“Spider-Man: Brand New Day” is directed by Destin Daniel Cretton (Wonder Man, Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings) and stars Tom Holland (Cherry, Onward), Zendaya (Dune, Challengers), Sadie Sink (Stranger Things, The Glass Castle), Jacob Batalon (Novocaine, Reginald the Vampire), Jon Bernthal (The Accountant, The Wolf of Wall Street), Florence Pugh (Dune: Part Two, Don’t Worry Darling), Tramell Tillman (Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning, Severance), Marisa Tomei (The King of Staten Island, My Cousin Vinny), and Mark Ruffalo (Spotlight, Dark Waters). This film is the fourth standalone Tom Holland “Spider-Man” installment and follows a forgotten Peter Parker as he lives life without his former friends and loved ones. He also has to deal with physical changes and a telepathic threat.
The Tom Holland “Spider-Man” movies remind me a bit of the Tom Cruise “Mission: Impossible” movies, particularly the run from “Mission: Impossible II” to “Fallout,” because each film, for me anyway, entertained me more than the preceding one. The run from “Spider-Man: Homecoming” to “No Way Home” played out in a similar manner.
As much as I enjoyed “Homecoming,” I found parts of it underwhelming, and I had some gripes with certain portions of the story. Then came “Far from Home,” which not only did I think was better than “Homecoming,” but the best comic book movie of that year. Keep in mind, this is 2019… A year that includes “Joker” and “Avengers: Endgame.” I liked both movies. I prefer “Far from Home.” Flash forward to 2021, when “No Way Home” hit theaters. This was a movie that I was both looking forward to as a fan of the property, but found myself incredibly nervous about, as I was worried it was focused more on quantity than quality. While the film may not have been the best-looking or directed of the “Spider-Man” movies, I still find it to be one of the most entertaining, exciting, and engaging films of the decade. I rewatched the film recently and thought it maintained a perfect pace. It even made me tear up at one point.
With “Spider-Man” being Sony’s most notable property, it should not be a surprise that “Brand New Day,” also starring Tom Holland, would be happening. After all, “No Way Home” ends in a way that effectively closes out the Jon Watts-directed trilogy, while setting a rather clean slate for someone new to add a touch of their own. Enter Destin Daniel Cretton, whose credibility at Marvel is fairly high at this point given how he directed “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings” and was involved in the production of “Wonder Man” on Disney+.
Going back to what I said about “No Way Home” not being the best-looking “Spider-Man” movie… When I say that, I do not necessarily mean that it looks downright terrible, but there are a couple effects or minor points that I thought could have been cleaned up. To reference another “Spider-Man” movie, those specific parts failed to “maintain the illusion.” Nevertheless, if I said that “Brand New Day” was a bad-looking movie, I would be lying to you.
Of the Tom Holland “Spider-Man” installments, this is definitely the best looking of the four, just from a general color perspective. Not only is the film graded in a way that often pops, much like an epic comic book frame, but a lot of the costumes and character designs make for eye candy as well. From Spider-Man’s new, simple suit to the outfits worn by the Hand. In fact, when those characters are in the same space, they face off in an incredible looking-action sequence with immaculate framing. By the way, said camerawork just so happens to be pulled off by Bill Pope, who in addition to collaborating with Destin Daniel Cretton in “Shang-Chi,” was also the cinematographer for “Spider-Man 2” and “Spider-Man 3” directed by Sam Raimi.
That Hand faceoff is just one of the many action scenes that stand out, including a chase sequence early on where we first see Spidey with the Punisher. Not only is it a good-looking scene, but it is just the first moment where we get a sense of Tom Holland’s brilliant chemistry with Jon Bernthal.
Another incredible-looking aspect of the film is the swinging. As far as the “Spider-Man” movies go, I cannot name any that had outright awful swinging scenes, but there are some that stand out more than others. Even though I was not a fan of the film as a story, I did find the swinging scenes in “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” to be creatively done, immersive, and downright sick. “Brand New Day” has my favorite swinging scenes in a “Spider-Man” film since “The Amazing Spider-Man 2.” These scenes are absolutely fluid and awe-inspiring. I truly felt at times that I was leaping through Manhattan.
Not to digress, but I do not know how this is not amazing… This is the second movie released in the span of two weeks that has Tom Holland, Jon Bernthal, and Zendaya in it. I should note, for those who wanted more from these three as opposed to “The Odyssey,” good news, “Brand New Day” has you covered. Holland should be no surprise as he is playing the lead. Bernthal takes up a good amount of screentime and is maybe the funniest of all the characters in the cast. Well, except for one… I will leave that as a surprise. And if you like the sound of Zendaya’s voice, you will be hearing a lot more of it in this movie than “The Odyssey.”
I am not surprised that Peter Parker’s former friends, M.J. (Zendaya) and Ned (Jacob Batalon) are in this movie for as long as they are. For one thing, the two are genuinely likable and bring some soul into these flicks. I am surprised to say this as these are two characters who, quite frankly, I did not immediately latch onto while watching “Homecoming,” but I thought they improved vastly as more movies came out. Early on in the film, we see Peter watching his friends from the sidelines, or more accurately, via the Internet, as they attend M.I.T.. For those who missed “No Way Home,” M.I.T. was the top college Peter, M.J., and Ned were trying to get into, but all of them were rejected from the school, given the public’s shift on how they viewed Spider-Man following Mysterio’s death, before which he revealed the webhead’s identity. M.J. and Ned now forget Peter courtesy of Doctor Strange’s spell towards the end of “No Way Home,” but the two start off the story creating a time to remember at M.I.T., Peter is not tagging along. In fact, he seems to be skipping college altogether. It does make sense, as he is living on his own in New York and needs to pay rent to a landlord who I can only assume has eyes like a rodent.
Instead, Peter seems to start off this movie fighting one bad guy after the next. The information given in an early action montage is being fed at such a breakneck pace and serves as a solid start to the webhead’s journey. It establishes him as the hero New York loves, which for him, must be a nice change of pace after being chased by haters left and right in the last film. Maybe that is a bit of an exaggeration, as Doctor Strange’s spell may have helped Peter get out of one problem, but ultimately created another. He has to start his life from scratch. While onlookers through New York may shower Spider-Man with love, Peter is dealing with the fact that he has nothing left to lose. No one knows who he is at this point. His most prominent mentors, particularly Tony Stark and Aunt May, are both dead. All Peter can do is take life one day at a time. It has gotten to the point where Peter himself has almost forgotten who he is. Throughout the film, Holland’s Spider-Man reminds me a little of Robert Pattinson’s Batman. While Bruce Wayne was never erased from existence, I got the sense that there was more “Bat” than “man” out of the character, the Spider-Man in this film feels more Spider than Man. Both figuratively and literally.
If you are tired of “Spider-Man” getting sidelined by other Marvel characters in his own movies, then “Brand New Day” may be the closest the series has come to avoid doing such a thing. Note that I said this is “the closest” example and not that this film has outright kept such a thing from happening. After all, Bruce Banner plays a prominent role in this film, and the Punisher has a fair amount of screentime, but of the MCU “Spider-Man” titles, this may be the purest “Spider-Man” story yet. It feels, in certain ways, more traditional. Spider-Man has no shortage of tech around him, but the suit he wears throughout this latest installment is a lot simpler than the ones he had previously. We see moments of Peter trying to live up to the expectations of important people he lost in life. The stakes in this film are by no means small, but by the end of the film, it was Peter’s mission to “save New York” as opposed to the entire world, or the multiverse. Although the film does in some ways continue to acknowledge the multiverse, as well as the Spider-Men he met in “No Way Home.” It should not be too surprising as the MCU is still in its Multiverse Saga.
The vibe of “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” reminded me quite a bit of “Thunderbolts*” by the film’s conclusion. Much like how “Thunderbolts*” centers around its characters’ handling of their mental health, “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” features Peter Parker constantly trying to deal with the fact that his life has changed. Even as the years go by, it still hurts. The mental struggles are not just exclusive to the heroes, as the film’s antagonist also has struggles their own that we see through flashbacks.
While “Spider-Man: No Way Home” remains my favorite of the Tom Holland “Spider-Man” movies, “Brand New Day” comes with a perk that “No Way Home” lacks. I think one can find enjoyment in “No Way Home” even if it is their first “Spider-Man” or Marvel film, but I think the experience watching that movie would be ten times better if you watched “Far from Home” or some of the other “Spider-Man” stories. As an entry point, “No Way Home” is not the best option. Despite “Brand New Day” being the fourth film in this saga, it is a good place to start if you are a “Spider-Man” newbie. That is despite having familiar characters like Hulk and Punisher. Yes, it piggybacks off of “No Way Home’s” ending. But the film does a good job at bringing viewers up to speed on what Peter is up to, what happened in his life, and so on. The only factors that would perhaps keep it from being the best entry point are Ned and M.J.. I appreciated the movie as someone who has grown fond of those characters in the original trilogy, as well as their connection to Peter. Even if you are not familiar with Ned and M.J., it is still fun to watch them. Their chemistry with each other, as well as Peter, is terrific.
The film is on the longer side, clocking in at 145 minutes. The pace does get a tad tiresome towards the end. At that point, things felt a bit slower than I would have anticipated. The movie is quite fast at the beginning, but almost the opposite towards the conclusion. For the most part, the pace works, but it is not perfect.
Speaking of credits, there is a post-credits scene in the film, which I will not reveal, but of the scenes that can be found in the end credits of MCU movies, I found this to be one of the weaker ones. Sure, it does play off of something that was previously highlighted in the movie, but it kind of feels lazy. For one thing, unlike most post-credits scenes in Marvel films, which are done physically and in-camera, this one, which only lasts 10 to 15 seconds max, is done on a virtual screen. Heck, even that stupid post-credit scene in “Ant-Man and the Wasp” where the ant plays the drums had more soul put into it! Sure, this new scene offers a tease of sorts, and I would probably would have been underwhelmed to have sat through the credits and not witnessed a scene at all, but the one we got sort of feels like a waste of time.
Keep in mind though, we are just talking about credits here. The post-credits scene did not ruin the movie. The movie is still awesome. It does a spectacular job handling Peter’s character, introduces a fairly compelling villain, has some great-looking and fun action sequences, and offers some really good performances from the entire cast. The pace of the film is not always perfect, it almost doesn’t know when it wants to end, and the story does get to a point where it is nearly overstuffed. Yet as I address these criticisms, the positives heavily outweigh the negatives when it comes to my thoughts on “Spider-Man: Brand New Day.”
In the end, “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” is some of the most fun one can have at the movies this summer. Tom Holland continues to prove that he is an incredible Spider-Man and offers another fine portrayal of the iconic hero. The film is at its best when its main character has to navigate various relationships. It is fascinating to see someone who feels he is alone trying to maintain some semblance of a social life when the opportunity comes up. I was glued to the screen whenever Peter had a chance to reunite with Ned and MJ. These three played off each other well in the previous films, so it is no surprise that they continue to do so in this one. The Punisher and Hulk are fine additions to the narrative, even if, again, some threads nearly make the whole story feel almost overstuffed. I have no idea what is in store for a Tom Holland “Spider-Man 5,” but if one is coming, and it probably is based on how much money this movie has earned so far, I would not mind seeing Destin Daniel Cretton come back to direct. As much as I praise Jon Watts for helming a solid original trilogy, I think Cretton a better eye for visuals. Of all the Holland “Spider-Man” films, “Brand New Day” is by far the easiest on the eyes. This movie has made more than a couple billion dollars worldwide, so chances are you have probably seen it by now, but if you have not seen “Spider-Man: Brand New Day,” consider this a recommendation. I am going to give “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” an 8/10.
“Spider-Man: Brand New Day” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now!
Thanks for reading this review! THIS SUNDAY, AUGUST 23RD, get excited! Because the newest episode of Movie Requests will be available to watch on Flicknerd.com and YouTube! This episode features the incredibly talented comedian Amy Sedaris, who suggested I should watch two of her favorite movies. You may know Sedaris from shows like “Strangers with Candy” and “At Home with Amy Sedaris,” as well as films including “Jennifer’s Body” and “Puss in Boots.” You can watch a promo of the episode above, where Sedaris gives her suggestions. What do you think they are? If you would like to watch the episode, you can do so here, but if you want the fastest way to see it, then by all means subscribe to my YouTube channel!
My next review is going to be for “I Want Your Sex.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “The Invite,” “Cookie Queens,” and “Tony!” 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 “Spider-Man: Brand New Day?” I mean, look at the box office… Of course you did. What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite of the Tom Holland “Spider-Man” movies? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“The Odyssey” is directed by Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight, Oppenheimer) and stars Matt Damon (Saving Private Ryan, The Martian), Tom Holland (Spider-Man: Homecoming, Cherry), Zendaya (Spider-Man: Homecoming, Challengers), Anne Hathaway (Interstellar, The Intern), Robert Pattinson (The Batman, Tenet), Lupita Nyong’o (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, The Wild Robot), Samantha Morton (The Walking Dead, Elizabeth: The Golden Age) and Charlize Theron (A Million Ways to Die in the West, Atomic Blonde). This film is based on Homer’s epic poem of the same name and follows Odysseus as he makes a dangerous journey back home to Ithaca to reunite with his wife, Penelope (Hathaway).
Well… It is finally here. The movie that may as well be my most anticipated of the year, perhaps even of the decade.
“The Odyssey” is more than a movie. It is a story that follows an epic that has been around for several thousand years. Despite being an old story, there is a sense of innovation being brought to the table with this film. During my time in high school, “The Odyssey,” or at least adaptations of it, happened to be assigned to me as required reading in English class. I enjoyed getting to know about the story of Odysseus. It was a grand adventure tale that sparked the imagination. While I cannot say that it prompted a fascination with Greek myth in the way it may have with other readers, I found the material to make for a good read.
I even thought “The Odyssey” could make for a decent flick. Granted, the story is old, so there are, unsurprisingly, screen adaptations of it already. But I thought perhaps, unfairly, this would be a decent film from the likes of Peter Jackson, who is a master of sword and sandal cinema. Little did I know that my all time favorite director would one day be stepping in to handle this highly celebrated story.
