It's a pretty good superhero movie from India and it is available in English on Netflix.

Definitely check it out if you like this genre because it is a well made flick! 👍🏻

Such an incredible bio pic. Everyone should see. Really inspires peace and in any team. Hope it wins some 2024 Oscars.

Source: https://www.reeladvice.net/2024/04/the-fall-guy-movie-review.html

We anticipated laughter and entertaining action from "The Fall Guy," and in those aspects, the film certainly delivered. However, what surprised us was its potential for more than just sheer entertainment. David Leitch offers a film experience that can be taken at face value but also holds deeper meaning. "The Fall Guy" serves as a love letter not only to the unseen stunt performers but also as a surprising ode to the film industry as a whole.

Colt Seavers (played by Ryan Gosling) is a stunt performer who finds himself sidelined from the industry after a humiliating and almost career-ending accident. More than a year later, he receives a call to return to Australia and resume his role as a stunt performer. Despite initial hesitation, he decides to accept the offer upon learning that the film's director is the love of his life, Jody Moreno (played by Emily Blunt). However, upon arriving on set, he discovers that there's more at stake than just performing stunts.

At over two hours long, "The Fall Guy's" primary issue, in our opinion, was its excessive length. The narrative felt simplistic, stretched thin, and predictable for its duration. The film would have been closer to perfection if it had been trimmed to 90 minutes. Despite its length, the film was highly entertaining. The comedy was the biggest draw for us, overshadowing the action, although both were competently executed. Whether you seek a laugh, thrills, or a blend of both, "The Fall Guy" delivers from start to finish. The pairing of Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt was enjoyable, albeit not flawless. The awkwardness between them added a unique and charming dynamic. However, it's Ryan Gosling who steals the show, delivering another outstanding performance as the charismatic yet over-the-top Colt Seavers, reminiscent of his role in last year's "Barbie." To truly enjoy "The Fall Guy," one must embrace its silliness, and what an enjoyable ride it was while it lasted.

Rating: 4 out of 5

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSA-E9pubu8

starring Charles Bronson and his real-life wife, Jill Ireland.

The first time I watched it was many years ago and I was deeply moved by it. Yesterday, I rewatched it and was still left in tears.

This movie has a break neck pace and delves into covert racism. A white cop shoots a black teen and is acquitted. The family sues him civilly for damages and he decides while drinking to go to their house to talk to them about it. Things go from bad to worse.

https://youtu.be/5CchWPIc394?si=8PCH899KXM6K41DE

I always like a good South Korean scary film and this doesn’t disappoint, although I’d be tempted to badge it as a ghost film, rather than a straight up horror.

With more than a nod to the MR James short story ‘A Warning to the Curious’, this film deals with the exhumation at an isolated gravesite in present day Korea. One of the most interesting aspects of the film involve the collaboration between a shaman and a geomancer In dealing with restless and often violent spirits.

It’s a slow burner for such a weird premise, but I liked its considered and methodical approach which gave it a ‘based on a true story’ authenticity.

One of the genuinely surprising plot branches deals extensively with the Japanese colonisation of Korea in the last century; an extremely sensitive subject to all Koreans, even nowadays. I thought that was quite a brave thing to do.

Like most films nowadays, it is a little bit too long and loses some momentum prior to the last quarter. The very end is also figuratively (and literally) a bit messy but these are small niggles; on the whole the film is a very enjoyable ride.

I saw the subtitled version (I’m ok with subtitles). Possibly a dubbed version is also around somewhere.

At any rate, ‘Exhuma’ is well worth checking out.

Third time the charm for posting this thing!

Plot: The main character (a gay man) is living abroad in Columbia & invites his best friend & brother (straight men) to holiday with him.

But the movie itself was weird. A lot of sex, some nudity, at one point >!the 2 brothers are having sex beside each other while their friend watches!<. Maybe I’m just too classy, but I could never do that.

It’s very surreal, how the one brother >!keeps saying he’s straight while having gay sex. And then the other brother suddenly becomes murderous, homophobic, and has gay sex!< all in the same scene.

There's several scenes of >!homophobic violence!<, which is alarming and scary. I guess when I started the movie it would be more light-hearted, but it got pretty dark sometimes.

