks great and never feels out of left field. I am going to give “Inside Out 2” a 7/10.

One last thing… I was a bit on the fence when they announced an “Inside Out 2,” partially because of how good the first one was. Having seen this second film, I can confirm the first one is far superior. But also having seen the second film, it honestly got me thinking… As much as I enjoy franchises like “The Incredibles” or “Finding Nemo,” they feel finite compared to “Inside Out” when you consider they’re about a certain group of characters. Even though the franchise revolves around the mind of Riley, I would not mind seeing inside the mind of a young boy or the mind of someone entering their 50s, or someone working the graveyard shift. There are tons of possibilities for the “Inside Out” franchise. If they greenlight an “Inside Out 3” with the Riley as the center, I am there. If they greenlight an “Inside Out” spinoff with somebody else as the center, count me in. I am game no matter what.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga!” Also coming soon, I will have reviews for “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 “Inside Out 2?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your personal favorite of the “Inside Out” movies? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Summer Camp (2024): Shelter Yourself Away from This Average Comedy

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Summer Camp” is written and directed by Castille Landon (After We Fell, Perfect Addition) and stars Diane Keaton (Book Club, The Godfather), Kathy Bates (Misery, The Waterboy), Alfre Woodard (Desperate Housewives, Memphis Beat), Beverly D’Angelo (National Lampoon’s Vaction, Entourage), Nicole Richie (The Simple Life, Great News) Josh Peck (Drake & Josh, Ice Age: The Meltdown), Betsy Sodaro (Duncanville, Disjointed), and Eugene Levy (American Pie, Schitt’s Creek). This film is about three childhood companions who reunite at the summer camp where they’ve bonded in their youth.

If you are asking why in the universe I, a 24 year old male, spent my time watching “Summer Camp” in a cinema, please note that if I were alone, I probably would have skipped this movie. But I was with other people and it seemed to be a fair equalizer. It has comedy, it has stars, and it is on the shorter side. It’s basically the same thing as “Anyone But You” all over again except this movie clearly does not have people close to my demographic as part of the target audience.

Was I looking forward to “Summer Camp?” Not really. But as MJ says in “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” “Expect disappointment, and you will never get disappointed.” That said, I cannot say I was disappointed with “Summer Camp” given my low expectations. But I also cannot say I was quite thrilled with it either because I did not find the movie to be that great. Is it better than I thought it would be? Sure. Maybe a little. But it is not saying much.

What did I like about this movie? While the overall structure of the film is somewhat predictable, there’s no real gaping holes in the story that threw me off. Everything in the movie makes sense to a certain degree and all the characters had their moment. Not only did they have their moment to shine during the movie, but the story effectively pays off its characters’ arcs. I thought each outcome the characters individually achieved were genuinely earned. The ride this movie takes me on is quite bumpy, but it ends on a note that I would consider to be a highlight. In fact, despite noting the characters being well constructed, I cannot say there are any performances in this film that really stand out. Sure, the main trio is “good enough” for the film to steadily progress and not have things falter significantly. But if anything, this film seems to rely on star power. Granted, not stars that a ton of my generation would generally recognize or care for.

Nevertheless, you have Diane Keaton, who’s had a storied career in her real life and is playing someone who’s trying to maintain a storied career in this film. There is also Kathy Bates, whose performance here is neither a titanic powerhouse or a complete and utter misery. She is doing her part to bind things together. You have Eugene Levy, who serves halfway decently as this movie’s aged boy toy. And… Yeah, that seems to be the entirety of his purpose, other than spewing wisdom or something. I am actually surprised they got a younger star like Josh Peck, who seems to maintain a nostalgia factor for gens y and z. I do not think this is going to get the younger audiences in. But then again, he was in “Oppenheimer,” which almost made a billion dollars at the box office. The characters themselves in this movie are not broken. For the most part anyway, there are some fantastical elements to their background or personality that I have trouble buying into. Speaking of their background, it sometimes feels surface level. We know their problems, but the movie is a bit rushed for those problems to have a semblance of depth.

As mentioned, this movie is a bumpy ride. One of the biggest problems that comes to mind with “Summer Camp” is that it feels inconsistent. At one moment it tries to be a comedy. In another instance, it tries to be a drama. Unfortunately, the tones this movie offers appear to clash a bit. And as a comedy, this movie honestly could have been funnier. Granted, there are no moments looking back where I put both my hands on my face to relieve myself of the cringe that I witnessed, but there are no jokes in the movie that truly sold me either. At best, the comedy is middle of the road. A lot of the comedy, and honestly, looking back at the trailer for the film confirms this for me, feels been there done that. There is another scene, also in the trailer, where a food fight breaks out. A scene like this one could conceptually come off as comedic, but when I watch it, the only things it comes off as just so happen to be forced and unrealistic.

I do like the themes this movie tries to highlight. The movie tends to tell its audience that life is short, and we should do whatever we can to make the most of it. If there is a hurdle in your life, you can overcome it. Life is not all work, all the time. You should also make some time for play. These are ideas that are well executed throughout the film. And given the target audience this film seems to be aiming for, it will probably sit well with them, despite this movie feeling rather disposable. It surprises me how much substance seems to have been delivered in a movie like this. If anything, I thought it was going to be a complete goof-fest. Again, the tones do clash, but there are highlights even when said tones butt heads. As far as the whole “elderly women friends” get together and find themselves experiencing shenanigans sub-genre, if that’s a thing, goes, this is, given time to marinate, a step up from “80 for Brady.” Unlike that film, “Summer Camp” seems to have more stakes and fewer conveniences. I actually felt like I was watching a movie as opposed to a random compilation of events and tired comedy gags.

