Review

Him (2025): Prepare to Sacrifice Your Brain Cells While Watching This Football Horror Story

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Him” is directed by Justin Tipping and stars Marlon Wayans (Scary Movie, A Haunted House), Tyriq Withers (Don’t Tell Mom the Babysitter’s Dead, I Know What You Did Last Summer), Julia Fox (Uncut Gems, Presence), and Tim Heidecker (Tim and Eric’s Billion Dollar Movie, Us). This film is about an up-and-coming football player who trains under the wing of an eccentric quarterback in an isolated location.

When I look back at movies like “Bob Marley: One Love” and “Argylle,” my most prominent memory of those movies is not so much the movies themselves, but rather the fact that every other time I went to the cinema before those films came out, one of their respective trailers would play during the preshow. “Him,” while not as frequent as say “Bob Marley: One Love,” had a strong chance of meeting the same fate because the “Him” trailers have been attached to many preshows I’ve witnessed this summer. And, sadly, the trailers did not really do anything for me.

The marketing for “Him” lacked an oomph that made me go, “I need to see this now!” This film is produced by Jordan Peele. Again, read that closely. Produced. He did not direct it. As for the films he did direct, he aced all of them. I would be more excited about Peele’s Monkeypaw Productions being attached if it were not for the release of “Monkey Man” in 2024. That movie was not a complete disaster, but it was very much a case of style over substance and I wish it were better. Speaking of things I wish were better, “Him” is a dull waste of an hour and a half.

There are some positives regarding “Him.” The movie was made for $27 million, and there are select moments where the film maintains a polish that lives up to its budget. Everything from the lavish costuming to select characters’ detailed makeup to the otherworldly production design. It is tough to call “Him” the biggest technical standout of the year, but it nails its aesthetics for the entire runtime.

“Him” is basically a mishmash of “Whiplash” and “Ex Machina.” It combines several elements of these two movies, including themes revolving around ambition, sacrifice, and well being. The film is also set mostly at one isolated location and revolves around a connection between two somewhat similarly-minded gentlemen. But unlike “Whiplash” and “Ex Machina,” “Him” differentiates itself from the fact that it is nowhere near as compelling as those two films.

Also, instead of centering around music or technology, the movie primarily focuses on football. That is… When it chooses to focus on football. Honestly, if you are looking for football in “Him,” you are not going to get that much of it. Most of the football played in the movie is done during training sessions. So if you are watching this movie and expecting a big game on a field, look elsewhere.

That said, I do dig the filmmakers trying to give football a horror angle. Over the years, I have come to realize how dangerous of a sport football is. There’s constant tackles, incessant contact between players, and an alarming number of concussions. It is truly a scary sport.

To call “Him” a football movie is a bit of an exaggeration. Yes, the sport exists within the context of the film and plays a heavy role in it, but the film is not “about” the sport per se. In the case of “Him,” it is more about how football, or perhaps more accurately, one person’s passion for football, or anything else for that matter, affects behavior and ego. The film quickly establishes its protagonist’s dedication to the sport. The film has a solid opening scene where a young Cameron Cade is instilled with the idea that one person’s sacrifice makes them a man. He learns this from his father while they are watching football on TV together. The film seems to tap into themes regarding toxic masculinity, suggesting that real men need to toughen up even when they face their greatest pain.

While I am glad to point out Jordan Peele did not deliver his first directorial stinker, I unfortunately have to say I wish Justin Tipping stuck the landing a bit more. That said, this film does have a Jordan Peele-esque DNA in it. For all I know, Tipping could follow in Peele’s footsteps and deliver his “Get Out.” This is not that movie. The film feels like a “Twilight Zone” episode, and at times it works, but in others, it lacks engagement.

The film also has some parallels to religion. That seems to be the case in more ways than one. The film does not establish exactly what belief system Cade follows, but much like how Christians for example look up to their God, we see how much Cade looks up to his athletic idol, Isaiah White. Our protagonist is at one point told to avoid some of life’s greatest pleasures, like pornography or dating. There are more connections in the film, but they could be considered spoiler territory.

Speaking of Marlon Wayans, he was easily the highlight of the movie for me. Isaiah Thomas (left), while not perfect, has the DNA of a beautifully complicated character. Thomas is one of those characters who you really do not know if you can trust. Wayans somehow convincingly manages to shift from pure rage to genuine friendliness in as little time as possible. He gives the performance his all, but I wish the script, which director Tipping is partially credited in writing, did him favors.

Am I going to forget “Him?” To a certain degree, one can argue that I probably will. The film is not fantastic, but I also would not go as far as to say it is the year’s absolute worst picture. As a story, it had more to say than some other stinkers this year like “A Minecraft Movie” or “Jurassic World: Rebirth.” Although I wish it communicated its messages more effectively. The film has a terrific performance from Marlon Wayans, it looks top notch, and even if I did not enjoy every scene, I got the sense that everyone working on said scenes happened to be trying their best.

In the end, “Him” is no good. That said, it is not a total fumble. It has glimmers of good ideas, but there is nothing in this film that I can say was executed to their full potential. Marlon Wayans gives a killer performance. If there is a character that has been on my mind more than any other since watching this film for the first time, it is his. The film starts off somewhat promising, but quickly runs out of steam. I think Justin Tipping has a future in the movie business, but this film is not quite cutting it. I am going to give “Him” a 3/10.

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

© Sony Pictures Classics

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Eleanor the Great!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “The Lost Bus,” “One Battle After Another,” “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You,” “Tron: Ares,” and “Bone Lake.” 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 “Him?” What did you think about it? Or, on the topic of “Ex Machina” and “Whiplash,” have you seen those movies? What do you think of those? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

A Big Bold Beautiful Journey (2025): Colin Farrell and Margot Robbie Deal with the World’s Strangest GPS

Posted on by Jack Drees

© Sony Pictures

“A Big Bold Beautiful Journey” is directed by Kogonada (Pachinko, After Yang) and stars Margot Robbie (The Wolf of Wall Street, Suicide Squad), Colin Farrell (The Banshees of Inisherin, Total Recall), Kevin Kline (Cyrano de Bergerac, Bob’s Burgers), and Phoebe Waller-Bridge (Fleabag, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade). This film is about two people who meet at a wedding and eventually go on a journey that leads both of them to revisiting their pasts.

The trailers for “A Big Bold Beautiful Journey” did very little to excite me. I had the feeling the flick was going to either be too corny, overly sappy, or uneventful. In some ways, the final product falls in line with those expectations, but not exactly in the way that I thought they would. I am here to tell you that this movie is much better than I could have imagined, even if it is not perfect.

