“Look Back” is directed by Kiyotaka Oshiyama (Devilman: Crybaby, The Boy and the Heron) and is based on a manga of the same name. This film adaptation is about two girls who could not be more different. Fujino (Yumi Kawai) is a confident student who goes to school every day and Kyomoto (Mizuki Yoshida) is a shut-in, but the two end up sharing a connection through their love for manga and form an unlikely bond.
I am not exactly what one would call famous for my last minute purchases, but I can confirm that I have a history of making them. And this even goes for some of the movies I watch. I had not even heard of “Brian and Charles” until maybe an hour before watching the film when I popped on the first trailer from my home. But I found it to be a solid movie, and therefore a good use of my time even if I did not take much of it to consider watching the film. I remember going to see “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” on opening Thursday because my party and I had tickets to see “Noah” around the same time, but the showtime was canceled. Moments later, one thing led to another and we ended up seeing “Captain America: The Winter Soldier,” which continues to reign as one of my top titles in the MCU. While not as last minute as those two, I was prompted to check out “Look Back” after seeing something something about it online. I booked a showtime the same day on the AMC app, and took my car to the mall to go watch the movie. I did not watch a trailer, or any other marketing. I knew almost nothing about the movie other than it being of the anime medium and the project being connected to someone who also created “Chainsaw Man,” which for the record is a property to which I have personally not given any of my time.
I am proud to say that not only is this one of the best last minute, barely researched purchases I have ever made, but this is one of the best films of the year. And I say this knowing about a chunk of this year’s animated slate. I know that “Inside Out 2” is getting tons of praise and making lots of money. I know that just a couple weeks ago, I have come onto this blog to sing praises about “The Wild Robot,” which is now in my top 5 DreamWorks animated projects. Despite seeing this film a couple weeks back, part of me still needs time to marinate and decide if I like this movie or “The Wild Robot” more. To be completely honest, those two are neck and neck for different reasons. While I think “The Wild Robot” is uniquely animated and offers an excellent take on parenting through the unlikely bond of a robot and a goose, I love this film for different reasons, and you could argue these reasons have bias attached to them. But while you could argue there is bias, it could also indicate that the people making the movie enormously understand their audience.
This film is about two young, passionate manga artists. They are not famous professionals. In fact, they are still in school. But they knew about each other sometime before having an encounter that goes in an unexpected direction. These characters have a common interest, but their personalities and lifestyles are not a match. Despite that, they find themselves in a situation where they end up bonding further and even working together. As someone who dedicates myself so heavily into various crafts such as this blog, my short films over the years, or some of my more professional endeavors. I found traits from both of these characters that I also have seen in myself over the years.
Fujino represents me by highlighting one of my personal flaws. That being perfectionism. In a way, perfectionism should be a good thing. After all, I am dedicating myself so heavily to doing something so well that such efforts should be rewarded. Only problem is, perfectionism is not great when you want to keep your mind sane. This leads me to another aspect that comes into play for this character, particularly jealousy. Fujino starts off the film as the best manga artist of her peers. Her works are published in the school paper on a weekly basis. Everything is going great until she has competition in said paper. She sees the work of Kyomoto, a student who does not leave her home. This pushes Fujino to work harder and create something better than she feels she has donw previously. But we also see moments where Fujino’s envy gets the best of her. It prompts her to take a certain action that some would say is uncalled for.
Kyomoto is representative of myself as an introvert. Do I leave my house? Oh, of course. But I do not have many close friends. And I often go to events alone, many times with the most absolute of intentions. If any of my friends are reading this, I love you, but sometimes I need to be alone. It is nothing against you, I just like my space. I also sort of feel that way as an artist and a storyteller. Through my time working at a news station and making short films, I understand that projects like those often require collaboration and teamwork. But I also love making art because there are times where said art is directly based on something I came up with. Something I have imagined. I will start making something from scratch and finish it in a similar fashion all by myself.
This film also reminded me of another anime, Mamoru Hosoda’s “Belle,” because that film dives deep into how we see other people. But whereas “Belle” dives deep into the mystery of how people represent themselves online, we see the story throw a curveball of sorts when our main duo first meet. While we see Fujino channel her envy against Kyomoto, we find out Kyomoto is obsessed with Fujino’s work. It is quite poetic to be frank, because yes, Fujino may have doubted herself as an artist because of how she viewed Kyomoto’s work, but the moments leading up to the duo’s first encounter shows that Fujino’s work paid off. Not only was she flattered that someone appreciates her material, but that flattery came from her own rival.
Seeing these two together was one of this film’s many highlights. Every scene between them was believable and played a part in the film’s overall emotional touch. I enjoy stories where we see two different people somehow click by the slightest of miracles. But of course, the two people have to emit chemistry, and these two have it in spades. I watched the film in Japanese, and both voice actors play off each other perfectly. I believed every exchange.
The movie is also a beast when it comes to its technical aspects. It gets rather creative with its animation style. While the animation style takes a traditional 2D approach, it contains moments that have a manga feel to them. You can tell that there was some love dedicated to the medium in this film’s story. In fact, one of my favorite sequences of the movie from a technical standpoint is where we see Fujino draw a yonkoma, or a four-cell manga for those not in the know. We see the sequence play out from one cell to the next in a limited color spectrum. I thought the way that was done was clever. It kind of reminded me of the “Diary of a Wimpy Kid” movies, where we see the footage transition from live-action to the diary drawings. It is a nice visual despite its limited effort.
By the way, I listened to the film’s soundtrack while making this review. It is excellent. Haruka Nakamura’s score is quite powerful. If “Look Back” is in a theater near you, I would by a ticket just to hear the music in all its glory. It was definitely a standout.
That said, if you are looking for an animated film to watch that can make you jump for joy, this is probably where I would instead recommend “The Wild Robot.” That film too has its teary moments, but perhaps not to the degree of this one. “Look Back” takes a riveting turn in the second half. I do not want to get into spoilers, but there is a moment that I could have not have predicted coming even from a mile away. The more I think about it, the more I look at the title of this film, “Look Back,” the more I maybe should have foreseen an emotional gut punch at such a point. But regardless, when this moment comes, the rest of the film is something that I cannot say made me sob my eyes out, but it is pretty sad to watch at times. Some could argue “Look Back” is an easy watch because of its short runtime, quick pace, and likable characters. But I will warn you that if you are someone who easily cries during more emotional films and wants to resist that feeling, then “Look Back” might not be your first choice. But if you can handle some tears, you are in for a film that pays tribute to the love of art, why people dedicate themselves to their passions, and explores an unlikely friendship between two characters who I came to adore by the film’s conclusion.
In the end, “Look Back” is one of those movies that reminds me of my love of art, my dedication to creativity, and how important it is to have other people by your side. It shows that we all have a story to tell, and sometimes those stories have their challenges. “Look Back” is one of my biggest surprises of the year. I had no idea this movie was coming out. And unfortunately, right now, it is only playing in one theater near me. But if it is playing somewhere near you, give it a chance sometime. This film is near perfect. I am going to give “Look Back” a 9/10.
“Look Back” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is for another animated movie, “Piece by Piece,” an all new documentary entirely presented in a LEGO artstyle. Is it a gimmick? Is it creative? You will find out soon enough. Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Saturday Night” and “Megalopolis.” 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 “Look Back?” What did you think about it? Or, what are some of your creative passions? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Joker: Folie à Deux” is directed by Todd Phillips (The Hangover, War Dogs) and stars Joaquin Phoenix (Don’t Worry, He Won’t Get Far on Foot, Gladiator), Lady Gaga (A Star is Born, House of Gucci), Brendan Gleeson (The Banshees of Inisherin, Troy), Catherine Keener (Being John Malkovich, Capote), Zazie Beatz (Deadpool 2, Atlanta), Steve Coogan (Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief, Philomena), Harry Lawtey (Industry, You & Me), and Leigh Hill (Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, Game of Thrones). This is the sequel to the 2019 film “Joker” and once again follows Arthur Fleck who this time around meets the love of his life, Lee Quinzel, while incarcerated at Arkham State Hospital.
Comic book movies this year have been a fascinating ride. If you told me that we would be getting only one Marvel Studios film this year, multiple prominent R-rated titles, and another movie from the same writers who did “Morbius,” I would have you called you crazy. Just to recap, I loved “Deadpool & Wolverine” and I hated “Madame Web.” Those movies are on two opposite sides of the spectrum. The former might be my favorite movie of the year, while the latter might be my least favorite movie of the year. And for those asking, I did not see “The Crow.” Going into “Joker: Folie à Deux,” I assumed that this movie would fall somewhere between “Deadpool & Wolverine” and “Madame Web” in terms of quality because those are on two extreme ends of my quality scale. Statistically, it makes sense. But I also realize that there is a lot of potential that could be fulfilled with a “Joker” sequel.
I say there is a lot of potential that could be fulfilled with a “Joker” sequel while also realizing there is just as much of a chance that nothing good could come from it either. After all, we got this sequel for the same reason we get sequels to lots of other movies. Money. The original film made history by being the first R-rated title to make a billion dollars at the box office. And one can argue it deserved to make a lot of money. It was a well made film that not only differentiated from other comic book movies at the time, but it was a well-crafted, well-directed, well-acted story that highlights how some of society tends to look at mental health. In addition to its praise from other bodies during awards season, “Joker” was nominated for 11 Oscars and took home two. If you are an executive at Warner Bros. and you are looking at the financial success and extended conversation that came about because of “Joker,” chances are you would want to greenlight a sequel. Personally, if I were there, I would be a bit hesitant. The first film ends a on satisfying note and I am not sure where I would want to take the story next. But I do admire the sequel taking a big swing with the idea that there were going to be musical elements attached. That is something we do not see in stories based on comic books. Forget “La La Land,” I want to know more about “Ha Ha Land!”
There is no doubt that “Joker: Folie à Deux” takes big swings, and because of how much money the last one made, it is likely that this sequel could get away with a lot of them. But it misses on each one. “Joker: Folie à Deux” is a movie that does not really understand its own identity. I think there are times when movies can be a bunch of different things at once, but “Joker: Folie à Deux” does not stand out positively in regards to any of its disciplines. When it comes to being a jukebox musical, it is annoying. That is if it technically is a jukebox musical. We will get to more on that later. As a courtroom drama, it is a bore sometimes. There are select moments that kept me interested, but it is kind of off and on. As a sequel documenting Arthur Fleck’s progression as a character, there is almost no progression to be seen. Yes, we see him meet Lee and that plays a part in the story. But a good portion of the sequel is a reflection of what happened in the first film. There is nothing wrong with referencing consequences in a case like this, but the movie spends so much time reflecting on its past that it forgets to live in the present. Yes, the story is about the aftermath of its 2019 predecessor, but the movie does not do a ton to explore this character any deeper.
