If I Had Legs I'd Kick You: A Review - The Madness and Mania of Motherhood

****THIS IS A SPOILER FREE REVIEW!! THIS REVIEW CONTAINS ZERO SPOILERS!!****

My Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

My Recommendation: SEE IT. Be forewarned, this film isn’t so much a dramedy as it is a horror-comedy that is nightmare fuel for parents…it also features a terrific performance from Rose Byrne.

If I Had Legs I’d Kick You, written and directed by Mary Bronstein, follows the travails of Linda, a mother who must deal with a plethora of disasters in her life all while caring for her chronically ill daughter.

The film, which stars Rose Byrne – who is nominated for the Academy Award for Best Actress for her work, opened in theatres back on October 10th, and is now streaming on HBO Max…which is where I just watched it.

The basic plot of If I Had Legs I’d Kick You is that Linda (Rose Byrne) is caring for her daughter, who I guess is maybe 7 or 8 years old, who has a mysterious chronic condition that requires a feeding tube. Linda is caring for her daughter while working full-time as a psychotherapist and while her husband is away for a few months for his work. In other words, Linda is on her own and has her hands full…and life keeps throwing one catastrophe after another at her until she is overwhelmed by the sheer scope and scale of disasters in her life.

The film bills itself as a psychological comedy-drama…which is sort of a tortured way to describe it. When I was about two-thirds of the way through the film I finally recognized what the movie really is…it is a horror movie. I think if you watch the movie as a horror film it will actually make a lot more sense and it will heighten its positive attributes.

If I Had Legs I’d Kick You is a difficult film to watch…that’s not to say it’s bad because it isn’t, but it is extremely effective and affecting. The odyssey that Linda goes on and the gauntlet she endures is the stuff of real-world nightmares. Any parent will immediately recognize the hell on earth that Linda is living through and will be greatly uncomfortable. Every parent has been through those times when everything is off and everything goes wrong and you have a bad day…or even a bad week…but Linda’s torment goes on for months and it is excruciating to witness.

Filmmaker Mary Bronstein does a terrific job of using all the tools at her disposal to increase the anxiety of viewers throughout, most notably through sound…the constant sound of the daughter’s over-night feeding device beeping, or the incredulously grating sound of the daughter’s voice whenever she opens her mouth…all of it adds to the tension.

Bronstein also is very clever in that she puts all the focus on Byrne’s Linda and just uses the child as a prop of agitation…so much so that you never see the daughter’s face. The faceless daughter is not an object of love to be adored, she is an irritant to be endured. In this way Bronstein effectively captures what it’s like to be in the worst moments of parenthood…unfortunately for Linda this moment lasts for months on end and not an afternoon.

Rose Byrne has gotten much acclaim for her performance in the film, and there’s an outside chance she wins a Best Actress Oscar for it…and it would be well-deserved. She is fantastic as the haggard Linda, who is constantly on the verge of absolutely losing her mind and with it her shit.

Byrne has always been an under-rated actress, and seeing her embrace such a tortured and ugly role is a joy and reveals her to be quite the subtle craftswoman. Watching Byrne’s Linda shift the masks she wears in public for differing audiences…be they her daughter, her daughter’s doctor, her clients, her own therapist, her neighbors…and have it all be believable no matter how unbelievable she is, is impressive. Her performance is akin to watching as frog in a pot of water as it slowly boils…as it is both captivating and cruel.

The film is not perfect though, as it has some stories and character arcs that are pretty ineffective. For example, there’s a whole storyline involving James, Linda’s neighbor, that doesn’t make a bit of sense and sort of sucks the life out of the film every time it takes center stage. James is played by rapper ASAP Rocky, and he is, to be kind – a lifeless screen presence.

On the plus side, Conan O’Brien has a small supporting role as Linda’s therapist and he does a good job at being a douchebag…which I found amusing.

Speaking of amusing, If I Had Legs I’d Kick You certainly has funny moments but it doesn’t feel like a comedy. The laughs it generates are more a function of anxiety and tension than anything else. The biggest joke of all, of course, is just the Book of Job-like, continuous onslaught of horribleness that is perpetually inflicted upon poor Linda.

Ultimately, If I Had Legs I’d Kick You is a grueling endurance test for parents to watch…but it does bring with it some psychological insight and the briefest sprinkling of profundity, which all parents will recognize when it rears its head.

That said, I watched the film on my own, and I would be very curious to know what mothers think of it as I think it may cut way too close to the bone for even the most-hearty of matriarchs to endure. I mean, if a mother finally gets some free time, and they use it to watch a movie, do they want that movie to essentially be a horror film about a cavalcade of awful parenting shit being thrown at the lovely Rose Byrne who gets buried under a mountain of said shit? I honestly don’t know.

Mothers may find catharsis in the film by seeing themselves and their struggle, or they may leave the movie more anxious than when they went in. Who knows?

All I will say is that I think overall, the film is well-made by Mary Bronstein, and Rose Byrne gives a terrific performance as Linda. If you have the stomach for it, I recommend you at least give If I Had Legs I’d Kick You a try…but go into knowing it is essentially a horror film for parents…with a few laughs sprinkled throughout.

©2026  

Emptying the Notebook - Four Film Reviews for the Price of One

END OF YEAR HOUSECLEANING

As the year is coming to a close, I went back through my notebook and discovered some films I watched but did not properly review. So I figured why not just empty everything out and share some brief thoughts on these movies in case you were looking for something to watch over the holidays.

THE APPRENTICE – Available to stream on Amazon Prime

The Apprentice is actually a 2024 film but I never got around to watching it…and I have to say I was pleasantly surprised as I had very low expectations for the film and they were easily exceeded.

I expected a sort of run of the mill anti-Trump diatribe in film form…a sentiment I understand but which I believe would make for a rather dull feature film. What I got instead was a really incredible performance from Sebastian Stan as The Donald, in a rather nuanced and, all things considered, restrained biography of the early adult years of our current President.

Directed by Ali Abbasi, The Apprentice chronicles Trump’s ascent in the New York real estate and social world from a nepo nobody to a socialite somebody. Trump’s relationship with uber-scumbag Roy Cohn – portrayed with aplomb by Jeremy Strong, gives the background to his cutthroat approach to both business and politics.

The film is shockingly good in the first half in presenting Trump as an actual human being trying to understand the world and his place in it. In the second half it loses some steam, some perspective and nuance, but Stan never loses his grasp of the character or his humanity (or inhumanity as the case may be).

Sebastian Stan’s portrayal of Trump in this film is jaw-droppingly good. He doesn’t imitate Trump, but he is subtle in recreating some of his mannerisms and speech, and he gives a truly seamless and sterling performance. Stan was nominated for a Best Actor Oscar and Strong for Best Supporting Actor…and both nominations are very well deserved.

If you are looking for a solid movie to watch, you could do much worse than watching The Apprentice. That said, if you are burned out on all things Trump…I get it.

My Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

WARFARE – Available to stream on HBO MAX

Warfare is a 2025 film directed by Alex Garland and Ray Mendoza that sort of slid under the radar when it hit theatres in April.

The film chronicles a single military encounter of a Navy SEAL platoon in 2006 during the Battle of Ramadi. It is based on the real-life experience of director Mendoza and accounts from his team members.

Alex Garland is a filmmaker who showed great promise in his debut feature Ex Machina, but who has disappointed since then. His most recent film, 2024’s Civil War, showed great promise as well but never was quite as good as it should have been.

Warfare is, in my unhumble opinion, Garland’s best film since Ex Machina. It is a rather simple set up, a platoon of Navy SEALS is stuck doing surveillance in a house in Ramadi. Then the shit hits the fan and a battle erupts.

The film is well shot by cinematographer David J. Thompson, and well-choreographed by Mendoza. The battle is chaotic and feels entirely real. The best thing about Warfare is that it feels like you are plunged into a real setting and situation with real warriors. It doesn’t have the usual Hollywood film structure or pacing or anything like that. There are no grandiose speeches are dramatic movie star posturing, just a cast of regular looking dudes thrown into a hellish environment and trying to survive it.

The film is not overtly political, but it certainly does have something to say about the Iraq debacle if you have eyes to see it.

I found Warfare to be an effective and affecting piece of moviemaking. It isn’t a great film, but it is a good enough one to recommend people check it out and do so with an open mind.

My Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

28 YEARS LATER – Available to stream on Netflix

28 Years Later is the sequel to the 2002 film 28 Days Later, both of which were written by the aforementioned Alex Garland. It is the third film in the 28 Days Later franchise…and a fourth is on its way in 2026.

I greatly enjoyed 28 Days Later when I saw it in the theatre back in 2002, as it gave a real jolt of energy to the zombie genre – a genre I admittedly had little interest in or knowledge of.

Having revisited 28 Days Later recently, the shine has come off that film in many ways. It wasn’t quite as good as I remembered it (I hadn’t seen it since seeing it in the theatre).

That said, I went into 28 Years Later with an open mind. I found the film, which is directed by Danny Boyle – the director of the original, to be mostly underwhelming.

The movie features a top-notch cast of Jodie Comer, Aaron Taylor Johnson, Jack O’Connell and Ralph Fiennes, so there is a great deal of potential there…but unfortunately it never coalesces into a compelling piece of cinema.

To be clear, it isn’t a bad film, but it also isn’t a great one…it just kind of exists. It is less a zombie movie than an existential and philosophical one…and that gives it some energy, but the plot and the execution of it all never quite comes together in a way that satisfies or satiates.

The biggest question I had at the end of the film was why was this necessary? I mean, I get that the first movie was compelling and the second – 28 Weeks Later (2007), was forgettable…but why make another movie in the franchise nearly twenty years later when there wasn’t exactly a rallying cry from the masses to get it done?

Ultimately, 28 Years Later is a pretty forgettable bit of moviemaking, something that has become all-too common in the last decade of Danny Boyle’s directing career.

I say skip 28 Years Later unless if you’re a gigantic zombie movie fanatic…but even then, you’ll be disappointed with the general lack of zombie mayhem captured on screen.

My Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars

THE SHROUDS – Available to stream on The Criterion Channel

The Shrouds, iconic filmmaker David Cronenberg’s latest film, hit theatres in 2025 and is now streaming on The Criterion Channel.

The film, which stars Vincent Cassel, Guy Pearce, Diane Kruger and Sandrine Holt, tells the story of a widower who has invented a new technology called “GraveTech”, that helps the grieving to monitor the decomposition of their loved one in the grave. Yes…this is some weird Cronenberg-ian shit.

The film is a sort of glorious concoction that mixes the usual Cronenberg body horror with a philosophical mediation on love, death, life and the modern world. Throw in some conspiracy theorizing and some big business corruption and you’ve got quite the arthouse phantasmagoria.

If you are a fan of David Cronenberg – and I consider myself one…not a super fan but a fan, then you will absolutely love The Shrouds as it is quintessential Cronenberg – most especially late-stage Cronenberg, as a man grappling with his own mortality and the death of his wife.

If you’re a normal human being you will probably find The Shrouds to be a completely alien, convoluted, and rather ghoulish cinematic experience. I understand that entirely and don’t judge anyone for feeling that way.

But if you are a Cronenberg fan, or a fan of somewhat eccentric arthouse cinema from a quality filmmaker who sometimes makes somewhat eccentric arthouse cinema…then I recommend you at least check out The Shrouds.

Ultimately The Shrouds might not be everybody’s cup of tea, but it is undeniably an original idea…and that is pretty rare nowadays.

My Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars (3.5 out of 5 stars for Cronenberg fans)

If you want to check out some other Cronenberg films here is a brief rundown of movies to see.

Solid horror movies – The Brood, Scanners, Videodrome, The Fly, Dead Ringers.

Very Solid Mainstream Movies – A History of Violence, Eastern Promises, A Dangerous Method.

Gloriously Bat-Shit Crazy Movies Worth Watching – Crash (1996)

Alright gang…that is all I have for now. I hope everyone has a happy and healthy New Year!!

©2025

Looking California and Feeling Minnesota: Episode 143 - Weapons

On this episode Barry and I chat about Zach Cregger's fantastic horror mystery movie Weapons, now streaming on HBO Max. Topics discussed include how this is one of the best films of the year, Cregger as an elevated horror master - and the tricky next step in his career, as well as Oscar hopes for Amy Madigan, and respect for Josh Brolin and Julia Garner. 