“A Big Bold Beautiful Journey” is not my kind of movie. When it comes to the many genres moviegoing has to offer, romantic dramas, in fact, even romantic comedies, are typically at the bottom of the list for me. I have nothing against the concept of romance, but as stereotypical of a guy thing as it is to say, I like my action. If I were not as open-minded about movies, chances are I would probably buy a ticket to “A Big Bold Beautiful Journey” solely to impress a date. That said, I do not live in that reality, and I took my single behind and put it in a Dolby Cinema chair. Because who needs a date when you have shaking recliners?

© Sony Pictures

Few things are as pleasing as a tremendous surprise, and “A Big Bold Beautiful Journey” was in fact, a surprise. This film immersed me from the very beginning and refused to let me leave. They say not to judge a book by its cover, but this film proves that it is not about the destination, it is, in fact, about the big bold beautiful journey.

The film finds itself in this peculiarly fulfilling middle ground where it does not quite feel real, but there is a certain level of belief that I am willing to suspend in what is ultimately a grounded world. Yes, much of the film features a self-aware GPS that takes its characters to places that make them think about their lives. But the film is ultimately about the human condition. The experiences that shape us. The places that make us. The people that define us. It is about the unpredictable mess that is life. Judging by everything I am telling you, it sounds like I am hyping this up to be the movie of the year. That would be a bit of an overexaggeration, but I do appreciate how much the movie made me think.

© Sony Pictures

I buy both of the leads in their respective roles. You have Colin Farrell as David… A reserved, hopeless romantic, trying to make it from one day to the next. Then there is Margot Robbie as Sarah, who has a bit more experience when it comes to the dating scene. Together you have a star-studded pair in a film that sounds too crazy to work, but somehow it does.

I am not going to pretend that everything works. One can make the argument that the film is too convenient. It is a film that relies heavily on something happening at the right place at the right time, or at the wrong place at the wrong time. I mentioned I am able to suspend my disbelief to a certain degree, but I think that is something I think not every viewer is going to do. The movie often feels fantastical and I see how select viewers would find that to be a turnoff. In fact, one thing that turned me off at times were the moments we spend at a rental car facility. That’s when we see a cashier and a mechanic played by Phoebe Waller-Bridge and Kevin Kline, who are honestly not as whimsical and charming as this movie wants me to think they are. Also, this film maybe has one of the most obvious product placements of any film I’ve seen in 2025, with its inclusion of Burger King.

Yes, I know “War of the Worlds” is a big Amazon commercial, but would you really call that a movie?

The restaurant ends up playing a somewhat substantial role in the plot as both lead characters go there, bond, share what they have in common, and once the leads are done there, that’s where the real fun begins for them. Nothing ignites romance like Whoppers!

Years ago, I reviewed a movie, if you want to call it that, by the name of “Superintelligence,” and this film reminds me of that one, as the protagonist’s journey is heavily guided by a computer, but there is a key point that this film gets right that “Superintelligence” does not. As I watched the film’s protagonist, David, I got the sense that he was often hesitant or second-guessing himself at each point of his journey. Despite some of his actions being determined by a computer, it often feels like he is presented with constantly engaging dilemmas. Should he go where the computer is taking him or should he go elsewhere? Should he perhaps go home?… As I watched the film, I wanted to know how these dilemmas were resolved.

You may be under the impression that the film’s biggest selling point would be one of it’s stars, like Colin Farrell. He is a great actor, but no. You might think it is Margot Robbie. Despite being a straight white male, she did not sell me either. Instead, what got me in the door was this film’s composer, Joe Hisaishi.

Some of you might be wondering who the heck I am talking about. And I would understand that reaction because this is Hisaishi’s first Hollywood feature he’s ever composed. That said, if you have watched Japanese film, or every film from anime director Hayao Miyazaki, you have heard his music, and each piece is often as inviting as his last. His compositions in this film are not exactly the most booming or epic pieces, nor do they need to be. Just about each one comes with a cozy vibe. Hisaishi delivers the goods here with several soothing tunes.

One last note, the GPS in this film is voiced by Jodie Turner-Smith. The role does not require a lot of pizazz or physical work. It is ultimately just a voiceover, but Turner-Smith gives it her all. The two most prominent characters are those of David and Sarah, but if this film had one character just below them in terms of importance, it would probably be the GPS, and Jodie Turner-Smith does her best to allow the character to ooze personality. It puts the film in the right direction.

…

I said, it puts the film in the right dire–(some dude tackles me to the ground and slaps me in the face)

© Sony Pictures

In the end, “A Big Bold Beautiful Journey” is surprisingly solid. Margot Robbie and Colin Farrell have enough star power to keep an entire solar system running by themselves, but together, they have solid chemistry. I buy these two as they revisit various points of their lives. I thought they were cute together. Is this a film I plan to watch again anytime soon? Not immediately, but this is not a bad flick by any means. It is also a decent pick for a date movie. I am going to give “A Big Bold Beautiful Journey” a 7/10.

“A Big Bold Beautiful Journey” is available to rent or buy on VOD.

Photo by Universal Pictures – © 2025 Universal Studios

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Him!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “Eleanor the Great,” “The Lost Bus,” “One Battle After Another,” “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You,” “Tron: Ares,” and “Bone Lake.” 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 “A Big Bold Beautiful Journey?” What did you think about it? Or, what two actors would you like to see play a couple on screen together? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

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

Posted on by Jack Drees

© Courtesy of Lionsgate

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Splitsville (2025): Non-Monogamous Magnificence

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Splitsville” is directed by Michael Angelo Covino (The Climb, The Self Tape), who also has a writing credit and stars in the film as Paul. Joining him in the cast are actors including Dakota Johnson (Fifty Shades of Grey, Madame Web), Adria Arjona (Morbius, Andor), and Kyle Marvin (WeCrashed, The Climb), the latter of whom also wrote the film. This movie showcases the chaos that ensues after Carey is asked by his wife, Ashley, for a divorce. Following the bombshell, Carey runs into his friends, who he finds out are in an open marriage.

Remember how in August “The Naked Gun” was supposed to be a wakeup call to audiences that supporting movies of its nature would allow for more comedies to play in movie theaters? Well, guess what? I missed it when it came out. It is not that I did not think it would be funny, but I would rather watch the previous “Naked Gun” movies first. Plus, there are plenty of other standalone comedies like this one that I thought were a higher priority. “Splitsville” not only looked funny, but also kind of sexy. The concept lends itself to both adjectives being met. I can safely say “Splitsville” is consistently hysterical and often delivers a pinch of sensuality.