Well, okay, there were tired comedy gags. Plenty of them in fact. I am not saying this movie is Shakespeare, but when you compare it to “Madame Web,” it is definitely watchable in parts. There are parts I would rather forget. Although to be real, I could forget this entire movie and be okay with it. But having seen the movie, I enjoyed what I saw. This is not the worst movie of the year. It is likely going to entertain some people and turn others off. As far as I go, I am somewhere in the middle.

In the end, “Summer Camp” is not going to win any awards. But I don’t think this movie deserves to be cast into a fire. At worst, maybe it deserves to be in the Walmart $5 bin when it comes out on DVD. It is not that funny, but I never found it to be overly annoying. It is harmless. At times, the movie is preposterous and utterly ridiculous. But cannot say it makes me wish to put a gun in my mouth. Maybe a water pistol. At least I’ll hydrate from that depending on what’s inside. “Summer Camp” tries to do several things at once, but I cannot really say it does any of them to such a masterful level. This is not the worst movie of the year, but it is by no means a summer spectacular. I am going to give “Summer Camp” perhaps one of the most generous 4/10s I have ever given. Part of me wanted to give it a 5, but between the overly fantastical backgrounds certain characters have, the varied depth some of them maintain, product placement, and the tonal inconsistency, I just cannot do that. I do not know. That could change. But for now, it is a 4.

“Summer Camp” is now available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Young Woman and the Sea.” Stay tuned! Also, look forward to my reviews for “Inside Out 2,” “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga,” “Thelma,” “Daddio,” and “A Quiet Place: Day One.” 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 “Summer Camp?” What did you think about it? Or did you ever go to summer camp in your youth? Tell me about your experiences in the comments! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Garfield Movie (2024): A Case of the Mondays

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Garfield Movie” is directed by Mark Dindal (Chicken Little, The Emperor’s New Groove) and stars Chris Pratt (The Super Mario Bros. Movie, The LEGO Movie), Samuel L. Jackson (The Avengers, Pulp Fiction), Hannah Waddingham (The Fall Guy, Ted Lasso), Ving Rhames (Mission: Impossible, Pulp Fiction), Nicholas Hoult (The Menu, Jack the Giant Slayer), Cecily Strong (Schmigadoon!, Saturday Night Live), Harvey Guillén (What We Do in the Shadows, Eye Candy), Brett Goldstein (Ted Lasso, SuperBob), Bowen Yang (Saturday Night Live, Awkwafina is Nora from Queens), and Snoop Dogg (The Joker’s Wild, Training Day). This film is inspired by the “Garfield” comic strip and centers around the iconic orange feline who reunites with his father all the while needing to complete a high-stakes heist.

The “Garfield” property is one that I never found myself overly attached to. As a child who grew up in the 2000s, I have come across the Bill Murray-led “Garfield: The Movie” and watched it a couple times. I did not have a passion for the material, personally. In my early double digit ages, I have also watched a couple episodes of Cartoon Network’s “The Garfield Show” when we had company at my house and I was not the one controlling the TV. Safe to say, with my limited exposure and lack of memory or experience with the comics, “Garfield” was not something I cared about a lot as a kid.

Speaking of not caring, I felt rather indifferent about “The Garfield Movie.” The only catalysts that could have gotten me invested in “The Garfield Movie” are the trailers looking uniquely bad, and the powers that be deciding some time ago that Chris Pratt is the only person who can lead big animated movies now for some reason. As soon I heard Chris Pratt was voicing Garfield, my first thought was the same when I heard he was voicing Super Mario. And that thought was, “Why?”

Now that I have seen “The Garfield Movie” and have now witnessed Chris Pratt’s performance as the title character, my thought was the same when I finally saw “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” and heard Pratt voice the title character in that. And that thought was, “Why?” Genuinely, I do not know how Chris Pratt could have worked in this role. The only defense I could possibly come up with is that Garfield, by nature, is a pretty lazy individual. And when I am hearing Chris Pratt talk, he kind of sounds rather mellow and unenthusiastic. That maybe could be what the movie’s going for, but it doesn’t work for me. And maybe this shows Pratt’s range because he also voiced Emmet in “The LEGO Movie,” which, sure, is pretty much the definition of an everyday, ordinary guy. But Pratt sounds enthusiastic enough in his performance there to put a spin on the everyday nature of the character. If anything, Chris Pratt in “The Garfield Movie” is about as interesting as a trip to DMV. He is lifeless, lacking in flair, and sounds as if he is just getting ready for the fat cat of a paycheck. The best way I can sum up Chris Pratt’s performance in “The Garfield Movie” is to say that I do not see a cat. I just see Chris Pratt in a soundbooth. It is the same problem I had with Dwayne Johnson voicing Krypto in “DC League of Super-Pets.” When you get a big name celebrity like that to be the lead voice of your film, sure, maybe it will boost credibility for select audience members. But to me it almost fails to come off as “acting.” I love “The LEGO Movie,” and Chris Pratt is a standout as the voice of Emmet. But “The Garfield Movie” is not a good fit for him. I did not think Chris Pratt could give a less interesting voiceover than “Onward.” Then “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” happened, and so did “The Garfield Movie.” What a world we live in.