The ending is what bothers me the most. The gay character >!tried to move on from all the craziness & tells the straight-gay brother to leave him alone, and he just keeps saying No. Cut to black. I genuinely hope the gay character doesn’t get messed up with him again.!<

The version I was streaming had commercials, so I downloaded it instead. But both versions had different lines, different shots, one starts with a monologue about a character being bipolar. Also some scenes black out so I streamed a third version just to see. I guess the second version had edited out >!some nudity and choking!<.

I think I really would have liked more solid character arcs and a better resolution. I liked the "Truman" nod. I didn't enjoy how much the stoner character was the writers' clear favorite.

The virgin kept on making the same stupid concerned face, which I understand is probably a parody, but it really annoyed me and at a certain point you have to wonder when you're crossing the line between bad and pretending to be bad.

Like characterization- the characters were flat, but there was a weird thing going on where they were flat pretending to be flat. Same sort of problem.

I probably didn't appreciate the menagerie of monster callbacks as much as others did.

I really didn't like the ending. Bro is really gonna let everyone die just out of some really vague and dumb misanthropy? If it turned out the old gods weren't actually real or weren't going to kill people that would be one thing, and if fool stepped up and became the messianic figure that would be really archetype of him, but instead we got the bitch of both worlds and stoner bro smokes a dooby as the world ends.

Assuming that the obvious self-insert is a self-insert, I don't think it reflects well on the writers. This is the protagonist? What's his motivation? He doesn't want to die, but he vaguely wants humanity to? Because of what? Did we get any characterization to this end?

I think Chris Hemsworth would've taken the bullet. Even in the fantasies of nerds they are still losers. Total jock supremacy.

I understand that this is parody, and therefore nothing the writers do can be wrong, but I still want a story that stands on its own two feet.

At the end of the day- I'm all for a film protesting mediocre movies, I just request that the protest film is not itself a mediocre movie. Just like a film critiquing sexualizing children should not itself sexualize children.

10/10 for creativity, and creativity counts for a lot, but I really wanna see you stick the landing. As others have said- Galaxy Quest is the gold standard here.

Source: https://www.reeladvice.net/2024/04/challengers-movie-review.html

Within the span of a month, we've been treated to two exceptional sports films: the first being the Chinese film "YOLO," and the second being Luca Guadagnino's "Challengers." The fact that "Challengers" isn't based on a true story or a biopic allows its narrative the freedom to explore its own path, and it surpasses all expectations. In fact, labeling it solely as a sports film might be a bit misleading, as its emphasis on romance and drama far outweighs its portrayal of the sport itself. It's riveting, intriguing, and intense on multiple levels simultaneously.

Tashi Duncan (Zendaya) is a former tennis prodigy turned tennis coach, a force of nature who makes no apologies for her actions both on and off the court. Married to Art (Mike Faist), a tennis champion currently struggling with a losing streak, Tashi's strategy for her husband's redemption involves persuading him to participate in a seemingly insignificant tennis tournament. However, what was expected to be an easy victory for Art takes an unexpected turn when he finds himself facing off against the washed-up former pro, Patrick (Josh O'Connor) – Art's former best friend and Tashi's former boyfriend.

Whether it's the kinetic soundtrack by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, the phenomenally shot sports sequences by Luca Guadagnino, or the intricate love triangle between the main characters, "Challengers" captivates its audience in various ways. The film endeavors to create a narrative with layers upon layers beneath its surface, transcending the boundaries of a typical sports film. Its refusal to conform to expectations is its greatest strength. Admittedly, some scenes may push the boundaries of sensuality, but for the most part, they serve a purpose within the narrative. The chemistry between Zendaya, Mike Faist, and Josh O'Connor is palpable and genuine, and their ongoing "competition" adds an enjoyable dynamic to the film. For us, this stands as Zendaya's best performance to date; her character evokes a deep sense of selfishness that really turned us against her - especially in the film's climactic and satisfying final scene. Overall, "Challengers" challenges the conventional notions of what a sports film should be, offering a deeply personal and intimate experience that extends far beyond the realm of sports.

Rating: 4.5 out of 5

My son was watching "The Marvels" and I started watching it with him... Are girls really happy to be represented like this?

Female director, female protagonist, female co-protagonist, female antagonist and there are even cats and scenes where everyone sings and dances like a classical Disney movie (yes, I know that Disney own Marvel but that's not the point).
It looks like a joke.

Aren't characters like Sara Connors, Ellen Ripley or Evelyn Wang from "Everything everywhere all at once" more functional for female emancipation?

I thought 2024’s Role Play was a middle of the road movie. On the positive side, I thought there was some good action and I thought it was a good story.

