Good Fortune (2025): Comedy Gets its Wings

“Good Fortune” is written and directed by Aziz Ansari (Parks and Recreation, Master of None), who also stars in the film as Arj. Joining him is a cast including Seth Rogen (Neighbors, Sausage Party), Keke Palmer (Nope, Password), Sandra Oh (Killing Eve, Grey’s Anatomy), and Keanu Reeves (John Wick, The Matrix). This film showcases what happens when an angel switches the life of a man struggling to get by with that of his wealthy employer.

“Good Fortune” is a movie that I have looked forward to since I watched the first trailer several months ago. Every time I saw the trailer at the theater, it felt like a dose of joy. This looked like a film that refuses to take itself seriously. At least in part, because it also features characters dealing with serious problems. Sure, many movies have characters dealing with problems, but we are talking about a protagonist who lives in their car. And not a camper, this is a typical, everyday car!

I am proud to say that “Good Fortune” met, and in some ways, exceeded my expectations. It definitely met my expectations when it comes to humor. The film is consistently funny. But I was not expecting this film to have such fantastic commentary on societal issues. The film sort of feels like a live-action “Family Guy” episode. In this case, this would be an extended commentary on the gig economy and the divide between the rich and the poor.

There is not a single character in this film I dislike. Even Seth Rogen, who plays a lazy, rich snob, is charming in his own way. That said, if I have one negative about Rogen’s role of Jeff, despite him doing a good job, part of me would have liked to see someone else in his shoes. After all, Rogen played a very similar character just a couple years ago in the super funny “Dumb Money.” Is he good at playing a pretentious bro? Sure. But the more I think about Rogen in “Good Fortune,” the more I link it to his previous performance in “Dumb Money.” There are some differences between the two characters, however. In this film, Jeff appears to be happily single, which I thought was perfect because on the polar opposite, Arj spends much of the movie trying to impress a woman. This movie reminds me of that debate of whether it is more fulfilling to have love or money. We know Jeff was able to find money, or perhaps more accurately, be born into it. But for Arj, finding both money and love is like finding a needle in a haystack.

I also like how the movie seems to hint that Jeff equates proving one’s self in a relationship to how much you are willing to spend on a person. When Arj tells Jeff he is taking his date out for tacos, Jeff thinks Arj needs to step up his game,  so he recommends an upper class restaurant whose meals cost an arm and a leg. But with Jeff not seeing money as that much of an issue, he claims the place is affordable. Jeff seems to mean well with his recommendation, but it was most definitely not a good match for someone of Arj’s budget. While I saw where this joke was going from a mile away, the execution of the restaurant scene as it was happening was rather funny.

For me, Keanu Reeves is an instantaneous selling point when it comes to marketing your movie. Reeves may not always be in the best films. Just read my review for “Replicas.” But as soon as this movie pitched me the concept of Keanu Reeves as an angel, I wanted to know more. I am proud to say that Reeves is fantastic in this film. He has perfect chemistry with everyone around him, most especially Aziz Ansari and Seth Rogen, but he has a knack for comedy. That said, he is not wholly responsible for his excellent performance, some credit has to go to the writing. Hearing Keanu Reeves say the words “chicken nuggies” alone is a guaranteed laugh.

That said, like a lot of comedies, I can see viewing experiences varying significantly based on whether you have seen the trailers. I found a good amount of the movie’s funniest bits to be in the trailers. Although there are some surprises to be found.

“Good Fortune” feels like this year’s “Thelma.” Conceptually, the two films are worlds apart, but in terms of what they are going for, the two follow and accomplish similar objectives. “Good Fortune” is one of the year’s biggest gooffests. There’s a lot of funny lines, lighthearted moments, and a ridiculous plot. But for some reason, everything works.

The other thing “Good Fortune” has in common with “Thelma” is that it made me think. The film taps into one of life’s growing problems. It deals with the near impossibility to live comfortably or be happy, no matter how hard one tries to make it. This is something we see with Aziz Ansari’s character, Arj, who despite working multiple jobs still has trouble affording basic necessities and lives in his car.

I was also pleased with how the movie was able to attribute this commentary to Keanu Reeves’ Gabriel as well. At the beginning of the film, we learn that Gabriel is one of several angels given a beat to oversee. In Gabriel’s case, he’s at a low point on the corporate ladder considering his duty is to stop people from texting and driving. We find out he runs into the opportunity to heal a lost soul, which is another angel’s job. Gabriel takes advantage of this opportunity, which is not only problematic because he tries to do someone else’s job that he has no experience doing, but it also causes him to forget about his primary duties, ultimately causing chaos. That said, despite Gabriel not having experience, I understand why he did what he did. He wanted to prove that he could do something above the bare minimum.

Thankfully, Gabriel’s mishaps lead to an excellent story that I can honestly buy into. There are certain things that I am willing to cheap out on in life, but I think some of us have had that experience where we spend a little more money on something and think we’re never going back to the cheap route ever again. I just bought a Sony OLED television over the summer and while I have had previous televisions I enjoyed, the picture quality on this bad boy is night and day compared to the other ones I owned. I still go to the cinema regularly, but the colors and black levels on my TV honestly rival some movie theaters I have been to in recent years. There is a moment in the film where Gabriel says that despite his best efforts, it seems that money, and by extension, the luxuries that come with it, has solved most of Arj’s problems. Once we get a little taste of the good life it is hard to return to what preceded it. While the good life can bring happiness, it can also trigger insatiability. The movie does a great job at capturing that.

In the end, “Good Fortune” is a fun little movie. It feels rare to find a genuine comedy in cinemas these days, but to have it be this good is just a bonus. That said, if you have not seen the trailers for this film, I would maybe recommend avoiding them because as funny as “Good Fortune” is, one could argue that it would be even funnier if you went into it blind. I watched the trailers multiple times before seeing the film, and I still laughed like a hooligan, so maybe that recommendation would not matter that much. But I do think a lot of the film’s best jokes are in the trailers, so proceed with caution. Aziz Ansari gives this film his all by crafting a hilarious screenplay, delivering a good performance on his own, as well as executing the best possible portrayals out of his fellow actors. Keanu Reeves is more well known as an action star than a comedic talent, but this film showcases his chops for humor. I hope to see him in more comedies. I am going to give “Good Fortune” a 7/10.

“Good Fortune” is now playing in theaters and is available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “The Running Man!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Eternity,” “Wicked: For Good,” “Sentimental Value,” and “Zootopia 2.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Good Fortune?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Aziz Ansari project? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Long Walk (2025): No Missteps, No Filler, All Killer

© Courtesy of Lionsgate

“The Long Walk” is directed by Francis Lawrence (The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, Red Sparrow) and stars Cooper Hoffman (Licorice Pizza, Saturday Night), David Jonsson (Alien: Romulus, Industry), Garrett Wareing (Perfect, Manifest), Tut Nyuot (The Dumping Ground, Dark Money), Charlie Plummer (Words on Bathroom Walls, Moonfall), Ben Wang (American Born Chinese, Karate Kid: Legends), Joshua Odjick (The Swarm, Sweet Summer Pow Wow), Roman Griffin Davis (Jojo Rabbit, The King of Kings), Josh Hamilton (Eighth Grade, Reality), Judy Greer (The 15:17 to Paris, Ant-Man), and Mark Hamill (Star Wars, The Wild Robot). This film is based on a Stephen King novel of the same name and centers around a group of young boys who compete in an event where they must keep walking to the finish line at three miles per hour, or die.