Despite this film heavily involving sex and partners, never once does it feel overly pornographic. There are various examples of nudity throughout the film, but each time nudity is shown on screen, it serves a purpose, and never flaunts any private parts. Well, except for one scene in the beginning, but it is more for a laugh than anything else. While characters do have sex in the film, never once does the film feel the need to showcase a graphic scene of said activity. Everything in this film, including the nudity, serves a purpose.

The screenplay for “Splitsville” is well done. Overall, I found it to be layered, unpredictable, and robustly structured. Other than the film at a certain point introducing so many elements at once that it is sometimes difficult to keep up, I cannot name any other glaring issues at the top of my head. I like all the characters, there is plenty of decent comedy, and each element of this film feels necessary. The moment one thing is introduced, even if it is something really small, it ends up playing an integral role that enhances the final product. 

Dakota Johnson is one of the most “interesting” actresses working today. I am not going to pretend I am the biggest fan of hers. Is she capable of giving a good performance? Sure. When given the right script and proper direction, she can deliver a “Daddio,” but sometimes she will give something as flat as “Materialists.” Thankfully, “Splitsville” does her favors, Johnson is quite good in this film as Julie. Unlike her experience of making “Madame Web,” I could tell Johnson, like everyone else in the cast, was having a lot of fun on set. Johnson plays an inviting, sometimes sensual, complicated character. To my pleasant surprise, I thoroughly enjoyed getting to know about Julie’s past. Johnson sings in her role.

And she is not alone when it comes to giving a good performance. Frankly, I do not have a problem with a single person in the entire cast. The film does not have many big names. Sure, Adria Arjona is growing in popularity with the success of “Andor,” but the film is quite low in terms of star power. But what this film lacks in name recognition, it makes up for in talent.

Despite being exposed to their previous work, Michael Angelo Covino and Kyle Marvin are names I did not know much about before this project. That said, watching these two do what they do on and off camera makes me pumped up to see whatever it is they do next. Michael Angelo Covino writes, directs, produces, and stars in this film as Paul. It is clear that his passion for this project is shining through in each frame. His character also has palatable chemistry with Dakota Johnson’s Julie. The two play off each other well.

Kyle Marvin plays this film’s protagonist, Carey. Kyle Marvin is a name that I have heard before, but completely forgot about before writing this review. Marvin previously directed “80 for Brady,” which ended up on my 2023 worst movies of the year list. “Splitsville” seems to showcase much more of Marvin’s abilities as a comedic force. Marvin does a great job at not only bringing humor into each scene but also occasionally balancing his performance when the film gets into some heavier moments.

Also, major shoutout to the young and talented Simon Webster, who gives an outstanding performance as Russ. Webster is given plenty to do, and he delivers in each scene. He is also connected to one of my favorite gags in the film, particularly one involving jet skis. I will not say more for those who have yet to watch the movie, but you will know what I am talking about once you see it.

“Splitsville,” to a degree, lives up to its name. While I cannot confirm that my sides split from laughing so hard, I think the film is still incredibly funny. Almost every joke feels naturally placed. There are only one or two jokes in the film that I thought lacked some sense of realism. Well, as much realism one can have in a comedy that is… These are jokes that may as well have been inserted solely keep a gag going, but even those got a laugh out of me. The movie delivers a surprising amount of tiny chuckles, especially in the first act. That may sound like a bad thing for a comedy film, but said chuckles are consistent, so in actuality, it works. The film also gave me quite a few bigger laughs to balance things out. “Splitsville” is not the funniest film I have seen this year, “Friendship” still takes the cake, but if you are looking for laughs, “Splitsville” has plenty.

A lot of the laughs come from what I would describe as authentic interactions between multiple characters. The film however does resort to extremes at times, and this includes one moment where Carey and Paul get into a fight. Not only do I buy this fight, but to my surprise, I think it is one of the best directed action sequences of the year. Every shot is as fluid as the next. I have seen action movies where the editor ends up cutting a new shot every microsecond and it sometimes looks shoddy. “Splitsville” is not an action movie, but its signature action scene is well shot, well constructed, and to top it off, it made me laugh. There is an incredibly funny gag involving fish and a bathtub. And that is just scratching the surface of this hilarious one-on-one.

In the end, “Splitsville” is fun, unique, and comes with a phenomenal cast. I cannot name a single person involved with this film who does not put in 110 percent. “Splitsville” is not the funniest comedy of the year, but if you are looking for a good laugh, this film will be there to fulfill that need. The past few months have been a solid run for Neon so far, with the release of this film, “Together,” and one of the year’s highlights for me, “The Life of Chuck.” This distributor is on fire right now. I am going to give “Splitsville” a 7/10.

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

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

Eden (2024): Ron Howard Presents: Survivor

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Eden” is directed by Ron Howard (A Beautiful Mind, Apollo 13) and stars Jude Law (Sherlock Holmes, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald), Ana de Armas (Blade Runner 2049, Knives Out), Vanessa Kirby (Mission: Impossible – Fallout, The Fantastic Four: First Steps), Sydney Sweeney (Euphoria, Anyone But You), Daniel Brühl (The Zookeeper’s Wife, The King’s Man), Felix Kammerer (All Quiet on the Western Front, All the Light We Cannot See), Toby Wallace (The Society, Pistol), and Richard Roxborough (Prosper, Moulin Rouge!). This survival film is inspired by true events and is about a group of people who hope to start a new life on an island, only to find that their greatest threat is each other.

Photo by Jasin Boland/Jasin Boland – © Courtesy of Vertical

Ron Howard is one of the most storied figures in Hollywood, from his humble beginnings as an actor on projects like “The Andy Griffith Show, “Happy Days,” and “American Graffiti,” to directing cinematic staples like “Apollo 13” and “A Beautiful Mind.” My question is, where is the hype for “Eden?” That is a serious question. After all, Ron Howard has a prolific resume, the stars of the film are well known, and it is based on a true story.

Instead of there being one answer as to why the hype for “Eden” feels relatively low, I would speculate that it comes down to multiple factors. Part of it could be due to Ron Howard’s more prominent projects being behind him. Also, this is from a lesser known studio, so it could not quite get as big of a push as it could have. And like the commercials or not, one of this film’s stars, Sydney Sweeney, has entered some recent controversy through her ad campaign for American Eagle.