On the negative side, though, I thought there would be more action, more stakes, and a better story. Also, nobody stood out with their acting. It wasn’t bad acting, but it was just normal

Overall, I wanted to see it because I thought the trailer looked good, but it wasn’t anything special. Just an average action thriller.

Rating-3/5

Just watched “Her” for the first time

Me n a buddy decided to watch a movie after we got sick of playing video games, so we found “Her”. I remember seeing the first few minutes when I was 11 and i immediately turned it off after a specific scene that I will not mention as to avoid spoilers and avoid talking about sexual content. So now that I’m 22 I figured I could handle the movie now, having finished the movie less than an hour ago, it had me shook, it’s both a very good movie, that also had me unsettled during some scenes, this trend was progressing towards the end. Admittedly there were also very heartwarming moments in the film as well. As a result it had me in a mix of emotions. For those who’ve not watched it, I recommend watching it only if you’re prepared for a mosh pit of emotions. As far as the writing, acting, and overall integrity of the film I give it a 10/10. But the story and topic may have some folks mind boggled

Very well made movie which may come as a surprise to some being the subject matter it is but director Alex Garland probably doesn’t get enough credit for how well he puts together his movies. It may also come as a surprise to some considering whether to watch this or not that it really isn’t politically charged, and merely uses the narrative of war to showcase the importance of journalists on the ground in wartimes, and the turmoil they go through to get the images and videos we see. Also, the acting in this movie is top notch, with a scene stealing cameo from Jesse Plemmons leaving you wanting more of his character. Our review touches base on all these topics and more.

https://youtu.be/9zPZ7KS2sDk?si=cVt8GjjYLtgguj1M

I’ve now watched the first two of the trilogy in the last couple of days. My god, I can’t believe I somehow overlooked these movies for so long. I absolutely loved the first two, especially Dawn.

Obviously, Matt Reeves is a great director, but his ability to tell both sides of a story might be unmatched. You watch one scene and you’re rooting for the apes and then you go to the next scene and you understand the human side of it. Then, you get to the actual battle scenes and they’re fantastic. You’re on the edge of your seat the entire time wondering how it’s going to play out. Caesar is written very well, as he can be both compassionate and understanding, but strong and domineering if needed.

I’m very much looking forward to watching War and Kingdom, when it comes out.

So I had no idea what I was getting into when I saw The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare but I had a very enjoyable time. Lots of action and explosions but also an interesting story that was based off a true story. It had me Em gaged entire time. I thought the main group was the best part especially with Henry Cavill and Alan Ritchson. Henry Cavill looks like he’s having fun in this role. I also enjoyed the score

The only small negative would be the scenes that don’t include the main group Don’t get to that level of excitement. I still think it was a solid watch that I enjoyed.

Rating-4/5

Source: https://www.reeladvice.net/2024/04/kampon-movie-review.html

"Kampon" presents itself as a visually striking horror film that manages to surprise viewers with its unsettling imagery. However, beneath its surface, the film struggles with a tangled narrative that leaves much to be desired. Despite commendable performances from Derek Ramsay and Beauty Gonzalez, the film's flawed writing undermines its potential.

The story revolves around Clark (Derek Ramsay) and Eileen (Beauty Gonzalez), a couple grappling with infertility. Their lives take a bizarre turn when a young girl named Jade (Erin Espiritu) appears, claiming to be Clark's daughter from a past he denies exists. Eileen's acceptance of Jade into their lives sets off a chain of events that delves deeper into Clark's and Jade's mysterious past.

"Kampon" feels like a haphazard amalgamation of ideas, lacking cohesion and clarity in its narrative direction. While it attempts to explore themes of parenthood and supernatural elements, it fails to deliver a cohesive message to its audience. As a horror film, it relies heavily on disturbing imagery and sporadic gore, but these moments are fleeting and fail to sustain a sense of dread throughout the film's runtime. The audience will be left grappling with unanswered questions and confusing plot developments, detracting from the overall viewing experience. Despite its shortcomings, "Kampon" boasts strong performances from its lead actors, particularly Derek Ramsay and Beauty Gonzalez, who bring depth to their characters. Nor Domingo also shines in his supporting role as a Colonel looking out for his old friend Clark. However, their efforts are hampered by the film's muddled narrative and unresolved themes as mentioned above. In conclusion, "Kampon" had the potential to deliver a compelling horror experience but falls short due to its narrative shortcomings. While it offers moments of visual intrigue and solid performances, it ultimately fails to deliver a coherent and satisfying story to make it special and stand out.

