Warner Bros. Discovery

They Will Kill You (2026): Cult Craziness Ensues in This Stylish Action Flick

Posted on by Jack Drees

“They Will Kill You” is directed by Kirill Sokolov (Why Don’t You Just Die!, No Looking Back) and stars Zazie Beatz (Deadpool 2, Joker), Myha’la (Swiped, Leave the World Behind), Paterson Joseph (Wonka, Timeless), Tom Felton (Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, Fackham Hall), Heather Graham (The Hangover, Boogie Nights), and Patricia Arquette (Boyhood, Severance). This film follows a woman named Asia, a recent hire at a high-rise in New York City, as she uncovers its ties to a Satanic cult and does what she can to survive against those who make up the place.

Part of me wonders what the heck Warner Brothers was thinking with the release of “They Will Kill You.” Not the fact that they put it out at all, but rather that they put it out when they did. As someone who loves the first “Ready or Not” movie to death, I figured it would be inevitable that “They Will Kill You” would end up reminding me of that absolute piece of cinema. But seriously, what prompted Warner Brothers to release this movie the week after “Ready or Not 2: Here I Come?” While these movies are not exactly the same, they have similar plots and vibes… Both films feature a woman who is forced to take on a mob of people who are trying to kill her. Oh, and that mob is connected to a cult.

Questionable release date aside, I was interested in “They Will KIll You.” Of course, with a title like that, how could I not be? The concept intrigued me, and the movie looked like an overall gory fun time. To me, that is exactly what this movie was. Is this film going to win any awards? Probably not. Though I would not start a debate if you thought this film should be recognized for its production design.

What makes this film great is more than just its style. And I say that realizing its style is quite pleasing. What makes everything work is the connection between Asia (Beatz) and Maria Reaves (Myha’la). The film starts with the younger versions of the two as they try to run from their abusive father. Asia shoots him and gets arrested, while Maria remains in his custody. The film then flashes forward a decade to where Asia becomes a housekeeper at a New York City high-rise. As she takes on the job, she learns more about the building’s history, as well as what could happen to her if she is not careful.

The progression of the story unveils the sisters’ backgrounds and capabilities. Asia is more than able to defend herself, and as the film’s action sequences reveal, she can look cool while doing it. Turns out Maria also made it into the high-rise. When Asia runs into her, we learn not only how she got there in the first place, but how she managed to stay for as long as she did. The backstory as to how Maria ended up surviving for so long makes for some meaty material. It added depth to her character, the high-rise itself, as well as the others inside it.

This is not the first time I have watched Zazie Beatz on screen. I enjoyed watching her supporting roles in “Deadpool 2” as well as “Joker.” That said, this is the first time I have seen her as a leading lady, and she carries this movie. After seeing her take on the leading role of “They Will Kill You,” I would not mind seeing another movie where Beatz plays the main character. She has proven herself to be a fine action star and carries a commanding presence.

When I talk about the things I enjoy in a movie, I will often go for the big guns and talk about performances, direction, writing, and so on. But at other times, there are films where “the little things” tend to stand out, and “They Will Kill You” is no exception. I will save the context for your viewing experience, but there is an important point of the story involving an eye. I thought what exactly they did with it was clever. The film also showcases what people in the high-rise like to do. We find out that there is an entire floor where groups of people could be in the same place having sex at the same time. For the record, the people living in this building are immortal, so they have to find things, or perhaps more accurately, people, to do, otherwise they might become bored.

This film cost $20 million to make, but each frame almost looks like a trillion bucks between the color palette, the action, and the sets. This film is directed by Kirill Sokolov. I had not seen any of his work prior to this movie. Having seen “They Will Kill You,” I was convinced that its style is what would happen if a Matthew Vaughn movie and a Guillermo del Toro movie had a baby. The movie is a perfect mix between fast-paced, boisterous action with a pinch of color to balance things out.

Not to digress from this movie, but having looked at Sokolov’s IMDb page, it mentions that one of his previous works, “Why Don’t You Just Die!,” is inspired by one of his favorite filmmakers, Quentin Tarantino. Filmmaking has been around for some time, so it is not surprising to know that newer filmmakers are copying older filmmakers that inspired them. This film reminds me of “Reservoir Dogs” or “Pulp Fiction” to a degree. These all have sick action scenes and are not afraid to show some blood and gore. It has been nearly seven years since a Quentin Tarantino-directed movie has hit theaters. If you are looking for a filmmaker that has a pinch of Tarantino’s DNA, then Sokolov seems to get the job done. Time will tell if Sokolov will have the career or name recognition of Tarantino, but if he keeps making good films like this one, that could end up being the case. Sokolov has a twisted mind, and his screenwriting efforts alongside Alex Litvak, who also has a story credit for the “Masters of the Universe” movie releasing later this year, prove to make for a solid hour and a half.

The film’s cast may be small, but its action sequences prove to feel giant. I am not in an immediate rush to watch “They Will Kill You” again. In fact, of the two big movies coming out within the span of a week that involve women surviving against cults, I would prefer to go back and watch “Ready or Not 2: Here I Come” a second time. Maybe it is because I have an attachment to the 2019 original, so there could be some bias. Nevertheless, I recommend “They Will Kill You.” Give it a watch sometime.

In the end, “They Will Kill You” is killer fun. The film is fast-paced, never boring, and is packed with brilliant setpieces. When I watched the trailer for this movie, I was intrigued by how the action sequences presented themselves. Having seen the movie, they lived up to the trailer. I was not surprised. However, what did surprise me was the film’s ability to get me engaged towards the two sisters’ connection. The movie has a good hook featuring the duo and successfully builds upon that. Go check this flick out. I am going to give “They Will Kill You” a 7/10.

“They Will Kill You” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you want to see another review, I am dropping a new episode of Scene Before’s brand new series “Movie Requests” Sunday, April 19th. It is going to feature “Avatar” actor Joel David Moore. I look forward to talking about his suggestion. If you want to see this review as soon as it drops, consider subscribing to my YouTube channel!

© Cool Girl Productions

My next review is going to be for “You’re Dating a Narcissist!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie,” “The Drama,” and “Exit 8.” 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 “They Will Kill You?” What did you think about it? Or, in the spirit of Tarantino, what is your favorite Quentin Tarantino movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Dune: Part Three Sells Out Limited IMAX 70mm Screenings Months Before Release – The Eventification of Moviegoing

Posted on by Jack Drees

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! My most anticipated movie of 2026 is Christopher Nolan’s “The Odyssey,” based on Homer’s epic poem of the same name. You may remember nearly 9 months ago, tickets went on sale for some of the movie’s IMAX 70mm screenings. And by sheer luck, I managed to grab a ticket for the first show in Fort Lauderdale, Florida when the movie opens this July.

Naturally, Warner Brothers must have seen this and decided to follow suit with another film I am looking forward to… “Dune: Part Three.” Around noon on the east coast, which is where I live, a list of theaters were selling tickets for the movie. I had very little notice to buy tickets, but I was scrolling on Instagram and saw a couple posts suggesting that tickets were going to go on sale in a half hour. Not next week, not the next day, but literally the next half hour. So, I go through the list of theaters and make a game plan… Opening multiple tabs, having different devices out… I was ready. After checking a couple websites, I go to IMAX’s official site and click on a link that brings me to the AMC Lincoln Square 13 in New York, New York… And lone behold… Tickets went on sale minutes before their scheduled time at 12 p.m.. So, I click on the 7 p.m. show for Friday, December 18th.

For the first time in my life, I had to go through multiple seat selections just to get something that will take me to the landing page. It took me three tries, and knowing how many seats were sold already, I am shocked the count was not higher. And if someone can get Hans Zimmer on the phone to play some victory music, that would be amazing! Why? Because I got my tickets! …And so did everyone else in the world, apparently. Less than a half hour after I buy the tickets, I check the “view” tab on my screening, and it says the show sold out. And so did other showtimes! Keep in mind, I bought tickets for Friday. There was also a show being held the day before that I had no idea about. When I checked AMC’s site originally, I did not see a listing for it. Not that I am complaining. Friday is still quite early in the release schedule and I am sure the crowd going to see it Friday will be just as enthusiastic as the crowd going the night before.

