“Are we the good guys?” – Lieutenant Dane Dumars (Matt Damon)
Matt Damon and Ben Affleck have been friends since they were in elementary school, and now they’re bringing that friendship to Netflix. The duo are reteaming for the new crime thriller The Rip, from writer-director Joe Carnahan (Narc, Smokin’ Aces, Copshop, Boss Level). Also coming along for the ride are Steven Yeun, Kyle Chandler, Teyana Taylor, Catalina Sandino Moreno, and Sasha Calle; the film is produced by Artists Equity, the studio-led studio that Damon and Affleck founded in 2022.
If you think you’re going to walk in and figure this one out while watching, I must say, you probably aren’t. The story has more twists and turns than a Monaco race track, and you catch on pretty quick that nothing is as it seems. The pacing is smooth, the dialogue is tight and economical, the action does NOT disappoint either. It may be a Netflix movie, but it really could have killed at the box office. I like Carnahan’s movies, and this is amongst his best. The chemistry with Affleck and Damon has not diminished with time, and the supporting cast all pull their weight with them. It’s definitely the edge-of-your seat action one wants from a crime drama, and the settings all feel like they could stand up to much bigger budget movies.
Beware: spoilers ahead, so if you don’t want to know too much, save the below for later.
THE RIP follows Damon – Lieutenant Dane Dumars – and Affleck – Detective Sergeant J.D. Byrne – as Miami cop partners who find themselves in a sticky situation after their team finds $24 million stashed away in a safehouse. Required by law to count the money before leaving the scene, the cops and their team must survive the night — and each other. Plus the team is already on edge — and under FBI investigation — after the murder of their captain, Jackie Velez (Lina Esco).
And they find the police informant in the house, Dumars and Byrne’s first instinct is soon proven correct: The money is from the cartel.
Desi (Sasha Calle), the home’s owner, is an unwitting pawn in the organization’s game. The cartel paid Desi to place buckets of cash in the attic of her new home, inherited from her recently deceased grandmother. With plenty of funeral and medical expenses to pay, it was an offer the young woman couldn’t refuse. Partner turns on partner, bullets start flying, and the cartel is on the prowl. When threatening phone calls start coming through and the house is hit with a barrage of bullets, the team naturally blames the cartel. But a nighttime chase quickly resolves that question. Byrne finds common cause with the cartel lookout who was communicating through the porch light. He even helps him run off the real culprits and coordinates a phone conversation with his cartel chief (Sal Lopez), who convinces Byrne and Dumars that the cartel didn’t fire a shot.
“The Rip came out of a deeply personal experience that my friend went through, both as a father and as head of tactical narcotics for the Miami Dade police department,” Carnahan explains. “It’s inspired in part by his life and then, by my enduring love for those classic ‘70’s cop thrillers that really valued the character and interpersonal relationships and became touchstones of that era — films like Serpico and Prince of The City and more recently, Michael Mann’s Heat.”
The viewer will discover that there are details in the movie drawn directly from officer Chris Casiano’s true story that inspired the film. The final piece of tension emerges from a procedural detail: will the rip’s final total match the count performed by the Tactical Narcotics Team? It does, to the dime: $20,650,480.
Dumars says goodbye to Desi, and reveals the truth behind his tattoos. They’re not a somber reminder of his duty, necessarily. They’re a memorial to his son. “Are we the good guys?” was the last thing his son said to him; “We are and always will be” was the last thing he said to his son.
Shot masterfully by cinematographer Juanmi Azpiroz, the film is filled with gunfights, car chases, and rooftop shootouts. This is The Rip. You won’t want to miss it.
Dacre Montgomery as Richard and Bill Skarsgard as Tony, in Gus Van Sant’s DEAD MAN’S WIRE. Courtesy of Row K Entertainment
It has been seven years since we saw a film from Gus Van Sant but the director comes back strong with DEAD MAN’S WIRE, an impressive crime thriller/drama based on a bizarre real hostage incident in late 1970s Indianapolis. In 1977, an aspiring businessman, Tony Kiritsis (Bill Skarsgard), who felt cheated by his mortgage lender, took the company’s manager hostage, by attaching a shotgun to his neck with a looped wire, while the gun’s trigger was wired to the kidnapper’s body, so that if a sniper killed the kidnapper, the hostage would die too. The method has since called a dead man’s wire. Gus Van Sant uses this real event to craft a tense, thriller film, laced with a dark humor that built on the absurdity of the situation, but also human drama that touches on issues of despair and desperation, economic unfairness, and shady business dealings. DEAD MAN’S WIRE is a technically impressive film as well as working as both a gripping entertainment thriller and commentary on slanted economic system.
Much of this crazy real event was captured on film by news camera, which was shot continuously during the 63 hour standoff with the kidnapper. The engrossing historic thriller is given an authenticity by director Gus Van Sant who captures the feel of 1977, by carefully reproducing the 1970s styles and visual aesthetics of the time period, and most strikingly by recreating the look of TV news and shows of the era, in this film. The visuals so closely match the actual archival footage of the real event, snippets of which Van Sant inserts into his film. The event took place during a transitional moment in how news is covered, and the event is still taught in schools of journalism as an example of news reporting crossing a line to escalate a situation. It adds an eerie level to this already atmospheric, darkly comic thriller/drama.
The film does not condone the kidnapper’s actions but Bill Skarsgard’s masterful performance gives us insights on someone driven to the edge, after being taken advantage of by his unscrupulous, wealthy lender. Austin Kolodney’s script speaks to “Everyman” issues of economic inequality and an unfair system skewed to favor the already rich, a topic that particularly resonates today. There are echoes of DOG DAY AFTERNOON in this film, as well as other “little guy” against the system tales, of someone driven over the edge by circumstances. While DEAD MAN’S WIRE is based on a true story, the drama/thriller goes in unexpected directions, and leans into its dark, absurdist humor at times.
Bill Skarsgard gives a striking performance as the odd, even unbalanced Tony Kiritsis, a would-be real estate entrepreneur who relishes the spotlight, which is part of why this film is so involving.
