“I Love Boosters” is written and directed by Boots Riley (Sorry to Bother You, I’m a Virgo) and stars Keke Palmer (Nope, Password), Naomi Ackie (The End of the F***ing World, Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker), Taylour Paige (Zola, Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom), Poppy Liu (The Afterparty, Sunnyside), Eiza González (Ambulance, Baby Driver), LaKeith Stanfield (Sorry to Bother You, Get Out), Will Poulter (Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, The Maze Runner), Don Cheadle (Space Jam: A New Legacy, Iron Man 2) and Demi Moore (The Substance, Ghost). This film is about a group of shoplifters who go after a fashion maven and try to sell their clothes at a lower price.
“I Love Boosters” is not my first exposure to Boots Riley’s filmography. While I missed it in the theater, I ended up checking out his film “Sorry to Bother You” after buying it on Blu-ray. I was fairly impressed with it. I thought it had good performances, clever writing, and an excellent use of color and production design. While “I Love Boosters” was not the biggest release over Memorial Day weekend, I will not deny that I was constantly exposed to its marketing, particularly one of its posters. Other than that, I went in with no memory of watching any trailers or hearing the film’s general premise. I heard interesting things about the movie, and I was onboard. I am delighted to say that this film is a unique cinematic experience that I will think about for a long time.
This is not my favorite film of 2026, but there is truly no picture that I have seen this year that provides an experience like this one. “I Love Boosters” is one of those movies that could have easily clashed its tones to such an unbelievable degree. But this picture is smarter than that. It finds a way to present likable heroes of their own story, a compelling antagonist in Christie Smith (Moore) whose mere existence brings forth diabolical charisma, all the while showcasing some of the most rad production elements I recall seeing in a film recently.
Perhaps my favorite thing about “I Love Boosters” is that it is so vivid and colorful. Then again, given one of this film’s initial opponents at the box office, there could be some recency bias to take into account with this sentiment. This film came out the same weekend as “Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu,” and not only do I think this is the better movie, but to my surprise, “The Mandalorian and Grogu” comes off as an occasional eyesore between its questionable color palette choices, dull presentation, and lack of flair. Within the first five minutes of “I Love Boosters,” I thought I was on drugs. This film’s emphasis on color is some of the finest I have ever seen. It has a look that belongs on a children’s TV program but perfectly blends itself into a mature story. Everything from the many eye-popping outfits that the characters don on screen… To the multitude of interiors that sometimes answer the question, “What if an M&M were a floor or a wall?”… Even seeing the different colors on the characters’ hair make me think that in another universe that this movie would be selling action figures like hotcakes.
Speaking of things that you have to see to believe, this film’s editing is jaw-dropping. This film moves fast, and boy am I not even close to becoming furious. If anything, the editing makes for a blessing and a curse. It keeps the movie from being boring, but the film is also so quick that it makes me wonder if I missed something important. Ah well, I plan to watch this a second time regardless.
Another favorite thing about this film is something I cannot see… The music. The Tune-Yards composed an original score for this film, and boy does it score. They previously scored another Boots Riley title, “Sorry to Bother You,” so it is clear he likes their approach, and I can see why, because much like some of John Williams’ memorable tracks, the score is almost its own character. The year is still young, but I could see this being my favorite score of 2026 by the end of it. I listened to this film’s theme several times since my screening. When I look at the screen and I see characters played by Keke Palmer, Naomi Ackie, and Taylour Paige, lingering in the background is a supporting role that can best be described as a sick beat.
While not exactly as good, I find “I Love Boosters” to be this year’s “Everything Everywhere All at Once.” It is a film that runs at one of the most breakneck paces imaginable. It is all killer, no filler. There is a perfect blend of comedy and drama. In fact, speaking of that, it is tough to really put this film in a box and give it a specific genre. It is not that the film does not know what it wants to be. It is that it wants to be something so unique, so fresh, something that even as a jaded moviegoer, I cannot recall ever seeing in my life. At the same time though, that probably makes this film slightly harder to recommend to certain people. I feel like Marty McFly in “Back to the Future,” part of me is ready to say to a collective audience that they might “not be ready for that yet.”
But if I were to recommend “I Love Boosters” to somebody, it would probably have to be someone who likes stories about people rising up against the bigger man. Perhaps someone who does not really feel the need to take everything so seriously. There is quite a bit of absurdity in this film. Yet in the context of its universe, characters, and vibes, all of the absurdity is seamless and makes the movie an animal of its own. As for myself, I cannot wait to watch this movie again. Not just because I had a blast watching it, but as I suggested before, this film flies by. I have a feeling I missed something cool the first time around. There are probably one or two memorable lines or moments that flew over my head that are probably going to land better the second, third, maybe fourth time I watch this.
In the end, it is almost impossible to describe “I Love Boosters” without using terms like wild or zany or nonstop. This is an experience. Sadly, with this film opening up against “Star Wars,” it kind of hurt its box office potential from the start. Then again, if somebody pitched this movie to me and I happened to be an executive, I think it would be a hard sell no matter what. It is debatable as to whether the characters are actually “heroes.” Then again, it is possibly true that everyone sees themselves as the hero of their own story. The concept of this film is so unique that it is difficult, at least to me, to compare this film to many others. But the fact is that this film is worth watching at least once. It has a fantastic cast lead by the always charismatic Keke Palmer. Its look is going to make for a fantastic demo down the line if I end up buying a new television or projector. And boy, is that theme song still stuck in my head. I am going to give “I Love Boosters” a 7/10.
“I Love Boosters” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! This is a bit of a short-notice announcement, but on SATURDAY, JUNE 20TH, I will be dropping the next episode of Movie Requests! This one is going to feature “The Wall” and “Talking Dead” host Chris Hardwick. You can hear his suggestion by clicking the video above! What do you think it is? If you want to find out what film he asked me to review, as well as my thoughts on it, you can watch the review right here on Flicknerd.com, or you can subscribe to my YouTube channel!
My next review is going to be for “Backrooms.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Masters of the Universe,” “Another World,” “The Breadwinner,” “Disclosure Day,” and “Toy Story 5!” 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 “I Love Boosters?” What did you think about it? Or, what is one of the wildest films you recall watching recently? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu” is directed by Jon Favreau (Iron Man, The Jungle Book) and stars Pedro Pascal (The Fantastic Four: First Steps, The Last of Us), Jeremy Allen White (The Bear, The Iron Claw), Brendan Wayne (Ahsoka, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.), Lateef Crowder (Mile 22, Tekken), Jonny Coyne (The Toxic Avenger, The Blacklist), Martin Scorsese (Goodfellas, The Wolf of Wall Street), and Sigourney Weaver (Ghostbusters, Avatar). In this film, the title characters go on a mission to recover Jabba the Hutt’s son, Rotta the Hutt, in exchange for information.
To me, “Star Wars” is life. As someone who has been reviewing movies on this site for the past decade, I always try my darndest to separate myself from my predisposed biases. When it comes to the “Star Wars” franchise, I think I did a decent job at that for the most part. The one exception that comes to mind is “The Last Jedi.” I gave that movie a 9/10, but upon rewatching it, I found myself highly questioning my original grade. I found the characters more annoying, certain scenes less interesting, and I was reminded of pacing issues I brushed aside the first time around. There are neat things about the movie, but is it a good movie? Not really.
Since my surprisingly positive review of “The Rise of Skywalker,” and yes, I stand by my original 6/10 grade, “Star Wars” has not had a major motion picture come out. They mainly focused on TV, not all of which I watched, but I enjoyed parts of it. Thankfully, “The Mandalorian” is one of those things I enjoyed. “The Mandalorian” season 1 brought something new to the franchise while maintaining the fun of the property. Season 2 kept up the pace, at least for me. Season 3 is definitely the weak point, but it still had its moments. When I first heard a “Mandalorian” movie was going to happen, my first thought was, “Okay. I don’t hate it.” Frankly, a “Mandalorian” movie is probably the safest film idea that Disney and Lucasfilm could have done. Many hardcore and casual viewers know and enjoy the show. It was a huge sell for Disney+ back when the first season came out. And speaking of selling, Grogu merch continues to sell like hotcakes.
Even with a season 3 that is clearly inferior from the others, I was still onboard to see more adventures with the titular characters.
Having now come out of the first “Star Wars” movie in almost six and a half years, I felt that I wanted more out of my experience.
This is a film that checks some boxes. It has action. It has adventure. It has the same feel as the TV show, but one could almost argue that this project feels more TV-like than movie-like. It is weird to say that, because when “The Mandalorian” came out, it felt more film-esque than it did a TV program in some ways. It had a scope aspect ratio. Heck, sometimes the aspect ratio would change to emphasize the feel of certain scenes. The CGI, while not as crisp as some of the movies, was very good. The worlds were oftentimes immersive, even with the Volume’s imperfections.
Now that this is turning into a movie, maybe we’d see the next step in technology to make it look as crisp as say “Rogue One.” In some ways, it is an incredibly immersive film. But sadly, not everyone is going to be able to experience it in the best way possible. My first viewing of this movie was at the AMC Lincoln Square IMAX in New York City. This is one of the largest screens in the entire world. They showed this movie through IMAX’s dual-laser 4K projection system, which is only in a handful of theaters. But everywhere I look, this is the big sell for the movie. Well, maybe aside from being in the “Star Wars” franchise… But I am seeing slogans like “Filmed for IMAX” and “Forged for IMAX” everywhere I go. Trailers, posters, standees, you name it. Do not get me wrong, I am a sucker for IMAX, so I was sold. Should you see this movie in IMAX? If it is still in an IMAX near you, yes. This movie has sequences that are shot for the IMAX format, including the rarely used 1.43:1 aspect ratio. But it is not going to erase the film’s imperfections. Some of the color grading looks abhorrent. There is this one sequence ingrained in my memory perhaps meant to emphasize how green one particular environment is, and it honestly looks like “The Matrix” had a baby with guacamole. It was kind of off-putting. There is no particular scene that wowed me in terms of its looks.
