Search Results

Red One November 15, 2024 By: Button Hunter Friesen To be able to critique a film, you have to care about it. It doesn’t matter if that care comes in the form of how much you loved or hated it, it just needs to be present. But every once in a while there comes a film that doesn’t do anything for you. A form of highway hypnosis takes over; a blank stare fixes upon your face, your posture slouches, and your sense of purpose has been fully diluted. Red One was one of those films for me, something that I should have easily foreseen. The solitary thought that broke through my catatonic state during the screening was a wish that the movie was worse, as it would at least be interesting to talk about. But it wasn’t, so the only ammunition I have to fill this valuable margin space is a list of things I didn’t care about: I didn’t care that every character’s motivation adheres to the tired “rubber-ducky school of drama.” Everyone is good or evil because of some innocuous thing in their childhood, which will certainly be explained at length. I didn’t care that the fine folks at Amazon funded a $250 million movie about the evils of consumerism. Although it’s probably not a coincidence that every act of consumer greed occurs at a mall, not online. I didn’t care that the film wanted to have its cake and eat it too when it came to the rules and logic. Every world leader is aware of the existence of Santa Claus, and he even uses military bases to land his sleigh. And yet, the rest of the world’s population still thinks he doesn’t exist. How do parents react when they buy presents for the kids and new ones appear under the chimney on Christmas morning? Are the leaders keeping Santa a secret to prop up the economy? I didn’t care that Santa’s helpers are now CGI trolls instead of elves. Milk and cookies are fine, but we’re drawing the line at elves? I didn’t care that the film used the convenient fact that the North Pole is in perpetual darkness during the winter months to cover up its laughably subpar effects. I didn’t care that none of the jokes would be worthy of appearing in the bottom rung of the MCU. Take a shot every time a character says an inherently silly line with a straight face, only for the other character to repeat that same line with an exacerbated tone. I didn’t care that the fourth-billed J.K. Simmons does absolutely nothing for 80% of the movie. What do you mean he got totally jacked for the role and then proceeded to sit in a snow globe jail cell for 100 consecutive minutes? I didn’t care that Nick Kroll, Mary Elizabeth Ellis, and Bonnie Hunt were totally wasted in nothing roles. I didn’t care that enough holiday-related mythological creatures were sprinkled throughout to tease the establishment of a cinematic universe. After reading that list (and checking it twice), you’re probably thinking to yourself, “For a movie you didn’t care about, you certainly had a lot to say about it.” My answer is simple: I don’t care, and neither should you. Checkmate. More Reviews One Battle After Another September 24, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen A Christmas Party September 23, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Him September 18, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Swiped September 19, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Hunter Friesen

Wicked Little Letters March 28, 2024 By: Button Hunter Friesen What would you rather be: Polite and with a stick up your ass, or vulgar and sincere? To the delight of all stick sellers, 99% of the residents living in the 1920s seaside English town within Wicked Little Letters side with the former camp. It’s an area that is as conservative as they come, with all the men returning from The Great War wanting to settle down and have the women back in their place. “Hysteria and general tears” is what passes for a crime, with the only bit of controversy being the appointment of Gladys Moss (Anjana Vasan) as the first female police officer. That is, until the Irish Rose Gooding (Jesse Buckley) moves in next door to Edith Swan (Olivia Colman) and her strict parents (Timothy Spall and Gemma Jones). Rose and Edith are a tale of polar opposites. Rose is a free-spirit who isn’t afraid to speak her mind and swear like a sailor. She came over with a young daughter and an unmarried love interest. Edith is a Christian woman who never married and is always dutiful to her parents. So, when Edith and several of the town’s residents start receiving exceptionally hateful and foul letters, you can imagine who they all accuse. Writer Jonny Sweet has set the stage for a modern-day (at least when compared to the source material) Crucible . This time, instead of the free-spirits being labeled as witches, they’re barbaric heathens that die the slow death of social rejection. There are several helpings surrounding the debate of gender roles, specifically on women’s freedom during a pivotal moment in the twentieth century. It’s all very surface-level and done with a winking attitude, portraying all the men as domineering buffoons. Also hammered home several times over is the hilarity of swear words, especially within a setting that is the antithesis of vulgarity like Puritan England. The words “fuck,” “shit,” “whore,” and “cock” get more prominent use here than they did in a Martin Scorsese movie. While it’ll likely play like gangbusters at your local AARP-sponsored screening, everyone else not drawing from Social Security will shrug their shoulders after its second or third use. And by the thirtieth scene where the punch line is that someone says “fuck,” you’ll be more likely to say “fuck this” and leave. Colman and Buckley are clearly having fun with the roles, reveling in the opportunity to act together after never being able to share the same space in The Lost Daughter (they played the same character at different ages). The over-reliance on dirty words is made palatable thanks to the deliveries of the two actresses, each salivating at the chance to have characters that are given a modicum of agency during this period. There really isn’t much suspense about who the author of the letters is, with Sweet and director Thea Sharrock spelling it out in as bold a print as possible. It’s all light and fancy-free, almost too much for its own good. But a healthy movie ecosystem needs to offer products for the older crowds (see 80 for Brady and anything else Diane Keaton is doing these days), so take your grandparents out to the cinema before you go see Civil War . More Reviews One Battle After Another September 24, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen A Christmas Party September 23, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Him September 18, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Swiped September 19, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Hunter Friesen

