“Splitsville” is directed by Michael Angelo Covino (The Climb, The Self Tape), who also has a writing credit and stars in the film as Paul. Joining him in the cast are actors including Dakota Johnson (Fifty Shades of Grey, Madame Web), Adria Arjona (Morbius, Andor), and Kyle Marvin (WeCrashed, The Climb), the latter of whom also wrote the film. This movie showcases the chaos that ensues after Carey is asked by his wife, Ashley, for a divorce. Following the bombshell, Carey runs into his friends, who he finds out are in an open marriage.
Remember how in August “The Naked Gun” was supposed to be a wakeup call to audiences that supporting movies of its nature would allow for more comedies to play in movie theaters? Well, guess what? I missed it when it came out. It is not that I did not think it would be funny, but I would rather watch the previous “Naked Gun” movies first. Plus, there are plenty of other standalone comedies like this one that I thought were a higher priority. “Splitsville” not only looked funny, but also kind of sexy. The concept lends itself to both adjectives being met. I can safely say “Splitsville” is consistently hysterical and often delivers a pinch of sensuality.
Despite this film heavily involving sex and partners, never once does it feel overly pornographic. There are various examples of nudity throughout the film, but each time nudity is shown on screen, it serves a purpose, and never flaunts any private parts. Well, except for one scene in the beginning, but it is more for a laugh than anything else. While characters do have sex in the film, never once does the film feel the need to showcase a graphic scene of said activity. Everything in this film, including the nudity, serves a purpose.
The screenplay for “Splitsville” is well done. Overall, I found it to be layered, unpredictable, and robustly structured. Other than the film at a certain point introducing so many elements at once that it is sometimes difficult to keep up, I cannot name any other glaring issues at the top of my head. I like all the characters, there is plenty of decent comedy, and each element of this film feels necessary. The moment one thing is introduced, even if it is something really small, it ends up playing an integral role that enhances the final product.
Dakota Johnson is one of the most “interesting” actresses working today. I am not going to pretend I am the biggest fan of hers. Is she capable of giving a good performance? Sure. When given the right script and proper direction, she can deliver a “Daddio,” but sometimes she will give something as flat as “Materialists.” Thankfully, “Splitsville” does her favors, Johnson is quite good in this film as Julie. Unlike her experience of making “Madame Web,” I could tell Johnson, like everyone else in the cast, was having a lot of fun on set. Johnson plays an inviting, sometimes sensual, complicated character. To my pleasant surprise, I thoroughly enjoyed getting to know about Julie’s past. Johnson sings in her role.
And she is not alone when it comes to giving a good performance. Frankly, I do not have a problem with a single person in the entire cast. The film does not have many big names. Sure, Adria Arjona is growing in popularity with the success of “Andor,” but the film is quite low in terms of star power. But what this film lacks in name recognition, it makes up for in talent.
Despite being exposed to their previous work, Michael Angelo Covino and Kyle Marvin are names I did not know much about before this project. That said, watching these two do what they do on and off camera makes me pumped up to see whatever it is they do next. Michael Angelo Covino writes, directs, produces, and stars in this film as Paul. It is clear that his passion for this project is shining through in each frame. His character also has palatable chemistry with Dakota Johnson’s Julie. The two play off each other well.
Kyle Marvin plays this film’s protagonist, Carey. Kyle Marvin is a name that I have heard before, but completely forgot about before writing this review. Marvin previously directed “80 for Brady,” which ended up on my 2023 worst movies of the year list. “Splitsville” seems to showcase much more of Marvin’s abilities as a comedic force. Marvin does a great job at not only bringing humor into each scene but also occasionally balancing his performance when the film gets into some heavier moments.
Also, major shoutout to the young and talented Simon Webster, who gives an outstanding performance as Russ. Webster is given plenty to do, and he delivers in each scene. He is also connected to one of my favorite gags in the film, particularly one involving jet skis. I will not say more for those who have yet to watch the movie, but you will know what I am talking about once you see it.
“Splitsville,” to a degree, lives up to its name. While I cannot confirm that my sides split from laughing so hard, I think the film is still incredibly funny. Almost every joke feels naturally placed. There are only one or two jokes in the film that I thought lacked some sense of realism. Well, as much realism one can have in a comedy that is… These are jokes that may as well have been inserted solely keep a gag going, but even those got a laugh out of me. The movie delivers a surprising amount of tiny chuckles, especially in the first act. That may sound like a bad thing for a comedy film, but said chuckles are consistent, so in actuality, it works. The film also gave me quite a few bigger laughs to balance things out. “Splitsville” is not the funniest film I have seen this year, “Friendship” still takes the cake, but if you are looking for laughs, “Splitsville” has plenty.