I enjoyed the first film. I found it to be a fascinating study on how a broken man like Arthur Fleck transformed into someone who became a face of chaos. I was invested in his story, his journey. I was not invested in Arthur’s arc this time around. Sure, there are moments that had my attention. But again, these are moments in an otherwise excruciating film. When you spend an extended period of time in court hearing about and reflecting on the events of a successful first movie, all that comes to mind is the idea that if I had time on my hands, I would probably rather go back and watch that movie again instead of this one.
It is kind of like what I said about “Furiosa” earlier this year, which was not horrible, but it ended in such a way where I thought I should go back and watch “Fury Road” again as opposed to the movie I just watched, which I found to be inferior.
“Joker: Folie à Deux” plays very much like the finale to the popular TV series “Seinfeld.” Much like that finale, “Joker: Folie à Deux” piggybacks off the success of its predecessor and fills so much time referencing said predecessor. Both projects spend a lot of time in court where said references come to life. But they are both missing a spark of what made the older material click. Both projects tend to put its main characters in uncomfortable positions. Not just in the story, as many projects should. But as a viewer, I can say I watched both of these feeling a bitter taste in my mouth. The “Seinfeld” finale goes out of its way to spoon-feed to the audience that its regular cast just so happen to be morons. “Joker: Folie à Deux” centers around someone who has a criminal history, which we have seen before. Without going into specific details, I do not need to watch “Joker: Folie à Deux” with the need to “root” for somebody who did what they did in the previous movie. But at minimum, I want to be engaged. And the film does not allow me to do that much.
I would like to talk about the film’s musical elements, that is if you can call them that or if the crew can actually confirm if this movie is a musical to begin with. Again, we will discuss more on that soon… Because the way I see things, this film fails miserably as a jukebox musical. Yes, there are no original songs. Did I recognize any of the songs in the movie as they were being performed? Sure. Could I tell you what the songs in the movie were if you ran into me on the street? Probably not. The lead duo’s singing in this film is kind of off and on. But when it is off, it is off. Never once was I watching these two and felt a complete sense of immersion. This is also really sad because I saw the movie at my local IMAX, which just so happens to be one of the few locations showing the movie in the brand’s coveted 1.43:1 aspect ratio, which is often used when shooting and presenting Christopher Nolan’s movies. When we get to the musical sequences, the screen goes from scope to IMAX and personally, I notice it. But not once do I “feel” it. This movie does not do anything to make its musical or singing sequences exciting. The ideas represented in each song do not change much. They are often a distraction from the story as opposed to a part of the story. Can Lady Gaga sing? Of course she can. But I am not going to pretend she does her best work here. If you want to see Lady Gaga sing like a champ on screen, just go watch the 2018 edition of “A Star is Born.” She is incredible in that.
Although if there is one thing I like about the musical sequences, there is some cool set design. There is one sequence where we see the leads together in front of a clearly fake night sky with a “Hotel Arkham” in the background. I thought that set in particular was atmospheric. It looked nice. But the sequences themselves are sometimes a drag or simply outright unmemorable.
You might think I am not satisfied with these sequences because I have an agenda against musicals. To me, musicals are like any other genre, if there is a project in it that appears to be done decently, it has my interest. If you want a review for a musical that I think needs more attention, than check out my thoughts on Steven Spielberg’s “West Side Story.” I was looking forward to seeing what “Joker: Folie à Deux” can do with its musical elements. I knew that these elements were in the movie before I watched it. But I looked back at the marketing, and part of me wonders how good of a job the marketing team did at implying that this movie was going to be a musical. Every time I watched the teaser trailer and I saw the shot of the spotlight shining on Arthur and the scene with Hotel Arkham, I realized those moments were musical-like. I thought people would pick up on that. But I watched with this movie with my dad. In fact, we went to see “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” together last month and the “Joker: Folie à Deux” teaser played in front of it. Maybe my dad’s trailer retention is not the greatest, but we ended up seeing this movie together too and he was not expecting a musical out of a film like this. For the record, he told me straight up, he does not like musicals. He made that clear when the film ended. Kind of like the first “Joker,” I respect this sequel for putting things in it that we do not usually see in a comic book-based film. I wanted all the musical shenanigans to work. But the singing was not the greatest. The songs were not that good. The movie kind of reminded me of “Dear Evan Hansen,” which did not work for me as a musical partially because the transitions to the numbers themselves did not come off as seamless as maybe they could have. They felt very out of place. There is one, maybe two numbers in the movie that feel natural in terms of that movie’s atmosphere. But that is about it.
Some of you might be reading this with the urge to ask several questions. For those who had no exposure to this movie, you may be wondering how musical elements got into the project to begin with. And others may wonder why the heck I am calling “Joker: Folie à Deux” a musical at all. Because if you ask one of its stars, Lady Gaga, or its director, Todd Phillips, they will say this film is not as much a musical, as opposed to a movie with a ton of music in it. If you ask me, “Joker: Folie à Deux” is simply a bad attempt at a musical. It is a musical that places its songs as an afterthought. I would like to use a quote from YouTuber Jeremy Jahns’ “Transformers: The Last Knight” review. This quote has more to do with that film’s pacing, but hear me out. “In the end, it’s how long a scene feels, not how long it actually is.” The same principle applies to this film’s identity and genre. Lady Gaga and Todd Phillips can try to sell me on the notion that “Joker: Folie à Deux” is not a musical as much as they want. But even though I sometimes think the phrase “the customer is always right” can sometimes be overused and presents cases where that is not always accurate, as a customer who bought a ticket to this movie, all I saw was a bad musical. That is what my dad who went with me saw too.
But let us say that “Joker: Folie à Deux” is somehow not a musical, and instead just a movie with plenty of singing. I do think there is a place in cinema for non-musical movies where the characters do a lot of singing. One example that comes to mind is Mamoru Hosoda’s anime, “Belle,” which is about someone who develops a virtual singing career. The moments where the lead character in that film sings occasionally play out like a musical. They’re visually creative and are presented in a massive scale, but those moments are not straight up musical sequences per se… Though there is one moment that takes a lot of inspiration from Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast.” But unlike “Joker: Folie à Deux,” each song in “Belle” effectively furthers the story and just so happen to be presented in sequences where not once did I have the illusion that a gun was locked right next to my head. Additionally, the soundtrack to “Belle” itself contains banger after banger after banger. I have found myself not just rewatching “Belle” at home more times than I would like to admit, but also listening to the songs from the movie in my spare time such as when I am in the car or when I am doing reviews like these.
Now that such an overblown, elongated, supersized rant about whether or not this movie is actually a musical is over, you might be thinking… Did I like anything about the movie? Well, yes.
For starters, the film does carry a few consistencies from the previous installment that also work the second time around. Joaquin Phoenix does a good job in the lead role. I do not think he is going to win an Oscar this year unlike he did in the first movie. But he puts on a captivating performance. Although to be fair on that “no Oscar this year” comment, I think the material this time around did him fewer favors than what he had in front of him for the first movie. Lawrence Sher also returned to do the cinematography, which like the first film, is really good. In fact, you could argue it was improved from the last movie. This film feels slightly bigger than the last one in terms of its scale. I do not know if I saw $200 million brought to the screen like the budget suggests, I would assume Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga got a good chunk of that money. But as I mentioned earlier, I like how the movie uses IMAX technology. Judging by everything I said so far, you can probably tell I am in no rush to buy the Blu-ray. But I hope if they do put one out, Warner Bros. allows the release to show an expanded aspect ratio during the IMAX scenes. Another consistency that I love in this film is the score. Like Joaquin Phoenix did for Best Actor, Hildur Guðnadóttir won an Oscar for her work on the original film in the category of Best Original Score. Personally, it was not my favorite score of the year. I think Alan Silvestri’s music in “Avengers: Endgame” was that year’s winner for me. That and Michael Abels’ work on “Us” was quite good too. But I remember hearing the “Joker” score and it captured the dark tone the film carried at times. It is not exactly depressing, but can easily induce a sense of discomfort. And “Joker: Folie à Deux’s” score does the same thing. It really shows how good your score is when an image or scene of the movie from which it originates comes to mind, and when you are thinking about said image or scene, you hear a glimmer of that score in your head at the same time. When I think about “Star Wars” sometimes, I will think of a certain moment and easily attach John Williams’ music to that thought. Hildur Guðnadóttir’s work has that power in both the original film and this sequel.
There is also one scene in the movie that I will not go too heavily into because it does involve potential spoilers, but there is a moment where Arthur is asked to sign someone’s book. While the autograph is being written, the person who gave the book says something that prompts a certain reaction out of Arthur. “Joker: Folie à Deux” is a movie that unlike many other comic book-based projects, does not have many laughs. But knowing what this movie entails, it does not need them. This one moment in particular though was hilarious. If you somehow drag yourself to the theater to check this monstrosity out and remember this part of the review, you will know which scene I am talking about when it comes up. It was a highlight of the movie for me.
The film also tends to maintain consistency with other stories about Joker and Harley Quinn, or in this case, Arthur and Lee. In the story, these two, as much as they like each other, show signs that they may not be the best match. I thought the film at times does an okay job at highlighting that. But at the same time, whether it was trying to highlight that or not, as I watched Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga together on screen, those two actors honestly could have played off each other a little better. Watching these two together felt awkward at times. Was discomfort the point when it comes to this film’s lead couple? You can definitely make that argument. But the discomfort was exactly as it sounds. Straight up uncomfortable. I was not marveled by the two leads of “Joker: Folie à Deux.” If anything, they were missing a spark. Yes, they are played by recognizable people with talent, but their talents do not lend themselves to this movie.
