ROOFMAN (2025)

Directed By: Derek Cianfrance

Written By: Derek Cianfrance and Kirt Gunn

Cinematography: Andrij Parekh

Editor: Jim Helton & Ron Patane 

Cast: Channing Tatum, Kirsten Dunst, Lakeith Stanfield, Peter Dinklage, Ben Mendelsohn, Uzo Aduba, Juno Temple, Melonie Diaz, Tony Revolori, Emory Cohen

A charismatic criminal, while on the run from the police, hides in a hidden space of a toy store. There, he adopts a new identity and becomes involved with an employee, beginning a relationship as unlikely as it is risky.

————————————————————————

This shows that Channing Tatum is a very adaptable actor, as he has previously been part of Steven Soderbergh‘s films in various capacities. Who has so far gotten the best work out of them next to the 21 JUMP STREET movies & franchise, which always offer a bit of a comeback for him. As it introduces him in appeal that is unexpected.

This film is another one that proves again Tatum’s charm in a role he fits into perfectly. That while being tough, there’s a sensitive soul, a romantic who has depth and is not all surface.

This is actually Director Derek Cianfrance most mainstream film, (THE PLACE BEYOND THE PINES, BLUE VALENTINE) but it still maintains his Indie artistic flourishes that grabbed the audience and keep the film from seeming like Hollywood fluff. Even as it adds to his repertoire of another failed romance story for him at the helm.

Another big surprise in the cast is Kirsten Dunst, who is thoroughly believable in her role, as the religious single mother whom Tatum‘s character falls for, especially after watching her under surveillance for so long.

This film is based on a true story that fits into the mold of movies like BERNIE and HIT-MAN (both directed by Richard Linkletter) that humanize is supposed to harden criminals, making their tales a bit more comedic & light than they normally would be told. Having the audience root for the criminal even if we know in the end, there will not be a happy ending at least not a traditional one. These films are usually more about the character or characters as well as the ensemble and ambience that is around them.

Was surprised that this film bombed at the box office. As it seems to have all the right elements for a non-traditional romantic comedy, but enough material that would appeal to more of a broad audience. It seems that maybe as it was a more grown-up, adult, human interest, drama and comedy, As well as being told in a small simple way that doesn’t have as many gimmicks or distractions, full of wackiness or slapstick, nor action that audiences didn’t go out and seek it more. Though could easily see this film being more of an audience pleaser.

Now some audience members might complain about the romance angle. Which might slow it down for some, but is what humanizes the characters and the story. Which makes it so compelling, rather than something thinner that you watch for action or antics. it doesn’t have to rely on filler it fills out the film.

I won’t lie and say this is the most exciting film, but it’s a nice down home story that entertains and grabs you as it goes along

Grade: B 

BALLAD OF A SMALL PLAYER (2025)

Directed By: Edward Berger

Written By: Rowan Joffe

Based on the novel by: Lawrence Osborne

Cinematography: James Friend

Editor: Nick Emerson 

Cast: Colin Farrell, Tilda Swinton, Fala Chan, Alex Jennings, Deanie Ip, Jason Tobin, Adrienne Lau

Lord Doyle is laying low in Macau spending his days and nights on the casino floors, drinking heavily and gambling what little money he has left. Struggling to keep up with his fast-rising debts, he is offered a lifeline by the mysterious Dao Ming, a casino employee with secrets of her own. However, in hot pursuit is Cynthia Blithe a private investigator ready to confront Doyle with what he is running from. As Doyle tries to climb to salvation, the confines of reality start to close in.

————————————————————————————

Unfortunately , this is another film where it’s a case of style over substance and the strange part is that there is enough substance to truly match the style, but by the end, it just feels so empty and almost like an opportunity wasted.

The film tries to tell the tail as the title suggest in a small way, even though it’s international, it sure does live up to the title. As it shows a small time player who wants to be bigger and more successful than what he is in this growing huge international market, and no matter how much he wins or loses, he still stuck almost insignificant in this world.