Tony Kiritsis (Bill Skarsgard) has reached a desperate state with a mortgage he took out from local lender Meridian Mortgage. The mortgage was not for a home, but a business investment in real estate, property Tony Kiritsis hopes to develop as the location for a shopping mall. Tony had lined up plenty of would-be business tenants but he is puzzled as they fade away and he has trouble securing businesses to lease space. Without those funds, he falls behind on payments, and Tony has grown increasingly frustrated in trying to deal with his lender. When Meridian Mortage’s owner M. L. Hall (Al Pacino) offers to buy the property – for far less than Tony paid – Tony begins to suspect it is his own lender who is re-directing would-be leasers to other sites, sabotaging Tony’s business plan.
Tony’s anger and desperation leads to his plan with the dead man’s wire. The original target was Meridian’s M. L. Hall but instead, Tony ends up taking Hall’s son Richard, who also works for Meridian, hostage. Since this is based on a real event, that is not much of a spoiler, as the real big question is what happens next.
The police are alerted and are almost immediately on the scene, but there is little they can do, with Tony’s “dead man’s wire” shotgun apparatus pointed at Richard Hall’s head and the trigger wired to be pulled if Tony falls. Shooting Tony means killing his hostage too. Hence, Tony is able to take Richard to his apartment unimpeded, where he holds him for several days.
Meanwhile, ambitious young Black TV journalist Linda Page (Myha’la), who happens upon the scene, recruits her cameraman and starts filming the events, despite her boss’ efforts to hand off the assignment to a more experienced (and white, male) reporter. Events unfold that also involve at popular radio DJ, Fred Temple (Colman Domingo) known for his philosophical, Everyman musings on the radio. Tony Kiritsis is a fan, and the police try to use the DJ as a way to reach the kidnapper. Cary Elwes plays plainclothes detective Mike Grable, who was first on the scene, and who tries to be a calming figure to establish rapport with the kidnapper.
This bizarre crime and ensuing police standoff takes on a media circus-like air out in the Midwestern city streets, but the film also spends a lot of time inside Tony’s apartment, with just Tony and Richard, who goes by Dick. Holed up in Tony’s apartment, we get to know both oddball Tony and buttoned-down Richard. Dick is very much under the thumb of his wealthy father. M.L. knew Tony was on the edge, yet M. L. deliberately leaves his son to deal with the loaded situation, while M. L. heads out of town, becoming unavailable for any face-to-face. In truth, Richard is as much exploited by his father M. L. as his client Tony is.
As the hostage situation goes on, a kind of cat-and-mouse relationship evolves between the two men, with the more outgoing Tony even becoming rather friendly towards Richard, in a bit of reverse Stockholm Syndrome. But whether that does Richard any good is another matter. Eventually, Tony issues his demands, which include an apology from M. L. Hall personally.
Skarsgard’s outstanding performance is supported well by the rest of the cast, including particularly Dacre Montgomery, who plays the kidnapped banker Richard Hall. All the cast are good, with Colman Domingo another strong character as the DJ drawn into the situation. The wealthy M.L. Hall is played as distracted and distant by Al Pacino, in a strong performance, and there also is a little parallel to the real-life kidnapping of millionaire J. P. Getty’s grandson here, as negotiations begin.
That shotgun wired to hostage Richard’s neck ensures tensions are constantly high, but the quirkiness of the people involved, the unpredictability of both their nature, and the situation, make this a film where you never know what will happen next. None of this goes like the typical movie hostage situation. No character feels that strangeness more keenly that Coleman Domingo’s radio DJ, recruited as a sort of hostage negotiator, a role he’d rather not play. The ambitions of the young reporter, the determination of the cops, led by Cary Elwes’ Mike Grable, to find a way out, and the pressure on everyone of being on camera and in the public eye constantly adds fuel to the incendiary situation. And remember these are real people and real events, something that Van Sant reminds the audience about by inserting actual footage of the real events.
While some may see the film as anti-capitalist, that is not quite an accurate description, as the “common man” at its center is also a businessman, even if he is not too successful. Instead, DEAD MAN’S WIRE, in part, is more commentary on the warping of the American Dream and the old American free enterprise system, an aspirational ideal in a post-WWII world marked by the Marshall Plan, but which came to a crashing end in the “greed is good” 1980s. The old free enterprise system promised a level playing field for even small businesses to compete fairly, and succeed through hard work and good ideas, rather than through a “thumb on the scale” and unscrupulous, deceitful practices. Kiritsis’ his lack of success is not due, per se, to lack of skill in business, but by the tilted playing field upon which he treads, ironically being skewed by his own lender, who in a more ethical world be his ally. Instead, his banker is concealing that his thumb is on the scale, and has plans to turn his client’s misery to his advantage. The film’s themes are less anti-capitalist than anti-unscrupulous, a condemnation of predatory business practices, contrasting human dealings versus dehumanized practices, the latter style one which Al Pacino’s morality-free character represents well.
Gus Van Sant’s DEAD MAN’S WIRE is highly entertaining as a crime thriller, as well as a technically impressive film, and enhanced by first rate performances particularly by Bill Skarsgard in what may be a career best, as well as working as historical drama and commentary on a slanted economic system.
DEAD MAN’S WIRE opens in theaters on Friday, Jan. 9, 2026.
Whew, now that is a really quick turnaround for a sequel (they way it sprinted to theatres in just a little over six months, you’d think that it had contracted the “rage”). Usually there’s at least a year between franchise entries, even if they were shot at the same time as the WICKED flicks or even more, like the last two “impossible missions” (who knows if or when we’ll have to endure the conclusion to FAST X). Then, this isn’t your usual “tent pole”, since the original sprinted out in 2002, its first sequel in 2007, then the follow-up last June. That installment was both a box office and critical hit, so a different director and much of the same cast are hoping that audiences will be eager to get out of the January chills and warm themselves by the fiery furnaces of 28 YEARS LATER: THE BONE TEMPLE.