Photo by Murray Close/Lionsgate/Murray Close/Lionsgate – © 2025 Lionsgate

“The Long Walk” is the latest work from Stephen King to be adapted for the screen this year following “The Monkey,” which I did not see. As well as “The Life of Chuck,” which I did see and I can confirm it is one of my favorite films of 2025. What brought me out to “The Long Walk” is the same thing that brought me out to “The Life of Chuck,” the marketing. Although in this case, the vibe that the “Long Walk” campaign seemed to be going for was a lot darker and gorier. I dug what the team was going for. But there have been great trailers to bad movies. Just look at my review for “Godzilla: King of the Monsters…”

Thankfully, that is not the case with “The Long Walk,” which is more than just a great film, it is among my favorites of the year. When I left this film, the first thought on my mind was, “How does this rank against ‘The Life of Chuck?’” I have no clue what my best movies of the year list is going to look like, but right now there are two Stephen King adaptations that are serious contenders to be on the top half of the list.

Photo by Murray Close/Lionsgate/Murray Close/Lionsgate – © 2025 Lionsgate

“The Long Walk” supports the notion that sometimes the simplest ideas can make for the grandest stories. The concept of this film is that a group of young men have to walk and avoid getting shot to death. If what I described sounds somewhat boring, I get it. But this movie is much more than meets the eye. The cast may move at a slow pace, but this film is all killer, no filler from beginning to end. This story wastes no time getting straight into the event. We see a letter written to the protagonist, Raymond Garraty, saying he’s been chosen to participate in the Long Walk. Then we see have a moment with his mom, after which he exits the car and goes off on his adventure. This beginning offers a perfect blend of mystery and nerves. Seeing Garraty leave the car reminded me of what it would be like to see your child going off to fight in the military. You do not know what is going to happen. You are fearful of whatever is bound to happen. And you absolutely, positively do not want to see your child get seriously hurt.

This film is directed by Francis Lawrence, whose resume includes the “Hunger Games” franchise. The film does, at times, have a “Hunger Games” vibe considering it is set in the future, and everyone is playing a game where only one can survive. That said, unlike “The Hunger Games,” which features a lot of buildup before the games, the “game” in “The Long Walk” goes on for practically the entire runtime. Again, it does not take long for the game to start, and once it finishes, it does not take that long for the film to end. Speaking of which, if I had any critiques for the film, the ending does feel a smidge unfulfilling, but this film is consistent with its ending based on how quickly it tends to get to the point.

I do not think it is a spoiler at this point to say that people die in “The Long Walk.” Heck, people die in lots of movies. Sorry if I ruined most of your unwatched entertainment. “The Long Walk” is not breaking new ground. But I do dig how it handles its deaths. I did not read the book so I cannot comment on any differences between the film and the source material, but every death in this movie, to some degree, feels appropriate and earned. It does a great job at picking who lives and dies at certain times of the film. It allows time for certain characters to flesh themselves out, and when said characters die, it makes those deaths all the more gripping. The film has a number of characters who linger in the background, but those put in the foreground are all stellar. I enjoyed getting to know every single one, even if they were written in such a way where it was clear the movie was trying to get you to root against them.

Photo by Murray Close/Lionsgate/Murray Close/Lionsgate – © 2025 Lionsgate

This movie stars Cooper Hoffman (center), who continues to make a name for himself after his breakout role in 2021’s “Licorice Pizza.” I had some problems with “Licorice Pizza.” Hoffman’s ability to give a competent performance is not one of them. Similarly, he does a commendable job in “The Long Walk.” Hoffman plays the incredibly layered Ray Garraty. I enjoyed not only getting to know the character in the present, but the movie also effectively uses flashbacks to tell his story and detail his background.

Photo by Murray Close/Lionsgate/Murray Close/Lionsgate – © 2025 Lionsgate

When I think of Mark Hamill, my mind unfairly darts to thoughts of Luke Skywalker. What can I say? I live for “Star Wars.” But forget everything you know about that hero, because Hamill slips into the antagonist role of the Major with ease. He is a character that I love to hate. Hamill plays the part with such a stern, demanding tone where I could easily tell he was having a ball on set. Hamill’s dialogue in the film is minimal, and often to the point. But whenever he does speak, every line is a highlight. They say a movie is only as good as its villain, so by that logic, “The Long Walk” is exceptional. Hamill’s performance is so well-delivered that I cannot see anyone else in his shoes.

In the end, “The Long Walk” is one of the best movies of the year. This film is not for everyone, but if you can handle some blood and gore, I think you are going to have a ball from the first scene to the last. “The Long Walk” is more of a thriller than a horror flick, but it has a lot of elements that would make a “horror” flick so admirable. “The Long Walk” is a concept that is as simple as it gets, but it is done as perfectly and exquisitely as possible. I am going to give “The Long Walk” a 9/10.

“The Long Walk” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “A Big Bold Beautiful Journey.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Him,” “Eleanor the Great,” “The Lost Bus,” and “One Battle After Another.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Long Walk?” What did you think about it? Did you read the book? How does the film compare to it? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Ballerina (2025): Yeah! I’m Thinking I Dig This Spinoff!

“Ballerina” is directed by Len Wiseman (Live Free or Die Hard, Total Recall) and stars Ana de Armas (Blade Runner 2049, Knives Out), Anjelica Huston (The Addams Family, Prizzi’s Honor), Gabriel Byrne (Hereditary, In Treatment), Lance Reddick (Bosch, The Wire), Norman Reedus (The Walking Dead, The Boondock Saints), Ian McShane (Deadwood, Kung Fu Panda), and Keanu Reeves (Point Break, The Matrix). This film is about a woman who trains as an assassin and seeks revenge following the death of her father.

Yeah, I’m thinking the “John Wick” franchise is back! But this time, it is not Wick’s film. He is in it, but the star of the show this time around is Ana de Armas as Eve Macarro. This marks the franchise’s first film spinoff. On the television side, there is also “The Continental,” which I have admittedly yet to see. But every time I watch a proper “John Wick” film, I am reminded of how much potential this franchise has when it comes to its lore. There are tons of stories that could be told within the walls of the many Continental hotels. With “Ballerina” being the franchise’s first film spinoff, does it compare to the proper movies? Honestly, it is worthy of the “John Wick” name.

“Ballerina” is better than I thought it would be. And I feel stupid for saying that. For the record, I was looking forward to this film for multiple reasons. First off, none of the “John Wick” movies have let me down so far. In fact, I find every movie in this franchise to be better than the one that came before. Not all of them are perfect. Some of them are much better with the action than the story. But the franchise is well-rounded from movie to movie. Second, Ana de Armas is in the lead role. This is the actress’s first appearance in this franchise, but I have been dying to see her in this role ever since I first heard about it. I have been hoping de Armas could take on a role like this since watching her in “No Time to Die.” She easily stole the show with her short but sweet appearance. Yes, you could argue in terms of the action genre that maybe she got a big spotlight in Netflix’s “The Gray Man,” but that movie was so mediocre that I almost forgot that it existed. Plus de Armas did not play the main character, unlike Ryan Gosling. “Ballerina” is a much larger showcase of what de Armas can do in these types of films. On top of that, she is an actress who I project could rack up a ton of Oscar noms if given the right roles. While “Ballerina” may not be Academy Award-winning in every regard, it did win me over with Ana de Armas’ presence.

Before we continue with the positives regarding Ana de Armas’ role, I must note that I also went into this film a tad worried despite my excitement. While I was excited to see Keanu Reeves as John Wick again, I was also wondering why he was in this film. What was his purpose? I will not spoil much, but he is in a lot more of the film than the marketing led me to believe. And it was fun to see him on screen once again. I will take any dose of Keanu Reeves I can get. He is breathtaking.