Christopher Nolan is responsible for some of my favorite films ever, including 2014’s “Interstellar,” which came up in a conversation recently with family. My uncle asked me if I thought this new movie could surpass “Interstellar” in terms of quality. My response at the time, “It’s possible…” Having now seen “The Odyssey,” this did not surpass the quality “Interstellar,” but it finds a way to nearly match that cinematic masterpiece’s high bar. “The Odyssey” is gargantuan in every way. In fact, that is one of the reasons why I found “Interstellar” to have such tremendous replay value. It is a movie that feels larger than life. “The Odyssey” goes by the same philosophy. It is a story that emits endless verisimilitude.
Every frame of this movie, despite being part of a mythical epic, felt real. I believed in the film’s world. Its environment. Its characters. Its sets. If you are looking for peak immersion, this is the movie for you, regardless of what format in which you see it. I kid you not when I say every shot looks beautiful. Just about everything on screen was done for real, in camera. Nolan is a master of practicality. I genuinely could not believe what I was looking at during certain moments. Everything from the various interiors that fill your vision to a Cyclops that made my jaw drop to a crucial night scene in the water that showcases the wrath of a storm.
Given how much I love this movie, and believe me, I love this movie, I think it is arguably fair that I get into my flaws early on in the review. The biggest flaw I have in this film is the lighting. I have seen this movie three times, and the lighting is by no means atrocious overall, but there is a scene or two where I think it could have been pinched up a little. During my first viewing, I do not know if it is more of a fault of the projector than anything else, but it was somewhat hard to pick up all the details in several frames during the Cyclops scene. It is a dark cave, and as immersed as I was in the movie, one could debate that I was too immersed. I think the frames could have been brighter to better highlight essential information. Some of the dialogue is borderline cheesy and out of place, but we are talking bits and pieces. For the most part, I do not have a problem with the writing, but the problems I do have may as well be addressed.
And yes, I made sure as a die-hard IMAX fanatic, that my first viewing of this movie would be in 15/70mm film. I bought my ticket a year ago, as soon as they went on sale, dedicating myself so heavily to this film and its technical glory by buying a ticket in a completely different part of the country from where I live. For the record, I live in Massachusetts. New England forever! I bought a ticket to see this film in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. I am the last person who wants to spend time in Florida in July. I remember walking around Disney World in June when I was 18 years old… I am shocked I did not melt in the middle of Tomorrowland. My trip to see this movie, or my odyssey rather, was worth it despite my apprehensions, and eventually finding out that a theater in Providence, Rhode Island would also be getting the movie in the premium format. Not only is this a great movie, but it is one that I urge everyone reading this to watch in a theater at least once.
When I look back at Nolan’s last movie, “Oppenheimer,” I was amazed by the use of IMAX film in that project. It was most certainly worth the extra money for the IMAX experience. But I will not deny that of all the projects in which Nolan used IMAX to shoot it, “Oppenheimer” might have been the one of the bunch that was not as essential to view on an IMAX screen. This is not a diss. If “Oppenheimer” is playing in an IMAX near you, go check it out. You’d be doing yourself a favor. The trinity test and the black and white scenes are cool to see on a giant screen. That said, I think if you were to view “Oppenheimer” on a traditional cinema screen, you will not miss a whole ton, even if the aspect ratio suggests otherwise. On the other hand, “The Odyssey,” while excellent on any screen, becomes an event when bringing the IMAX experience into play. I have been to many IMAX experiences. This has to easily be a top 5 IMAX experience of all time. “The Odyssey” in IMAX is better than sex. “The Odyssey” in IMAX is better than winning the lottery. Once that IMAX logo flashes on the screen, get ready for 172 minutes of some of the most amazing cinema of your life. Not just because every frame fills the screen, showcasing some of the best imagery of any movie I have seen this decade courtesy of Hoyte van Hoytema’s brilliant camerawork, but because the movie is just that good.
Also, this review is being published after three viewings of the film, the last of which included a four-minute preview of “Dune: Part Three,” which is exclusive to IMAX 70mm screenings. My friends, YOU ARE NOT READY. Anyway, I digress. I just figured I should add that in as a bonus incentive.
The story may be simple and not every character has significant depth, but the movie does a great job at handling Odysseus (Matt Damon) as the center of the story. Damon’s struggle here is that he just wants to get home. He finished fighting in the Trojan War, he is surrounded by his men, and together, they work to overcome the various obstacles that stand in their path. Everything from a Cyclops to Laestrygonians to Sirens. The movie does a great job in its less action-packed moments, of which there are plenty, of showcasing Odysseus’ personal connections to his beliefs, his love, and his family.
Speaking of which, Anne Hathaway plays Penelope in what is her third Christopher Nolan movie. This is her best performance of the three. Hathaway constantly has to deal with the struggle that her husband is gone, and the dilemma as to whether he is gone gone. Meanwhile, tons of suitors are vying for her hand in marriage, thus making them king of Ithaca.
As this is going on, we see Tom Holland as Telemachus watching all of this from the sidelines, believing that “his dad is coming home.” Yes, weird line. There is one of those questionable dialogue choices. But even with some odd dialogue here and there, Tom Holland handles every line given to him with brilliance. This is one of the best performances of his career so far. Holland’s essential presence towards the end of the film is a highlight. That said, if I have one thing to say, of all the actors in the cast, Holland is perhaps the least disguisable. There are a lot of recognizable stars in this ensemble, and if I had to pick a weak link of the performances, Holland may be it. That is not to say he is doing a bad job with his role. But his transformation is not as noticeable as others in the cast. Even with what I just said in mind, if the Academy were to nominate him for his efforts, I would understand it. He is tremendous.
I am not kidding when I say this movie is full of recognizable stars. This feels like the “Super Smash Bros. Ultimate” of movie casts. Everyone is here. Zendaya. Charize Theron. Jon Bernthal. Robert Pattinson. John Leguizamo. Elliot Page. Lupita Nyong’o. Even Travis Scott. Much like one of Nolan’s previous projects, “Tenet,” Scott made an original song for this film.
Sadly, there is no Michael Caine. I cannot blame him though. He says he is getting old, and I respect his choice to stay out of this project.
Although if I had to name a favorite secondary character in this film, it is not Telemachus. It is not Athena. It is not Menelaus. It is the score.
It is so great to acknowledge the extraordinary talents of Ludwig Göransson, especially after watching “The Mandalorian and Grogu,” which I not only found to be his worst work yet, but the first time I recall watching a “Star Wars” project and being turned off by the music. This is Göransson’s third project with Christopher Nolan, and like a certain song suggests, three is indeed the magic number. I thought Göransson’s earliest collaboration with Nolan through “Tenet” was already a contender for the best score of the decade. This might beat that. The score almost serves as a hint of irony, especially when considering how this movie was entirely shot on a format as huge as IMAX. Compared to some of Nolan’s other works, the music is not that complicated. There is no huge, sweeping orchestra. Though much like “Tenet,” there is a lot of percussion. There are several scenes in which the tunes stand out, including one that dives into some background about the Trojan Horse. There is a particular beat that repeats, but every other second that beat increases speed. It is almost like a track you would put in a trailer for a horror movie. Another piece I love is a particular tune that sounds off every time Odysseus readies his bow. It is almost like his superhero theme. When you hear a specific set of four notes towards the final 10 minutes of the movie, they mean business.
I do not approve of filming in movie theaters while the film is playing. No, seriously. Stop it. This has gotten out of control. But I did see a video online where the four note leitmotif plays in the final 10 minutes and the audience just starts losing their minds like they are at a concert. Having seen this exact moment, I get why.
While there is still debate as to whether “The Odyssey” is the year’s best film so far, I am more than certain I witnessed my favorite climax so far this year. Having been exposed to “The Odyssey” in high school, I was familiar with some of what was about to go down, but even with beforehand knowledge, the final 20, 30 minutes of the film were unbelievably satisfying and come after an entire movie whose buildup is immaculate. There is a scene towards the end where Odysseus narrates about something that happened during the war, and just when I thought his words were powerful enough, the visuals were just as emotionally charged. The final ten minutes deliver a well put together action scene that had me glued to the screen. “The Odyssey” is a several thousand-year-old text, so I have no idea if how much I would be spoiling here, but holy heck… Parts of this ending may leave you with all kinds of chills.
And of course, those chills are best experienced in IMAX… For more reasons than one.
IMAX screenings for this movie, whether they are in 70mm, dual-laser, XT laser, or even 2K digital, are selling like there’s no tomorrow. I have an IMAX 10 minutes from home. And it is not part of a multiplex. It is a proper, 8 story IMAX. Trying to get a ticket there is harder than solving a Rubik’s Cube! But if you can see this film in IMAX at least once, consider yourself blessed. For one thing, this is the first Hollywood feature shot entirely on IMAX film. There have been movies shot entirely on IMAX cameras, like “Avengers: Infinity War” and “Avengers: Endgame,” but those were shot digitally, and in lower resolutions. As for IMAX film in Hollywood cinema, Christopher Nolan has always been at the forefront when it comes to utilizing the technology ever since his first go with it in “The Dark Knight.” The results are always a feast for the eyes and allow the movie to reach full immersion. But never did I think we would see an IMAX movie entirely shot with the company’s film cameras. Leave it to Sir Nolan to prove me wrong, and put a gigantic grin on my face. This is something I have been dying to see for a good chunk of my life, if I could not make it happen myself. I have been obsessed with the IMAX film format since my early teens. I am happy to know Nolan has done everything in his power to keep it going.
One surprise I discovered in this film is that I was just about able to make out each line of dialogue given by the characters. As much as I enjoyed “Tenet,” I thought the sound mixing in that film was sometimes a failure. There is one scene in that movie that takes place on the water where subtitles are essentially required to understand everything that is being said. Not here. Nolan seems to understand this problem. On top of making new IMAX cameras, one thing that was made specifically for this production was a blimp that would cover the IMAX camera while it was in use. This was to solve issues related to background noise, including how much noise the camera itself makes. Yet the same time, having such a big blimp creates its own problems. On top of making the cameras themselves heavier to lug around during certain scenes, it can make it harder for the actors to see each other. So, a mirror system was built that way the actors could maintain eye contact. Despite the source material being old, “The Odyssey” feels like a generational product that is not only fun to watch, but brings new tricks to the table when it comes to filmmaking.
It is hard to tell if “The Odyssey” is going to be a one time thing, or if we are going to see more movies shot on IMAX film from start to finish. In fact, where does Nolan go from here? Nolan is at the center of implementing IMAX into Hollywood cinema, but in a way, this feels like the ultimate goal. It is his equivalent to climbing Mount Everest. He has not shot anything on IMAX 3D cameras. I do not think he is a fan of 3D, but that has to be the next step, right?
Do not get me wrong, any theatre is worth the price of admission for “The Odyssey.” IMAX… LIEMAX… NO-MAX… But I stand here saying that I do not think there is a single film in history that has been worth the price of admission for IMAX more than “The Odyssey.” This film is big, loud, clear, and most importantly, an excellent time regardless of the technical aspects.
In the end, “The Odyssey” is my favorite Christopher Nolan movie since “Interstellar.” There are movies, there are epics, and then there is Christopher Nolan’s latest masterpiece. Going back to “Interstellar,” which I have seen 5 times in theaters ranging from 2014 to 2025, “The Odyssey” is likely going to get at least three viewings from yours truly during its initial theatrical run. For awhile I was thinking that “Project Hail Mary” had a straight shot at being my favorite film of the year. I am not saying I like “The Odyssey” more, but if there was a runner-up right now for my top movies list of 2026, this is it. “The Odyssey” is the cinematic form at its absolute peak. This movie has already made more than a billion dollars at the box office, it is a hit with critics and audiences, and I can see why. The entire cast is on their A-game. The score is stupendous. The techniques that went into the making of this film look incredible in the finished product, and those are just the ones that you can see for yourself. I do have some slight nitpicks with the lighting, but they do not take much away from what is an excellent time at the movies. I am ecstatic to know that premium and IMAX screens are selling out for this film, even about a month after its release. If there is one movie you should see on the big screen this year, it is “The Odyssey.” I was talking to cousins recently and they said they might wait for streaming to watch “The Odyssey” as it is not their type of movie. I get that completely, but I think if you wait for streaming to watch “The Odyssey,” you are going to be doing yourself a massive disservice. If everything I just said has not yet convinced you to buy a ticket for “The Odyssey,” then maybe my score will, because I am going to give the film a 9/10.
As far as I am concerned, this film’s legacy is not going to fizzle anytime soon. I studied “The Odyssey” in high school, and if that continues to be a part of students’ required material, I am going to be so jealous. Nolan’s film is rated R, so we shall see if students, particularly those in certain years of high school or below, will be able to watch it in class, but if they are given permission, they are going to be introduced to one of the finest masterpieces of cinema ever created with a crowd of their peers. Frankly, if I were in an English class, and I got to watch “The Odyssey” as a required assignment, I would probably kiss my teacher on the mouth. Please go see this movie. You will thank me later.
“The Odyssey” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! If you have not done so already, check out my latest episode of Movie Requests featuring Elijah Wood, Frodo from “Lord of the Rings” himself! In the video, he requested I should watch “Festen,” or “The Celebration” as it is known in English. To find out what I thought of the movie, click the video above! If you enjoy the video, please leave a like and subscribe to my YouTube channel!
Also, I will let everyone know that my next guest in the series is going to be Amy Sedaris! You may know Sedaris from films like “Elf,” “Is This Thing On,” “Jennifer’s Body,” and “Puss in Boots.” You can also find her on television shows like “Strangers with Candy,” “The Mandalorian,” “At Home with Amy Sedaris,” and “Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt.” She has quite the prolific resume! Work has already started on her episode, I will have more details soon, but look forward to it. It is gonna be a good one.
My next review is going to be for “Her Private Hell!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Haunted Heist,” “Spider-Man: Brand New Day,” “I Want Your Sex,” “The Invite,” and “Cookie Queens.” 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 Odyssey?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the greatest movie theater experience you ever had? And I am not just talking about the quality of the movie… What is a cinema experience that checked every box for you? The film looked great, sounded fantastic, and truly felt like a once in a lifetime event? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“The Drama” is written and directed by Kristoffer Borgli (Dream Scenario, Sick of Myself) and stars Zendaya (Spider-Man: Homecoming, The Greatest Showman) and Robert Pattinson (The Batman, Tenet) as a couple who are preparing for their wedding. While the two get ready for their big day, they have a conversation with some friends that ends up becoming much bigger than any of them could have anticipated. When Emma reveals a key part of her past, it changes the way everyone sees her, including her future spouse, Charlie (Pattinson).