When we last saw the preteen loner Spike (Alfie Williams), he was saved from a rage-infected pack by a group of track-suit wearing, platinum-haired young men and women. But as we see in the opening sequence, Spike might have gone from the “frying pan into the fire”, as he must face off against an older young man as his “initiation” into the group called “the Jimmies”. Watching over the duel is their leader, Sir Jimmy Crystal (Jack O’Connell), in his thirties, making him a veteran of the “plague” world. He “fancies” himself to be the son of “ole’ Nick” AKA Satan. Somehow, Spike triumphs, is dubbed the newest “Jimmy”, and is forced to join them in deadly attacks on human survivors on the mainland, encounters that end with Sir Jimmy orchestrating acts of barbaric cruelty. Meanwhile, Dr. Ian Kelson (Ralph Fiennes) is still tending to the title “Bone Temple”, or “memento mori” dedicated to the dead, the bone towers flanking a massive spire of human skulls. Kelson’s daily routine is broken up by visits (more like roaring attacks) from the hulking “alpha” of the infected, whom he dubs “Samson” (Chi Lewis-Parry). Those encounters turn into a game as Kelson waits until the giant is nearly upon him before using a long tube to blow a dart full of his special sedative, that renders Samson docile. The doctor soon comes to the conclusion that Samson actually welcomes the “rest” and often joins him for a brief “nap”. Kelson then begins to experiment on Samson and somehow is able to counteract the “rage”. However, his research may soon be disrupted when he and his sanctuary are discovered by the Jimmies. What happens when the worlds of these survivors clash? Who will claim the land, Sir Jimmy, Dr. Kelson, or perhaps Samson?
Probably the greatest performance from the last entry was from the gifted Fiennes as the somewhat still sane medical man, somehow learning to adapt to the hellscape of the plague -ridden countryside. Here he actually builds on that work (last time we didn’t meet him until well past the halfway mark), adding some new “layers” to this lonely soul. He shows us that Kelson is yearning for a real human connection, even if it’s with a “zonked out” behemoth. Plus, we get to see a bit of his eccentric side, as his main joy comes from his love of his 80s pop records. Fiennes captures our attention in every one of his scenes (he’s got a long overdue date with Oscar). His character’s “inverse” may be the charismatic O’Connell as the cunning, cruel, and still a bit charming Sir Jimmy. He may be the “wildest card” in the twisted pack of Jimmies, who has a teen idol’s swagger while putting a Manson-like spell on his faithful followers. After his splendid work last year as the “boss vamp” in SINNERS, O’Connell is quite the engaging movie monster. Williams commands our interests and elicits our sympathies as Spike, still a boy, as he tries to survive this world and his still painful family loss. Luckily, he’s got a caring surrogate “big sis” in the enigmatic Erin Kellyman as “Jimmy Ink”, the gang’s “enforcer” who has freed herself from the “cult” of Sir Jimmy. Kudos also to the compelling physical presence of Lewis-Parry who gives some unexpected vulnerability, showing us that like the Frankenstein monster, he could have his cloudy savagery cleansed by a bit of kindness.
Earlier I mentioned that this installment boasts a different director. Taking the reins from Danny Boyle is the versatile, visually elegant Nia DaCosta (after last year’s “chamber drama” HEDDA). She clues us in, with the searing brutality of “Spike’s test” that this second act of a planned final trilogy, won’t dance around its violent, visceral origins. In other words, the blood does flow, like a red storm over the gorgeous green English countryside. The screenwriter of last June’s entry, Alex Garland, does return with a tale that echoes several horror survival themes, showing us how the uninfected humans can be more deadly than the screaming charging hordes. We’re even given an “origin story” set at the beginning s of the “rage”, reminding us that these mindless monsters were exactly like us. What really surprised me this time was the unexpected bursts of very dark, nearly pitch black, humor, especially in the final showdown. Ah, but it’s not really “final” as an epilogue promises another glorious glimpse into this altered Earth. Let’s hope our next visit, probably not a quick seven months wait, will be as well produced and as full of conflict and compassion as 28 YEARS LATER: THE BONE TEMPLE.
3.5 Out of 4
28 YEARS LATER: THE BONE TEMPLE opens in theaters everywhere on Thursday, January 15, 2026
Will Arnett stars as Alex, a middle-aged man grappling with the news that his wife is leaving him, who happens into a bar on open-mic night for stand-up comedy. Mistaking him for one of the would-be comedians, Alex suddenly finds himself in front of a mic, and suddenly, the guy who works in finance and has no performance experience, finds a new door opening for him.
Bradley Cooper directs IS THIS THING ON?, a dramedy in which he plays a supporting part as well. The plot is built around a divorce story but it is the comedy club and the amateur comedians who are the real heart of the film.
Will Arnett’s Alex is married to Tess (Laura Dern), a former elite athlete, and they have three kids together. Alex is blindsided when Tess announces she is leaving, to launch a career as a coach, and he seems at a loss what to do with himself. He seems to accept the coming divorce rather than fight it but has no idea how to move forward. Stand-up comedy isn’t even on his radar.
Yet when doing a favor for someone takes him to this bar, he seems to just as passively accept when they call his name and say “you’re next” at the mic. Clearly not a shy person or someone afraid to talk in front of strangers, he tries to be funny but mostly just talks about his crumbling marriage, in a dry, slightly ironic way. It isn’t exactly funny and the audience gives polite applause at most, but suddenly, he’s hooked.
Several films have tried to delve into stand-up comedy, but IS THIS THING ON? takes a kind of backdoor approach by focusing on someone going through a divorce who falls into stand-up. Alex has no prior ambitions to do comedy, and just kind of stumbles in, finds himself front of a mic and a crowd, and decides he likes it there. Not a bad start.
The divorce plot forms the framework for the film, and that story follows a familiar path. It hits all the expected marks:: dad Alex having to figure out cooking and manage household chores, both of them figuring out how to co-parent and co-ordinate schedules, and so forth. While the split takes Alex by surprise, and it is not something he wants, but they are both pretty civil about it, thankfully.
With a familiar framing story, that puts the burden on the comedy, and the denizens of the comedy club world to carry the film. The problem with IS THIS THING ON? is that the comedy routines are not very funny. Bradley Cooper throws a spotlight more on the community these would-be comics form, which is fine. Cooper seems to want to populate that community with colorful characters – including one he plays himself – but instead fills it more with two-dimensional characters, who come across as as odd and cartoonish rather than convincing – or funny.
Director Bradley Cooper showcases some comedy bits, mostly with Will Arnett at the mic. Cooper plays one of Arnett’s character Alex’s friends, an weird actor named Balls (no joke). Why a guy “in finance” has an off-beat actor friend is not clear. Beside Laura Dern as Alex’s soon-to-be ex, Tess. we get Ciaran Hinds as Alex’s soft-spoken dad and Christine Ebersole as his plain-speaking mom. The cast also includes Andra Day as Christine, Tess’ best friend.
