Thriller | Scene Before

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Eden (2024): Ron Howard Presents: Survivor

Posted on October 1 by Jack Drees

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Honey Don’t! (2025): A Blandly Sensual Ride from Star Margaret Qualley and Director Ethan Coen

Posted on September 24 by Jack Drees

“Honey Don’t!” is directed by Ethan Coen (The Big Lebowski, No Country for Old Men) and stars Margaret Qualley (Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, The Substance), Aubrey Plaza (Parks and Recreation, My Old Ass), Chris Evans (Captain America: The First Avenger, The Gray Man), and Charlie Day (It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, The Super Mario Bros. Movie). This film is the latest installment what some may call Ethan Coen and Tricia Cooke’s “lesbian B-movie trilogy” and centers around private investigator Honey O’Donahue, who must look into multiple deaths supposedly tied to a church.

“Honey Don’t!” is Ethan Coen and Margaret Qualley’s latest collaboration following the above average “Drive-Away Dolls.” I ended up giving the film a positive score, but it was far from my favorite movie of 2024. I praised the film when it came out, but if I had to name a core weakness, it would have to be the plot. I liked a lot of what went down in the film, but some of the script is kind of forgettable.

Having seen “Honey Don’t!,” I think it has a lot more in common with “Drive-Away Dolls” than its star-director combo. Both films feature its lead playing a homosexual woman finding herself while connected to an ongoing case. The film heavily leans into its sensual vibes. The film is also on the shorter side with a runtime of 89 minutes. And unsurprisingly, it is tightly paced.

Though one thing that individualizes “Honey Don’t!” is that I honestly do not see myself revisiting the film anytime in the near future. I ended up buying “Drive-Away Dolls” on Blu-ray. At best, I see “Honey Don’t!” as background noise while flipping channels and trying to get some sleep at a hotel. Even as I write this down, I am second-guessing myself. This is the kind of movie that I could imagine playing great if the TV were on mute. It has big stars in it, the overall look of the film is not bad. The production design is sometimes picturesque and individualistic. I will even add that some of the costume choices are memorable. But if you are going to ask me what my favorite part of this movie was, I would draw a blank. This is a clear case of all spark but little personality. At times, the film does have a quirky vibe to it, but it does not really do much to make the overall product better. There is a blandness to the quirkiness, if that makes any sense. It feels weirdly flat.

I said this about “Smurfs” recently, and the people behind “Honey Don’t!” can rest easy, because their movie is nowhere near as awful, but this movie somewhat feels like it should go straight to streaming. If I had to guess, the main reason why this film did not end up on streaming is because of the same reason why “Smurfs” did not end up on streaming, and it is not exactly due to how much it cost or how pristine it looks. Some of the production value is not bad. I thought a lot of the film’s style was clever. But its substance was lacking. It kind of reminded me of The Russo brothers’ “The Gray Man,” because the film is nice to look at, but it stars a talented group of people who deserve a better story. Heck, if I needed an even more recent comparison, Wes Anderson’s “The Phoenician Scheme” seems to fit the bill. Ethan Coen is kind of in the same boat as Wes Anderson given their respected resumes and individual filmmaking quirks. But on top of that, both of these films also have star-studded casts. If these films were not directed by people whose names are as well known as they are, I would imagine that someone is going after several big names to compensate for a lackluster story.

In addition to Margaret Qualley, the film stars Aubrey Plaza, Charlie Day, and Chris Evans, the latter of whom was also in “The Gray Man,” so this is not his first dose of mediocrity in somewhat recent times. I would not say that any of these actors give bad performances. In fact, I buy the chemistry of Qualley and Plaza as a horned-up couple. I thought Charlie Day was charming in his supporting role, even if it is not his best work. I have nothing overtly negative to say about him, much like many of the movie’s other cast members. They play their parts well, even if they are not written to their highest potential.

That said, the real standout for me is Chris Evans, who plays the marvelously unhinged Reverend Drew Devlin. Kind of like his outing in “The Gray Man,” Evans is chaotic in all the right ways. He brings an energy to this film that kept me interested. It is almost cartoon-like compared to some others in the cast, but it works. In recent years, Evans has been proving his range by playing complicated or moronic characters that separate himself from the hero who can do no wrong such as Captain America or Buzz Lightyear, and this is the latest example on Evans’ resume. It is not his best performance, but he comes off as if he is having fun with the role.

While I have not rewatched Ethan Coen’s preceding film to this one, “Drive-Away Dolls,” since the theater, I much prefer it to “Honey Don’t!” simply because there is a clear zaniness to it. The film is funnier, I like the characters more, and much like this movie, it is fun to look at. “Honey Don’t!” on the other hand feels like there is something missing. There is an emptiness to it. And empty is not an adjective I would want to use to describe any movie, much less one from a Coen brother and its talented cast. Once again, this is supposedly the second film of an unofficial trilogy. I hope this is the one dud of the bunch. But there is a saying that you are only as good as your last project, and I am a little worried that the next movie could be as flat as this one. I hope that is not the case.

