Music | Scene Before

Michael (2026): A Middle of the Road Michael Jackson Greatest Hits Album

“Michael” is directed by Antoine Fuqua (The Equalizer, Training Day) and stars Jaafar Jackson, Nia Long (Missing, Boyz in the Hood), Juliano Valdi (Arco, The Loud House), KeiLyn Durrel Jones (Better Call Saul, Succession) Laura Harrier (Spider-Man: Homecoming, BlacKkKlansman), Jessica Sula (Recovery Road, Skins), Mike Myers (Shrek, Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery), Miles Teller (Whiplash, Top Gun: Maverick), and Colman Domingo (Sing Sing, Wicked: For Good). This film is about Michael Jackson’s rise to stardom, chronicling his growing up, family life, and the rising conflict he faces as an artist.

The last movie I reviewed on the blog is “Lorne,” and now I am doing “Michael…”

Ladies and gentlemen… We missed a grand opportunity to make the next “Barbenheimer” happen. LORNE MICHAEL? The name writes itself!

Anyway, “Michael” has been on my radar for some time, not necessarily because I was looking forward to it. Not that I thought the movie would be the worst I have ever seen, but Michael Jackson is not my goto artist. Sure, I like hearing “Thriller” every now and then, especially around Halloween. But keep in mind, this guy is called “the king of pop.” I am generally not a pop guy. I am more rock and roll, classical, jazz, heavy metal… Those genres speak to me more.

To be frank, the real reason why I am reviewing this movie is not because it heavily interests me, but rather because it seems to be of interest to so many other people. Some are projecting that this could end up becoming the highest-grossing musical biopic in box office history. I have family members and relatives who grew up with Michael Jackson who wanted to see this ASAP. I do not despise Michael Jackson. I think as a musician he knows his stuff, but he is not the first person I would pick to listen to in my spare time.

Also, some people have nicknamed me “Jackson 5…” So that’s a bonus.

Here is some seemingly shocking news… I have never seen an Antoine Fuqua movie. I have always been meaning to check his work out. My dad has expressed his approval for “The Equalizer” and “Shooter” for example. I just have not had the time or motivation. But given how popular I projected “Michael” to be from the getgo, I felt the need to check this movie out for myself.

Having seen “Michael,” it is better than I figured it would be in some ways, but the movie is not without its faults.

I am not a Michael Jackson fanatic. Again, I recognize his talent, but he is not my jam. That said, I have a feeling that in some way that a lot of Michael Jackson fans are going to see this film as a personal love letter, showcasing some of his greatest hits and career highlights. In that sense, the film feels overstuffed, which is really weird to say given how the film itself plays out.

Do not get me wrong. “Michael” has a story. In fact, when it comes to executing its story, or, based on several factors, as much of the story as it is willing to unveil, I thought it did a better job than the recently released “Super Mario Galaxy Movie.” Interesting enough, I find both movies to be quite similar. Both are based on cultural behemoths, they are aiming towards family demographics to a certain degree, and there seems to be a divide between the critics and audiences as to whether or not the movie is good.

Another thing that puts these two in the same boat is that they seem to rely on nostalgia. If you grew up in the 80s, you may have been playing “Mario” or listening to Michael Jackson. Perhaps both. When I was watching “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie,” I found myself needing more than nostalgia to keep me entertained. That is also the case when it comes to “Michael,” and the case arguably has more merit this time around, as, again, he is not my artist of choice. Of course, I have heard several of the songs in this movie… “Thriller,” “Beat It,” “Billie Jean,” but when they played, I do not think they hit me in the way the crew would have hoped.

What I liked about “Michael” is not so much the music, but rather the journey as to how we got some of the music. “Michael” reminds me a bit of “A Complete Unknown,” because that film seems to explore an artist who wants to play music based on what he is passionate about, and there are obstacles standing in his way of doing that. For Bob Dylan, the protagonist of “A Complete Unknown,” the obstacle was the audience, who put the artist in a box. For Michael Jackson, the biggest obstacle is his family. In some ways, the film highlights the importance of Jackson’s family, but it also sets up his father as an antagonist. We see Michael begin as a member of the Jackson 5 with his siblings, but the more the movie progresses, the more we see Michael feel the need to tread his own path. The only problem, his father wants him to keep making music under his supervision and with his siblings.

I am not going to pretend that “Michael” is the best movie of the year, but there is a decent movie in here somewhere. Is it familiar? Sure. But it is sometimes engaging. When I am watching “Michael,” I do not see myself watching a film about an aspiring performer who became a huge success, even though that idea does play a part in the story. If anything, I found myself mostly invested in the protagonist’s personal conflict of being his ultimate creative self. Yes, the movie presents Michael Jackson’s eccentricities. For example, we see his relationship with his pets. And these are not your typical dogs and cats. These are the kind of pets that Veruca Salt would beg for after finally getting her hands on a golden goose.

Not all of the concert scenes are exactly memorable, but I will not deny that there are some that stood out to me. There is one scene in particular that is shot and edited less like a movie and more like a televised special, or an actual “concert film.” I thought it was kind of clever. The sound mixing is also quite good, and I had a feeling it would be from the getgo, where the movie opens to a crowd chanting “Michael’s” name over and over again. The auditorium was almost shaking at that point.

Perhaps the biggest standout in “Michael” is… Well, Michael himself. Or more specifically, Jaafar Jackson, who plays him. In real life, Jafaar is Michael Jackson’s nephew, so I would have been shocked to say that his performance was not good. Thankfully, he is excellent. It is too early to tell if his performance is awards-worthy, but Jackson brings a flair to his uncle that feels similar to how some would probably imagine the artist in real life. Jackson does a great job at capturing the character’s ambitions and kineticism. It is clear that Jackson did some major studying behind the scenes to capture his uncle’s essence.

“Michael” is Jaafar Jackson’s first movie acting credit. My question is, and I say this as someone who found this performance to be excellent, what is Jaafar Jackson’s future in film? Is he just going to play Michael Jackson and call it quits? I would be interested to see him in another role, as long as it is something completely different than the one he played in “Michael.” I would like to see some range should he continue acting. This is also the biggest factor as to why he may not win an Oscar next year. As great as Jaafar Jackson is, he is playing someone who has a somewhat personal attachment to him. Jackson is superb, but unlike Rami Malek as Freddie Mercury or Austin Butler as Elvis Presley, his performance feels less transformative in comparison.

This does not take anything away from Jackson’s ability to capture the character and bring him to life. I will not deny that he did exactly that. In fact, if there is one positive that I will continue to think about regarding this movie, Jaafar Jackson may be it. All due respect to everyone else involved, including the super talented Colman Domingo as Joseph Jackson, but Jaafar steals the show.

As I watched this movie though, I found parts of it to drag, especially around the middle. For a movie whose trailers promise something exciting and kinetic, I was kind of surprised to find myself bored during certain scenes. I think about 10 minutes of the runtime could have been trimmed just to provide something tighter.

In the end, “Michael” is not the worst film I have ever seen, but it is occasionally bogged down by somewhat poor pacing, feeling somewhat incomplete in the story it is trying to tell, and the concert scenes not having the oomph that I was expecting. For a movie about the King of Pop, it works in some places, but overall, it does not quite pop. This movie is likely going to go down as a success at the box office, and I partially played a factor in that. I cannot say my experience of watching it, however, was exactly the best. Did I have a decent time? Perhaps barely. But I do not see “Michael” having any replay value down the road. I am going to give “Michael” a 6/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! If you want to see more of me, and by that I mean, literally see me, check out my latest episode of Movie Requests, featuring special guest Katee Sackhoff! She requested I should watch “High Noon,” and I was more than happy to do so! To hear my thoughts, click the video above! Give it a like if you enjoyed it! If you want to see more episodes down the line as soon as they come out, please subscribe to my YouTube channel!

My next review is going to be for “Deep Water!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, be on the lookout for my thoughts on “Animal Farm,” “Mortal Kombat II,” “The Sheep Detectives,” and “In the Grey!” 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 “Michael?” What did you think about it? Or, what are your thoughts on Michael Jackson as a performer? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

EPiC: Elvis Presley in Concert (2025): Baz Luhrmann’s Big, Loud, and Ambitious Showcase of the King of Rock and Roll

Posted on March 13 by Jack Drees

“EPiC: Elvis Presley in Conert” is directed by Baz Luhrmann and is a documentary about the titular musician, following portions of his life through pre-existing footage, a good chunk of which had not yet been witnessed by the public.

Back in 2022, I reviewed the “Elvis” biopic. I waited a bit after its premiere to check it out. Not because it was off my radar. I just had other people in my life who also had interest in checking it out so I figured I’d wait so I could watch it with them. Safe to say, it was not worth the wait. While there are worse movies I saw in 2022 like “Morbius,” I do not know if there is a movie that left me with a headache like the one “Elvis” did. And it is not that I do not like Elvis’ music. After seeing the film, I think I can come to the conclusion that Baz Luhrmann’s filmmaking style is not my tempo. I have vivid memories of watching “Romeo + Juliet” in middle school, and immediately getting the sense that the movie stole my soul. Since watching “Elvis,” I have since checked out Luhrmann’s “Moulin Rouge!,” which felt like a case of style over substance.

So far, Luhrmann’s filmography has left me all but impressed, which is why I was somewhat nervous going into “Elvis Presley in Concert.” That said, this is a documentary and not a fictional narrative. Perhaps this could allow me to see a different side of Baz Luhrmann. Much like Luhrmann’s past films, “Elvis Presley in Concert” comes with a distinct, clear style. Although unlike “Elvis,” I occasionally found myself having a good time with this film.