The cast do well, especially Arnett, but not everything, or everyone, makes much sense. That would be fine if it were funny, but unfortunately, the humor is tepid at best, including the stand-up. The characters are likable enough but the whole story is just not that engaging.
Still, all that would have worked if more of those comedy routines had been funnier. Instead, we spend more time emphasizing the quirkiness of members of this accidental community, and with Alex’s and Tess’s unlikely best friends, relationships that just doesn’t feel real. In particular, Bradley Cooper’s character Balls is bizarre more than funny, and at times, just irritating.
The best moments are the ones that highlight the camaraderie among the comics, all these souls are trying to find the way to get a laugh, working on their routines or hunting for the right angle. Although most of them are unlikely to make a living at it, they do form a social circle of mutual support, with a bit of competition too.
It just not enough to lift this dramedy above mildly entertaining. IS THIS THING ON? is not a bad film as much as just a marginally interesting one, although with a really good cast. It could have been more. Without some really good comedy to give it energy and the audiences some laughs, IS THIS THING ON? just limps along, gradually lulling us in a stupor. There are moments of mild interest, brief drama and there is a little commentary on how this divorce is best for both Alex and Tess.
Will Arnett and Laura Dern turn in nice performances, and there are a few bright moments from the supporting cast that includes Ciaran Hinds, Christine Ebersole and Andra Day. Bradley Cooper plays the oddball character, Balls, who is more just odd than amusing.
IS THIS THING ON? opens in theaters on Friday, Jan. 9, 2026.
Everett Blunck as Ben, in THE PLAGUE. Courtesy of IFC
THE PLAGUE is one of those horror films that taps into familiar childhood, in this case, early adolescence and the bullying that frequently comes with that, and uses this familiarity to create the horror. THE PLAGUE opens with on-screen text giving a very specific time, Summer 2003, the second session of Tom Lerner Water Polo Camp. The camp is supposed to instill a sense of camaraderie in the 12 to 13-year-old boys, but instead something sinister is going on. What develops is a kind of “Lord of the Flies” in the suburbs. The very specific date and setting suggests that personal experience, from first-time director/writer Charlie Polinger, lies behind this chilling mix of psychological and a bit of body horror.
Most of the boys at the camp already know each other from the first session but Ben (Everett Blunck) is new. He sits down at their lunch table and, after a little teasing about a faint Boston accent, seems to be accepted. When another boy sits down at the table, he gets a very different reaction: everyone gets up and moves to another table. After a few minutes, Ben joins them. The boys’ leader, Jake (Kayo Martin), later tells newbie Ben that the boy, Eli (Kenny Rasmussen), has “the plague” and is to be avoided, because it is contagious. Eli does have a skin rash, which might be contagious, but he is also an odd duck, maybe on the spectrum. Anyway, he is the target of the boys’ group, their outcast, who they describe as having leprosy, whose body parts might fall off, and who is degenerating mentally and physically. Touching Eli, even being too close to him, can give you “the plague.”
That bullying of the outcast is something everyone will remember from growing up. Another thing that is familiar is how this tale mirrors “The Lord of the Flies.” Even though adults are present in this tale, they might as well not be, for all they notice they take of what is going on, and of their ineffectiveness. Actually, the only adult we really see is Joel Edgerton’s stone-faced coach, who is billed as “Daddy Wags,” who varies between oblivious and ineffective. The campers are all boys, ages 12 to 13, who are attending this sleep-way camp, meaning parents are out of the picture. Edgerton’s coach is either unaware of the bullying or unwilling to step in. When he does, at a few moments, he is remarkably unhelpful, with the kid being bullied paying the price.
Later, Jake admits they made those gruesome details and “the plague” isn’t real, although Eli really does have a rash that might be contagious. And Eli does himself no favors, with a strange sense of humor, a “Lord of the Rings” obsession plus a good Gollum impersonation, and a willingness to just be weird. Ben is a kindhearted kid, and someone going through his own problems, with his parents’ divorce, and eventually, also becomes a target for Jake’s bullying.
The acting is overall impressive in this film, with standouts being Everett Blunck as Ben, who is desperate to fit in and worried he won’t, Kayo Martin as bully Jake, alternating between charming and a sharp, intelligent cunning when he spots weakness, and Kenny Rasmussen as Eli, strange but smart, and with an unsettling self-destructive side. All the young actors explore the depths of their characters, with hints of why, while Edgerton’s adult is ineffective and uninspiring, in a chilling way.
However, that rash is one of several odd things about this summer camp. If the rash is contagious, why is he at a water polo camp? It seems most camps would exclude anyone who is contagious. Also, the camp seems to be at a high school, or at least the pool is, but the kids are sleeping in bunks rather than going home. We only see the one coach/camp counselor, Joel Edgerton’s character, although we see other adults in the background and at a distance, running their own water programs at the pool. Late in the film, there is a kind of school dance mixer, with girls from a synchronize swimming camp at the same pool, who we see late in the film.
Director Charlie Polinger builds a great deal of the tension and dread in this chilling film by tapping into memories we all likely have of the time period in our own lives. He also uses a technique to create tension that I personally dislike, which is soft whispered dialog in close up, half-lit scenes, followed by very loud, jarring music or screeching sounds. The shift makes one jump but it seems like a gimmicky, unpleasant way to build tension.
Polinger does better on the visual side. Many of the pool scenes are shot from below the surface, a nice visual metaphor but also a way to create an intriguing visual landscape. In some scenes, the director even flips the camera over, so we are disoriented as to what is up and what is down. He also does a nice job of creating mood with dark and shadowy scenes for the boys discussion, or confined ones in the communal showers with boys in team swim suits, and alternating those with brightly-lit scenes of the angular pool and school hallways.
At 98 minutes, THE PLAGUE is mercifully short but it packs a great deal of horror in that time. I say mercifully, because it is not a pleasant time to revisit. It is an impressive debut feature from the scary side, although the ending makes less sense than it should and the puzzling, unanswered practical questions raised above are distracting. It is a clear way to find the horror in the ordinary, and people’s universal experiences.
THE PLAGUE opens nationally in theaters on Friday, Jan. 2, 2026.