Photo by Jasin Boland/Jasin Boland – © Courtesy of Vertical

We live in crazy times. Who knew we’d live in an era where a Ron Howard film did not sound like a big deal? Granted, I have heard about the making of this film through the internet. But I still wonder how many people have done the same. You also have Jude Law playing a lead role. He is just a small part of this movie’s talented ensemble, because you have three of the most prolific and picturesque actresses all in the same movie. One includes Sydney Sweeney as Margaret Wittner. While she may not have much to offer on the surface, Sweeney plays a surprisingly layered character. I ended up feeling bad for her in ways I did not expect. Ana de Armas is also a standout as Baroness Eloise Bosquet de Wagner Wehrhorn, an over the top actor who lives like every day is a cinematic adventure. Vanessa Kirby is also in the film as Dore Strauch. While she is not my favorite character in the film, she has a commanding presence and owns every line she is given. Every time she is on screen I cannot help but be immersed into each scene with her.

The film has a respectable cast. If I told you Jude Law and Vanessa Kirby were in this film, I would barely scratch the surface for how star-studded this movie is. For the most part, the cast is used wisely, but I will not lie, there are parts of this film that feel surprisingly staged. Granted, like most movies, just about everything here is written on a page. Of course it is staged. But when I watch certain films, there is sometimes an authenticity to a character’s performance that makes the experience riveting. While I find “Manchester by the Sea” to be a smidge overrated, I will not deny that the characters in that film came off as raw due to each actor playing their part to the best of their ability. On top of that, the film’s director did their job by unleashing the best vision they can. I am not an actor, although I have done acting in various short films, and sometimes the performances in “Eden” feel like they are made for a stageplay rather than a movie.

Photo by Jasin Boland/Jasin Boland – © Courtesy of Vertical

The performances could have been toned down a little. This is especially true for Ana de Armas. Yes, I did say she is a standout, but there are select lines where I thought I was watching someone who was trying too hard. Her performance is definitely not an easy one to capture. But at times I watched Ana de Armas and saw her as more of a villain figure on a modern reality competition like “Survivor” rather than a movie based on true events set sometime in the 20th century. Granted, the movie is set with a group of people alone on an island, so of course it is like a reality competition. At times, the cast does a good job with their material, but there is that occasional moment where it feels like the actor thinks they are in a completely different movie than their co-star.

“Eden” is not the year’s most memorable film, but it is one that kept me consistently engaged. It is a film where I liked getting to know the characters, their personalities, and their quirks. At one moment I would be watching a zany business opportunist. Then in another, I am watching a hermit writer trying to figure out what it means to be human. The film weaves in several stories at once, and for the most part, it flows naturally. Some portions of the plot are better than others, but it is hard to find a dull moment throughout the film. In fact, the story flies at a smooth pace. Prior to buying my ticket for this film, I was not aware of the tales it bases itself upon, but it makes for a fascinating narrative. There is only one scene that comes to mind that I found rather disturbing, but the final product does not quite go too over the top when it comes to gore and violence. This is not an easy watch, but it could definitely be more terrifying.

If I have anything else to say, this movie makes me wonder if Sydney Sweeney is going to be typecast sometime in the future. Between this film and “Immaculate,” Sweeney seems to be the current favorite for playing characters who deal with unique pregnancies. She is not horrible in either film, but nevertheless…

Photo by Jasin Boland/Jasin Boland – © Courtesy of Vertical

In the end, “Eden” is not a bad little movie, but it is one that does not have a lot of standout elements. On paper, to call this film intriguing would be an understatement between its cast, crew, and plot. But it is far from the best movie of the year. I cannot speak for every actor in this film, but a couple of the film’s big stars were also in a couple films that came out earlier this year, and I would prefer to watch those a second time over this one. Ana de Armas is much more convincing as an action star in “Ballerina,” and Vanessa Kirby plays a large role in Marvel’s exceptional “The Fantastic Four: First Steps.” I may be biased because I dig my action movies, but I think those films did a much better job at accomplishing their respective goals compared to “Eden.” I cannot wait to watch those films again. They have replay value. I cannot say the same is true with “Eden.” Maybe if I find it on cable I will put it on, but I do not see myself buying the Blu-ray. That is if it is even coming out on Blu-ray at this point. I am going to give “Eden” a 6/10.

“Eden” 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 “Splitsville!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “The Long Walk,” “A Big Bold Beautiful Journey,” “Him,” “Eleanor the Great,” and “The Lost Bus.” 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 “Eden?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Ron Howard movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Nobody 2 (2025): Hitman: Far from Home

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Nobody 2” is directed by Timo Tjahjanto (The Night Comes for Us, Killers) and stars Bob Odenkirk (Breaking Bad, Incredibles 2), Connie Nielsen (Wonder Woman, Gladiator), John Ortiz (Kong: Skull Island, American Fiction), Colin Hanks (The Great Buck Howard, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle), RZA (The Man with the Iron Fists, American Gangster), Colin Salmon (EastEnders, Krypton), Christopher Lloyd (Back to the Future, The Tender Bar), and Sharon Stone (Casino, Basic Instinct). This sequel once again centers around suburban dad Hutch Mansell, who is pulled back into his violent past while trying to have a nice family vacation.

Part of me is surprised “Nobody” ended up getting a sequel. If that film came out before COVID-19, we might be having a different conversation, but unfortunately, it came out in March 2021, when some people were still hesitant to go back to the movies. Despite the film likely missing some box office potential, there is no denying that those who ended up seeing it had a good time, including me. I would have totally been down for a second installment, but with the film flying over some people’s radars, part of me wondered if it was reasonable to even get one in the first place. Nevertheless, we did get one, and when I first saw the trailer, I was given the impression that we would be getting more of what worked in the original film.

“Nobody 2” maintains a lot of what was good about the 2021 original, but it is not perfect.

What does work? To no surprise at all, Bob Odenkirk once again kills it as Hutch. A lot of people, including myself, would say “Nobody” shares some similarities to “John Wick.” One similarity happens to be that the protagonist is not only fighting for himself, but for those he loves. While John Wick spent several movies fighting for a dead dog, we see Hutch in this second outing continue to fight for his family. Remember in the first film when Hutch finds out his daughter’s kitty cat bracelet was taken, and he starts to lose his mind? There is a moment in this film that reminds me of that scene. Granted, this scene presents Hutch losing his mind over something perhaps more important than a bracelet, but it goes to show how easily Hutch will lose it if someone messes with his family.

Speaking of family, the rest of the main cast of characters from the last film come back too. I buy into Bob Odenkirk and Connie Nielen as the main couple. They have good chemistry with each other and blend perfectly with their children. The family members all play a significant role in the film to a certain degree. After all, the film sees the group going on vacation together.