A lot of the laughs come from what I would describe as authentic interactions between multiple characters. The film however does resort to extremes at times, and this includes one moment where Carey and Paul get into a fight. Not only do I buy this fight, but to my surprise, I think it is one of the best directed action sequences of the year. Every shot is as fluid as the next. I have seen action movies where the editor ends up cutting a new shot every microsecond and it sometimes looks shoddy. “Splitsville” is not an action movie, but its signature action scene is well shot, well constructed, and to top it off, it made me laugh. There is an incredibly funny gag involving fish and a bathtub. And that is just scratching the surface of this hilarious one-on-one.
In the end, “Splitsville” is fun, unique, and comes with a phenomenal cast. I cannot name a single person involved with this film who does not put in 110 percent. “Splitsville” is not the funniest comedy of the year, but if you are looking for a good laugh, this film will be there to fulfill that need. The past few months have been a solid run for Neon so far, with the release of this film, “Together,” and one of the year’s highlights for me, “The Life of Chuck.” This distributor is on fire right now. I am going to give “Splitsville” a 7/10.
“Splitsville” is now playing in theaters and is available to rent or buy on VOD.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “The Long Walk!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “A Big Bold Beautiful Journey,” “Him,” “Eleanor the Great,” “The Lost Bus,” and “One Battle After Another.” 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 “Splitsville?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite comedy of the year so far? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Materialists” is directed by Celine Song, the director behind one of 2023’s best films, “Past Lives.” This film stars Dakota Johnson (Fifty Shades of Grey, Madame Web), Chris Evans (Captain America: The First Avenger, Lightyear), and Pedro Pascal (The Last of Us, The Mandalorian). This film is about a matchmaker from New York City who finds herself in a personal conflict between her ex and a new love interest.
One movie I am mad at myself for skipping while it was in theaters was “Past Lives.” I did not review the film, but I was able to catch it by the end of 2023. I adored it so much that it ended up among my best movies of the year. The chemistry between the three leads was impeccable. Each role was perfectly cast and I was hooked from scene one. I thought the film was cute and heartfelt. Naturally, when I first saw the trailer for “Materialists,” I did not get excited by the film because big Hollywood stars like Chris Evans or Pedro Pascal would be in it. Although I do like those two actors. But what sold me was finding out that this was Celine Song’s next film following “Past Lives.”
I missed “Past Lives” in the theater but ended up loving it. Unfortunately, I had the opposite experience watching “Materialists.” Honestly, I was rather disappointed watching Song’s latest outing on the big screen.
What makes this effort somewhat sad is the fact that not only did the film’s director carry some weight, but as someone who lives in the U.S., and not South Korea, the actors have a ton more star power than Song’s previous project. You have Dakota Johnson, whose resume is hit and miss, but nevertheless prolific. Then there’s Pedro Pascal, who has had a large hand in the geek culture spheres in recent years between “Game of Thrones,” “The Mandalorian,” and “The Last of Us.” Also, there’s Chris Evans… Captain America himself! Need I say more? It would be one thing to see a disappointing Celine Song movie, but to have these well known actors in the mix makes it worse.
And honestly, I wish I could say that all the actors do a good job in this film despite the… (sigh) material. But I thought Dakota Johnson, while not horrible in this film, is sometimes stiff. Every other line out of her character, Lucy, feels flat. Watching Dakota Johnson in this film is like playing roulette. Every time there is a line out of her, I had no clue if it was going to be delivered decently or poorly. The gap separating the quality of her lines feels significant. Dakota Johnson can give good performances. Just go watch “Daddio.” But not only is Johnson sub-par in this film, I got the impression at times she was playing the same character she’s played in other films like “Madame Web” or “The High Note.” Despite the range of her line delivery in this film, I am starting to think Johnson herself has limited range as a performer.
That said, I thought the film’s two main male leads were okay in their roles. Pascal is a well built, rich, successful man. Or, as he is sometimes referred to throughout the film, a unicorn. I thought Pascal was perfectly cast. I never met Pedro Pascal myself, but from what I imagine, he must be a charming, handsome person.
Chris Evans on the other hand is a little less perfect of a human being. He self-admittedly has anger issues, he struggles with maintaining a steady career path as well as his financial stability. But despite his problems he seems like a decent guy. I liked Evans’ performance. He felt down to earth and inviting. Not preppy, not over the top. Just a genuine guy.
