Review

Locked (2025): A Hilarious, Torturous Thriller That Dives Into Humanity’s Entitlement

Posted on by Jack Drees

© The Avenue

“Locked” is directed by David Yarovesky (Nightbooks, Brightburn) and stars Bill Skarsgård (IT, Boy Kills World) and Anthony Hopkins (Thor, The Silence of the Lambs) in a film where a carjacker gets trapped inside of a luxury SUV owned by a mysterious man who wants to teach him a lesson about his lifestyle.

It has been hard to find time to go to the cinema in March, so any opportunity I can get to do so, I will take in a heartbeat.

Well, except for “Snow White.” I am honestly not interested in any more Disney live-action remakes for the time being. Additional apologies to “Lilo & Stitch” as well. I think I will be giving my money to the new “Mission: Impossible” the weekend that film comes out.

Thankfully, in March’s second half, the trailer for “Locked” sold me and got me to buy a ticket shortly afterwards.

Not only does “Locked” have solid talent on display like Bill Skarsgård and Anthony Hopkins, but the film looked like it would have fun with its simple concept. Essentially, a man named Eddie enters someone else’s unlocked car, and when he tries to get out, he is stuck and must deal with the unfamiliar surroundings as well as the virtual presence of an utterly hilarious geezer named William. Sounds simple, right? It might. Yet the film goes balls to the wall with its execution between a couple of powerhouse lead performances, and its implementations of one obstacle after another, no matter how convenient or absurd.

I did some research while writing this review and found out that “Locked” is the latest adaptation of a 2019 Argentinian film called “4×4.” I did see that title during the credits, but I was surprised to know that this was the fourth iteration of a film that was finished less than a decade ago. Apparently the film also has a Brazilian remake, as well as another in the Telugu language. To be fair, the premise works in several environments.

For the record, “Locked” was technically shot in Canada, but the English-language film has done much of its marketing in the United States, and uses well known Hollywood stars. Therefore, when connecting this movie to the United States, it works perfectly not only because we are a car-centric country. Not only because we sometimes put significant value on cars. But in regard to this movie’s deeper meaning, it also helps that the United States may be one of the most individualistic countries on the planet. While the movie is about someone being trapped in a car, if you look deeper, the movie is a dive into humanity’s selfishness.

Take Eddie for example. The movie taps into some addiction complications Eddie has. Early on, we see he does not have enough cash to pay for an important vehicle repair. Granted, cars can be pricey to maintain, but we also see that some of his other investments such as drugs and gambling could be getting in the way of more important aspects of his life. Additionally, he has a daughter who he seems to care about, but is not perfect when it comes to supporting her or being there for her. I do not have kids, but in one of my favorite movies, “Interstellar,” there is a line from Cooper that I think about sometimes where he suggests the reason why he is still around is to be a memory to his children. In comparison to Cooper, Eddie is not a role model by any means. He is far from a perfect protagonist, but I like him as a character despite his issues, he clearly loves the people in his life. That is despite him showing barriers that keep him from showing that love.

At the same time, we see Eddie questioning William, and how he got to live a luxury lifestyle. After all, Eddie entered a clearly expensive vehicle, so it is not surprising to see him ask William if he had a head start of some kind. Meanwhile, the film reveals that the two have different educational backgrounds. William has book smarts, Eddie has street smarts. William spent time in the classroom, Eddie was self taught. There is clearly a sense of snobbery when we dig deeper into William’s point of view. The movie shows that entitlement, a quality that both of these characters possess, does not necessarily come from having it all. Entitlement is not specific towards one class of people. Humans, at their core, want everything. And at the point where we do have everything, we do not necessarily have the urge to settle down.

The film mainly takes place in a car that is almost always in park. Yet pacing-wise, the narrative gets into gear to the point where several cops would be following it in a high speed chase. “Locked” is heavy on language, and by the midpoint, violence. This movie dials things up to an 11 by that point. Every random gag, no matter how unnecessary, landed for me. I do not want to reveal every single one, but there is one constant back and forth that had me dying in the beginning where William would call out Eddie for his vulgarity and lack of manners. When it comes to his delivery, Anthony Hopkins at first sounds like a sweet, reserved old man. As the film progresses, we see further hints of aggressiveness within his character. The more of a loose cannon Anthony Hopkins becomes, the more fun the film gets.

The film is quite a short watch. Granted if I had another positive to add, it is that every minute of the runtime is either essential to the story, or at the very least, downright entertaining. On that note, I will say the film does end somewhat abruptly. Is it a fitting ending? Sure. Is it a satisfying ending? One could say that. But I think the movie would have benefitted from being a minute longer and letting the actual end scene play out just a little. Even so, the film does end on a decent note and fulfills all the important arcs. That is perhaps my one gripe with an otherwise near-perfect film.

In the end, “Locked” is an exhilarating joyride. Even when the movie stays in the same place, the overall pace is fast and furious. Unsurprisingly, Anthony Hopkins is on fire with his role. The same can also be said for the film’s lead, Bill Skarsgård, which is also not surprising because that whole family is loaded with talent. I have been impressed with Skarsgard’s script choices lately. Sure he has done mainstream titles like “IT,” which was fantastic. The sequel, not as much, but it was still enjoyable. But he has had an impressive run in recent years with smaller films like “Barbarian” and “Boy Kills World.” “Locked” is yet another small wonder for this talented actor. I hope he continues to land roles as captivating as this one. The film made laugh, and then think. It is a great time overall. I am going to give “Locked” a 9/10.

“Locked” is now available for preorder on VOD and will be available to stream starting April 22nd.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, I have plenty more on the way! My next review is going to be a first for me. For the first time in Scene Before history, I will be sharing my thoughts on a concert movie, specifically “Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert.” I very rarely watch concert movies, but I love Hans Zimmer’s scores, so I jumped at the chance to check this film out in theaters last month. Also, stay tuned for my thoughts on “The Luckiest Man in America,” “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 “Locked?” What did you think about it? Or, have you ever been trapped somewhere? If you dare, let me know your crazy stories down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Mickey 17 (2025): More Robert Pattinsons Means More Fun in Bong Joon Ho’s Latest Movie

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Mickey 17” is directed by Bong Joon Ho (Parasite, Okja) and stars Robert Pattinson (The Batman, Tenet), Naomi Ackie (Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker, Master of None), Steven Yeun (The Walking Dead, Minari), Toni Collette (Knives Out, Hereditary), and Mark Ruffalo (The Avengers, Dark Waters). This film is set during a group’s mission to colonize a planet and mainly follows the journey of a disposable employee who we see living his 17th life.

I have waited desperately for the day I could watch “Mickey 17.” As a science fiction fanatic, this film looked like my jam. It had a clever concept, intriguing cast, and it was helmed by Bong Joon Ho, whose previous film became the Academy’s first Best Picture recipient not made specifically in the United States. I have a feeling that if this film were in the hands of, say a first time director, it might still sell me, but Bong Joon Ho’s involvement basically put me over the edge.

Is “Mickey 17” likely going to follow in the footsteps of “Parasite” and win Best Picture next year? It is still too early to say, but I would assume that to be a “no.” Although if the Academy Awards were tomorrow, I could see the film at least being nominated. That said, it is not for everyone. The film has heavy commentary, but also happens to cross a line to where it can be silly. If Bong Joon Ho did not direct this movie, I would have been convinced that this was a Taika Waititi film in the style of “Jojo Rabbit,” which seamlessly blends comedy and drama despite the movie sometimes falling into an extreme on one side or the other.

The movie has Robert Pattinson playing a character who we get to see repeatedly die, sometimes in brutal ways. That is something to put on the more comedic side of the spectrum. Yet on the dramatic side, the movie uses this disposable character as a foundation for highlighting the human condition.

Going back to comedy, this movie also has Mark Ruffalo and Toni Collette playing a couple who tend to be more concerned with blood spilling on their carpet as opposed to having someone die on said carpet. At the same time, on the dramatic end, the narrative also shows how people with prominence or power can affect the way people think.