For one of the first big new film releases of 2026, we turn to a “tried and true” horror “sub-genre”, the “zombie flick” (or “walking dead” if you’re more “refined” in your terror tastes). Sure, these grungy ghouls began their cinematic lumbering more than 90 years ago (WHITE ZOMBIE and I WALKED WITH A ZOMBIE are examples respectively from the 30s and 40s), but the current iteration probably begins with George Romero’s landmark NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD in 1968. But in more recent years we’ve gotten some “mixed movies” such as the comedies (ZOMBIELAND (2 of them), THE DEAD DON’T DIE, and SHAUN OF THE DEAD), and even a romance (WARM HEART). Much in that (jugular) vein, this new one from “down under” could be considered a “relationship drama” as it focuses on a woman (and her partner) who could declare on a resume that WE BURY THE DEAD.
The first person we meet in the film is Ava (Daisy Ridley), a young wife from the states who’s on a bus in Tasmania with dozens of very anxious people. These passengers are “twitchy” because they’re citizen volunteers in the “body retrieval units” after the US (we’re the “baddies” again) accidentally launched an experimental device that sends out a pulse that terminates neural functions, killing over a half a million on the island. Ava’s group is escorted by the military forces in the “zones” after they’re told that some struck by the “event” may be springing back to life. If they encounter a person whose brain is somehow “back online”, they are to send up a flare and soldiers will take care of them “humanely”. It’s revealed that Ava’s motives go beyond charity, as her husband had attended a business conference there. She wants to head south to his resort to see if he survived, but the military has forbidden travel past Hobart due to massive fires. Ava must wait for her “moment” while being teamed with a snarky “free spirit” named Clay (Brenton Thwaites), who unwittingly provides an “opportunity” via is theft of a motorcycle. The duo sneak away from the troops to travel the off-highway back roads in a quest for Ava’s hubby Mitch (Matt Whelan). But will a chance encounter with a grief-stricken soldier, Riley (Mark Coles Smith) abruptly end the journey of Clay and Ava. And what about the “re-animated” and aggressive survivors along the way?
After her initial splash in the final “episodes” of the STAR WARS saga, it’s great to see that Ms. Ridley is getting to flex her considerable dramatic skills as the haunted Ava, who will take any risk or suffer any humiliation to reunite with her spouse. But then she conveys that “shift” in this seeker, as the rose-hued “tint” in her memories of marriage slowly chip away. We see this is not only a rescue of Mitch, but perhaps a relationship rescue. Ridley also has a deft physicality, whether evading the “onliners”, or darting eyes in order to find the best “action option”, making Ava a unique thriller heroine. And somehow Ava does work well with Thwaites as the more laid-back Clay, a fellow who has forsaken the altruism of this new “temp gig” in order to indulge his hedonistic appetites. This dude has serious swagger, as he readily agrees Ava’s plans, with Thwaites saying, “Why the Hell not?” with a whip of his long dark locks. Much more “tightly-wound” is Smith as the emotionally traumatized Riley, whose haunted backstory prompts him to go against his training and his moral compass. In the aforementioned flashbacks, Whelan is quite effective as Mitch is transformed from an adorably-smitten groom to something darker and wounded by life.
This tale is written and directed by screen vet Zak Hilditch. He has a confident visual flair, filling the screen with expansive island vistas, while not neglecting the focus on the desperate characters. Though the “body retrievals” are mainly done in the blazing sunlight, he gives each domicile a touch of rotting decay, with horrific menace lurking just inside the nurseries. Unfortunately, aside from the “marriage subplot” there’s little here that fans of the genre haven’t seen before, in much better thrillers. The main problem here, perhaps, is the lack of thrills. The “undead onliners” only make a handful of attacks, with wildly different results (it’s explained that the longer they’ve been ‘activated”, the more agitated they act). That may account for the rather sluggish pacing, making this feel longer than its 94-minute runtime. Yes, the “ghouls” are unsettling due to a twist on standard “zombs” in their dentistry (their “teeth grinding” is pretty creepy as we hear molars scraping as they lurch forward). But then we’re back trudging through the often lovely countryside. Plus, the “twist” ending loses much of its impact after a big reveal in last year’s superior 28 YEARS LATER (maybe Ralph Finnse could have provided a needed jolt of energy). Fans of fear flicks will want more shocks than marital conflict, while drama fans will be turned off by the dollops (not deluges) of gore in the well-intentioned WE BURY THE DEAD.
2 out of 4
WE BURY THE DEAD opens in select theatres on January 1, 2026
Timothee Chalamet as Marty Mauser in Josh Safdie’s MARTY SUPREME. Courtesy of A24
Timothee Chalamet is supremely charismatic and kinetic as a “bad boy” hustler in early 1950s New York with an obsession to make ping pong – table tennis – into a major sport in the U.S., in Josh Sadfie’s kinetic drama MARTY SUPREME. Director/co-writer Sadfie’s story is very loosely based on a real person, Marty Reisman, a handsome, bespectacled, and rail-thin young Jewish man from New York City’s Lower East Side, who was a table tennis wiz with a flair for showmanship in the 1950s. and an obsession to make his sport, ping pong, as respected and a big deal in the U.S. as it already was in Asia and Europe. Safdie renamed Timothee Chalamet’s character Marty Mauser, and takes liberties with the facts, but MARTY SUPREME is a kinetic skyrocket of a drama that picks up speed as it goes, about a man obsessed with a sport no one respected but who is willing to do anything, and everything, to change that.
and the film itself takes a neutral view of his sometimes appalling behavior. Marty’s lack of scruples seems to get worse as he grow desperate to reach his goals, and much of this film better suited for adult audiences than teens (although, by the end, he shows some improvement, and opens the door to more).
In the Lower East Side of 1950s New York City, ambitious Jewish teenager Marty Mauser (Chalamet) is determined to escape the life that is being laid out for him, working in his uncle’s shoe store. Marty is his uncle’s best salesman and the uncle dreams of making him the manager, but selling shoes is not Marty’s dream. He has much bigger dreams, dreams no one respects, to be a ping pong champion while making the sport he loves, and is supremely good at, into a high-profile, popular sport in the U.S.
Timothee Chalamet’s young character is charismatic and he charms all those around him, but he is not a good guy. and the film itself takes a neutral view of his often appalling behavior. Marty’s lack of scruples seems to get worse as he grow desperate to reach his goals, and much of this film better suited for adult audiences than teens (although, by the end, he shows some improvement, opening the door to more improvement).