The Starling Girl February 6, 2023 By: Button Hunter Friesen The Starling Girl had its World Premiere at the 2023 Sundance Film Festival. Bleecker Street will release it in theaters on May 12. The narrative beats within writer/director Laurel Parmet’s The Starling Girl may not be the most original, but that doesn’t lessen their impact. Elevated by an excellent leading turn by Elzsia Scanlen, who continues her upward trajectory after successful supporting roles in hit films and television shows such as 2019’s Little Women and HBO’s Sharp Objects , Parmet’s feature debut offers a youthful examination of the struggle between personal ambitions and the confines of religious tolerance. Scanlen is the titular Starling girl (Jem Starling to be exact), playing younger than herself through wardrobe decisions and physical performance. The Starling family is among many within a Christian fundamentalist community nestled in the Kentucky plains. Jem's actions are in service of what God and her community would want, such as leading a group prayer dance for her youth group. But just like every teenager, Jem starts to become drawn to the other sex, particularly her handsome youth pastor Owen (Lewis Pullman, last seen as the shy Lt. Robert “Bob” Floyd in Top Gun: Maverick ), who happens to be ten years older than her and married. The attraction slowly becomes mutual, with the flirtation of danger being a catalyst of their desire for each other. Parmet’s script focuses both on the personal aspects of this complicated relationship, and the societal judgment of it. As part of being a member of her community, Jem does not have the luxury of independence when choosing a romantic partner. Her devout mother and recovering alcoholic father have decided that Jem will be courted by Owen’s much younger brother Ben, despite there being no spark of affection between them. This loss of autonomy is painful to witness, mostly because of Scanlen’s displays of inner turmoil. Much of the film plays within the tropes of this specific story, as our character rebels against their societal expectations, leading to consequences in their relationship with themself and others. At 116 minutes, the pacing could have been greatly quickened, or at least some of it chopped off in bulk. Much of the material with Jem’s father, played finely by Jimmi Simpson, plays dangerously close to parody as the struggles with addiction are delivered with such heavy-handedness. If not for Scanlen’s performance, The Starling Girl would fall much further into the realm of obscurity its middling writing and direction had it heading for. If not for anything else, Parmet’s film has given one of our brightest young talents room to shine. Those with a deeply religious background may find more depth to it, but they may also find it dryly conventional. More Reviews One Battle After Another September 24, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen A Christmas Party September 23, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Him September 18, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Swiped September 19, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Hunter Friesen

Presence September 6, 2024 By: Button Hunter Friesen Presence had its International Premiere at the 2024 Toronto International Film Festival. Neon will release it in theaters on January 24, 2025. To label Presence as a horror film feels a bit misleading, as is the indication of quality with the flag for the film’s January release having already been firmly planted by distributor Neon. The scares are never in your face, although the camera (also helmed by Soderbergh under his now-famous pseudonym Peter Andrews) does get quite close to the actors. That’s because the camera is a character, not just in the metaphorical sense, but in the literal sense that the camera acts as the first-person perspective for a character. This character can’t be seen or heard by anyone else in the cast, as they are a ghost roaming the halls and rooms within an upscale house residing in a suburban neighborhood. The story is told entirely from their perspective, a silent protagonist who observes everything, yet (mostly) takes no action. This bold experiment is another in a long line of Soderbergh’s forays into altering the perception of what stories should be told in this age of digital cinema. iPhones were used as cameras for his one-two-punch of Unsane and High Flying Bird , and Mosaic allowed the audience to experience the mystery through an app. But while those projects were meant to radicalize the process of making films, Presence opts to change what’s right in front of your eyes. There’s a Michael Haneke-esque feeling of tension and voyeurism to every scene, each unfolding in a single take and being broken up with cuts to black. Some of the characters can feel that they are being watched, while others are totally oblivious to it. The most sensitive is teenaged Chloe (Callina Liang), the youngest in the newly moved-in family. She’s dealing with the trauma of recently losing two of her friends, both of them dying under mysterious circumstances. Her feelings of unease are only exasperated by the happenings around the house, such as doors creaking shut and objects suddenly falling off shelves. The rest of the unit is either in some stage of denial or acceptance of what’s going on around them. None of them know the 5 Ws and H for this entity, but they all realize deep down that something is happening. The initial buildup to the mystery is where Soderbergh and veteran screenwriter David Koepp (also the writer for Soderbergh’s Kimi and upcoming Black Bag ) flex their creative muscles to their fullest potential. As the homeward-bound camera weaves its way around, we gather snippets of the dynamics between the family. Mom (Lucy Liu) is controlling and pushy, obviously showing greater favor to the oldest son (Eddy Maday), while the dad (Chris Sullivan) tries to keep the peace. Secrets and subplots start interweaving from there, with mundane lines of dialogue from one scene acting as the hidden puzzle piece to unlock something later. Even at 85 minutes, nothing about Presence can be described as brisk, with the latter half of the film not following through with as much vigor as the setups would promise. A few reveals and twists are not as satisfying as they should be, with a little bit of a “Is that it?” energy permeating the entire experience as you walk out of the theater. The actors are all fine, especially Liang and Sullivan, with their characters sharing a deeper bond, and the technical experiment is perpetually interesting. This is more than a VR experience, although it could be a more than worthwhile starting point for something of that caliber in the future. More Reviews One Battle After Another September 24, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen A Christmas Party September 23, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Him September 18, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Swiped September 19, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Hunter Friesen

