Search Results

The Nun September 13, 2018 By: Button Hunter Friesen Over the last five years, the Conjuring Universe has taken the horror genre by storm. This has been made possible by having great directing and inventive scares that defy expectations. The Nun , the newest film in the series, has none (pun intended) of those quality traits. Instead, it ends up being one of the most generic and forgettable horror films in recent memory. Set in 1952 Romania, the body of a young nun is found outside a monastery. The nun committed suicide by hanging, but the purpose is unknown. The Vatican sends Father Burke and Sister Irene to investigate the nun’s death and find out if the monastery is still holy ground. Once there, Burke and Irene are met with many different types of supernatural evil, all of which spawn from a spirit that has been recently awoken. Marking only his second feature, director Corin Hardy fails miserably to make this film different than other supernatural horror films. He relies way too heavily on jump scares and doesn’t establish a creepy atmosphere. Despite having only a 96-minute runtime, The Nun is surprisingly boring. Hardy keeps the pace very slow and doesn’t allow for anything interesting to develop. Not much really happens until the very end when we get a quick final showdown that ends in the campiest way possible. Speaking of campiness, the film tries to interject the scares with a few slight one-liners. They make no sense in the context of the story and always fail miserably, invoking groans rather than laughter. One slight nod that can be given to Hardy is his average camerawork. Some of the overhead and pan shots are interesting to look at, but that’s about it. Written by Gary Dauberman with help from James Wan, The Nun could already take the cake for the worst writing of the year. The overall premise of the film is decent, but any resemblance to a story after that is downright terrible. Important elements have very little background and anything that happens is given no reasoning whatsoever. Each character is very dull. They have tragic generic backstories that try (and fail) to make us connect with them. They also make some of the dumbest decisions, such as splitting up multiple times and trying to fight a demon head-on. Similar to the directing, the writing fails to make the film scary in any way. Almost every “scare” is a jump scare that just startles you. After that, nothing really happens as the film cycles to the next jump scare. It’s very predictable and restricts any element of surprise. Completing the trifecta of horribleness is the acting. Demián Bichir plays Father Burke. Just like his character, Bichir is very bland and lacks any trace of personality. All he does is have a concerned look on his face and barely makes any meaningful interaction with the other characters. Taissa Farmiga, sister of franchise star Vera Farmiga, plays Sister Irene. Unfortunately, Taissa shares no quality acting traits with her superior sister. She constantly looks out of her element and isn’t able to be more than a one-note character. Last, and certainly least, is Jonas Bloquet as Frenchie, a local farmer who acts as a guide to Burke and Irene. Frenchie is the arrogant tough guy in every horror film that you just want to punch. He’s the source of all the painful one-liners and is just flat-out terrible to watch. The Nun is a boring and frightless mess that fails on all levels. By the time the credits roll, any audience member should feel insulted that they wasted both time and money on this pitiful excuse of a horror film. More Reviews Wicked: For Good November 19, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Rental Family September 7, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Jay Kelly November 20, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Train Dreams November 21, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Hunter Friesen

Heretic September 11, 2024 By: Button Hunter Friesen Heretic had its World Premiere at the 2024 Toronto International Film Festival. A24 will release it in theaters on November 15. With as many organized religions as there are fast food chains, it can be quite hard to differentiate between “the one” and the imitations. It’s a conundrum that Mr. Reed (Hugh Grant) has dedicated much time to. He’s done the research, concocted some hypotheses, conducted experiments, and solidified his grand thesis on how religion has transformed the human race for thousands of years. And based on his secluded house filled with metal-lined walls and counterintuitive locks, his outlook isn’t going to be positive. Unbeknownst to Sister Paxton (Chloe East) and Barnes (Sophie Thatcher), Reed’s request made to their Church of Latter-Day Saints to receive a house visit wasn’t simply about hearing their sales pitch. But before the pair land in the trap, they must still navigate the polite society minefield. They’re mocked before they even open their mouths, with a group of teenage girls posing for ironic photos with them. For the first time in my life, I actually felt sorry for those missionaries you often find on the street corners handing out Bibles. But their faith is strong and they believe in their mission, so the pain is just another hurdle in God’s grand plan. I wouldn’t want to meet their God if Mr. Reed was always part of his plan. Things start with simple pleasantries, with the girls making their rehearsed points and Reed intermittently countering with humoristic observations he’s made in his studies. Grant weaponizes his charm to its full extent during this opening section, making no distinction between his buffoonish characters from his rom-com days and the darkness that we know Reed is hiding. The writer/director pair of Scott Beck and Bryan Woods know what they have on their hands, giving this moment of set-up the space to breathe far beyond what most horror films would allow. Once Reed starts to reveal his cards, that’s when the girls start to differentiate themselves. Paxton is the more agreeable one, always walking on eggshells to appease Reed’s demands and never seeming like a bad guest. She tells a story to Barnes about stumbling about pornography, the shame and inexperience of it keeping her from saying