“The Uprising” is directed by Paul Greengrass (News of the World, The Bourne Supremacy) and stars Andrew Garfield (The Amazing Spider-Man, Hacksaw Ridge), Jamie Bell (Fantastic Four, The Adventures of Tintin), Stephen Dillane (Game of Thrones, John Adams), Tom Hollander (Harley Quinn, Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest), Cosmo Jarvis (The Alto Knights, Warfare), Thomasin McKenzie (Last Night in Soho, Fackham Hall), Jonny Lee Miller (Trainspotting, Hackers), Woody Norman (Cobweb, C’mon C’mon), and Katherine Waterson (Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, Fackham Hall). Inspired by the 1381 Peasants’ Revolt, this film is about a group of people who rebel against King Richard II.
To be real, there were not a ton of movies coming out in September that I was beyond excited to see. There were a couple titles that stood out to me, but when it comes to “The Uprising,” I felt like I was taking a chance on it. I knew little to nothing about the film other than listening to people talk about it online. I do not even recall if I watched a trailer for the movie prior to checking it out in theaters. That said, there are some promising things about the film at a glance, including star Andrew Garfield.
Andrew Garfield is a fantastic actor. I had iffy thoughts on his Spider-Man to a degree back in the day, but “No Way Home” gave him a bit of a boost for me. If anything, having seen that movie, I think part of that boost is because he was given much better material to work with than what was handed to him in the Marc Webb movies. But Garfield is more than Spidey. For example, he’s received Oscar nominations for “Hacksaw Ridge” and “Tick…Tick…BOOM!.” With each role, Garfield continues to prove he has chops and charisma. The same can be said for “The Uprising.” While Garfield himself is fairly recognizable in the role of a Ploughman, it does not change the fact that he does well as the story’s center. Is his performance the best of the year? No. But it is perhaps precisely what this movie needed due to Garfield’s range. Sometimes he is commanding. Other times he is a bit soft. It depends on the context of the scene, but Garfield plays his part well no matter what the role requires. Garfield is not the only actor who stands out. Others include Woody Norman as King Richard II, Jamie Bell as John Ball, and Thomasin McKenzie, the latter of whom has a particularly compelling backstory.
As for the film itself, it is quite good. The story is never boring and there is a healthy mix of engaging dialogue and thrilling action sequences to balance out the pace. Some might say the film is slow, which frankly, I kind of get, but do not wholly agree with. I prefer to call the film steady. It’s by no means a slog, but not a sprint either. It aims for the middle and does not miss.
Despite being set in the 14th century, “The Uprising” is a fitting movie for today’s times. For the record, I live in the United States, and it is not like this is a problem that is exclusive to this part of the world, but in recent years, it has become noticeable that prices for just about everything have been going up. That’s not an unusual concept, but the rate at which it has been happening has been exorbitant. So, it feels like perfect timing to have a movie come out where its heroes are trying to confront the reality that on top of already struggling as they are, they now have to put up with more taxes.
“The Uprising” is directed by Paul Greengrass. I have not seen all of his movies, but I tend to like the ones that I did see. Although this movie has a bit in common with his 2020 outing, “News of the World.” In addition to both films being somewhat action-centric, they also deal with topics relevant to their time of release, even if the films themselves are set long before said period. “News of the World,” which is about a man who goes around reading newspapers to audiences, came out a few years after the term “fake news” popularized with certain people. This film features political controversy and complaints over taxes. Those two topics are arguably evergreen, but as someone living in the United States, it is not hard to notice them making the rounds today.
Much like Greengrass’s other projects, there is quite a bit of shaky cam in this film. If that is not your thing, you may be turned off by this film’s production elements. Frankly, sometimes it works, and other times it feels quite clunky. There are one or two battle sequences that I thought the shaky cam ended up blending perfectly with the chaos. That said, there are moments where I felt the handheld videography came off as a bit overdone. One could argue that this speaks more to my personal preferences as a viewer than anything else. Heck, to this day I have not watched a ton of “The Office” and yes, one of the reasons why is because I don’t find it funny. Sorry not sorry. But another, perhaps dumber reason is because all the camerawork is handheld and it throws me off. The handheld camerawork in “The Uprising” is by no means the worst thing I have ever seen, I can make out what is going on in just about every scene, but there are a lot of moments where it feels a bit unnatural. To be fair though, this is a dramatic narrative, and in some ways, the handheld nature of the film does contribute to said drama.
No spoilers for those who have not seen the movie, but I dug the ending. If anything, this film almost crosses a line to the point where it becomes something else entirely during this specific moment. In actuality, the ending is fitting given what the story is, but its delivery is perhaps intentionally linked to another famous character. The ending is well done and has some solid action to back it up. Look forward to it. Sadly, the film’s marketing does spoil this moment, so chances are some of you reading this already have an idea as to the connection I am talking about. But if you did miss the trailers somehow, the ending is a fitting, yet almost out of left field treat.
In the end, “The Uprising” is a good flick. Is it the most exciting film of 2026? Not even close. It is not even the most exciting movie to come out this month… More on that in the next review. But the film is nevertheless engaging in more ways than one. It features a solid lead performance by Andrew Garfield and is incredibly relevant for today’s audience despite being set in the late 14th century. This is not a film that is going to have massive replay value, at least from me. Maybe if I am scrolling channels and I come across it, I will put it on. But it is nevertheless beautifully made and executed. I am going to give “The Uprising” a 7/10.
“The Uprising” is now playing in select theatres and is available to rent or buy on VOD.
Thanks for reading this review! If you want to keep the party going, check out my latest episode of the Scene Before original series Movie Requests! In this episode, Rosario Dawson requests that I should talk about “Legend,” the fantasy film from 1985. To find out what I thought about it, click the video above!
Also, look forward to my next episode of Movie Requests, which will feature comedian Joe Gatto! You may know him from “Impractical Jokers” and “The Misery Index!” The official upload date is unclear at this time, but if you want to stay updated on that episode and others, please subscribe to my YouTube channel! And if you enjoy the last episode, please give it a like! It really helps out!
My next review is going to be for “Forgotten Island!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Primetime,” “The Weight,” and “Digger.” 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 Uprising?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Paul Greengrass movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Coyote vs. Acme” is directed by Dave Green (Earth to Echo, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows) and stars Will Forte (Scoob!, Saturday Night Live), Lana Condor (Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken, X-Men: Apocalypse), Tone Bell (Whitney, Little), Luis Guzmán (The Limey, Traffic), Martha Kelly (Euphoria, Baskets), P.J. Byrne (The Wolf of Wall Street, The Legend of Korra), Eric Bauza (Looney Tunes Cartoons, Buddy), Kenneth Choi (The People v. O.J. Simpson: American Crime Story, The Last Man on Earth), and John Cena (Blockers, The Suicide Squad). After many attempts of trying to catch the Roadrunner to no success, Wile E. Coyote has one thing to blame, Acme. Now fed up with the company’s defective products, Coyote decides to sue Acme for each of their products that kept him from catching the iconic blue bird. But winning the case will not be easy as Acme is a dominate corporate force, and Coyote teams up with a lawyer known for settling every case that comes his way.
I am not the biggest “Looney Tunes” guy. I did not grow up watching the property. Heck, even as someone who was born in the late 90s, I did not even watch the original “Space Jam” until I was 21. By the way, the movie is awful. Seriously… What was that? But even I was stoked for “Coyote vs. Acme.”
Even as a novice to the “Looney Tunes” brand, I am well aware, and sometimes amused, by the constant charade of Wile E. Coyote trying to catch the Roadrunner. Never in my life did I think we would ever get a movie where Coyote takes the company who makes his contraptions and gadgets to court. But as soon as I heard the pitch, I was all eyes and ears. This was a brilliant premise, and I really wanted to see it come to life. But Warner Bros. Discovery decided to go full Adam Conover and ruin everything.
Following in the footsteps of “Batgirl,” “Coyote vs. Acme” was fated to become Warner Bros. Discovery’s latest tax write-off. The film, while well-liked by people who worked on it as well as others outside the production, was not seen as a moneymaker to Warner Brothers Discovery, in addition to any potential buyers. Except for one. And that is Ketchup Entertainment, who also released another recent “Looney Tunes” project, “The Day the Earth Blew Up.” I did not see that one, but I was eager to check out this one.
I have now seen “Coyote vs. Acme,” and it is not just good. It is actually great. No… I take that back. This is one of the best films of the year.
This film, much like “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?”, is set in a world where people and cartoons co-exist. The Acme Corporation is a real company run by actual people, making animated products for cartoons like Coyote. We see that Coyote has had it. He has spent his whole life trying to catch the Roadrunner. He’s gotta eat! So, he gets an idea to sue Acme for each one of their products he got his hands on. None of them worked, and he wants to hit them where it hurts. So, he teams up with a lawyer named Kevin Avery (Forte) to get the job done. However, we find out that these two are opposites. Avery, and by extension, his firm, is known for settling. In fact, the firm has been involved in multiple cases against Acme and there has been a settlement for each one.
You have two core characters, each of whom want to get things done their own way. Coyote and Kevin make for an incredible odd duo. I was pleasantly surprised with not just how well Forte wound up doing in this film as a live-action performer blending in with cartoons, but the same can be said for how I felt about Coyote as a character.