Looking California and Feeling Minnesota: Episode 143 - Weapons

P. S. SEE THIS MOVIE!!

Thanks for listening!!

©2025

Frankenstein: A Review - Guillermo del Toro's Lifeless Monster

****THIS IS A SPOILER FREE REVIEW!! THIS REVIEW CONTAINS ZERO SPOILERS!!****

My Rating: 2 out of 5 stars

My Recommendation: SKIP IT/SEE IT. If you’re a monster movie maniac like me then watch it out of curiosity, but just know this disappointing movie isn’t anywhere near as good as it could, and should, have been.

Frankenstein, written and directed by acclaimed auteur Guillermo del Toro, recounts the famous Mary Shelley tale of man’s cursed attempt at playing God.

The film, which stars Oscar Isaac, Mia Goth, Christoph Waltz and Jacob Elordi, is currently streaming on Netflix and is also available in some theatres, for those inclined to see it on the big screen.

As someone who truly loves Mary Shelley’s book, slavishly adores the 1931 James Whale Frankenstein movie, and is also a great admirer of Guillermo del Toro, it is a massive understatement to say that I was greatly anticipating this version of Frankenstein.

Every year come October, I make a pilgrimage to the Universal Monster Classics and my first watch is always Frankenstein – as it is my favorite of the bunch. That moody and mesmerizing movie is considerably different from Shelley’s book, but it is one of those rare cases where both the book and movie are great despite their differences.

As for Guillermo del Toro…I really dig his work too. I was one of the few who was happy when he won Best Picture/Best Director for The Shape of Water…which I found to be a psychologically and mythologically insightful film.

Del Toro’s Pan’s Labyrinth is an emotionally powerful, politically vibrant and cinematically imaginative masterwork. His Nightmare Alley is an underrated gem, a true nightmare of a movie.

Del Toro’s last film before Frankenstein was 2022’s Pinocchio, an animated musical. Despite being allergic to musicals and wary of some animation, I thought that was a brilliant piece of work – both poignant and profound.

And so it was that I was greatly anticipating seeing Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein, the film which he has spoken about being his dream project.

The reality of my experience of the film is thus…I love del Toro. I love Frankenstein. But I did not love del Toro’s Frankenstein.

Unfortunately…and frankly quite shockingly, this version of Frankenstein simply doesn’t work no matter how much I wanted it to.

Out of respect to del Toro I will start by focusing on what I did like about the film.

I thought Jacob Elordi did a terrific job playing the monster. Elordi skillfully captures the emotional tenderness that transforms into the turmoil that fuels the monster’s entire existence. It also helps that he is very tall and looms over the rest of the cast with ease and a certain sense of menace.

It also must be said that the monster make-up effects, as well as the effects of other corpses in various stages of experimentation, are imaginative, fantastic and well-deserving of Oscar gold.

Now onto the plethora of things that don’t work.

Let’s start with the script. The plot of the film is altered from the book – which is not a big deal, but the problem is that the script feels both bloated and emotionally emaciated. The main characters have been jumbled around and left in dramatic disarray, neutering the film of much of its emotional power. The structure of the screenplay is flawed as well and the dialogue is clunky and at times painfully on the nose, and is delivered with less than spectacular skill.

Speaking of which, a major issue with the film is that Oscar Isaac plays the lead Viktor Frankenstein…and he is not a good actor…at all. Isaac is an albatross around the neck of this film, and every second he is on screen the movie suffers. Not only is Isaac a bad actor, he is absolutely devoid of any charisma…rendering him a black hole on screen that allows no light or life to enter or exit.

Guillermo del Toro has often spoken about how Francis Ford Coppola’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992) is one of his favorite movies. It is one of mine too. It isn’t a perfect film by any means, but it is the last piece of notable work by one of the all-time greats - Coppola.

That film was greatly wounded by a dreadful supporting performance from a dead-eyed Keanu Reeves struggling with a British accent. Thankfully, Reeves isn’t the lead, and his awful work is counter-balanced by the great Gary Oldman as Dracula, who absolutely crushes the role.

Del Toro’s Frankenstein is not as fortunate as Coppola’s Dracula…as Oscar Isaac is bad in the lead role and not a supporting one…and as good as Elordi is as the monster, he ain’t no Gary Oldman.

Mia Goth, an actress I quite like, is equally bad as Lady Elizabeth, Viktor’s soon to be sister-in-law. Goth is given a tough task due to the inadequacies of the script, and she never elevates the bad material into anything watchable or resembling human.

Christoph Waltz plays Elizabeth’s rich uncle and his character makes no sense and his performance is as confused as the writing.

Another major, and quite stunning issue considering the director, is that the film is remarkably underwhelming visually. Exactly twice during the film did I sit up and think – “wow…that’s a nice shot.” That didn’t happen until the last act of the movie – inexcusable for a cinematic great like del Toro.

Longtime del Toro collaborator Dan Laustsen is the cinematographer on the film and his work is painfully flat, devoid of crispness or cinematic flair – with no color and no contrast. It is genuinely shocking how remarkably dull this movie looks.

Another major issue is the dreadful CGI deployed in the film. Thankfully there isn’t a ton of CGI, but when it appears…most notably with wild animals – like wolves, it is alarmingly bad and very distracting. How can a movie with a $120 million budget and a master director who cares at the helm end up with such low-rent CGI?

Another issue is that the film is tonally all over the map. The visuals feel like something from a kid’s movie…and yet there are flourishes of ultra-violence mixed in among the soap opera melodrama which make the whole affair quite tonally off-putting.

And finally, the sets are poorly designed and the soundtrack is cloying and intrusive. But besides that, how was the play Mrs. Frankenstein?

The cold, hard reality is that del Toro’s Pinocchio is worlds better and more profound than his Frankenstein. It is also considerably darker and scarier.

The thing that grates about this version of Frankenstein is that it cost a ton of money to make, and del Toro has as much control as any director imaginable…and yet it all still looks so goddamn cheap.

Once again, I will refer to another remake of a monster movie classic…last year’s Nosferatu directed by Robert Eggers. Egger’s film is glorious to look at – gorgeously shot and masterfully made creepy. Eggers understands the assignment…and will continue it with his next remake of a classic monster movie with Werwulf…and I will run out to see it. What bums me out is that del Toro has fumbled his Frankenstein film and thus someone like Eggers won’t get a chance to make his own version of Frankenstein. That complaint may not make sense to anyone else, but it makes perfect sense to me.

I love the Universal Classic Monster movies…and I love when masters remake them well….like with Coppola and his Dracula (two years after his Dracula, Coppola also produced a Frankenstein film which was directed by and starred Kenneth Branagh – Robert DeNiro was the monster…I wanted to love that movie too…and was devastated when it really stunk), and I desperately wanted to del Toro’s Frankenstein to be glorious.

The truth is that in our techno-dystopian age of aggressively infantile AI struggling to take its first baby steps – which will no doubt lead to it outgrowing us and ultimately destroying us…we are primed for a great Frankenstein movie. Unfortunately, Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein isn’t it.

©2025

2025 Halloween Viewer's Guide

HALLOWEEN VIEWER’S GUIDE

So my favorite season - spooky season -  is upon us!! And that means people may need to know what to watch over the Halloween weekend.

I am not what you’d call a horror afficionado, but I do enjoy the genre and every October I gorge myself on all things scary…so I have some thoughts on the subject.

There are all kinds of horror films within the genre…for example there are slasher movies, and monster movies, and zombie movies and supernatural movies and on and on. I will try and touch upon different sub-genres to mix things up.

I tend to watch movies in bunches…so I’ll watch a series of zombie movies back-to-back-to-back…things like that…if that isn’t your thing you can just ignore those recommendations.

Alright gang, let’s buckle up and dive head first into the Halloween Viewer’s Guide!!

SLASHER MOVIES

Slasher films were a staple back when I was growing up. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre kicked off the era of my childhood and led into a series of stellar films in this genre.

Opinions may vary with some loving Freddy Kruger and the Nightmare on Elm Street movies, others dig Jason in the Friday the 13th films…me? I’m definitely a Michael Myers guy…so sign me up for…

Halloween (1978) – John Carpenter is a really great moviemaker and his greatest may be Halloween. Jamie Lee Curtis and Donald Pleasance are the leads in this movie…but slasher icon Michael Myers is the star. A can’t miss Halloween movie!! Available on multiple weird streaming services I’ve never heard.

In a Violent Nature (2024) – For something more modern, check out In a Violent Nature…a weirdly meditative slasher movie that is essentially shot from the killer’s perspective. Some of the kills in it are astonishing – if you’re into that sort of thing. Available on HULU.

CLASSICS

So every October I watch a bunch of classic Universal Monster movies. I get how people think they aren’t scary now…and some of it can be dated…but goddamn I really love these movies and love the craft and skill that went into making them.

Dracula (1931) – Dracula kicked off the big run of Universal monster movies in 1931. Bela Lugosi is great and it is a moody masterpiece that runs just over an hour. Available on Prime.

Frankenstein (1931) – Frankenstein came out nine months after Dracula and it is a decidedly creepy monster movie. The finale…which is filled with harrowing wails from the monster…is truly unnerving. Boris Karloff is amazing in the lead role. It too runs just over an hour long. Available on Prime.

Nosferatu (1922) – A phenomenal non-Universal 1922 silent movie from German master F.W. Murnau. Max Schreck as the vampire is one of the more alarming screen presences in history. There are different versions of the film available…all of them run between an hour and an hour and a half. Available on Prime.

NEWER SCARES

Late Night with the Devil (2024) – A very clever horror film that uses a late night 70’s tv show as its vehicle to supernatural scares. A terrific lead performance by David Dastmalchian, and deft direction make this a terrific choice for scary viewing. Available on HULU.

TI WEST TRILOGY – X, Pearl, MaXXXine: Ti West’s fun homage to 70’s and 80’s horror starts strong with X, and keeps going with Pearl, but then stumbles with MaXXine, but it never fails to be entertaining. A twisted and sexy Mia Goth is the perfect scream queen companion for this Halloween. Available on HBO Max.

ZOMBIES!!

Here is a really great grouping of zombie movies to watch together.

Start with…

Night of the Living Dead (1968) – George Romero’s classic is an exquisite piece of horror movie making and it never fails to be very affecting. Available on MGM+

Then go to…

28 Days Later (2002) – In this Danny Boyle update to the genre, zombies have evolved and humans are devolving. A truly unique play on Romero’s masterpiece. Available on Netflix.

Finish with…

World War Z (2013) – This Brad Pitt movie is flawed but it is a natural extension of 28 Days Later…and it has some pretty creepy moments and well-executed action too. Available on Paramount+

GENUINELY HORRIFYING

These are the movies that genuinely frighten me…so much so that I actually try not to watch them…and when I do it is during the daytime!!

The Exorcist (1973) – Not just a great horror movie…but a great movie. This film literally keeps me up at night which is a testament to its mastery. I even hesitate to write about it because it scares me so much. Available on HBO Max.

The Shining (1980) – Kubrick’s moody and menacing take on the Stephen King novel is brilliant and bizarre. A twisted nightmare of a movie that unsettles from start to finish. Anchored by a gloriously gonzo performance from Jack Nicholson. For a Shining double feature - Doctor Sleep: Director’s Cut (2019) – Dr. Sleep is a distant sequel to The Shining…and while it isn’t anywhere near the movie The Shining is…it is actually really good. Rebecca Ferguson gives a fantastic performance in the film that features one of the most disturbing scenes in recent memory. Be sure to watch the Director’s Cut only…the theatrical version is weak sauce. Both Available on HBO Max

TECHNICALLY NOT HORROR BUT TRULY HORRIFYING

Zodiac (2007) – David Fincher’s masterpiece…and yes, it is a masterpiece…is an unnerving and moody meditation on the darkness deep under the surface of the American psyche. The scene at Lake Berryessa is one of the most both brutal and horrifying ever made.