If anything, this movie reminds me a bit of “Star Wars: The Clone Wars.” Specifically, the 2008 movie. Funny enough, without giving much away, there is a callback to that movie that made me chuckle. Much like 2008’s “The Clone Wars,” “The Mandalorian and Grogu” has its moments that are not as cinematic as maybe they should be. This is partially evident in the story. The story does not quite have an identity. What is this movie actually about? Sure, it is about the titular characters, the Mandalorian and Grogu, but what are they doing exactly? What is their purpose? The movie suggests that the team must deal with a hutt, but it sometimes feels unfocused.
I have heard from others that this movie comes off as if it were an extended “Mandalorian” episode or multiple “Mandalorian” episodes combined into a two hour movie, and I see where they are coming from. I don’t mind the first comment, because if it were an extended episode, it would likely maintain focus and stick to one main idea. But it doesn’t. The film ends up feeling like a couple different episodes. These either resemble “Mandalorian” episodes that ended up getting rejected, or episodes that perhaps could have made for a small season or a half-season.
Pacing-wise, this film may be the worst I have experienced during a “Star Wars” installment. Again, with this coming off as several episodes in one piece, there are times where the film felt like it did not know when it wanted to end. I am not saying that I hated what happened in this movie. I was quite entertained through a good portion of it. But all of it probably would have been better if it were divided into bits and pieces. This movie, even though it does not span that much time, feels too heavy. I cannot recall a single moment during this film where I wanted to slap myself in the face or punch the screen or force choke myself to death. At the same time, I also cannot recall many instances where I wanted to jump for joy or cheer or go, “This is the way!” There are scenes where I kind of felt nothing, and that is shocking for a franchise whose original movies gave me a range of emotions from excitement to chills… Whose prequel movies sometimes made me cringe, but at other times made me drop my jaw at some of the lightsaber battles… Whose sequel movies had me locked into whatever the characters were going through such as Rey’s personal struggle of figuring out who she is, as well as Kylo Ren trying to live up to his grandfather, while also sometimes showing his humanity by destroying objects with his lightsaber whenever something goes wrong. This movie does not have any moment that made me go, “I’m going to remember that for as long as I live.” Instead, it is filled to the brim with moments that I passively glanced upon.
I think if you are a huge fan of “The Mandalorian” on TV, you might enjoy this movie. But even as I say that, I question my comment. While I am a fan of the show, I have to admit this movie did not quite do it for me. Is it horrible? No. It has some redeeming qualities, and one of those redeeming qualities is Ludwig Göransson’s score. …Sort of.
Of course, Goransson’s iconic theme music from the show is here and gets some extra pizazz on occasion. That said, I was not a fan of some of his new themes. There was one theme in particular that sounded like Hans Zimmer’s Electro theme from “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” became blood brothers with Atticus Ross and Trent Reznor’s headache-inducing “Challengers” score. Yes. I cannot stand the “Challengers” score. All film is subjective, and in the spirit of subjectivity, I believe that all the cinephiles that raved about that techno nightmare are entitled to their wrong opinions.
There is a particular piece of techno-style music in this film as well, which was not as headache-inducing as the “Challengers” score, but it felt very out of place with the environment. I questioned why it was even playing to begin with. That said, I did stay for the credits and I heard the theme play one more time. I would not say I warmed up to the piece, but it did sound better the second time around. Maybe it works in the right context, but for whatever reason, it does not work here. It was one of the few times I remember watching anything “Star Wars” and thinking the music doesn’t work. Sure, there are times where the music is forgettable, but even in those cases, they still match their scenes and movies overall. This is a massive and unfortunate exception to that idea.
If you are a newbie to the “Star Wars” franchise, I doubt “The Mandalorian and Grogu” is going to be the best entry point for you. Not necessarily because it piggybacks off of a streaming series. I don’t think you have to watch the “Mandalorian” show to understand every single thing that is going on in this film. However, this is not only one of the weaker films, at least in my opinion, but it also comes with very little substance. We do not really see Mando develop much as a character. He does not go through much noticeable change. He feels about as flat as this movie’s color palette. Now Grogu on the other hand is the most interesting of the titular characters. Since he can barely speak, it allows for more show than tell with his character. I found his challenges much more compelling, and as much as I do not want to judge a book by its cover, his challenges fit the “Mandalorian and Grogu” name. It shows how the two work as a team. At times this movie reminded me of those group projects in school, where one person ends up doing all the work. Grogu is that individual sometimes. There is one particular point in the story about two-thirds of the way through the movie that shows what Grogu is capable of.
Although this movie is rather predictable. Do not go in expecting the next “I am your father.” I have no problem with predictability if the story beats are handled decently. But they are not. They feel way too been there done that, not to mention done better. Say what you want about “The Last Jedi,” which I will remind you, is a film I did not like, but at least the film took risks. It came from the singular mind of Rian Johnson. I did not agree with all of his choices, but it felt like his movie for the most part. “The Mandalorian” feels more committee-esque, and I hate to say that because this film is done by a fabulous director. Jon Favreau has proven he can make great movies. “Iron Man,” “Chef,” “Elf,” and while I am not a huge fan of the Disney live-action remakes, I will defend “The Jungle Book.” That film is a technical marvel. I even liked the one “Mandalorian” episode he helmed. So, what happened here?
Admittedly, when it comes to certain technical choices, I think Favreau does a good job. If anything, it felt kind of video-game esque in the sense that we were closely watching characters behind their back in the third person perspective, or getting their view from a first-person perspective. There is a scene where Grogu is blazing through a city and the camera shows the world from his eyes. It was really cool to see it on a big IMAX screen in 1.43:1.
The action scenes are also well done. The opening 10 or 15 minutes are easily the best part of the film because while Mando does not develop much throughout the movie, the movie sets him up as this name that should be feared. Kind of like John Wick. It shows that through and through as he is taking down baddies left and right. While the Mandalorian never takes down a Stormtrooper with a pencil, this movie convinces me he could.
After those opening 10 to 15 minutes, we are introduced to Sigourney Weaver’s character, Ward, who does not really have much to do in the story other than to give Din orders and remind Grogu not to overeat. It is an easy paycheck for her. I do not hate the character, but I wish Weaver, who has built a legendary career in film, had more to do. Weaver’s basically the queen of sci-fi at this point between “Ghostbusters,” “Alien,” “Avatar,” “Galaxy Quest,” and “WALL-E…” Now that she is in “Star Wars,” I wish she had a character that were more memorable than the one we got. Aside from the recently mentioned “WALL-E,” as well as another Pixar feature, “Finding Dory,” the latter of which features Weaver voicing herself, this is probably the easiest money that the actress has made in her entire career.
Speaking of easy money, Martin Scorsese has a voiceover role in this movie as a shopkeep named Hugo. Was the name inspired by Scorsese’s own movie? You decide.
It is honestly hilarious to me that Martin Scorsese is in this movie. Not because I was under the impression that he would never work on a “Star Wars” movie. Weeks before checking out this film I watched an episode of “Light and Magic” on Disney+ and it reminded me of Scorsese’s friendship with George Lucas, but this film nevertheless reminds me of what I would imagine Scorsese thinks of Marvel movies.
“Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu,” and keep in mind, I say this as a fan of the franchise, plays less like a movie and more like a crappy theme park ride. And if anything, the film is using the over the top IMAX plugs in the marketing almost as a way to compensate for its lack of quality in terms of the story. I did say it was cool to see this film in true digital IMAX, but I honestly think that is one of the only reasons this movie should be seen at all, regardless of watching it in a theater and at home. The IMAX enhanced ratio, as incredible as it looks, ultimately feels like a gimmick. I hate saying that, because much like the “Star Wars” franchise, I am also an IMAX fan. I have seen filmmakers like Ryan Coogler, Christopher Nolan, and Jordan Peele play with the coveted aspect ratio and utilize it well in their own productions. This is not Jon Favreau’s first time making something in 1.43:1. 2019’s “The Lion KIng” remake also had 1.43:1 scenes. But I cannot judge those scenes as I missed the film in theaters. The aspect ratio in a way makes up for every other technical aspect that does not work like the lighting, the color grading, as well as the sometimes flat framing.
Look… I am a “Star Wars” fan, so I will plead guilty to watching movies I did not enjoy as much as the others more than once. I have done this with some of the prequels, I have done this with “The Last Jedi.” And like those lesser titles, “The Mandalorian” has redeeming qualities in it. The only “Star Wars” film I have not seen multiple times to this day is “Solo.” If you ever read my review of it, you would know I gave it a 6/10, a barely positive score. At the time I thought it was the most middle of the road “Star Wars” movie ever. I think “Mandalorian and Grogu” gives it a run for its money. I bought tickets to a second screening for reasons beyond simply seeing the movie again, but if I were to buy tickets for this movie one time, and I did not have those tickets, it would be somewhat difficult for me to come up with a valid reason to spend money on this once more.
This is a movie that barely develops its core characters. I think it does a somewhat decent job on Grogu’s arc, but less so on Mando’s. Rotta the Hutt was fascinating at times as he tried to separate himself from his father, Jabba. But there are not many other characters who stood out. Say what you will about that one “Mandalorian” episode with Lizzo and Jack Black, at least it was weird. This movie does not really have a distinct feeling to it, other than blandness. Say what you want about the prequels. At least they had color! Say what you want about “The Rise of Skywalker,” at least it has me quoting “They fly now,” every once in a blue moon.
The more I think about “The Mandalorian and Grogu” the more I am going to think about it the same way others may think about “Star Wars: The Holiday Special.” This is a clear money grab that could best be described as content. It is not clear who this is for. Is this for grown adults who like watching bounty hunters double tap people like they’re pawns in a game of chess? Is it for young children or infants who like watching Grogu get into shenanigans? Is it for fans of the show who just want to see more episodes? As I ask all these questions, I continue to think to myself that maybe this movie is not for me, even if there, admittedly, doses of entertainment.