Even though director, Edward Berger gives his all and making this film flash and a visual delight with plenty of color and style throughout, not quite making the images always surreal, but definitely always making them feel alive when bright, but also feeling chill and coldness when there is no color and it’s rather plain 

which is rather shocking as with his previous two films conclave and all quiet on the Western front adaptation both seem to be simple yet highly visual with the media stories that seem to plane at the time, but as the film goes along, truly brings the audience in deeperz.

where as here the film seems to go for flash and slowly reveal a more dramatic story underneath, but there’s just no meat to be chewed on as we watch so that the only time the film truly is entertaining is when it comes to the visuals and more visual storytelling rather than the dialogue scenes and the little meat that they offer

Colin Farrell gives his all in his performance as the gambler in the middle of this, but again it’s something we’ve seen before and many other films, and we never quite understand why he makes certain decisions. There are explanations that has left more for the audience to read into. 

Just as Tilda Swinton having a supporting role here, though it feels more like a special appearance as her role is vital, but she’s not given much to do other than have kind of a frumpy noteworthy look and style. 

This one was like watching a steak or a meal that just looks so big and delicious but then when you bite into it is undercooked and thus disappointing 

Where you can imagine how great it could’ve been but have to deal with what it actually is. 

There is glitz and glamour, but they’re still seems to be something missing things. We are supposed to take for granted or figure out from little information we are given as there aren’t that many explanations, but big decisions and actions that we question the meaning behind all of them.

Grade: C

IF I HAD LEGS I’D KICK YOU (2025)

Written & Directed By: Mary Bronstein 

Cinematography: Christopher Messina 

Editor: Lucian Johnston

Cast: Rose Byrne, A$ap Rocky, Conan O’Brien, Ivy Wolk, Delaney Quinn, Danielle Macdonald, Christian Slater, Josh Pais, Ella Beatty, Mary Bronstein

While trying to manage her own life and career, a woman on the verge of a breakdown must cope with her daughter’s illness, an absent husband, a missing person, and an unusual relationship with her therapist.


This is dramatic, but present presented as a dark comedy

One can remember the first time I saw Rose Byrne in a film. It was in a disastrous epic movie Troy and I remember not being that impressed by her and it seems like since then if she had heard, she took it as a personal upfront because it seems like since then she has done nothing but build her career and impress in numerous performances that she sometimes gets credited with, but not enough in my view and here she gives an Oscar level performance think general Rowlands in a woman under the influence and her intensity

The film also has her character leading with all sorts of catastrophes that are making her breakdown and the camera seems to present most scenes, especially with her an extreme close-up, so you can never escape her intensity just as she seems to never be able to escape her ongoing problems and challenges

IT’S interesting that her character is a therapist as clearly she is breaking down and has her own therapist, and her job is to listen to other people‘s problems and give advice, but she can’t seem to solve her own as well as taking care of a disabled daughter and a husband who is not supportive truly, and never there

Randomly Conan O’Brien is in this movie, which is a welcome surprise, especially if you’re a fan of his though in a role that is quite different 

One of the wisest decisions is that her child is often in the scenes, but remains unseen, so while she has this illness, we never quite see her. She is kind of a phantom where we wonder what she looks like, but it might also be because it would be hard to find a child to give a physical and unbelievable performance for that character. While mostly throughout we are given fl glimpses of her. when eventually the child is revealed it is at a pivotal point. It seems as a must rather than play the character is almost invisible or imaginary.

Not sure that this film was produced by Josh Safdie, as it does feel like one of his films maybe not visually but with a main character going through increasing pressure and as the film goes on, they’re being an unrelenting tension that doesn’t seem to offer any distractions and the character coming more and more unhinged

Though the film is like the character at first, it seems a little light, a little more comedic and then as it goes along, it gets a little darker and has a little more pressure then by the end it just feels like there’s nowhere to go nowhere a turd and it doesn’t offer any answers or show that any character is a saint nor a villain they are just who they are in life. Is that way too there’s no definitive answer. There’s no let up Sometimes. It can be random.

It is surprising how much it has gripped you by the end and how much you care. Even as itnolays like an emotional horror film as it unfolds especially towards the end.

