Stage 6 Films

Materialists (2025): Love and Money Blend Together in This Middle of the Road Romance

Posted on by Jack Drees

Courtesy of A24 – © A24

“Materialists” is directed by Celine Song, the director behind one of 2023’s best films, “Past Lives.” This film stars Dakota Johnson (Fifty Shades of Grey, Madame Web), Chris Evans (Captain America: The First Avenger, Lightyear), and Pedro Pascal (The Last of Us, The Mandalorian). This film is about a matchmaker from New York City who finds herself in a personal conflict between her ex and a new love interest.

One movie I am mad at myself for skipping while it was in theaters was “Past Lives.” I did not review the film, but I was able to catch it by the end of 2023. I adored it so much that it ended up among my best movies of the year. The chemistry between the three leads was impeccable. Each role was perfectly cast and I was hooked from scene one. I thought the film was cute and heartfelt. Naturally, when I first saw the trailer for “Materialists,” I did not get excited by the film because big Hollywood stars like Chris Evans or Pedro Pascal would be in it. Although I do like those two actors. But what sold me was finding out that this was Celine Song’s next film following “Past Lives.”

I missed “Past Lives” in the theater but ended up loving it. Unfortunately, I had the opposite experience watching “Materialists.” Honestly, I was rather disappointed watching Song’s latest outing on the big screen.

What makes this effort somewhat sad is the fact that not only did the film’s director carry some weight, but as someone who lives in the U.S., and not South Korea, the actors have a ton more star power than Song’s previous project. You have Dakota Johnson, whose resume is hit and miss, but nevertheless prolific. Then there’s Pedro Pascal, who has had a large hand in the geek culture spheres in recent years between “Game of Thrones,” “The Mandalorian,” and “The Last of Us.” Also, there’s Chris Evans… Captain America himself! Need I say more? It would be one thing to see a disappointing Celine Song movie, but to have these well known actors in the mix makes it worse.

And honestly, I wish I could say that all the actors do a good job in this film despite the… (sigh) material. But I thought Dakota Johnson, while not horrible in this film, is sometimes stiff. Every other line out of her character, Lucy, feels flat. Watching Dakota Johnson in this film is like playing roulette. Every time there is a line out of her, I had no clue if it was going to be delivered decently or poorly. The gap separating the quality of her lines feels significant. Dakota Johnson can give good performances. Just go watch “Daddio.” But not only is Johnson sub-par in this film, I got the impression at times she was playing the same character she’s played in other films like “Madame Web” or “The High Note.” Despite the range of her line delivery in this film, I am starting to think Johnson herself has limited range as a performer.

That said, I thought the film’s two main male leads were okay in their roles. Pascal is a well built, rich, successful man. Or, as he is sometimes referred to throughout the film, a unicorn. I thought Pascal was perfectly cast. I never met Pedro Pascal myself, but from what I imagine, he must be a charming, handsome person.

Chris Evans on the other hand is a little less perfect of a human being. He self-admittedly has anger issues, he struggles with maintaining a steady career path as well as his financial stability. But despite his problems he seems like a decent guy. I liked Evans’ performance. He felt down to earth and inviting. Not preppy, not over the top. Just a genuine guy.

“Materialists” is a fairly grounded narrative. But unfortunately the script is where its tonal inconsistencies lie. Much of the film’s dialogue is quite good. Parts of it made me think about life. But there are quite a few cheesy lines that do not feel like they belong in a movie like this. I am not denying that people have said something cheesy at some point in their life. But the rate in which it happens in this film does not feel authentic.

There is a message in “Materialists” that makes for a good story. While a lot of people date and eventually marry for love, there are some people who want more out of a relationship. They want the partner to be attractive, have money, have a nice place and so on. As the film progressed, and this should be no surprise given the title, the film successfully presented itself as an allegory about how certain people find others’ possessions more attractive than the person they are dating. I will not go into spoilers, but there is a line towards the end of the film that could almost double as the film’s slogan. The film suggests that some people are simply attracted to success. Yes, someone could be the nicest person on earth. But for some people, they would be turned off if they found out the person they were dating happened to be poor.

Given this film’s message, I found it interesting how Lucy was written. Lucy works with a dating agency. Customers, some of whom are clearly desperate for a relationship, give this company good money to find a partner. The film asks questions as to whether love can be bought or if it is simply something you have to find yourself. The film shows the potential dangers of trying to follow a perhaps unachievable dream but also reveals how one can find life unappealing if they were to give their dreams up and settle.

The film does not shy away from highlighting appealing and thought-provoking topics. I just wish that the package that contains such topics was a little more appetizing. I wish it had better dialogue. I wish I liked some of the acting better. And I wish it were a little more tonally consistent. The film is shot well, has good music, and contains a couple decent scenes, but for me, I wanted more. I guess I am a bit of a materialist myself.

In the end, I do not think the “Materialists” and I are that great of a match. There are plenty of other fish in the sea, thankfully. Maybe the film will find its audience somewhere else. Honestly, I found this film disappointing. It is decently framed, the production design is nice, and some of the acting is okay. But there are plenty of elements that bog the film down between the tonal inconsistencies, Dakota Johnson’s sometimes stiff performance, and the cheesy dialogue. I still think Celine Song has a promising future as a filmmaker. I just hope her next project is much better than this one. I am going to give “Materialists” a 5/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on Pixar’s latest film, “Elio.” Stay tuned! Also, you can look forward to reading my reviews of “Jurassic World: Rebirth,” “M3GAN 2.0,” and “F1: The Movie.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Materialists?” What did you think about it? Or, have you seen Celine Song’s directorial debut, “Past Lives?” If you did, tell me your thoughts on that! Leave your comments down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Bring Her Back (2025): Another Clever, Scary Outing from the Philippou Brothers

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Bring Her Back” is directed by Danny and Michael Philippou, the directing duo behind “Talk to Me.” This film stars Billy Barratt (Kraven the Hunter, Responsible Child), Sora Wong, Jonah Wren Phillips (Human Error, How to Make Gravy), and Sally Hawkins (The Shape of Water, Paddington). This film centers around Andy and Piper, a brother and sister who are placed under the care of an eccentric woman and find themselves part of a terrifying ritual.