“Materialists” is a fairly grounded narrative. But unfortunately the script is where its tonal inconsistencies lie. Much of the film’s dialogue is quite good. Parts of it made me think about life. But there are quite a few cheesy lines that do not feel like they belong in a movie like this. I am not denying that people have said something cheesy at some point in their life. But the rate in which it happens in this film does not feel authentic.
There is a message in “Materialists” that makes for a good story. While a lot of people date and eventually marry for love, there are some people who want more out of a relationship. They want the partner to be attractive, have money, have a nice place and so on. As the film progressed, and this should be no surprise given the title, the film successfully presented itself as an allegory about how certain people find others’ possessions more attractive than the person they are dating. I will not go into spoilers, but there is a line towards the end of the film that could almost double as the film’s slogan. The film suggests that some people are simply attracted to success. Yes, someone could be the nicest person on earth. But for some people, they would be turned off if they found out the person they were dating happened to be poor.
Given this film’s message, I found it interesting how Lucy was written. Lucy works with a dating agency. Customers, some of whom are clearly desperate for a relationship, give this company good money to find a partner. The film asks questions as to whether love can be bought or if it is simply something you have to find yourself. The film shows the potential dangers of trying to follow a perhaps unachievable dream but also reveals how one can find life unappealing if they were to give their dreams up and settle.
The film does not shy away from highlighting appealing and thought-provoking topics. I just wish that the package that contains such topics was a little more appetizing. I wish it had better dialogue. I wish I liked some of the acting better. And I wish it were a little more tonally consistent. The film is shot well, has good music, and contains a couple decent scenes, but for me, I wanted more. I guess I am a bit of a materialist myself.
In the end, I do not think the “Materialists” and I are that great of a match. There are plenty of other fish in the sea, thankfully. Maybe the film will find its audience somewhere else. Honestly, I found this film disappointing. It is decently framed, the production design is nice, and some of the acting is okay. But there are plenty of elements that bog the film down between the tonal inconsistencies, Dakota Johnson’s sometimes stiff performance, and the cheesy dialogue. I still think Celine Song has a promising future as a filmmaker. I just hope her next project is much better than this one. I am going to give “Materialists” a 5/10.
“Materialists” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on Pixar’s latest film, “Elio.” Stay tuned! Also, you can look forward to reading my reviews of “Jurassic World: Rebirth,” “M3GAN 2.0,” and “F1: The Movie.” 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 “Materialists?” What did you think about it? Or, have you seen Celine Song’s directorial debut, “Past Lives?” If you did, tell me your thoughts on that! Leave your comments down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Daddio” is written and directed by Christy Hall and this is her feature film debut as both a writer and a director. This film stars Dakota Johnson (Fifty Shades of Grey, The High Note) and Sean Penn (Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Mystic River) in a film showcasing a cab ride from John F. Kennedy International Airport to midtown Manhattan where two people have deep and honest conversations about their lives.
Before we go any further, for those keeping track, much like how “The Beekeeper” and “Thelma” are two revenge flicks I saw this year showing how people deal with scammers, “Daddio” just so happens to be the second example of a film primarily about two people in a cab ride. The first one, for the record, just so happens to be the French film “Driving Madeleine.” Coincidentally, I reviewed that film right after one of those revenge flicks, “The Beekeeper.” And guess what my last review was before doing this film? “Thelma!” That’s what! How poetic indeed!
With that digression out of the way, “Daddio” snuck up on me last minute. Particularly when I watched an interview with Dakota Johnson on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” last month. This is not the first time this has happened. I remember watching “Four Good Days,” which is an excellent film by the way, mainly because I watched Mila Kunis being interviewed on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.” It is nice to know how effectively these kinds of interviews double as both fun conversations and marketing tools. It works, so why fix it?
That said, interview tactics or not, Dakota Johnson very much needed something to get moviegoers back on her good side. On top of being the lead in the “Fifty Shades” films, which assumedly has its audience, but also its fair share of critics, she also just led the pile of schlock known as “Madame Web,” which I think many would agree with me when I say it is one of the worst comic book films ever. It is a film that I said was somehow worse than “Morbius.” And amazingly, it is written by the same duo who wrote “Morbius.” Quite a hot streak, right?! Although if you ask me, Johnson has had her fair share of wins. “The Peanut Butter Falcon” and “The High Note” are two smaller, non-franchise films she did in recent years that I quite enjoyed. “Daddio” is another such example, but I would argue it is even tinier. Because while it is set in various parts of the New York metro area, the whole movie basically takes place in a car. And it is primarily between two characters, at least two characters whose faces we see.