There are multiple adjectives I could use to describe “Mickey 17.” Fun, brisk, grand, ambitious… I was not expecting “horny” to be one of those adjectives. At times, the vibe of this film reminded me of the 2021 flick “Voyagers,” which like this film, is mainly set in a spaceship with a decent amount of characters. The films have their differences, one of them being that “Mickey 17” is much more watchable. Although one similarity the two movies have is that they feature characters or storylines that have something to do with sexuality and urges. The movie features a sizzling connection between Robert Pattinson’s Mickey variants and a security agent named Nasha (Ackie) for example. This movie is about a group’s journey to colonize a new planet, and the individual at the forefront of this mission is politician Kenneth Marshall (Ruffalo) who early on, gives this dramatic speech to an audience encouraging them to “spread their seed” upon their arrival.

This is Bong Joon Ho’s first feature film following the Oscar Best Picture winner “Parasite.” While the film itself is not on the same level as “Parasite,” there are some scenes from “Mickey 17” that made me shake in the same way I did watching the former. “Mickey 17” has a halfway decent amount of unpredictability, but nothing as out of left field as “Parasite.” The structure of the film feels familiar, but it is done in a way where certain moments feel fresh or one of a kind. Much like “Parasite,” “Mickey 17” does a good job at handling commentary. Sometimes it is a little on the nose, but it is still decently delivered. For example, there is a scene early on where we notice a massive sea of supporters for Kenneth Marshall, a politician this movie clearly paints as the antagonist, and a fair amount of those supporters are wearing red hats. Sound familiar? If not, then maybe this movie will have to try harder and make commentary great again.

I can get by the not so subtle commentary because despite it being played up, it does feel reminiscent of current times. In fact, it only feels more on the nose by coincidence considering who was elected President in the U.S. before this film came out. The true test however is to see how the film ages with the world’s political landscapes. That said, society is not perfect. So odds are this film could age decently.

Tonally, “Mickey 17” is an enigma. It is certainly unconventional, but I kind of love it. That said, I could see some people comparing this film to a Saturday morning cartoon at certain points. Aside from that, there is not a ton else that bothers me in the film aside from the fact that some of the effects look fake. The exterior of the spaceship looks like something out of a TV series. That bothered me in the marketing for this movie. When I saw that spaceship for the first time, I thought I was watching an animation. That gripe remains in the final product. Many of the effects in this film look okay, but that spaceship stood out to me. I will not doubt that a lot of work was put into the CGI, but the film’s budget is at least $118 million. It could definitely be more expensive, but for that much money, I sometimes expected something a little more polished.

I am curious to know how this film will do with general audiences. For science fiction nerds like myself, this film is a complete and total blast. I think some casual moviegoers will be riveted by the film’s spectacle, and they will also enjoy seeing Robert Pattinson give it his all in two roles. Bong Joon Ho has had a prominent boost in the past number of years, and “Mickey 17” will likely garner certain people’s attention in my country, the U.S., since the film is in English, unlike his previous outing. But I am not sure if this film is going to have the spark to bring everyone together. Plus, again, I will mention that Mark Ruffalo is essentially playing a Donald Trump wannabe. Should word of that spread around just enough, I can imagine more people wanting to give their hard earned money to something else that will feel more like an escape. Although if I am being honest with you, this film is kind of an escape. The film took me to space, and I found it to be a fine journey. I give the movie a recommendation.

In the end, “Mickey 17” is an experience that is going to stick with me for a long time. This movie is grounded yet wonderfully odd. It is full of tiny, admirable quirks. The performances are to die for. Everyone is great in this film. Mark Ruffalo, Robert Pattinson of course. But if I had to name a favorite, I would have to say Toni Collette takes the cake. By the end of the film, I loved her simply because of how fiendish this film makes her out to be. She is very well directed. “Mickey 17” is another win for Bong Joon Ho and I am going to give it a 7/10.

“Mickey 17” is now playing in theaters and is available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! I keep beating a dead horse, but I apologize if I am behind on my reviews. The truth is, I am most definitely behind. I have been busy. I am still catching up on posting about the movies I watched while making the 7th Annual Jack Awards. A ceremony which by the way, you should totally check out. Here are some of the reviews you can expect going forward, and I have seen all these movies by the way. Coming soon, you can read my thoughts on “Locked,” “Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert,” “The Luckiest Man in America,” “The Penguin Lessons,” “Novocaine,” “The Ballad of Wallis Island,” “Secret Mall Apartment,” and “A Minecraft Movie.”

I cannot wait for you to see my reviews on all these movies. No, seriously. I have been putting these off for quite some time so I cannot wait any longer. And you can be notified about these reviews as soon as they drop. Please follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account, and be sure to check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Mickey 17?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Bong Joon Ho film? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Nickel Boys (2024): The 2024 Academy Award Best Picture Nominee I Did Not Care for

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Nickel Boys” is directed by RaMell Moss (Hale Country This Morning, This Evening, Easter Snap) and stars Ethan Herisse (When They See Us, The American Society of Magical Negroes), Brandon Wilson (Murmur, The Way Back), Hamish Linklater (The Big Short, Battleship), Fred Hechinger (The White Lotus, Thelma), Daveed Diggs (Wonder, The Little Mermaid), Jimmie Fails (Pieces of a Woman, The Last Black Man in San Francisco), and Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor (King Richard, Ray). This film is set mostly during the Jim Crow era and is about the friendship between two African-American men who meet an abusive reform school.

I love when filmmakers experiment and try to insert unique concepts or tricks in their films. In the case of “Nickel Boys,” the film mainly uses a first person perspective to tell its story. If you watch a lot of movies, you will notice that while they do have main characters, the camera, more often than not, acts as a third person. I think a first person point of view is a clever idea for telling a story like this. It could put you in the mindset of someone who lived unfathomable events. I wish I could tell you I was riveted by this concept, but I cannot. The honest truth is, I found “Nickel Boys” to be gimmicky.

Going back to what I said about that first person perspective… Notice how I said it “mainly” uses that perspective. Because the film tends to switch perspectives from time to time, and these transitions tend to come off as distracting. There is a decent story that engages conversation in “Nickel Boys” somewhere. In fact, this story takes inspiration from a book based on unfortunate but true events. But the impact of that story is diminished by unusual tricks that do not stick the landing.

I should note this is not the first time I have seen a film done primarily in a first person view. One of my first reviews on Scene Before, where my writing abilities were definitely not as up to par, was for the action film “Hardcore Henry,” which I thought was okay but ended on a weird, abrupt note. While the movie is not perfect, I thought for the most part, the first person perspective added to the experience of that film. It reminded me of a first-person shooter like “Call of Duty.” I did not feel as immersed or closer to the scene when watching “Nickel Boys.” If anything it sometimes gave the illusion that I was watching life. Granted, this film does have a slice of life feel to it. You might think, “If something is so lifelike, does that not make it immersive?” Technically two and two can go together, but what I am getting at is that there was nothing about this film’s first person perspective that made me escape my reality and enter someone else’s, no matter how hard the filmmakers tried.

There are shining moments of “Nickel Boys” despite its flaws. The acting in this film is excellent. While I meant it as a diss earlier, this film is like watching life. In the sense of everyone’s acting abilities on screen, that is technically a compliment because all the performances are lifelike. While I wish I were more riveted by the relationship between Elwood and Turner, I will not deny that both of their respective performers, Ethan Herisse (above) and Brandon Wilson, knock their performances out of the park. These two seem like genuine friends and part of me wishes I could have been a fly on the wall if they were ever given a chemistry test.

The film does a really good job at establishing the connection between the main character, Elwood (Herisse), and his grandmother, Hattie (Ellis-Taylor). This is best established by what happens when they are separated. There is a scene where we see Hattie talking with Turner, and she reveals her displeasure for how the school would not allow her and Elwood to see each other. The scene even ends on a comforting note. Despite my previous complaints for the way the movie was produced, I thought that moment enhanced the first-person perspective. It is a moment that I thought could have worked in a more conventional manner, but it was made a smidge better since it was done in a first person view.

If I am going to be honest with you, I am going to remember this film mostly for its experimental vision that I imagine could sit well with some viewers, but not so much for yours truly. I think this film’s narrative is only going to become increasingly forgettable over time. I know this is a deep narrative, I just wish I were more compelled by it. The film will undoubtedly have an audience, some of whom will likely revisit it over the years. I just do not know if I will be a part of the crowd that ends up watching the movie more than once. As I watched the film I found myself a bit underwhelmed. I knew in advance about all the accolades and praise this film received from others. There is always at least one film nominated for Best Picture every year at the Oscars that begs me to question or disagree with the majority of viewers in regards to liking it. Last year, it was “Killers of the Flower Moon.” The year before that, it was “Elvis.” This season, it is “Nickel Boys.”