Courtesy of Focus Features – © Focus Features

In the end, if I had genuine words to describe “Honey Don’t!”, I would be blanking. This is not the worst film of the year as I can truthfully name some redeeming qualities such as the technical aspects, some of the performances, and to my surprise, the rather tight pacing. The film by no means feels rushed, though I will admit I did check the time at one point. But when it comes to personality, this is where “Drive-Away Dolls” is a slightly better movie. Margaret Qualley is a great actress, and if you want a better example of her talent, maybe go watch “Drive-Away Dolls.” Heck, I would even recommend “The Substance,” which some of you might hate me for saying this, was far from my favorite film of 2024. But that film was something that “Honey Don’t!” was not. An experience. As much as I was turned off by the climax of “The Substance,” I will also likely not forget it anytime soon. “Honey Don’t!” on the other hand is withering in my brain as we speak. I am going to give “Honey Don’t!” a 4/10.

“Honey Don’t!” 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 “Eden.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Splitsville,” “The Long Walk,” “A Big Bold Beautiful Journey,” and “Him.” 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 “Honey Don’t!”? What did you think about it? Or, which film do you prefer? “Honey Don’t!” or “Drive-Away Dolls?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Nobody 2 (2025): Hitman: Far from Home

Posted on September 18 by Jack Drees

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Honey Don’t!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Eden,” “Splitsville,” and “The Long Walk.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Nobody 2?” What did you think about it? Or, which of the two “Nobody” installments do you prefer? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

M3GAN 2.0 (2025): Does Not Compute

Posted on July 23 by Jack Drees

“M3GAN 2.0” is directed by Gerard Johnstone, who also directed the original “M3GAN” installment. This film stars Allison Williams (Get Out, Girls), Violet McGraw (The Haunting of Hill House, Black Widow), Ivanna Sakhno (The Spy Who Dumped Me, Pacific Rim: Uprising), and Jermaine Clement (Moana, The Flight of the Conchords). This sequel sees the return of the original cast a couple years after the titular character went on a rampage. Despite her dangerous antics, said title character is tasked with taking down a robot named Amelia.

Photo Credit: Universal Pictures – © 2025 Universal Studios. All Rights Reserved.

If you told me in 2023 that I would walk out of the original “M3GAN” having a great time, I would summon a lightning cloud and strike a bolt into your head. But to my surprise, the film is solid. And not just because the robot does a funny dance. I found it to be a fine metaphor for technology always being there for you, perhaps to extremely dangerous levels. I liked the first film so hopefully “M3GAN 2.0” would keep up the good work.

“M3GAN 2.0” had an unusual marketing campaign. The trailers seemed to indicate a shift similar to that of a James Cameron sequel like “Aliens” or “Terminator 2: Judgment Day.” The first film is at its core, a horror movie. This sequel has horror elements, but it is a bit more action-oriented. It is definitely not as scary as the original film, at least not in a direct sense. Although if there was something that was as scary this time around, it would be the overhanging commentary. Another key difference this time around is that M3GAN goes from being a bad robot to a good gal. The film finds a less than buyable way to have her make amends with those she either harmed or nearly killed in the previous installment to justify her goodness, but still.

That is just one of several wrongs in this film’s screenplay. “M3GAN 2.0” is not that scary. Sure, this is less of a horror film than what the first film turned out to be, but there are attempts at horror in this film that do not stick the landing. The film clearly tries to be funny and edgy, but if anything it just sounds like M3GAN is trying her darndest every other second to join the cool kids table. If anything she comes off as a PG-13 robot “Deadpool.” There are select moments and lines where I think the film would have been better if they were done in a more R rated fashion. I am not saying that this film needs to go overboard like it’s the next “Wolf of Wall Street,” but I think it would have helped if M3GAN had a tad less of a filter. Granted, the original film was PG-13, so I guess logically this one had to be as well. If the film goes for an R, that would risk losing the younger audience who likely checked out the last film. But seriously! This sequel changes the genre as well as the titular robot’s personality. Why not a maturity shift? Is it to get more money? Because I do not think your $10 million opening weekend is not doing you any favors.

Honestly, the only genuine laugh I remember having in the film involves a line having to do with a yeast infection. If I did laugh at all for the remainder of the runtime, then said laughter was not that hard or it ended up being for the wrong reasons.

As previously established, “M3GAN 2.0” is an action movie. Is the action good? Well… It is competent. I do not have a ton of complaints regarding the action, but I am not going to pretend any of it was that memorable. Although there was one fun scene between the film’s antagonist and a wealthy individual in his erotic cave. Remember how I said the film was not that funny? Well, this part actually had me laughing for, you guessed it, the wrong reasons. It was not necessarily comedy gold. I was laughing at the movie rather than with it.

One thing that people seem to remember distinctly from the first film is the scene where M3GAN jumps around and dances. That moment is still ingrained in my mind and its memability is noticeable. In this sequel, the filmmakers appear to create a scene inspired by the roaring response that scene got. And quite frankly, it seems that is the only reason why that scene was put in the film. It felt kind of forced.

Speaking of memes, this movie introduces some new meme potential for the M3GAN character… She sings now. I do not want to spoil much about it, but I was so thrown off by this moment to preposterous levels. The moment that M3GAN sings is so out of left field that I would not have been surprised if at one point Lady Gaga’s Harley Quinn showed up in the background asking to perform a duet. It kind of reminded me of the musical planet from “The Marvels,” but at least that moment had some greater context and purpose in the story.