The Last Duel October 18, 2021 By: Button Hunter Friesen At 83 years old, Ridley Scott is quite the inspiration. With a directorial career that spans nearly 2,500 commercials and countless films - such as Alien , the Best Picture-winning Gladiator , and The Martian - no one would blame him to hang it all up and retire to the countryside. But Scott has never known the definition of the word “break” and has tasked himself with increasingly tougher work the more he ages, with 2021 seeing the release of two major tentpole films in The Last Duel and House of Gucci . The latter of that pair bows at Thanksgiving, with the former hitting theatres this past weekend. In an extended prologue surrounding the titular bout between Jean de Carrouges (Matt Damon) and Jacques Le Gris (Adam Driver), The Last Duel sets up what to expect, such as the grey dourness of the setting and story, lensed exquisitely by Scott’s longtime cinematographer Darius Wolski. Atop both of the knights is the petulant King Charles VI, who is more than giddy for some bloodshed. And standing between the duelists is Marguerite de Carrouges (a terrific Jodie Comer), whose fate is linked to the outcome. Before any of the men meet their maker, we flashback sixteen years prior, to a time when they were dear friends. Broken up into three chapters, the film follows the unique perspectives of the three central individuals as it tracks the events that led to the duel. This Rashomon - inspired structure is where Scott, along with Damon and Ben Affleck in their first credited screenplay since Good Will Hunting , show off their brilliance. The first chapter is “The truth according to Jean de Carrouges.” In Jean’s eyes, he’s a righteous knight that has been wronged by those that deserve less than him. Despite his proud military record, his squire Jacques is shown favor by Count Pierre (a bleach blonde Affleck), who gifts Jacques with a vast piece of land once promised to Jean. The growing resentment between the two reaches a tipping point when Jean’s new wife, Marguerite, accuses Jacques of rape. But “The truth according to Jacques Le Gris” sees things differently. Jean is headstrong and foolhardy, easily leading Pierre to favor Jacques’s worldliness. Jacques feels that Jean is wasting the sophistication of Marguerite and that he is the only person that truly appreciates her. Therefore, his sexual act cannot be classified as rape, since the two of them are meant for each other. Not that it’s much of a spoiler of what the actual truth is, but “The truth according to Marguerite de Carrouges” displays the words “the truth” for an extra couple of seconds before fading away. This chapter is written by the talented Nicole Holofcener, as Damon and Affleck felt they were unqualified to write from a female perspective. Marguerite’s truth sees both Jean and Jacques as squabbling children using the pretexts of duty and honor to mask their cruelty. The rape scene is played again, this time amplifying the excruciating horror of the act, prompting a necessary uncomfortable feeling within the viewer. Her accusation against Jacques is met with hostility from both Jean and the rest of France, as rape is not considered a crime against a woman, but a property matter. The greatness of the film’s structure is that it creates a puzzle where the pieces are constantly shifting in size and placement. Even a simple act, such as a handshake between Jean and Jacques, is seen from three angles, each eliciting a different response. It’s fascinating to watch as the web of lies and truth becomes increasingly difficult to parse, with Scott supplying the necessary inertia to keep the film moving at a great pace. And the final duel more than lives up to expectations, especially when compared to the high bar Scott has set for himself within his filmography. There have been only a handful of final battles that weren’t already decided by the plot before they begin, and this is one of them. There’s an exciting amount of tension as the knight's exchange blows in agonizing brutality. Bolstered by spectacle and substance, The Last Duel is one of Ridley Scott’s finest films. It’s one of the few films in 2021 to exceed my expectations, and one of the few blockbusters of the modern age to be propelled by collaborative artistry, rather than preconceived properties and overblown budgets. More Reviews One Battle After Another September 24, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen A Christmas Party September 23, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Him September 18, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Swiped September 19, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Hunter Friesen

A Hero July 16, 2021 By: Button Hunter Friesen A Hero had its World Premiere at the 2021 Cannes Film Festival. Amazon Studios will release it in theaters on January 07, followed by its streaming premiere on January 21. Without much fanfare, Iranian auteur Asghar Farhadi has become one of the most consistent filmmakers of the new millennium. His work has amassed him prestigious premieres at film festivals, two Academy Awards for Best International Feature (2011’s A Separation and 2016’s The Salesman ), and the opportunity to work with some of the biggest international stars. Premiering at this year’s Cannes Film Festival (which usually serves as his launching pad) is his newest film, A Hero . Set within modern Iran, A Hero follows the life of Rahim, who is currently on two-day parole from his prison sentence, which he is serving because of his inability to pay off a debt to a local lender. When Rahim and his girlfriend find a bag of gold coins at a bus stop, they decide to pawn them off to help pay the debt. Unfortunately, the exchange rate for the coins isn’t ideal, so they decide to do the right thing and return them to the owner. A woman comes forward to reclaim her lost property, which turns Rahim into a local celebrity for his generosity. But after some digging, hidden details start to come up to the surface. Rahim’s story is put under a microscope, with many suspecting there’s more than meets the eye. Barring his 2018 feature Everybody Knows , Farhadi has concentrated his storytelling on his home country of Iran. He has a fascination with showcasing the modern problems that its citizens often deal with, a monumentally difficult task considering the strict censorship the government puts on its artists. Despite the government initially banning him from making the film, Farhadi was able to explore the modern fallacies of divorce and gender in A Separation . A Hero taps into that same vein as Farhadi spins a web of moral and ethical quandaries so dense that it would give the world’s leading philosophers a headache. Often compared to the great Alfred Hitchcock for his knack for suspenseful drama, Farhadi structures his film with a rapid pace, both in terms of setting and plot progression. Taking place entirely throughout Rahim’s two-day parole, the film covers a lot of material in a short amount of time. And this material isn’t clean and dry stuff as much of it contains complicated details and extensive