Jeffrey Wright

The Phoenician Scheme (2025): One of Wes Anderson’s Weakest Films Yet

Posted on by SceneBefore

© Focus Features

“The Phoenician Scheme” is directed by Wes Anderson (The Grand Budapest Hotel, The French Dispatch) and stars Benicio del Toro (Sicario, Star Wars: The Last Jedi), Mia Threapleton (The Buccaneers, I Am…), Michael Cera (Juno, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World), Riz Ahmed (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, Sound of Metal), Tom Hanks (Toy Story, Cast Away), Bryan Cranston (Godzilla, Breaking Bad), Mathieu Amalric (Quantum of Solace, The Grand Budapest Hotel), Richard Ayoade (The Bad Guys, The Watch), Jeffrey Wright (Asteroid City, What If…?), Scarlett Johansson (Black Widow, Sing), Benedict Cumberbatch (The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug, Doctor Strange), Rupert Friend (Hitman: Agent 47, Homeland), and Hope Davis (Asteroid City, Greenland). This film is about Zsa-zsa Korda, a wealthy businessman who appoints his daughter as the heir to his estate. During his search for a new enterprise, the two become the target of assassins, terrorists, and tycoons.

Courtesy of TPS Productions/Focus Features – © 2025

Even noticeably solid directors have at least one dud on their resume. Steven Spielberg has “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.” Joel Schumacher has “Batman & Robin.” Meanwhile, for Wes Anderson, his dud would be his most recent film, “Asteroid City,” which despite its technical mastery and somewhat intriguing concept, had uninteresting characters, boring scenes, and a lackluster ending. I like Wes Anderson. Just read my reviews for “Isle of Dogs” and “The French Dispatch.”

There is a saying that you are only as good as your last project, so with “Asteroid City” somewhat fresh in my mind, I went into “The Phoenician Scheme” with moderate at best expectations. When the movie started, I was pleasantly surprised. Unfortunately, that feeling fizzled real fast.

Courtesy of TPS Productions/Focus Features – © 2025

“The Phoenician Scheme” has a fantastic hook. The movie starts with a plane crash, which apparently is one of several our protagonist has gone through. In that same scene, not even thirty seconds in, someone’s head gets blown off and flies out into the sky. Very exciting stuff! Having a solid beginning can lead to promise down the road. First impressions matter, and this movie impressed me right off the bat. But I would say that this scene is where the movie peaked. Because what follows is a complete and utter disappointment of a snoozefest some like to call a motion picture.

It did not take long for me after finishing “The Phoenician Scheme” to declare that it might be my least favorite of Wes Anderson’s filmography. I still have yet to see “The Royal Tenenbaums” and “The Darjeeling Limited,” but from his work that I have seen so far, this is probably the one that I can say is the weakest. And that is sad, because I was not a huge fan of “Asteroid City.” Much like “Asteroid City,” there are things to like in “The Phoenician Scheme,” but the film itself underwhelmed me. I knew what I was getting out of this film to a certain degree given its director. If you like Wes Anderson’s quirky style, good news, it can be found here. But I simply wish there was a little more substance to accompany it.

Most of my positives regarding “The Phoenician Scheme” have to do with the film’s technical aspects. This film, to my lack of surprise, has stunning production design. The color choices of all the surroundings are meticulously chosen and easy on the eyes. Everything in the frame feels organized. The film makes the most of its 4:3 aspect ratio that Wes Anderson has previously used in films like “The French Dispatch” or “The Grand Budapest Hotel.” Despite its consistent vibrance, the film has an old timey feel to it. Even with the score sometimes, which is another tour de force from Alexandre Desplat. The music commands your attention and is up there with “Isle of Dogs” as one of my favorites in a Wes Anderson film.

Courtesy of TPS Productions/Focus Features – © 2025

Watching “The Phoenician Scheme” is like going to an art museum but you are consistently bored or unamused by every single exhibit. Yes, this film looks extravagant and is obviously well done, but is it worth my time? Judging by my repeated urge to fall asleep in the auditorium, I do not think so. As easy on the eyes and ears as “The Phoenician Scheme” is, I wish I could have used those eyes and ears to see and hear something much more valuable.

As a director, Wes Anderson is undeniably quirky. Part of his quirkiness shines through the performances he gets out of his actors. Like some of his other films, his unique way of getting actors to deliver dialogue tends to stand out. There is something about their lines, at least to me, that lacks realism, but nevertheless tends to work in the environment of his films. Watching “The Phoenician Scheme” however, the dialogue comes off as stiff and stilted. Every line feels as if the characters are reading off their finest essays rather than speaking off the cuff or acting like genuine human beings. Seriously! Every other line in this film feels disappointingly robotic!

To make matters worse, this film, like some of Wes Anderson’s previous work, has a stacked, talented cast. If you were to ask a friend who their favorite actor is, chances are their pick is in this movie! Everyone from Benecio del Toro to Tom Hanks to Scarlett Johansson to Benedict Cumberbatch to Bryan Cranston! This movie is kind of like “Amsterdam” with a pinch more polish!

Courtesy of TPS Productions/Focus Features – © 2025

The worst offender among the cast for me is Michael Cera, seen above doing his best Adam Conover cosplay. For the record, I like Michael Cera. I am a big “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World” fan. And his performance here somewhat reminded me of his performance in that film. They are not the same on the surface, but when it comes to direction and vision, they feel like they strictly belong in their respective universes. That sounds like a good thing, but in the case of “The Phoenician Scheme,” I was bewildered as to some of the choices they made regarding Cera’s character of Bjørn. Cera unleashes a voice for his character that got on my nerves real fast. The more he talked, the more I wanted to melt my brain.