the word “fucking.” Between this and her role as Sammy’s religiously fanatic girlfriend in The Fabelmans , East has claimed a bit of a monopoly on these roles. Dressed in black as opposed to Paxton’s white, Barnes is the more skeptical of the two, with the past opening the door to a more confrontational view of everything she preaches. Figuring out where this is all going is what makes Heretic so much fun. Cinematographer Chung-hoon Chung (a frequent collaborator with Park Chan-wook) keeps the camera roaming on a tightrope, expanding the exquisite decorated confinement that production designer Philip Messina has crafted. The comparison between fast food chains and religions gets expanded once Reed brings in the Monopoly board game, with the theme of iterations connecting all three. There have been iterations of this type of production before, with Woods’ labeling during the world premiere screening of the film’s genre being “A24” being a pretty simple way to summarize it all. Whether that term is complimentary or derogatory is up to you. The film’s commitment to living up to this promise ultimately subsides for more familiar beats. Moments of the sound drowning out to make way for a loud crash are repeated a few too many times, as well as some conveniences in reveals. Reed may work in absolutes when making his claims, but that doesn’t mean that the filmmaking has to follow the well-trodden path of its genre brethren. Even if they can’t be fully supported by the end, the ideas at the forefront of Heretic is what takes it to the next level. It’s not looking to offend or be the person who arrogantly claims that “they’re just asking questions.” This is a genre exercise after all, not a semester in Religion 101. More Reviews Wicked: For Good November 19, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Rental Family September 7, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Jay Kelly November 20, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Train Dreams November 21, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Hunter Friesen

The Old Guard 2 July 2, 2025 By: Button Hunter Friesen By waiting five years to produce a sequel to The Old Guard , which found a respectable amount of applause and eyeballs during the COVID-19 summer of 2020, Netflix isn’t exactly striking the iron while it’s hot. Then again, five years is just a drop in the ocean for our main characters, their lifespans exceeding several millennia. But for us mere mortals, it’s more like a bucket of water in a kiddie pool. The cobwebs have to be dusted off in the memory bank, and an interest in the continuation of an overarching story has to be rekindled. The Old Guard 2 doesn’t accomplish either of those tasks very well, making the wait just that much more egregious. Only six months have passed since the events of the first film, and Andy’s (Charlize Theron) team is still doing the unappreciated dirty work of keeping humanity safe from themselves. They take out the worst of the worst, which really just means the generic Eastern European mobster we see in the opening set piece. Subbing in for the outgoing Gina Prince-Bythewood is director Victoria Mahoney, who doesn’t make a great first impression. The action is overedited and frenzied, leaving all of the physicality to feel a bit generic. Upping the stakes from the first film’s pharmaceutical villain is an equally immortal opponent in Discord (Uma Thurman). She’s just rescued Andy’s immortal soulmate Quynh (Veronica Ngo) from her five-century imprisonment at the bottom of the ocean, something that Andy failed to do. Discord has a Magneto-mindset to the whole immortals vs. humans debate, and she doesn’t take kindly to Andy continually protecting those who have hindered the progress of immortals. The proposition of Furiosa fighting The Bride is enough to immediately sell a movie. Theron and Thurman have been at the forefront of modern action, with their physicality and screen presence being unmatched. The trouble is that it takes an awfully long time to get to the good part, which isn’t all that it’s cracked up to be either. This is a film that thinks that switching locations is the same as doing something. It hopscotches between Paris, South Korea, Croatia, and Indonesia without much fanfare. The same goes for the flashbacks to illustrate the centuries-spanning backstories. A brief moment of visual imagination comes when Andy walks down a Parisian street, the memories across generations flooding throughout the background. There’s still the problem that none of these characters can die, except for Andy, since she lost her immortality at the end of the previous film. Similar to Deadpool, critical injuries are more of an inconvenience. Broken legs snap back, and bullet holes sew themselves up in seconds. Some contrivances are needed for consequences to be injected into the action. The extremely overqualified Henry Golding and Chiwetel Ejiofor are there to add a bit of gravitas to their sole responsibilities of explaining the rules. And for the second time in as many films, there isn’t so much a conclusion to this story, but a setup for what’s to come next. It feels like a mini-miracle that we even got this movie, so doubling down for another feels like a foolhardy gamble. I really hope it pays off, because I’m starting to consider pulling out my investment. More Reviews Wicked: For Good November 19, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Rental Family September 7, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Jay Kelly November 20, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Train Dreams November 21, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Hunter Friesen