“Elvis Presley in Concert” gives you what you came for and more. I say “more” both as a positive and a negative. The movie is part documentary, part dive into Elvis’s career, and part concert showcase. Not all of it is perfect, but let’s start with the good.

If you came for a concert film, this absolutely delivers. If you are a die-hard Elvis fan, this is automatically going to leave you impressed. This is probably the closest one can get to experiencing Elvis in concert today. I had the privilege of watching “Elvis Presley in Concert” on a true IMAX screen via its 4K laser projection system. While the film is not quite “full IMAX,” it comes very close at times. In fact, at my screening, I noticed the way the film was formatted and essentially all of the framing was off center. All the scenes that were in scope widescreen had a taller black bar on the top than the bottom. There are scenes that are a bit taller-looking that essentially have no black bar on the bottom of the screen, but a black bar on the top. It is an odd choice, but I had the sense Luhrmann wanted to make the audience believe certain people in the film were standing on my auditorium’s ground. You see a lot of movies nowadays that advertise themselves as “Filmed for IMAX.” While the footage that makes up “Elvis Presley in Concert” was filmed long before IMAX was associated with Hollywood fare, this is a film that feels like it was designed for IMAX first. This may as well sound like a negative… I feel that watching this film in IMAX almost ruins every other possible way I could see it.

That said, while the formatting of this film is perhaps best experienced in an IMAX theater, the sound mix is probably going to translate well across various formats, whether you are watching it in the cinema or at home. From the very beginning, this film is booming. The first couple of minutes unleash a sense of electricity beyond comprehension. Certain performance sequences like those for “Burning Love” or “Suspicious Minds” gave me the sense that I was part of the audience in Vegas, some of whom happened to be women screaming their lungs out. I could really tell some of the audience enjoyed the film too, because during my screening, some people were clapping to a performance here or there. Granted, this movie did not garner the same attention that the “Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour” documentary did a couple years back. There were no screaming youngsters in my audience, which, frankly, despite being in my 20s, I am okay with. I do not mind loud movies, but my sensitive ears can only take so much.

Another monumental technical achievement this film boasts is its clean editing. This is some of the craziest film editing I have seen in recent memory. Not only does the edit blend tons of archival clips together beautifully, along with one engaging soundbite after another, but all of the pre-existing material makes for a fascinating story about Elvis himself, all the while saving room for the concert experience that many people likely came to see. It is amazing how much this film was able to tell in just a short amount of time. That said, much like Luhrmann’s “Elvis” biopic, the film is almost too fast. The film tells a lot of information in a short amount of time. In fact, I was somewhat surprised to find out that the film was only an hour and 36 minutes. As the movie ended, I asked myself, “That’s it?” But apparently it was. This movie’s supersonic pace, which sometimes works, made it somewhat difficult to digest every little detail. Maybe upon a second watch I will appreciate certain parts more, but there are a handful of bits highlighting Elvis’s career and personal life that had me less entertained compared to other scenes.

The pacing issues were especially noticeable towards the beginning, which does not start off bad. In fact, the first moment of the movie features Presley walking onstage and introducing himself to the crowd. What follows is a lot less concert material than I anticipated and a lot more backstory material. I get that this film is a documentary, but given how the film has “concert” in the title, I found it to take a bit of an odd turn early on in the runtime. It’s around the first twenty minutes or so, and perhaps another point or two, that the movie spends so much time being one thing that it nearly forgets to be something else.

Do not get me wrong, I was entertained. I like the movie as a whole, but at times, it feels like it has ADHD. It is too fast and almost unfocused. Technically speaking, it is astounding at times. But I am not sure if this film is going to have much replay value for me down the line, even in the cinema again despite how immersed I happened to be.

In the end, “EPiC: Elvis Presley in Concert” is undoubtedly a good time, even with its flaws, which do not take much away from an overall entertaining hour and a half. I wonder how well this film is going to play with people who are not Elvis fans. Granted, I am not a hardcore Elvis fanatic myself, though I do like some of his songs. I think even if you are not an Elvis fan, there is something to be said about how well put together this movie is. The concert scenes are a lot of fun. The footage feels seamless at times. The pacing is a bit iffy, but forgivable. That said, I think if you are an Elvis Presley lover, this will be your jam. If you are an Elvis Presley casual, I think there is something to appreciate here. I liked this film more than the “Elvis” biopic, so if anything, I consider that win, especially considering both projects were helmed by the same filmmaker. I am going to give “EPiC: Elvis Presley in Concert” a 7/10.

“EPiC: Elvis Presley in Concert” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Photo by 20th Century Studios/20TH CENTURY STUDIOS – © 2025 20th Century Studios. All Rights Reserved.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Send Help.” I know I am a bit late to the party on this film. I was going to go see it during an early access screening, but I ended up skipping it as I felt somewhat sick beforehand. Cut to the weekend the film came out… I was in New York. Then things did not end there as I could not make time within the next couple of weeks. Blog projects got in the way, weather got in the way, other movies got in the way, but no longer! Stay tuned for that review, which will be dropping soon! Also, coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “The Bride!” and “Hoppers.”

And I will once again remind everyone, if you have not checked it out yet, please watch the first ever episode of “Movie Requests,” it is a brand new review series where I talk about movies requested by some familiar faces. I just talked about “The Idiots,” which was requested by Bryce Dallas Howard. You can watch the video above to hear my thoughts on the film. Also, if you enjoy the video, please leave a like and subscribe to my YouTube channel!

If you want to see more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “EPiC: Elvis Presley in Concert?” What did you think about it? Or, since the topic is relevant, have you seen the “Elvis” biopic? Am I a monumental moron for disliking it? Leave your thoughts down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Song Sung Blue (2025): Pack Up the Babies and Grab the Old Ladies, and Everyone Else For That Matter

Posted on January 21 by Jack Drees

“Song Sung Blue” is directed by Craig Brewer (Dolemite Is My Name, Coming 2 America) and stars Hugh Jackman (X-Men, Real Steel), Kate Hudson (You, Me, and Dupree, Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery), Michael Imperioli (The Sopranos, Oh Canada), Ella Anderson (The Glass Castle, Henry Danger), Mustafa Shakir (Brawl in Cell Block 99, Love Hurts), Fisher Stevens (Succession, Key West), and Jim Belushi (According to Jim, Saturday Night Live). Inspired by true events as well as a documentary of the same name, this film is about Lightning and Thunder, a husband and wife Neil Diamond tribute act. The story explores the couple’s relationship and adventures in performing.

Courtesy of Focus Features. © – © 2025 Focus Features, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

I was first alerted to “Song Sung Blue” by my mom, back when she told me she wanted to see what she referred to as “the Neil Diamond movie.” Color me shocked and surprised, I figured if there were a Neil Diamond movie, I would have known about it. Not that I am huge Neil Diamond fan or anything, but I figured I would have seen a trailer or even read an article about it through Variety or some other outlet. While I was not surprised to find out there was no Neil Diamond biopic coming soon, I was surprised, however, to see that we were getting the movie that we would come to know as “Song Sung Blue.” I thought the concept for this was somewhat refreshing.

We live in a world where we frequently get some variation of a musician biopic like “Bohemian Rhapsody” or “Elvis” or “Back to Black.” While it is fun to see how select big name musicians rose to fame, there was a novelty to the concept of “Song Sung Blue,” because it is not about Neil Diamond and rather two people paying tribute to him. On the surface, this film felt like a small wonder. Granted, it also has two big name leads, so there is that. Then came my screening of “Jay Kelly,” where I saw the trailer for the first time. While I did not think the movie would reinvent the wheel, the trailer made the movie come off like it would be loads of fun. I was planning to see it when it came out on Christmas, but my aspirations did not quite work out, hence the late review. That said, there is a saying that good things come to those who wait. Not to say that I had low expectations for “Song Sung Blue,” but it is still amazingly better than I thought it would be. This film is a rollercoaster in every sense of the word. I was fully engaged for its two-plus hour runtime and it is simply one of the best experiences I had watching a film revolving around music.

When it comes to music-based films, “Song Sung Blue” may not go down in history for being as masterful as “Whiplash,” but its script allows for loads of fun while also allowing time to put the audience’s emotions through the ringer. I went to see this film at an 11:15 am screening, where I was more than likely the only person there under 30. That said, this movie knows no age. I mean… Who doesn’t like Neil Diamond? Or, even if you do not like Neil Diamond, I would even argue this movie is ball, because it revolves around two completely likable, sometimes quirky characters. After all, name me an artist who is not quirky.

I am not going to pretend all of the dialogue is Oscar-winning, granted, a lot of it is really good, but there is a cheesy line here and there. If anything, the script contains dialogue that made me believe that these characters themselves were real. It is dialogue that made me think that this is exactly how these characters would talk. Maybe they differ slightly from their real life counterparts, but even if they did, they allowed me to believe that they could exist. The sometimes exaggerated dialogue is part of these characters’ charm. It is part of who they are as storytellers, artists who are trying to give joy to those around them. It reminds me of myself as an artist sometimes.

© 2025 Focus Features, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

The screenplay, by itself, is a compelling idea. Although its execution is just as good, if not better. One thing that separates this film from those aforementioned musician biopics is that if you look at those films, we see certain artists showcase their talent and find great success and riches out of it. “Song Sung Blue” focuses on two people who are simply trying to get by. They do not have loads of money. They do not have a nice house. Seeing their constant struggles to make ends meet only made both of these people more relatable and likable. Sure, they were chasing after fame and fortune, but they came off as people who found joy in each little moment they had, even if they were not Hollywood hotshots.