I was also very pleased to see Christopher Lloyd come back as David. Not just because he is Christopher Lloyd, but to me, he was the surprise standout from the last movie. In this film, he has a lot less to do, but every scene with him is a riot. I like the way the film handled him, he was directed in such a way where he practically turned into a big ball of energy, but part of me does wish he played a bigger role in the story.

Lendina, the “big bad” in this film, is played by Sharon Stone. To me, this character is an enigma, because she feels like she is in a much different movie than everyone else. Part of me wants to compliment Stone in one regard because she is undoubtedly evil and not afraid to show it. But she is also cartoonishly evil sometimes. There are moments where I thought she reminded me of a “Fast & Furious” villain. In fact, at first I thought I was watching Charlize Theron on screen. But Stone sometimes nears the point where I am convinced she was supposed to be in a “Power Rangers” project and somehow magically ended up on the set of “Nobody 2.” I do not expect Shakespearean performances out of a movie like this, but it would have been nice to get something a step above what the movie delivered. That said, I am also not going to call Stone’s performance incompetent. If anything, I would call it uneven. Though it would not shock me if Stone gets nominated for a Razzie at the end of the year.

This may sound weird considering my previous complaints, but part of me wishes Stone had more screentime. The movie takes a long time to introduce the character. Despite being a pivotal part of the story, her appearance in the film feels kind of out of the blue. It would be one thing if the movie were longer, but the runtime is 89 minutes. It does not give me a lot of time to get invested in the character. By the time we get to the end of the movie and our protagonist must face off against her, the rivalry did not feel as exciting as it could have been.

I am also a little conflicted on how the final fight concludes. The end of the final fight makes a lick of sense considering the film’s overall themes and tendencies to focus on a group supporting each other when they need it most. It also makes sense because we see Hutch is not perfect when it comes to fighting. But truthfully, the fight spent too much time showcasing what the villain is capable of rather than showing what Hutch, the star of the film, can do going up against said villain.

Despite my complaints, I will acknowledge that this film does generally satisfy when it comes to action. There is not one sequence that was improperly shot or lazily done. The filmmakers spared no expense. If you are simply looking for some solid action sequences, “Nobody 2” has them. This is not my favorite action film of the year. It also does not have my favorite action scenes of the year. But that does not mean the film is bad. If anything, it implies that this has been a pretty good year for action, and “Nobody 2” is the latest project to prove that point, even if it is a step below some other recent movies.

In the end, “Nobody 2” is not a bad movie, but it is definitely inferior to the original. It has action that is about as solid as its predecessor, but the story and characterization is sometimes lacking. The past few months have delivered some terrific action movies, particularly “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning,” and “Ballerina.” If you are looking for an action flick to watch in the near future and you want my recommendation, I would probably suggest those two films before this one. I am going to give “Nobody 2” a 6/10.

“Nobody 2” is now available to rent or buy on VOD.

Courtesy of Focus Features – © Focus Features

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Honey Don’t!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Eden,” “Splitsville,” and “The Long Walk.” 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 “Nobody 2?” What did you think about it? Or, which of the two “Nobody” installments do you prefer? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Freakier Friday (2025): Well… It’s Definitely Freakier

Posted on by Jack Drees

Photo by Disney/DISNEY – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

“Freakier Friday” is directed by Nisha Ganatra (You Me Her, Late Night) and stars Jamie Lee Curtis (Halloween, Everything Everywhere All at Once), Lindsay Lohan (Mean Girls, The Parent Trap), Julia Butters (American Housewife, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood), Sophia Hammons (Up Here, The Social Dilemma), Manny Jacinto (The Acolyte, The Good Place), and Mark Harmon (Chicago Hope, NCIS). In this sequel to the 2003 film “Freaky Friday,” Tess and Anna, a mother-daughter duo who have switched bodies with each other in the past, now have to deal with something even wilder… A body switch between three generations, which includes Anna’s child, as well as her future stepchild.

We live in a time where it feels like even the most unnecessary of sequels are popping up in movie theaters. While one could argue almost no movie in history is “needed,” I think a sequel to the 2003 “Freaky Friday” is the year’s most unnecessary movie. Then again, this comes from someone who frankly does not care for the original. That is, if you can actually call that movie an “original.” It is based on a book that was already made into a movie decades prior.

To be honest, even though I read the book and watched the 1976 movie as a teenager, I never bothered checking out the 2003 “Freaky Friday.” For those who want to know, the book is quite good, and the 1976 film could be worse, but it shows its age. I also found the music choices in that film to be a bit weird.

I will not deny that the concept of “Freaky Friday” is intriguing, but I did not feel a need to see it again, despite my love for Jamie Lee Curtis. If you want my quick thoughts on that film, it is the very definition of “fine at best.” It is a movie that seems to lean more towards a female audience than it does male. After all, the two main characters are a mother and daughter. But even so, the film comes off as if it is trying to impress as many demographics as possible to the point where it almost pleases no one.

That said, what do I know? 2003’s “Freaky Friday” is seen as a classic to some, and I have talked to people who said that it is probably Jamie Lee Curtis’ biggest property and role.

Couple things… As long as “Halloween” exists, I am pretty sure “Freaky Friday” is not Jamie Lee Curtis’ biggest role to date. Also, if I were not reviewing movies, there is a strong chance I would not have seen “Freakier Friday,” but here we are.

Unsurprisingly, I did not like the film. In fact, I honestly prefer the 2003 original. This is not the worst film of the year, but I have similar gripes with this film that I do with the original. “Freakier Friday,” like the original, is a family film, and much like the original, it feels like there is something in this film for all ages and demographics. The film seems to be more concerned with how many people it can please to the point where it occasionally feels overstuffed. In fact, “Freakier Friday” seems to suffer from what I like to call the misuse of the “bigger is better” cliche. “Freakier Friday” undoubtedly lives up to its name. It is most certainly “freakier” than the original in the sense that its story involves more characters and threads. But it is almost to a point where I am not as invested in everything the movie’s throwing at me. The movie packs so much into less than two hours and sometimes certain parts feel rushed.

The film’s “switch” is a bit different from previous “Freaky Friday” projects. Instead of two people switching bodies, this movie has four. You have Annabel switching with her daughter, Harper. And you have Annabel’s future stepdaughter, Ella, switching with Tess. This took me a second to comprehend at first, but I have no problem with that. If anything, I am glad to see that “Freakier Friday” could challenge younger viewers. The film could get them to use their heads.