The Predator September 20, 2018 By: Button Hunter Friesen The original Predator from 1987 was a film full of mindless action done in a smart way. Every other sequel, spin-off, and reboot following has just been mindless action done really dumb. The Predator , the new quasi-reboot/sequel, is no exception to that trend. The Predator tries to be a lot of things at once: an ultra-gory action thriller, a witty character comedy, and a relationship drama between family and friends. Instead, it’s none of these things as each piece is weighed down by the other until the whole thing falls apart into one lazy mess. The Predator comes as the first failure by director Shane Black, who previously did well with Iron Man 3 and The Nice Guys . Black’s trademark use of witty banter doesn’t go over well here as it has in his previous films. Most of the jokes are shoehorned in for the sake of having them and are delivered with little effort. They also seem really out of place. Dramatic scenes have jokes in them for no reason and scenes that are supposed to be comedic end up being dry. Also, the whole tone of the film just feels off. It never settles and constantly keeps seesawing between hard action and silly over-the-top fun, which jarringly contrast each other. When the film is hard action, it’s ordinary gory action that’s been done better by others. Specifically, the whole third act of the film feels like a generic shoot ‘em up. It’s a huge disappointment considering that the film had been building up to this moment throughout the first two acts. Along with Fred Dekker, Shane Black also serves as a writer. Similar to his directing, Black’s writing is lackluster and a letdown when compared to his previous work. The overall plot comes off as lazy. There really isn’t a big picture for the film and how it connects to the rest of the franchise. We do get some connectors and facts, but mainly they’re just cast aside in favor of more action set pieces. Another misstep is the introduction of the main character’s son, Rory, who acts as a link between the aliens and humans. Just like every other kid in an action movie, Rory’s only purpose is to artificially raise the stakes and force us to care for him just because he’s a kid. The biggest gripe against the writers is how they take the Suicide Squad approach towards the characters. We go around introducing each character and learn one trait about them. Then the characters only act on that one trait the whole movie, which quickly gets tiresome. Half of them don’t even serve a point until they die at the end in a desperate attempt to make us care for them. Stemming from the bad writing is some equally bad acting from the main cast. Boyd Holbrook plays our lead character, Quinn McKenna, an elite stealth sniper. Holbrook is very boring in the role and plays the same “conflicted army character with a heart of gold” that we’ve seen over and over. Just like Holbrook, Olivia Munn plays her character, Dr. Casey Bracket, like every other action movie scientist. She gives some science mumbo jumbo every few minutes and doesn’t do much else. Sterling K. Brown lacks his usual confidence here. He always looks unsure of himself as he doesn't know how to play his character. He wants to be a multi-layered villain but ends up being a cartoon. One slight nod can be given to Keegan-Michael Key. His manic energy allows for some of the jokes to not totally fail. Everybody’s heard the saying, “Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.” Most films embody this statement, shooting too high and coming out average. The Predator , on the other hand, does the exact opposite of this statement. It seems like the filmmakers didn't care enough to shoot for the moon. They shot for average at best and missed badly, leaving us with a film that feels like an empty shell of what it could have been. More Reviews Wicked: For Good November 19, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Rental Family September 7, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Jay Kelly November 20, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Train Dreams November 21, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Hunter Friesen

The Boys in the Band October 5, 2020 By: Button Hunter Friesen Back in 1968, playwright Mart Crowley shocked the world by penning a stage production solely comprised of gay men and their repressed feelings. The spiteful language and harsh authentic look at gay life were too much for “polite society” at the time. The production played off-Broadway for a few years before closing in 1970. Right before he directed The French Connection and The Exorcist , William Friedkin gave the play new life by adapting it for the screen the same year it closed. Finally, in 2018, the play was given its proper due with a Broadway revival directed by Joe Mantello and starring an all-out-gay cast, most notably Jim Parsons (Sheldon Cooper in The Big Bang Theory ), Zachary Quinto (Spock from the modern Star Trek franchise), and Matt Bomer. Now in 2020, history has repeated itself as Mantello and co. have regrouped for another screen adaptation, this time for producer Ryan Murphy at Netflix. The Boys in the Band opens in 1968 New York. Seven gay friends are soon to be gathered for the birthday of one of their own. We get to know each of them over the first half-hour as they prepare for the party. The host, Michael, is a so-so writer with a drinking and money problem that he can’t let go of. Michael’s good friend (and old flame) Donald comes into town hot off a session with his analyst that made him confront the shame he feels as a gay man. Larry is the group flirt as he refuses to be wholly committed to one man, which often puts him at odds with his lover Hank, who recently left his wife for Larry. Then there’s Emery, the comedic relief of the group who isn’t afraid to show off who he is. There’s also Bernard, the only black member of the group who’s still wrestling with both his racial and sexual identity. Finally, the birthday boy himself is Harold, a Jew who always arrives late and knows exactly what to say to get under someone’s skin. But wait, there’s one more guest at this little shindig. Michael’s old college roommate, Alan, is in town under mysterious circumstances and must see him right away. Michael isn’t 100% out of the closet to Alan, mostly because Alan is as straight as an arrow and about as open-minded as the rest of 1960s America. The party kicks off great as the friends reminisce on old times. These are the moments when the acting troupe shines, especially Robin de Jesus as Emery and Parsons as Michael. Crowley’s original dialogue is lifted right from the stage to the screen with pure elegance. The one-liners and zingers, which are often playfully vulgar, are still eye-opening fifty years