If you really want to dive in watch Zodiac and then watch Fincher’s Netflix series about serial killers – Mindhunter. Great and very scary stuff… and what makes both Zodiac and Mindhunter so scary…is that it’s real. Available on MGM+

Jaws (1975) – I saw Jaws as a kid and am still scared to get into the water…and I’m not just talking about getting into the ocean. I’m scared to go into a lake, a pond, a pool, a kiddie pool and even a bathtub. Great and very scary movie. By the way…if you want to see where Spielberg got some of his shot ideas for Jaws…go watch the Universal Classic Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954). And if you listen close enough you can even hear the iconic riff that John Williams uses to such great effect in Jaws – no lie. Available on Netflix

Alien (1979) – The tagline for Ridley Scott’s Alien was “In space no one can hear you scream”…unfortunately for my neighbors  I don’t live in space because I scream my ass off when I watch this movie. A truly original film that is expertly made by the master Ridley Scott and features a terrific lead performance from Sigourney Weaver. Available on to rent or buy.

ARI ASTER

One of the great modern masters of the horror genre is Ari Aster. Aster is a terrific filmmaker – as evidenced by he’s recent work of genius Eddington. But his first two films are fascinating examples of elevated horror.

Hereditary (2018) – A genuinely creepy movie that keeps pushing viewers to the limit. A great lead performance from Toni Collette makes this movie a must see. Available on HBO Max

Midsommar (2019) – This bizarre and maniacal meditation subtly sucks you in then unleashes a world of madness upon you. Florence Pugh is brilliant as the self-centered sad sack who goes to Sweden for a much-needed vacation and ends up a diabolical Norse goddess. Available on HBO Max

ROBERT EGGERS

The other great master of the elevated horror genre is Robert Eggers.

THE WITCH (2015) – A meticulous exploration of witchery in the early Massachusetts colonies is a gripping tale that features a mesmerizing performance from Anya Taylor-Joy. A must see. Available on HBO Max.

NOSFERATU (2024) – Eggers’ take on the horror classic features a spectacular performance from Lily Rose-Depp and some of Eggers’ usual cinematic mastery. A beautiful film to look at and a wondrous addition to the vampire genre. Available on Prime.

Alright gang, those are my recommendations for this Halloween weekend. I hope you all have a great holiday and that you keep the ghosts and goblins at bay and the candies close at hand!!

©2025

Eddington: A Review - The Madness of Covid...and a Lot of Other Things

****THIS IS A SPOILER FREE REVIEW!! THIS REVIEW CONTAINS ZERO SPOILERS!!****

My Rating: 4.25 out of 5 stars

My Recommendation: SEE IT NOW.

Eddington, written and directed by Ari Aster and starring Joaquin Phoenix, hit theatres way back in July…but I only just saw it this past weekend…and I have a lot of thoughts.

The film, which bills itself as a “neo-Western dark comedy thriller”, tells the story of the fictional town of Eddington, New Mexico and the personal and political trials and tribulations it faces during the Covid pandemic.

Ari Aster is a filmmaker of whom I think highly – so why didn’t I see Eddington until this past weekend? Well, Aster’s first two films, Hereditary (2018) and Midsommar (2019), were really top-notch elevated horror movies that I loved, but his third feature, Beau is Afraid (2023), was a film that was so affecting that I literally could not watch it all the way through. In fact, I tried multiple times to stream Beau is Afraid and each time I made it roughly 30 minutes in and bailed.

To be clear, I am not saying Beau is Afraid is a bad movie (it might be but I can’t judge after watching only 30 minutes of it - twice), what I am saying though is that it was so affecting that I had a terribly uncomfortable visceral reaction to it – the reasons for which even I am not completely clear on (paging Dr. Freud!!) – so much so that I had to stop watching. This is something that has never happened to me before (or since).

So, when Eddington came out this past Summer, I thought that seeing it in the theatre was not a priority because I might want to bail on this one too. And so…all these months later when it is now available on VOD, I rented it for $4 and watched it. And oh boy…am I ever glad I did!

Eddington is the very best film I have seen this year, and it isn’t even remotely close. It is incredibly smart, insightful, bold, brave and brilliant.

This film is once again very affecting…even uncomfortably so…but it is such a compelling and dynamic film that it is impossible to turn away from it…even when you want to.

One of the reasons you may want to turn away from Eddington, is because it so expertly recreates the Covid experience – both socially, personally and medically, in such visceral and palpable ways that watching it literally feels like having a Covid fever dream.

Ari Aster masterfully captures the disorientation of the Covid era, which felt like an assault on our senses, psyches and souls. This disorientation from Covid (both the disease and the cultural reaction to it) created rampant hysteria and mania that spread like wildfire during the insanity of the Covid era. Ultimately, that hysteria is the true pandemic that thrives to this day having lived long after the disease of Covid has faded into distant memory.

Eddington is a comedy, a thriller, a horror movie and a political satire, but above all else it is an indictment. The indictment of how foolish and gullible and easily manipulated we all are. How even now we suffer from such aggressive cognitive dissonance that the excesses of the Covid era, and the worst offenders of Covid hysteria (and the accompanying BLM mania) have never been forced to acknowledge their egregious and calamitous errors, never mind pay for them.

As time passes and we gain more distance from the lunacy and imbecility of our current age, Eddington, with its sharp and incisive criticisms, will age like the finest of wines. The film’s insights will become more profound over time for those with eyes, and the intellectual courage, to see them.  

As you may have noticed I have intentionally avoided any and all plot points for Eddington, and that is because I think it is best watched with as little information known about it as possible. That said, I will try and convey my appreciation for the film despite my strict spoiler limitations.

First of all, Joaquin Phoenix, who plays protagonist Sheriff Joe Cross, gives a stellar performance. Phoenix is brilliant, his Sheriff Joe is a stew of subdued defiance and fury mixed with smoldering self-righteousness that often curdles into hubris.

Phoenix is the great actors of our time and he creates a deliciously complex character in Sheriff Joe, that is so captivating and subtly magnetic that it is a marvel. And Phoenix’s ability to convey physical ailments is truly stunning – and I will say no more about that.

The rest of the cast, which features Pedro Pascal, Emma Stone, Deirdre O’Connell, and Austin Butler, all have smaller roles but do exceptionally noteworthy work. Pascal, in particular, is an actor who can often grate, but his unlikability is used to great effect in the film. Stone’s role is small but she is completely bought into it and does exceptional work despite minimal screen time.

Cinematographer Darius Khondji does his very best work on Eddington, using the high desert landscape and the small-town setting to great effect. He also deftly paints with a deft palette and masterfully frames his shots throughout – heightening the drama.

The real star of Eddington though is writer/director Ari Aster. It took balls the size of watermelons to make this movie and Aster has them. He has been pilloried by many critics for Eddington, but I think that has more to do with the perceived politics of Eddington rather than the filmmaking skills on display from Aster. I also think many critics are among those who so wholeheartedly embraced the Covid and BLM hysteria and are so ravaged by cognitive dissonance that they aggressively resist any notions of coming to grips with how foolish they look in hindsight.

The reality is, is that the “conspiracy theorists” were right all along…and still are…or at least they’re more right than the buffoons who think “conspiracy theorist” is a derogatory term. The most amusing thing that has happened in the last five or six years has been that tinfoil hats have been transformed from objects of ridicule into crowns of knowledge and wisdom – worn proudly.

To be fair, the “conspiracy theorists” are closer to the truth than the normies…but they still are a far way off from the truth. The conspiracy theorist’s real enlightenment comes from the fact that they understand the one undeniable fact that “normies” are loathe to admit…that the “official” story is, always and every time, a lie. And Eddington is one of those rare movies that not only acknowledges that fact…but aggressively embraces it.

The unacknowledged mantra of the dystopian digital age is – “The map is not the territory” – as our culture is so detached from the territory of reality because they have their noses buried in the map…their phones. Because of this fact we as a people are easily manipulated – emotionally, mentally, politically, and Eddington is a film that slaps us across the face in an attempt to wake us from our technologically induced stupor – and it does so with cinematic and dramatic aplomb.

You may not want to see Eddington, but trust me when I tell you…you NEED to see Eddington, you NEED to absorb Eddington, and you NEED to eventually accept what Eddington is teaching you.

Make no mistake, Eddington is thus far the very best film of the year…and is also the most important film of the year, if not the decade.

©2025

Weapons: A Review - Big Creepiness in Small-Town America

****THIS IS A SPOILER FREE REVIEW!! THIS REVIEW CONTAINS ZERO SPOILERS!!****

My Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

My Recommendation: SEE IT.  A solid piece of elevated horror moviemaking that is worth watching when it hits streaming.

Weapons, written and directed by Zach Cregger, is a horror movie that tells the mysterious story of seventeen children in a small town who one night all run out of their homes into the darkness never to be seen again.  

Zach Cregger’s first feature film, Barbarian (2022), was two-thirds of a great horror movie that lost its way a bit in its final act. Despite its flawed final act, Barbarian showed Cregger to be a serious talent as it was a taut, smart, well-shot, well-acted and until its final act, very effective piece of horror filmmaking.

Weapons once again reveals Cregger to be a filmmaker to watch despite being somewhat similar to Barbarian in that as good as it is it still has some flaws that keep it from being great.

Weapons, like Barbarian with its commentary on Reagan and the destruction of the American working class, has some insightful social commentary artfully ingrained into its narrative core – the most obvious of which is the predation of children.

In an age where the Epstein files are forgotten before they’re ever released, and sex trafficking and exploitation of children runs rampant, a movie which opens by telling us it is a true story that powerful people have covered up, where seventeen kids disappear without a trace…is making a point for those with eyes to see and ears to hear.

Weapons is, in many ways but not all, Pizzagate, The Franklin Affair, Johnny Gosch, the Epstein story, and all the rest of the horrific child exploitation stories in recent times, subtly made manifest in narrative fashion…and that in and of itself makes the film unnerving – particularly if you have kids.

Cregger structures Weapons in an interesting way as the story is broken into chapters that feature the different perspectives of each main character – Justine – the kid’s teacher, Archer – parent to one of the kids, Paul – a cop in the town, James – a homeless drug addict, Marcus – the school principal, and Alex – the lone kid in the class who doesn’t disappear.

These perspectives are structurally staggered and non-linear and then intersect and converge to form the story as a whole. This approach really heightens the film and elevates what could have been rather mundane material in lesser storytelling hands.

Cregger’s greatest accomplishment with Weapons though is that he, along with cinematographer Larkin Sieple, create some very memorable and distinct visuals that stick with you.

For example, the poster for Weapons shows the silhouette of kids running in a very distinctive arms-out style, and that is used to very creepy effect in the film.

I won’t get into any of the details of the film to avoid spoilers – but I will say that there is a character in the movie that is so well-designed, well-acted, well-shot and visually unnerving that it makes you wince whenever it arrives.

There’s also a recurring motif of a certain door opening where it is so dark you strain to see what is in it, that is simple yet very effective. As is the scene where someone walks out of the door – a sequence that is chilling.

Cregger as a filmmaker is sort of a cross between Jordan Peele and Ari Aster. Cregger’s ability to create notable visuals is right up there with Peele – a noted visual stylist (although a filmmaker who struggles to tell a story), and his type of horror is reminiscent of Aster’s early work – most notably Hereditary and Midsommar.

Cregger’s skill, talent and style places him among the premiere “elevated horror” filmmakers of this era, namely Peele, Aster, and Robert Eggers.

What elevates Weapons besides Cregger’s storytelling and visual style, is a top-notch cast doing terrific work.

Julia Garner as Justine is a startlingly compelling character that is both sympathetic and abrasive. Garner, who was terribly misused in Fantastic Four earlier this summer, gives a very deft performance here.

Josh Brolin is really good as Archer, the devastated father determined to find out what happened to his son. Brolin has developed over the years to be such a reliably good actor that when he arrives on-screen you feel assured that the film is in strong acting hands.

Both Alden Ehrenreich and Benedict Wong, as Paul the cop and Marcus the principal respectively, really make the most of somewhat smaller parts that in lesser hands would have been thrown away, but in theirs are fleshed out to be really captivating pieces of work.

And finally, Cary Cristopher as the young boy Alex, is perfect as a creepy, lonely, sad and slightly scary little kid. Christopher looks like he could be the cousin to Damien from the Omen movies, and gives a really solid performance.

As much as I like Cregger, I do think Weapons has some issue that keep it from being a great film, but I will withhold the specifics of why so as not to spoil the film for those who want to see it – except to say that part of the conclusion to the mystery feels a bit unsatisfying…which is similar to how I felt about Barbarian. I’d also say that the film is better at being creepy than it is at being “horrifying”…but that is not necessarily a bad thing.