While I really enjoyed this film, I also realize some creative liberties were taken for the sake of telling a particular narrative. I had not seen the documentary prior to checking this movie out, nor did I know much about this couple in advance. That said, I do not have that much of a problem with this movie and the way it tells its story. For the record, given how much I enjoyed the movie and the story behind it, I ended up checking out the documentary of the same name the day after I saw the feature film. First off, I fully endorse the documentary. Check it out if you get a chance. The film does a good job at presenting a fascinating slice of the main couple’s lives. Second, having watched both the feature film and documentary, I recognize that the feature film takes some creative liberties. For example, the documentary features a story about its subjects’ relationship to smoking. “Song Sung Blue” is PG-13, therefore it should not be a huge surprise that smoking does not play as significant of a part in the film’s story. Alcoholism does play a notable role in Mike’s journey, however, and I thought the film does a good job with that particular aspect. The film sees Mike attending AA meetings as well as celebrating “sober birthdays,” or anniversaries celebrating the end of his alcohol consumption.

“Song Sung Blue” may have my favorite concert scene in film since “Belle.” I will not spoil the movie, partially because you should see it, but not only is the scene itself immersive when it comes to the sound mixing that perfectly blends the music and the audience reactions together, but there is so much going on in this scene in terms of conflict. Something happens to Mike, also known as Lightning, prior to the concert and it makes what should be an incredibly fun scene, also arguably the scariest thing ever. I was so nervous as to what was about to go down.

With this film being about lesser known artists, it does feel somewhat ironic that Hugh Jackman and Kate Hudson were cast to play their characters. That said, I have no problem with it. Both actors by themselves are talented. As for their work in this film, both are on their A-game, and their chemistry as a couple is terrific. Kate Hudson in particular gives my favorite performance in the movie, because her character, Claire, also known as Thunder, is going through so much more than her artistic struggles. The film gives Hudson some compelling material to work with around the halfway point based on a significant injury. I am not saying any other actor would have been incapable of playing these characters, but these two stars give some of the best possible performances that a story like this could allow. Both Jackman and Hudson are equally adorable and even make the film’s cheesier moments feel earned.

Depending on which part of the movie we are talking about, watching “Song Sung Blue” is like watching a really good “Spider-Man” movie. In addition to the story being a whole lot of fun, the musicians it chooses to center around are some of the most relatable that I can recall seeing in a film. The script sometimes feels goofy, but in a charming way. In fact, the movie starts with Mike, showing off his jacket with a lightning bolt on the back. When he puts that jacket on, he sort of feels like a superhero. In fact, doesn’t the name Lightning and Thunder sound like a heroic duo? Also, like some of my favorite “Spider-Man” movies, like “Spider-Man 2” or “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” the film is perfectly paced and is capable of delivering on the emotions. When I look back at “Song Sung Blue,” I will remember it for being one of the most gleeful cinematic experiences I had in 2025. But I am not going to pretend that the movie is a happy watch from beginning to end. Towards the film’s final moments, there was some noticeable sniffling in the audience. If you cry easily, make sure you have tissues. You’ll thank me later.

In the end, “Song Sung Blue” is a film that has surprised me with each passing moment. When I first heard about the concept, I thought, “Okay…” When I saw who was in the movie, I dug it a bit more. Then I saw the trailer, and I was onboard, even if it looked a little cheesy and cliché. Then I saw the movie, and while I was not wrong about parts of the film feeling cheesy and cliché, I found myself wishing I had been able to check it out sooner. This is one of my favorite films of 2025, and I did not think I would come to that conclusion a month ago. All of the characters are likable, it delivers a rollercoaster of emotions and vibes, and I contend that even if you are not that big of a Neil Diamond fan, I still think you might be able to appreciate this film as a story. The highest highs of the film make for some smile-inducing moments to remember while the lowest lows are haunting as can be. “Song Sung Blue” is in fact, “so good, so good, so good,” and I am going to give it a 8/10.

Also, one last note, this film opened the same day as “Marty Supreme,” which is also a really good film. While the movies vary in terms of tone, style, execution, and the state of their protagonists, they are both really solid flicks about dreamers. If you want a really good double feature, check if your theater is playing both of these movies right now. If they are, take advantage of the opportunity and check out both in the same day. Both flicks are great in their own way.

“Song Sung Blue” is now playing in theaters and is also available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Mercy” and “Send Help.” Stay tuned!

In the spirit of dreams, I want to thank 10 people for making my dream come true, and those are my guests in the upcoming series Celebrity Movie Requests! I just dropped a teaser trailer showcasing hints about each special guest. Their actual names will be revealed sometime soon. Be on the lookout. The link for the video is above, which I posted on YouTube. Be sure to give it a like and subscribe to my channel so you can know more about the series and watch it when it drops!

And on Sunday, January 25th, be on the lookout for the nominations of the 8th Annual Jack Awards. The show that celebrates the best of 2025 in film! It is yet another edition of arguably the most over the top awards ceremony in movie blogging history. If you want to see all of these upcoming posts 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 “Song Sung Blue?” What did you think about it? Did you know about Lightning and Thunder before this movie came out? If so, tell me what you think about them, and if you got to see them perform, what was that experience like? Also, have you seen the documentary “Song Sung Blue?” If not, go check it out. It is free on YouTube. Tell them in the comments section that Jack Drees sent you! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Ballad of Wallis Island (2025): This Quirky British Comedy Hits the Right Notes

Posted on May 17, 2025 by Jack Drees

“The Ballad of Wallis Island” is directed by James Griffiths and is based on a short film he helmed by the name of “The One and Only Herb McGwyer Plays Wallis Island.” Frankly, I am glad they went with a different title. Saying that out loud is kind of a mouthful. Nevertheless, the film stars Tom Basden (Plebs, The Wrong Mans), Tim Key (See How They Run, Mickey 17), and Carey Mulligan (Promising Young Woman, Maestro). This film is set on island and follows a quirky lottery winner who successfully brings two formerly coupled musicians to said island, so they could perform for an audience. That audience being himself.

Alistair Heap/Focus Features ©2/Alistair Heap/Focus Features ©2 – © 2025 Focus Features, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

“The Ballad of Wallis Island” snuck up on me last minute. If you have read my reviews before, you may know that I often go to see movies with my mom and grandma, so I have to find some sort of equalizer for the three of us. “The Ballad of Wallis Island,” which was not playing in a ton of places in my area, is the latest example. Having not seen any trailers, I was sold by this film’s basic premise alone. This film sounded bonkers, and having seen it, it is. But I was also surprised by how raw it feels at times. “The Ballad of Wallis Island” immersed me in its environment and I did not want to leave. Not only was I captivated by this film’s serene location, but I was constantly engaged with its characters.

Tim Key and Tom Basden play off each other very well in their off and on relationship. And speaking of Tom Basden, I thought he and Carey Mulligan made for a cute former couple. Every cast member is great in this film. I have no complaints. No one feels out of place.

In the world of Screenwriting 101, it is often best to write characters who stand out because of their problems. For example, in some of the Tobey Maguire “Spider-Man” movies, we see Peter Parker in situations where he must fight tooth and nail to make a quick buck and pay rent, making him easy to root for. The protagonist in “The Ballad of Wallis Island” appears to have much better luck, and financial stability, than Parker. We find out early on in the film that Charles wins the lottery. Not many people can say that. Winning the lottery is one of the least relatable and most envy-inducing events that one can experience.

Amazingly, I was able to find some relatability in Charles. The character lives on an island, which again, is not exactly relatable, but it also presents a problem that even some “normal” people run into, like limited communication. I also felt bad for the character, as it is also established he lost his wife, so he lives by himself. Tim Key does a really good job at delivering Charles’ eccentric charm and wit. We quickly learn he is a master of puns. There is an early one involving a famous actress that had me in stitches.

“The Ballad of Wallis Island” is a fine line between the impractical and the buyable. This movie goes out there in terms of its concepts but somehow manages to make each one work. This film has everything from Charles’ lottery backstory, to getting two people who dissolved their band as well their partnership to somehow reunite on an island and play together again, to letting this reunion not only respark their interest in each other, but as well the idea of doing bigger and better things. The breakdown of this movie is like an extended sitcom episode, where people are precisely where they need to be at the most convenient, but nevertheless understandable times.

“The Ballad of Wallis Island” has plenty of laughs. Aside from the recently mentioned out there situations and admirable puns delivered by this film’s lead, I thought Tom Basden, who plays Herb McGwyer, did an excellent job handling his character’s bewilderment in a series of situations. There is a problem McGwyer runs into early on in the film regarding his phone, and I found the solution to not only be fitting, but also amusing. The film’s humor also comes from Charles’ lack of connections. While is not entirely lonely on his island, he is not close to friends or family. There is a funny scene where we see Charles and Herb playing tennis. Again, going back to that fine line between impractical and buyable, we find out Charles usually plays tennis, a sport usually played by multiple people, by himself. Therefore, we find out he has a killer serve.

On occasion, “The Ballad of Wallis Island” sort of reminds me of “The Banshees of Inisherin.” And no, nobody’s fingers come off in this film. But both films take place on islands, center around quirky leads, and feature limited casts. I think “Banshees” is the superior movie, but both films do a great job when it comes to implementing stories about music. “The Ballad of Wallis Island” seems to be slightly more music-centered than “Banshees,” so if that is something you are looking for, this film seems to have you covered. That said, despite this film being about music, I cannot say I walked out of it thinking I would need to buy the soundtrack or listen to the songs again on YouTube. The songs were not bad. Maybe with a rewatch that could change. When it comes to the context of each song, I cannot say there are any that were not used wisely. The songs were good, but to me that is probably the highest praise I can give to them. None of them floored me or left me gobsmacked. That said, I cannot say I outright hated any of them, so there is that.