In the end, “The Mandalorian and Grogu” is by no means the best or worst “Star Wars” movie. It winds up somewhere in the middle. I have seen this movie twice now, and it is admittedly better the second time. The pacing problems still exist, but it did go by a little faster. Probably because I had a clearer concept of what to expect going in. If you enjoy “The Mandalorian” on Disney+, this will likely come off as a comforting return to a long lost home. But is it as good as the first, or even the second season? I don’t think so. I would rather watch all of those episodes again before putting on this movie.
Of all the “Star Wars” films I have seen, I think this one may have the least personality. The action, while good, is not as memorable as some of the other “Star Wars” titles. There are bits of humor, but the comedy does not land quite as well as other installments. The dialogue is not that memorable or quotable. Who knows how this project will age from here? That said, I am having trouble coming up with a reference I would use in a conversation with friends down the line. The movie bridges off of a show that already has three seasons, maintains a look and feel that is somewhat reminiscent of said show, and to my surprise, it sometimes looks cheaper than some of the show’s episodes. I did not hate this movie. It is entertaining, but not to the highest degree. I am going to give “Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu” a 5/10.
“Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! Before we go any further, I would like to remind everyone that Scene Before’s original web series, Movie Requests, is going to feature five additional guests, on top of the 10 that have already been announced! I am not announcing their names at this time. But if you want a hint as to who these guests are, check out the poster above! While you are at it, please be sure to check out the latest episode of the series featuring “Clerks” star Brian O’Halloran. If you want to see more episodes as soon as they drop, you can watch them here on Flicknerd.com, but the fastest way to be notified about the episodes is to subscribe to my YouTube channel and hit the notification bell!
My next review is going to be for “I Love Boosters!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Backrooms,” “Masters of the Universe,” “Another World,” and “The Breadwinner.” 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 “Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu?” What did you think about it? Or, have you seen “The Mandalorian” TV show? What are your thoughts on it? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Mortal Kombat II” is directed by Simon McQuoid, who also directed the 2021 “Mortal Kombat” movie. This film stars Karl Urban (The Boys, Dredd), Adeline Rudolph (Chilling Adventures of Sabrina, Riverdale), Jessica McNamee (Packed to the Rafters, Home and Away), Josh Lawson (Superstore, House of Lies), Ludi Lin (Power Rangers, Aquaman), Mehcad Brooks (Law & Order, Supergirl), Tati Gabrielle (The 100, Chilling Adventures of Sabrina), Lewis Tan (Deadpool 2, Into the Badlands), Damon Herriman (Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Mr Inbetween), Chin Han (Ghost in the Shell, American Born Chinese), Tadanobu Asano (Thor, Shōgun), Joe Taslim (Warrior, The Raid), and Hiroyuki Sanada (Shōgun, Bullet Train). This film is the sequel to 2021’s “Mortal Kombat” and this time around, actor Johnny Cage joins the battle as he and other fighters take on the tyrannical Shao Khan.
I have played some of the “Mortal Kombat” games, and I am a fan of those games. I will sometimes hop on a cabinet in the arcade, or maybe put in a game I have at home. I am a casual player, but I am a player nonetheless. The games are a ton of fun. As for the movies, that’s where things become more complicated.
The 1995 “Mortal Kombat” is far from the greatest movie ever made, but there was a period of time where it was considered the gold standard of video game to film adaptations. Not that that is saying much. The film did have its problems and occasionally felt like a product of its time. Though I did have fun watching it, admittedly.
Then in 1997, the universe was introduced to the disgrace on a bloody stick known as “Mortal Kombat: Annihilation.” It is a movie whose subtitle quite literally described what happened to my brain cells while watching it. I have no plans to do a worst movies of all time list, but I think “Mortal Kombat: Annihilation” is a contender for the bottom of the barrel.
Then comes 2021, when another “Mortal Kombat” hits the big screen (and HBO Max), and I thought it was quite good. It is not perfect, but I thought even with some creative liberties, it did a decent job at capturing the spirit of the games. Plus, unlike the previous “Mortal Kombat” movies, this one was a lot bloodier and gorier. So, while not a home run, I was down for another “Mortal Kombat” should one be in the pipeline.
Now, “Mortal Kombat II” has made its presence known, and while it is not quite a flawless victory, the film may be my favorite so far based on the “Mortal Kombat” property. That is, of the theatrically released ones. There are others that have not been to theaters that I have yet to see.
“Mortal Kombat II,” like the previous installment, terrifically captures the vibe of the games. The locations are big, colorful, and while they may not always be realistic, they are nevertheless palatable. If you have never played a “Mortal Kombat” game, or heck, missed out on the last “Mortal Kombat” movie, you may not know that this film should require some suspension of disbelief.
The film, like many sequels, aims higher and goes bigger than its predecessor, with more violence, a longer runtime, and new characters. The standout of the newbies on the roster, by a clear mile, is Johnny Cage (Karl Urban).
Johnny Cage brings the camp to “Mortal Kombat II.” In most cases, when I use “camp” and “movie” in the same sentence, my mind will think of the combination as a negative, but “Mortal Kombat II” is an unusual exception where I find it to be a positive. The campiness of “Mortal Kombat II” works like a charm, and that is mostly due to Karl Urban’s commitment to making the character of Johnny Cage come off as the coolest has-been movie star of all time.
In Earthrealm, we see our protagonists watch a vision that reveals their “chosen one” to defeat evil. That being Johnny Cage. The movie perfectly sets the tone for what’s to come by showing Cage in perhaps the most 90s-esque action schlock of a movie imaginable. AI could not create this magic. Of course, that time is over, and like some other actors who are not doing as much film work, Cage is making money through conventions. The moment we see the first encounter between Cage and the heroes of Earthrealm, he tries to show as much respect as possible, thinking that they are cosplayers, hoping they would screw off. I thought the first scenes featuring Cage were clever and did a good job at revealing how much Cage has evolved from his prime.
While “Mortal Kombat II” is far from Shakespeare, some lines in the film are poetic in their own way. My favorite moment in “Mortal Kombat II” features Johnny Cage fighting against Baraka, the leader of the Tarkatans. The fight itself is massively entertaining. That is if you can even call it a fight. There is a repeated moment in the choreography that is honestly begging to find its way into today’s meme culture. I saw this film alongside my dad, and there have been instances following its conclusion where we jokingly repeated said moves.
What follows after is Baraka’s purely cinematic line, “That is the greatest fighting I have ever f***ing seen!” Collectively, that may have been the biggest laugh amongst my opening Thursday audience. Truth be told, I read this line back as I write this paragraph, and I am trying my hardest not to roll on the floor.
“Mortal Kombat II” is not perfect. I had the privilege of seeing this film in IMAX, which for this film, is fantastic, as some scenes feature an expanded aspect ratio. But while this critique may not matter for every screening, I think the IMAX scenes could have been handled better, because the way that some of these scenes were edited felt inconsistent or jumpy. It reminded me of “Transformers: The Last Knight,” where the aspect ratio changes every second. It is nowhere near as bad, but it is still jumpy. The CGI at times is utterly amazing and a complete feast for the eyes. I was gobsmacked with the worlds the VFX artists were able to create. But that does not mean that they do not look CGI-ish. Again, the movie looks real when it chooses to. Sometimes the heightened reality works. At other times, it could be better.
The story of the film is very simple, but what complicates it is how often this movie jumps from place to place and has to handle a variety of characters. It is hard to say that the characterization of this movie is the strongest. It is kind of like the last “Mario” movie, though I admittedly had more fun with this video game adaptation compared to that one.
Even with its imperfections, “Mortal Kombat II” is a total blast. Shao Khan is a menacing threat. Johnny Cage has personality for days. I liked seeing more of the characters from the last movie like Raiden, Kano, and Liu Kang. Not that I dislike the original, but I think this sequel is an improvement. I walked out of this movie thinking that I cannot wait to watch it a second time. This is a fantastic movie to watch with friends. If you can handle some blood and gore, you are in for a treat.
In the end, “Mortal Kombat II” is a komplete explosion of epicness! This is a visual effects-heavy, balls out killer time that is by no means going to win any major awards. But if you are a sucker for a big, dumb action movie that sometimes pays tribute to the video games of the same name, this movie might be up your alley. Karl Urban is excellent as Johnny Cage and oozes charisma from start to finish. The action is super fun. This movie maintains a modern look to it, but it also has this occasional throwback feel that ties everything together. I cannot wait to watch this movie again, and I have no shame in saying that. I am going to give “Mortal Kombat II” a 7/10.
“Mortal Kombat II” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! This Sunday on Flicknerd.com and YouTube, stay tuned for the next episode of Movie Requests! This episode is going to feature a suggestion from Brian O’Halloran, who you may know from the “Clerks” trilogy! I just watched his suggested movie last night. I cannot wait to share what it is and talk about it with you. If you want to watch the review as fast as possible, do yourself and I a favor by subscribing to my YouTube channel!
My next review is going to be for “The Sheep Detectives!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “In the Grey,” “Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu,” “I Love Boosters,” and “Backrooms.” 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 “Mortal Kombat II?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Mortal Kombat” film that has been released thus far? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Project Hail Mary” is directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller (Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, The LEGO Movie) and stars Ryan Gosling (La La Land, Blade Runner 2049), Sandra Hüller (Anatomy of a Fall, Zone of Interest), James Ortiz (Cryptid, The Woodsman), and Lionel Boyce (Loiter Squad, The Bear). This film is based on a novel by Andy Weir, who also wrote the book “The Martian,” which has since been adapted into a hit movie starring Matt Damon. “Project Hail Mary” follows a middle school teacher-turned-astronaut by the name of Ryland Grace who is put on a mission to stop a mysterious substance from destroying the earth’s sun.
I am not that much of a reader. Although there have been rare occasions where a movie would come out and I would read the book sometime before seeing it. I did this years ago for “The Martian,” by Andy Weir, which has become one of my favorite reads. The movie, while not as good as the book, is utterly amazing. Much like the book, I found the movie to be extremely funny and endlessly engaging. As someone who found myself to be a fan of Andy Weir’s writing style, I thought I would give the “Project Hail Mary” book a shot. I barely finished it before I saw the movie, but I really liked the book. It maintains the humor that Weir mastered in “The Martian,” while delivering something more complicated and adventurous. I think “The Martian” is the superior read, but both books are winners.
