“Look Back” is directed by Kiyotaka Oshiyama (Devilman: Crybaby, The Boy and the Heron) and is based on a manga of the same name. This film adaptation is about two girls who could not be more different. Fujino (Yumi Kawai) is a confident student who goes to school every day and Kyomoto (Mizuki Yoshida) is a shut-in, but the two end up sharing a connection through their love for manga and form an unlikely bond.
I am not exactly what one would call famous for my last minute purchases, but I can confirm that I have a history of making them. And this even goes for some of the movies I watch. I had not even heard of “Brian and Charles” until maybe an hour before watching the film when I popped on the first trailer from my home. But I found it to be a solid movie, and therefore a good use of my time even if I did not take much of it to consider watching the film. I remember going to see “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” on opening Thursday because my party and I had tickets to see “Noah” around the same time, but the showtime was canceled. Moments later, one thing led to another and we ended up seeing “Captain America: The Winter Soldier,” which continues to reign as one of my top titles in the MCU. While not as last minute as those two, I was prompted to check out “Look Back” after seeing something something about it online. I booked a showtime the same day on the AMC app, and took my car to the mall to go watch the movie. I did not watch a trailer, or any other marketing. I knew almost nothing about the movie other than it being of the anime medium and the project being connected to someone who also created “Chainsaw Man,” which for the record is a property to which I have personally not given any of my time.
I am proud to say that not only is this one of the best last minute, barely researched purchases I have ever made, but this is one of the best films of the year. And I say this knowing about a chunk of this year’s animated slate. I know that “Inside Out 2” is getting tons of praise and making lots of money. I know that just a couple weeks ago, I have come onto this blog to sing praises about “The Wild Robot,” which is now in my top 5 DreamWorks animated projects. Despite seeing this film a couple weeks back, part of me still needs time to marinate and decide if I like this movie or “The Wild Robot” more. To be completely honest, those two are neck and neck for different reasons. While I think “The Wild Robot” is uniquely animated and offers an excellent take on parenting through the unlikely bond of a robot and a goose, I love this film for different reasons, and you could argue these reasons have bias attached to them. But while you could argue there is bias, it could also indicate that the people making the movie enormously understand their audience.
This film is about two young, passionate manga artists. They are not famous professionals. In fact, they are still in school. But they knew about each other sometime before having an encounter that goes in an unexpected direction. These characters have a common interest, but their personalities and lifestyles are not a match. Despite that, they find themselves in a situation where they end up bonding further and even working together. As someone who dedicates myself so heavily into various crafts such as this blog, my short films over the years, or some of my more professional endeavors. I found traits from both of these characters that I also have seen in myself over the years.
Fujino represents me by highlighting one of my personal flaws. That being perfectionism. In a way, perfectionism should be a good thing. After all, I am dedicating myself so heavily to doing something so well that such efforts should be rewarded. Only problem is, perfectionism is not great when you want to keep your mind sane. This leads me to another aspect that comes into play for this character, particularly jealousy. Fujino starts off the film as the best manga artist of her peers. Her works are published in the school paper on a weekly basis. Everything is going great until she has competition in said paper. She sees the work of Kyomoto, a student who does not leave her home. This pushes Fujino to work harder and create something better than she feels she has donw previously. But we also see moments where Fujino’s envy gets the best of her. It prompts her to take a certain action that some would say is uncalled for.
Kyomoto is representative of myself as an introvert. Do I leave my house? Oh, of course. But I do not have many close friends. And I often go to events alone, many times with the most absolute of intentions. If any of my friends are reading this, I love you, but sometimes I need to be alone. It is nothing against you, I just like my space. I also sort of feel that way as an artist and a storyteller. Through my time working at a news station and making short films, I understand that projects like those often require collaboration and teamwork. But I also love making art because there are times where said art is directly based on something I came up with. Something I have imagined. I will start making something from scratch and finish it in a similar fashion all by myself.
This film also reminded me of another anime, Mamoru Hosoda’s “Belle,” because that film dives deep into how we see other people. But whereas “Belle” dives deep into the mystery of how people represent themselves online, we see the story throw a curveball of sorts when our main duo first meet. While we see Fujino channel her envy against Kyomoto, we find out Kyomoto is obsessed with Fujino’s work. It is quite poetic to be frank, because yes, Fujino may have doubted herself as an artist because of how she viewed Kyomoto’s work, but the moments leading up to the duo’s first encounter shows that Fujino’s work paid off. Not only was she flattered that someone appreciates her material, but that flattery came from her own rival.
Seeing these two together was one of this film’s many highlights. Every scene between them was believable and played a part in the film’s overall emotional touch. I enjoy stories where we see two different people somehow click by the slightest of miracles. But of course, the two people have to emit chemistry, and these two have it in spades. I watched the film in Japanese, and both voice actors play off each other perfectly. I believed every exchange.
The movie is also a beast when it comes to its technical aspects. It gets rather creative with its animation style. While the animation style takes a traditional 2D approach, it contains moments that have a manga feel to them. You can tell that there was some love dedicated to the medium in this film’s story. In fact, one of my favorite sequences of the movie from a technical standpoint is where we see Fujino draw a yonkoma, or a four-cell manga for those not in the know. We see the sequence play out from one cell to the next in a limited color spectrum. I thought the way that was done was clever. It kind of reminded me of the “Diary of a Wimpy Kid” movies, where we see the footage transition from live-action to the diary drawings. It is a nice visual despite its limited effort.
By the way, I listened to the film’s soundtrack while making this review. It is excellent. Haruka Nakamura’s score is quite powerful. If “Look Back” is in a theater near you, I would by a ticket just to hear the music in all its glory. It was definitely a standout.
That said, if you are looking for an animated film to watch that can make you jump for joy, this is probably where I would instead recommend “The Wild Robot.” That film too has its teary moments, but perhaps not to the degree of this one. “Look Back” takes a riveting turn in the second half. I do not want to get into spoilers, but there is a moment that I could have not have predicted coming even from a mile away. The more I think about it, the more I look at the title of this film, “Look Back,” the more I maybe should have foreseen an emotional gut punch at such a point. But regardless, when this moment comes, the rest of the film is something that I cannot say made me sob my eyes out, but it is pretty sad to watch at times. Some could argue “Look Back” is an easy watch because of its short runtime, quick pace, and likable characters. But I will warn you that if you are someone who easily cries during more emotional films and wants to resist that feeling, then “Look Back” might not be your first choice. But if you can handle some tears, you are in for a film that pays tribute to the love of art, why people dedicate themselves to their passions, and explores an unlikely friendship between two characters who I came to adore by the film’s conclusion.
In the end, “Look Back” is one of those movies that reminds me of my love of art, my dedication to creativity, and how important it is to have other people by your side. It shows that we all have a story to tell, and sometimes those stories have their challenges. “Look Back” is one of my biggest surprises of the year. I had no idea this movie was coming out. And unfortunately, right now, it is only playing in one theater near me. But if it is playing somewhere near you, give it a chance sometime. This film is near perfect. I am going to give “Look Back” a 9/10.
“Look Back” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is for another animated movie, “Piece by Piece,” an all new documentary entirely presented in a LEGO artstyle. Is it a gimmick? Is it creative? You will find out soon enough. Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Saturday Night” and “Megalopolis.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Look Back?” What did you think about it? Or, what are some of your creative passions? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Joker: Folie à Deux” is directed by Todd Phillips (The Hangover, War Dogs) and stars Joaquin Phoenix (Don’t Worry, He Won’t Get Far on Foot, Gladiator), Lady Gaga (A Star is Born, House of Gucci), Brendan Gleeson (The Banshees of Inisherin, Troy), Catherine Keener (Being John Malkovich, Capote), Zazie Beatz (Deadpool 2, Atlanta), Steve Coogan (Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief, Philomena), Harry Lawtey (Industry, You & Me), and Leigh Hill (Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, Game of Thrones). This is the sequel to the 2019 film “Joker” and once again follows Arthur Fleck who this time around meets the love of his life, Lee Quinzel, while incarcerated at Arkham State Hospital.
Comic book movies this year have been a fascinating ride. If you told me that we would be getting only one Marvel Studios film this year, multiple prominent R-rated titles, and another movie from the same writers who did “Morbius,” I would have you called you crazy. Just to recap, I loved “Deadpool & Wolverine” and I hated “Madame Web.” Those movies are on two opposite sides of the spectrum. The former might be my favorite movie of the year, while the latter might be my least favorite movie of the year. And for those asking, I did not see “The Crow.” Going into “Joker: Folie à Deux,” I assumed that this movie would fall somewhere between “Deadpool & Wolverine” and “Madame Web” in terms of quality because those are on two extreme ends of my quality scale. Statistically, it makes sense. But I also realize that there is a lot of potential that could be fulfilled with a “Joker” sequel.