That said, I can somewhat appreciate the film’s commentary, which presents a double edge sword. Part of me wonders how this movie, and the more I think about it, the last one, is going to age. I saw the last movie as a warning that being too attached to your phone, or in some cases, your phone being too attached to you, can be dangerous. If anything, this film is a warning about artificial intelligence. You can argue the last film was as well, but this one feels stricter in that regard. It shows the dangers of advancing technology to a point where it could potentially kill us, and it may lead to an inevitability where we have to adapt to the technology being in our lives rather than ignoring it. As campy as these films occasionally come off, there are moments where they feel down to earth.

Unfortunately, the commentary feels like a downgrade from that of the original because as I said before, this film is not that scary. Part of what made the commentary work in the original movie is that it had a hand in the film’s scares. Here it is just littered throughout the script.

In a way, I can appreciate the crew behind “M3GAN 2.0” for trying something different rather than resorting to the same old tricks. I was looking forward to a more action-centered installment. But what makes this film different either felt too out there or simply put, poorly executed. As for what felt the same, it was kind of lame this time around. It does not matter if you try to go for something different or the same as before. If all of your material is bad, then it is bad. Plain and simple.

In the end, “M3GAN 2.0” was kind of disappointing. It is one of the weakest films of 2025. I was really looking forward to this film after the original turned out to be a delightful surprise. In a way one could say that this sequel was a surprise of its own, but not in the way that I would want it to be. The film differentiates from its predecessor in more ways than one. This is more of an action movie than a horror movie. But no matter what genre it shoots for, I simply wish it were a good movie. And unfortunately, it is not. I am going to give “M3GAN 2.0” a 3/10.

“M3GAN 2.0” 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 “F1: The Movie.” Stay tuned! Also, coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “Superman” and “Guns Up.” 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 “M3GAN 2.0?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a sequel you enjoy that shifts its genre from the original? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Jurassic World: Rebirth (2025): Dinosaur Dullness

Posted on July 15 by Jack Drees

“Jurassic World: Rebirth” is directed by Gareth Edwards (Godzilla, The Creator) and stars Scarlett Johansson (Black Widow, Under the Skin), Mahershala Ali (Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, Moonlight), Jonathan Bailey (Bridgerton, Wicked), Rupert Friend (Obi-Wan Kenobi, Pride & Prejudice), Manuel Garcia-Rulfo (Sicario: Day of the Soldado, The Lincoln Lawyer), and Ed Skrien (Alita: Battle Angel, Deadpool). This film is about a group of people who are on a mission to extract DNA from dinosaurs in order to achieve a medical breakthrough.

Photo by Universal Pictures and Amblin Entertainment – © Universal Studios. All Rights Reserved.

Here we go again. “Jurassic Park” is undoubtedly a well known franchise. But so far, it is, at best, two for six as far as yours truly is concerned. Maybe three if I am being generous. Of course, the original “Jurassic Park” is peak cinema. I also enjoyed “The Lost World.” The film had some engaging sequences. The other films as far as I am concerned are dinosaur fodder, but I will admit when I watched “Jurassic World” in the theater a decade ago, it was a cool experience, especially in IMAX 3D. But having watched it at home, I think the film as a story and character piece is mediocre at best.

I went into “Jurassic World: Rebirth” with little expectations. After all, the odds were against this film being good based on the data I have provided thus far. Plus, I thought the last film, “Jurassic World: Dominion,” is one of the most abysmal blockbusters of all time. They say you are only as good as your last project.

I saw “Jurassic World: Rebirth” with a friend. Upon walking out of the film, I told my friend that I thought it was one of the weaker installments. Because that is the truth. I thought compared to the original, this was a waste of time. It is really hard to establish myself as a “Jurassic Park” fan when there is only one outright memorable installment. Yes, the second film has its moments. But other than those two, I have no desire to go back to watch any of the “Jurassic Park” movies, including this one.

There are positives to this film, and thankfully, as a narrative, it is slightly more entertaining than whatever the heck “Jurassic World: Dominion” turned out to be. It certainly helps that this movie chooses to focus more on dinosaurs than it does locusts. The biggest positive I can give to this film is that it is scary. The previous film had only one dinosaur sequence that had me scared for the characters. This latest film improves upon that. Part of that has to do with the direction from Gareth Edwards.

While Gareth Edwards may not be my favorite director working today, he is a name I respect. He can bring a lot to a big budget project. I love how he demonstrates the scale of titans in his work between establishing the titular character in 2014’s “Godzilla” and the AT-ATs in “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story.” Unsurprisingly, there was a sense of wonder to be had with the dinosaurs on screen. There is one particular sequence involving two dinosaurs with long tails in the middle of the grass that honestly took me back to the original “Jurassic Park” when Alan Grant takes off his sunglasses and marvels over the sight of a living dinosaur. There is also some okay dinosaur action… When said action actually happens.

Gareth Edwards does a good job at handling the action sequences in this film, but much like his “Godzilla” movie, my big problem with it is that I thought the film’s action does not become truly exciting until the film’s second half. There is some action in the first half, but it is honestly kind of a bore. You could argue that the crew wanted to spend time establishing the human characters, and there are snippets where you get to know the film’s cast. But I am honestly not going to remember most of these people. Yes, some of them are played by well known, award-winning actors, but I failed to connect with their respective characters. If you want a better monster movie that perfectly balances characterization with monster action, I hate doing this because Edwards did not direct this installment, but I highly recommend “Godzilla Minus One.”