Grade: B+

BOB TREVINO LIKES IT (2024)

Written & Directed By: Tracie Laymon 

Cinematography: John Rosario 

Editor: Anisha Acharya 

Cast: Barbie Ferreira, John Leguizamo, French Stewart, Lauren ‘Lolo’ Spencer, Rachel Bay Jones, Ted Welch, Tony Milder, Ashlyn Moore 

When lonely 20-something Lily Trevino accidentally befriends a stranger online who shares the exact same name as her own self-centered father, encouragement and support from this new Bob Trevino could change her life for the better. Inspired by a true story.

————————————————————————

Wow, this movie surprised the heck out of me practically came out of nowhere and while at first, it seemed like a small streaming dramatic title. It might be because it’s premise seems like one of those or some quirky Indie drama that might’ve played big at Sundance and won an audience award. I do remember that this film got a theatrical release and more independent theaters, getting by decent reviews but never quite knew what it was about.

 Now I kick myself for not actually checking it out then, As this is one of those that seems to slip through the fingers of audience is really looking for underrated gems, or diamonds in the rough 

Going into the film, it will feel somewhat familiar and going or heading towards a tearjerking motivational film, which is at heart, but it’s so much more and it’s not overcomplicated. It keeps it rather simple but quite moving. and got me very emotional. A true earnest and charming movie.

I knew the movie was gonna make me emotional halfway through as it was all ready, stirring up things by the end you know out came, the water works in the tears and then finding out it’s based on a true story, really amazed and destroyed me, but it also allowed me to have faith That there are good people out there honest and you can make a true connection with strangers and can care for one another almost like family or as family

Now, while I have seen a lot of movies I have liked recently. This is the first one that really got to me emotionally and one that I really needed as I haven’t had an overall emotional response to a movie. In quite some time and this really helped was almost like a lot of repressed feelings finally coming out. 

This isn’t a flashy film, nor really an emotionally manipulative film where in the score tries to truly direct you or your emotions rather this did it on its own and it’s almost its own personal therapy session. Where you can watch the drama of someone else’s life and identify with it. Even if the details in situations differ.

It’s also nice to see John Leguizamo get somewhat normal role, not outrageous, not over the top, not a criminal and to see Barbie Ferreira get a chance to be in the spotlight of a film, especially after her noted Work in the first season of the television show EUPHORIA and since then, while she has had Supporting and small roles and other things, nothing that truly let her shine or show her depth of talent. Even if in these various roles, it allowed her to showcase her range 

Here she is the real deal And the only weak or puzzling part of this film is the performance by French Stewart. Who seems like he’s more going for some kind of weird western accent or just seems over the top, but maybe that is how the character needs to be played. Whereas he’s always putting on a performance to scam other people in whichever way he can do it. So that he is never quite genuine.

The film might be so affecting, because the writer/director based the film on her own experiences. So that the film always feels real and identifiable with human emotions . Who make good and bad decisions in the character stay three dimensional and not perfect.

This is the type of film that in the past would’ve won the Sundance film festival, for being a bit offbeat, but maybe a little bit more mainstream and identifiable. So that it could find an audience that is a bit more mainstream. if they would give it a chance as it is Something that feels pure and it’s all about connection and family. That might not necessarily be blood and it’s chosen a little more randomly

When I was younger, I would’ve felt that this performance or this type of character felt too unrealistic, but as you live life, you do realize that some people are just this way unemotional unless it comes to themselves, but while you’re thinking, you have created a bond or have earned or inherited one due to bonds, either born into or ones that would naturally happen. Nothing is ever promised in some don’t feel bound by any of those connections

Maybe I got suckered by the emotions on display mixed in with the storytelling more than any technical achievements. As this could perfectly fit into some kind of hallmark lifetime TV movie, but this feels a little more real, not quite hard edged, but a little more blunt and direct than those films are not offering a façade or an entirely happily ever after of promise. I wasn’t seduced by the filmmaking but the story and emotions. Which I believe audiences will appreciate and truly enjoy 

Grade: B+

NORTH HOLLYWOOD (2021)

Written & Directed By: Mikey Alfred

Cinematography: Ayinde Anderson 

Editor: Alex Tsagamilis 

Cast: Ryder McLaughlin, Nico Hiraga, Aramis Hudson, Vince Vaughn, Miranda Cosgrove, Angus Cloud, Gillian Jacobs, Blake Anderson 

A kid must decide between choosing the future his father wants and following his dream of becoming a pro skater.

