Movie

Twisters (2024): You Don’t Face Your Fears, You Forget About Them After Leaving the Theatre

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Twisters” is directed by Lee Isaac Chung (Minari, The Mandalorian) and stars Daisy Edgar-Jones (Normal People, Under the Banner of Heaven), Glen Powell (Top Gun: Maverick, Anyone But You), Anthony Ramos (In the Heights, Transformers: Rise of the Beasts), Brandon Perea (Nope, The OA), Maura Tierney (NewsRadio, ER), and Sasha Lane (Loki, American Honey). This is a standalone sequel to the 1996 film “Twister,” and is about a former tornado chaser who comes to Oklahoma with a meteorologist to scan tornados.

While there are a fair share of original movies being made, it is also accurate to say that franchise continuations tend to stand out more nowadays than said originals. This even includes “Twisters,” a movie I have been looking forward to since the first trailer came out. Between the aura of Glen Powell, the energetic vibes, the riveting tornado shots, and a pinch of that summer blockbuster feel, I was stoked. But here’s the thing, at the time, I have still yet to watch the original “Twister.”

I may have heard “Twisters” was happening prior to the Super Bowl, but chances are I did not care about it. Why? Well, it is the same reason why I have yet to see “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes.” It is the same reason why I am probably not going to see “Alien: Romulus” in the theater. As good as those movies look, I have some catching up to do when it comes to those properties. Thankfully, unlike the several movies both of those franchises offer, “Twister” only has one film for me to worry about. And as for that 1996 original movie, I thought it was rather fun. It had some immersive camerawork, a decent cast, a good amount of tornado action, and at times, an incredible score by Mark Mancina.

How does this standalone sequel compare to the original? I mean… It is fine I guess. It has its moments. I would not exactly rave about it, but I do not hate it. “Twisters” is kind of like Sbarro pizza. It is not the best of its class, but if it were one of the only options, I would tolerate its existence. Did I have fun with “Twisters” while watching it? Of course I did. And I would say that I am glad I watched this film in a theater as opposed to my house for the first time. This is definitely the kind of movie you would want to see on a giant screen, perhaps with a few friends. I cannot completely confirm or deny as I saw the film by myself, but still, that is the vibe I got.

“Twisters” pays respect to its predecessor. This was something I heard going into this movie, and was honestly quite worried about. Part of me was worried that this would be a beat for beat remake. While it is not quite as beat for beat as the 2019 edition of “The Lion King,” “Twisters” has a lot of similarities to its 1996 counterpart. There is a scene in a movie theater, kind of like how the original had a scene in a drive-in. The line in this film, “We got twins,” is very much a tribute to 1996’s “We got cows.” It’s little things like those that can easily be picked up along the way if you pay enough attention. Speaking of repeated techniques, “Twisters” is shot entirely on 35mm film. The average viewer is probably not going to care about a detail like that, but as I watched the movie, it definitely had a rugged palette in every frame. Even if the frame looked clean, it still had a sense of character to it that put me into each scene. With that in mind, I would still claim “Twisters” has enough material in it for the movie to stand on its own. It definitely feels like it belongs in the same universe as its predecessor, but by no means is it a complete ripoff despite some degree of copy and pasting.

One of the differences between this film and the original however, is the cast. This time around, there is, by complete coincidence, only one cast member from the original movie who returns for this follow-up. And they do not even play the same character. Instead, we have room for new stars including Daisy-Edgar Jones, who is finely cast in the lead role of Kate. You have Anthony Ramos, who brings a lot of energy to the screen as Javi. But if you see this movie yourself, chances are you are going to agree that there is one true star of the show…. Glen Powell as Tyler Owens.

Some argue that the movie star is dead, but if there is anyone who could potentially defeat that argument, Glen Powell is honestly a contender. As much as I hated “Anyone But You,” I thought Powell was far and away the best part of the film. Much like that movie, he oozes an endless stream of charisma. Every line out of him is perfectly delivered. His presence is incredible. If I had to come up with a word or two to describe Powell in “Twisters,” it would be “rockstar.” The moment he steps on screen, it is almost like this movie finished its opening act, and now he comes out and unleashes a sense of star power that is almost indescribable. I have no desire to ride a tornado. It is not my thing, but if anyone were to convince me I should, Tyler Owens might be the guy. Of course, there are still movie stars out there who have developed their career to a high like Dwayne Johnson, Tom Cruise, Ryan Reynolds… They have been on the scene for years and to some degree, they are all able to get butts into seats. After seeing “Twisters,” I am convinced Glen Powell is going to be looked back on years from now as one of this generation’s most adored talents. If there is a movie coming out that doesn’t exactly look great, I am sure it will get a boost at the box office if you simply put Powell’s face on the poster.

I also like the background behind Powell’s character. The movie establishes that Tyler Owens is a successful YouTuber. Owens has built a channel documenting his storm chases, earning him the nickname, “Tornado Wrangler.” He definitely delivers the energy you would expect out of a popular YouTuber or vlogger, I think Powell did a good job at channeling the traits I am used to seeing from some of my favorite personalities. The one thing though I would note is that Owens probably needs to work on his copyright game. Now, on YouTube, you can probably have some videos with copywritten material fly depending on the circumstances. There are times they can go unacknowledged or the owner of such material may not even care. But typically, it is wise for creators, especially for those trying to make money on their videos, to use royalty free music in their content, unlike Owens, who is making a video while blasting a copywritten song in the background. Just something that I noticed during the film that I probably would have changed if I were in control. I think it would have been funny to have Owens playing some fairly often used Kevin MacLeod song. It would have caught me really off guard in a good way.

Though I have to be real, much like the original “Twister,” this movie is probably not going to have much replay value for me. Am I glad I saw “Twisters?” Yes. Especially considering I saw it in the theater. But compared to the original, while “Twisters” is definitely equal in its own right when it comes to star power, feels a tad weaker when it comes to characterization. But at the same time, the characters do to a degree feel fairly fleshed out. The script is not really anything to write home about. The biggest thing this movie has going for it is Glen Powell’s personality. Honestly, his aura stands out more than the tornados themselves. That said, the sound is quite immersive. The film is decently shot. And it definitely has a fun factor to it. It is a fine movie to watch in order to kill a couple hours and maybe never watch again. You will not have any regrets watching this movie, but maybe not a ton of fond memories in the years down the road depending on your viewing experience.

In the end, “Twisters,” as a theatrical experience, is definitely one you would not want to miss. If it is playing in a theater near you, I would totally justify going to watch it. But this might just be a one and done film. There is not a ton of flair to it. It is not the best film of the year, nor is it the worst. For me, it is somewhere in the middle. I think the original is a slightly better experience, but if you do enjoy the original, you might enjoy this one to some degree as well. I am going to give “Twisters” a 6/10.

“Twisters” is now playing in theaters and is available to buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Deadpool & Wolverine,” the latest entry to the MCU and one of my most anticipated movies of the year. You will have to find out next week if it lives up to the hype. Also coming soon, I will have reviews for “Kinds of Kindness,” “The Instigators,” “Sing Sing,” and “Borderlands.” 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 “Twisters?” What did you think about it? Or, which is your favorite of the “Twister” movies? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

MaXXXine (2024): Mia Goth and Ti West Deliver Those 1980s Vibes and Good Times in the Third Installment to the “X” Saga

Posted on by Jack Drees

“MaXXXine” is directed by Ti West, who also directed the previous installments of what is now known as the “X” trilogy. This film stars Mia Goth (Infinity Pool, Emma.), Elizabeth Debicki (Tenet, The Burnt Orange Heresy), Moses Sumney (The Idol), Michelle Monaghan (Gone Baby Gone, Eagle Eye), Bobby Cannavale (Ant-Man, Sing 2), Halsey (Sing 2, Americana), Lily Collins (Abduction, Priest), Giancarlo Esposito (The Mandalorian, Abigail), and Kevin Bacon (Apollo 13, Footloose). This film follows adult film actor Maxine Minx. When she lands her big break by getting the lead role in a feature film, Maxine must deal with being targeted by a mysterious killer.

Before I give my thoughts on “MaXXXine,” I will give you a bit of a recap of my thoughts on “X” and “Pearl.” For the record, I have never reviewed those films. I missed them in the theater, so I skipped those reviews and watched the movies at home. I thought as a horror film, “X” definitely delivers the creeps. I also like the chemistry between the characters and I thought the climax was rather entertaining. That said, knowing some of the content in it, I would probably think twice before watching this movie with my parents. As for its sequel, “Pearl,” not only do I think it is a step up from the original, it is almost my favorite horror movie of 2022, and that was in a year containing a murderers’ row of good horror films. You had “Smile.” You had “Barbarian.” The only pure horror movie, if you prefer to call it one, I thought was better than all of these titles, was “The Menu.” No offense to “Pearl,” but one movie made me want a cheeseburger and the other did not. Mia Goth is a star as the lead role. The cinematography is gorgeous. The color palette at times is like something out of a Disney movie if you put it in the hands of an anarchist. The score is beautifully grand. And as much as I enjoyed the climax in “X,” the last moments of “Pearl” are borderline unforgettable. It has an incredible monologue scene, it is gory, and a final shot for the ages. Tonally, the film matches the motivations and dreams of its own character, and I was immersed with all of it.