I ended up going to see “Bring Her Back” mainly because of the films that were out in one particular weekend, it piqued my curiosity the most. Note my choice of words. I never said I was looking forward to this film. But I cannot say I was dreading it either. If anything, I was going to see “Bring Her Back” because of my past experience. If I saw any trailers for “Bring Her Back,” they likely flew over my head. That said, I saw “Talk to Me” one time a couple years back. I thought it was a respectable effort by filmmaking brothers Michael and Danny Philippou. While the film had its fans, I cannot say I thought it was perfect. Though I liked it enough to give it a thumbs up. There is a saying that you are only as good as your last project. The Philippou brothers’ last project got me in the door. So, how is their latest outing?

Out-freaking-standing, and I cannot emphasize my enthusiasm enough.

“Bring Her Back” is easily one of the best films of the year. It is a movie that is not quite committed to one genre. I have called it a horror film, and knowing what “Talk to Me” turned out to be, I was kind of expecting “Bring Her Back” to be in the same boat as that movie. While the film is creepy, I will say that one could easily put “Bring Her Back” in the category of psychological thriller. One can simply say it is a drama. Regardless of whatever genre you call it, it handles all of its mini-genres with excellence.

What makes “Bring Her Back” so great is my attachment to the core characters. We come to find out that they all have something in common. Specifically, they are all grieving over someone they lost. While it is traditional for people to grieve over someone’s death, these deaths are unlikely scenarios. For the two younger characters, Andy and Cathy, we see early on in the film that they lose their dad. Shortly after, they meet a new foster parent (Sally Hawkins), whose young daughter died after drowning in a pool. The movie made me feel bad for all three of these people, even if something seems off about one of them.

When these three people first met, it did not take long for me to develop a pit in my stomach. I knew we were in for a ride with Sally Hawkins from the moment I saw her. First off, like some of her previous projects, Hawkins does not phone it in whatsoever when it comes to her performance. She has so much range packed into one character. At one moment she is kind of a creep, then lovable, then flamboyant. Whatever she happens to be as Laura, Hawkins nails it. That said, even when she is those last two adjectives, there is a sense of creepiness to her that remains consistent.

There are some things Hawkins does throughout the runtime that not only made me hate her, but made me want to straight up punch her in the face. She is everything you can want in a solid antagonist. While I will give praise to Hawkins for her performance, I will not deny that her character is sometimes straight up unlikable despite her occasionally having a chill or “cool mom” vibe. And me loathing her is a good thing. All it got me to do is get behind the kids through their journey as it plays out. As wacky as this movie gets at times, I was able to buy into Laura’s motivation. I could see where she was coming from even if I ultimately thought she was a psychotic lunatic.

I would not call this a complaint, but this is more or less something I noticed through my experience of watching the film. Keep in mind, I found “Bring Her Back” to be quite scary. But I cannot say that there are many jaw-dropping individual scares in the film. If anything, I found the film to maintain a consistent eeriness. Going back to how this film balances itself between multiple genres, this is another example to support that case. The scariest part of this film is not any particular scene, but it is the everlasting sense that Laura is going to do something bonkers. And she ends up doing some bonkers things.

Structurally, “Bring Her Back” does not miss a beat. It has a great hook that gets you to care about the two younger kids. You have all the adventures these kids encounter alongside their new foster parent, and as the film gets to the climax, it means business. Again, Sally Hawkins is a fantastic performer. But by the end of the movie I would not have minded seeing her character splatter into bits. There is never a boring moment in this film. The story is captivating. The characters are well written, everything ends on a solid note, and the entire film has a pretty good soundtrack. There are some tunes that slide their way into the film that are perfectly placed.

Sally Hawkins is not the only standout amongst the cast, though she is by far the biggest name. That said, I must give credit to all the younger cast members as well. Billy Barratt does a solid job in the film as Andy. I thought he was on the money when it came to channeling his character’s apprehension in a variety of situations. Jonah Wren Phillips is not given as much to do as Oliver compared to some of the other characters, but what he ends up doing stands out. There is one particular scene in the film that involves him chewing an unusual object that will linger in my mind beyond the end of the year. And lastly, Sora Wong as Piper is adorable. This is Sora Wong’s first role and I am very pleased by how it turned out. I think she is going to have a great career ahead of her. I can totally tell how masterful the Philippou Brothers are as directors based on the efforts of the talent. Each actor feels perfectly in sync with the others around them and not a single performance feels off.

In the end, “Bring Her Back” is top tier filmmaking. I cannot believe we have been blessed with cinema as compelling as this. When I walked out of “Talk to Me,” I did so having had a good time with it. Flash forward a couple years later to “Bring Her Back,” I am genuinely onboard for whatever the Philippous can produce. I keep bringing up Sally Hawkins as a selling point, partially because she is a recognizable name. But everyone else in this film does a great job too. I have to give the entire cast credit for their work. If you like good storytelling, look no further, because I am going to give “Bring Her Back” an 8/10.

“Bring Her Back” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the brand new comedy “Friendship.” I have been looking forward to seeing and talking about this movie. And I finally get to discuss it in the coming days. Stay tuned! Also look forward to my reviews for “Ballerina,” “The Phoenician Scheme,” and “The Life of Chuck.” 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 “Bring Her Back?” What did you think about it? Or, which film did you like better? “Talk to Me” or “Bring Her Back?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

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

Posted on by Jack Drees

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

STUDIOCANAL – © STUDIOCANAL SAS

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

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Love Hurts,” “The Brutalist,” and “I’m Still Here.” Stay tuned! If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Paddington in Peru?” What did you think about it? Or, which is your favorite of the “Paddington” movies? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

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

Posted on by Jack Drees

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Persian Version (2023): Two Generations of Stories Come Together in a Uniquely Structured Dramedy

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Persian Version” is directed by Maryam Keshavarz (Viper Club, Circumstance) and stars Layla Mohammadi (Special Ops: Lioness, The Sex Lives of College Girls), Niousha Noor (Kaleidoscope, Here and Now), Bijan Daneshmand (Infidel, The Night Manager), Bella Warda, and Tom Byrne (The Crown, Road Dance). This film is about a young Iranian-American woman who is at odds with her family, most notably her mother. The two have their key differences. But when a secret is revealed, the young woman realizes that she and her mother may have more in common than then they once thought.