So, Weapons isn’t a great film but it is a good horror film…and in this day and age that is definitely good enough.

I think Weapons, just like Barbarian, is a perfect Halloween watch if you want to creep yourself out – particularly once it hits streaming. I also think it would make a wonderful companion piece to Ari Aster’s Hereditary.

In conclusion, writer/director Zach Cregger continues to show glimpses of brilliance in his second feature film and is quickly establishing himself as one of the premiere talents in the horror genre.

Weapons isn’t a perfect film, and it isn’t quite a great film, but it is a top-notch horror film that delivers copious amounts of creepiness, enough to have you squirming in your seat…but for less horror inclined individuals that seat can be in your home, and not necessarily in the theatre.

©2025

Looking California and Feeling Minnesota: Episode 136 - Sinners

On this episode, Barry and I head down to the Delta and sing the blues over Ryan Coogler's blockbuster vampire movie, Sinners, starring Michael B. Jordan. Questions addressed include is Ryan Coogler good? Is Michael B. Jordan good? Is Sinners good? Stay tuned at the end for a rundown of the Summer blockbuster season and predictions regarding Fantastic Four and Superman. 

Looking California and Feeling Minnesota: Episode 136 - Sinners

Thanks for listening!!

©2025

Sinners: A Review - Don't Believe the Hype

****THIS IS A SPOILER FREE REVIEW!! THIS REVIEW CONTAINS ZERO SPOILERS!!****

My Rating: 1.5 out of 5 stars

My Recommendation: SKIP IT. An over-hyped horror movie that under-delivers on every count.

Sinners, written and directed by Ryan Coogler, is a period horror film that chronicles Black twin entrepreneurs, Smoke and Stack, who open a juke joint in the Mississippi Delta in 1932 and contend with racism and vampires…and not necessarily in that order.

Sinners hit theatres on April 18th and was a run-away smash hit. The film was a box office blockbuster, making $350 million on a $90 million budget, was a critical darling, and generated a ton of positive buzz...some of which included Oscar talk.

I missed Sinners in the theatre, but as a fan of vampire movies, Blues music, actresses Hailee Steinfeld, Wunmi Mosaku and actor Delroy Lindo – all of whom have supporting roles in the movie, when the film hit Video on Demand this week, I quickly bought it (for $25 – essentially the price of two theatre tickets) and was excited to watch it and see exactly what all the fuss was about.

Having watched all two-hours and fifteen minutes of Sinners, I regret to inform you dear reader that I am completely at a loss for what all the aforementioned Sinners fuss was about.

Simply said, despite how much I wanted it to be, Sinners is just not a good movie…hell…it isn’t even an entertaining one. It is poorly paced, egregiously shot, incoherently written and at least in terms of its lead Michael B. Jordan, abysmally acted.

The film opens with a long set-up that introduces us to Smoke and Stack, the twins played by Michael B. Jordan. They have returned to Mississippi from Chicago where they worked for Al Capone. They are also combat veterans from World War I.

Smoke and Stack have a pile of money and buy an old lumber mill from a Klansman and turn it into a juke joint. The film takes place on the day they open the juke joint and the whole community (Black community) comes out to party there.

The languid first hour has the distinct pacing of a prestige drama, but it lacks both the prestige and the drama. The film then transitions, slowly…very slowly…into a horror film that is as derivative and dull as imaginable, and as predictable as can be.

The unquestionable highlight of the film is a scintillating music sequence in the juke joint that masterfully connects Delta Blues with African folk music and then to contemporary Black music. It is a visually and musically compelling piece of cinema. What makes that sequence stand out all the more though is that everything surrounding it is so visually unimaginative and aesthetically anemic.

For example, cinematographer Autumn Arkapaw, makes the decision to compose all of her shots exactly the same way, with the main subject smack dab in the middle of the frame. I know this style is en vogue nowadays but that doesn’t make it look any less amateurish and reprehensible. The cinematography in this movie looks like something from a second rate tv show on the USA network.

Another piece of cinematic malpractice is the mismanaged and poorly shot crescendo to the main action battle – which is cinematically obtuse, visually incoherent and dramatically incomprehensible…and a truly absurd and aggressively pandering coda tacked on at the end that only extends this already interminably long and decidedly lifeless movie.

Sinners is not aided in the least by the poor performance from Michael B. Jordan as the two leads. Jordan does next to nothing to differentiate between the twins and does little more than pose and preen his way through the film.

Jordan, who I once thought had such great promise as an actor – most notably in Friday Night Lights and Fruitvale Station, has eschewed acting for “blacting” in his movies now. “Blacting” is a vacuous and vapid form of stereotype incarnation in the place of actual acting among Black actors – and occasionally white ones. When someone “acts”, they create a rich and complex human character, when they are “blacting” they simply do a shallow pantomime of hollow Black stereotypes. Michael B. Jordan does blacting, not acting, in Sinners…as well as in the vast majority of things he’s been in over the last few years.

Jordan’s fall from artistic grace mirrors director Ryan Coogler’s similar precipitous stumble…not surprising since they have teamed up often over the years and both had their breakout with Fruitvale Station.

Coogler garnered much acclaim for Fruitvale Station, which was a film that showed him to be a director bursting with potential. Unfortunately, he has squandered that potential with a series of sub-par franchise films (Creed and Black Panther).

Yes, I know that Black Panther (which also starred Michael B. Jordan) was a blockbuster and got nominated for a Best Picture Academy Award…but I said it at the time and will say it again now…Black Panther is a middling Marvel movie. It just isn’t good…but critics slobbered all over it because it was a “Black movie” that came out at the height of the Trump shitshow (or first incarnation of the Trump shitshow) and all the #OscarSoWhite stuff and the rest of that era’s racial “awakening”.

I wrote about the middling nature of Black Panther when it came out and have only been proven more right as every day passes. That movie too was very poorly shot…and its cinematographer was…you guessed it – Autumn Arkapaw.

Black Panther II, which came out post Trump I and pre-Trump II, was a truly atrocious Marvel movie, and it showed the ever-expanding cracks in the Coogler myth that I astutely diagnosed much earlier on.

Now with Sinners, audiences and critics have been wowed, and I am left shaking my head in dismay, if not disgust. I get people want to be excited about movies again, and want to have a communal cultural experience, but Sinners is not the answer now…just like Top Gun: Maverick wasn’t the answer a few years ago.

Lowering our standards and pretending that Sinners (or Top Gun: Maverick, or Barbie) is a great movie, or even a good one, does no one, not audiences, not critics, not Hollywood and certainly not the art of cinema, any good.

Ryan Coogler’s success, like Jordan Peele’s and Greta Gerwig’s success, is a function of cultural wishful thinking, critical and audience virtue signaling, and a steep lowering of cinematic standards across the boards.

Sinners is a film that has no business making $350 million or of being adored by critics or of garnering Oscar nominations. The film’s success, both with audiences and critics, speaks less to its quality and more to how far both American intelligence and the art of cinema has fallen.

Ultimately, Sinners is the type of movie that dumb people think is deep, and stupid people think is smart. It is an instantly forgettable and entirely frustrating cinematic endeavor and you shouldn’t waste a single second of your precious time on it.

©2025

Looking California and Feeling Minnesota: Episode 135 - Heretic

On this episode, Barry and Mike go door to door to spread the word about Heretic, the horror/thriller starring Hugh Grant now available on MAX. Topics discussed include the terrific cast, the fantastic first half of the film, and the trouble with finals acts.

Looking California and Feeling Minnesota: Episode 135 - Heretic

Thanks for listening!

©2025

Heretic and Longlegs: Two Horror Reviews for the Price of One!!

***THIS REVIEW CONTAINS ZERO SPOILERS!! THIS IS A SPOILERS FREE REVIEW!!***

Heretic – 2.75 out of 5 stars. SEE IT/SKIP IT.

Longlegs – 2 out of 5 stars. SKIP IT.

Heretic, written and directed by Scott Beck and Bryan Woods, is a horror film that tells the tale of two Mormon missionaries, Sister Barnes and Sister Paxton, who attempt to convert Mr. Reed, a man who is not what he seems.

The film, which stars Hugh Grant as Mr. Reed, opened in the U.S. on November 8th 2024 and is available to stream on MAX, where it is currently the number one ranked movie.

Heretic was a success at the box office, raking in $58 million on a $10 million budget, and it garnered some positive buzz and even some awards consideration, with Grant receiving Golden Globe and BAFTA nominations.

I missed Heretic in the theatre but recently checked it out on MAX.

Heretic is one of those tantalizing movies that has a stellar premise, a wonderful set-up, terrific performances and a gripping first half, but that loses its way in its second half/final act and ultimately suffers greatly because of it. In this way Heretic reminds me Barbarian (2022), another horror film from a few years ago that was phenomenal for two acts and then stumbled badly in its final act.

The first half of Heretic really is remarkable as it deftly presents its characters and subtly creates tension. The film is at its best when it is essentially a philosophical and theological debate between the Mormon missionaries and Mr. Reed. The interplay between the three of them and Reed’s intellectual chess playing is extraordinarily compelling to watch.

Hugh Grant’s performance in the first half is outstanding as he chews the scenery and spits out dialogue with aplomb.

Sophie Thatcher and Chloe East as Sister Barnes and Sister Paxton respectively, also give top notch and very layered performances that in lesser hands would have been easily botched.

The dramatic interplay between Grant, Thatcher and East is a glorious stew for the first half of the film…but then a shift occurs (to avoid spoilers I won’t reveal it) and the script loses its way, and the film loses a great deal of its tension, and it is no longer as captivating a cat and mouse game.

Unfortunately, the film spins out of control in its final third to an alarming degree and it diminishes all that came before it. Gone is the intrigue, the tension, the intelligence, and in its place are some rather tired horror tropes – well executed but tropes nonetheless.

Again, Heretic’s fumbled final act reminded me a great deal of Barbarian because Barbarian made similar mistakes, such as expanding its story and setting unnecessarily which egregiously dissipated dramatic tension.

That said, there is no doubt that writer/directors Beck and Woods are skilled filmmakers as this movie is well-made, and are interesting thinkers…they just need to be more concise and more contained storytellers in order to make the most of their moviemaking opportunities.

Another horror film from last year that I just checked out was Longlegs, which hit theatres on July 12th, 2024 and is now available to stream on Hulu.

Longlegs was a big hit, making $126 million on a $10 million budget. It was well-marketed, and had very positive word of mouth, with many calling it the “scariest movie ever made!”

I missed Longlegs in the theatre and just watched it on Hulu and I can testify that Longlegs is most definitely NOT the scariest movie ever made. It is definitely creepy, and has some scary moments, but over-all it isn’t that scary and it also isn’t very good.

Longlegs is an exercise in creating mood, and it excels at that, but what it has in mood it lacks in story and character.

The basic premise of Longlegs is that it follows the travails of Lee Harker, and FBI agent in the 1990s assigned to the mysterious serial killer case Longlegs. Harker has the gift of clairvoyance and uses it in her FBI work, and so it seems she is a good choice to track down this killer.

As the story progresses, we learn more about Harker, and about Longlegs, and the more we learn the less it makes sense and the less we care about any of it.

The film is undoubtedly trying to pay homage to The Silence of the Lambs and create a newer more esoteric version of it, and it does a respectable job of capturing the weird and creepy essence of that film, but it lacks a coherent and compelling narrative to drive the story forward, and once again, it loses the plot in its second half.

The performances in Longlegs are all just a bit underwhelming as well. Maika Monroe does a decent enough job as Agent Harker, but shenever quite completely takes the role into her possession and instead seems just a bit too contained.

Nicholas Cage as Longlegs is certainly unnerving, but Nicholas Cage not as Longlegs is unnerving too. Cage never truly inhabits this sicko character but rather play acts at being a sicko…which has been the story of Cage’s career from the get go.

Blair Underwood and Alicia Witt have two supporting roles and neither of them feel fully fleshed out or adequately performed.

I left Longlegs with a certain sense of admiration for the film’s ambitions, and a certain level of irritation because it only succeeded in creating a marketing movement around itself rather than a great horror movie.