For the record, “Joker: Folie à Deux” has been out since early October, so chances are some of you reading this have seen the movie, but for those who have not, I will not spoil the ending. That said, we are going to talk about it. First off, it comes out of nowhere. Second, unlike the first movie, it does not feel satisfying. It is one of those endings that when you see it, you are left wondering if they forgot to finish the movie. Sure, it is somewhat conclusive, but there is a feeling of emptiness that comes with it. Is the ending bold? Perhaps. But again, this is another swing and a miss. Having seen this ending, it is a final note that would have honestly worked better if it were attached to the first movie. Knowing the climax of the first movie and how that all goes down, I think that if the climax of that first movie, as it was, came to an end, we see Arthur in jail, and a particular chunk of the second movie’s ending were implemented into the first, I think it would have been a better fit. In fact, as I said, I do not have anything against the first movie’s ending. But I think if that recently mentioned chunk were used to cap off the first film, it would have made for something incredible. It might be an ending that I would be talking about on a positive note for years to come. It would have been clever. The ending to “Joker: Folie à Deux” is a slap in the face. It left me speechless, confused, and a bit broken. The movie could have been a continued progression of the title character, or at least his alternate identity, but almost refuses to give any interesting expansion to him at all. And it culminates with maybe the most baffling ending I have ever seen in a movie based on a comic book.
This is one of those endings that tries so hard to be clever, but it fails to get any raw reaction out of me. It is the below freezing icing on the heavily wax-induced cake that is “Joker: Folie à Deux.” It is a contender to be the most controversial film I have reviewed in years. It is a film that seems to be confused in what its audience is. I found a decent number of people on the Internet who enjoyed this movie, but there is a reason why if you look at the box office, another clown-centered film, “Terrifier 3,” which for the record I do not plan to see, is currently finding its people and “Joker: Folie à Deux” is not. It appears to understand its purpose and who it is for. At the box office, “Joker: Folie à Deux” had the biggest second-weekend drop in comic book movie history. Clearly, I am not alone when it comes to adding to this film’s bad word of mouth. While this movie has some okay parts in it and looks nice, it is nowhere near enough to outweigh the pile of garbage that toppled me throughout its poorly paced runtime.
In the end, “Joker: Folie à Deux” just so happens to be a joke itself. But am I laughing? Absolutely not. There is a common consensus about sequels that they are usually not as good as their predecessor, but rarely do I recall seeing a step down as massive as this one. If anything, “Joker: Folie à Deux” reminds me of say my transition from “Star Wars: The Force Awakens,” one of my favorite films in the franchise, to “Star Wars: The Last Jedi.” If you read my review for “The Last Jedi,” you would know that I gave that film a positive grade when it came out. But the more I thought about the movie, and after rewatching it, the less I liked its story choices. And “The Last Jedi” and “Joker: Folie à Deux” are kind of similar in some ways. Both films look beautiful. They have good scores. But I am not a massive fan of the directions they took the story and certain characters. I wish we got something different with them. “Joker: Folie à Deux” only manages to support my thoughts that this property would have been better had the timeline just been one and done. I did not see the point of this movie other than to make a quick buck. Going into the movie, I would have argued it could have garnered some awards talk because of the previous film’s success, but this film is not receiving the best word of mouth. If I were to picture this movie’s fate at next year’s Oscars, I think it will have a chance it being nominated for several technical categories. But I do not know if it will get any of the big ticket ones like screenplay, director, actor, or picture. “Joker: Folie à Deux” is not even the worst comic book movie of the year. This sequel has the abomination against humanity known as “Madame Web” to thank for that. But “Joker: Folie à Deux” is probably the biggest disappointment I have seen in a long time. I was looking forward to this movie. I thought it had potential. But all I saw was an iffy courtroom drama with bad musical and singing sequences, an underuse of Lady Gaga, a series of unmemorable events, and a big fat dumb ending. I am going to give “Joker: Folie à Deux” a 2/10.
“Joker: Folie à Deux” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now. Plenty of seats are available, I guarantee it!
Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Look Back,” “Piece by Piece,” “Saturday Night,” and “Megalopolis.” 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 “Joker: Folie à Deux?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the biggest step down in a franchise you have seen from a certain installment to the one that came after it? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“It Ends with Us” is directed by Justin Baldoni (My Last Days, Five Feet Apart) who also stars in the film as Ryle Kincaid. The film also stars Blake Lively (The Shallows, Gossip Girl), Jenny Slate (Everything Everywhere All at Once, Marcel the Shell with Shoes On), Hasan Minhaj (Babes, The Daily Show), and Brandon Sklenar (The Big Ugly, 1923). This movie is about a woman whose relationship with her neurosurgeon becomes upended when someone she previously dated reenters her life.
If there is a duo that ruled this summer for movies, it would have to be Ryan Reynolds and Hugh Jackman for their blockbuster hit “Deadpool & Wolverine.” But Ryan Reynolds is not the only one in his family making dough at the box office this summer. While not quite up to the $1.3 billion “Deadpool & Wolverine” has raked in so far, Blake Lively’s “It Ends with Us” is doing very well for itself. So far, it is past the $300 million mark on a $25 million budget. Frankly though, I am kind of surprised, because this is a movie that if I were an executive, I would second guess myself before letting it into theaters during mid-summer. Not that such a thing could be impossible, but it deals with a subject matter as serious as domestic violence. While there is romance, humor, and a recognizable name like Blake Lively, August would not have been my first choice when it comes to an appropriate time to release this film.
The fact is, I am not a woman. Instead, I am, not that it matters, as straight and white of a male as you can get. But I was nevertheless intrigued by the buzz this movie seemed to be getting, even if some of it seems to be due to its controversial marketing campaign. Having seen the movie, I can say that it was a decent watch. Was it perfect? By no means. In fact, a lot of the dialogue is cheesy, though nowhere as bad as a by the numbers romcom like “Anyone But You,” a movie that strictly made money because it was a rare film released at the year’s end that put stylistic sex appeal over substantive Oscar bait. In fact, even the movie’s characters know how cheesy its own script is at times. The film’s main character literally says so when she is introducing herself to the love interest! For those who have not seen this movie or read its respective source material, the main character’s name is Lily Bloom, and interesting enough, she is a florist! But there is also a balance when it comes to the script’s tones that just so happens to bind together. At times, the movie is cute. At others, it is funny. At others, it is serious. All of these elements are handled with care.
As for that last element, that is where this movie’s issue of domestic violence comes in.
I would like to make another thing clear, and maybe this will once again make me the last person you’d want to be talking about this movie, I have never had a girlfriend. I have never been in a relationship. I have, thankfully, been on neither end of a domestically violent relationship. I am not going to pretend I am an expert on the subject, nor should I tell others how to handle such a matter. All I can lend is my opinion on how the movie handles it. As for how the matter is handled in “It Ends with Us,” I was surprised to find that it comes off as kind of tame. Now do not get me wrong, domestic violence is a serious issue. And the movie, effectively, presents it as such.
The MPA has officially rated this film PG-13. Not the lowest rating of the bunch, but certainly not the highest. There is a lot that you can get away with in a PG-13 movie. Though like many other PG-13 flicks, the movie does only limit itself to one f-bomb. But as I watched the scenes where the relationship becomes dangerously physical, the violence is never over the top or graphic. I honestly do not mind this choice because I am trying to think about this from the perspective of someone who has dealt with a relationship like the one this movie presents. Would over the top violence or a little extra blood be too much for some people? Chances are that could be the case. This is a movie that gets its message across by showing people the wrongs of this couple’s relationship without overplaying said wrongs for a horrid, disturbing dramatic effect.
Even though we have war movies that tend to use bloody and gory scenes to captivate the audience and immerse them into the environment, I think “It Ends with Us” made a smart choice to hold back on its handling of domestic violence to make the movie a bit more user-friendly. If anything, part of me is also glad the movie turned out to be PG-13, because while a number of adults have probably witnessed domestic violence themselves, it is something that teenagers and young adults should probably learn about because depending on the person, they are at the point where they may be starting to think about dating, or relationships. It is something that they would perhaps need to know. Whether it means detecting certain behaviors from their partners or preventing people from becoming violent themselves.
I cannot name a single character in the movie I did not admire. Not only do I think the entire cast does a good job with their roles, but I buy into the chemistry between everyone. Whether we are talking about Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni as the two leads, or even Lily Bloom’s relationship in high school where we get to see Isabella Ferrer and Alex Neustaedter play sweethearts. Looking back, the scenes between those two young high school students are some of my favorite parts of the film. For the most part, they are wholesome. I appreciated some of Lily’s actions. And it did a good job setting up these two characters for the events that play out in the rest of the film. On that note, Brandon Sklenar stands out as an older Atlas much like Alex Neustaedter does playing the younger interpretation.
As a Bostonian, I would say this film does an okay job masking the fact that despite the story taking place in Boston, this movie was in fact shot in New York. Of course, the movie has an obligatory shot of the Zakim Bridge before it hides any sense it was shot somewhere else. There is one concept that I thought was pretty funny where there happens to be a bar that plays Bruins games, and encourages people to wear onesies to get free drinks. I do not know of a bar in Boston that does that. I should note this concept is also in the book. But I would not be surprised if someone sees this movie, or based on said movie’s growing popularity, reads the book, and starts this tradition somewhere in Boston.
I am not going to pretend that “It Ends with Us” is the must see title of 2024. But kind of like “Barbie” last year, it is probably one of the more important watches. It is a movie that I probably would not have selected as my first choice. Heck, I watched “Oppenheimer” two weeks before I watched “Barbie,” but I think it is a movie from which people will take something with them, while also still being quite entertained. And boy, am I surprised at the entertainment value this movie offers. It has its laughs, it has its smiles. It has its feel good moments. Yet at the center of it all is an issue that I can gladly say I never had to face, but I think could serve as a decent learning experience for those who have never seen it. As for those who have dealt with it, or those with more expertise on this issue than I, this begs me to ask… Is this movie’s depiction of domestic violence rightfully executed? Do you think they should have done it differently? I know this issue is not comfortable for everyone to talk about. I am not trying to pressure anyone. But as someone who does not have a ton of experience with this topic I am never against learning something new.
In the end, “It Ends with Us” surprised me. I almost ended up not seeing this movie. To be real, I went because my mom wanted to check it out and I thought I’d go with her. And I am glad I did. Also, considering how Blake Lively’s spouse, Ryan Reynolds has a big movie out, I wanted to see what Blake Lively herself had up her sleeve. Safe to say, it was something worth checking out. Regardless of how it was marketed, “It Ends with Us” is a good movie. Sometimes the dialogue is not the greatest and some moments feel oddly hokey. But I can forgive that. The film has a great cast of characters and I found the pace flying at times. This is not a movie that I would recommend to everyone, but I think it is one that should you decide to watch it, you will leave it thinking you have not wasted your time. I am going to give “It Ends with Us” a 7/10.