“The Persian Version” is a film that I am not surprised a lot of people are keeping out of the conversation. It is not playing in too many places, and it came out the same weekend as “Five Nights at Freddy’s.” By the way, I have no plans to watch that film for those who ask. But I was very intrigued by “The Persian Version.” I was sold with the marketing. The movie looked, bright, cheery, vibrant, and seemed to make the most of whatever budget it had. It did not look terribly expensive, but it looked polished for a film of its caliber. Turns out, that is just half the battle, because little did I realize what I would be in for.

“The Persian Version” is a quirky, fun, good old fashioned time that occasionally inserts moments of seriousness every once in a while. Is this a good thing? Sort of. There are multiple storylines at hand, all of which deliver some sense of engagement to varying degrees. Like a lot of other movies, there are parts of “The Persian Version” that are better than others. But in the case of “The Persian Version,” even when the movie transitions in an uneven, and nearly cluttered manner, I still find myself invested in much of what is going on.

I found the storytelling and the way it was executed to be particularly creative. It is non-linear, there is an occasional song and dance aspect. There are notable tonal shifts. There is a balance between comedy and drama. But when it comes to those last two things, it is kind of like a see-saw. It has its highs and lows. I found the comedy in particular to be funny, charming, and for the most part, it works. I found the drama to bring the film to a more down to earth feel that gives a sense of perspective for the characters at hand. This does not result in the best movie of the year. Far from it. But it does result in a film I do not regret seeing and one I think that if it is playing near you, would not make for a bad choice. It comes with plenty to enjoy even with its quirks, whether they work or not.

This film starts out in a lighthearted manner. But it sort of does a back and forth transition between genres where at one moment, it is serious. It is dramatic. Then eventually, it reverts back to being something of a comedy. If you have seen my last review, “Freelance,” you would know that meshing genres does not lead to the best results. But in this movie’s favor, it manages to utilize comedy in a way that is humorous. And it also blends in drama to the point where it manages to compel me. But it does not mean the film is without its imperfections. If anything, I think as fascinating as the events within these genre blends are, there is a noticeable sense of inconsistency between them. Because while comedy and drama can work when combined together, the shift from one genre to another feels nearly seismic at times. It does not really allow much room to breathe and the movie almost spends too much time focusing on one genre to the point where it almost has no identity. It is kind of a mish mash, and too extreme of one at that.

The best way I can describe “The Persian Version” is that it is two movies in one package. Both movies are really good, but they almost do not fit together. The story presents itself in two tonal opposites. In comic book movie speak, it’s like combining “Deadpool” with “V for Vendetta.” Both movies work perfectly on their own, and maybe if you put both together, they could lead to an interesting result. But combining both projects only lessens their value in a case like this.

Although given time to marinate, the movie presents two different tones that ultimately fit their respective narratives by the end. And the more I ponder, it gives me a good idea as to how this film’s main duo tends to see the world. In the back of Leila’s mind, she will do anything to embrace the fun and spontaneity of life. She will do anything to have a good time. She will do anything to keep herself happy. Meanwhile we see another story with her mother as the center where I am getting the sense that having fun may not be the top priority, and fun would only get in the way of what she thinks is important. But it is also shepherded by what these two have on their plate at their respective times of their lives.

The other thing I really appreciated about the movie is that it kind of gave me perspective as someone who is of similar age to Leila, who serves as the film’s protagonist. It reminded me that nobody is perfect. I often think about my parents growing up and realize that maybe they have made choices in life that they either regret or maybe their parents did not always agree with, but maybe they stood by them regardless of the outcome. That is not to suggest those choices are a bad thing, because in the end, they ultimately make us who we are. What matters is how we conduct our lives moving forward for ourselves, in addition to the people around us. In the end, even if our choices end up being mistakes, life finds a way to make us happy.

To top off all of what I just said, “The Persian Version” has a marvelous ensemble that is led beautifully by a mother-daughter duo played by Niousha Noor and Layla Mohammadi respectively. Both individuals are perfectly cast and play off each other very well. The family itself offers plenty of moments to enjoy. I thought Leila’s grandmother, Mamanjoon, was a highlight of the film. She also had my favorite line of the film that comes into play a couple times. It got a good laugh out of me. When it comes to slice of life-style films, “The Persian Version” gets plenty of things right, but it is not without its flaws. But would I watch it again? Perhaps so. It is by far one of the most unique movies of the year and if you are looking for something beyond the traditions of filmmaking, this is a decent option.

In the end, “The Persian Version” showcases the beauty of life, all the while highlighting problems that its core woman characters have to face at certain times of their lives. No matter how big or small. The movie is kind of like life itself. It has its fun moments. It has its downer moments. But by the end, everything tends to come full circle. I think this is a creative, one of a kind feature that despite not getting a lot of attention at the box office for the past number of weeks, certainly had mine. I am going to give “The Persian Version” a 7/10.

“The Persian Version” is now playing in select theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, good news! I have more coming! My next review is going to be for “Priscilla!” I got the chance to watch this film at the beginning of the month. It has been on my mind for quite a bit. I cannot wait to talk about it. Also coming soon, I have reviews coming for “The Tunnel to Summer, the Exit of Goodbyes” and “The Marvels.” Stay tuned! If you want to see 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 “The Persian Version?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite mother-daughter relationship in film? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Sisu (2022): A John Wick Wannabe Travels with Gold

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Sisu” is directed by Jalmari Helander (Big Game, Rare Experts) and stars Jorma Tomilla (The Christmas Party, Big Game), Aksel Hennie (Hercules, The Martian), Jack Doolan (The Boys, The Green Green Grass), and Mimosa Williamo (Headfirst, Lake Bodom). Set during the Lapland War, this film is about an ex-soldier who finds gold and must fend off Nazis on his journey into the city.