The concept of watching Coyote trying to catch the Roadrunner by itself is fun on paper, but let’s be real. His goal is to end this bird’s life. He is kind of a fascinating character, because despite this movie being made for families, it centers around someone who is so dedicated to killing a bird that you cannot help but appreciate him. It is kind of like watching Mauser from “Marty Supreme,” who is a bit of a moron, but he has this drive that as I watched the film, I could not help but appreciate it. The film is, ironically, fantastic for younger people to watch. Because despite being about someone whose goal is to kill a bird, it also serves as a fine lesson for younger viewers to chase their dreams.
This lesson plays heavily not just into Coyote’s personal motivation, but also the relationship between him and Kevin. Coyote’s drive ends up inspiring Kevin to not just challenge himself to perhaps become a better lawyer, but it seems to instill him with a reason to keep on living.
As the film progresses, it becomes one of the most surprisingly heartfelt features I have seen in a long time. Heartfelt and “Looney Tunes” are two concepts that I did not think I would use in the same sentence, but here we are. I was almost convinced that I was watching a Pixar movie or something from Lord and Miller. A perfect execution of comedic gags that also manages to interweave moments that pull your heartstrings. I nearly cried at the end of this movie. When this movie nearly got scrapped for a tax write-off, I knew I wanted to see it. I did not know that it would be this compelling, this exciting, this moving.
The ending of this film is so satisfying. It is, in a way, a predictable ending, but it manages to pack in an element or two of unpredictability to get there. Regardless, the ending feels earned. It puts the film’s characters in a position that makes sense and overall, the final moments emit oodles of joy. This is a movie about underdogs, and it is perhaps only enhanced by the fact that getting the film to the big screen was a bit of an underdog story by itself.
Speaking of all the behind the scenes drama, one of my favorite things we see, not even in the film itself, but just before it starts, is the WB logo. This is a completely baseless assumption, but there is a subtitle in the opening logo that part of me wants to believe was put in as a response to the whole tax-write off saga. Moments into the title, we zoom in and we see a caption that reads “A wholly owned subsidiary of the Acme Corporation.” On one hand, it is kind of funny because it plays into the joke of Acme’s corporate dominance. But the joke may also have a double meaning. Much like how Acme is the villain of the movie, some people who wanted to see this film succeed saw Warner Bros. as a real life villain that kept this project from seeing the light of day.
…Or I could be overthinking this and the logo was designed before the tax-write off shenanigans even became a thing. I have to keep all possibilities open to avoid making a fool of myself.
Arguably the most notable physical standout in the film is John Cena, and not just from a looks perspective. He plays Buddy Crane, who is not only a lawyer for Acme, but just so happened to be Kevin’s rival while the two attended Harvard. Despite sometimes playing Crane up as this tough guy, and he is, he also manages to sometimes deliver a kind, calm aura. There is a balance to this character that Cena masters as a performer. Cena has proven in previous roles that he has a knack for comedy, and while this may not be his funniest role, he continues to prove that he has a fine presence on screen.
The movie also comes with plenty of fan service and fun Easter eggs. Sure, you have some classic footage and phrases that even casuals would recognize, but there are sometimes some nice small touches. There is a scene set in the middle of the film set to the DJ Shadow song “Nobody Speak,” which is a good song by itself, but the film adds a slight enhancement to the song and replaces a couple notes with the Roadrunner’s “meep meep.” I almost burst out laughing, but I wanted to avoid embarrassing myself in front of other people.
The film does come with some minor issues. For the most part, the blending of live-action with the animated elements works fantastically. It is actually kind of incredible how seamless everything is. But not all of it is consistent. Not everyone seems to be drawn in the same style. I do not have a problem with this as “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?” implements multiple styles, but I thought “Roger Rabbit” did a better job at blending those styles together than “Coyote.” While he is by no means an eyesore, the design for Foghorn Leghorn sometimes looks a little tacky when put next to live-action characters. He is not awful looking, but it is also true at the same time that he looks like a character during the main sequence of “The Simpsons Ride” at Universal Studios.
Even with some tiny issues, this film is not just a blast, it is a triumph. This is perhaps the greatest middle finger to corporate giants encapsulated via film since “WALL-E.” In fact, by happy accident, the film feels like it is throwing an extra middle finger to a real life corporate behemoth at the same time. I say this as someone who loves Warner Brothers as a studio. I am a massive fan of their movies. In fact, “Sinners” and “One Battle After Another” were two of my favorite films from last year. But they made a mistake by nearly axing this film. What one corporation sees as trash, is the audience’s treasure. Please go buy a ticket to this movie, because not only are you supporting a spectacular project, but you will be sending a message to the people who almost kept you from seeing it in the first place.
In the end, while I do not think “Coyote vs. Acme” is not going to get a Best Picture nomination from the Academy, it is one of those movies that you have to see at least once. This is a one-of-a-kind project that wound up being more than a pleasant surprise for me. I genuinely do not know when I am going to stop thinking about it. This film nearly broke me. It presents two completely admirable heroes who not only have fascinating goals, but make a great team. You do not have to be a “Looney Tunes” diehard to enjoy this film, and given the little history I have with this franchise, I am proof of that. Please go see this movie. It will make you laugh and cry. I am going to give “Coyote vs. Acme” a 9/10.
“Coyote vs. Acme” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! As a reminder, in honor of Scene Before’s 10th anniversary, I am working on a special video series, Movie Requests, which sees me reviewing movies suggested by celebrity guests. My latest episode features actress Melissa Barrera, who you may know from films like “Abigail” and “In the Heights.” In this episode, she suggests I should watch “Roma!” What did I think? Click the video above to find out! If you enjoy the video, please leave a like, subscribe to my YouTube channel, and hit the notification bell that way you can see more episodes as soon as possible!
My next review is going to be for “Idiots.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Don’t Move” and “The Uprising.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, be sure to check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Coyote vs. Acme?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie that you wish you got to see that has never been released? For me, the answer is Sam Raimi’s “Spider-Man 4.” I remember that it was supposed to come out in the early 2010s, but it got scrapped in favor of “The Amazing Spider-Man.” No offense to Andrew Garfield, but I would give anything for another solo Tobey Maguire movie. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Tony” is directed by Matt Johnson (BlackBerry, Nirvana the Band the Show the Movie) and stars Dominic Sessa (The Holdovers, Oh. What. Fun), Emilia Jones (CODA, Task), Dagmara Domińczyk (Priscilla, The Lost Daughter), Rich Sommer (Fair Play, BlackBerry), Stavros Halkias (Let’s Start a Cult, Bugonia), Leo Woodall (One Day, The White Lotus), and Antonio Banderas (Shrek 2, Babygirl). This film is about a young Anthony Bourdain who is aspiring to be a writer. It follows Bourdain’s time in Provincetown, Massachusetts as he takes a job at a restaurant, tries to impress a girl, and covers up a big lie to his family.
For those who read this blog in 2023, you may know that one of the movies I massively enjoyed was “The Holdovers.” Not only has the film quickly become a must watch for me around the holidays, but it has the bonus of being shot minutes away from my house. “Tony” is not shot as close, but nevertheless in my home state of Massachusetts. One thing those films have in common – Dominic Sessa stars in both of them. Another thing both films have in common – I enjoyed them very much.
No matter where this movie was shot, it did not change the fact that I witnessed one of the year’s most compelling films. While this film can probably best be described as a coming of age drama, it has a little bit of everything in it. It has humor. It has grit. It has romance. This is the kind of film that I can honestly see appealing to many different demographics. Not only does it implement all of these elements from the getgo, but utilizes each one to their full potential.
“Tony” is basically “Marty Supreme” for foodies. For those who remember my review of “Marty Supreme,” you may recall that when I described Marty Mauser, I said he was “by no means a role model.” I did not necessarily mean that as a negative. In fact, the way that film fleshes Marty out only accentuated his complication. He is a bit of a jerk, but he comes off as palatable. Anthony Bourdain, or at least this film’s interpretation of him, is kind of in the same boat. He is young, has a remarkable drive, but also comes off as cocky. Depending on the situation, he is not the most pleasant person to be around. This is something that the late Anthony Bourdain himself seems to have acknowledged at a certain point in his life. As a matter of fact, when the film starts, there is a title card with a quote from Bourdain himself. In the quote, Bourdain says that he was a “spoiled, miserable, narcissistic, self-destructive and thoughtless young lout.” That specific quote is taken from his memoir, “Kitchen Confidential,” which also inspired this movie.
I love that the movie started with this quote. Not only is it a compelling quote by itself, but this perfectly set the tone for what’s to come. While there are people who fondly remember Bourdain following his 2018 death, the film in more ways than one portrays him as a bit of a whiner and egomaniac. Is he smart? Perhaps. Is he driven? Sure. But it does not change the fact that he does come off as an occasional moron. I think many of us, in one way or another, would look at our younger selves and ask what the heck were we thinking at that age. If anything, this film is a raw look at a Bourdain’s young adulthood where his character flaws come to show.