That said, this film is also shaping up to Mia Threapleton’s (right) big break. For those who do not know, Mia Threapleton is Kate Winslet’s daughter. She was in a few projects before this film, but this is my first time seeing her in a role. She did a great job as Sister Liesl. And I do not mean that by nepotism standards. I got the impression that she could potentially have a career as successful as her mother. She is very talented.

I am by no means a Wes Anderson newbie. I have an understanding that he tends to stylize his dialogue, frame objects or people in the most still-like manner possible, and beautify the background so much to the point where it becomes a character of it own. Anderson is a noticeably a visionary director. He is an auteur. But if anything this is a film that so is overwhelmingly packed with Wes Anderson’s style that he prioritized it before characterization and pacing. As I watched this film, I barely felt anything. I did not care much about the characters, even if they are conceptually interesting. The story occasionally reeked of convolution. Overall, I left this film unsatisfied.

Courtesy of TPS Productions/Focus Features – © 2025

In the end, “The Phoenician Scheme” is a complete bore. One can argue that this film feels like something that only Wes Anderson can do. But if that is the case, that is disappointing because what this film ended up being was a slow, albeit pretty looking espionage story that I won’t even remember in the next year. If you want to watch a good Wes Anderson movie go back and watch “Rushmore.” Go watch “Fantastic Mr. Fox.” Heck, even his earliest feature film, “Bottle Rocket,” was quite fun. If this was my first Wes Anderson film, chances are I would not be looking forward to what he has up his sleeve next. I am going to give “The Phoenician Scheme” a 3/10.

“The Phoenician Scheme” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “The Life of Chuck!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “Materialists” and “Elio.” If you want to see 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 Phoenician Scheme?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a bad film from a filmmaker whose work you traditionally like? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

W. (2008): No Review Left Behind

Posted on by SceneBefore

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! It is time for the second review in my Election Days series! Today we are going to be talking about “W.,” starring Josh Brolin. The film is about the life of the controversial leader George W. Bush. It features a stacked cast and is helmed by a filmmaker whose respectable track record includes other films having to do with U.S. politicians such as “JFK.” Does this 2008 film earn a Texas-sized thumbs up? Or does “W.” take the L? Here are my thoughts…

“W.” is directed by Oliver Stone (World Trade Center, JFK) and stars Josh Brolin (No Country for Old Men, American Gangster), Elizabeth Banks (Slither, Spider-Man), Ellen Burstyn (The Exorcist, The Last Picture Show), James Cromwell (Babe, The Artist), Richard Dreyfuss (Jaws, American Graffiti), Scott Glenn (Urban Cowboy, The Right Stuff), Toby Jones (Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, The Mist), Stacy Keach (American Greed, Titus), Bruce McGill (Collateral, MacGyver), Thandiwe Newton (Mission: Impossible II, ER), and Jeffrey Wright (Angels in America, The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles). This film centers around the life of George W. Bush, the man who would become the 43rd President of the United States.

Like him or not, George W. Bush is an important U.S. President in my lifetime. Not because I agreed with his policies or because I liked him. Perhaps second to George Washington, maybe Abraham Lincoln, W. Bush is the earliest President I remember hearing about at some point in my life. Of course, with me being a child during the entirety of his two-term run, I did not immediately know the various aspects of his time in office that people talk about even today such as how he was President during the 9-11 attacks, No Child Left Behind, his response to Hurricane Katrina, his involvement in the Iraq War, and so on. The movie does not go deep into all of that, but it does not mean it is not a contained story. In fact, I would say I was surprised with how engaged I was with the film itself.

For the record, this is my second Oliver Stone film. I previously watched “Wall Street.” A film that I think does a really good job at capturing the hustle and bustle of the stock market and how much of a sport capitalism can be. So if you want me to compare this film to Stone’s other flicks involving U.S. Presidents, particularly “JFK” and “Nixon,” consider yourself disappointed. All I can say is that “W.” was better than I thought it would be. Though I really should not be surprised. It contains tons of great actors, moves at a brisk pace, and features several engaging characters.

The one thing I will say though about this movie, is that I wonder how people who do not know anything about George W. Bush, his family, or maybe live outside the U.S. would take this film. This movie came out in 2008. W. Bush was still in office at the time, making this is a topical picture during its release. I will let you be the judge as to whether 16 years is a long time, but that is how long it has been since this film has come out. There are people in high school right now who were born around the time Barack Obama first became President. I am not going to pretend I have the strongest opinions on W. Bush’s time in office because as I said before, he was President during my youth. During that time in my life, I was more concerned as to when would the next time I was going to Outback Steakhouse as opposed to the state of the economy. The film dives into the days leading up to Bush’s decision to invade Iraq and I am sure even a number of younger people who may end up watching the movie today would probably have an opinion on it. But such a topic is probably not going to have the same impact on those who vividly remember living through that time in history. At times, this feels like a 2008 film that was specifically made for a 2008 audience. I am not insulting those audiences, just to be clear. Those same audiences also got to witness timeless cinema like “Wall-E” and “Slumdog Millionaire.” But would “W.” hit the same way for today’s generation? Hard to say.

That said, the film is still quite universal in its story. It dives into W. Bush’s relationship with his father, which I thought was one of the best parts of this movie. Even though W. Bush comes from a family with a storied legacy, his relationship with his father is something I think a lot of people can relate to. Because we all have parents, and deep down, most of us want to do anything that will keep us from breaking their hearts. The two have a steady connection, but it is not perfect. Nor is it without rules.

My favorite deep dive in the film has to do with George W. Bush’s relationship with alcohol. We see how much drinking impacts his life in terms of the choices he makes, how it affects his relationships with other people, and his overall stability. The movie tends to present alcohol as an obstacle that keeps W. Bush from potential success. We notice as W. Bush ages and becomes more accomplished, mainly in politics, he gives it up. The movie shows how much drinking holds W. Bush back and how him giving it up seems to correlate with his achievements.