Some of the biggest studios today like Disney and Universal mostly rely on popular IP to keep their ships afloat. Lionsgate, while not being as big as those two, has done the same to respectable results. If you look at titles like “The Hunger Games,” “The Twilight Saga,” and “John Wick,” you would notice that these franchises have continued to receive sequels due to their popularity and recognition. Obviously with the first two, it helps when they are based on preexisting books. But “John Wick” is an interesting case where even a by the numbers movie with not the biggest, or smallest, of budgets can lead to a series of films that continues to receive praise from action junkies. While “The Hunger Games” is coming back and more of the “John Wick” universe is set to be unveiled in various stories, Lionsgate would benefit from a new franchise after “John Wick: Chapter 4.” After seeing one of the studio’s latest projects, “Sisu,” it has potential for expansion. That said, if I were not doing Scene Before, I would have mixed thoughts as to seeing another one of these movies if it were greenlit. I say this because I really enjoyed the movie, minus certain aspects that stuck out like a sore thumb.

This movie seems to be inspired by the “John Wick” formula. It centers around a man who happens to have a connection with a dog, and people attempt to get in his way. Therefore, he must stop them in perhaps the most diabolical, slickest way he can imagine. While it is a remix, I am not complaining because seeing Aatami do what he does best is satisfying to watch. There are some kills in this film that honestly rival a “Deadpool” movie or a Tarantino flick. While many action movies in recent years such as “Nobody,” “Wrath of Man,” or “Bullet Train” have a flair to them that reminds me of “John Wick” in some way, “Sisu” stands out because it is set long before those films. It is set during World War II, specifically through the Lapland War, where the rivals are Finland and Nazi Germany. If you are having trouble figuring out which side is represented as good and bad according to this movie, then you probably do not know where the title of this movie comes from.

That said, the title of this movie is quite fitting for the main protagonist of Aatami, because throughout the movie, his look comes off as someone who has seen everything that there is to see, and much of it was not good. And even in moments where he may look innocent, he will subvert expectations anyone had of him being a softie. We do not learn a textbook’s worth of information about Aatami, but we also learn enough to appreciate him. It hits the Goldilocks zone. All we learn is that he needs to get from point A to point B, with gold. Of course, since the opposition is Nazis, it makes it that much simpler to root for him.

“Sisu” is perfectly paced. Yes, there is a short runtime that may help some people, but that is not what I am necessarily pointing to. Within that short runtime, the film does very little, but it makes the most of its minimalistic nature. There are not too many characters, the plot is simple yet effective, and dialogue appears to be used sparingly. Speaking of small, the film cost €6 million (approx. $6.56 million) to make. This movie does a lot with that small budget, and despite the modest cost, it sometimes feels as big as some notable modern action blockbusters. The overall look, design, and feel of the film are perfect.

My biggest complaint with “Sisu” is that we get to a point in the movie, specifically during the third act, where I am having trouble believing anything that is happening. There are some good movies that exist that bend reality a bit such as some of the “Fast & Furious” sequels, “Kingsman: The Secret Service,” and “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.” There are things in those movies that I would never expect to happen in real life, but they convince me that within the rules of their respective universes that they could be pulled off in that setting. There is something towards the end of “Sisu” that feels so off that it almost ruined the movie for me. Granted, the movie has a brilliant first half so of course I am going to praise it. The reason is because even though this movie jumps the shark quite a bit, it felt like it had a limit. And I know that this is an original film, this is not a spinoff or sequel that builds off of rules that already exist. But the movie flicked like a lightswitch. It went from ridiculous fun to colossal stupidity in a split second. It makes Dom Toretto’s Tarzan swing in “F9: the Fast Saga” feel real. I am not even joking.

This may sound like I hate the movie. I do not. If you scrolled down to this or the last paragraph, you may have missed my recent praise for it. I just think if I were in charge of the script I would have changed this one scene dramatically. There are a lot of other moments that had me laughing, gagging, or dropping my jaw with excitement. Much like the “John Wick” franchise, there are some highlight kills in this film for me that I continue to think about to this day. I recommend going to see this movie with a couple friends, maybe make it a guys night out. “Sisu” may take inspiration from other action flicks, but it does enough to make it its own thing. That said, if you do not like heavy violence or gore, you might want to sit this one out. Just a warning.

In the end, despite my one big complaint regarding “Sisu,” I have zero regrets having seen it. If Lionsgate or the other companies behind this movie wanted to recreate one of their most popular ideas but put it in World War II, they did so with excellence. It is a film that starts rather quiet, but its obnoxiousness increases with time. Sometimes for good, other times for bad. The film also supports the notion that if you make Nazis the villain, it is all the more satisfying to see a protagonist like Aatami potentially triumph. If I have any other recommendations, avoid the trailer. Don’t get me wrong. I watched the trailer for “Sisu” before going to see it. I think it is a good trailer. But I think this is one of those movies that is probably best viewed with a clean slate. It might increase some shock value. It is up to you, but if you want my two cents, that is what I have to give. Speaking of my two cents, I am going to give “Sisu” a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3!” And if you want even more upcoming content, I will also soon be talking about the new horror comedy “Renfield.” I waited a bit to watch this movie, but as to whether it is worth the wait, is a question that will be answered soon. If you want to see 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 “Sisu?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie you like that has an ending that almost ruins it? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

A Man Called Otto (2022): Tom Hanks Hits a Grump in the Road

Posted on by Jack Drees

“A Man Called Otto” is directed by Marc Forster (World War Z, The Kite Runner) and stars Tom Hanks (Toy Story, Cast Away) as Otto. The performers joining him in the cast are Mariana Treviño (How to Break Up with Your Douchebag, Overboard), Rachel Keller (Tokyo Vice, Legion), Manuel Garcia-Rulfo (The Magnificent Seven, Murder on the Orient Express), Truman Hanks, and Mike Birbiglia (Orange Is the New Black, Billions). In this adaptation of the Swedish novel and film by the name of “A Man Called Ove,” Otto is a man who has had it all. When a new neighbor moves in, Otto develops a companionship that may turn his frown upside down.