“The Drama” has one of the best trailers I have seen in recent memory due to its quick pace and effective messaging of the film’s main idea. Add a pinch of star power, and you have a recipe for hype. Zendaya and Robert Pattinson not only have busy years ahead of them, but they are in a few films together, including this one. Naturally, I was excited for this movie.
I am not saying skip the trailer before you see the movie, because, again, it is a great piece of marketing. It got me in the door. But if you want my two cents, the trailer does not even do this movie justice. It does a great job giving a spec of the main idea, and what unfolds from said main idea is completely bonkers. This is a film that is likely to inspire conversations, make people think, and whether for good or bad, could potentially ruin a relationship.
I am a believer that nobody, including myself, is perfect. Everyone does something stupid at some point in their life. This movie does a great job at showcasing the dangers of having your past come back to haunt you in the worst possible way. This is done through a simple conversation where two couples talk to each other discussing the worst things they have ever done. It is an innocent game where harsh truths come to light, but everyone seems to take the information and brush it aside. That is until Zendaya’s character, Emma Harwood, reveals something she has not even told her partner. I am not going to say what she did, as I had no idea what it was prior to watching the movie, but this ruins her friendship with the couple across from her, and puts a bad taste in her partner’s mouth.
Harwood’s revelation sets the tone for what’s next, and could not come at a worse possible time. Throughout the film we see her and Charlie Thompson (Pattinson) get ready for their wedding. Planning for a wedding, as exciting as it can be, is already stressful enough between getting people together, choosing and setting up the venue, making sure everyone assumes their role, and now it has become ten times harder.
Throughout the film, we see Thompson writing his wedding vows. We see him tinker with the document where he has them stored. It is not just a matter of giving a speech from the heart. It is a matter of knowing his partner. The revelation essentially turned things upside down for Thompson. He does not feel like he knows her the way he did before. He sees an entirely new side to her. The longer the film goes on, the more we find Thompson in a sense of personal debate. Does he know his partner? Or is she a complete enigma? What else does he not know?
This movie kind of makes me glad I am single. What if I end up doing something stupid that I will have to bring up to my partner one day? Will they accept it? Or perhaps vice versa? What if I am dating someone and I find out they killed a guy? I find myself to be quite an accepting person, but if I find out my partner killed a guy, I think it would be an understatement to suggest that idea gives off a bad vibe.
I also dig the start of the movie. The movie begins with our main couple meeting each other in a cafe, where Thompson notices Harwood reading a book and tries to win her over by saying he loves said book. We find out early on that Harwood is deaf in one ear. The way the movie establishes this point is rather cute.
Perhaps the biggest strength, arguably to no one’s surprise, is the on-screen talent. Of course, Robert Pattinson and Zendaya lead this film, both of whom are great actors on their own. But this film does them favors by putting them together. I buy that these two are a couple from, as mentioned recently, the moment they meet in a cafe, to their eventual decline. As good as they are together, the two are not alone when it comes to showcasing tour de performances.
While Zendaya and Robert Pattinson are naturally going to be the first two people that come to mind when I think of this movie, trailing ever so slightly behind them is Alana Haim, who plays Rachel, Emma’s maid of honor. The movie easily allows her to shine due to the already excellent material she is given, but it also helps that Haim takes said material and goes to town with it. Everything from finding out about her personal revelation, which as much as the other characters seem to let it slide, made me gulp in my throat a bit, to what she ends up doing as the film gets to the big wedding itself. This film is called “The Drama” for a reason, and as it progresses, Rachel often accentuates it.
While there is a somewhat grounded feel to this movie, if there is any character that most resembles a cartoon, Rachel would probably be the closest candidate. This is not meant to come off as a dig. If anything, her exaggerated tendencies seem to stand out. As much as I did not like “Licorice Pizza,” one thing is for sure, it put Alana Haim on the map for me. She did a terrific job in that movie. Not only does she do just as swell of a job in “The Drama,” but it also helps that the movie itself is just as riveting.
In the end, “The Drama” is one of those films that you kind of have to see to believe. Just about everything in this film stands out in some way. The acting. The location choices. The dialogue. The direction. Everything in this movie works. I do not think “The Drama” is going to end up being the best movie of the year. In fact, part of me thinks it could have been slightly shorter. But it does not change the fact that “The Drama” lives up to its name. It is a film that for better or worse, is going to make you think. I am going to give “The Drama” an 8/10.
Also, I would like a personal note. Between this movie and “Dream Scenario,” both of which are helmed by Kristoffer Borgli, the filmmaker seems to have an attachment to setting his work in Massachusetts. It seems like a minute point, but I am glad Borgli is not only making good movies, but manages to do so while shining a spotlight on my home state. If Borgli is ever in the Boston area again, let me know if you’re up for some candlepin bowling.
“The Drama” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! I have an update regarding my ongoing video series Movie Requests, where I take film suggestions from other people and talk about them. I am pleased to announce that the fourth episode is coming soon and it is going to feature none other than “The Mandalorian” star Katee Sackhoff! She suggested a movie for me to review last November, and I am finally going to talk about it on May the 4th, otherwise known as “Star Wars Day.” How appropriate. What movie do you think she requested? Leave your comments! You can catch the video as soon as it drops on Flicknerd.com or my YouTube channel, which you should absolutely and positively subscribe to. You’ll get it faster that way.
And if you have not done so by now, please check out my last episode of Movie Requests, featuring “Avatar” actor Joel David Moore! He requested I should watch “Force Majeure.” What did I think about it? Click the video and find out for yourself!
My next review is going to be for “Exit 8.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Normal,” “Lorne,” and “Michael.” 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 Drama?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie about a couple who happen to be in a not so perfect relationship? If you want my two cents, please go check out “Marriage Story” if you have not done so already. It is on Netflix, but if you prefer your physical media, like me, it is available on the Criterion Collection. Give it a shot. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
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…
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!
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! You know that feeling when you were going Black Friday shopping in the 1990s or the 2000s? You found a parking spot at Walmart, and you were trying your best to get your hands on that new TV and would push hundreds of people out of the way just to get your hands on it? Imagine that, but online, and with movie tickets. “The Odyssey” is about to do something that as far as I know, no movie in history has done before. Not even a “Star Wars” or Marvel title.
Tickets are going on sale for “The Odyssey” a full year before its scheduled release. If I had to be honest though, part of me is not surprised this is happening. The film, which comes out July 2026, is expected to be one of the biggest of that year and unleash a first in cinematic history.
If you look on several ticketing sites right now, you will notice that there are times available for Christopher Nolan’s “The Odyssey” a year in advance. This kind of push rarely, if ever, happens for films. If the tickets are not sold out by the time you are reading this, they are likely ready to buy. This post is being published on July 16th, 2025, one day before these tickets officially drop. That said, if you are reading this hours after publication, check Fandango. Check AMC. Tickets are available!
There are a few caveats however… The showtime options are limited, and the tickets are only available at select locations. “The Odyssey” is expected to have a wide release, but if you are looking for times in cities like Boston, which is where I live for example, be patient. Also, these are for IMAX 70mm screenings. If you want to see the film in a standard theater or another format such as Dolby Cinema or IMAX digital, you will have to wait a bit longer. But if you are eager to see the film early the way it was intended, now may be a good time to buy your tickets.
Based on Homer’s epic poem of the same name, “The Odyssey” centers around the character of Odysseus as he ventures home following the end of the Trojan War. The film features an all star cast including Matt Damon, Tom Holland, Zendaya, Jon Bernthal, Robert Pattinson, Lupita Nyong’o, Charlize Theron and Anne Hathaway. That is just scratching the surface! Christopher Nolan is writing and directing the film, as well as producing it alongside his wife Emma Thomas. You might think with an all star cast and an Oscar-winning filmmaker who is hot off of “Oppenheimer” these reasons would be enough to sell tickets early. But perhaps the biggest selling point for me is the opportunity to see the film in IMAX 70mm.
Those who know Christopher Nolan are well aware that he champions the IMAX format, most especially IMAX 70mm, the company’s original film format that has decreased in use throughout the current century with the rise of digital filmmaking and projection. But in recent years, it has regained popularity following the releases of certain movies. Christopher Nolan’s most recent film, “Oppenheimer,” released in a list of theaters playing it in IMAX 70mm. The presentation allows the IMAX-shot scenes to cover the entire screen in a resolution that is theoretically as high as 18K. That movie was Nolan’s latest effort where he would combine traditional 35mm or 70mm film with IMAX film while shooting. But “The Odyssey,” which is also showing in IMAX 70mm, is a different story.
“The Odyssey” has many distinctions of being a cinematic event, including the fact that this is the first Hollywood feature to be shot entirely on IMAX film cameras. This is a feat that yours truly thought might never see the light of day. IMAX film cameras are traditionally known for being loud and bulky, Despite their magnificent results through the lens, they are not always the most realistic camera to use. One reason why “Dunkirk” in particular has so much IMAX-shot footage is due to the film having minimal dialogue.
Dropping the tickets this far in advance is not just a great way to get people talking and push this film’s marketing campaign into gear, but it is essentially an invitation to be a part of history. People who buy tickets for these shows on opening weekend not only get to see the movie, but they earn the right to say that they are the first people to see a Hollywood film shot entirely on IMAX film. Seeing any movie on IMAX film is worth bragging about, especially today when much of the moviegoing market is digital. I had the opportunity, by complete coincidence, to see Ryan Coogler’s “Sinners” on IMAX film a week into its release while it was playing in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Like some of Christopher Nolan’s previous movies, “Sinners” combines multiple film formats. But “The Odyssey” is a different animal. Whereas with the “Sinners” IMAX experience, where that movie will switch between black bars and full screen, “The Odyssey” will show the entire movie with the picture covering the screen from top to bottom.
Do any extra perks come with these tickets? Other than bragging rights, it does not look like that will be the case. At least for now. That said, it would be cool to include something special for the attendees whether it means a Q&A, getting to meet one of the film’s stars, or maybe an exclusive t-shirt or popcorn bucket. Just spitballing ideas.
Thankfully, if these theaters are too far for you, IMAX film has a digital equivalent capable of showcasing the IMAX-shot scenes in all their glory through their 4K laser projection system. The projector is available at a short list of IMAX’s “true” theaters, and definitely worth seeking out if you cannot watch the movie on film. That said, tickets are not on sale for any of those locations. But it is nice to have options closer to the film’s release.
As of writing this, a part of me is planning to buy a ticket for one of these screenings, perhaps at the AMC Lincoln Square 13 in New York City since as of now, it appears to be the closest theater to me with showtimes. If you know me, I am such an avid Christopher Nolan and IMAX fanatic that being one of the first to see this film in IMAX 70mm would be a dream. I am honestly willing to fly to another state if New York starts selling out and they have tickets over there. Move over, Taylor Swift, the Eras Tour is so 2023! As a cinephile, my moment is here, and I am “ready for it!” For my fellow New Englanders, the Providence Place Cinemas in Providence, Rhode Island has an IMAX with a film projector. However, due to certain issues it had during “Oppenheimer’s” run there, I do not think that theater is going to end up screening “The Odyssey” in IMAX 70mm. One can hope, but I am worried it will not make the list.
Do you have to buy “The Odyssey” tickets right now? Not necessarily. Again, the showtimes available are limited. The film is not out for a year and they are inevitably going to add more times. Heck, the film could end up getting delayed, thereby making all these advance purchases irrelevant. But if you want to guarantee your spot as a part of film history, this might be a solid investment. Should the ticket gods by on my side, I plan to be a part of this cinematic event, and I hope to see you there in July 2026.
I also very much look forward to potentially bonding with my new best friend, the “refresh icon.”
Thanks for reading this post! This was a bit impromptu, but I had to get this off my chest because to be honest, the hype is real and I choose to be a part of it. There are probably people reading this right now, including my own friends and family that think I would be a madman for buying a movie ticket a year in advance in a theater far from home. They might be right, but I make no apologies. What if I move to that city? Who’s crazy now? That’s one less travel ticket I have to buy! That’s less gas in the car! I should not have to apologize for being a fan. That said, if you are getting tickets for “The Odyssey” a year in advance? What theater are you going to? What showtime? Maybe we will run into each other. I would love to meet my fellow movie fans. Let me know down below! In the meantime, please check out the official Facebook page if you want to be updated on my latest posts through social media! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
PS: If you plan to sell scalp tickets for this, do the world a favor and get off this page. In fact, even better, get off the Internet.
“Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert” is a concert film directed by Paul Dugdale. The picture features performances from a Hans Zimmer concert as well as several interviews featuring people Zimmer has worked with over the years.
I was somewhat hesitant to talk about this film. Not because I thought it was bad, or I wanted to easily forget about it, but it all comes down to a lack of experience. I can safely say I have not watched many concert films. In fact, to this day, I never reviewed a concert film on Scene Before. Yes, even that “Eras Tour” movie that made a decent amount of money when it came out. I am not a Swiftie, to be honest. In fact, my experience of attending concerts in person is next to none. I have sensitive ears, so attending obnoxious events like these are not often my first choice. Although, Hans Zimmer is one of the few artists I have seen live during his tour, fittingly titled “Hans Zimmer Live,” at Boston’s TD Garden last year, which leads me to another reason why I almost avoided reviewing this movie.
I am a huge Hans Zimmer fanboy.
If there one artist that has defined my life over the past decade, it is Hans Zimmer. Not just because he has done some of my favorite movies, but his variety of approaches to composing his music. In one movie, he will go super electronic, in the next he will do things a bit more on the orchestral side, sometimes he will go full rock and roll. Sometimes a bit metal. Zimmer is one of the greatest musicians alive. When I would do homework after school, blaze down the highway on road trips, or even trek on Amtrak trains, Zimmer would often be my artist of choice. Going into this film, I was a bit worried that I would be so lost in what I love about Zimmer’s music that I would forget that there was a movie in front of me to potentially critique.
We will start this review off with some bad news for the filmmakers. Despite my fanaticism, and it was definitely on display during my experience of watching the movie, I have some negatives to point out. They are not game-breaking, but still.