The reality is that Longlegs is a creepy vibes movie with some distinctly disturbing sequences that are nightmare fuel, but it is not a movie I would recommend because it never coalesces into a thoroughly successful horror venture. It ultimately falls flat in its fear-mongering because it can’t find a way to fulfill its promise and adequately finish.

Out of Heretic and Longlegs I would definitely choose Heretic even with its flaws, because it is vastly superior to Longlegs when at its best. Longlegs strikes me as the type of movie that pre-teens will absolutely freak out watching at a slumber party and keep themselves up all night trying to avoid nightmares…but unless you fit that demographic – I don’t recommend it.

If you’re a horror aficionado, then you’ll watch both of these movies…so my opinion is meaningless. But if you’re a regular person who only occasionally wanders into the horror genre, then I’d say the best option out of these two is Heretic.

©2025

11th Annual Mickey©®™ Awards - 2024 Edition

11th ANNUAL MICKEY©®™ AWARDS

The ultimate awards show is upon us!!!

The Mickeys©™® are superior to every other award imaginable…be it the Oscar, the Emmy, the Tony, the Grammy or even the Nobel. The Mickey©®™ is the mountaintop of not just artistic but human achievement, which is why they always take place AFTER the Oscars!

This year has been a rather sub-par one for cinema but there are still a multitude of films eligible for a Mickey©™® award.

Actors, actresses, writers, cinematographers and directors are all sweating and squirming right now in anticipation of the Mickey©™® nominations and winners. Remember, even a coveted Mickey©™® nomination is a career and life changing event. 

Before we get to what everyone is here for…a quick rundown of the rules and regulations of The Mickeys©™®…The Mickeys©™® are selected by me…I am judge, jury and executioner. The only films eligible are films I have actually seen, be it in the theatre, via screener, cable, streamer or VOD. I do not see every film because as we all know, the overwhelming majority of films are God-awful, and I am a working man so I must be pretty selective. So that means that just getting me to actually watch your movie is a tremendous accomplishment in and of itself…never mind being nominated or winning!

Enough with the formalities…let's start the festivities!!

Is everybody in? Is everybody in? The ceremony is about to begin...

Ladies and gentlemen…welcome to the 11th annual Mickey©™® Awards!!!

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY

Jarin Blaschke – Nosferatu: Blaschke beautifully photographs this film and gives it a desaturated look with a stunning contrast between light and shadow and magnificent framing. A true cinematic master work that is glorious for cinephiles to behold.

Lol Crawley - The Brutalist: In many ways this is a minimalist piece of cinematography which does a lot with a little, and always in service to the story. From the opening tracking sequence on the boat to the insightful slow pan in the granite quarry, Crawley shows he can tell a story with visuals alone, and do it with aplomb.

And the Mickey©®™ goes to…JARIN BLASCHKE – NOSFERATU: An exquisitely shot film that goes to the top of the vampire cinematic catalogue.

BEST EDITING

Sean Baker – Anora: Sean Baker wrote, directed, produced and edited Anora and he did all of those jobs exceedingly well. The editing on this film is pretty miraculous as it keeps the proper pace and tone throughout and never fails to make every scene crackle with dramatic energy.

Hansjorg Weibrich - September 5: This movie could’ve felt dull and claustrophobic but thanks to Weibrich it is perfectly paced and wondrously put together and squeezes every ounce of drama out of its story and setting.

And the Mickey©®™ goes to…HANSJORG WEIBRICH - SEPTEMBER 5: In lesser cinematic hands, this movie is entirely forgettable but Weibrich’s edit turns this into a tight and taut dramatic thriller.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Bill Skarsgard – Nosferatu: Do what you’re good at…and Skarsgard is good at being creepy, and he turns the creep up to 11 as a horny vampire in Nosferatu. An original and truly horrifying take on the age-old vampire character.

Jesse Plemons – Kinds of Kindness/Civil War: Plemons is nominated for two performances…the first for his scene stealing work in Civil War as a “real American”, which was a stunning piece of acting, and for his performances in the anthology film Kinds of Kindness. Both films highlight Plemons’ impressive versatility and subdued volatility. Plemons is one of the best actors working today.

Yuri Barosov – Anora: From the get go Yuri Barosov jumps off the screen in Anora and commands audience attention. His performance is quiet and subtle yet shows a level of charisma that is startling. One hopes he gets a ton more work from now on.

Karren Karagulian – Anora: Karagulian is fantastic as the handler who must try and control and contain a wild Russian rich kid in Anora. Karagulian’s energy, intensity, subtlety, comedic timing and commitment are crucial to the success of Anora, and shows him to be a very skilled and talented actor.

And the Mickey©®™ goes to…KARREN KARAGULIAN – ANORA: Karagulian’s funny and ferocious performance in Anora is the hidden lynchpin to the entire movie…and now he has a Mickey©®™ for his efforts!!

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Margaret Qualley – The Substance: Qualley is an outstanding actress and she dives in headfirst into her role as the “ingenue” in The Substance. She lights up the screen with a dastardly, doe-eyed and sometimes demonic presence that is beguiling.

Monica Barbaro – A Complete Unknown: Who the hell is Monica Barbaro and where has she been hiding? Barbaro nearly steals the entire movie from under Bob Dylan’s prominent nose despite the fact that her character is criminally underwritten. A commanding and compelling performance all the way around.

Lady Gaga – Joker: Folie a Deux - I am not a fan of Lady Gaga…but I have to admit that she really is terrific in Joker: Folie a Deux, as she fits right in with the vibe of the film and gives it an allure and edge that is mesmerizing.

And the Mickey©®™ goes to…MARGARET QUALLEY – THE SUBSTANCE: Qualley brings a life and tempestuousness to The Substance that invigorates the film and elevates the material…and now she has a Mickey©®™!!

THE GENRE CATEGORIES MICKEY©®™ WINNERS ARE…

BEST HORROR FILM

Nosferatu – Everybody knows the Nosferatu/Dracula story…and yet Robert Eggers films his version so exquisitely, and his cast deliver such glorious performances, that this movie becomes an instant classic.

BEST ACTION FILM

Furiosa – The chase scenes in this movie are, not surprisingly considering George Miller is at the helm, astonishing. Visually vibrant, this movie contains some of the best and most breathtaking stunt sequences in years.

BEST COMEDY FILM

Anora – This is technically a dark dramedy but it still qualifies for me as a comedy. This movie is wickedly funny, powerfully poignant, and painfully insightful.

BEST ANIMATED FILM

Flow – The animation in Flow isn’t the best you’ll ever see but the depth and magnitude of the story are as profound as you’ll find.

BEST ACTOR

Joaquin Phoenix – Joker: Folie a Deux - Once again Phoenix disappears into Arthur Fleck and his alter ego Joker and gives a twisted and terrific performance as the most hated person and character in the world. Phoenix is still the best and boldest actor in the world.

Colman Domingo - Sing Sing: Domingo is absolutely astonishing as a dramatically driven prison inmate. This performance is both combustible and contained and is a gift to the art of acting. I had no idea Domingo could be this good…but he is…he really is.

Ralph Fiennes – Conclave: Fiennes, as always, gives a meticulous and mesmerizing performance as a Cardinal navigating Vatican intrigue. A joy to watch this master craftsman at work.

And the Mickey©®™ goes to…COLMAN DOMINGO – SING SING: Domingo’s exquisite performance in this movie is so intimate and intricate it is difficult to adequately describe. It is such a poignant, profound and powerful piece of acting work that it has elevated Colman Domingo to the absolute heights of artistic achievement with a Mickey©®™ award!!

BEST ACTRESS

Mikey Madison – Anora: Madison so thoroughly embodied a certain New York archetype that it felt like I was watching a home movie. A daring yet subtle performance that showed Madison has some serious chops when given the right material and direction.

Demi Moore – The Substance: I’ve never really thought much of Demi Moore as an actress, but in The Substance, she gives a phenomenal performance that speaks to the reality of the actress’ experience in the shithole that is Hollywood.

Emma Stone – Kinds of Kindness: Emma Stone’s overlooked performance in the arthouse anthology Kinds of Kindness is funny, intense and disturbing, and reveals an artistic depth uncommon in today’s cinema.

Lily Rose Depp - Nosferatu: Depp has been much maligned in her career, but she went balls to the wall as the love interest of a vampire in Nosferatu. Depp gives as committed and courageous a performance imaginable in a role that in lesser hands would have been ridiculous to the point of disaster.

And the Mickey©®™ goes to…LILY ROSE DEPP – NOSFERATU: Depp’s performance is such a tour de force it elicited giggles from moviegoers uncomfortable with such levels of commitment…that is an indictment of our imbecilic audiences and an endorsement of Depp’s artistic integrity and commitment. No one is laughing now that Lily Rose Depp has a Mickey©®™!!

BEST ENSEMBLE

Nosferatu: Lily Rose Depp, Nicholas Hoult, Aaron Taylor Johnson, Emma Corrin, Willemn Dafoe and of course Bill Skarsgard, give fantastic performances in this gothic drama.

Anora: Mikey Madison, M<ark Eydelshteyn, Yura Borisov and Karren Karagulian are all so good in this movie that it boggles the mind. A terrific ensemble with absolutely zero weak links.

Kinds of Kindness: Emma Stone, Jesse Plemons, Willem Dafoe and Margaret Qualley crush their roles in this crazy anthology film that features acting brilliance across the board.

The Substance: Demi Moore, Margaret Qualley and Dennis Quad chew scenery and bring this movie to life with aplomb. All three give very brave and courageous performances for different reasons.

And the Mickey©®™ goes to…ANORA: Top to bottom this cast just doesn’t miss. A truly remarkable collective performance.

BEST DIRECTOR

Sean Baker – Anora: Baker brought a unique and original vibrancy, humor and drama to this twisted, modern-day screwball dramedy that made it deliriously compelling and captivating.

Robert Eggers - Nosferatu: Eggers is an exquisite filmmaker obsessed with detail, and his attention to cinematic detail is what makes Nosferatu so absorbing despite the fact that we all know the story.

Brady Corbet – The Brutalist: Corbet’s ambition and audacity are off the charts and he is reaching for the stars with The Brutalist…and he almost gets there.

Todd Phillips – Joker: Folie a Deux: I know, I know, I know, everybody hated this movie but me…but Todd Phillips gave a big budget middle finger to his critics and supporters alike with Joker 2, and he did it by making the most insane arthouse franchise film in history…and for that he gets a much-deserved Mickey©®™ nomination. Hey everybody…look at the big balls on Todd.

Tim Fehlbaum - September 5: Fehlbaum takes a story we already know in a contained setting and through sheer skill and talent fills it with exquisite drama. A truly remarkable achievement by Fehlbaum to avoid all the traps laid out before him and to make this film work as well as it did.

And the Mickey©®™ goes to…ROBERT EGGERS – NOSFERATU: Eggers is such a singular talent that he turned an age old story into a cinematically breathtaking, and darkly heartbreaking, blockbuster. Eggers is well-respected as a craftsman, and now he has the ultimate in prestige and respect in the form of The Mickey©®™ award!!

 BEST PITCURE

10. Furiosa – George Miller’s wild ride is bumpy at times but has a visual brilliance to it that can be breathtaking.

9. The Substance – This movie is as insightful about the female experience in Hollywood as any you’ll see. It loses its way in the third act but the first two acts are riveting.

8. Late Night with the Devil – This overlooked gem of a horror film is really original and very effective in conveying its creepiness and its relevant ideology.

7. The Brutalist – The Brutalist is ambitious and audacious, but unfortunately never quite lives up to its spectacular first half.

6. Kinds of Kindness – Yorgos Lanthimos is an acquired taste…and I’ve acquired it. This wild and weird anthology that always leaves you guessing is shockingly compelling from start to finish, and features some spectacular performances.

5. Sing Sing – This prison drama perfectly manages its mostly amateur cast and the underlying menace of life behind bars. A deeply moving and vibrant film that stays with you.

4. September 5 – Impeccably directed film that maximizes the drama without ever crossing over into melodrama. An undiscovered gem of a film.

3. Joker: Folie a Deux – This movie is a punchline…but the jokes is on all of us as director Todd Phillips once again is ahead of the curve in regards to the collective unconscious. Magnificent and malicious movie madness.