The hype train was real going into “Project Hail Mary.” Not just because it was based on a well received book… Not only because I happen to concur with those who say the book is great… Not just because I am a sci-fi junkie… Not just because it stars Ryan Gosling… Not just because it is directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller… But the trailers and the footage leading up to the movie, for the most part, looked incredible. The effects were pure eye candy. The sets looked great. The camerawork looked awe-inspiring. The film was even shot in true IMAX… Granted, it is technically digital. But still.
Maybe I am overexaggerating my excitement a bit. If there is any movie this year I would have been looking forward to more than any other, it would be “The Odyssey,” but “Project Hail Mary” was up there based on everything that I have seen, heard, and read prior to checking it out, including the overwhelmingly positive reviews.
Ladies and gentlemen, believe the hype. Actually… No. The hype might actually be too small.
“Project Hail Mary” is the best movie I have watched in years.
It has not been since “Godzilla Minus One” that I walked out of a movie buzzing so excessively.
As previously mentioned, I have read the book. I thoroughly enjoyed the book. I thought the way Weir told the story was unique. I think I prefer the movie. If you told me that Steven Spielberg directed this film, I would believe you. I said this some time ago with “Arco,” but I meant that more as a statement on the film’s style rather than its quality. This not only reminds me of some of Spielberg’s past movies, but it is just as watchable as some of his greatest hits. My dad, who for the record did not read the book, saw the movie with me. He had a great time. He said the movie reminded him of “Close Encounters of the Third Kind.” To me, “Project Hail Mary” feels like “E.T.” for a new generation. Only this time around, not as much of the story is set on earth.
Honestly, there are a number of filmmakers whose work I could compare this to, and I mean that as a positive. This film reminds me of some of my favorite projects said filmmakers have done. In addition to this film delivering Spielberg vibes, it comes off as what would happen if a Christopher Nolan epic had a baby with a James Gunn adventure. It has the scope and ambition of one of Nolan’s blockbusters and the humor and fun of Gunn.
This movie is a pure bundle of joy. I should not be surprised, as this movie is done by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, who have produced some of my favorite films of the past decade like “The Mitchells vs. the Machines” and the “Spider-Verse” movies.
They have also done “The LEGO Movie,” which is so much better than it should be. If I ever have a conservations with people discussing my personal favorite films of all time, I am proud to say “The LEGO Movie” and “Project Hail Mary” will both likely be part of said conversations.
No, seriously, who is Ryan Gosling’s agent? Because his resume, especially over the past ten years, is filled with banger after banger after banger, with this film being the latest example. “La La Land” is extravagant and otherworldly. “Blade Runner 2049” was amazing despite not doing so hot at the box office. “First Man” was moving. “Barbie” was not just a good movie, but Gosling practically stole the show. When I think of the best actors working today without an Oscar, Gosling is somewhere close to the best of the best. After seeing “Project Hail Mary,” I am convinced that not only is Gosling capable of being nominated, but also of winning an Oscar next year. Granted, it is only spring. The Oscars are practically a year from now. But I have a feeling that Gosling’s performance can sit well with people through the coming months as he is given lots to do and handles all of it with excellence.
It also helps that he plays such a likable character. There is a line in this film where Ryan Gosling’s character, Ryland Grace, says he puts the “not” in astronaut. As corny as that may sound, that line solidifies his entire journey. I do not want to spoil everything that happens in this movie, but the narrative constantly unfolds bits and pieces of the character as it goes along through its clever non-linear format. Much of the film is set in space, but there are portions that take place on earth, and those portions are surprisingly engaging. Grace is a middle school teacher, which only adds to his likability. Remember “Interstellar?” Arguably the biggest drive Cooper has in that film that allows him to try to save earth are his children. Grace does not have any kids, but his middle school class, while temporary, almost comes off as a set of children he never had.
In a multitude of other possible movies, Grace would be the star of the show. But one character constantly steals the spotlight, and that is Rocky. Much of the film features these two in close quarters as they learn about each other, their worlds, their backstories on how they found each other, to the point where they end up working together not only to save earth, but Rocky’s own planet.
Remember the Grogu craze when “The Mandalorian” came out? It felt like for months that Grogu fever, and by extension, merchandise, was everywhere. Heck, I own a pair of Grogu socks that are worn out, but I cannot get rid of them. They’re comfortable, and I like the design. There is a fine line that a film rides with a “merchandisable” character, which I would say Rocky just so happens to be. For me, to get me to buy a character’s merchandise, I would prefer to realize I like said character before wasting my money. Thankfully for this film, Rocky is a riot. Having read the book, I had no clue how they were going to portray him in the movie, but I was actually surprised with how much I loved his first moments on screen. He is adorable, but also rather smart. Rocky is a winning combination. James Ortiz does an excellent job on the voice. Given how Rocky is an alien, the communication styles vary significantly between him and Grace, but I enjoyed getting to see how the movie showcases both characters as they learn how to communicate back and forth.
Rocky also has the best line in the movie, and without giving any context to the situation, all I will say is that it involves a guy named Mark. You will know it when you hear it.
I said before that this film reminded me a lot of “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial” and I could sum up the basic reasons… Both films heavily feature bonds between a human and an alien. Both have inspiring musical scores. Both have characters who want to do what they can to get home. But the real reason why I find this to be “E.T.” for the next generation is that the film is an incredibly emotional experience. I did not cry during “Project Hail Mary,” but I would not be surprised to be sitting during this film again and seeing other people wiping tears off their faces. This film has everything that reminds me of why I love the movies. Well-realized characters with their own quirks… A great story that enlightens the soul… Stunning visuals and audio that excite on every level.
Some could argue that I am rather predisposed to liking “Project Hail Mary.” Not only did I read the book and like it, but if you know me well, you would know that sci-fi is my preferred genre. It does not mean every science fiction tale is great. I have seen a few “Star Wars” movies I would rather forget. In fact, having read the book, I recognize that not everything from the source material is going to find its way into the film. It is too long, and I think the general audiences can only take so much technical and scientific jargon. Are there things from the book that I am disappointed are not in the movie? Yes. There is a pinch of backstory involving Stratt towards the book’s end that moved me. But these are two separate things. I am not going to let the dismissal of that material affect my verdict of the film, because as a general movie, regardless of what it was based on, this was one of the most unbelievable experiences I have ever had.
“Project Hail Mary” presents a universal problem, as a mysterious creature is causing the sun to die. On the surface, one would think this film is about saving the world. And in a way, it is. But as soon as Rocky is brought into the picture, the film basically gets to the point where both he and Grace think bigger. The journey these two go on together as friends is truly something. I could honestly watch a weekly sitcom starring these two. But the film, as fun and joyous as it is, is simultaneously sad. You have this protagonist who minute by minute is trying to remember every little thing about himself. He finds out he is alone. He is tasked with mankind’s most important mission, and his only escape appears to be Rocky. And you might think he has people back on earth to save. Sure, he has the people he knows from his school. But he has no lover, no pets. Nobody. All he has is himself, the children he will likely only see for portions of his life, and Rocky. But the film manages to balance the sadness with more optimistic moments, hilarious lines, and a satisfying ending. This is the kind of movie that I can see a lot of people going to multiple times, bringing new people with each go. Heck, I am already thinking about who I would bring for a second viewing. If you are still reading this and have not seen this movie, please stop what you are doing and go check it out. Do not pirate the film. Go to a theater. See it on a big screen. Do it as soon as you possibly can.
In the end, I cannot stop thinking about “Project Hail Mary.” I read the book before checking out this movie, but I have to say I enjoyed the movie more than I did the book. There are certain scenes in this film that honestly play out ten times better as visuals rather than text. I have a pretty active imagination, but even I have to say some of these scenes were better than how I interpreted them. Ryan Gosling gives the performance of a lifetime. James Ortiz is fantastically cast as the voice of Rocky. Sandra Hüller does a great job as Stratt. Overall, the cast brings their A-game. The musical score is riveting. The cinematography is easy on the eyes. Phil Lord and Christopher Miller deliver a spectacle for the ages. Everything in the story from the beginning to end had me hooked. It is a longer film at two hours and thirty-six minutes, but it is never boring! Please go see this movie. It will make you laugh. It may even make you cry. Amazon does not have a long history as a film distribution company, but this is easily my favorite film they have put out thus far. If you are reading this review around its publication, do not wait for Prime, if there is a prime time to go see “Project Hail Mary,” it is now. I am going to give “Project Hail Mary” a 10/10.
“Project Hail Mary” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! I want to remind everyone that in honor of Scene Before’s 10th anniversary, I started a new series called Movie Requests and if you would like, you can now check out my latest episode, where “Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back” star Jason Mewes requests I talk about “House Party.” And if you want to see future episodes, please consider subscribing to my YouTube channel that way you can see them as soon as they drop!
My next review is going to be for “Ready or Not 2: Here I Come!” Also, coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “They Will Kill You,” “You’re Dating a Narcissist!,” “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie,” and “The Drama.” 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 “Project Hail Mary?” What did you think about it? Or, did you read the “Project Hail Mary” book? What did you think about that? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Hoppers” is directed by Daniel Chong (We Bare Bears, We Baby Bears) and stars Piper Curda (A.N.T. Farm, Teen Beach 2), Bobby Moynihan (Saturday Night Live, The Secret Life of Pets), Jon Hamm (Mad Men, Keeping Up with the Joneses), Kathy Najimy (King of the Hill, WALL-E), and Dave Franco (Together, The Disaster Artist). This film is about a young girl named Mabel who uses a new technology to allow her consciousness to hop into a robotic beaver. Despite discouragement from those working on the tech, Mabel uses her newfound beaverhood as an opportunity to save a glade from being replaced by a freeway.