My theater is not alone. For this push, 19 IMAX theaters were selling tickets. Only two are located outside of North America. More than seven hours after tickets went on sale, most of these theaters say they “sold out” on IMAX’s website. All of these theaters were selling one show per day from opening Thursday to the following Sunday. Since buying my tickets, more showtimes have been added, and those are already selling too.

Though my ticket-buying experience makes me wonder if we are seeing a shift in how movie tickets are sold. Between “Dune: Part Three” and “The Odyssey,” buying movie tickets, in certain regards anyway, is starting to feel like buying concert tickets. The concept may not be resemblant to every concert, but these past couple of instances of buying tickets felt like the cinephile’s equivalent to scoring seats for Taylor Swift’s The Eras Tour a few years back. Between how early the tickets are going on sale, the specific venues that are allowing tickets to sell immediately, the fact that people like me are fighting to get the seat they want, as well as the price… These are not only hottest tickets in town, but buying one almost guarantees jealousy from others who did not acquire theirs in time. That is, if you choose to keep the ticket. There are already some users online selling them for several times their original price. Morons.

I bought two tickets for my screening at the AMC Lincoln Square 13. Each ticket cost me $30.49. It would have cost me more if my AMC Stubs memberships did not cover my convenience fees. Sadly, this film is excluded from my A-List reservations, but in actuality, I do not mind it that much. If anything, it saves me the trouble from having one less slot I can use for the next 8 months. For the record, the price is not that much different from what I would pay now for an IMAX movie at the same location. Not to give AMC any ideas, but I am a tad surprised the cost is not higher.

The reason why I say that is because not only is Lincoln Square home to one of the biggest IMAX screens in the country, but due to it being in New York City, I would expect the price to be more than some of the other markets selling tickets early. Yet to my surprise, there are a few less populated areas that are selling the same experience, but charging more money for it.

I was going through X, and found a couple of people posting about the prices some of these theaters were charging…

Including one in Nashville, Tennessee…

As well as another located about 35 miles away from Atlanta, Georgia…

I should also note, both of these are Regal locations. I am noticing a trend here…

In fact, since the theaters have added more showtimes, it has only given me a smidge more material to work with for this post. I checked a 10:45 p.m. showtime for the Regal in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. This theater probably would have been my backup if I could not get into Lincoln Square as the distance is somewhat drivable from home, and the fact that I have always wanted to check out the King of Prussia Mall. Though I likely saved myself a hassle, as tickets are $50 a pop.

Meanwhile, a Cinemark that is somewhat drivable from home, located in Rochester, NY, is also listing early showtimes. Having checked an 11 p.m. show on opening Thursday, they do not seem to be showcasing the same level of greed as Regal, considering how tickets are half the price at $25.

The pricing for this event does appear to be a bit out of control, especially when you consider that a ticket for an evening IMAX show set around the same timeframe for both Nashville and the Mall of Georgia is typically around $30 for adults. If I were to go see “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” this week during the evening, that is how much I would pay just for a single ticket prior to fees. As much as I do not mind the trend of premium screenings selling tickets early, I do think there is a limit on how high one of these screenings should be priced. $40 for a movie ticket in 2026 feels like overkill. $50 is just outrageous.

I have paid 50 bucks for a movie ticket before, but I felt that price was somewhat justified as the director of said movie showed up to introduce the screening and stay after to do a Q&A. By the way, the screening was for the 25th anniversary of “Dogma,” and getting to see Kevin Smith before and after was a complete blast. This was a standard 2D screening, but it had a unique luxury on top of it.

I have a feeling that should we continue to do events like these, theaters could end up taking advantage of their customers and make them spend more money than perhaps one realistically should on something as simple as a movie. And that is important to note. I have no problem spending a good chunk of money to see a comedy show or a baseball game, because you are witnessing the event live. Movies are on a screen, therefore you are not watching real people. It does not make as much sense to charge $10 more than what a typical ticket would cost around an identical timeframe in the same auditorium, even if the detail on the screen is going to be incredibly lifelike.

Interesting enough, if I were to see “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” this week during the evening at Lincoln Square’s IMAX, where fate decided I should have a “Dune: Part Three” ticket waiting for me, I would be paying $30.49 for the adult tier. That is the same price as a single ticket for “Dune: Part Three.” It gives me the sense that Regal is jacking up the price on purpose… Again, going back to the eventification of moviegoing, this shows that even if a movie theater charges a higher price, someone will pay it just to be in the building. In fact, my backup option if Lincoln Square sold out was to buy a ticket at the Regal in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. But knowing myself as an IMAX fanboy, there is a good chance I would have paid whatever the ticket cost just to get my hands on it.

The $30.49 ticket price packs quite a bit into it. In addition to being part of one of the first audiences to experience “Dune: Part Three,” we are watching it in IMAX 70mm, one of clearest formats of all time. Any instance in which I can see something on one of the clearest formats of all time, I will most definitely take. There are very few theaters in the world with capable, working equipment to make this possible. The film is also shot on IMAX technology, including IMAX film. The screen is one of the largest in the country. There will be no trailers before the movie starts, which for AMC is almost unheard of. For my commitment, the theater is giving me a collectible filmstrip. The theater is giving a lot for 30 bucks. I would not pay that much for a movie each and every day, but I would for something like this.

Going back to what I said earlier about the “Dogma” screening and how cool it was to see Kevin Smith there, if we really want to eventize these screenings even further, here is an idea… Have the stars show up. Granted, these are 19 locations in different parts of the world, so it may not be possible for this to happen. But in theory, it would be cool to be welcomed to “Dune: Part Three” on opening weekend by Zendaya or Denis Villeneuve or Robert Pattinson. It is almost like a reward for buying tickets early.

Between “The Odyssey” and “Dune: Part Three,” movies are truly becoming much bigger events for yours truly then they have ever been. Granted, I have gone to press screenings and premieres in my area. I have been to screenings where celebrities show up. But these two movies have gotten me to consider crossing state lines just to watch them. I am flying to Florida in July. FLORIDA. IN JULY. Just to watch a movie. I think air conditioning is going to be my best friend when that time arrives. These are more than adventures to catch flicks. These are practically turning into vacations. Heck, since I am seeing “Dune: Part Three” a week before Christmas, I am already debating on what time would be best to visit Rockefeller Center to check out the big Christmas tree.

Could I watch these movies closer to home? Perhaps. In fact, I live 10 minutes away from the largest IMAX in New England, located at Jordan’s Furniture in Reading, Massachusetts, which is an amazing place to see a movie. …But it is not currently 70mm capable. If I waited months to buy tickets there, I would not be mad at myself. In fact, I would be excited. That theater is amazing and it would be fun to see something as hotly anticipated as “Dune: Part Three” there. But this screening is getting me more excited by the minute. It feels electric just knowing that I am going to be in a room with a group of people who are likely just as committed to seeing this film as me.

To add even further excitement… Unless Disney decides to change their mind, “Avengers: Doomsday,” which could end up making $2 billion at the box office, even without IMAX screens, releases the exact same day as “Dune: Part Three,” thus inspiring the term “Dunesday.” If both Warner Brothers and Disney are committed to this event, it is possible that we could witness the biggest moviegoing weekend in history. Now that I have my ticket for “Dune: Part Three” it makes me wonder when exactly I should plan to buy a ticket for “Avengers: Doomsday.” Should I do a screening the same day hours before? Should I do it the day before? It would let me easily avoid spoilers. Should I watch that film closer to home? I still have not figured out how I am getting to New York, so we shall see what happens. Part of me thinks deep down that “Dunesday” could end up hurting both “Dune” and “Avengers.” But after seeing the response “Dune: Part Three” is getting months before release with these ticket sales and the first trailer, I think this less diverse edition of “Barbenheimer” could pay off for both parties.

“Dune” and “Dune: Part Two” are movies that have given me some fond memories upon watching them, so it is no surprise that I am looking forward to “Dune: Part Three,” no matter how I see it. That said, I am thrilled to experience the film the way the director intended. Judging from what has been shown so far and the track record of the previous installments, I would not be surprised if this ends up being a Best Picture nominee at the next Academy Awards. Until then, if anybody else already has their “Dune: Part Three” tickets, congratulations! Maybe I will see you at Lincoln Square. Much like Paul Atreides’ promise at the end of “Dune: Part Two,” I am sure that IMAX and Warner Brothers are going to lead me to paradise this December. I cannot wait.