————————————————————————

This film unfortunately feels sort of like a b-movie version of the film MID 90S or a more independent version of it, as it feels similar but being not quite as sharp. as there are no major names in the cast, except for Vince Vaughn playing the main characters, strong willed, father, and he makes his presence felt And gives the strongest performance. 

The majority of the film is plotless. It’s more of a becoming of age comedy drama, where we watch our main character who wants to be a pro skater through the ins and outs of a few weeks into his life and the various situations he finds himself in. 

As in most coming-of-age films, he finds a romance and faces alienation or the breaking up of friendships as they mature and change and head off in a different directions, though there’s a little actual plotter story a bunch of stuff happens that help to define the characters 

Though the characters being kind of unlikable, juvenile and bland, which one is sure is the main point of the film. As we all are at that time but here it doesn’t come off as fun or poignant. It comes off more as annoying more like someone looking back at that age, and trying to be hip with the current generation as it feels a little Just out of date for some reason. So that there feels like no one in particular to root for or even look forward to. 

What the film does have is a good soundtrack and greats and photography that make you sit through the film and study the shots and notice how well film they are really your patience will be tested with this film and how much you actually get into either the characters or your wonder to see what’s gonna happen next 

As the film isn’t quite as polished or confident as mid 90s and has a more open ambiguous ending, that seems a bit more downtrodden and then positive, but hold out hope strives for a DIY attitude and tone.

As it seeks to be authentic, it just constantly seems a bit off brand and a little more manufactured rather than telling it’s truth or being autobiographical or someone’s passion project

Watching it it just feels way too familiar even in different clothing and locations. You’re going to have that I’ve seen this before, but maybe it works for a new generation and will speak to them. 

The film is worth watching if you don’t have too many expectations or expect that much from me it’s perfectly fine entertainment. Give the film a chance, though you can’t say you weren’t warned beforehand 

Grade: C 

LILI (1953)

Directed By: Charles Walters

Written By: Helen Deutsch

Based on the story “THE MAN WHO HATED PEOPLE” By: Paul Gallico 

Cinematography: Robert Planck 

Editor: Ferris Webster 

Cast: Leslie Caron, Mel Ferrer, Zsa Zsa Gabor, Jean Pierre Aumont, Kurt Kaszner, Amanda Blake, Alex Gerry, Ralph Dumke

An orphaned young woman becomes part of a puppet act and forms a relationship with the anti-social puppeteer.

————————————————————————-

This film will automatically not be for everyone and honestly some might be repulsive, especially the sensibilities of most in modern times. Though for those wanting to get lost in a fantasy of old school filmmaking in its own world. A fairy tale of sorts. We can look at it as different times and what was acceptable at the time. Which doesn’t make it right or wrong. 

The Film is very light and more noteworthy for its design under modern eyes. 

Either way, it’s a very strange film of its time that offers magical realism with an innocence. Yet approaches adult matters at times. Which can be very dark when it comes to the material

It’s a musical that truly only has two musical sequences. It’s a strange family film that might make adults more uncomfortable, though children might love it. As it comes across as a real world fairy tale

The film is a bit creepy. As usually anything with puppets can be for some. Especially as the puppeteer uses them to distract her and seduce her. It’s where he shows his more sensitive side. Though her believing they are real continuously shows how young she is. 

At heart,  it’s a film about a man gaslighting and underage girl who’s innocence is shown demeanor, and a baby face 

Made Romantic as the puppeteer of the carnival she joins seems to try to save her first from suicide, but also seems to slowly seduce her to teach and save her from her naïveté. Though this is partially in retaliation. As she falls in love so easily with a decent flirty and romantic man. Who earlier saved her from being attacked and taken advantage of. 

Though the romantic rival, The Puppeteer is a man scarred by the war and the world becomes More and more bitter. As she seems to not see him at least not the real him only pieces of  him that are rough and angry. Though he acts like his feelings are obvious for her. Which only shows that they are not a match if anything due to maturity. That the film Tries to act like she has gained by the end. Making the romance possible.

This is a romantic fantasy truly, but watching it under modern eyes makes it more dastardly if looking at it more critically and under a microscope. 