This is also the first film in the franchise where Chad Stahelski does not have a directing credit. That credit instead goes to Len Wiseman. Stahelski’s lack of directorial power specifically does not worry me. If anything it gives the opportunity for someone to bring in a fresh take on the property. That said, the film’s action sequences are often stylistically consistent with the previous movies. Whether they are done on massive, colorfully lit set pieces… Run on extensive, smooth shots… Or involve constant running and gunning, these look like something Chad Stahelski would come up with. Partially because he did. Well, sort of. While the action sequences are the product of Wiseman himself, Stahelski did have a helping hand with enhancing those sequences through reshoots. I think whatever they did may have been worth it because this movie cost $90 million to make, and every dollar looks like it has flown onto the screen. I have to go back to watch the other movies to verify, but this may be the most vibrant and colorful the “John Wick” franchise has ever looked. That might be odd to say considering the film is fairly dramatic and bloody. But if I were to buy myself an OLED TV, “Ballerina” would make for a great test movie.

I said I would go back to Ana de Armas, and now is the time. There are few compliments one can give an actor as positive as “I cannot see anyone else playing their role.” That happens to be the case for Ana de Armas as Eve Macarro. And that says something, because the same character was portrayed by Unity Phelan in “John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum.” For the record, Phelan has very limited acting credits, so I have no problem with de Armas replacing her. De Armas does not disappoint here. She continues to prove she is an action star.

Not only does de Armas handle the choreography given to her with perfection, but she always maintains an aura of toughness and determination. She may be small, she may be pretty sometimes, but she can pack a punch. I also liked getting to know about a bit of her backstory. She seems to have developed her recently mentioned toughness and determination partially because of how hard she was pushed as a ballet dancer. Her childhood also was not perfect in more ways than one. 

There are a couple great action films out right now, both of which are part of major franchises. Since May, you had “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning,” and a couple weeks later came “Ballerina.” If you had to ask me which of these two films I recommend you watch first, my mind would go to “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning.” But “Ballerina” is not far behind. Do not sleep on it. In fact, “Ballerina” actually outshines “The Final Reckoning” in some ways. For starters, the pacing in “Ballerina” is significantly better. There is never a boring moment in either movie. But you can sometimes feel the weight of “The Final Reckoning” whereas “Ballerina” is a consistently thrilling ride. Speaking of consistency, the film never shifts much in tone. At times “The Final Reckoning” gets into Saturday morning cartoon territory with its dialogue and villain. Even with some hyperbolic action and funnier moments, the overall vibe of “Ballerina” maintained a sense of grit.

Courtesy of Lionsgate – © 2025 Lionsgate

That said, the film is, as I said earlier, not going to win every Academy Award. I will give props to the technical side like the production and costume design, the cinematography, as well as the film editing. This film undeniably looks grand, even if the scale seems to take a dip from the previous couple of “John Wick” movies. But there are times where the story lacked hints of engagement. The dialogue, while not bad, is not the best I ever heard. It is also not as emotionally investing as it could be. At times the film tries to go for the emotions, but I did not care for the supporting cast enough to feel those emotions.

But this film already has so much going for it to the point where I can forgive its faults. In true “John Wick” fashion, “Ballerina” shows how you do action shots and choreography. Never once did I look at a scene and wonder who was fighting who or feel jarred by how many takes the editor could splice together in a span of 10 seconds. There are also some cool action scenes involving objects as unusual as dinner plates. Once again, while it is not Keanu Reeves’ movie, he is great in it. He handles all of his material with excellence. He does not phone it in. And Ana de Armas puts on a performance that is arguably better than what this movie deserves. I left “Ballerina” not only wanting to see more of Ana de Armas in action roles, but also more of her in this specific role. Despite the screenplay’s faults, this character has potential. I did like what we got of her backstory, I will give the movie that. Maybe that could be expanded in later films or you can give her something better in the present to work with. “Ballerina” is a solid start for Eve Macarro, unless you technically count “Chapter 3.” Hopefully if she comes back, the crew can find a way to keep up the good work.

Courtesy of Lionsgate – © 2025 Lionsgate

In the end, as far as the “John Wick” franchise goes, “Ballerina” is a weaker installment. It might even be the weakest. But like I often say about Pixar movies, even lower tier “John Wick” is still good. Per usual, the action is world class. The production design is astounding. The camerawork and lighting are top notch. The climax is wildly entertaining. There is a lot to enjoy about this film. I have no clue how many people are going to go see this film in the long run. I have my doubts it will be remembered as a “success.” But if you are an action junkie, there is a lot to like here. I would definitely watch it a second time. I am going to give “Ballerina” a 7/10.

“Ballerina” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Courtesy of TPS Productions/Focus Features – © 2025

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for Wes Anderson’s latest film, “The Phoenician Scheme.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will share my thoughts on “The Life of Chuck,” “Materialists,” and “Elio.” 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 “Ballerina?” What did you think about it? Or, is there a rising action star who caught your eye in recent years? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Penguin Lessons (2024): A Poignant and Pleasant Penguin Picture

“The Penguin Lessons” is directed by Peter Cattaneo (The Full Monty, Military Wives) and stars Steve Coogan (Night at the Museum, Philomena), Jonathan Pryce (The Two Popes, Brazil), Vivian El Jaber (Guapas, Cha Cha Cha), and Björn Gustafsson (People of Earth, Parlamentet). This film is about an Englishman living in 1970s Argentina who rescues and looks after an orphaned penguin.

One of the coolest things about going to the movies is getting to experience something with other people. “The Penguin Lessons” is the latest example of one of those events. Partially because this is a film I would have probably waited a bit before going to see by myself. Granted, the trailer, for the few times I saw it, won me over, but this was not my kind of movie. I picked this movie to watch with a couple other people, particularly my mom and grandma, as an equalizer. I thought it would be something we would all agree on.

Thankfully, the decision to watch this film was a wise one. “The Penguin Lessons” is one of the most adorable films I have seen in a long time. I am the furthest thing from a pet person, but even I was captivated by the connection between our film’s protagonist, Tom, and a penguin who eventually winds up going by the name Juan Salvador. The film itself follows a predictable path, where you have a guy who could care less about owning a penguin, he is essentially obligated to take care of it, and he ends up forming an unlikely bond with it. Although the film is much more than that. It is a look into a tragic time for Argentina, where its people were noticeably divided and under dictatorship rule.

In some cases, the penguin in this film seems to serve as an escape from the troubles Argentina’s people were experiencing at this time. We see him not only as Tom Michell’s pet, but also as a reward for his class. There is a scene where we see the class spiraling into chaos, and to calm him down, Michell goes into his nearby home, grabs the penguin, and walks into class with it. Having had time to think about this movie, I probably would have had a much different reaction to this scene if Michell suddenly brought in a dog or a cat, considering a decent number of people are allergic to them. That said, in fairness, there are not as many known records of people having penguin allergies. It is nice to see this group of students experience a moment of comfort and joy in what is clearly a tense time. Some of these boys may be immature or part of the problem, but we see them lighten up a bit because of this one animal.

Some of the best films have something to say about what it means to be human. At certain points, “The Penguin Lessons” is not afraid to show the worst of humanity, as this film is set in an Argentinian dictatorship where anyone on the street can be captured. “The Penguin Lessons” reminds me of humanity’s unique connection to other creatures. We do not just bond with our own kind, but also many others. In fact, the penguin in this film sometimes shows it is easier for certain people to step up for another animal than it is for them to step up for another human being, even if they see another human being in serious danger. In some cases, that may be because we do not want to risk our own lives, partially to the blame of, unfortunately, other humans.