So, I liked “X,” and I liked “Pearl.” This franchise is two for two so far, therefore that gave me confidence that “MaXXXine” could be another win. After all, the trailer sold me for its vibes. It took me back a few decades, promised plenty of action, and it looked like another solid performance from Mia Goth. This time around she is replaying the role she had in the first film, Maxine Minx. So I was curious to see what she would bring to the table now that she was clearly onto bigger things.

As for what was brought to the table, I would say I was quite pleased. While I think “Pearl” is still the best entry of the trilogy, “MaXXXine” is another worthy installment that delivers on gore, characterization, and plenty of style.

One thing I appreciate about “MaXXXine,” and therefore, the “X” trilogy in general, is its individual flair. Each movie so far has its own feel to it. But simultaneously, they all feel consistent. “MaXXXine” has the sleaziness of “X” if you mixed it with a detective thriller. It has that after dark vibe with a pinch of class. The feel fits the movie perfectly, especially considering the dark past of the protagonist, the creepy nature of the antagonist, and the actions that ensue throughout the runtime.

If you want me to be real, as much as I like “X,” part of me would think twice before watching it in the same room as my parents. As for this movie, I feel perhaps more comfortable if I put it on in front of say my dad. But I would probably stay away from my grandma. That said, if you like gore, this movie is not short on it. If you like a good story, this movie has it. And if you want a film that also manages to please on the technical side, look no further. Despite this movie’s dark tone, it has plenty of color. It is beautifully lit and gorgeously shot. Some of the costume choices stand out, especially for, and it is a bit ironic to say given her established profession, Maxine herself. The production design is also pretty neat. At times, the more I look at it, the more I think about it, part of me would not mind seeing this movie’s universe in video game form. Some of the night scenes in particular elicit a unique sense of immersion.

The performances in “MaXXXine” all around are great. Elizabeth Debicki is a standout as Elizabeth Bender, a director on a film Maxine’s working on. Kevin Bacon is also a highlight as John Labat, a private investigator who clearly knows a thing or two about being fashionable. But of course, this is Mia Goth’s movie, and much like this franchise’s protagonists aspire to be, she is a star. She kills this role with fire. When I think about my favorite actors working today, Mia Goth never comes to mind, and I feel ashamed to say that because I have seen her in several movies now, and even if I do not particularly enjoy a film in which she appears, such as “Infinity Pool,” Mia Goth herself still comes off as one of the better parts of the movie. And here, she commands each scene she is in. Goth is a powerhouse.

Admittedly, there are a couple scenes in this film that do not quite have the memorability that others deliver. But even in those scenes, I was still onboard. The film is nevertheless properly paced and a fun ride. There is one kill in this movie that may go down as my favorite of the year. It is definitely a favorite of the past couple years. The climax of this movie at times had me on the edge of my seat. This movie also has an ending that not only fits will within its narrative, but if the series were to stop here, it would be a swell conclusion. I would not mind seeing more from the “X” franchise, but if it were to end here, it ended on a fine note. Ti West once again, writes and directs another sensationally fun flick, getting the best out of Mia Goth, who continues to prove she is one of this generation’s more notable talents. I would not mind seeing more from these two, whether they are together or not. Props to both of them.

In the end, “MaXXXine” is not my favorite installment of the “X” franchise, but I think if I had to pick a movie to watch on a Friday night, I think “MaXXXine” would probably get the edge over the original “X.” I think it offers more entertainment value, slightly more preferable vibes, and perhaps a more memorable outing with Mia Goth in the lead role. It could be recency bias though, I have not seen “X” since 2022. But for what I recall, I think “X” has the edge story-wise. Not that “MaXXXine” has a bad story. If anything, I was mostly engaged with it, but of the three movies in this series so far, I think if I had to pick the weakest of the three stories, “MaXXXine” would probably come out on top. And I say that despite some of the places it takes us. One of the things I love about this movie is how it uses the Universal Studios Lot in Hollywood. Seeing Los Angeles in 1985 was pleasing to the eye. Speaking of pleasing to the eye, as a lover of neon, this film is not short on it. I do not know, maybe that is just a me thing. That said, “MaXXXine” is another solid effort from Ti West and Mia Goth. The “X” franchise continues to thrive, and I am going to give this movie a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! I have more reviews along the way including “Twisters,” “Deadpool & Wolverine,” “Kinds of Kindness,” “Sing Sing,” and “Borderlands.” 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 “MaXXXine?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie of the “X” trilogy? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Daddio (2024): Dakota Johnson and Sean Penn Share Bumps in the Road in This Simple, but Unpredictable Ride

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Daddio” is written and directed by Christy Hall and this is her feature film debut as both a writer and a director. This film stars Dakota Johnson (Fifty Shades of Grey, The High Note) and Sean Penn (Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Mystic River) in a film showcasing a cab ride from John F. Kennedy International Airport to midtown Manhattan where two people have deep and honest conversations about their lives.

Before we go any further, for those keeping track, much like how “The Beekeeper” and “Thelma” are two revenge flicks I saw this year showing how people deal with scammers, “Daddio” just so happens to be the second example of a film primarily about two people in a cab ride. The first one, for the record, just so happens to be the French film “Driving Madeleine.” Coincidentally, I reviewed that film right after one of those revenge flicks, “The Beekeeper.” And guess what my last review was before doing this film? “Thelma!” That’s what! How poetic indeed!

With that digression out of the way, “Daddio” snuck up on me last minute. Particularly when I watched an interview with Dakota Johnson on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” last month. This is not the first time this has happened. I remember watching “Four Good Days,” which is an excellent film by the way, mainly because I watched Mila Kunis being interviewed on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.” It is nice to know how effectively these kinds of interviews double as both fun conversations and marketing tools. It works, so why fix it?

That said, interview tactics or not, Dakota Johnson very much needed something to get moviegoers back on her good side. On top of being the lead in the “Fifty Shades” films, which assumedly has its audience, but also its fair share of critics, she also just led the pile of schlock known as “Madame Web,” which I think many would agree with me when I say it is one of the worst comic book films ever. It is a film that I said was somehow worse than “Morbius.” And amazingly, it is written by the same duo who wrote “Morbius.” Quite a hot streak, right?! Although if you ask me, Johnson has had her fair share of wins. “The Peanut Butter Falcon” and “The High Note” are two smaller, non-franchise films she did in recent years that I quite enjoyed. “Daddio” is another such example, but I would argue it is even tinier. Because while it is set in various parts of the New York metro area, the whole movie basically takes place in a car. And it is primarily between two characters, at least two characters whose faces we see.

Thankfully, these two characters are well written, concrete, and play off each other beautifully for the film’s entire runtime. I have seen my fair share of road adventure films where we have multiple characters in the car who cannot quite connect the dots to make the ride entertaining for me as a viewer. This film, I would not exactly classify as “entertainment.” Again, it is quite deep and gets you thinking, but my eyes and ears were open whenever the ride was going down so it is technically accurate to say I was quite entertained from start to finish. I was invested in these two’s conversations, Johnson’s uses of her phone, and the little obstacles these two come across as they made their way through the route.

You ever go on the road expecting a typical ride only to find something completely unexpected? I certainly have. Anything from massive traffic to endless road closures to finding random piles of debris in the middle of the road… These have all happened to me at some point in my life. And this movie reminded me of times when I would have those obstacles come my way. Granted, there is an obstacle this movie presents that I cannot really compare to anything I’ve personally encountered. It is something much bigger, perhaps unexpected. But it fascinating to see how these two react to and deal with such a thing in the moment.

One of the things I love about this movie is how it shows the layers of humanity. It shows that there is more to people than meets the eye. When you get a look at someone in your life, or maybe when you talk to someone you’ve never talked to before, you will garner an interpretation or image of that person. This movie shows that what you may think a person could be, while possibly true, is not entirely who they are. Or in some cases, that image you have of a person may not even be true in the slightest. Whether it is an image we make up ourselves or an image we hear from them. Regardless of how true or false the images are amongst our two main characters, I was thoroughly captivated by both of them. I loved getting to know Dakota Johnson’s character, Girlie, from the dialogue and what we see from her on her on her phone. Sean Penn does a really good job encapsulating a man who very much resembles an individual who has seen it all. After all, we find out he has been a cab driver for a long time, he does not have time or motivation for the apps like Uber and Lyft. He’s old school. He is someone who’s simply tired of the way the world’s shifting.

Some of my favorite movies do a good job at taking the ordinary, whether it is a character, a place, or an everyday situation, and turns them into something extraordinary. I sometimes look back at one of my favorite films at 2021, “CODA,” and find myself marveled with how its protagonist’s normality would be seen as abnormal by so many other people. In a different sense, “Daddio” takes one of the most everyday things, a drive, something that just so happens to be in the entire film, by the way, and adds quite a bit to it to make the journey something that stands out a lot more than a simple commute. Things that make the ride interesting, or compelling. Each obstacle had my attention. Each conversation had my investment. Each little thing we learn about these two characters kept my chin up. It is hard to know if a movie like “Daddio” is going to be for everyone. If some of you asked me to explain what this movie is about, chances are you’d question how cinematic it really is. This film is very much about the human condition, the way we think, the way we interpret others. And if you are interested in a story about people, then maybe this film is for you. Frankly, I watched this film partially because I will admit, and I do not know if this reason has a ton of validity to it, I love New York. I thought it would be fun to see a commute from the airport to Manhattan. But this film, to my lack of surprise, delivers much more than that.