Without spoiling anything, I really enjoyed the film’s conclusion. It ends on a solid, upbeat note. In fact, this whole movie, even with its characters having their own ups and downs, is a consistent delight. This is a solid flick to watch if you want a dose of joy. It is funny, charming, and lots of fun. Additionally it is sentimental, and I can see a story like this triggering the feels for select viewers. Would I watch it on a Friday night? I do not know if it is my first choice if I am by myself. But I could see it being an okay date movie perhaps.

Courtesy of Focus Features © 20/Courtesy of Focus Features © 20 – © 2025 Focus Features, LLC. All RIghts Reserved.

In the end, “The Ballad of Wallis Island” is a thumbs up. It is not my favorite film of the year so far, but it is one I do not regret watching. It is a solid British comedy with a likable cast that rides a fine line between fantasy and reality. The film has its fair share of laughs. I am not sure if the humor will be for everyone, but I would say it was for me. I am going to give “The Ballad of Wallis Island” a 7/10.

“The Ballad of Wallis Island” is now playing in theaters and is available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for a film that I am very excited to talk about. It is on a story I have heard a bit about ever since I was a kid. The review is for a documentary called “Secret Mall Apartment.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “A Minecraft Movie,” “Sinners,” “Thunderbolts*,” and “The Ruse.” 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 Ballad of Wallis Island?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie that you feel is a perfect balance between reality and fantasy? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert (2025): The Most I Have Fanboyed Over a Movie in a Long Time

Posted on April 24, 2025 by Jack Drees

“Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert” is a concert film directed by Paul Dugdale. The picture features performances from a Hans Zimmer concert as well as several interviews featuring people Zimmer has worked with over the years.

I was somewhat hesitant to talk about this film. Not because I thought it was bad, or I wanted to easily forget about it, but it all comes down to a lack of experience. I can safely say I have not watched many concert films. In fact, to this day, I never reviewed a concert film on Scene Before. Yes, even that “Eras Tour” movie that made a decent amount of money when it came out. I am not a Swiftie, to be honest. In fact, my experience of attending concerts in person is next to none. I have sensitive ears, so attending obnoxious events like these are not often my first choice. Although, Hans Zimmer is one of the few artists I have seen live during his tour, fittingly titled “Hans Zimmer Live,” at Boston’s TD Garden last year, which leads me to another reason why I almost avoided reviewing this movie.

I am a huge Hans Zimmer fanboy.

If there one artist that has defined my life over the past decade, it is Hans Zimmer. Not just because he has done some of my favorite movies, but his variety of approaches to composing his music. In one movie, he will go super electronic, in the next he will do things a bit more on the orchestral side, sometimes he will go full rock and roll. Sometimes a bit metal. Zimmer is one of the greatest musicians alive. When I would do homework after school, blaze down the highway on road trips, or even trek on Amtrak trains, Zimmer would often be my artist of choice. Going into this film, I was a bit worried that I would be so lost in what I love about Zimmer’s music that I would forget that there was a movie in front of me to potentially critique.

We will start this review off with some bad news for the filmmakers. Despite my fanaticism, and it was definitely on display during my experience of watching the movie, I have some negatives to point out. They are not game-breaking, but still.

There is a scene in the film where we see Hans Zimmer suggest that the audience was not allowed to take photos or use their phones during the concert. Shortly after, he essentially says “Screw it,” and allows everyone in the room, including him, to take a photo of the exact same moment in time. There is nothing wrong with the concept of this scene. In fact, it is a cool, community-driven moment of the movie. But when the film later features a ton of quickly spliced shots of people recording the concert, it makes me wonder if that “rule” existed to begin with. For the record, during my show in Boston, camera use was fair game, assumingly as long as we did not engage in flash photography. Perhaps the same was true for the concert he did in the film. Maybe Hans Zimmer and crew just wanted a good scene for the sake of a good scene. I have no clue.

Before we get to my next negative, I will state one positive, and it is that the music sequences outside the venue are not only fitting, but incredibly creative and very well put together. They start the concert off with a piece from “Dune” and it makes you feel like you are in the middle of an Arrakis-like landscape. When the film gets to “The Dark Knight,” it becomes an obnoxious rush through the city. Later on, when the movie gets to “Interstellar,” they eventually transform the set into a cosmic wonder. The efforts on display to make the most stunning spectacles possible are nothing short of magnificent. That said, if I had a nitpick, the film spends so much time outside the venue for the “Interstellar” sequence that I wish I could have been in the room with the audience, seeing their reaction to the musicians playing the music in front of them.

In fact, if you look hard enough during the movie, you will notice a disco ball in the middle of the arena. Having been to the concert that inspired this project, I can confirm that the ball was utilized during the “Interstellar” portion of the concert. We never see it used during the movie. Then again, I went to the concert with my dad, and he told me while he did see the ball at one point, he never noticed the ball being used during the “Interstellar” sequence. Perhaps no one could figure out a way to show the ball and make it look cinematic, but part of me would have liked to see a closer look at least once.

Although if you are a Hans Zimmer fan, like me, you are in for a treat. If you missed the Hans Zimmer Live concert, this movie shows most of it. There are a couple pieces missing, but the film is already quite long so I can understand why a couple parts were taken out. The film also features several interviews between Zimmer and some of the people with whom he has a connection to in the industry. Some of these include producer Jerry Bruckheimer, musician Pharrell Williams, director Christopher Nolan, and actor Zendaya. The film is not short on notable names. Some of the more prominent members of Zimmer’s band are not part of the talks like Tina Guo or Lebo M, but they do get their shoutouts during the concert itself.

These interviews give fascinating insights as to why Hans Zimmer attached himself to the movies he did. I found Zimmer’s story on his connection to “The Lion King” to be particularly powerful. In some ways, it enhances the connected concert sequence, and might also enhance “The Lion King” movie itself. That says something because it is a spectacular film.

Additionally, the interviews also highlight fans’ perspectives. When we get to Zendaya’s interview, a much younger individual than Zimmer, she talks about her connection to the composer’s music and the films in which they are a part of. Again, going back to “The Lion King,” she highlights it is a film she enjoyed growing up. Zendaya also says that “Interstellar” is a movie she adores and the two get into what can be described as an apparent resurgence of one piece of music from that film that is used on TikTok on a regular basis. The movie reveals just how much of an impact Zimmer has had on the people who had the pleasure of listening to him over the years.

If you are not familiar with Hans Zimmer, I would still highly recommend checking out this film. As of this review, being able to do so is probably near impossible at this point. But if there is ever a legal way to do it, give it a chance. Because even if you do not know the name Hans Zimmer, you probably know some of his work like “Pirates of the Caribbean” or “Man of Steel” or “Gladiator.” The concert itself is a sight to behold. The camerawork both in and out of the arena is immaculate. The lighting onstage is downright jaw-dropping. There are some shots that go on so long yet feel so pristine and yet the film also treats its audience to some crystal clean editing that flies at supersonic speed. This film is an experience.

Even if you have not seen any of the films represented during the concert, this is still a great time. In fact, despite my film-watching experience, I am proof of this. I still have yet to see “Dark Phoenix.” Judging by what I have heard about the film, I might be better off for avoiding the film up until this point. But good movie or not, that score nevertheless made it into the setlist, and it is a straight-up frenzy of electronic mayhem. Though I will warn people, that part of the film contains a lot of colorful flashing lights. If that is not your thing, you may want to fast forward through that, close your eyes, or skip this film altogether because that is not the only flashy scene in the final cut. Though that one in particular stands out to me. That said, if you are like me and you know Hans Zimmer’s work, this film is almost like a dream. If you are less familiar with Hans Zimmer, still give it a shot anyway, because I think you will find something in it to enjoy. Going back to, again, the story he gave as to why he ended up embracing “The Lion King,” it might even make you appreciate certain movies he did a little more.

In the end, “Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert” is a giant ball of euphoria. It is a near perfect experience. I found this movie to be equally as electrifying as one of Hans Zimmer’s scores. It sucks you in from the first minute and quickly becomes something totally over the top. The show is fantastic. The music videos are creative. The interviews are fun to watch. You might learn something new by the end of this two and a half hour thrillfest. If there is any legal way you are able to check this project out, I highly recommend doing so, because this is truly something special. I am going to give “Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert” a 9/10.

“Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert” is unfortunately not playing anywhere as of posting this review. There is no information available on a home release date at this time.

Thanks for reading this review! Turns out, my next review is going to be for a film that I also admittedly have been fanboying over simply based on the concept. If you know me in real life, you know I love game shows. And if you are aware of the true story behind this film, you would have to imagine the utter excitement I have been feeling for “The Luckiest Man in America.” Also stay tuned for my thoughts on “The Penguin Lessons,” “Novocaine,” “The Ballad of Wallis Island,” “Secret Mall Apartment,” and “A Minecraft Movie.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Hans Zimmer score? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Colors Within (2024): A Poppy Ride Celebrating the Importance of Art

Posted on February 1, 2025 by Jack Drees

“The Colors Within” is directed by Naoko Yamada (A Silent Voice: The Movie, K-On!) and stars Akari Takaishi (Watashi no Ichiban Saiakuna Tomodachi, Baby Assassins), Sayu Suzukawa (Cool Doji Danshi, Falling high school girl and Irresponsible teacher), Taisei Kido (First Love, Yuria-sensei no Akai Ito), and Yui Aragaki (Digimon Data Squad, Mixed Doubles). This film centers around a girl named Totsuko. She is in a band and can see the colors of other people.

January has been a very slow month for me in terms of movies. Granted, it is typically a slow month for movies in general. There really is not a lot coming out this month that caught my genuine interest. Although “The Colors Within” was an exception. The concept sounded rather intriguing, particularly in regards to how the movie seems to handle its protagonist. While the protagonist’s life could be ordinary, their extraordinary trait certainly stood out to me, particularly their ability to see color. Or, more accurately, to see color in a way that most people do not. I think that could make for not only an interesting story, but one that is visually inviting.