The film may be set during a dark, gritty time, but it manages to pack plenty of joy and levity into just about every other scene. If you are looking to escape from the problems of the real world, this movie surprisingly works, despite also presenting a world with prominent problems of its own. The first 30 minutes of this film, especially when we first see our protagonist and the penguin in the same place, is sometimes laugh out loud funny. There is a line, I will not say what it is, but you will know it when you hear it, that Tom says twice in a span of several minutes, and I was almost rolling on the floor. It is not so much the line itself that is funny as much as it is the delivery. There are moments where Tom finds out what it is like to clean up bird poop, but much to my delight, the film does not treat it so much like a gag.

This film is directed by Peter Cattaneo, who was previously nominated for a Best Director Oscar for “The Full Monty.” With “The Penguin Lessons” being a 2024 release to some degree and having its wide release this early in 2025, I do not know if Cattaneo is going to get another nomination, but if the Oscars were tomorrow, his presence amongst the nominees would be debatable. Between his perfect balance of comedy and drama, as well as the timing connected to both of those genres, Cattaneo knows exactly what he is doing.

Another reason why Cattaneo knows what he is doing shows through the performances. This film is led by Steve Coogan, who I have seen in a number of films before. But I am not going to lie, I had no idea who the lead was for this film going in,. As I was watching, I thought, much to my embarrassment down the line, that I was looking at Hugh Grant. The two actors have their aesthetic individualities, but for whatever reason they do look surprisingly similar. Steve Coogan in this film sort of reminds me of a Hugh Grant type. His character, Tom, is reserved and comes off as if he is stuck in his ways. Yet at the same time, if you get to know him, you will realize he is a wholesome person. While Tom may seem like a grump on occasion, he stands firmly alongside Juan Salvador the penguin as the film’s heart and soul.

The film clearly establishes Tom’s lack of enthusiasm for keeping a penguin from the getgo, but never once did I think he was a jerk. Heck, if someone randomly handed me a penguin, I would probably resist the idea of keeping it too. But this film shows the fascinating journey of what happens when you choose to keep a pet you never wanted, and how taking on such a responsibility can be rewarding.

In the end, “The Penguin Lessons” is a well-paced, well-written delight. If you are looking for a film that focuses on Argentinian history, it might be for you, but you may also want to look elsewhere. Ultimately, this is an adorable story about a man and his penguin. If that is what you signed up for, you will be satisfied. Steve Coogan gives a heck of a performance. It is still early, but I will be interested to see what other portrayals could top it throughout the year. I highly recommend “The Penguin Lessons,” and I am going to give it an 8/10.

“The Penguin Lessons” is now playing in theaters and is also available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! If you have been paying attention to my recent posts, you may have noticed my last couple have focused heavily on game shows. If you have not yet checked them out, be sure to read my thoughts on “The Luckiest Man in America,” the new movie based on a couple of infamous “Press Your Luck” episodes, as well as my thoughts going into the upcoming season of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire.” If you want to see posts like these 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 Penguin Lessons?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie involving penguins? I’ll even accept “Batman Returns.” That movie is sick. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

W. (2008): No Review Left Behind

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!

Megalopolis (2024): Mediocritis

“Megalopolis” is directed by Francis Ford Coppola (Dracula, The Godfather) and stars Adam Driver (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Marriage Story), Giancarlo Esposito (The Mandalorian, Abigail), Nathalie Emmanuel (Furious 7, Game of Thrones), Aubrey Plaza (Parks and Recreation, Dirty Grandpa), Shia LaBeouf (Transformers, Eagle Eye), Jon Voight (Reagan, Midnight Cowboy), Laurence Fishburne (The Matrix, John Wick: Chapter 2), Kathryn Hunter (Poor Things, Andor), and Dustin Hoffman (Lenny, Kramer vs. Kramer). This film is set in the city of New Rome, which is basically an alternate version of New York City. The story is about architect Cesar Catilina as he aspires to rebuild his city into a utopia, much to the opposition of New Rome’s mayor, Franklyn Cicero (Esposito).

Francis Ford Coppola’s resume is one to behold. If you go on the IMDb top 250, you will notice that several of his titles make the list. Heck, as of this writing, “The Godfather” and “The Godfather Part II” literally take up the #2 and #4 spots. “Apocalypse Now” is also at #56. Coppola has no doubt cemented his legacy in Hollywood as one of the icons. Heck, even though it is not talked about as much, I have to say that I really liked “The Outsiders.” It’s a solid movie inspired by a pretty good book. Kind of like Clint Eastwood, it is somewhat mind-blowing to know that Coppola is still making films at his age. “Megalopolis” has become something of a passion project for Coppola. He has been developing it off and on for many years. He’s talked with several actors for an opportunity to appear in the film. He’s even sold part of his winery so he could self-finance the film. But was this movie worth all that time and effort? As much as I champion Francis Ford Coppola for bringing the movie he wants to cinemas, I simply wish I liked it more. “Megalopolis” is not my least favorite movie of the year, but it is certainly one of the most boring.

I will be honest, I almost did not go see this movie, because I heard about the bad reviews this movie was getting some time before checking it out. And I had already dealt with the abomination against humanity that is “Joker: Folie à Deux.” I did not know if I had it in me to sit down and dedicate time to this controversial flick. Unfortunately I hate myself enough to do just that. After two hours that honestly almost felt like two and a half, maybe three, I can say that this film is one of the most unmemorable I have seen all year. That honestly says something. I am sure a lot of people put effort into the films they are crafting. But in the case of “Megalopolis,” I already knew this was a labor of love from the start. Having seen this film come to life, I almost cannot see anyone else doing this film in the style that Coppola did. That said, I cannot say I found the style entirely appealing.

Now, this film is a feast for the naked eye. The lighting in this film offers a variety of color. This one shot of Adam Driver’s face that continues to be ingrained in my memory. From a production value standpoint, this film gets top marks. “Megalopolis” is kind of like, well, here comes another mention of that stinker… “Joker: Folie à Deux.” There is no doubt that the look of the film is worthy of praise. It goes without any debate that it is nicely shot, contains good costumes, and has marvelous set design. There are times where I feel the film gets a little too far-fetched in terms of how fantastical the look comes off. But there are others where I can buy what the film is selling and I like what I see.

The film is set in New Rome, which as I mentioned earlier is basically New York City with some minor changes. The structure is the same, it contains tons of tall buildings, there’s the Statue of Liberty. The Madison Square Garden even exists in this film, and I kind of like what this film has done with the place. In Ancient Rome, people flocked to the Colosseum for events like gladiator fights. And in a sense, MSG is basically a modernized version of the Colosseum. This movie tends to present a stadium with the old school glory of the Colosseum with the modern day wonder of the Madison Square Garden people still flock to today. A good portion of the movie is spent there, and while there are some clips set within the arena which contain select editing choices I honestly found to be mind-numbing, I think the film nails the atmosphere of that venue to make it as Colosseum-like as possible while still factoring in what makes it what it is today. There is very much a blend of old meets new throughout the execution of such an iconic venue.

“Megalopolis” as a film somewhat reminds me of “The Boy and the Heron,” made by another visionary director, Hayao Miyazaki. For the record, I think that film is significantly better than this one. But I say this because I thought the best part of that film is its world-building. That said, the story and characters appear to play second fiddle in comparison. While “Megalopolis” contains a decent cast, most of the characters are missing a spark of some kind. In fact, I would almost argue none of the performances are really that great. There are definitely some that are okay. But some are over the top while others are forgettable. Adam Driver seems to try his best, but it is no “Marriage Story.” If you want a better outing from Aubrey Plaza, go see “My Old Ass.” As great as Laurence Fishburne’s voice is, seeing him in this movie makes me think I would rather be watching “The Matrix” right now. If anything, even though New Rome is a city and not a person, I would almost argue it is a character of its own and is more interesting than any of the people in this film. Then again, that is not saying much.