I hate to say this, because I was genuinely was looking forward to this film. By the halfway mark, I was bored. As of writing this, the film is streaming on MGM+, a streaming service whose slogan must be “The streaming service to buy when you finished buying all the other ones.” I watched “Nickel Boys” in a theater, but if I were streaming, I would probably turn it off and watch something else around the halfway point. My time is much too valuable and this would not have been the best use of it. I wish I were more compelled by the story, the characters, and unfortunately I was not. I think others will be. I am likely in the minority. Maybe a second viewing would help. But I do not think that is going to happen anytime soon.

In the end, “Nickel Boys” one of the biggest disappointments of the past year. It is not a broken movie, it is just one that I wish I could have appreciated more. I have seen all of the Academy Award Best Picture nominees from 2024, minus “Emilia Perez.” I would have to say “Nickel Boys” is my least favorite of them all. This was not an easy movie for me to sit through. Other than a couple decent scenes, “Nickel Boys” does not have a lot for me to write home about. The narrative dives into poignant moments that should keep me riveted. Maybe they are better represented in the book that this film is based on. “Nickel Boys” was a one time watch for me. I would watch it a second time to see if it is better, but if I were alone on a Friday night and were looking for something to watch, I would want it to have a better pace than what this movie delivered. I am going to give “Nickel Boys” a 4/10.

“Nickel Boys” is now available to stream on MGM+ for all subscribers.

Thanks for reading this review! Once again, apologies if my posts have been slow lately. I am still catching up on reviews after finishing the 7th Annual Jack Awards. And I have plenty in the pipeline. Soon I will be reviewing “Mickey 17,” “Locked,” “Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert,” “The Luckiest Man in America,” “The Penguin Lessons,” “Novocaine,” and “The Ballad of Wallis Island.” 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 “Nickel Boys?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite of the 2024 Academy Award Best Picture nominees? It is an easy pick for me, and I am very glad this movie won. I would have to say “Anora.” That was an experience if there ever was one. Let me know your pick down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Riff Raff (2024): Having a Cast This Good in a Movie Just Shy of Being Solid is a Crime

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Riff Raff” is directed by Dito Montiel (Empire State, The Son of No One) and stars Jennifer Coolidge (American Pie, The White Lotus), Ed Harris (The Truman Show, Apollo 13), Gabrielle Union (America’s Got Talent, Bring it On), Lewis Pullman (Top Gun: Maverick, Bad Times at the El Royale), Miles J. Harvey (Supercool, The Babysitter), Emanuela Postacchini (The Seven Faces of Jane, Who is America?), Michael Angelo Covino (Keep in Touch, The Climb), Pete Davidson (Saturday Night Live, The King of Staten Island), and Bill Murray (Ghostbusters, Stripes). This film is set during a family reunion when a criminal’s life is suddenly turned upside down.

February is typically a dumping ground for movies. Although in recent years, the month has had a few attractive titles at the box office that would bring in a vast audience. In fact, this year we had “Captain America: Brave New World” as the month’s hot ticket. I am not going to pretend that “Riff Raff” had anywhere close to the box office potential of Marvel’s latest film, but if you look at the film’s cast, it would, in theory, bring some unlikely viewers in the door.

With the film’s cast being the biggest selling point, I am not surprised to say that they collectively end up being the highlight. Each individual brings their A-game and they all have decent material to work with. Is the material award-winning? No. Will the material go down in the history books? Probably not. But if you are looking for an hour and a half to kill, this might do. Perhaps just barely.

If you like the vibes of Rian Johnson’s “Knives Out” combined with a bunch of Quentin Tarantino’s filmography, then “Riff Raff” is for you. This film features a peculiar family who all come together at the same place. Even families whose members vowed to never speak to each other after that one time they discussed politics at Thanksgiving can tell you that this is clearly not a typical family gettogether. On top of that, the film is violent, bloody, and visceral. It is not the most grotesque picture of all time, but it is rather dark.

You may have noticed in the last couple paragraphs that I refused to take select thoughts I had on the film to an extreme. This is a consistency I have noticed regarding the film as I write this review. “Riff Raff” is a film that lacks standouts, both positive and negative. Sometimes I wonder if that is worse than a straight up bad movie. Because at least you can remember a bad movie. It is an experience you want to forget, but it often stays with you for a reason. This movie, while it has its moments, feels kind of disposable in the long run.

That said, there are some standouts in this film, one of which is Jennifer Coolidge as Ruth. She is funny, charming, and brings a respectable energy to her role to the point where I can only see Coolidge playing this particular character. There are certain portions of the film where you can clearly see the nerves coming out of Ruth to the point where she even tries to defend said nerves by suggesting they turn her on.

When you put Jennifer Coolidge in the same room as Bill Murray, Pete Davidson, and Ed Harris for example, such a concept sounds promising. In fact, all of these actors do a great job with their roles and have solid chemistry with one another. If I had to be honest, if you have a cast this promising, I wish the script were pinched up a little more to make the experience of watching all of these people at the same time just a bit better. Going back to “Knives Out,” the great thing about the movie, and even its 2022 follow-up, is that the gangbusters ensemble casts of both projects had great screenplays to back up their performances. I am not going to pretend that the screenplay for “Riff Raff” is broken. It works, it functions. Again, just barely. When I look back at this movie however, if I were to recommend it to somebody, I would recommend it on the idea of watching all of these big name actors come together as opposed to selling them on what kind of ride they are in for. The actors seem to offer more to the film, and as a result, the experience, than the writer does.

For the record, this film is solely written by John Pollono, who co-wrote one of my favorite films of the past decade that I did not review, “Stronger,” which is about a guy who was injured in the 2013 Boston Marathon Bombing. If I were to put these films side by side, I would easily choose to watch “Stronger” every single time. Although this is not to say “Riff Raff” is a heaping pile of malarkey. Pollono does a good job with “Riff Raff” by balancing humor with occasional drama. He also brings halfway decent stakes to the table.

I watched the film alongside my grandma as well as my mom. These two are not usually the target audience when it comes to bloody, violent films. Unsurprisingly, these two did not seem to walk out of the film thinking it was their favorite. But I would say in a way, the film seemed to do its job because it definitely generated a reaction out of them. The film has its hints of shock value, and there are some tense scenes where serious injury or bloody death seems imminent.

The film has some hilarious moments. There is one sequence past the halfway point featuring Pete Davidson and Bill Murray’s characters that had me in stitches. The sequence presents them with a neverending obstacle, and it was executed fantastically. “Riff Raff” is not the easiest film to identify within a certain genre. It is a little bit of an action flick. It is a little bit of a drama. It is a little bit of a crime story. It is a little bit of a comedy. When it comes to the comedy, it does not always hit, but when it does hit, it is sometimes a bullseye.

In fact, going back to those genres, one problem with this film is that it leans into being multiple genres at a time to the point where it never finds its footing and excels at one thing. It is like a more mature “Red One.” Although in this case, some of those genres perhaps barely surpass the “it’s fine” mark.

In the end, “Riff Raff” is neither great or horrible. It is the Little Caesars Pizza of crime movies. It delivers some enjoyment in the moment, but by no means is it going to sit in the hall of fame. Is “Riff Riff” going to end up being the year’s most memorable movie? No. In fact, it will likely be far from it. But there are also way worse options out there for your viewing displeasure. This is kind of in the middle of the road. It has been some time since I sat down and watched the movie so I am bound to forget some things, but truth be told, the more that time passes, the more I realize how forgettable “Riff Raff” becomes. The film has some decent moments that could squeeze it into a territory where I would say it is worth at least one watch, but I am nevertheless going to give “Riff Raff” a 5/10.