That said, the movie’s supporting cast is a bit better. Samuel L. Jackson does an okay job as Vic (center). Hannah Waddingham, even though she could have been written better, does the best she can with Jinx. I thought Nicholas Hoult gave a much better performance as Jon than I anticipated. I like Hoult, but I was rather surprised he put as much passion as he did into the role. But by far the best performance in the movie is Ving Rhames as Otto, a bull who served as a mascot for a farm. Rhames currently has a consistent career in the voiceover game doing Arby’s commercials. But his performance as Otto proves that he not only has the meats, he has the goods. Also to his advantage, he has the best lines in the movie. There is one line, I cannot remember it verbatim, that he uses to mathematically determine how long it would take for Garfield and Vic to cooperate and work as a team. But for what I remember, based on the way it was executed, it delivered one of the bigger laughs I had during the film. And that transitions into another disappointment. I wish this film were funnier. After all, “Garfield” is an iconic comic strip. You’d expect humor out of something like “Garfield.” And sure, there are glimmers of “The Garfield Movie” that deliver a few laughs, but not a ton.

Animation-wise, the movie delivers a fairly wide color spectrum in certain scenes. There are moments, color-wise, that feel surprisingly bland. But I was impressed with the animation of the Italian restaurant we see at the beginning of the movie. Additionally, there are a few shots that tend to stand out and match the film’s mile a minute pacing. But I cannot say anything regarding the animation is revolutionary or changes the game. Although one compliment I would add is that Garfield himself is well designed. For the most part, he looks like he is straight out of the comic strip. They did a good job at bringing him to life. I just wish he were voiced more effectively.

One thing I took from “The Garfield Movie” is the notion that if this is how the title character is in his other material, then I probably do not have a passion for said character. On paper, Garfield may sound relatable, but his relatability is hard to balance for story like the one this movie is delivering. Garfield’s relatability comes from laziness, unwillingness to get outside, flawed dieting choices, things that make us human. Deep down, some of us can put ourselves in Garfield’s shoes, but throughout this film, no matter how much the plot chooses to progress, Garfield himself appears to lack dimension. In fact, going back to Ving Rhames as Otto, I think he had by far a much better journey in this movie than Garfield did. By the time we got to the end of his portion of the story, it delivered a greater sense of satisfaction to yours truly to what I felt as soon as we got the end of Garfield’s time in the film.

On another note, I was surprised to know how much product placement is in this film. Who directed this? Michael Bay?! Where are the explosions?! Where’s the corny, outdated dialogue? Come on, guys! What are you doing?! I’m guessing this what one of the “Transformers” movies changes into when it needs to shake things up. When it comes to animated movies, “The Garfield Movie” is not quite as bad as “The Emoji Movie” in terms of product placement, but there are obvious winks to FedEx, Popchips, and multiple instances of Olive Garden to the point where I thought I was watching a “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie instead of “The Garfield Movie.”

In the end, “The Garfield Movie” is predictable, disposable, and unmemorable. I would almost argue the movie is too chaotic. Everything gets into gear really quickly to the point where I never found myself fully invested with what was happening. The best phrase I can use to describe this movie is “run of the mill.” I have most definitely seen better, but it is not horrible. It is not the worst thing I ever seen. In fact, with “Madame Web” having released earlier this year, “The Garfield Movie” is not even the worst Columbia Pictures movie we got this year. But the first act at times is a chore to get through. Garfield is rather unadmirable as a character. The story, even with its more complex elements, is somewhat predictable. The ending almost overstays its welcome. And Chris Pratt is incredibly miscast as the titular role. I am going to give “The Garfield Movie” a 4/10.

“The Garfield Movie” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “I Saw the TV Glow.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will have reviews for “Back to Black,” “Summer Camp,” “Young Woman and the Sea,” and “Inside Out 2.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Garfield Movie?” What did you think about it? Also, Garfield clearly loves lasagna to such an insatiable degree. On that note, I must ask, what food would you say is your weakness? I have a number that come to mind, but pizza’s gotta be up there. I literally took a two hour drive from my house a month ago and stayed overnight in a hotel just to try a pizza place I have been eyeing for some time. With that said, let me know down your hunger-inducing weaknesses down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

IF (2024): John Krasinski Brings the Power of Imagination to One of the Best Family Films of the Past Few Years

Posted on by Jack Drees

“IF” is directed by John Krasinski (A Quiet Place, The Office) who also stars in the film as Bea’s Dad in addition to also voicing a Marshmallow. Joining him in this film is a cast including Cailey Fleming (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, The Walking Dead), Ryan Reynolds (Deadpool, Free Guy), Fiona Shaw (True Blood, Killing Eve), Phoebe Waller-Bridge (Fleabag, Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny), Louis Gossett Jr. (An Officer and a Gentleman, Roots), and Steve Carell (Despicable Me, Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy). This film is about a young girl dealing with drastic changes in her life who is suddenly able to see imaginary friends of real people who have grown up and separated from them.

“IF” had me partially interested but at the same time, skeptical. When I watched the marketing for this film, I noticed that it was trying its best to show off its humor, but very few, if any of the jokes, made me laugh. That said, I thought “IF” had potential. The overall design looked nice. The cast was stacked. And it was being directed by John Krasinski, whose directing resume is limited, but nevertheless impressive. I admire his work on the “Quiet Place” movies, especially the first one. That first film had 25 lines of voiced dialogue. That is pretty impressive in this day and age for something that has become rather mainstream. While it is not my favorite horror movie of the 2010s, it is arguably the most beautifully made. Krasinski has shown what he can do behind the camera so quickly and so effectively to the point where I was looking forward to just about anything he could be directing next. I did not think it would be something like “IF.” But I had an open mind.