later. It’s both happy and sad to see this material continue to be relevant after so many decades. However, things get icy when Alan shows up. Harold hasn’t arrived and everyone still has their social masks on. Alan doesn’t fully comprehend what he has barged in on as Michael tries to quell the flamboyancy. Director Mantello grinds everything to a halt once Alan walks through the door. Almost as if this was a horror movie, a deep feeling of suspenseful dread fills the atmosphere. Like all good suspense, a needle eventually drops and things quickly get messy. The language turns from sarcastic to hateful as old secrets and dark truths bubble up to the surface after years of being buried. Parsons still takes the cake with his exceptional lead performance. Harold remarks that when Michael drinks “he’s lethal”. Parsons is indeed lethal once things get serious as he ditches his sitcom roots and delivers a much more bullying persona. Quinto is also great as Harold. Usually sitting in the corner with his humongous tinted sunglasses, he delivers line after line with stinging fervor. The Boys in the Band can feel a bit too stagy at times, which is to be expected. Long speeches and heartfelt moments that work well on the stage sometimes come off as schmaltzy on the screen. But Mantello does incredible work despite only directing one other film in 1997. His excellent blocking of the apartment setting is second to none as it allows for swift camera movements that capture every moment. Cinematographer Bill Pope does well to preserve that same stage energy with numerous long takes and great lighting of the wonderful set by production designer Judy Becker. The Boys in the Band is an astounding stage-to-screen adaptation that remains relevant in its messaging and entertaining in its story. The cast is top-notch and Joe Mantello proves he still has the directing chops. Unfortunately, Mart Crowley died from a heart attack in March before the film was finished. Despite being gone from this physical world, he still lives on within this excellent production. More Reviews Wicked: For Good November 19, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Rental Family September 7, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Jay Kelly November 20, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Train Dreams November 21, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Hunter Friesen

Black Bag March 13, 2025 By: Button Hunter Friesen ! Widget Didn’t Load Check your internet and refresh this page. If that doesn’t work, contact us. More Reviews Wicked: For Good November 19, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Rental Family September 7, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Jay Kelly November 20, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Train Dreams November 21, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Hunter Friesen

After the Hunt October 7, 2025 By: Button Hunter Friesen Luca Guadagnino's After the Hunt opens with the sounds of a ticking clock. With each tick, a routine is established for Alma Imhoff (Julia Roberts). She's woken up in the morning by a kiss from her husband Frederik (Michael Stuhlbarg), takes two pills as she shuffles through their classy apartment, and then struts across the Yale campus to teach her philosophy course. Days go by like the seconds on that looming clock, almost as if you could blink and fast-forward through weeks of monotony. And then, one day, that clock stops, jolting your eyes wide open as you scratch and claw to hang onto all that you have. That occurs the day after Alma and Frederik host a party for the students and faculty. Hank (Andrew Garfield) is the department's resident bad boy, poking and prodding at the generational divide between the guests. He and Alma are good friends, and both are up for the same tenured position. Hank especially likes to mischievously pick on Maggie (Ayo Edebiri), Alma's favorite student, who just submitted her PhD dissertation. Barbs are shared, wine is copiously consumed, and everyone goes home having flexed their favorite philosophical jargon. Maggie appears on Alma's doorstep the next day. She explains that Hank came up to her apartment after walking her home. A few more drinks were shared, and then he "crossed the line." Hank denies the whole thing, spinning a yarn about confronting Maggie for plagiarizing her dissertation, and this being her way of covering it up. Between what she should believe and what she chooses to believe, Alma becomes the third point in this triangle, which opens up old wounds from her conflicted past. Guadagnino and first-time screenwriter Nora Garrett don't allow a single door to be kept open, always half or fully closed. Sightlines are blocked and voices are muffled, leaving assumptions to fill in the gaps. “I’m in the business of optics rather than substance,” says the school dean, a poignant summarization of how these issues are handled. A young male student tells Alma that she will get tenure because higher education now favors women in the post-#MeToo climate. Maggie is a black, queer student in a largely white populous, and she comes from rich parents who have made a handful of sizable donations to the university. These things initially carry as much weight as the facts of the case, eventually growing to bury the truth of the matter underneath layers of excuses and conjecture. But the truth by itself is just as slippery. Guadagnino takes after David Fincher, specifically his idea that “language was invented so people could lie to one another.” Everyone goes into a conversation with an agenda, twisting and turning every syllable beyond its face value. What they can’t control is their body language, which Guadagnino and cinematographer Malik Hassan Sayeed capture under a microscope. Hands fold at the end of a sentence, and eyes dart once a question is asked. Jonathan Demme’s famous close-ups take a new life here, with the 180-degree rule being broken as characters talk directly towards the camera. In those moments, you can no longer hide from what’s been bubbling over, almost as if you’ve been slapped back awake after spacing out. Roberts is fantastic, presumably taking a lot of inspiration from Cate Blanchett’s performance