I say there is a lot of potential that could be fulfilled with a “Joker” sequel while also realizing there is just as much of a chance that nothing good could come from it either. After all, we got this sequel for the same reason we get sequels to lots of other movies. Money. The original film made history by being the first R-rated title to make a billion dollars at the box office. And one can argue it deserved to make a lot of money. It was a well made film that not only differentiated from other comic book movies at the time, but it was a well-crafted, well-directed, well-acted story that highlights how some of society tends to look at mental health. In addition to its praise from other bodies during awards season, “Joker” was nominated for 11 Oscars and took home two. If you are an executive at Warner Bros. and you are looking at the financial success and extended conversation that came about because of “Joker,” chances are you would want to greenlight a sequel. Personally, if I were there, I would be a bit hesitant. The first film ends a on satisfying note and I am not sure where I would want to take the story next. But I do admire the sequel taking a big swing with the idea that there were going to be musical elements attached. That is something we do not see in stories based on comic books. Forget “La La Land,” I want to know more about “Ha Ha Land!”
There is no doubt that “Joker: Folie à Deux” takes big swings, and because of how much money the last one made, it is likely that this sequel could get away with a lot of them. But it misses on each one. “Joker: Folie à Deux” is a movie that does not really understand its own identity. I think there are times when movies can be a bunch of different things at once, but “Joker: Folie à Deux” does not stand out positively in regards to any of its disciplines. When it comes to being a jukebox musical, it is annoying. That is if it technically is a jukebox musical. We will get to more on that later. As a courtroom drama, it is a bore sometimes. There are select moments that kept me interested, but it is kind of off and on. As a sequel documenting Arthur Fleck’s progression as a character, there is almost no progression to be seen. Yes, we see him meet Lee and that plays a part in the story. But a good portion of the sequel is a reflection of what happened in the first film. There is nothing wrong with referencing consequences in a case like this, but the movie spends so much time reflecting on its past that it forgets to live in the present. Yes, the story is about the aftermath of its 2019 predecessor, but the movie does not do a ton to explore this character any deeper.
I enjoyed the first film. I found it to be a fascinating study on how a broken man like Arthur Fleck transformed into someone who became a face of chaos. I was invested in his story, his journey. I was not invested in Arthur’s arc this time around. Sure, there are moments that had my attention. But again, these are moments in an otherwise excruciating film. When you spend an extended period of time in court hearing about and reflecting on the events of a successful first movie, all that comes to mind is the idea that if I had time on my hands, I would probably rather go back and watch that movie again instead of this one.
It is kind of like what I said about “Furiosa” earlier this year, which was not horrible, but it ended in such a way where I thought I should go back and watch “Fury Road” again as opposed to the movie I just watched, which I found to be inferior.
“Joker: Folie à Deux” plays very much like the finale to the popular TV series “Seinfeld.” Much like that finale, “Joker: Folie à Deux” piggybacks off the success of its predecessor and fills so much time referencing said predecessor. Both projects spend a lot of time in court where said references come to life. But they are both missing a spark of what made the older material click. Both projects tend to put its main characters in uncomfortable positions. Not just in the story, as many projects should. But as a viewer, I can say I watched both of these feeling a bitter taste in my mouth. The “Seinfeld” finale goes out of its way to spoon-feed to the audience that its regular cast just so happen to be morons. “Joker: Folie à Deux” centers around someone who has a criminal history, which we have seen before. Without going into specific details, I do not need to watch “Joker: Folie à Deux” with the need to “root” for somebody who did what they did in the previous movie. But at minimum, I want to be engaged. And the film does not allow me to do that much.
I would like to talk about the film’s musical elements, that is if you can call them that or if the crew can actually confirm if this movie is a musical to begin with. Again, we will discuss more on that soon… Because the way I see things, this film fails miserably as a jukebox musical. Yes, there are no original songs. Did I recognize any of the songs in the movie as they were being performed? Sure. Could I tell you what the songs in the movie were if you ran into me on the street? Probably not. The lead duo’s singing in this film is kind of off and on. But when it is off, it is off. Never once was I watching these two and felt a complete sense of immersion. This is also really sad because I saw the movie at my local IMAX, which just so happens to be one of the few locations showing the movie in the brand’s coveted 1.43:1 aspect ratio, which is often used when shooting and presenting Christopher Nolan’s movies. When we get to the musical sequences, the screen goes from scope to IMAX and personally, I notice it. But not once do I “feel” it. This movie does not do anything to make its musical or singing sequences exciting. The ideas represented in each song do not change much. They are often a distraction from the story as opposed to a part of the story. Can Lady Gaga sing? Of course she can. But I am not going to pretend she does her best work here. If you want to see Lady Gaga sing like a champ on screen, just go watch the 2018 edition of “A Star is Born.” She is incredible in that.
Although if there is one thing I like about the musical sequences, there is some cool set design. There is one sequence where we see the leads together in front of a clearly fake night sky with a “Hotel Arkham” in the background. I thought that set in particular was atmospheric. It looked nice. But the sequences themselves are sometimes a drag or simply outright unmemorable.
You might think I am not satisfied with these sequences because I have an agenda against musicals. To me, musicals are like any other genre, if there is a project in it that appears to be done decently, it has my interest. If you want a review for a musical that I think needs more attention, than check out my thoughts on Steven Spielberg’s “West Side Story.” I was looking forward to seeing what “Joker: Folie à Deux” can do with its musical elements. I knew that these elements were in the movie before I watched it. But I looked back at the marketing, and part of me wonders how good of a job the marketing team did at implying that this movie was going to be a musical. Every time I watched the teaser trailer and I saw the shot of the spotlight shining on Arthur and the scene with Hotel Arkham, I realized those moments were musical-like. I thought people would pick up on that. But I watched with this movie with my dad. In fact, we went to see “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” together last month and the “Joker: Folie à Deux” teaser played in front of it. Maybe my dad’s trailer retention is not the greatest, but we ended up seeing this movie together too and he was not expecting a musical out of a film like this. For the record, he told me straight up, he does not like musicals. He made that clear when the film ended. Kind of like the first “Joker,” I respect this sequel for putting things in it that we do not usually see in a comic book-based film. I wanted all the musical shenanigans to work. But the singing was not the greatest. The songs were not that good. The movie kind of reminded me of “Dear Evan Hansen,” which did not work for me as a musical partially because the transitions to the numbers themselves did not come off as seamless as maybe they could have. They felt very out of place. There is one, maybe two numbers in the movie that feel natural in terms of that movie’s atmosphere. But that is about it.
Some of you might be reading this with the urge to ask several questions. For those who had no exposure to this movie, you may be wondering how musical elements got into the project to begin with. And others may wonder why the heck I am calling “Joker: Folie à Deux” a musical at all. Because if you ask one of its stars, Lady Gaga, or its director, Todd Phillips, they will say this film is not as much a musical, as opposed to a movie with a ton of music in it. If you ask me, “Joker: Folie à Deux” is simply a bad attempt at a musical. It is a musical that places its songs as an afterthought. I would like to use a quote from YouTuber Jeremy Jahns’ “Transformers: The Last Knight” review. This quote has more to do with that film’s pacing, but hear me out. “In the end, it’s how long a scene feels, not how long it actually is.” The same principle applies to this film’s identity and genre. Lady Gaga and Todd Phillips can try to sell me on the notion that “Joker: Folie à Deux” is not a musical as much as they want. But even though I sometimes think the phrase “the customer is always right” can sometimes be overused and presents cases where that is not always accurate, as a customer who bought a ticket to this movie, all I saw was a bad musical. That is what my dad who went with me saw too.
But let us say that “Joker: Folie à Deux” is somehow not a musical, and instead just a movie with plenty of singing. I do think there is a place in cinema for non-musical movies where the characters do a lot of singing. One example that comes to mind is Mamoru Hosoda’s anime, “Belle,” which is about someone who develops a virtual singing career. The moments where the lead character in that film sings occasionally play out like a musical. They’re visually creative and are presented in a massive scale, but those moments are not straight up musical sequences per se… Though there is one moment that takes a lot of inspiration from Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast.” But unlike “Joker: Folie à Deux,” each song in “Belle” effectively furthers the story and just so happen to be presented in sequences where not once did I have the illusion that a gun was locked right next to my head. Additionally, the soundtrack to “Belle” itself contains banger after banger after banger. I have found myself not just rewatching “Belle” at home more times than I would like to admit, but also listening to the songs from the movie in my spare time such as when I am in the car or when I am doing reviews like these.
Now that such an overblown, elongated, supersized rant about whether or not this movie is actually a musical is over, you might be thinking… Did I like anything about the movie? Well, yes.