The best thing I can say about “IF,” particularly when it comes to John Krasinski, is that this movie is probably his best showcase of his abilities as a writer. Unlike the first “A Quiet Place,” where he had help from Bryan Woods and Scott Beck, Krasinski wrote “IF” by himself. For the record, Krasinski also wrote “A Quiet Place Part II” solo, but looking back at the film, I did not attach myself to all the characters. There was a certain magic from the first installment that seemed to be missing, even though I did ultimately lean positive in my verdict. “IF” on the other hand is not only magical, it is likely going to end up being one of the best family movies of the year. Not only that, I was pretty surprised by how good this movie ended up being. Again, I was a bit skeptical. But I was nevertheless pleased by how this movie turned out.

I have talked about my love for Pixar on this blog before. To this day, their batting average is incredible. No pun intended. Thus far, the only film from the studio I would give a thumbs down to is “Elemental.” I know it is probably a hot take, but I stand by it. “IF” is not a Pixar movie. It is not even an animated movie. But there are a lot of elements to this project that remind me a lot of what Pixar does best. Taking unlikely beings and flawlessly humanizing them. Going for deep, emotional layers. Using one’s experience from the real world and letting them craft the best story possible out of it. This movie was inspired by John Krasinski’s time as a father and it clearly shows. It reveals what it is like to see your kids grow up. Yes, they’re maturing. Yes, they’re becoming one of a kind human beings, but there is also a loss of childlike innocence. Growing up, to some degree, is where plenty of people look at their dreams and put them aside for whatever reality lies in front of them. In fact, “IF” sort of reminds me of one of my favorite Pixar movies. Particularly, “Inside Out,” which had an imaginary friend character named Bing Bong. Much like “Inside Out,” “IF” does a really good job at highlighting the role that having an imaginary friend can play in a child’s life. But this film also makes an argument as to why we would also need them as adults. When we grow up, we might actually need them more than we ever did before. It would make us feel young. It would make us feel free. It would make us feel happy.

One of my favorite arcs in “IF” has to do with the Grandmother (left), played by Fiona Shaw. We learn a bit about her backstory and interests throughout the picture, including her love for dancing. The way this story plays out breaches into fantasy to some degree, but for this movie’s universe and rules, it absolutely works. This movie is very much about maintaining every bit of that youthful spark you’ve had since you were born and this particular arc is perhaps the movie’s most graceful and dazzling example of that. I loved this character, and Shaw owns the role. Great casting.

Speaking of great casting. This movie does a pretty good job on the IFs, or imaginary friends. These characters are primarily voice roles so we do not see any actors themselves. But I thought Phoebe Waller-Bridge was a particular standout as Blossom, a humanoid butterfly. Emily Blunt does a good job as the Unicorn. Christopher Meloni unleashes some of the film’s more comedic moments as Cosmo, a detective. And Steve Carell gives it his all as Blue, a furry purple monster.

If I had to pick one person I thought would be miscast, it would probably be Awkwafina as Bubble. I like of the concept of her character, which is just a bunch of bubbles that can reconstruct once popped. It’s pretty clever. But I think Awkwafina, despite her clearly not sleepwalking here, continues to show that she somewhat lacks a chameleon nature about her. From my experience, I feel even if Awkwafina is not playing the same character in one movie to the next, she’s riding that line, and she continues to ride that here. I like Awkwafina, I think she is charming in films like “The Farewell” and “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings.” But is she the most disguisable, range-filled actor of her generation? If you are asking me, I would not think so. While we are on the negatives, I mentioned earlier that the movie had me turned off by the comedy shown in the marketing. There is one joke from the trailer revolving around Steve Carell’s Blue that honestly did not work for me. Specifically, the one where Bea is keeping Blue from saying “IFs.” It is about as awkward and as cringeworthy as I expected. But hey, at least this movie did not pull a “Madame Web” and straight up lie to me in the marketing. I thought the joke was odd in the trailer, and also odd in the movie. It feels great not being ripped off!

On that note, when it comes to the live action roles, everyone plays their part well. Cailey Fleming is well cast as the lead. John Krasinski is also doing his best in front of the camera as the Dad. And Ryan Reynolds holds his own as Cal. While this film is not likely going to warrant any high caliber acting awards from these people, Reynolds in particular gives a standout performance because it is a lot different than what I am used to seeing from him. Usually I am used to Reynolds giving portrayals of his characters that lean more on the hyperactive end of the spectrum. This is evident through his efforts in projects like “Deadpool,” “Free Guy,” and “Spirited” for example. If anything, Reynolds’ performance in “IF” reminds a bit of his time in “The Adam Project,” partially because both characters serve as mentor figures to the film’s protagonists. That said, Reynolds seems to bring a much calmer, down to earth presence in this movie. As someone who has seen some of Reynolds’ previous work, I am not used to him toning things down a bit here, but it gives me more respect for him as an actor. Not that I did not have respect for him already, but this project shows a bit of his range.

“IF” also stands out to me from a musical perspective. This film’s score is composed by Michael Giacchino, a composer whose work I admire from films like “The Incredibles,” “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story,” and “The Batman.” “IF” is one of his best scores yet. Because in every moment, it fits the vibe of the picture. It ranges in its nature from being innocent at one point, to straight up bombastic in another. It is kind of like if the theme for “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” had a baby with the score for something much more epic, like “How to Train Your Dragon.” While “Wall-E” might currently be my favorite score from Giacchino, “IF” could honestly compete with that film to the point where it becomes my new top dog from the maestro. I know this is a Paramount movie, so I sort of apologize for the lack of brand synergy, but this is the kind of score that I would dare to blast from my phone if I ever go to Disneyland and make a run for the castle. That is, if it were not crowded there… Nevertheless, there is something about this score that makes me want to reclaim my youth and go back to a simpler time. Giacchino outdid himself here and I will definitely be playing the music in my spare time, perhaps as I write my future reviews.