Fast-talking Marty lives with his mother in a tiny apartment but dodges her questions (and her as well) about what he is doing. When not trapped in the shoe store, he is a hustler who makes a living playing ping pong in seedy tennis table parlors. Those parlors might remind some of the shady pool halls seen in Paul Newman’s classic THE HUSTLER, but such ping pong halls really did exist in the neighborhood where the really Marty grew up. But Chalamet’s Marty Mauser needs no manager to help him achieve his goal. Instead, he charms and exploits a host of people, good and even shady types, to reach his goal.
Marty has a girlfriend, but she is already married to someone else and now pregnant, and he has a circle of admirers, energized by his self-confidence and ambition, who he charms into giving him money or other forms of help. Marty will do anything to get the money for the next international table tennis tournament, where he expects to win the championship, and to make table tennis the major sport in the U.S. that he believes it should be.
MARTY SUPREME is darkly funny, energetic and entertaining – a somewhat bent American Dream. Surprisingly, some of Marty’s crazy antics in this fictional film are based on things that really happened. Timothee Chalamet gives an electrifying performance, one is a string of recent great ones. Chalamet’s unstoppable ping pong hustler and dreamer is backed by a strong cast of stars, often in unexpected roles. Fran Dresser is unrecognizable as Marty’s mother, a sad Jewish mother in a tiny NY apartment who pumps her wild teen son for information on his life, information he avoids giving. Gweneth Paltrow plays an aging movie star wife of a rich man, to which Marty attaches himself with a plan to get him access to places he’s not so welcome. The characters are often quirky, as are the situations Marty finds himself in, and both Fran Dresser and Gweneth Paltrow craft intriguing characters, especially Paltrow’s sharp, hard-eyed star who matches Marty in wits.
The rest of the cast, combined with a twisty plot in which unexpected disasters seem to loom around each turn, make this a drama with the pulse of a thriller. The film pick up speed as it goes, and cocky Marty finds himself juggling more balls than he expected.
While Chalamet’s cocky character is charismatic, resourceful and sharp-witted, he is no model of moral behavior. Early on, he makes a tasteless, anti-semitic joke, and then brushes aside the gasps by saying he’s Jewish so it’s OK, (although clearly not). He and a ping pong playing pal raise money playing demonstration games for money, that involve trick shots that would fit right in with the Harlem Globetrotters if that team played ping pong. Marty hustles unsuspecting people by feigning being a bad player – until the bets are down. At one point, he and a pal pull a con to get a better hotel room paid for by someone else (which really happened), with some unintended consequences.
But it is all in service of elevating his beloved ping pong and putting him on the top of the players’ heap, so we have conflicted feelings about this very young, very ambitious man with a mission. The people who back him up, even when he exploits that trust, seem to have no such doubts, and seem just drawn to his energy and confidence, as he pursues dreams that themselves dare not dream. Maybe it is that impossible dream, or the surprising encouragement Marty gives to other people that everyone else overlooks or dismisses that they too can dream big, and they come along and be part of his adventure.
This is a drama is likely to divide audience opinions, as it has critics, about whether Marty’s willingness to dream big, and commit to a dream others find preposterous, is compelling enough to justify or overcome his willingness to step on other people on his way up, no matter how much he charms those he steps on, in pursuit of that wild dream. Again, that makes this film more suited to grown-ups than the younger audiences who might not be quite ready to grapple with this ethical battle.
Still, MARTY SUPREME is a showcase for Timothee Chalamet, as well as an excellently made wild ride of a most unusual adventure.
MARTY SUPREME opens Thursday, Dec. 25, in theaters.
So who’s up for some great tunes on this big holiday…, at the multiplex? No, we’re not talking about any Christmas carols (you’re probably hearing those jingle bells in your sleep by now). We’re talking a full-fledged musical movie, though it’s not another bold brassy big-screen version of a stage musical in the wake of WICKED: FOR GOOD (though it’s really an expanding of its second act). This new release may be more in that subgenre of the “jukebox musical” as it focuses on the pop songs of an iconic star, although it’s not a biopic of him (much like ELVIS or ROCKETMAN). You see, this is a true life dramatic love story about a “tribute band” of that singing superstar. Sounds confusing? It’ll all be clear with the first few notes (and scenes) of SONG SUNG BLUE.
That title tune is heard in the opening scene, in which Mike Sardina (Hugh Jackman) serenades his AA support group after he has hit a big sobriety milestone in late 1980s Milwaukee. From there he’s off to his sweet “side gig” as part of a “tributes” show at the state fair. Mike walks out after the organizer insists that he take on the songs of Don Ho (“Tiny Bubbles”). No, Mike wants to perform the works of his idol, Neil Diamond. As he exits, Mike stops to catch the fetching Patsy Cline (“Walkin’ After Midnight”) songstress Claire Stingl (Kate Hudson). He strikes up a conversation with her later that night, leading to a date for the two divorced parents (Mike’s teenage daughter visits once a month or so). He tries to bond with Claire’s energetic pre-teen son Dayna (Hudson Hensley) and her somewhat surly teenage daughter Rachel (Ella Anderson). After a quick “jam session” Mike asks Claire if she would consider partnering with him for his “dream Diamond tribute review” that he dubs “Thunder and Lightning” (the latter being his stage persona while she’d be the former). Claire is thrilled and seals their partnership with a kiss. They assemble a back-up band and begin performing in bars, wedding halls, and eateries in the Wisconsin/Illinois area. Through it all, the two become much more than a singing duo, eventually tying the knot. Their reputation is on the rise, leading to an “opening act” slot at a Pearl Jam concert. The sky seems to be the limit, but the joyful music is almost silenced as fate hits several “sour notes” to challenge their sweet harmonies.