Rating: 2 out of 5

Source: https://www.reeladvice.net/2024/04/late-night-with-devil-movie-review.html

"Late Night with the Devil" ventures into the fading realm of found footage films with a unique proposition. Its unexpected authenticity transports viewers back to the 1970s, offering a refreshing departure from the genre's typical tropes. Bolstered by stellar performances, particularly from lead David Dastmalchian as the struggling host Jack Delroy, the film delivers an immersive experience that shouldn't be overlooked.

Set against the backdrop of a 1970s late-night talk show hosted by Jack Delroy, the narrative unfolds as the crew invites parapsychologist June Ross-Mitchell and the allegedly possessed Lilly onto the show. The subsequent unearthing of the master tape from that fateful Halloween broadcast in 1977 provides a chilling glimpse into the supernatural events that transpired within the studio.

While the film effectively blurs the lines between reality and fiction, it does stumble slightly in its execution. For us, the pacing remains steady throughout its runtime as it was able to maintain the illusion of a genuine broadcast. However, the climactic ending falls short for us, with the effects feeling noticeably artificial against the authentic '70s aesthetic of its concept. We also felt that it failed to explain what it all meant and the ramifications of the demon being let loose on a live broadcast. Despite its shortcomings, "Late Night with the Devil" succeeds in crafting an immersive atmosphere that lingers long after the credits roll. David Dastmalchian was a revelation here and the reason why the film was effective in its illusion. While it may not cater to those seeking outright terror, its ability to spark genuine curiosity and thought about the supernatural lends it a unique allure. From its behind-the-scenes glimpses of what happens in the production of a show to its convincing performances, the film offers a captivating journey that effectively transcends its genre's limitations.

Rating: 4 out of 5

1995’s The Quick and the Dead is a movie I’ve been hearing good things about for years And I finally got around to seeing it. This movie exceeded my expectations.

First off, let’s talk about the performances. The main four in this movie, being Sharon stone, Gene Hackman, Russell Crowe, and Leonardo DiCaprio. You get good backstories with Stone and Crowe, you get solid motivations from DiCaprio, and you get why Gene Hackman always plays a great feeling. He is menacing, but also Despicable. That also lends itself to the story too. You get that great balance of action and storytelling.

Finally, let’s talk about the action. Gunfights might be short, but each one of them bring some excitement because of what’s happening, but also the different camera angles, the music, and everything else involved.

Rating-4.5/5

6.5/10

pretty slow until he goes down under, but then gets fun

the ending was great and made the whole movie

Just got done with Kung Fu Panda 4 and feeling a whirlwind of emotions, and let me tell you, it was a total blast! Seeing Po back on the big screen after all this time brought back so many happy memories. The movie definitely captured the same fun and energy of the previous films, and it seems there are some exciting new challenges in store for the Dragon Warrior.

The animation looked incredible, I can't wait to see what new characters Po encounters on his journey, and how he tackles the obstacles ahead.

Without giving anything away, I can say that Kung Fu Panda 4 is a must-watch for fans of the series! It's full of laughs, heart, and of course, incredible kung fu action. If you're looking for a feel-good movie experience, this one definitely delivers.

Anyone else catch Kung Fu Panda 4 this weekend? What did you think? Let's discuss in the comments below

For those who are curious about the movie but haven't had a chance to see it in theaters yet, there are always ways to stay entertained. I recently discovered https://soap2day.ist They have a great selection of movies, including some classics, we shouldn't waste our free moment, and it's free to use.

​

This is an animated South Korean wlw/lesbian film. Strongest suits are the character designs and animation. It is vivid with colour and the depiction of the surroundings are beautiful and wonderfully detailed. The animation is very smooth. It is kind of weak story-wise and in characterization though. The main characters aren't all that interesting. We're just shown what happens during the course of their romance. Maybe this is a kind of step in the right direction - showing how wlw romance can be just as boring and mundane as hetero ones. But also maybe I'm being overly generous. Nonetheless this is a film with a lot of calm and relaxing scenes. Not that much tension in this film, and whatever conflict there is, is portrayed delicately to not break that mood of slight melancholy.