As it is the basis of the stage musical CARNIVAL and won the Oscar for Best Music in 1953. 

FRANKENSTEIN (2025)

 

Written & Directed by Guillermo del Toro

Based on the novel “FRANKENSTEIN OR THE MODERN PROMETHEUS” ByMary Shelly 

Cinematography: Dan Laustsen 

Editor: Evan Schiff 

Cast: Oscar Isaac, Jacob Elordi, Mia Goth, Christoph Waltz, Charles Dance, David Bradley, Ralph Ineson, Lars Mikkelsen, Nikolaj Lie Kaas, Lauren Collins, Sofia Galasso 

Dr. Victor Frankenstein, a brilliant but egotistical scientist, brings a creature to life in a monstrous experiment that ultimately leads to the undoing of both the creator and his tragic creation.

————————————————————————

Guillermo del Toro’s adaptation of Frankenstein arrives with the kind of anticipation usually reserved for cinematic pilgrimages. It’s a long-gestating passion project by a filmmaker whose devotion to monsters borders on religious. And yes, it’s gorgeous. Ravishing. Sculpted with the kind of gothic precision that makes you want to pause the frame and hang it in a museum (which, ironically, is part of the problem).

Because for all its visual majesty, the film feels less like a living, beating story and more like a beautifully lit museum chamber piece sacred, admired, but curiously still. Almost like a Wes Anderson film

Watching Frankenstein at home, even on the biggest TV you can justify without shame, is like trying to view a cathedral through your peephole. You get the idea, but not the impact. As The film Is A Gorgeous Experience That Never Quite Comes Alive

Del Toro stages the movie like a theatrical spectacle; wide, grand, operatic. It demands an audience seated in the dark, collectively hopefully

holding their breath. On a smaller screen the whole thing compresses, and so does its emotional force. It becomes one more thing you’re “watching while also texting,” its larger-than-life gestures suddenly feeling muted. Which might be why this film doesn’t reach me. As much as it would in a theater more secluded and direct. 

It’s a reminder of an uncomfortable truth: not every film needs the big screen, but this one absolutely does. Shrink it, and the soul shrinks with it.

A friend once described last year’s NOSFERSTU remake as “a museum piece”—impeccable, reverent, exquisitely lit, styled, designed and emotionally distant. It comes off more as a presentation than a movie. Del Toro’s Frankenstein often slips into that same territory.

The sets are Immaculate. The creature design is inventive. The mood? Pretentiously Overwhelming in the best way.

And yet… it rarely moves you. The emotions are presented but not felt. They are laid before the viewer with academic seriousness, like annotations on a text everyone already knows by heart. Maybe that’s the curse of remaking a story we’ve collectively known since childhood: the beats land, but they don’t surprise.

It becomes less a story and more an opportunity to witness someone else’s interpretation of a myth you’ve heard too many times.

Del Toro is too talented to ever make something bad, but here he feels like a director in his Tim-Burton-phase: Instead of breaking new ground, he’s lovingly recreating  the things that inspired him growing up. Unlike Burton, del Toro doesn’t defang his monsters or turn them into punchlines. He actually adores them too much for that, but the result is still a filmmaker circling familiar territory rather than charting new routes. 

And yes, the del Toro signature remains: a gothic romance at the center, a creature yearning for connection, a broken heart inside a larger-than-life body. It’s easy to see what drew him to the material. It’s also easy to wish he’d returned to an original idea instead.

Christoph Waltz—shockingly—goes big. He’s operatic, but also the kind of actor who benefits from stern directorial supervision. Left unchecked, he can become his own genre. Here, he hovers just on the edge of self-parody, charismatic but distracting. 

The rest of the cast plays it with earnestness and restraint, letting del Toro’s production design do most of the heavy emotional lifting. Sometimes too much.

So… Is It Good? Absolutely. Is it essential?

Not quite. As Frankenstein is an achievement, a vision, a painterly triumph. But it’s also one more retelling of a story that has been told so many times it now arrives pre-interpreted. Beautiful, yes undeniably. But also strangely hollow, like an echo of itself.

It’s a noteworthy film, worth admiring, worth seeing on the biggest screen you can find.