I’ll just get this out of the way: Jackman and Hudson are superb singers. Yeah, that’s not a big revelation, since Hugh has a couple of Tonys on his mantle and Kate cut an album (they still call them that) last year. But that skill is certainly essential in these roles in order to “sell” them as a vocal duet. As for the other aspects of their performances, Jackman may have a bit more to do, as Mike is the “entry point” to this true tale. The “movie mutant” has swagger to spare, as he pushes past the goofy hairstyle and the flashy fashions to give us a man who overtakes the inner demons from his past by reinventing himself. His furrowed brow hints at Mike’s PTSD from serving in Nam, while he still has a vulnerability with the knowledge that his body is failing him and his “time clock” may halt at any time. The bubbly Hudson brings out the best in him. Beneath that beaming smile, Claire has had lots of heartbreak in his own past, and decides to bask in the high she gets from singing. In the story’s second act, we see that life tries to snuff out that spark, until family and friends re-ignite it. It’s no wonder Hudson was the “queen of rom-coms” as she conveys Claire’s joy in getting another chance at love. The film’s other great standout is Anderson as Claire’s teen daughter, Rachel. Sure, she starts as a clichéd snarky “eye-roller”, but she shows how the love of Mike for her mom warms that cynical heart, even making her an ally of his when things get tough, and as she faces her own big life-changing decision. Oh, and there are a couple of 1980s movie stalwarts on hand for support. Fisher Stevens is solid as Mike’s dentist-backer, and Jim Belushi goes all “cheese-head” (right outta’ FARGO) as the tour bus-drivin’ manager. The 90s are repped by Michael Imperioli from “The Sopranos” as the tributes show boss (and resident Buddy Holly) who plays back-up guitar for the revue.
Though no stranger to movies with music, this film is an interesting detour for director/ screenwriter (adapting the same-titled documentary by Greg Kohs) Craig Brewer, after making his 2005 breakout hit, the hip-hop-flavored HUSTLE AND FLOW followed by the 2011 remake of FOOTLOOSE. He takes us past the high camp (exploited in 2001’s SAVING SILVERMAN) of Diamond’s 70s heyday, though we get some Elvis-style kitsch, to get us into the minds and hearts of Mike and Claire. This lulls us into thinking that their love story will always prevail. The huge chaotic challenges make for an abrupt shift (though it seems too extreme, it’s all true), one that may be too much for some viewers, Brewer never veers too much into the melodramatic while keeping the story firmly planted in its frigid northern US roots. Brewer also keeps the pacing smooth, breaking up the dialogue with a burst of song, and not overdoing the big rehearsing and performing montages. Aside from those great hairstyles and fashions, the music selection is pretty terrific, touching on all the big Diamond hits while introducing some often neglected tunes (I now know a whole lot about “Soolaimon”). Hey, there’s even a couple of Patsy Cline and Buddy Holly classics. And the set decorators really capture the tone of the early 1990s. Some of the more jaded filmgoers may think that this is merely a sweet little flick to see with your older relatives, but they may be surprised by the endearing look at the performers that don’t fill arenas, the bus-travelin’ workin’ stiff weekend warriors. That and the chemistry of Hudson and Jackman really blend for a nearly pitch-perfect romance in SONG SUNG BLUE.
3 Out of 4
SONG SUNG BLUE opens in theatres everywhere on Christmas Day, 2025
Director James Cameron is back with a third installment of his AVATAR franchise, which continues to deliver astounding visual effects and world-creation at the highest level. In the first film, a human expedition looking for resources to extract is sent to world called Pandora, a place with an un-breathable atmosphere and inhabited by tall, blue, technologically less-advanced people, dispatches a Marine, Jake Sully (Sam Worthington), in the form of an avatar that looks like the forest-living Na’vi people, to learn more about them. But after falling in love with a Na’vi warrior woman, Neytiri (Zoe Saldana), Jake switches sides and leads a rebellion against the humans. The second film takes place some 15 years later, as Jake, wife Neytiri and their kids hide out from the human among some beach-dwelling peoples, pursued by Jake’s nemesis and fellow Marine, Quaritch (Stephen Lang). This third one, AVATAR: FIRE AND ASH, takes place shortly after that second film.
The main reason to see AVATAR: FIRE AND ASH, are the spectacular visual effects and it’s breathtaking world-building. The 3D visual effects are immersive and beautiful, with one breathtaking vista after another. AVATAR: FIRE AND ASH continues to astonish with innovative visual effects that combine motion-capture and digital effects, like the first film, and now including 3D like the second one, but the effects are even more fully integrated, allowing one to entirely be enveloped by its imaginary world. The impressive effects even continue in the scenes with regular non-CGI or motion-capture actor, creating a seamlessly believable world.
Since the outstanding visual effects are the major reason to see this film, the best way to do that is in a theater, on a big screen with 3D capability. If you watch it on a small screen at home or on a phone, you will be missing out most of the reason to see it at all.
The reason why that matters so much is, despite all that visual effect artistry and technical dazzle, the characters and story do not reach that same high level, remaining familiar figures from a classic hero’s tale, with the addition of a historical tale of a colonial or corporate power moving in on a less-technological indigenous one. These indigenous people are aided greatly by that fellow who switched sides, which sets up a David and Goliath / underdog tale.
Action is plentiful and looks great but the story adds more and more characters without expanding on the ones already there. The main characters remain underdeveloped, being either noble good guys or evil bad ones. The story focuses on battles and those breathtaking new vistas but that can hold audience interest forever.
The effects are 3D but the characters remain 2D. It is not the fault of the cast, but the writer. The characters are written to be simple: Worthington’s Jake is noble and brave, Saldana’s Neytiri is emotional and protective, Stephen Lang as Jake’s enemy is relentless, while Giovanni Ribisi’s corporate boss is greedy and heartless. If the story is familiar, the audience has to care about the people in the story to maintain interest, and that means making them more real, more rounded and full-developed.
This story introduces new peoples on Pandora, with peaceful trading peoples who travel through the air in ships attached to blip-like floating creatures. There is another, less peaceful group too, the raiders/pirates known as the Ash People, who prey on the traders and others less warlike folk.
Quaritch, now also using an avatar body, sets out to make contact the war-like Ash People, with the aim of forming an alliance. He hits it off with the Ash People’s fierce, fearless, blood-thirsty queen Varang (a splendid Oona Chaplin, granddaughter of Charlie Chaplin), and a deal is struck.
Meanwhile, Jake struggles with getting the Na’vi and water-based Metkayina Clan to consider using human weapons that he retrieved from the water after the last battle, rather than just bows and arrows. Jake and Neytiri, in addition to their own kids, have adopted two more: Kiri (Sigourney Weaver), the Na’vi child of the avatar of the scientist played by Sigourney Weaver in the first AVATAR, and a human boy nicknamed Spider (Jack Champion), the biological son of Jake’s enemy Quaritch, who needs a special mask to breath the air, a mask that has to be continually replenished to keep him alive.