critical thinking without the guarantee of a satisfying answer. Unlike Hitchcock, Farhadi is quite invisible in his direction. Like the master that he is (which isn’t to say Hitchcock isn’t a master), Farhadi is always present, but never visible. There isn’t anything showy about his work as the story and actors carry the film from beginning to end. His reluctance to overtly showcase his prowess to the audience is a sign of a director confident in his abilities, and the crew that he has assembled. A Hero is still filled with a few directorial flourishes such as a perfectly framed shot here and there, with the final shot rivaling his best visual work. Where Farhadi flexes his muscles is in the jam-packed script. Like Aaron Sorkin’s work in The Social Network , there are mountains upon mountains of dialogue, all going by in the blink of an eye. This is both a blessing and a curse to the film, as it produces a rapidly evolving plot that keeps you guessing, but also overloads itself and spreads its message too thin over too many topics. The ideas of The Good Samaritan and the troubling machinations of the court of public opinion are topics rife with debate that Farhadi is expertly able to dissect, but just not at the same time. At the center of the film is Amir Jadidi as Rahim, who, like all Farhadi performers, is a captivating lead. Despite his myriad of problems, Rahim always carries around a dogged smile on his face and a sliver of optimism in his mind. You’re attracted to him as a character because of this and feel betrayed by him once more light is shed on the truth. While he may not be working at the absolute height of his power, Asghar Farhadi’s A Hero is still a feature by a master storyteller doing what he does best. There’s a lot to learn and digest, with some of the material being quite rough around the edges. Few filmmakers are as gifted as Farhadi at showing the complicated nature of everyday life. More Reviews One Battle After Another September 24, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen A Christmas Party September 23, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Him September 18, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Swiped September 19, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Hunter Friesen

Talk to Me July 26, 2023 By: Button Hunter Friesen The horror genre has been experiencing a small renaissance as of late, with more than a handful of fresh-faced directors announcing themselves to the world through the art of the scare. Robert Eggers ( The Witch ), Jordan Peele ( Get Out ), Ari Aster ( Hereditary ), Jennifer Kent ( The Babadook ), and Julia Ducournau ( Raw ) are just a few that have risen to the top of the game in the last few years. To use a term that has become a meme at this point: They elevated a genre that has historically been disrespected. Now with the pandemic forever shifting the theatrical landscape, it seems that horror movies are the only things that are guaranteed to put butts in seats. Add in the rise of technology, and it’s never been easier to enter into the business. Australian YouTube sensations Danny and Michael Philippou, a.k.a RackaRacka , have done just that with Talk to Me , an exceedingly well-crafted, albeit slightly shallow, debut feature. A drug is storming through the streets of Australia, hooking in teens with unprecedented potency. It’s not heroin, cocaine, or even some other narcotic you’ve ever heard of. It’s actually a sick game where the contestant holds onto a ceramic scrawled with illegible writing. Uttering the words “talk to me” conjures up a dead spirit that can only be seen by the person touching the hand. An even greater high can be achieved by saying “I let you in,” which allows the spirit to take control of the person’s body. But be warned: Holding the hand for more than ninety seconds will allow the spirit to remain in the host forever, essentially rendering them a puppet of the undead. Mia (Sophie Wilde) is a teenager riddled with guilt and trauma from the semi-recent unexplained suicide of her mother. She’s become the sad sack of her class, a status she would like to turn around. The best way to do that is to get in with the cool kids, who are all about the hand. Mia quickly becomes addicted to the feeling of dissociating from this mortal world. “I don’t feel alone anymore” is her foolproof excuse to her protective friend Jade (Alexandra Jensen), who feels like this thing is snowballing into dangerous territory. Jade is absolutely right, as like any regular drug, the good times eventually fade out and the darkness begins to take over, only this time in the form of unholy entities wreaking havoc on your body and soul. There’s a social undercurrent relating to young people’s unquenchable thrift to become viral sensations throughout much of the horror. An exciting opening tracking shot sees one of the victims of the hand executing the wishes of the damned, with a crowd of teens recording the whole thing. Earning tens of millions of views through their YouTube channel, the Philippou brothers are adept at commenting on seeking online attention. They’re not as adept at handling the topics of grief and loss, however, as Mia’s relationship with her deceased mother and distraught single father never feels more than anything we haven’t seen in several other “smart” horror movies. And while it is a little refreshing to have a movie with a simple premise and rules, there is a desire for more information to be supplied regarding the perpetrators. The craftsmanship on display is quite remarkable. When people talk about the theatrical experience, they mostly mention the size of the screen and how it adds unparalleled scale to already mammoth productions like Oppenheimer and Avatar: The Way of Water . But the thing that theaters do best is suppress your senses, keeping you locked to the moment, and focusing only on what’s in front of you. Talk to Me will surely not play as well at home, where the bone-crunching sound design and crisp cinematography by Aaron McLisky won’t be able to take over ears and eyes to its full effect. The reaction from you and the audience during the wince-inducing moments is what keeps Talk to Me alive, pushing it to be a cut above the rest of the pack. The Philippous seem to be fast learners when it comes to filmmaking, and I’m excited to see what the future holds in store for them. More Reviews One Battle After Another September 24, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen A Christmas Party September 23, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Him September 18, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Swiped September 19, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Hunter Friesen