When it comes to story, “Jurassic World: Rebirth” seems to have an identity crisis. While many movies have a plots and b plots, this movie has a couple different plots that feel like they distract from each other for the most part. The movie spends so much time establishing one set of characters only to suddenly introduce another set who quite frankly do not feel like they belong in this particular narrative.

But maybe the screenplay will utilize these plots to their full potential and unleash some memorable characters and line delivery! Ha! I wish. Some of the dialogue is cliche. The film seems to have attempts at humor that do not stick the landing. Some lines sound like they are out of a bad Michael Bay movie. And as I said before, the characters could have been better. Even the main ones feel relatively shallow. Do I like Scarlett Johansson? Yes. A lot actually. I think she is talented. I could tell she wanted to be in this film and she looked like she was having fun. But I wish I had more of a reason to care about her character of Zora Bennett.

These are not even the biggest faults of the screenplay. For some time after watching the movie, I thought this was a bad “Jurassic Park” installment. But the more I think about it, the angrier I get based on one particular complaint I have. For reasons I do not understand, the film establishes early on that public interest in dinosaurs has waned since the last movie. I’m sorry, what?!

How is that possible?! Look! Dinosaurs might just be one of the most consistently amazing concepts in history. Think about it! These are magnificent creatures from ages ago who dominated the planet until all of sudden they were taken out by space junk! They’re humungous! They’re boisterous! They come in many different shapes, sizes, types, and colors! Some of them will probably rejoice in the thought of straight up annihilating you! How on earth do dinosaurs become tiresome to the general public? In fact, let’s talk about this franchise alone! Four of these movies made more than a billion dollars! Yes, if you read my review for “Dominion” I thought that film accomplished the unthinkable feat of making dinosaurs boring. But that does not mean dinosaurs as a concept is boring. They were boring in a certain context. Ask ANY young boy living today if they like dinosaurs. I guarantee all of them would answer with a “yes.”

One could argue that the idea of the general public being bored by dinosaurs was written based on the ongoing consensus of the recent “Jurassic Park” installments. The films do not appear to be impressing audiences as much the previous ones did. But even if that is true, it does not change the fact that dinosaurs are still exciting. I live 20 minutes away from Boston, so we have the Museum of Science, and just about every time I go, I cannot help but look at the giant t-rex exhibit.

Saying that public interest in dinosaurs has deteriorated is like assuming that people today are no longer interested in other animals. We still go to zoos! We still go to aquariums! We still have pets! We still go on YouTube and watch cat videos every once in a while! But sure, the general public thinks dinosaurs are boring.

Now I would defend this idea for one reason, which is that dinosaurs spent so much time terrorizing the planet to the point where so many people were afraid to so much as look at one again. After all, they were unleashed into our world between “Fallen Kingdom” and “Dominion.” I do not recall “Jurassic World: Rebirth” making such a point clear, so I continue to question the film’s logic.

By the way, this film is written by David Koepp! The writer for the original “Jurassic Park!” Oh how the mighty have fallen. It is not like he has a perfect resume. After all, in recent years he did “You Should Have Left” and “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny,” but I cannot recall being as infuriated by one of his screenplays as much as I am with this one.

Also, going back to what I said about the film’s wonder factor and how it reminded me of a certain scene from the original “Jurassic Park,” some of “Rebirth’s” highest points are those that are borderline nostalgia bait. While Alexandre Desplat is doing the score this time around instead of John Williams, the best musical beats are, unsurprisingly, those that clearly springboard off of John Williams’ original music. Do not get me wrong, these are iconic tunes. But the film does not really individualize itself from a musical perspective. There is, admittedly, a pretty fun chase scene in the climax of the film that feels at least partially inspired by the kitchen scene from the original movie. I will not go into spoilers, but the very end of the film reminded me of the original as well. As I watched it play out, I got the sense the filmmakers were trying to pay tribute to the original’s ending.

That said, if anything, this film makes me want to go back and watch the original “Jurassic Park.” Not necessarily because this film was fun, though there are one or two moments that stand out, but because it spent so much time reminding me of the original’s superiority.

I have nothing against dinosaur movies, and “Jurassic Park” is a franchise with potential. But unfortunately that potential is repeatedly shattered from one bad movie to the next. My interest in dinosaurs has definitely not waned. But my interest in this franchise definitely has.

In the end, “Jurassic World: Rebirth” is further proof that this franchise needs to be wiped out by an asteroid. This is one of the worst films of 2025. I honestly think if they continue to make these movies they are going to achieve a fate similar to the “Transformers” franchise when it was under the helm of Michael Bay. These movies have had their moment in the sun, but I think audiences are going to open their eyes and either ask for the filmmakers to aim higher or decide to stop going to these films altogether. Then again, these are literally the only relevant dinosaur movies on the market, so maybe not. This franchise should be exciting but for whatever reason, each movie finds a way to spiral into awfulness. I am going to give “Jurassic World: Rebirth” a 3/10.