Despite being a Bay Stater and finding out “Tony” was set in Provincetown, that did not turn out to be the sole big draw for me. Another big draw for me was the casting of Dominic Sessa as Anthony Bourdain. This is not necessarily because I thought Sessa would make a good Anthony Bourdain. I know as much about Anthony Bourdain as I do about professional cornhole. I have seen both of those things once or twice on a television screen, but that is about it. Though maybe I should take that back a little bit, because Sessa, who just so happened to have a major role in “The Holdovers” prior to this movie, has proven his talents. He is a sensational young actor and I can see him following in the footsteps of the greats. He had plenty to work with in “The Holdovers” alongside Paul Giamatti and now he has this movie to essentially call his own.
Although at the same time Sessa’s dynamic with Antonio Banderas felt like a remix of his dynamic with Paul Giamatti. It’s a mentor-mentee relationship where both sides have their clear differences. It’s a cliche that works in both of these movies, and much like “The Holdovers,” what really holds this relationship together is the chemistry between both actors in addition to their individual performances, which, by the way, to my lack of surprise, Antonio Banderas does an excellent job in the film as Chef José Vatel. No notes.
Another actor I am happy to see in this film is Emilia Jones. While she has been in other projects since, like “The Running Man,” I still adore Jones for her lead outing in “CODA.” That movie is so riveting. While Jones plays a supporting role as Nancy, Bourdain’s crush, instead of a leading role, she is still fun to watch on screen. She and Bourdain tend to have a rocky connection as characters sometimes, and both Jones and Sessa do a great job at capturing said rockiness.
Random segway, one of the best movies I watched over the years is “Chef.” I love the story, the characters, the performances… Everything about it. But one of my favorite things about the film is the fact that the food looked so good that it made me hungry. For the record, the food in “Tony” is not as good-looking as “Chef,” but it is still quite appetizing. I love a good restaurant that serves nothing but their interpretation of the American basics. When I saw the camera angle on the french fries in this film, I wanted to leap into the screen and take one for myself. This is one of those films that makes me want to go to a restaurant and soak in the atmosphere. Not necessarily a nice restaurant. In fact, regarding the eatery where Bourdain works, Nancy even refers to its cuisine as junk food at a particular point of the film. Look, the food may be unhealthy, but it does not mean the it looks off-putting. In fact, it is quite the opposite. This film’s food sometimes makes me want to chuck my popcorn towards the screen, dash out of the auditorium, and indulge in some hand-cut fries.
In the end, “Tony” impressed me. It is hard to come up with any flaws that I have with “Tony.” The film is perfectly paced, engaging, and as I said before, it has a fine balance in multiple genres. It has some cliches that you might see in coming of age stories like this, but cliches do not really break a movie if they work, and the cliches seem to work here. I cannot recommend this movie enough. I went into “Tony” mainly because it was new and I wanted to pay off my AMC A-List subscription for the month, I stayed because how much this film sucked me in. Oh, and it made me hungry. I want french fries! I am going to give “Tony” a 9/10.
“Tony” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now!
Thanks for reading this review! If you have not done so already, please be sure to check out the latest episode of the Scene Before original series, Movie Requests, which features actress Melissa Barrera! In this episode, she recommends the movie “Roma.” Click the video to find out my thoughts! And if you enjoy the video, remember to leave a like, subscribe to my YouTube channel, and click the notification bell if you want to see more episodes of Movie Requests coming soon!
My next review is going to be for “Spa Weekend.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Coyote vs. Acme,” “Idiots,” and “Don’t Move.” 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 “Tony?” What did you think about it? Or, in the spirit of “Marty Supreme,” have you seen that movie? Tell me your thoughts on it if you have seen it! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“The Invite” is directed by Olivia Wilde (Booksmart, Don’t Worry Darling) who also stars in the film as Angela. Joining her is Seth Rogen (Sausage Party, The Super Mario Bros. Movie), Penélope Cruz (Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, Ferrari), and Edward Norton (The Incredible Hulk, American History X). This film is about a couple in a declining marriage who decide to invite their neighbors over for dinner, only for the night to go in an unexpected direction.
Olivia Wilde is one of those Hollywood insiders I respect, but I sometimes forget just how much of a footprint she has in the industry. When I found out about her directorial debut, “Booksmart,” in 2019, I was excited to see what skills she could bring behind the camera. And while I thought the film was not my favorite of the year, I found some parts quite funny, and the two leads were excellent.
Then came “Don’t Worry Darling…” It is a film that has quite a bit going for it in the first couple of acts, but topples like a house of cards by its conclusion. It was a frustrating film to watch, despite a sometimes great performance from Florence Pugh. It was not the worst film of 2022, but it nearly turned me off of seeing “The Invite,” a film that I wound up watching after hearing positive word of mouth.
I am proud to say that not only did I enjoy “The Invite,” but it is Olivia Wilde’s best directorial effort yet. It is a film that showcases a married couple’s drama as both sides do their best to play things cool in front of their neighbors. This is also perhaps Wilde’s most grounded film yet, even if it does involve a series of extreme scenarios faced by several characters.
While Olivia Wilde seems to be growing as a director, she has spent most of her career as an actress, and therefore it is no surprise that the performances in “The Invite” are perhaps the highlight of the film. Some highlights are shown through the sometimes funny, other times riveting relationship between Joe and Angela. Seth Rogen plays the former while the latter is played by Wilde herself. The cast in this film is quite small. The movie revolves around four characters and for the most part, is set in one location. The other two characters, Piña and Hawk, are played by Penélope Cruz and Edward Norton. What the film lacks in quantity it most certainly has in quality, which is by no means a bad thing.
The story is quite digestible, moves at a steady pace, and it is easy to buy each of the characters as individuals and as members of their particular relationships. Each actor plays off each other incredibly well and it also helps that they have such remarkable material to work with.
The more I reflect on the film, I do not necessarily think the story has one character that is a true protagonist or antagonist. The film feels more like an exciting game of two equally balanced teams or players. Each one has their strengths and weaknesses, and the movie finds a way to make you root for or appreciate each character in the cast.
Despite being a drama and mostly about a couple’s failing marriage, the film is surprisingly funny. I should not be that surprised considering how Rogen has a knack for comedy on camera, and Wilde has experience with directing good comedy through “Booksmart,” but comedy is all about timing, and it could not be better when it comes to how everything is executed in “The Invite.”
Speaking of timing, this is a film that truly takes its time. There is not a single scene that feels rushed, even if the characters find themselves in a fast-paced situation. “The Invite” does a phenomenal job at hinting at each character’s motivation and taking advantage of those motivations in future scenes. Plot-wise, this film starts as one thing and almost becomes something else entirely. I would not call “The Invite” the twistiest film of all time. In fact, I had a slight idea as to where things would go given how I have heard other viewers talk about the film’s vibe before I had a chance to check it out. But the film starts off as a conversational dramedy and morphs into something more complex and nearly bonkers. And while, again, this is not the twistiest movie I have ever seen, this film marks an improvement from Olivia Wilde’s last movie, “Don’t Worry Darling.” That film, much like this most recent one, was not written by Wilde. But when it comes to the films Wilde helmed, “Don’t Worry Darling” had a gargantuan twist, but bigger does not always mean better. If anything, it made that movie fall off a cliff. While “The Invite” definitely heightens its reality in the second half, it stays fairly consistent with the film’s grounded nature, and it is all thanks to a particular reveal that I will let you see for yourself.
Although it should be noted, while Will McCormick and Rashida Jones did in fact craft one of the best screenplays of the year, it is not an original idea, as this film is inspired by a 2020 Spanish picture called “The People Upstairs.” I have not seen that movie, nor have I heard of it prior to watching “The Invite,” but if anything, this film serves as the greatest piece of marketing “The People Upstairs” could ask for. “The Invite” serves as a piece of marketing to its predecessor in the same way that “The Departed,” a 2006 Hollywood film, was arguably the greatest piece of marketing for the 2002 Hong Kong film “Infernal Affairs.” “The Departed” was not only nominated for multiple Academy Awards, it won Best Picture. “Infernal Affairs” had less relevance in the United States, much like “The People Upstairs,” so it is no surprise that the Academy did not recognize either film. But I have a strong feeling that “The Invite” will be recognized for sure. Based on its top notch direction by Olivia Wilde, brilliant writing by McCormick and Jones, smart editing choices by Yorgos Mavropsaridis and Anthony Boys, and excellent performances by the four actors who command the screen in each scene, “The Invite” is one of the year’s finest movies.
In the end, “The Invite” is Olivia Wilde’s best work so far as a director. There is a saying that you are only as good as your last project, and that made me somewhat hesitant to check out this movie as I was not exactly fond of Wilde’s previous outing, “Don’t Worry Darling.” But not only is her latest film a vast improvement as far as I am concerned, but it makes me look forward to what she has up her sleeve next. This film is proof that big things come in small packages. The cast may be tiny, but the story packs a punch. Do not miss this one. I am going to give “The Invite” an 8/10.
“The Invite” is now playing in theaters and it is also available to rent or buy on VOD.