One last thing, if you saw “Madame Web” this year and questioned Dakota Johnson’s ability as an actor, I highly recommend you watch “Daddio” because I am convinced this movie will change your mind. Remember what I said earlier, “Madame Web” was written by the same people who wrote “Morbius.” Their track record is not the best. Johnson was not given the finest material, and it shows in the movie. It is like watching George Clooney in “Batman & Robin.” He has proven he can act both before and after that film. But there is much more to his lackluster performance in “Batman & Robin” than how he handles it. Here, Dakota Johnson is given a higher quality script, a deeper character, and a more compelling plot. And as a moviegoer, this movie gave me something too. Compared to “Madame Web,” “Daddio” gave me a greater investment of my time. And that is an investment that should never ever go to waste.

In the end, “Daddio” is a film that I am not sure that many of you reading this are going to see, but please do not let it slip by you. This film features two really good performances of well written characters. I wanted to know as much about these two as the movie would allow me to. The movie is the simplest of ideas, but it is done in such a way that makes for an incredibly engaging journey. Now, if I were to compare “Daddio” to another one I mentioned at the beginning, “Driving Madeleine,” I would probably say I would rather watch “Daddio” a second time before putting on “Driving Madeleine” again. And for those who ask, no, it is not because I am a simpleton who wants the characters in the movie to speak English. If anything, it is because “Daddio” does such a great job at fleshing out its leads and makes the most of every situation it presents. This is nothing against “Driving Madeleine.” In fact, if you have not seen that film, I would recommend it. Much like “Daddio,” “Driving Madeleine” is an effective showcase of what it means to be human. But if you asked me to pick between the two, and for all I know, this could be recency bias, I currently find “Daddio” to be more appealing. But if you were to watch either of these films, you would not be wasting your time. I am going to give “Daddio” an 8/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! If you liked this review, I have more coming! Stay tuned for my thoughts on “A Quiet Place: Day One,” “MaXXXine,” “Twisters,” “Deadpool & Wolverine,” and “Kinds of Kindness.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Daddio?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the craziest car ride you’ve ever had? Tell me about it down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Thelma (2024): An Ageless Mission Movie Watchers Should Most Definitely Choose to Accept

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Thelma” is written and directed by Josh Margolin and this is his first time directing a feature film. The film stars June Squibb (About Schmidt, Nebraska), Fred Hechinger (Pam & Tommy, The White Lotus), Richard Roundtree (Brick, Shaft), Parker Posey (Superman Returns, Dazed and Confused), Clark Gregg (Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, Ultimate Spider-Man), and Malcom McDowell (The Artist, A Clockwork Orange). This film is about an elderly woman named Thelma who falls for a scam where she ends up throwing away $10,000. Once she realizes she has fallen into a trap, Thelma takes the matter into her own hands and tries to get her money back.

Now I know when people bring up the movies they have been looking forward to this summer, the answer is usually “Deadpool and Wolverine,” “Despicable Me 4,” “Inside Out 2,” and while these mainstream titles are definitely getting a lot of attention, I have long awaited the day I could sit in the theater and watch “Thelma.” Ever since I saw the trailer prior to watching “Back to Black,” my first thought was not only do I want to watch this movie. Not only do I want to watch this movie with other people. I really want to check it out with my grandma. And thankfully, my wish was granted. We saw the movie together, and not only did I have a good time watching it with her, it also helped that the movie itself is quite fun.

“Thelma” is one of those movies that speaks to everyone. Perhaps to a lack of surprise, it goes on about aging, how tough it can be to get older, and how such a thing could have its downsides. But this movie speaks to the insecurities of each generation living in the present day, not just seniors. Yes, the movie is about a 93-year-old woman dealing with issues ranging from memory loss to lack of knowledge regarding modern technology to being widowed. However, we also get to spend plenty of time getting to know her grandson, who takes care of her on a regular basis. The young man means well, but he does not tend to take a ton of responsibility for himself. But at the same time, as someone who is of a similar age, I do not necessarily think Danny is an idiot. I just think he’s trying to get by in whatever way he can but doing so is not the easiest thing in the world for him. Trying to establish yourself in your 20s can be a bit of a challenge. For some, it might be more of a challenge than others. And as for Danny’s parents, Gail (Posey) and Alan (Gregg), they are basically caught in the middle of two generations who are dealing with issues of their own, adding some difficulties to their own lives.

The movie also has something to say on how we use technology to monitor those we love. The elderly will sometimes use devices for the purposes of stability. You have likely seen those commercials for Life Alert on television promoting a product designed for senior moments such as falling and being unable to get up. Similarly, there is a tendency for parents of younger children to want to know where they are, what they are doing. We live in a world where we have access to almost everything at our fingertips, including our location. There is a scene where the parents give Danny, the grandson, a location device just because he is going off on his own. And it is not like he’s going out of the country. He’s essentially going around the corner. When such devices are used on this movie’s lead and the grandson, the reason why they are used, as the monitoring characters will suggest, is for their mental health. Yet deep down, it also shows how connected people are to each other these days through technology, phones, or smart devices, for better or worse.

“Thelma” tends to hit several marks from comedy that is really funny to drama that is really engaging to heart that is really touching. I am not going to pretend that “Thelma” is my favorite movie of the year, but I think it is one of the most well rounded. If you are younger, there is something in this film for you. If you are older, there is something in this film for you. If you are a comedy fan, an action fan, a spy flick fan, you might appreciate what this movie has to offer and leave with more than what you came for.

The message of the movie is that you can do anything. It shows age is just a number. This movie starts off with Thelma and Danny sitting on the couch watching “Mission: Impossible – Fallout” and we see the clip from the movie where Ethan Hunt is chasing Walker all the while running around London like a madman. As a movie fan and as someone who adores Tom Cruise, I love this early scene from “Thelma” partially because the characters watching the movie seem to be just as mind-blown as I was watching it. It took me back to 2018 when I declared it was some of Tom Cruise’s best work. But the reason why the use of that movie here is such a great example of how to kickstart anything that happens going forward is because both projects are associated with the ability to accomplish your goals without letting time or your age get in the way. “Mission: Impossible – Fallout” does not necessarily display that message in its script, but more so behind the scenes. “Thelma” is all about how age is an obstacle that just about everyone has to deal with, but it also presents the obstacle as one that is potentially navigable.

I also found myself pretty engaged with the film’s threat. I will not go into much detail as to who that threat is. Of course, we know they steal Thelma’s money, but as to who does the stealing, I will leave that as a mystery. But the movie does a surprisingly decent job at giving them believable layers. I kind of hate saying this, but there was a point where we learn a particular struggle they were dealing with and I could not help but feel bad for them. How they go about dealing with that struggle is another story, but on the surface, I get why they felt the way they felt and why they did what they did. I am not saying I side with the threat, but I least understand where they are coming from.

In the end, “Thelma” is not my favorite film of the year, but if you were to ask me if there was one movie I saw this year that I would recommend to any demographic, this could be the first one that comes to mind. There’s this movie, and there’s “Inside Out 2.” June Squibb is a riot as the lead. The supporting cast from Richard Roundtree to Fred Hechinger all play their parts fantastically. The parodic nature of this film is one to be appreciated. It has the DNA of a spy, action-esque feature, but takes it in a different direction. I like what they did with it. Also, this film reminded me a bit of “The Beekeeper,” because that film is also about someone losing their money to a scam. Only in that case, we had a character played by Jason Statham try to get revenge for somebody else. “Thelma” has a different kind of appeal because we see our protagonist fall to their lowest low, where she gets caught in a scam herself, and she decides to take matters into her own hands. Thelma is an admirable protagonist, and one of the best I have seen this year. And this is no diss against “The Beekeeper.” I enjoyed that movie as well. Jason Statham does a good job in it. If anything, these two movies would make for a fun double feature just to see different age groups dealing with money-grabbing scammers in their own ways. I had a lot of fun with “Thelma” and I am going to give it a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the brand new film “Daddio,” starring Dakota Johnson and Sean Penn. Also coming soon, I will have reviews for “A Quiet Place: Day One” and “Maxxxine.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Thelma?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a fun movie-related memory you shared with your grandma? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024): Anya Taylor-Joy is Fast and Furious in This Mad Max Prequel

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” is directed by George Miller (Happy Feet, Babe: Pig in the City) and stars Anya Taylor-Joy (The Super Mario Bros. Movie, The New Mutants), Chris Hemsworth (Thor, Rush), Tom Burke (Mank, The Souvenir), and Alyla Browne (Sting, Three Thousand Years of Longing) in a prequel film that follows its titular character’s origins throughout various stages of her life, before she meets Mad Max.

“Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” is one of those films that had my interest ever since it was first announced. And as much as I know people love Charlize Theron’s take on the character back in “Mad Max: Fury Road,” I was very much excited to see what Anya Taylor-Joy could do with the role. She is one of the hottest names in Hollywood right now, racking up several projects that have given her a diverse resume. Everything from Jane Austen adaptations like “Emma.,” to visionary horror titles like “Last Night in Soho,” to a video game adaptation that has become one of the decade’s most mainstream titles, “The Super Mario Bros. Movie.” I am proud to say that when it comes to Anya Taylor-Joy’s take on the Furiosa character, I was not disappointed. Like all of her other roles, she plays the part well. Despite this movie having a female protagonist, this movie feels pretty masculine. And I mean that in a positive way. As I watched this movie, I was on a bit of a high, and Anya Taylor-Joy is the drug that fueled it.