“Jurassic World: Rebirth” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “M3GAN 2.0.” Stay tuned! Also, coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “F1: The Movie” and “Superman.” Blockbuster season is kicking into gear so I hope you are ready to hear what I think about the hottest movies of the summer. Hopefully these movies will end up better than “Jurassic World: Rebirth.” 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 “Jurassic World: Rebirth?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Jurassic Park” movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Phoenician Scheme (2025): One of Wes Anderson’s Weakest Films Yet

Posted on July 1 by Jack Drees

“The Phoenician Scheme” is directed by Wes Anderson (The Grand Budapest Hotel, The French Dispatch) and stars Benicio del Toro (Sicario, Star Wars: The Last Jedi), Mia Threapleton (The Buccaneers, I Am…), Michael Cera (Juno, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World), Riz Ahmed (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, Sound of Metal), Tom Hanks (Toy Story, Cast Away), Bryan Cranston (Godzilla, Breaking Bad), Mathieu Amalric (Quantum of Solace, The Grand Budapest Hotel), Richard Ayoade (The Bad Guys, The Watch), Jeffrey Wright (Asteroid City, What If…?), Scarlett Johansson (Black Widow, Sing), Benedict Cumberbatch (The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug, Doctor Strange), Rupert Friend (Hitman: Agent 47, Homeland), and Hope Davis (Asteroid City, Greenland). This film is about Zsa-zsa Korda, a wealthy businessman who appoints his daughter as the heir to his estate. During his search for a new enterprise, the two become the target of assassins, terrorists, and tycoons.

Courtesy of TPS Productions/Focus Features – © 2025

Even noticeably solid directors have at least one dud on their resume. Steven Spielberg has “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.” Joel Schumacher has “Batman & Robin.” Meanwhile, for Wes Anderson, his dud would be his most recent film, “Asteroid City,” which despite its technical mastery and somewhat intriguing concept, had uninteresting characters, boring scenes, and a lackluster ending. I like Wes Anderson. Just read my reviews for “Isle of Dogs” and “The French Dispatch.”

There is a saying that you are only as good as your last project, so with “Asteroid City” somewhat fresh in my mind, I went into “The Phoenician Scheme” with moderate at best expectations. When the movie started, I was pleasantly surprised. Unfortunately, that feeling fizzled real fast.

“The Phoenician Scheme” has a fantastic hook. The movie starts with a plane crash, which apparently is one of several our protagonist has gone through. In that same scene, not even thirty seconds in, someone’s head gets blown off and flies out into the sky. Very exciting stuff! Having a solid beginning can lead to promise down the road. First impressions matter, and this movie impressed me right off the bat. But I would say that this scene is where the movie peaked. Because what follows is a complete and utter disappointment of a snoozefest some like to call a motion picture.

It did not take long for me after finishing “The Phoenician Scheme” to declare that it might be my least favorite of Wes Anderson’s filmography. I still have yet to see “The Royal Tenenbaums” and “The Darjeeling Limited,” but from his work that I have seen so far, this is probably the one that I can say is the weakest. And that is sad, because I was not a huge fan of “Asteroid City.” Much like “Asteroid City,” there are things to like in “The Phoenician Scheme,” but the film itself underwhelmed me. I knew what I was getting out of this film to a certain degree given its director. If you like Wes Anderson’s quirky style, good news, it can be found here. But I simply wish there was a little more substance to accompany it.

Most of my positives regarding “The Phoenician Scheme” have to do with the film’s technical aspects. This film, to my lack of surprise, has stunning production design. The color choices of all the surroundings are meticulously chosen and easy on the eyes. Everything in the frame feels organized. The film makes the most of its 4:3 aspect ratio that Wes Anderson has previously used in films like “The French Dispatch” or “The Grand Budapest Hotel.” Despite its consistent vibrance, the film has an old timey feel to it. Even with the score sometimes, which is another tour de force from Alexandre Desplat. The music commands your attention and is up there with “Isle of Dogs” as one of my favorites in a Wes Anderson film.

Watching “The Phoenician Scheme” is like going to an art museum but you are consistently bored or unamused by every single exhibit. Yes, this film looks extravagant and is obviously well done, but is it worth my time? Judging by my repeated urge to fall asleep in the auditorium, I do not think so. As easy on the eyes and ears as “The Phoenician Scheme” is, I wish I could have used those eyes and ears to see and hear something much more valuable.

As a director, Wes Anderson is undeniably quirky. Part of his quirkiness shines through the performances he gets out of his actors. Like some of his other films, his unique way of getting actors to deliver dialogue tends to stand out. There is something about their lines, at least to me, that lacks realism, but nevertheless tends to work in the environment of his films. Watching “The Phoenician Scheme” however, the dialogue comes off as stiff and stilted. Every line feels as if the characters are reading off their finest essays rather than speaking off the cuff or acting like genuine human beings. Seriously! Every other line in this film feels disappointingly robotic!

To make matters worse, this film, like some of Wes Anderson’s previous work, has a stacked, talented cast. If you were to ask a friend who their favorite actor is, chances are their pick is in this movie! Everyone from Benecio del Toro to Tom Hanks to Scarlett Johansson to Benedict Cumberbatch to Bryan Cranston! This movie is kind of like “Amsterdam” with a pinch more polish!