“Riff Raff” is now available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! I am sorry I have not posted a review for awhile. I have been busy with life, hobbies, as well as crafting the 7th Annual Jack Awards, which you totally should check out! It is available now for your enjoyment! That said, I do have more reviews coming including ones for “Nickel Boys,” “Mickey 17,” “Locked,” “The Luckiest Man in America,” “The Penguin Lessons,” and there is one film I saw recently that I have been debating as to whether I am going to review it or not, I just saw “Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert.” It is a concert film, and I do not have a ton of experience with reviewing, or even watching those kinds of movies. That said, it was a great moviegoing experience and I would love to talk about it at some point. 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 “Riff Raff?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie with a solid cast that you think could have been better? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Brutalist (2024): A Fantastically Constructed Three Plus Hours at the Cinema

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Brutalist” is directed by Brady Corbet (The Childhood of a Leader, Vox Lux) and stars Adrien Brody (King Kong, The Pianist), Felicity Jones (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, On the Basis of Sex), Guy Pearce (Memento, Iron Man 3), Joe Alwyn (The Favourite, Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk), Raffey Cassidy (Tomorrowland, Vox Lux), Stacy Martin (Vox Lux, All the Money in the World), Emma Laird (Mayor of Kingstown, A Haunting in Venice), Isaach de Bankolé (24, Black Panther), and Alessandro Nivola (Jurassic Park III, Amsterdam). This film is about a Hungarian-Jewish Holocaust survivor’s struggle to achieve the American dream.

“The Brutalist” was a movie that I have been trying to get to for nearly a couple months at this point. Unfortunately, I just never had the time to sit down for three and a half hours and commit to it. Thankfully, an opportunity opened up recently, and I went out of my way to a theater further away from home, because I wanted to get this movie under my belt before the Academy Awards. After all, despite the body’s questionable practices and relevancy, the film did win Best Picture – Drama at another awards show, the Golden Globes. Well that, and quite frankly, I was in much more of a rush to watch “The Brutalist,” instead of “Emilia Perez,” which won Best Picture – Musical or Comedy in the same show. That movie seems to have gotten a lot of praise during the 2024-2025 awards season. However, I have not seen as many people outside the core voting bodies share the kindest words about the film.

When you make a commitment to any movie, it has to be worth your money and time. That last part is extremely emphasized with a more sizable runtime. Thankfully, “The Brutalist” is worth both of those things.

Most of the movies I have reviewed on Scene Before are from the 2010s or 2020s, therefore I have not had the opportunity to talk about many titles that include intermissions. “The Brutalist,” released at the end of 2024, is one exception. An intermission itself is not a core part of a movie experience if you break it down, but in this case I thought it added to a nice, throwback feel.

That said, having an intermission introduces a problem that stood out to me, which is that if I had to pick one half of the movie to watch over the other, I would pick the second half almost every time. Granted, I understand why the first half exists. Without it, the movie would not work the way it does. But I found the second half to be better-paced. I found the characters to be at their most compelling. I thought the acting and atmosphere was upped a notch. I felt more passive watching the first half and more active in the second.

The movie was shot on 35mm, which for the record, is still a format used in modern movies. Last year’s “Twisters” is one such example. The film also used VistaVision, which I arguably did not experience to the fullest given how I watched the movie on digital projection. But the film itself, kind of like another Adrien Brody project, “The Artist,” has all these little touches of older cinema. The movie had all sorts of imperfections from frame to frame.

This movie also makes great use of color, or lack thereof in some cases. The film is not necessarily the most vivid, but despite the film’s grainy, dusty look, there are certain colorful objects in the film that stood out to me. There is a shot where two characters are hugging in front of a green bus that pops. This film also has really effective use of beige. There are some shots inside of a home where that color stands out. It is the little things that catch my attention in this picture. Speaking of shots, the opening of this film is one of the trippiest I remember seeing in recent memory, where we see an upside down shot of Lady Liberty. That part of the movie is ingrained in my memory not only for its unconventional yet immersive shot choice, but it is just the start of what “The Brutalist” stands for as a work of art.

When you break down “The Brutalist,” it is a representation of one’s journey and struggle to achieve the American dream. The movie starts off with a staple of that dream with the main character, László Tóth, a holocaust survivor and an architect, coming into Ellis Island, set for a better life. His journey comes with obstacles, such as leaving people he knows behind or sometimes taking jobs one can consider painstaking or filth-inducing.

I also find it interesting how the film is set in the 1940s to the 1980s. I did not see this at a festival or a special screening, but if I had a chance to talk to the film’s writers, Brady Corbet and Mona Fastvold, I would want to know if they think the idea of “the American dream” is still alive. This film does represent the continued aspirations of the American dream in regard to seeking a better life, but it begs the question as to whether the American dream is a thing of the past, or if it is still obtainable in the 2020s.

Pacing-wise, this film sometimes reminded me of “Blade Runner.” The film is very much a slow-burn. Combine that with a three and a half hour runtime, you have a recipe for a movie that I imagine will turn off a fair amount of the general audience upon their first impression. I say this because there are a lot of pauses between the characters’ utterances of dialogue. Very rarely do the characters actively respond to another individual right away. I thought this direction choice sometimes worked and tied into the film’s atmosphere, but at other times, was a bit distracting.

I liked Felicity Jones before watching “The Brutalist,” but she is a different kind of great in this film. She is not in the entire movie. But she ends up taking the spotlight in every scene towards the end. As the film culminates, she unleashes the most unhinged supporting performance I have seen in a 2024 film. I have not seen “Emilia Perez” so I cannot comment on Zoe Saldana’s performance. I am aware Saldana won the Best Supporting Actress category at the Oscars, but if I had to cast a vote, it would be for Felicity Jones because of not only how she represents her own pain, but also her urgency to relieve the pain of those around her. By the end of this film, I left thinking that I would do anything to avoid a screaming match with this individual. I did not know Jones had that kind of power in her.

In the end, “The Brutalist” is not my favorite movie of 2024, but it is one of the more well-crafted films of that year. Part of it has to do with the production design, but also the solid direction from Brady Corbet that has also led to excellent performances from actors like Adrien Brody and Felicity Jones. Breaking this film down, I found the film to pick up a bit in the second half compared to the first, but I still found the film as a whole to be worth watching. I know an Adrien Brody-led three and a half hour movie with an intermission set decades prior to its release shot on VistaVision sounds like the most pretentious movie that has ever pretentiated in the history of pretentiousness. Trust me, if you give it your time, you might enjoy it. The acting is great. The directing is even better. The story is one I think many people, especially those living in the United States, can relate to. I am going to give “The Brutalist” a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! Coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “I’m Still Here,” “Riff Raff,” “Nickel Boys,” and “Mickey 17.” 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 Brutalist?” What did you think about it? Or, should more movies coming out today have intermissions? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Love Hurts (2025): Sparks Barely Leap Off the Ground in This Action Flick

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Love Hurts” is directed by Jonathan Eusebio (300, The Fall Guy) and this is his directorial debut. The film stars Ke Huy Quan (Everything Everywhere All at Once, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom), Ariana DeBose (West Side Story, Wish), Daniel Wu (American Born Chinese, Into the Badlands), Mustafa Shakir (The Deuce, Luke Cage), Lio Tipton (Warm Bodies, Two Night Stand), Cam Gigandet (Reckless, The O.C.), Marshawn Lynch (Bottoms, Westworld), and Sean Astin (The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles). This film is about a realtor whose past comes back to haunt him when he receives a message from his former partner-in-crime.

Everyone loves a comeback story, although in the case of Ke Huy Quan, I am going to channel LL Cool JJ and say that he has been here for years. The reality is, whether we knew it or not, Ke Huy Quan has remained the slightest bit active behind the scenes leading up to his big return in front of the camera, “Everything Everywhere All at Once.” If it were not for the deserved success of that movie, chances are we would never get a film like “Love Hurts,” which I was looking forward to. It kind of had a mainstream, 2010s, 2020s-esque action flick feel that you would get out of a film like “John Wick” or “Nobody” with some twists and turns, but like those movies, the choreography and scenes looked stellar in the marketing.

As off and on as I am about “star power” in a movie, Ke Huy Quan is the reason why I watched “Love Hurts.” But how could he not be? The actor played a significant role in my favorite film of 2022, won an Oscar, and when he is not busy taking names, he is taking selfies with every star he can find. This is part of why I am disappointed to say that “Love Hurts” is not that great.

“Love Hurts” is not horrible, but if I have any real highlights for the film, they certainly would not be for the characters. Some could argue that since this is an action movie one does not always come for the characters, but the way I see things, the less engaged I am with the characters, the less engaged I am with the action. I will defend the action scenes from a technical perspective. I do not think there was a single bad sequence. In fact, there are a couple that I am still thinking about and find to be incredibly creative. But this film seems to be more concerned in showing off what its talent can do, as opposed to what its characters can do.