Thanks for reading this review! I am happy to announce that the next episode of Movie Requests officially drops Monday September 7th and it is going to feature Melissa Barrera! You may know her from movies like “Abigail” and “Your Monster,” as well as shows like “The Copenhagen Test” and “Keep Breathing.” You can also catch her on Broadway in the musical comedy “Titanique,” which I have seen twice and find to be an utter riot. Check out the episode when it drops Monday September 7th here on Flicknerd.com and YouTube! If you want to see the episode as soon as possible, please subscribe to my YouTube channel!
Also, be sure to check out my most recent episode of “Movie Requests,” featuring Amy Sedaris! In this episode, I talk about two of her favorite films, “The Elephant Man” and “Babe!” What did I think of them? Watch the video to find out.
My next review is going to be for “Cookie Queens!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Tony,” “Spa Weekend,” “Coyote vs. Acme,” and “Idiots.” 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 Invite?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie featuring a small cast that you enjoyed recently? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“I Want Your Sex” is directed by Gregg Araki (13 Reasons Why, Now Apocalypse) and stars Olivia Wilde (Don’t Worry Darling, Tron: Legacy), Cooper Hoffman (The Long Walk, Licorice Pizza), Mason Gooding (Ballers, Love, Victor), Chase Sui Wonders (The Studio, Generation), Johnny Knoxville (Jackass, Action Point), Margaret Cho (30 Rock, All American Girl), Roxane Mesquida (Now Apocalypse, Gossip Girl), Charli XCX (The Moment, UglyDolls), and Daveed Diggs (Black-ish, The Boys). This film is about a man named Elliot who takes a job at a company specializing in erotic art. Soon after taking said job, he finds himself in a sexual relationship with his boss.
Sex sells. End of story. Well, unless your sex-centric movie comes out against “Spider-Man,” then that’s a different conversation entirely. As Tom Holland, Zendaya, and Jon Bernthal continue their box office domination with “Spider-Man: Brand New Day,” released just two weeks after their smash hit “The Odyssey,” a significantly smaller title is getting, unsurprisingly, nowhere near as much spotlight. That movie being “I Want Your Sex.”
The concept of this film is intriguing, as it places a 23 year old man with a much more experienced woman in a series of sexual situations. The kicker to this, the 23 year old man just so happens to be working for said woman at, amazingly enough, a company dedicated to erotic art.
Couple things to note… First off, my family does read this blog, and I have no problem with them knowing that I very much enjoyed this raunchy, sexy movie. I would like to shoutout one cool aunt who was confused as to why I recommended “Anora,” which she deemed “pornagraphic.” Auntie… That’s tame compared to what “I Want Your Sex” has to offer. You’ve been warned. Now for all the sick human beings who have not clicked away from this review, you are in for a good time.
The best thing about this movie is the cast, not necessarily because of anyone’s star status, although it does contain a few recognizable names including Cooper Hoffman and Olivia Wilde, whose chemistry together is electric. For those who have followed me for a while, you may be aware that I was not the biggest fan of another film in which Hoffaman stars, “Licorice Pizza.” It is not entirely his fault the movie did not work for me, Hoffman played his part as he was instructed to do so. But the dynamic between Hoffman and Wilde in this latest film reminded me a bit of the dynamic the former had with Alana Haim in “Licorice Pizza.” This is yet another case of a much younger man having feelings of some sort for a woman much older than him. While the relationship in “Licorice Pizza” felt uncomfortable, I actually found quite a bit of enjoyment in what “I Want Your Sex” had to offer. Partially because one, the relationship is… Well, legal… Also, whereas I found Hoffman’s character in “Licorice Pizza” to be a pervy creep, I found myself occasionally sympathizing with the one he plays in “I Want Your Sex…”
As for the opposite end of the dynamic, Olivia Wilde, she is a knockout. Erika is packed with all kinds of range. Every once in a while you can see Wilde portraying her as a stern conversationalist. Sometimes she enters boss mode. Other times she gloriously loses her temper. And then there are those moments where her actions speak louder than her words. Every scene between Erika and Elliot had my eyes glued to the screen because I genuinely had no idea where things were going to go with them at certain points. This movie is a rather unpredictable ride.
The surprise star of the film… Charlie XCX. I never cared for her music, but even I must admit that she is brilliant here. On top of everything that is going on between Hoffman and Wilde, the former also just so happens to be in a relationship with XCX’s character of Minerva. One would think that my favorite sex-centric moment of the movie is between Hoffman and Wilde, but it is actually between the former and Charlie XCX, because it says a lot about where both characters were in the relationship and further tapped into Hoffman’s sexual tendencies. The scene perfectly establishes Hoffman’s need for sex in order to stay sane, as opposed to Charlie XCX, who clearly could not give two craps about it in addition to the relationship itself. Of all the characters in the film, Charlie XCX’s seems to be the least expressive, perhaps on purpose. I have no problem with it. The character works.
On top of the awkward intimate moments shared between Minerva and Elliot, the film occasionally has a hint or two that highlights how, let’s just say, important sex is to the latter. Elliot’s roommate, Apple (Wonders), asks him if he has ever faked an orgasm, to which he responds, “Well, I’m a guy, so…” It also puts a spotlight on unrealistic standards people seem to have for sex, especially when one is so often exposed to it in parts of their daily life outside of the actual activity.
If anything, the film is a love letter to, and at the same time, a parody of Gen Z, which I happen to be a part of. There is a lot of media coverage suggesting that some members of this generation do not exactly have a complete interest in sex, or have fears about engaging in said activity. Granted some of these people are younger, so sex is probably not something they want to think about. But others, like myself, are in their twenties, which some would stereotype as a time where sex winds up playing some kind of role in one’s life.
At the same time, I wonder how accessible this film will wind up being to my generation, considering how part of said media coverage on Gen Z suggests they want to see less sex in film and television. That said, this film has a lot of sex, and just about every scene ends up contributing to the story in some way.
But this film is a lot more than just sex. It is often quite funny and dramatic. The film, in addition to being about a May-December sexual relationship, also interweaves an intriguing part of the story having to do with the Los Angeles art gallery scene. There is never a boring moment in “I Want Your Sex,” which if there were, would be shocking, as the film is only 90 minutes. Is this the best film I have seen this year? No. But in terms of pacing and messaging, it is top-notch. This is my first Gregg Araki film, and I can say I am a new fan. He has a knack for brisk storytelling. I would love to see him helm another feature down the line.
In the end, “I Want Your Sex” is wildly entertaining. The film combines comedy, drama, romance, and blends everything together in a neat package. This is not a film for everyone. It is also one that should be watched only with certain individuals. But it was certainly a film for me. Olivia Wilde and Cooper Hoffman have incredible chemistry as the leads, and the film’s supporting cast members are also by every means an asset to the production. I am not the biggest Charli XCX guy, but even I was surprised with her performance as Minerva. She was perfect. I am going to give “I Want Your Sex” a 7/10.
“I Want Your Sex” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! For those new here to Scene Before, in addition to written reviews, I also have recently been doing video reviews! Be sure to check out my latest episode of Movie Requests, the original series where I ask celebrities what movies they think I should talk about, and give my official thoughts! My latest episode features the very funny Amy Sedaris, who suggests I should review two of her favorite movies, “The Elephant Man” and “Babe.” To find out if I liked these movies as much as her, click the video above! And if you enjoy the video, please leave a like and subscribe to my YouTube channel. I have more episodes coming featuring celebrities including Adam Conover, Rosario Dawson, Joe Gatto, Michael Rooker, and Tessa Thompson,. The next episode, which will be released on a future undetermined date, will feature Melissa Barrera (Abigail, In the Heights). Be sure to look out for that when it drops!
My next review is going to be for “The Invite!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Cookie Queens,” “Tony,” “Spa Weekend,” and “Coyote vs. Acme.” 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 “I Want Your Sex?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite film that you would think twice before watching with your family? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Her Private Hell” is directed by Nicolas Winding-Refn (Drive, The Neon Demon) and stars Sophie Thatcher (Heretic, Companion), Charles Melton (Riverdale, Beef), Havana Rose Liu (Bottoms, Tuner), Kristine Froseth (How to Blow Up a Pipeline, Oh, Canada), Shioli Kutsuna (Deadpool 2, Invasion), Aoi Yamada (First Love, Perfect Days), Dougray Scott (Mission: Impossible 2, Taken 3), Diego Calva (Babylon, Bird Box Barcelona), and Hidetoshi Nishijima (Drive My Car, Shin Ultraman). This film is set in a futuristic, neon-lit, mist-covered metropolis. At this time, an entity referred to as the Leather Man is taking the lives of the women he comes across.
Nicolas Winding-Refn is not my favorite filmmaker. In fact, I do not think his films are particularly my taste. But I do have a soft spot for his handling on visuals. He knows how to put together a good-looking project. I have seen “Drive” and “The Neon Demon” and even if I do not think the stories of those films are perfect, I do remember the projects for their vibes and visual splendor. When I saw Winding-Refn’s name attached to this project, I was intrigued. I was under the impression that he could deliver something worth my time.
If you were to ask me to describe “Her Private Hell” to you on a whim, I would probably stand before you in awkward silence. I say this despite watching the entire movie in a cinema and somehow not managing to fall asleep. I kind of wish I did however, because this movie was a nightmare to sit through. Part of me is struggling to describe what exactly “Her Private Hell” is in essence, but Hell is certainly what I found watching this.