Thankfully, these two characters are well written, concrete, and play off each other beautifully for the film’s entire runtime. I have seen my fair share of road adventure films where we have multiple characters in the car who cannot quite connect the dots to make the ride entertaining for me as a viewer. This film, I would not exactly classify as “entertainment.” Again, it is quite deep and gets you thinking, but my eyes and ears were open whenever the ride was going down so it is technically accurate to say I was quite entertained from start to finish. I was invested in these two’s conversations, Johnson’s uses of her phone, and the little obstacles these two come across as they made their way through the route.
You ever go on the road expecting a typical ride only to find something completely unexpected? I certainly have. Anything from massive traffic to endless road closures to finding random piles of debris in the middle of the road… These have all happened to me at some point in my life. And this movie reminded me of times when I would have those obstacles come my way. Granted, there is an obstacle this movie presents that I cannot really compare to anything I’ve personally encountered. It is something much bigger, perhaps unexpected. But it fascinating to see how these two react to and deal with such a thing in the moment.
One of the things I love about this movie is how it shows the layers of humanity. It shows that there is more to people than meets the eye. When you get a look at someone in your life, or maybe when you talk to someone you’ve never talked to before, you will garner an interpretation or image of that person. This movie shows that what you may think a person could be, while possibly true, is not entirely who they are. Or in some cases, that image you have of a person may not even be true in the slightest. Whether it is an image we make up ourselves or an image we hear from them. Regardless of how true or false the images are amongst our two main characters, I was thoroughly captivated by both of them. I loved getting to know Dakota Johnson’s character, Girlie, from the dialogue and what we see from her on her on her phone. Sean Penn does a really good job encapsulating a man who very much resembles an individual who has seen it all. After all, we find out he has been a cab driver for a long time, he does not have time or motivation for the apps like Uber and Lyft. He’s old school. He is someone who’s simply tired of the way the world’s shifting.
Some of my favorite movies do a good job at taking the ordinary, whether it is a character, a place, or an everyday situation, and turns them into something extraordinary. I sometimes look back at one of my favorite films at 2021, “CODA,” and find myself marveled with how its protagonist’s normality would be seen as abnormal by so many other people. In a different sense, “Daddio” takes one of the most everyday things, a drive, something that just so happens to be in the entire film, by the way, and adds quite a bit to it to make the journey something that stands out a lot more than a simple commute. Things that make the ride interesting, or compelling. Each obstacle had my attention. Each conversation had my investment. Each little thing we learn about these two characters kept my chin up. It is hard to know if a movie like “Daddio” is going to be for everyone. If some of you asked me to explain what this movie is about, chances are you’d question how cinematic it really is. This film is very much about the human condition, the way we think, the way we interpret others. And if you are interested in a story about people, then maybe this film is for you. Frankly, I watched this film partially because I will admit, and I do not know if this reason has a ton of validity to it, I love New York. I thought it would be fun to see a commute from the airport to Manhattan. But this film, to my lack of surprise, delivers much more than that.
One last thing, if you saw “Madame Web” this year and questioned Dakota Johnson’s ability as an actor, I highly recommend you watch “Daddio” because I am convinced this movie will change your mind. Remember what I said earlier, “Madame Web” was written by the same people who wrote “Morbius.” Their track record is not the best. Johnson was not given the finest material, and it shows in the movie. It is like watching George Clooney in “Batman & Robin.” He has proven he can act both before and after that film. But there is much more to his lackluster performance in “Batman & Robin” than how he handles it. Here, Dakota Johnson is given a higher quality script, a deeper character, and a more compelling plot. And as a moviegoer, this movie gave me something too. Compared to “Madame Web,” “Daddio” gave me a greater investment of my time. And that is an investment that should never ever go to waste.
In the end, “Daddio” is a film that I am not sure that many of you reading this are going to see, but please do not let it slip by you. This film features two really good performances of well written characters. I wanted to know as much about these two as the movie would allow me to. The movie is the simplest of ideas, but it is done in such a way that makes for an incredibly engaging journey. Now, if I were to compare “Daddio” to another one I mentioned at the beginning, “Driving Madeleine,” I would probably say I would rather watch “Daddio” a second time before putting on “Driving Madeleine” again. And for those who ask, no, it is not because I am a simpleton who wants the characters in the movie to speak English. If anything, it is because “Daddio” does such a great job at fleshing out its leads and makes the most of every situation it presents. This is nothing against “Driving Madeleine.” In fact, if you have not seen that film, I would recommend it. Much like “Daddio,” “Driving Madeleine” is an effective showcase of what it means to be human. But if you asked me to pick between the two, and for all I know, this could be recency bias, I currently find “Daddio” to be more appealing. But if you were to watch either of these films, you would not be wasting your time. I am going to give “Daddio” an 8/10.