As for the performance of George W. Bush (right) himself, I have to say Josh Brolin did a good job in the role. Never once did I feel Brolin was trying to do an impression of the character. He kind of made the performance his own. He was bold in his presence and consistently commanding from scene to scene. Is it the greatest performance of a U.S. President in film history? No it is not. But to be fair, it is hard to compare with Daniel Day-Lewis as the lead of “Lincoln,” a film that came out four years later. In fact, during the same year “W.” was released, audiences were also treated to “Frost/Nixon,” and I would argue Frank Langella did an even better job as the titular leader in that film.

The supporting cast in this film also manages to put their best foot forward. Elizabeth Banks is a standout as Laura Bush. Richard Dreyfuss does a good job as Dick Cheney. And I thought James Cromwell as George H.W. Bush (right) was excellent casting. Across the board, I cannot name a single performance in “W.” I did not like.

But I have to give props not only to Josh Brolin for having the presence one would expect of a flawed but charming leader, but also to the writer of this film, Stanley Weiser, for bringing some decent material to the screen. Unfortunately, it is not all perfect. Despite the film never once feeling boring, it is a tad bewildering at times. The film comes off like I am in history class, and we are doing a unit on the Bush era of politics, whether that is W.’s time or his father’s, maybe with a brief cameo from Jeb here and there. But the unit does not have a clear path. It kind of jumps from place to place and it is not that organized. I guess in a way you can call “W.” a nicely laid out mess. Because I understand the film and what was presented to me. The final product did not melt my brain. I am just not sure if maybe the specific non-linear route the story took was as compelling as it was trying to be.

In the end, “W.” is not a movie I intend to watch again within the next year, but it is one I can definitely see myself revisiting at some point in my life. Again, I am a bit of a novice when it comes to Oliver Stone. “W.” just happens to be a third film in his trilogy revolving around U.S. Presidents. Given how I enjoyed “W.,” it makes me want to go back at check out “JFK” and “Nixon” should the chance ever come up. Is this movie for everyone? Probably not. It is about a controversial leader, so therefore I would not expect it to be for everyone. But it has the hallmarks of a good movie. Decent storytelling, good acting, solid production, and while it is a bit jumbled, I did appreciate Oliver Stone’s vision and what he brought to the table. I am going to give “W.” a 7/10.

“W.” is now available on DVD, Blu-ray, and on VOD. As of this writing, the film is available to stream on Peacock to all subscribers, and can be watched for free on Tubi, Philo, and the Roku Channel.

Thanks for reading this review! My next entry to the Election Days series is going to be for “On the Basis of Sex,” a film about Ruth Bader Ginsberg, the second woman to serve as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. 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 “W.?” What did you think about it? Or, do you have a favorite Oliver Stone film? Which of his U.S. President movies would you say is your favorite? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

American Fiction (2023): Cord Jefferson’s Directorial Debut Balances Humor and Emotion with Excellence

Posted on by SceneBefore

“American Fiction” is directed by Cord Jefferson and this is his directorial debut. The film stars Jeffrey Wright (Asteroid City, What If…?), Tracee Ellis Ross (Black-ish, The High Note), John Ortiz (Fast & Furious, Clyde Goes Boating), Erika Alexander (The Cosby Show, Living Single), Leslie Uggams (Roots, Deadpool), Adam Brody (Shazam!, Ready or Not), Issa Rae (Barbie, Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse), and Sterling K. Brown (This Is Us, Army Wives). This film is about an author who creates a satirical book under a pen name that becomes bigger than anyone, even he, could have imagined.

As we approach the end of the 2023 film awards season, it is time to discuss a movie that may not be a frontrunner to win all the Oscars this year, but one that has had a respectable share of spotlight. I knew about a lot of movies coming out towards the year’s end, but “American Fiction” was one that kind of came out of nowhere for me. It took me a couple trailer watches, mentions from social circles, and online pundits to drill the title in my head, but the whole idea of the film was something that I could get behind. It looked funny, well-acted, and well-written. Thankfully, when it comes to my expectations, this film hits all three of those checkmarks. The humor is great. The acting is great. The screenplay is great. And what makes all of this even better is that the director of this film, Cord Jefferson, is making this picture his debut.

According to his IMDb page, Cord Jefferson has never once directed anything else before “American Fiction.” This includes other features. This includes shorts. This includes television. Up until now, Jefferson has had a hand in television producing and writing. His resume includes “Master of None,” “Watchmen,” and “The Good Place,” the latter of which I have watched and find quite hilarious. It got me through my recovery after getting my wisdom teeth removed so I feel like I owe something to the people who made that show. And now Jefferson his taking his TV talents and using them to deliver one of 2023’s funniest films.

The ensemble for “American Fiction” can do no wrong. From the commanding, but not quite in your face presence of Jeffrey Wright, to the quality charisma of Tracee Ellis Ross to the flamboyant glory of Issa Rae, the latter of whom makes me imagine that she could eventually become one of my favorite performers in the near future. I thought Rae was a standout in “Barbie.” But she is a different kind of great here. Honestly, I almost cannot see anyone else playing her character. She does a great job not only having a hypnotic presence from scene one, but when we see her read her book, she does a great job at immersing me into the scene and feeling as if I am not only getting to hear the book, but maybe also getting some speck of imagination to the point where I would be mistaken to believe the events of the book are actually playing out in front of me.