But it’s not a new favorite. More a reminder of what del Toro can do… and what we wish he’d dare to do next.

Grade: B 

CHRISTMAS EVE IN MILLER’S POINT (2024)

Directed by: Tyler Taormina

Written By: Tyler Taormina and Eric Berger

Story Editor/Editor: Kevin Anton

Cinematography: Carson Lund

Cast: Matilda Fleming, Maria Dizzia, Ben Shenkman, Francesca Scorsese, Elsie Fisher, Michael Cera, Gregg Turkington, Tony Savino, Steven Alleva, Grege Morris, Sawyer Spielberg

On Christmas Eve, a family gathers for what could be the last holiday in their ancestral home. As the night wears on and generational tensions arise, one of the teenagers sneaks out with her friends to claim the wintry suburb for her own.

————————————————————————-

this film is the epitome of an ensemble film as there are no real stars. Every character plays their role essentially in each other stories, and there is no real complete story as everything is told more and snippets and scenes, but never quite from beginning to end in a complete way. 

As the film is largely plotless, but plays out over a families holiday traditions, and party as they all get together where many individual things happen some smaller some greater but nothing really happens except for this celebration.

it seems like the filmmaker wanted some more evoke, the emotions of the holiday or any holiday gathering with your family where the story is told purely at this celebration where you get updates about their lives away from one another, always wanting to showcase the best and you get a sense of the family history and their relationships with one another, but nothing is ever clearly defined 

The drama that happens as well as the comedy is more lived in and isn’t as random as everyone knows each other and because they know each other and their habits nothing is quite shocking to one another. 

The film works and its own artistry that might be frustrating to some members of the audience as it takes its time telling the story it wants to, but again the story is never told in a complete way it’s more told segments that seem like they go nowhere endless that more evoke moods as there is an inherent sadness throughout as they adults are realizing they’re getting older and how much they have in the past but also the ones who raise them are slowly deteriorating and they want to take care of them. It might be too much for them to take on

And that would also celebrates the happiness of seeing long lost family members who you grew up with who now other than these types of get together rarely ever see as those family members you never really want to see, but are forced to and have to play nice with 

The tons of cuisine and food that you can board yourself on and share with family 

As well as issues that certain family members have with one another that everyone seems to know about, but either or not acknowledged or not talked about, but clearly seen and felt 

there is a section of the film where it more focuses on the younger characters the teenagers and their wild night out though even though there’s more adventure and the film seems to have a little more energy and spirit to match the characters. It also is more told in segments whereas anytime the film comes close to anything happening, especially any kind of action or excitement it seems like it cuts to something else or another character and then we see the aftermath of the action.

As even the biggest names in the cast, who is also a producer, Michael cera barely has any lines and isn’t in much of the movie nor anal part of it, but is appearance does add a certain prestige into the film

this is a film that might be challenging for some and truly you’re either going to get into its wavelength or not.

Though as an audience member one cannot say they were totally down with everything about the film. I applaud it for its artistic choices and the mood and can identify with the material as the film presents highs and Lows joys and defeats, but isn’t meant to leave the audience depressed, but also isn’t the typical holiday movie where it’s all smiles and happiness for the audience, though the film does end with a lot of smiles for the characters.

Grade: B-

SILENT NIGHT (2021)

Written & Directed By: Camille Griffin

Cinematography: Sam Renton 

Editor: Pia Di Ciaula and Martin Walsh 

Cast: Keira Knightley, Matthew Goode, Roman Griffin Davis, Sope Dirisu, Kirby Howell-Baptiste, Lucy Punch, Annabelle Wallis, Lily-Rose Depp, Rufus Jones, Davida McKenzie

Nell, Simon, and their 3 sons are ready to welcome friends and family for what promises to be a perfect Christmas gathering. Perfect except for one thing: everyone is going to die.

————————————————————————

This is a film. You should know as a little about before you watch it and let yourself be surprised by it that way it can be rewarding for you.

This is a dark comedy with a surprise ending that you don’t necessarily see coming, especially with this material. Which can be subtle but does leave a sting.