Although if I had to name one character I surprisingly enjoyed on screen it would be Vesta Sweetwater (top), played by Grace VanderWaal, and if you somehow remember that name from almost a decade ago, then you probably watched season 11 of “America’s Got Talent.” VanderWaal plays a pop star who the film establishes to maintain her purity and remain a virgin until marriage. It is a whole thing. But I thought VanderWaal carried an incredible screen presence whenever she played this character. When she came on screen, she commanded my attention. While her screen time was brief, it made for one of the film’s few highlights, and that says a lot considering I wanted The Clairvoyants to win “AGT” the year she was on by a clear mile. Just one moron’s opinion. That said, VanderWaal is great here. She plays her part well.

In the end, “Megalopolis” is one of those movies that the more I look at it, the more I am transfixed with the images on screen, but not so much the substance within them. When I walked out of “Megalopolis” I started to forget about the film’s context, story, and characters, but there is one thought that stuck in my mind. This could be a decent tech demo. It is colorful, bright, and offers a lot of detail frame by frame. I could clearly tell that Francis Ford Coppola put his heart and soul into this project, but sadly it is kind of a mess. It also comes off as rather pretentious and overly cartoony, which is not the finest combination. Is it the worst film of the year? No. In fact, threepeat alert! It is not as bad as “Joker: Folie à Deux!” So… Yay? I am going to give “Megalopolis” a 4/10.

“Megalopolis” is now playing in select theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you like this review, I have more coming! Stay tuned for my thoughts on “Venom: The Last Dance,” “The Apprentice,” “Anora,” “Here,” and “Gladiator II.” If you want to see my reviews for these films 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 “Megalopolis?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Francis Ford Coppola film? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Borderlands (2024): Boring Blands

“Borderlands” is directed by Eli Roth (Thanksgiving, The House with a Clock in Its Walls) and stars Cate Blanchett (Carol, Thor: Ragnarok), Kevin Hart (Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, Ride Along) Jack Black (Kung Fu Panda, The Super Mario Bros. Movie), Edgar Ramírez (Jungle Cruise, The 355), Ariana Greenblatt (65, Barbie), Florian Munteanu (Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, Creed II), Gina Gershon (Showgirls, Snoops), and Jamie Lee Curtis (Freaky Friday, Halloween), this film is based on the video game of the same name and centers around a team who tries to save a girl who holds the key to unimaginable power.

Video game adaptations have seen a bit of a high point in recent years, whether it is the growing success of the “Sonic the Hedgehog” movies, the high ratings of HBO’s “The Last of Us,” or the massive box office records set by “The Super Mario Bros. Movie.” And there are plenty more adaptations on the way. All of those properties are seeing follow-ups in the future. The “Mortal Kombat” movie released in 2021 is getting a sequel. Sony is currently making a live-action film adaptation based on “The Legend of Zelda.” Heck, they are making a “Minecraft” movie, and it is going to be live-action! Interesting choice there… Video game adaptations have come a long way. Many people will tell you that there have not been many great ones. Though a select few seem to have a continued following like the 1995 “Mortal Kombat.”

This is where we come to “Borderlands,” which is based on a game that I have never played. Granted, I have heard of it before walking into the theater, but I could never tell you what it is about, who the primary characters are, or even how good the story is. Interestingly, after seeing this movie, I barely have the stamina to tell you what it is about, who the primary characters are, or even how good the story is.

Hint, on that last part, it sucks!

The story behind “Borderlands” plays out like a boring video game objective. This movie feels as if I was playing a video game and was stuck on a level that is longer than life. Granted, it is somewhat well paced at times and fairly short, but just because it is well paced and short, does not mean it is sweet. Because all the substance within the short runtime is a discombobulated mess.

As I write this review, one of the films that comes to mind that “Borderlands” reminds me of is “Red Notice.” That movie is so notoriously bad and a potential reason why it likely even saw the light of day in the first place is because of star power. Granted, it likely cost a crapton of money, but if you were an executive and had the opportunity to sell a movie with Dwayne Johnson, Ryan Reynolds, and Gal Gadot on the poster, I am sure you will take it. These are three of the biggest stars in the world and it almost does not matter how good the script is at that point. “Borderlands” is led by several stars including Cate Blanchett, Jack Black, Jamie Lee Curtis, Kevin Hart, and Ariana Greenblatt. That is a stacked cast, and if you were to tell me they’d all be in a movie together, I would at least be curious about it. But when it comes to “Borderlands,” curiosity threw this cat into an incinerator.

In fact, you know what is funny? I said how this movie on paper, without a script, without a treatment, without any idea of how it is going to go, could most definitely be appealing just from imagining what an ensemble poster could look like. You know who thought the same thing? One of the films stars, Jamie Lee Curtis! Why is she in this movie? Because at heart, she is a fangirl. Perhaps not of the “Borderlands” franchise, but she has mentioned the reason why she took the part she had in “Borderlands” is due to Cate Blanchett being in the movie. Look, if I were an actor and I were pitched a movie, and you told me I was going to work with Cate Blanchett, I would be there in a chicken suit for all I care. But it does not change the fact that this dynamic duo of actresses are somewhat miscast. These two performers, to some degree, have aged past their respective parts. Jamie Lee Curtis in particular stands out when I say this. I looked up the character she plays based on how she is presented in the games, and while Curtis somewhat resembles her physically, she definitely looks younger in the source material. The same can be said for Blanchett. I hate saying this because both of these women are not just good at what they do, they are a couple of my favorite performers working today. And their recent outings continue to prove that like Curtis’s “Everything Everywhere All at Once” and Blanchett’s “Tar.” Are their performances in “Borderlands” at least worthy of a thumbs up? I guess?… I would say they are tolerable. As much as I did not love the writing for “Borderlands,” I think Blanchett in particular does the best she can as a character who clearly does not want to be doing what she is doing.

But while Cate Blanchett and Jamie Lee Curtis are busy bringing some of the superior performances to the movie, there is one actor on the cast that has given a voiceover performance so annoying that even Jar Jar Binks is looking at this character and saying, “MEESA GETTING A HEADACHE!” Ladies and gentlemen, I give you, Jack Black as Claptrap. Much like Jar Jar Binks in “The Phantom Menace,” Claptrap is obnoxious, talkative, and spews attempts at humor that would be better executed if it were in a program presented for toddlers. Again, Jamie Lee Curtis and Cate Blanchett do an okay job, but the more I hear Jack Black’s voice here, the more I question how the heck he was even cast in the first place. I hate saying this because I like Jack Black, and he has proven time and time again with the “Kung Fu Panda” franchise that he can unleash not just good, but great voiceover work. I do not doubt that he probably fulfilled the vision the director was probably aiming for at times. But if that is the case, than that vision needs a trip to LensCrafters. Just to paint a picture of how much Jack Black’s character got on my nerves, there is a scene where we see his character getting shot. If you saw the movie you likely know which one I am talking about. In a lot of cases, when I see a character get shot, it is sometimes a dramatic or emotional moment. When Claptrap gets shot, I was ecstatic. I was cheering. I did not care if those bullets killed him. If anything he is getting what he deserves for nearly destroying my brain.

It is really sad to see Jack Black give a performance like the one he gives here, especially considering he killed it in another video game adaptation, “The Super Mario Bros. Movie,” as Bowser. He was easily my favorite part of the film. Apparently, Black is not done with bringing video game characters to the screen, because he also is seemingly playing Steve in the upcoming “Minecraft” movie. Hopefully Black can come back from his performance as Claptrap, because to say it was harder to sit through than a race between turtles is probably the understatement of the year.