As mentioned, “IF” is likely going to be one of the year’s best family movies. It is that good. If you have not seen “IF,” make an effort to do so. It is a movie that I would recommend to absolutely anyone. Kids. Teens. Adults. Seniors. Anyone. If you have ever had a human experience, this movie is for you. That said, going to back to my love for “Inside Out,” this movie reminded me of another thought that seems to stick in my mind regarding that film. While kids can definitely watch “Inside Out,” it is hard to know how much kids are going to appreciate it when they are young. I think kids will like the film. It is vibrant, colorful, packed with surprisingly decent humor, and it is a fun adventure. But I think this is a film that will resonate more with adults. I saw this film in a packed theater a week before it officially came out. There were lots of kids, but also plenty of adults. There were instances of the movie where a good amount of people took tissues out. I could hear crying in the audience. And those tears were clearly from adults. This movie seems to have hit these people where they live. I have no idea what the ratio would be when it comes to comparing children who at one point had an imaginary friend as opposed to those who did not. But even if you can go on the record and say you never had an imaginary friend, there is probably something in this movie for you. I did not know what to expect from “IF.” That said, John Krasinski is a mighty fine storyteller. With his range, I cannot wait to see what he does next.

In the end, “IF” is an easy recommendation. Go see this now. Take your family. Take your friends. Take your lover. Go by yourself even! I did! Solo movie outings rule! “IF” is filled to the brim with stunning visuals, clever concepts, and a story that anyone can attach themselves to. There are certain movies that I look back on like “Kung Fu Panda” that I liked as a kid, but have grown to appreciate more as an adult using the experience I have taken with me as I grew up. I am going to be curious to know how today’s kids are going to look back on this movie in a decade or two from now. When you have phenomenal casting, a script that is better than it has any right being, and an overall look to the film that is stupendously easy on the eyes, there is not much else to ask for when it comes to my experience with “IF.” I am going to give “IF” an 8/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for another family film. “The Garfield Movie!” Look forward to my thoughts on that coming soon! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “I Saw the TV Glow,” “Back to Black,” “Summer Camp,” and “Young Woman and the Sea.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “IF?” What did you think about it? Or, did you have an imaginary friend? I cannot say I ever imagined a friend from scratch if I recall correctly, but I can confirm throughout my life, I have imagined myself being friends with pre-established fictional characters or celebrities. Maybe it kind of shows a weakness in my imagination if you will. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Fall Guy (2024): David Leitch’s Love Letter to Stuntwork

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Fall Guy” is directed by David Leitch (Bullet Train, Deadpool 2) and stars Ryan Gosling (Barbie, La La Land), Emily Blunt (Oppenheimer, Edge of Tomorrow), Aaron Taylor-Johnson (Godzilla, Bullet Train), Hannah Waddingham (Ted Lasso, Sex Education), Teresa Palmer (The Choice, Point Break), Stephanie Hsu (Everything Everywhere All at Once, Joy Ride), and Winston Duke (Us, Black Panther). This film is inspired by a 1980s TV series of the same name and centers around a Hollywood stuntman named Colt Seavers who is tasked with finding the missing star of a film directed by his ex.

July 21st, 2023 to me will forever be known as one of the biggest days in the history of moviegoing. You have two high profile films opening on the same day, “Barbie” and “Oppenheimer,” both of which have high anticipation and dedicated audiences. Both films ended up making tons of money overtime with “Barbie” becoming the biggest film of the year and “Oppenheimer” earning more at the box office than any other biographical film in history. Now, less than a year later, a couple of the stars from those competing movies join forces for “The Fall Guy,” a project I was curious about for some time. You have “Barbie’s” Ryan Gosling, who I’d argue gave the best supporting performance of the past year. And you have “Oppenheimer’s” Emily Blunt, who also stood out in her role.

This leads to my first positive of the film. Gosling and Blunt’s characters, Colt and Jody, are a match made in Heaven. And I am not necessarily talking about their attachment to each other, or much they like each other, or how good they look together.

Although to be real, they do look pretty freaking good together…

In fact, the movie makes it clear that these two are not always on the best terms. But what I mean is that these two, even in moments where they clearly are not supposed to align with each other, have undeniable chemistry. Honestly, it is some of the best chemistry I have seen in a big budget movie in a while. I am not going to pretend that either one of these actors are giving performances equal to their “Barbenheimer” outings, but when it comes to “The Fall Guy,” these two deliver stellar portrayals of their respective characters, and when they are on screen together, it is simply put, magical.

There are a lot of stories out there in the realm of movies where the people behind the projects are expressing their passion for the craft. Steven Spielberg’s “The Fabelmans” does a good job at tributing filmmakers trying to get into the industry. Damien Chazelle’s “La La Land” is a salute to the dreams of stars, including hopeful actors. I even thought Kevin Smith’s “Clerks III” was a great encapsulation of what it is like to make a passion project. What it is like to be an auteur. What it is like to take on such a monumental effort of a film without realizing what it is you’re getting into. Similarly, “The Fall Guy” is clearly a love letter to stuntwork. The movie itself is about a stuntman, has tons of stunts in it, and it is directed by someone who has a history of overseeing stunts in film. David Leitch has helmed some of the biggest action movies in recent years like “Deadpool 2” and “Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw.” Before that, he was responsible for stunts in “The Matrix Reloaded,” “Underworld: Evolution,” “300,” “Tron: Legacy,” and “Jupiter Ascending.” On paper, if anybody was qualified to direct “The Fall Guy,” it would be David Leitch. In execution, the results are fantastic.