As a perfectly mixes, the joy and melancholy of the holidays. As a time of joy camaraderie, but also a time of darkness, especially if not feeling that particular joy and still feel a certain loneliness or emptiness

The film starts off at typical if not cynical, though eventually you find out the downside or tragedy of what brings all the characters together. Even though there are at the beginning.

We get to see the characters go through the emotions as it dawns on them what is coming and have to face their own mortality and their past. The film surprisingly has them talking about each other, but never becoming vicious or revealing secrets that would normally tear them apart, which would direct the film into a more territory. it to be point and somewhat realistic.

The drama of it all gets to you in the audience that has its fair share of humor that comes more naturally as some secrets are revealed.

What is that? The film isn’t reliant on one thing it’s the mixture of elements that works. The same way with the cast it’s an ensemble no real stars, though wish some of the cast members or other characters had more to do than what they are given here mainly Kirby Howell-Baptiste.

This is a film, where the melancholy hangs in the air no matter how light some scenes or the atmosphere might be.

When the heart is introduced, it gets dark and all the more real thou it is a release of the underlying tension that the film has been building up.

Soon as you see  Roman Griffin Davis in this film, you should know it’s a tragedy or whoever is playing his mother won’t survive. So far his career highlights have been this and JOJO RABBITT. so usually a quirky dark comedy. Though he is also the film’s director’s son 

Ultimately, the film has a climate change message and is very subtle with its theme and provocations. Especially when it comes to science and the government also the establish class and youth culture.. 

I’m surprised this film is more popular as it is a gem 

Grade: B

EDDINGTON (2025)

 

Written & Directed By: Ari Aster

Cinematography: Darius Khondji

Editor: Lucian Johnston 

Cast: Joaquin Phoenix, Emma Stone, Austin Butler, Pedro Pascal, Deidre O’Connell, Michael Ward, Cameron Mann, Clifton Collins Jr., Luke Grimes, William Belleau, Amelie Hoeferle 

In May of 2020, a standoff between a small-town sheriff and mayor sparks a powder keg as neighbor is pitted against neighbor in Eddington, New Mexico.

————————————————————————

This film Is A Modern Western Fever Dream America Desperately Needs to Talk About

Eddington is one of those films that walks into the cultural conversation like it owns the place. It’s loud, strange, earnest, paranoid, poetic—and you immediately know you’ll be arguing about it for months. It’s a genuine conversation starter, which is why I will gently advise: go in knowing as little as possible.

That said… one has have to talk about it, and talking about it requires spoilers. So consider this your warning, your permission slip, and your parachute.

This is a film that is hard to describe or even evaluate on one review. There are so Many things going o. Where even the littlest action, decision or even detail means more by the ends 

This is a movie that is, by design, divisive. A cinematic Rorschach test. Some viewers will love it. Some will hate it. Some will think they “get” it. Some will swear others don’t “get” it. And others still will simply sit there wondering why the film dared to poke at politics, identity, and American mythmaking with a stick this sharp and this reckless.

But that’s also the point: Eddington isn’t here to soothe you. As it’s a midwest tapestry stitched with paranoia.

Set in a small Midwestern town, the film plays like a modern western that swaps out the black-hatted outlaw for pandemic panic, online conspiracy, fractured identity politics, and the creeping realization that the “outside world” has already invaded long before anyone notices.

The first half feels deceptively simple. small tensions, personal feuds, social anxietie, but those threads keep tightening, knotting, and snapping until the town erupts, not because of a single villain, but because absolutely everyone is too wrapped up in their own drama to actually talk to each other.

It’s a portrait of America where communication has been replaced with suspicion. Where rivalries escalate past all reason. Where every person is starring in their own private conspiracy thriller. Even as the real threats crawl right through the cracks.

By the end, the film begins to resemble a Donald-Trump-era conspiracy fantasy… but with absolutely none of the idol worship or flattery. It’s the nightmare version: the idea that paranoia itself becomes prophecy. That fear becomes religion. That enemies, real or imagined materialize because characters are too busy reenacting their own ideological theater to notice the world burning around them.

The satire bites hard, aiming squarely at both political sides. The left -idealistic, moralizing, eager to be on “the right side of history” treats the town’s homeless man like an inconvenience. The right – fearful, defensive, easily provoked, treats him like a problem to eliminate. And everyone, absolutely everyone, is a hypocrite.

