FREAKY TALES (2025)

Written & Directed By: Anna Boden & Ryan Fleck

Cinematography: Jac Fitzgerald

Editor: Robert Komatsu

Cast: Pedro Pascal, Jay Ellis, Ben Mendelsohn, Normani, Dominique Thorne, Angus Cloud, Too $hort, Ji-Young Yoo, Jack Champion, Kier Gilchrist 

Four interconnected stories set in 1987 Oakland, CA. will tell about the love of music, movies, people, places and memories beyond our knowable universe.

—————————————————————————

I’m Going to say this right now that this room is best to go into blind, as that is the best way to experience it, and might offer you more of a surprise or surprise is there anything. As even if you seen the trailer there’s still enough mystery to not know exactly what you’re getting into.

One thing that can be said Is that the film doesn’t really live up to its title as there are tails I don’t know how freaky they are, rather than just tales of an anthology. The film feels more like short stories, that take place around one another in the bay Oakland, California, as characters do cross paths with each other in different tails, but each one has its own kind of genre in story. It feels very Tarantino ask the light and more of a wannabe.

The thing that connects them might be violence and Oakland legends like Tom Hanks in Too $hort you are treated like legends in this film, and Too $hort has a cameo as well as being betrayed by someone else in one of the stories.

The stories here, pretty much cut and dry. They don’t offer that much in the way of surprises. One story focuses on punks versus Nazis and we get to know some of the characters involved. The next story is about two young African-American women going into a rap battle. The next story is a tale of redemption in the past in the last tail is more of a revenge tail inspired. It feels like by game of death the Bruce Lee movie.

Truthfully, the first tale could’ve been its own film in itself exploring the characters a bit more, but maybe it was in case of been there done that no not offering up as much of a diverse characters in the Punk cultural scene. 

The film fall short as it doesn’t really live up to its title and what are the stories, eventually connect your left, wanting more or expecting more from it, especially with the angle of this green substance, that really only comes into play effectively in one tale, but does work to connect or let the audience know Somethings about to happen. it’s a harbinger.

One wishes, the film was much better as it definitely has the creativity and talent involved. It just builds to a certain level and never goes past it even when it seems like it has the strength to go further and be better.

It’s around the 80s which gives a kind of a nostalgic, feel where you can look back and laugh at the fashions, but I also remember them as that was what was cool at the time as well as the culture.

The film Does offer plenty of cameos throughout the film

No, it isn’t mirable as it still keeps too similar themes but like a true short story collection, it has different types of tails where one can be more comedic. One can be more dramatic. It’s the same here, whereas one tail, or at least two tails are pure, more action territory. Another could just be a kind of a slight more success story.

Wow, the film has trouble living up to its title. It is still worth checking out.

I Grade: C+

I WENT DOWN (1997)

Directed By: Paddy Breathnatch 

Written By: Conor McPherson 

Cinematography: Cian De Buitlear 

Editor: Emer Reynolds

Cast: Peter McDonald, Brendan Gleeson, Tony Doyle, Peter Caffrey, Johnny Murphy, David Wilmot, Michael Mcelhatton, Antoine Byrne 

Irish action comedy. An ex-con is forced into taking on a new task by a ruthless crime-boss, but finds he is hindered by the partner he has been teamed up with. However, he soon realizes they must work together if they are to survive.


This film reminds me of the quirky indies that had stylized crime stories before it seemed like Quentin Tarantino cornered the market and with him a new generation who tired to copy and clone his style with throwbacks to bygone eras. 

Then having witty, snappy dialogue that told stories while not exactly always being about crime, but reveal ethics, morals, passions or lack of them.

This is one of those films that centers around crime, but is much more interested in the characters and dialogue. 

Though this film Will probably be accused of being one of them. This one has mroe heart 

As the film offers charm. It’s not something you haven’t seen before, but it is fun that the crime story that moves it along is almost secondary and there to keep the characters on their toes and moving from location to location. 

Jsit as the main characters are learning more and more about the job they have been hired to do and the history behind it. We are u raveling the mystery as to what is really going on.