2. Nosferatu – A glorious exercise in cinematic mastery combined with electric performances makes Nosferatu a must watch.

And the Mickey©®™ for BEST PICTURE goes to…ANORA: Nosferatu won Best Director and Best Actress, but Anora comes from behind for the Mickey©®™ victory. Funny, insightful and frankly profound, Anora grabs you by the balls and never lets go…even after it ends. A masterful piece of moviemaking by Sean Baker and a fantastic cast, make Anora this year’s Mickey©®™ winner~!!

MOST IMPORTANT FILM OF THE YEAR

JOKER: FOLIE A DEUX and ANORA:

These two films, one much maligned (Joker) and the other much celebrated (Anora - Oscar and Mickey©®™ winner) are seemingly much too different to have anything in common.

One deals with a psychopathic comic book character singing show tunes as his demonic alter-ego, and the other with a strong-willed stripper striving for financial success.

But there is one thing that binds them both…namely that both films take place in worlds completely devoid of love.

Joker’s Gotham City and Anora’s New York are hellscapes because it is impossible for love to exist there, or for the inhabitants there to truly contemplate love and its absence. They aren’t sure what is missing but they know something huge and vital is…and its absence is destroying them….they try and fill it with money, sex, power…but nothing fills the void.

The reason these films are so important is because they reflect a growing darkness in our own world…where love in its many forms is being suffocated by a soulless culture hellbent on destroying love, beauty and truth.

It would be easy to think that love in the world of Anora is transactional…except it isn’t transactional, it is non-existent. Love is not the thing being bought and sold in Anora…power is…and dignity too. Love has nothing to do with any of it.

Joker’s Gotham is so devoid of love that it is hostile to human life like a planet with no oxygen and extreme temperatures. Arthur Fleck is so starved for love that he wastes away in this loveless landscape…but Joker…the devil…the king of hatred, cruelty and viciousness, thrives in this loveless world.

Love is not something that most people think about in regards to the big ideas of the world or geopolitics and all the rest…but a lack of love tells us a lot about what’s happening and what will happen.

For instance, the distinct absence of any love, or the ability to love, in these movies speaks to the American Empire’s devolution into capitalistic self-destruction. At this stage of the American Empire’s collapse, love is often transactional, a commodity to bought or sold in order to gain money, power or both.

In our cancerous culture, where religion is corrupt, wealth is worshipped, government self-serving, and pornography and gambling mainstream, vices have are now virtues and beauty and truth sullied and maligned. In this state of existance, the spiral downward for the American Empire isn’t just inevitable, it is accelerating at break neck speed, for with love goes humanity, decency and dignity.

Anora, like many Americans, had to detach from her moral and ethical foundation (and her humanity, decency and dignity) given to her by tradition (in her case her Russian ancestry), in order to pursue money by selling her soul and body one piece at a time…intentionally ignoring the fact that neither of these are limitless resources.

Arthur Fleck is the delicate and damaged among us…he is a fish out of water in this hateful world…the love he needs to survive isn’t kept from him because he is repulsive, he can’t get it or give it because it is non-existent in the world. He gasps and flounders about desperate for the life sustaining substance to fill his gills…but it’s not there for him…or anyone else…and its absence will undoubtedly kill him, sooner rather than later.

We are all either Anora or Arthur Fleck, and the evil ruling elite of oligarchs and aristocrats that lord over us don’t just not care about us, they actively hate us and want to exploit us and see us suffer. If you doubt this simply open eyes and look around at our country…homelessness, drug addiction, suicide, violent crime, broken homes and families, children abused, unhealthy food, malignant pharma, casino banks, justice-free justice system…and all the rest.

We will, if we haven’t already, like Anora and Arthur, be forced to degrade and demean ourselves at the altar of the ruling elites power and wealth, just to survive, or be crushed under the weight of the loveless world they force us to inhabit.

This is not a democrat or republican issue. This is not as conservative or liberal issue. This is an existential issue. And this issue isn’t just a fight for our literal survival, it is also a fight for our souls.

First, they crush your spirit, and then they suck out your soul. Arthur Fleck had his spirit crushed and then his soul taken by the darkness. Anora had her spirit crushed and sold most of her soul, but realized at the very last moment that she had one last chance at redemption and wholeness.

We are all either Arthur or Anora right now, and either the devil within us is going to take over or we’ll grasp on with all our might at the last vestiges of light in our dark world and save our souls from the malicious ghouls in charge who want to take them.

Don’t let them take them. Don’t let them win. Love one another. Use that love as a shield as you go to battle to destroy the ones who rule and despise you.

This is the only way.

On that oh-so-pleasant note…thus ends the 11th annual Mickey©®™ awards!!

Thanks for reading and all your support through the years…and stay tuned for the Slip-Me-A-Mickey©®™ awards coming soon!

©2025

Wolf Man: A Review – A Sheep in Wolf's Clothing

****THIS IS A SPOILER FREE REVIEW!! THIS REVIEW CONTAINS ZERO SPOILERS!!****

My Rating: 2 out of 5 stars

My Recommendation: SKIP IT/SEE IT. A tepid horror tale that lacks bite. Horror aficionados can wait to watch it on streaming, everyone else can skip it altogether.

Wolf Man, written and directed by Leigh Whannell, chronicles the journey of a young family of three as they travel to a remote section of Oregon, where they try to stave off a werewolf attack.

Leigh Whannell had some success with his last film, The Invisible Man (2020), which was a modern re-telling of the 1933 Universal Film horror classic of the same name. This time out he attempts to do the same thing with the Wolf Man, a modern re-imagining the 1941 Universal classic The Wolf Man starring Lon Chaney Jr.

While Whannell’s The Invisible Man was a box office smash, making $144 million off a $7 million budget, I found the film to be a bit too heavy-handed with its feminist politics…or to be more precise…it’s male-hating politics, which were quite en vogue at the time, the height of the Trump hysteria (or so we hope).

That said, Whannell, who made his bones writing the Saw movies, displayed some nice cinematic flourishes on ocassion in The Invisible Man, so I was intrigued to see what he could do with The Wolf Man without the burden of having to frantically push a cultural and political ideology.  

I was also interested in seeing Wolf Man because I just dig monster movies. I absolutely love the Universal Classic Monster movies like Frankenstein, Dracula, The Creature from the Black Lagoon, and The Wolf Man, and I’m always fantasizing about those movies being remade in the modern era but somehow being even better. I realize that is a pipe dream, but I dream it nonetheless.

Having recently seen Robert Eggers’ outstanding remake of Nosferatu, which is essentially my monster movie remake dream come to life, I found myself excited to see the new Wolf Man.

Having seen Wolf Man, I feel foolish for having been excited for it. The film isn’t awful, but it isn’t good either. It’s a rather tepid retelling that never really grabs you by the throat and sinks its teeth into you. Its biggest sin is that it is rather blasé and bland.

The film tells the tale of the Lovell family, Blake, Charlotte and their young daughter Ginger (I’d guess she is maybe 9 years old), who live cosmopolitan lives in San Francisco. But Blake grew up with a very strict father deep in the wilds of Oregon, amidst rumors of a beast in the woods that is half-man and half-animal, and he, and frankly the rest of his family, seem pretty unhappy in the city.

While trying to figure out the status of his rocky marriage to Charlotte, Blake gets the official, and apparently long-awaited, death certificate of his father along with keys to his house in remote Oregon. To try and save their marriage, the Lovell’s decide to make a road trip for the Summer up to the Oregon house….and so their tale begins.

As is my wont, I won’t give away any spoilers whatsoever…but instead will speak in generalities.

Here are some issues with the movie.

I recently heard a discussion about werewolves that wondered whether people liked their movie werewolves to be more human than wolf or more wolf than human. I am in the more wolf than human camp, but I understand the opposing argument.

Wolf Man is definitely a more human than wolf movie, and to me that translates into it looking often-times cheap and tawdry. It doesn’t help that the make-up and special effects are, at best, uneven.

There are some very cool effects, for example shots of hands morphing were particularly quite good, but I found the rest of it less than convincing and not the least bit frightening.

Another issue, and this may be a function of the shitty movie theatres we have nowadays, but I thought the film didn’t look very good. The inability for there to be a sharp, distinct contrast between shadow and light was grating, and undermined the effectiveness of the film a tremendous amount.

All of the darkness had a hazy, smoky hue to it, which again, may not be entirely on director Whannell and his cinematographer Stefan Duscio, it could be that the projector in my theatre sucked and the idiotic theatre owners refuse to turn the lights in the theatre down all the way – a never ending frustration for me. Regardless of why the film looked so bad, the bottom line is that it looked bad.

The film also fails to fully use its setting to its advantage. The house the family are trapped in is never turned into a claustrophobic hell, as it should have been. In fact, the house seems to get bigger and bigger somehow as the movie goes along. In addition, the film never fully utilizes the inherent horror of the vast forest, particularly at night. This should be an easy thing to do, as anyone who’s ever been in the woods at night can attest, but Whannell seems disinterested in utilizing setting for horrific effect. The inability to use setting for effect leads to a muting and dispersal of tension, which is never good for a horror film.

On the other hand, there were sequences in the film that I thought were very clever, original and worked incredibly well….namely when Whannell lets us see the world through the perspective of the wolf man. This works incredibly well and not only looks really cool (and is pulled off seamlessly) but adds a significant layer of depth and drama to the film.

The cast, which features Christopher Abbot as Blake, Julia Garner as Charlotte, and Matilda Firth as Ginger, are hamstrung by a script that feels rushed, not fully fleshed out and a tad shallow.

Garner is a remarkable actress as she well established in her Emmy-winning turn on Ozark, but here she feels criminally underused, and dare I say it, slightly miscast.

Matilda Firth does her best in the child role, but it’s a child role so the less we see of her the better.

The weakest link though is Christopher Abbot as Blake. Abbot has the most work to do in the film and frankly, he just isn’t up to it. He lacks the charisma, magnetism, vivid inner life, and the primal/paternal power that is necessary for him to thrive in the role.

Ultimately, Wolf Man is a pretty forgettable film that never fully fleshes out the glorious myth at its core or the horror in its heart yearning to break free.

If you’re a horror and/or monster movie fan, I think you can skip this one in the theatres and wait to watch it when it comes to streaming. Besides that, normal movie goers and cinephiles alike have no need to see this movie as it’s a toothless horror film that lacks any and all bite.

©2025

Looking California and Feeling Minnesota: Episode 129 - Nightbitch

On this episode Barry and I chase our own tails trying to find something nice to say about Amy Adams' new film Nightbitch, currently streaming on Hulu. Topics discussed include the multitude of bad decisions made by the writer/director Marielle Heller, Amy Adams' career decline, and the missed opportunity of a arthouse or body horror "mother" movie. 

And finally, stay 'til the end of the pod for a tribute to the great filmmaker David Lynch.

Looking California and Feeling Minnesota: Episode 129 - Nightbitch

Thanks for listening!

©2025

Nosferatu: A Review - Beautiful, Brilliant and Bloodthirsty

****THIS IS A SPOILER FREE REVIEW!! THIS REVIEW CONTAINS ZERO SPOILERS!!****

My Rating: 4.25 out of 5 stars

My Recommendation: SEE IT. A masterfully-made arthouse horror movie that features exquisite craftsmanship.

I went to a small arthouse theater here in flyover country last night to see Robert Eggers’ new film Nosferatu, which is a remake of the 1922 F.W. Murnau silent film classic of the same name.

My theater going experience was, to say the least, not very conducive to a positive cinematic experience. First off, the theater across the hall from my screening was playing the Bob Dylan bio-pic A Complete Unknown, and so my often-silent screening of Nosferatu many times had an unintentional bass line accompanying it courtesy of Mr. Dylan.

Secondly, despite being the only people in the theater at the start of the screening, my wife and I were soon joined by a cavalcade of dimwits and dipshits in our small screening room once the film began. A couple in their mid-60’s sat in the row in front of us off to the right and decided this theater was their living room and chatted freely and loudly. Another man, by himself, sat in the row in front of us to our left and after downing a bag of popcorn and drinking a canned iced tea, proceeded to sanitize his hands and compulsively rub them together literally every ten minutes for the duration of the film. The medicated stench of the sanitizer did not add to our enjoyment of the film.