As expected, the animation style for “The Colors Within” is pleasant to the naked eye. Is it the best I have ever seen? No. However, it is still a style that pops and maintains a consistent bright palette to it. It is a welcoming look considering the movie, despite having occasional drama, always maintains a sense of lightheartedness. By the end of this movie, I left with a smile, and part of it may have been due to looking at something that appeared rather heavenly at times.

Color-wise, the movie tends to live up to its name, but I have to be frank. If I were to judge “The Colors Within” by its cover so to speak, I have to say that the concept at times feels gimmicky. When the movie tells its audience about its main character’s ability to see color, it sounds intriguing. But I feel like the movie minimizes its chances to show such an aspect in a visually stunning manner. Granted, I enjoyed seeing our main character use her unique trait as a point of inspiration in making music. In fact, if I had to name a favorite part of the movie, it would be getting to see a few artists coming together to get creative. “The Colors Within” reminds me of “Sing Sing,” which, spoiler, I think is a better movie. It is a movie about a bunch of people expressing themselves through art, and how art lets people forget their troubles. Again, going back to the animation of the film, I do think it looks nice. But I think the film’s animation barely enhances the story. Looking back, it barely feels different than if I were to see something more traditional within the anime medium. Does the film effectively convey the protagonist’s “power” so to speak? You could say that, yes. But it really does not add much to the overall experience if you ask me.

The film also features a list of original songs, all of which are at minimum, fun to listen to. There is one in particular that is repeated during the film that became rather catchy by the end. Also, as a piece of music, it was nice to see this one song evolve from a simple idea to something much bigger. It reminds me of some of my own projects. There was a short film that I created in college that I thought of based on one of my own weird interests. I made it with a couple other people who had their own ideas that they built on top of it. It was amazing to see this small idea develop. Seeing Totsuko brainstorm her own song and have it come to life kind of reminded me of the process of creating my own art.

This film mainly revolves around three main characters. Totsuko, Kimi, and Rui. The three come together to make music. I love seeing them all in the same room. Not only do they come off as genuine friends, but seeing them together allows each one to unleash the deepest part of themselves. That is when they are most honest about how they feel, what is going on in their lives. It allows for some of the film’s most emotionally hypnotic scenes. We find out not only do they enjoy making music, but how such a passion interferes with their personal lives.

We find out Rui loves making music, but his family expects him to become a doctor and take the next step in the family business. I think a good amount of people can relate to Rui’s dilemma. Rui seems so concerned with impressing his parents that he is having trouble accepting what he really wants to do. I am all the more invested in a character knowing not only is he having fun doing what he is doing, but he is feeling perhaps the freest he has felt in his life.

Kimi also has a problem where if she were to be honest about it, she could end up disappointing her own family. We find out Kimi dropped out of school and has yet to tell her grandmother about it. The film’s characters seem to share the commonality of holding something back, hiding their true thoughts, and maybe not being their full selves. When we see them make music however, that changes. We see them at their happiest, their liveliest. That happiness leaps off the screen to the point where I too am smiling.

To be real with you, while most of the movie revolves around Totsuko, I admittedly found myself latching more to the supporting characters in terms of their backstory. I found their presence to be more compelling. This is not to say Totsuko is a horribly written character. I do not hate her. Again, I think the “colors” aspect was not as well established as it could have been. It had potential, but I do not think all of it was unleashed properly. But I think Totsuko is a pleasant center to the film as she sees her two bandmates flesh themselves out.

In the end, “The Colors Within” is just plain fun. It took me awhile to take the anime medium seriously as someone who watches a lot of movies. While I never outright hated it, it was always hard to find a gateway to watching more of it. I am glad watching films like “Belle” a few years back have opened my eyes because it has allowed me to seek out great projects like this. If you are a creative individual, I highly recommend this film. I will be real, 2025 is off to a crazy start between the Los Angeles wildfires, the political division, the recent plane and helicopter collision in Washington, DC… I said earlier that this film highlights art’s abilities to make you forget your troubles. I think there is a case to be made that while “The Colors Within” will not make your problems in life disappear, they will be left in the background for sometime. I left this movie feeling giddy, and excited to watch it again at some point. I think some of you reading this review will feel the same way if you were to seek this movie out. I already watched this film in the Japanese language, and I am eager to check out the English dub when I get the chance. I am going to give “The Colors Within” a 7/10.

“The Colors Within” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Dog Man” and “Love Me.” Stay tuned! 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 Colors Within?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie that you enjoy about artistic expression? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Maria (2024): Pablo Larraín Completes His Unofficial Prominent 20th Century Woman Trilogy

Posted on January 18, 2025 by Jack Drees

“Maria” is directed by Pablo Larraín (Jackie, Spencer) and stars Angelina Jolie (Eternals, Kung Fu Panda), Pierfrancesco Favino (Night at the Museum, Angels & Demons), Alba Rohrwacher (The Wonders, Hungry Hearts), Haluk Bilginer (EastEnders, Halloween), and Kodi Smit-McPhee (Memoir of a Snail, X-Men: Apocalypse). This film is about opera singer Maria Callas, and is most prominently set during the week leading up to her death.

Courtesy of Netflix – © 2024 Netflix, Inc.

When it comes to film directors, if you were to ask me if I knew who Pablo Larraín was before this review, chances are I would say no. Although upon research after seeing this movie, it turns out, I have experienced his previous filmography. For the record, this is my first film of his I am reviewing. More than a year ago I watched “Jackie,” which I thought had stunning production design, killer camerawork, costuming, and a great lead performance by Natalie Portman. I ended up enjoying the film overall. Is it a masterpiece? No. But it is a compelling watch that I recommend checking out if the chance comes by. It also turns out that “Maria” is part of an unofficial trilogy. This is Pablo Larraín’s third film regarding notable 20th century women. 2016’s “Jackie” was the first, followed by 2021’s “Spencer,” which for the record, I did not see, and now “Maria.”

Having seen both “Maria” and “Jackie,” I can confirm that they contain similar positives. Both feature talented leads who give really good performances. The dialogue is particularly well executed and properly placed. There is not a line in the film that comes to mind that feels like filler. The sets and locations in both films feel noticeably extravagant. If I have one thing to say, I personally prefer the overall look to “Jackie” to “Maria.” The color choices between the on-set items feel more rugged and have more character, whereas I look at “Maria” and somehow the frames continuously emit a greater sense of perfection. It is almost to the point where some of the set design feels oddly artificial. But if I am going to remember one of these films within the next year, I think “Jackie” is the one. I recall it having more of an impact on me by the end than this film did. I am not going to pretend I remember that movie through and through, but whereas “Jackie” drew me in through its flair, “Maria” feels like a borderline snoozefest at times.

Despite what I said about the look though, there is no doubt that “Maria” at least provides a sense of immersion. Between the detailed costumes, excessive use of wallpaper, and extravagant sets, the film is easy on the eye, even if some of it looks somewhat unreal.

There is a good movie somewhere in “Maria,” but it is not doing the best job at unveiling itself. “Maria” feels less like a story and more like a series of events that are loosely connected together. It all amounts to a bit of a bore. As I write this review, I am having trouble naming what I found to be the best parts of the film. The events in this film are all wound properly and maintain a sense of consistency, but I am not going to pretend I was moved or compelled by all of them.

The one thing that is saving these moments are the performances. Angelina Jolie, again, does a good job with the lead role, though I am disappointed to know that a lot of her singing scenes were lip-synced. Her most prominent moments are simply driven through spoken dialogue. That is weird to say because this film has a pace to it where the dialogue is used rather sparingly. Interesting enough, this film is about an opera singer, and I would say that there is a bit less singing in this film than I probably expected going in. If you are looking for singing in this film, it exists. But if you take into consideration what this film is actually about, a woman who is essentially losing the ability to sing, then it would not be a surprise to realize that this film is not a a marathon of vocals.

I also liked a lot of the supporting performances. Haluk Bilginer does a good job as Callas’ partner, Aristotle Onassis. Pierfrancesco Favino is a standout as Callas’ servant, Ferruccio. That character plays a major part in the film despite the greatest highlight of his performance likely extends to him just being in the room.

This film is not a typical biopic as much as it is a short series of events with tons of flashbacks. The film does have some elements one might expect out of a biopic. A summary of a star’s success, an emphasis on the same star’s downward spiral, and a highlight into the star’s substance abuse. We see Callas taking drugs during the film and how it affects her down the road. What separates this biopic is not only its contained feel, as it primarily treks itself through a specific time period, but also a noticeable use of flashbacks. If you are not into non-linear stories, this film may not be for you. That said, the way this film is told, I would argue it would be worse if it were linear. That kind of says something though because the film as is failed to impress me.

If I have any other notable highlights I have not gone over yet, there is one scene that stuck with me because of how much it makes me think about our ongoing celebrity culture. There is one scene where Maria is in public and someone comes up to her that he was going to her show, but she never showed up. At this point, Maria firmly tells him she was sick. Looking back, maybe she was a bit harsh in her response to this individual. But I think it also taps into something I think we often forget about as a society. We expect so much from celebrities to the point where we forget that they are human beings. Some debate as to whether stars are just like us. But if there is a way they are like us, it is through the idea that stars are not perfect.

There is also a little Easter Egg in this film for those paying attention. As mentioned in the beginning, this film is from the same director who did “Jackie,” which is about Jackie Kennedy. Turns out this film has a rather noticeable Kennedy connection. You will know it when you see it.