“Daddio” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! If you liked this review, I have more coming! Stay tuned for my thoughts on “A Quiet Place: Day One,” “MaXXXine,” “Twisters,” “Deadpool & Wolverine,” and “Kinds of Kindness.” 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 “Daddio?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the craziest car ride you’ve ever had? Tell me about it down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Madame Web” is directed by S.J. Clarkson (The Defenders, Jessica Jones) and stars Dakota Johnson (Fifty Shades of Grey, The High Note), Sydney Sweeney (Anyone But You, Euphoria), Isabella Merced (Transformers: The Last Knight, Dora and the Lost City of Gold), Celeste O’Connor (Ghostbusters: Afterlife, Selah and the Spades), Tahar Rahim (The Serpent, The Mauritanian), Mike Epps (The Hangover, Next Friday), Emma Roberts (Nerve, Scream Queens), and Adam Scott (Parks and Recreation, Big Little Lies). This film centers around a woman named Cassandra Webb. When this paramedic discovers she is clairvoyant, she tries to balance learning about her past all the while protecting the future of three teenage girls.
In the moviegoing market, comic book movies are a dime a dozen nowadays. But there are reasons for that. For starters, a lot of them have received positive reviews in recent years. DC titles like “Joker,” “The Suicide Squad,” and “Wonder Woman” have received a lot of love over the years. In the case of the first title, it even got some recognition at the Academy Awards. The MCU has had a lot of positive critical reception and have been darlings with fans and audiences. On Sony’s side, the animated “Spider-Verse” titles have tons of dedicated fans. But let’s not forget the real reason why these films keep getting made. It’s the same reason every film gets made. Profit.
Films like “Iron Man 3,” “Aquaman,” and “Captain Marvel” for example, all made more than a billion dollars. Naturally, Sony wants a piece of that pie as well. And it’s not like they’re a stranger to it. Their collaborations with Marvel Studios, “Spider-Man: Far from Home” and “Spider-Man: No Way Home” both joined the billion dollar club. At the time, 2002’s “Spider-Man” became the fastest movie to ever reach $100 million at the box office. But in recent years, the studio has moved over to making films about Spider-Man characters without the use of the webhead as its primary protagonist. “Venom,” despite how much I think it is hot garbage, made more than $856 million. “Venom: Let There Be Carnage,” even though it came out when the COVID-19 pandemic kept some audiences at home, still managed to pass the $500 million mark. Then came “Morbius…” With the film grossing $167.5 million against a reported $75 million budget, it barely reached a point of breaking even.
And some may ask why these films seem to be making less than some of their competitors. While there are other factors that definitely come into play, I can shed light on one of them. These films are just not as memorable or high quality compared to say a lot of the MCU installments we have gotten over the years.
If you all remember my review for “Morbius,” I railed that movie into the ground. I wondered why Sony decided to get the writers of “Gods of Egypt,” Matt Sazama and Burk Sharpless, to pen the picture. Maybe they are nice people. Maybe they save kittens from trees on a regular basis, I have no idea, but it does not change the fact these two are some of the worst writers in Hollywood. I was especially shocked that Sony saw “Morbius” and thought, “You know who we should get to write our next comic book film?” The guys who gave us that schlocky Jared Leto film we pushed back for a couple years! As for the one trailer released in this film’s lackluster marketing campaign, it honestly did not help things. But of course, there have been plenty of uninteresting trailers to good movies. But what did I think of the movie itself? Well, to answer this question, I am just gonna have to ask anyone who is reading this to strap themselves in. Because this movie is getting the angry, tangent-filled review it deserves. Why? Because this movie is one of the worst I have ever seen in my entire life. I am not exaggerating. I am not being hyperbolic. This may be the worst film of the decade. Period. End of sentence. Done. Finito. The rain has taken the spider out.
This film is the first I have seen where they flashed the Columbia Pictures 100 years logo. I guess it only took a century to make something as truly diabolical and asinine as whatever this ridiculousness happens to be. I do not know how they did it. But somehow, Matt Sazama and Burk Sharpless wrote a film that is worse than “Morbius.” Get ready guys, I am about to do something I hoped I would not have to do, use “Morbius” as THE POSITIVE.
