Search Results

1967: A Dramatic Shift in Film March 29, 2023 By: Hunter Friesen The year 1967 can be regarded as one of the most pivotal years in cinema history. It was a transitional year where the conventional and unconventional came crashing together for the first time on such a large scale. Using David Newman and Robert Benton’s article “The New Sentimentality” (1964), we can categorize the conventional and unconventional into two distinct categories: Old Sentimentality (conventional) and New Sentimentality (unconventional). These two categories were not just found in film, they were also found in nearly every aspect of American culture. Each version of sentimentality garnered financial and critical success in 1967. No two movies were more opposed that year in style, viewpoint, and audience than Mike Nichols’ The Graduate and Stanley Kramer’s Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner . Also, no two actors better represented their respective sentimentality better than Dustin Hoffman and Sidney Poitier. In this essay, I’ll explain why and how 1967 was such a cinematic turning point that shifted the paradigm of power away from Hollywood conventionalism and towards a new era of auteur cinema. I’ll also look at how both Poitier and Hoffman were shaped by their generation and how their respective careers were forever changed in 1967. To show the difference between Old and New sentimentality, we must define what exactly they are. In simplistic terms, Old Sentimentality represents conventionalism and past values. The values this movement revered were about the good old days of ruggedness, strong moral character, and banding together. These ideas were born out of the nation’s unity and recovery from World War II and were prevalent throughout the next few decades. Figures such as Dwight Eisenhower, John Wayne, and Henry Fonda embodied this type of thinking, and films such as The Ox-Bow Incident, High Noon, and The Best Years of Our Lives were most popular. New Sentimentality began making a presence around the start of the 1960s. It was less about thinking as a group and more about thinking and acting for oneself. New Sentimentality pushed the idea of being self-indulgent, getting carried away, looking inward, and being authentic. John F. Kennedy, Audrey Hepburn, and Elvis Presley were the purveyors of this thinking, which could be found in films such as Bonnie and Clyde (screenplay by Newman and Benton) and Easy Rider . In 1967, producer and director Stanley Kramer released Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner . It was an all-star vehicle for him filled with the biggest stars of the past few decades in Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn. Sidney Poitier was cast as the figure who’s coming to dinner, John Prentice. The plot is fairly straightforward as Prentice and his new fiancé, Christina, intend to get married. John is a respected medical doctor who has accomplished everything under the sun. Their engagement is under a deadline as he must fly to Europe that night. Christina’s parents, played by Tracy and Hepburn, are taken aback at the reality of their daughter marrying a black man, even though they raised her with a liberal mindset. Stanley Kramer was a director known for incorporating social commentary into his films. He previously had great success with The Defiant Ones and Judgement at Nuremberg . Even though his social messaging would make one think that he was a part of the younger outspoken generation, Kramer geared his films toward the older generation of moviegoers, the ones that would better respond to conventionalism and star power. Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner is part of an era in Hollywood where films about race were becoming more popular but weren’t purely benevolent in the way they handled the topic. Instead of utilizing themes like life under Jim Crow, black activism, or black community culture, a lot of films before the Hollywood New Age illustrated that racism was wrong through a white character's conversion from racial prejudice to tolerance. The prototypical movie of this thinking, In the Heat of the Night (also starring Sidney Poitier), won Best Picture that year. In Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner , the racism obstacle is solved by the white parents' eventual acceptance of John marrying their daughter. In his book "Genre and Hollywood," author Steve Neale (1988) breaks this style down even further by explaining that “dramatic conflict [in racism films] was to be structured around two opposing poles clearly representing good and evil, with a readily identifiable hero and villain”. This idea of opposing forces is seen in Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner as the prejudiced maid and the nosy Tillie act as the villains for the heroic Draytons to vanquish. Black characters rarely saw themselves as the heroes of their own story. They were either relegated to being the villain or to serve the heroic white characters. This role came to be known as the “noble negro”, a role that Sidney Poitier would play throughout the majority of his career. In her YouTube video Why The Help ?, Isabel Custodio (2020) describes this role as having “its own predictably