“The Fall Guy” is packed with one thrilling action sequence after another. Whether it is a simple moment where you have characters on foot, a high speed chase through the city, or a so-called fight in an apartment, everything in this movie had me glued to the screen. Even the moments where we just watch Colt Seavers doing his job is engaging as heck. One of the best scenes of the movie is where we see his character repeatedly set on fire. Not only does it showcase the dangers of his job, but again, this movie is a love letter to stunts, and it also showcases what the people making our movies go through for our entertainment. This movie showcases that in a way that is informative while also doubling as a standout scene.

One thing I always noticed in David Leitch’s movies is that at some point, there will be at least one big A-List celebrity cameo. In “Hobbs & Shaw,” the movie seamlessly finds a way to have Kevin Hart and Ryan Reynolds pop up for a scene. During my initial watch of “Bullet Train,” I found myself delightfully shocked to see the latter of those two actors appear in that film for a hot second. Without giving much away, the last moments of “The Fall Guy” has a cameo from a celebrity that I am sure many of you reading this would probably know. As far as cameos go, it is probably one of my favorites in recent years. I burst into pure laughter when this person showed up. Regarding who that person is, I will just let you find out for yourself.

“The Fall Guy” is one of those movies that is clearly going after a wide audience. If it sticks the landing, that is of course, a big fat win. And thankfully, it does. Perhaps the biggest compliment I can give “The Fall Guy” is that the movie presented itself in such a way to the point where my mom ended up going to the theater to check it out. Turns out, she had a great time. She is not an action movie person. But I must say that if you do not like action movies and are hesitating on checking this film out, I would hold those hesitations at the door and give the movie a shot anyway. Because this film is more than just action. It also does well in the humor department. I found myself laughing quite a bit. I also would say the film works well as a romance story. It does not feel overly cheesy, and as mentioned, I like the two leads enough to the point where I would not mind seeing them together in a relationship. With “The Fall Guy” going after a multitude of demographics, perhaps even the “Swiftie” crowd at one point, it is arguable that there is some noticeable potential for disappointment because of how many things the movie tries to shove in a single package. But somehow, everything flows naturally.

“The Fall Guy” is probably not going to win any Oscars. Not only because there is no such thing as a Best Stunts category. By the way, I was not surprised that the movie found a way to note this fact in the script. But on top of that, I would imagine “The Fall Guy” is not the kind of movie the Academy would hail as one of the year’s best. It could pick up a technical nomination or two. But I doubt it is going to get much more than that. But this is the kind of movie that I think is best watched with a group of people. The film is now available to stream at home, so you could gather some friends and watch it at your place. But if you want my recommendation, if “The Fall Guy” is playing in a theater near you, go see it there. The action is worth seeing on the big screen. The sound is incredible. And it is undoubtedly an immersive experience. Nothing beats watching Ryan Gosling speed through the city in a car with a dog who only understands commands in French. And it is even better on the big screen.

In the end, “The Fall Guy” is a rare flick that has something for everyone, and also one where those somethings exceed the bare minimum. “The Fall Guy” is a movie that I would honestly recommend to just about anyone looking for something to watch because if you are not an action junkie, I think this is nevertheless a fairly accessible title. It’s got comedy. It’s got romance. It’s got drama. It’s got all you can want in a movie. As far as mainstream titles go, this should have done a lot better at the box office than it did. Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt are excellent in the film. As for other standouts in the cast, I really enjoyed Hannah Waddingham as Gail, a producer on Jody’s film. If you do watch “The Fall Guy,” please stick around for the credits. There are some cool behind the scenes moments you might not want to miss. I am going to give “The Fall Guy” an 8/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! Coming soon, I will have reviews for “Tarot,” “IF,” “The Garfield Movie,” “I Saw the TV Glow,” “Back to Black,” and “Summer Camp.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Fall Guy?” What did you think about it? Or, if you could take one star from “Barbie” and one star from “Oppenheimer” and put them in a movie together? Which ones would you want and what would the movie be about? For me, I’d love to see Simu Liu and Florence Pugh do a movie together where they play love interests. I think they’d have good chemistry. Let me know your selections down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Snack Shack (2024): Hot Dog!

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Snack Shack” is written and directed by Adam Rehmeier (Jonas, Dinner in America) and stars Conor Sherry (Are You Afraid of the Dark?, The Terminal List), Gabriel LaBelle (The Fabelmans, American Gigolo), Mika Abdalla (Sex Appeal, The Flash), David Costabile (Breaking Bad, Suits), and Nick Robinson (Love, Simon, The Fifth Wave). This film is about two boys who find themselves in a situation where they end up running a snack shack by an outdoor swimming pool. The film dives into their attempts to make money, find romance, and cook up the best summer they can.

It almost feels like yesterday when I was a teenager. Frankly, I do not miss that time of my life, but I will admit it had its moments. That said, to some people, it is an undeniably special time. If I were to miss one thing about being a teenager, it is having a summer to just chill. It was a relaxing time with few worries. This brings me to what made me gravitate towards seeing “Snack Shack” in the first place, it looked like a wonderfully nostalgic story. In more ways than one, “Snack Shack,” at least from the marketing, reminded me of “The Sandlot.” Both films involve multiple teens trying to have the time of their lives during the summer, it is very much a slice of life tale, and as a bonus, both movies involve swimming pools! In terms of plot and characters, the movies have their fair share of differences, but that is perhaps the easiest comparison I can make off the bat.