The worst offender among the cast for me is Michael Cera, seen above doing his best Adam Conover cosplay. For the record, I like Michael Cera. I am a big “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World” fan. And his performance here somewhat reminded me of his performance in that film. They are not the same on the surface, but when it comes to direction and vision, they feel like they strictly belong in their respective universes. That sounds like a good thing, but in the case of “The Phoenician Scheme,” I was bewildered as to some of the choices they made regarding Cera’s character of Bjørn. Cera unleashes a voice for his character that got on my nerves real fast. The more he talked, the more I wanted to melt my brain.

That said, this film is also shaping up to Mia Threapleton’s (right) big break. For those who do not know, Mia Threapleton is Kate Winslet’s daughter. She was in a few projects before this film, but this is my first time seeing her in a role. She did a great job as Sister Liesl. And I do not mean that by nepotism standards. I got the impression that she could potentially have a career as successful as her mother. She is very talented.

I am by no means a Wes Anderson newbie. I have an understanding that he tends to stylize his dialogue, frame objects or people in the most still-like manner possible, and beautify the background so much to the point where it becomes a character of it own. Anderson is a noticeably a visionary director. He is an auteur. But if anything this is a film that so is overwhelmingly packed with Wes Anderson’s style that he prioritized it before characterization and pacing. As I watched this film, I barely felt anything. I did not care much about the characters, even if they are conceptually interesting. The story occasionally reeked of convolution. Overall, I left this film unsatisfied.

In the end, “The Phoenician Scheme” is a complete bore. One can argue that this film feels like something that only Wes Anderson can do. But if that is the case, that is disappointing because what this film ended up being was a slow, albeit pretty looking espionage story that I won’t even remember in the next year. If you want to watch a good Wes Anderson movie go back and watch “Rushmore.” Go watch “Fantastic Mr. Fox.” Heck, even his earliest feature film, “Bottle Rocket,” was quite fun. If this was my first Wes Anderson film, chances are I would not be looking forward to what he has up his sleeve next. I am going to give “The Phoenician Scheme” a 3/10.

“The Phoenician Scheme” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “The Life of Chuck!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “Materialists” and “Elio.” 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 “The Phoenician Scheme?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a bad film from a filmmaker whose work you traditionally like? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Ballerina (2025): Yeah! I’m Thinking I Dig This Spinoff!

Posted on June 25 by Jack Drees

“Ballerina” is directed by Len Wiseman (Live Free or Die Hard, Total Recall) and stars Ana de Armas (Blade Runner 2049, Knives Out), Anjelica Huston (The Addams Family, Prizzi’s Honor), Gabriel Byrne (Hereditary, In Treatment), Lance Reddick (Bosch, The Wire), Norman Reedus (The Walking Dead, The Boondock Saints), Ian McShane (Deadwood, Kung Fu Panda), and Keanu Reeves (Point Break, The Matrix). This film is about a woman who trains as an assassin and seeks revenge following the death of her father.

Yeah, I’m thinking the “John Wick” franchise is back! But this time, it is not Wick’s film. He is in it, but the star of the show this time around is Ana de Armas as Eve Macarro. This marks the franchise’s first film spinoff. On the television side, there is also “The Continental,” which I have admittedly yet to see. But every time I watch a proper “John Wick” film, I am reminded of how much potential this franchise has when it comes to its lore. There are tons of stories that could be told within the walls of the many Continental hotels. With “Ballerina” being the franchise’s first film spinoff, does it compare to the proper movies? Honestly, it is worthy of the “John Wick” name.

“Ballerina” is better than I thought it would be. And I feel stupid for saying that. For the record, I was looking forward to this film for multiple reasons. First off, none of the “John Wick” movies have let me down so far. In fact, I find every movie in this franchise to be better than the one that came before. Not all of them are perfect. Some of them are much better with the action than the story. But the franchise is well-rounded from movie to movie. Second, Ana de Armas is in the lead role. This is the actress’s first appearance in this franchise, but I have been dying to see her in this role ever since I first heard about it. I have been hoping de Armas could take on a role like this since watching her in “No Time to Die.” She easily stole the show with her short but sweet appearance. Yes, you could argue in terms of the action genre that maybe she got a big spotlight in Netflix’s “The Gray Man,” but that movie was so mediocre that I almost forgot that it existed. Plus de Armas did not play the main character, unlike Ryan Gosling. “Ballerina” is a much larger showcase of what de Armas can do in these types of films. On top of that, she is an actress who I project could rack up a ton of Oscar noms if given the right roles. While “Ballerina” may not be Academy Award-winning in every regard, it did win me over with Ana de Armas’ presence.

Before we continue with the positives regarding Ana de Armas’ role, I must note that I also went into this film a tad worried despite my excitement. While I was excited to see Keanu Reeves as John Wick again, I was also wondering why he was in this film. What was his purpose? I will not spoil much, but he is in a lot more of the film than the marketing led me to believe. And it was fun to see him on screen once again. I will take any dose of Keanu Reeves I can get. He is breathtaking.