At heart this is a buddy comedy of two nit wits. Not cut out for crime. even though both are ex-Cons. Who are trying to get out of the life, but keep getting pulled back in no matter how ahrdbthey try to escape. It’ also a road trip movie as they keep having to travel and go to new locations to suposedlt finish the job. 

For some audience members this film might remind them or have the same spirit as IN BRUGES only not as violent or dark. It also helps that this film has a similar cast member Brendan Gleeson when he was younger. 

In Fact this was one of his early roles that put him on the map and got him noticed.

The sayings and place cards between scenes are a bit annoying, but representative of the time period in film. Where it was thought witty or like chapter themes.  

There is a lack of style but plenty of laughs. Believable character work. Where you enjoy the company of the characters. As even when you find out the truth. You just have mroe compassion for them. As even the title is kind of a punchline. 

Grade: B

BAD ASS (2012)

Directed By: Craig Moss

Written By: Craig Moss and Elliot Tishman

Cinematography: John Barry

Editor: Jim Flynn 

Cast: Danny Trejo, Harrison Page, Patrick Fabian, Ron Perlman, Charles S. Dutton, Joyful Drake, Chris Spencer, Craig Sheffer, Richard Riehle, Winter Ave Zoli

A Vietnam veteran who becomes a local hero after saving a man from attackers on a city bus decides to take action when his best friend is murdered and the police show little interest in solving the crime.

————————————————————————

will be the first to admit this film and it’s sequels for the most part are guilty pleasures there bee movies, but they have a lot of heart and truly seem to want to give the audience entertainment as they respect them.

this film is a fun takeoff of the viral video of an elderly senior citizen, who gets tired of a bunch of young punks, harassing others and ends up in self-defense beating them up 

How this film begins truly showing the origins of the lead character and shows us his strength and attitude as well as getting a community behind him

So that when the main storyline starts, we already know what he is capable of as he tries to figure out an avenge the murder of his best friend in the investigation taps into a conspiracy 

This film rely heavily on comedy but definitely has plenty of action in a while not the greatest of Scripps or believability or direction. This film does have its charms and it seems to have a lot of heart, especially in the right place and wants to please fans not only the genre, but the type of film that it is. 

As this is the type that would definitely go straight to home video back in the day now it would be straight to streaming and plays off like a bee movie with big names to get funding and have an audience and least this film earnest and provides the chance to play a leading role Which passes amicably

Again the film has a recognizable supporting cast who seemed to be here more in cameos, but by the end, you just can’t help, but like the film, despite its weaknesses as it’s just a fun movie, even when it takes itself serious, it manages to be entertaining and fun.

As long as you go in knowing it’s a no-brainer and just seeking entertainment and fun I think you’ll enjoy this film that surprises you a bit with it’s resourcefulness and lives up to its title kind of vigilante revenge film. While also filling in the boxes of an action film, even having a light romance by the end.

Essentially gaining all the things that he always wanted, but was never granted.

Grade: C+

BAD ASS 2: BAD ASSES

Written & Directed By: Craig Moss

Cinematography: Paul Marschall 

Editor: Clark Burnett 

Cast: Danny Trejo, Danny Glover, Patrick Fabian, Andrew Divoff, Ignacio Serricchio, Jaqueline Obradors, Jonathan Lipnicki, Sarah Dumont, Loni Love, Charlie Carver, Dante Basco

Frank Vega teams up with grumpy old agoraphobic Bernie Pope to kick ass and clean up the streets of L.A.

—————————————————————————

Like most sequels this is pretty much more of the same only bigger and unfortunately batter in terms of quality as even though it seems to have taken its time this film feels rushed, and if the original was a revenge tale vigilante this one is the same now it’s also a comedy as bad ass has a partner who is slowly dying who seems to join him only for that reason.

Similarly, these films when they have sequels also get a bit dumber so this one is a little more flashier than the first film as expected definitely has more guns.