Thanks for reading this post! As a reminder, be sure to check out my latest episode of Movie Requests! This is a brand new series where I take movie suggestions from celebrities and talk about them. The latest episode features “Clerks” actor Jason Mewes. Check it out, give it a like, and if you want to see more videos in the series, consider subscribing to my YouTube channel!

My next review is coming later this week, and it is going to be for “Ready or Not 2: Here I Come.” I love the first “Ready or Not” to death, so it should not be a surprise that I eagerly awaited the sequel. I will share my thoughts on it soon. 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 get tickets for “Dune: Part Three?” Where and when are you seeing it? And how much did you have to pay? Also, if you are a scalper, please find something better to do with your time. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Bride! (2026): Buckley and Bale Do Their Best with This Unexciting Cinematic Enigma

Posted on by Jack Drees

Photo by Courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures – © Warner Bros. Pictures

“The Bride!” is written and directed by Maggie Gyllenhaal (The Dark Knight, White House Down) and stars Jessie Buckley (Hamnet, Women Talking), Christian Bale (Batman Begins, Thor: Love and Thunder), Peter Saarsgard (Shattered Glass, The Batman), Annette Bening (American Beauty, Nyad), Jake Gyllenhaal (Stronger, Spider-Man: Far from Home), and Penélope Cruz (Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides). This film is set in 1930s Chicago, at which point Frankenstein’s monster, or Frank, asks Dr. Euphronius to create a companion. Once the companion is brought to life, the film follows both creatures as they go on a wild journey together in which they become romantically involved.

“The Bride!” was on my radar ever since I saw the trailer back in October in the best possible way… On a giant IMAX screen. Any movie that is shot in the coveted 1.43:1 format, even if it is digital, has my attention. Of course, having looked at the many shots the trailer had to offer, the film definitely would dazzle in scope widescreen if I were to see it that way too. The film had a dirty, rugged, sometimes sexy feel to it that felt unlike anything I would not recall witnessing before. Sure, in terms of vibe, this film did remind me a bit of “Joker” and its severely insulting sequel, especially considering some of the crew members on those films also work on this one. Some of the names attached to this film include cinematographer Lawrence Sher and composer Hildur Guðnadóttir. But “The Bride!” appeared to have its slight differences from “Joker.” “The Bride!” seemed to lean more towards the horror route rather than a pure drama route, though “Joker” did manage to insert an eerie moment or two.

Speaking of the “Joker” movies, if you are aware of how I scored them, you would know I did so on opposite sides of the spectrum. The first was pretty positive, while the second was highly negative. “The Bride!” falls somewhere between these two projects. Frankly, this movie is kind of a hot mess. If I had to compare “The Bride!” to any other film experience in my life, the “Joker” movies are an easy target because they do have similar tones and concepts. The movie takes familiar characters and puts an odd spin on them. As much as I do not mind odd movies, this experience felt too odd at times. It was odd to the point where I did not really feel any emotion in certain scenes. Overall, Maggie Gyllenhaal puts something together that is pleasing to the eye, but at times, it strikes a vibe that feels like “Dollar Tree Tim Burton.” That is almost unfair to say because this movie was by no means cheap. Variety reports the budget is a hefty $90 million. While the film looks nice, it does not really feel nice. It reminded me of “Jupiter Ascending,” which is one of the most beautiful looking pieces of crap that someone has the audacity to call a film. One moment after another, the movie sounded like it was trying to welcome me into its environment, but as a viewer, I was consistently hesitating on the film’s invitations.

The film is not all bad. It has a decent cast, and its two leads do a fantastic job despite the average at best material given to them.

Jessie Buckley is on a roll lately. Right alongside Timothee Chalemet in “Marty Supreme,” I think she gave the best performance captured on film in 2025 through her lead outing in “Hamnet.” While her lead role in “The Bride” is not as compelling, Buckley nevertheless manages to bring a performance that makes me think I am getting a five-star meal despite slumming it in the middle of a Buffalo Wild Wings. Buckley is diabolical as the titular character. I almost cannot imagine anyone else in her shoes.

Alongside her is Christian Bale as Frankenstein’s monster. Technically his character is credited as Frankenstein, even though he is not the scientist… Anyway… The timing of this film is interesting, as it was made around the same time as Guillermo del Toro’s “Frankenstein,” which I thought was pretty good. Much like Jacob Elordi, who played the Creature in that movie, Bale is excellent here. Is he as strong as Elordi? Perhaps not. But I also feel that part of it is more the fault of the material given to Bale rather than his performance. Much like Buckley, Bale makes the most of what is given to him. This is not to say everything about his presence is bad. In fact, I really liked getting to see the two leads when they’re close as a couple. It brought out both of their wild sides and showed they have chemistry. That said, Bale’s performance did feel rather familiar. It almost reminded me of his portrayal of Gorr the God Butcher from “Thor: Love and Thunder.” It is a character who is mildly scary, odd-looking, but complicated beneath their wretched surface.

Technically speaking, this film is rather impressive. The cinematography is beautiful. The makeup work is stunning. The production design is off the charts. I bought into every location and set. When it comes to immersion, “The Bride!” really tries. Though I cannot say it always succeeds.

The color palette feels weirdly mute. Note my use of the word “weirdly.” I was convinced by the marketing that this film was going to be big and exciting. While it was definitely the former, I cannot say the same for the latter. The film looked oddly dry for something that simultaneously was trying to deliver something of utter extravagance. It is an enigma.

I am sure many people are familiar with the phrase “do not judge a book by its cover.” Bear with me as I go against this philosophy for a moment. If you look closely at the title for “The Bride!”, you would notice that it has an exclamation mark. “The Bride!” is not the first project to contain such a thing. You would notice this if you ever get a good look at the game show “Jeopardy!”, or the animated series “American Dad!”, or the movie “Airplane!”. In terms of punctuation, an exclamation mark is meant to signify an extreme. “Jeopardy!” is extremely fast-paced. “American Dad!” is extremely action-packed. “Airplane!” is extremely funny. Meanwhile, I find it difficult to come up with an extreme for “The Bride,” that is unless I were to resort to negatives. I could say the movie is extremely bland. I could say it is extremely wasted. On paper, “The Bride!” sounds like a project that should be a big ball of energy. But at times I am watching it and find myself surprised that I barely happen to be awake.

Chances are I am not going to remember much about “The Bride” by the end of the year. Part of it is because other than the visuals and the unique way of telling the story, there was nothing to write home about. Sure, the two leads are great, but never once did I feel captivated by anything the story had to offer. If I were presented the story in a pitch meeting, I think it would sell. If I saw the full picture, like what we got in this film, that is a different scenario. If anything, “The Bride!” does feel like a film that comes from a singular mind. I would have never have been able to come up with the vision that Maggie Gyllenhaal had intended. While I have one or two gripes about Warner Bros. Discovery since their merger three years ago, I will credit them for hiring filmmakers with unique visions, with Gyllenhaal being the latest example. I would love to see what other projects she has in mind, and sincerely hope they are better than what this one had to offer.

In the end, “The Bride!” is by no means the worst movie ever. In fact, part of me is glad I saw it because it has some great acting and setpieces. But from one moment to the next, I thought there was something missing. There was barely a sense of a wow factor. It is really sad I did not like this more. I was genuinely looking forward to “The Bride!”. I do not think Gyllenhaal should give up on her work behind the camera. I can see her knocking another project out of the park, but she struck out on this one. I am going to give “The Bride!” a 4/10.

“The Bride!” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Hoppers.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Project Hail Mary” and “Ready or Not 2: Here I Come.”

Also, feel free to check out the new promo for the second episode of Movie Requests! The next guest on my list is actor Jason Mewes, who requested a movie he has watched in the past with his collaborator Kevin Smith. Make your guesses! The movie will be revealed this Saturday, March 28th! If you want to see me review whatever movie Jason Mewes asked me to talk about, subscribe to my YouTube channel and hit the notification bell that way you know exactly when the video drops! 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 Bride!”? What did you think about it? Or, what is the most disappointing movie you have seen recently? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

All You Need Is Kill (2025): Groundhog Day – Anime Style!