Complaining. It is about as human as breathing. Complaining is the foundation of many protagonists. Some of the most iconic film protagonists of all time started off their story by complaining. In “Star Wars,” Luke Skywalker complains about having to live on the farm for another year. In “Ratatouille,” Remy complains about the way rats treat food compared to mankind. In “Risky Business,” Joel Goodson complains about the landscape of high school as it comes to an end while he tries to pass his exams and get into a good university. We love to complain, and I have done my fair share of it over the years. And I assure a lot of people reading this have too. Now this story centers around that entirely. Otto is an aged man who has seen a lot over the years, maybe too much. He thinks he is smarter than everyone else, and he simultaneously thinks society as a whole is getting dumber. When I think of Tom Hanks, this is a more subversive role for him, much like his appearance the recent shiny, polished turd known as “Elvis.”

Much like “Elvis,” I was not a huge fan of “A Man Called Otto.” Not because I think it is a bad adaptation. I have not seen the original movie or read the novel. Therefore, I have nothing to compare it to. But if I have to be real, this movie was not for me.

As someone who has reviewed movies on the web since 2016, I have learned that sometimes I can be predisposed to liking certain things. I love “Star Wars,” so I often get excited for whatever the franchise has coming up. I am a huge fan of J.K. Simmons, therefore when he is in a new project, I am usually curious. Similarly, when I look back at my experience regarding “A Man Called Otto,” I may have been predisposed to thinking I would not like it. Not because Hanks is playing someone who is complaining, but because the main character himself is complaining. What do I mean? Honestly, I have had enough of it in real life. Look at me, complaining about complaining. Hey, everyone! Time for a new drinking game! Take a shot every time the Movie Reviewing Moron says “complaining!”

I am not saying that characters in a movie should not complain. But what I liked about Luke Skywalker is that when I watched him, complaining never felt like the definitive aspect of his character. Sure, he definitely whined, he definitely did not want to do certain things for particular reasons, but Luke Skywalker felt like a relatable character, at least to me. Part of it is because of his complaining, but it was executed in a way that was palatable. I cannot say the same for Otto. While there is noticeable character development in “A Man Called Otto,” the character of Otto starts the movie calling out everything in sight that he views as unfit or unlike his worldview, and it is hard for him to stop. There are few things that are as important in life as first impressions. If I go to a pizza shop and I end up making a wacko face on my first bite of their pie, that is not the best of signs. I might hesitate to come back. Tom Hanks, or perhaps director Marc Forster, is the pizza shop owner. And the character of Otto, unfortunately, is a lackluster pie.

Although speaking of predisposal, part of me wonders how much the supposed subversiveness of this role rubbed me the wrong way. Tom Hanks is, perhaps stereotypically, America’s dad. And seeing him in a light like this felt jarring. But if you ask me, I do not know if that is the case. Because in reality, Tom Hanks is a great actor. But he feels miscast here. Yes, name recognition helps, but he nevertheless sometimes fails to bind with this role. Plus, after seeing him in “Elvis,” where he potentially gave my least performance he has done as the weirdly accented Tom Parker, and now this, I am beginning to assume that this turn where he plays meaner or comparatively pessimistic roles is not working out. I recently watched “Spirited,” the brand new holiday movie, with my family last December. During said viewing, my mom said she does was not used to seeing Ryan Reynolds or Will Ferrell sing or do anything musical-related. As far as I’m concerned, Ferrell and Reynolds had range whereas Hanks is trying his best and he does not have everything down to a science. In some ways, his character is comes off as one-dimensional as a ragdoll. I love Tom Hanks, but this is not his best work.

This is not to say that “A Man Called Otto” is entirely bad. If anything, it is an interesting concept for a movie that is not done as well as I would have hoped. There are characters I liked in the film including Marisol, played by Mariana Treviño. Every scene she is in, she warms everything up, including my brain. She is perhaps the most adorable character in the entire film. If I could spend an entire weekend with this character, I might take that chance.

The film, which again, is based on previous works from Sweden, also has a nice touch to honor where it came from. There is a scene set in a cafe where Otto shows Marisol a certain usual he enjoys. The moment he explained what it was, I thought it was a nice little touch. As much as I dig on this film, I will recognize some small glimmers of charm it carries.

Although despite the small glimmers of charm, when I take everything that I saw leading up to this film’s final moments, I look back at the film negatively. Almost in as grumpy of a state as Otto himself. There are funny moments in the film, but I cannot say they had me laughing out loud. There are poignant moments in the film, but I never felt a ton of emotional weight. Even though there are certain complexities in regard to Otto’s character that make him interesting, I never felt intrigued enough to say that my time was not being wasted. Ultimately, this film has some likable supporting characters, like the recently mentioned Marisol, but the same cannot be said for the film’s main character.

Though I must add one final note. There has been a lot of talk lately about “nepo-babies” in Hollywood and the film industry. Personally, I have mixed feelings on it given how I can support family business, but it could also exclude equally, more talented, or even more aspiring individuals who hope to enter this industry. With that in mind, I must say this film’s use of Tom Hanks’s son, Truman Hanks, was not only appropriate, but made for some highlights. Truman Hanks plays a prominent role in the film as the younger version of Otto. He is seen in several scenes and he plays the part well. I have no idea to what degree Truman Hanks is hoping to take acting seriously much like his father, but he did a good job in this film as Otto’s younger interpretation.

In the end, “A Man Called Otto” is a shocking movie. Because if you told me that I would watch two movies in the span of a year where I am not fond of Tom Hanks’s character, in addition to his performance, I would have slapped you Will Smith style. But here we are. I love Tom Hanks as an actor, and I would continue to watch anything he is in. Heck, they just announced “Toy Story 5.” I would watch that. But as much as I respect Tom Hanks for trying to spice things up from his usual flair, I think his “nicer” performances work because he executed them so much better. Although art is subjective, so maybe this flair works for others. But it did not work for me. I am going to give “A Man Called Otto” a 5/10.

“A Man Called Otto” is now playing in theatres everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the brand new MCU installment, “Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania.” I had the chance to see the film last weekend, and I will have the review for you to read sometime next week.

Also coming on March 5th, it’s the Jack Awards! Scene Before’s annual awards show is back with a new and hopefully improved name! Get ready for another unnecessarily long celebration of the past year in film with exclusive video content, also featured on my YouTube channel! The nominations for the show are already online, and if you would like to vote for Best Picture, click the link right here, it will take you to a poll and you can vote for one of the ten nominees! May the best picture win.