And yet…despite all of the morons and miscreants around us and the uninvited bass line, I still found myself under the spell of the arthouse horror of Nosferatu as its the mesmerizing mastery played out before me.

The original Nosferatu is a truly staggering cinematic achievement. Director Murnau is one of the most influential filmmakers of the German Expressionist era. I saw Murnau’s Nosferatu for the first time in the early 1990’s and was blown away by it. It is essential viewing for anyone interesting in making, or understanding, cinema.

Robert Eggers’ remake is not as colossal a cinematic document as Murnau’s, but it is very impressive nonetheless. What is so remarkable about this new version is that Eggers’ Nosferatu is one of the most magnificently crafted films in recent memory.

The film is bursting with a bevy of extraordinary craftsmanship, from its cinematography to its costume and set design, that is exhilarating for a cinephile. Unfortunately, for whatever reason (and there are a myriad of them), craftsmanship of this level is rarely seen in films anymore.

Jarin Blaschke’s cinematography is astonishing as the film is gorgeously photographed. His framing and composition, use of shadow and light, and deft camera movements make for a phenomenal visual feast of a film.

Robert Eggers’ and Blaschke’s clarity of vision, precision and attention to detail are extraordinary. The film is not black and white, like the original, but it is dark…but unlike so many modern movies, the darkness does not lack distinction. In other words, you can actually see despite – or in some cases – because, of the darkness.

Blaschke’s cinematography and muted color palette, combined with the locations, sets and costumes, along with Eggers’ gothic brilliance, set an unsettling mood for the movie which is more-creepy than it is scary.

If you know the original Nosferatu, or are familiar with the Bram Stoker novel Dracula, you’ll know the plot of this film, so there will be no twists or surprises, but thanks to Eggers’ mastery, you’ll still be compelled to watch.

The cast all acquit themselves well, but it is Lily Rose Depp (daughter of Johnny Depp) as Ellen, who stands above the rest with a truly superb performance. Depp is asked to do quite a bit and she is fearless in tackling all of the madness required of her. Depp is unleashed, physically, emotionally, artistically, and she devours the role with a ferocious aplomb.

Depp’s Ellen is the embodiment of repressed female sexuality in the Victorian era. The men in her life restrain her, numb her, drug her, chastise her, shame her and ignore her. But the sexual beast within her, which has called Nosferatu forth, simply cannot be denied.

Nicholas Hoult plays Thomas, Ellen’s husband, and he is fantastic as essentially the cuckold to Nosferatu. Thomas is afraid…of everything, and Hoult brings that fear to life in a captivating, and never mannered, way.

Thomas loves Ellen, of that there is no doubt, but he is rudderless when it comes to navigating the intricacies of the staid business world as well as his wife’s carnal needs.

Aaron Taylor Johnson, Emma Corrin, and Willem Dafoe all give deliciously theatrical performances as Friedrich, Anna, and Dr. von Franz respectively.

Dafoe, if you’ll recall, starred as Max Shreck in Shadow of the Vampire back in 2000 – a fictional (and clever) re-telling of the making of Murnau’s Nosferatu. Now here he is playing a German version of Von Helsing in the remake. It never fails to amuse me that Willem Dafoe has become the go to eccentric character actor of our time…it also never fails to please me.

Bill Skarsgard plays Count Orlack/Nosferatu in all his grotesqueness and is magnificently menacing. Skarsgard’s voice is unnervingly demonic and matches his ungodly and ungainly physicality.

The vampire has long been a symbol of repressed sexual energy…which is why it was such a potent myth in Victorian era. Count Orlock/Nosferatu, is not a sexy and suave lady killer like Dracula, instead he is a demon and beast…a sub-conscious symbol of repressed sexuality.

Ellen’s sexual energy is stifled at an early age under the repressive mores of her time, but it is released when she calls forth the beast Nosferatu…a shadow creature who dwells in psychological darkness where unspoken and unacknowledged desires reside.

As Thomas says to Ellen after she speaks of her calling forth the demon in her youth – “let’s never speak of it again” – which of course leaves it in the psychological shadow which will only further empower the beastly demon.

Eggers’ re-telling of the Nosferatu/Dracula/vampire story goes, unsurprisingly, deep into the lore and the core of vampire mythology. Thanks to this much of the Hollywood stuff we’ve grown accustomed to is gone. For example, there are no wooden stakes or flying bats in Nosferatu…but there are rats…lots and lots and lots of rats.

Eggers is a filmmaker who has a distinct style that some consider an acquired taste. If that is true then I have, for the most part, acquired it. I was blown away by Eggers’ moody first film, The Witch, but was disappointed by his second effort, The Lighthouse, which just wasn’t for me.

I really enjoyed his third film The Northman, but the movie flopped and I was worried what he would or could do next to keep his artistry and his career afloat. Thankfully he’s now given us Nosferatu, which while it isn’t a truly great film, it is so exceptionally made and is doing well-enough at the box office, that Eggers will continue to do his cinematic thing for the foreseeable future, which makes me happy.  

Genuine auteurs are tough to find nowadays, and auteurs with exquisite artistic sensibilities and craftsmanship are even more rare. Eggers is all of the above, and when you consider his unique cinematic style and taste in projects, he really comes to the forefront as one of our treasured filmmakers…even if he isn’t blowing up the box office or winning Academy Awards.

In conclusion, Nosferatu may not interest normal people, or it may be too dark for the cineplex crowd, but it is a masterful piece of moviemaking that should be celebrated and encouraged.

Nosferatu was the best movie I’ve seen this year because it was the best made-movie I’ve seen this year. If you like cinematic excellence, even when it comes in the form of a remake of a one-hundred-year-old silent horror classic, then this movie is for you.

And finally, while I heartily recommend David Eggers’ new arthouse horror version of Nosferatu to those with the taste for it, I also highly recommend the original 1922 Nosferatu by F.W. Murnau, but that I recommend for everyone…as it’s something everybody needs to see at least once in their life (and it is streaming on Amazon Prime!!).

©2024

The Substance: A Review - Everything Old is New Again

****THIS IS A SPOILER FREE REVIEW!! THIS REVIEW CONTAINS ZERO SPOILERS!!****

My Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

My Recommendation: SEE IT. Be forewarned, this is a body horror movie with ample amounts of gooey gore, but it is also a well-executed and well-acted piece of social commentary that works quite well despite some major issues with its third act.

The Substance, written and directed by Coralie Fargeat, is, almost despite itself, one of the more intriguing films of 2024.

The movie is a satirical body horror film that stars Demi Moore as Elisabeth Sparkle, a once celebrated but now aging star who hosts an exercise show ala Jane Fonda in the 1980s.

On Elisabeth’s fiftieth birthday she connects with a mysterious company that sells “The Substance” – which is an injectable formula that creates a second, younger you. As The Substance company is quick to remind customers, this new version isn’t a different person from the original…the original and the newer version are one in the same.

A desperate and depressed Elisabeth ultimately chooses to take The Substance and the rest of the film involves Elisabeth and her younger new self, Sue - magnificently played by Margaret Qualley, trying to navigate their very unusual circumstances.

The Substance, which is available VOD or on the streaming service MUBI (you can get a free trial subscription for a week and then cancel – that’s what I did) is an undeniably clever movie that is well-executed enough to be elevated to an interesting and compelling piece of cinema. It masterfully and often hysterically comments on the long-running, rampant misogyny and ageism in Hollywood. Having worked with many women in the acting business over the years I can attest that it’s a young woman’s game, and hitting thirty, never mind forty or fifty, is often a death knell.

The Substance’s biggest issue as a film is that it is two-thirds of a very good one. Unfortunately, in the final act the story and the film’s internal logic and perspective, take a beating and the movie meanders aimlessly for about thirty minutes until finally settling on a less than satisfying conclusion.

French writer/director Fargeat seems like she didn’t know how, or when, to end her movie. In this way The Substance reminded me of another pretty good horror film in recent years, Barbarian, which was exquisite for its first two acts and then devolved into a bit of a derivative mess.

As poor as the final act of The Substance is, and it really is poor, the first two acts are really wonderful.

Demi Moore gives a brave performance as Elisabeth, doing a bevy of extended nude scenes – which are pivotal to the narrative and to the drama. An actress having the courage to bare her aging body on the big screen in age and perfection obsessed Hollywood is a courageous one indeed.

Casting Moore, whose career is vaguely similar to Elisabeth’s, is a meta-textual masterpiece, most of all because she gives a dynamic, nuanced and very vulnerable performance which elevates the film.

Margaret Qualley is an actress who I have noticed from the beginning of her career. I remember the first time I saw her was in a small film titled The Novitiate. I thought she was extremely good in that mostly forgettable movie as she displayed an undeniable charisma and magnetism…and thought she had a chance to have a big career in front of her. I didn’t even know she was Andie McDowell’s daughter at the time.

Qualley has proven me right with her work since then. She was spectacular in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood and she is equally impressive here.

I was going to congratulate Qualley on her bravery as well for the numerous nude scenes and body shots on display in The Substance, but I was informed by a female “friend” that Qualley used a body double for her nude scenes. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but I will say that whoever is baring their body as Sue in this film, be it Margaret Qualley or a body double, has my respect and gratitude.

Qualley is fantastic as Sue as she fills her with a verve and vitality that few can replicate on screen. Sue’s persistence, petulance and power are a combustible combination, and the film comes alive whenever Qualley as Sue is unleashed.

Another noteworthy performance comes from Dennis Quaid as pervert producer Harvey. Quaid goes all in on repugnancy and is such a repellent figure it is uncomfortably hysterical. That director Fargeat repeatedly shoots him in the most grotesque of close-ups only heightens Harvey’s repugnancy.

Despite the misstep that is the third act, there is no denying the great job writer/director Coralie Fageat did in the first two acts of The Substance.

The film is exquisitely shot and edited, and the costumes and sets are artistic perfection. There are little details throughout the film that are impressive to notice, such as all the cars parked in the street when Elisabeth is walking around town, are either, fancy sports cars or refurbished muscle cars – which is a subtle cinematic touch that is an indication of a quality director at the helm.

Recommending The Substance is a slightly tricky thing to do because as stated it is a body horror movie, so there are ample scenes of grotesque gore that, while well-executed, are pretty horrific. If you’re into that sort of thing I think you’ll definitely love this movie…even the third act.

If you’re not into that sort of thing, then this might be a tougher watch. I would recommend The Substance to the cavalcade of, dare I say it, older actresses I know (ducking to avoid the Manolo Blahnik being thrown at my head), because they will totally get the sentiment that drives this movie even if the body horror stuff is a turn off.

The truth is that in lesser hands, both in terms of the acting and the directing, The Substance could have been a real cringeworthy piece of feminist bitching, moaning and man-hating. But Demi Moore, Margaret Qualley and director Coralie Fargeat make this satiric body horror story into a complex cinematic venture that, despite its massive third act issues, is an insightful, and thoughtful piece of work worth checking out.

The Substance resonates as a piece of art, and despite being a body horror film it really is at heart a European arthouse movie, because it exists in a world over-run by Instagram and Tik Tok influencers making a living off of exploiting their young, nubile bodies, and in which the public sphere and the entertainment industry have been pornified beyond belief.

The Substance doesn’t get everything right, but it gets enough right, particularly the performances of Demi Moore and Margaret Qualley, to be worth watching.

©2024

Looking California and Feeling Minnesota: Episode 126 - The Substance

On this episode, Barry and I dive head first into the fountain of youth to discuss the intriguing satirical body horror movie The Substance, starring Demi Moore and Margaret Qualley. Topics discussed include the clever premise of the film and it's quality execution, third act issues, and the stellar work of Moore and Qualley. 

Looking California and Feeling Minnesota: Episode 126 - The Substance

Thanks for listening!!

©2024

Halloween Viewer's Guide - A Horror Movie Round-Up for the Harrowing Holiday

Horror Movie Round-Up And Halloween Viewer’s Guide

It is Halloween week so I thought I’d put together a quick movie guide to help you set the tone for the spooky times ahead.

I love Halloween, always have, and have spent the last few weeks gearing up for the festivities by catching up on some of the horror films released this year, and the last few years, that I’ve missed.

Here are the films I watched for the first time in recent weeks (all rated on the “1 to 5 horror movie scale” not the “1 to 5 regular movie scale”).