Posted on by Jack Drees

“All You Need is Kill” is directed by Ken’ichirô Akimoto and co-directed by Yukinori Nakamura, making this their first official directing credits. This film stars Natsuki Nanae (Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba – The Movie: Mugen Train, Goodbye, Don Glees!), Ai Makami (Kokuho, Chastity High), Mô Chûgakusei, and Kana Hanazawa (Suzume, The Night is Short, Walk on Girl). This film is based on a light novel of the same name, which also inspired the 2014 live-action film “Edge of Tomorrow.” The film follows a young woman who has relive the same day over and over while dealing with an alien invasion. She crosses paths with a young man, and together, they fight to break the cycle.

I saw the trailer for “All You Need Is Kill” last month and was genuinely shocked I had not heard this movie was going to be coming out. Granted, I should not be too shocked, given how I have not read the light novel or the manga series. That said, I did recall the name “All You Need Is Kill” as soon as it popped up, and that is because I am a fan of “Edge of Tomorrow.” For those who do not know, “Edge of Tomorrow” is a film starring Tom Cruise as an American public relations officer who is forced into battle against aliens by his superiors. He quickly comes to realize that each time he dies, he reverts back to a specific point in his life that he has to relive over and over.

When I first saw “Edge of Tomorrow,” I thought of it as “Groundhog Day” with a sci-fi twist. While that is technically accurate, the film was actually inspired by “All You Need Is Kill,” which was written by a Japanese author and made with a Japanese mindset, so “Edge of Tomorrow” is in a sense, the Americanized version of “All You Need is Kill.”

…Although, now that I think about it… “Groundhog Day” did release before all of these… So, there is that.

As a fan of “Edge of Tomorrow,” I was looking forward to seeing what could be done with a movie that would likely end up feeling closer to the source material that inspired it. Now that I have seen “All You Need is Kill,” I have to say the film is quite solid. It is definitely worth watching if you are looking for a dazzling spectacle in addition to an admirable character piece.

While the characters in “All You Need Is Kill” are identical to those in the light novel, one difference that should be noted is that the roles in the story’s center are reversed. Instead of centering around Keiji, who this time around serves as a supporting character, the film’s protagonist is Rita. I have no problems with this change, mainly because I found both characters to be well written and each one seems to the serve the other in a way that benefits the story overall.

Both of these main characters have excellent chemistry and are not only fun to watch as a team, but it is nice to see how each character allows the other to realize what they are missing. One thing I noticed throughout the movie is Rita’s tendency to become overly emotional and cry on certain occasions. I have no idea how such a thing would play out for certain viewers, but I thought it was a great way to balance Rita out from Keiji, who tends to be a bit more reserved with his presence. By the end of the movie, this allows for some really good dialogue between the two.

I also really like seeing Rita learn how exactly her time loop works. Throughout the movie, we see Rita wake up in the same time and place, and do almost the exact same things each time, but she learns something during each go. She remembers what other characters say, whether they are directed specifically towards her or simply uttered in the background. Each time she dies, she tries a different move to avoid perishing, only to realize that she sometimes ends up doing so moments later in another way.

While the film is not a comedy, the constant cycle of death does allow for a funny moment or two. Every time Rita dies, she is reverted back to her bedroom where she is woken up by the sound of her alarm clock. When this happens, another character in the background yells from the other room, telling Rita her alarm is sounding off. At one point, Rita becomes so familiar with the same old song and dance that she tells the other character to shut up before they could finish reminding her about the alarm. Moments like that, and a couple others, did get a chuckle out of me.

The other standout to me in this film is the animation, which is almost ironic the more I think about it. Because this is a film where characters die on repeat, and yet, it is absolutely gorgeous and picturesque. The alien creatures in this film are presented in a vibrant color palette. They are incredibly easy on the eyes, almost to the point where it works in their favor. If I were in battle against them, I would be so distracted by their glitz to the point where I would die instantly. If you ever watch certain movies, you would notice that the villains would present themselves in a darker costume or a more “negative” color. Look at the “Star Wars” villains over the years like Darth Vader or Kylo Ren. This is not the case with “All You Need Is Kill.” While the aliens may look pretty, there is more to them than meets the eye.

This film is not even an hour and a half. Yet by no means is it rushed. I think the runtime is almost perfect given the story that has been told. I have no complaints about the pacing at all. In fact, it might be one of the best things about this film. It is, no pun intended, all killer, no filler. We come to realize the main character dies hundreds of times. The film does not show each death, but it makes time for ones that are arguably more important to the story and allow the final product to have a more compelling impact. The film gets to the point with each and every scene. Not every scene is presented in a TikTok-pace, but there are no moments that overly draw themselves out. This movie hits the Goldilocks zone in terms of engagement.

In the end, “All You Need Is Kill” is a fun movie. Rita and Keiji are an admirable duo and their journey throughout the film makes for quite the story. The animation is well done and emits a weird sense of peace in what is ultimately a dark world. The musical score in this film is also really good. I have no idea if I will listen to it down the line, but I dug it while watching the movie. Also, the soundwork is amazing. Every time the aliens make noise, it is not only easy on the ears, but also rather ominous. Technically, the film is a beast. I am going to give “All You Need Is Kill” a 7/10.

Again, I did not read the light novel, nor have I read the manga. The best comparison I have to this film is “Edge of Tomorrow.” In preparation for “All You Need Is Kill,” I rewatched “Edge of Tomorrow,” and I think both stories are equally engaging. The styles, while different, each serve their movie’s vibe perfectly. I think “Edge of Tomorrow” is an immersive ride that puts you in the middle of a futuristic war. Its darker color palette tends to serve its tone well. I also like William Cage as a character. That said, I also think “All You Need Is Kill” stands out for its more unique technical presentation and I find it to be the superior character piece. I am not saying one film trumps the other. If anything, both are great for their own reasons. I think certain things stand out in one film more than the other, but if it were a Friday night and I were to pick between either movie to watch, it would be like going to Ben & Jerry’s for ice cream and having to choose between Ameri’Cone Dream or chocolate chip cookie dough. Both choices, in the end, are winners, for their own reasons.

“All You Need Is Kill” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Song Sung Blue,” “Mercy,” and “Send Help.” Stay tuned!

Also, if you missed it, be sure to check out the teaser trailer for Celebrity Movie Requests, the all new series where I review movies requested by your favorite stars, coming to Scene Before, and my YouTube channel! And while you are here, please watch the trailer, give it a like, and subscribe to my YouTube channel, hit the notification bell, that way you are up to date on the latest info Celebrity Movie Requests has to offer! If you want to see all of this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “All You Need Is Kill?” What did you think about it? Have you read any of the prior source material? Is it good? And lastly, if you have seen “Edge of Tomorrow,” tell me your thoughts on that movie! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

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

Posted on by Jack Drees

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted on 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!

Sinners (2025): Michael B. Jordan Pulls Double Duty in This Solid Vampire Flick

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Sinners” is directed by Ryan Coogler (Creed, Black Panther) and stars Michael B. Jordan (Creed, Black Panther), Hailee Steinfeld (Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, Hawkeye), Miles Caton, Jack O’Connell (Back to Black, Skins), Wunmi Mosaku (Moses Jones, Vera), Jayme Lawson (How to Blow Up a Pipeline, The Batman), Omar Miller (Ballers, CSI: Miami), and Delroy Lindo (Da 5 Bloods, The Good Fight). This film is about two criminal twin brothers who start over in their hometown, only to discover that a greater evil is about to welcome them back.

Courtesy of Warner Bros. – © Warner Bros.

I have been eager to see “Sinners” since the first trailer dropped last year. It did not explain a ton, but like a lot of good first trailers, it gave “enough” to sell me. And that is putting things lightly. Because I thought it was very well put together. The film had a lot to like behind the scenes. Michael B. Jordan playing two roles… Other great cast members like Hailee Steinfeld in the supporting roles… Ryan Coogler in the director’s chair… Things were lining up perfectly. And to later find out that the film was shot on IMAX cameras, I could not be more in if I tried. The hype I had for this film was through the roof. So was it worth the excitement? To a certain degree, yes.