In fact, all the actors in this film are great. None of them feel out of place. Not only does Taylor-Joy provide a superstar outing as Furiosa, but her younger variant, played by Alyla Browne, also shines bright. Lachy Hulme does a good job as Immortan Joe, who we previously saw played by Hugh Keays-Byrne in “Fury Road,” rest in peace. In fact, that’s not his only role in the film, because he is credited with playing Rizzdale Pell, a gang member serving under this film’s most enjoyable character to watch, Chris Hemsworth’s Dementus.

They say a movie is only as its good as its villain, so I am happy to report that Dementus will end up being one of my favorite on-screen villains I have seen this year. While Chris Hemsworth is playing a different character entirely, it is safe to say that he is putting the “mad” in “Mad Max.” He’s over the top, bombastic, and kind of wonderfully demented. Sometimes he is so rage-filled it is kind of artistic. There is something beautiful about it. Also, I love how he has a line twisting a classic phrase where he utters, “Lady and gentlemans.” Chef’s kiss.

And much like Hemsworth’s Thor sometimes, I can say Dementus’ beard game in this movie is strong. Just look it it. I have grown out my facial hair quite a bit from time to time, but I cannot say I have ever grown a beard like the one Dementus has. Adding to the beautiful rage of this character, Hemsworth himself has something to say to back that up. Speaking with Variety, Hemsworth goes on about his experience in the makeup chair…

“Twas justifiably irritated by the end of it. That really helped my performance-there was a nice amount of pent-up rage simmering under the surface.”

Take this as a lesson kids. If you work hard enough, and learn some patience by sitting in a chair, you too can entertain tons of people by becoming a bit of a maniac. Inspiring stuff.

That said, looking back at “Furiosa,” this movie ends on a bit of an interesting note. I do not want to spoil everything that happens in this film, but if you are a novice to this franchise, I will remind you once again this is a prequel to “Mad Max: Fury Road.” A film that, and I apologize to the thousands of cinephiles I am inevitably going to irritate, I find to be a tad overhyped.

Now to find that flame shield…

Nevertheless, I recognize that a lot of work went into “Mad Max: Fury Road,” not to mention a lot of money. Based on research via IMDb, the total budget of the film comes out to $150 million. Despite being older and less expensive, it still looks better than some of the more recent Marvel projects for example, including Hemsworth’s own “Thor: Love and Thunder.” Just so we have the statistics in place, I will remind you that “Furiosa” cost more than “Fury Road,” specifically $168 million. For the record, Wikipedia says “Fury Road” cost anywhere between $154.6–185.2 million, but if I had to compare “Fury Road” and “Furiosa” side by side, I would say that “Fury Road,” depending on what the actual budget is, feels like the slightly bigger bang for the studio’s buck. It is also a slightly better movie as a matter of fact. Story-wise, both of these movies do not have the most Shakespearean of plots or happenings. They are pretty simple when it comes to their concepts. And honestly, in the case of “Furiosa,” I sometimes wish I were more interested in some of the goings on that we witnessed on screen. “Furiosa” has a runtime of 148 minutes, and I truly felt that runtime. I have no problems with movies going on for that long. In fact on paper, one of the pros of having such a long runtime for a movie like this is that we get to see some pretty cool extended action sequences. There are some action scenes that go on for quite a bit and had me glued to the screen. But substance-wise, “Furiosa” feels kind of thin. Does this movie try to deliver a fun story? I guess. But other than seeing Furiosa grow up, I did not feel as engaged with this film as I wanted to. That said, one thing I was engaged by was seeing Furiosa’s exposure to certain torturous acts, and how much said acts shaped the perspective of the character throughout the film.

But this film ends on an interesting, yet rather fitting note. I do not think this is a spoiler. If you think otherwise, you do you. But the end credits for “Furiosa” start with a few minutes of clips essentially detailing “Mad Max: Fury Road.” After all, again, this film leads into that one. Though it got me thinking… Upon leaving the movie, I did not say I wanted to go back and watch “Furiosa” a second time. If anything, the credits made me think I should potentially revisit “Fury Road” instead. While “Furiosa” is well done in its own right, it made me wish I were watching something better. I have seen “Fury Road” twice, and even though I think it is not the masterpiece some call it, I recognize there is plenty to like about it. And I think there is more to like about “Fury Road,” than “Furiosa.” Sure, “Furiosa” could stand as its own movie, but at the end of the day, it doubles as the world’s most robust, compelling advertisement for “Mad Max: Fury Road.”

Much like “Fury Road,” “Furiosa” tends to use star power to sell itself between the casting of Anya Taylor-Joy and Chris Hemsworth. However, from an effects perspective, the money is definitely there, but it does not mean the quality is there. What makes the look of “Fury Road” so appealing at times is despite knowing it is a movie, it tends to look as raw and lifelike as it could in such an environment on display. In “Furiosa,” there are a fair share of effects that look like they could belong in a blockbuster movie, but they feel like they belong more in a demo for the sake of showing off a new piece of tech. There is a lot less verisimilitude with these effects this time around. While “Furiosa” does not have the worst special effects I have seen, they are a significant step down compared to its predecessor.

And that’s the thing about this movie. It reminds me a lot of “Fury Road,” but it does not do anything as exciting as it. Plus between some long buildup, some forgettable characters, and scenes that probably did not need to go on as long as they did, I do not think “Furiosa” is worth watching a second time. How does it compare to the other “Mad Max” installments? I will be real, I have not seen any of the other ones. I want to, I just have not had the time. I could tell George Miller made the movie the way he intended. I just wish it were better.

In the end, “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” has plenty of positives. But there is not a lot in this movie, maybe other than Hemsworth as the villain, that truly stands out. Do not get me wrong. Anya Taylor-Joy does a good job as the title character. The film, despite some overpolishing, is easy on the eyes. The color palette of the film is appealing. I say this film looks like an over the top tech demo, and I meant such a thought as a bit of a dig. But it does not mean the film all looks bad. Also, if the Oscars were tomorrow, “Furiosa” would definitely be nominated for Best Makeup and Hairstyling. But when all is said and done, I would rather watch “Mad Max: Fury Road” one more time as opposed to watching “Furiosa” again. I am going to give “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” a 6/10.

“Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” is now playing in theatres and is available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Thelma,” the new movie starring June Squibb as an elderly woman who tries to get her money back from scammers. Also coming soon, I will share my thoughts on “Daddio,” “A Quiet Place: Day One,” and “Maxxxine.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga?” What did you think about it? Or, which Furiosa-centric story do you think is superior? “Fury Road” or “Furiosa?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Inside Out 2 (2024): A Bigger, Not Better, Yet Still Really Solid, Look Inside Riley’s Head

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Inside Out 2” is directed by Kelsey Mann (Party Central, Megas XLR) and stars Amy Poehler (Parks and Recreation, The House), Maya Hawke (Asteroid City, Do Revenge), Kensington Tallman (Drama Club, Home Sweet Rome!), Liza Lapira (NCIS, The Equalizer), Tony Hale (Veep, Arrested Development), Lewis Black (The Daily Show, Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law), Phyllis Smith (The OA, The Office), Ayo Edebiri (The Bear, Bottoms), Lilimar (Batwheels, Cleopatra in Space), Grace Lu (Fright Krewe, Super Wings), Sumayyah Nuriddin-Green, Adèle Exarchopoulos (Blue is the Warmest Color, Passages), Diane Lane (Let Him Go, Extrapolations), Kyle MacLachlan (Dune, Twin Peaks), and Paul Walter Hauser (Richard Jewell, Cruella). This film once again follows the emotions inside Riley’s head. As Riley enters puberty, the five core emotions of the previous movie face the reality that they could potentially be replaced with newer, more complex emotions. Meanwhile, Riley tries to properly navigate herself and fit in while attending hockey camp.

Pixar is one of those studios that I automatically associate with greatness. What Studio Ghibli likely is to Japan, Pixar is to the United States. A group of talented individuals making some of the most mature, watchable animation out there. When it comes to the Disney library, I tend to prefer Pixar’s work over their own in-house studio. That said, I still think “Raya and the Last Dragon” is one of the best animated films of the decade. While studios like DreamWorks and Illumination tend to have their place in moviegoing, when I watch an animated movie, chances are I am going to prefer it to be under the Pixar banner. Their track record over the past few decades has been astounding. With the exception of “Elemental,” I like every film they have put out so far. That said, when they greenlight a sequel, a part of me asks why. Granted, part of the answer is likely money. But even with that in mind, I question the creativity factor that would go into such movies like “Toy Story 4.” I felt the same way about “Inside Out 2,” which I was kind of intrigued by, but I was worried that it would not have the same impact as the first one. I thought the original installment was one of the best films of the 2010s. Then again, even though I thought “Toy Story 4” is the worst of the franchise, it is still an incredibly watchable, admirable flick. Maybe “Inside Out 2” would meet a similar fate.

To my lack of surprise, “Inside Out 2” is in fact a step down from the original. In fact, when it comes to the Pixar lineup, I would put “Inside Out 2” in the lower or middle tier. But as I have said before, Pixar movies that do not meet the higher tier are still, most of the time, solid enough to possess a level of quality that plenty of movies would kill to meet.