in Tár . There’s even a similar scene where she scolds a student who dares to question her teachings. Her conviction is supported by her sharp outfits and blonde hair, with every confrontation being a battle she has every intention of winning. But she also carries a loose thread, one that completely unravels her once someone starts to pull on it. Garfield is slimily charming, so full of himself that you’re confident that he is capable of doing bad. And Edebiri finds the gap between naivety and confidence, knowing that she hasn’t been fully stripped of power in this situation. As evidenced by the Woody Allen-inspired credits, Guadagnino isn’t interested in making things comfortable or easy for us. That doesn’t come as much of a surprise, considering the tangledness of previous works like Suspiria and Queer . Any answer will have to be formulated on your own, and subjected to assumptions and doubts. Even the ending betrays what we were left to speculate, fittingly illustrating that a maze can never be solved by going in a straight line. More Reviews Wicked: For Good November 19, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Rental Family September 7, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Jay Kelly November 20, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Train Dreams November 21, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Hunter Friesen

The Trial of the Chicago 7 October 26, 2020 By: Button Hunter Friesen “The whole world is watching!” Those words have just as much relevance today as they did back in 1968 at the Democratic National Convention. It isn’t a coincidence that the problems we dealt with more than sixty years ago are still the same problems that we wrestle with today. It’s also not a coincidence that Aaron Sorkin and Netflix have released their new politically charged film, The Trial of the Chicago 7 , just weeks before one of the most important elections in our nation’s history. Based on a true story, The Trial of the Chicago 7 opens like a rocket with a rapid pace intercutting between all the major parties involved at the 1968 Democratic National Convention. The first of these parties is Tom Hayden and Rennie Davis as part of the Students for a Democratic Society. Next is the hippies of Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin who lead the Youth International Party. There’s also David Dellinger, Lee Weiner, and John Froines. These seven make up the ragtag group of the Chicago 7. Also (unfairly) part of their trial is Black Panther co-founder Bobby Seale. These eight activists are on trial for their roles in the anti-Vietnam War protests in 1968 Chicago that led to a series of brawls between protestors and police. The bigwigs in the White House believe that the protestors were the ones that started the riots and want to make an example of the seven. The demonstrators (correctly) claim that it was the people dressed in blue that instigated the violence. From here the battle begins between two opposing sides with the potential nation-defining verdict hanging in the balance. Director Aaron Sorkin follows up his 2017 debut feature Molly’s Game with another director’s showcase. Mainly set within a single courtroom, the film is ripe with technical wizardry from all facets of the production. Cinematographer Phedon Papamichael incorporates a wide array of long takes and many angled shots that tell just as much of the story as the script does. Editor Alan Baumgarten doesn’t allow for a single dull moment as he keeps this train moving at full speed from beginning to end. This isn’t to say Sorkin is a perfect director, far from that actually. Sorkin still misses his mark in a few key areas, most notably in the final moments of the film where the attempt at a stirring finale comes off as cheesy and dated. A writer before taking over the director’s chair, Sorkin has delivered some of the greatest scripts of this millennium with his work on The Social Network (which won him an Oscar), Steve Jobs , and Moneyball . The Trial of the Chicago 7 delivers yet another Oscar-worthy script from Sorkin and the exact one you would want for a courtroom drama. Sorkin instills his trademarked rapid back-and-forth dialogue during the trial proceedings as witnesses testify and lawyers verbally spar. Several lines throughout elicit a strong provocative reaction that connects the film to today's cultural climate. Like all Sorkin scripts, everything does feel a bit too clean and artificial. Every character speaks on a near-genius level as they always say the exact right thing at the exact right moments. This style of perfect dialogue is more in line with characters such as Mark Zuckerberg and Steve Jobs instead of the ones found within this film. But, when the dialogue is this good all the time, that problem doesn’t matter all that much. Sorkin has also assembled an all-star cast to relish in his whip-smart script. There isn’t a single weak link among them as they will crowd Oscar ballots with their powerhouse performances. Veteran stage and screen actor Mark Rylance, here on the opposite side of the law than his performance in Bridge of Spies , leads the pack with his spectacular turn as the defense lawyer for the Chicago 7. Also a stage and screen veteran is the great Frank Langella who plays the dangerously maniacal judge who oversees the case. Langella’s grumpy performance parallels closely to a certain political figure who currently occupies the Oval Office. Jeremy Strong is almost unrecognizable from his uptight role in Succession as he expertly plays the relaxed Jerry Rubin. Sacha Baron Cohen is more in line with his previous roles as the clownish Abbie Hoffman. Yahya Abdul Mateen II is great in his both intentional and unintentional small role as George Seale. His role incites the most sympathy and relates to our current situation of race and policing. Aaron Sorkin’s The Trial of the Chicago 7 is a nostalgic old-school courtroom drama bolstered by strong modern filmmaking and terrific performances from its cast. The timeliness and importance of its message make it a must-see as the whole world will be watching during this tumultuous election season. More Reviews Wicked: For Good November 19, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Rental Family September 7, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Jay Kelly November 20, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Train Dreams November 21, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Hunter Friesen