“Borderlands” is kind of like “Guardians of the Galaxy” if the people making the movie decided to suck all the fun out of it. There are no memorable songs that are stuck in my head by the time I leave the theater. All the attempts at humor are stale. The movie has a team of misfits, but none of them have chemistry. If anything, you are stuck with a lead whose attitude very much screams “I’m getting too old for this,” an annoying teen played by Ariana Greenblatt, and a surprisingly unfunny character played by Kevin Hart. Heck, even if Kevin Hart is not in the best movie like “The Wedding Ringer” he can still get a laugh out of me. Not this time around! “Borderlands” is polished and colorful, but is lacking a story with some of polish of its own. If it does not feel been there done that, then it certainly feels excruciatingly snore-inducing.

I was also marveled as to how this film looked at times. Frankly, it has the most unrealistic green screen and special effects I have seen in years. There are certain moments and effects that took me out of the movie, and if they did not, they definitely made me die inside. If you think Cate Blanchett in an orange wig is hard to buy, just wait until you see some of the backgrounds this movie provides. In some ways, this movie does resemble the art style and presentation of the video game. I will give it credit where it is due. But just because the movie is based on a video game, does not mean the backgrounds should look like they are out of a video game. I remember watching the 2020 “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie and seeing the Green Hill Zone on screen. While I could definitely tell there is a fantastical outlook to the place, within the context of the movie and everything else in it, I was able to buy this world. When I look at Pandora in “Borderlands,” I am immediately taken out of the movie. I cannot buy what this movie is trying to sell me.

The video game movie curse seems to be dying. Granted, I cannot think of a perfect video game adaptation. While “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” is faithful to the games, it is one of the most cliché productions of the past few years. “Sonic the Hedgehog” is a lot of fun, but definitely predictable. “Gran Turismo,” if you can technically call it an adaptation, was a joyous experience, but does not reinvent the wheel in terms of the story, and is sometimes bogged down by product placement. “Borderlands” feels like a product of years past. Specifically the years when many people were waiting for a video game movie they can be excited about but we did not quite reach that point yet. The script is awful, the backgrounds are as realistic as a high school play, the story is unmemorable, and worst of all, my time was surely wasted.

In the end, I had little expectations for “Borderlands” as I was going in, but little did I know what I would be in for. Much like this year’s “Argylle,” “Borderlands” excels at getting the best cast possible, but it equally excels in wasting each member in the ensemble. To add to the discombobulation of this disasterpiece, the film had reshoots a couple years after it went into production, but its director, Eli Roth did not even return to oversee it. So the studio brought in “Deadpool” director Tim Miller. So while I do not know who to wholly blame for certain things that happened in the film, I can easily say as far as Lionsgate is concerned, to call “Borderlands” a misfire would be generous. The writing is some of the worst of the year. The look of the film is atrocious. I am sure that if Cate Blanchett were not living through a pandemic or perhaps friends with Eli Roth since they did “The House with a Clock in Its Walls” together, she would have never signed onto this project. Just one moron’s theory… Again, if I were an actor and you told me Cate Blanchett was going to be in the same project as me, I would be stoked. That said, if I knew what the end product would be, then chances are I would question myself before actually taking on said project. As far as I am concerned, I surely hope “Borderlands” has zero chance of respawning on a screen in front of me ever again, and I am going to give the so-called movie a 1/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, I have more coming! Stay tuned for my thoughts on “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 “Borderlands?” What did you think about it? Or, if you were cast in a movie, who is an actor that you would want to work with, even if you knew that said movie was going to be terrible? For me, one person that comes to mind is Seth MacFarlane. I have wanted to meet him for years so it would be a dream come true. Let me know in the comments down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Boy Kills World (2023): Bill Skarsgård Lets the Bodies Hit the Floor in This Adrenaline Rush of an Action Flick

“Boy Kills World” is directed by Moritz Mohr (Akumi, Ronin 2035) and stars Bill Skarsgård (Malignant, It), Jessica Rothe (Mary + Jane, Happy Death Day), Michelle Dockery (Downton Abbey, Good Behavior), Brett Gelman (Stranger Things, Fleabag), Isaiah Mustafa (It Chapter Two, Murder at Yellowstone City), Yahan Ruhian (Warrior, Bullet Train), Sharlto Copley (Hardcore Henry, Monkey Man), H. Jon Benjamin (Bob’s Burgers, Archer), and Famke Janssen (X-Men, Taken). This film is set in a dystopian time and is about a deaf and mute person who is trained to become an instrument of death. Now he must use all that he knows to achieve revenge over the murder of his family.

If I were to make a top 10 most anticipated movies of 2024 list at the beginning of the year, there is a solid chance “Boy Kills World” probably would not have been on there. Why? Because I had no idea about it. But had I seen the marketing for it at the beginning of the year, I probably would have considered sliding it into one of the spots, or at least noting it as an honorable mention. “Boy Kills World” looked like a bloody good time. And if you put Bill Skarsgård, one of this generation’s great actors together with H. Jon Benjamin, one of this generation’s great voiceover artists, you may have a recipe for a winning combo. On paper, this sounds like my kind of movie. In execution, this is most certainly my kind of movie. It is like if “Deadpool” had a baby “John Wick: Chapter 4” and it just so happened to be set in a environment straight out of “The Hunger Games.” I am not even a huge “Hunger Games” fan, but my god, is this movie delicious…

“Boy Kills World” is as simple as can be when it comes to the premise. Basically, a guy has to survive against his enemies all to get to a specific person he needs to kill. But the way this movie goes about it is unbelievably satisfying. Technically speaking, this movie has a color palette that bridges a gap between grit and fantasy… Fluid camerawork that flawlessly showcases an endless series of incredible action sequences from start to finish… And on top of that, some surprisingly intricate and palatable production design. For a movie set in a dystopian future, I was pleasantly surprised to know how much pizazz said future has.

The costume design in this film is a bit of a standout to me. It is kind of all over the place in terms of color, design, and vibe. But the movie somehow makes all of those costumes feel consistent with one another. Each costume suits the characters’ personalities in addition to the personality of the movie itself.

Going back to the “Deadpool” meets “John Wick” comparison, this movie, much like those, involves our main character looking for a little payback in honor of those he loves. Also like both movies, our protagonist, in this case, Boy, is a mastermind when it comes to killing. The stellar choreography we see from him certainly adds to the thrills as well. And much like “John Wick: Chapter 4,” I found this movie to be very video game-esque. Every other moment, our protagonist has something new to fend off, and each time, it is done with a lovingly quick pace. The action not only looks great, but it is to some degree, nonstop. In fact, one could argue that this movie is more video game-like than “John Wick: Chapter 4,” because the main character does not speak. You ever play a video game like “The Legend of Zelda” or “Portal” where everyone has lines except for the main character? That’s what this movie reminds me of. Except in this case, unlike say Link from “The Legend of Zelda,” we actually get some context fed to us as to why Boy does not speak, and it works.

The closest we get to the main character speaking is H. Jon Benjamin being a guiding voice for our protagonist, and he does an excellent job all the way through. He has a lot of lines in this movie. While I sometimes complain about actors, particularly in voiceover roles, playing themselves like Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart practically did in “DC League of Super-Pets,” I am going to give H. Jon Benjamin a pass because there is an endless sense of energy in his performance. He is one of the best parts of this movie, and we do not even see him! On top of that, if you have never heard H. Jon Benjamin’s voice, turn on any episode of “Bob’s Burgers” right now because he is legendary. There is a saying in film that you should show instead of tell. That should always be the priority. But if you want to know how much I enjoyed this movie, I will remind you that H. Jon Benjamin’s “telling” is probably some of the coolest I have witnessed in cinematic history. He can make anything sound epic, and he is only helped by a dynamite script.