The good news is with “Inside Out 2” is that it does a nice job at evolving its characters. In this film we see Riley become a teenager, she is going through puberty, and we get a decent look into how that all plays out. Inside her mind, we see all the complexities of her emotions begin to rise as we meet new characters like Anxiety, Envy, Ennui, and Embarrassment, all of whom seem to serve their purpose. And these characters, on the surface, tend to accurately represent what a lot of teens probably go through at that time of their lives. Between their identity, seeing other people have things they do not, aging out of things that they may or may not actually want to age out of. If it did not properly represent me at that age, I am sure it will do so for somebody else.

On that note, Pixar usually does a good job with casting. Of course, Amy Poehler is back, and she brings a powerhouse performance as Joy. Phyllis Smith also does a great job as Sadness. Both characters continue to be the heart and soul of the franchise to some degree. Lewis Black also shines as Anger. But Maya Hawke as Anxiety is a serious contender to go down as the year’s most memorable voice performance. Not only is this character fantastically written and conceived, but she is performed at such a pace that I would automatically think of when it comes to Anxiety. Even if she is talking normally, her voice sounds like she is moving a million miles a minute. She is hyperactive, a little zany, but not too much. And there is one scene we witness towards the film’s climax where she is stunningly animated. Her movement in said scene very much fits her name. Her general design fits the role too. Anxiety is one of those characters that looks appealing, but kind of gets on your nerves once you get to know her. I say that in a good way of course, her purpose in the film is brilliantly realized. She is the closest character this film has to an antagonist, but I would not necessarily call her a villain. But much like some of the best villains or antagonists, Anxiety is someone whose perspective you can easily understand, possibly even appreciate. That said, I was still able to root for the core emotions throughout the movie. For Riley’s sake, I wanted them to get their way as the film went on.

The best thing about these two “Inside Out” movies, in addition to many other entries to Pixar’s library, is that there is a lot for grown-ups to appreciate to a greater degree than children. There is a segment where we get deeper into Riley’s mind and visit some of her more archived possessions. Two of which include characters named Bloofy (Ron Funches) and Pouchy (James Austin Johnson). First off, from an animation perspective, I love how this movie seamlessly blends these 2D characters into its 3D environment. Second, if you ever seen an episode of say “Dora the Explorer,” either as a child growing up or as a guardian watching over somebody else, I guarantee the moments that these two are on screen are going to get a laugh out of you. I knew seconds after they came on screen exactly what they were going for. These characters even did the cliche where they’re breaking the fourth wall, asking the viewer what they think should be done. Points all around. This movie amazingly described a lot of people’s childhoods while they were sitting in front of the television. And going back to the animation style, these are not even the only two styles we see, because the film also introduces a character named Yong Yea, who very much has a design similar to the artstyle of characters from the “Final Fantasy” games. These styles complement each other beautifully and never come off as distracting.

If you must know, “Inside Out” has arguably my favorite ending in an animated movie. It is to some degree, one of the simplest climaxes in a major motion picture. But what goes down in said climax is nothing short of emotional. It hits me every time I watch it because it shows that sometimes in life, happiness and sadness can work together to make you feel whole. In this film, the stakes feel a little bit bigger. Not just inside Riley’s head, but also outside. That said, one thing that felt a little smaller in this film’s ending compared to the last one is the emotional impact. The ending is really good and makes complete sense. But it seemed to be missing a moment that I took with me as the movie ended. There is one moment, or more accurately, a repeated line, that I continue to think about. Each time it was said, it truly showed what Riley was going through, and how she was perhaps letting her emotions and desires get the best of her. But with the last movie, you have multiple moments that I will list among some of the greatest in cinematic history between “Take her to the moon for me,” and Joy and Sadness allowing Riley to have a second to shed a tear when she needed it most. There are no moments in “Inside Out 2” that quite reach that level.

The structure of this movie is one to admire. Because the film is partially about Riley trying to get on a hockey team. In reality though, as much screentime as we get out of it, you could argue it is a borderline B-plot. The A-plot is inside Riley’s head as the B-plot is happening. That plot being the fight to make sure Riley is mentally stable. Because the reality is if Riley does not make the team, deep down, she still, depending on the state of her emotions inside her, has her mental health. The emotions’ jobs are to make sure Riley is herself and in control. And if she ends up making the hockey team, that is just bonus points. But if Riley reaches an extreme that could alter the course of her life for the worse, then chances are they are failing at doing their jobs.

If you think “Inside Out 2” is better than the original, I could totally understand why. But I feel like the first does a slightly better job at addressing the problems Riley and her emotions go through. It also possibly benefits from its originality. At the time, I do not think I have seen any concept like it. The first film exemplifies what Pixar does best. Taking inanimate concepts and heightening them to the point where they can make you laugh, cheer, and cry. “Inside Out 2” takes a lot of what is great about the first movie and builds on it, but it is not quite as memorable or as impactful as the material we got back in 2015. That said, there is a reason why the film has made more than a billion dollars at the box office. Because it is quite watchable. Good for kids, good for adults, good for everybody. Much like “Wall-E” did for me when I was younger, I am sure young children will probably watch this in their childhood and see it one way, and maybe come back to it as an adult and watch it with a new, matured set of eyes. And it is possible they might enjoy it more at such an age.

In the end, “Inside Out 2” is, again, not the best Pixar movie. But it is still a really good watch. I definitely found more enjoyment out of it than their previous feature, “Elemental,” so that is quite a positive thought if you ask me. The emotions are all well written and performed. I even liked Liza Lapira filling in for Mindy Kaling as Disgust. I thought she did a great job. Tony Hale as Fear was also quite good. He was very expressive throughout the picture. Although I could tell there was a difference in his voice compared to Bill Hader’s. That said, it is a good thing he is putting his best spin on the performance as opposed to doing a crappy impression of the previous one. The score of these past two films tend to serve as a character of its own sometimes. It was touching in the first one, and the same can be said here. As soon as the music played in this start of the film, I felt like I was instantly transported back to this universe. But as usual for Pixar movies, this film is beautifully animated. And kind of like the first film does in its abstract thought scene, “Inside Out 2” manages to seamlessly diversify its animation style. It looks great and never feels out of left field. I am going to give “Inside Out 2” a 7/10.

One last thing… I was a bit on the fence when they announced an “Inside Out 2,” partially because of how good the first one was. Having seen this second film, I can confirm the first one is far superior. But also having seen the second film, it honestly got me thinking… As much as I enjoy franchises like “The Incredibles” or “Finding Nemo,” they feel finite compared to “Inside Out” when you consider they’re about a certain group of characters. Even though the franchise revolves around the mind of Riley, I would not mind seeing inside the mind of a young boy or the mind of someone entering their 50s, or someone working the graveyard shift. There are tons of possibilities for the “Inside Out” franchise. If they greenlight an “Inside Out 3” with the Riley as the center, I am there. If they greenlight an “Inside Out” spinoff with somebody else as the center, count me in. I am game no matter what.

“Inside Out 2” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga!” Also coming soon, I will have reviews for “Thelma,” “Daddio,” “A Quiet Place: Day One,” and “Maxxxine.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Inside Out 2?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your personal favorite of the “Inside Out” movies? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Young Woman and the Sea (2024): Daisy Ridley Swimmingly Stands Out in the Latest Live-Action Effort from Walt Disney Pictures

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Young Woman and the Sea” is directed by Joachim Rønning (Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil) and stars Daisy Ridley (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Chaos Walking), Tilda Cobham-Hervey (Hotel Mumbai, The Lost Flowers of Alice Hart), Stephen Graham (Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, Kim Bodnia (Killing Eve, The Witcher), Christopher Eccleston (Thor: The Dark World, True Detective), and Glenn Fleshler (Boardwalk Empire, Billions). This film is inspired by the book of the same name and is about the competitive swimmer Trudy Ederle, who makes a daring attempt to swim across the English Channel.

One of the benefits of being in a “Star Wars” movie is having such a massive franchise be part of your resume. But regarding the more recent films, particularly the prequel trilogy and the sequel trilogy, it feels interesting to note that a few of its leads are, unsurprisingly, mostly known for their “Star Wars” roles, but not really making rounds since. Sure, Hayden Christensen did “Jumper.” But who religiously and fondly remembers that movie? What else has he really done since “Revenge of the Sith” that has stood out? As for Daisy Ridley, who I adore as Rey in the “Star Wars” franchise, I hope she can find some enormous success outside of the “Star Wars” franchise that way she does not remain a one hit wonder of sorts. I liked her in “Chaos Walking,” but I recognize that movie is not perfect, even though I did have fun with it. That, and COVID-19 definitely affected its box office performance. Yes, I am aware Ridley did other things too. “Murder on the Orient Express,” the “Peter Rabbit” movies, “The Marsh King’s Daughter…” But I have not seen any of those.

While I cannot legitimately recommend any of those movies, I can say Daisy Ridley’s latest film, “Young Woman and the Sea” is definitely worth the watch. Not only is it a solid story, but one thing that favors the film is the timing of which it released. After all, it is summer. Therefore, it is basically swim season. The Olympics are around the corner. It is the perfect time to get in the water. Maybe you will not want to venture the same waters as this movie’s lead, but still.

But even if you do not want to venture those same waters, you may feel inspired to do other great things. I am a straight white male, so I cannot speak for everyone, but I have a feeling that a lot of people who check out this movie are going to feel empowered, they’re going to feel inspired. Everyone loves a good story of this nature, and it is perhaps a bonus if the lead is a woman like it is here.