This is also the first film in the franchise where Chad Stahelski does not have a directing credit. That credit instead goes to Len Wiseman. Stahelski’s lack of directorial power specifically does not worry me. If anything it gives the opportunity for someone to bring in a fresh take on the property. That said, the film’s action sequences are often stylistically consistent with the previous movies. Whether they are done on massive, colorfully lit set pieces… Run on extensive, smooth shots… Or involve constant running and gunning, these look like something Chad Stahelski would come up with. Partially because he did. Well, sort of. While the action sequences are the product of Wiseman himself, Stahelski did have a helping hand with enhancing those sequences through reshoots. I think whatever they did may have been worth it because this movie cost $90 million to make, and every dollar looks like it has flown onto the screen. I have to go back to watch the other movies to verify, but this may be the most vibrant and colorful the “John Wick” franchise has ever looked. That might be odd to say considering the film is fairly dramatic and bloody. But if I were to buy myself an OLED TV, “Ballerina” would make for a great test movie.

I said I would go back to Ana de Armas, and now is the time. There are few compliments one can give an actor as positive as “I cannot see anyone else playing their role.” That happens to be the case for Ana de Armas as Eve Macarro. And that says something, because the same character was portrayed by Unity Phelan in “John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum.” For the record, Phelan has very limited acting credits, so I have no problem with de Armas replacing her. De Armas does not disappoint here. She continues to prove she is an action star.

Not only does de Armas handle the choreography given to her with perfection, but she always maintains an aura of toughness and determination. She may be small, she may be pretty sometimes, but she can pack a punch. I also liked getting to know about a bit of her backstory. She seems to have developed her recently mentioned toughness and determination partially because of how hard she was pushed as a ballet dancer. Her childhood also was not perfect in more ways than one.

There are a couple great action films out right now, both of which are part of major franchises. Since May, you had “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning,” and a couple weeks later came “Ballerina.” If you had to ask me which of these two films I recommend you watch first, my mind would go to “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning.” But “Ballerina” is not far behind. Do not sleep on it. In fact, “Ballerina” actually outshines “The Final Reckoning” in some ways. For starters, the pacing in “Ballerina” is significantly better. There is never a boring moment in either movie. But you can sometimes feel the weight of “The Final Reckoning” whereas “Ballerina” is a consistently thrilling ride. Speaking of consistency, the film never shifts much in tone. At times “The Final Reckoning” gets into Saturday morning cartoon territory with its dialogue and villain. Even with some hyperbolic action and funnier moments, the overall vibe of “Ballerina” maintained a sense of grit.

Courtesy of Lionsgate – © 2025 Lionsgate

That said, the film is, as I said earlier, not going to win every Academy Award. I will give props to the technical side like the production and costume design, the cinematography, as well as the film editing. This film undeniably looks grand, even if the scale seems to take a dip from the previous couple of “John Wick” movies. But there are times where the story lacked hints of engagement. The dialogue, while not bad, is not the best I ever heard. It is also not as emotionally investing as it could be. At times the film tries to go for the emotions, but I did not care for the supporting cast enough to feel those emotions.

But this film already has so much going for it to the point where I can forgive its faults. In true “John Wick” fashion, “Ballerina” shows how you do action shots and choreography. Never once did I look at a scene and wonder who was fighting who or feel jarred by how many takes the editor could splice together in a span of 10 seconds. There are also some cool action scenes involving objects as unusual as dinner plates. Once again, while it is not Keanu Reeves’ movie, he is great in it. He handles all of his material with excellence. He does not phone it in. And Ana de Armas puts on a performance that is arguably better than what this movie deserves. I left “Ballerina” not only wanting to see more of Ana de Armas in action roles, but also more of her in this specific role. Despite the screenplay’s faults, this character has potential. I did like what we got of her backstory, I will give the movie that. Maybe that could be expanded in later films or you can give her something better in the present to work with. “Ballerina” is a solid start for Eve Macarro, unless you technically count “Chapter 3.” Hopefully if she comes back, the crew can find a way to keep up the good work.

In the end, as far as the “John Wick” franchise goes, “Ballerina” is a weaker installment. It might even be the weakest. But like I often say about Pixar movies, even lower tier “John Wick” is still good. Per usual, the action is world class. The production design is astounding. The camerawork and lighting are top notch. The climax is wildly entertaining. There is a lot to enjoy about this film. I have no clue how many people are going to go see this film in the long run. I have my doubts it will be remembered as a “success.” But if you are an action junkie, there is a lot to like here. I would definitely watch it a second time. I am going to give “Ballerina” a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for Wes Anderson’s latest film, “The Phoenician Scheme.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will share my thoughts on “The Life of Chuck,” “Materialists,” and “Elio.” 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 “Ballerina?” What did you think about it? Or, is there a rising action star who caught your eye in recent years? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

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

Posted on June 21 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!

The Accountant 2 (2025): Ben Affleck and Jon Bernthal Shine in Two Hours of Punches and Booms

Posted on June 18 by Jack Drees

“The Accountant 2” is directed by Gavin O’Connor, who also directed this film’s 2016 predecessor. This film stars Ben Affleck (Justice League, The Way Back), Jon Bernthal (The Walking Dead, The Punisher), Cynthia Addai-Robinson (Spartacus, Arrow), Daniella Pineda (Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom, The Originals), and J.K. Simmons (Spider-Man, Whiplash). This film once again follows Christian Wolff who teams up with his brother, Braxton, to find mysterious assassins.