It only makes sense that someone like H. Jon Benjamin would have a voiceover role in this film, because not only does it feel like a video game, it has a lot of cartoony elements. Yes, the movie is live-action. But going back to the costumes, the movie rides a fine line with them to the point where they feel authentic, but fantasy-like. The violence is over the top, creative, and bloody to no end. A lot of the dialogue is expressive, comedic, and leans into an occasional digression here and there. Also, one of the key points of this movie is the Culling, which gathers 12 people who are going to be murdered on live television. The way the movie goes about handling something like this, to my surprise, makes me buy it. If you ever watch live sports, you would notice how riddled they are with commercialism and sponsorships. When we get to the Culling, we find out the assigned killers are dressed as breakfast cereal mascots. I do not want to see a future where we have deadly events like this. But if we ever get to that point, I can see a timeline where something like this happens. After all, people need to get paid, and big corporations need to sell cereal. It’s a win win. And in “Boy Kills World’s” favor, it adds to the humor of it all despite the movie being dark and gory. There is a fun side to it.

This movie is not only killer when it comes to style, but it slays when comes to substance. Story-wise, the movie does a good job at letting us get to know about not just our protagonist, but it also does the same when it comes to handling his sister. I thought she was a standout. From the marketing, this looks like a movie that was going to deliver on action, maybe let the story take a back seat. But no, I was pleasantly surprised by how invested I became in the plot, and the details of our protagonist. This movie has multiple winning combos. A revenge tale mixed with a dystopian vibe. One of this generation’s great physical actors mixed with one of this generation’s great voice talents. And on top of the sick action, you have an admirable story. What more could you want out of a movie like this?

In the end, it is a shame that “Boy Kills World” only made 3 million bucks at the box office, because it is one of my favorite films of the year so far. It kind of reminds me of one of my favorite comedies of last year, “Bottoms,” not only because it delivers on laughs, but because it is set in a world that makes up an occasionally absurd set of rules that I can somehow buy into. If you want to see action that pushes the limits, this movie is for you. If you are not a fan of blood, violence, gore, or seeing people get killed in creative ways, maybe stay away from this one. But I am a sick person, so this movie was certainly for me. I am going to give “Boy Kills World” an 8/10.

“Boy Kills World” is unfortunately, not playing in many theaters right now. I checked for showtimes in Los Angeles and New York City and could not find anything. If you live where I live, in Massachusetts, there is one theater playing it in Rockport right now. Not sure where else it is playing. But if it is playing near you, see it. I endorse this film. Otherwise, you can preorder it right now to watch on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Challengers!” Stay tuned! Also, be sure to check out my reviews for “The Fall Guy,” “Tarot,” “IF,” and “The Garfield Movie.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Boy Kills World?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie you saw this year you wish more people were aware of? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Joy Ride (2023): Four Young Women Go Global to Deliver the Hardest Laughs Imaginable

“Joy Ride” is directed by Adele Lim, and this is her directorial debut. Prior to this outing, she has spent a much of her career writing various movies and TV shows. This film stars Ashley Park (Girls5eva, Emily in Paris), Sherry Cola (Turning Red, Good Trouble), Stephanie Hsu (Everything Everywhere All at Once, The Marvelous Ms. Maisel), and Sabrina Wu. This film is about four Asian American friends who go to China together in search of one of their birthmothers.

It is hard to find good comedies nowadays. I am not saying it is impossible. But usually when I think about some of the funnier recent movies, they honestly come from movies that could not be defined as comedies by themselves. “Free Guy” had me busting a gut, but you could argue that it is more of an action-adventure film than a comedy. The Marvel Cinematic Universe has delivered plenty of humor, but again, those are action movies. At times, “Everything Everywhere All at Once,” which is sort of a blend between action, adventure, and science fiction, had me wheezing and shaking my body. The only true comedies I recall watching in recent years that have been really good are “The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent,” which yes, I guess you could say there is an actionish element there too. But in addition to that, I also really enjoyed films like “Clerks III” and “No Hard Feelings.” Either through a lack of good material or slim pickens, maybe both. If there are other comedies I saw, so be it, but that goes to show how weak the genre has been. When it comes to pure laughter, nothing has surpassed those titles. Sticking with the latter for a second, when I did my review for “No Hard Feelings,” I said I’m glad I saw it. However, I also said at the time, it was not even the funniest movie I have seen in the past few weeks.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is that movie.

Continuing to stick with the “No Hard Feelings” comparisons, I appreciated the raunch factor that movie provided. There are a few scenes that push some boundaries. But if you thought “No Hard Feelings” was dirty, hold your horses, because “Joy Ride” may the be, aside from maybe “Sausage Party,” the single filthiest movie I have reviewed on this blog. This film pulls no punches and unleashed all sorts of wild vulgarity that few movies of its kind have delivered. It is not as heavy in language as “The Wolf of Wall Street,” (the shorter runtime partially helps), but it nevertheless has tons of bombs and plenty of sexual content, much of which actually blends seamlessly with the situations at hand. There does not appear to be a moment of this movie that either feels tacked on or a waste of time. Everything works and is done to the point where it almost could not have been executed any better than it was. Though in all seriousness, if you are one of those people who does not like watching explicit scenes with parents, maybe find a way to watch this movie without them. Considering how “Joy Ride” was originally going to be called “Joy F*** Club,” it should not come as a surprise to know how naughty this movie is.

But just because this movie is all sex, all drugs, and all filth, does not mean it lacks a story. If anything I am pleasantly surprised with how amazingly laid out the story is. The concept is not too complicated, and if this movie had a minimalistic point a to b narrative to make me laugh, that would have been serviceable. But the trio of writers behind this movie decided to go beyond that barrier and not only bring a good story in addition to tons of laughs, but I would say when it comes to turning points, this film brings one of the best I have seen this year. I was kind of taken aback by how invested I became in the story for a film that is best described as a pure comedy. When I look back at movies like “Horrible Bosses” or “Anchorman,” I remember those movies not so much for the narrative, even though they tend to make sense, there is nothing broken about them. But I remember them mostly for the characters. Much like “Anchorman,” this film has a lead quartet that works both together and as individuals.

You have Audrey (left center), the serious lawyer who wants nothing more to remain successful and find her mom. Along for the ride is her best friend, Lolo (right), an artistic individual who has been by Audrey’s side since her youth. Also on the team is another artsy type, Kat (left), a famous actress, played marvelously by Stephanie Hsu, whose top tier work in “Everything Everywhere All at Once” is followed up nicely here. Finishing things off is Deadeye (right center), Lolo’s cousin, who deeply loves k-pop. Of the group, she seems to be the geek type. Not in a shy, reserved way though. Each individual appears to be rather outgoing, which matches the party-like vibe of the film from start to finish, but much like certain geeks such as myself, her obsession for what she loves is crystal clear.

Overall, the phenomenal lead cast makes this movie shine. The four lead women may not be the most well-known performers. Personally, the only one of the bunch I could have picked out was Stephanie Hsu. And unfortunately, due to how bad this film did at the box office, they might remain as such. But they make this movie worth the watch. All of the cast members play off each other perfectly and I loved every second they were on screen. I do not think a sequel is in the cards right now for “Joy Ride,” but I would love to see these four together again in some capacity. They did a great job.

The supporting cast is great too, between everyone on the basketball team to those in Audrey’s family, but perhaps the highlight of said cast would have to be Meredith Hagner (Search Party, Disenchantment). Hagner plays Jess, a drug smuggler, and she is not in much of the movie, but the scene she is in is one of the film’s best. Look out for it, if you like gross humor, you might be entertained.

One of the best things about “Joy Ride” is that despite how it is heavily marketed as a laugh out loud comedy and contains all sorts of vulgar humor, it does not shy away from being heartfelt. Because I like these characters so much, I not only end up rooting for them, I feel bad for them when something tends to not go their way. When the characters hit a certain low, I am hoping they get back up. There is a certain goldilocks zone with this film by the end of it that despite being filled with dark humor through most of it, it ends up meshing together with, like the title, a joyful vibe. Check out this film, you’ll laugh, you’ll have a good time, and it is the filthiest comedy I have seen in years.