There is a scene in the film where we see Hans Zimmer suggest that the audience was not allowed to take photos or use their phones during the concert. Shortly after, he essentially says “Screw it,” and allows everyone in the room, including him, to take a photo of the exact same moment in time. There is nothing wrong with the concept of this scene. In fact, it is a cool, community-driven moment of the movie. But when the film later features a ton of quickly spliced shots of people recording the concert, it makes me wonder if that “rule” existed to begin with. For the record, during my show in Boston, camera use was fair game, assumingly as long as we did not engage in flash photography. Perhaps the same was true for the concert he did in the film. Maybe Hans Zimmer and crew just wanted a good scene for the sake of a good scene. I have no clue.
Before we get to my next negative, I will state one positive, and it is that the music sequences outside the venue are not only fitting, but incredibly creative and very well put together. They start the concert off with a piece from “Dune” and it makes you feel like you are in the middle of an Arrakis-like landscape. When the film gets to “The Dark Knight,” it becomes an obnoxious rush through the city. Later on, when the movie gets to “Interstellar,” they eventually transform the set into a cosmic wonder. The efforts on display to make the most stunning spectacles possible are nothing short of magnificent. That said, if I had a nitpick, the film spends so much time outside the venue for the “Interstellar” sequence that I wish I could have been in the room with the audience, seeing their reaction to the musicians playing the music in front of them.
In fact, if you look hard enough during the movie, you will notice a disco ball in the middle of the arena. Having been to the concert that inspired this project, I can confirm that the ball was utilized during the “Interstellar” portion of the concert. We never see it used during the movie. Then again, I went to the concert with my dad, and he told me while he did see the ball at one point, he never noticed the ball being used during the “Interstellar” sequence. Perhaps no one could figure out a way to show the ball and make it look cinematic, but part of me would have liked to see a closer look at least once.
Although if you are a Hans Zimmer fan, like me, you are in for a treat. If you missed the Hans Zimmer Live concert, this movie shows most of it. There are a couple pieces missing, but the film is already quite long so I can understand why a couple parts were taken out. The film also features several interviews between Zimmer and some of the people with whom he has a connection to in the industry. Some of these include producer Jerry Bruckheimer, musician Pharrell Williams, director Christopher Nolan, and actor Zendaya. The film is not short on notable names. Some of the more prominent members of Zimmer’s band are not part of the talks like Tina Guo or Lebo M, but they do get their shoutouts during the concert itself.
These interviews give fascinating insights as to why Hans Zimmer attached himself to the movies he did. I found Zimmer’s story on his connection to “The Lion King” to be particularly powerful. In some ways, it enhances the connected concert sequence, and might also enhance “The Lion King” movie itself. That says something because it is a spectacular film.
Additionally, the interviews also highlight fans’ perspectives. When we get to Zendaya’s interview, a much younger individual than Zimmer, she talks about her connection to the composer’s music and the films in which they are a part of. Again, going back to “The Lion King,” she highlights it is a film she enjoyed growing up. Zendaya also says that “Interstellar” is a movie she adores and the two get into what can be described as an apparent resurgence of one piece of music from that film that is used on TikTok on a regular basis. The movie reveals just how much of an impact Zimmer has had on the people who had the pleasure of listening to him over the years.
If you are not familiar with Hans Zimmer, I would still highly recommend checking out this film. As of this review, being able to do so is probably near impossible at this point. But if there is ever a legal way to do it, give it a chance. Because even if you do not know the name Hans Zimmer, you probably know some of his work like “Pirates of the Caribbean” or “Man of Steel” or “Gladiator.” The concert itself is a sight to behold. The camerawork both in and out of the arena is immaculate. The lighting onstage is downright jaw-dropping. There are some shots that go on so long yet feel so pristine and yet the film also treats its audience to some crystal clean editing that flies at supersonic speed. This film is an experience.
Even if you have not seen any of the films represented during the concert, this is still a great time. In fact, despite my film-watching experience, I am proof of this. I still have yet to see “Dark Phoenix.” Judging by what I have heard about the film, I might be better off for avoiding the film up until this point. But good movie or not, that score nevertheless made it into the setlist, and it is a straight-up frenzy of electronic mayhem. Though I will warn people, that part of the film contains a lot of colorful flashing lights. If that is not your thing, you may want to fast forward through that, close your eyes, or skip this film altogether because that is not the only flashy scene in the final cut. Though that one in particular stands out to me. That said, if you are like me and you know Hans Zimmer’s work, this film is almost like a dream. If you are less familiar with Hans Zimmer, still give it a shot anyway, because I think you will find something in it to enjoy. Going back to, again, the story he gave as to why he ended up embracing “The Lion King,” it might even make you appreciate certain movies he did a little more.
In the end, “Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert” is a giant ball of euphoria. It is a near perfect experience. I found this movie to be equally as electrifying as one of Hans Zimmer’s scores. It sucks you in from the first minute and quickly becomes something totally over the top. The show is fantastic. The music videos are creative. The interviews are fun to watch. You might learn something new by the end of this two and a half hour thrillfest. If there is any legal way you are able to check this project out, I highly recommend doing so, because this is truly something special. I am going to give “Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert” a 9/10.
“Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert” is unfortunately not playing anywhere as of posting this review. There is no information available on a home release date at this time.
Thanks for reading this review! Turns out, my next review is going to be for a film that I also admittedly have been fanboying over simply based on the concept. If you know me in real life, you know I love game shows. And if you are aware of the true story behind this film, you would have to imagine the utter excitement I have been feeling for “The Luckiest Man in America.” Also stay tuned for my thoughts on “The Penguin Lessons,” “Novocaine,” “The Ballad of Wallis Island,” “Secret Mall Apartment,” and “A Minecraft Movie.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Hans Zimmer score? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Challengers” is directed by Luca Guadagnino (Call Me by Your Name, Bones and All) and stars Zendaya (Spider-Man: No Way Home, Euphoria), Josh O’Connor (The Crown, Hope Gap), and Mike Faist (West Side Story, Panic) in a story revolving around a tennis prodigy named Tashi Duncan and two ex-best friends named Patrick (O’Connor) and Art (Faist), both of whom expressed sexual interest in her. Years after they have met, Tashi is now married to Art, who must compete in an ATP Challenger tennis match against Patrick, a much less prominent figure in the sport.
There are no two words in marketing more accurate than “sex sells.” Let’s be real though. Much of “Challengers” revolves around tennis. I like tennis. I’ve played tennis. I watch tennis occasionally when it is on television. But I am willing to bet some of you reading this right now have probably seen this movie. And for all I know, maybe you like tennis too. But you probably went to this movie for another reason.
Admit it…
And if you did, I would not blame you. Sex sells. I have seen ads on TV promoting the film and they ended up using a review, which I unfortunately cannot find at the moment, but I swear this is true… The spot said the movie was so sexy it might just get you pregnant. Now THAT is the endorsement of the bloody century. Imagine one day you have a kid and they’re gonna ask you and your spouse, “Where do babies come from?” Your answer, “Challengers.”
This movie was a marketer’s dream. It had everything to sell a moviegoer. You have an experienced, Oscar-nominated filmmaker, specifically Luca Guadagnino, helming this picture. In the forefront, you have a star actor in Zendaya, who is hot right now off of “Dune Part Two.” On top of that, you’ve got romance, drama, and of course, sexuality. Let’s not forget about that. As a movie critic, I wanted to of course know how the movie is. But of course, a lot of the positive marks of the movie from other people tie directly to, perhaps unsurprisingly, its sex appeal. So I feel obligated to talk about that.
I am going to issue a hot take… This movie is not sexy. Maybe from a screenwriting perspective, there are layers where you could make something seductive or hot, but for my money, I do not see the appeal. If anything, the movie almost gets to that point in one scene or another, but cannot quite go all the way.
When it comes to judging “Challengers,” it is hard to say that my tastes align with the crowd. I honestly did not enjoy this movie. And much like the sexuality factor, there are elements of the movie itself that work for me. This movie is one of those stories that contains its ups and downs.
The biggest positive for me when it comes to “Challengers” is perhaps the most important aspect of the film, at least on screen, and that is the chemistry between the three leads. Zendaya, Josh O’Connor, and Mike Faist are all top tier in this film and I honestly would not mind them reuniting for another project if the opportunity were to strike. “Challengers” is at its best when these three are on screen at the same time. The scenes where all three of these characters are at their youngest and just getting to know each other make for some of the most genuine, human connections I have seen in recent film.
When it comes to the overall vibe of her performance, Zendaya rides a fine line between glamour and girl next door. While I have missed out on some of her career highlights including “Euphoria” and “The Greatest Showman,” based on what I have seen from her, Zendaya is a performer who frankly gets better with each role she takes on and “Challengers” could arguably be her best performance yet. The job of an actor is to make you believe that they could be someone they are not. In addition to Zendaya transforming into a tennis pro, she also plays the character through multiple ages. Granted, the timeline does not spread significantly far, it’s not like it’s twenty, thirty years, but I think Zendaya did a good job at encapsulating the character through multiple points of her life. I knew Zendaya was skilled, but I did not think she had that kind of talent in her. I am pleased to see her kill it in this role.
That said, I have to be real. I like the way the actors handle the material given to them. Although it does not mean that I enjoyed the material itself. If anything, the film is boring, and almost headache-inducing. I saw “Challengers” was playing in IMAX. In fact, I almost went to see it in IMAX. While it would have been cool to see the tennis scenes, including the thrilling moment where the camera is shown from the ball’s perspective in IMAX, I am glad I ended up seeing this in a standard theater because some of the music choices in “Challengers” got on my nerves. When it comes to music in film, it is rare for me to say that a song choice or a moment in the score feels out of place or broken. The film is chock full of electronic dance music, and it is honestly some of the most unbearable noise yours truly ever had the displeasure of witnessing in a movie theater. Especially considering how cranked up it sounds. It is honestly worse than some of the music in “Civil War,” and I thought that would be the low point in cinema this year from a musical perspective. Maybe my tastes do not align with the crowd or I need to go outside more and get some fresh air. Perhaps I am yelling at a cloud, but when that music blares, it reminds me of when people, sometimes justifiably, complain about the sound mixing in Christopher Nolan movies like “Dunkirk” and “Tenet.” I should note, I have sensitive ears, which I think is hilarious considering how often I go to the movies… Therefore, certain sounds are likely to irritate me more than other people. Maybe the music will work for you. But for me, “Challengers” is probably the worst film soundtrack I have heard in a long time.
I will not deny that there are things to like about “Challengers.” I have already gone on long enough about how much I enjoyed the performances. Technically, this movie gets creative with its cinematography. While I was not fully invested in the film, I will admit the last few seconds put a smile on my face to some degree. But there are so many detractors that keep this from being good in my book. A series of scenes that fail to keep me entertained. My inability to attach myself to the characters 100 percent of the time. Ungodly amounts of slow motion that honestly did not need to be there. And despite this movie boasting about how steamy it is in the marketing, I am honestly not buying what they are selling. If you were turned on by “Challengers,” you do you. But as I said before, I do not see the appeal.
In the end, “Challengers” was challenging to watch at times. Honestly, if you want a better tennis movie, also starring someone who played Spider-Man’s love interest, just go watch “Battle of the Sexes.” It’s a good story, it’s entertaining, and Emma Stone along with Steve Carell make for a solid leading duo. I remember “Challengers” was supposed to come out at the tail end of 2023, making it potentially a fierce competitor during the previous award season. Unfortunately, it was delayed due to the industry-related strikes. I was looking forward to “Challengers,” but this movie was not worth the wait. There are some notable positives regarding “Challengers,” but the negatives stick out like a sore thumb to me. If somebody ever brings up “Challengers” in a conversation, I am going to think of it as “the tennis movie with terrible music” as opposed to “the tennis movie where it has a really cool shot where you get to be the ball for a short period of time.” It is not a reality I am proud to be a part of, but in my reviews, it is better to be brutally honest than to make up a positive on the spot that does not feel genuine. I am going to give “Challengers” a 4/10.
“Challengers” is now playing in theaters and is also available to rent or buy on VOD.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “The Fall Guy.” I had a great time with the film and I cannot wait to share my thoughts with you guys! Also coming soon, I have reviews on the way for “Tarot,” “IF,” “The Garfield Movie,” and “I Saw the TV Glow.” 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 “Challengers?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite tennis movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Dune Part Two” is directed by Denis Villeneuve (Blade Runner 2049, Arrival) and stars Timothée Chalamet (Wonka, Interstellar), Zendaya (Spider-Man: Homecoming, The Greatest Showman), Rebecca Ferguson (Reminiscence, Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation), Josh Brolin (The Goonies, Avengers: Infinity War), Austin Butler (Elvis, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood), Florence Pugh (Black Widow, Don’t Worry Darling), Dave Bautista (Guardians of the Galaxy, Blade Runner 2049), Christopher Walken (Catch Me if You Can, The Deer Hunter), Léa Seydoux (Crimes of the Future, Spectre), Souheila Yacoub (Making of, Climax), Stellan Skarsgård (Mamma Mia!, Thor), Charlotte Rampling (Restless, 45 Years), and Javier Bardem (Being the Ricardos, No Country for Old Men). This film is a sequel to the 2021 science-fiction epic based on the novel by Frank Herbert. It follows Paul Atriedes as he journeys with the Fremen while waging war against House Harkonnen.
It is crazy to think how far we are in the 2020s. The decade is flying by. It kind of feels like yesterday when I saw “Dune” for the first time in theaters. By now, I have seen it a few times in theaters, once on 4K Blu-ray, and a couple times on TNT. Safe to say, this film has taken up a significant part of my screentime through the past two and a half years. And like many people, I happened to dig it. I do not think it is by any means the greatest science fiction film ever. If anything, the pacing could have been improved. The color palette could have been tinkered just a tad in select scenes. The film feels far less eventful in its third act than it does in the first two, which felt a bit odd but I was engaged nevertheless. Overall, I thought the first “Dune” was fantastic. It even made my top 10 best movies of 2021 and won Best Picture at the 4th Annual Jack Awards. It is a really good movie and it is deserving of its praise, even if there are science fiction films I would rather watch first.