This might shock some of you, “Sinners” is not necessarily my favorite film of the year so far. If I had to be honest, I think it had some minor pacing issues and I cannot say I walked out of the theater remembering every single character’s name. I was engaged with the film, but I have seen better this year when it comes to the story. It is hard to say the film is overrated though. I can totally see why other people would consider it to be a masterpiece. I do want to watch the film again at some point, and I genuinely think it would benefit from a second viewing.

That said, I think when it comes to pure experiences, there are few that compare to “Sinners.” For the record, I saw this film in IMAX 70mm, meaning I was able to experience “Sinners” in the most definitive way possible, with the finest detail and clearest sound, so there were definitely some enhancements. Regardless of however you see “Sinners,” do so on the biggest screen you can.

This film is shot entirely on 65mm film, some of it in IMAX. Every frame of this film looks immaculate. Several shots might as well be a painting. This movie also makes history, as it is also the first film shot in IMAX by a woman. Autumn Durald Arkapaw is behind the camera for this project and there is so much to love about how she handled the end product. Many of the exterior shots in particular are going to linger in my mind throughout the year.

Much like another one of Ryan Coogler’s films, “Black Panther,” “Sinners” is a great time. Also like “Black Panther,” this is a film perhaps best suited for Ryan Coogler’s voice. This is a film that I, a straight white male, would probably sully if I were to write or direct it myself. There is a sense of pride in each scene, each shot, each line, and that is because of Coogler’s touch. He clearly knows what he is doing. If you remember “Black Panther,” one of my favorite moments from that film is this one action scene in a casino where the camera navigates between levels to get a solid view of different things that are going down. I thought it was a flawless one take scene, but without going into detail, there is a one take scene during this film that might surpass that moment if you ask me when it comes to execution.

Not too surprisingly, I am quite impressed with the film’s cast. Of course, you have a talented actor in Michael B. Jordan who plays not just one, but two roles. He does a good job here. Both of his characters have charisma. Despite some differences, the two twins genuinely feel like the same person at times. That might have been the point because watching these two reminded me of my own interactions with twins in real life. Mainly because as much as I have built a bond with some of them, I will admit, despite them wearing different outfits and letting off slightly different mannerisms, it is occasionally hard to tell which one is which unless you are digging for certain features.

From mainstay talent to young talent, this film is also the acting debut of Miles Caton. After seeing this film, I am convinced that Caton is going to have a great career. Now he is at the helm of a terrific director, so part of his on-screen talent may be owed to Ryan Coogler. Even so, seeing what I have seen of him in this movie, it shocks me that this is his first role. If anything I would figure he would have a few under his belt. Maybe they were never documented on his IMDb page, I do not know.

While I cannot see it winning an Academy Award, the standout performance for me in this film is Hailee Steinfeld as Mary. I think of all the characters in this movie, she is the one written in the sense that allows for the most range. If you have seen the trailer, you can probably get a sense of where this character is going, where the narrative takes her. But when it gets to “that” point, it is satisfying. I have seen Hailee Steinfeld in other projects, but this is arguably the most fun she has been on screen. It is not my favorite role of Steinfeld’s, but if I were to determine which role of hers appears to be the most fun, I think it comes down to “Sinners” and “The Edge of Seventeen.”

“Sinners” is a vampire movie, and it is a good vampire movie at that. But it kind of gives you a little bit more than just vampires. It takes on concepts such as brotherly connections, music, and then it goes ahead and plops in vampires as a bonus. And when it gets to the vampires, it is a treat. The film has its scary moments. It has its fun moments. The action during the vampire-centered scenes is very well done. This is a film that if you are to see it, try do so on the big screen. The music in the film is also attention-grabbing from the foot-tappable soundtrack to Ludwig Göransson’s admirable score.

If I had anything else to say, and I hate to say this, but I will be real, I am going to remember this film more for its second half than its first. For me, this film took a bit to get going, and I do mean a bit. But when it gets into gear, it goes at lightspeed. That said, the entire film is worth watching. Check it out.

In the end, “Sinners” is a thumbs up. It is another solid outing from director Ryan Coogler. If the Oscars were tomorrow, I could totally see “Sinners” getting some awards attention, especially in the technical categories like film editing and cinematography. But again, I do want to emphasize that this film is one that starts off okay but gets better as it goes. I do not want to confuse anybody. I never said this film was bad, but the second half is much more inviting to me than the first. I might be alone in this statement. I have talked to friends who say that this film is peak cinema. If anything, I think it is a fine movie. I would watch it again. And I will say this again, maybe it would benefit from a second watch. I am going to give “Sinners” a 7/10.

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

Marvel Studios/MARVEL STUDIOS – © 2025 MARVEL. All Rights Reserved.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for Marvel’s latest project, “Thunderbolts*!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, look forward to my thoughts on “Rust,” “The Ruse,” “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning,” and “The Accountant 2.” If you want to see my thoughts on these films 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 “Sinners?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite film directed by Ryan Coogler? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

A Minecraft Movie (2025): Chicken Schlocky

Posted on by Jack Drees

“A Minecraft Movie” is directed by Jared Hess (Napoleon Dynamite, Nacho Libre) and stars Jason Momoa (Aquaman, Slumberland), Jack Black (Kung Fu Panda, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle), Danielle Brooks (Peacemaker, Orange is the New Black), Emma Myers (A Good Girl’s Guide to Murder, Wednesday), Sebastian Hansen (Lisey’s Story, Just Mercy), and Jennifer Coolidge (American Pie, The White Lotus). This film is based on the “Minecraft” video game and is about a group of people who find themselves inside the mysterious “Overworld.” Together, they must use their imaginations to survive and make it back home.

Courtesy of Warner Bros. – © Warner Bros.

If there is a movie coming out this year I could not possibly be less excited about, it is “A Minecraft Movie.” I have never played “Minecraft.” However, I have seen tons of gameplay of it either through family, friends, or on YouTube when I am looking for something to fall asleep to. The game came out just before I was a teenager, but I was never one of the cool kids playing it. It was never my thing. If I were to play a building game as a kid, chances are it would have been “Mall Tycoon.”

In fact, I largely avoided “A Minecraft Movie” when it first came out due to competition. I wanted to see “The Luckiest Man in America,” which came out the same weekend. I still had not seen “Novocaine.” I was lucky to catch it in theaters while I still could. I ended up seeing “A Minecraft Movie” a couple weeks into its run with a friend of mine, who is clearly more into the game than I. Frankly, they seem to be much more into the movie than I as well. Whereas they seemed to be having a ball with everything in front of them, I was cringing beyond belief.

While video game adaptations seem to be getting better with movies like “Sonic the Hedgehog” and TV shows like “The Last of Us,” “A Minecraft Movie” fails to meet the standards of those two projects. Heck, even “The Super Mario Bros. Movie,” one of the most by the numbers hero’s journey stories in years, was more memorable. Granted, unlike “A Minecraft Movie,” I actually played the “Super Mario” games. So there could be some bias.

Thankfully though, this adaptation is a slight improvement over last year’s “Borderlands,” which despite a decent cast, is an intolerable mess. Aside from being bad, “Borderlands” and “A Minecraft Movie” share some similarities. As much as I was not a fan of the way both films are presented through their artificial-looking backdrops, they do seem to implement some key elements from their respective games. “A Minecraft Movie” is full of blocky textures, from buildings to weapons to even some of the characters. It does not change the fact that some of these textures fail to please the eye. The movie sometimes presents its Overworld as a place of wonder, but I never felt that as a viewer. It had an uncanny valley effect at times. It felt like something inside “Ready Player One,” except in that film’s virtual world, just about everything was distinctly animated whereas the Overworld often serves as a hybrid between live-action and animation. I questioned the filmmakers’ decision from the start to make this film live-action, and seeing some of the Overworld on screen makes me feel justified for reacting the way I did. What were they thinking?!

Courtesy of Warner Bros. – © Warner Bros.