As I have grown older, one of things I continue to appreciate about movies is the very idea of how people can take something and deliver a primarily visual experience, but if you have to ask me, “American Fiction’s” greatest asset has to be its dialogue. There are several lines from this film that are contenders to be some of the year’s best. I don’t think any of them will have as monumental of an impact as “Oppenheimer‘s” final line, “I believe we did,” but when it comes to individual lines, there is one quote from the main character that is funny, not only because of its delivery, but because regardless of its context, the more I think about it, the more I feel it applies to some aspects of modern society. Specifically, “The dumber I behave, the richer I get.” In fact, some would say this line even links to how entertainment works nowadays. There seems to be a consensus that we keep making entertainment, whether it is through movies, television, or in this movie’s case, books, arguably for the lowest common denominator. In fact, that falls in line with the main protagonist’s goal as well, because the film follows his journey as an author who cares about and finds passion in what he does, even though he does not have the widest audience. But the more he panders to a demographic or lie about himself, the more successful he becomes.

As for other standouts, the film itself looks beautiful. This film is shot by Cristina Dunlap. Cinematography-wise, it is not the top dog of the year, but it is sometimes enchanting to look at. The film is packed with a variety of eye-popping exterior shots. I may be biased because I am from Massachusetts and this movie is set around various areas I have been to around the state, but I can say that when it comes to showcasing those areas on camera, I will not deny that the showcase itself is rather pleasing. But the film is not just easy on the eyes, but also the ears. Laura Karpman’s score is quite good. It fits every scene well.

While this film may not win Best Picture at the Oscars this year, that said, you never know, it could pull an upset… I will say when it comes to this year’s slate, particularly the movies that are going for the heavy-hitting awards, this film gets some things right that I would say “Barbie” also gets right. Specifically the vibes and tone, mixed together with the overall look of the film. In some sense, “American Fiction” is a down to earth story about people you could probably find in our society, but it also comes off with this slight sense of fantasy. It is hard to describe, but I appreciated it.

I also must note that when I remember this film, I will remember it well for the laughs I had. The smiles I had. But it is a pretty balanced movie in terms of emotion. When we get to know Thelonious’s family, we also get to know his mother, who we find out has Alzheimer’s. While I will affirm the film is not quite as memorable as “Everything Everywhere All at Once,” when you take the main idea of “American Fiction” and combine it with this Alzheimer’s subplot, the two films feel similar tonally. Because “Everything Everywhere All at Once” had tons of multiversal shenanigans, but you also have an intriguing subplot that is more down to earth like the turmoil between multiple family relationships. As for the subplot itself, I thought it was handled with grace and it unleashed a great performance out of Leslie Uggams (right). In terms of story and characters, what “American Fiction” provides on the surface, is intriguing. That said, there is more to it that paints a pretty picture.

In the end, “American Fiction” is unpredictable, exciting, and hilarious. When it comes to commentary, this is one of 2023’s finest works. But it also does something equally as important. Entertain. Once again, this is the first film from Cord Jefferson, and I honestly cannot wait to see what he does next. It is not just a good time, it is a great time. And I think you will have a great time should you decide to watch this film. Not the best of 2023, but it gets a lot of things right. When it comes to flaws, they do exist. I will remember some aspects of this film more than others. Some scenes feel a tad abrupt in terms of flow. But there’s nothing game-breaking. As for my score, I am going to give “American Fiction” a high 7/10, and honestly if I were to watch it a second time, it could go up.

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

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, I have more where that came from! Pretty soon I am going to have reviews for “Lisa Frankenstein,” “Madame Web,” “Bob Marley: One Love,” “Drive-Away Dolls” and my most anticipated movie this year, “Dune Part Two.” Also, if you have a lot of time on your hands and you want to find what films defined the art form in 2023, check out the 6th Annual Jack Awards, possibly the biggest waste of time in your entire life. Who knows? If you want to see more great content like this, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “American Fiction?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite directorial debut? I don’t have a concrete answer, but I recently rewatched “Deadpool” over Valentine’s Day, because what other movie would I watch?! That was Tim Miller’s first feature film and it ended up being one of the funniest I have ever seen. If you have an answer of your own, say it down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Batman (2022): The Longest Sight of the Darkest Knight

Posted on by SceneBefore

“The Batman” is directed by Matt Reeves (Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Cloverfield) and stars Robert Pattinson (Twilight, The Lighthouse), Zoë Kravitz (Mad Max: Fury Road, X-Men: First Class), Paul Dano (Little Miss Sunshine, There Will Be Blood), Jeffrey Wright (The French Dispatch, Westworld), John Turturro (Transformers, The Big Lebowski), Peter Sarsgaard (Dopesick, Green Lantern), Andy Serkis (The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, Star Wars: The Force Awakens), and Colin Farrell (Total Recall, The Lobster). This film is the umpteenth reboot/remake/cash cow on a platter of the Caped Crusader. And I assume Warner Brothers already happens to have three more in development. This time around, Robert Pattinson plays Batman, or Vengeance, it can go either way at this point, who is forced to chase down the Riddler (Paul Dano) and follow himself down the rabbit hole to determine his family’s involvement in Gotham’s ongoing crime.

My excitement for “The Batman” was always something I kept in my head. And unlike other superhero stories in recent months like “The Suicide Squad” or “Eternals,” I had those expectations at a moderate level, but not at one that made me feel somewhat pessimistic. If you want a fair comparison, I would say it is almost equal to the excitement I had for “Shang-Chi” before all the reviews came out. I was immersed into the trailers we were given, and looking forward to seeing how Matt Reeves could potentially pull off a “Batman” movie that speaks to a 2022 audience.

While I will admit I think there are days where “The Dark Knight” may get a tad too much hype, I have always admired the film. I thought it was the definitive comic book film that delivered a little bit of fun, a little bit of dark, and a whole lot of epic. Christopher Nolan’s direction and Hans Zimmer’s score definitely add to the scope and vibe of the film. I would have been happy if “The Batman” were half as good as the “The Dark Knight” because even in that case, it would be a good movie.