In fact, of Denis Villeneuve’s filmography, I think it is one of his inferior outings. I liked “Prisoners” better. I liked “Arrival” better. I liked “Blade Runner 2049” better. He did those previous two movies back to back and both were equally sensational. Even with the slightly weaker “Dune” coming afterwards, I will not deny that Denis Villeneuve is not only on a hot streak, but is building a case to become the greatest science fiction director ever. As far as my excitement for “Dune Part Two” goes, it was astronomical. All the trailers were great. The footage looked beautiful. And knowing that the film was shot in IMAX’s specialized aspect ratio was a bonus. I thought the film was made for the theatrical experience, and I was also happy to know that more people were going to get the chance to see this movie the way this and the last film were meant to be seen.
Shoutout to HBO Max for nearly killing movie theaters in 2021.
But the million dollar question is this… How was the movie?
Well, to answer that question… I am going to start off by stating a potential problem the movie has. And that is that I will never be able to watch it for the first time again. I will likely never get to experience the sense of euphoria the way I did seeing this movie during my initial viewing.
For those who nag about me not getting around to certain film classics like “Rocky” or “12 Angry Men,” those who choose to say I am not a real movie fan, I could do the same thing to you when it comes to “Pulp Fiction” or “2001: A Space Odyssey,” but I am not going to. Instead, I am going to tell you I am somewhat jealous because you have the opportunity on your hands to watch those movies for the first time. When I hear someone is going to watch either of those films for the first time, my initial thought is, good for them! I hope they have a time of their life equal to what I myself experienced during my first viewing. I feel the same way about “Dune Part Two,” because while I immensely enjoyed the first “Dune,” not only does this sequel feel like it is on another level, but it is one of the most innovative additions to the sci-fi genre that comes to mind.
And I say this knowing that this is a follow-up that just so happens to be the second half of a first book of a popular series that has already been adapted to both film and TV in the past. Nevertheless, this feels like something new. There are times where I watched “Dune Part Two” and could not help but make a couple “Star Wars” analogies. Based on its technical mastery and power, this film must emit similar feelings to when people watched “Star Wars” for the first time in 1977. Meanwhile, as a sequel, “Dune Part Two” reminds me a bit of “The Empire Strikes Back.”
This is not only because “Dune Part Two” is a high quality second installment, but when it comes to the duel scenes, those are improved here. Not that the duel scenes in the first “Dune” were bad. If anything, they were terrific. That said, the choreography is much more spellbinding this time around. Additionally, I felt incredibly riveted by the story and characters, which made the film’s action scenes all the more exciting. With these two ideas in mind, I can tell you there is a duel towards the end of this film that is nothing short of jaw-dropping. The choreography is so fast that you would think that Sonic the Hedgehog oversaw it. Meanwhile, it is all in the middle of a key scene of the film where the emotions of our characters reach a tipping point. Where the story reaches its finest moments. Where we get some of the finest exchanges and performances in the history of science fiction. There is a moment towards the end of the movie, it is in the trailer, where Paul Atriedes yells, “SILENCE!” As far as pure line delivery goes, it is arguably the most chilling utterance of dialogue of the decade so far. The only other line in a movie that I can think of that came out in the 2020s that rivals this for me is the final line of “Oppenheimer.” Specifically, “I believe we did.”
Another reason why I found myself calling this the next “Empire Strikes Back” is because it goes all out on its antagonists. Stellan Skarsgård returns once again to slay his performance as Baron Harkonnen. Dave Bautista continues to prove himself as a fine wrestler-turned-actor as Glossu Rabban. In fact, not only does Bautista cement himself as a superior wrestler-turned-actor when compared to John Cena and Dwayne Johnson, he convinces me he could rack up one or two Oscar nominations if he keeps up the good work. I have seen Bautista in quite a few movies now. “Dune Part Two” is easily his greatest performance yet. Between the “Dune” movies and “Blade Runner 2049,” I would love to see Bautista continue to collaborate with Denis Villeneuve as much as possible because they tend to bring out the best in each other. Both of these characters are intimidating and well executed. Every moment they are on screen had me hooked.
But the real star of the show, antagonist-wise, is Austin Butler as Feyd-Rautha. While I did not love “Elvis,” there is no denying that Butler was the best part of it. Much like that film, his performance just so happens to be one of the best elements of “Dune Part Two.” There is such a sinister nature to this character that is almost beyond reality but in the case of this universe, I immediately bought into it from scene one. Butler makes it believable. This is a guy who will literally kill his own people on a whim, perhaps delivering him a great deal of satisfaction as a result. Feyd-Rautha works so well because he emitted a feeling in me that many great villains should be able to emit. He becomes a character that I love to hate. I would not want to go bowling with this character, but as a villain, he is perfect. Not only that, but Butler sometimes feels unrecognizable. I have not seen him in a lot of movies, but based on what I have seen him in before, he has a flair to his performance here that comes off as individualistic.
That said, this is film is led by Timothée Chalamet. In today’s culture, it is easy to say the idea of “the movie star” is dead. But if there are sparks of that idea that are still alive, then Timothée Chalamet is certainly one of them. And boy is he a fine star. Not only is he young and good looking, not only is he bankable, but he also just so happens to have incredible range. Prior to this movie, he starred in “Wonka.” While I was not a fan of the movie, I thought he handled the material perfectly. He made the movie fun. He was expressive, upbeat, not to mention a mighty fine vocalist. Now we go to his next movie, “Dune Part Two,” where Chalamet’s character is caught in the middle of war, politics, and drama. And Chalamet’s ability to immerse himself into a world like this is impeccable. It feels weird, but one of Chalamet’s hidden talents is making such a scrawny dude come off as one of the most convincing leading figures in recent cinema. Sure, he’s not exactly short, but muscular is not the first word I’d use to describe Chalamet as a person.
I think “Dune Part Two” has an advantage for general audiences. While I cannot imagine this movie being for everyone, I can see this movie having a wider appeal than the first one. The movie not only has more action, but I would say the action is better this time around. I also think this film’s use of Stilgar makes for a great sidekick role of sorts. He almost comes off as a guy you would be sitting next to as you are watching the movie. Maybe he recommended it to you and is guiding you for the ride. Additionally, he has some of the most memorable lines. One of my favorite moments in “Dune Part Two” is when we see him believe Paul refuses to mention he is “the one.” There is a reason why I am seeing the words “As it is written” all over social media right now, it is Javier Bardem does a phenomenal job as Stilgar. He is perfectly cast and I cannot imagine anyone else filling in his shoes.
That said, if you enjoyed “Dune,” that does not necessarily imply you will fail to do the same in regards to “Dune Part Two.” I am proof of that. I really liked the first “Dune.” I gave it a positive review. But I think this sequel feels more adventurous. The score, somehow, is more memorable its predecessor. There is a theme that blares throughout the movie that I cannot get out of my head. It does a good job at expanding the lore and building the world. The acting is better. And as a pure experience, “Dune Part Two” is simply put, superior. One of my problems with the first “Dune” is that it very much feels like an intro guide to the world within. The movie has a three act structure, character development, and pretty much everything else you need to call it a movie. But one of its flaws is that it tends to feel more like a “how to survive Arrakis tutorial” than a journey through Arrakis. Now with this movie, it feels like we are taking the tools we acquired from the predecessor and putting them to the test.
Thankfully, as I write this review, “Dune Part Two” is still playing in theaters. And I must tell you, if you have not seen “Dune Part Two” in a theater yet, do yourself a favor and get your tickets as soon as you can, because this is one of those theatrical experiences you have to see to believe. This is easily one of the best times I ever had in a movie theater. I felt like sand was coming through the speakers the entire time. I thought I was in the middle of the desert. I was convinced the wind was flying in my face. If you told me that I was in Arrakis for two and a half hours, I would have believed you. But there is a reason, above all others, why you should see this movie on the big screen. Sandworms. Yes, there are sandworms in the last movie. But that’s not the point.
In this sequel, there are several minutes in this movie dedicated to Paul first experiencing what it is like to ride a sandworm for the first time. This is one of the most riveting, loudest, most visceral, exhilarating scenes yours truly has ever witnessed. This is one of those scenes that shows why movie theaters are built. It shows why we make big movies for the big screen. When I look back at this scene, it was almost as if I were alive a century or two ago, I had never seen a movie and someone from the distant future time-travelled to when I would exist. That person would then show me the power of what movies could be. This scene is perfection. It was well shot, packed with rambunctiously satisfying audio, and is nothing short of a perfect tech demo. But in both the background and the forefront, we are seeing our characters experience the world in front of them, learn more about each other, themselves, and their abilities. As an audience member, I am getting a great mix of thrills, expansion of lore, and details about certain characters.
The movie makes such a simple moment of learning and adapting look like the most intense thing in the history of the world. This is a scene I will never forget. Once again, a moment like this will show why I would be jealous to find out someone tells me they are about to watch this movie for the first time.
I thought the sandworm action could not get as electrifying as this… Until the second half of the movie happened, and somehow it equaled, if not surpassed the thrills I felt before. There is a scene, you’ll know it when you see it, where there is a shot showing the perspective from a sandworm’s eye. It is one of the most eye-popping, beautiful things I have ever seen on a screen. It’s quick, it’s raw, it’s massive. It is basically an encapsulation that describes the film itself. I was thrilled to no end.
Although going back to the original “Dune,” this brings up something noticeable about this sequel. There is a reason why it has “Part Two” in its title. Obviously, it is the second “Dune” movie, yes. Also, it is the second half of the original book. But this really is true to its name, a “Part Two.” There are several sequels you could watch and appreciate without having to see the original movie. Having watched “Dune Part Two,” this is one of those movies where I feel in order to fully appreciate what is in front of you, it would be worth going back and giving the first “Dune” a watch at some point. Either if you forgot what happened, or if you have never seen it before. Because there are a couple moments that would hit harder if you have that movie under your belt.
I have not seen “Dune Part Two” a second time just yet, but knowing the how lost for words I became by the time the movie was over, my second viewing is definitely around the corner. But I will never forget my first time. And this is where I bring in another “Star Wars” comparison. Much like that 1977 science fiction event, I will look back at “Dune Part Two” as a film that will define a generation. It has flaws. I kind of wish to know how people get off the sandworms once they are done with them. Some of the pacing feels inconsistent, but even in the less consistent moments the story is still exciting. And again, if you have not seen the first movie, it could theoretically lessen the impact of this one just a little. Other than that, there is not much else can I say except this is one of the best fiction movies of the decade, and you should see it as soon as you get a chance.
In the end, “Dune Part Two” fits the classic motto of a fine sequel. It goes bigger, and it is better. “Dune Part Two” is not only superior to its predecessor, but it is also the first great movie I have seen in 2024. It is still early in the year, but I needed this. After “Madame Web,” “Night Swim,” and “Argylle,” I truly needed a movie that I could deem somewhere on the level of a master class effort. And this is that movie. Going back to what I said earlier, Denis Villeneuve is on a roll. While I think Christopher Nolan is the superior director, he has a knack for filmmaking that is on the level of Christopher Nolan. I have not seen all of his work. I still need to watch “Enemy” and “Incendies.” But from what I have seen so far from Villeneuve, I can say that I have not seen a single bad movie from him. I can easily name a least favorite, and that would be “Sicario,” but that is still a movie where there are more positives than negatives for me. If Denis Villeneuve ends up making a third “Dune,” perhaps an adaptation of “Dune: Messiah” that is on the level of these last two movies, it would easily further the case of him being the greatest sci-fi director of all time. Villeneuve is that good at what he does. But it is not just him. You have Greig Fraser’s immensely beautiful cinematography. Hans Zimmer’s roaring score. An incredible ensemble of actors across the board. Timothée Chalamet, Stellan Skarsgård, Rebecca Ferguson, Austin Butler, and Dave Bautista just to name a few! I did not even get to Zendaya! She does a really good job as Chani in this film. Regarding the love connection between Chani and Paul, I bought into it immediately. It is still early, so it is hard to know how this movie will do next awards season. That said, not only could I see this movie getting nominated for Best Picture at next year’s Oscars, …I can totally see it winning. It is that brilliant. I am going to give “Dune Part Two” a 9/10.
“Dune Part Two” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, good news! I have more coming! Be sure to look out for my thoughts on “High Tide,” “Kung Fu Panda 4,” “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire,” “Snack Shack,” “Godzilla X Kong: The New Empire,” and “Monkey Man.” 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 “Dune Part Two?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite scene in film history? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Hey everyone! Jack Drees here! Ladies and gentlemen, we have a lot to talk about! I mean, wow! Before we dive into what has been happening lately at Warner Bros. Discovery, let me give you a recap of some of the events that went down during AT&T’s possession of Warner Bros..
If you asked me what I thought about the state of Warner Bros. a year ago, I would have said I was nervous. Warnermedia’s decision to put all of their big movies on HBO Max hurt most of those movies that already happened to be finished. This ultimately hurt their box office, not to mention potential word of mouth and longevity. Sure, it definitely seemed like a good idea to combat COVID-19 and certain titles like “Godzilla vs. Kong” and “Dune” had a halfway decent performance, but it does not change the fact that for the most part, the performance of most of these films were financially hindered. While some may argue that Warnermedia offered viewers a choice by putting their movies both in theaters and on streaming, they also had a long-term goal on prioritizing content for HBO Max, which was created through said ownership.
For the most part, HBO Max was not a bad idea. It contained a lot of the latest movies from studios like Universal, Fox, and Warner Brothers, the entire DC library, some of the shows from Turner networks like TBS and TNT. They had a good thing going. Then in 2020, it was announced that Warner Brothers’s entire slate of films for the next year would go to HBO Max in addition to theatres, as recently mentioned. This technically started with the 2020 film “Wonder Woman 1984.” The unexpected move led to the film’s star and director, Gal Gadot and Patty Jenkins respectively, receiving more than $10 million as a result. Alternate stars on the other hand were not favored.
“Representatives for major Warner Bros. stars like Denzel Washington, Margot Robbie, Will Smith, Keanu Reeves, Hugh Jackman and Angelina Jolie wanted to know why their clients had been treated in a lesser manner than Ms. Gadot. Talk of a Warner Bros. boycott began circulating inside the Directors Guild of America. A partner at one talent agency spent part of the weekend meeting with litigators. Some people started to angrily refer to the studio as Former Bros.” –The New York Times
Legendary Pictures, the production company behind “Godzilla vs. Kong” and “Dune,” noted that they, like others, were not given advance notice on the move. On a nearly dated “Saturday Night Live” episode, host and “Dune” star Timothee Chalamet ended the show by unveiling a Legendary sweatshirt, symbolizing his support for the company.