If you are seeing this movie solely for Ke Huy Quan, then he is probably not going to disappoint you. Other parts of the movie might, but I do not think Quan is going to be one of them. Not only does Quan solidify himself as a buttkicking action star with his role of Marvin Gable, but he is charismatic. He brings a unique energy to this genre of filmmaking. A lot of our modern action stars like Jason Statham, Keanu Reeves, and Liam Neeson tend to have this obviously masculine aura to them both in terms of the way they look and act on screen. Ke Huy Quan very much screams cute, but not cuddly. I think the movie was smart to make him a dedicated real estate agent. Even if his character was not hiding something underneath, I think Quan is a good fit to play someone working in that industry.

This is a movie that I cannot see myself revisiting in its entirety, but instead rewatching certain clips on YouTube. Because there are a couple cool scenes where we see Marvin Gable either trying to defend his award, or dodge some baddies while trying to keep a house together for example. The movie goes at a brisk pace, and with an 84 minute runtime, that should not be a shocker. For the most part, the film is simple and effective in terms of progressing the narrative. It is not a unique narrative. But does have a soft flair one does not typically find in these types of action movies. As the film continues, however, things get more convoluted, and therefore, unmemorable.

Also, Ariana DeBose is in this film, a great actress in her own right, but I am convinced she needs a new agent. Yes, she was fantastic in “West Side Story.” But just about everything afterwards was critically panned or unmemorable. Between “Argylle,” “Kraven the Hunter,” and now this… She is not on the hottest of streaks. Yes, I liked “Wish.” I stand by that opinion. Yes, I liked “I.S.S.,” but not a lot of people thought it was worth seeing considering it failed to make its budget back. As I am writing this paragraph, I forgot the name of her character. That is not the best of signs. Granted, I have also forgotten the names of characters for movies I enjoy, but I bring this up because you might as well just name this character “the love interest” or “the girl.” The movie could have fleshed out this character more and individualized her to a better degree. It does however do okay when it comes to establishing Ke Huy Quan’s infatuation with her, but sometimes the film tells such a concept when it really should just show it.

Interesting enough, for those who do want to know the name of DeBose’s character, that, my friends, is Rose. For the record, I know people named Rose, and I am aware it is not the most uncommon name. But that has to be on purpose. It reminds me of a theory my dad has about Cliff Booth in “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.” He thinks the character, who is accused of killing his spouse, has the last name Booth, just so the script can allow for someone else to refer to him as “John Wilkes Booth” in a scene. 

The film is centered around Valentine’s Day, and this presents a potential problem for rewatchability in the same way I look at Christmas movies. I have nothing against watching “Fred Claus.” But I would not watch it outside of November or December. Unfortunately, “Love Hurts” is barely good enough for February. If you want a good Valentine’s Day-centric action movie, there is one already, and it is called “Deadpool.” Heck, it could even be a good watch around Christmas. Or literally any day of the year, it is perfect.

“Love Hurts” is the directorial debut from Jonathan Eusebio. I do not think he should automatically give up directing based on this one lackluster product. Although if he were to continue, I hope his sophomore outing is better than this. On the bright side, Eusebio at least has some credibility in the industry. He has shown his talents helping coordinate stunts and choreography in films like “The Fall Guy,” “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End,” and the first three “John Wick” installments. Some of this film’s strongest elements are the action scenes, and it comes as no surprise knowing who helped direct said scenes.

In the end, “Love Hurts” neither left me infatuated or brokenhearted. If anything, the movie is just okay. If you put the film on silent, I would still pay attention to the visuals. But as I said before, this movie packs a lot in it by the time it is over that I did not really care about the film’s substance. I would love to see Ke Huy Quan in more projects. I am glad he is voicing a character in the upcoming “Zootopia” sequel, but I would also be open to more live-action roles as well. I think he is talented and would not be a surprise if he puts another Oscar on his shelf in the future. However, I do not think anyone will be winning any Academy Awards for this film. I am going to give “Love Hurts” a 5/10.

“Love Hurts” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “The Brutalist” and “I’m Still Here.” 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 “Love Hurts?” What did you think about it? Or, who is an actor that has not done any work in a while that you think has a pretty good chance of making a comeback? Is there anyone you would like to see who has not been on screen in a while? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Paddington in Peru (2024): This Bear’s Still Got It

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Paddington in Peru” is directed by Dougal Wilson and this is his feature film debut. The film stars Hugh Bonneville (The Monuments Men, Downton Abbey), Emily Mortimer (The Pink Panther, The Newsroom), Julie Waters (Mamma Mia!, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone), Jim Broadbent (Bridget Jones’s Diary, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince), Carla Tous (30 Coins, El hombre del saco), Olivia Colman (The Favourite, The Mitchells vs. the Machines), Antonio Banderas (Shrek 2, The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard), and Ben Whislaw (Skyfall, Fargo). This film is the third installment to the “Paddington” film franchise, where Ben Whislaw once again voices the title character. The film dives into Paddington’s adventurous journey to reunite with his Aunt Lucy, who now lives at the home for retired bears in Peru.

Two similar phrases I notice myself use sometimes as a film fan are “better than it should be” or “better than it has any right being.” Those two phrases very much apply to the current “Paddington” movies. Sure, these movies might appeal to kids, but just like I often say about Pixar titles, they are presented in such a way where they also have a lot for adults to enjoy. I watched both “Paddington” titles leading up to this one earlier this year. I have heard nothing but good things about both, and boy do they live up to the hype. Ben Whislaw adorably voices the lead role. The rest of the cast has perfect chemistry and all play their parts well. The atmosphere of these films do a great job at adding an enhanced otherworldliness to real life locations. The films somehow get you to buy that an animated bear lives with a large human family.

That said, I did maintain a notable nerve with “Paddington in Peru.” The director of the past couple movies, Paul King, is not in the chair this time around. Dougal Wilson is helming this project instead. As someone who is sometimes resistant to change, it was something lingering in my mind upon this film’s release. Thankfully, my nerves were rid of by the time the film got into gear because this film maintains the tone, atmosphere, and therapeutic nature of the previous “Paddington” installments. I did not know this was Wilson’s first film. But having seen it, I would love to see more from work from him. Heck, if he wanted to do a sequel to this movie, I would not be against it.

Is “Paddington in Peru” as good as the Paul King installments? No. It is a step down. But it is a step down in the same way that I see “Inside Out 2” as a step down from its predecessor. “Inside Out” is so masterfully made that whatever came after it had big shoes to fill. While “Inside Out 2” was good, it was nowhere near the level of the original. In fact, one similarity I will note between these sequels is that these latest films do not pack as much emotional weight as their predecessors. I will forever cherish the ending to “Paddington 2.” It has become a new favorite of mine because not only is it earned, but it almost broke me. There is nothing in this film as emotionally charging as that scene. This does not mean the film itself lacks emotion, it just does not have as much.

In addition to emotion, the film has laughs and adventure. This is a great watch for the entire family, but also maintains a balance between being overly mature and overly childish. Pardon the incoming bear pun, but when it comes to finding a balance for all audiences. The film is “just right.”

“Paddington in Peru” is a solid trilogy capper that understands its characters, its vibes, and successfully progresses the universe into a direction that is bigger than what came before. Bigger does not necessarily mean better in this case, but this film in terms of scope, sometimes feels more epic than the last two. At times, the film has an “Indiana Jones” feel. Not only because of the adventurous structure, but also likely because the film mainly takes place in the jungle. As a bonus, there is a scene involving a giant boulder.

One of the most crucial aspects many movies must balance is a sense of realism combined with suspension of disbelief. The “Paddington” movies do a great job at this, and this one is no exception. One example of this involves Olivia Colman’s character, the Reverend Mother, a happy go lucky, singing, guitar-playing nun who lives in the middle of the Peruvian Jungle. Unsurprisingly, Colman kills it here. She is so dynamic and hyperactive to the point where every scene of hers is a highlight. She makes you believe that someone as over the top like her can exist in a world much like ours.