Movies That Made More Money Than You Think August 7, 2023 By: Hunter Friesen In the modern world of cinema, the power of recognizable brands often sets the stage for box office success. However, now and then, something unique emerges that not only captivates audiences worldwide but also defies all expectations by amassing colossal profits beyond anyone's wildest imagination. These are the movies that made way more money than they were supposed to, shattering records and redefining the very essence of success in the film industry. One ground rule is that each selection for this list was released in 1990 or afterward. This is approximately the time the modern box office landscape was born, with multiplexes overtaking the long-standing mom & pop movie theaters. It’s also hard to compare and analyze box office performances from several decades ago, as it wasn’t uncommon for a movie to be in theaters for months on end. Both Gone with the Wind and The Sound of Music were in theaters for over four years upon their initial release, which certainly gave them an advantage towards becoming two of the highest-grossing films ever. Several metrics were also used to make these selections, such as the amount of money the movie made, how much it was expected to make based on projections and the performance of similar movies, and its overall cultural relevance (or lack thereof). From underdog productions battling against all odds to star-driven blockbusters soaring to unprecedented heights, each film on this list has a unique tale to tell. Ghost (1990) ($500 million) 1990 was the year of surprise hits. Pretty Woman, Home Alone , and Dances with Wolves all hugely outgrossed expectations. But the best of the bunch was Ghost , a bit of female counterprogramming from Paramount against the boy-friendly summer titles of Die Hard 2 and Back to the Future III . Mixing steamy romance, crime drama thrills, the supernatural, and comedy, the film was the prototypical four-quadrant release. Its PG-13 rating wasn’t too risque for conservative viewers, while still pushing the envelope enough to entice teenagers. It opened #2 at the box office in July just behind the second weekend of Die Hard 2 . It would remain in either of those top two spots for the following nine weeks and would retain the same theater count (1700) until November. It had the third-highest domestic gross ever (behind E.T. and Star Wars ) before Home Alone dethroned it that holiday season. It’s a simply astounding feat for a film that has never inspired sequels, spin-offs, or even merchandise sales (at least not yet). What Women Want (2000) ($375 million) It’s hard to envision it now, but Mel Gibson was, for a brief moment, a romantic leading heartthrob. The $34.4 million opening weekend for Nancy Meyers’ film was the highest ever in December at that time and even bested Gibson’s action-oriented films like Ransom and the Lethal Weapon franchise. An EW poll found that nearly half the audience saw the movie for Gibson, who would receive a Golden Globe nomination for Best Performance in a Motion Picture - Comedy or Musical (losing to George Clooney for O Brother, Where Art Thou? ). The film ended with $180 both domestically and internationally, claiming the fourth best worldwide cume of 2000. Meet the Fockers (2004) ($525 million) Gone are the days of star-driven studio comedies being at the top of the box office charts. Meet the Fockers earned the highest-ever Christmas Day gross at $19.5 million in 2004, even beating the previous’s year champion, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King . The character of Greg Focker was almost as lucrative as Harry Potter and Peter Parker that year, with the comedy sequel finishing its box office run with over half a billion dollars. It was Robert De Niro’s highest-grossing film for fifteen years until it was beaten by Joker in 2019. The Da Vinci Code (2006) ($760 million) While many films on this list accumulated their huge grosses due to good reviews and word of mouth, neither of those was the case for The Da Vinci Code . The film boasts a 25% on Rotten Tomatoes and was the recipient of several rounds of booing during its premiere as the opening film of that year’s Cannes Film Festival. The film was also banned in several countries such as parts of India, Egypt, and China (after it had played for a few weeks), and was boycotted by several religious groups. None of those factors stopped audiences from flocking to the film that summer. It amassed a near-record worldwide total of $224 million on its opening weekend, thanks in part to the immense popularity of the novel and the star power of Tom Hanks. Over 70% of its $750 million total gross would come from international territories, with a similar breakdown occurring for the film’s two disappointing sequels: Angels & Demons ($500 million total) and Inferno ($220 million total). 2012 (2009) ($770 million) Sure, disaster movies are pretty dependable at the box office because of their simplistic storytelling and bang-for-your-buck visuals. But does it make much sense that one of the most forgettable entries in that subgenre, Roland Emmerich’s 2012 , is also one of the most successful? 2012 was boosted by a viral marketing campaign that latched onto the urban legend of the world ending in the year 2012. Comcast even blocked out a ten-minute chunk of time on nearly every genre to show a clip of the film. Even with a less-than-ideal leading man in John Cusack, the film accumulated almost $800 million worldwide. Almost 80% of those dollars came from overseas, as the film was the first $700+ million grosser to make less than $200 million stateside. True Grit (2010) ($250 million) It only took twelve days for this Western remake to become the highest-grossing film within the Coen brothers’ filmography. The strong critical reactions and awards buzz helped the movie double its opening weekend projections, pulling in over $25 million during the holiday weekend. There was also the advantage of the Coens dialing down their eccentricities for this film, delivering a more conventional crowdpleaser that had a more long-lasting theatrical appeal. It ended up being one of the highest-grossing Westerns ever, finishing with $171 million domestically and $81 internationally. That holiday window happened to be the coronation of star Jeff Bridges, who also appeared in the chart-topping TRON: Legacy . Black Swan (2010) ($330 million) While it is nice to see Oppenheimer and Barbie sparking a renewed conversation about the merits of “original” programming at the box office, it is still a little disheartening to see that this same conversation was taking place over a decade ago thanks to Black Swan . Strong interest in Darren Aronosky’s film started from the viral marketing campaign, which didn’t commence until just a few weeks before the film’s premiere at the Venice Film Festival. The buzz out of the fall festivals matched the enthusiasm online, something relatively unheard of for an arthouse movie. Along with the strong critical remarks it received, especially for Natalie Portman’s lead performance, one of the biggest benefits of the movie was that it was somehow able to appeal to nearly every demographic. Arthouse cinephiles were excited about a new Aronofsky film, dance and theater fans got a unique reimagining of