Before going to see “The Accountant 2” I made an effort to rewatch the original. If you remember my amateurish review you would know that I connected to the film at the time. This was mostly due to how the protagonist was written and executed. Ben Affleck plays an individual who has high functioning autism. I have grown up having many of the traits and quirks that we see from various stages of this character’s life such as his lack of urge to socialize with others. I also thought the film does a good job at providing a humanized portrayal of autism as opposed to a more stereotypical, robotic interpretation.

Is “The Accountant 2” as good as the first one? No, it is not. But is it still worth watching? Perhaps. My biggest problem with this film is that it feels less story-driven and a little more action driven. It’s like the writers listened to Elvis Presley’s “A Little Less Conversation” and suddenly thought, “We’ve cracked the code!”

Now I have no problem with good action. And to be honest, this movie has some good action. However, the action scenes sometimes lack the oomph of those in the original. Part of it is because the story here is rather convoluted. I am not going to pretend the story in the original riveted me all the way through. The movie relied way too much on flashbacks towards the end to the point of utter boredom. But this sequel at times feels overstuffed.

While the film may be slightly above average, one great thing about it is the chemistry between Christian (Affleck) and Braxton (Bernthal). The film spends lots of time putting these two in the same place, and every scene between them is worth the price of admission. There is a fantastic scene where Bernthal says he wants a dog and Affleck says everything possible to confirm that he is a cat person. The delivery between these two is on point each and every time.

Going back to how I relate to the characters in this franchise, I almost see Christian and Braxton as a personal representation of a conflict that has been circling in my mind nonstop throughout my young adult life. While these two bond as brothers, they have their differences. One key difference between these two is their individual wants in life. We see Braxton as a lone wolf, which I have always been throughout most of my life. If he puts his mind to something, he does it. He works on his own terms. But then we find out a little bit about Christian, who would like to have a partner he can check in on every once in a while. In this way, Christian, is a little more than meets the eye. You would not expect someone of his mannerisms to be interested in a relationship, but I buy his desire. As I watched this film I thought these character differences represented my personal yin and yang. Do I love being alone? Quite a bit, actually. But do I want someone to check in on? A part of me thinks about it every day.

Speaking of conflicts, I have a conflicting opinion regarding Christian Wolff in this film. Starting with the positives, I genuinely think Ben Affleck put a lot of effort into his performance and he is a standout as the character. Although some of the choices that were made in regard to the character threw me off. I get that Wolff has autism, but he comes off as a robot in this film, especially in comparison to the original. If anything, Wolff is sometimes a lackluster stereotype for people on the spectrum. For some reason, some of his line delivery and choice of words lack authenticity. I would not say that this film paints autism in the worst light, but sometimes his performance, particularly through his onslaught of stoicism, is overly emphasized. Sure, in the original, Wolff may be a bit robotic, but he also has a heart as well as feelings. In this sequel, he sounds more like the T-800. Sure, Affleck is not entirely robotic. When paired with Bernthal in this film, the two seem like genuine brothers. But if I were to judge Affleck by himself, he is sometimes soulless. Again, this is not an incompetent performance. I just think a little more depth and pizzazz could have been added to it.

“The Accountant 2” is not a movie I can see myself renting or buying to watch on my own schedule. To me, it is a cable movie. It is a movie that I would watch on a Sunday at home and eventually rely on for background noise. Now whether this movie will ever end up on cable is another story. The film is from Amazon after all and I doubt they want anybody leaving Prime or whatever the heck MGM+ is. Seriously, who uses MGM+? Anyone? If you have not seen the original “Accountant,” I much recommend that film over this one. It moves at a better pace, is less convoluted, and honestly does a much better job at characterization than the sequel. I enjoyed getting to know Christian Wolff not only through his profession but as someone who is on the spectrum. I thought the flashbacks during that film, most of them anyway, were used to its benefit. Like this sequel, the original has some decent action, but I cared more about what happened during those action scenes based on what I was learning about Christian as a character at the time. The sequel’s action is not bad, but it suffers from inferior character progression as well as storytelling. If it were not for the perfect chemistry between Affleck and Bernthal, I do not think I would be lending as much praise to this film.

In the end, “The Accountant 2” has its ups and downs. There are other recent films I would recommend watching before this one, especially in the action genre. Although if you are simply looking for good action, you will find it here. But this film is not a full meal. It satisfies in some ways and leaves a little to be desired in others. Do not get me wrong, Ben Affleck does not do a bad job in this film, and neither does Jon Bernthal. But I would not rush to see this film right away. I am going to give “The Accountant 2” a 6/10.

“The Accountant 2” is now playing in theaters and is available to stream on Prime Video.

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Bring Her Back,” “Friendship,” “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 “The Accountant 2?” What did you think about it? Or, which of the two “Accountant” films do you like better? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

	Top 10 BEST Movies o… on Secret Mall Apartment (2024):…
	Top 10 BEST Movies o… on Is This Thing On? (2025): Brad…
	Top 10 BEST Movies o… on The Life of Chuck (2024): The…
	Top 10 BEST Movies o… on Hans Zimmer & Friends: Dia…
	Top 10 BEST Movies o… on The Long Walk (2025): No Misst…