While “Morbius” was not great, the film at least started with a hint of promise. Looking back, the film had an okay, not great, but mildly amusing first act that did an alright job at establishing a key relationship in the film. You got to know Michael. You got to know Milo. It actually helps the film somewhat as it shoddily progresses. In “Madame Web,” I was about to break just from scene one.
As far as big budget movies go, this is one of the most headache-inducing I have watched. This may seem like a small thing, but there are a couple moments in the film that had these unnecessary zooms. It felt like the cameraman was trying out a camera for the first time and attempting to figure out how the zoom works! It’s that bad! Of course, the cringeworthy dialogue from the beginning did not help much either. And if you like cringeworthy dialogue, fasten your seatbelts, because you are in for a treat! This movie has it in spades! Disappointingly, “He was in the Amazon with my mom when she was researching spiders right before she died,” is not one of those lines. Yep, that infamously awful line from the trailer, it’s not in the movie. As for the other straight up abysmal utterances of words and phrases that did make it into the final project, they are not much better.
What makes “Madame Web” inferior to “Morbius?” Well, looking back at “Morbius,” I think Jared Leto did a great job staying in character the entire time and Matt Smith had the energy of a lively game show host with an edge. As much as I hate bashing actors nowadays, there is not one performance in the film to write home about.
With the exception of one scene past the film’s halfway mark, I cannot say Dakota Johnson gave her best work in this film. To be fair though, going back to the irritatingly terrible screenplay, it did not help things. The one moment Johnson shines in the film just so happens to be the one halfway decent moment in the screenplay. It is one where we get to have a nice, charming moment between her and another character. It is perhaps the only moment of the movie where any of the characters unleash authentic emotion. It was the one moment of the movie where I didn’t hate myself. Then we get to the next scene, and I am not kidding, where it only took a few lines for me to slap myself in the face like I was the first guy trying to figure out how to cure amnesia.
Dakota Johnson may play the protagonist of the film and had top billing. Given what she had to venture through, I’d argue she was underpaid. Right below her is Sydney Sweeney. In the time it took me to write this review, I think significantly more teenage boys took the time to buy posters of Sweeney to put on their bedroom walls than they did to secure “Madame Web” tickets. Knowing the inexcusably bad execution of her character on the page, I think those teenagers made some comparably reasonable purchases. For one thing, from a casting perspective, I find it hilarious that they ended up casting Sydney Sweeney to play a shy, reserved teenage girl. It might be the funniest casting since getting John Cena to play Vin Diesel’s brother in “F9: The Fast Saga.” Now I have seen twenty-something year old actors play teens decently before, and I have seen suave, confidence-exuding actors play roles that do not quite match those aspects of their real life persona. The profession is called acting for a reason. Look at Ana de Armas in “Knives Out!” She is perhaps one of the most beautiful actresses in the business today, but I don’t think you would get that impression of Ana de Armas if your first watch of her in a movie happened to be “Knives Out.” The best thing I can say about Sydney Sweeney in “Madame Web” is the same thing I can say for Jared Leto in “Morbius.” She did her best with the excruciatingly dull material given to her.
In comic book movie speak, the placement between Sydney Sweeney, the other teenage girls, and Dakota Johnson reminds me of the 2015 “Fantastic 4” reboot. An uninteresting, poorly contrived group of four people that is randomly placed together with no semblance of personality or likability. But you know what? I was able to find more positives in “Fantastic 4” than I did for “Madame Web.” The visual effects look nice, some of the first act was okay, and I think Miles Teller did a good job in the lead role. Meanwhile, “Madame Web” pales visually minus a few creative moments, I rolled my eyes from scene one, and I could not find a good performance even if you put a hypnotist in front of me to convince me that one was in front of me all along.
Speaking of “Fantastic 4,” this film, not to mention their respective distributors, have something in common. They come from similar obligations. Rights maintenance. It’s not show friends, it’s show business. Sony is obligated to commence production on a “Spider-Man” project every five years and nine months. They do not have to release the film, they just have to say that it is in production. After seeing “Madame Web,” I can say to those complaining that studios are not making enough original movies, Sony probably feels your pain. They likely felt that they did not want to make this film and instead, they had to. But you know what they could have done? I don’t know, cancelled it?! Go all David Zaslav on it and scrap it for a tax write-off?! That’s what they could have done! For those who say “Batgirl” should never have been cancelled, I think “Madame Web” may prove why that movie met its fate. After all, “Madame Web” is not making all the money in the world. You know why it is not making all the money in the world? It’s unwatchable! Simple as that!