Going back to what I said about change, turns out the director was not the only change behind the scenes. While Mary Brown (right) from the previous movies does return here, Sally Hawkins has been replaced with another actor, Emily Mortimer. While watching the film, I did not know Hawkins was replaced, but when I look at the two actors side by side I could barely see a difference. Mortimer maintains the welcoming, calm feel Hawkins previously brought to the role and gives a solid performance in her own right. I would love to watch all three of these movies back to back one day and see how these two performances compare as a whole. Although upon my first impression, I have no complaints regarding Emily Mortimer’s portrayal of Mary Brown.

That said, Hugh Bonneville does come back as Henry Brown (right center), and while I think his presence here is probably the weakest of the three movies, I still think Bonneville himself plays the role nicely. I am glad to see him come back. The film tends to dive into Henry’s risk aversion. I thought that was handled well and brought a decent load of conflict into the character’s path.

I see this franchise in the same way that I see some of my favorite sitcoms like “Seinfeld” or “The Big Bang Theory.” Story is arguably the most important aspect of any movie. But even if the story comes off as an afterthought, which for the record, it does not here, I would keep coming back to the “Paddington” movies just to hang out with the characters. Paddington himself is a bundle of joy. The supporting human characters are all likable. The antagonistic roles in this film are some of the best parts of the movie. I would watch a fourth “Paddington” film just to see where these characters go next. If you are under a lot of stress or you want to forget about the troubles of the world, the “Paddington” movies, including this one, are a solid option to pass the time.

The film also looks beautiful. This should not come as a major surprise considering a lot of it takes place in the Peruvian jungle, but the color palette, much like the last two films, has this slight homey gloss to it. Many of the river shots, the tree shots, and anything else related to the jungle environment are pleasing to the eyes. Erik Wilson, who shot the last two “Paddington” movies, comes back to shoot this one, and he follows up those two with another gorgeously framed spectacle.

Also, when the credits roll, do not get out of your chair. There is an extra scene. If you are familiar with these movies, it is a nice little addition that would be worth your time.

STUDIOCANAL – © STUDIOCANAL SAS

In the end, “Paddington in Peru” is the worst of the “Paddington” movies. But like the “Toy Story” franchise, even the weakest film, in my case the fourth one, is worth a watch. The film is a fine-looking, exquisitely presented, well-oiled machine of happiness. Feeling down? Watch this movie. I am not a doctor, but I watch a lot of movies. This is simply my professional advice. The film has the vibe of a glorified Saturday morning cartoon that also feels down to earth. I am looking forward to seeing what Dougal Wilson does next as a director. If “Paddington” continues, I will go to the cinema to support it. The franchise is 3 for 3 so far. I am going to give “Paddington in Peru” a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Love Hurts,” “The Brutalist,” and “I’m Still Here.” 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 “Paddington in Peru?” What did you think about it? Or, which is your favorite of the “Paddington” movies? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Captain America: Brave New World (2025): The First Post-Endgame MCU Film I Did Not Enjoy…

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Captain America: Brave New World” is directed by Julius Onah (The Cloverfield Paradox, Luce) and stars Anthony Mackie (Synchronic, Twisted Metal), Danny Ramirez (Top Gun: Maverick, The Gifted), Shira Haas (Bodies, Unorthodox), Carl Lumbly (Cagney & Lacey, M.A.N.T.I.S.), Xosha Roquemore (Precious, The Mindy Project), Giancarlo Esposito (The Mandalorian, Abigail), Liv Tyler (The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Armageddon), Tim Blake Nelson (Watchmen, Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed), and Harrison Ford (Star Wars, Blade Runner). This is the 35th movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and it is about Sam Wilson, the new Captain America, as he investigates a conspiracy regarding President Thaddeus Ross.

It is that time again. Another Marvel movie is here. Many people will tell you that their interest in the Marvel Cinematic Universe has been on a decline since “Endgame.” Some are experiencing said decline faster than others… But I am here to tell you that Marvel has yet to let me down since that 2019 blockbuster came out. That is unless you count the TV side, which has had its hits like “WandaVision,” but if I were to be honest with you, “The Falcon and the Winter Soldier” could have been better. I did not hate the show. In fact, for television, it seems as if no expense was spared in terms of the production. I just find it to be rather forgettable.

That said, “The Falcon and the Winter Soldier” did have its moments. It was also a solid introduction to Anthony Mackie’s Sam as the new Captain America. I thought the way they went about handling that arc was engaging. It set up the character effectively for further stories to commence, including “Captain America: Brave New World.”

Regardless of how I felt watching “The Falcon and the Winter Soldier,” I was excited for “Captain America: Brave New World.” I thought the trailers did a good job at not giving a ton of information away, while also teasing highlights to look forward to. Plus, even if some people are fatigued by Marvel, there is no denying that it is in a zone right now between “Deadpool & Wolverine” on the film side and “Agatha All Along” on the TV side. Does “Captain America: Brave New World” continue this hot streak?

Ehh…

Marvel Studios/Courtesy of Marvel Studios – © 2024 MARVEL.

I hate to say it, but I think the movie side of the MCU has experienced its weakest installment in years. I am of the unpopular opinion that phase 4 had no bad movies in it. Not every film was a banger in the way that “Spider-Man: No Way Home” was, but I did not hate any of the phase 4 films from Marvel. I also think all the phase 5 movies are good. Yes, even “Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania.” Yes, even “The Marvels.” Both movies were big, explosive bursts of fun. “Captain America: Brave New World” on the other hand was missing the MCU magic.

I have referenced Martin Scorsese before when talking about comic book movies, but I think when it comes to his philosophy on the subgenre, “Captain America: Brave New World” honestly matches parts of it. While the film definitely has human characters expressing human emotions, the screenplay sometimes feels like it was written by artificial intelligence. I say this not only because the dialogue sounds stale and robotic, but also due to how this film essentially takes what has worked in previous films and shoved it into this one.

The film is definitely a “cinematic experience,” but it is cinematic in the sense that it has the scope of a theme park ride that offers very few genuine thrills. If this were Universal Orlando, this would be the equivalent to “Race Through New York Starring Jimmy Fallon.” It is a timewaster full of connections that some people will probably understand right away but will just as likely fly over lots of people’s heads.

Marvel Studios/Courtesy of Marvel Studios – © 2024 MARVEL.

“Captain America: Brave New World” is marketed as a… well, “Captain America” movie. But kind of like how “Civil War” was also a mini “Avengers” film, this is also secretly a film that if you break it down, is a blink you’ll miss it sequel to another part of the MCU. One of the problems with the MCU I have addressed is that as the universe gets bigger, it makes it that much harder to keep up with all the material. And for those who did keep up, chances are some of those people will not retain every detail. There is a chance I would have enjoyed this movie more had I vividly remembered certain details from earlier in the MCU.

What makes this film the weakest the MCU given in years is perhaps the idea that it builds off of so much that has already been established to the point where it comes off more as a continuation than an original idea. You do not necessarily have to see “The Falcon and the Winter Soldier” to understand this movie, but I think one can argue that viewers may appreciate this movie more if they watch that show. However, this movie is essentially a continuation of an MCU property that I am surprised is being brought back to the spotlight all these years later. Is this a good continuation? Not really. If anything, it adds to the overall convolution of this movie to the point where it almost lacks an identity. The MCU often receives complaints for how villains are handled in their projects, but at least in a lot of their projects, I can pinpoint who the big baddie usually is. That is not the case this time around.

Sometimes, “Brave New World” is a watered-down version of “The Winter Soldier.” The main characters may be different people this time around to some degree, but the main trio is structured similarly to that 2014 banger. The film emphasizes the presence of a new Falcon sidekick. We already met this sidekick on “The Falcon and the Winter Soldier,” but he has a much bigger presence this time around. That said, I am honestly not loving Danny Ramirez’s portrayal of Joaquin Torres. I have nothing against Ramirez, the actor. If anything, I am not a fan of the material he is given through the direction and the script. Going back to my distaste for the dialogue, this is especially noticeable with Joaquin. The character kind of reminds me of Tom Holland’s Spider-Man if you decided to remove his knack for humor. He is awkward, and sounds like he is giving off multiple variations of the same line over and over again, even if the next line is completely different from the last. The movie is likely going for a Batman & Robin vibe with its relationship. But if anything, Falcon sounds like a Robin parody.