Now “The Batman,” per my opinion, is no “The Dark Knight,” but it is a watchable film. And like “The Dark Knight,” the tone is incredibly set by the music, perhaps more effectively than the 2008 counterpart. Michael Giacchino’s score, even in its more subtle moments, feels prominent and difficult to ignore. Now unlike “The Dark Knight,” which I think has a really good opening scene, I think the opening scene of “The Batman” does a much better job at measuring the tone and stakes of everything at hand. This film’s introduction to the Riddler is chill-inducing, and almost horror-like. Granted, this movie does take place on Halloween, hence the Long Halloween inspiration.

Now, Batman and Spider-Man are often seen as two of the most popular heroes of all time. So much so that their characters reboot almost on the frequency of Tom Brady winning Super Bowls. Similar to seeing a couple movies where Peter Parker, AKA Spider-Man, loses his uncle, we also have seen a couple movies where Bruce Wayne, AKA Batman, loses his parents. “The Batman” takes the MCU or “Spider-Man: Homecoming” route and skips the deaths of Wayne’s parents. For a movie like this, I like this approach. Partially because it allows us to get straight into the character of Batman, whose first main scene in this movie provides one of the grittiest action sequences the character has gone through, and also because THIS MOVIE IS SO FREAKING LONG!

Maybe I should not have said that. This is not the longest Halloween–err I mean, longest comic book movie I have sat through. “Avengers: Endgame” was over three hours. But the reason why “Avengers: Endgame,” to me, gets away with its three hour runtime is because I have realized more and more over the years that it is not necessarily a matter of how long a movie is, but how long it feels when it comes to keeping me entertained. I cannot tell you how many times I have watched “Blade Runner 2049” from start to finish. That movie is two hours and forty-four minutes, which by today’s standards, is rather long. It flies by every single time I watch it. However, there were one or two moments when I watched “The Batman” and thought, “When’s the credits? Why aren’t they popping up yet?” I feel like this movie could have been better paced if they shaved off 5, 10, even 20 minutes. I do think the slow burn feel fits the narrative and characters at hand, but it also almost made me want to fall asleep.

But I’ll tell you what didn’t make me fall asleep…

ONE OF THE BEST CAR CHASES IN YEARS!

It’s been a few years since I have seen a truly exciting, immersive, compelling car chase. The last one that comes to mind is from 2018 during “Ready Player One,” where we keep transitioning from the real world to the virtual world where the people are driving and Wade is trying to get the key in the hole. The chase between Batman and the Penguin sent chills down my spine from frame one. For starters, the sound in this chase is some of the most heart-pumping I heard in a recent movie. I knew how amazing this chase would be ever since I saw the trailers, and I was not wrong. That moment where Colin Farrell, who looks almost unrecognizable as Penguin, shouts to himself, followed by the Batmobile’s reveal behind him, provides for pure satisfaction. Speaking of which, as soon as the Batmobile flicks on, I knew I was in for one of the boldest, almost self-transition into slow motion moments in recent film history. You know that feeling when you are out on the street and see someone so attractive that you’ve never seen before, it’s like time almost stops when you are taking every moment in.

And I think a lot of these slow, bold, yet exciting moments would not happen, or would be less likely to happen if this were not the first story we saw with Robert Pattinson’s interpretation of Batman. There’s a first time for everything, and we might as well let this first time last as long as possible. Speaking of Robert Pattinson, let’s talk about him.

Let me be clear on something. I have NEVER seen “Twlight” or its sequels. I also have never read the books. Some might say I am a better person for not partaking in these stories. I know Robert Pattinson, prior to suiting up for Batman, was perhaps a teenage heartthrob in those films, which gives him a bit of an image that some may think will hinder the film. Similar to One Direction’s Harry Styles in “Dunkirk,” put those thoughts aside because “The Batman” supports the notion that Pattinson is committed to what he does and that he is a genuinely great thespian. And if you do not believe me. Watch “Good Time,” where his performance partially adds up to a good time. Watch “Tenet,” he’s practically my favorite character in the film in terms of line delivery. And PLEASE. PLEASE. Watch “The Lighthouse.” SOOO GOOD. I was not one of these people, but I had maybe a friend or two who despite Robert Pattinson’s continuous career buildup, still felt skeptical of this film’s quality partially because of Pattinson’s past in the “Twilight” series. Either that or Bruce’s emo look, which admittedly works for me. Don’t worry. Pattinson IS Batman. Both literally and figuratively.

Unlike say Ben Affleck or Christian Bale where the difference between Bruce Wayne and Batman is often very clear, I feel like this interpretation of Batman leaves the character of Bruce Wayne, who technically still exists, almost in the background entirely. I don’t mean this in a bad way, because this shows how much Wayne himself has been consumed by the Bat. You know that theory that people have about children? The one where they apparently see something in a video game and decide it is okay to do in real life? While this is not exactly a complete replica of that, Pattinson’s interpretation reminds me of that because of how much Bruce and the Bat have basically become one with each other.

So please? Can we stop already? Can we stop making fun of Robert Pattinson? He’s a genuinely good actor, and he can show that. Matt Reeves accentuates that with his eye-popping and marvelous direction. So let’s get back to talking about the more important things…

Like THE SLAP AT THE OSCAR–Ooohh wait, wait, wait, never mind.