Anybody remember “Megalopolis?” If you thought that film reeked of pretentiousness, then you are clearly not ready for “Her Private Hell.” This movie essentially uses its, admittedly, sometimes pleasing visual stimuli, to compensate for its lack of an engaging narrative. There are some decent action shots and well-lit scenes that stand out. Note that I said the visual stimuli is sometimes pleasing. There are quite a few moments in this movie in which I wanted to nearly avert my eyes altogether. I am by no means epileptic, but there was a point during this film where I am shocked I did not have a seizure. I do have sensitive ears however, and there is a moment where the music is cranked so loud that I was convinced that I was dragged into one of those modern bowling alleys that thinks it is more important to deck out the place in colorful lighting as opposed to, well, provide a good bowling experience. Safe to say, I nearly left this film with a headache.
Watching this movie evokes the feeling of entering a trendy art museum with tons of colorful lighting, neon, special effects. But as soon as I leave said art museum, those are the parts of the experience I will remember the most as opposed to the exhibits within. When it comes to anything in this movie involving story or characterization, there is nothing that sparks my interest until act 3. This film strikes a remarkable first impression with its grand score, heaping production value, and concept of a mind-bending future. I even thought I would end up listening to Pino Donaggio’s music in spare time. But part of me is apprehensive with that idea as it will most likely remind me of the complete and utter boredom I had to endure during this film’s slog of a runtime. The movie is not even two hours. Yet it certainly feels like it is just a bit longer than that.
This is one of the slowest movies I had to sit through all year. I do not mind a slow movie as long as the content within it keeps me engaged. “Her Private Hell” tries to do that on every level. The film evokes the cyberpunk feel of “Blade Runner,” a movie which is also pretty slow itself. But unlike that 1982 classic, “Her Private Hell” does not present a cohesive story or series of events that kept my eyes and ears onboard. Does the dialogue make up for it at least? Heck no! In fact, it only makes things ten times worse! I understand that this movie is not in our reality per se, but I was not able to immerse myself in this film’s reality that showcases some of the cheesiest sounding lines I remember hearing in a sci-fi flick. There’s nails on a chalkboard, and then there’s the incredibly sluggish delivery given by some of this film’s cast.
I would love to sit here and suggest that this movie makes up in its style for what it lacks in substance. Thankfully, it does in certain ways. Yet as I look back on my experience, I remember not being able to buy one or two sets in particular. There is one set in this movie that has tons of crystals in the background. It is almost as if someone on the crew looked at the Meta Crystal stage from “Super Smash Bros.” and decided to make a more colorful, three-dimensional space out of it. I was expecting Metal Mario to show up at some point to show everyone who’s boss. There is a particular polish to this set that reeks of artificiality. It gave me high school play or “Saturday Night Live” vibes.
Story-wise, the only time I found myself somewhat engaged is whenever the movie enters a relationship drama between two women and one man. I will not spoil much about it, but when it comes to both women in particular, I was intrigued as to what was going to happen to them in relation to this matter. I wish I could have felt this way through the rest of the film’s content, but this is proof that we cannot have nice things.
There is an antagonist in this film referred to as the Leather Man. The film convinces me its characters fear this individual, but it somehow lacks the ability to make me fear him in the same way, or feel for the characters as they are fearing him. It is the difference between watching something and experiencing something if that makes any sense. Never once did I look at the Leather Man and tremble or get a bad vibe. Even when the movie showcases him doing immoral or terrible things, I sat in my seat as still as can be, desperately waiting for the credits to roll.
If I were to watch this movie on mute, maybe I would have a higher opinion of it. “Her Private Hell” is, again, in certain ways, visually pleasing. But whenever I had to dredge through the film’s cringeworthy dialogue, ostentatious nature, and snoozefest of a story, it only drags that opinion off a cliff.
In the end, “Her Private Hell” is one of the worst movies of the year. It is pretentious crap to the tenth degree. The best films can make you feel all kinds of emotions. But “Her Private Hell” simply made me feel frustrated and tired. While I have respect for Nicolas Winding-Refn’s visual approach, this movie makes me wonder if his work is actually for me. Part of me thinks it is not. Does the cast do a good job with the material given to them? One could argue they do. For all I know, everything I watched was as the director intended. But it does not mean the material was worth my time. I am going to give “Her Private Hell” a 2/10.
“Her Private Hell” is now playing in select theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! I am happy to announce that the ninth episode of MOVIE REQUESTS is in the works and it is going to feature the funny and charismatic Amy Sedaris! You may know Sedaris from projects like “The Mandalorian,” “Strangers with Candy,” and “Elf!” For the first time in the series, I will be reviewing two movies from the same person! What do you think they are? Leave your predictions in the comments! The episode will be posted here on Flicknerd.com and on my YouTube channel, which by the way, please subscribe to my YouTube channel if you have not done so already! Stay for the episode coming SUNDAY, AUGUST 23RD!
My next review is going to be for “Haunted Heist!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Spider-Man: Brand New Day,” “I Want Your Sex,” “The Invite,” and “Cookie Queens.” 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 “Her Private Hell?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the most pretentious movie you recall seeing recently? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Supergirl” is directed by Craig Gillespie (Dumb Money, Cruella) and stars Milly Alcock (Upright, House of the Dragon), Matthias Schoenaerts (The Danish Girl, Red Sparrow), Eve Ridley (3 Body Problem, Emerald), David Krumholtz (The Santa Clause, Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle), Emily Beecham (Daphne, 1899), David Corenswet (Pearl, Twisters), and Jason Momoa (Aquaman, A Minecraft Movie). This film is about Kara Zor-El, also known as Supergirl, as she races to hunt down an adversary who harmed her dog, Krypto.
The DC Universe started with a big bang last year with the incredibly enjoyable “Superman.” It brought a particular flair to comic book movies that gave me a solid first impression of what its cinematic universe could be. It was helmed by James Gunn, who alongside Peter Safran, is forging the timeline in which this movie belongs. Now a year later, we get “Supergirl,” directed by Craig Gillespie. While I have not seen all of his filmography, he can crank out a decent picture. “I, Tonya,” while not the best sports movie I have seen, was stunning to look at and brought an excellent performance out of Margot Robbie. More recently, he did “Dumb Money,” which is not only based on an unbelievable true story, but it is also very funny. I recommend checking both movies out.
Craig Gillespie has proven that he can be a visionary director. I thought his work on “I, Tonya” came off as something that only he could helm. Sadly, “Supergirl” feels like it was made by a committee. For all I know, “Supergirl” was Gillespie’s vision. He could have had final say on just about everything. I highly doubt it, as this is a cinematic universe, and certain checkboxes need to be marked off so future stories can happen and the timeline is not ruined. That said, if Gillespie made most of the choices as this film’s director… I will praise him in certain regards.
The action scenes, while not the best I have ever seen, are sometimes fun to look at. I also saw the film in IMAX, which features an exclusive, taller aspect ratio in select scenes. I thought the occasional enhancements added to some sequences. They did a better job at enhancing the experience than “Mortal Kombat II,” which was a fun movie, but the aspect ratio switches in that project’s case were oftentimes distracting. I thought he also got some good performances out of the cast, most especially Jason Momoa. Although to be fair, I could clearly tell Momoa was just happy to be in the movie regardless of the script or director, simply because he finally got to portray Lobo, a role some would argue he was practically born to play.
But who am I kidding? I nearly fell asleep watching this movie.
If anything, “Supergirl” feels like it is directed by someone doing a lackluster James Gunn impression. I like James Gunn, for the record. In fact, he even produced this movie. I think Gunn has some bangers on his resume including “Guardians of the Galaxy,” “Slither,” and even “Superman,” which kicked this universe off. But “Superman” had elements of a project that James Gunn would normally write or direct, but those elements are not entirely effective in this case. I would want to give points in regards to keeping the cinematic universe consistent, but at the same time, not really, because I thought “Superman” was fun whereas “Supergirl” was melatonin in the form of a comic book movie. “Superman” had quite a few laughs, some good music, and a great villain in Lex Luthor. “Supergirl” on the other hand was not that funny, had some odd song choices, and had a fairly forgettable antagonist.
When I hear the terms “summer movie” or “summer blockbuster,” I think of big, loud, fun, adventurous escapes where you can munch popcorn and have a good time. This is not the only kind of movie that should come out during the summer, but that is often the stereotype that comes to mind. I expect to go into movies featuring superheroes, robots, dinosaurs, fast cars, or even robotic dinosaurs that are able to turn into fast cars, you name it, expecting to have fun. Sitting through “Supergirl” gave me the sense I was sitting in a cosmic DMV. The film felt soulless and tiresome. I hate to say that especially because this film follows an incredibly joyous and exciting “Superman” film from the year before.
I knew exactly how my experience with “Supergirl” would wind up from the opening scene. One of the first things shown on screen in this tinkle-riddled terror of a film is Krypto the Superdog pissing on a newspaper. I will not judge. When you gotta go you gotta go. But you took this adorable, albeit sometimes vicious sidekick that Superman had in his movie last year, and he does one of the most unattractive things any creature can do. Also, this is not the only reference to things coming out of particular holes during the movie. As these references continued through the dialogue and visuals, I was almost convinced someone was trying too hard to cater to the under 5s.