While one perk of HBO Max is the freedom for viewers to watch the new films as many times as they want for 30 days, the caveat for the studio is that the films are free as long as the viewers subscribe. In addition to hurting the movie theaters that work alongside the studios, movies like “In the Heights,” “The Suicide Squad,” “Reminiscence,” “King Richard,” and “The Matrix Resurrections” did not even make their budgets back.
You could make the argument that HBO Max benefited from this. Sure, they had some subscribers come aboard. In fact the service topped their projections (70 million) by the end of 2021 by earning 73 million paid subscribers. But that is not enough. Warner Bros. lost one of their key filmmakers, specifically Christopher Nolan, and has damaged their trust with others as they felt backstabbed by these recent events. Denis Villeneuve, while he ultimately finished and released “Dune” in October 2021, found out about his movie’s simultaneous HBO Max release on the news long before the film ultimately came out. It is the studio’s project at the end of the day, but it does not mean Warner Bros. and AT&T can ignore common sense and decency with their fellow creators. This was a multi-million dollar collaborative effort, and it is very much Denis Villeneuve’s movie as much as it is Warnermedia’s. When Villeneuve promises he will bring forth a franchise, his mouth cannot be kept shut in situations like this.
Now that David Zaslav is responsible for the position of CEO, a position previously held by Jason Kilar, many big changes have come about in such a short time. As of now, there are no more day and date Warner Bros. movies. “The Batman,” “Elvis,” and “DC League of Super-Pets” all released in theaters exclusively for a period of time. There are still movies that have been released on HBO Max exclusively, like the romantic comedy “Moonshot,” but without the day and date option. But for the most part, the new administration has allowed their few theatrical exclusive films to shine.
Now, as a fan of the moviegoing experience, this is great. I am glad to know these movies are being seen the way the filmmakers intended. I do not know if Warner Bros. is going to restore its relationship with Christopher Nolan, but that is probably going to depend on how well “Oppenheimer” does for Universal. Although as someone who has found streaming convenient and messy, this month has demonstrated the messier elements on the HBO Max side of things.
Recent events have shown my slight lack of trust from streaming providers. Last week, HBO Max removed six films. It is normal for a streamer to get rid of their film or television content. Maybe the deal has expired and a project needs to move somewhere else, or maybe a property is under new ownership. These are perfectly valid reasons to remove a film from a service, despite disappointing the fans of that movie. What is unusual however is that a set of “Max Originals,” meaning that these projects were exclusive to HBO Max, were removed from the service. I emphasize, not HBO the channel, HBO Max. Despite being intended and marketed as exclusives, they were removed. Although if you look around, they are not QUITE exclusive. This is probably why they were called “Max Originals” and not “Max Exclusives.” These films are available for purchase on platforms like Google Play and Vudu, therefore they are not unwatchable. Well, except “Superintelligence,” you should never ever watch that movie even in your sleep. And there is also good news for physical media collectors. These movies, like the recently mentioned “Superintelligence,” are also available on DVD. So while these films may be gone from HBO Max, you can pay to watch them in other ways.
Nevertheless, an event like this shocks me as the films are technically Warner Brothers movies, which HBO Max would perhaps most likely try to maintain as they are a part of the brand. It is the same reason why you never saw “The Irishman” leave Netflix. It is the same reason why you never saw “Manchester by the Sea” leave Prime Video. It is the same reason why you never saw “LEGO Star Wars: The Holiday Special” leave Disney+. With the exception of that last one, these titles are available elsewhere such as DVD and Blu-ray, but these are ultimately the studio’s and streamer’s projects to control and maintain on their respective services. Or so I thought. They can practically do anything now and it is kind of unreal to think about.
So HBO Max got rid of six “exclusive” films. Fine. They can do that. People can still watch them elsewhere? Okay, that’s wonderful. I think it is a bit weird to not at least leave them on the service for people to at least watch, although at the same time I do not think people subscribe to HBO Max nowadays to watch “The Witches.” These films, or more specifically, where they ended up, are partially the result of the previous administration. “Superintelligence” was once supposed to release theatrically, but it was eventually dropped exclusively on HBO Max through Ben Falcone’s pitch. “The Witches,” directed by Robert Zemeckis, was supposed to be released theatrically, but was ultimately moved to HBO Max. However, it was released theatrically in international markets. I can understand why a move like this was made. In addition to promoting HBO Max, COVID-19 was still somewhat new and prominent in late 2020. But if there is something I can say “The Witches” and “Superintelligence” have in common other than their release, it is their lack of longevity. When you release a movie in theaters, you ultimately do more than simply release it for the big screen. If the movie is successful on the big screen, there is a chance it could also succeed when it comes to VOD and physical media. It already has word of mouth, and if enough people are curious, it could have a second wind. This is a tried and true method that works almost every time.
Despite my confidence, and we will dive more into that, in regard to David Zaslav as CEO, this is perhaps the one big conundrum that has come up during his time as the head of the company. If there is an outside force that is making these movies disappear, I wish I knew about it. But for now, this makes no sense.
Speaking of movies you will not be seeing anymore, let’s talk about “Batgirl.” During Jason Kilar’s run as CEO, it was announced that we would be seeing an HBO Max exclusive “Batgirl” movie set in the DCEU. The film was previously in development, partially under the creative juices of Joss Whedon, but he left the project a year after its 2017 announcement. The film would star Leslie Grace (In the Heights) and similar to “The Flash,” which we will be talking about later, viewers would be treated to Michael Keaton as he returns to play Batman. Before Zaslav became CEO, another DC film once set to hit HBO Max, “Blue Beetle,” was officially no longer an HBO Max exclusive and would instead play in theaters. This is how every other DCEU film, including the day and date-specific “Wonder Woman 1984” and “The Suicide Squad,” released.
“Batgirl,” both before and after Zaslav’s beginning as CEO, was never announced to receive the same treatment. In fact, one more announcement in this crazy week is that the release of “Batgirl” would be cancelled. Nobody in the viewing public would ever get to see the movie, no matter what. Not in theatres, not on HBO Max. No bat time, no bat channel.
Obviously this came as a shock given how the film finished shooting and happened to be in post-production. And not to ignore Leslie Grace’s titular character, who wouldn’t want to see Michael Keaton as Batman again? This could have been a good movie. But after seeing more information, I had my doubts as to whether it was actually good to begin with.
“Batgirl” was originally intended for HBO Max, and when you do not have to worry about the stakes of the big screen, there is, theoretically, less of a vision that encapsulates quality. I am not saying straight to streaming movies cannot work, but it comes with a major price tag from a viewer’s perspective as being “inferior.” “Batgirl” had a $90 million budget. In DC speak, this is about the same as 2019’s “Shazam!” although about half as much as Matt Reeves’s “The Batman.” While Leslie Grace may not have carried the star power of Robert Pattinson, the movie had plenty of big names alongside her including J.K. Simmons, Brendan Fraser, and as mentioned before, Michael Keaton. The directing team behind the film, Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah had experience with action films before, not to mention 2020’s biggest picture (not that there was much competition), “Bad Boys for Life.” The two even have experience at DC’s competitor, Marvel Studios. While they never made a Marvel film, the duo handled directing duties for two episodes of the Disney+ original series “Ms. Marvel.”
For all I know, these people gave 110% to every part of the production. Leslie Grace could have given the performance of the year. Michael Keaton could have given his best portrayal of Batman yet. And this would be a movie that could establish Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah as future in-house names at DC kind of like the Russo Brothers were to Marvel for some time. But given how “Batgirl,” is cancelled as a tax write-off as of last week, I, and the viewing public as a whole, will never know for sure.
There is a saying that actions speak louder than words, but given how I have never seen “Batgirl,” I unfortunately can only rely on words at this point. However, other people have seen the movie through test screenings, and the results are reportedly not great. While the movie is said to have scored similarly to “Shazam!: Fury of the Gods,” which is still set to release this December, one source says the consensus led to a verdict that indicated “Batgirl” is not big enough for theaters, nor appropriate enough for a platform like HBO Max, as revealed by Hollywood insider Matthew Belloni on an episode of his podcast, “The Town.”
“This is someone who was in the test screening a couple months ago where they were trying to figure out what to do with this movie and I called him and we chatted and he said that after the screening, the executives Walter Hamada of DC and some of the others there ask the audience, “Did this feel big?” and clearly they were trying to figure out whether it felt like it deserved a theatrical release and the consensus was absolutely not. He said it played like a TV pilot, the stakes were very small… He said it felt a little like Dark Phoenix.” -Matthew Belloni
Why are they releasing “Shazam!: Fury of the Gods” and not “Batgirl?” That is a great question. If you ask me, I think it is a somewhat marketable film that could do well around the holiday season, or in this case, well enough to compete with “Avatar: The Way of Water,” but nevertheless. Although “Shazam!: Fury of the Gods” was planned as a theatrical release this whole time, and may have been executed as such during the production. And the first trailer of the film promises some neat treats for those looking for a big screen experience. I reiterate, I have not seen “Batgirl,” but I think there is a reason why I am seeing material for “Shazam!: Fury of the Gods,” and nothing for “Batgirl.” While I genuinely feel terrible for everyone behind the film, I stand by David Zaslav’s decision to cancel “Batgirl.” I would rather have a genuinely great movie that will win over audiences as opposed to a terrible movie that could cause people to compare it to “Batman & Robin.” People are going to literally have to say that the best Batgirl movie is somehow “The LEGO Batman Movie!” Who thought we’d be saying that in this day and age?! And Zaslav cancelled the film for this reason. During a recent conference call, Zaslav was asked about the cancelation of “Batgirl,” which he stated was part of a restructuring of DC through a 10-year plan. This plan would be similar to what Alan Horn and Bob Iger established with producer Kevin Feige over at Disney’s Marvel Studios. In addition to that, Zaslav wants to make sure that audiences are not only getting good movies, but happen to be getting their money’s worth at the cinema similar to the studio itself through the box office as it releases its newer content.
“We’ve seen luckily by having access now to all the data, how direct-to-streaming movies perform. And our conclusion is that expensive direct-to-streaming movies in terms of how people are consuming them on the platform, how often people go there or buy it or buy a service for it and how it gets nourished over time is no comparison to what happens when you launch a film in the motion – in the theaters. And so this idea of expensive films going direct-to-streaming, we cannot find an economic case for it. We can’t find an economic value for it.” –David Zaslav
However, I am not saying the axing of “Batgirl” is not unfortunate for the audience. I was looking forward to potentially seeing the movie. This is also an unfortunate cancelation in terms of diversity. Because Leslie Grace is Afro-Latina, giving a fresh look to the DCEU’s main heroes. This means that most of the studio’s upcoming lineup, like “Shazam!: Fury of the Gods” and “The Flash” will continue to center around white male characters. While these films are likely to be successful, it avoids giving a particular audience a film they can call their own. While “Wonder Woman” and its vastly inferior sequel obviously happen to be anthems for women, it does not change the fact that there are still some audiences who probably have not seen themselves in the heroes DC is providing. Sure, the “Suicide Squad” movies feature two different African-American leads, but as far as non-team movies go, diversity has some ways to go. Superman is a white male. Shazam is a white male. The Flash, while played by an actor who currently identifies as non-binary, is as far as we know, a white male. Harley Quinn, while not a male, is more of an anti-hero as seen in projects like “Birds of Prey.” This could have been DC’s chance to give the audience a different kind of hero. And while this may be towards the villain or anti-hero route, DC is lucky that the Dwayne Johnson-starring “Black Adam” is set to come out as the iconic movie star happens to be Black and Samoan.
At the same time though, while this is unfortunate, I will reiterate, I agree with Zaslav’s decision to cancel the film. It is not a pleasant decision to make, but as a business move, it makes sense. I am not saying people are not interested in seeing a Latina superhero, but I think that if people want a character like Batgirl, such a character should receive better treatment than what she is getting at the moment. I have to remind everyone reading this that I am a straight white male, therefore it is my responsibility to acknowledge that a lot of the movies that have come out in the superhero genre revolves around people like me. Some are great like “Iron Man” while others are not so great like “Morbius.” This is the same thing I have said about “Ghostbusters” since I watched the 2016 Paul Feig-directed reboot. You cannot just remake the movie with women and call it a day. You have to have a good script, great chemistry amongst the cast, and solid humor. Now obviously every movie has its fans, but I saw the movie and felt that it failed on those recently mentioned objectives. Pitching and selling a “Batgirl” film to the audience is half the battle. The other half is delivering a great story or experience that will stand the test of time, and I can only assume that “Batgirl” did not meet certain standards to make that happen.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, the cancelation of “Batgirl” has more to do with the reset plan in regard to DC and not as much to do with the talent behind the film like Leslie Grace.
“Leslie Grace is an incredibly talented actor and this decision is not a reflection of her performance. We are incredibly grateful to the filmmakers of “Batgirl” and “Scoob! Holiday Haunt” and their respective casts and we hope to collaborate with everyone again in the near future.” -WB Insider (The Hollywood Reporter)
On that note, I will remind you that “Batgirl” is not the only upcoming Warner Bros. film that was announced to be cancelled last week, as the quote suggests that “Scoob!: Holiday Haunt,” a Christmas-themed “Scooby-Doo” film, was also part of the chopping block. The film was set to come out on HBO Max this year, which does not surprise me as 2020’s “Scoob!” skipped theatres and went straight to VOD due to COVID-19. While I watched “Scoob!” a couple years ago and thought it was a trainwreck, I will note one thing that was not a problem was the look of the film or the animation style. Overall, it looked very polished. Once again, I can only use assumptions here, but I would not be surprised if this streaming-mindset affected production in terms of how polished the film could turn out. Once again, I feel bad for the crew, but I think that this is a proper business decision.
Although if I must be real, I find it shocking that “Batgirl” was cancelled at the time it was. I am less shocked after finding out that it probably was not that good. Although what I am saying is that there is another DC film that based on public outcry, probably should have been cancelled first. In fact, recent events further indicate the complications behind this film’s existence. That film being… “The Flash.”