This one is definitely more comedic and has a slightly bigger budget as the villain poses more of a threat, and uses kind of the same excuse to get away with his crimes as in lethal weapon to the infamous diplomatic immunity clause 

As in the first film, he fought against a corrupt government in street gang now bad ass find himself going up against pretty much a whole cartel and it’s leader who is a international politician again police or any authorities hands are tied so it’s up to him and his partner this time played by Danny Glover 

Who is a ladies man which leads to some hilarious scenes as again this film seems more camping played for laughs than the first time. It’s still a fun ride, but it definitely starts to stretch the plausibility faster like most seems to partially throw away the events of part one to a certain extent , so that it fits more into a different narrative that allows for again him losing someone close who was like a son and setting up a side romance story for him

The villains are still over the top and ridiculous though a little higher echelon as far as the budget is concerned with Andrew Divoff playing the villain who seems like a more polished version of the same villain he played in A LOW DOWN DIRTY SHAME.

One of the aspects of these films that I think has audiences keep coming back is seeing more of an adult action hero, who isn’t necessarily invincible, but for the films purpose seems near invincible and using their smart and experience to win and figure things out as well as being budgeted so there’s no Too much over the top action sequences that make no sense and the film firmly planted tongue in cheek

As well as the lead characters really have nothing to lose, which is why they seem to be going out and willing to risk it. All it is a bee movie franchise is that is worth watching and checking in with each gets more ridiculous because there is another sequel to this film.

It’s nice to see characters who are used to playing supporting roles kind of get their day in the sun to play more leads and carrying over from the first film. It seems like this film also has an unnecessary. at least one unnecessary. 

That house these films is that the actors seem to at least be having fun which is infectious for the audience because they intern feel like the film is fun

If you are a fan of the first film. You should enjoy the sequel.

Grade: C

BOAT TRIP (2003)

Directed By: Mort Nathan

Written by: Mort Nathan and William Bigelow

Cinematography: Shawn Maurer

Editor: John Axness

Cast: Cuba Gooding Jr, Horatio Sanz, Roselyn Sanchez, Roger Moore, Vivica A. Fox, Lin Shaye, Maurice Godin, Bob Gunton, Artie Lange, Richard Roundtree

Two straight men mistakenly end up on a “gays only” cruise.

————————————————————————

One can’t imagine what the thought process was behind this film. As it’s suppsed to be a sexual comedy for straight people by seemingly stereotyping and making it seem like a journey into homosexual lifestyles, focusing more on the hedonistic aspects. While also easily being seen as homophonic Maybe inviting the controversy and commentary and hoping that it would sell tickets.

That seems to seek out the message Hey Homosexual’s they are just like us. while throwing in a sitcom were the curve plot about to Street man who gets sent on a singles cruise after one has just had some heartbreak and being sent as revenge on and gay singles cruise That they can’t escape from, and when one falls in love with the few single available woman on the boat, but must play long as she thinks he’s gay and wants to get closer to one another.

This film is purely tasteless but strangely has a talented cast or lease big Name cast, and it seems to want to level the playing field envy open, but with most of its stereotypes, it still feels a bit mean-spirited.

The Movie was filmed in 2001 but wasn’t released till 2003 which kind of tells you the studio releasing a new they had some thing controversial on their hands

Despite all involved, the only reason to truly watch this film is Roselyn Sanchez, who is sexy as hell in this film they should have made her a big screen bombshell As it is one of her all-time sexiest appearances, though she is obviously Icandy, for the mostly straight audience that actually probably watch this film, but people avoided this film, like the plague due to his flight and it’s just such bad taste. I will also and it’s kind of insulting, Crude and stupid.

In its own weird way tries to show that hey gay humor and gays can be just as juvenile, a straight sex, comedies and humor even though the film like most sex comedies deals more and stereotypes, I found this also feels oddly misogynistic for a film that seems to be trying to bring all men together.

You already know somethings up with Cuba Gooding Junior is the star of the film. It all really depends at which part of his career. That you are witnessing his acting during as pretty much after he won the Oscar, other than MEN OF HONOR. it all seems to go downhill from there, except for maybe a handful of rolls here and there.