In fact, much of the movie revolves around Krypto. Well, sort of. Krypto does not exactly do much in this film. Krypto the Superdog is not doing a ton of “super” things. Part of it is due to what ends up being Supergirl’s inciting incident. Krypto gets shot with an arrow, leaving Supergirl with three days to keep him from dying. On paper, this should work. People want to see a dog’s owner kick butt whenever their pet gets put in peril. This could have been the “John Wick” of comic book movies! Maybe we will get to see Kara kill a guy with a pencil. For whatever reason, the movie does not give enough time to fully engage me into Kara and Krypto’s connection. I may sound like a moron, because I thought “Superman” did a good job at handling Krypto. He was cute, but not cuddly. This movie fails to give the dog a role this time around that matches the decency of the one he had in his previous go. When it comes to Krypto’s presence in “Supergirl,” he is nothing more than a pawn.
For those who have not been on the Internet that long, chances are you will run into, get this, sexist men who think women belong in the kitchen. Imagine that! If you clicked on this blog to see if there was a man running it with that viewpoint, you have come to the wrong place. I am not a woman, so my opinion here may not be as valid, but I think women deserve a better movie with its particular lead. This is not to say that Kara is a weak character. Judging by her powers and some of her actions in the film, she is quite strong. However, I wish the film gave her more of a personality. Yes, we see she loves to party. Yes, we see she loves her dog. But I never found myself attached to the character. Milly Alcock is not given the best material to work with, which may play into why a good portion of her line delivery feels flat in every other scene.
Part of my lack of enthusiasm towards Kara may be part of the film’s intentions. There is a line in this film given by Kara that sums up the differences between her and her super-cousin, Clark. She says that Clark sees the good in everyone, whereas she sees the truth. First off, did she steal Wonder Woman’s lasso? Give that back! It belongs to her! Second, I reflect on last year’s “Superman” with the sense that not only did I have fun watching it, but Clark maintained a sense of fun despite the many obstacles standing in his way. There is almost no fun to be had in “Supergirl.”
The film tries to be comedic, but I rarely even chuckled. In fact, while my auditorium was not quite sold out, there were a decent number of people there of various ages. I do not think a single person uttered a sound during the entire movie.
To top things off, Superman does appear in select sequences of the film, all of which are arguably the most fun parts of the entire runtime. “Supergirl” to DC sort of plays like “The Book of Boba Fett” does to the “Star Wars” universe. Not only does the film come off as cheap and fail to meet a certain standard, but I found the best part of it was when another character perhaps equal in terms of prominence got some of the spotlight. In this case, Superman is The Mandalorian, who shows up partway through the project and reminds the audience that it is time to have some fun. Supergirl, the “Boba Fett” in this example, is the character who, to my most unpleasant surprise, makes me want to fall asleep whenever she is on screen. Do I despise this character? No. I just was not that engaged with her, partially because I was not convinced she was wholly engaged in her own journey.
Going back to the time when I initially watched this film’s first trailer, I had a bad feeling about how this experience would go, but I was hoping to be wrong. Much like one particularly political intro to a 2016 episode of “The Simpsons,” I must say, “being right sucks.” There is a line from that trailer that made me nearly facepalm. Specifically, when Supergirl has a bunch of guns pointed at her, and she says to everyone holding said guns, “This is not going to end well – for you guys.” She sounds like a stand-up comedian dealing with a heckler, but she is turning her gears way too hard as she hopes to come up with a clever comeback, all the while she has nothing in the tank so she gives a response that makes said comedian go, “better than nothing.”
In fact, speaking of firsts, this script just so happens to be a first. The screenplay is written by Ana Nogueira, who has previous writing credits in theatrical productions and a short film, but “Supergirl” is her first feature-length script. You have to get your start somewhere, but I am not convinced that doing a second film in a cinematic universe featuring well-known comic book characters is the best way to get your feet wet. However, I do think it is smart to have a woman write the screenplay. I think a female perspective would enhance a project like this one. That said, I wish the screenplay had more to write home about and did not make me want to snooze. There is not a single character in the lineup that I found compelling, even if their respective performers are showing signs of effort.
If there is one thing I think DC has done better than Marvel, it is prioritizing female leads in their own films. We saw it in the DCEU with “Wonder Woman,” and with the current DCU, it only took two movies to make such a reality happen. Granted, we also live in a market that over time has likely become more noticeably open for female-led superhero movies. Plus, as general concepts, Supergirl and Wonder Woman have greater longevity than say Captain Marvel or Black Widow. I highly doubt that “Supergirl” is the second film simply because a woman is the lead. Though if this universe began in 2008 like the MCU did, chances are the world might not have been ready for a female-led superhero film following the failures of Marvel’s “Elektra” and DC’s “Catwoman,” at least from a financial point of view.
This is the second film in the DCU, so the timeline is still young. It is not easy to know where things will go from here. There’s “Clayface,” which sounds promising. Another “Superman” project is on the way. Also, just because this one project was a dud does not mean I am not looking forward to those other two. Sure, maybe my overall optimism about this timeline is lower than it was previously, but I am still onboard. In fact, for all I know, this universe could still turn out better than the previous one. We still have not gotten a deep dive into characters like Batman and Wonder Woman. Those characters are arguably more important to the overall state of DC than Supergirl. If those characters are featured in projects that are not up to a certain standard, then maybe an instant reboot may be necessary. The same can be said if future projects, regardless of the character, happen to showcase the same level of mediocrity that “Supergirl” did.
Also, going back to what I said about this film’s soundtrack, this film has one of the weirdest song placements I remember hearing in any movie ever. Towards the film’s end, there is a big action scene, the picture morphs into slo-mo, and in the background, Jimmy Eat World’s song “The Middle” starts playing. This is a great song. I love this song. I used to work at a Staples location, and this song would play constantly during my shifts. It was one of the highlights of my time there. Too bad they ended up playing a soft, quiet, cover version of it. For all I know, maybe there was a reason why they could not use the original song, but this cover version was not a good fit. Speaking of things that are not good fits, this movie was not exactly a good fit for my schedule. There is a list of more worthwhile things I could have done with my time. Watching this movie kept me from doing those things. Time is too valuable to waste on bad movies. I do not recommend watching this one.
In fact, to my surprise, I think I had a better experience watching the 1984 “Supergirl” movie starring Helen Slater. Sure, it looks dated at times, the villain is a bit over the top, the special effects are laughable, and some of the dialogue is plain awful. But there was a sense of wonder to be had with that film. The score is brilliant, the cinematography is sometimes beautiful, and even if her journey sometimes made for a questionable watch, I liked seeing Supergirl develop as a character. Is the movie flawed? Unquestionably. But it didn’t make me want to fall asleep unlike this 2026 counterpart.
In the end, “Supergirl” is a disappointment. Not only because this is simply a bad movie by itself, but because this sets a bad vibe for the DCU as a whole. Again, this is only the second film, so maybe this will wind up being the one bad movie in the entire run. Perhaps “Clayface” or the next “Superman” installment will change everything. But is this movie as super as its title suggests? Not really. This film lacks color, personality, and fun. I go to a big budget comic book movie with flashy heroes expecting to at the very least have fun. When these kinds of films lack fun, then what is the point of watching it? This wound up being one of the biggest bores of the year, sadly. I am glad to see Jason Momoa finally got to play Lobo, and maybe he will get to play the character again. Although I wish said character had a better start. Milly Alcock tries as the lead, but she is not given decent material to work with. If you want to watch a great DC film, just go watch “Superman.” If you want to watch a solid Craig Gillespie film, go back and watch “Dumb Money.” Avoid “Supergirl” if you can. I am going to give “Supergirl” a 2/10.
“Supergirl” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! As a reminder, in addition to putting out film reviews like this one, I am also doing a special series in honor of Scene Before’s 10th anniversary called Movie Requests, which features me reviewing movies requested by your favorite stars. Be sure to check out my latest episode featuring Sandi Harding, who suggested I should review “The Goonies!”
I am also happy to announce that the next guest who will be featured in the series is “Lord of the Rings” actor Elijah Wood! I had a chance to talk to Wood in May during a convention in Philadelphia. With his permission, I was able to get his film suggestion. Hopefully, his suggestion is good enough that way he and I can have quite the fellowship! If you want to see the episode of me reviewing Wood’s film of choice, it is going to be out Sunday August 2nd! I will share the review here, but if you want to see the episode as fast as possible, please subscribe to my YouTube channel!
My next review is going to be for “Jackass: Best and Last!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Obsession,” “Maddie’s Secret,” “Gail Daughtry and the Celebrity Sex Pass,” “The Odyssey,” and “Her Private Hell.” 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 “Supergirl?” What did you think about it? Or, have you seen the 1984 “Supergirl” movie? How does it compare to this new one? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Another World” is directed by Tommy Kai Chung Ng (Shi Wai, Tale of Rebellious Stone) and stars Suet-Ying Chung (The Lyricist Wannabe, Time), Hiu-Tung Choi (Say I Do to Me, Left on Read), Louis Cheung (Keeper of Darkness, Narrow Road), Kay Tse (Band Four, Legal Affair), Will Or (A Foggy Tale, Drifting), and Thaimay in a film about the journey between a spirit guide and a young girl whose anger threatens to turn her into a monster.