If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “A Man Called Otto?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a performance that you hate from an actor you love? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Missing (2023): This Kinda Sorta Sequel Spinoff to Searching Cannot Compete with the Novelty of Its Counterpart

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Missing” is directed by Nicholas D. Johnson and Will Merrick, both of whom edited the 2018 film “Searching.” This film stars Storm Reid (A Wrinkle in Time, 12 Years a Slave), Joaquim de Almeida (Good Morning, Babylon, 24), Ken Leung (Old, Lost), Amy Landecker (Transparent, Project Almanac), Daniel Henney (My Lovely Sam Soon, The Wheel of Time), and Nia Long (The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, Boyz in the Hood). This film centers around a young girl named June whose mom goes on a getaway. When June goes to the airport to pick her mom up at a time she was scheduled to arrive back from said getaway, she is nowhere to be seen. This leads June down a spiral of questions, searches, and wonders as to what happened to her mom and what she could be up to via the internet.

This film is from the editors of “Searching,” which I missed during its original release. In fact, despite having a pass to a press screening for this film, I took it almost neglecting the fact that I still have not seen “Searching.” I felt guilty. I heard good things about it and the concept itself sounded unique. Having watched the film the week of said screening, I can confirm the execution is exactly that. A good movie with a unique concept. Naturally, this made me more excited for “Missing.” I was also glad to know that this was from people who were involved with “Searching.” Part of what made that original film so watchable is its ability to multitask. “Searching” has the ability to juggle a quick pace, a wonderfully twisty narrative, and great characterization without the use of full-fledged cameras. I thought this was shockingly well done. In my best movies of 2022 list, I said “Everything Everywhere All at Once” stood out to me because of how much of a one of a kind concept it turned out to be. “Searching,” while not as great of a movie, sits in the same boat.

One of the greatest things about “Searching” was its ability to keep me interested in the story from start to finish despite the unique, perhaps gimmicky filmmaking style. “Missing” nails the start, but as we get closer to the finish, my interest levels waned. Part of it is because this film missed (no pun intended) something that “Searching” had through its full runtime. Each moment in “Searching” felt like something that could actually happen. Each conversation, every action. All of it felt real. Despite some occasionally juicy material, everything that happened came off within the definition of verisimilitude. That said, the first half sold me before we get into some shark jumping moments that ultimately reduced my enjoyment. I did not hate this movie. To say I hated “Missing” would be a hyperbole. But it is also a movie where the flaws stand out just as much as its wins.

The wins for “Missing” would be the performances. Every actor does a good job in this movie. Storm Reid carries this film from start to finish, but it does not mean the supporting roles filled by actors like Joaquim de Almeida and Nia Long were not worthy of my praise. Giving some specification on the latter, I bought the chemistry both between Nia Long and Storm Reid, in addition to Long and Ken Leung, who plays her love interest. The love Long’s character gives to both individuals, even if there is some tension between them and the protagonist, feels genuine.

If there are any other wins, I did find the film surprisingly humorous. Although between both movies, I laughed more during “Searching.” That said, like “Searching,” there were a couple moments that showcase jokes that poke fun at some of the ways we use technology or some of the things we use technology for. There were a couple laughs from me and the rest of my audience.

I loved the use of the screen technology in “Searching.” Not only because of its uniqueness, but how it was used. While “Missing” definitely does not have as many visual effects as “Avatar: The Way of Water,” there are moments where this film has a larger than life feel to it. But this is a rare case where I am using that as a negative. This is especially true in the climax. Larger than life can have numerous meanings. In this case, the meaning applies to how far-fetched the climax felt at times. While there is a moment where my crowd erupted in applause, I on the other hand remained silent because I did not believe what was happening on screen felt like it belonged in a picture like this. I have watched movies where I was able to suspend my disbelief because while I knew what was happening is not realistic in our universe, the movie’s rules made me think it could happen there.

In fact one of my negatives regarding “Missing” is how the movie attempts to connect to “Searching.” This movie just came out, therefore I am going to be as spoiler free as I possibly can, but there is a television program in the film. Not a real program, but one that exists within this film’s universe, that starts off as something that sounds legitimate within the lore. But by the end of the film, it comes off as a cheap joke. I mean that in more ways than one. The end of this film, while it has glimmers of entertainment, feels loosely strung together like a last minute project for a high school class I deemed less important than the others. It did not have the satisfying oomph the filmmakers seemed to be going for. If anything it felt out of place, abrupt, and maybe even a bit lazy. I am not asking for every aspect of “Missing” to be just like its original counterpart, but my hope was for this movie to take what was great about “Searching” and have a story that kind of stands on its own. “Missing” does both those things, but it does not make the story interesting. Before my screening started, they had a promo suggesting that this movie is full of twists and turns. That should be a good thing, right? It could have been. But it did not help that the twists and turns ranged from out of the blue to highly illogical. What do I think about “Missing?” Well, to put it short, something was missing.

In the end, while I did not despise “Missing,” it is definitely no “Searching.” I would much rather watch “Searching” a second time than pop this movie on again. I thought Storm Reid did a great job leading this movie. Her performance and character stood out. The cast is great. The concept, while a reversal of the original, lends itself to some decent ideas. I just wish they belonged in a better narrative. I am going to give “Missing” a 5/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! I know I am in the minority when it comes to this movie. The reviews for this film so far have been mostly positive from both critics and audiences. For some reason it did not work for me. But that is the beauty of film. Speaking of films, next weekend I will be watching “80 for Brady.” The brand new movie about four elderly women who will do anything to see a Tom Brady-led New England Patriots play in the Super Bowl. If you want to see 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 “Missing?” What did you think about it? Also, did you see “Searching?” Tell me your thoughts on that film as well! Leave your comments down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Don’t Breathe 2 (2021): This Terminator 2-Esque Horror Sequel May Leave You Breathless

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Don’t Breathe 2” is directed by Rodo Sayagues, who wrote and produced the original “Don’t Breathe.” This sequel is his directorial debut. This film stars Stephen Lang (Avatar, Tombstone), Brendan Sexton III (The Killing, The Odd Way Home), and Madelyn Grace (The Orville, Grey’s Anatomy). “Don’t Breathe 2” once again involves Norman Nordstrom (Stephen Lang), a blind man who is more able than he is set out to be. Years after his home was invaded, Nordstrom must face the realities in his way as his past catches up to him.