Grade: F

THE PHOENICIAN SCHEME (2025)

Written & Directed By: Wes Anderson

Story By: Wes Anderson And Roman Coopola 

Cinematography: Bruno Delbonnel

Editor: Barney Pilling 

Cast: Benecio Del Toro, Mia Therapleton, Michael Cera, Tom Hanks, Benedict Cumberbatch, Bryan Cranston, Scarlett Johanson, Jeffrey Wright, Riz Ahmed, Bill Murray

Wealthy businessman Zsa-zsa Korda appoints his only daughter, a nun, as sole heir to his estate. As Korda embarks on a new enterprise, they soon become the target of scheming tycoons, foreign terrorists and determined assassins.

————————————————————————

It’s getting harder and harder to review Wes Anderson films as it feels like with each film he gets more and more Lost or not even Lost just sticks to his style

There is nothing wrong with that even though it might annoy Some audiences. who want

him more to evolve, just asked from his early films, which had certain sensibilities, but weren’t quite as artistic, as his films are now and at least felt a little more free, whereas his films now, which is a style feel a little more closed off

It feels like more he’s making the film for himself than necessarily an audience. Now he does achieve what most filmmakers seek. He creates his own world and settles into his own absurdist fashion comedies with a tight, bright aesthetic, and all seem to be homage to something or someone.

Is films aren’t necessarily bad it’s just a style you have to get used to it either. You love it or you hate it. You Can enjoy them because they are visual story books pretty much while one can’t say they loved each and every one  of his films but one will say there’s at least something interesting about each film and they’re all pretty to look at.

This film one can believe allows younTo get into a bit more than his last film ASTEROID CITY, maybe because it wasn’t such a big cast and while it’s kind of a spy/espionage tale, that seems to go global near Sumner. This one is more enjoyable personally because he tries to be deep at times, but it more focused on the actual story plot and moving forward, even though there are plenty of character moment.

whereas ASTEROID CITY, each was just the size of the cast was so grand, but it did have more dramatic moments and showcasing of actors but that also seem to be a little bit more devoted to a little sci-fi, but definitely to theater whereas this film still has that kind of deadpan humor. It does have an emotional center that is an obvious, but it does come about this also feels more like a common. 

That with this room, Benicio Del Toro gets the rare leading man role, where he gets to be comedic and suave and commanding even though he’s surrounded by an ensemble, who more seem to play caricatures or pretty much their wardrobe, pretty much defines their character it’s still managed to take you on a journey maybe not as emotional this one is a bit more detached, playing more into it setting in Europe 

The film does offer Michael Cera, a more noteworthy rolled and he has had in sometime. No as an ensemble whenever the big names in the Castillo show up, it’s still does feel like they’re more guest starring. It’s a little jarring and takes you out a little reminding you that it’s a production but then again, that is how most of Anderson’s films tend to feel as over the years they feel like they’ve gotten more and more away from any kind of reality or truth, at least in any kind of world that we might now but makes sense and can be emotional and their own kind of worlds.

This places perfectly into his wheelhouse, but it seems to lack the flare that his films usually have

One will say that Wes Anderson films are starting to feel like not only their own world, but kind of going into a museum where the designs and patterns are so well. So that they always seem hip and watchable.

Grade: B 

FRIENDSHIP (2025)

Written & Directed By: Andrew DeYoung

Cinematography: Andy Rydzewski

Editor: Sophie Corra 

Cast: Tim Robinson, Paul Rudd, Patti Harrison Kate Mara, Jack Dylan Grazer, Raphael Sbarge, Whitmer Thomas, Ivy Wolk, Josh Segarra, Jon Glaser, Connor O’Malley

A suburban dad falls hard for his charismatic new neighbor.

————————————————————————

Yes, the review isn’t gonna be any different than probably many of the other ones you might’ve read or heard, or seen about this film, as the film stars comedian Tim Robinson, the film does feel like an extended skit from his popular show. I think you should leave, which showcases skits that are awkward, bizarre the top surreal. Though based in a familiar reality that can be identifiable.

So that this film does feel like an extended skit as it gets more absurd as the film goes along, the film with the same character, so that it feels more like we’re going through a crisis

Inntunnel, vision than anything else. As the film at times can be bizarre.

The film does explore male loneliness and could be seen as a midlife crisis movie of a married man.  who doesn’t have any friends, and his family seems not to be interested in him or have really much use for him, who starts an adult friendship and a little bit of worship with his new neighbor.