“It Ends with Us” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice,” the long-awaited sequel starring Michael Keaton. Stay tuned! If you want to see this upcoming review and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “It Ends with Us?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie you saw this year that surprised you? It could be a good or bad surprise. “It Ends with Us” ended up being one of my positive surprises, so if you would like to know a negative one, check out my review for the colossal disappointment known as “Argylle!” I like Matthew Vaughn, I like the cast, but the movie? Cast it into the fire for all I care! Let me know your surprise movies down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Reagan” is directed by Sean McNamara (Soul Surfer, The King’s Daughter) and stars Dennis Quaid (Frequency, The Day After Tomorrow), Penelope Ann Miller (The Artist, Kindergarten Cop), Robert Davi (Showgirls, Profiler), Lesley Anne-Down (Sunset Beach, The Bold and the Beautiful), and Jon Voight (Midnight Cowboy, Mission: Impossible). This film is about the life of Ronald Reagan from his childhood to his acting work to his political career.
Of all the movies I could have seen this year, “Reagan” was not a movie I was genuinely anticipating. The marketing made it look unbearably generic. In a sense, it came off as if it was made for television. And the only reason why it got a theatrical release is because of the actors on screen like Dennis Quaid. But what do I know? I went to go see this film less than a month ago at my local cinema, on opening weekend. And while I do not recall the theater being full, it actually got quite a large audience. Granted, the auditorium was on the slightly smaller side. But it showed there may have been more interest in this film than I expected.
But as for the movie itself, it is, as I thought it would be, bad. It is not the worst movie of the year, but it is definitely one of the most discombobulated and convoluted.
In fact, would you like to know how convoluted this movie becomes by the very end? Well, you do not even have to watch the movie to find out. Just go to the Wikipedia page! If you are reading this page years down the road, I have no idea if anybody will make any dramatic changes to the page, but as of this writing, if you go to the “Plot” section, there is a warning that reads, “This section’s plot summary may be too long or excessively detailed.” Even Wikipedia says this movie is overstuffed! The most unreliable reliable source on the Internet agrees with me! And calling Wikipedia the most unreliable reliable source is not an error! It is not inaccurate! Much like Wikipedia, Scene Before is written by some random moron on the Internet, so you can trust me!
During my time in school, history was a mixed subject for me. There are times I would do well in history, but as I got into high school, that’s where things started to fall apart. But one thing I would remember about history is the textbooks. Remember how huge those things were? Granted, time is enormous. There is a lot to go over. I can gladly say that “Reagan” is slightly more entertaining than a by the numbers history textbook. Something that amazingly could not be accomplished with the ambitious Czech film “Medieval.” But despite the massive size of history textbooks, they cannot quite cover every minor detail of an event. Much like a history textbook, I learned something. Granted, I knew Reagan was an actor. But I did not know how much of an impact he had on the Screen Actors Guild. Knowing his background as that union’s president makes sense considering his future in politics. As someone who was not alive during Reagan’s time as president, I thought I would learn something from this movie. I did not think it would be that.
With that in mind, “Reagan” does remind me of a history textbook because it goes over a lot in such little time. And in the same way, you could also say “Reagan” reminds me of CliffsNotes, which if you are a teacher reading this, is something your students are probably using to pretend they read “King Lear.” It feels like we are flying faster than the speed of light from one important moment of Reagan’s life to the next to the point where the impact of whatever moment came before is less than it should be.
There is one particular moment in this movie, particularly during the 1976 RNC, where such a lack of impact is noticeable. Let’s just say it presents a moment involving Reagan’s political ambitions, where he cannot quite make it to the top, only to have a much more monumental moment be presented to us several minutes later. The pacing between these scenes is too fast and lessens the depth of the Reagan character. It does not give enough time to sympathize with him during his lowest low. The movie just says, bop-da-le-skiddly-bop, onto the next scene!
At times, this movie does not really know what it wants to be. I mentioned the marketing makes “Reagan” look generic. Having seen the film, I can confirm it is quite generic. But it is not all generic. If anything, the thing that sets this film apart, is probably its most bewildering element. On top of the mostly linear story that we get regarding the life of Ronald Reagan, we also get several scenes between two men in present day Moscow. Those two men are Russian agent Andrei Novikov and KGB agent Viktor Petrovich, both fictional characters by the way. The duo spend some time in the latter’s home discussing why the Soviet Union fell. Now I get it. The Soviet Union and Russia were a hot topic during Reagan’s life and his time as presidency. Despite that, I honestly do not see how the movie benefits from any of the scenes between these two. This movie is already over two hours long, and boy did I occasionally feel the runtime. Do we really need to see these two on screen? No we do not! In fact, one of those fictional Russian characters, Viktor Petrovich to be specific, is played by Jon Voight. Part of me is convinced those scenes were kept just so you could have Jon Voight’s name on the poster! As for the duo’s performances, while not quite as comedic as an “SNL” sketch, they lacked a certain authenticity. Although Voight’s accent in particular is not doing him any favors.
As for the lead performance, I will not deny that Dennis Quaid had a monumental task in front of him. He had to play a well-known world leader. He had to play said world leader during various portions of his life. But his performance to me was a bit of a mixed bag. At times, he embodied the nature of Ronald Reagan. At others, he overemphasized his accent and presence. And at others, he was somewhat unconvincing. Again, I recognize the challenge at hand, but it does not change the fact that watching this performance on screen resulted in Dennis Quaid trying a bunch of different things only to have them all combine into something average at best. If you want to see a more convincing lead performance by someone who plays the same character in multiple parts of their life, just go watch Zendaya in “Challengers.” I did not love the movie, but I will not deny Zendaya did a great job in her role. But most of the performances in “Reagan” range somewhere between overdone, unmemorable, or mediocre. There are no performances in this movie that I would imagine to be nominated for an Oscar. Maybe one or two will get nominated for a Razzie, but it is hard to know whether they are going to be nominated simply because the performances are bad or because it is funny to nominate performances in political movies. This is, after all, the same awards body that nominated several members of the Donald Trump administration for their “performances” in the 2018 documentary “Fahrenheit 11/9.” I try to avoid talking about my political views on Scene Before unless it is absolutely necessary, but if you must know my thoughts on “Reagan,” they are quite simple. Just say no.
In the end, “Reagan” is dull, bland, and all over the place. As fast as this movie moves, it oddly feels kind of slow. Occasionally, it gives you little time to take in one scene before quickly waltzing straight onto the next. The performances are nothing to write home about. You could literally take out all the scenes between the men in Moscow and dramatically improve the film’s substance. There are no positives in this film that stand out, but at the same time, I cannot say the film is incompetent. It is well shot, well lit, and the locations are okay. But the movie itself is kind of forgettable. It is almost kind of propaganda-like in its presentation. Some of the lines just feel oddly preachy and over the top at times. Maybe that was the intention. Maybe not. But again, if you want to know about my thoughts on “Reagan,” I wonder if my score of 5/10 will give you any hints.
“Reagan” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now!
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “It Ends with Us,” the brand new film starring Blake Lively. Stay tuned! If you want to see this review and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Reagan?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie heavily involving a U.S. President? I’ll even count fictional ones. Shoutout to “Air Force One” for being totally awesome! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
DISCLAIMER: Before we begin this review, I want to remind everyone reading this, while I do my best to keep certain details away regarding the film, there are parts of this review that involve some things in the movie that surprised me. I talk about those points in this review and chances are it COULD affect your viewing experience if you see them yourself. It is hard to call these points spoilers, because it does not necessarily have to do with the plot, but it does involve something that if you had zero idea about it going into this movie, I will probably ruin the reveal for you. All I will say is, if you want to see these surprises the way I did, click out of this review, and go see “Sing Sing” yourself. Otherwise, enjoy my thoughts on the movie!
“Sing Sing” is directed by Greg Kwedar (Transpecos, Rising from Ashes) and stars Colman Domingo (Lincoln, Fear the Walking Dead), Clarence Maclin, Sean San José (Life Tastes Good, Dream for an Insomniac), and Paul Raci (Parks and Recreation, Sound of Metal). This film is set in a maximum security prison where a group of men who work on plays together do all they can to bring their latest production to life.
When you go to the movies as often as I do, chances are you will run into an endless barrage of trailers. Sometimes you might get anywhere between four to eight in a single screening. Despite my constant eyeing of the screen, I cannot say I am able to witness everything the studios are putting out. Heck, I recall only seeing a trailer for “Deadpool & Wolverine” in theaters once before it came out. Although if you count that little thing they did before certain movies with the two leads telling the audience not to use their phones, I guess you can say I saw some other marketing material for the film as well. But my point is, my experience with the marketing for “Sing Sing” is next to none. At least for what I recall. I say this despite knowing one of the problems of being a frequent AMC customer is that I get so many trailers in select screenings that it is sometimes difficult to remember them all. I heard about the concept of the “Sing Sing” and I figured it could be a pleasing time. But the only reason why I went to go see this movie in the first place is because the screening for it was free.
It feels nice going into a movie blind. Especially as someone who is so constantly exposed to everything the studios are trying to sell me. But of course, compared to some of the other movies out this summer, I did not have a ton of excitement for “Sing Sing.” Although that is for good reason, because I did not know enough about “Sing Sing” to get excited. However, I can confirm I am quite excited to discuss this movie because it was a great experience. This is one of those movies, kind of like “CODA,” that is going to stick with me emotionally months after leaving the theater. To be clear, I do not think this film is as good as “CODA,” but much like “CODA,” “Sing Sing” was wholesome, moving, and beautiful.
There is a saying that you should not judge a book by its cover. And “Sing Sing” sort of fits that idea. Because when I look at this title, I think of innocence, I think of unity, I think of community, I think of… Well… Singing… For those who do not know, and I did not know this going in, Sing Sing is the name given to a prison where this movie is set. The name is derived from a Native American tribe. Despite that, this movie shows how much the act of performing is in the blood of several people staying here. You have a set of people who take plays seriously, some who enjoy being comedic, and you also have people doing this in order to forget about their troubles. The reality is that as someone who has never set foot inside of a prison, I will never know what it is like to be incarcerated, to spend a night in jail, to do time. Nothing of that sort, but this movie presents the universal concept of escapism and does so through the lens of people who perhaps deep down hope to achieve it more than most. I go to the movies as often as I can, but I realize how lucky I am to be able to do that on a regular basis. These are people who have the plays at Sing Sing as one of their only ways to forget their troubles. Whether they are there for a crime they committed or put there for the wrong reasons, all of these people share a common bond, and it is nice to see here.