While this movie is about Trudy Ederle, I thought it also did a good job with its supporting characters. I really enjoyed the scenes early on in the film where we see Trudy learning to swim and getting to know the others inside the building, in addition to one tradition they share. In addition to Trudy’s journey as she navigates the English Channel, I was simultaneously engaged with what was going on back at home. We see the family’s perspective, how nervous they are, and I think plenty of people can relate to those events playing out. It is natural for a parent to worry about their kid in a multitude of scenarios. Heck, my mom constantly worries about me getting to work on time. Granted I have to be there at 2 a.m…. But still. A good movie can make you care for its lead and their progression throughout the runtime, but that good movie could potentially be better, like this one, if you somehow also care about those who tend to express their worries about the lead.

One of the unsung standouts of “Young Woman and the Sea,” and I perhaps mean that literally, is the music. This film’s score is done by Amelia Warner, whose work I have not heard previously, but the orchestral power of this film leaves me curious as to what she has up her sleeve next. Each instance of the music adds to the tension, adventure, and sometimes joy of each scene. It is easily one of my favorite musical compilations this year. “IF” still remains my favorite score perhaps, but this trails only slightly behind.

Production value-wise, this film is as inviting as can be. The shots look beautiful. Every time I look at the water in this movie, it makes me want to go by the sea. It truly strikes a proper mood. It was also soothing to see the film’s various environments accompanied with a 1920s vibe. The film is chock-full of impeccably designed interiors. Probably some of my favorite I have seen this year. “Young Woman and the Sea” is quite a picturesque movie that is easy on the eyes. A lot of the frames that pass by as I am watching our hero navigate the English Channel are enchanting to gaze upon.

If I had any real critiques that come to mind regarding “Young Woman and the Sea” it would probably be that the film seems a little played up for what it is trying to be. Granted it is nowhere near as played up as the last movie I reviewed, “Summer Camp,” but it is sometimes over the top. The performances in the film are all over the place. It is not to say they are bad, but they seem to clash with each other tonally sometimes, as if they belong in a couple different movies. The actors all do a good job, even if their collective performances are not quite a perfect match. This film is a term I do not use often, but it feels appropriate to use here. If there were a word to describe this film at times, it would be “Hollywoodized.” This is a story that on paper, would make a good movie. A woman taking on a dangerous mission of swimming across a body of water makes for a great story, especially considering this one is true. But some of it is perhaps pushing the boundaries of reality. It sometimes feels familiar in terms of its story and its beats. This film is released under the Disney banner, and even though the two movies are not quite the same, “Young Woman and the Sea” reminded me of another Disney live-action effort, “The Finest Hours,” another story highlighting a dangerous time in the water. That film also felt played up and perhaps overly glamourous. I think “Young Woman and the Sea” is much more engaging, but both movies share similar flaws. They are presented as these glorious tales, and to some degree, they can be defined as such. But the movies tend to push the limits in terms of how glorious they actually are.

In the end, the real question is, should you watch this movie? Absolutely. Give “Young Woman and the Sea” a shot if you have the time. It is played up and sometimes cliche, but it is nevertheless charming and inspiring. I liked all the characters in this movie. The chemistry we see between Trudy and her sister, who is wonderfully played by Tilda Cobham-Hervey, is quite good. Performance-wise, despite being a bit on the hyper side, I admired Sian Clifford as Charlotte, Trudy’s swimming trainer. Every time she is on screen she has a commanding presence. If there is any performance I remembered the most from the movie, aside from Daisy Ridley’s, it is hers. “Young Woman and the Sea” is probably not going to be on my top 10 of the year, but it is a movie that I am glad I saw. It is an effective, inspirational story of determination, feminism, and going for the impossible. I am going to give “Young Woman and the Sea” 7 seas out of–

Wait, that doesn’t sound right… I’m going to give the movie a 7/10. There, that’s better.

“Young Woman and the Sea” is unfortunately not playing in many places right now, and as of writing this, the film is not currently available to watch at home. But if it is somehow playing near you by some miracle, check the movie out if you can.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Inside Out 2,” one of the biggest films of the year so far. I cannot wait to finally talk about this one. Also coming soon, I will have reviews for “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga,” “Thelma,” “Daddio,” “A Quiet Place: Day One,” and “Maxxxine.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Young Woman and the Sea?” What did you think about it? Or, do you enjoy swimming? Tell me where your favorite place to swim happens to be! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Summer Camp (2024): Shelter Yourself Away from This Average Comedy

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Summer Camp” is written and directed by Castille Landon (After We Fell, Perfect Addition) and stars Diane Keaton (Book Club, The Godfather), Kathy Bates (Misery, The Waterboy), Alfre Woodard (Desperate Housewives, Memphis Beat), Beverly D’Angelo (National Lampoon’s Vaction, Entourage), Nicole Richie (The Simple Life, Great News) Josh Peck (Drake & Josh, Ice Age: The Meltdown), Betsy Sodaro (Duncanville, Disjointed), and Eugene Levy (American Pie, Schitt’s Creek). This film is about three childhood companions who reunite at the summer camp where they’ve bonded in their youth.

If you are asking why in the universe I, a 24 year old male, spent my time watching “Summer Camp” in a cinema, please note that if I were alone, I probably would have skipped this movie. But I was with other people and it seemed to be a fair equalizer. It has comedy, it has stars, and it is on the shorter side. It’s basically the same thing as “Anyone But You” all over again except this movie clearly does not have people close to my demographic as part of the target audience.

Was I looking forward to “Summer Camp?” Not really. But as MJ says in “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” “Expect disappointment, and you will never get disappointed.” That said, I cannot say I was disappointed with “Summer Camp” given my low expectations. But I also cannot say I was quite thrilled with it either because I did not find the movie to be that great. Is it better than I thought it would be? Sure. Maybe a little. But it is not saying much.

What did I like about this movie? While the overall structure of the film is somewhat predictable, there’s no real gaping holes in the story that threw me off. Everything in the movie makes sense to a certain degree and all the characters had their moment. Not only did they have their moment to shine during the movie, but the story effectively pays off its characters’ arcs. I thought each outcome the characters individually achieved were genuinely earned. The ride this movie takes me on is quite bumpy, but it ends on a note that I would consider to be a highlight. In fact, despite noting the characters being well constructed, I cannot say there are any performances in this film that really stand out. Sure, the main trio is “good enough” for the film to steadily progress and not have things falter significantly. But if anything, this film seems to rely on star power. Granted, not stars that a ton of my generation would generally recognize or care for.

Nevertheless, you have Diane Keaton, who’s had a storied career in her real life and is playing someone who’s trying to maintain a storied career in this film. There is also Kathy Bates, whose performance here is neither a titanic powerhouse or a complete and utter misery. She is doing her part to bind things together. You have Eugene Levy, who serves halfway decently as this movie’s aged boy toy. And… Yeah, that seems to be the entirety of his purpose, other than spewing wisdom or something. I am actually surprised they got a younger star like Josh Peck, who seems to maintain a nostalgia factor for gens y and z. I do not think this is going to get the younger audiences in. But then again, he was in “Oppenheimer,” which almost made a billion dollars at the box office. The characters themselves in this movie are not broken. For the most part anyway, there are some fantastical elements to their background or personality that I have trouble buying into. Speaking of their background, it sometimes feels surface level. We know their problems, but the movie is a bit rushed for those problems to have a semblance of depth.

As mentioned, this movie is a bumpy ride. One of the biggest problems that comes to mind with “Summer Camp” is that it feels inconsistent. At one moment it tries to be a comedy. In another instance, it tries to be a drama. Unfortunately, the tones this movie offers appear to clash a bit. And as a comedy, this movie honestly could have been funnier. Granted, there are no moments looking back where I put both my hands on my face to relieve myself of the cringe that I witnessed, but there are no jokes in the movie that truly sold me either. At best, the comedy is middle of the road. A lot of the comedy, and honestly, looking back at the trailer for the film confirms this for me, feels been there done that. There is another scene, also in the trailer, where a food fight breaks out. A scene like this one could conceptually come off as comedic, but when I watch it, the only things it comes off as just so happen to be forced and unrealistic.

I do like the themes this movie tries to highlight. The movie tends to tell its audience that life is short, and we should do whatever we can to make the most of it. If there is a hurdle in your life, you can overcome it. Life is not all work, all the time. You should also make some time for play. These are ideas that are well executed throughout the film. And given the target audience this film seems to be aiming for, it will probably sit well with them, despite this movie feeling rather disposable. It surprises me how much substance seems to have been delivered in a movie like this. If anything, I thought it was going to be a complete goof-fest. Again, the tones do clash, but there are highlights even when said tones butt heads. As far as the whole “elderly women friends” get together and find themselves experiencing shenanigans sub-genre, if that’s a thing, goes, this is, given time to marinate, a step up from “80 for Brady.” Unlike that film, “Summer Camp” seems to have more stakes and fewer conveniences. I actually felt like I was watching a movie as opposed to a random compilation of events and tired comedy gags.

Well, okay, there were tired comedy gags. Plenty of them in fact. I am not saying this movie is Shakespeare, but when you compare it to “Madame Web,” it is definitely watchable in parts. There are parts I would rather forget. Although to be real, I could forget this entire movie and be okay with it. But having seen the movie, I enjoyed what I saw. This is not the worst movie of the year. It is likely going to entertain some people and turn others off. As far as I go, I am somewhere in the middle.