Source: https://www.reeladvice.net/2024/04/a-journey-movie-review.html

The intentions behind "A Journey," from its cast to its soundtrack, are evident to viewers. Initially, our concern was that the film might lean too heavily on nostalgia, to drive its success. However, "A Journey" defies this expectation. While its narrative may not break new ground conceptually, the film excels in delivering a purposeful and inspiring experience and it transcends the typical boundaries of a drama film and offers a whole lot more to its audience.

When Shane (Kaye Abad) learns that her cancer has returned, she resolves to complete her "magic list" with the time she has left. With the support of her husband Bryan (Paolo Contis) and close friend Tupe (Patrick Garcia), they embark on a journey through Tasmania to fulfill her list one by one.

Despite our initial reservations, RC Delos Reyes' latest film continually proved us wrong. At its core lies its cast, whose natural chemistry lends authenticity to their friendships on screen. This chemistry amplifies the emotional impact of the narrative further that there will be several scenes that tears will roll down your face. While Kaye Abad and Paolo Contis shine in this film, Patrick Garcia, though still delivering a capable performance, struggles especially in his emotionally-charged scenes. Narratively, "A Journey" has its strengths and weaknesses. Its simple and well-paced narrative delivers genuine surprises most of the way but becomes somewhat predictable towards the end. Overall, "A Journey" offers a nuanced experience even with its simplicity. It caters to a variety of audiences and will definitely provide a fulfilling experience who want pure drama or a nostalgic trip from its cast. However, its true beauty lies in its ability to inspire and its poignant message urging us all to live our days with purpose.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

I don’t know how 2019’s Iron Mask got on my watchlist. I’m guessing it’s because of a sub Reddit of possibly bad movies. I will say that this movie is better than I thought, but it is so out there and it’s off the wall.

On the positive side, Jackie Chan and Arnold Schwarzenegger, and pretty much the entire cast looks like they’re not trying to do anything serious but I think that’s the point and they’re just having fun. Also, I’d like some of the action scenes especially the one between Jackie Chan and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

For the negatives, there is obvious green screen and CGI pretty much throughout all of this movie. Also, the acting isn’t good by anybody

Rating-3.5/5

Source: https://www.reeladvice.net/2024/04/what-jennifer-did-movie-review.html

The true crime library of Netflix often presents a mixed bag, and unfortunately, "What Jennifer Did" falls into the latter category. This documentary proved challenging to watch, not due to the disturbing actions of Jennifer Pan, but rather because it lacked the substance to captivate audiences. When one can easily find YouTube videos offering more in-depth analysis and suspenseful editing, the question arises: why release this documentary at all?

In 2010, Jennifer Pan calls 911 to report a home invasion resulting in the shooting of her parents. However, as investigators scrutinize her account, discrepancies emerge. What unfolds is a convoluted narrative of greed, love, and delusion.

The entire experience was confounding. Firstly, the title serves as a major spoiler, robbing the documentary of any potential suspense. Moreover, it heavily relies on archival police interviews with Jennifer Pan, failing to provide fresh insights into her motivations or into the case. Even viewers unfamiliar with the case found of little interest. There are mostly interviews from start to finish. There's a glaring absence of compelling or emotionally resonant content to set it apart from even the most run-of-the-mill documentary. Directed by Jenny Popplewell, who previously helmed "American Murder: The Family Next Door," this release is a significant letdown compared to her excellent 2020 output. Sadly, it's advisable to skip this and simply read the Wikipedia page on Jennifer Pan instead to get your true crime fix.

​

Rating: 1.5 out of 5

Have always loved the music by Ennio Morricone and ofc knew most of the story but had never actually seen the film in its entirety. So of the bat yeah the soundtrack is phenomenal. I love the slow phase and the characters and the different aspects of them. All the scenes and details that showcase the mortal complexity of human emotion and the scenes of genuine heart and kindness from Clint Eastwood hit so hard. The criticism of war as well. Despite being a very goal based film it somehow still managed to have a indie like feel too it. Honestly I can’t really think of a single problem I had with it. Maybe the fist fights looked a little goofy at times but it’s also a pretty silly movie. This but this was actually kinda a perfect film. It’s not a super ambitious masterpiece but it’s still incredibly well made and it understands the importance of using both glass clear messages as well as subtle ones. Something the wast majority of modern films don’t. Easy 9/10! If you haven’t watched it I highly recommend it. It’s both silly, brutal and shockingly emotional in it’s own right despite it’s many over the top scenes and characters.