In the end, “Maria” is a film that I could see being a highlight in certain aspects during this awards season, but it is not perfect. It is a film that I am probably going to forget by next year. I expect that from a Netflix title to be frank, but for something like this, this feels shocking to say. Angelina Jolie definitely carries star power in the lead role, but it is not the best performance I have seen in a 2024 film. If you want something pretty, this film will do. But if you are looking for something memorable, look elsewhere. I am going to give “Maria” a 5/10.

“Maria” is now playing in select theaters and is available to stream on Netflix for all subscribers.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the brand new horror film, “The Damned!” Stay tuned! If you want to see this review and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Maria?” What did you think about it? Or, what are your thoughts on Maria Callas as an artist? Let me know down below! Scene before is your click to the flicks!

The 10 WORST Movies of the 2020s (2020-2024)

Posted on January 9, 2025 by Jack Drees

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! If you have followed this blog for a long time, you would know that I enjoy doing recaps of my best and worst films of the year once that specific period comes to a close. 2024 is no different. But when 2020 started, I also put out my best and worst films of the 2010s. I did two separate countdowns and I had a lot of fun doing those. I figured given how we are halfway through the decade, why not do a halftime report? This is not going to be as grand as the countdowns I did recapping the entire 2010s. There is no video content on top of everything else. I figured I would keep the summaries simple and as much to point as possible. For this list, I am going to be talking about the 10 worst films throughout the first half of the 2020s per my opinion. Few reminders, this is a subjective list based on movies I have seen. The movies also have to be theatrical releases. No streaming exclusives, no straight to DVD titles, no straight to TV titles. Well, actually, there is one exception to that rule, and I will explain why when I get to it. Also, this list is going to be in alphabetical order. I figured since there is a chance that I could do a 10 year recap in 2030, I will maintain some mystery and not rank my worst films of the decade from most tolerable to least tolerable or vice versa. With that in mind, let’s get straight to the list. No honorable mentions, just the 10 stinkers right off the bat! These are the 10 WORST movies of first half of the 2020s.

Borderlands (2024)

I have played my fair share of video games, although I have never played any of the “Borderlands” titles. After seeing the “Borderlands” movie, I am not sure if I have any plans to play any of those games given the bad taste this film left in my mouth. This film is essentially “Guardians of the Galaxy” if you allowed someone who lacked the competence of James Gunn to oversee it. This film has green screen backgrounds that are about as real as Bigfoot. It also has special effects that would perhaps be barely tolerable in the early 2000s. To have these effects now is almost a criminal offense! This film has a lot of big stars in it like Cate Blanchett, Jamie Lee Curtis, and Kevin Hart. But the bigger the names are, the harder this movie falls. Trust me when I say, this movie shook the ground with its lack of quality. Did I mention Jack Black’s horribly realized voice performance as Claptrap? Jack Black has at least one tolerable video game movie on his resume, “The Super Mario Bros. Movie,” and he was easily the highlight of said film as Bowser. So it is only fitting he has a movie on the opposite side of the spectrum that comes off as a fine example of the video game adaptation curse.

Cinderella (2021)

One of my favorite comedies of the 2010s was “Blockers,” directed by Kay Cannon. I was excited to see whatever she would pump out next. I did not think it would be something as bad as “Cinderella.” This film is kind of a parody on the “Cinderella” tale. It is a jukebox musical that takes a satirical approach on the formula, but the problem is the movie is simply not that funny. I do not remember laughing once throughout the entire runtime. As much as I do not want to be on his enemies list, this film has something in common with a lot of other movies I did not enjoy in recent years. Specifically, the presence of James Corden. I do not know who his agent is, but I think his resume suggests that he could probably find a better one between this film, “The Emoji Movie,” and “Cats” just to name a few. I do not know if he is just wasted or simply not that funny. I never really watched his late night show when it was on. If I were up at that hour, chances are I would be watching “Late Night with Seth Meyers.” Just my personal taste. As a musical, I was barely entertained by some of the numbers at best, perhaps straight up annoyed at worst. Conceptually, this film has promise by setting a character like Cinderella in a modern society where women are more independent, but as far as the execution goes, I thought it could have been better. I still like Kay Cannon though and I am curious to see what she does next.

Dolittle (2020)

After many years of being the dominant face in the MCU, Robert Downey Jr. moved onto his first big project following the gargantuan success of “Avengers: Endgame,” and let’s just say the movie did very little to impress me. “Dolittle” is not just a waste of Robert Downey Jr. in addition to a fairly talented supporting cast, it just so happens to be one of the most forgettable family films I have ever seen. Well, for the most part. There are some parts I’d rather forget, but much to my disappointment, that is simply impossible. In recent years, I have come to totally despise the term “kids movie.” It is not an entirely unusable phrase, but sometimes it is kind of like the term “chick flick.” It is more or less used as an excuse to put a movie in a box for its lack of quality. “Dolittle” is a movie that some kids can probably enjoy for its visuals, but I do not think this film will age well for every viewer who watches it at a young age. Maybe they’ll have some nostalgic attachment to it when they are older. But it does not change the fact that the film itself is sloppily written, badly directed, and is not as funny as they are trying to convince people it is.

Freelance (2023)

When it comes to wrestlers-turned-actors, John Cena seems to care more about his range and performances than Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson. But just like many other performers, his resume is far from perfect. Case in point, “Freelance.” John Cena comes off as the most likable, nice guy in real life, but Cena unfortunately plays a lead in this film who is honestly the polar opposite. Given some of the dialogue early on in the film, his character, Mason Pettits, seems to dislike his spouse and children. Maybe he respects them deep down, but that is not the first impression I got from watching the character in the film’s earliest scenes. On top of that, he sounds miserable. I get that the film presents this character with an opportunity that could potentially turn his frown upside down, but from everything I gathered in the first 10, 20 minutes of the movie, Cena lacked any and all charisma when it comes to this role. Sure, the film gives a reason for the character’s misery, but I still thought Cena came off more as a moron than anything else. A lack of charisma is something I am not used to seeing with John Cena as an actor. Even in movies I did not enjoy like “Fast X,” I still thought Cena was charming. Not here. If there is one performance I liked in the movie, it would probably Juan Pablo Raba’s performance as the dictator, Venegas. I remember emitting one genuine laugh during the film, and he was the one responsible for it. Does it make up for a bad, somewhat ordinary screenplay? No. Does it make up for some of the characters having nonexistent chemistry? Also, no. Does it make up for a lack of identity as to what the film is supposed to be? Definitely not.

Madame Web (2024)

Yyyyyyyup. This is only the umpteenth time in recent memory I had to talk about this abomination against humanity. “Madame Web” is a humongous disgrace on every level. This is just the first culprit in a year of outright inexcusable comic book movies. Thank goodness for “Deadpool & Wolverine,” because otherwise I probably would be in a straight up depression as a fan of this genre. To me, Sony’s Spider-Man Universe was dead on arrival. But for whatever reason the studio just kept pumping out ridiculous crap like this. “Madame Web” is a film about a woman who can see the future. Well, if that is the case, why did she not see this flop coming from a mile away?! Between okay at best action scenes, horrible camerawork, and some of the most annoying characters of all time, “Madame Web” is a horror show. The film even puts its own spin on the “with great power comes great responsibility” line. The delivery of that line comes off like a parent trying to take interest in their children’s hobbies but doing a terrible job at hiding their distaste for them. People can try as hard as they want to convince me that this movie could develop a cult following similar to Tommy Wiseau’s “The Room,” but I will not be part of it. The film is not so bad that it is good. It is so bad that I questioned Sony as to why the heck they were okay with making the film, in addition to bringing back the writers of “Morbius.” Sure, “Morbius” was technically profitable… But it does not change the fact that they wrote a terrible screenplay. Again, I do not have comic book movie fatigue. But I am fatigued by Sony’s Spider-Man Universe. I would be totally happy if they stopped making these films. In fact you know what? I would be totally happy if I could stop talking about these films. I had to review three of these atrocities in 2024, as if doing one them was not already bad enough. I have had it with this film! I have had it with “Kraven the Hunter!” I have had it with the “Venom” movies! Well except the second one, that was actually fun. I have had it with this impractical joke of a cinematic universe! And I would most certainly be happy if I never had to talk about another Sony Spider-Man Universe movie ever again!

Morbius (2022)

So, now that I am done whining about the Sony Spider-Man Universe, let us move onto something el–AW COME ON! …Alright. Let’s trash “Morbius” one more time. I already bashed the screenwriters of this film, so I will at least address a positive by saying that some of the first act was decent. But once that act concludes, the film crashes and burns. It is 104 minutes of images that honestly made me feel nothing. I never once felt excitement, or chills, or wonder. The movie itself comes off as if it were going through the motions. Jared Leto and Matt Smith definitely play up their performances, and the results of that are in fact memeable. But it is not enough to save this nightmare. This movie is centered around science. I am a little suspicious about that. When your film’s characters cannot properly pronounce “Nobel Prize” I think you lost your credibility. The special effects in this film are also amazingly unrealistic by 2022 standards. Maybe they would get by in the early 2000s, but not today. I normally try not to judge a film by a post-credit scene, but this is one where I cannot help myself because it tacks on a promise that sounds so nonsensical it is insane. It promises a team-up I had no interest in checking out. It brings in a character who I honestly have no interest in seeing return because I fear they will be written terribly. It very much feels like Sony saying, “We are out of options.” In case you are not paying attention, “Kraven the Hunter” dodged a bullet. I hated that movie, it would probably be in my top 20 worst of the decade. But I hope that film is the last one we see in Sony’s Spider-Man Universe because the two that did make this list reek of utter incompetence. Perhaps to the point where it is almost being done on purpose.

The Murder of Nicole Brown Simpson (2019) (STILL COUNTS!)