The film does feel more mature than the original, but also maintains the spirit of said movie. It makes sense considering how a core part of the audience are people who watched it when they were young and are now in their 20s and 30s. Another reason is likely because both of the film’s biggest stars this time around are adults. Lindsay Lohan is now grown up, and the same goes for her character. There is a calmer chemistry between Lohan and Curtis throughout the runtime.

One of my favorite characters in the film is Eric Davies (center), played by Manny Jacinto. Remember how I said this film is more mature than the original? Well, it appears Anna has outgrown her boy toy from 2003 as well. The film features Eric and Anna as an engaged couple. The two have their own daughters who are bound to become stepsisters. I also appreciate the film’s approach in regard to how it handles Eric’s personality. Never once did I get the sense that he was an unlikable guy. This movie could have easily set him up in such a way where he could have been the evil stepdad that his future stepchild has no choice but to put up with. Although this film is smarter than that. While it is obvious that Harper does not like Eric, and by extension, Ella, being in her life, never once do I get the sense that she hates him because he does terrible things. For the most part, she simply hates him because she does not like change. It sounds illogical but I get where she is coming from. In Harper’s eyes, this change evokes a similar vibe to moving to a new town at a young age. It is beyond her control and uncomfortable.

That said, as much as I can appreciate the film for somewhat effectively building things up, I cannot say I am a big fan of how it ends. For starters, the climax feels rather rushed. There is a point where we get from one’s lowest low to a certain climactic point with little breathing room. I think fans of the original film will appreciate the ending in certain parts. But as someone who did not grow up watching the original, I do not think the film left the impact it was going for. Without spoiling what happens, I think the ending puts the main four characters in a predictable place, but it does not mean that place is earned. It is a well-intended, happy-ish ending, but not one I buy. I know this is a Disney movie, so a happy ending is perhaps inevitable, but still.

The film tends to pack in a similar lesson also seen in the original. Throughout the film, the characters are put in positions where they realize what it is like to see themselves in another person’s shoes. But I thought that lesson was done better in other interpretations. The telling of that lesson to the audience felt cleaner and more digestible in the 2003 film compared to its 2025 sequel. As much as I thought 2003’s “Freakier Friday” reeked of averageness, I do buy the two leads appreciating each other a little bit more after switching bodies. In this film, it feels more focused on the chaos of the plot rather than finding ways that the characters can appreciate others being in their life or having them learn something about those people.

In the end, “Freakier Friday” to my surprise, was not outright frustrating. But it does not mean that this is a good film. At times “Freakier Friday” feels rushed, slapped together, and lacking on the emotion that it seems to be going for. The film is called “Freakier Friday” for a reason, but it seemed slightly more focused on the freakiness compared to establishing the most robust characters possible. I am not going to pretend I am a huge nut for the “Freaky Friday” IP, but if I did see the 2003 film when I was younger, or maybe even a teenager, the thought of a sequel titled “Freakier Friday” would probably be best fit for a “Saturday Night Live” sketch. But instead, a group of people got together and made a full-fledged movie out of it. I am going to give “Freakier Friday” a 4/10.

“Freakier Friday” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Nobody 2.” Stay tuned! Also look forward to reading my thoughts on “Honey Don’t!”, “Eden,” “Splitsville,” and “The Long Walk.” 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 “Freakier Friday?” What did you think about it? Or, between this film and the 2003 “Freaky Friday,” which one do you think is better? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Weapons (2025): A Slightly Repetitive, but Undoubtedly Creative Sophomore Outing from Zach Cregger

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Weapons” is directed by Zach Cregger, who also directed the brilliant 2022 horror flick “Barbarian,” and stars Josh Brolin (The Goonies, Avengers: Infinity War), Julia Garner (The Fantastic Four: First Steps, Ozark), Alden Ehrenreich (Solo: A Star Wars Story, Cocaine Bear), Austin Abrams (This Is Us, The Walking Dead), Cary Christopher (Days of Our Lives, The Rookie), Toby Huss (The Adventures of Pete & Pete, King of the Hill), Benedict Wong (Doctor Strange, Annihilation), and Amy Madigan (Uncle Buck, Gone Baby Gone). In this film, several children wake up at 2:17 a.m. and disappear. Now it is up to a community to come together to figure out why these children vanished.

While not my favorite film of 2022, Zach Cregger’s “Barbarian” left me gobsmacked. It is genuinely one of the cleverest horror screenplays I had the privilege of seeing come to life.  That said, I really was not sure what his future would hold when it comes to filmmaking.

By the way, where’s the “Barbarian” Blu-ray? Come on, Disney! I thought you wanted my money!

I was not sure what to think going into “Weapons,” partially because I missed out on much of the marketing. I knew this film was coming out. I had people in my circles who were stoked to see it. But I did not know what I would think of it. Then the week of its release, I watched the trailer for the first time. If I were a higher-up for a studio and someone pitched me this film in an elevator, I would probably follow that person out, needing to know more. This is an incredible idea that has translated into quite a good movie.

“Weapons” sucked me in from minute one. This movie only had one chance to make a first impression, and as soon as it started, I figured I was going to get something of the nature of an epic bedtime story. The movie starts off with narration from a child, and I thought having a child narrate was smart partially because of the subject matter, but also because it makes what’s being told much more mysterious and chilling. If an adult were narrating this, I might have more trouble buying it because the subject matter dives into a certain degree of fantasy. But it is perfect the way it is.

The film contains an unbelievable cast, led with excellence by Julia Garner. Safe to say, she is having quite a year for herself between this film and “Fantastic Four.” She might be the star of the summer, and while she was good in “Fantastic Four,” this film allows her to unleash much more of her chops. While she may not have as high of a profile as some of her co-stars such as Josh Brolin or perhaps even Benedict Wong, this film put her on the map for me. I would like to see her in more movies going forward.

“Weapons” is one of the freshest films of the year. Though I will admit, like another highly rated horror film from earlier this year, “Sinners,” I might have to be a party pooper and say “Weapons” is probably not going to end up amongst my favorite films when I do my countdown at the end of 2025. The film has problems and I have the balls to talk about them. There is a concept in this film involving people eating soup. This is really hard to dive into without giving much away, but I’ll give it my best shot. For those who have seen the movie, you likely know what I am talking about. My biggest question, how do the people eating the soup, one, swallow it, and two, digest it? The people eating the soup all have something in common, and that similarity is boggling my mind as to whether they are actually able to eat. I should probably stay calm about this issue. But I am conflicted as to whether it really makes sense.