I will also add that Robert Pattinson is not the only standout here performance-wise, Zoe Kravitz makes a fine addition to the movie as Catwoman, and her presence is as commanding as can be. Her chemistry with Pattinson is spot on. Speaking of spot on, aside from maybe Pattinson, I’d say the best performance in the movie probably goes to none other than Paul Dano. I never thought much about Dano as an actor much before “The Batman” came out, but he’s been one of the few things I could not stop thinking about once this movie ended. And this goes back to what I said about the film’s opening scene where we first see the Riddler. They say a movie is only as good as its villain, and they also say that first impressions matter. The Riddler killed it in this film, and had my attention throughout because of that first scene. Every other moment, he kept that same maniacal vibe up. This interpretation of the Riddler is not my favorite Batman on-screen translation ever, but it is up there. And that is part of why this movie is worth watching. Not just for Batman himself, but the people he runs into along the way.

In the end, “The Batman” is the best comic book movie of the year! Why is that? Well, partially because “Morbius” exists. And that’s another story for another time. But I’ll be real with you. There are plenty of “Batman” movies out there, ranging from standalones to crossovers. Out of the many Batman stories that exist on screen, this is not the first one I would pick to watch on a Friday night. Replay value-wise, this movie is not high on my list. But I also think it is beautifully made. It encapsulates a dark vibe that feels modern, but also brings us a masked hero who maybe had much of his personality altered because of his transition. I like that idea brought to the table, and I would not mind seeing a sequel at some point. I am going to give “The Batman” a 7/10.

“The Batman” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now. The film will be available to stream on HBO Max starting April 19th.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for Pixar’s “Turning Red,” the brand new animated film that is now streaming on Disney+ for free as long as you are subscribed! Also, stay tuned for my thoughts on “Morbius!” I gave a little tease, but we shall dive deeper at some point! If you want to see this and more on Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, be sure to like the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Batman?” What did you think about it? Or, who plays the best on-screen Batman? Is it Keaton? Bale? Kevin Conroy? Someone else? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The French Dispatch (2021): Wes Anderson Spreads the News

Posted on by SceneBefore

Characters! Characters everywhere!

“The French Dispatch” is directed by Wes Anderson (The Grand Budapest Hotel, Rushmore) and stars Benicio del Toro (Star Wars: The Last Jedi, The Usual Suspects), Adrien Brody (King Kong, Predators), Tilda Swinton (Doctor Strange, The Deep End), Léa Seydoux (Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol, Spectre), Frances McDormand (Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, Fargo), Timothee Chalamet (Interstellar, Little Women), Lyna Khoudri (Papicha, The Specials), Jeffrey Wright (Casino Royale, What If…?), Mathieu Amalric (Quantum of Solace, Sound of Metal), Steve Park (Do the Right Thing, Warrior), Bill Murray (Ghostbusters, Stripes), and Owen Wilson (Loki, Cars). This film is a compilation of a few different written stories brought to life, all of which are told in The French Dispatch.

It’s been nearly a month since I watched this film, but before I went in, I’ve seen a number of Wes Anderson’s flicks. Much like Quentin Tarantino, Anderson has a distinct directorial style that I have not seen from anyone else. He shoots a number of his films with shots containing vibrant colors up the wazoo. One of his more recent pictures, “The Grand Budapest Hotel,” which I enjoyed, shows a mix of aspect ratios from 4:3 to traditional scope widescreen. He has a flair to his work that if I were a director I almost want to resist at the risk of being deemed a copycat. But just because his quirks are obviously present in his directorial style, does not mean that the story in his films are sacrificed. Months ago, I put on “Moonrise Kingdom” for the first time and safe to say, I really enjoyed the connection the two main kids had with one another. The writing had this feel to it that explained everything you needed to know, but felt satisfyingly minimalistic. I don’t really have another way to describe it.

I was rather excited for “The French Dispatch.” I thought the marketing was decent, and hopefully it would be worth the wait after COVID-19 pushed this film back, just like everything else. Having seen it, I honestly think it is on the lower tier of Wes Anderson’s library. This does not say much however, because much like Christopher Nolan and Pixar, an inferior movie from Wes Anderson is still a movie many would kill to make. “The French Dispatch” is interestingly told because it’s not exactly one story, it’s a story that influenced the display of other stories. It kind of reminded me of the “Treehouse of Horror” specials that “The Simpsons” do every Halloween, although in this case it’s not the same characters in each story. I say that because the film is essentially a few different stories all told in the same newspaper. Each one has its set of main subjects, and they’re all after different goals. I kind of like this style of storytelling because there are a lot of movies that I watch nowadays where you have one character and their goals, everything feels very important. This feels lighthearted and fun, but it’s also not over the top. At the end of the day, the movie’s goal is to make the viewer have fun, which I did. Although that also brings in a minor complaint, even though there are characters that sew all the stories together, “The French Dispatch” does not have a specific character that I can look back on and remember as the center of the story, at least one that is particularly interesting when it comes to those at the French Dispatch. And frankly, even though these characters have their quirks, some of which may be due to Wes Anderson’s directing style, there is not one I can say I loved more than any other. This movie has so many characters that it’s hard to keep track of all of them. It especially does not help when you’re reviewing the movie nearly a month after seeing it.

Although just because there are so many characters that it makes the cast for a “Lord of the Rings” movie look small, does not mean that I did not enjoy any of the three stories. All of them were in fact, very good. I was delighted by all of them. The Concrete Masterpiece, which is a pretty creative title, is an interesting look at an artist who has to do time while also focusing on his work. Although of the few main stories, it was probably my least favorite. Revision to a Manifesto was wonderfully quirky, very Wes Anderson-esque. I loved the idea of a chessboard revolution, I would have never thought of that. Then again, I never play chess. If you put me in front of a chess board and it was my turn, I’d just slap the opponent’s pieces off the board and shout “Yay! I win!”

I would never fare well in a chess tournament.