Young “progressive” locals demand justice yet lecture the Black deputy on what he should feel, while he’s simply trying to do his job and survive in a town that barely allows upward mobility. Romantic tensions reveal that personal motives are often far murkier than the ideologies people hide behind. Friendships fracture. Morals bend depending on who’s watching. It makes you wonder if the characters truly feel this or if it’s just performative social justice because that is the trend and what’s popular. Also giving them a sense of rebellion that youth seems to always desire against the aged or old ways. 

By the end the deputy has his own scars and learns the lessons his ancestors had to deal with and learn. Yet still go on day to day in pain. Never being able to forget the injustices. 

The virus infiltrates. Fear infiltrates. Antifa is said to infiltrate. But really, it’s paranoia doing all the infiltrating.

Yes, this is very much an Ari Aster film, though it’s looser, less mannered, and more sprawling than Midsommar or Beau Is Afraid. It’s a messy beauty, intentionally so. The visuals are gorgeous but less overtly stylized; the tone more erratic, more chaotic, more human. It’s a modern western of moral collapse 

If Beau Is Afraid punished its lead for everything, Eddington punishes its lead for exactly one thing: believing revenge is righteousness.

And his downward spiral, though tragic, is compelling in a mythic, moral-fable way.

The third act is where Aster lights the fuse and lets the whole film detonate.

Chaos reigns. Consequences catch up. Characters pay the ultimate price. not for their politics, but for their blindness.

Eddington refuses to pick a side because it’s too busy examining how people weaponize sides in the first place. It understands that humans are more complicated than the slogans they carry or the propaganda they share. Ideology becomes performance. Performance becomes identity. Identity becomes a trap.

And through all this, the film insists that sometimes the greatest horror story is simply a group of people refusing to truly see one another.

So that the film is about flawed people, not slogans 

Is the film perfect? No. Is it Ari Aster’s best? No 

But Is it vital? Absolutely. It’s ambitious, jagged, clunky in spots, occasionally too big for its own frame, but it’s also alive—full of ideas, full of danger, full of that rare cinematic bravery that demands viewers think rather than simply consume.

The major supporting actors. Some of the film’s biggest names. Emma Stone, Austin Butler, Pedro Pascal all appear briefly but meaningfully, flashing like caution signs in the town’s slow-motion meltdown. Their presence reinforces how everyone is part of the problem, part of the confusion, part of the noise.

Joaquin Phoenix’s acting here is more internal than external and it’s his show the ringleader to reign in. Even if by the end he is one of the acts rather then being in control. Especially the way he wants or hopes he is. 

I could try to link the various theories and interpretations that this film presents but that is for the viewer to discover for themselves and read into,  no I’m not writing that to say that I don’t

Have any or see any. I think half the interest and entertainment isn’t Always what is happening on the screen but how you or an audience reacts to it. 

I can see why some might dislike the film

Though most admit they don’t like the film but It’s 

Not a bad film as it does make you think. As it tries to be a satire that is less comedic and more political exposing the chaos of the pandemic playing out all the theories, fears and politics in a small town and making it come across as a modern western due to it’s Location and strange mix of morals and anti-hero To show that we are all flawed in some way

As when the lead does what he thinks is right out of revenge but leads to his own and others downfall that ends up with him being heroic and paying the ultimate price 

The films shows flaws I. Both sides as it is more interested in showing characters and how they can be lead astray but also victims of circumstance and survival at times 

Who are we to hate because things don’t

go the way they are supposed to or are expected to. People are people not slogans and propaganda that they might brandish or share and at the heart of all these movements the leaders are open to oversight and more interested in the message and less the followers or even supposed victims 

This is not a pass/fail film. It’s a what did this make you feel? film. A what did you see that I missed?film.

The entertainment isn’t just the plot. it’s the audience reaction, the interpretations, the debates in the parking lot afterward.

Eddington is a human horror story disguised as a political satire disguised as a western disguised as a pandemic drama.

It’s a film about how easily we fracture under pressure, how quickly we fall into narrative traps, and how dangerous it is when no one is listening.

Not my favorite Aster film… but maybe the one most urgently worth discussing.

Grade: B+