Now, is “Snack Shack” as good as “The Sandlot?” Not really. In fact, I would recommend not going into this movie expecting to watch this generation’s version of that film. These are two different projects with completely different ideas and structures. But is “Snack Shack” a fine movie? For sure. It is one of the better watches I had so far this year.

What ties this film together is the leading duo of A.J. and Moose, played excellently by Conor Sherry and Gabriel LaBelle. As for Sherry, this is my first time watching him in anything. He has experience with other projects, but I cannot say I bothered to check them out. That said, I like him in his respective role. When it comes to LaBelle, I was pleasantly shocked to know that he was in this movie given how much I enjoyed “The Fabelmans,” which he starred in. Compared to that project, LaBelle ends up giving a much more energetic and upbeat performance to match the mood of a film like this. He does a good job. These two friends feel legitimate and have solid chemistry. Every moment these two are on screen together shows they are perfectly cast and play off each other well. The movie goes to show that these two will do anything, even at such a young age, to make a buck. But when I look at these two best friends, it does not come off as if money is the only thing they care about. They seem to enjoy hanging out, they enjoy life, even if it means getting into a little trouble. They seem like fun dudes.

This film is marketed mainly as a comedy. You could say it falls into that “coming of age” bracket as well, but if I had to name one genre to associate with “Snack Shack,” it would be comedy. Thankfully, the movie is quite funny. It has plenty of laughs. The movie has a fair amount of visual gags. There was one moment that got a chuckle out of me where we see the two friends trying to buy the “Snack Shack.” From a visual perspective, the duo’s choice of outfits in that scene was already funny enough. But on top of that, you also have the community’s reaction to their investment, and the overall pacing of the dialogue. Simply put, the scene could not have been any better. One of my other favorite visual gags of the movie is when the guys start selling a foul hot dog. This is not to say the hot dog looks, smells, or tastes bad. But the guys find a way to get creative with condiments and write a swear word on the sausage itself. The way this is executed is one of my favorite parts of the movie from the way it starts to seeing customers react to the whole idea.

Another highlight of the film is Mika Abdalla as Brooke, who serves as this story’s love interest of sorts. It becomes clear that both of the boys fall for her. But the way this connection goes about only intensifies and gets in the way of the boys’ relationship. When it comes to Mika’s character, there is one part of the story I enjoyed where we see her using a camera. There are several moments of the movie where a camera comes into play that had me immersed. The object basically becomes a part of the character’s personality.

If I have to give any negatives for the film, I would say the supporting characters are not that memorable. Did I like most of the supporting characters as I watched them? Sure. I will not deny that. But if you had to ask me about them right now, I would almost not even be able to tell you a single thing about them. At the same time though, my lack of knowledge towards the supporting cast does not take away from the fun I had watching A.J., Moose, and Brooke, the three most integral characters to the story.

I mentioned this movie is kind of a slice of life story. And in that sense, it really does feel like it is a part of someone’s life. The film is a semi-autobiographical tale from the viewpoint of writer-director Adam Rehmeier. It is inspired by his time working at a snack shack. The way the movie goes feels less like a linear story, though it is told in chronological order, and more like a topsy turvy journey. It is kind of like life itself. A series of ups and downs until it is all over. You just never know what is going to come next.

This film has been out since last March. And this is not to say that the film is unwatchable. I’m clearly giving this a positive review. I do not know why the people behind this film decided to release it at such an early point of the year. Maybe the strikes put a damper on things, I do not know. Although I bring this up because “Snack Shack” feels like a fine summer watch. This is a movie could easily get you in the mood to jump in the pool or go outside and bask in the sun. Maybe the studio thought the season would be overcrowded with blockbusters or people might be, I don’t know, actually going outside. But if you need a movie to get you in the summer mood, I think “Snack Shack” will satisfy your cravings.

In the end, “Snack Shack” is delicious. Between the stellar main characters, intriguing story, well executed dialogue, and overall energetic flow of the script, the movie has a lot of strengths. The film is not perfect. But again, summer is around the corner. If it is a rainy day and you want to be inspired to go outside by the next time the sun comes out, “Snack Shack” is an effective watch. One last positive, the film made me thirsty. Now, as someone who has seen a lot of movies, I kind of groan when a movie has obvious product placement. That said, when I looked at the drink cups the snack shack had in stock, all I can say is that I immediately wanted a Diet Coke from the drink fountain. So, props to the movie for selling me on Coca-Cola products. I am going to give “Snack Shack” a 7/10.

“Snack Shack” is now available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, good news! I have more coming! Be sure to stay tuned for my thoughts on “Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire,” “Monkey Man,” “Abigail, “Civil War,” “Boy Kills World,” and “Challengers.” 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 “Snack Shack?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the one food that comes to mind that screams “summer” to you? Just writing this is making me want a basket of french fries. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire (2024): We Came, We Saw, But the Movie Only Barely Exceeded Average

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Ghostbsuters: Frozen Empire” is directed by Gil Kenan (Monster House, Poltergeist) and this film stars Paul Rudd (Dinner for Schmucks, Ant-Man), Carrie Coon (The Leftovers, Fargo), Finn Wolfhard (Stranger Things, It), Mckenna Grace (The Young and the Restless, Gifted), Kumail Nanjiani (Silicon Valley, The Big Sick), Patton Oswalt (King of Queens, A.P. Bio), Ernie Hudson (The Basketball Diaries, Quantum Leap), and Annie Potts (Toy Story, Young Sheldon). This movie traces back to the franchise’s origin point, New York City, and centers around the Ghostbusters’ quest to uncover the connections to an ancient artifact and to keep civilization from being trapped under ice.