The Private Dining Room with the Police Commissioner, which was the final story told of the bunch, was also a ridiculously entertaining piece of writing brought to life (even if it is fiction). I also think they did a good job at segmenting these stories in a certain way, because if you watch the movie, the real thing that connects all these stories together is the fact that they are presented in the same news outlet and are set in similar spots. There is not one specific story that has a main character that is directly tied to another, so they could have played around with all of them in whatever order they choose, but I think in terms of giving this film a satisfying conclusion, this final story was the best one, because not only is it, for what I recall, probably the most action-packed of all the stories presented, but it ends in such a way that is fitting for a finale. Not the story itself, but the aftermath of it where the people are talking about it. I will not go into detail about it, because I would rather have you see the movie yourself and be entertained by it.

If I had anything else to say about the film, I do think it did a good job with both the costuming and makeup. For the record, this film came out in a limited number of theaters the same weekend “Dune” had its wide release, so I got to see Timothee Chalamet (right) in two films on the same weekend. I could tell who Timothee Chalamet was on screen, but at times, at least from my eyes, he did not look like his real self. He looked like he could actually age a bit. But at times he’d also revert back to someone younger. It’s hard to describe. His outfit felt distinguished and he looked like he had his hair done a bit. His outlook was striking, and maybe having “Dune” come out at the same time had something to do with it, but it caught my attention nevertheless.

In the end, “The French Dispatch” is a delightful film that even though it is not Wes Anderson’s best work, is one I am looking back on with a smile. To be frank, as I wrote this review, I thought it would be fun to maybe watch it a second time. Maybe not in a theater, unless nothing else was out and I wanted to use my A-List for a free film. Either way, Wes Anderson made a delightful movie. The cast is incredible, although I wish I remembered all the characters. Although maybe that’s the advantage of a repeat viewing in this case. There’s so many characters, that they can only be appreciated in multiple viewings. I’m going to give “The French Dispatch” a 7/10.

“The French Dispatch” is now playing in theaters everywhere.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, be sure to look forward to my reviews for “Last Night in Soho,” “Eternals,” “Ron’s Gone Wrong,” and “King Richard.” I cannot wait to get these reviews out for you all. I was gonna go see “Ghostbusters: Afterlife” this weekend, although I don’t know if I have the time. I was planning on seeing it with a couple other people, but it’s more or less a matter of what time works for them, as opposed to me. So a review may be coming, but I won’t be seeing it right now. If you want to see this and more on Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or a WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The French Dispatch?” What did you think about it? Or, since I brought it up… What is your favorite “Treehouse of Horror” segment from “The Simpsons?” My favorite would probably have to be “Citizen Kang,” the one that coincided with the 1996 U.S. Presidential Election. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

No Time to Die (2021): It’s a Good Time to Watch Daniel Craig’s Bond Swan Song

Posted on by SceneBefore

“No Time to Die,” a film that was literally scheduled to come out a year and a half ago mind you, so there really was still some time to die between then and now, is directed by Cary Joji Fukanaga (Maniac, Beasts of No Nation) and stars Daniel Craig (Knives Out, Logan Lucky) in his fifth and final portrayal of James Bond. Joining him this time around is Rami Malek (Bohemian Rhapsody, Night at the Museum), Léa Seydoux (Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol, Midnight in Paris), Lashana Lynch (Still Star-Crossed, Captain Marvel), Ben Whishaw (A Very English Scandal, Fargo), Naomie Harris (Venom: Let There Be Carnage, Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest) Jeffrey Wright (What If…?, Westworld), Christoph Waltz (Inglorious Basterds, Django Unchained), and Ralph Fiennes (Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, The LEGO Batman Movie). This film is once again, Daniel Craig’s last outing as James Bond, the suave 007 spy who this time around, is retired, he’s done with his life as a spy, but when an old colleague asks for help, Bond takes on the job and finds himself down a path toward a villain who will unleash hell to the world with weapons of mass destruction.

Bond. James Bond. These are words that probably come to everyone’s mind when they think of the iconic 007 intellectual property. This is the last time we can associate them with Daniel Craig, who has not only done a great job at portraying the spy since “Casino Royale,” but as of recently, has also been the symbol of letting you know when the work week is over.

Exquisite.

I will admit, as excited as I was to see Daniel Craig give a goodbye to the character we’ve come to know for so many years, I was also a little nervous. The front of my head, all excited and ready to go, was doing cartwheels. Meanwhile, the back of my head, all nervous and timid, was shivering. Part of me wondered if Daniel Craig genuinely wanted to make a fifth Bond title or if he was just showing up for the paycheck. Thankfully, the trailers for this film put those worries away as each one is as action packed as the next. Each time this film got pushed back, it made me slightly more eager to see it to witness whether the thing I was bound to see was actually worth the wait. The film had more that intrigued me on the surface aside from Daniel Craig. Ana de Armas, one of the most objectively attractive and talented actresses working in Hollywood right now, plays a role in the film as well, and this is not even her first outing with Daniel Craig as they both played key roles in 2019’s “Knives Out,” which is one of the most fun films I have watched in recent years. The film was also shot in IMAX 70mm, which kind of didn’t matter in the end as it didn’t play anywhere in the format in which it was shot, but I saw the film in IMAX and those scenes are well put together, even if audiences will not usually be able to fully realize them. This is just speculation and pregame, so how was the film?

Everyone is going to have their personal rankings of the Daniel Craig Bond films. If it were me, I would put “No Time To Die” somewhere in the middle, which is not a bad thing, because based on the decent track record these films have, “No Time To Die” is a fun film to watch and just so happens to be a lovely tribute to the Daniel Craig era by the time it is over. For the most part, the film does not necessarily feel like a finale through the first act, I’d say you get more of that feel through the second and third act. I don’t mind that. Even though the film ends in one of the most climactic ways it could possibly go out, the feeling of this being the end never came off as forced.