As I become increasingly tired of modern films, I've decided to dig into the archives of gems I may have missed. After canceling every streaming service due to a lack of decent content (The Gentlemen on Netflix being the only exception of late) I decided to gift myself The Criterion Channel streaming service. One of the first things I watched was 'Sorcerer'.

The story itself focuses on four desperate men who end up in Mexico due to various turns of bad luck. Without money or opportunities, they take on an insanely dangerous job which becomes a road trip through complete hell.

However, the production of the film was almost as hellish as the plot itself. William Friedkin was on a roll after 'The French Connection' and 'The Exorcist'. He wanted to make his own 'Apaccolyce Now' for his next film. He opted to remake the French film 'Wages of Fear' (1953). Much like 'Apocalypse Now', the film was plagued with problems. Half the crew was sent home with medical issues ranging from food poisoning to gangrene. Friedkin himself lost 23 lbs after contracting malaria. Sets were destroyed and locations were problematic and had to be scrapped and rebuilt. His perfectionism caused problems on set with lead Roy Shrider after Steve McQueen declined the film. His cinematographer quit halfway through production. The film's small budget ended up ballooning to 21 Million (laughable by today's standards) and he had constant fights with the studio.

The film was released in the summer and at first, people responded well to it and it looked like Friedkin had another hit on his hands. However, in a final twist of cruel fate, another little film was released at the same time. Star Wars. 'Sorcerer' was drowned out at the box office, pulling in 9 million domestically. Additionally, the foreign distributors recut the movie for overseas making the movie an incomprehensible mess, making it bomb internationally as well.

Fortunately, many film buffs have revisited the over the years and have given it its due. Quintin Tarintino considers it one of his favorite films. It has aged well and still holds up.

If you, like me, are burnt out with superhero fatigue, overuse of CGI, and scripts that seem like they were generated by AI, please check out 'Sorcerer'. They really don't make them like this anymore.

https://jwwreviews.blogspot.com/2024/04/civil-war.html

9/10

This movie follows a group of journalists and photographers as they travel across a United States ravaged by civil war.

First off, the trailers make this more of a film focused on the action and battle movements, while this is actually a more measured piece that focuses on the journalists' journey. This is written and directed by Alex Garland (Ex Machina, Men) and if you've seen his Annihilation, this is kinda the same formula (a group on a journey) minus the sci-fi. When the action happens, it's well executed but the core of the film is a lot of showing and talking about the situation.

Don't confuse this being plot heavy for this being a boring movie. Far from it. This reminds me a lot of The Big Red One in that this is a travelogue looking at the madness of war that is composed of various thematic elements. This movie does a solid job of changing gears from the eeriness of desolate, war-torn America to dark comedy to moments of real tension. Civil War has one of the most gripping, suspense scenes I think I've ever seen.

The main focus of this film is on the musings in the last few years that the United States could go to war. This has a real world message in that an ACTUAL civil war in the United States would be a terrible, bloody thing that'd pretty mess up most people lives.

For those radicals arguing in favor a civil war, this movie also makes a point that having one in a place as vast as the United States wouldn't be a single concentrated effort. (In this movie we've got factions and smaller rebel groups.) A lot of people may want the Democrats toppled, but how much you wanna bet they all don't have the exact same view on the government that comes after or what they want or what the real threats are? (Did you see the footage of the gathering assembled to stop immigration at the border? There was some infighting between individuals and factions).

The movie also a well-written look at what it is like to be a journalist during war.

Garland makes the scenario audience-friendly (and more importantly audience-money-friendly decision) by not to base this movie off of any real world politics. Texas and California are in an alliance and that ain't happening in the real world (maybe parts of rural California but not all of California). Garland does an interesting job of laying out the hints of how the civil war came without straight up directly telling the audience exactly what went down.

In terms of visuals and audio, this is pure "cinema." The cinematography is excellent, featuring well-placed camera work and a strong design sense with what is undoubtedly going to be considered one of the most hauntingly beautiful movie scenes of the year. I do not have discerning ears, so audio work doesn't usually stand out to me. Not here, though. I won't go into detail, but prepare for some of the most effective movie sounds in a while.

Kiersten Dunst delivers what is probably one of the best and most distinct performances in her career as main lead photojournalist Lee. She is a cool-headed, hard-headed veteran of war coverage. Dunst really manages to deliver an objective and hardened, but human-beneath-it-all individual. Also really good in this is Dune Part One's Stephen McKinley Henderson as journalist Sammy, the eldest and wisest of the group. I noticed that the guy's stock in in the film world has gone up in the last ten years or so, because he does a quality job as an authoritative but approachable person.