You ever hear the saying “Just another Tuesday?” Well, that phrase applies to Pixar. Specifically, when it comes to describing their ability to pump out one solid movie after another. Not every one is perfect, but the studio has unleashed a ton of hits over the years, including a couple all-timers like “The Incredibles” or “Inside Out.”
Watching a new Pixar movie always feels like an event, because while they are not the only group dedicated to making animations, I always see Pixar as the gold standard. It has come to the point where I find inferior Pixar projects to be better than most movies. Do I think “Elio” is a masterpiece? No. But did I enjoy it and take something from it? Absolutely. Even with “Elemental” turning out to be lackluster, I continue to find myself onboard Pixar’s train for whatever they have in store.
As much as I look forward to seeing what Pixar brings to the table with franchise extensions including “Toy Story 5” and “Incredibles 3,” I am often more engaged when I find out about one of their original projects, including “Hoppers.” That said, while the movie did look fun and hilarious based on what I saw in the marketing, I will admit that the movie did turn me off slightly even while watching the trailers, as they admit how much their concept sounds like “Avatar.” Although in fairness, if you break down “Avatar,” it has ripped off quite a few other films like “Pocahontas” and “Dances with Wolves.”
Despite the film’s self-admitted ripping off of sorts, there is plenty in it to enjoy. In fact, I think it is just about as enjoyable as the first “Avatar.” Much like how I think “Avatar” is not James Cameron’s best work, I would have to say the same is true for “Hoppers.” Nevertheless, both movies are worth watching. These two stories just so happen to play around with similar ideas beyond just having someone take on the form of another living thing. They both highlight how humanity tends to mistreat other creatures, intentionally or not. “Hoppers” also taps into the idea that humans often fail to realize that they are not the center of the universe. As humans we are taught to appreciate nature, but in the past couple hundred years we have become so reliant on convenience and industrialization to the point that we forget to care for other animals.
I saw this film with a couple friends, and one of those friends said this film is Pixar’s closest cousin to “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.” I would partially agree with them as, like that film when put next to others in its franchise, is not exactly the best one. But also, like “Temple of Doom,” there are some surprisingly dark moments. There is a particular death that comes in this film. Wow. Characters die in a movie. What a spoiler. But without specifying, there is one death involving a clap that caught me by total surprise. You will know it when you see it. If you saw the trailer, you would know that a good chunk of the movie is dedicated to other creatures trying to “squish” humans for everything they have done. That said, the trailers make this film look totally lighthearted. It was a bit darker than I anticipated. There are some segments involving the animals’ aspirations that lead to some eerie visuals or concepts. I do not want to spoil much, but the end of the movie has some “facial expressions” if you will, that I cannot stop thinking about.
Speaking of things I cannot stop thinking about, I like the film’s protagonist, Mabel. She comes off as smart, though a bit rebellious. Yet she is not necessarily pushy. The movie does a great job at creating someone whose passion for nature is as strong as her desire to preserve it. While this film is not as emotionally charging, there are some sentimental moments between Mabel and her Grandma Tanaka that felt reminiscent of watching earlier moments of “Up.” Much like that Pixar classic, “Hoppers” works so well because not only is Mabel doing what she’s doing for herself, she is thinking of the people in her life each step of the way. She is an individual who clearly wants something to go her way, but oftentimes cares enough about others during her journey to see said thing play out.
Story-wise, this film reminds me of a lot of other movies, including some of Pixar’s own like “Up,” “Ratatoullie,” or “A Bug’s Life.” This film is not exactly the same as all of these, but it borrows a lot of elements from their stories like large insect casts, the “humans are dangerous” cliche, or the general appreciation of nature. “Hoppers” is far from Pixar’s best film. To me, it is mid-tier Pixar, which is still better than a lot of movies. I would probably put it in the same boat as “Onward” or “Inside Out 2.” Yet “Hoppers” borrows a lot of traits from some of Pixar’s most memorable stories and creates a fun remix out of them.
In some ways, I think you would be forgiven if “Hoppers” also reminded you of a recent DreamWorks film, specifically “The Wild Robot.” For one thing, both films, on a technicality, primarily feature “robots” as their main characters. These “robots” if you will, are their respective universe’s fish out of water. Both Roz and Mabel have to adapt to the ways of the wild. They take on completely different adventures and carry completely different motivations, but on the surface, both films would seem like distinct cousins if watched back to back. This is especially true when you consider both films suggest that humans the reason why the world is changing for the worse.
Overall, “Hoppers” is a hoot. It is quite funny, wonderfully ridiculous, and like a lot of other Pixar fare, beautifully animated. The studio has only gotten better at making their films look as crisp as can be through the years and “Hoppers” is just the latest example.
In the end, I recommend “Hoppers.” This is not going to end up being my favorite film of the year, but it is one that I think is fun for all ages. It does get a bit dark, but it is not the first film of its kind to do so. The mostly star-studded voice cast brings their A-game. The story is a lot of fun, but also important. For the younger viewers, the film offers positive lessons about environmental preservation and not messing with nature. The film is fast-paced, never boring, and an overall good time. I am going to give “Hoppers” a 7/10.
“Hoppers” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! If you like this review, I have more coming including for “Project Hail Mary,” “Ready or Not 2: Here I Come,” “They Will Kill You,” “You’re Dating a Narcissist!,” and “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie.”
Also, if you have not done so already, please check out my latest episode of Movie Requests featuring special guest Jason Mewes, who asked me to review “House Party.” If you enjoy the episode, leave a like on YouTube, and subscribe to my channel so you can stay tuned for more episodes as they drop!
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 “Hoppers?” What did you think about it? Or, if you could experience life as another living creature? What would it be and why? For me, I would pick a mayfly. Their lives are short, but they sound interesting, as they only tend to live one or two days as soon as they become adults. Let me know which creature you’d want to be down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Before we begin this review of “Arco,” I would just like to remind everyone that “Movie Requests” begins this Saturday, February 28th! “Movie Requests” is my upcoming film review series where I ask prominent people to request films for me to talk about, and I give my thoughts on their suggestion. A new promo is out now for the first episode, featuring Bryce Dallas Howard! You can watch it by clicking the video below!
And if you want to see the new episode when it drops, please subscribe to my YouTube channel! Otherwise, if you are following Scene Before with an email or WordPress account, you can be notified shortly after the video is uploaded! Now, on with the review!
“Arco” is directed by Ugo Bienvenu and Gilles Cazaux and stars Swann Arlaud (By the Grace of God, Anatomy of a Fall), Alma Jodorowsky (Blue is the Warmest Colour, Kids in Love), Margot Ringard Oldra (Fortune de France, Along Came Love), Oscar Tresanini (La rebelle, les aventures de la jeune George Sand, Mini-Court), Vincent Macaigne (Diary of a Fleeting Affair, Cicadas), Louis Garrel (Little Women, A Faithful Man), William Lebghil (Soda, Some Like it Veiled), and Oxmo Puccino (In Your Dreams, Athena). This film is set in the future and follows a young girl who sees a boy fall from the sky, only to find out this boy has the ability to travel through time. The two do what they can to help each other, while trying to get the boy back to his own time.
Just an FYI before we get on with the rest of this review. This is a French movie. Nevertheless, I watched the movie in English. I bring this up because when I review movies, I always attempt to watch them in their original language to get the most authentic experience possible. Even so, I watched the film in English as the film did not appear to be playing anywhere near me in French. Just know that I will not have any concrete thoughts on the film’s original cast. That said, the cast of the English version of the film did a good job. I do not really have any complaints. If you watch the film in English, and chances are you will if you live in the U.S. like me, I think you will have a solid experience.
“Arco” is one of those films where I went in nearly as blind as possible. I knew about the film a couple months before its release. Having followed Natalie Portman on Instagram, I was made aware that she was in the English version. I have also been made aware about the film receiving noticeably positive reviews. Having seen the film myself, those positive reviews were justified. This is not my favorite animated film of 2025. But it is a finely crafted remix on a familiar time travel concept.
Some people believe that they do not make movies like they used to. While everyone’s definition of this phrase may vary, “Arco” feels like an answer to that philosophy for those looking for something like they got in the 1980s. “Arco” is essentially “Back to the Future” for a new generation. Not only because the plot heavily involves time travel and someone’s intentions to get back to their specific time following a mishap. But the film also captures a specific kind of wonder that movies like “Back to the Future” can easily evoke. During my earliest viewings of “Back to the Future,” which has now become one of my all time favorite films, I was always marveled by everything that went into the climax of that film between the actors’ line delivery, the sound mix, the lightning effects, and Alan Silvestri’s iconic score. If I watched “Arco” as a child, perhaps even as a teenager, it could have inspired me to pursue filmmaking or animation. It is a film that comes with a concept that not only sounds clever, but plays really well on screen. Even the method of time travel feels like a sibling of “Back to the Future.” If you have seen “Back to the Future,” you may recall Doc saying he turned a Delorean into a time machine to “do it with some style.” Much like that 1985 classic, there is a sense of style brought to the time travel in “Arco,” where we see characters utilize such a fantastical concept through rainbows. I cannot come up with many cooler ways to travel through time more magical than that.
This film is the feature-length debut from Ugo Bienvenu, and I think anyone’s efforts should be commended should they direct a feature film for the first time. Although Bienvenu’s in particular had me perplexed, because throughout the film, I was under the impression I was watching the work of a longtime veteran. The 2D animation style feels very Studio Ghibli-like with some of the film’s occasionally vivid landscapes, strong colors, and cozy locations. If you told me that this film were being directed by Hayao Miyazaki, chances are I could believe you. If this film were live-action, based on all the 1980s movies talk from before, you could have convinced me Steven Spielberg put something like this together. That said, if you want to get technical, Steven Spielberg has done an animated film before, specifically “The Adventures of Tin-Tin,” but these films do not quite feel the same. I enjoyed that movie, but still.