We’ll skip Daniel Craig’s performance for a second, we’ll get to it. But going back to Ana De Armas, I think of all the film’s supporting characters, she was the most fun to watch. I may say this with a predisposed bias as I love the actress. I have been excited to see almost anything she’s in since “Blade Runner 2049,” but her character may be the most fun in the movie. I say that because she is genuinely HAVING THE MOST FUN in the movie. There is a scene that takes place in Cuba where she and Bond meet, they get dressed, get ready, and she’s just spewing out the fact, smilingly, that she’s had “three weeks training.” She’s just excited to see whatever comes up in her path. I would love to in some way, see more of this character. Or, based on what I just saw in this film, I would love to see Ana de Armas lead her own Bond-esque spy film. De Armas has one of my favorite performances in the film and her chemistry with Daniel Craig is untouchable.

And this also leads me with my one deterrent with Daniel Craig in this film. As much fun as I imagine Craig could be having on set, his character never feels like he’s having fun anywhere he goes, even for a drink. I dunno. I get it, he just retired and wants to relax, but it feels weird to say that I’m having fun when the main character is not. I get it. He’s out killing left and right, interrogating people, and after a while that can get boring, but I feel like the way Bond was written in this film made him feel less “fun” then he did in other iterations. I get that characters develop and change, and that’s good for story purposes, but I feel that one constant Bond has experienced is that he was genuinely happy to do what he does. It may just be a personal thing. If anything, the best way I can describe Bond in this film, is that he has a lot of the traces that the character had in every film from “Casino Royale” to “Spectre.” He’s badass, he’s kind of stern, and he’ll let out his emotions only when he means to. These are traits I keep in mind every time when I think of this character. But the way Bond is written in this film sort of reminds me of the way Luke Skywalker was written in “Star Wars: The Last Jedi,” which currently stands as one of my least favorite “Star Wars” films to date. The reason why I bring that up is because Luke Skywalker has a broken personality to him to the point where he almost refuses to associate himself with what made him who he is. If you break down the two characters, Bond is obviously more in tune with his profession than Luke, but still.

One of the big lines of press this movie got before it came out was the fact that there was a brand new 007. Of course, Craig’s character left the service, so it’s only fitting that he got replaced. The replacement, Lashana Lynch’s character of Nomi. I don’t mind Lashana Lynch as an actress. I thought she did an okay job in “Captain Marvel” as much as I think it is one of the inferior MCU installments. Lynch brings her character to life here and there are some fun scenes with her. But there is one part of the film that the more I think about it, the more I dislike it. It’s this recurring gag between Craig and Lynch where the two are throwing these little jabs at each other. On the surface, it’s kind of fun to watch, but as it keeps going, it only feels forced. It sort of rubbed me the wrong way.

As for Rami Malek, who I personally awarded a Jackoff during my first ceremony, he sort of plays the typical Bond villain that has a distinguished look to him. He’s got a suit. He’s got this attitude that you would probably only find in the Bond franchise. The way he’s written in some ways feels cliché, but Malek is convincing enough to play the part to perfection. I like the way he’s handled toward the end of the film. The conflict between him, Bond, and other people whose names I won’t mention, added up to make an entertaining, intense, fast-paced finale. When it comes to the finales in the Daniel Craig Bond saga, this might be my favorite. It’s explosive, it’s brutal, and the choices the characters have to make feel like they have some real stakes.

I will admit, I have rarely exposed myself to anything Bond aside from Daniel Craig, so I have nothing much else to compare this movie to. Although I would love to have a big marathon one day where I catch up on all the other flicks in the franchise. But I would say that collectively, the Daniel Craig Bond saga was a success. I had fun watching this conclusion to said saga. I am glad they ended it where they did. If you like the Craig era of James Bond movies, this may be a fun watch for you. I don’t know if you will put it in the same caliber as some of the other installments, but you will probably have a good time with it. I can say I did.

In the end, “No Time To Die” was worth the fifty thousand year wait we had to sit through to see it. I am glad we got a proper goodbye to the Daniel Craig character. The film looks beautiful. The villain, while cliché in certain ways, is effective. This film blends fun and emotion together to positive results, and I would probably watch it again one day. What’s next in Daniel Craig’s career? Well aside from “Knives Out 2,” which I hope Netflix gives a wide theatrical release (PLEASE. That first one was one of the greatest theatrical outings of my life.), we’ll have to see what the future holds. Either way, his Bond run is complete, and it ended in a satisfying way. I’m going to give “No Time to Die” a 7/10.

“No Time to Die” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! Just a reminder that this Halloween, Sunday, October 31st, I will be debuting my review for “Ghostbusters,” the classic 1984 film featuring creepy libraries, ghost traps, proton packs, and giant marshmallows. What could be better? Well, let me just remind you, this is all part of my upcoming mini review series titled “Ghostbusters: Before Afterlife,” where I not only review the first “Ghostbusters,” but I will also be talking about “Ghostbusters II” on November 7th. I cannot wait to talk about both films, and not long after, I will be sharing my thoughts on the all new “Ghostbusters” installment, “Ghostbusters: Afterlife, which hits theaters the weekend before Thanksgiving! Which if you’re not from the United States, that’s where turkeys make a plan of attack against humanity to dominate the world.

Also, couple more housekeeping updates… My next review, as far as new releases go, is going to be for “Dune,” my most anticipated film of the year. I have no idea what day that will drop, but I guarantee you will see it by the end of next week. After that, I also have reviews coming for “The French Dispatch” and “Last Night in Soho.” If you want to see this and more on 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 “No Time to Die?” What did you think about it? Or, who do you think should be the next James Bond? In no particular order, I would to throw these names into the ring: Henry Cavill, Tom Hiddleston, and Orlando Bloom. Feel free to use em. Or don’t. Your call. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!