Stephen Lang’s Quaritch and Oona Chaplin’s Ash queen are by far the most interesting in this one, but if left undeveloped, will just join the crowd of cookie-cutter characters. The story is packed with action and battles and so full of twists (and new characters) that there isn’t much time to do much with this growing cast of characters anyway. But failing to develop the characters beyond the two-dimensional means that maintaining interest in the familiar tropes of this tale will become increasingly challenging.
Reportedly, director/writer James Cameron has two more of these visual effects extravaganzas in the planning stage but unless he starts creating depth to this characters to sustain this hero tale, he is likely to see waning audience interest, something already underway. It can’t just be pretty pictures.
AVATAR: FIRE AND ASH opens in theaters on Friday, Dec. 19, 2025.
Sydney Sweeney as Millie and Amanda Seyfried as Nina in The Housemaid. Photo Credit: Daniel McFadden/Lionsgate
Ho, ho, ho, Hollywood is coming home for the holidays. Oh, but what a home. The domicile featured in this new movie is exquisite, lush, the stuff of “house and garden” fever dreams. But the looks are indeed deceiving. That’s because some deadly, dark secrets are tucked behind those pricey but tasteful furnishings. No doubt countless weekly book clubs explored this when the literary inspiration for this new release came out just a little over three years ago. Now, it’s getting the full “studio movie” adaptation, with a screen vet and a sizzling “hot” rising star cast in the title role of THE HOUSEMAID.
That title refers to a young woman in her early twenties named Millie (Sydney Sweeney). She’s certainly at a crossroads in her life as she tries to find work, Any work, Why the rejections? We learn that she’s got a lot of “baggage”, namely a criminal record requiring her to check in with a parole officer who insists that she be employed. As the story begins, Millie is interviewing for the position of “general housekeeper (or that earlier title)” at a ritzy, right from the pages of “Architectural Digest” New Jersey estate. Quizzing her is the “lady of the house”, the gorgeous, blonde, refined Nina (Amanda Seyfried). After being told that the gig would involve cleaning, light cooking, helping with her ten-year-old daughter Cecilia (Indiana Elle), Nina bids Millie adieu, insisting that she’ll “be in touch”. Thinking that this was the “brush off” Millie hunkers down in her “beater” of a “home on wheels” for another long, cold night parked in an empty lot. Just as the cops tap on the car door, she gets a call from Nina offering the position. Millie zips over where Nina gives her the tour, taking her to the top floor location of Millie’s attic bedroom. Is this perfect, or what? Well, Millie meets the “master of the house”, Nina’s hunky hubby Andrew (Brandon Sklenar). No, no,no, she’s determined to keep things “professional”. But after the first night there, she gets a “front row seat” to a Nina “freak out”. This is the first of many scenes of erratic behavior from her, leading to threats of dismissal. Millie endures, needing to work, or it’s back to jail. But can she take the bizarre behavior and the unpredictable mania of Nina? And what’s up with the dark, brooding groundskeeper, the stoic Enzo (Michele Morone)? Could this dream home be the epicenter of a “nightmare manor” for Millie? And just what was her crime?
That “hot” darling of current pop culture is that “super-nova” Ms. Sweeney, who is given a chance to carry the dramatic weight of this tale. Though she burst out (I’ll not make a wardrobe comment), a couple of years ago, she’s bounced (watch it) from forgettable rom-coms to generic thrillers (though she did very well with a supporting role in ECHO VALLEY), she’s not gotten a real chance to test her star-power until this. Yes, Millie is often the victim that the audience frets over, but we also see her taking charge to find the truth. And she also embarks on a swoony forbidden romance, until Sweeney becomes a full action heroine. For much of the film she must hold the screen with the equally compelling charisma of Seyfried, whose Nina may be the “showier” role as she careens from sweet to unhinged with little warning, like a human pinball ricocheting off the tasteful-texured walls. With her wide expressive eyes, she draws us into the world of this pampered domestic diva, prepping us for another abrupt switch as we’re plunged into her own past. Sklenar is a slick, smooth charmer whose sympathy often feels too good to be true as he becomes Millie’s secret ally during Nina’s explosive displays. Morone emits a suave, sinister vibe as the terse gardener who seems to magically appear in Millie’s eyeline (yes, “jump-scares” a’plenty). Elle is also strong as the pouty, snooty rich kid who will not warm up to Millie, despite her efforts. Also of note is Alexandra Seal as Officer Conners,, a local cop who might just have a connection to the mysteries of the mansion.
Orchestrating all the over-the-top mayhem and machinations is acclaimed comedy director (the guru of that TV gem, “Freaks and Geeks”), Paul Feig. But he’s in a different “mode” here from the inspired hilarity of BRIDESMAIDS and THE HEAT. Instead, he’s diving into the sparkly “high class” camp of his thriller parody A SIMPLE FAVOR (and let’s erase that lackluster sequel from our memory, shall we) to create another homage to the classic “women’s pictures” of Hollywood’s “golden age”. Think back to that classic first film of THE WOMEN, where screen sirens “faced off” to fight for their desires (I guess there’s also a pinch of the Davis/Crawford dynamic from WHATEVER HAPPENED TO BABY JANE). Here two extremely photogenic blondes battle for “the whole enchilada”, going just short of hair-pulling and punching (there’s some physical stuff in the finale). Plus, there’s even a take on the whole “rescued princess” fantasy that Feig expertly trashes. Speaking of, yes this is really good “high gloss” trash, a super-sized, souped up version of all the over-heated, soapy, sudsy, made for basic-cable TV thrillers, given a studio sheen. This superior silliness is lifted by Rebecca Sonnenshines’ juicy screenplay adaptation of the bestseller from Freida McFadden (guessing it was seen at last of beach pools over the last couple of summers). And with all the high fashion and furnishing, we still get a solid tale of strong ladies “gettin’ it done”. Speaking of, here’s hoping that these two are teamed once more (Seyfried and Sweeney certainly hammered that home in their press tour). During the cold Winter of somber Oscar hopefuls, take a fluffy, popcorn break with THE HOUSEMAID.
3 Out of 4
THE HOUSEMAID opens in theaters everywhere on Friday, December 19, 2025