One of the things I loved about Zach Cregger’s “Barbarian” is how it successfully blended multiple key perspectives without having the end result feel convoluted or jarring. “Weapons” does not do exactly the same thing, but the film commits to something similar. “Weapons” is much heavier in its storytelling. It combines a multitude of perspectives as a large cast takes in the same event playing in front of their eyes in different ways. Some of these perspectives are handled better than others. A lot of these perspectives are blended nicely, but sometimes it is a little unsatisfying to have the moment play out multiple times. The film itself is finely edited, but every once in a while it does feel a little repetitive.

“Weapons” falls into the horror genre, and it does the number one job these movies are supposed to accomplish, delivering on the scares. When I say that, it should be made clear that I would not call “Weapons” terrifying. If anything, it is more tense than it is scary. I am not going to pretend that this film goes over the top with its scares, but it does not mean it does not fail when it comes to the creeps.

The film is also, at times, surprisingly hilarious. I can probably see some of the comedy being a distraction for some people considering quite a bit of the narrative comes off as serious. But this movie has a knack for delivering naturally funny moments. I went to see this film with a small crowd and I was delighted to see quite a few people other than myself letting out a few laughs.

While the movie does have some bumps in the road, I have to admit that the ending is beyond satisfying. It is one of my favorite scenes of the year. Not only does it do a good job at tying all the loose ends but it is simply one of the most well directed scenes in cinema I can recall seeing recently. Everyone on camera gives it their all. There is sometimes a point of view shot that made me feel like I was in the middle of the scene. The ending is a rollercoaster ride worth seeing on the big screen, much like the film as a whole.

In the end, “Weapons” is another decent outing from Zach Cregger. They say you are only as good as your last project, and thankfully, Cregger’s last couple of projects have me looking forward to whatever he has up his sleeve next. The cast of the film unleashes a ton of talent and they all have a great script that does them favors. The film is endlessly intriguing and well-paced despite some minor flaws. Will I watch “Weapons” again? It’s within the realm of possibility. I am in no rush, frankly, but if a friend were at my place and they wanted to put it on, I would not say no. This is a solid flick. I am going to give “Weapons” a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Freakier Friday!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “Nobody 2,” “Honey Don’t!”, and “Eden.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, be sure to like the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Weapons?” What did you think about it? Or, which Zach Cregger movie did you like more? “Barbarian” or “Weapons?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Oh, Hi! (2025): A Surprisingly Relatable Romcom That Features Multiple Relationship Extremes

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Oh, Hi!” is directed by Sophie Brooks and stars Molly Gordon (The Bear, Animal Kingdom), Logan Lerman (Fury, The Hunters), Geraldine Viswanathan (Thunderbolts*, Blockers), and John Reynolds (Search Party, Stranger Things). This film is about a couple who go on their first romantic getaway, only for it to go awry in an unexpected way.

I saw “Oh, Hi!” as part of a double feature. I do not usually partake in double features. In fact, when many people were participating in the infamous “Barbie” and “Oppenheimer” trend back in 2023, I saw “Oppenheimer” opening weekend, but waited on “Barbie” for a couple weeks. That said, because of my schedule over one particular weekend, I saw “Oh, Hi!” just minutes after finishing Micahel Shanks’ solid directorial debut “Together.” As I was waiting to watch both movies, I was thinking “Oh, Hi!” could be a nice palette cleanser after some body horror shenanigans, kind of like “Barbie” would have been had I watched it right after “Oppenheimer…” Boy was I wrong.

I often watch movies with my grandma, and this is one I am kind of glad we did not watch together. For the record, the film is quite good. But keep in mind, it is a dark comedy that is probably best watched with, or without, certain people.

I skipped most of the marketing for “Oh, Hi!”, other than catching a random spot on social media every once in a while, so when this film got to the core of the story, I was rather surprised by where it was going. Conceptually, this is a great idea for a movie. The thought of trapping someone to a bed to test romantic compatibility is undoubtedly dark, but the movie handles this narrative with excellence.

This sounds unbelievably stereotypical as a straight white male, but romcoms are not my first choice when it comes to movies. It does not mean they are impossible to enjoy, because “Oh, Hi!” is a blast. It is a romcom worthy of its title. The film is romantic and comedic. I very much felt the spark between its two leads while also having plenty of laughs. This is neither the most romantic or funny movie I have seen, but when it comes to both of those adjectives, I would be lying to say they do not apply to this film. The movie does not hold back on its story either. It is a story that is not only relatable, but does everything to keep you engaged. As the film reached its final ten, fifteen minutes, I was on the edge of my seat.

Much of what makes “Oh, Hi!” work so well is the cast. At the top you have Molly Gordon and Logan Lerman as Iris and Isaac, a completely admirable couple, if you want to call them that. Right below them is Geraldine Viswanathan and John Reynolds as Max (right) and Kenny (left). I was pleasantly surprised to find David Cross make an appearance in the film. He does not play a significant role in the story, but he is charming and funny. In fact, everyone in the film is charming and funny. They all play off each other perfectly. Props to casting, each actor feels well placed in their role.

There is a saying that every story is only as good as its villain. The antagonist of “Oh, Hi!” is by no means evil. There are no world-ending matters in a movie like this.

In fact, while Isaac (left) is most likely “the” antagonist of this film, it does not suggest that Iris (right) is a perfect individual herself. She ends up making some nearly indefensible, dark decisions despite her best intentions. That said, it does not change the fact that both characters are likable.

What makes Isaac in particular likable is his relatability. The film seems to address a common issue that people have in relationships, particularly commitment. The idea of committing to being with someone else for the rest of your life is one of the most daunting decisions you can make. The idea of taking steps in a relationship is scary. The idea of getting married is scary. The idea of being with someone else every day is scary. Nobody knows what the future has in store.

That said, having seen “Oh, Hi!”, I recognize that Isaac is kind of a fool. The way he addresses that he is not looking to be in relationship is so out of the blue to the point where he comes off as a jerk. And if he is not a jerk, he is most certainly stupid. While Isaac is relatable, it is no surprise the script does not always take his side. That said, it is also easy to root for him, especially considering he is tied to a bed for much of the runtime. The movie even points out despite Iris’ best intentions, she is technically kidnapping Isaac. His character is a solid representation of someone who would prefer to keep things casual, and is possibly afraid of taking things to the next level.