That does get his hopes up, but then clearly coola down because of his awkwardness, and trying too hard, but also lacking social

Skills , which then alienates him. 

Truly showcasing his vulnerability, which is not an attractive trait, as well as leading to an obsession and stalking, if that’s not enough, also his problems at home, which he has been repressing his anger or disillusionment about, only help him boil over. As we all need a tribe a group to feel a part of and here he can’t seem to fit into one might be better one on one, but also no matter where he goes. He seems to be the butt of jokes of whichever group.

What about the film? Is that while the lead character goes above and beyond what is necessary, and is truly a scary character piece? It also shows that the other characters are flawed, though they seem to know how to handle situations in life much better and sooner 

This could be more of a character study. We learned more about the character and could see a little bit more why his actions are the way that they are, but that film isn’t built for this nor is it its aim. The film builds up sympathy form, but doesn’t let him off the hook as showing that he’s not perfect and most things seem to be his fault and just let them grow and get to him and his reactions or what truly make him unhinged.

That has the humor of Tim Robinson, other than as an actor, he doesn’t seem to have any input or basis on the film, as he didn’t write it, nor did he direct it. He doesn’t even produce it. Paul Rudd, his co-star, actually produces it. Writer/Director Andrew DeYoung has gotten Robinson’s charms and humor perfectly, which helps sell the film. as it is supposedly based upon deYoung’s experience after getting iced out of it, a group of friends.

As I have been describing this film, I have not said how hilarious the film is. You laugh throughout the film, even if it’s just out of being uncomfortable. I wouldn’t say it’s near perfect, but. It’s not insubstantial. It has a message, maybe not an important one, and goes way over the top by the end, though you do kind of appreciate it for where it goes, and not the ending clearly could’ve had, but it wouldn’t be true to itself if it did. 

this isn’t some gag, filled comedy

Nor slapstick with one liners hunch lines, and too much physical comedy. It’s a bit random This is more what some might call cringeworthy comedy. Which makes it appeal to a certain Taste or audience so keep this in mind as I review this film as I am part of that audience as I am a fan of Tim Robinson, his show that type of comedy so I might be vice plus the film is partly identifiable for me and I will not explain in which way, but those who know me will recognize it

The film also explores some of the social rules of groups of friends, and try to infiltrate that group, how cruel and unforgiving it could be, no matter how all might seem 

Everything seems a bit twisted other than the lead character, though I can’t recommend this film more. I think I’m liked it a bit more than some other. 

Grade: B

ANOTHER SIMPLE FAVOR (2025)

Directed By: Paul Feig

Written By: Jessica Sharzer and Laeta Kalogridis 

Based upon the characters created by: Darcey Bell 

Cinematography: John Schwartzman 

Editor: Brent White 

Cast: Anna Kendrick, Blake Lively, Henry Golding, Allison Janney, Elizabeth Perkins, Michele Morrone, Elena Sofia Ricci, Alex Newell, Bashir Salahuddin, Taylor Ortega Aparna Nancharla, Andrew Rannells, 

Stephanie Smothers and Emily Nelson reunite on the island of Capri, Italy for Emily’s extravagant wedding to a rich Italian businessman, which is interrupted by murder and betrayal.

———————————————————————-

This phone is OK considering it didn’t feel like the first film really needed a sequel as this truly could’ve gone either way it stays in the spirit of the first film, though this feels more like a buddy mystery comedy.

Whereas the first film felt generally like a suburban mystery with twists and turns. this film has decided to take the characters and go international. Sonthat it feels like it’s following the trend of the KNIVES OUT murder mystery franchise, finding corpses of the past no matter where these characters go. We get a whole new set of supporting characters played by recognizable faces.

Even though in the first film, they were friends and rivals,  in this film where are forced to believe that they have buried the hatchet so to speak and become friends,  uneasy ones, but eventually, ones who seem to have made peace with one another.

Anna Kendrick’s character seems to only go along with her to help her book sales which are lagging. Henry Golding is in the film and for all the sex appeal he had in this film. He seems like an insufferable jerk and clown.