I am not a huge fan of the blocky graphics “Minecraft” tends to use in their games, but they are still undeniably unique. If you presented “Minecraft” to someone in the 1990s who was in the middle of playing “Super Mario 64,” and say this is coming out more than a decade later, they could think that video game graphics regressed heavily over the years. But the graphics are still a part of the “Minecraft” brand. I understand this is an adaptation, but the movie just looks off-putting. If I had one positive, if we are going by symbolism, the contrast between the people from the real world and the Overworld is distinct. Perhaps this distinction is an artistic choice. But if I want art, I will simply go watch paint dry.

Going back to “Borderlands,” another similarity that film has with “A Minecraft Movie” is that Jack Black appears in both projects. And just like “Borderlands,” Jack Black basically plays a cartoon. In some ways, Jack Black’s character, Steve, reminds me of my dad. He is pretty expressive, spends lots of time building things, and sings during the most random occasions. Although unlike my dad, I found Steve’s singing to be annoying and nonsensical. There are multiple instances where Steve sings. Not all of them impressed me. There is one song towards the film’s conclusion that I found mildly decent, but other than that, they were headache-inducing.

By the way, I have no idea how many people would be surprised by this, Steve is not exactly what one would call the main character of this film. Sure, the film is sometimes presented from his first-person perspective, but there is also a huge gap where he basically disappears. So, the question is, who is the main character?

Your guess is as good as mine.

The film starts with Steve yearning for the mines and later discovering the Overworld, until we eventually spend some time in the real world with a couple young adults, a retro gamer, a realtor, and some other faces.

Courtesy of Warner Bros. – © Warner Bros.

In the real world, much of the screen time is dedicated to the young adults, who happen to be a brother-sister duo. The sister, Natalie (left) is raising her brother, Henry (right center) while trying to hold a job at a chip factory. The brother means well, but his creative mind seems to get him in trouble. If you were to break this movie down structurally, one can argue the brother is the main character as his arc tends to show him being creative and embarrassing himself in the real world, but having much better luck with such creativity in the Overworld. By the film’s conclusion, the script tries to implement an epilogue for each character, but sometimes they feel half-baked based on the little substance their characters are given during the runtime.

Sticking to the real world, there are a couple characters who come from there who caught my attention from their first appearance – Jason Momoa as Garret Garrison (right), and Jennifer Coolidge as Vice Principal Marlene.

I said earlier that Jack Black basically plays a cartoon, but whereas his performance felt overdone, Jason Momoa had an animated energy that kept me captivated. He plays a game store owner who endlessly brags about a particular accomplishment he made in his career, but ultimately, he comes off as a has-been. Momoa gives 110% with every line, no matter how idiotic.

Warner Bros

Then you have Jennifer Coolidge’s character. She is not in the movie for long, but by the end, she is unhinged. I am not going to pretend her character was perfect. In fact, you could almost write Coolidge out of the film entirely and it would have little to no real effect on the main story. Does it change the fact that her material was mildly entertaining? No. I will admit, Coolidge oozed personality at times. I will also note that this is a film mainly aimed at children, but Coolidge’s character does utter some mature phrases and act out some equally mature scenarios. I think the teenagers might understand what she is doing. The children? Hard to say. Hard to know in this digital age.

“A Minecraft Movie” has five writers. This film is the textbook definition of too many cooks in the kitchen. Again, when it comes to naming a main character, the film is almost confused in who that ultimately is. Maybe I would be more forgiving if all the characters were likable, but several of them were dull or flat out irritating to watch. By the film’s conclusion, the atmosphere honestly feels as bloated as one of the Michael Bay “Transformers” movies.

My experience of watching “A Minecraft Movie” reminded me of when I saw “Avengers: Infinity War” in the theater for the first time. During both screenings, there was no shortage of people applauding and cheering at various points. Although there is a difference between the two experiences. The age range for my “Infinity War” screening skewed more adult, whereas “A Minecraft Movie” had noticeably more kids. I was also not one of the people cheering. Granted, some of the applause breaks were for in-game references, which I would not fully understand anyway. I was not the target audience for those jokes. But one reason why I was not applauding as much as the people around me is because I was not as engaged as they were with the film. I wonder if I would be clapping more if I played the game. I wish I could share the same passion about this film that seemed to be beaming throughout the rest of the auditorium, but I was bored. There is no way around it.

Although I will say, even though my audience seemed to applaud at certain points either out of pure contagion or simply for the sake of doing so, one positive thing about my experience is that no one threw food. On that note, “Chicken Jockey” got a lot of fanfare.

With that in mind, it leads me to something I typically say about movies. Just because the children end up liking it, does not automatically indicate that I had equally as positive of an experience and will therefore give the movie a positive score. There are good movies that are “made for kids.” “A Minecraft Movie” is not one of them. Go watch a Pixar movie or a Studio Ghibli movie if you want a fine example of masterclass visual storytelling. This is just visual noise. Heck, if you want a great commercialized film that kids and adults can enjoy, go watch “The LEGO Movie!” Who would have thought a movie on plastic building blocks would become a beloved hit? Go watch “A Minecraft Movie” and “The LEGO Movie” back to back and tell me which one you think is better. Personally, I think the answer is obvious.

In the end, there is not enough TNT in the Overworld to destroy my memories of experiencing “A Minecraft Movie.” This is a film that I imagine that the people making it will probably be happy to have on their resume, likely because it was popular, and not necessarily because it was good. If you are looking for cinema, look elsewhere. This is not the worst video game movie of all time. I just find a lot of choices in the final product to be questionable. Everything from casting Jack Black as Steve to the uncanny valley-esque live-action style choice to the paint by numbers narrative. I do not play the “Minecraft” game that much. It does not interest me. But I imagine I could have a more pleasant hour and a half playing the game as opposed to watching the movie that it inspired. I am going to give “A Minecraft Movie” a 3/10.

“A Minecraft Movie” is now playing in theaters and is also available to rent or buy on VOD.

Courtesy of Warner Bros. – © Warner Bros.

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Sinners,” “Thunderbolts*,” “Rust,” “The Ruse,” and “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning.” 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 “A Minecraft Movie?” What did you think about it? Or, have you ever played “Minecraft?” Is it fun? Let me know down below! Scene Before is click to the flicks!

The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim (2024): Nowhere Near the Quality of Peter Jackson’s Original Trilogy, But Still Precious Enough to Get by

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim” is directed by Kenji Kamiyama (Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex, Blade Runner: Black Lotus) and stars Brian Cox (Succession, X2: X-Men United), Gaia Wise (A Walk in the Woods, The Chelsea Detective), Luke Pasqualino (Skins, The Musketeers), and Miranda Otto (Talk to Me, War of the Worlds). This film is set 183 years before the original “Lord of the Rings” trilogy and is about the tale of Helm Hammerhand (Cox) and how his family went about defending themselves against an army of Dunlendings.

Just a warning for those who need to know… I have not read a single “Lord of the Rings” book. I have not lacked desire to read the books, I just never got around to it. But I have seen every single Peter Jackson-directed “Lord of the Rings” film, including “The Hobbit” trilogy. I enjoyed all those movies. There are even a couple of those movies I would even considerto be amongst the greatest of all time. If you have not seen these movies, you are missing out and owe it to yourself to give them a watch at least once in your life.

It has been ten years since the last theatrically released “Lord of the Rings” film, specifically “The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies.” As a fan of these movies, I thought they had a good run, but I would have been fine knowing that is all we were getting. I am well aware on the TV side, “The Rings of Power” is doing well on Prime Video in terms of finding an audience after a couple seasons, but I cannot give my thoughts on it since I have not seen a single episode. Though when they announced a new animated “Lord of the Rings” film was coming, I was not against the idea, but my reaction to it reminds me of the reaction I had when I first heard about “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse.” My thought was… “Okay then.” I was not completely uninterested, but I also was not going to be first in line to check it out.

Then I got the recommendation of my life, and I swear on my unborn children, this is a true story.

I went to a taping of “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” in October and during a Q&A, Colbert picked me to ask him a question. I was one of three people. I asked him, “Have you seen any good movies lately?” To which he responds, “Yes.”

…

Following the audience’s laughter, he asks, “Would you like to know which ones?”

I say, “If you would like to tell me about them.”