The star of this movie is Colman Domingo, and he easily shines in the lead role. He comes off as the serious one of the group sometimes, but I feel deep down he is willing to drive himself out of his comfort zone. Domingo has some memorable scenes as John “Divine G” Whitfield and it still feels too early to tell if this performance will be up for awards contention, but I think Domingo has given one of my favorites so far this year. This film is not the strongest at the box office. It has been out for weeks and only recently crossed the two million dollar mark. Granted, it never had a large number of showtimes, and it does not have the star power of say “Deadpool & Wolverine.” Colman Domingo is without a doubt the movie’s biggest name. The only other person I recognized in the cast, and it actually took me a bit to figure out what his name actually was despite knowing his face, was Paul Raci. Boy oh boy is it great seeing him here, because I loved his performance in “Sound of Metal” and he manages to bring a similar feel to his portrayal here. He comes off as the voice of wisdom of the bunch. Much like his outing in “Sound of Metal,” Raci brings a calming, welcoming presence to his character. I very much enjoyed seeing him in another role and hope this is not the last I see of him.
As mentioned, this film does not have the biggest stars. However, as far as I am concerned, I do not think that is a bad thing. Because “Sing Sing” manages to cast a group of people that may not have been my first choice, but seeing this film made me realize I would not want this cast to be any different than the way it is.
This movie reminds me a bit of “The 15:17 to Paris,” Clint Eastwood’s biographical drama about three men and their journey leading up to a train attack. For those of you who have not read my review, I can tell you it is absolutely insufferable and obscenely uneventful. But one thing I remember from that movie is that the main characters are played by the real people attached to the true event the movie bases itself upon. While creative, I could honestly tell they were not the greatest thespians. This leads me to one of my praises for this film, I am marveled by the performances given by some of the prisoners, especially because they are played by actual people who were imprisoned at Sing Sing. And while I may not be able to recognize these people compared to some of the big movie stars we see on screen today, when the credits rolled and the cast was revealed, I was taken aback by this group’s acting abilities. Granted, maybe I should not have been too surprised considering they have acting experience through plays, but I thought this was a professional group of people trying to be someone else. The definition of acting is playing pretend, that is traditionally what I would expect from most situations. Can you have people play themselves? Sure. There have been cases where it has happened and it has worked. But “Sing Sing” is not just a case where it worked, it is a case where I found myself heavily immersed into each performance on display.
Going back to “The 15:17 to Paris,” when the film was over, I looked at the actors on screen, thought their performances could have been better, and came up with my own interpretations of some more professional people that could take their place. That is not the case with “Sing Sing,” as every single person in the cast kills their respective role. It is hard to tell if these actors playing themselves are going to be contenders for awards in the coming months, but I think it would not just cool to see, but legitimately fitting, to see these people get a Best Ensemble nomination at the SAG Awards, because I bought the entire group, and I think you will too.
“Sing Sing” tackles a lot in one picture. It deals with people’s reputations, toxic masculinity, and the value of teamwork just to name a few topics. And all of these ideas are handled well. Above all, “Sing Sing” shows how art can bring people together. It also shows the value of escapism and being able to become the person you want to be. It is definitely a serious picture at times, but if you are looking for straight-up fun, this movie has a shockingly decent amount. I found myself smiling quite a bit during this film’s runtime.
One last thing, this regards the film’s ending. The film makes a certain choice at the end, and honestly, I was surprised by the direction they decided to take things. It almost felt unfinished and out of left field, like I was waiting for the big event to happen, only for the movie to tell me it is not happening. But as I saw what the film presents as an alternative, I thought it was a brilliant move. This direction was wholesome, it was lovely, and it was satisfying. As I said, I smiled quite a bit during this movie, and this was one of those times. This film is not all smiles and laughs, but I would recommend you check this movie out. Maybe it will bring out some emotions of your own.
In the end, “Sing Sing” totally sings. This is one of the better movies I have seen this year. While it is probably not my favorite, it is one that I will be thinking about as we get closer to awards season. Unfortunately, not many people saw this movie. Remember how I mentioned the rather low box office total for this film? Sadly, I could not contribute to it, I was able to see this film for free. But I urge you to check this movie out as soon as you can. Whether you are able to buy a ticket for this movie, watch it when it comes out on home video, or even at a free screening like I did, I hope you see it and enjoy it as much as I did. I hope more people spread the word about this picture. It is a must watch for sure. I am going to give “Sing Sing” a 9/10.
“Sing Sing” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Borderlands,” the new film based on the video game of the same name. Also coming soon, I will share my thoughts on “Skincare,” the new thriller starring Elizabeth Banks as an aesthetician. And if that is not enough to satisfy you, I will also be talking about films like “My Old Ass,” “Reagan,” and “It Ends with Us.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Sing Sing?” What did you think about it? Or, is there any way that art has helped you in your life? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“The Instigators” is directed by Doug Liman (The Bourne Identity, Jumper) and stars Matt Damon (The Martian, Good Will Hunting), Casey Affleck (Manchester by the Sea, Gone Baby Gone), Hong Chau (Kinds of Kindness, The Menu), Michael Stuhlbarg (Call Me by Your Name, The Shape of Water), Paul Walter Hauser (Cobra Kai, Inside Out 2) Ving Rhames (The Garfield Movie, Mission: Impossible), Alfred Molina (Raiders of the Lost Ark, Spider-Man 2), Toby Jones (Frost/Nixon, W), Jack Harlow (White Men Can’t Jump), and Ron Perlman (Hellboy, Pinocchio). This film is about two men who go on the run with a therapist after a heist does not go as planned.
As someone who has lived in Massachusetts all his life, it should not come as a surprise that I have a few Boston-based movies under my belt. Movies like “The Departed,” “Good Will Hunting,” “Spotlight,” “Ted,” “Patriots Day,” “Stronger…” Granted I still have not seen everything like “Mystic River,” “Black Mass,” “Gone Baby Gone…” Still waiting to get around to those. But as someone from this area, I feel it is my duty to check out a Boston-based film when possible, which is one reason why I saw “The Instigators” recently.
Sadly though, I cannot say I was that excited for this movie. The trailer failed to impress me, and I did not think this movie was going to do that well.
There are times where I almost forgot I had to review this movie, which is really weird when you consider my experience with it. This is a true story… When I saw this film on opening Thursday night, I am not making this up, my theater was decked to the brim with “The Instigators” posters. If this were my bedroom, you would think I have an unhealthy obsession with this movie. That should probably give you some indication as to how my experience went down.
For the record, I do not despise “The Instigators,” but I also cannot say it is worth your time either. This is one of those movies that barely kept me awake as it went. Does it have a good pace to it? Sure. Do I like the cast in the movie? Sure. Do I think the movie has some clever moments? Sure. But everything about the overall experience of the film just screams middle of the road. There is nothing outright amazing about “The Instigators,” especially when compared to other Boston titles like “The Departed.” If I was in a Boston mood and I wanted to truly pay attention to every single detail on screen, I would simply turn on “The Departed.” But as for “The Instigators,” the situation in which I most likely see myself watching this movie again in the future would probably be when I just need some background noise. Part of me wants to say that I could maybe catch the movie on cable and just leave it on, but I highly doubt that Apple is going to allow that to happen. I do not think they are in that kind of business.
Now as someone who resides on the North Shore of the Bay State, I do fit into some local stereotypes. I do enjoy Dunkin’, I buy a ticket to a ballgame at Fenway, I have used the term “Storrowed” every once in a while, and I have even had the privilege of seeing a couple Boston Marathons in person. When I was in college the Boston Marathon route went right by my campus, so I took advantage of my commuter parking pass and got to see the event play out a couple times. Heck, I went to see this movie IN THE ONLY THEATER TECHNICALLY IN BOSTON, not any of its suburbs, selling tickets for it! But I have to be real with you, as much as I try, to varying successes and failures, to maintain my local roots, I have to admit this movie does a good job linking itself to the Greater Boston culture. When I say this however, I should also say, the movie almost does… TOO GOOD of a job. Sometimes the outcome this movie provides when it comes to its Boston tributes, if you can call them that, is almost pornographic. Whether it means Alfred Molina randomly showing up with Dunkin’, getting Rob Gronkowski of all people to make a rather gratuitous cameo, or having Hong Chau’s character mention she’s from Lynn during a chase and having the other characters say “Lynn Lynn the City of sin” just because. Though I must admit, there is a scene in the movie where we see a protest outside of Boston City Hall and I almost burst out laughing as soon as I saw a sign that read “FIX THE MBTA!”.
It is almost as if the crew behind this movie decided to ingrain themselves so heavily in Boston culture to the point where they sort of built a decent atmosphere for the film, but did not have the brains on how to make the film as entertaining as can be. Because as I look back at this film, I find to be uneventful, unmemorable, and minimally engaging. I cannot say I hate any of the characters on screen, but I am not going to remember their names in six months.
That said, this film is led by Matt Damon and Casey Affleck, and the two, to my lack of surprise, have decent chemistry in their roles. They both do a good job as two guys from Quincy, and even though I admit their journeys in this film fall into some pits of predictability, I enjoyed seeing their motivations play out and their personalities come to life. But when you have these two leading a movie like this, I kind of expect something more from the script or the plot, or even the direction.
Heck, this movie is directed by Doug Liman, whose resume partially includes “The Bourne Identity” and “Edge of Tomorrow,” which like those movies or not, you would probably agree with me when I say they look pretty cinematic. This movie honestly looks like it was made for television between its lighting that appears as if the crew forgot to brighten the bulb a tad occasionally. Yet at other times, it has some unusual camera tricks that try to appear cinematic, but only manage to feel jarring the longer I gaze my eyes upon them.
If I had to pick a performance in the film that stood out to me the most, it would probably be Ron Perlman as Mayor Miccelli. At a glance, Perlman very much looks the part of a politician. He has this look to him that like some politicians, you question yourself in the back of your mind on whether or not to trust him. His presence in the film made for some good scenes, especially towards the end.