As a story, “Arco” is incredibly tight. Clocking in just short of an hour and a half, “Arco” delivers a simple concept met with brilliant execution. I stared at the screen in awe of the vision that was on display. Unlike some time travel stories, which are set close to the time the story comes out, this film takes place, as of this review’s publication date, entirely in the future. This allows us not only to play around with the idea of people traveling through time, but simultaneously tap into the continued evolution of technology and the earth’s climate. In the case of addressing climate change, I found “Arco” to come off as less obvious in its messaging than “The Wild Robot” and “Flow” did when those two films came out in 2024. Maybe that is just a me thing. I would not be surprised to find out that some viewers feel different when it comes to that matter. That said, the film not only does a good job at entertaining, but also serves as a reminder to take care of the planet.
Much like “Back to the Future,” “Arco” is a film that I can see playing really well with families. In fact, I think some parents may be more comfortable showing “Arco” to their children considering it has significantly less foul language. The film may be animated, which some adults may find to be a turnoff, but “Arco” often feels more Pixar or Studio Ghibli-like rather than something out of the more obnoxious Illumination. The movie is bright and colorful. Heck, any movie heavily involving rainbows should be. But there is a perfect balance that makes the film feel grounded yet imaginative. The film is likely going to entertain younger viewers while also delivering important messages. “Arco” seems to indicate that no matter what time you live in, everyone has their own problems. Nobody’s perfect.
That said, having seen a lot of movies, it is tough to argue that “Arco” is, by definition, original. If anything, the film reminds me a lot of “Colossal,” which puts a completely unique spin on the classic monster movie. In fact, that movie was even described by its own director to be “the cheapest ‘Godzilla’ movie ever.” Despite maintaining a noticeable degree of freshness, “Arco” does a good job at reminding me of some of the great movies I watched in the past that appeal to multiple age groups like “E.T.” or “Spirited Away.” It makes me want to go back and revisit those movies. Yet at the same time, I can see “Arco” having some replay value sometime in the future. It is hard to say that “Arco” is my favorite animated film of 2025, but it is one that gives me great joy the more I think about it.
In the end, “Arco” is a swell time travel flick that brings some originality to the table while also delivering vibes that are familiar from some of the most beloved films of all time. I keep comparing “Arco” to “Back to the Future,” partially because both movies involve time travel, but because they both handle such a concept in a somewhat similar fashion. Not just in terms of structure, but also quality. Is “Arco” as good as “Back to the Future?” Honestly, no. “Arco’s” technical aspects could arguably age better, but as a story, “Back to the Future” is superior. That said, if you are looking for something that delivers on entertainment and commentary, “Arco” is a solid pick. I am going to give “Arco” a 7/10.
“Arco” is now playing in select theaters, and as of this publication, is available to preorder on VOD.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Solo Mio.” Stay tuned! Also, coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “GOAT” and “EPIC: Elvis Presley in Concert.” 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! And one last reminder, please subscribe to my YouTube channel to catch my latest videos, including the upcoming series “Movie Requests,” which begins this Saturday, February 28th! I want to know, did you see “Arco?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite animated film of 2025? For me, I would have to go with “Scarlet.” I thought it a was clever, fantastical concept done with excellence! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“All You Need is Kill” is directed by Ken’ichirô Akimoto and co-directed by Yukinori Nakamura, making this their first official directing credits. This film stars Natsuki Nanae (Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba – The Movie: Mugen Train, Goodbye, Don Glees!), Ai Makami (Kokuho, Chastity High), Mô Chûgakusei, and Kana Hanazawa (Suzume, The Night is Short, Walk on Girl). This film is based on a light novel of the same name, which also inspired the 2014 live-action film “Edge of Tomorrow.” The film follows a young woman who has relive the same day over and over while dealing with an alien invasion. She crosses paths with a young man, and together, they fight to break the cycle.
I saw the trailer for “All You Need Is Kill” last month and was genuinely shocked I had not heard this movie was going to be coming out. Granted, I should not be too shocked, given how I have not read the light novel or the manga series. That said, I did recall the name “All You Need Is Kill” as soon as it popped up, and that is because I am a fan of “Edge of Tomorrow.” For those who do not know, “Edge of Tomorrow” is a film starring Tom Cruise as an American public relations officer who is forced into battle against aliens by his superiors. He quickly comes to realize that each time he dies, he reverts back to a specific point in his life that he has to relive over and over.
When I first saw “Edge of Tomorrow,” I thought of it as “Groundhog Day” with a sci-fi twist. While that is technically accurate, the film was actually inspired by “All You Need Is Kill,” which was written by a Japanese author and made with a Japanese mindset, so “Edge of Tomorrow” is in a sense, the Americanized version of “All You Need is Kill.”
…Although, now that I think about it… “Groundhog Day” did release before all of these… So, there is that.
As a fan of “Edge of Tomorrow,” I was looking forward to seeing what could be done with a movie that would likely end up feeling closer to the source material that inspired it. Now that I have seen “All You Need is Kill,” I have to say the film is quite solid. It is definitely worth watching if you are looking for a dazzling spectacle in addition to an admirable character piece.
While the characters in “All You Need Is Kill” are identical to those in the light novel, one difference that should be noted is that the roles in the story’s center are reversed. Instead of centering around Keiji, who this time around serves as a supporting character, the film’s protagonist is Rita. I have no problems with this change, mainly because I found both characters to be well written and each one seems to the serve the other in a way that benefits the story overall.
Both of these main characters have excellent chemistry and are not only fun to watch as a team, but it is nice to see how each character allows the other to realize what they are missing. One thing I noticed throughout the movie is Rita’s tendency to become overly emotional and cry on certain occasions. I have no idea how such a thing would play out for certain viewers, but I thought it was a great way to balance Rita out from Keiji, who tends to be a bit more reserved with his presence. By the end of the movie, this allows for some really good dialogue between the two.
I also really like seeing Rita learn how exactly her time loop works. Throughout the movie, we see Rita wake up in the same time and place, and do almost the exact same things each time, but she learns something during each go. She remembers what other characters say, whether they are directed specifically towards her or simply uttered in the background. Each time she dies, she tries a different move to avoid perishing, only to realize that she sometimes ends up doing so moments later in another way.
While the film is not a comedy, the constant cycle of death does allow for a funny moment or two. Every time Rita dies, she is reverted back to her bedroom where she is woken up by the sound of her alarm clock. When this happens, another character in the background yells from the other room, telling Rita her alarm is sounding off. At one point, Rita becomes so familiar with the same old song and dance that she tells the other character to shut up before they could finish reminding her about the alarm. Moments like that, and a couple others, did get a chuckle out of me.
The other standout to me in this film is the animation, which is almost ironic the more I think about it. Because this is a film where characters die on repeat, and yet, it is absolutely gorgeous and picturesque. The alien creatures in this film are presented in a vibrant color palette. They are incredibly easy on the eyes, almost to the point where it works in their favor. If I were in battle against them, I would be so distracted by their glitz to the point where I would die instantly. If you ever watch certain movies, you would notice that the villains would present themselves in a darker costume or a more “negative” color. Look at the “Star Wars” villains over the years like Darth Vader or Kylo Ren. This is not the case with “All You Need Is Kill.” While the aliens may look pretty, there is more to them than meets the eye.
This film is not even an hour and a half. Yet by no means is it rushed. I think the runtime is almost perfect given the story that has been told. I have no complaints about the pacing at all. In fact, it might be one of the best things about this film. It is, no pun intended, all killer, no filler. We come to realize the main character dies hundreds of times. The film does not show each death, but it makes time for ones that are arguably more important to the story and allow the final product to have a more compelling impact. The film gets to the point with each and every scene. Not every scene is presented in a TikTok-pace, but there are no moments that overly draw themselves out. This movie hits the Goldilocks zone in terms of engagement.
In the end, “All You Need Is Kill” is a fun movie. Rita and Keiji are an admirable duo and their journey throughout the film makes for quite the story. The animation is well done and emits a weird sense of peace in what is ultimately a dark world. The musical score in this film is also really good. I have no idea if I will listen to it down the line, but I dug it while watching the movie. Also, the soundwork is amazing. Every time the aliens make noise, it is not only easy on the ears, but also rather ominous. Technically, the film is a beast. I am going to give “All You Need Is Kill” a 7/10.
Again, I did not read the light novel, nor have I read the manga. The best comparison I have to this film is “Edge of Tomorrow.” In preparation for “All You Need Is Kill,” I rewatched “Edge of Tomorrow,” and I think both stories are equally engaging. The styles, while different, each serve their movie’s vibe perfectly. I think “Edge of Tomorrow” is an immersive ride that puts you in the middle of a futuristic war. Its darker color palette tends to serve its tone well. I also like William Cage as a character. That said, I also think “All You Need Is Kill” stands out for its more unique technical presentation and I find it to be the superior character piece. I am not saying one film trumps the other. If anything, both are great for their own reasons. I think certain things stand out in one film more than the other, but if it were a Friday night and I were to pick between either movie to watch, it would be like going to Ben & Jerry’s for ice cream and having to choose between Ameri’Cone Dream or chocolate chip cookie dough. Both choices, in the end, are winners, for their own reasons.
“All You Need Is Kill” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Song Sung Blue,” “Mercy,” and “Send Help.” Stay tuned!
Also, if you missed it, be sure to check out the teaser trailer for Celebrity Movie Requests, the all new series where I review movies requested by your favorite stars, coming to Scene Before, and my YouTube channel! And while you are here, please watch the trailer, give it a like, and subscribe to my YouTube channel, hit the notification bell, that way you are up to date on the latest info Celebrity Movie Requests has to offer! If you want to see all of this 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 “All You Need Is Kill?” What did you think about it? Have you read any of the prior source material? Is it good? And lastly, if you have seen “Edge of Tomorrow,” tell me your thoughts on that movie! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Bugonia” is directed by Yorgos Lanthimos (Poor Things, Kinds of Kindness) and stars Emma Stone (The Favourite, The Amazing Spider-Man) Jesse Plemons (Civil War, Game Night), Aidan Delbis, Stavros Halkias (Let’s Start a Cult, Tires), and Alicia Silverstone (Clueless, Batman & Robin). This film is based on the 2003 South Korean feature “Save the Green Planet!”, and it is about two cousins who capture a pharmaceutical company CEO and keep her in their home. One of the cousins, Teddy, is convinced the captive is secretly an alien who is killing earth’s honeybees.