“Another World” was barely on my radar prior to seeing it. I did not see any major trailers or posters, but I came across some ads for it on social media, and found out it was playing at a local theater in Boston. There were barely any showtimes available, which served as a challenge for actually being able to see it, but it also became an incentive. Maybe this film could be one of those hidden gems. Plus, GKIDS has a decent track record when it comes to their slate of international animated flicks they choose to distribute for the US audience.
“Another World” seems to ask the same question that a lot of other great pieces of cinema tend to ask, “What does it mean to be human?” When it comes to its analysis of the human condition, there is something there. Much of the film is centered around the relationship of Yuri and Gudo, the latter of whom is a soulkeeper constantly learning about Yuri’s human traits. He finds out about the concepts of being tired, hungry, what it means to long. Having these two polar opposites work together made for a fascinating relationship that ties everything together.
The film itself feels somewhat jarring when it starts. It is not exactly clear who or what this movie is about. In fact it is so jarring at a certain point that I nearly tuned out. Thankfully, the film does become a bit clearer by the second half. That said, it is kind of heady. Not “Tenet”-heady, but heady nonetheless. The climax of the film, while definitely entertaining and watchable, does feel somewhat convoluted. It is not convoluted enough to the point where it falls like a house of cards, but if you are going to watch this movie, go in making sure you are ready to use your head once or twice.
Granted, this is an animated film, so it is not like suspending disbelief is an impossibility. Sticking with the climax, this is arguably when the film is at its best. This is a 2D animated film, which nowadays is always a treat to see in a world where it feels like every major release is 3D animated, even if there is some kind of hybrid style implemented into the project. But there is a particular action sequence in the final ten minutes that has so many flashy cuts that I was under the illusion that I was flipping through pages of a comic book or playing a fantasy video game. In fact, the pace at the end feels like a reward for sitting through everything that comes before. It is not that this film is boring, but rather an occasional slow burn. It takes its time. The climax offers maximum exhilaration and a unique sense of immersion. The final twenty or so minutes of the movie are debatably worthy of a tech demo between the crisp sound mixing, stunning framing, and immaculate cuts that made my eyes nearly fly out of their sockets.
If you read my reviews for “I Love Boosters” and “The Mandalorian and Grogu,” you would know that I look at both films on opposite sides of the color spectrum. The former is as bright and lively as can be, while the latter is about as gray as an office with endless cubicles. I bring those two movies up as “Another World” feels like what happen if those two projects came together and had a lovechild. I thought the use of color in “Another World” was perfect and effectively differentiated the afterlife from the real world. The afterlife often has, no pun intended, a lot more life put into it. Whenever this movie takes place in the real world, the color palette is sometimes a bit darker. A bit less pleasing to the eye. While the latter may sound like a negative, it matches some of the more unfortunate events that happen through the story in said environment. It also seems to play into the general idea that life itself, as beautiful as it can be, is a struggle. This is not to say that all struggles are eliminated in this film’s afterlife, but when it comes to the afterlife scenes, the color palette feels like they belong in a Nintendo game. Yet for whatever reason, it finds itself intertwined with a story that refuses to hold back on its serious nature. Overall, the film looks fantastic and shows off some gorgeous animation.
Was this film worth the semi-short drive to Boston? Perhaps. Is it going to be my favorite animated film of the year? Probably not. “Hoppers” was pretty, and I apologize for the pun, dam good, so that is going to be hard to top. Is this film a must see? I would not say that is the case when there is so much else out right now. Granted, if you reading this review the day it is published, good luck finding a showtime for this film. I highly doubt you’ll find it in a theater near you. It took me a month to finally get this review out. Better late than never. When it comes to that age old question, “What does it mean to be human?”, I would argue this film effectively taps into that idea, but there are so many other movies that handle this topic better, and by extension, offer a superior viewing experience. This is not a bad movie, but I have no idea how much exactly I am going to remember from it by the end of the year. Maybe that would make for an interesting second viewing down the line, and frankly, while I am in no rush to watch this film a second time, I would not say I am against the idea.
In the end, “Another World” is a beautiful film. It is not a picture that I would instantly tell you to rush out and see, but I would recommend it to people looking for some grit in their animations. In North America, much of the animated material that is popular around here is aimed towards families and children. Tell the kids to skip this film. It is not officially rated by the MPA, but I would probably put it somewhere around the PG-13 mark given the violence. That said, should you watch “Another World,” look forward to same top-notch voice acting, stunning scenes, and an intriguing story despite some occasional convolution. I am going to give “Another World” a 7/10.
Based on recent Internet searches, “Another World” is neither playing in theaters or available to watch at home as of this review.
Thanks for reading this review! Before we go any further, I would like to apologize as it took me some time to get this review out. Life has been busy, but fun. I cannot complain. I have also been watching a lot of movies recently to the point where I have had little time to talk about them. That, and I am also hard at work on updating Scene Before’s original series Movie Requests, whose next guest is… Sandi Harding!
If you do not know the name Sandi Harding, you may nevertheless be familiar with her business. Harding owns the last Blockbuster Video still standing, located in Bend, Oregon. What movie do you think she recommended? Find out TUESDAY JULY 14TH on Flicknerd.com and YouTube! If you have not done so already, subscribe to my channel, that way you are able to watch the new episode as fast as possible! Also, if you are not busy, check out my last episode featuring Chris Hardwick, who suggested I should watch the 1985 comedy “Real Genius!”
My next review is going to be for “The Breadwinner.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Disclosure Day,” “Toy Story 5,” “Supergirl,” “Jackass: Best and Last,” “Obsession,” and “Maddie’s Secret.” 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 “Another World?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite animation released so far this year? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“I Love Boosters” is written and directed by Boots Riley (Sorry to Bother You, I’m a Virgo) and stars Keke Palmer (Nope, Password), Naomi Ackie (The End of the F***ing World, Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker), Taylour Paige (Zola, Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom), Poppy Liu (The Afterparty, Sunnyside), Eiza González (Ambulance, Baby Driver), LaKeith Stanfield (Sorry to Bother You, Get Out), Will Poulter (Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, The Maze Runner), Don Cheadle (Space Jam: A New Legacy, Iron Man 2) and Demi Moore (The Substance, Ghost). This film is about a group of shoplifters who go after a fashion maven and try to sell their clothes at a lower price.
“I Love Boosters” is not my first exposure to Boots Riley’s filmography. While I missed it in the theater, I ended up checking out his film “Sorry to Bother You” after buying it on Blu-ray. I was fairly impressed with it. I thought it had good performances, clever writing, and an excellent use of color and production design. While “I Love Boosters” was not the biggest release over Memorial Day weekend, I will not deny that I was constantly exposed to its marketing, particularly one of its posters. Other than that, I went in with no memory of watching any trailers or hearing the film’s general premise. I heard interesting things about the movie, and I was onboard. I am delighted to say that this film is a unique cinematic experience that I will think about for a long time.
This is not my favorite film of 2026, but there is truly no picture that I have seen this year that provides an experience like this one. “I Love Boosters” is one of those movies that could have easily clashed its tones to such an unbelievable degree. But this picture is smarter than that. It finds a way to present likable heroes of their own story, a compelling antagonist in Christie Smith (Moore) whose mere existence brings forth diabolical charisma, all the while showcasing some of the most rad production elements I recall seeing in a film recently.
Perhaps my favorite thing about “I Love Boosters” is that it is so vivid and colorful. Then again, given one of this film’s initial opponents at the box office, there could be some recency bias to take into account with this sentiment. This film came out the same weekend as “Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu,” and not only do I think this is the better movie, but to my surprise, “The Mandalorian and Grogu” comes off as an occasional eyesore between its questionable color palette choices, dull presentation, and lack of flair. Within the first five minutes of “I Love Boosters,” I thought I was on drugs. This film’s emphasis on color is some of the finest I have ever seen. It has a look that belongs on a children’s TV program but perfectly blends itself into a mature story. Everything from the many eye-popping outfits that the characters don on screen… To the multitude of interiors that sometimes answer the question, “What if an M&M were a floor or a wall?”… Even seeing the different colors on the characters’ hair make me think that in another universe that this movie would be selling action figures like hotcakes.
Speaking of things that you have to see to believe, this film’s editing is jaw-dropping. This film moves fast, and boy am I not even close to becoming furious. If anything, the editing makes for a blessing and a curse. It keeps the movie from being boring, but the film is also so quick that it makes me wonder if I missed something important. Ah well, I plan to watch this a second time regardless.
Another favorite thing about this film is something I cannot see… The music. The Tune-Yards composed an original score for this film, and boy does it score. They previously scored another Boots Riley title, “Sorry to Bother You,” so it is clear he likes their approach, and I can see why, because much like some of John Williams’ memorable tracks, the score is almost its own character. The year is still young, but I could see this being my favorite score of 2026 by the end of it. I listened to this film’s theme several times since my screening. When I look at the screen and I see characters played by Keke Palmer, Naomi Ackie, and Taylour Paige, lingering in the background is a supporting role that can best be described as a sick beat.