Swan Lake , and horror junkies were treated to a dark psychological tale of obsession. The film would gross over $100 million domestically, all before it even had been released internationally, with many of those dates pushed up to capitalize on the demand. In the end, it grossed $330 million worldwide on a $13 million budget, placing it as the second biggest sleeper hit of 2010. What was #1 you ask? The King's Speech (2010) ($480 million) Everything Everywhere All at Once ’s worldwide gross of $140 million puts it near the top half of Best Picture winners in the modern era. But that total doesn’t even match the domestic cume of The King’s Speech , which only accounted for a little less than a third of the film’s global take of almost $500 million. Tom Hooper’s film is the second-highest-grossing Best Picture winner of the 21st century, behind The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (which stands so far ahead with over $1 billion). Between claiming the People’s Choice Award at the Toronto International Film Festival, having the highest per-theater-average opening weekend of the year ($350,000), and receiving a yearly best of twelve Oscar nominations, success followed The King’s Speech everywhere it went. It was hailed as one of the most successful British independent films ever only after a month of release, overcoming the controversial R-rating it received. The film also made over half its money after the Oscar nominations were announced, with the compelling exploration of friendship and resilience resonating deeply with viewers. American Sniper (2014) ($550 million) If asked to guess which film conquered the North American box office in 2014 most people would defer to a franchise film such as Guardians of the Galaxy, The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1 , or Captain America: The Winter Soldier . Those would all be good guesses (they each placed within the top five), but sitting on the throne was 84-year-old Clint Eastwood with American Sniper . Showing the power of appealing to middle America and controversy about its messaging, American Sniper grossed $90 million in its opening weekend, more than double what it projected to do. The A+ CinemaScore and awards attention kept it at the top of the box office for the next six weeks, where it would end with over $350 million domestically and $550 worldwide. It still stands as the highest-grossing war film ever (not accounting for inflation) and is only behind The Passion of the Christ and Deadpool as the highest-grossing R-rated film in North America. More Reviews One Battle After Another September 24, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen A Christmas Party September 23, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Him September 18, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Swiped September 19, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Hunter Friesen

Dreamin' Wild August 1, 2023 By: Button Hunter Friesen History is full of instances where creative geniuses were overlooked in their own time, only to get the proper amount of recognition long after they’ve left our mortal world. Vincent van Gogh personally sold only one painting; the majority of the poems by Emily Dickinson never saw the light of day until decades after her death; and Johann Sebastian Bach was only known as a simple organist during his active days. But what if that rush of recognition wasn’t delayed so posthumously? What if all that work was reappraised during their lifetime? Would those figures celebrate their newfound success, or would it disrupt the unappreciated lives they had content themselves with? Such are the questions within Bill Pohlad’s sophomore feature, which premiered last fall at the Venice and Toronto Film Festivals, and just made its American debut as the opening night selection for the writer/director’s hometown Minneapolis St. Paul Film Festival. In the late 1970s, the teenage brothers of Donnie (Noah Jupe) and Joe Emmerson (Jack Dylan Grazer) recorded an album called “Dreamin’ Wild” in their makeshift studio their dad built on the family farmland. Nothing came of it, with most copies going unsold and taking up space in their parent’s basement. The brothers moved on with their lives. Thirty years later, a producer hears the album and is compelled to track down the creators. The record is remastered and re-released to great acclaim, sparking a newfound nationwide interest, capped off with an article in The New York Times . The adult Donnie (Casey Affleck) is a bit skeptical of all this attention and isn’t sure if he wants to get back into the life he left behind so long ago. Affleck’s performance may as well have been lifted straight from Manchester by the Sea , which earned him an Oscar. There’s a quiet sense of guilt and regret in his demeanor, as his first go at music fame cost his dad a small fortune. Joe (Walton Goggins) is the less talented brother, but he’s always trying his best on the drums and there as support. While Donnie struggles with finding the passion he once had as a teenager, Joe is more than willing to dive into the musical beats once again. Pohlad started out his Hollywood journey as a producer for several talented filmmakers such as Ang Lee ( Brokeback Mountain ), Terrence Malick ( The Tree of Life ), Sean Penn ( Into the Wild ), and Steve McQueen ( 12 Years a Slave ). His directorial debut came in 2014 with Love & Mercy , a biography of The Beach Boys frontman Brian Wilson, split between his youthful origins and later broken years. Dreamin’ Wild repeats that exact narrative structure, with Donnie and Joe literally looking into their past on multiple occasions. “Magical realism” is the way Pohlad described his approach to the film, with the exact stylings leaning close to that of Malick (sans whisper narration). But just as Malick’s name is misspelled in the “special thanks” portion of the end credits, Pohlad’s emulation of his style isn’t totally correct either. Some scenes are a little amateurish in their production qualities, and some of the interesting creative ideas are sandwiched between the story beats we’ve come to expect within the musician genre. Still, the director’s love and appreciation for the Emersons is always evident, almost as if he made the movie more for them than the paying audiences. That emotional reverence is what I walked away from the movie feeling the most, which is more than I can say about the majority of biopics these days. More Reviews One Battle After Another September 24, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen A Christmas Party September 23, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Him September 18, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Swiped September 19, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Hunter Friesen