Here is a fun fact about Scene Before, “Ghostbusters” literally got this blog started. I am serious. Because I started this blog in 2016 as part of a high school project. One of the big talking points at the time was the trailer for the “Ghostbusters” reboot, which I did not enjoy. Then months later, one of the big talking points was the movie connected to that trailer, which I did not enjoy. Like, really did not enjoy. In fact, when I did my worst films of the 2010s list, that was #1, and I stand by it. Could that movie have worked? Of course it could have! After seeing “The LEGO Movie,” I am under the impression any movie can work. But 2016’s “Ghostbusters” was not funny. The CGI was off-putting. And it is a waste of a lot of people’s talent. When I look back at the film, part of me hates talking about it. Because if I simply say I did not like the movie, there is probably someone out there pointing their finger at me and telling me that I hate women. I am all for women empowerment. Look at how epic “Wonder Woman” was the following year. I just wish this movie were handled better.

When “Ghostbusters: Afterlife” was announced, I was quite excited. I thought it was a little soon for a new “Ghostbusters” outing, but the trailers seemed to successfully balance nostalgia with an immersive, adventurous vibe. It was also nice to see the franchise outside of New York City for once. Unfortunately, I did not get to review the movie due to time constraints. But if you want my quick thoughts, I had a ball with it. I liked the new characters. Paul Rudd was great in his role. The sound design was quite good. And the action sequences were fun. The movie was a delight. The film by no means rewrote what it meant to be a box office success, but it was enough of a hit to justify another movie, in this case “Frozen Empire.”

Just to give a quick ranking of the “Ghostbusters” movies before this one came out, I would have to say the first one is easily the best. “Afterlife” comes in second. “Ghostbusters II” takes third place for me. And again, it pains me just mentioning it, but I have to be honest, my least favorite film of the franchise is the disconnected “Ghostbusters” 2016. So where does “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire” rank amongst these movies?

Honestly, smack dab in the middle.

In a thumbs up, thumbs down world, “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire” is an easy thumbs up. There is plenty to like about this sequel. But there is not a lot to love. Does the movie have decent nostalgia? Sure. Does the movie have a good concept? Sure. Is the humor on point? Sure, but it is not as strong as the original movie. Does it handle the newer characters well? Some better than others. This is the one thing about this movie, there are a lot of positives, but when I say positives, I do so knowing that these positives may not be worthy enough for me to go back and watch the movie a second time in the next few months.

Sorry to spoil a movie that is a couple years old, but in “Ghostbusters: Afterlife,” the four original “Ghostbusters” made an appearance towards the end of the film. And yes, I said four. They found a way to inject the late Harold Ramis into the project. In this installment, three of those four are back, and around for a bit longer. Ernie Hudson and Dan Aykroyd have more notable impacts on the story, but Bill Murray manages to squeeze himself in at some point.

One thing I have noticed about the “Ghostbusters” franchise, at least in the movies, is that all of the ghosts are not on the busters’ side. Obviously, if your crew is about killing ghosts, of course, you are going to not play nice with them. But this movie introduces a ghost character who I thought served as a nice antithesis to that idea to some degree. Specifically, Melody played by Emily Alan Lind. Throughout the film we see young Phoebe (Mckenna Grace) develop a connection with her that drives the plot forward significantly. The two have good chemistry and I like seeing them onscreen together. Some elements as to how their bond starts may come off as far-fetched or convenient, but at the same time, it does make sense in a franchise where the Statue of Liberty basically goes “Night at the Museum” during the climax of “Ghostbusters II.”

Although that subplot does not even bring forth the most convenient, perhaps out of left field part of the movie. Because that honor, if you can call it that, goes to something we see out of Kumail Nanjiani’s character, Nadeem Razmaadi (left center). As much as I enjoyed the climax of this movie, if there is one thing I did not like about it, there is a moment where we see Nadeem do something that had me going “Why?” The moment did not feel authentic. Again, I understand, it is “Ghostbusters.” The franchise has jumped the shark before. But I feel the franchise is at its best when there is a balance between reality and fantasy. This leans too far into the fantasy route for me.

This is not to suggest you have to like one movie over the other, but I have a feeling that if you like the 1980s “Ghostbusters” fare, you might feel more comfortable watching this movie at times compared to “Afterlife.” It’s back in New York City, you have more time with the original cast, and it has a much larger scale and feel. If you like those things, you should, on paper, have an okay time with this movie. But the reality is, much like what I said last week about “Kung Fu Panda 4,” if I were to introduce this franchise to someone, I would just start with the original. This follow-up is entertaining, but it does not change the game. It is not going to be remembered as one of the greats. Maybe I will catch it again on cable one day. “Ghostbusters” seems to have a large presence there anyway. But we shall see. It could be better. But for my money, I had fun with it.

In the end, “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire” is an enjoyable time, but compared to a couple other installments in this franchise, it is not as good. When it comes to pure spectacle, this movie does not fail. There is an action scene in the first act that had me hooked and excited for whatever was going to come next. Was I intrigued by everything that came after? You can say that. But I am not going to pretend I will run down the street screaming my highest recommendations for this film. That said, if you decide to watch it, you might enjoy it. You never know. I am going to give “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire” a 6/10.

“Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! I have more reviews coming up in the pipeline including “Snack Shack,” “Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire,” “Monkey Man,” “Abigail,” and “Civil War.” 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 “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Ghostbusters” movie? And despite everything I said earlier, I welcome any and all opinions about the 2016 reboot. If you like it, more power to you. But for me, the original is the best one. Let me know your picks down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!