And you know what? This is a poetic transition. If I had anything else to say that is positive about the film, I must admit, I was not 100% thrilled with all that it had to offer, but there are several scenes where you can easily be entertained by these characters. The entire cast oozes charisma, even if they are playing characters whose names you will probably erase from your memory after leaving the theater. Is part of it because some of the actors in the cast are recognizable? Perhaps. Why do you think I am going about this review referring to the actors names but not acknowledging their respective characters? But like some of their previous work, those recognizable actors play their parts well here. However, for me, this film was missing something. If anything the film is almost too stereotypical and lacking in any oomph that will make audiences remember it for years to come.
In the end, “The Instigators” is a somewhat entertaining movie, but it is not one that had me engaged the entire time. As the heist goes down, I am interested in what is going on. But I cannot say there are any standout moments in this film that will cement it as one of my favorites of the year. Does everyone in the cast do a good job? Again, sure. But they are not Oscar-worthy. This movie is on Apple TV+, and I can frankly see why. I have to be real, their record has not been working for me. Other than “CODA,” which is amazing, I cannot say I have seen one movie from Apple yet, and I include “Killers of the Flower Moon” in this thought, that has totally floored me. If you were planning on watching “The Instigators,” I am here to tell you your time will not be completely wasted, but you can probably use that time to do other things that would be more exciting. I am going to give “The Instigators” a 5/10.
“The Instigators” is now playing in select theaters and is available on Apple TV+ for all subscribers.
Thanks for reading this review! If you want to see more reviews like this, I have more coming! Stay tuned for my thoughts on “Sing Sing,” “Borderlands,” “Skincare,” “My Old Ass,” “Reagan,” and “It Ends with Us.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Instigators?” What did you think about it? Or, since I clearly have no faith in their service, what is something you recommend on Apple TV+? Yes, I know they’ve got shows like “Ted Lasso,” “Severance,” “For All Mankind,” but I want to specifically ask if there are any movies from them that you enjoyed. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Kinds of Kindness” is directed by Yorgos Lanthimos (The Lobster, Poor Things) and stars Emma Stone (The Amazing Spider-Man, Poor Things), Jesse Plemons (Civil War, Game Night), Willem Dafoe (Spider-Man, Platoon), Margaret Qualley (Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Drive-Away Dolls), Hong Chau (The Menu, Downsizing), Joe Alwyn (Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk, Catherine Called Birdy), Mamoudou Athie (Jurassic World: Dominion, Elemental), and Hunter Schafer (The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes, Euphoria). This film contains three separate stories starring the same cast that all share loose connections.
“Kinds of Kindness” is one of those movies that is going to get several butts in seats. Well, maybe not everyone’s butt. That said, if you are of a certain audience, chances are this movie got your attention. After all, some of the people who are connected to this film have are hot off the recent award circuit. “Poor Things” dominated several bodies last year, earning a few Oscar wins, including Emma Stone’s beyond deserved accolade for Best Actress. It was also nominated for a multitude of Critics Choice Awards, BAFTAs, Golden Globes, and even a couple SAGs. When they dropped the trailer for this movie earlier this year, and I saw the names “Emma Stone” and “Yorgos Lanthimos” attached, my first thoughts were “Wow! That was fast! I did not think they’d crank out another movie that quickly!” And given how recently “Poor Things” won me over, I was excited to see what this dynamic duo could do with a film like this. But there was something missing from the marketing… I did not really know what the movie is about.
Now, for those who did not see this movie, I am going to try my best to not give a ton of info away, but this film is three stories all done by the same cast. They all somewhat relate in tone and theme, but they also have their differences. This was something I knew going in, but I found out from someone else who saw the movie. I did not get this from any marketing, any trailers, nothing. And as much as I do not want to spoil the whole movie, I think there are some people who would at least like to know what to expect going in…
Now I was able to remember this information going into the theater, but as for the movie itself, it is not as memorable. In fact, some of the parts I do remember, failed to win me over.
I want to be real with you… “Kinds of Kindness” is one of the worst film experiences I had in the past several years. To be clear, I do not think it is even close to being the worst movie of said years. Granted it is not exactly good… But during my screening, my projector had multiple instances of technical difficulties. So much so that the theater had to issue passes for a free screening. But not only did I have a bad experience by watching a movie that I did not enjoy for the material that the filmmakers made, but it was sullied even more by outside factors. I cannot even tell you precisely how this movie, and by that I mean the third movie within the movie, ends. Sure, I saw how it ended. But this film was so slow, so uninteresting, and yet, out of nowhere, my theatrical experience reached a lowest low to make an unmemorable ending even worse.
I just want to remind you all, this movie and its three stories star recent Oscar winner Emma Stone. Her efforts in this movie are not quite to the level of a Razzies nominee. Not even close. In fact, I would say everyone in this film is rather competent, but there is a reason why this film is releasing in the middle of the year as opposed to the end of the year. It feels really weird to say this because I have a couple Yorgos Lanthimos films under my belt, and every other one I have seen, I feel like he is getting the best performances out of each one of his actors. While the actors in this film do a good job, none of the performances this time around feel Oscar-worthy. At best, they meet some gap between an okay performance in a big budget summer blockbuster and an arthouse performance that would be considered for a nominee but is missing some sort of spark.
Admittedly, some of the stories from a conceptual perspective, are intriguing. I like the ideas for all three of these stories, but by the time they get to the end of each story, it falters at some point. Not only are they similarly titled by having “R.M.F.” in each name, but they do feel somewhat similar to each other when it comes to the execution. Each one delivers a somewhat sinister vibe and features some sequences where part of me wants to look away because they are not always easy to watch. Interestingly enough, “Kinds of Kindness” just so happens to be paced in such a way that makes it not always easy to watch. Talk about a slogfest. What can be worse than one bad movie? Ha! I know! Three bad movies in one bad movie! It’s bad movie-ception!
I admire each short story for having some daring scenes and moments, and they did catch my attention, but that is one of the only compliments I can truly give this film. It pushes some boundaries and those scenes stood out to me. There are also some scenes that turned me off, perhaps to a degree where I almost wanted to stop watching the movie altogether, so this movie has a balance of its positive and negative moments.
The way that these mini-stories are structured, the way they are written, the way they are brought to life, they should to some degree be able to stick with me after leaving the theater. But in all honesty, they were not able to do that. If anything, these stories were amusing to watch. I think there are a couple scenes that are very well directed and realized, but it does not make up for all the other moments that made me roll my eyes. Is this film incompetently made? No. It is just one that did not work for me. For all I know, this could win some people over, but I am not one of those people. This is the kind of movie that was going for a reaction, and I was definitely able to give one during some scenes. But I wish said reaction was slightly different sometimes. Honestly, if you were to ask me to recommend a Yorgos Lanthimos movie to watch, I will just recommend the film he did prior to this one, “Poor Things.” It’s fun, it is comedic, and a wacky vision brought to life. And unlike this recent outing, “Poor Things” left me thinking a bit more after leaving the cinema. The only thought on my mind after leaving “Kinds of Kindness” is that I never want to watch the movie again.
In the end, while I did enjoy “Kinds of Kindness” a bit more than “The Favourite,” it was a rather off and on experience for me where some of the turnoffs tended to stand out. Honestly, if you are looking for a recent movie from a filmmaker with an auteurist approach containing a few decent short stories, I think Wes Anderson’s “The French Dispatch” is a slightly better watch. Granted it is not a perfect movie either. It is far from Wes Anderson’s best work, but it definitely has its moments. “Kinds of Kindness” likely has an audience. It had some laughs, it has good production design, and respectable direction. But it does not have the oomph for me to call the movie great, and the experience is only worsened by several moments that left me questioning why I was watching them or why they were even put in the film in the first place. I am going to give “Kinds of Kindness” a 5/10.
“Kinds of Kindness” is now playing in select theaters and as of writing this post in 2024, the film will available on Hulu Friday, August 30th.
Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, I have more coming! Stay tuned for my thoughts on “The Instigators,” “Sing Sing,” “Borderlands,” “Skincare,” and “My Old Ass.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Kinds of Kindness?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie that grossed you out so much that you cannot appreciate it? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Daddio” is written and directed by Christy Hall and this is her feature film debut as both a writer and a director. This film stars Dakota Johnson (Fifty Shades of Grey, The High Note) and Sean Penn (Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Mystic River) in a film showcasing a cab ride from John F. Kennedy International Airport to midtown Manhattan where two people have deep and honest conversations about their lives.
Before we go any further, for those keeping track, much like how “The Beekeeper” and “Thelma” are two revenge flicks I saw this year showing how people deal with scammers, “Daddio” just so happens to be the second example of a film primarily about two people in a cab ride. The first one, for the record, just so happens to be the French film “Driving Madeleine.” Coincidentally, I reviewed that film right after one of those revenge flicks, “The Beekeeper.” And guess what my last review was before doing this film? “Thelma!” That’s what! How poetic indeed!
With that digression out of the way, “Daddio” snuck up on me last minute. Particularly when I watched an interview with Dakota Johnson on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” last month. This is not the first time this has happened. I remember watching “Four Good Days,” which is an excellent film by the way, mainly because I watched Mila Kunis being interviewed on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.” It is nice to know how effectively these kinds of interviews double as both fun conversations and marketing tools. It works, so why fix it?
That said, interview tactics or not, Dakota Johnson very much needed something to get moviegoers back on her good side. On top of being the lead in the “Fifty Shades” films, which assumedly has its audience, but also its fair share of critics, she also just led the pile of schlock known as “Madame Web,” which I think many would agree with me when I say it is one of the worst comic book films ever. It is a film that I said was somehow worse than “Morbius.” And amazingly, it is written by the same duo who wrote “Morbius.” Quite a hot streak, right?! Although if you ask me, Johnson has had her fair share of wins. “The Peanut Butter Falcon” and “The High Note” are two smaller, non-franchise films she did in recent years that I quite enjoyed. “Daddio” is another such example, but I would argue it is even tinier. Because while it is set in various parts of the New York metro area, the whole movie basically takes place in a car. And it is primarily between two characters, at least two characters whose faces we see.
Thankfully, these two characters are well written, concrete, and play off each other beautifully for the film’s entire runtime. I have seen my fair share of road adventure films where we have multiple characters in the car who cannot quite connect the dots to make the ride entertaining for me as a viewer. This film, I would not exactly classify as “entertainment.” Again, it is quite deep and gets you thinking, but my eyes and ears were open whenever the ride was going down so it is technically accurate to say I was quite entertained from start to finish. I was invested in these two’s conversations, Johnson’s uses of her phone, and the little obstacles these two come across as they made their way through the route.