While not exactly as good, I find “I Love Boosters” to be this year’s “Everything Everywhere All at Once.” It is a film that runs at one of the most breakneck paces imaginable. It is all killer, no filler. There is a perfect blend of comedy and drama. In fact, speaking of that, it is tough to really put this film in a box and give it a specific genre. It is not that the film does not know what it wants to be. It is that it wants to be something so unique, so fresh, something that even as a jaded moviegoer, I cannot recall ever seeing in my life. At the same time though, that probably makes this film slightly harder to recommend to certain people. I feel like Marty McFly in “Back to the Future,” part of me is ready to say to a collective audience that they might “not be ready for that yet.”
But if I were to recommend “I Love Boosters” to somebody, it would probably have to be someone who likes stories about people rising up against the bigger man. Perhaps someone who does not really feel the need to take everything so seriously. There is quite a bit of absurdity in this film. Yet in the context of its universe, characters, and vibes, all of the absurdity is seamless and makes the movie an animal of its own. As for myself, I cannot wait to watch this movie again. Not just because I had a blast watching it, but as I suggested before, this film flies by. I have a feeling I missed something cool the first time around. There are probably one or two memorable lines or moments that flew over my head that are probably going to land better the second, third, maybe fourth time I watch this.
In the end, it is almost impossible to describe “I Love Boosters” without using terms like wild or zany or nonstop. This is an experience. Sadly, with this film opening up against “Star Wars,” it kind of hurt its box office potential from the start. Then again, if somebody pitched this movie to me and I happened to be an executive, I think it would be a hard sell no matter what. It is debatable as to whether the characters are actually “heroes.” Then again, it is possibly true that everyone sees themselves as the hero of their own story. The concept of this film is so unique that it is difficult, at least to me, to compare this film to many others. But the fact is that this film is worth watching at least once. It has a fantastic cast lead by the always charismatic Keke Palmer. Its look is going to make for a fantastic demo down the line if I end up buying a new television or projector. And boy, is that theme song still stuck in my head. I am going to give “I Love Boosters” a 7/10.
“I Love Boosters” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! This is a bit of a short-notice announcement, but on SATURDAY, JUNE 20TH, I will be dropping the next episode of Movie Requests! This one is going to feature “The Wall” and “Talking Dead” host Chris Hardwick. You can hear his suggestion by clicking the video above! What do you think it is? If you want to find out what film he asked me to review, as well as my thoughts on it, you can watch the review right here on Flicknerd.com, or you can subscribe to my YouTube channel!
My next review is going to be for “Backrooms.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Masters of the Universe,” “Another World,” “The Breadwinner,” “Disclosure Day,” and “Toy Story 5!” 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 “I Love Boosters?” What did you think about it? Or, what is one of the wildest films you recall watching recently? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“In the Grey” is written and directed by Guy Ritchie (The Gentlemen, Snatch) and stars Henry Cavill (Man of Steel, Mission: Impossible – Fallout), Jake Gyllenhaal (Stronger, Spider-Man: Far from Home), Eiza González (Baby Driver, Ambulance), Kristofer Hivju (Force Majeure, Game of Thrones), Fisher Stevens (Hackers, Short Circuit), and Rosamund Pike (Gone Girl, Saltburn). This film is about a group of operatives who try to recover a billion dollar debt from a criminal organization.
My relationship with Guy Ritichie is iffy. I like some of his movies, that is of the ones I have seen. In fact, while it may have the DNA of a typical Jason Statham flick, I still remember really enjoying “Wrath of Man.” I thought it was well shot, had great action, and contained likable characters.
While “In the Grey” may not have Jason Statham, it does come packed with a ton of other stars including Henry Cavill, Jake Gyllenhaal, and Eiza González just to name a few. It is always nice when a movie is able to have notable, talented names in front of and behind the camera. So, my question is… Why did everyone waste their talent on this absolute chore of a movie?
This was BORING. And it is really weird to say that, because I could tell that this movie felt like it came from a singular vision. It is definitely Guy Ritchie’s film through and through based on the creative editing choices, the fast pacing, and unique layout of the screenplay. Also, note the use of the word “fast.” If your movie is fast, but also boring, then that is a different kind of special.
I am not going to pretend that “In the Grey” does not have anything good in it. I just wish that this talented, A-List cast who I enjoyed in other projects could have delivered something just as solid as some of their previous work. This movie feels like a step down for them, and I would not go as far as to blame the talent specifically.
That said, there are positives. A lot of the camerawork was eye-popping. Granted, I thought the movie’s color palette was quite underwhelming and looked more like something that belonged on Netflix. But there were quite a few shots I liked, including one at the beginning where we see Maggie Q’s character falling to the side. It reminded me of a similar shot of the same thing happening in “Ready or Not 2: Here I Come” earlier this year. The locations and production design are also neat. The set up of the movie does a halfway decent job at giving a sense of the tone, but what followed did not quite live up to what was given in the beginning.
The more I try to think of redeeming qualities, the more I wish I were talking about better movies released just a short time before this one like “Mortal Kombat II” or “Lorne.” While those are not the best movies I have seen in recent memory, I found something in those movies that this one tends to lack. Personality. Perhaps it is unfair of me to say that considering I already said that this film feels like a singular vision from Guy Ritchie. After all, it technically is. He wrote the movie itself in addition to directing it. If anything, this film reminds me a lot of “The Gentlemen.” Like this movie, that one contains a stacked cast, moves at a breakneck pace, and has a fair amount of action. I think I had more fun with “The Gentlemen” than I did watching this film, partially because I got to watch a rather unhinged Matthew McConaughey.
While I could tell that the actors were doing their best with the characters, they did not stand out in any significant way. Perhaps “In the Grey” does have personality, but said personality is not sitting well with me. You know that saying “Don’t judge a book by it’s cover?” My apologies, I think that saying lacks merit when “In the Grey” sometimes emits a sense of so-called personality that could best be described as grey.
Sometimes the characters will have a good line or two, and other times they won’t. No, seriously. For all I know, maybe the dialogue reads well, but as I watched certain scenes in this movie, the dialogue came off as something one would find in a “Saturday Night Live” parody of a generic action film. It is sometimes overemphasized, uninspired, and somewhat cliche. The movie itself does not entirely feel cliche. Getting from point A to point B is not exactly done in the most usual of manners, but the specific manners did not sit well with me.
In today’s world where second-screen viewing is a common occurrence for some people, “In the Grey” seems to challenge that concept with its constant need to put captions for certain things that may matter throughout the movie. I am not saying that this movie feels like it was designed to cater to the second-screen viewer. In fact, if you partake in second-screen viewing for everything you watch now, good luck with this movie, because the dialogue is some of the least digestible I remember hearing. I wish I could quote some of the characters for you off the top of my head, but I cannot, because every line is given as quickly as the other. The way the dialogue is laid out during the entire movie reminds me of an extended YouTube vlog where there happens to be a jumpcut every five seconds. I am not saying this movie has noticeable jumpcuts, but if you like nonstop talking, this movie is probably going to be Heaven for you.
I like my auteur directors. Christopher Nolan, Quentin Tarantino, and Denis Villeneuve are a few that come to mind. I have come to this conclusion previously, but if anything, “In the Grey” reminds me that maybe Guy Ritchie’s style is not exactly my jam. He is quick, and I do not mind quick. But there is no room to breathe. I would hate to see him do a “Run Lola Run” remake. Also, I do not care what you all think. That movie sucks.
In the end, “In the Grey” is a completely fitting title for what is ultimately one of the dullest flicks of the year so far. After seeing this movie, I am starting to question whether my artistic tastes line up with Guy Ritchie’s. I am sure he is a friendly human being and could be interesting to work with. But this movie is not quite doing it for me. On top of the well-known director, the movie comes with an A-list cast who deserve a script that is much more in line with their talents. I am probably not going to remember “In the Grey” for any reason other than the fact that it nearly put me to sleep. I am going to give “In the Grey” a 3/10.
“In the Grey” is now available to rent or by on VOD.
Thanks for reading this review! If you have not done so already, be sure to check out my latest episode of Movie Requests, featuring “Clerks” actor Brian O’Halloran! In this video I review his recommendation, the 1970 war film “Patton.” To hear my thoughts, click the video above! Be sure to like the video if you enjoyed it and subscribe to my YouTube channel if you want to see more new episodes as soon as they drop! They will also be posted here on Flicknerd.com, but if you want the fastest way to view the episode, subscribing to my channel will do the trick.
My next review is going to be for “Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “I Love Boosters,” “Backrooms,” “Masters of the Universe,” “Another World,” and “The Breadwinner.” 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 “In the Grey?” What did you think about it? Or, what are some Guy Ritchie movies that you enjoy? I liked one of his more recent features, “Operation Fortune: Ruse de Guerre.” It was a lot of fun. I did not have a chance to review it a few years ago, but if I saw it early enough to do so, I would have given the film a positive score. Let me know your favorites down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