I know some would say “The Murder of Nicole Brown Simpson” is a 2019 film, but in the United States it released in 2020, so I am counting it here. Regardless, this is a terrible movie. The one positive in the movie is perhaps Mena Suvari, who like everyone else, is working with abominable material, but it does not erase the other negatives. When I look at some of the cast members alongside Suvari, they sound like they are overacting. I could not buy into their performances even for a second! This film is directed by Daniel Farrands, and this is not the only film he has done in relation to famous figures who died in a tragic manner. Not long before this film came out, audiences were also subjected to “The Haunting of Sharon Tate.” It is actually amazing how close in quality, or lack thereof, these movies happen to be. “The Murder of Nicole Brown Simpson” is both so bad that you want it to be over instantaneously, and yet, I am under the impression that this 82 minute film perhaps overstuffs itself by the end of it. By the final 10 minutes, I just questioned why I was watching this movie. Maybe I just hate myself. It is possible.

Music (2021)

This was my worst movie of 2021, and it still stands. “Music” is a cinematic disaster. It advertises itself as a movie championing the autistic community. But as someone who has connections to and has been around people in said community for a good portion of my life, this is not a movie that best represents them. You could make the argument that maybe it has something in its story for caretakers of autistic people, but it also displays actions that if you speak to autistic people, they probably would disapprove if somebody else were to engage in them. The film itself is stereotypical, poorly paced, and horribly directed. I feel bad for Maddie Ziegler because for all I know she is talented, but she was not given good material to work with in this film. Honestly, her performance is almost offensive, but I more or less blame the film’s director, Sia, for letting this picture come to be in the first place. Kate Hudson gives an okay performance, but it is not enough. Say what you want about the Golden Globes having any meaning whatsoever. But the fact that this film even got a Best Picture nomination from that voting body is one of the all greatest insults to cinema I have ever seen. Kate Hudson getting nominated for Best Actress? I mean, it is not my first choice, but okay… But Best Picture?! Go home, you’re drunk!

Skinamarink (2023)

Out of all the movies on this list, this is the only one I did not put on one of my worst of the year countdowns. But if I did, I would say “Skinamarink” is probably the worst horror film I have seen all decade. This film is not just bad, but utterly disappointing at the same time. I am not going to pretend my expectations were as high as say they would be when I walk into a Christopher Nolan movie. But I was intrigued by what this film had to offer. It was an experimental vision unlike anything I had seen. Yet that is exactly what this film feels like. An experiment. A failed one at that. Essentially, the entire film is a series of shots staring at various parts of the inside of a home. The film apparently has a plot, but I could not describe it to you if I tried. Also I mentioned this is a horror movie. It is one of the least scary horror films I have ever seen. Not once did I even shiver or get a bad vibe. I just stared at the screen in awe of how unamusing this travesty turned out to be. I watched this film from home. I wonder if the experience is any different watching it in the cinema, but I missed out on that opportunity so I got to suffer from the comfort of my bedroom.

Superintelligence (2020)

Remember how I said at the beginning that I would only put movies that were in theaters on this list, with one exception to the rule? Well, here we are. “Superintelligence” released on the streaming service formerly known as HBO Max in 2020. The film was going to hit theaters at one point in 2019 until Warnermedia decided to make it a streaming release. It kind of bends my rules a little, but 2020 kind of bent everyone’s rules a little bit so this is only fitting. This film is a collaboration between Hollywood couple Ben Falcone and Melissa McCarthy. As if their previous film together, “Life of the Party” was not bad enough, they followed it up with this pile of artificially unintelligent garbage. The screenplay for this film is just plain terrible. Does it get from point a to point b? Sure. But as I watched this film’s protagonist go from one point to the next, never once do I get the impression that any of her outcomes feel earned. Such a thing could be acceptable if the film made me laugh, but unfortunately that concept is about as real as Valve’s chance of ever releasing a video game with the number “3” in its title. My first laugh while watching the film honestly did not come in until the 44 minute mark. The further the film went on, the angrier I became. By the end, I was at a loss for words. For a film called “Superintelligence,” it certainly feels super dumb. Also, once again, shoutout to James Corden’s agent for ruining everything! Apparently Corden makes an appearance in this shoddy mess as well.

Thanks for reading this recap! Coming up next, I am going to be talking about my best films of the decade so far! Expect that post in the next few days! I am just like Thanos, I believe in perfect balance. If I am going to bash 10 films, I will applaud 10 others. It is only fair. If you want to see posts like these and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, what are your worst films of the decade so far? What films do you recommend for properly punishing your enemies? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

A Complete Unknown (2024): Timothée Chalamet Shows His Range One of His Most Complicated Roles Yet

Posted on January 4, 2025 by Jack Drees

“A Complete Unknown” is directed by James Mangold (Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, Logan) and stars Timothée Chalamet (Dune, Interstellar), Edward Norton (The Incredible Hulk, Fight Club), Elle Fanning (The Neon Demon, Maleficent), Monica Barbaro (FUBAR, Top Gun: Maverick), Boyd Holbrook (Narcos, The Sandman), Dan Fogler (The Goldbergs, The Walking Dead), Norbert Leo Butz (Bloodline, The Exorcist: Believer), and Scoot McNairy (Halt and Catch Fire, Nightbitch). This film is set in much of the 1960s and centers around a young Bob Dylan as he establishes several relationships and creates a series of songs.

Bob Dylan is to music what the “Star Trek” franchise has been over the years to television and movies. He has been relevant since the 1960s, produced a lot of material that has been well regarded, and has somehow managed to maintain even the slightest hint of relevancy up until now. Much like the “Star Trek” franchise, I cannot say that I have the deepest appreciation for Bob Dylan. It is not that I hate Bob Dylan, or “Star Trek” for that matter, it is just that I never find myself circling around to Dylan’s music despite having many options for the taking.

You may remember there was an Amy Winehouse biopic in the middle of 2024 called “Back to Black,” which I gave a positive review. I do not think it was particularly striking or memorable, but I ended up leaning positive on it. It has its moments of fun and does a good job at capturing the darker side of Winehouse’s life. I also said that even though the movie presents the artist’s songs well, I would not claim to be an Amy Winehouse fan. I was not one before the movie. I am still not one after the movie. The same is true with Bob Dylan. I still appreciate his music, but I am pretty much in the same position as I was going into a “A Complete Unknown.” I am a Bob Dylan appreciator. Not a Bob Dylan fanatic. In regards to my appreciation, it is perhaps greater for him now than it was before, but still. I also think “A Complete Unknown” does a great job showing Dylan’s impact on the music industry by the time the movie’s over.

Is the film entirely accurate? No, it is not. If you know your Bob Dylan lore, you would know that he had a girlfriend in the 1960s by the name of Suze Rotolo. That is not the case in this film as Dylan himself requested her name would be changed. Therefore, we see Elle Fanning play a character by the name of Sylvie Rotolo (left). Regardless of accuracy, Fanning does a good job with the role. She has spot on chemistry with Chalamet’s Dylan. Speaking of chemistry, Chalamet also has quite a spark with another love interest in this film, Joan Baez, played by Monica Barbaro.

Overall, it is easy to say that the acting in “A Complete Unknown” is a standout element. This extends to more than just love interests. Edward Norton does a great job playing Pete Seeger. Dan Fogler plays one of my favorite characters in the film, Dylan’s manager, Albert Grossman. I thought of the entire cast, he was the one that delivered the most laughs. He had plenty of good material in the script to keep him busy. Boyd Holbrook oozes with charisma as Johnny Cash.

But of course, the real star of the show is Timothée Chalamet as Bob Dylan. Chalamet has been killing it for the past year or so. In 2023, he starred in “Wonka” as the title character. While I did not love the film, he does a phenomenal job with the role. I criticized “Wonka” for having unmemorable music sequences, but it does not mean Chalamet did not do his best with them. He has proven himself to be a solid singer, and therefore it is no surprise that Chalamet ends up lending his own voice to Dylan’s songs. Not only that, but Chalamet also plays the guitar in this film. I love Chalamet’s overall commitment to the role and he looks like he is having fun with it. If I had one thing to say though, there are some scenes where Chalamet has a bit of an accent to his character that feels kind of played up. It is a little over the top. Not quite over the top enough to sound like something out of “Saturday Night Live,” but at times it was a little distracting.

As an artist, I always appreciate when a movie has something to say about art itself. “A Complete Unknown” does this very well. Not only does the film highlight a portion of Bob Dylan’s career, which by the way, given how much Dylan has done over the years, I think it is wise of the filmmakers to just corner the story into just a small chunk of his life. It is worth noting within this small chunk of Dylan’s life we get to know a bit about his influence on the music industry and his rise to becoming an icon. With these elements in mind, this presents Dylan with a problem. While he is known for his music, deep down, he would like to be more than the identity in which society has given him. He wants to try new things and experiment. This film builds to a point where we see such a monumental shift come to fruition. Bob Dylan has built a reputation as a storytelling folk artist with a calming vibe. But we find out later on that he wants to implement electric instruments into his repertoire. The extended scene where we see this play out is easily my favorite part of the film. Not only is this sequence entertaining and presents significantly more stakes than we have seen throughout the story’s prior points, but we see Chalamet successfully channel his character’s happiness and indifference in regard to what others think of him.

This movie is more than just the rise of a popular musician, but it is also the story of an artist who just wants to make art. This is a consistency in every scene. Dylan sometimes tends to put his art before the people in his life, whether he knows them personally or they just so happen to be fans. It is his greatest passion in life. The movie shows the balance of making art to impress people intertwined with the complication of making art for yourself. It showcases the hurdle of shattering audience expectations. When you watch a movie, a shocking twist is sometimes warranted and can often be done well. But when is the shift too significant? That is a question this movie tries to answer and I think the overall response has resulted in an entertaining and exciting climax to a solid flick.