You ever go on the road expecting a typical ride only to find something completely unexpected? I certainly have. Anything from massive traffic to endless road closures to finding random piles of debris in the middle of the road… These have all happened to me at some point in my life. And this movie reminded me of times when I would have those obstacles come my way. Granted, there is an obstacle this movie presents that I cannot really compare to anything I’ve personally encountered. It is something much bigger, perhaps unexpected. But it fascinating to see how these two react to and deal with such a thing in the moment.
One of the things I love about this movie is how it shows the layers of humanity. It shows that there is more to people than meets the eye. When you get a look at someone in your life, or maybe when you talk to someone you’ve never talked to before, you will garner an interpretation or image of that person. This movie shows that what you may think a person could be, while possibly true, is not entirely who they are. Or in some cases, that image you have of a person may not even be true in the slightest. Whether it is an image we make up ourselves or an image we hear from them. Regardless of how true or false the images are amongst our two main characters, I was thoroughly captivated by both of them. I loved getting to know Dakota Johnson’s character, Girlie, from the dialogue and what we see from her on her on her phone. Sean Penn does a really good job encapsulating a man who very much resembles an individual who has seen it all. After all, we find out he has been a cab driver for a long time, he does not have time or motivation for the apps like Uber and Lyft. He’s old school. He is someone who’s simply tired of the way the world’s shifting.
Some of my favorite movies do a good job at taking the ordinary, whether it is a character, a place, or an everyday situation, and turns them into something extraordinary. I sometimes look back at one of my favorite films at 2021, “CODA,” and find myself marveled with how its protagonist’s normality would be seen as abnormal by so many other people. In a different sense, “Daddio” takes one of the most everyday things, a drive, something that just so happens to be in the entire film, by the way, and adds quite a bit to it to make the journey something that stands out a lot more than a simple commute. Things that make the ride interesting, or compelling. Each obstacle had my attention. Each conversation had my investment. Each little thing we learn about these two characters kept my chin up. It is hard to know if a movie like “Daddio” is going to be for everyone. If some of you asked me to explain what this movie is about, chances are you’d question how cinematic it really is. This film is very much about the human condition, the way we think, the way we interpret others. And if you are interested in a story about people, then maybe this film is for you. Frankly, I watched this film partially because I will admit, and I do not know if this reason has a ton of validity to it, I love New York. I thought it would be fun to see a commute from the airport to Manhattan. But this film, to my lack of surprise, delivers much more than that.
One last thing, if you saw “Madame Web” this year and questioned Dakota Johnson’s ability as an actor, I highly recommend you watch “Daddio” because I am convinced this movie will change your mind. Remember what I said earlier, “Madame Web” was written by the same people who wrote “Morbius.” Their track record is not the best. Johnson was not given the finest material, and it shows in the movie. It is like watching George Clooney in “Batman & Robin.” He has proven he can act both before and after that film. But there is much more to his lackluster performance in “Batman & Robin” than how he handles it. Here, Dakota Johnson is given a higher quality script, a deeper character, and a more compelling plot. And as a moviegoer, this movie gave me something too. Compared to “Madame Web,” “Daddio” gave me a greater investment of my time. And that is an investment that should never ever go to waste.
In the end, “Daddio” is a film that I am not sure that many of you reading this are going to see, but please do not let it slip by you. This film features two really good performances of well written characters. I wanted to know as much about these two as the movie would allow me to. The movie is the simplest of ideas, but it is done in such a way that makes for an incredibly engaging journey. Now, if I were to compare “Daddio” to another one I mentioned at the beginning, “Driving Madeleine,” I would probably say I would rather watch “Daddio” a second time before putting on “Driving Madeleine” again. And for those who ask, no, it is not because I am a simpleton who wants the characters in the movie to speak English. If anything, it is because “Daddio” does such a great job at fleshing out its leads and makes the most of every situation it presents. This is nothing against “Driving Madeleine.” In fact, if you have not seen that film, I would recommend it. Much like “Daddio,” “Driving Madeleine” is an effective showcase of what it means to be human. But if you asked me to pick between the two, and for all I know, this could be recency bias, I currently find “Daddio” to be more appealing. But if you were to watch either of these films, you would not be wasting your time. I am going to give “Daddio” an 8/10.
“Daddio” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! If you liked this review, I have more coming! Stay tuned for my thoughts on “A Quiet Place: Day One,” “MaXXXine,” “Twisters,” “Deadpool & Wolverine,” and “Kinds of Kindness.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Daddio?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the craziest car ride you’ve ever had? Tell me about it down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Young Woman and the Sea” is directed by Joachim Rønning (Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil) and stars Daisy Ridley (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Chaos Walking), Tilda Cobham-Hervey (Hotel Mumbai, The Lost Flowers of Alice Hart), Stephen Graham (Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, Kim Bodnia (Killing Eve, The Witcher), Christopher Eccleston (Thor: The Dark World, True Detective), and Glenn Fleshler (Boardwalk Empire, Billions). This film is inspired by the book of the same name and is about the competitive swimmer Trudy Ederle, who makes a daring attempt to swim across the English Channel.
One of the benefits of being in a “Star Wars” movie is having such a massive franchise be part of your resume. But regarding the more recent films, particularly the prequel trilogy and the sequel trilogy, it feels interesting to note that a few of its leads are, unsurprisingly, mostly known for their “Star Wars” roles, but not really making rounds since. Sure, Hayden Christensen did “Jumper.” But who religiously and fondly remembers that movie? What else has he really done since “Revenge of the Sith” that has stood out? As for Daisy Ridley, who I adore as Rey in the “Star Wars” franchise, I hope she can find some enormous success outside of the “Star Wars” franchise that way she does not remain a one hit wonder of sorts. I liked her in “Chaos Walking,” but I recognize that movie is not perfect, even though I did have fun with it. That, and COVID-19 definitely affected its box office performance. Yes, I am aware Ridley did other things too. “Murder on the Orient Express,” the “Peter Rabbit” movies, “The Marsh King’s Daughter…” But I have not seen any of those.
While I cannot legitimately recommend any of those movies, I can say Daisy Ridley’s latest film, “Young Woman and the Sea” is definitely worth the watch. Not only is it a solid story, but one thing that favors the film is the timing of which it released. After all, it is summer. Therefore, it is basically swim season. The Olympics are around the corner. It is the perfect time to get in the water. Maybe you will not want to venture the same waters as this movie’s lead, but still.
But even if you do not want to venture those same waters, you may feel inspired to do other great things. I am a straight white male, so I cannot speak for everyone, but I have a feeling that a lot of people who check out this movie are going to feel empowered, they’re going to feel inspired. Everyone loves a good story of this nature, and it is perhaps a bonus if the lead is a woman like it is here.
While this movie is about Trudy Ederle, I thought it also did a good job with its supporting characters. I really enjoyed the scenes early on in the film where we see Trudy learning to swim and getting to know the others inside the building, in addition to one tradition they share. In addition to Trudy’s journey as she navigates the English Channel, I was simultaneously engaged with what was going on back at home. We see the family’s perspective, how nervous they are, and I think plenty of people can relate to those events playing out. It is natural for a parent to worry about their kid in a multitude of scenarios. Heck, my mom constantly worries about me getting to work on time. Granted I have to be there at 2 a.m…. But still. A good movie can make you care for its lead and their progression throughout the runtime, but that good movie could potentially be better, like this one, if you somehow also care about those who tend to express their worries about the lead.
One of the unsung standouts of “Young Woman and the Sea,” and I perhaps mean that literally, is the music. This film’s score is done by Amelia Warner, whose work I have not heard previously, but the orchestral power of this film leaves me curious as to what she has up her sleeve next. Each instance of the music adds to the tension, adventure, and sometimes joy of each scene. It is easily one of my favorite musical compilations this year. “IF” still remains my favorite score perhaps, but this trails only slightly behind.
Production value-wise, this film is as inviting as can be. The shots look beautiful. Every time I look at the water in this movie, it makes me want to go by the sea. It truly strikes a proper mood. It was also soothing to see the film’s various environments accompanied with a 1920s vibe. The film is chock-full of impeccably designed interiors. Probably some of my favorite I have seen this year. “Young Woman and the Sea” is quite a picturesque movie that is easy on the eyes. A lot of the frames that pass by as I am watching our hero navigate the English Channel are enchanting to gaze upon.
If I had any real critiques that come to mind regarding “Young Woman and the Sea” it would probably be that the film seems a little played up for what it is trying to be. Granted it is nowhere near as played up as the last movie I reviewed, “Summer Camp,” but it is sometimes over the top. The performances in the film are all over the place. It is not to say they are bad, but they seem to clash with each other tonally sometimes, as if they belong in a couple different movies. The actors all do a good job, even if their collective performances are not quite a perfect match. This film is a term I do not use often, but it feels appropriate to use here. If there were a word to describe this film at times, it would be “Hollywoodized.” This is a story that on paper, would make a good movie. A woman taking on a dangerous mission of swimming across a body of water makes for a great story, especially considering this one is true. But some of it is perhaps pushing the boundaries of reality. It sometimes feels familiar in terms of its story and its beats. This film is released under the Disney banner, and even though the two movies are not quite the same, “Young Woman and the Sea” reminded me of another Disney live-action effort, “The Finest Hours,” another story highlighting a dangerous time in the water. That film also felt played up and perhaps overly glamourous. I think “Young Woman and the Sea” is much more engaging, but both movies share similar flaws. They are presented as these glorious tales, and to some degree, they can be defined as such. But the movies tend to push the limits in terms of how glorious they actually are.
In the end, the real question is, should you watch this movie? Absolutely. Give “Young Woman and the Sea” a shot if you have the time. It is played up and sometimes cliche, but it is nevertheless charming and inspiring. I liked all the characters in this movie. The chemistry we see between Trudy and her sister, who is wonderfully played by Tilda Cobham-Hervey, is quite good. Performance-wise, despite being a bit on the hyper side, I admired Sian Clifford as Charlotte, Trudy’s swimming trainer. Every time she is on screen she has a commanding presence. If there is any performance I remembered the most from the movie, aside from Daisy Ridley’s, it is hers. “Young Woman and the Sea” is probably not going to be on my top 10 of the year, but it is a movie that I am glad I saw. It is an effective, inspirational story of determination, feminism, and going for the impossible. I am going to give “Young Woman and the Sea” 7 seas out of–
Wait, that doesn’t sound right… I’m going to give the movie a 7/10. There, that’s better.