I won’t say that this film is predictable, but the twist and turns seem more melodramatic or almost out of a TeleNovella rather than a solid story. 

Not to mention for a film that is supposed to take place more internationally. One would think that the location and lush is this film would look more lavish. it has its moments, but from the looks of things of could’ve been everywhere and just added some color.

Whereas the first film felt like it had deeper stakes and was set in a reality you recognize. This film just feels like it’s a slapstick comedy and the deaths aren’t really that deeply felt or even respected. they’re just like part of the plot. It’s a shame as some characters we know some characters are new to us, but they are treated more Flagrantly than deeply

Which only helps make our leads look all the more guilty. Even though we in the audience know they’re not and give them a reason to be on the run.- while sidelining any supporting characters from the first film other than the stars to cameos 

The film is fun and a guilty pleasure way whereas it’s not rushed, it also didn’t need to be made, it still wants to keep its acid tongue, humor, and cynical, as well as try to be a bit campy 

All the actors do what is required of them and they are really what makes this film work and makes it at times fun though corny bits that kind of overcrowd the film too or also cliché moments and characters that don’t need to be there, but are it doesn’t hurt.

Luckily Paul Feig returns as the director as without him this would most certainly fail, but he brings his skills and panache with the actors to craft quite a meal from scraps

If you are a big fan of the first film, you will probably enjoy this one but know that it’s not as sharp as the first film it’s not dull, but it just doesn’t quite as deep as well as the first film and leaves itself open for another sequel for this to be a franchise 

Grade: C+

C.H.U.D. II: BUD THE CHUD (1989)

Directed By: David Irving 

Written By: Ed Naha 

Cinematography: Arnie Sirlin

Editor: Barbara Pokras 

Cast: Gerrit Graham, Brian Robbins, Tricia Leigh Fisher, Robert Vaughn, Norman Fell, Jack Riley, Bill Calvert, Larry Linville, Sandra Kerns, June Lockhart, Rich Hall, Bianca Jagger, Larry Cedar 

A couple of teenagers break into a secret government science lab and steal a frozen corpse for a high school prank and accidentally awaken the corpse which turns out to be a CHUD named Bud, who goes on a killing spree and making his victims also cannibalistic CHUD’s and its up to the teens to stop him.

————————————————————————

The film as strange as it’s rated R, but there is nothing that bad, except for the implied violence in a little blood, but really as it’s so comedic and camp he could easily be more for kids as a starter, horror, film, or at least young teens, as there is nothing really that objectionable in the film

This song is one of those hidden in plain sight as this hits the right spot and happy to discover it late to truly appreciate it rather than just dismiss it as a product of the time which I’m sure many did. Now can watch it as a time capsule as they don’t make them even close to like this anymore.

The film is not scaring the least, as it goes more for comedy, which might have upset many fans of the original Chud film as this is nothing like the original, The film doesn’t even follow in the creature designs of the first  CHUD film instead this is a straight-up undead or zombie film. Should know that it’s an in name sequel. Which should have known by its subtitle of blood the Chad

The only way it’s Really connected to the original Is serving as a monster movie of sorts when an actuality, this was originally written to be a sequel to RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD, and stay in that realm of comedy-Horror.

The film has a cast recognizable character actors in various roles. That feels like they are more guest starring. As The film feels like one of those TV movies from the 1980s at usually start actors on the network shows of the past and of the current shows that they had on and just like them. This is more of a teen film.

actor Garrett Graham is kind of the star of the film here as he plays Bud, the Chad, and truly steals the show and saves the phone. He showcases his talents that people slept on in various other roles in different movies. Here he does it all, though it’s more a physical comedic performance, especially his facial expressions. As the character doesn’t really talk.

Actress, Tricia Leigh Fisher Costars in this film and she’s an actress that one is always a fan of, but seems to have done so few films and television that when you do see her on screen, you can’t help but put a smile on your face as she has the talent and looks to do so much more in the film industry. And she comes across as a bombshell with a middle town, America appeal, and who can actually act

This isn’t a good film, but it’s a fun film of chess for Gerritt Graham’sphysical performance above all else. Especially, How he goes from awkward zombie to a more suave Casanova look.  not to mention seeing the cast of recognizable actors, feels a bit heartwarming. No, it stays comedic throughout.