Triangle of Sadness May 28, 2022 By: Button Hunter Friesen Triangle of Sadness had its World Premiere at the 2022 Cannes Film Festival. Neon will release it in theaters on October 7. An influencer couple, a Russian capitalist, two British arms dealers, and an American Marxist sea captain all board a $250 million luxury yacht bound for the high seas. What could go wrong? You’ve seen movies better at dissecting economic classism than Triangle of Sadness . You’ve also seen much tighter and more succinct ones. And you’ve definitely seen ones that leave you with a better understanding of an issue than when you walked in. But, I don’t think you’ve ever seen a film that doesn't do all of that and still be as wickedly hilarious as Triangle of Sadness . Ruben Östlund has never found an issue he can’t tackle. Whether it be mundane social norms in Involuntary , male ego in Force Majeure (for which he was given the dubious honor of having remade in the English language with the woefully dull Downhill ), or the upside-down art world in The Square , the Swedish filmmaker has always found a playful way to show just how absurd life is. And, along with those themes of social skewering, the thing that has stayed most consistent is the praise he’s received. Force Majeure snagged the Un Certain Regard Jury Prize at the 2014 Cannes Film Festival, which allowed him to be “promoted” to the official competition with 2017’s The Square . The brighter lights did nothing to hinder his upward trajectory as he added the prestigious Palme d’Or to his trophy shelf. Now in 2022, Östlund’s stock continues to rise with his second consecutive Palme win, joining Michael Haneke and fellow countrymen Billie August as the only filmmakers to win the award for back-to-back films. So, with all the awards surrounding Triangle of Sadness as it sets its American theatrical release, the question remains: Does it live up to the hype? Well, yes and no. Taking a page out of the Zoolander school of satire, Östlund’s film opens with a modeling audition. At the age of 25, Carl (both smartly and aloofly played by the rising Harris Dickinson) is getting a little too close to being phased out of his career as the roles in the “grumpy” and “smiley” brands aren’t coming as easily as they used to. He’s left to languish in a slow and painful societal death, which includes losing social media followers and invites to his girlfriend Yaya’s (Charlbi Dean, who tragically passed away just after the film’s premiere) runway shows. This A Star Is Born dynamic threatens the pair’s relationship, which Östlund punctuates with a side-splitting cringe-fueled debate over who should pick up the check at a restaurant. Fortunately, the couple is bound for a superyacht vacation that will act as the final opportunity to mend their connection. On the boat, they become the middle class, stuck between the uber-rich guests and the lowly workers that service every passenger’s whim, which includes going for a swim to assuage their master’s guilt and promising to clean the sails, even though this a motorized vessel. In this second act of the film’s clear three-act structure, Östlund unleashes a tirade of written and visual allegories upon his micro-society, with two standouts being Woody Harrelson’s alcoholic ship captain and the closing scene where the ship fills with literal shit and vomit. Any viewers with a weak stomach have been properly warned. None of what Östlund is saying is revolutionary, but it is oh so funny. But that high level of hilarity can’t sustain itself across the film’s extremely bloated 150-minute runtime, which becomes quite clear during the final, and weakest, act. Through unforeseen circumstances, the passengers have been marooned on a desolate island. Things get even more in-your-face by Östlund as the social hierarchy completely flips, with the white-collar passengers proving to be inept and the “peasants” becoming royalty because of their basic survival skills. From here to the end, most everything only elicits a mild chuckle instead of the belly-aching that the first two hours had accustomed us to. Triangle of Sadness demands to be seen with the largest crowd possible, as its mixture of low and high-brow humor travels like wildfire in the moment. Unfortunately for the majority of the viewers, the post-pandemic theatrical landscape doesn’t create too many opportunities for that level of a collective experience for any non-MCU branded film. It’s a true pity, as my Cannes screening of Östlund’s farce in May has lasted longer in my memory than most blockbusters do the day after. More Reviews One Battle After Another September 24, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen A Christmas Party September 23, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Him September 18, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Swiped September 19, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Hunter Friesen

Death on the Nile February 14, 2022 By: Button Hunter Friesen The cards have been stacked against Kenneth Branagh’s sequel to Murder on the Orient Express for some time now. It had its production and release disrupted several times on account of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. It was part of the jumbled merger when Disney acquired Fox, creating a whole new set of business problems behind the scenes. And it was caught up in the scandal that swallowed the career of star Armie Hammer, as well as the anti-vax statements made by Letitia Wright and Russell Brand. And unlike any great mystery that would take those elements and spin it into something beyond your imagination, those ingredients simply turn out to be part of an equation where their sum equals the rotten product that is Death on the Nile . There, I’ve solved the mystery that every critic sets out to conquer: Is a movie worth its cost, in both time, energy, and money? In this case, it most certainly is not. But I can’t let this mystery go away so easily, as it must be dissected and analyzed so we know how and why this movie died in such an ugly fashion. Like the skilled cinematic detective that I am, I’ll go through the autopsy piece by piece. The first reason for the film’s demise lies in its cast, which, both on paper and in the flesh, is a sharp downgrade from its predecessor. Say what you want about Murder on the Orient Express , but you can’t deny the legendary assortment of actors that it assembled in Michelle Pfeiffer, Johnny Depp, Willem Dafoe, Judi Dench, Olivia Colman, Penélope Cruz, Derek Jacobi, Leslie Odom Jr., and Daisy Ridley. They had the perfect combination of movie star wattage and talent. When it came time for Branagh to reload for the sequel, he wasn’t able to scrounge up enough to replace what he had lost. I mean no personal disrespect to these actors, especially the wonderful Annette Bening and Sophie Okonedo, but they pale in comparison to the originals. Any casting director could have told you the writing was on the wall the moment you replaced Michelle Pfeiffer with Gal Gadot. Next on the list of causes of death is the technicals. I’ve been working on a theory that there is an inverse relationship between the number of visual effects that Branagh uses within his films and their overall