I saw this film over a couple weeks ago, and I almost passed on it but I gave in given the limited options at the movie theater. This is not to say that I was not looking forward to “Don’t Breathe 2,” but it has been awhile since I saw the original so I wondered if it would be reasonable to go see this sequel having not seen the first one recently to refresh my memory. This brings me to my first compliment of the film. There’s not much catching up to do if you have not watched the first movie. “Don’t Breathe 2” feels like its own, contained story, not to mention a good one.

I may have mentioned a few times on Scene Before that horror is one of my weaker genres. It’s not that I have a vendetta against horror, it’s just that I’ve missed a lot of its staples over the years. Staples including “Friday the 13th,” “A Nightmare on Elm Street,” and even some modern titles like “Insidious.” Despite this certified weakness, it did not stop me from checking out this “Don’t Breathe” sequel, and I cannot say I was underwhelmed. If anything, I walked out of this film feeling as if I watched a horror version of “Terminator 2: Judgment Day.” Now, I’m not saying I liked it as much as “Terminator 2: Judgment Day,” that film is honestly much better, but in terms of story, execution, vibe, and the way everything plays out, these two films present similar qualities. You have the villain of the first film returning once again, but this time, the villain has a good side to him, and much of the movie is spent between him and a kid. While not exactly the same, it kind of reminded me of the The Terminator having a bond with young John Connor. In “Don’t Breathe 2,” we see that The Blind Man has a daughter now by the name of Phoenix. This connection is presented extensively throughout the film and is nicely explored.

Sticking to my “Terminator” comparisons, I think Stephen Lang does a great job at portraying the Blind Man, otherwise known as Norman Nordstrom, once again. He kind of reminded me of a big guy who could step into any situation and make someone’s day a living hell, and do so in a way that as far as me, as an audience member, is concerned, is utterly dope. But as far as his character’s concerned, seeing him the way he is in this film is a slightly weird transition because in the last film he was the big bad. Here, he’s a hero. I do like how the film manages to continue the idea that Nordstrom wanted nothing more than a daughter. After all, in the first movie, it was revealed he used to have one, he was going to have another one before Cindy Roberts is accidentally killed by Nordstrom himself. As a result, towards the end of the film, Nordstrom traps Rocky in said film and attempts to inseminate her with a turkey baster. Despite the fact that the first film presented this concept with hint of evil attached, I love how this sequel dives into the originally crazy concept and expands on it. And it is not like the concept is anywhere near as twisted or wicked. I mean, there are abnormalities attached that could raise some questions from people standing by or other people who happen to have different parenting styles. Nevertheless, it feels more natural and more along the lines of a television drama for a period of time. After all, if you want the same wickedness that the first film provides, just wait for the second half where it gets dark and bloody, and boy do I mean it.

One of the best parts of “Don’t Breathe 2” is that there is a somewhat consistent sense of unpredictability. Yes, some of the scares, not all, but a selection, can be predictable, but story-wise, this film does not disappoint with the creepy, dark, and twisted direction they take their plot points and characters. I will not lie, there was a point towards the end of the second act where I basically winced as to what could happen within the next twenty minutes because I was getting increasingly creeped out.

If you had to ask me rwhich “Don’t Breathe” film I’d watch again right now, the answer would not be the easiest, but if you had to ask me what I thought about “Don’t Breathe 2,” I would argue that it is possibly, like “Terminator 2,” better than the original. I’m probably not in the majority when I say that, but I stand by my statement. I will also say that part of me does not want to see a sequel to “Don’t Breathe 2” because the movie ends in such a way that makes the idea of a sequel feel kind of campy or absurd. Granted, you never know. The Hollywood machine loves endless sequels and remakes, so anything is possible in a world where “Toy Story 4” can get made (and to positive results!).

If I had to give any flaws to “Don’t Breathe 2,” I’d say the one that comes to mind is that there is a major plot point that Phoenix experiences and I feel like her reaction to the whole scenario is not natural whatsoever. She gave a good performance in the film, but if anything, I feel like this issue is more on the script than anything else. This is something that is supposed to be sadistic, crazy, and life threatening, and the way that I interpreted most of her emotions were that of a robot. She just took it all in as if there was no real worry or misfortune. I don’t know, maybe it is because she’s already had enough going on, which I won’t get into for spoiler reasons, but nevertheless. Even so, I would highly recommend “Don’t Breathe 2,” especially to those who enjoyed the original.

One last thing, I don’t know if this was supposed to be a joke, but this was a literal line from the film…

“Breathe. Breathe. Breathe.”

It’s called “DON’T Breathe!” Get it right!

In the end, “Don’t Breathe 2” is a sequel that could take your breath away. Stephen Lang does a great job returning as the fierce Norman Nordstrom. This film is well directed, well shot, nicely edited. I think technically speaking, this film checks all the boxes. As a horror flick, it is hypnotizing. As a sequel, it is one of those cases where I may have enjoyed this film more than the original. And it is one of the better movies I have seen this year. If you have not seen “Don’t Breathe 2,” check it out whenever you can. I’m going to give “Don’t Breathe 2” a 7/10.

“Don’t Breathe 2” is now playing in theaters and is available to rent on VOD services such as Prime Video and Vudu.

Thanks for reading this review! Coming soon, I will have a couple new reviews for movies including “Reminiscence” and “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings.” Stay tuned for those! Speaking of staying tuned, be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Scene Before Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Don’t Breathe 2?” What did you think about it? Or, which of the two “Don’t Breathe” films is better? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Yellow Rose (2019): Bigger Than Texas, Bigger Than Gold

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Yellow Rose” is directed by Diane Paragas (NextWorld, Brooklyn Boheme) and stars Eva Noblezada, Dale Watson, Princess Punzalan, and Lea Salonga (Aladdin, Mulan). This film follows a 17-year-old Filipina, who also happens to be part of a family of undocumented immigrants living in the United States. When Rose Garcia’s mother gets picked up by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, she runs off and attempts to adapt to a new life and new reality as she aspires to become a country singer in Austin, Texas.