MaXXXine (2024) - Available on Max: This is the third movie in Ti West’s trilogy – which began with X (2022), then Pearl (2022), and now MaXXine. MaXXXine is hands down the worst of the three films. X was terrific and Pearl was pretty good too, but MaXXXine is just an incoherent mess that never finds its footing or a distinct flavor. It’s a mish mash of 1980s nostalgia stuffed into a dour and dull narrative that doesn’t really know what it wants to be.

Yes, Mia Goth is an intriguing screen presence, but even she can’t overcome the flaccid and foolish script for this seriously sub-par film. Very disappointing and definitely not worth watching. 2 stars out of 5

Late Night with the Devil (2024) - Available on Hulu: An extremely clever and well-executed movie that deftly uses the medium of 1970’s late nite tv to plumb the depths of devilry and the demonic depravity of the ruling elite who sell their souls to the dark lord at Bohemian Grove.

David Dastmalchian gives a fantastic performance as a desperate late night talk show host trying to catch Carson in the ratings. A very effective and captivating film…especially if you lived through the 70s. 4 stars out of 5.

The First Omen (2024) - Available on Hulu: Speaking of the 70s!! The First Omen is a surprisingly well-made and executed prequel to the iconic 1976 film The Omen. The First Omen won’t change your life but it will keep you mildly entertained and reasonably spooked for its two-hour run time. 3 out of 5 stars.

Immaculate (2024) - Available on Hulu: This is a not great movie but serves as a decent enough vehicle for Sydney Sweeney to keep building the foundation to her movie stardom. A rather forgettable film with a tenuous premise but the luminous Sweeney, who still manages to be insanely sexy even in a nun’s habit, makes the most of it…especially in the final scene. 2.5 out of 5 stars

Doctor Sleep – Director’s Cut (2019) - Available on Amazon Prime: A shockingly well-made and completely compelling sequel to The Shining which, like Late Night with the Devil, casts a severely jaundiced eye toward the ruling elite and their demonic ways, which include feeding off of the pain and suffering of regular people, most notably children. It’s impossible to watch this movie and not think about the infamous pedophile rings involving people of power, including the Jeffrey Epstein ring, the P Diddy accusations and the horrific Franklin Affair…not to mention the wholesale sickening and senseless slaughter of children in Gaza by the Israelis.

Doctor Sleep features two great performances, the first by Ewan McGregor, who gives a subtle, layered and impressive performance as the adult Danny trying to navigate life after the horrors he endured in The Shining. The other by the absolutely luminous Rebecca Ferguson. Ferguson is so good, so charismatic, so gorgeous and so sexy in Doctor Sleep it is astonishing.

I completely skipped Doctor Sleep when it came out in 2019 because I thought “a sequel to The Shining? No thanks!”. To me The Shining is one of the greatest horror movies of all time…and to be clear Doctor Sleep is nowhere close to being an equal of The Shining in terms of the filmmaking or storytelling. But…it really is a fantastic horror movie.  In some ways I’m glad I missed it in the theatre though because my first watch of it was of the three-hour Director’s Cut which is available on Amazon Prime. I highly recommend you watch the director’s cut and not the theatrical release.

Know this going in though, Doctor Sleep – The Director’s Cut, has one of the most disturbing scenes I’ve seen in a film in a long time. It deeply disturbed and unnerved me – which may say more about me and my life’s circumstances, but still…this scene was tough to watch, but necessary to see. 4.5 out of 5 stars.

Smile (2022) - Available on Hulu: Smile came out in 2022 and has a sequel out this month…but I never saw the original so I watched it last week. Smile is a decent enough piece of trauma porn horror movie making. It’s got some clever story lines and keeps you engaged through out. I thought Sosie Bacon did a solid job as the lead, and she had some very heavy lifting to do. In some ways Smile is a typical middle of the road horror movie, but to its credit, it works. 2.5 out of 5 stars.

As for the rest of a Halloween Movie Guide…

My usual go-to horror films are previously mentioned The Shining (1980), The Exorcist (1973) and Rosemary’s Baby (1968). They are, to me, the best horror films around and they never fail to scare the living shit out of me.

I also love the Universal Classic Monster movies like Frankenstein (1931), Dracula (1931), The Wolf Man (1941) and The Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954). Another old movie classic is F.W. Murnau’s masterful Nosferatu (1922), which is creepy as hell and well worth watching.  

Other less ancient notables would be most anything by David Cronenberg, his remake of The Fly (1986) is particularly fantastic and his films The Brood (1979), Scanners (1980), Videodrome (1983) and The Dead Zone (1983) are solid choices as well.  

You also can’t go wrong John Carpenter’s Halloween (1978) and The Thing (1982), which are all time horror classics that never fail to frighten no matter how many times you’ve seen them.

More current horror films that are most worthy of a watch are Robert Eggers’ extremely eerie The Witch (2015), and Ari Aster’s formidably frightening and fearsome Hereditary (2018) and Midsommar (2019).

And finally, one movie which is not technically categorized as a horror film but which is as creepy, frightening, disturbing and unnerving as any movie out there, is David Fincher’s Zodiac (2007). Zodiac is a great film that pulsates with a darkness of such depth that haunts you for days and weeks after after watching.

And thus ends the Halloween viewer’s guide!! I hope everybody has a Happy Halloween and gets a bevy of tricks AND treats!!

©2024

Godzilla Minus One: A Review - The Glories and Horror of the God Encounter

****THIS IS A SPOILER FREE REVIEW!! THIS REVIEW CONTAINS ZERO SPOILERS!!****

My rating: 4.25 out of 5 stars

My Recommendation: SEE IT. As good as it gets in terms of Godzilla moviemaking. Not just a great Godzilla movie, but a really fantastic film all its own.

Language: Japanese with English Subtitles.

Godzilla Minus One, written and directed by Takashi Yamazaki, is the 37th film in the Godzilla franchise, and the 33rd film produced by Japan’s Toho Studio, the place where Godzilla got his start back in 1954.

That original Godzilla movie, aptly titled Godzilla, wasn’t just the birth of the great kaiju film in modern cinema, it was also a truly fantastic piece of cinema. Every Godzilla movie since has paled in comparison, even the good ones, and there have been plenty of good ones…at least from Toho.

Godzilla Minus One is a reboot of the franchise and a remake of sorts of the first Godzilla movie. It tells the origin story of Godzilla and his first foray into his favorite sport…destroying Japanese cities.

The film is set at the tail end of World War II and in the early post-war years and it follows its protagonist, Koichi Shikishima (Ryunosuke Kamiki), as he tries to integrate back into civilian life after a deeply traumatic war experience.

Shikishima is a failed kamikaze pilot who ditched his suicide mission on the pretense that his plane malfunctioned. He ends up on a small Pacific Island used for airplane maintenance by the Japanese. It is here that Shikishima is confronted by not only his cowardice, but by a youthful and spry, mysterious sea monster the locals call Godzilla.

After the war, Shikishima is haunted by his shameful wartime cowardice, which he wears like a scarlet letter. He tries to build a life in the ruins of Japan and his mental state, and becomes a step-father and de facto husband to a young woman, Noriko (Minami Hamabe) and the infant child she rescued during the war. He also gets a job aboard a ship that must destroy mines in the Pacific left over from the war.

While working this job, you’ll never guess who he runs into…his old foe Godzilla. But this time Godzilla is bigger and badder than ever thanks to the testing nuclear weapons in the Pacific by the U.S., which triggered Godzilla to grow bigger and stronger and angrier.

What makes Godzilla such a compelling movie monster is that he is, as Jungian psychology would describe him, the “God encounter”. Godzilla is, to quote the Bhagavad Gita and Robert Oppenheimer, father of the atomic bomb, quoting the Bhagavad Gita, “death, destroyer of worlds.” Godzilla is the void. He is both the immovable object and the irresistible force. One cannot help but feel insignificant and helpless in the face of such astonishing, horrifying destructive power.

In terms of the mythology of Godzilla, the foundation of it is that Godzilla is born both as a symbol of the dangers of the atomic age as well as the manifestation of Japan’s guilt and divine punishment for their aggression. In other words, he is God’s revenge on mankind for deploying nuclear weapons on earth, and hubris for Japan’s imperial ambition and heinous war time behavior.

The original Godzilla film resonated because it understood this mythology. As the Godzilla franchise has moved along over the decades, that mythology has been watered down if not entirely neutered, turning Godzilla into some sort of cuddly friend, or fierce environmental warrior.

Godzilla Minus One makes no such error. Here, Godzilla is not cute and cuddly, or friendly in the least. He is a dead-eyed and destructive killing machine that cannot be reasoned with, only endured.

The politics of Godzilla Minus One show a Japanese people exhausted by war and the malignant government that got it into one, and the incompetent government that survives after war. In this vulnerable state, the people of Japan are forced to do for themselves in the battle against Godzilla.

I won’t go into too much detail in order to avoid spoilers, but I will say that Godzilla Minus One is easily the second-best Godzilla movie ever made, behind the original – which is only the best in this instance because it is the original.

The sequences where we see Godzilla in action are spectacular, and considering the film had a budget of a measly $15 million, which is just 10% of what the most recent American Godzilla movie cost to make, is remarkable.

But this is exactly how you make a monster movie. You give people what they want…namely Godzilla wreaking havoc, and doing it in a realistic setting, with real-world consequences, inhabited by complex yet compelling characters. In other words, take the Godzilla subject matter seriously, something the recent spate…hell…ALL OF, the American Godzilla movies have failed to do.

Ironically enough, while reading the news this morning I read that the Christopher Nolan film Oppenheimer will finally be released in Japan after months of controversy. Oppenheimer, the father of the atomic bomb, is not exactly a hero in Japan, where his handiwork slaughtered roughly 225,000 Japanese in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Oppenheimer famously does not show the bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nor does it show their gruesome aftermath. When Godzilla comes to shore in Godzilla Minus One and makes his way through a Japanese city, what happens, and its aftermath, are undeniably evocative of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the hell on Earth that Oppenheimer’s genius unleashed.

Accordingly, I think, as odd as this sounds, that Oppenheimer and Godzilla Minus One would make for a splendid double feature, as the former sets the stage for the death and destruction in the latter.

Take away the psychological musings, and as a pure piece of entertainment, Godzilla Minus One still works incredibly well. I went to the film with my wife and young son, who is too young to read the subtitles quickly enough – but he saw the trailer and wanted to see the film. My son had a few questions about the plot throughout, but not that many, and he could understand what was happening for the most part without reading the subtitles. He absolutely loved the film…for the same reason I grew up loving Godzilla…because Godzilla is awesome in the truest sense of that word.

Watching Godzilla unleash his destructive powers and fury onto the world is both horrifying and highly entertaining, and the fact that it is treated seriously and that characters you care about are in great peril when Godzilla rampages, makes that rampage all the more compelling.

In terms of the filmmaking, Yamazaki does a stupendous job directing this film. Godzilla Minus One pays homage to the original Godzilla in numerous ways, and does the same with a diverse array of films, from Jaws to Dunkirk.

The cast are terrific, without a bad note among them. And the special effects are better than anything I’ve seen in recent years from any of the American studios.

If, like me, you’re a huge fan of Godzilla movies, Godzilla Minus One is a dream come true, as it’s not only a great Godzilla movie, it’s a fantastic film in its own right.

If, like my wife, you couldn’t care less about Godzilla, you should still see this movie, as she didn’t just endure Godzilla Minus One, she actually enjoyed it.

At a time when blockbuster filmmaking from American Studios is at an all-time, ghetto-dwelling, nadir, Toho’s Godzilla Minus One is a glorious, shining city on a hill. Of course, that city is shining because Godzilla just stomped all over it and set it on fire with his atomic breath.

Godzilla’s back, baby!!!

 Follow me on Twitter: @MPMActingCo

©2023

Looking California and Feeling Minnesota: Episode 100 Part Two - Popular Streaming Platform Recommendations

On the conclusion of our 100th episode celebration, Barry and I finish up our streaming service  film/tv recommendations. Topics discussed include the wonders of the Criterion Channel, the god-awful shit that is Peacock, and how HBO Max was better before it became Max. Oh...and a flock of geese gets slaughtered on air for no apparent reason. 

Looking California and Feeling Minnesota: Episode 100 Part Two

Thanks for listening!

©2023