For starters, the film does carry a few consistencies from the previous installment that also work the second time around. Joaquin Phoenix does a good job in the lead role. I do not think he is going to win an Oscar this year unlike he did in the first movie. But he puts on a captivating performance. Although to be fair on that “no Oscar this year” comment, I think the material this time around did him fewer favors than what he had in front of him for the first movie. Lawrence Sher also returned to do the cinematography, which like the first film, is really good. In fact, you could argue it was improved from the last movie. This film feels slightly bigger than the last one in terms of its scale. I do not know if I saw $200 million brought to the screen like the budget suggests, I would assume Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga got a good chunk of that money. But as I mentioned earlier, I like how the movie uses IMAX technology. Judging by everything I said so far, you can probably tell I am in no rush to buy the Blu-ray. But I hope if they do put one out, Warner Bros. allows the release to show an expanded aspect ratio during the IMAX scenes. Another consistency that I love in this film is the score. Like Joaquin Phoenix did for Best Actor, Hildur Guðnadóttir won an Oscar for her work on the original film in the category of Best Original Score. Personally, it was not my favorite score of the year. I think Alan Silvestri’s music in “Avengers: Endgame” was that year’s winner for me. That and Michael Abels’ work on “Us” was quite good too. But I remember hearing the “Joker” score and it captured the dark tone the film carried at times. It is not exactly depressing, but can easily induce a sense of discomfort. And “Joker: Folie à Deux’s” score does the same thing. It really shows how good your score is when an image or scene of the movie from which it originates comes to mind, and when you are thinking about said image or scene, you hear a glimmer of that score in your head at the same time. When I think about “Star Wars” sometimes, I will think of a certain moment and easily attach John Williams’ music to that thought. Hildur Guðnadóttir’s work has that power in both the original film and this sequel.
There is also one scene in the movie that I will not go too heavily into because it does involve potential spoilers, but there is a moment where Arthur is asked to sign someone’s book. While the autograph is being written, the person who gave the book says something that prompts a certain reaction out of Arthur. “Joker: Folie à Deux” is a movie that unlike many other comic book-based projects, does not have many laughs. But knowing what this movie entails, it does not need them. This one moment in particular though was hilarious. If you somehow drag yourself to the theater to check this monstrosity out and remember this part of the review, you will know which scene I am talking about when it comes up. It was a highlight of the movie for me.
The film also tends to maintain consistency with other stories about Joker and Harley Quinn, or in this case, Arthur and Lee. In the story, these two, as much as they like each other, show signs that they may not be the best match. I thought the film at times does an okay job at highlighting that. But at the same time, whether it was trying to highlight that or not, as I watched Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga together on screen, those two actors honestly could have played off each other a little better. Watching these two together felt awkward at times. Was discomfort the point when it comes to this film’s lead couple? You can definitely make that argument. But the discomfort was exactly as it sounds. Straight up uncomfortable. I was not marveled by the two leads of “Joker: Folie à Deux.” If anything, they were missing a spark. Yes, they are played by recognizable people with talent, but their talents do not lend themselves to this movie.
For the record, “Joker: Folie à Deux” has been out since early October, so chances are some of you reading this have seen the movie, but for those who have not, I will not spoil the ending. That said, we are going to talk about it. First off, it comes out of nowhere. Second, unlike the first movie, it does not feel satisfying. It is one of those endings that when you see it, you are left wondering if they forgot to finish the movie. Sure, it is somewhat conclusive, but there is a feeling of emptiness that comes with it. Is the ending bold? Perhaps. But again, this is another swing and a miss. Having seen this ending, it is a final note that would have honestly worked better if it were attached to the first movie. Knowing the climax of the first movie and how that all goes down, I think that if the climax of that first movie, as it was, came to an end, we see Arthur in jail, and a particular chunk of the second movie’s ending were implemented into the first, I think it would have been a better fit. In fact, as I said, I do not have anything against the first movie’s ending. But I think if that recently mentioned chunk were used to cap off the first film, it would have made for something incredible. It might be an ending that I would be talking about on a positive note for years to come. It would have been clever. The ending to “Joker: Folie à Deux” is a slap in the face. It left me speechless, confused, and a bit broken. The movie could have been a continued progression of the title character, or at least his alternate identity, but almost refuses to give any interesting expansion to him at all. And it culminates with maybe the most baffling ending I have ever seen in a movie based on a comic book.
This is one of those endings that tries so hard to be clever, but it fails to get any raw reaction out of me. It is the below freezing icing on the heavily wax-induced cake that is “Joker: Folie à Deux.” It is a contender to be the most controversial film I have reviewed in years. It is a film that seems to be confused in what its audience is. I found a decent number of people on the Internet who enjoyed this movie, but there is a reason why if you look at the box office, another clown-centered film, “Terrifier 3,” which for the record I do not plan to see, is currently finding its people and “Joker: Folie à Deux” is not. It appears to understand its purpose and who it is for. At the box office, “Joker: Folie à Deux” had the biggest second-weekend drop in comic book movie history. Clearly, I am not alone when it comes to adding to this film’s bad word of mouth. While this movie has some okay parts in it and looks nice, it is nowhere near enough to outweigh the pile of garbage that toppled me throughout its poorly paced runtime.
In the end, “Joker: Folie à Deux” just so happens to be a joke itself. But am I laughing? Absolutely not. There is a common consensus about sequels that they are usually not as good as their predecessor, but rarely do I recall seeing a step down as massive as this one. If anything, “Joker: Folie à Deux” reminds me of say my transition from “Star Wars: The Force Awakens,” one of my favorite films in the franchise, to “Star Wars: The Last Jedi.” If you read my review for “The Last Jedi,” you would know that I gave that film a positive grade when it came out. But the more I thought about the movie, and after rewatching it, the less I liked its story choices. And “The Last Jedi” and “Joker: Folie à Deux” are kind of similar in some ways. Both films look beautiful. They have good scores. But I am not a massive fan of the directions they took the story and certain characters. I wish we got something different with them. “Joker: Folie à Deux” only manages to support my thoughts that this property would have been better had the timeline just been one and done. I did not see the point of this movie other than to make a quick buck. Going into the movie, I would have argued it could have garnered some awards talk because of the previous film’s success, but this film is not receiving the best word of mouth. If I were to picture this movie’s fate at next year’s Oscars, I think it will have a chance it being nominated for several technical categories. But I do not know if it will get any of the big ticket ones like screenplay, director, actor, or picture. “Joker: Folie à Deux” is not even the worst comic book movie of the year. This sequel has the abomination against humanity known as “Madame Web” to thank for that. But “Joker: Folie à Deux” is probably the biggest disappointment I have seen in a long time. I was looking forward to this movie. I thought it had potential. But all I saw was an iffy courtroom drama with bad musical and singing sequences, an underuse of Lady Gaga, a series of unmemorable events, and a big fat dumb ending. I am going to give “Joker: Folie à Deux” a 2/10.
“Joker: Folie à Deux” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now. Plenty of seats are available, I guarantee it!
Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Look Back,” “Piece by Piece,” “Saturday Night,” and “Megalopolis.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Joker: Folie à Deux?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the biggest step down in a franchise you have seen from a certain installment to the one that came after it? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Transformers One” is directed by Josh Cooley (Toy Story 4, Inside Out) and stars Chris Hemsworth (Thor, Rush), Brian Tyree Henry (Eternals, Godzilla vs. Kong), Scarlett Johansson (Iron Man 2, Don Jon) Keegan-Michael Key (Toy Story 4, Keanu), Steve Buscemi (Reservoir Dogs, Miracle Workers), Laurence Fishburne (The Matrix, Man of Steel), and Jon Hamm (Mad Men, Baby Driver). This film is about the origins of robots Orion Pax and D-16, who eventually become Optimus Prime and Megatron. As a team, these two and several others are given the powers and capabilities to change their planet, Cybertron, forever.
I was born at the tail end of the 1990s, so I was alive at a time when Transformers was continuously shrinking in relevancy. Then a big bang happened in 2007 when the franchise’s first Michael Bay-directed film came out. That is when I first heard about the property, that is when I also started watching it. I had little to no experience with any of the toys beforehand. And no, I have not gone back to watch any of the “Transformers” material from the 20th century. I am somewhat familiar with it. I am aware of “Transformers: The Movie” killing off all the Autobots and that scarring several viewers. But I have not seen the movie myself. But even with my lack of experience of older “Transformers” material, I can confirm that my biggest problem with a number of the live-action “Transformers” films of this era is that they do not feel as character-based as they could be. Not to mention, despite having “Transformers” in the name, the movies are more about the humans than anyone else. Admittedly, I like the first Michael Bay “Transformers” film. I had some fun with “Dark of the Moon.” “Bumblebee” was fantastic. And while it is not the most memorable of the bunch, “Rise of the Beasts” definitely has its moments.
That said, “Transformers One” removes the humans and makes the movie about its titular robots, which is refreshing. The movie is entirely set on Cybertron and features zero scenes on earth. Despite these differences, this movie arguably has the most human story I have witnessed from the “Transformers” franchise yet. It is very much an underdog story about rising up, questioning authority, and embracing the power of friendship.