Decision to Leave May 26, 2022 By: Button Hunter Friesen Decision to Leave had its World Premiere at the 2022 Cannes Film Festival. Mubi will release it in theaters on October 14. Phantom Thread meets Vertigo in Park Chan-wook’s deliciously twisted Decision to Leave . For many directors, that combination would come together as well as oil and water. But for the famed South Korean auteur, whose previous works of Oldboy and The Handmaiden (both awarded at Cannes. I predict this one will be as well) have exemplified his unparalleled ability to combine the traditional with the gonzo, it’s a heavenly pair that you immediately want more of. As the new hotshot detective within the Busan police force, Hae-jun (Park Hae-il) is brought in to solve a mysterious new murder case. A climber has fallen from the top of the local mountain, and a strangely coincidental set of clues hints that it may not have been an accident. The victim’s Chinese immigrant wife, Seo-rae (Tang Wei), is brought in for questioning, a move that jeopardizes everything as Hae-jun develops a sort-of crush on her. Seo-rae seems to know more than she lets on, but Hae-jun’s judgment is clouded by love, putting him at odds with the mounting evidence against her and the rest of the detectives. What ensues is a dangerous game of cat and mouse where the intentions of the players are often hidden, but the danger is always present. Just like every film in Chan-wook’s filmography, the direction, especially the camerawork and editing, is first-rate. It’s not uncommon for 360-degree twists, reversals, re-reversals, and smooth pans to take place in one continuous movement. One scene, in particular, is an entertainingly surreal set piece where the camera peers through the detective’s binoculars as he spies on a suspect, only for him to be transported to that location next to the person of interest. DP Kim Ji-yong (replacing regular cinematographer Chung-hoon Chung after he made the jump to Hollywood) loads each of his images with double (and sometimes triple) meanings, most notably present during a conversation scene in a stairwell. Though it always wears its film noir influences prominently on its sleeve, Decision to Leave is not merely a slave to the past. Chan-wook and frequent collaborator/co-writer Seo-kyeong Jeong inject the film with modern sensibilities. Smartphones, often the hindrance of many mystery films, are brilliantly employed. A language translating app is relied upon to bridge the gap between the two Hae-jun and Seo-rae, with subtle details sometimes being lost in translation. There are also delayed text messages and warped video/audio recordings that endlessly twist and turn the facts. You can sometimes feel lost while watching the film, as if you missed some important revelation that brings everything together. These are the moments where Chan-wook leans more on his Phantom Thread inspirations than his Hitchcockian ones. Much like Paul Thomas Anderson’s film, the characters within Decision to Leave can’t be tied down with simple explanations. Manipulation and intrigue are the names of the game, with the unspoken sexual tension tinging the edges of every scene. As the playfully dangerous duo, Hae-il and Wei are more than up to the task, with their unmatched chemistry doing wonders for the film’s emotional themes. Decision to Leave is often a paradox in itself. It’s classical, yet modern. Cold, yet sexy. Unsatisfying, yet enthralling. Luckily, it finds the near-perfect balance between all of those things, creating a wondrous genre exercise that must be seen to be wholly believed. More Reviews Wicked: For Good November 19, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Rental Family September 7, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Jay Kelly November 20, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Train Dreams November 21, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Hunter Friesen

Die My Love November 4, 2025 By: Button Hunter Friesen Die My Love is a film that made me angry. Perhaps it’s what director Lynne Ramsay wanted me to feel, a connection to the spiraling headspace of its protagonist, Grace (Jennifer Lawrence. She seems to be suffering from a bout of postpartum depression, a trendy topic among the motherhood subgenre that also includes recent films like Tully, A Mouthful of Air , and Baby Ruby . Die My Love would have you believe that postpartum depression involves walking around the house with a knife or a shotgun, having an uncontrollable urge to kill your annoying dog, and violently bashing your head through every pane of glass you come across. None of it seems to be grounded in reality, mostly a showcase for its lead star to cut loose and be praised with adjectives like “raw” and “fearless.” I’d prefer to label it as self-indulgent, overwrought, and just plain bad. Ramsay drops her two leads in the middle of the Montana wilderness. Grace and her partner Jackson (Robert Pattinson) have inherited the farmhouse of his recently deceased uncle, a remote paradise for them to cut loose. And, boy, do they ever. Sex looks and sounds like two animals fighting, the pair writhing around on the floor, scratching and biting. Music is constantly blaring, the floorboards chip and squeak as they’re jumped on without a care in the world. What breaks up this hedonistic cycle is the introduction of a third wheel: their newborn son. Responsibility isn’t exactly a word they’re looking for at a time like this, which makes its forced placement drive a wedge between their relationship and Grace’s connection to reality. “I’m stuck between wanting to do something and not wanting to do anything,” is an explanation she blankly offers to a nosy party guest. Ramsay isn’t a filmmaker interested in straightforward methods of communication. Words are often replaced by images, jarringly photographed by Seamus McGarvey and stitched together by Toni Froschhammer. Everyone is lost in their own little world, illustrated through