That is when he recommends this movie. He saw it early. This is no surprise considering Colbert has established himself as a J.R.R. Tolkien and “Lord of the Rings” fanboy. He told the audience and I that the film matches the feel that he got out of the Tolkien books and the Peter Jackson films. Granted, I was aware that he was going to be hosting a panel for the film at New York Comic Con the next day, so this may as well be a plug for the movie.

That said, if it was good enough for Stephen Colbert, it was good enough for me.

So without dillydallying any longer, I thought the movie was fine.

As far as “The Lord of the Rings” film franchise goes, I think this is the weakest of the films I have seen so far. This is not to say it is bad. If anything it is just that most of the other ones are so good that this film easily pales in comparison to them. It is like when I watched “Lightyear.” I thought almost every “Toy Story” movie was a masterpiece of animation and storytelling, then we get to the “Lightyear” spinoff, which was fun but it did not have the impact on me that the “Toy Story” movies did.

I will admit, Colbert was correct on one thing. Tonally, this film feels like it belongs in Jackson’s Middle-earth. That said, it does so maybe to an unhealthy degree. The film is a nice welcoming back to that universe with the familiar title cards and Howard Shore’s music. For the record, Howard Shore did not do the music for this movie, it was instead composed by Stephen Gallagher, who I thought did an okay job. I am not going to go back to listen to the score on my own time unlike some of Shore’s work, but I thought it fit the movie. There are also some pieces of fan service that have ties to the Jackson films, including one towards the end that involves someone’s voice that audiences have not heard in a new film for a long, long time. I thought it was a clever addon towards the film’s conclusion.

“The War of the Rohirrim” is done in the style of an anime. You have this colorful 2D look to the film with a rough pace to it. When I watched the trailer for this film previously, I thought it looked cool. Having seen the movie, I would say it is cool to a degree, but also kind of underwhelming. There are many scenes where we see some vibrant colors, finely detailed characters, and some nice landscapes. But there are other scenes that either lack detail, feel slapped together, done on the cheap, or flat. They lack a sense of realism. Now I know you can get away with a lack of realism in animation. But this lack of realism honestly equals a lack of flair at times.

The same can be said for the actual journey of the film and what we see our hero, specifically Hera, go through. I will give credit for the film for one thing, nearly each and every scene, even if it is subtle, oozes with conflict. Who is gonna live? Who is gonna die? Will our hero make it? The film is a lot of things, but uneventful is not one of them. Speaking of Hera, Gaia Wise does a great job voicing her. Wise’s resume is not huge, but I would not mind seeing her in more projects. Though as I watched the movie, the progression of the story seemed to lack unpredictability or a sense of originality. The structure feels familiar. Granted, even the better “Lord of the Rings” films are not that complex when it comes to the plot as they are with the world involving said plot. Most of the films are essentially about the characters navigating from point A to point B. This is not as much the case with “The War of the Rohirrim,” which spends most of its time around one specific portion of Middle Earth. The scope feels a bit smaller. But the earlier films were simply much more well executed in terms of bringing the best out of a familiar journey. Not to mention, for the time they came out, Jackson’s “Lord of the Rings” films had monumental special effects, whereas the animation for this film, while definitely different, lacks innovation.

“The War of the Rohirrim” is a standalone “Lord of the Rings” project. There are no continuations planned for it. By that logic, this should make “The War of the Rohirrim” a good watch in the franchise if you do not want to worry about keeping up with the greater lore. While this is true, I will also say if you are a more casual “Lord of the Rings” fan or someone looking for a place to start, I do not think “The War of the Rohirrim” is a priority. Is it a good movie? Yes. If anything, while the negatives stand out, I think I lean a little more positive when it comes to my overall verdict. While Hera’s journey has cliches, it is still engaging. The soundwork for the film is quite solid. Tonally, this film is very good. If you love Brian Cox’s voice, you will hear plenty of it in this film. Every time Cox speaks as Helm Hammerhand, he steals the scene. If you are a “Lord of the Rings” casual, there is a chance you might walk out of the movie thinking it is a thumbs up. If you are perhaps a more hardcore fan of the franchise, there could be something more for you. But I also think most people who watch this movie will end up saying that it is not as good as any of the films in Jackson’s original “Lord of the Rings” trilogy. As for ranking this film against “The Hobbit” trilogy, I am not sure. I know it has its fans, and I am one of them. I personally find “Desolation of Smaug” to be one of my favorite movies. But if it were a Friday night, I ordered a pizza, and I needed a movie to go with it, I might put on “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey,” which I thought to be the weakest of the “Lord of the Rings” installments for a long time, before watching “The War of the Rohirrim” again.

Although speaking of “An Unexpected Journey,” this brings me to a negative I sometimes found with both that film and “The War of the Rohirrim.” As engaged as I was in the journey, I wish I found myself more attached to some of the characters. I do not think I am going to remember some of these characters’ names a couple years from now. If you want a good movie, watch “The War of the Rohirrim.” But if you are looking for the best possible “Lord of the Rings” experience, Peter Jackson might have some better options available.

In the end, “The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim” was a fine time at the movies, especially compared to the film this one opened against, “Kraven the Hunter.” Both of these films are flops at this point. Neither of them likely have any chance of making their budgets back. But if you had to pick between one of these losers to watch in the cinema right now, then “The War of the Rohirrim” is definitely the winner. The film is a fun adventure that sometimes comes off as cliche. Some of these cliches are handled well, others not so much. The cast is likable, even if I am probably not going to remember some of these characters in a couple years. The action scenes have their moments. And for the most part, I was engaged in the journey. This film is not playing in a ton of places right now, but if you have a cinema loyalty subscription like AMC A-List or Regal Unlimited, use it for this film. Either that or find a showtime at matinee price. Even though I think the film looks cheap at times, the sound design makes up for it. There are moments where the film does become wonderfully obnoxious and immersive. I am going to give “The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim” a 6/10.

“The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim” is now playing in theaters and is now available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, I have more coming! Stay tuned for my thoughts on “Sonic the Hedgehog 3” “Flow,” “Nosferatu,” and “Babygirl.” 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 Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim?” What did you think about it? Or, have you seen “The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power?” For those who have seen it, tell me your thoughts! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Red One (2024): A Holiday Movie for Everyone, and Therefore, No One

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Red One” is directed by Jake Kasdan (Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, Sex Tape) and stars Dwayne Johnson (Central Intelligence, Moana), Chris Evans (Captain America: The First Avenger, Knives Out), Lucy Liu (Charlie’s Angels, Strange World), and J.K. Simmons. This film showcases what happens when Santa’s bodyguard (Johnson) and a hacker (Evans) team up to find and rescue Saint Nick himself after he has been kidnapped.

Courtesy of Prime – © Amazon Content Services LLC

There are two words that define “Red One” for me. And no, they are not “red” or “one.” The two words that have consistently stayed in my head regarding “Red One” just so happen to be “it’s fine.” It is that middle of the road utterance you give to someone when you are trying not to hurt their feelings, but you also do not want to overblow your emotions and put on a performance. What did I think of the first “Red One” trailer? Eh, it’s fine. What did I think of the second trailer? I mean, it’s fine I guess. Looks fun enough. I was entertained by both of them. They both made me curious about the film. But I am not going to pretend it boosted my excitement in the same way that Marvel’s “Thunderbolts*” did, which took me from a concept I felt rather indifferent about, to immediately demanding at least five or so minutes of more footage.

I will be real, if you were to measure my excitement for “Red One,” it would be somewhere in the middle. I cannot pretend I have massive expectations for this film, but there are promising elements to behold. I liked the whole spy action vibe the film was promising, where the objective for our two recognizable leads is to rescue Santa Claus. “Violent Night” recently showed you can make a cool modern action flick with a Christmas backdrop, so maybe “Red One” would result in something similar.

Not to beat a dead horse… But “Red One” is, well, what other description can I possibly give?! It’s fine! If they come out with a DVD for this film, please note how I said if, not when, because this movie is an Amazon production. But if they come out with a DVD for “Red One,” you might as well take the two words I just said, “It’s fine,” and put that quote on the bottom of the cover. I bet that will make a great addition to the Walmart $5 bin. Do those bins even exist anymore? Asking for a friend.