The main friendship we see is that of Orion Pax (lower right) and D-16 (upper right), played by Chris Hemsworth and Brian Tyree Henry. I bought every moment of their connection. The two come off as genuine friends. They have some admirable moments where they bond, they stand up for each other, exchange items. The two are best buds. Both of their respective actors do a great job in this film, which relieves me. After all, this is yet another animated project featuring a cast of mostly celebrity voice actors whose names and faces are known in popular live-action projects. These people may as well have been used as a selling point to adults who would be weary about taking their kids to a film like this. Granted, some of these actors have voiceover experience. Scarlett Johansson was in “The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie” as well as “Sing 2.” Keegan-Michael Key has several voiceover credits including “Toy Story 4,” the 2019 “Lion King,” “Migration,” and “IF.” He’s doing well for himself in the voiceover department. Everyone does a good job here and the story serves them well.
This movie is perfectly paced. Every action scene had my attention. The character moments are admirable. The humor stuck the landing. It is not the funniest movie I have seen in years, but it had quite a few laughs. The best part about the movie, it follows a paramount rule of show business, which is to leave the audience wanting more. By the end of this film, I was happy with what I got, but there was a point where I wanted to see where these characters would take their adventures next. I remember when I saw “Transformers: Age of Extinction,” which finished on a note where certain ends were not tied together, and I did not really care as much as I could have. This film has a balance in its journey and conclusion where I was satisfied by what was in front of me, but it also left me eagerly hoping to find out what is next.
The film also has a nice polish to its animation. In this age, having bad animation in a major motion picture is kind of a surprise nowadays. But this film, like some others I have been seeing recently, has an individualistic look to it. I cannot say its style offers the diversity of the “Spider-Verse” franchise. But “Transformers One” is stylized just enough to have an identity of its own. The way the movie plays around with some of its shots are fast-paced and immersive. Cybertron itself is sometimes a sight to to behold. This movie is based on toys, so of course the color palette is eye-popping.
Despite my recent positives, I have problems with the movie. For one thing, the storyline is a bit predictable. Sure, as someone who knows about “Transformers,” and the way certain characters are, I know how some characters will wind up by the end of the film. That is not my biggest problem. But there is one other character in the film who as soon as I saw him in the beginning and the way he was written, it was not that hard for me to speculate where exactly this character would be taken. Again, this is a character who has been used in the franchise previously, including one of the Michael Bay movies, all of which I have seen. But I am willing to bet if this was my first “Transformers” anything, I would have nevertheless found this character’s path to be utterly predictable. Maybe unless I was a young child because I have not seen enough movies.
Speaking of young children, I do think that “Transformers One” is a fine family film. Although I would not necessarily say this movie is entirely kid-friendly. At least for all ages that is. There are a couple instances of violence, granted, it is cartoon violence, that kind of push the line as for what you can see in a modern PG movie. Heck, even some of the language pushes the line. There are no f-bombs or s-words here, but Bumblebee repeatedly refers to himself as “Badassatron.” If I had kids I would not prevent them from watching this movie. Heck, part of me would want to put this on for them before “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom,” which is rated PG and came out just before PG-13 was ever slapped onto a film. If my future children watch “Transformers One” say when they are 7 or 8, I have no problem with it. Ask me again if I become a father, but still… “Transformers One” is a good movie with solid action, a good story, and despite some moments that go a bit far, the movie manages to have positive lessons for its viewers to take with them. I would question taking a certain type of four year old for example to see “Transformers One” in the theater, but if they are a little older, things should be fine. Parents, if you are reading this, I say this as someone who is not a parent, so maybe I am just a moron, but use your own judgment. Despite being one of this year’s most attractive and colorful films, “Transformers One” might not be as well-rounded for all ages as say “Inside Out 2.”
In the end, “Transformers One” is an incredible time. Some people might be rejoicing right now and saying that this may be the first great “Transformers” movie in ages, or maybe even ever. For the record, I disagree. I think Michael Bay’s first “Transformers” is good. His third movie is good. Travis Knight’s “Bumblebee” might be my favorite of the live-action ones they have done. “Transformers One” is honestly up there with “Bumblebee” for me. If it were not for being one of this year’s more predictable narratives at times, that would probably be the one significant thing that could make a movie like this better. But “Transformers One” handles its material with excellence. It is great for both adults and kids. It might not be suitable for all kids, but I am sure many kids will enjoy this just fine. I am going to give “Transformers One” an 8/10.
“Transformers One” is now playing in theatres everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, I have another animated movie to talk about soon, and that is “The Wild Robot!” That review will be available soon. Also coming up, stay tuned for my thoughts on “Joker: Folie a Deux…” The most divisive movie in ages. My goodness… That review is going to be fun. …Probably. 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 “Transformers One?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie about friendship that you enjoyed? Let me know down below! Scene before is your click to the flicks!
“It Ends with Us” is directed by Justin Baldoni (My Last Days, Five Feet Apart) who also stars in the film as Ryle Kincaid. The film also stars Blake Lively (The Shallows, Gossip Girl), Jenny Slate (Everything Everywhere All at Once, Marcel the Shell with Shoes On), Hasan Minhaj (Babes, The Daily Show), and Brandon Sklenar (The Big Ugly, 1923). This movie is about a woman whose relationship with her neurosurgeon becomes upended when someone she previously dated reenters her life.
If there is a duo that ruled this summer for movies, it would have to be Ryan Reynolds and Hugh Jackman for their blockbuster hit “Deadpool & Wolverine.” But Ryan Reynolds is not the only one in his family making dough at the box office this summer. While not quite up to the $1.3 billion “Deadpool & Wolverine” has raked in so far, Blake Lively’s “It Ends with Us” is doing very well for itself. So far, it is past the $300 million mark on a $25 million budget. Frankly though, I am kind of surprised, because this is a movie that if I were an executive, I would second guess myself before letting it into theaters during mid-summer. Not that such a thing could be impossible, but it deals with a subject matter as serious as domestic violence. While there is romance, humor, and a recognizable name like Blake Lively, August would not have been my first choice when it comes to an appropriate time to release this film.
The fact is, I am not a woman. Instead, I am, not that it matters, as straight and white of a male as you can get. But I was nevertheless intrigued by the buzz this movie seemed to be getting, even if some of it seems to be due to its controversial marketing campaign. Having seen the movie, I can say that it was a decent watch. Was it perfect? By no means. In fact, a lot of the dialogue is cheesy, though nowhere as bad as a by the numbers romcom like “Anyone But You,” a movie that strictly made money because it was a rare film released at the year’s end that put stylistic sex appeal over substantive Oscar bait. In fact, even the movie’s characters know how cheesy its own script is at times. The film’s main character literally says so when she is introducing herself to the love interest! For those who have not seen this movie or read its respective source material, the main character’s name is Lily Bloom, and interesting enough, she is a florist! But there is also a balance when it comes to the script’s tones that just so happens to bind together. At times, the movie is cute. At others, it is funny. At others, it is serious. All of these elements are handled with care.
As for that last element, that is where this movie’s issue of domestic violence comes in.
I would like to make another thing clear, and maybe this will once again make me the last person you’d want to be talking about this movie, I have never had a girlfriend. I have never been in a relationship. I have, thankfully, been on neither end of a domestically violent relationship. I am not going to pretend I am an expert on the subject, nor should I tell others how to handle such a matter. All I can lend is my opinion on how the movie handles it. As for how the matter is handled in “It Ends with Us,” I was surprised to find that it comes off as kind of tame. Now do not get me wrong, domestic violence is a serious issue. And the movie, effectively, presents it as such.
The MPA has officially rated this film PG-13. Not the lowest rating of the bunch, but certainly not the highest. There is a lot that you can get away with in a PG-13 movie. Though like many other PG-13 flicks, the movie does only limit itself to one f-bomb. But as I watched the scenes where the relationship becomes dangerously physical, the violence is never over the top or graphic. I honestly do not mind this choice because I am trying to think about this from the perspective of someone who has dealt with a relationship like the one this movie presents. Would over the top violence or a little extra blood be too much for some people? Chances are that could be the case. This is a movie that gets its message across by showing people the wrongs of this couple’s relationship without overplaying said wrongs for a horrid, disturbing dramatic effect.
Even though we have war movies that tend to use bloody and gory scenes to captivate the audience and immerse them into the environment, I think “It Ends with Us” made a smart choice to hold back on its handling of domestic violence to make the movie a bit more user-friendly. If anything, part of me is also glad the movie turned out to be PG-13, because while a number of adults have probably witnessed domestic violence themselves, it is something that teenagers and young adults should probably learn about because depending on the person, they are at the point where they may be starting to think about dating, or relationships. It is something that they would perhaps need to know. Whether it means detecting certain behaviors from their partners or preventing people from becoming violent themselves.
I cannot name a single character in the movie I did not admire. Not only do I think the entire cast does a good job with their roles, but I buy into the chemistry between everyone. Whether we are talking about Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni as the two leads, or even Lily Bloom’s relationship in high school where we get to see Isabella Ferrer and Alex Neustaedter play sweethearts. Looking back, the scenes between those two young high school students are some of my favorite parts of the film. For the most part, they are wholesome. I appreciated some of Lily’s actions. And it did a good job setting up these two characters for the events that play out in the rest of the film. On that note, Brandon Sklenar stands out as an older Atlas much like Alex Neustaedter does playing the younger interpretation.