The Flash is one of the more well-known DC superheroes, and the hero’s popularity has only jumped due to the success of CW’s original series that is soon to enter its final season. Although on the movie side, there has been extensive development in regard to bringing the red speedster to the big screen but for several reasons, they could not quite get it out before the end of the previous decade. Having seen both “Justice League” and its eventual “Snyder Cut” on HBO Max, I think Ezra Miller did a fine job bringing Barry Allen to life and I would not mind seeing more of the character. Unfortunately, if Miller continues to play the character, I may have second thoughts.
After seeing Ezra Miller’s shenanigans of choking a woman in a bar, assault, restraining orders, harrassing a woman in her own apartment, and most recently, burglary, this only makes Zaslav’s final decision on “The Flash” that much harder to make. You could say that releasing “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” is also hard because Amber Heard is in it, but that’s a cakewalk compared to this. For one thing, the public is divided on whether Heard is innocent or guilty after her recent trial with Johnny Depp. And not to undermine the events prior to or of said trial, many of Ezra Miller’s crimes or arrests have happened after they finished shooting “The Flash.” As time has shown, I believe in redemption. Since joining Marvel, James Gunn held back on making inappropriate jokes over the Internet, and even after his firing and rehiring, he kept his cool. But at this point, when Ezra Miller has already been cast, the movie is shot, and it is set to release next year. This is a dilemma if there ever was one. As a viewer who is not in charge of a substantial company or its products, it is easy for me to say that they should cancel the movie or recast Ezra Miller and reshoot every scene with the character of Barry Allen. But the film already has a budget of $200 million, and this requires a massive return of the crew, the actors, everybody.
…But in my own little fantasyland, I also think it is worth it. …Kind of. It’s not my money, and if it were, for all I know, I might not have said this.
Similar to “Spider-Man: No Way Home” where there were three Spider-Men on the lineup, “The Flash” is a movie where we are seeing the return of Michael Keaton as Batman, making “Batgirl” one of the two films where the iconic actor dons his cowl. That, alongside another Batman appearance from Ben Affleck, will obviously get butts in seats. This is certainly a film that people will want to see in theaters before streaming, making HBO Max a concept that must be left out of the equation. But this involves potential delays, recasting, and so on. The other alternative I can get behind at this point is releasing the film as is and announcing Ezra Miller’s firing beforehand. I could almost see there being a disclaimer before the film starts stating the wrongdoings of Ezra Miller and a note that Warner Bros. does not condone or approve of his actions. While it may not be comfortable to provide in a public setting, it is better to condemn this consistently inappropriate or incorrect behavior rather than continue to enable it. There is a good chance Ezra Miller is already canned and such a thing has not been announced, but I think this is a message that should be announced before the public starts a trend claiming Warner Bros. “defends assaulters” or something along those lines. They say there is no such thing as bad publicity, but this is exhibit A as to why that is not true. On the bright side, reports have surfaced that “The Flash” is apparently a good movie. Obviously, film is subjective, so if it comes out, we will see if that statement holds true. But it is nice to hear Warner Bros. Discovery has confidence in the film’s quality, unlike “Batgirl.” Some of the general audience more than likely will not care about what Ezra Miller has done in the past, but it does not change the fact that word gets around. Plus Miller is getting into trouble on a consistent basis. They have already been the subject of multiple negative events as of this year. My confidence in Miller or their image’s ability to change by next year, or even 2024, is quite low. What if they end up in prison for a year? What is Warner Bros. Discovery going to do then? Imagine if Ezra Miller shows up at the premiere and how awkward that could be given everything they have done. This is not exactly my idea, but one alternative is finding a way to remarket the film as a “Batman” movie. I do not know how much the script would warrant such a thing, but given the marketability of the “Batman” IP and the fact that there are two Batmen in the movie, it theoretically makes sense.
Until then, there is no easy answer to this ongoing problem. “Batgirl” may have had its reasons to be cancelled, but this only makes me wonder what is going to happen with “The Flash.” If the movie gets cancelled because of Ezra Miller, it is a solid publicity move in the short term, but this also ends up being a disservice to the rest of the people behind the film who had nothing to do with Ezra Miller other than working with them. But at the end of the day, filmmaking is a business. And if Ezra Miller keeps doing what they’re doing, or worse, the business of the film is only going to trickle bit by bit. “The Flash” is still set to come out, and I am glad to hear it is good. But is it worth it? Much like “Batgirl,” but for completely different reasons, “The Flash” at this stage is probably going to hit some landmines if the studio wants it to be released theatrically. But at the same time, the movie is too big, not to mention too expensive, for HBO Max.
Sticking with HBO Max, let’s ask a question… WHAT ON EARTH IS HAPPENING TO HBO MAX?!
Remember how HBO Max was supposed to be Warnermedia’s big streaming service? It was the thing that was going to make HBO Now look like HBO Then. Some not so surprising news that came out of last week’s events was the merging of HBO Max and Discovery+ into one streaming service. Now, that has not happened yet. You will not find “Property Brothers” on HBO Max, nor will you find “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver” on Discovery+.
This is not the first time in recent years that Warner had one of its streaming services fold into another one, as DC Universe gradually dissolved in 2020 and all of its film and television content like “Titans” and “Harley Quinn” ended up on HBO Max, with the latter now airing its third season.
Now if you ask me, I like the fact that all of this content is merging. I am probably not going to watch all of it. But it is nice to know that the options are there. For all I know, there could be a new show that I could put on in the background one day. I think one big problem consumers face is that there are too many streaming services out there. I do not have Discovery+, as it is one of the few services I do not consider a priority. Slimming two services into one is not necessarily a bad concept. My one concern is how much more I’d be paying, that is if there is a price hike. I will revisit this issue later, because I need to talk about one of the most poorly guided comparisons I have seen in this day and age.
Remember how I said actions speak louder than words? Well, words are pretty powerful. Some people tend to take them seriously.
A breakdown of how Warner Bros. Discovery are differentiating between the HBO Max and Discovery+ brands.
I understand that this may be an exaggeration, but it still must be pointed out. When talking about the differences between HBO Max and Discovery+, this was done through a side-by-side chart indicating that HBO Max’s content was male-skew and Discovery+’s content was female-skew. Now to be fair, I am a man and I have never watched Discovery+ on my own time. I rarely turn on any of Discovery’s channels. But this is a loose and stereotypical assumption to make in this day and age. Because this declares that gendered content is put into boxes. HBO is one of the most sought-after cable networks of all time by all genders. “Game of Thrones” was a huge hit over recent years. Recent series like “Scenes From a Marriage” have been met with acclaim. And APPARENTLY, women don’t watch “EUPHORIA?!” If anything, they’re the target audience! Literally every woman on this planet wants to be Zendaya! She is good-looking, she has an Emmy, and she is dating Spider-Man! You think women do not watch “Euphoria?”
I am not saying that some of these classifications do not make sense. HBO has a lot of scripted content, and that is their forte. Although HBO Max has plenty of unscripted or reality content like the original show “Legendary,” truTV’s “Impractical Jokers,” and the TBS reboot of “Wipeout.” It is very much a service for everyone in same way that Netflix or Prime Video is. Discovery+ is very much a comfort food network. Most of their content is within the reality genre like “90 Day Fiancé,” “Diners, Drive-ins, and Dives,” and “Chopped.” Again, I am a man, and I do not know of many men, but I know they are out there, who lean into Discovery’s content more than they do with the type of content HBO provides, so Zaslav and the infographic are technically onto something. But it does not mean that this is the best analogy to give to the public.
Also, you are telling me “The Bachelor” is a male-skewed show?! Again, I imagine there are some men who watch. Although if you want to talk about HBO Max strictly having male-skewed content, I raise you “The Bachelor,” “The Bachelorette,” “Bachelor in Paradise,” “The Bachelor: Winter Games” and “Bachelor Pad!” The only guys watching these shows are those who are trying to impress their significant other that this show specifically targets! Obviously, there are others, but you get my point! What man turns on the television, looks at that night’s lineup, and thinks, I’m gonna pour myself some wine, and watch young women fight over a guy?! The majority would flip the channel in a heartbeat.
There are also plenty of HBO or HBO Max scripted shows that do not mainly target men. In addition to the recently mentioned “Euphoria,” look at shows like “Big Little Lies,” “Gossip Girl,” “Insecure,” “The Sex Lives of College Girls,” “Love Life,” and let me just remind you that HBO has a show literally called “Girls.” HBO and HBO Max apparently suggests that women do not watch shows like “Succession,” “Silicon Valley,” “Divorce,” “The White Lotus,” or “Mare of Easttown.”
The men/women analogy would have probably worked in the 1920s. More so in the 1820s. But definitely not in the 2020s. This was probably delivered with the best intention in mind, but it does not change the fact that the delivery was terrible. The infographic itself is helpful and for the most part, an accurate representation of both streaming services. HBO Max is definitely more lean in and Discovery+ is certainly more lean back. Those are good comparisons. Plus, while I did address that HBO Max is not short on unscripted content, it is no doubt that scripted content is their bread and butter in the same way that unscripted content is to Discovery+.
Now let’s go back to the price concern. While it is nice to know that I would not be paying for two different streaming services at the same time, one of the nice things about HBO Max is that while it is not the cheapest service out there, it offers a lot of great, sometimes award-winning content, for a reasonable price. HBO Max has two tiers, an ad-included tier at $9.99 and an ad-free tier at $14.99. Discovery+ also offers two tiers. An ad-included tier at $4.99 and an ad-free tier at $6.99. These prices make some sense given how Discovery+ is more of a niche service in the same way that the horror-based Shudder would be to a certain degree. Should we see these two services combine, I think it is perhaps likely that the service to be offered will have an increased price from HBO Max’s current price. If it increases by $1, I do not see much of a problem. $2? Okay, whatever. $3? Now you are pushing it. I understand that adding more content can justify a price increase, but there comes a tipping point. If I find out that this new streaming service costs $19.99/month or more, which is the current price for Netflix’s top tier, I would have to debate on ignoring the service and worry about my other subscriptions for the time being. There is plenty of great content being offered through services like Hulu and Prime Video that I’d rather flock to for a better value. I especially worry for those who have Discovery+ and not HBO Max, because their increase could be worse.
There is no official word as to what the name of the combined service is, and this presents a problem if they come up with a new name. The beauty of HBO Max is that the name HBO is one of the most coveted television brands ever conceived. No offense to Discovery, but when most people think of “television,” HBO is often seen as the gold standard nowadays. They could come up with a new name, let’s just use Warner Discovery as an example, but this could result in brand confusion. This could be HBO’s most bewildering matter since trying to explain the difference between HBO Go, HBO Now, and HBO Max. What makes HBO Max different? I don’t know, it’s purple! This could be a short term confusion once the audience collectively realizes where their preferred content ended up, but nevertheless.
Phew. We made it to the end. Just to recap, I still use and enjoy HBO Max. The third season of “Harley Quinn” is great fun and I cannot wait to see the rest of it. I am excited to see where David Zaslav takes the Warner Bros. brand in the future. I am curious about movies like Olivia Wilde’s “Don’t Worry Darling,” which looks like a trip if there ever was one. I just hope that Zaslav realizes within the mistakes that have been made recently, that this Warner Bros. Discovery ship remains as tight as possible. While I remain saddened for the crews behind the films, I think cancelling “Batgirl” and “Scoob!: Holiday Haunt” were the right moves. If the movies were not up to a certain standard, then why should they be put out to begin with? The main basis of the movie business is profit. This is part of why “Batgirl” was cancelled, but I am also glad to know that we will not potentially be seeing the next “Superman IV: The Quest for Peace” or the next “Catwoman” or the next “Morbius.” It is still NOT Morbin’ time! I don’t care who says it! Why is “The Flash” not cancelled? Sure, I hear it is a good movie, but the closer we get to its release, the more I worry about the film itself in addition to its star’s ability to not cause chaos. Is there a weird move will we see next from Zaslav and crew? Who knows? Until then, all I can do is sit back and wait for movies like “Shazam!: Fury of the Gods” and go back and watch the many hit movies and television shows on HBO Max like “Peacemaker,” “The Carbonaro Effect,” and “The Bachel–” Hahaha, never mind that last one.
Thanks for reading this post! If you liked this post and want to see more, follow the blog either with an email or a WordPress account! Also, check out the official Scene Before Facebook page! If you are interested in more of my long-form content, check out my five-thousand word analysis as to why I cannot stop watching “Belle,” the recent anime from Mamoru Hosoda. This is a movie which is by the way, as of this post’s debut, NOW STREAMING ON HBO MAX! Until then, I want to know your thoughts! What do you think about the recent events at Warner Bros. Discovery? Do you think the brand is in a good direction? Do you think cancelling “Batgirl” and “Scoob!: Holiday Haunt” was a wise decision? What do you think they should do with “The Flash” at this point? Also, about those six movies that were taken off HBO Max, did you watch any of them? Tell me your thoughts. If you ask me, I think “An American Pickle” is one of the most overlooked comedies in recent times and a hilarious parody on modern society. Leave your thoughts down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Spider-Man: No Way Home” is directed by Jon Watts, who also directed the previous two MCU-set “Spider-Man” installments, which also have home in the title. I’m assuming if they make a fourth movie, it’s gonna be called “Grand Slam?” You know, instead of home run? Four?
Anybody?
Who cares?
Anyway, this film stars Tom Holland (Cherry, Onward), Zendaya (Space Jam: A New Legacy, Dune), Benedict Cumberbatch (Star Trek: Into Darkness, Sherlock), Jacob Batalon (Blood Fest, Let it Snow) Jon Favreau (Chef, Solo: A Star Wars Story), Jamie Foxx (Soul, Ray), Willem Dafoe (The Lighthouse, Aquaman), Alfred Molina (Raiders of the Lost Ark, Prince of Persia: Sands of Time), Benedict Wong (Annihilation, Raya and the Last Dragon), Tony Revolori (Dope, The Grand Budapest Hotel), and Marisa Tomei (Parental Guidance, Anger Management). This film revolves around Peter Parker, AKA Spider-Man, who has to deal with the newfound dangers that lie ahead now that his identity has been revealed, in addition to being connected to the recent event of Mysterio’s drone swarm in London, which has been interpreted differently by the general public. When Peter seeks Dr. Strange’s help to make everyone forget he was Spider-Man, the spell to make such a thing happen goes wrong, villains from other universes arrive, and it is up to Peter to do the right thing before the dangers of one universe then become the dangers of another.