I have heard this comparison before, but I think there is almost no better way to pitch this film to someone. “Red One” is practically a movie within a movie. It is a movie that you would make that purely exists within the universe of another film, or even say a TV show. This is the kind of movie that would exist in an episode of “The Big Bang Theory,” Penny would have to pitch the concept to her friends after she reads the script only to pause for audience laughter. The concept sounds goofy enough, but putting actors as notable as Dwayne Johnson and Chris Evans in the lead roles? It is a perfect recipe for a two minute gag in a coming of age comedy. But this movie is not two minutes. It is more than two hours. And it packs quite a bit into the runtime. Some of it lands, some of it does not. But it is hard for me to say that there was a lot in the movie that gave me a particularly strong reaction. Not much made me overly irate. Not much made me giddy with glee. That said, there are things that stood out to me about the film.

One positive I have about the film is how much lore they put into the mythology of Christmas, the North Pole, Santa Claus, or even other mysterious beings. The film undoubtedly puts a creative twist on handling what we tend to know as mythology.

That said, this film’s interpretation of the North Pole is both creative and underwhelming at the same time. For my “Star Wars” fans out there, it is basically the midichlorians of North Pole interpretations. When I think of the North Pole based on how I imagined it as a kid and what I have seen through media, I have always interpreted it as this whimsy, magical place. But a couple of the first things I notice when we get to the North Pole are a semi-depressing color scheme and drones flying. Sure, maybe drones can be magical… But when I look at the drones they have no poppy color to them, no pizzazz, and they honestly look like something you’d find in a store. The North Pole does not look as fun or magical as other interpretations. If anything it looks kind of bland. I get that the movie is a spy action thriller, and I like parts of what they are going for. But the North Pole is not one of them.

I also want to note something to families looking to see this film. I will not spoil anything considering the movie is new, but the movie opens with some material I think certain children should not be seeing. Also, this scene does set up the rest of the film, but I also think that scene would have been a better set up to a different story. For the record, the scene features a younger version of Chris Evans’ character, Jack O’Malley, and shows him doing something he probably should not be doing. We see this develop into something else in the long term, but I would love to see how this would have paid off in a shorter term. Perhaps hours, days, or even a year after Jack commits to his actions. Again, I will not go into detail. I think it would have spiraled into a movie that would have been much more fun than the one we got.

The holiday season is full of new films with great performances, many of which get nominated for Oscars, Critics Choice Awards, SAGs, and so on. “Red One” is not one of those movies. In fact it is not even close. Yes, there are competent performances on the supporting end. There is nothing totally anger-inducing, yet there is also not really much to write home about. With that in mind, if you were to ask me what I want for Christmas this year? It would for this movie to have two significantly better lead performances.

I am not going to pretend that Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson is the greatest actor of all time. Though I would not doubt his charisma gets him by from one movie to the next. That said, after several outings, he almost seems to do the same song and dance every other time. Yeah, maybe the “Jumanji” movies showcase his skills sometimes because he has to play other people simulating him. But when I look at movies like “Skyscraper,” “Rampage,” “Red Notice,” or this latest one, he seems to be playing some variation of himself. In some of these movies, even if he does not give an Oscar-worthy performance, he at least has a positive presence. The same can be said for “Red One” in certain scenes. I liked all the scenes between Johnson’s character, Callum Drift, and Santa Claus, played nicely by J.K. Simmons. But for various portions of the film, Johnson came off as if he was just playing the hits, but giving a tired version of them. The performance is not that inviting. It feels been there, done that. Does Johnson look like he wants to be on set? The way the movie is presented certainly makes him look that way. But I am willing to bet whenever he smiled on screen, that smile came with the knowledge that he would soon be getting a good chunk of the movie’s $250 million dollar budget.

Yeah… There is no way this movie cost $250 million. There are definitely a lot of special effects and things going on in each frame, but there is no way this is movie cost as much to make as “The Dark Knight Rises…”

Speaking of people who probably got paid a crapton of money for their presence in the film, let’s talk about Chris Evans! I love Chris Evans. Of course I have enjoyed watching him as Captain America, but even in movies I did not enjoy, I still think Evans ends up being a highlight. Personally, he was the best part of that forgettable Netflix movie, “The Gray Man.” But as far as Evans goes, his performance belongs on the naughty list. Though I would not entirely blame Chris Evans. While he may appear to be sleepwalking in the film from time to time, the script does him almost no favors. His character is about as one-dimensional as a ragdoll in “G-Mod.” Every other moment with Evans is just him acting bewildered or mind-blown. He is clearly playing the fish out of water role, but such a trait brings nothing interesting to the table as far as this project is concerned. Other than trying to get what he wants when he wants it, being a lame fish out of water might as well be Jack’s entire personality. Well, those aspects in addition to perving out on Wonder Woman.

Courtesy of Prime – © Amazon Content Services LLC

As for the action in this film, I am surprised to say that there are some standout scenes. There are a couple minutes inside of Jack O’Malley’s apartment where he fends off tons of people at once. I thought the choreography in that scene was really good. There is a creative moment in the film involving Rock ‘Em Sock ‘Em Robots. While I thought the scene itself was average, I did like one confrontation between Jack O’Malley and a giant snowman that turns its head like a Terminator when placed on a burning grill. But I cannot pretend I was that riveted by any of the action scenes. If anything I was amused by them, but to say I was wowed would be a hyperbole.

This is not necessarily an action scene as much as it is a face off, but there is a fantastic scene where our heroes come face to face with Krampus. There is a perfectly paced few minutes where Krampus and one of the characters are going one on one in the creature’s own game. It is quite entertaining. Sadly, I cannot say most of the movie is just as thrilling. By the way, for a movie full of visuals that would make you think it is a forgotten project from the late 2000s, early 2010s, I have to say the look for Krampus is a great display of practical effects. He looks great!

Theoretically, “Red One” is a movie that seems to be made to entertain or satisfy just about every person who would see it. But that is also where the film has a drawback. It tries to be dozens of things at once to the point where it does not really seem to know who exactly it is for. Is it for action junkies? Is it for people who like Christmas movies? Is it for people who like “The Rock?” Is it for people looking for a bit of a family dynamic? Will teens like it? Does it have enough for the kiddos? The movie throws a bunch of things at the wall. Some may stick, but not like superglue. Sure, “Red One” has action, but it is not the most innovative or exciting of the year. Yes, this movie has a Christmas backdrop, but lacks a sense of spirit or magic. Of course, “The Rock” is in the movie, but I would say he has had better performances and scripts to work with. There is a family dynamic but it almost lingers in the background. Certain teens would probably get behind some of the spectacle-based scenes but to call this movie the most spectacular-looking of the year when “Dune: Part Two” and “Twisters” exist would be generous. Kids could also be entertained by the adventure, but there are some things in this film that I imagine their parents would not want them to see.

When you break it down, “Red One” tries to be for everybody, but embraces its elements so minimally or poorly to the point where the movie is arguably for nobody. If you want to watch a movie from this year that so brilliantly speaks to several demographics, one that comes to mind would probably be “The Fall Guy.” For those looking for holiday cheer, you might be disappointed. Maybe some younger viewers should stay away from the film too. But for those looking for ludicrous action, charismatic stars, great music, an engaging love story, and a fun adventure, it is one of the year’s best flicks. I cannot say “Red One” is the movie equivalent to a lump of coal, but watching the movie at times sort of feels similar to going into my stocking on Christmas morning and finding a toothbrush. It works, but it might not exactly be what I am looking for.

In the end, “Red One” is as the kids say, mid. It is not great, not terrible. Just okay. Do I feel like my time was wasted watching “Red One?” Probably not. Will I watch it again in the future? Also probably not. But “Red One” is not worthy of the same applause that certain Christmas classics continue to get today. Movies like “Home Alone” or “Elf” or if you want to talk about something from this decade, I would say “Red One” does not even hold a candle to “The Holdovers.” If you are having company over during the holidays and need background noise on the television, “Red One” is somewhat serviceable. But you could also do a lot better. I am going to give “Red One” a 5/10.

“Red One” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

© 2024 SEARCHLIGHT PICTURES

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “A Real Pain,” “Y2K,” “Juror #2,” “Wicked,” and “Smile 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 “Red One?” What did you think about it? Or, are there any Christmas movies you watch once a year? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!