As a Bostonian, I would say this film does an okay job masking the fact that despite the story taking place in Boston, this movie was in fact shot in New York. Of course, the movie has an obligatory shot of the Zakim Bridge before it hides any sense it was shot somewhere else. There is one concept that I thought was pretty funny where there happens to be a bar that plays Bruins games, and encourages people to wear onesies to get free drinks. I do not know of a bar in Boston that does that. I should note this concept is also in the book. But I would not be surprised if someone sees this movie, or based on said movie’s growing popularity, reads the book, and starts this tradition somewhere in Boston.
I am not going to pretend that “It Ends with Us” is the must see title of 2024. But kind of like “Barbie” last year, it is probably one of the more important watches. It is a movie that I probably would not have selected as my first choice. Heck, I watched “Oppenheimer” two weeks before I watched “Barbie,” but I think it is a movie from which people will take something with them, while also still being quite entertained. And boy, am I surprised at the entertainment value this movie offers. It has its laughs, it has its smiles. It has its feel good moments. Yet at the center of it all is an issue that I can gladly say I never had to face, but I think could serve as a decent learning experience for those who have never seen it. As for those who have dealt with it, or those with more expertise on this issue than I, this begs me to ask… Is this movie’s depiction of domestic violence rightfully executed? Do you think they should have done it differently? I know this issue is not comfortable for everyone to talk about. I am not trying to pressure anyone. But as someone who does not have a ton of experience with this topic I am never against learning something new.
In the end, “It Ends with Us” surprised me. I almost ended up not seeing this movie. To be real, I went because my mom wanted to check it out and I thought I’d go with her. And I am glad I did. Also, considering how Blake Lively’s spouse, Ryan Reynolds has a big movie out, I wanted to see what Blake Lively herself had up her sleeve. Safe to say, it was something worth checking out. Regardless of how it was marketed, “It Ends with Us” is a good movie. Sometimes the dialogue is not the greatest and some moments feel oddly hokey. But I can forgive that. The film has a great cast of characters and I found the pace flying at times. This is not a movie that I would recommend to everyone, but I think it is one that should you decide to watch it, you will leave it thinking you have not wasted your time. I am going to give “It Ends with Us” a 7/10.
“It Ends with Us” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice,” the long-awaited sequel starring Michael Keaton. Stay tuned! If you want to see this upcoming review and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “It Ends with Us?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie you saw this year that surprised you? It could be a good or bad surprise. “It Ends with Us” ended up being one of my positive surprises, so if you would like to know a negative one, check out my review for the colossal disappointment known as “Argylle!” I like Matthew Vaughn, I like the cast, but the movie? Cast it into the fire for all I care! Let me know your surprise movies down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Reagan” is directed by Sean McNamara (Soul Surfer, The King’s Daughter) and stars Dennis Quaid (Frequency, The Day After Tomorrow), Penelope Ann Miller (The Artist, Kindergarten Cop), Robert Davi (Showgirls, Profiler), Lesley Anne-Down (Sunset Beach, The Bold and the Beautiful), and Jon Voight (Midnight Cowboy, Mission: Impossible). This film is about the life of Ronald Reagan from his childhood to his acting work to his political career.
Of all the movies I could have seen this year, “Reagan” was not a movie I was genuinely anticipating. The marketing made it look unbearably generic. In a sense, it came off as if it was made for television. And the only reason why it got a theatrical release is because of the actors on screen like Dennis Quaid. But what do I know? I went to go see this film less than a month ago at my local cinema, on opening weekend. And while I do not recall the theater being full, it actually got quite a large audience. Granted, the auditorium was on the slightly smaller side. But it showed there may have been more interest in this film than I expected.
But as for the movie itself, it is, as I thought it would be, bad. It is not the worst movie of the year, but it is definitely one of the most discombobulated and convoluted.
In fact, would you like to know how convoluted this movie becomes by the very end? Well, you do not even have to watch the movie to find out. Just go to the Wikipedia page! If you are reading this page years down the road, I have no idea if anybody will make any dramatic changes to the page, but as of this writing, if you go to the “Plot” section, there is a warning that reads, “This section’s plot summary may be too long or excessively detailed.” Even Wikipedia says this movie is overstuffed! The most unreliable reliable source on the Internet agrees with me! And calling Wikipedia the most unreliable reliable source is not an error! It is not inaccurate! Much like Wikipedia, Scene Before is written by some random moron on the Internet, so you can trust me!
During my time in school, history was a mixed subject for me. There are times I would do well in history, but as I got into high school, that’s where things started to fall apart. But one thing I would remember about history is the textbooks. Remember how huge those things were? Granted, time is enormous. There is a lot to go over. I can gladly say that “Reagan” is slightly more entertaining than a by the numbers history textbook. Something that amazingly could not be accomplished with the ambitious Czech film “Medieval.” But despite the massive size of history textbooks, they cannot quite cover every minor detail of an event. Much like a history textbook, I learned something. Granted, I knew Reagan was an actor. But I did not know how much of an impact he had on the Screen Actors Guild. Knowing his background as that union’s president makes sense considering his future in politics. As someone who was not alive during Reagan’s time as president, I thought I would learn something from this movie. I did not think it would be that.
With that in mind, “Reagan” does remind me of a history textbook because it goes over a lot in such little time. And in the same way, you could also say “Reagan” reminds me of CliffsNotes, which if you are a teacher reading this, is something your students are probably using to pretend they read “King Lear.” It feels like we are flying faster than the speed of light from one important moment of Reagan’s life to the next to the point where the impact of whatever moment came before is less than it should be.
There is one particular moment in this movie, particularly during the 1976 RNC, where such a lack of impact is noticeable. Let’s just say it presents a moment involving Reagan’s political ambitions, where he cannot quite make it to the top, only to have a much more monumental moment be presented to us several minutes later. The pacing between these scenes is too fast and lessens the depth of the Reagan character. It does not give enough time to sympathize with him during his lowest low. The movie just says, bop-da-le-skiddly-bop, onto the next scene!
At times, this movie does not really know what it wants to be. I mentioned the marketing makes “Reagan” look generic. Having seen the film, I can confirm it is quite generic. But it is not all generic. If anything, the thing that sets this film apart, is probably its most bewildering element. On top of the mostly linear story that we get regarding the life of Ronald Reagan, we also get several scenes between two men in present day Moscow. Those two men are Russian agent Andrei Novikov and KGB agent Viktor Petrovich, both fictional characters by the way. The duo spend some time in the latter’s home discussing why the Soviet Union fell. Now I get it. The Soviet Union and Russia were a hot topic during Reagan’s life and his time as presidency. Despite that, I honestly do not see how the movie benefits from any of the scenes between these two. This movie is already over two hours long, and boy did I occasionally feel the runtime. Do we really need to see these two on screen? No we do not! In fact, one of those fictional Russian characters, Viktor Petrovich to be specific, is played by Jon Voight. Part of me is convinced those scenes were kept just so you could have Jon Voight’s name on the poster! As for the duo’s performances, while not quite as comedic as an “SNL” sketch, they lacked a certain authenticity. Although Voight’s accent in particular is not doing him any favors.
As for the lead performance, I will not deny that Dennis Quaid had a monumental task in front of him. He had to play a well-known world leader. He had to play said world leader during various portions of his life. But his performance to me was a bit of a mixed bag. At times, he embodied the nature of Ronald Reagan. At others, he overemphasized his accent and presence. And at others, he was somewhat unconvincing. Again, I recognize the challenge at hand, but it does not change the fact that watching this performance on screen resulted in Dennis Quaid trying a bunch of different things only to have them all combine into something average at best. If you want to see a more convincing lead performance by someone who plays the same character in multiple parts of their life, just go watch Zendaya in “Challengers.” I did not love the movie, but I will not deny Zendaya did a great job in her role. But most of the performances in “Reagan” range somewhere between overdone, unmemorable, or mediocre. There are no performances in this movie that I would imagine to be nominated for an Oscar. Maybe one or two will get nominated for a Razzie, but it is hard to know whether they are going to be nominated simply because the performances are bad or because it is funny to nominate performances in political movies. This is, after all, the same awards body that nominated several members of the Donald Trump administration for their “performances” in the 2018 documentary “Fahrenheit 11/9.” I try to avoid talking about my political views on Scene Before unless it is absolutely necessary, but if you must know my thoughts on “Reagan,” they are quite simple. Just say no.
In the end, “Reagan” is dull, bland, and all over the place. As fast as this movie moves, it oddly feels kind of slow. Occasionally, it gives you little time to take in one scene before quickly waltzing straight onto the next. The performances are nothing to write home about. You could literally take out all the scenes between the men in Moscow and dramatically improve the film’s substance. There are no positives in this film that stand out, but at the same time, I cannot say the film is incompetent. It is well shot, well lit, and the locations are okay. But the movie itself is kind of forgettable. It is almost kind of propaganda-like in its presentation. Some of the lines just feel oddly preachy and over the top at times. Maybe that was the intention. Maybe not. But again, if you want to know about my thoughts on “Reagan,” I wonder if my score of 5/10 will give you any hints.