ultra-shallow focus, the background a swirling blur. Everything feels jagged, with danger lurking in every piece of hellish soundscape and dingy production design. On their own, each of these facets is serviceable, albeit a bit disappointing considering the talent. Together, spearheaded by Ramsay’s vision, they’re incredibly off-putting and obvious. In attempting to capture the inexplicability of Grace’s state of mind, a bright, neon sign is brandished in the corner of every frame, perpetually telling us exactly what we’re supposed to feel. That kind of shagginess leaves its star out high and dry. Lawrence’s performance is exactly that: a performance. She’s walking around all fours in the fields, licking windows, barking at the dog, and constantly complaining about not having sex with Jackson. It’s all so painfully “edgy,” seemingly stemming from a constant need to prove something, as if making faces and flailing around is what it means to be a “serious actor.” It beats me to assume what needs to be proved, as Lawrence has more than solidified her chops as a movie star and actor. Hell, she already played a stand-in mother married to a shitty man in a remote house in Mother! , a film that matched its madness with inquisitive substance. While Lawrence gets plenty (too much) to do, the rest of the cast just kind of stand around and watch. Pattinson’s character is woefully underdeveloped and uninteresting, the prototypical movie husband who is unwilling to communicate when the going gets tough. Sissy Spacek plays his mother, Pam, who is also dealing with a sudden change after the death of her husband Harry (Nick Nolte). The veteran acting pair are the lighthouses in this densely fogged-up narrative, with the ship repeatedly crashing without ever reaching its destination. It’s best not to explain LaKeith Stanfield’s presence as a wordless seducer that certainly should have been fully excised from all aspects of the project. This is the kind of arthouse film that gives the genre a bad wrap, a movie destined to receive an F CinemaScore and be another small catalyst in the rapid decline of risk-taking from the average moviegoer. If this is the kind of stuff that we’re risking our hard-earned dollars and time for, then what’s the point? The point is to be given an experience you’ll never forget, enlightened in ways that other art forms can’t quite achieve. Granted, that is true about Die My Love , just in the exact opposite ways everyone hoped for. More Reviews Wicked: For Good November 19, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Rental Family September 7, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Jay Kelly November 20, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Train Dreams November 21, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Hunter Friesen

Snow White March 19, 2025 By: Button Hunter Friesen At this point in the Disney live-action remake cycle, the only way to grade Snow White would be on a curve. “That’s not fair!” says Pinocchio , Dumbo, The Lion King , and The Little Mermaid . To them, my response is simple: Be better (or release later). Their faults have become Snow White ’s blessing, a bar lowered so that even something with as many conceptual flaws as this can pass for good enough. Now, it’s not all doom and gloom, nor does this remake of the famed 1937 Walt Disney animated film (itself a much cheerier adaptation of the fairy tale by The Brothers Grimm) get by purely on the benefit of comparison. First and foremost, Rachel Zegler is simply wonderful as the titular princess. I’d call it a star-making performance if she hadn’t already proved those bonafides with turns in Steven Spielberg’s West Side Story and The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbird & Snakes . Instead, I’ll just call it a case of perfect casting. Zegler fills her role with grace and composure, endlessly likable and charming. Her character’s disposition is natural goodness, a lesson taught by her royal parents. But tragedy struck the young Snow White in the form of her mother dying from illness and her father disappearing after he led some of his troops to fight in some unspecified war off-screen. This power vacuum allowed the Evil Queen (Gal Gadot) to take command of the kingdom, forcing Snow White into servitude and taking away all sense of hope and optimism amongst the citizens. Look, you don’t need me to rehash this plot. Screenwriter Erin Cressida Wilson doesn’t make many changes to the original’s story and structure. Her main goal was likely to remold some of the creakier elements with modern sensibilities, such as making the original Prince into Jonathan (Andrew Burnap), a somewhat wisecracking Robin Hood-type whose initial cold heart is melted by Snow White’s kindness. Burnap’s casting is less than ideal, with the Tony winner always looking exactly like his real age of thirty-four despite all the strenuous work done by the hair and makeup department. There’s never any predatory or creepy intonation between him and Zegler; it's just that seeing them side-by-side raises a slight eyebrow when I should be immediately swooning. Not changing from the original film is the fact that the seven dwarves are animated… although I prefer the original style to whatever this is. It’s not the same uncanny valley from the recent The Lion King films, as that had the detriment of being compared to real-life animals. But there’s still some creepiness permeating from them in each frame, and I can confirm that one child had to leave the screening in fear during the dwarf's initial introduction (the correlation can’t be confirmed, but the evidence is pretty strong). It’s no surprise that they’ve been heavily reduced in the marketing campaign and that no 3D prints were made. Something that is two-dimensional is Gadot’s performance. We all know she’s not a gifted thespian, with her turn here never clearly defining itself as strained or campy. I’m leaning towards the former, although her evil musical number makes a strong enough case for this to be seen as an elaborate wink for the parents. Director Marc Webb doesn’t stage many of the setpieces well, overcutting and giving more attention to the fake sets rather than the performances. Luckily, the music by musical superstars Benj Pasek and Justin Paul is catchy and empowering, so I could at least just close my eyes and still be entertained. Kids will definitely not wear out this VHS tape (I guess the term for this in this day and age would be “overload the Disney+ server”) as they did with Snow White and the Seven Dwarves . Internet trolls will also be disappointed to find out this isn’t an unmitigated disaster. Avoiding a catastrophe probably wasn't Disney’s strategy when they put down so much cash for this, but that’s about the best we’re all going to get. More Reviews Wicked: For Good November 19, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Rental Family September 7, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Jay Kelly November 20, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Train Dreams November 21, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Hunter Friesen

Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes May 8, 2024 By: Button Hunter Friesen Dubbed by many as the “thinking man’s action franchise,” the Planet of the Apes films has garnered itself quite high esteem over the years. What started as a single above-average 60s sci-fi blockbuster quickly became a cash-grab franchise, complete with a failed reboot at the turn of the millennium by Tim Burton. A balance of brain and brawn was finally met with Rise of the Planet of the Apes a decade later, followed by two excellent sequels ( Dawn and War ) that proved to be the exception to the rule of the dumbed-down CGI-heavy summer blockbuster. The momentum was too hot to put a cold towel over, prompting a continuation in Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes (the perfect title for critics striving to hit a certain word count). And just like they proved the doubters over the past decade, Kingdom rises above the notion that it’s an unnecessary addition, as it reaches for newer relevant themes in a world turned upside down. The central ape of the modern reboot trilogy, Caesar, has now passed, with his legend taking different forms in the many generations to follow. Earth is still an ape-dominant world, with them talking in semi-complete sentences and harnessing the power of other animals (eagles, horses, etc.) to progress their clans. It’s a feudal time of several clans all living disparately, one of them being a group of eagle herders deep within the jungle. A young ape named Noa (Owen Teague) knows that there is more to the world than the arbitrary borders his clan elders have drawn. But instead of a great journey inspired by self-discovery, Noa’s adventure is spurred by warring ape factions that seek to dominate and enslave others. The motivation for these aggressive apes is the deification of Caesar into a Christlike figure. Led by Proximus Caesar (Kevin Durand), who sees himself as the second-coming of the messiah, are essentially medieval crusaders, fighting to purify the land. “Apes together strong” has become one of their commandments, only this time it’s been twisted to brainwash apes into indentured servitude as there isn’t a common enemy in the form of humans, with only a few left who are intelligent enough to speak. Writer Josh Friedman keeps the brain of Kingdom firing at all times, holding up a mirror to the apes just as much as it does to all of human history. The words of Caesar have now become copies of copies of copies, with the loss of meaning being replaced by control and lust to grab hold of the power they possess. While it may sometimes over-explain itself, there’s a lot to appreciate in the moment and the many moments after the lights have gone up. In conjunction with Friedman, who is working from a foundation laid by Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver, the writers of Rise who James Cameron has recruited to help steer his Avatar films, is director Wes Ball, now also taking a few inspirations from that particular blue franchise. This is a new world from the time of Caesar, with Ball relishing in the time needed to relearn its environment and culture. There’s a patient rhythm to the storytelling, with just as many quiet moments of introspection as there are moments of shrieking bombastic. The overall production qualities are still top-notch, even if they are a mild step down from what director Matt Reeves was able to accomplish with his two most recent entries. The rich, natural colors of War have been replaced with an overly lit palette, and the ape CGI is slightly less expressive in the facial area. And the excellently underappreciated work by composer Michael Giacchino is sorely missing. It doesn’t feel like the highest form of criticism to simply compare the previous films to this new one, but it’s nearly impossible to avoid it after the bar has been set so memorably high. Under all that digital fur are some quality actors, notably Teague as our new hero. It must be catnip for an actor to inhabit a role such as this, especially after Andy Serkis revolutionized and displayed to the world just how seriously the craft of motion capture performing should be taken. There are real emotions on display, with Teague and his other ape castmates deserving just as much credit as the visual effects department. There’s also Freya Allan as the intelligent human Mae, who serves as the main catalyst for the debate over whether humanity has the right to take back that they once held a several millennia-long grip over. That debate will surely rattle on and become more intensive in the successive sequels, which will have the opportunity to follow the same trajectory of the previous sequels by improving on an already solid start. There’s also the possibility that they drag over the same terrain that we’ve become accustomed to. But this franchise hasn’t done us wrong for a while now, so I’ll let the side of optimism take over for the time being. It’s a nice feeling to have, and not one I take for granted. More Reviews Wicked: For Good November 19, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Rental Family September 7, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Jay Kelly November 20, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Train Dreams November 21, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Hunter Friesen