If there any possible flaws to this film, some may find the final act to run a bit long.

Highly recommended, this is such a well-constructed film. Garland delivers his first movie that isn't sci-fi (or whatever genre Men was supposed to be), which has resulted in his most accessible film.

It was gut-wrenchingly beautiful, painful, witty-- I'll be crying then laughing. I know I'm a little late to the movie but watching it as who I am now really made an impact.

Olive is such an angel. I loved how her family, as effed up as they were, really supported Olive and made sure that she can enjoy life. The adults knew how effed up life is, and yet they didn't make it a burden on her. Well, the dad through the first scenes was infuriating. At least he had realizations through their journey.

The thing is, they still pushed through with her pageant. It was heartwarming to see how everyone fought for Olive to get on the stage even though everything was chaotically falling apart. (the pageant was kinda creepy though)

Anyway, the thing is--she's just a kid. She deserves to see the good in life, as all kids should.

Other impactful parts for me:

-Even though the grandpa's the way he is, it was nice to see how he encouraged his son (Richard) when he had a major setback.

-Dwayne not lashing out on Olive despite his dream being crushed

-Sheryl trying to emotionally support everyone

-Richard's overly, if not, toxic positivity, damages others but the thing is, for some reason, it works for him. Of course he has to learn the difference of 'giving up' and 'not having the capacity or capability to handle anything anymore'.

-Frank being open about his situation

Source: https://www.reeladvice.net/2024/04/becky-badette-movie-review.html

At its core, "Becky & Badette" is an absolute blast. This film confidently embraces its campiness, delivering a finger lickin' good time from start to finish. Eugene Domingo and Pokwang shine as the titular duo, serving up laugh-out-loud moments and keeping audiences entertained throughout its runtime. If you're in the mood for a film that's outrageously entertaining, "Becky & Badette" is the perfect choice.

The premise of the film centers around Becky (Eugene Domingo) and Badette (Pokwang), lifelong bestfriends stuck in dead-end jobs. Ashamed on what they have failed to achieve, they get drunk at their high school reunion and both make a fake confession about being loves. The video of their confession goes viral and they find themselves propelled into the spotlight as supposed lesbian lovers. What follows is a hilarious rollercoaster ride as they navigate fame and fortune while trying to keep up the charade.

Beyond its comedic surface, "Becky & Badette" offers some unexpected depth. The film tackles themes of identity, friendship, and the power of pubclic and media perception with a surprising amount of heart. While some may dismiss it as a mere comedy, there's more to uncover beneath its surface. Central to the film's success are the performances of Eugene Domingo and Pokwang, who effortlessly carry the weight of the story with their impeccable comedic timing and pairing. Each one delivering their own brand of comedy well also. However, the film is not without its flaws. The narrative can feel somewhat predictable at times, and the abundance of side characters with little or no purpose may distract from the main storyline. Overall, "Becky & Badette" exceeded expectations. While it may not be flawless, it's undeniably charming and offers a refreshing take on the comedy genre. With its mix of humor and heart, this film is sure to leave audiences smiling.

​

Rating 3.5 out of 5

Please be aware that this entire post is possibly a spoiler of an entire subplot/main plot and definitely a spoiler of some scenes.

So I just got done with Birdy, and I am dying to know if anyone else saw the subplot at play that I saw. Every review or comment I can find online suggests that the film is simply about two friends who grew up together, simultaneously went to Vietnam, and simultaneously suffered from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

But here is what I saw: the actual subplot was that Birdy and Al were one and the same person who was suffering from Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD)/Disassociative Identity Disorder (DID), that disorder ramps up throughout adolescence, and then plays out through a PTSD experience via the Vietnam War. Then, post-PTSD incident, the military becomes aware of Al's MPD/DID and attempts, but fails, to successfully treat it. The cinematography lends itself to the idea so deeply, that I am almost certain this is the case. I searched and search for someone, somewhere, suggesting what I suggest here, and I found nothing. I found several lists of MPD/DID movies, and Birdy was not once mentioned in any of them. It was so strange to me, since this movie got several awards and was, arguably, Cage/Modine's best acting. I am still blown away that Cage pulled two of his own teeth out, without anesthetic drugs, for the role.