“Reagan” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now!
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “It Ends with Us,” the brand new film starring Blake Lively. Stay tuned! If you want to see this review and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Reagan?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie heavily involving a U.S. President? I’ll even count fictional ones. Shoutout to “Air Force One” for being totally awesome! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“My Old Ass” is written and directed by Megan Park (The Neighbors, The Secret Life of the American Teenager) and stars Maisy Stella (Nashville, Spirit Riding Free), Percy Hynes White (The Gifted, Wednesday), Maddie Ziegler (Music, The Fallout), Kerrice Brooks (The Prom, How We Roll) and Aubrey Plaza (Parks and Recreation, Dirty Grandpa). This film is about a young girl who gets a chance to talk to her older self. Once the younger self receives advice from her older self, the story showcases the younger self’s journey as she takes or leaves said advice.
There are some ideas that make you go “Why didn’t I think of that?” As someone who is heavily into film, I find myself saying that sometimes about the movies I watch. The more I think about “My Old Ass,” that is a film that fits within that sphere. The only thing is, I am 24. But as someone who watched this movie at such an age, I think it probably would have been a good idea years down the road. Then again, as a 24 year old, I would still say some things to my younger self, telling them my regrets, the things to look forward to, maybe to invest in GameStop for a short time in 2021. By the way, read my review for “Dumb Money” if you want to see people do things in 2021 that I probably should have… Stupid brain.
But I love this idea of an older self and a younger self communicating with each other. And I have to say the way it was executed was very well done. First off, while these two are not dead ringers of each other, I buy Maisy Stella (right) and Aubrey Plaza (left) as the same person, specifically Elliott. They seem to carry a number of mannerisms that make them come off as the same individual, but differentiate enough to the point where they feel like they are not the same age. Aubrey Plaza’s character is giving Maisy Stella’s character advice, including one piece at which she seems to scoff at first, particularly hanging out with her brothers. I bought into the execution of the advice, I bought into the younger self’s reaction. I think the way the movie goes about its concept is hypnotizing and clever.
I also have to say that I came very close to having an enormous complaint about this movie. I thought the way this movie was handled in terms of its structure, in terms of its characterization, and the end results of certain character arcs, would amount to something rather predictable. As we got to the movie’s end, the movie takes a sudden turn that I could have never seen coming. It is arguably the most positive out of left field moment I experienced watching a film this year.
I kind of like the way this movie handles its relationship between the two main selves, and the way the story progresses between them. If you are a teenager reading this, if you look back at your current time in life with no problems or regrets, then you probably have lived a different life than the vast majority of the world’s population. I would say I was smart as a teenager, but I would also say that there are moments in my life where my older self would tell my teenage self to go in a different direction. In a perfect world, my teen self would listen to my older self because, well, that is me. I might as well be my own best teacher, or perhaps more appropriately, my own worst critic. But this movie shows the moments where the teen self has trouble listening to or acknowledging the advice of the older self, but it makes sense. After all, let’s face it, I think everyone can agree on this in regards to any point in our lives, but it is especially true in the teen years. We might not agree on every single piece of advice given to us. We might think we have everything down, but the reality is we might not know what exactly is down the road. Short term we might think something is good for us, but long term? Maybe it is not as good as we think, at least from a certain point of view. There is one particular relationship that plays out where we see this come to fruition.
This movie also shows how we hold our entire time on this earth near and dear to ourselves. While this movie shows how stupid or clueless we can be as teenagers, it also shows us that our choices make us who we are. It shows us that everything happens for a reason, and maybe if we make one stupid or clueless choice, maybe it is worth it because something better lies ahead or there is something else in life to look forward to. There is one quote in the movie, it is also in the trailer, specifically from young Elliott, that I love. Specifically, “If you weren’t young and dumb you wouldn’t be brave enough to do anything.” I adore this quote because not only is it true that many of us tend to become more calculated as we age, perhaps we play things safer. But it also implies that sometimes big risks can lead to big reward. What may seem like an unlikely or dumb decision could also turn out to be a life-changing moment. When we are young, we have our entire lives ahead of us. There is room for error. It never hurts to try something new, take a chance, open our minds. Granted, we should also use logic in our decision-making. But it does not mean we should not be open to risk every once in a while.
Will I watch “My Old Ass” a second time? If we are talking tomorrow or the next week, maybe not, unless someone requests to see it at the theater with me. That said, I probably would not go watch it alone as there are plenty of other movies I need to get around to watching. As far as replay value goes though, I think it would be fun to maybe check out “My Old Ass” again in 15, 20, maybe 25 years. Because I watched this film as someone who is closer to the younger self’s age, but I am curious to know, given the life experience I would have in the coming years, what commonalities I would have to the older self. I would watch “My Old Ass” again for that reason. Well that, and the fact that the movie is in fact quite entertaining.
In the end, “My Old Ass” is a movie that makes you laugh and think. It makes you ask questions about the choices you have made in your life and whether they were worth making. As someone who is still on the younger side, it got me thinking about my future and what kind of path I would like to make for myself moving forward. The chemistry between Maisy Stella and Aubrey Plaza is perfect. A lot of the supporting characters are likable. And I honestly left the movie wanting more. I am going to give “My Old Ass” a 7/10.
“My Old Ass” is now playing in select cities, and will be available in more theaters later this month. For my viewers near me in the Greater Boston area, you can catch the film in select cinemas starting Thursday, September, 19th. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the biopic “Reagan.” Stay tuned! Also look forward to my thoughts on “It Ends with Us” and “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice!” 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 “My Old Ass?” What did you think about it? Or, what is something you would tell your younger self, or even ask your older self? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Skincare” is directed by Austin Peters (More Than an Athlete, Give Me Future) and stars Elizabeth Banks (The LEGO Movie, Spider-Man), Lewis Pullman (Lessons in Chemistry, Top Gun: Maverick), Michaela Jaé Rodriguez (Pose, Loot), Luis Gerardo Méndez (Me Time, Half Brothers), and Nathan Fillion (Firefly, The Rookie). This film is about an aesthetician whose life turns upside down when a rival opens their business across the street from hers.
As someone who loves filmmaking, I often talk about some of my favorite directors like Steven Spielberg, Christopher Nolan, and Denis Villeneuve. Given my passion for what goes on behind the scenes, some of you might figure I am above talking about my favorite actors. That is not the case. If you want to know what, or in this case, who, sold me on watching “Skincare,” it is the same person who sold me on watching “Call Jane” a couple years ago, Elizabeth Banks. She is so incredibly dynamic and just a bundle of joy to watch in each one of her projects. She delivers on energy, personality, and can easily balance herself between comedy and drama. Additionally, with her time on ABC’s “Press Your Luck,” Banks also happens to arguably be my favorite game show host working today. I love this woman. I will watch her in almost anything. Granted, “Pitch Perfect” is not my cup of tea, and part of me has no desire to watch “Movie 43.” But I will watch her in almost anything.
In the case of “Skincare,” I came for Elizabeth Banks, but I stayed for the feature presentation, which ultimately impressed me.
If you have never heard of “Skincare” until this review, I cannot say I am too surprised. It is from a lesser known studio, IFC Films to be specific. And the movie opened in fewer than 800 theaters. But if I were to review this movie opening weekend, I would definitely recommend you see it. Especially over something like “Borderlands…” But I also would say if you have other options out there, I would not blame you for picking those instead. That is despite realizing that this movie would not be in theaters for that long. Because the structure of this movie is utterly predictable at times. Granted, there are glimmers of unpredictability sprinkled into what is ultimately a fairly formulaic script. But there are things about this movie that make up for that.
For starters, I like all the characters. I think each one is well written, and brought to life nicely by their respective actors. Going deeper into that idea, the rivalry between Hope (Banks) and Angel (Méndez) is one that had me intrigued from beginning to end. I almost cannot imagine anyone else playing these characters and this pair plays off each other perfectly. Knowing how much I liked their work together here, I would not mind seeing Banks and Méndez in another project together.
As for Elizabeth Banks on her own, praising her performance as Hope in this movie could come off as biased based on my established appreciation for the actor, but I am not kidding when I say she knocks her performance out of the park. Granted, knowing how the rest of the year will probably go, I do not think this performance will get a ton of awards buzz, but if there is any reason you should watch “Skincare,” Elizabeth Banks slaying her role should be at top of the list. I do not know where specifically I would rank this performance on Banks’s resume, but this is one of those that I can appreciate because of how unleashed Banks comes off at times, and based on the script, she is justified for coming off that way each and every time.
“Skincare” dives deep into reputation, specifically how it can change in an instant, and how you might not always have the power to change it yourself. It shows how our modern culture has allowed other people to paint a seemingly impressionable picture of you for everyone else to see. And said painter may have a certain power to them that makes it near impossible for you to get the public to not buy what said painter is selling. There is a scene in this film where we see Hope get hacked. Essentially, she sends a lewd email to all of her clients, and soon thereafter, all of her appointments are cancelled. That is just a small part of how this film deals with the way the public sees others.