As a fan of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which this movie does not connect to, I recognize that the entirety of that timeline is not based on the vision of one director, or writer. A lot of it traces back to Kevin Feige, the President of Marvel Studios. As much as I am not one for what many would call studio interference, I will not deny that a lot of the success of the MCU is owed to Feige and his ability to balance connectivity from one project to the next. Not everything is a hit. There have been duds like “Thor: The Dark World,” but everything makes sense and at least feels like it is coming from some hint of passion. Feige cares about what goes on the screen. The filmmakers care about what goes on the screen. I am not saying this film’s director, S.J. Clarkson does not care. But as a whole, this movie feels like made by people who could care less about how it would turn out. Despite how much money these movies make and their extreme presence in popular culture, the MCU movies feel like they are made with love. At least they are when standing next to “Madame Web,” which feels like it was made to fit into a release schedule.
Speaking of release dates, I love how this movie was released on Valentine’s Day. I have never been in a relationship myself, but I nevertheless feel like I am in a fair position to give some advice. If you took your partner to see “Madame Web” on Valentine’s Day, they have every right to use that as a reason to block your phone number, ghost you, or break up with you. I don’t make the rules. I just tell things as they are.
Seriously! Who in their right mind saw “Morbius” and thought the writers should continue working in this cinematic universe? The fact that they were able to conjure a script that is inferior to their previous project is baffling to me.
And if you think I got into the movie’s most shameful moments yet, just wait. You have seen nothing yet. If you have been following this blog for the past five or six years, chances are you may remember my thoughts on “Uncle Drew.” But for those who need catching up, I have to say the movie was not funny, not charming, and completely lacking in any likability whatsoever. As far as I am concerned, “Uncle Drew” has only given me two things. One of the most passionate reviews I have done on this platform, and ire. Not much else. In that review, I titled it the “worst Pepsi commercial ever.” That highly talked about ad with Kendall Jenner has nothing on just how bad that movie was. It was filled to the brim with Pepsi product placement to the point where I almost wanted to chuck a couple Coca-Colas directly at the screen.
Ladies and gentlemen, I think “Madame Web” is now a fine contender to be the worst Pepsi commercial in history.
I am almost scared to know what went on behind the scenes of “Madame Web,” but at the same time, I am curious to know how much money Pepsi shelled out just have the exposure they’ve gotten in this film. Sony films in general are usually obnoxious enough for how much they advertise their own products. Just look at “Gran Turismo!” Not only is that based on a PlayStation exclusive video game, but it also doubles as a Nissan commercial, and ends up making the Walkman an essential element to the story. When it comes to product placement, Sony is arguably the most shameless major studio when it comes to this heinous trend. I understand, movies are expensive and studios need to pay the bills. But why does Pepsi need to be thrown in my face so obnoxiously? At this point, this is not a movie. It’s a giant, uninspired, bloody two hour ad! The real protagonist of this film is not Cassandra Webb, it’s Pepsi!
Speaking of lazy, the ending of this film downright sucks on so many levels. For starters, it reuses footage from Sam Raimi’s “Spider-Man 2.” Not only did it feel like a quick copout, but it made me wish I was watching a much better movie! As for other reasons why the ending sucks, I must once again go back to my old friend “Morbius.”
I said one of the reasons that film did not work for me was because it lied in its marketing campaign about certain things. Unfortunately, Sony learned nothing when marketing “Madame Web.” Because there is an entire segment of the trailer dedicated to showing off something regarding the teenage girls. Now, as mentioned, the teenage girls are in the movie. And that “something” I just mentioned is in the final picture. Unfortunately though, that something is used to basically tease a certain thing in the future. Perhaps a “Madame Web 2.” To that I must say, if you cannot give me a cool movie the first time, why should I care about what you are going to give me the second time? The ending of this movie basically just tells me that after being trapped in front of a screen for two hours, it wants me to come back for an occasion where we actually see something potentially worthwhile. One of the flaws of cinematic universes or modern film franchises in general is that everybody is so concerned about building excitement in regards to what’s next to the point where it is easy to forget that you have to focus on the feature that is in front of you. Additionally, we get a costume reveal for our title character and I have to say, it is strange to look at. Maybe it is because so much of this movie looks dark and greyish at times. Compared to a lot of other comic book movies, the color palette looks bleak. If these Sony Marvel movies have one thing in common, it’s that they look dark and depressing. It sometimes turns me off. I get that characters like Venom are often seen as villains, but still.