In the end, “Summer Camp” is not going to win any awards. But I don’t think this movie deserves to be cast into a fire. At worst, maybe it deserves to be in the Walmart $5 bin when it comes out on DVD. It is not that funny, but I never found it to be overly annoying. It is harmless. At times, the movie is preposterous and utterly ridiculous. But cannot say it makes me wish to put a gun in my mouth. Maybe a water pistol. At least I’ll hydrate from that depending on what’s inside. “Summer Camp” tries to do several things at once, but I cannot really say it does any of them to such a masterful level. This is not the worst movie of the year, but it is by no means a summer spectacular. I am going to give “Summer Camp” perhaps one of the most generous 4/10s I have ever given. Part of me wanted to give it a 5, but between the overly fantastical backgrounds certain characters have, the varied depth some of them maintain, product placement, and the tonal inconsistency, I just cannot do that. I do not know. That could change. But for now, it is a 4.

“Summer Camp” is now available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Young Woman and the Sea.” Stay tuned! Also, look forward to my reviews for “Inside Out 2,” “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga,” “Thelma,” “Daddio,” and “A Quiet Place: Day One.” 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 “Summer Camp?” What did you think about it? Or did you ever go to summer camp in your youth? Tell me about your experiences in the comments! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Garfield Movie (2024): A Case of the Mondays

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Garfield Movie” is directed by Mark Dindal (Chicken Little, The Emperor’s New Groove) and stars Chris Pratt (The Super Mario Bros. Movie, The LEGO Movie), Samuel L. Jackson (The Avengers, Pulp Fiction), Hannah Waddingham (The Fall Guy, Ted Lasso), Ving Rhames (Mission: Impossible, Pulp Fiction), Nicholas Hoult (The Menu, Jack the Giant Slayer), Cecily Strong (Schmigadoon!, Saturday Night Live), Harvey Guillén (What We Do in the Shadows, Eye Candy), Brett Goldstein (Ted Lasso, SuperBob), Bowen Yang (Saturday Night Live, Awkwafina is Nora from Queens), and Snoop Dogg (The Joker’s Wild, Training Day). This film is inspired by the “Garfield” comic strip and centers around the iconic orange feline who reunites with his father all the while needing to complete a high-stakes heist.

The “Garfield” property is one that I never found myself overly attached to. As a child who grew up in the 2000s, I have come across the Bill Murray-led “Garfield: The Movie” and watched it a couple times. I did not have a passion for the material, personally. In my early double digit ages, I have also watched a couple episodes of Cartoon Network’s “The Garfield Show” when we had company at my house and I was not the one controlling the TV. Safe to say, with my limited exposure and lack of memory or experience with the comics, “Garfield” was not something I cared about a lot as a kid.

Speaking of not caring, I felt rather indifferent about “The Garfield Movie.” The only catalysts that could have gotten me invested in “The Garfield Movie” are the trailers looking uniquely bad, and the powers that be deciding some time ago that Chris Pratt is the only person who can lead big animated movies now for some reason. As soon I heard Chris Pratt was voicing Garfield, my first thought was the same when I heard he was voicing Super Mario. And that thought was, “Why?”

Now that I have seen “The Garfield Movie” and have now witnessed Chris Pratt’s performance as the title character, my thought was the same when I finally saw “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” and heard Pratt voice the title character in that. And that thought was, “Why?” Genuinely, I do not know how Chris Pratt could have worked in this role. The only defense I could possibly come up with is that Garfield, by nature, is a pretty lazy individual. And when I am hearing Chris Pratt talk, he kind of sounds rather mellow and unenthusiastic. That maybe could be what the movie’s going for, but it doesn’t work for me. And maybe this shows Pratt’s range because he also voiced Emmet in “The LEGO Movie,” which, sure, is pretty much the definition of an everyday, ordinary guy. But Pratt sounds enthusiastic enough in his performance there to put a spin on the everyday nature of the character. If anything, Chris Pratt in “The Garfield Movie” is about as interesting as a trip to DMV. He is lifeless, lacking in flair, and sounds as if he is just getting ready for the fat cat of a paycheck. The best way I can sum up Chris Pratt’s performance in “The Garfield Movie” is to say that I do not see a cat. I just see Chris Pratt in a soundbooth. It is the same problem I had with Dwayne Johnson voicing Krypto in “DC League of Super-Pets.” When you get a big name celebrity like that to be the lead voice of your film, sure, maybe it will boost credibility for select audience members. But to me it almost fails to come off as “acting.” I love “The LEGO Movie,” and Chris Pratt is a standout as the voice of Emmet. But “The Garfield Movie” is not a good fit for him. I did not think Chris Pratt could give a less interesting voiceover than “Onward.” Then “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” happened, and so did “The Garfield Movie.” What a world we live in.

That said, the movie’s supporting cast is a bit better. Samuel L. Jackson does an okay job as Vic (center). Hannah Waddingham, even though she could have been written better, does the best she can with Jinx. I thought Nicholas Hoult gave a much better performance as Jon than I anticipated. I like Hoult, but I was rather surprised he put as much passion as he did into the role. But by far the best performance in the movie is Ving Rhames as Otto, a bull who served as a mascot for a farm. Rhames currently has a consistent career in the voiceover game doing Arby’s commercials. But his performance as Otto proves that he not only has the meats, he has the goods. Also to his advantage, he has the best lines in the movie. There is one line, I cannot remember it verbatim, that he uses to mathematically determine how long it would take for Garfield and Vic to cooperate and work as a team. But for what I remember, based on the way it was executed, it delivered one of the bigger laughs I had during the film. And that transitions into another disappointment. I wish this film were funnier. After all, “Garfield” is an iconic comic strip. You’d expect humor out of something like “Garfield.” And sure, there are glimmers of “The Garfield Movie” that deliver a few laughs, but not a ton.

Animation-wise, the movie delivers a fairly wide color spectrum in certain scenes. There are moments, color-wise, that feel surprisingly bland. But I was impressed with the animation of the Italian restaurant we see at the beginning of the movie. Additionally, there are a few shots that tend to stand out and match the film’s mile a minute pacing. But I cannot say anything regarding the animation is revolutionary or changes the game. Although one compliment I would add is that Garfield himself is well designed. For the most part, he looks like he is straight out of the comic strip. They did a good job at bringing him to life. I just wish he were voiced more effectively.

One thing I took from “The Garfield Movie” is the notion that if this is how the title character is in his other material, then I probably do not have a passion for said character. On paper, Garfield may sound relatable, but his relatability is hard to balance for story like the one this movie is delivering. Garfield’s relatability comes from laziness, unwillingness to get outside, flawed dieting choices, things that make us human. Deep down, some of us can put ourselves in Garfield’s shoes, but throughout this film, no matter how much the plot chooses to progress, Garfield himself appears to lack dimension. In fact, going back to Ving Rhames as Otto, I think he had by far a much better journey in this movie than Garfield did. By the time we got to the end of his portion of the story, it delivered a greater sense of satisfaction to yours truly to what I felt as soon as we got the end of Garfield’s time in the film.

On another note, I was surprised to know how much product placement is in this film. Who directed this? Michael Bay?! Where are the explosions?! Where’s the corny, outdated dialogue? Come on, guys! What are you doing?! I’m guessing this what one of the “Transformers” movies changes into when it needs to shake things up. When it comes to animated movies, “The Garfield Movie” is not quite as bad as “The Emoji Movie” in terms of product placement, but there are obvious winks to FedEx, Popchips, and multiple instances of Olive Garden to the point where I thought I was watching a “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie instead of “The Garfield Movie.”

In the end, “The Garfield Movie” is predictable, disposable, and unmemorable. I would almost argue the movie is too chaotic. Everything gets into gear really quickly to the point where I never found myself fully invested with what was happening. The best phrase I can use to describe this movie is “run of the mill.” I have most definitely seen better, but it is not horrible. It is not the worst thing I ever seen. In fact, with “Madame Web” having released earlier this year, “The Garfield Movie” is not even the worst Columbia Pictures movie we got this year. But the first act at times is a chore to get through. Garfield is rather unadmirable as a character. The story, even with its more complex elements, is somewhat predictable. The ending almost overstays its welcome. And Chris Pratt is incredibly miscast as the titular role. I am going to give “The Garfield Movie” a 4/10.

“The Garfield Movie” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “I Saw the TV Glow.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will have reviews for “Back to Black,” “Summer Camp,” “Young Woman and the Sea,” and “Inside Out 2.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Garfield Movie?” What did you think about it? Also, Garfield clearly loves lasagna to such an insatiable degree. On that note, I must ask, what food would you say is your weakness? I have a number that come to mind, but pizza’s gotta be up there. I literally took a two hour drive from my house a month ago and stayed overnight in a hotel just to try a pizza place I have been eyeing for some time. With that said, let me know down your hunger-inducing weaknesses down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

IF (2024): John Krasinski Brings the Power of Imagination to One of the Best Family Films of the Past Few Years

Posted on by Jack Drees

“IF” is directed by John Krasinski (A Quiet Place, The Office) who also stars in the film as Bea’s Dad in addition to also voicing a Marshmallow. Joining him in this film is a cast including Cailey Fleming (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, The Walking Dead), Ryan Reynolds (Deadpool, Free Guy), Fiona Shaw (True Blood, Killing Eve), Phoebe Waller-Bridge (Fleabag, Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny), Louis Gossett Jr. (An Officer and a Gentleman, Roots), and Steve Carell (Despicable Me, Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy). This film is about a young girl dealing with drastic changes in her life who is suddenly able to see imaginary friends of real people who have grown up and separated from them.