Also, despite my complaint about this movie being by the numbers, it does not mean that it the script itself is bad. Granted, it does sometimes have the vibe of say a Lifetime movie, but when it is brought to life, it is done so with significantly better acting, more appealing aesthetics, and a vision that I bought into from beginning to end. And again, I can get behind it all because I found myself intrigued by all the characters, and I especially rooted for the lead. Everything makes sense and is wound together neatly. It is just that at times, some specific events that play out feel too familiar or as they are playing out I could easily paint a picture in my head of where things would be going only to have said prediction play out in front of me.
I had no idea about this as the movie was playing, but as I write this review, I found out the film is somewhat based on true events experienced by celebrity facialist Dawn DaLuise. The movie has quite a few similarities to those events, between how certain characters look and the way the locations are set up. But there are some noticeable differences too. Hope is dealing with different accusations and problems than DaLuise. The way the film goes about its problems had me engaged and they all flow together. But having read about DaLuise’s real life story, part of me is curious to know what would have happened had they done a more accurate take on the actual events. Granted, one of my favorite films of the past decade or so is “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood,” I do not always need 100% accuracy in my cinema. But knowing about some of what went down in real life, and what did not go down in this project, it begs me to wonder what it would be like to see a movie with a more true take on Dawn DaLuise’s story. Not that the movie we got is nonsensical, everything adds up and there is nothing that feels completely broken. To be real with you, “Skincare” is worth watching. It is one of the better movie experiences I had this summer and I wish more people checked it out. Hopefully it gets some more attention as the year goes on.
In the end, “Skincare” is quite a solid thriller, but it is unfortunately also overwhelmingly cliché and predictable. This movie is inspired by true events, but it is also true that this film has a structure to it that feels been there done that. The real reason why you should watch this movie is to see Elizabeth Banks put on a stellar lead performance. For me, Banks simply being in “Skincare” was its top selling point in the marketing. That said, having walked out of the movie, I can say that if I were to sell “Skincare” to you on the street, my appreciation for Banks’s performance would probably be the first thing that comes out of my mouth. A lot of the other stuff in this movie is just a bonus. I am going to give “Skincare” a 7/10.
“Skincare” is now playing in select 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 “My Old Ass,” “Reagan,” “It Ends with Us,” and “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice.” 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 “Skincare?” What did you think about it? Or, given how I mentioned Elizabeth Banks as a potential favorite game show host, I must ask, who do you think is the best game show host working today? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“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!
DISCLAIMER: Before we begin this review, I want to remind everyone reading this, while I do my best to keep certain details away regarding the film, there are parts of this review that involve some things in the movie that surprised me. I talk about those points in this review and chances are it COULD affect your viewing experience if you see them yourself. It is hard to call these points spoilers, because it does not necessarily have to do with the plot, but it does involve something that if you had zero idea about it going into this movie, I will probably ruin the reveal for you. All I will say is, if you want to see these surprises the way I did, click out of this review, and go see “Sing Sing” yourself. Otherwise, enjoy my thoughts on the movie!
“Sing Sing” is directed by Greg Kwedar (Transpecos, Rising from Ashes) and stars Colman Domingo (Lincoln, Fear the Walking Dead), Clarence Maclin, Sean San José (Life Tastes Good, Dream for an Insomniac), and Paul Raci (Parks and Recreation, Sound of Metal). This film is set in a maximum security prison where a group of men who work on plays together do all they can to bring their latest production to life.
When you go to the movies as often as I do, chances are you will run into an endless barrage of trailers. Sometimes you might get anywhere between four to eight in a single screening. Despite my constant eyeing of the screen, I cannot say I am able to witness everything the studios are putting out. Heck, I recall only seeing a trailer for “Deadpool & Wolverine” in theaters once before it came out. Although if you count that little thing they did before certain movies with the two leads telling the audience not to use their phones, I guess you can say I saw some other marketing material for the film as well. But my point is, my experience with the marketing for “Sing Sing” is next to none. At least for what I recall. I say this despite knowing one of the problems of being a frequent AMC customer is that I get so many trailers in select screenings that it is sometimes difficult to remember them all. I heard about the concept of the “Sing Sing” and I figured it could be a pleasing time. But the only reason why I went to go see this movie in the first place is because the screening for it was free.
It feels nice going into a movie blind. Especially as someone who is so constantly exposed to everything the studios are trying to sell me. But of course, compared to some of the other movies out this summer, I did not have a ton of excitement for “Sing Sing.” Although that is for good reason, because I did not know enough about “Sing Sing” to get excited. However, I can confirm I am quite excited to discuss this movie because it was a great experience. This is one of those movies, kind of like “CODA,” that is going to stick with me emotionally months after leaving the theater. To be clear, I do not think this film is as good as “CODA,” but much like “CODA,” “Sing Sing” was wholesome, moving, and beautiful.
There is a saying that you should not judge a book by its cover. And “Sing Sing” sort of fits that idea. Because when I look at this title, I think of innocence, I think of unity, I think of community, I think of… Well… Singing… For those who do not know, and I did not know this going in, Sing Sing is the name given to a prison where this movie is set. The name is derived from a Native American tribe. Despite that, this movie shows how much the act of performing is in the blood of several people staying here. You have a set of people who take plays seriously, some who enjoy being comedic, and you also have people doing this in order to forget about their troubles. The reality is that as someone who has never set foot inside of a prison, I will never know what it is like to be incarcerated, to spend a night in jail, to do time. Nothing of that sort, but this movie presents the universal concept of escapism and does so through the lens of people who perhaps deep down hope to achieve it more than most. I go to the movies as often as I can, but I realize how lucky I am to be able to do that on a regular basis. These are people who have the plays at Sing Sing as one of their only ways to forget their troubles. Whether they are there for a crime they committed or put there for the wrong reasons, all of these people share a common bond, and it is nice to see here.
The star of this movie is Colman Domingo, and he easily shines in the lead role. He comes off as the serious one of the group sometimes, but I feel deep down he is willing to drive himself out of his comfort zone. Domingo has some memorable scenes as John “Divine G” Whitfield and it still feels too early to tell if this performance will be up for awards contention, but I think Domingo has given one of my favorites so far this year. This film is not the strongest at the box office. It has been out for weeks and only recently crossed the two million dollar mark. Granted, it never had a large number of showtimes, and it does not have the star power of say “Deadpool & Wolverine.” Colman Domingo is without a doubt the movie’s biggest name. The only other person I recognized in the cast, and it actually took me a bit to figure out what his name actually was despite knowing his face, was Paul Raci. Boy oh boy is it great seeing him here, because I loved his performance in “Sound of Metal” and he manages to bring a similar feel to his portrayal here. He comes off as the voice of wisdom of the bunch. Much like his outing in “Sound of Metal,” Raci brings a calming, welcoming presence to his character. I very much enjoyed seeing him in another role and hope this is not the last I see of him.
As mentioned, this film does not have the biggest stars. However, as far as I am concerned, I do not think that is a bad thing. Because “Sing Sing” manages to cast a group of people that may not have been my first choice, but seeing this film made me realize I would not want this cast to be any different than the way it is.
This movie reminds me a bit of “The 15:17 to Paris,” Clint Eastwood’s biographical drama about three men and their journey leading up to a train attack. For those of you who have not read my review, I can tell you it is absolutely insufferable and obscenely uneventful. But one thing I remember from that movie is that the main characters are played by the real people attached to the true event the movie bases itself upon. While creative, I could honestly tell they were not the greatest thespians. This leads me to one of my praises for this film, I am marveled by the performances given by some of the prisoners, especially because they are played by actual people who were imprisoned at Sing Sing. And while I may not be able to recognize these people compared to some of the big movie stars we see on screen today, when the credits rolled and the cast was revealed, I was taken aback by this group’s acting abilities. Granted, maybe I should not have been too surprised considering they have acting experience through plays, but I thought this was a professional group of people trying to be someone else. The definition of acting is playing pretend, that is traditionally what I would expect from most situations. Can you have people play themselves? Sure. There have been cases where it has happened and it has worked. But “Sing Sing” is not just a case where it worked, it is a case where I found myself heavily immersed into each performance on display.
Going back to “The 15:17 to Paris,” when the film was over, I looked at the actors on screen, thought their performances could have been better, and came up with my own interpretations of some more professional people that could take their place. That is not the case with “Sing Sing,” as every single person in the cast kills their respective role. It is hard to tell if these actors playing themselves are going to be contenders for awards in the coming months, but I think it would not just cool to see, but legitimately fitting, to see these people get a Best Ensemble nomination at the SAG Awards, because I bought the entire group, and I think you will too.