Alright guys, it is that time again. A big movie in December. Although this time around, it’s not in the “Star Wars” franchise. Still huge. That being said, “Spider-Man: No Way Home” is the biggest movie of the year. I should note the box office suggests that this film is enormous, but there are still people who have not seen the film. I know at least a couple. With that being said, I will note that this review is spoiler-free. I am going to talk about certain points in the film that stand out, but I’m not going to go into deeper plot points. If you have not seen this movie and plan to see it, I can tell you that this review is safe to read.
“Spider-Man: No Way Home” is a follow-up to “Spider-Man: Homecoming” and “Spider-Man: Far from Home.” I have to say that when it comes to the first film, it is slightly more enjoyable than I remember it being. But given Spider-Man’s excellent writing in “Captain America: Civil War,” the writing for that film felt like a step down. I really liked Vulture. Peter’s chemistry with Aunt May (Marisa Tomei) was charming. I even liked Liz in that film. I still think the film has logic issues when it comes to how Peter’s suit works and how Tony Stark would want it to work, but the film is still decent enough to pass the time. When it comes to “Spider-Man: Far from Home,” that film felt like a step up. Jake Gyllenhaal did a great job as Mysterio. I liked Ned a bit better this time around compared to the original. Plus it was nice to see Spider-Man somewhere other than New York for a change. Plus, the end of the film promised a fantastic setup for what would ultimately become “No Way Home.”
When it comes to “No Way Home,” is it a thumbs up or a thumbs down?
I think neither. I’d say TWO thumbs up.
Now, like almost everyone else, I should note that my anticipation and my excitement for “No Way Home” was high. Not as much as “Dune,” but still high. But I was also nervous. Because the film promised massive multiversal shenanigans, which sounds great. I should note… It SOUNDS great. During the fall as we built up to this film’s release, “Spider-Man: No Way Home” in my mind sounded like it could be one of two things. It’s either going to be the best movie ever, or the worst movie ever, and nowhere in between. In crossover-speak, is it going to be the next “Infinity War?” Or is it going to be the next “Space Jam: A New Legacy?” God that movie was awful. Thankfully, upon leaving the theater, I can confirm that I felt excited to go see the movie again in less than 24 hours, and my mind literally melted on the way home from how exciting this movie was to watch.
This film has a ton of villains ranging from Doc Ock to Electro, but it’s not like they’re just there for nostalgia purposes. Granted, at the end of the day, this film is sort of a tribute to the Spider-Man character and all the stories that came before this one. Anyone can put in a ton of cool characters and have them fight against Spider-Man. Heck, this movie could be Spider-Man vs. Godzilla vs. Agent Smith vs. Ron Burgundy, but it does not guarantee a good movie. It’s a basic case of concept vs. reality. The concept is great, but the reality could suck. But here’s the truth about all these villains…
Jamie Foxx’s Electro was written ten times better than he was written in “The Amazing Spider-Man 2.” Now, I will admit, they did kind of highlight a specific aspect about him from that film, specifically how Max was a nobody, which I thought had some okay setup before he was affected by a bunch of eels. But as we see him enter this universe, I could really tell that he was confused, he was concerned, and had no idea what was going on. They’ve even given him a new costume, which may be for story purposes, sure, but of course, who doesn’t want to sell more toys? Why do you think they gave 3PO a red arm in “The Force Awakens?”
My favorite villain of Raimi’s “Spider-Man” films was always Alfred Molina’s Doc Ock. I feel like even though his character was truly at the end of the day, an evil mastermind, he also had a heart. He went through tragedy the same way Peter did in those movies when he lost Uncle Ben. Only in the case of Doc Ock, he used his tragedy for evil, partially for a reason beyond his control. Even though he terrorized New York City, I feel bad for him, looking back. Plus, his arms are among some of the best practical effects ever. As for how he’s handled in this movie, I like the way they went about exploring his character’s newfound questions. After all, when you enter another universe, everything feels completely strange. Although when they first introduced him, they had a potential plot hole that could have affected how I viewed the entire movie that was corrected about ten to twenty minutes later. Glad they touched up on that. In this film, instead of his arms being practical, they were CGI, and I honestly could barely tell the difference. They did a really good job at making Doc Ock fit into a universe like this, even though it’s really the same character as another one.
But if you’re going to ask me who I think gives the single greatest performance out of all the film’s villains, I think that would have to be Willem Dafoe’s Green Goblin. Now I always sensed that Dafoe enjoyed playing the character of Norman Osborn and being a part of the “Spider-Man” franchise. Even after his character died in “Spider-Man” (2002) he came back for the sequels, and there’s also a bonus feature where Alfred Molina is pranked by Dafoe, wearing the Doc Ock tentacles, trying to motivate Molina to give the greatest performance possible. Part of this movie centers around Osborn struggling with his inner self, which is not new for him, and I feel like we get so many layers to his character. We see his bewilderment of the world around him. We see him conflict over power and normalcy, and I think his dark side is more evident than ever. Whenever he does something truly horrific in this film, not only is it well written, I think it may deliver the best performance I have seen out of a Spider-Man villain in a long. Long. Long. Long time. I really liked the Green Goblin in the 2002 “Spider-Man” movie. “Spider-Man: No Way Home” arguably made him even better.
Now I will say that there are a couple other villains in this film, including Sandman and Lizard. Of the film’s villains, those two were the weakest, but they were still better than a lot of the villains we get in the MCU nowadays. I say that because a lot of the films in the MCU sometimes fail to heighten the villain and instead we get a cliche bad guy who just stands in the hero’s way. These are two are better than Ronan in “Guardians of the Galaxy.” And they’re especially better than Malekith in “Thor: The Dark World.” These two have some occasional funny lines, and I like Lizard’s reference to his master plan which Electro ended up making fun of. It’s not like they did not need to be in the movie, the movie is definitely cool with them and they do not end up doing anything offensive. But of all the villains in the film, Sandman and Lizard are the weakest links because they have the least depth. We get more time with Doc Ock and Goblin, therefore we have more opportunities to see depth for them, but for Sandman and Lizard, not so much.
But of course, this film belongs to the heroes. Spider-Man, Doctor Strange, Ned, and MJ.
All of these actors who play the heroes are great and I think when it comes to Ned (center) in this movie, he’s kind of a bundle of joy. When I saw Ned for the first time in “Homecoming,” I thought he was annoying. I kind of grown to like him in that movie a little bit, because I kind of get the enthusiasm behind finding out your best friend is Spider-Man, but I think of these three movies, he had the worst writing because his questions can get excessive. To me, the writing in this film made the most sense of the three, although his storyline in “Far from Home” was hilarious. It’s one way to write teen love I guess. Although if I have one thing to say, it’s not a huge complaint, but it is something worth pointing out, something happens with Ned in this movie that is out of random chance. It was never something that was established that he could do, or something he learned. It just happened. I mean, if you watched the movie, they “teased” it a little, but kind of as a joke, nothing more. I guess foreshadowing is foreshadowing, even if it’s a throwaway joke.
Zendaya’s MJ is another character that to me evolved with time. In the first film, she felt overly snarky. In the second film, I got to know her a little better and I began to appreciate her as a character just a bit more. In this third film, we see her with Spider-Man from the start, and I think their chemistry has blossomed into something special. It is worth noting that all three live-action Spider-Men from Tobey Maguire to Andrew Garfield to Tom Holland all dated their character-based love interests at one point in real life. Maybe that’s why their chemistry all feels natural. There was a scene on a school rooftop, it’s in the trailer, that stood out to me as to why Holland and Zendaya work together. Although I was a bit surprised to see MJ reading a physical newspaper as opposed to some article on her phone. I dunno, just a stereotypical generational thing.
Doctor Strange is in this film as well, and judging by the trailers, his performance at first felt a little different from his previous outings in the MCU. Having seen the movie, and having remembered some of the other movies he’s been in, it actually feels somewhat consistent. Maybe it feels different because he’s communicating with teenagers, which may not be his forte. I may be making excuses, but I think if you’re an adult, you may have a way of communicating with teenagers in a slightly different tone than you would with your spouse or your boss. You know, unless your employer works at “LitDonald’s!” Keep it 100 with our Big Lit! Sauce me some of those yeet fries! Enjoy the LitRib for a limited time! Although when it comes to consistency, there is a one-liner out of Strange about birthday parties that feels wonderfully similar in tone to this exchange in “Infinity War.”
Dr. Stephen Strange: If we don’t do our jobs…
Tony Stark: What is your job, exactly, besides making balloon animals?
Dr. Stephen Strange: Protecting your reality, douchebag.
But of course, we need to talk about Tom Holland. Spider-Man stories have shown a balance between a hero struggling to maintain his friendships, his identity, while also trying to save the world. In the case of “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” this balance is handled brilliantly. The film starts off right where the last one ended, and right off the bat we already see Spider-Man protecting what he has left of his identity, his love interest, and the people he knows. We already start off the movie with one of the worst possible things that could have happened to Peter Parker, and that’s just the beginning. We see him deal with controversy in school. Parker’s trying to find a lawyer. The people he loves are being hurt for reasons beyond their control. As we go through Spider-Man’s journey, the tragedy only builds up. And this is what makes Spider-Man a hero. When he goes to Doctor Strange to make everyone forget he’s Spider-Man, he’s not just looking out for himself, he’s looking out for the people around him. His friends, family, colleagues. There’s a subplot in the film where the trio are trying to get into college and that is only made harder through their connections to the battle in London.
I expected this film to be exciting. I expected this film to be fun. But part of me was not ready for how much emotion this movie packs. Now I figured there would be at least one emotional moment because it is the third film of a trilogy and that’s where certain ends are tied up for good and that sort of thing. This film has multiple powerful scenes and happenings that bring a balance between the expected excitement and the emotional weight. Tom Holland in this film honestly delivers one of the best performances of his career because of this. I don’t think he’ll be nominated for an Oscar, but by the end of the film, there’s a particular arc that is perfectly assembled and you don’t even need words for it. Just the expressions on his face alone make the scene perfect. You may know what I’m talking about when it comes around.
Although I do want to talk about one thing when it comes to the emotion. This is a spoiler-free review, so I will not go into detail. But the ending of “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” despite its instant feeling of satisfaction, induction of a smile, and solid conclusiveness to certain characters, probably would have been made better if Peter did one thing to possibly prevent another thing from happening. If I did a spoiler review, I would expand on it. But again, I cannot. The point of me making this review is not to discuss every single plot point and detail. It is to convince my viewers as to whether they could make a formal decision on whether “Spider-Man: No Way Home” is worth seeing. I recommend you do, I think this is easily one of best “Spider-Man” films ever made. But I want my viewers to go into this film knowing as little as possible, but with enough details as to what I like, didn’t like, and maybe that will help them know whether or not this movie is for them. I would not instantly recommend this movie to my mom (although I would recommend Shang-Chi), but I do recommend a lot of you reading this should go check out “No Way Home” on the biggest screen you can.
I will also point out that this is Jon Watts’s third film in this trilogy, making him the first director to direct a complete trilogy in the MCU. Jon Favreau directed two installments for “Iron Man,” but Shane Black did the third. Joss Whedon did the first two “Avengers” films, but the next two ended up going to the Russo Brothers. When it comes to all three movies, they are solid. But the directing in these films do not really give him much of a chance to individualize himself. And as for this movie, I think Willem Dafoe’s face reveal, as exciting as it was, could have been handled slightly better. It was still exciting, but it was very quick. Although I think if you take into account the end of the film and the performances from just about everyone, this may be the best-directed film in the franchise. Everyone felt true to their characters and when came to Peter’s emotions, Watts likely knew exactly how to touch base with Tom Holland. I think after seeing this film, I am curious to see if there are any specific quirks Watts develops, but I nevertheless think he will do a good job with “Fantastic 4,” whenever that comes out.
One last thing before we move on, J.K. Simmons is back as J. Jonah Jameson. You saw the little snippet of him in the previous film, but now we have him here and the way they utilize him is perfect. For this modern era, his placement in the universe makes sense. He’s basically Alex Jones if he was trying to find a cure for his balding. After seeing this film, I am convinced that nobody else aside from J.K. Simmons can play J. Jonah Jameson. Debate over.
In the end, “Spider-Man: No Way Home” is the best film in the Jon Watts trilogy. It’s a triumph for Tom Holland. It’s at the end of the day, a love letter to the character. My favorite “Spider-Man” movie is “Spider-Man 2,” and right below that would have to be this one. It’s that good. The movie has its flaws, but no movie’s perfect. I think the best part about “Spider-Man: No Way Home” is that it doesn’t just use all these previous characters and actors just for the sake of marketing. Granted, it definitely helps. But each villain had at minimum, the slightest of reason to be there. Even Sandman and Lizard. The first two “Spider-Man” films in the MCU happen to be about teenage Spider-Man dealing with teenage situations from crushes to school dances. This film, in my imagination, is literally Spider-Man attempting to push back a giant boulder of inconveniences and tragedies. And by the end of the film, I felt enough of its weight to make me care for everyone. If you like “Spider-Man,” you will love this movie. I don’t know if you will like it more depending on whether you have seen the other villains before, but that’s another debate for another time. Please check this film out, take your friends, take your family, take everyone. It’s best experienced with an audience, and there are some are some epic potential applause break moments depending on when and where you see this film. I’m going to give “Spider-Man: No Way Home” a 9/10.
To me, this kind of reminds me of “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood…” because despite the glaring issues that such a movie has, I ended up giving it a 9/10. The reason for that is because those issues barely get in the way of all the other crazy sequences and crowd-pleasers of this film. The fan part of me wants to give a perfect score, but again, there’s some issues that keep that from happening. There’s the fan side of me and the critic side of me. Today, I have to be the critic. The film is an experience that I want erased from my memory in order to go back and witness again. For those reasons alone, I highly recommend you go watch this film in a theater. But reserve your tickets in advance, you’re gonna want the best seats.
“Spider-Man: No Way Home” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! I want to let you guys know that I have more reviews coming up including one for “King Richard.” Stay tuned for that! 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 “Spider-Man: No Way Home?” What did you think about it? Or, which Jon Watts-directed “Spider-Man” movie is your favorite? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Scene Before 