Yorgos Lanthimos… We meet again.
On Scene Before, I make an effort to talk about the things I love. Unfortunately, sometimes this blog feels like work, and Lanthimos is a reason for that. So far, Lanthimos is one for three through the films of his I have seen. In 2018, I watched “The Favourite,” which despite its stunning presentation and solid performances, I found to be incredibly boring. Then his next feature, “Poor Things” shocked me beyond belief. I not only genuinely liked the film, I found it to be one of the funnier watches of 2023. Then came his 2024 movie, “Kinds of Kindness,” which I found kind of forgettable, kind of overly disturbing, and ultimately, kind of a chore to get through. While there are other films I have not seen from the director, my experience with him showcases why I have avoided “Bugonia” for as long as I did. I know people who went to see it as soon as the film came out, but I waited a little more than a month. The marketing came off as quirky, and so did the concept. I do not mind a quirkfest, as long as it is good. Sadly, “Bugonia” not only fails to be good, it nearly left me with a headache.
As I write this, I recognize that my review is going to come off as something in the neighborhood of a CBR opinion piece that challenges people to reconsider one of their all time favorite films. But I am nothing if not honest. And as much as it pains me to tell the truth, “Bugonia” may be my least favorite film I have seen from Yorgos Lanthimos so far. And if it were not for select redeeming qualities that I had time to think about post-viewing, I would have been so close to calling “Bugonia” the worst picture of the year.
Look… “The Favourite” was a bore. “Poor Things” surprisingly scored. “Kinds of Kindness” is a chore. But “Bugonia…” broke me to the core! This movie is deplorable! Is the movie made by people who are clearly trying hard? Trying their best? You can say that. The film is by no means incompetent. In fact, like one of this year’s most prominent talking points amongst cinephiles, “One Battle After Another,” it is shot in VistaVision. Therefore, the color palette sometimes feels fairly diverse. Although unlike “One Battle After Another,” never once does the movie feel as grand. Maybe that is unfair of me to say since I saw “One Battle After Another” in IMAX 70mm whereas I saw “Bugonia” on AMC’s laser system. Although for a movie that uses a high quality format, it feels surprisingly intimate. While there are several shots that feel like they come from the same crew that did “Poor Things,” I think the on screen results are a bit more picturesque and satisfying in “Poor Things.”
On top of the VistaVision, another Lanthimosianism makes a return, particularly Emma Stone. This is their fourth film in a row together, and I can see why. The two clearly work well as a team, and the results sometimes show on screen. I would even go as far as to say that Emma Stone’s lead performance in “Poor Things” may be the best display of acting I have seen so far this decade. Not surprisingly, Stone plays her part well. A lot of it has to do with her given dialogue and the specific direction Lanthimos gives her. A large chunk of the movie is set amongst three people, Stone’s character included. Although the characterization is something I find to be one of the film’s weak points.
Much of the movie involves the two male leads, Teddy Gatz (Plemons) and his autistic cousin Don (Delbis), as they keep Michelle Fuller (Stone) captive inside their home. Teddy appears to be heavily invested in conspiracy theories to the point where it is nearly impossible for him to escape his echo chamber. Don appears to be somewhat easily influenced by Teddy, even when he questions some of the choices he makes. While both pairs have their distinctions, the relationship between Teddy and Don kind of reminded me of George and Lennie from “Of Mice and Men.” Only in the case of George and Lennie, I found that pair through their respective story, whether it was told on the page or the screen, to be more likable and compelling, whereas I found “Bugonia’s” main pair to peeve me on a regular basis. Granted, as I say that, I more than likely reserve most of my despise towards Teddy, who is practically the captain of their respective duo. Don often seems to follow Teddy’s lead. Given their characteristics and quirks, it makes sense. I buy into their mannerisms, I just wish both characters were executed better. Teddy is not that compelling of a lead to me. In fact, at times, I think he is kind of a psychopath. Perhaps that is the point of such a character and maybe that is what Lanthimos is going for, but this movie genuinely made me uncomfortable. Everyone is the hero of their own story, but if that hero is downright insufferable, then their story is probably not worth my time. If I were not reviewing this movie, and I were strictly watching this for entertainment, I would probably have walked out of the theater because some of the things Teddy does on screen deeply turned me off.
With the VistaVision filmmaking, distinct colors, and prominent use of actress Emma Stone, this film is about as Lanthimosian as it gets. As for that last part, I will not deny that Stone gives a good performance. There is a sense of mystery to her character, particularly as to whether or not she is an alien. Without spoiling too much, I thought Stone’s specific tendencies matched that mysteriousness. This is not the best performance of her career, but I thought she handled the role well, and props to her for shaving her head.
“Bugonia” is not short on commentary. In addition to perhaps having something to say on humanity’s place on earth, this film is essentially a satire on echo chambers, conspiracy theories, and extremes. As a result, it also satirizes those who follow such things. But just because the film supposedly spends a couple of hours mocking its subject matter, does not make the end result comedic, entertaining, or satisfying. The lead character is either so deep in his echo chamber to the point where it is difficult for me to root for, care about, relate to, or even sit back and admire him. I like complicated characters, but there is a flavor to Teddy that feels too rotten for yours truly. He reminds me of Ernest Buckheart from “Killers of the Flower Moon,” there are very few, if any, qualities that appealed to me about this character. Both characters, deep down, come off as jerks. Sure, there are people these characters care about, but if I ran into both characters at the mall I would immediately speedwalk past them as I try to get as far away from them as I can.
I think I have come to the conclusion that Lanthimos and I have completely different personalities and artistic preferences. I often say on this blog and in life that art is subjective. Not everyone is going to think the same way, therefore not everyone is going to like the same things. But I did not think I could become less excited for whatever else Yorgos Lanthimos has up his sleeve. Sometimes being wrong just plain sucks.
In the end, “Bugonia” broke me. I must reiterate, my opinion of this film is obscenely unusual. Chances are it might work for you. Heck, as of writing this, the movie has Best Picture nominations from the Critics Choice, Golden Globes, and to my complete and utter amazement, it is one of AFI’s top movies of the year. I highly question and nearly gag at all of these accolades but that is just how the cookie crumbles sometimes. As far as I am concerned, “Bugonia” is not one of the top movies of the year, but rather a movie released this year. Are there good things about it? With some time to marinate on the film, I can conclude that there are. The film has a nice color palette. While I do not think the commentary works 100% of the time, I do appreciate the film for getting me to think about humanity’s place on this planet. Even though I am not a fan of Lanthimos’ style, I do think he did a fine job with the direction, particularly with getting effective performances out of the actors, most especially Emma Stone. I will also give some credit for the casting of Aidan Delbis. The actor, who has autism in real life, plays a character in this film who is also on the spectrum. I will give some points for authenticity and it shows in his performance. This is also Delbis’ feature film debut, so I hope this leads to him finding more work. Maybe if I watch the film a second time with a different mindset, chances are I could appreciate it more. But this first viewing, which nearly left me with a headache, gave me the sense that I would probably would not have any desire to put on this film for a second viewing anytime soon. I am going to give “Bugonia” a 3/10.
“Bugonia” 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 “No Other Choice!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Scarlet,” “The Secret Agent,” “Hamnet,” and “Avatar: Fire and Ash.” 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 “Bugonia?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a film released this year that everyone seems to love except for you? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“The Running Man” is directed by Edgar Wright (Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, Last Night in Soho) and stars Glen Powell (Twisters, Anyone But You), William H. Macy (Fargo, Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes), Lee Pace (Foundation, Guardians of the Galaxy), Michael Cera (Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, The LEGO Batman Movie), Emilia Jones (CODA, Locke & Key), Daniel Ezra (A Discovery of Witches, All American), Jayme Lawson (The Batman, Sinners), Sean Hayes (Will & Grace, The Three Stooges), Colman Domingo (Sing Sing, Rustin), and Josh Brolin (Avengers: Infinity War, The Goonies). This future-set film is based on the book by Stephen King and follows Ben Richards who is put on a game show where he has the chance to become a billionaire by surviving for 30 days against hunters.
The 2025 adaptation of “The Running Man” is my first true exposure to the property. Yes, I have long been aware that Arnold Schwarzenegger starred in a previous adaptation years ago. It took me a while to realize that said adaptation was based on a Stephen King book. That said, I was onboard for this 2025 film just for the fact that Edgar Wright was helming it. I love his fast-paced directing style utilized in films like “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World” and “Baby Driver.” He has a knack for sick action scenes.
That said, compared to those movies, “The Running Man” does not hold a candle. Yet at the same time, like I often say about Pixar, an inferior Edgar Wright project can still equal a good movie, and a good movie “The Running Man” is.
While I have not seen the original “Running Man” film, I am aware that former “Family Feud” star and record-breaking lady kisser Richard Dawson played Bobby Thompson, a charismatic game show host. I cannot say much about Dawson’s performance given my lack of experience with the 1987 movie, but I can see why he was cast to play the character. Flash forward to 2025, where we have Colman Domingo, who last I checked, let me check my notes here =flips papers= hosted ZERO game shows. But Domingo’s performance as Bobby T makes me think he could easily kill it as a game show host in real life I would love to see what he could do on perhaps a reboot of “1 vs. 100” if that ever comes back. In fact, at times, that’s what part of “The Running Man” game show feels like, at least before “The Running Man” gets started. Maybe it is because both concepts involve one person trying to fend off a group of people.