In the end, “A Complete Unknown” is not my favorite film of the year, but it has a series of strong moments and performances. Additionally, it has great production design, good direction by James Mangold, and a cozy vibe. I walked out of this awards contender feeling similar to how I did walking out of an Oscar-winning film I watched in 2023, specifically “The Holdovers.” “A Complete Unknown” is a movie that emits a sense of coziness. The movie practically puts you in a warm blanket. Again, this movie did not transition me into becoming a Bob Dylan fan. I am not going to go on YouTube just to listen to his music on a regular basis. But the musical sequences where we see Dylan’s folk songs come to life are most definitely comforting. If this movie is playing near you, give it a shot. I am going to give “A Complete Unknown” a 7/10.

“A Complete Unknown” is now playing in theaters everywhere. tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! And that is the last of the movies I saw in theaters in 2024! Coming soon, I will be talking about my top 10 best and worst movies of the year. Like the past couple years, I will be starting with the worst. Stay tuned! If you want to see these countdowns 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 “A Complete Unknown?” What did you think about it? Or, what are your thoughts on Bob Dylan as an artist? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Piece by Piece (2024): A “Happy” LEGO Lucky Time at the Movies

Posted on October 23, 2024 by Jack Drees

“Piece by Piece” is directed by Morgan Neville (20 Feet from Stardom, Won’t You be My Neighbor?) and stars Pharrell Williams in his own biographical documentary comedy entirely told though a LEGO animation style. The film centers around Williams’ life, how he grew up, how he created his music, and how he became the star people know him to be today.

I will be real… Modern music is not my forte. I have often distanced myself from the material in the past number of years that winds itself up in the “top 40.” I find that a decent amount of the biggest hits that come out nowadays are not my cup of tea. But one of the advertising points of “Piece by Piece” was the song “Happy,” which is performed by Pharrell Williams, the film’s lead. Turns out I never knew who did the song despite it playing everywhere in 2014. Yes, it was featured in “Despicable Me 2,” but those films are not the most intriguing to me. I never cared enough to watch the credits and see who did the song. But when they advertised this movie, my first thought was not, “Oh, Pharrell Williams!” Before that thought even popped in my head, I had another one and that was… “Oh great, I have to hear ‘Happy’ for the six-thousandth time…” I despised the song when it came out. Despite sounding peaceful and cheery, I found that aspect of the song to be overdone to the point of annoyance. It felt overly cartoony. But despite my lack of knowledge on the artist, I was curious to see how this film handled Pharrell Williams’ story. I knew almost nothing about Bob Marley, but I cannot say that turned me away from the movie centered around him that came out earlier this year, specifically “Bob Marley: One Love.” If anything, the overplaying of that film’s trailers when I went to the cinema almost did. And then the movie turned out to make that streak of trailers all the more irritating.

But I found out about “Piece by Piece” just as the film was coming out. I wanted to see this movie because I thought the idea was original and creative. Yes, we have seen theatrically animated “LEGO Movies” in the past, and those have been great. There is a decent amount of LEGO content done for home viewing, and the same can be said for stop motion LEGO videos. But this was something that I have never seen. A LEGO-style documentary… This is also likely the first notable “LEGO” movie of sorts that has been done since Warner Bros. gave Universal the rights to make new ones. If you want to get technical, in this case, Universal is distributing the film internationally, but in the United States, this is a Focus Features movie. For those not in the know, they’re both owned by Comcast.

I really should not say I am surprised I like this movie, but I am nevertheless surprised at how much I enjoyed it. I say that because this film comes from Morgan Neville, who also helmed the wonderful documentary “Won’t You be My Neighbor?“, centered around television’s Fred Rogers. This film is not as good as that one, but I can definitely say this is one of the most unique animated features I have ever come across. Although one thing “Piece by Piece” does better is that it fantastically lets us see the world through Pharrell Williams’ eyes. To be fair though, he was alive during the making of this project whereas Fred Rogers died more than a decade before “Won’t You be My Neighbor?” came out. But “Piece by Piece” clearly dives not only into the life of Pharrell Williams, but the mind of Pharrell Williams. This film may as well prompt an argument that almost whenever Williams dozes off, he imagines whatever comes into his head in a LEGO artstyle. Like a lot of great stories, this is about someone who sees themselves as “different” from the rest of his peers. If this were Tatooine, Williams would clearly be some variant of Luke Skywalker. This film effectively captures Williams’ one of a kind personality early on. The film is autobiographical, so there is some bias that comes with a story like this, perhaps even when it comes to admitting personal flaws. But one thing I can say about this film is that in many cases, it is a nice, easy watch. It can be a good pick for a family movie night, that is as long as everyone in the household is okay with the occasional expletive despite the film’s PG rating. That said, this is a creative, animated take on how a documentary can be done. It has recognizable music I think some children and adults would want to dance to. But as a story it is also compelling. You can tell that Pharrell Williams is passionate about his music, and how he got to his position. The documentary shows he does not forget his roots either, even if he mentions he felt out of place at times within said roots. When it comes to drama, this film does not come with a ton of it. But sometimes a lighthearted story is all you need, and this is exactly that. But for the most part, this film has something for everyone.

Kind of like the Warner Bros. LEGO features starring Chris Pratt for example, there is a colorful, glossy tone to the whole picture. The film may present itself with blocky physical limitations but manages to use those blocks in order to give a spectacle that you could only get out of a project like this one. One example is done with water. There are plenty of moments in the film where we see water. After all, this film is set partially on Virginia Beach, and we learn about Williams’ fascination with a concept that he just so happens to see every day.

Not once does the film feel gimmicky or overdone. I think doing this documentary in LEGO is not just a good idea, but having seen the final product I can confirm it is absolutely brilliant. The way they integrate the visuals with the music is very well done. I even like what they did with “Happy!” I thought that sequence was fun. Even the buildup to the song was clever, where they clearly reference “Despicable Me 2.” I am sure the head honchos at Universal were very happy to have an excuse to shove the minions in another one of their films because lord knows they do not have several thousand projects with them already… Again, despite the blocky limitations, LEGO is all about imagination. LEGO as a concept and brand has a history of allowing children, adults, families, whomever to build anything their heart desires for several years. Yes, they have many projects that are based on things that already exist, but there is no doubt a creative spark to the overall concept.

“Piece by Piece” is quite funny. The film has a really good pace to it in general and the humor that does come up got some laughs out of me. It is not as funny as the Warner Bros. “LEGO movies” which gave me some of my hardest laughs ever as a moviegoer, but it has its laughs. One of my favorite parts of the film involves an earlier moment in Pharrell Williams’ career when he gets his first paycheck. And it is not a small paycheck. It turned out to be $10,000! Not bad for an early payday. But of course, Pharrell Williams was a teenager, so he did what a lot of people who have not fully grasped the concept of financial responsibility would do and quickly blow through the entire paycheck. Also, Snoop Dogg is in the film as himself, as are most of this film’s cast, and I thought it was a step up from his previous animated outing this year, “The Garfield Movie.” Seeing him smile at one point was kind of fun too.

“Piece by Piece” is undoubtedly a unique film, and it makes me wonder if we are going to see more projects like this. Part of me is curious to see another documentary done like this but at the same time, I somewhat would not like this to become a continued trend because I enjoyed this film partially for it being one of a kind. This movie is evidently going to end up nowhere near as successful as some of the other movies we got this year. Heck, during its opening weekend, it was not even the most successful animated film at the cinema. Despite it being out a week earlier, “The Wild Robot” managed to make more money during “Piece by Piece’s” opening weekend. But if you are looking for something fun and light, “Piece by Piece” is a great pick. Is there drama? Sure. But nothing over the top. If you want to forget your troubles for an hour and a half, this is quite a good escape.

In the end, “Piece by Piece” is a great time. It is one of those movies that I will probably be thinking about at the end of the year. I do not think it is going to make my top 10, but right now it is probably in my top 20. If you love animated movies, this is a good time to go to the cinema. “Transformers: One” is a really fun adventure. “The Wild Robot” is one of the best films of the year.” “Look Back” is a captivating and moving story. For the most part, I am going to remember “Piece by Piece” more for its style as opposed to its substance. The very idea of doing this film in LEGO is clever enough, but to have it look as polished as it is, I can say that is even better. This is not to say “Piece by Piece” is a bad narrative. It is actually quite fascinating, but when it comes to style and substance, the style edges out the substance to a certain degree. This is one reason why I think “The Wild Robot” is a slightly better film because I will remember “The Wild Robot” for its characters and the stakes that build as their journeys play out. The animation sometimes has an unfinished look to it, but like “Piece by Piece,” it is also creative in its design. But I think if you are going to pick a film between these two to watch on a movie night with the family, neither one is a bad choice. I think these can make for a great animated double feature with the family. I would suggest starting with “The Wild Robot,” which is a bit heavier, a bit more emotional. And once that is over, keep the night going with “Piece by Piece,” which contains less drama and some dance-worthy music. Of the two movies, I would call it the palate cleanser. Whether you decide to watch “Piece by Piece” with the family, by yourself, or as part of a double feature somewhere, you are doing yourself a favor. I am going to give “Piece by Piece” a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Saturday Night” and “Megalopolis.” Stay tuned! 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 “Piece by Piece?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite LEGO project? It can be a movie, a video game, a toyset, anything! What is your favorite LEGO creation? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

	Animal Farm (2026):… on Willy Wonka and the Chocolate…
	Animal Farm (2026):… on Dora and the Lost City of Gold…
	Animal Farm (2026):… on Spider-Man 2: Best Superhero M…
	Deep Water (2026): P… on The Last Sharknado: It’s…
	Michael (2026): A Mi… on Elvis (2022): A Movie So Bad T…