Marvel Studios/Courtesy of Marvel Studios – © 2024 MARVEL.

Holy Red Hulk, Captain!

“Captain America: Brave New World,” despite all the otherworldly shenanigans and science fiction elements, appears to be more grounded than some of the other recent MCU films. If there is one character that cartoonifies this film, it would probably be Joaquin. There are more installments in the cinematic universe to come, so hopefully, Joaquin gets some better material than this.

This film is led by Anthony Mackie, who has done an excellent job playing Sam Wilson through the MCU’s previous installments. I am glad to see him get his own movie after all this time. While I wish the film itself were better, the long wait pays off in spades in another regard, because Mackie dominates the screen. People talk about actors like Ryan Reynolds and Tom Cruise oozing movie star level charisma. While Anthony Mackie may not be a movie star to the degree those two actors are, I think he could have been in another life because he kills it as the lead.

One common complaint I hear about the MCU, not to mention comic book movies in general, is that they all tend to end the same way where you have this big battle where the effects are dialed up to an 11. Sometimes to the point where said effects lack any realism at all. I do not always mind these sorts of climaxes because you have to end the movie on a big note. That said, the big note in this case had something missing. This film’s climax in no way feels grand or exciting. In fact, when the climax draws to a close, I thought we were on the verge of something else happening. I thought there would be another big bad to worry about or a last minute twist. That is not what happens. The climax of this film, while it has one or two decent elements, was underwhelming. Part of it might as well be blamed on the marketing. There was a character in the marketing that had me convinced they would be a middling threat of some kind, but they turned out to be a bit bigger. That said, when the movie goes down, said character felt as middling of a threat as they were in the trailer.

I also hate to say this, but the special effects did not save this movie. This is something I have noticed quite a bit in some recent Marvel projects. While I cannot name a single MCU movie or show where every effect is bad, there are quite a few projects where some effects that are noticeably sub-par. “Thor: Love and Thunder” is a good example. Per usual, Thor’s lightning effects look great. There are some good fire effects. But if you take certain shots from the movie, like one of Heimdall’s son’s floating head, that is not up to the quality I would expect from a cinematic universe that has garnered praise for delivering one spectacle after another. This leads me to say that “Captain America: Brave New World” may have the weakest special effects I have seen in an MCU film. Not only is the CGI obvious at times, but distractingly so. It took me out of the movie. This complaint mostly pertains to the way the movie handles Sam Wilson’s Captain America suit, which is established at the start of the film to be made of highly advanced vibranium in perhaps the most expository way possible. Every time the movie highlights some piece of vibranium technology, it looks holographic. It looks so unrealistic. I hate to say that because vibranium is not a new concept to the MCU. Just go watch the “Black Panther” movies. I do not have humungous problems with the vibranium effects in those films. Though when it is applied to Sam’s suit, it is rather goofy-looking.

I understand that “Captain America” as a brand is heavily associated with the big screen. As a concept, it is one of the most prominent in the MCU. There is a reason why something like this movie, titled “Captain America” ended up in theaters, whereas “The Falcon and the Winter Soldier,” which is about previous supporting characters and sidekicks, went to Disney+. Although just because the name “Captain America” is cinema-friendly, does not mean the same is true for the product behind the name. When you break this movie down on selling points, it feels like something that should be put in theaters. The Captain America name, the star power of Harrison Ford, Red Hulk, select scenes being shot with digital IMAX cameras… But tonally, this movie comes off as a lame Disney+ series that got condensed into a two hour movie. Certain scenes and storylines feel rushed, underdeveloped, and poorly written. When I was talking to my friend as we were leaving this film, one of the first things I said to her in regards to my initial thoughts was that the movie “flies by.” One can see that as a compliment. But I think the movie took notes from “Spaceballs” and dialed itself into “ludacrous speed.” I love a good fast-paced movie. I can also say I was never completely bored by this film. But the film seems to end at a point that leaves me unsatisfied.

To no one’s surprise, there is extra material during the end credits of this film. Unfortunately though, or perhaps fortunately if you are in a rush to get home after the mediocrity of this film, there is not really anything exciting in the post-credits scene. I have seen some MCU products do a good job at teasing something new. This does not really do that. Instead of a tease, it is more of a reminder of something that I already thought would be coming. I guess if you are not familiar with the MCU this could be an okay credits scene. But this is one of the weaker ones I have seen in this cinematic universe.

Marvel Studios/Courtesy of Marvel Studios – © 2024 MARVEL.

In the end, “Captain America: Brave New World” is not up to the quality I expect from the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I do not expect every MCU film to be perfect, but I think it is safe to say that the timeline has spoiled me with one decent project after another. I was looking forward “Brave New World.” The trailers looked great. It had the ingredients for an intriguing watch. But the culmination of such a recipe left a bad taste in my mouth. I will not deny there are good things about the movie. The action, for the most part, is fun to watch. I particularly enjoyed seeing the shield move chaotically through the screen in multiple scenes. Anthony Mackie is an excellent lead. I would watch a fifth “Captain America” movie if he were the star. But between the bad special effects, unmemorable characters and story, bland at best dialogue, and underwhelming climax. The negatives stood out for me more than the positives. That is a sentiment I hate to use regarding any movie, but as a fan of the MCU, it particularly hurts saying that in this case. I am going to give “Captain America: Brave New World” a 5/10.

“Captain America: Brave New World” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Paddington in Peru” and “Love Hurts.” 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 “Captain America: Brave New World?” What did you think about it? Or, in the spirit of negativity, what is your LEAST favorite Marvel movie since “Avengers: Endgame?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

One of Them Days (2025): Keke Palmer and SZA Star as Two Broke Girls

Posted on by Jack Drees

“One of Them Days” is directed by Lawrence Lamont and this is his first feature film. The movie stars Keke Palmer (Nope, Lightyear), SZA, and Katt Williams (Scary Movie 5, Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore). This film is about two roommates who must do anything and everything they can so they can pay their rent and continue living in their apartment.

As a moviegoer, I wholeheartedly welcome “One of Them Days” as a concept alone. With the growth of streaming and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the moviegoing space is in a dire need for more straight-up comedies. While not every comedy lands with me, it is a preferred genre of mine. These kinds of movies are fairly digestible and fun, even if they sometimes feel repetitive or try too hard to be over the top and raunchy just for the sake of being raunchy. That said, I was a little skeptical watching the marketing for “One of Them Days” each time it came on. At best, I found what was in front of me to be mildly funny. Thankfully, the movie itself has more than a few laughs. This film released in January, and as far as January movies go, this is quite good. It is hard to know if I will remember this film by the end of the year, but this is a movie that if I had my way, I could experience it in a sold out setting because I think it has enough decent humor to get an entire room cracking up.

If I had to choose my favorite things about “One of Them Days,” a few immediately come to mind. For starters, the pace of this film never slows down. The film is kind of like “Saturday Night” in a sense. It constantly reminds the audience of how much time our characters have left before certain doom. I would say this is probably less anxiety-inducing than “Saturday Night” though as our characters start their journey off with more time to waste. But the movie still has a looming countdown to something that could potentially change the course of our characters’ lives.

Another standout element that comes to mind? The actors. Everyone on screen genuinely looks like they are having a good time making something that could be considered mindless. While the film may look and sound mindless on its surface, it nevertheless does a good job at getting me to care about the characters as they deal with their problems. Keke Palmer and SZA play Dreux and Alyssa. The two are fairly grounded characters who also bridge a gap to where they match the film’s hyperactive, almost animated vibe. This is the latest film in which I have seen Keke Palmer, who is quickly becoming one of my favorite on-screen personalities. On top of her movies, I think she is a solid game show host as well on NBC’s “Password.” This film continues to prove why I want to see more work from her. As for SZA, I do not know enough about her, but this film definitely makes me want to know more.

I saw this movie with my mom, and we both agreed upon walking out that it is silly and ridiculous. In a way, one can say my expectations were met. But if you go on the Wikipedia page for “One of Them Days,” it says the film is in the “tragicomedy buddy” genre. In reality, I would say most, if not all comedy, comes from tragedy, hence the phrase “comedy equals tragedy plus time.” But sticking with the idea of tragedy, I also think this movie does a great job at interjecting drama, and none of it feels forced or tacked on. The main plot involving the rent money is one thing, but there is also a subplot where we see Dreux trying to get a job she has been working towards, and I felt the stakes as this subplot was unfolding. There is a great interview sequence where I cannot help but root for the character. There is so much more to this scene than one could expect. In fact, “more” is a word that could heavily apply to my experience watching this movie. This movie keeps putting more, and more, and more high stakes material into its narrative to the point where you continue to worry that the main duo will fail at accomplishing their goals.