quality. His earlier Shakespearean work of Henry V and Hamlet (clocking in at a daunting 238 minutes) still stand the test of time in part because of Branagh’s use of lavishly authentic sets and costumes. It’s one of the reasons why his Cinderella is the only Disney live-action remake that deserves attention, and why he’s recently been nominated for Best Director for Belfast . But when Branagh ups his budgets (as he did here, going from $55 to $90 million) and tries to push the envelope, such as he did in Thor and Artemis Fowl , things start to look and feel messy. For not a single second did I believe that Death on the Nile was taking place on the Nile River. The CGI-rendered backgrounds are glossy and wouldn’t fly for 2002, let alone 2022, and rob the film of any sense of wonder and grandiosity. The third and final, and most important, explanation is the central mystery at hand. In both the original Agatha Christie novel and film adaptations, the unraveling of Murder on the Orient Express is top-rate. For someone like me who wasn’t familiar with the plot going into Branagh’s adaptation, the ultimate reveal was shocking and satisfying. The twists and turns within Death on the Nile , on the other hand, are far more on-the-nose. Screenwriter Michael Green and Branagh put a little too much attention on certain lines of dialogue and specific edits, making it all too easy to pinpoint who the killer is and how they did it. I was only one-third of the way through the film by the time I pieced it all together, which made the next hour quite tedious as I waited for the characters to catch up. What fun is a murder-mystery whodunnit if you can easily solve it? The answer is that it’s no fun at all. On nearly every level, Death on the Nile is a serious dropoff in quality compared to its 2017 predecessor, which now looks much better in hindsight. Branagh has expressed interest in continuing the adventures of Hercule Poirot with further sequels, which, at this point, I’m not looking forward to. More Reviews One Battle After Another September 24, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen A Christmas Party September 23, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Him September 18, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Swiped September 19, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Hunter Friesen

Chaos Walking March 11, 2021 By: Button Hunter Friesen Like The Hunger Games, Harry Potter , and Percy Jackson , Chaos Walking is the newest attempt to establish a lucrative franchise based on a series of popular teenage-audience books. But unlike those successful series, this Lionsgate release is more likely to fall in line with the other failures such as The Golden Compass and The Mortal Instruments . Haven’t heard of this movie? Well, I wouldn’t blame you since Lionsgate has attempted to bury this money pit in the middle of the pandemic to save themselves from further embarrassment. Filmed in 2017 and originally to be released in early 2019, the film underwent extensive (and expensive) reshoots after the first cut was deemed unwatchable. It was shelved for nearly two years until crawling its way back from the grave into newly reopened theatres. So, is this movie as terrible as its reputation precedes it? No, but that’s not to say it isn’t bad. Similar to all YA novels, Chaos Walking takes place in a dystopian space colony in 2257. This planet is like Earth, except that there is something in the atmosphere called The Noise. An introvert's worst nightmare, The Noise makes it where the thoughts of men are heard aloud, and is something our hero, orphaned Todd (Tom Holland), still has yet to control. Everything he thinks is broadcast to anyone within earshot, restricting any sense of privacy. No one knows why this is happening, and why women are not affected. The colony Todd lives in also has no women there, as he is told the Spackle - the native inhabitants of the planet - killed off. Obviously, what you’re told isn’t always what actually happened. Everything changes when a scout, Viola (Daisy Ridley), crashes on the planet. The leader of the colony decides to use her as bait to attract her command ship so he can ambush it and leave this godforsaken land. Naturally, Todd develops a crush on Viola, agreeing to help her escape to a deserted colony fitted with a communicator that she can use to warn her rescuers. If you wanted to know what Tom Holland was thinking all the time, this will be a supreme disappointment to you. The character is very bland, and so are his thoughts, which consist solely of him saying his name to calm himself down and suppressing his budding feelings for his newfound partner. Holland tries to use his Peter Parker charm to make the character at least bearable, but the script makes his efforts a waste. The word bland is the best way to describe everything about this movie. It might be a weird movie, but that doesn’t mean it’s interesting. There’s a lot of semi-world building here as we are introduced to all sorts of details about the planet and its backstory. I say semi because the movie never gives away too much information, as they want you to pay more for that in the sequels, which are never going to happen. It’s also done at a rapid pace, moving from one location to another like we’re just skimming through the pages. Adapting his book, writer Patrick Ness seems more interested in setting up sequels than establishing an interesting base. Take for instance the Spackle, who look like all-black Martians and rightfully fought back against the colonizing humans. In this movie, we see them for one three-minute action scene. After that, they disappear completely and are never mentioned again. I was told by a friend that the Spackle are reintroduced in the third book, a fact that I audibly groaned at. I want to learn about these natives now, not these boring humans! Even for a $100 million (+ reshoots) blockbuster, Chaos Walking is sparsely light on meaningful action. Director Doug Liman had the potential to mash the sci-fi and western genre into something off the beaten path, but he instead stays in the same lane as his contemporaries. Like Star Wars , the guns shoot plasma so the wounds are bloodless and any serious violence is cut away from. The one unique feature is the movie’s questionable hatred towards animals, as a horse is violently put down and a dog is drowned in the frame. I’m glad no one in the cinema could hear my thoughts while watching this movie because my head was full of a lot of questions and negative comments. By next month, Chaos Walking will feel like a distant memory, a fact that we should all rejoice in. It was nice to be back in the cinema after a long while, I just wish it wasn’t for this. More Reviews One Battle After Another September 24, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen A Christmas Party September 23, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Him September 18, 2025 By: Hunter Friesen Swiped September 19, 2025 By: Tyler Banark Hunter Friesen