recurrent tropes. These characters had impossibly noble traits seemingly honed to mollify white audiences. They were slow to anger, had no sexual impulses, and often sacrificed themselves for white co-stars.” Black audiences at the time often found Poitier's characters disingenuous. In Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner , they thought it was ludicrous that Poitier played a world-renowned doctor who acts more holy than Jesus. Why give the parents a pat on the back for accepting a virtually perfect man? Kramer, on the other hand, believed that was the point. By making Prentice so perfect, only his skin color could be the barrier to marriage. Kramer’s viewpoint worked for his audience and the Oscars, as the film was nominated for ten Academy Awards, winning for Best Actress (Katharine Hepburn) and Best Original Screenplay. 1967 marked the peak of Poitier’s career. His successes in previous films had typecast him as the “noble negro”, a role the younger generation didn’t accept. Now that his career is over, it is ironic to say that Poitier’s appeal was to the generation of people that had been holding him back all those years, and not to the people who were looking to create change within the nation and Hollywood system. As Poitier’s career was about to fall, the career of Dustin Hoffman was about to take off like a rocket. 1967 saw the release of The Graduate , directed by Mike Nichols, who was making his follow up to the critically acclaimed Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? . That film put Nichols on the map with its groundbreaking vulgarity and sexual innuendos, with the latter carrying forward into his next film. The Graduate centers around Benjamin Braddock, who has just graduated college and doesn’t know what to do with his life. He finds himself in an affair with Mrs. Robinson, the wife of his father’s business partner. This sexually charged relationship goes on for quite some time until Benjamin catches feelings for Mrs. Robinson’s daughter, Elaine. A beacon of New Sentimentality, The Graduate spoke to a generation through its unmatched authenticity. Dustin Hoffman had no screen presence before being cast. He had no major previous roles and did not possess the classic movie star looks such as the blonde hair of Robert Redford and Paul Newman, or the towering charisma of Warren Beatty. Hoffman was of Jewish descent, which could be easily discerned from his looks, making him even more of an outsider to his contemporaries. Nichols saw something in Hoffman, an opportunity to use his “flaws'' to tell a story to a younger audience growing tired of Hollywood perfectionism. Film critic Roger Ebert (1967) described Hoffman’s performance as “painfully awkward and ethical that we are forced to admit we would act pretty much as he does, even in his most extreme moments." Hoffman’s awkward and anxious performance is filled with the traits of New Sentimentality. The idea of people having inward problems, sleeping around with others, and being wounded were ideas becoming more and more part of the national psyche, especially to young adults. Newman and Benton stressed that New Sentimentality had to do with you and you alone. “Personal interest is the abiding motivation and... your primary objective is to make your life fit your style.” The idea of personal interest and selfishness comes to its apex at the end when both Elaine and Ben run off together, though they have no idea what they are going to do now that they’re gone. Unlike Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner , Nichols (and screenwriters Buck Henry and Calder Willingham) doesn't craft the story around the message. It’s the inverse, as the message comes from the story. Ebert noticed this subversive social messaging in his review, saying, “[the film] is inspired by the free spirit which the young British and French New Wave directors have brought into their movies. It is funny, not because of sight gags and punch lines and other tired rubbish, but because it has a point of view. That is to say, it is against something.” With The Graduate , the audience is the one deciding the message for themselves, instead of it being intentionally swayed towards one side like Kramer did (even if he had good intentions). The Graduate’s methods proved highly successful, becoming the highest-grossing film of 1967 (beating out second-place Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner ) and garnering seven Academy Award nominations, winning for Nichol’s direction. The film also inspired a generation of filmmakers to craft stories for a new generation of moviegoers. Films such as American Graffiti, Harold and Maude , and the filmography of Woody Allen took a more liberal policy towards sex and personal relationships. Dustin Hoffman’s career exploded following 1967. He continued with down and dirty roles in films such as Midnight Cowboy, Straw Dogs, and Lenny . His imperfections won him a passionate following of fans that saw themselves through him. He reached his peak in 1979 with his Oscar-winning role in Kramer vs. Kramer and stayed at the top of his game for nearly a quarter-century with acclaim in later roles in Death of a Salesman, Rain Man, and Tootsie . 1967 was the transition point of two eras in American cinema. It was the beginning of the end for Hollywood conventionalism and the beginning of the rise of auteur-driven filmmaking. Looking through the lens of Old and New Sentimentality, one can see why and how this specific period marked that shift and how it enforced lasting consequences on how filmmakers see their audience and how audiences see themselves on the screen. 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