This movie played at a plethora of film festivals in 2019. Not only did this film get to play at these film festivals, but it did something else. WIN. On IMDb, there is a list of the many festivals in which this movie played. At almost every single one, it took home whatever each festival’s equivalent to Best Picture happens to be. It’s that good. Simply from the awards potential and what it has racked up so far, I had high expectations for this film. At the same time, it’s 2020, the year where each day I wonder if the next one is going to be less intolerable than the one before. For those who must know, it’s not like we have not had any good films this year. “Tenet,” “Summerland,” and “The Last Shift” are incredible. I’ll also happily defend “Impractical Jokers: The Movie” until the day I die! It’s worth a watch, trust me! Check it out on HBO Max!

In all seriousness, I saw “Yellow Rose” in an empty theater, given how cinemas are the only way you can watch this movie. Over the past couple year, we’ve had quite a few music-based movies that became popular, including “A Star is Born,” “Bohemian Rhapsody,” and “Yesterday.” Honestly, I’d rather forget that last one, it’s terrible. Here’s some good news. “Yellow Rose” is not as bad as yesterday.

Here’s some GREAT news… “Yellow Rose” is one of the best movies of the year!

This year in general started off fine, became bad, it’s gotten worse, and it hasn’t stopped progressing down the rabbit hole in terms of how terrible it truly is. For movies, it’s kind of the opposite point of view. We started off with a couple duds, got some good movies here and there, but overall, this year has been nothing special. We were so spoiled in 2019 with movies like “Parasite,” “Knives Out,” “Marriage Story,” and “Ready or Not.” But I will say one thing about this year, that’s kind of like last year. The sweet stuff comes later. And trust me, “Yellow Rose” is, in the words of Peter Griffin, freakin’ sweet.

Now I don’t know if this movie will be for everyone, specifically because the main character and her mother are living in the United States illegally, so I imagine some people will look at this movie, witness the main character, and simply ignore it. Movies are not made for everybody, that is the subjectivity of film. But when it comes to how this film tells this story, you cannot deny its power. You cannot deny its impact. I honestly don’t care about the status of our main character, because overall she is incredibly likable. I am a legal citizen of the United States. That is something which I will admit I have not been proud to say in recent years, but that’s not the point. Nevertheless, I enjoyed how the film deals with its issues, themes, and overall conflict.

Not only is “Yellow Rose” a great film about an aspiring artist, but it is a fantastic film about being an illegal in the United States. You’re trying to get by, you may not have the best accommodations, although you’re managing, and when it comes to dealing with I.C.E., it’s a brutal game of hardball. At the same time, even WITHOUT that, this film is still a lively presentation of how someone aspires to be something bigger than themselves, which is a story I enjoy from time to time. Minus the legality factor, I related to the character Rose. From the first five or so minutes of the film, I was instantly hooked from just seeing her on screen. And I’ll tell ya why. Like her, I have enormous aspirations. I spend all my time in my room. I’m a creative type. And there’s even a scene where I got the sense that she hides her creative self from other people. My eyes lit up from that very moment, and I knew I was in for what could possibly be the best movie of the year. By the way, Rose is played by Eva Noblezada, this is her first role that is not on a stage, and it is PERFECT. I do not think she will win Best Actress, but for a first performance, I could not be happier.

Speaking of songs, there are a lot of them in this movie, and there is a good chance that I’ll listen to some of them again. I will say though, one of the few cons, and there are not that many, that I have with “Yellow Rose” is despite the fact that “Yellow Rose” heavily centers around music, I don’t remember many of the songs in the film or the lyrics of said songs. At the same time, this stands true for much of the music I enjoy, so I could debunk this. Nevertheless, no movie’s perfect. This is a philosophy that has stood true for years, and I am willing to abide by it. This is not to say the songs suck, and I will say that many of them are spectacular, but a flaw’s a flaw.

If I had to say anything else about this movie, this came out at the perfect time for me. I still live with a parent, but I can see myself starting my own life pretty soon. This girl, embodies me as someone who sees their future and even a little bit of their present, and it ain’t always pretty. I can’t always rely on the best transportation, I make things up as I go along, and the living conditions may not always be great. I am very thankful to have such an incredible life right now where I can get three meals a day, and maybe a little more. This movie made me appreciate what people, regardless of their legality, go through just to survive. This movie is not only relatable, but emotionally gripping. My eyes and ears were engaged from start to finish, and it never let me go. In this wreck of a year, we need more movies like “Yellow Rose.”

In the end, “Yellow Rose” is quite high on my must see list! The film is only available in theaters now, which I will say, as usual, I get it, not everyone wants to go to the movies. But, if you are one of those people who wants to go see a movie, “Yellow Rose” is mandatory viewing. If you don’t enjoy the movie, maybe you’ll enjoy the songs. Who knows? This movie deals with multiple stories and issues, with each one coming out to top notch perfection. “Tenet” is one of the big movies out right now, and it has gotten a lot of attention, but if you want to support something with a smaller budget, I implore you to watch “Yellow Rose.” Again, some of the songs are not that memorable, but that could change upon listening to the album or a second viewing. And you bet I will want to participate in a second viewing because I’m going to give “Yellow Rose” a 9/10!

Now, IMDb technically lists this as a 2019 movie, but it came out for a public theatrical release in 2020, so I am going to count this as a 2020 film. With that being said, this may be my favorite film of 2020. I’m a little torn between this and a couple other films, but I am glad that 2020 has picked up the pace movie-wise. I’m really hoping we can get a 10/10 movie by the end of the year, but I’m so happy. By the way, about that 10/10. THIS MOVIE CAME SO CLOSE that I almost gave it that score. Maybe things will change with a second viewing! We’ll have to see!

Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon I’m going to have my review up for “Honest Thief” starring Liam Neeson. I hope to publish my thoughts on that film by the end of next week. School may be keeping me a little busy during these times. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or a WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Also, check out my Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Yellow Rose?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite piece of music, either song or score, from a movie this year? For me, it has to be the “Tenet” score, Ludwig Göransson created a banger! Leave your thoughts down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!