“IF” had me partially interested but at the same time, skeptical. When I watched the marketing for this film, I noticed that it was trying its best to show off its humor, but very few, if any of the jokes, made me laugh. That said, I thought “IF” had potential. The overall design looked nice. The cast was stacked. And it was being directed by John Krasinski, whose directing resume is limited, but nevertheless impressive. I admire his work on the “Quiet Place” movies, especially the first one. That first film had 25 lines of voiced dialogue. That is pretty impressive in this day and age for something that has become rather mainstream. While it is not my favorite horror movie of the 2010s, it is arguably the most beautifully made. Krasinski has shown what he can do behind the camera so quickly and so effectively to the point where I was looking forward to just about anything he could be directing next. I did not think it would be something like “IF.” But I had an open mind.

The best thing I can say about “IF,” particularly when it comes to John Krasinski, is that this movie is probably his best showcase of his abilities as a writer. Unlike the first “A Quiet Place,” where he had help from Bryan Woods and Scott Beck, Krasinski wrote “IF” by himself. For the record, Krasinski also wrote “A Quiet Place Part II” solo, but looking back at the film, I did not attach myself to all the characters. There was a certain magic from the first installment that seemed to be missing, even though I did ultimately lean positive in my verdict. “IF” on the other hand is not only magical, it is likely going to end up being one of the best family movies of the year. Not only that, I was pretty surprised by how good this movie ended up being. Again, I was a bit skeptical. But I was nevertheless pleased by how this movie turned out.

I have talked about my love for Pixar on this blog before. To this day, their batting average is incredible. No pun intended. Thus far, the only film from the studio I would give a thumbs down to is “Elemental.” I know it is probably a hot take, but I stand by it. “IF” is not a Pixar movie. It is not even an animated movie. But there are a lot of elements to this project that remind me a lot of what Pixar does best. Taking unlikely beings and flawlessly humanizing them. Going for deep, emotional layers. Using one’s experience from the real world and letting them craft the best story possible out of it. This movie was inspired by John Krasinski’s time as a father and it clearly shows. It reveals what it is like to see your kids grow up. Yes, they’re maturing. Yes, they’re becoming one of a kind human beings, but there is also a loss of childlike innocence. Growing up, to some degree, is where plenty of people look at their dreams and put them aside for whatever reality lies in front of them. In fact, “IF” sort of reminds me of one of my favorite Pixar movies. Particularly, “Inside Out,” which had an imaginary friend character named Bing Bong. Much like “Inside Out,” “IF” does a really good job at highlighting the role that having an imaginary friend can play in a child’s life. But this film also makes an argument as to why we would also need them as adults. When we grow up, we might actually need them more than we ever did before. It would make us feel young. It would make us feel free. It would make us feel happy.

One of my favorite arcs in “IF” has to do with the Grandmother (left), played by Fiona Shaw. We learn a bit about her backstory and interests throughout the picture, including her love for dancing. The way this story plays out breaches into fantasy to some degree, but for this movie’s universe and rules, it absolutely works. This movie is very much about maintaining every bit of that youthful spark you’ve had since you were born and this particular arc is perhaps the movie’s most graceful and dazzling example of that. I loved this character, and Shaw owns the role. Great casting.

Speaking of great casting. This movie does a pretty good job on the IFs, or imaginary friends. These characters are primarily voice roles so we do not see any actors themselves. But I thought Phoebe Waller-Bridge was a particular standout as Blossom, a humanoid butterfly. Emily Blunt does a good job as the Unicorn. Christopher Meloni unleashes some of the film’s more comedic moments as Cosmo, a detective. And Steve Carell gives it his all as Blue, a furry purple monster.

If I had to pick one person I thought would be miscast, it would probably be Awkwafina as Bubble. I like of the concept of her character, which is just a bunch of bubbles that can reconstruct once popped. It’s pretty clever. But I think Awkwafina, despite her clearly not sleepwalking here, continues to show that she somewhat lacks a chameleon nature about her. From my experience, I feel even if Awkwafina is not playing the same character in one movie to the next, she’s riding that line, and she continues to ride that here. I like Awkwafina, I think she is charming in films like “The Farewell” and “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings.” But is she the most disguisable, range-filled actor of her generation? If you are asking me, I would not think so. While we are on the negatives, I mentioned earlier that the movie had me turned off by the comedy shown in the marketing. There is one joke from the trailer revolving around Steve Carell’s Blue that honestly did not work for me. Specifically, the one where Bea is keeping Blue from saying “IFs.” It is about as awkward and as cringeworthy as I expected. But hey, at least this movie did not pull a “Madame Web” and straight up lie to me in the marketing. I thought the joke was odd in the trailer, and also odd in the movie. It feels great not being ripped off!

On that note, when it comes to the live action roles, everyone plays their part well. Cailey Fleming is well cast as the lead. John Krasinski is also doing his best in front of the camera as the Dad. And Ryan Reynolds holds his own as Cal. While this film is not likely going to warrant any high caliber acting awards from these people, Reynolds in particular gives a standout performance because it is a lot different than what I am used to seeing from him. Usually I am used to Reynolds giving portrayals of his characters that lean more on the hyperactive end of the spectrum. This is evident through his efforts in projects like “Deadpool,” “Free Guy,” and “Spirited” for example. If anything, Reynolds’ performance in “IF” reminds a bit of his time in “The Adam Project,” partially because both characters serve as mentor figures to the film’s protagonists. That said, Reynolds seems to bring a much calmer, down to earth presence in this movie. As someone who has seen some of Reynolds’ previous work, I am not used to him toning things down a bit here, but it gives me more respect for him as an actor. Not that I did not have respect for him already, but this project shows a bit of his range.

“IF” also stands out to me from a musical perspective. This film’s score is composed by Michael Giacchino, a composer whose work I admire from films like “The Incredibles,” “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story,” and “The Batman.” “IF” is one of his best scores yet. Because in every moment, it fits the vibe of the picture. It ranges in its nature from being innocent at one point, to straight up bombastic in another. It is kind of like if the theme for “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” had a baby with the score for something much more epic, like “How to Train Your Dragon.” While “Wall-E” might currently be my favorite score from Giacchino, “IF” could honestly compete with that film to the point where it becomes my new top dog from the maestro. I know this is a Paramount movie, so I sort of apologize for the lack of brand synergy, but this is the kind of score that I would dare to blast from my phone if I ever go to Disneyland and make a run for the castle. That is, if it were not crowded there… Nevertheless, there is something about this score that makes me want to reclaim my youth and go back to a simpler time. Giacchino outdid himself here and I will definitely be playing the music in my spare time, perhaps as I write my future reviews.

As mentioned, “IF” is likely going to be one of the year’s best family movies. It is that good. If you have not seen “IF,” make an effort to do so. It is a movie that I would recommend to absolutely anyone. Kids. Teens. Adults. Seniors. Anyone. If you have ever had a human experience, this movie is for you. That said, going to back to my love for “Inside Out,” this movie reminded me of another thought that seems to stick in my mind regarding that film. While kids can definitely watch “Inside Out,” it is hard to know how much kids are going to appreciate it when they are young. I think kids will like the film. It is vibrant, colorful, packed with surprisingly decent humor, and it is a fun adventure. But I think this is a film that will resonate more with adults. I saw this film in a packed theater a week before it officially came out. There were lots of kids, but also plenty of adults. There were instances of the movie where a good amount of people took tissues out. I could hear crying in the audience. And those tears were clearly from adults. This movie seems to have hit these people where they live. I have no idea what the ratio would be when it comes to comparing children who at one point had an imaginary friend as opposed to those who did not. But even if you can go on the record and say you never had an imaginary friend, there is probably something in this movie for you. I did not know what to expect from “IF.” That said, John Krasinski is a mighty fine storyteller. With his range, I cannot wait to see what he does next.

In the end, “IF” is an easy recommendation. Go see this now. Take your family. Take your friends. Take your lover. Go by yourself even! I did! Solo movie outings rule! “IF” is filled to the brim with stunning visuals, clever concepts, and a story that anyone can attach themselves to. There are certain movies that I look back on like “Kung Fu Panda” that I liked as a kid, but have grown to appreciate more as an adult using the experience I have taken with me as I grew up. I am going to be curious to know how today’s kids are going to look back on this movie in a decade or two from now. When you have phenomenal casting, a script that is better than it has any right being, and an overall look to the film that is stupendously easy on the eyes, there is not much else to ask for when it comes to my experience with “IF.” I am going to give “IF” an 8/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for another family film. “The Garfield Movie!” Look forward to my thoughts on that coming soon! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “I Saw the TV Glow,” “Back to Black,” “Summer Camp,” and “Young Woman and the Sea.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “IF?” What did you think about it? Or, did you have an imaginary friend? I cannot say I ever imagined a friend from scratch if I recall correctly, but I can confirm throughout my life, I have imagined myself being friends with pre-established fictional characters or celebrities. Maybe it kind of shows a weakness in my imagination if you will. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!