Honestly though, the movie is sometimes hilarious, but not in a good way. There is an entire subplot dedicated to the birth of a certain character whose name is never mentioned. As a “Spider-Man” fan, I am able to put the pieces together and determine who this character is, but the way this movie goes about this feels insulting and lazy. The subplot also brings out one of the most cringeworthy jokes in the movie. Basically, Emma Roberts’s character reveals her water just broke, to which one of the teenage girls ends up shouting, “Ewwwwwwww!” I am not joking, to say I facepalmed in that moment would be an understatement. If you were in my auditorium and you heard a loud slapping sound out of nowhere, that was me slapping my hand on my face in anger.
And yes, for those who ask, that was the scene that followed the one decent moment in the movie.
From a technical perspective, “Madame Web” has some okay moments in terms of the action sequences, but nothing I will worship until the day I die. In fact, once again, there is one action sequence that further emphasizes my displeasure with Pepsi’s overexposure throughout this turd of a film. I think the weakest part of the film from a technical standpoint is the sound. Now, everything’s clear. I could hear all the dialogue, in its everlasting, infinite, sigh-inducing glory… But there are multiple parts of the film where I thought I was getting brain damage from how loud the movie was. I watched the film in IMAX, which would naturally mean the sound would be louder. But I have been to numerous IMAX experiences and have witnessed plenty where louder sound has only served as a benefit. Take “Oppenheimer” for example. That trinity test scene was bonkers in IMAX. It was something else. It was one of the most riveting things I witnessed in my entire life simply because I felt like I was a part of that scene. Sometimes “Madame Web” was just loud enough to the point where my headache must have gotten irritated by what was in front of it. Speaking of headaches, the way this movie goes about explaining our main protagonist’s powers sometimes got on my nerves. It’s not that I did not understand it, but rather that it was showcased in such a way that messed with my mind the longer it lasted on the screen.
“Madame Web” is an hour and 56 minutes long. Honestly, that runtime is incredibly flawed. According to my calculations, I think I found the perfect runtime for the film. And that runtime is nothing because a film like this should have never been released. The fact that it even got made is mind-blowing. When this film started, I was turned off. As it progressed, I was seething. When the credits showed up, I stormed out of the theater like a young child who got blue shelled by their friend twice in one race during a session of “Mario Kart!”
I wish I were exaggerating. You may think I am simply telling you this for dramatic effect. It’s true. But I assure you, that short paragraph I just wrote, has more substance than “Madame Web” can provide in less than two hours.
In the end, to call “Madame Web” a joke would make sense, but to do that would be insult against comedy. Because comedy makes you laugh. The only thing “Madame Web” did was intensify my anger. I love comic book movies. I know they are not exactly in the best state right now, but I remember walking out of every MCU movie that came out last year. And even if they were not fantastic, they at least had some redeeming qualities. I know a lot of people have been recently bagging on “Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania” and “The Marvels,” but I dare you to watch those two movies and “Madame Web” in a marathon and tell me that “Madame Web” is not the worst of those three. Because those two movies, despite their flaws, manage to pack in some fun. They deliver good action, neat effects for the most part, and have likable protagonists at the forefront. When I say that “Madame Web” is the worst film of the decade, it is hard to imagine such an assessment being a stretch. Between a wasted superhero story where we barely get any superhero DNA throughout, a lackluster villain, bad writing, terrible jokes, obscene dialogue, and tired homages to “Spider-Man” lore, “Madame Web” is an utterly atrocious mess that will go down in history as one of the most asinine, sloppy, downright criminal pieces of cinema that has ever disgraced the silver screen. Martin Scorsese, if you are reading this, I may disagree with you on comic book movies in regards to whether or not they are cinema. But after seeing “Madame Web,” I think it would be wrong to even call it a theme park ride. Why? …Because theme park rides are fun. I am going to give “Madame Web” a 1/10.
“Madame Web” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Drive-Away Dolls!” Hopefully that will serve as a palette cleanser for the fiendish brain cell-eradicator of a movie I just watched. One can only hope. Also coming soon, I will have my thoughts on “Bob Marley: One Love,” “Dune Part Two,” “High Tide,” and “Kung Fu Panda 4.” Stay tuned! If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Madame Web,” and why did you think it was terrible? Err, sorry! My mind nearly broke for a second, what I meant was, what did you think of the movie? Or, what is the superior project? “Madame Web” or “Morbius?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Scene Before 