There are so many signs to me that point to this MPD/DID interpretation:

• Al and Birdy reflect two polarized personalities. Al is dramatically self-confident, outgoing, a ladies-man, socially likeable, an athlete, highly socially intelligent, and so forth. Birdy, on the other hand, is a recluse, an academic, highly academically intelligent, mentally fixated on anti-social activities, socially awkward, bad with romantic pursuits, and so forth. In essence, Al is everything Birdy is not (personality-wise) and vice versa.
• Al accidentally calls Birdy "Al" one time in the film.
• Every scene where Al and Birdy are together, they are in lockstep. In certain scenes, such as in the junkyard when they buy the car, they are literally seen to be in lockstep.
• Al and Birdy's parents are strikingly similar. Both dads are a traditional rough and rugged type with similar blue collar jobs. It is easily believable that one and the same dad would be a refuse worker and a custodian 9working two jobs). Both moms are stay at home moms (afaik) with eerily similar personalities.
• The way that Al and Birdie meet blocks out all importance of peripheral characters.
• For that matter, all peripheral characters that should be central to Al's/Birdy's upbringing are rather insignificant after the two of them meet.
• Al is shown to have no real social life, or life at all for that matter, outside of being with Birdie. Same with Birdie. The two's lives seem to fixate around each other, and they have no real lives of their own outside of being together. All of their significant adolescent experiences seem to happen around each other.
• Birdy is painted as the antisocial one, but, when one looks deeper, Al seems just as disconnected from society as Birdy was. Al seems to have no real friends, was originally hanging out with kids half his age, and has no real romantic pursuits. Neither have employment. Both have parents that are oddly okay with (but concerned about) all of this. It all jives with a teen struggling with NPD/DID and a community that recognizes that.
• Every scene where Al is hooking up with girls around Birdie, Al goes into zoned out hookup mode while Birdie has all the actual interaction time of social awkwardness with chick number two. Every scene has both hooking up with two women simultaneously. At the prom, they don't even show a clear take of Al's date's face, whom looks eerily similar from the side/behind as Birdy's date looks. Al's date is obviously unimportant or hidden by the cinematography.
• Al seemed to have a life of his own before meeting Birdy, and then his life suddenly becomes hyperfocused around all of Birdy's focuses (birds mostly).
• Birdy isn't a real name but a nickname, and Al never even expresses an interest in Birdy's real name.
• Birdy somehow easily convinces Al time and time again to do activities that Al's character probably wouldn't be comfortable doing on his own (Like dressing like a pigeon to go illegally collect pigeons at night from an industrial plant).
• The psychologist seems to have a weird fixation on Al and his behavior.
• The psychologist allows this bizarre ongoing experiment between Al and Birdie, where Al is given free reign to attempt to mentally save Birdie. The experiment makes way more sense when seen through the eyes of a psychologist trying to treat and reintegrate someone with MPD/DID.
• There are many clues in the movie that Al self-applied his facial bandages from the PTSD event onward and that he doesn't really have any physical wounds. The psychologist also talks to Al about how Birdie had no physical wounds either, but actually just mental PTSD wounds.
• When Al goes away to the Vietnam War, Birdy's character essentially (and painfully) ceases to exist. The death of the bird could be seen as a symbolism of the Birdy personality's death and then Birdy is later reborn when Al can't mentally handle the reality of his PTSD event on his own.
• Al and Birdie suffer from, arguably, the same exact PTSD event from two perspectives that are secretly one and the same perspective.
• Al seems to be (and even pokes at the idea himself) just as much a patient at the facility as Birdy is. They even lock Al in Birdy's cell, against his will, in one or two scenes.
• The ending makes total sense when seen through the eyes of this narrative: The psychologist realizes that the attempt to reintegrate Al and Birdy's personalities has been unsuccessful. Al realizes that he is out of time and going to be "separated" from Birdie, so he attempts with all of his physical power to save his Birdie personality, even to the point where it violently endangers the wellbeing of others.
• Al has several close-encounters throughout the movie with Birdie's possible death/suicide but Birdie somehow survives every time in a miraculous way and the two go on together. This is perpetuated all the way through the final scene. This would coincide with two personalities/identities struggling to survive within one human body.
• Birdie never actually sleeps, eats, has sex, or does any typical human basics outside of Al being present and vice versa.

I find the movie to have so much more meaning when seen through a MPD/DID lens instead of a more straightforward coming of age story followed by a tragic PTSD event narrative.

I could go on more if I sat here and thought about more, but you get the idea. So please, someone on Reddit, tell me I am onto something, or else tell me I am reading too deeply here.