In the end, “Joy Ride” does not always make sense. But even in its more unrealistic moments, there is a sense of immersion in them. This movie builds a world around it in which I found myself invested. The characters are layered, the jokes are hysterical, and the screenplay is more Shakespearean than it has any right being. If you are not cool watching certain films with your parents, think twice before turning “Joy Ride” on with them in the room. But I think this is a great film to watch with friends, or even by yourself. The premise may be simple, but the movie within the premise can only be described as a goldmine. I am going to give “Joy Ride” an 8/10.

Also, this movie would not be as good as it is if were not for the writers. Adele Lim, Teresa Hsiao, and Cherry Chevapravatdumrong are responsible for one of the best comedies in the past decade. Also, I want to shout out Cherry Chevapravatdumrong specifically, as she also wrote my favorite television episode of all time, specifically “And Then There Were Fewer” from the “Family Guy” series. I talked a bit about the episode a few years back and it still remains a gem in my book. Here is hoping we get more good material from her, in addition to Lim and Hsiao.

“Joy Ride” is now playing in theaters and is also available to rent or buy on VOD platforms.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One.” Also coming soon are my reviews for “Oppenheimer,” “Haunted Mansion,” “The First Slam Dunk,” and “Barbie.” 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 “Joy Ride?” What did you think about it? Or, what comedy has your favorite main cast of characters? Hard to pick one, but I would either have to go with “Ghostbusters” or “Anchorman” at the top of my head. Let me know your picks down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Blackening (2022): I Don’t Want to Play This Game Again

“The Blackening” is directed by Tim Story (Fantastic Four, Think Like a Man) and stars Grace Byers (Harlem, Empire), Jermaine Fowler (Coming 2 America, Superior Donuts), Melvin Gregg (The Way Back, Snowfall), X Mayo (American Auto, The Farewell), Dewayne Perkins (The Upshaws, Saved by the Bell), Antoinette Robertson (Hart of Dixie, Dear White People), Sinqua Walls (Power, American Soul), Jay Pharoah (Saturday Night Live, Unsane), and Yvonne Orji (Velma, Insecure). This horror spoof is about a group of friends who gather together at a house for a Juneteenth party. When the tables turn, it is up for each one of these friends to survive to the very end.

It is time for me to beat a dead horse. If you are going to take that statement literally, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. To be clear, as I have said in other reviews, horror is not my most watched genre. There are several major titles that I have yet to see, and I usually flock to genres like science fiction, action, and comedy prior to it. Although if you look back at the 2022 cinematic calendar, movies like “Smile,” “Barbarian,” and “Nope” just to name a few, were amongst my favorites of the year. Of all the genres, horror may have been the clear winner. 2023 horror has only had few candidates that I have seen. To be fair, it is not fall yet. More will be coming. But of the ones that I have seen, none have had the spark that any of those movies did.

M3GAN” was likable, and it had some decently executed commentary, but it also is not the most replayable film I have seen. Another horror comedy that came out recently, “Renfield,” was quite good. Though I had some minor problems with Awkwafina’s performance and even though it is funny, I would not call it laugh out loud funny. “Infinity Pool,” which came out early on in the year, felt like an instantly forgettable headache inducer. As great of a performer Mia Goth is, I cannot tell you one thing I enjoyed about “Infinity Pool” that stood out aside from that.

Now we have “The Blackening,” which much like “Renfield,” blends horror and comedy together but seems to extremify both of those elements just a bit more. Whereas “Renfield” could be described as a comedy, I would put “The Blackening” in the category of spoof. Now, I am pretty weak on spoof horror myself, so my expectations may have been somewhere in the middle. Although the more I looked at the poster, the more I lowered said expectations. Thankfully, we got a movie that appears better than its poster, but that is not saying much.

“The Blackening” calls itself a comedy horror. Unfortunately, it does neither of those things well. The jokes do not land and neither do the creeps. I have seen bad comedies and just as awful horror flicks. When you combine the two together in this case, it only delivers twice the disappointment. Two wastes of genres happen to be worse than one. It is simple math. This is not to say there are not inklings of entertainment at all. There is a chuckle here and there, and maybe one or two moments of genuine tension. The scene where the cast are all playing the board game for the first time may have been the highlight of the film. Between everyone’s performances and the pacing of the script, it is a genuinely tense, occasionally humorous instance in what is otherwise a below average film.

The biggest problem I have with “The Blackening” is that the characters, despite their respective actors trying their best with each one, feel interchangeable. Even if there are individual traits given to each character, they all feel like the same person in a different body. Maybe that is what makes them good friends, but it does not help when it comes to indicating things about them that stand out. I ended up caring about certain characters more than others. That is to the point where I likely did not give a crap if someone else ended up dying before the others did.

I saw this film a month ago during a free screening. Knowing what the results of said movie are, I do not think it is worth paying for. Maybe your reaction will be different. The film did get plenty of reactions at my screening ranging from laughs to gasps to hollers. If I had to pick a favorite reaction of mine, in the earlier half, one guy saw something that threw him off. Therefore, this allowed him to swear loud enough for the whole theater to hear. I am not usually for talking during movies in the cinema. But if it is reactionary, I can make an exception. Honestly, I kind of chuckled at his reaction. Speaking of being honest, I would truthfully confess that this guy’s reaction to said scare, may be have been funnier than most of the comedy this movie was trying to deliver. Although if there is one thing I noticed during my screening, and I do not know if this will be the case during yours because with the amount of movies out right now, it is that this movie may be interesting to watch with a crowd. The audible reactions were almost through the roof by the end. Knowing the two genres of this film, I am aware of their infinite subjectivity. Comedy and horror will sit different with each individual perhaps more than action. As of this writing, the film has an 87% critic score and 85% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. It seems to be sitting well with a lot of people. I cannot say the same for myself. I do not know, I think while I may continue to recall the tension of some moments while the players were around the game board, I will equally recall the cringe that was induced whenever this movie resorted to a gag about reading people’s minds.

Going back to the end, my last critique to (literally) end this review, is that the ending is not satisfying. I have seen worse endings, I have seen better endings. However, this movie tends to wrap itself up too quick. Calling it anticlimactic would not be the right description, but that is the closest word that comes to mind. Basically when the movie ended, I felt indifferent. I was not angry, nor was I happy. The right word to describe my mood at such a point may be “content.” I want to leave a film feeling some sort of reaction. If I leave feeling silent, there better a good reason for it. A lack of passion for what I just saw is far from one of them. Again, the scores on this film are mostly positive. Perhaps you will feel different. Maybe go try the movie for yourself sometime and see if that is the case.

In the end, “The Blackening” came and gone like the wind. One moment it was in front of me, and in the next, I wanted to know if there was a better movie that I could watch. Speaking of better movies, if you look hard enough, you can find better comedy and horror titles. When it comes to comedy and horror blended together, “Renfield” just came out a couple months ago. That film delivers more laughs in addition to scares. It is no masterpiece, but it is worth the watch. There are a ton of movies out right now. Of those films competing for your hard earned money, “The Blackening” is not what I would call the prime candidate. I am going to give “The Blackening” a 5/10.

“The Blackening” is now playing in theatres everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon I will have reviews for movies like “Transformers: Rise of the Beasts,” “The Flash,” “No Hard Feelings,” “Elemental,” and “Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken.” Stay tuned! If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Blackening?” What did you think about it? Or what is a movie with a high Rotten Tomatoes score that you disagree with? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!