It ends up feeling So bad it’s good but seems to be designed that way so it’s not bad Chessmore silly plus the film has the creepiest cameo by Robert England.

The humor of the film make it makes it feel like it’s a film full of dad jokes. Which one can appreciate this film for because it seems more and more these days like all her films even if they’re comedic, they’re more focused on exploitation of nudity and violence and can’t just be in the genre of horror and be fun and kind of clean.

Even if not scary, the film does offer good practical effects and make up FX, which seems to be a kind of a lost cause or getting diminishing returns these days

The film was filmed in 1987, but wasn’t released until 1989 the Director even made three cuts one emphasizing her, the other more emphasizing comedy in the third Edited to play on television one wonders if the cut we see now

Is the purely comedic one and the television one has one can only imagine what the scary version looks like. Even though this film seems . more made for television, and the humor seems more for a juvenile crowd.

Grade: C+

Y2K (2024)

Directed By: Kyle Mooney 

Written By: Kyle Mooney and Kevin Minter

Cinematography: Bill Pope

Editor: David Marks 

Cast: Jaeden Martell, Rachel Zegler, Julian Dennison, Daniel Zolghardi, Lachlan Watson, Eduardo Franco, Kyle Mooney, Mason Gooding, The Kid Leroi, Alicia Silverstone, Tim Heidecker, Miles Robbins 

Two high school nobodies make the decision to crash the last major celebration before the new millennium on New Year’s Eve 1999. The night becomes even crazier than they could have ever dreamed when the clock strikes midnight.


 this film feels like Something that was written by a teenager in the 1990’s as their opus and then 20 years later dusted off discovered and written through a modern lens to be both nostalgic and have a kind of recent commentary

As it feels poem a guilty pelasure of that decade and can see this film being a guilty pleasure for certain aidnece members. As it seems to be for writer-director and performer Kyle Mooney making his second film here after BRIGSBY BEAR from 2017

The film Plays like a worst case scenario nightmare of the y2k bug from 1999 where it was feared that once it turned to the year 2000 most electronics would either fail or malfunction

At first, the film tries to smother us in the pop culture of 1999 and drown those of us who remember it with the nostalgia and laughs of how ridiculous it was. as well as touching that universal truth of you of high school crushes parties, bands, being the outsiders having an identity that is defined by what your into not really knowing necessarily who you are or only coming into your own, and beginning to form will be of age such as that

No, as it tries to get into that territory, more concerns itself with its plot of a group of teenagers trying to survive as technology rebuild itself to take over the human race and become simulators and the antics that happened while trying to survive

The film has an eclectic cast which it seems meant to as the characters they play are those who have known each other for years, but never really bonded or gotten to know one another and seem to be separated by social class. 

Julian Dennison being the brave comedic relief in the film is truly the heart and fun of this film and when he leaves the film. It truly makes its complete change to another genre. Though it tries to keep the laughs coming. 

I will offer this one spoiler if you are not a fan of the rapper musician known as the kid Laroi you might enjoy his fate in this film.

The film Also features a comeback of a certain entertainer from that period whose 2024 was greet with a role here and in a cricucally

Acclaimed cult film that premiered in 2024 

The film might have a built-in audience, though for some of its originality it does feel like a letdown of sorts as it’s not really too deep and it’s fine for what it is, but there’s nothing that impressive about it again it stays entertaining though you wish either did more or had more to it. As the film falls short from what it seems it has the possibility of doing or where it seems headed. As even with a 15million dollar budget it look so much lower budgeted. So it seems most of the money went on thebsoecialmeffects which are mostly practical butbfirnall the innovations made also loom like 1990’s visual effects one is sure it was planned that way, but still could have been a bit more smooth

Approach this film with caution. As it’

Cute but feels more made for teens though seems marketed to the now middle-aged teen crowd of the 1990’s.

Though it also plays like some long lost unseen self declared classic movie that the stoner video store clerk played by Kyle Mooney would recommend. Like a mash up no one Requested and feels forced.  

Grade: C