“Young Woman and the Sea” is unfortunately not playing in many places right now, and as of writing this, the film is not currently available to watch at home. But if it is somehow playing near you by some miracle, check the movie out if you can.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Inside Out 2,” one of the biggest films of the year so far. I cannot wait to finally talk about this one. Also coming soon, I will have reviews for “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga,” “Thelma,” “Daddio,” “A Quiet Place: Day One,” and “Maxxxine.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Young Woman and the Sea?” What did you think about it? Or, do you enjoy swimming? Tell me where your favorite place to swim happens to be! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“IF” is directed by John Krasinski (A Quiet Place, The Office) who also stars in the film as Bea’s Dad in addition to also voicing a Marshmallow. Joining him in this film is a cast including Cailey Fleming (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, The Walking Dead), Ryan Reynolds (Deadpool, Free Guy), Fiona Shaw (True Blood, Killing Eve), Phoebe Waller-Bridge (Fleabag, Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny), Louis Gossett Jr. (An Officer and a Gentleman, Roots), and Steve Carell (Despicable Me, Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy). This film is about a young girl dealing with drastic changes in her life who is suddenly able to see imaginary friends of real people who have grown up and separated from them.
“IF” had me partially interested but at the same time, skeptical. When I watched the marketing for this film, I noticed that it was trying its best to show off its humor, but very few, if any of the jokes, made me laugh. That said, I thought “IF” had potential. The overall design looked nice. The cast was stacked. And it was being directed by John Krasinski, whose directing resume is limited, but nevertheless impressive. I admire his work on the “Quiet Place” movies, especially the first one. That first film had 25 lines of voiced dialogue. That is pretty impressive in this day and age for something that has become rather mainstream. While it is not my favorite horror movie of the 2010s, it is arguably the most beautifully made. Krasinski has shown what he can do behind the camera so quickly and so effectively to the point where I was looking forward to just about anything he could be directing next. I did not think it would be something like “IF.” But I had an open mind.
The best thing I can say about “IF,” particularly when it comes to John Krasinski, is that this movie is probably his best showcase of his abilities as a writer. Unlike the first “A Quiet Place,” where he had help from Bryan Woods and Scott Beck, Krasinski wrote “IF” by himself. For the record, Krasinski also wrote “A Quiet Place Part II” solo, but looking back at the film, I did not attach myself to all the characters. There was a certain magic from the first installment that seemed to be missing, even though I did ultimately lean positive in my verdict. “IF” on the other hand is not only magical, it is likely going to end up being one of the best family movies of the year. Not only that, I was pretty surprised by how good this movie ended up being. Again, I was a bit skeptical. But I was nevertheless pleased by how this movie turned out.
I have talked about my love for Pixar on this blog before. To this day, their batting average is incredible. No pun intended. Thus far, the only film from the studio I would give a thumbs down to is “Elemental.” I know it is probably a hot take, but I stand by it. “IF” is not a Pixar movie. It is not even an animated movie. But there are a lot of elements to this project that remind me a lot of what Pixar does best. Taking unlikely beings and flawlessly humanizing them. Going for deep, emotional layers. Using one’s experience from the real world and letting them craft the best story possible out of it. This movie was inspired by John Krasinski’s time as a father and it clearly shows. It reveals what it is like to see your kids grow up. Yes, they’re maturing. Yes, they’re becoming one of a kind human beings, but there is also a loss of childlike innocence. Growing up, to some degree, is where plenty of people look at their dreams and put them aside for whatever reality lies in front of them. In fact, “IF” sort of reminds me of one of my favorite Pixar movies. Particularly, “Inside Out,” which had an imaginary friend character named Bing Bong. Much like “Inside Out,” “IF” does a really good job at highlighting the role that having an imaginary friend can play in a child’s life. But this film also makes an argument as to why we would also need them as adults. When we grow up, we might actually need them more than we ever did before. It would make us feel young. It would make us feel free. It would make us feel happy.
One of my favorite arcs in “IF” has to do with the Grandmother (left), played by Fiona Shaw. We learn a bit about her backstory and interests throughout the picture, including her love for dancing. The way this story plays out breaches into fantasy to some degree, but for this movie’s universe and rules, it absolutely works. This movie is very much about maintaining every bit of that youthful spark you’ve had since you were born and this particular arc is perhaps the movie’s most graceful and dazzling example of that. I loved this character, and Shaw owns the role. Great casting.
Speaking of great casting. This movie does a pretty good job on the IFs, or imaginary friends. These characters are primarily voice roles so we do not see any actors themselves. But I thought Phoebe Waller-Bridge was a particular standout as Blossom, a humanoid butterfly. Emily Blunt does a good job as the Unicorn. Christopher Meloni unleashes some of the film’s more comedic moments as Cosmo, a detective. And Steve Carell gives it his all as Blue, a furry purple monster.
If I had to pick one person I thought would be miscast, it would probably be Awkwafina as Bubble. I like of the concept of her character, which is just a bunch of bubbles that can reconstruct once popped. It’s pretty clever. But I think Awkwafina, despite her clearly not sleepwalking here, continues to show that she somewhat lacks a chameleon nature about her. From my experience, I feel even if Awkwafina is not playing the same character in one movie to the next, she’s riding that line, and she continues to ride that here. I like Awkwafina, I think she is charming in films like “The Farewell” and “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings.” But is she the most disguisable, range-filled actor of her generation? If you are asking me, I would not think so. While we are on the negatives, I mentioned earlier that the movie had me turned off by the comedy shown in the marketing. There is one joke from the trailer revolving around Steve Carell’s Blue that honestly did not work for me. Specifically, the one where Bea is keeping Blue from saying “IFs.” It is about as awkward and as cringeworthy as I expected. But hey, at least this movie did not pull a “Madame Web” and straight up lie to me in the marketing. I thought the joke was odd in the trailer, and also odd in the movie. It feels great not being ripped off!
On that note, when it comes to the live action roles, everyone plays their part well. Cailey Fleming is well cast as the lead. John Krasinski is also doing his best in front of the camera as the Dad. And Ryan Reynolds holds his own as Cal. While this film is not likely going to warrant any high caliber acting awards from these people, Reynolds in particular gives a standout performance because it is a lot different than what I am used to seeing from him. Usually I am used to Reynolds giving portrayals of his characters that lean more on the hyperactive end of the spectrum. This is evident through his efforts in projects like “Deadpool,” “Free Guy,” and “Spirited” for example. If anything, Reynolds’ performance in “IF” reminds a bit of his time in “The Adam Project,” partially because both characters serve as mentor figures to the film’s protagonists. That said, Reynolds seems to bring a much calmer, down to earth presence in this movie. As someone who has seen some of Reynolds’ previous work, I am not used to him toning things down a bit here, but it gives me more respect for him as an actor. Not that I did not have respect for him already, but this project shows a bit of his range.
“IF” also stands out to me from a musical perspective. This film’s score is composed by Michael Giacchino, a composer whose work I admire from films like “The Incredibles,” “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story,” and “The Batman.” “IF” is one of his best scores yet. Because in every moment, it fits the vibe of the picture. It ranges in its nature from being innocent at one point, to straight up bombastic in another. It is kind of like if the theme for “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” had a baby with the score for something much more epic, like “How to Train Your Dragon.” While “Wall-E” might currently be my favorite score from Giacchino, “IF” could honestly compete with that film to the point where it becomes my new top dog from the maestro. I know this is a Paramount movie, so I sort of apologize for the lack of brand synergy, but this is the kind of score that I would dare to blast from my phone if I ever go to Disneyland and make a run for the castle. That is, if it were not crowded there… Nevertheless, there is something about this score that makes me want to reclaim my youth and go back to a simpler time. Giacchino outdid himself here and I will definitely be playing the music in my spare time, perhaps as I write my future reviews.
As mentioned, “IF” is likely going to be one of the year’s best family movies. It is that good. If you have not seen “IF,” make an effort to do so. It is a movie that I would recommend to absolutely anyone. Kids. Teens. Adults. Seniors. Anyone. If you have ever had a human experience, this movie is for you. That said, going to back to my love for “Inside Out,” this movie reminded me of another thought that seems to stick in my mind regarding that film. While kids can definitely watch “Inside Out,” it is hard to know how much kids are going to appreciate it when they are young. I think kids will like the film. It is vibrant, colorful, packed with surprisingly decent humor, and it is a fun adventure. But I think this is a film that will resonate more with adults. I saw this film in a packed theater a week before it officially came out. There were lots of kids, but also plenty of adults. There were instances of the movie where a good amount of people took tissues out. I could hear crying in the audience. And those tears were clearly from adults. This movie seems to have hit these people where they live. I have no idea what the ratio would be when it comes to comparing children who at one point had an imaginary friend as opposed to those who did not. But even if you can go on the record and say you never had an imaginary friend, there is probably something in this movie for you. I did not know what to expect from “IF.” That said, John Krasinski is a mighty fine storyteller. With his range, I cannot wait to see what he does next.
In the end, “IF” is an easy recommendation. Go see this now. Take your family. Take your friends. Take your lover. Go by yourself even! I did! Solo movie outings rule! “IF” is filled to the brim with stunning visuals, clever concepts, and a story that anyone can attach themselves to. There are certain movies that I look back on like “Kung Fu Panda” that I liked as a kid, but have grown to appreciate more as an adult using the experience I have taken with me as I grew up. I am going to be curious to know how today’s kids are going to look back on this movie in a decade or two from now. When you have phenomenal casting, a script that is better than it has any right being, and an overall look to the film that is stupendously easy on the eyes, there is not much else to ask for when it comes to my experience with “IF.” I am going to give “IF” an 8/10.
“IF” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for another family film. “The Garfield Movie!” Look forward to my thoughts on that coming soon! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “I Saw the TV Glow,” “Back to Black,” “Summer Camp,” and “Young Woman and the Sea.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “IF?” What did you think about it? Or, did you have an imaginary friend? I cannot say I ever imagined a friend from scratch if I recall correctly, but I can confirm throughout my life, I have imagined myself being friends with pre-established fictional characters or celebrities. Maybe it kind of shows a weakness in my imagination if you will. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Scene Before 