“Sing Sing” tackles a lot in one picture. It deals with people’s reputations, toxic masculinity, and the value of teamwork just to name a few topics. And all of these ideas are handled well. Above all, “Sing Sing” shows how art can bring people together. It also shows the value of escapism and being able to become the person you want to be. It is definitely a serious picture at times, but if you are looking for straight-up fun, this movie has a shockingly decent amount. I found myself smiling quite a bit during this film’s runtime.
One last thing, this regards the film’s ending. The film makes a certain choice at the end, and honestly, I was surprised by the direction they decided to take things. It almost felt unfinished and out of left field, like I was waiting for the big event to happen, only for the movie to tell me it is not happening. But as I saw what the film presents as an alternative, I thought it was a brilliant move. This direction was wholesome, it was lovely, and it was satisfying. As I said, I smiled quite a bit during this movie, and this was one of those times. This film is not all smiles and laughs, but I would recommend you check this movie out. Maybe it will bring out some emotions of your own.
In the end, “Sing Sing” totally sings. This is one of the better movies I have seen this year. While it is probably not my favorite, it is one that I will be thinking about as we get closer to awards season. Unfortunately, not many people saw this movie. Remember how I mentioned the rather low box office total for this film? Sadly, I could not contribute to it, I was able to see this film for free. But I urge you to check this movie out as soon as you can. Whether you are able to buy a ticket for this movie, watch it when it comes out on home video, or even at a free screening like I did, I hope you see it and enjoy it as much as I did. I hope more people spread the word about this picture. It is a must watch for sure. I am going to give “Sing Sing” a 9/10.
“Sing Sing” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Borderlands,” the new film based on the video game of the same name. Also coming soon, I will share my thoughts on “Skincare,” the new thriller starring Elizabeth Banks as an aesthetician. And if that is not enough to satisfy you, I will also be talking about films like “My Old Ass,” “Reagan,” and “It Ends with Us.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Sing Sing?” What did you think about it? Or, is there any way that art has helped you in your life? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“The Instigators” is directed by Doug Liman (The Bourne Identity, Jumper) and stars Matt Damon (The Martian, Good Will Hunting), Casey Affleck (Manchester by the Sea, Gone Baby Gone), Hong Chau (Kinds of Kindness, The Menu), Michael Stuhlbarg (Call Me by Your Name, The Shape of Water), Paul Walter Hauser (Cobra Kai, Inside Out 2) Ving Rhames (The Garfield Movie, Mission: Impossible), Alfred Molina (Raiders of the Lost Ark, Spider-Man 2), Toby Jones (Frost/Nixon, W), Jack Harlow (White Men Can’t Jump), and Ron Perlman (Hellboy, Pinocchio). This film is about two men who go on the run with a therapist after a heist does not go as planned.
As someone who has lived in Massachusetts all his life, it should not come as a surprise that I have a few Boston-based movies under my belt. Movies like “The Departed,” “Good Will Hunting,” “Spotlight,” “Ted,” “Patriots Day,” “Stronger…” Granted I still have not seen everything like “Mystic River,” “Black Mass,” “Gone Baby Gone…” Still waiting to get around to those. But as someone from this area, I feel it is my duty to check out a Boston-based film when possible, which is one reason why I saw “The Instigators” recently.
Sadly though, I cannot say I was that excited for this movie. The trailer failed to impress me, and I did not think this movie was going to do that well.
There are times where I almost forgot I had to review this movie, which is really weird when you consider my experience with it. This is a true story… When I saw this film on opening Thursday night, I am not making this up, my theater was decked to the brim with “The Instigators” posters. If this were my bedroom, you would think I have an unhealthy obsession with this movie. That should probably give you some indication as to how my experience went down.
For the record, I do not despise “The Instigators,” but I also cannot say it is worth your time either. This is one of those movies that barely kept me awake as it went. Does it have a good pace to it? Sure. Do I like the cast in the movie? Sure. Do I think the movie has some clever moments? Sure. But everything about the overall experience of the film just screams middle of the road. There is nothing outright amazing about “The Instigators,” especially when compared to other Boston titles like “The Departed.” If I was in a Boston mood and I wanted to truly pay attention to every single detail on screen, I would simply turn on “The Departed.” But as for “The Instigators,” the situation in which I most likely see myself watching this movie again in the future would probably be when I just need some background noise. Part of me wants to say that I could maybe catch the movie on cable and just leave it on, but I highly doubt that Apple is going to allow that to happen. I do not think they are in that kind of business.
Now as someone who resides on the North Shore of the Bay State, I do fit into some local stereotypes. I do enjoy Dunkin’, I buy a ticket to a ballgame at Fenway, I have used the term “Storrowed” every once in a while, and I have even had the privilege of seeing a couple Boston Marathons in person. When I was in college the Boston Marathon route went right by my campus, so I took advantage of my commuter parking pass and got to see the event play out a couple times. Heck, I went to see this movie IN THE ONLY THEATER TECHNICALLY IN BOSTON, not any of its suburbs, selling tickets for it! But I have to be real with you, as much as I try, to varying successes and failures, to maintain my local roots, I have to admit this movie does a good job linking itself to the Greater Boston culture. When I say this however, I should also say, the movie almost does… TOO GOOD of a job. Sometimes the outcome this movie provides when it comes to its Boston tributes, if you can call them that, is almost pornographic. Whether it means Alfred Molina randomly showing up with Dunkin’, getting Rob Gronkowski of all people to make a rather gratuitous cameo, or having Hong Chau’s character mention she’s from Lynn during a chase and having the other characters say “Lynn Lynn the City of sin” just because. Though I must admit, there is a scene in the movie where we see a protest outside of Boston City Hall and I almost burst out laughing as soon as I saw a sign that read “FIX THE MBTA!”.
It is almost as if the crew behind this movie decided to ingrain themselves so heavily in Boston culture to the point where they sort of built a decent atmosphere for the film, but did not have the brains on how to make the film as entertaining as can be. Because as I look back at this film, I find to be uneventful, unmemorable, and minimally engaging. I cannot say I hate any of the characters on screen, but I am not going to remember their names in six months.
That said, this film is led by Matt Damon and Casey Affleck, and the two, to my lack of surprise, have decent chemistry in their roles. They both do a good job as two guys from Quincy, and even though I admit their journeys in this film fall into some pits of predictability, I enjoyed seeing their motivations play out and their personalities come to life. But when you have these two leading a movie like this, I kind of expect something more from the script or the plot, or even the direction.
Heck, this movie is directed by Doug Liman, whose resume partially includes “The Bourne Identity” and “Edge of Tomorrow,” which like those movies or not, you would probably agree with me when I say they look pretty cinematic. This movie honestly looks like it was made for television between its lighting that appears as if the crew forgot to brighten the bulb a tad occasionally. Yet at other times, it has some unusual camera tricks that try to appear cinematic, but only manage to feel jarring the longer I gaze my eyes upon them.
If I had to pick a performance in the film that stood out to me the most, it would probably be Ron Perlman as Mayor Miccelli. At a glance, Perlman very much looks the part of a politician. He has this look to him that like some politicians, you question yourself in the back of your mind on whether or not to trust him. His presence in the film made for some good scenes, especially towards the end.
And you know what? This is a poetic transition. If I had anything else to say that is positive about the film, I must admit, I was not 100% thrilled with all that it had to offer, but there are several scenes where you can easily be entertained by these characters. The entire cast oozes charisma, even if they are playing characters whose names you will probably erase from your memory after leaving the theater. Is part of it because some of the actors in the cast are recognizable? Perhaps. Why do you think I am going about this review referring to the actors names but not acknowledging their respective characters? But like some of their previous work, those recognizable actors play their parts well here. However, for me, this film was missing something. If anything the film is almost too stereotypical and lacking in any oomph that will make audiences remember it for years to come.
In the end, “The Instigators” is a somewhat entertaining movie, but it is not one that had me engaged the entire time. As the heist goes down, I am interested in what is going on. But I cannot say there are any standout moments in this film that will cement it as one of my favorites of the year. Does everyone in the cast do a good job? Again, sure. But they are not Oscar-worthy. This movie is on Apple TV+, and I can frankly see why. I have to be real, their record has not been working for me. Other than “CODA,” which is amazing, I cannot say I have seen one movie from Apple yet, and I include “Killers of the Flower Moon” in this thought, that has totally floored me. If you were planning on watching “The Instigators,” I am here to tell you your time will not be completely wasted, but you can probably use that time to do other things that would be more exciting. I am going to give “The Instigators” a 5/10.
“The Instigators” is now playing in select theaters and is available on Apple TV+ for all subscribers.
Thanks for reading this review! If you want to see more reviews like this, I have more coming! Stay tuned for my thoughts on “Sing Sing,” “Borderlands,” “Skincare,” “My Old Ass,” “Reagan,” and “It Ends with Us.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Instigators?” What did you think about it? Or, since I clearly have no faith in their service, what is something you recommend on Apple TV+? Yes, I know they’ve got shows like “Ted Lasso,” “Severance,” “For All Mankind,” but I want to specifically ask if there are any movies from them that you enjoyed. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Scene Before 