Domingo says his role was inspired by Jerry Springer, and I can see where he is coming from, because if you watch those kinds of talk shows, even ones like “Maury” or “The Steve Wilkos Show,” there is a sense of heightened reality that those hosts are responsible for bringing to the table. In fact, when it comes to Domingo’s line delivery and the production design that often matches perfectly alongside it, it reminds me of something I and others would often compare “The Jerry Springer Show” to, specifically wrestling. The theatrics on “The Running Man” are much more extravagant than most real life game shows. At times it makes “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?”, a show that partially succeeds on its elaborate production design, seem insignificant.
“The Running Man,” like many films set in the future, paints a dystopian, bleak picture of what’s to come. To my surprise, I found quite a bit in common with “The Running Man” and “Idiocracy.” Granted, people are much smarter in “The Running Man,” but if you look at the state of television in both films, you would notice that both heavily feature programming that focuses on people’s pain. Sure, we have that now. One of my all time favorite game shows is “Wipeout,” which features people falling from great heights in each episode. But it is on a different level in this film. Life in “The Running Man” has gotten to a point where gambling is supposedly dominating the world. For Ben Richards, getting on a game show means everything to him. Not necessarily because he likes the shows, but because those shows are a means to make a quick buck. He wants a better life for himself, his family, and game shows are a fast and easy way to get to that point.
Overall, I thought Ben Richards was a likable protagonist. The movie gives him one obstacle after another. He cares about the people he loves. I like the film indicating his distaste for being on “The Running Man” despite doing all he can to make it through. If I had one thing to say though, I feel that of all the characters in this film, Ben Richards is the most likely candidate to receive the title “character that could be played by almost anyone.” I have nothing against Glen Powell. Each role of his proves he is a movie star in the making. Powell has charisma, and he even impressed me in the neither romantic nor funny “romcom” some like to call “Anyone But You.” But as I look back at Ben Richards, I feel that this is maybe the least Glen Powell-esque the actor has been thus far. Through the films in which I have seen him, this is the most “everyday” Powell has come off.
This is a film that fires on all cylinders in act one, keeps up the pace in act two, and while it does not fall apart in act three, if I had to name a “worst act,” it is easily the third. By the time the film reaches its end, I found it to be overstuffed, too long, and close to tonal inconsistency. The third act sometimes feels slow, and slow is the last adjective I should be using to describe a movie called “The Running Man.” The movie is 2 hours and 13 minutes long, and for the most part, it is paced well. That said, the third act has a pacing problem. Certain moments of the third act feel rushed and slapped together, while others tend to drag. It lacks the personality of the acts that came before. It is not the worst schlock I have seen this year, but I do not think it is up to the standards of Edgar Wright, who is generally praised as a filmmaker. This is not Wright’s finest outing, but it does mean the movie is bad. I would still recommend it if you want a fun action-adventure.
In the end, “The Running Man” is worth checking out. The film looks great, sounds great, and at times, it feels like Edgar Wright’s passion for the material shines through. That said, there are quite a few scenes in this film that are noticeably superior to others. “The Running Man” paints a future that I can see happening. It has traces of our present with the popularity of reality TV, gambling, and humanity’s noticeable desire to see others fail for the sake of entertainment. I am going to give “The Running Man” a 7/10.
“The Running Man” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Eternity!” Stay tuned! Also, look forward to my thoughts on “Wicked: For Good,” “Sentimental Value,” “Zootopia 2,” and “Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery.” 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 Running Man?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Stephen King film adaptation released this year? As for me, I have not seen “The Monkey” yet, so I am not sure if I can validly answer that question, but I must declare that “The Life of Chuck” is a must see if you have not gotten the chance to check it out already. Leave your thoughts and opinions down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Tron: Ares” is directed by Joachim Rønning (Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil) and stars Jared Leto (Morbius, Blade Runner 2049), Greta Lee (Russian Doll, The Morning Show), Evan Peters (Invasion, X-Men: Days of Future Past), Jodie Turner-Smith (A Big Bold Beautiful Journey, The Last Ship), Hasan Minhaj (Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj, The Daily Show), Arturo Castro (Narcos, Broad City), Gillian Anderson (The X-Files, Sex Education), and Jeff Bridges (The Big Lebowski, True Grit). This is the third film in the “Tron” franchise and is about the rivalry between ENCOM and Dillinger Systems as both corporations attempt to bring digital entities into the real world.
“Tron” is a franchise that I do not think about much these days, but as a teenager, these movies were my jam. When it comes to special effects, both of these films are marvels. I never had a chance to watch “Tron: Legacy” in a theater when I was 11 years old. While I still had not watched the original “Tron” by that time, I am jealous of those who got to watch “Legacy” on the big screen, especially in IMAX 3D.
In preparation for “Tron: Ares,” I went back and watched both “Tron” and “Tron: Legacy.” While neither film is perfect, they both hold up. Sure, the effects in the original might not fly today, but they have such a vintage charm. They have an aesthetic I do not find in many other films, new or old. Between the prior two installments, I was a little more pleased with the look of “Tron,” which I found to be more vivid and appealing in terms of color. As a story, I also found it to be better paced. Not to say that “Tron: Legacy” is bad, but I found Kevin Flynn to be more inviting as a protagonist than Sam.
But the thing about “Tron” and “Tron: Legacy” is that both movies have protagonists whose adventures and character arcs I can fondly appreciate and remember, even if I liked one more than the other. “Tron: Ares,” across the board, has flat characters in comparison. Few, if any, kept my attention. And when one of them did have my attention, their dialogue felt fairly cookie cutter. Am I going to remember Julian Dillinger? Probably not. Elisabeth Dillinger? Don’t think so. Eve Kim? I don’t know. In fact, if I had to name a favorite character in the movie, it would be a monumental undertaking. I would have to get to the point where I would have to name aspects of the film that are not characters as my top dogs.
The best characters in “Tron: Ares” are as follows… Kevin Flynn, played by the legendary Jeff Bridges who is back once again to reprise his role… The Nine Inch Nails… for providing some killer tracks that are not quite on the level of Daft Punk’s “Legacy” music, but manage to hold their own… And of course, the CGI… It is full of detail and eye candy both in the real world and beyond. If I am referring to music and special effects as my favorite characters, it is a telltale sign that “Tron: Ares” is not a good movie. In fact, this is easily the weakest of the three “Tron” movies so far, and maybe ever depending on how well this film does financially. As of publishing this review, the movie’s been out for almost a month and it has not made its budget back.
Just because the movie is weak, does not mean it is lacking in cool moments. But to be honest, I do not know if this movie is best designed for newcomers. On the surface, one could argue “Tron: Ares” is newcomer-friendly due to most of the cast and characters not appearing in the prior two installments. It is to a certain degree, a clean slate. But the movie also noticeably relies on fan service and nostalgia. Admittedly, as someone who has seen the prior two movies, there are select instances where I was shaking in my chair like a rocket ready to blast off.
The more I think about “Tron: Ares” the more it reminds me of “Jurassic World: Dominion.” “Tron: Ares” is significantly more appealing, but the film’s negatives tend to match, partially because both films sell themselves on the hook that its threat is “coming to the real world.” Granted, the dinosaurs in “Jurassic Park” have always been part of the real world, but they have been closed off from towns and cities whereas beings from inside the Grid are exiting their digital society and entering our own. That said, I will give “Tron: Ares” an enormous edge against “Jurassic World: Dominion” because the former actually seems to commit to its idea of digital beings entering the real world, whereas the execution of the dinosaurs entering the real world in the latter feels like an afterthought at times.
Even though I find “Tron: Ares” to not be that good of a film, I do think there are glimmers of decency to be found. While the story of the film itself ends up being a bore, I do think the plot of “Tron: Ares,” which involves companies racing against each other in bringing digital constructs to reality, feels somewhat reminiscent of how tech companies today are heavily pushing artificial intelligence. Part of the similarities are also revealed when the movie exposes a significant flaw regarding the Ares character. The movie not only reminds me of how much these companies seem to be pushing AI, but they will likely go so far to brush away or hide drawbacks that could heavily affect the product or the consumer.
“Tron: Ares” continues to prove that Jared Leto cannot catch a break. He often finds himself in one of two unfortunate situations… Situation one, he is in a movie that does not do well in terms of box office. Situation two, he is in a movie that does not do well in terms of the reviews. He is particularly doing a lot of damage in geek culture. In the past decade, he’s received an off-screen death in the DCEU, bad reviews for his movie in Sony’s Marvel universe, low box office returns on “Blade Runner 2049,” and now, it looks like another science fiction franchise has been met with the curse of Jared Leto. Do not interpret this as me hating on Jared Leto. He is a phenomenal actor and can give a solid performance when cast in the right role. In fact, he is great as Ares. He kind of reminded of a Sheldon Cooper-type. There are one or two scenes from this film where I internally replaced Leto’s face with that of Jim Parsons. To be clear, and this is nothing against Jim Parsons, I am glad they cast Jared Leto instead. It’s best for all parties involved. After Parsons finished “The Big Bang Theory,” I would imagine the last person he’d want to play is a Sheldon Cooper-wannabe.
Whether you see this movie in 2D or 3D is your call. I will defend either choice, but as someone who traditionally does not care for 3D as much as I did when I was 13, 14 years old, I will admit the 3D upcharge for this film is completely justified. Between select sequences where the entire screen is covered in digital effects, to some pretty cool action scenes, this movie makes the extra cost for the glasses worthwhile.
In the end “Tron: Ares” is far and away my least favorite “Tron” installment yet. As far as big budget films go, it is, thankfully, not as insufferable as “A Minecraft Movie.” Though that comparison may not be fair because I had no previous attachment to the “Minecraft” property before going to see the film, whereas with “Tron” I did. Despite the film’s flaws, the attachment did help when it came to the film’s fan service, which was sometimes borderline forced, but at others, it completely flowed. “Tron: Ares” often looks great and sounds great. I just wish it had a screenplay that was just as great. I am going to give “Tron: Ares” a 4/10.
“Tron: Ares” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Bone Lake!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “A House of Dynamite,” “The Smashing Machine,” “Shelby Oaks,” “Frankenstein,” and “Good Fortune.” 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 “Tron: Ares?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Tron” movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Scene Before 