Overall, the relationship between Iris and Isaac is beautifully complex. The two seem to like each other and happen to be cute together. But they seem to have different goals in mind. One is in it for the romance, the other seems to be enjoying a short-lived fling. The film may as well be hinting that Isaac cares more about sex than anything else. The two seem to have failed to communicate their wants and needs before taking things further, therefore leading to the movie’s main incident. Either that, or it is possible that Isaac did what he could to impress Iris just to get into bed with her. The movie leaves a little room for interpretation and I appreciate that. If anything that matches the real-life complication of relationships.

Again, the end of this film is fantastic. I think a number of you could predict what happens towards the conclusion as the movie goes along, but it feels earned. The moments leading up to it are sometimes goofy, even for a romantic comedy like this one. But I can forgive it somewhat. If you are looking for a super funny film to watch with a great lead couple, then give “Oh, Hi!” a chance. It deserves some love.

In the end, “Oh, Hi!” came out of nowhere for me, but I ended up loving it. It is a romcom that is by no means disposable. It is a film that made me laugh, and then think. “Oh, Hi!” features an incredible cast of characters, well-written dialogue, and an ending that is truly satisfying. Romcoms are not my genre, but this one in particular stands out to me. I am going to give “Oh, Hi!” an 8/10.

“Oh, Hi!” is now playing in theaters and is also available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Weapons.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Freakier Friday,” “Nobody 2,” and “Honey Don’t!”. 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 “Oh, Hi!”? What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie you really enjoyed from a genre you typically could not give two craps about? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Together (2025): Real-Life Couple Dave Franco and Alison Brie Display Unreal Chemistry in Michael Shanks’ Creepy Directorial Debut

Posted on by Jack Drees

© NEON

“Together” is directed by Michael Shanks and this is his first feature film. This movie stars Dave Franco (The Disaster Artist, Neighbors), Alison Brie (The Disaster Artist, Freelance), and Damon Herriman (Flesh and Bone, Justified). The film is about a couple who move out of the city and into the country, where new lives and an unnatural force waits for them.

I often talk about my love for the distribution company A24 and its long list of excellent, one of a kind titles. Although if A24 had a close cousin, it would be Neon. I have not caught all of Neon’s films, but most of the ones I have seen are excellent. “Colossal” is one of my favorite films of the 2010s. ”Anora” ended up amongst my top movies of 2024. Neon even made history as the North American distributor for “Parasite,” with the film becoming the first made outside the U.S. to win the Academy Award for Best Picture. While I was not expecting “Together” to be the next Best Picture frontrunner, I was intrigued by the film mostly due to its concept.

The film is, fittingly, titled “Together” because it mainly revolves around a couple who quite literally become attached to each other. Of course, the two love one another, but on top of that, their bodies literally combine at times. The idea is just gross enough to the point where I need to know more. This film has a little bit of what I was expecting through its scare factor, though I am not going to pretend that it made my skin crawl. What I did not see coming is how deep down the rabbit hole the film would take me through its dialogue. I do not want to give much detail away, but when the story gets to a point where the characters discuss Zeus, I was compelled to know how the rest of the movie would go. From a more straightforward perspective, a lot of the back and forth between Dave Franco and Alison Brie is pristine.

Courtesy of 1.21 – © 1.21

Part of why Dave Franco and Alison Brie work so well as Tim and Millie is the fact that the two are a real life couple. I sometimes get nervous when two people who are related in some capacity work on a film together, but Franco and Brie are an exception. This is not their first film together. They were also in “The Little Hours” as well as “The Disaster Artist,” But the difference between those projects and “Together” is that their relationship takes center stage and the supporting cast is incredibly limited. After all, this film is set in the middle of nowhere.

“Together” is a delightfully deranged commentary on how human beings tend to survive based on connection. We are smart, or perhaps more accurately, stupid enough to be able to work and live on our own to some extent. But this film shows humans are ultimately co-dependent. Much of the film is about a couple, and the two seem to work at their best when they are by each other’s side. We see Tim and Millie deal with some unusual obstacles, but we also get to know some of their more traditional setbacks such as an inability to drive or cook. The film is uniquely romantic. It is by no means sweet. But between the leads’ fantastic chemistry and their characters’ commitment to bettering each other even in the most dire of situations, it kind of made me believe that “soul mates” could be real. “Together” is not a movie for all audiences, but if you and your partner like horror and are in the mood for something dark, this is a good date flick.

That said, the film does have problems. Going back to what I said about the scares, the film was not as terrifying as I was expecting it to be. The film has some scares, but they felt tamer than what I thought a film of this caliber would deliver. Personally, if you were to ask me which film from this year I would recommend based on scares alone, I would point you to “Bring Her Back.”

Also, there is a scene set in a school classroom where a young girl draws a picture of two dogs attached to each other and presents it to Millie before she leaves. I get what that picture is referencing, but I thought it did not add much to the movie. Although as the film itself progresses, it does a good job when it comes to callbacks and plot devices.

Despite its flaws, I am more than impressed with the turnout of the final product. There are a multitude of creative concepts and scenes. The film is timed and paced perfectly. Never once did I have the urge to fall asleep. This is Michael Shanks’ first feature film. Shanks has some prior production experience with shorts, but I think he has enormous potential should he continue down the path of making features. You can tell that each filmmaker gives it their all with each project they take on, but Shanks’ passion for filmmaking is clear as crystal with how he handles this movie. The screenplay could be scarier, but I acknowledge my claim is completely subjective. When it comes to the structure, pace, lore, and characterization, this film sings. This is far from my favorite film of the year, but Shanks did for me this year what Takashi Yamazaki did for me back when “Godzilla Minus One” came out. If Shanks has a new movie coming out, I hope to be first in line to see it. I am eager to see how Shanks’ sophomore outing turns out should he continue making features.

Without spoilers, I also like how the film ends. It is a fitting conclusion that references an earlier point in the film. It took me a second to realize what was happening, but when my brain connected the dots, I thought it was a neat way to address what was previously established.

In the end, “Together” is a solid film to watch alone, with the love of your life, or even someone to whom you are physically attached. Again, “Together” is not the scariest film I have seen this year, but it is one that I would say has potential to make certain groups of people think they are watching something that will haunt their nightmares. If you need any reason to watch this movie, it is because of how well written and portrayed the main couple happens to be. Dave Franco and Alison Brie are perfectly cast and I believed every scene between them. “Together” wastes no time and had me intrigued from start to finish. I am going to give “Together” a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Oh, Hi!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Weapons,” “Freakier Friday,” “Nobody 2,” and “Honey Don’t!.” 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 “Together?” What did you think about it? Or, is there a real life couple you would like to see star as an on-screen couple in a feature film? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!