While “One of Them Days” is not my favorite screenplay of all time, I will not deny that it is structured quite nicely. This movie keeps building one problematic scenario for our main duo after another, with each one as engaging as the last. At one moment, they are dealing with their rent money. At another, one of them is dealing with their career. At another, they are dealing with their literal lives. I do not think “One of Them Days” is perfect considering how I do not remember all the character’s names. Also, execution-wise, some of the dialogue was delivered in such a way where I could not digest all of it. While the film’s replay value is not as high for me as others, I think “One of Them Days” is not only worth watching again just for fun, but I think the film would absolutely benefit from a rewatch in case there are any jokes or lines I missed the first time around.

“One of Them Days” also delivers a surprisingly thrilling climax. For what I previously referred to as a straight-up comedy, this film is at times, rather deep. And it shows here. Because the film resolves itself in a way where everything makes sense, everything binds together, but it leaves our characters in positions that I may not have seen coming from the movie’s earliest moments. And on top of that, I would imagine the characters themselves happen to feel the same way.

I am not going to pretend that I am watching “One of Them Days” for the visual effects, but if I had one nitpick about the film, I will say that there is a scene where one character gets electrocuted and throughout the process, we see the most fake-looking, obviously CGI-ed electricity that could have possibly been brought to screen. Despite that, this movie is often grounded to the point where you buy the scenarios, even if they are a bit over the top. There are also moments that almost cross a line to where if they happened in real life, it would leave one responding to the moment saying, “You can’t make this stuff up!”. This film feels real because not only does it have relatable characters, but it does a good job at putting you in the mindsets of these characters to the point where you too are bewildered by the actions of other people.

In the end, “One of Them Days” definitely lives up to its title. It is crazy, briskly paced, and refuses to let its characters, and therefore the audience, breathe. Sometimes it is so bonkers to the point of potential convolution, but the movie also has enough laughs in it to make up for that. Keke Palmer and SZA are a fine leading duo. I thought their roles were well cast. Also, I have to shout out Rizi Timane, who is also a highlight as Uche the landlord. Same goes with Maude Apatow as Bethany, I thought she was adorably charismatic. I have seen better movies, not to mention better comedies, but “One of Them Days” is a good time at the movies and I am going to give it a 7/10.

“One of Them Days” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the brand new MCU installment, “Captain America: Brave New World.” 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 “One of Them Days?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite comedy of the decade so far? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Love Me (2024): Kristen Stewart and Steven Yeun Engage in Robotic Romance

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Love Me” is a feature-length directorial debut from Sam and Andy Zuchero and stars Kristen Stewart (Twilight, Spencer) and Steven Yeun (Minari, The Walking Dead) in a film where a buoy and a satellite form a relationship following the end of humanity.

“Love Me” is the last new release I saw in January, and if you have been keeping track, I have been lamenting this month as it was unfolding. Thankfully, the month so far has been a tad better than I expected. And by that I mean, still bad for movies, but not outright horrible. That said, the annual monthly dumpster fire for film is not over yet, we still have to determine whether “Love Me” will join the rejects of January, or the one shining light known as “The Colors Within.” That film honestly made me forget about the problems of the world for a little bit.

Thankfully, “Love Me” is worth seeing, and it is quite a thinker. This is a film that I liked while watching it, and continue to appreciate more after the car ride home.

Like many other films, “Love Me” is its comparisons. While “Love Me” is not entirely animated, I cannot help but compare this film at times to “Wall-E” and “The Wild Robot.” This film, like those, is set in the future, and primarily centers around artificially intelligent characters. It also highlights humanity’s resistance to maintaining the earth. Although unlike those films, our focus on human characters is never seen in the present, it is always in the past.

The film centers around two robots, a buoy sitting in the middle of earth’s waters, and a satellite up in space looking down on the planet. The two meet, with the buoy seeming to continuously maintain a sense of curiosity. The robot is asking questions about anything that comes to mind. She learns about life, humanity, the Internet, and it results in a very creative relationship, if you can call it that, between the two core characters.

The film stars Kristen Stewart and Steven Yeun. That said, if you are looking forward to seeing them physically, you may not see as much of their actual selves as you would expect.

That said, their physical selves do have a good amount of screentime, but they are not there from the beginning. They show up later on and serve the robots’ stories. Both of them do a good job in the film as this lovey dovey couple who have a vlog. The couple also serves as a foundation for the buoy’s desires to be human. The buoy gets an impression on what it is like to live as a human just by watching these two engage in certain activities. We see the buoy in a sense trying to simulate those activities through digital animation. The animation clearly does not look high-tech. It is not up to the level of Pixar if you want a cinematic example. If anything, it looks like it is out of a “Sims” game. That seems to be the artistic intention, but still.

Despite the seemingly intentional schlocky animation, I will not deny that the film is pleasing to the eye. The color palette is often dazzling, especially during the scenes where we see the buoy floating in the water. The film is often bright, well lit, and there are also several shots involving the sun that look particularly great.

The film very much highlights the joys of being human, while also recognizing that maybe we are not perfect. Sticking with the human characters, who we come to know as Deja and Liam, I notice that never once do they leave their home, nor do their simulated counterparts. It seems to highlight the shift humanity is experiencing right now with shopping, watching media, and the shrinkage of social lives. We seem to be getting more sheltered and less adventurous. We find out the couple’s “date night” vlog is literally just them staying home, cooking, and watching television. It is not to say that staying home cannot be considered a date night. But I am under the impression the film is suggesting that in the future, we will see a significant increase in date nights at home.

Going back to “Wall-E,” one thing that the film tries to convince its audience is that two robots can fall in love. In a way, “Love Me” seems to be the anti-”Wall-E.” Because it is very much about a flawed relationship. It shows the struggles two robots have with such a concept. Likely because they are not programmed to love in the way that it would come naturally to a human. They are programmed to do other things. If that’s the case, you almost have to suspend your disbelief when watching this film. That said, this story also falls in line with the idea of artificial intelligence’s continued evolution to the point where it could one day become more human than human. We see the film’s protagonist, who we come to know as Me, establish itself as a “lifeform,” even though we know the character was manufactured.

If I had to list any negatives during the movie, I would say that the story does take a bit of time to get into gear. I think if I had to name a weakest part of the film, it would be the first ten minutes or so. The film also kind of reminds me a bit of “Ron’s Gone Wrong” because the robot voices happen to be very repetitive. This is especially noticeable with the satellite. When the satellite, who we come to know as Iam, literally pronounced “I am,” says a certain word or phrase, it often sounds exactly the same as it does previously. Much like the movie’s digital animations that turned me off, this appears to be an artistic intention. It perhaps highlights how computerized the bot’s voice sounds, but it still got on my nerves a little bit.

Despite these negatives, I still recommend the movie. There is not a lot that has come out in January that I think you should rush out in see, but “Love Me” is definitely worth your time.

© thelove.me

In the end, “Love Me” is a movie with a small cast, but a big impact. Not only is this a movie that I can see myself watching again, but there is a possibility that I will appreciate it to a greater degree the more times I watch it. It is a film that highlights what it means to be human, while also recognizing the issues we as a species are dealing with, and potentially creating. I have not heard a ton of word of mouth on this movie, so hopefully I can spread some for those checking this post out. I highly recommend “Love Me” and I am going to give it a 7/10.

“Love Me” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “One of Them Days!” Stay tuned! But before we get to that, Scene Before is on the cusp of 800 posts, and I intend to celebrate with yet another look at my Blu-ray collection. I have been waiting to do this post for a long time. I am glad I am finally getting around to it once again. If you want to see these 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 “Love Me?” What did you think about it? Or, given the theme of romance and with Valentine’s Day coming up, is there a movie that you plan to watch on Valentine’s Day this year? For me, every other year, I’ve been watching “Deadpool.” On top of coming out around the holiday, it is a solid love story with superb action scenes. Leave your comments down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!