Spoiler Alert December 2, 2022 By: Button Hunter Friesen While it usually goes without saying, I feel I’m obliged to mention that this review is spoiler-free. I guess it doesn’t really matter since this film adaptation of the novel Spoiler Alert: The Hero Dies kind of spells everything out within its title. The meta-ness of that title brings up a philosophical question: If a movie is incredibly predictable, but the creatives recognize and address it, is it then still predictable? For many years, the answer to that question would likely be a “no.” But with the overall rise in meta humor in nearly every genre (comic-book: Deadpool ; comedy: This Is The End ; horror: The Cabin in the Woods ), the pendulum has swung back the other way, making the unpredictable totally predictable. Spoiler Alert sits somewhere in the middle of this problem, as it presents a highly personal true story in such a conventional way that - even for all its positives - makes for an incredibly forgettable watch. It’s also a little surprising that this film is not a dime-a-dozen release by a streaming service as television plays such a large part in the life of its main character, Michael Ausiello, who currently serves as the editor-in-chief of his website, TVLine. Instead, it finds its way into theaters through Focus Features, where it will likely fall in line with the rest of the adult-skewing victims of this new box office landscape. Michael, played here by The Big Bang Theory’s Jim Parsons in another attempt at meta-humor, has always used television as a safe space for his emotional traumas. Every day as a child, he and his mother would settle on the couch and catch up on soap operas. It eventually became the way he realized he was gay and offered escapism while his mother fought, and lost to, cancer. So, when Michael’s long-time partner Kit (I’m skipping a lot of plot here, but there’s only so much margin space, and the story of them meeting is very by-the-numbers) is diagnosed with the deadly illness, the heartaches of the past meet the reality of the present. To further emphasize the importance of television in Michael’s life even more, director Michael Showalter ( The Big Sick, The Eyes of Tammy Faye ) stages several fake 80s sitcom moments, complete with overacting and canned laughter. These moments sort of serve as flashbacks to Michael’s past, with the bad memories portrayed through the rose-colored glasses of network television. It’s a jarring concept, one that never meshes well with the dramatic material that comes with a cancer drama. The same can be said for Michael’s narration, which is addressed to Kit in the afterlife and often butts in at the worst possible moments. Parsons is a weird movie star, mostly because he has a sort of “supporting actor that steals the show” energy, which was fully evidenced over the twelve seasons of The Big Bang Theory . He can’t totally shake that persona, with some moments of sincerity coming across as stilted. He and Ben Aldridge as Kit do make a nice pair, with Sally Field as Kit’s mother being a welcome addition in the couple times she pops up. Calling Spoiler Alert the more dramatic (and slightly inferior) version of Billy Eichner’s Bros is a little reductive, but it isn’t untrue. On both the comedic and dramatic fronts, everything within Showalter’s film has an aura of “been there, done that,” keeping it out of my memory bank for more than an hour after finishing it. I remember a lot of worse films than Spoiler Alert , but I also remember a lot of better ones too. 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

Twisters July 17, 2024 By: Button Hunter Friesen Is it a good or bad sign if the most interesting aspect of a disaster movie is the humans? Twisters may be the first film to buck a decades-long trend within the disaster/monster subgenre where our species has been the superficial window to view the events within our world that hold dominion. The occasional glances at the watch here are reserved for the moments of tornado-based destruction, with the character-driven scenes coming in like a knight in shining armor to break up the monotony. I guess that’s what you get when you hire the director of one of the most tender human dramas of the decade. Lee Isaac Chung’s inability to fully flex his filmmaking muscles is definitely the lesser of two evils, as none of the traditional journeymen that could have been hired to fill the chair would have a percentage of the heart he instills here. A ragtag group of Oklahoman storm chasers has replaced his Arkansan family from 2020’s Minari , each ready to risk their lives in the name of science. But the risk turns out to have exactly that asking price, with the only two survivors of the five-person team being Kate (Daisy Edgar-Jones) and Javi (Anthony Ramos). It’s another startling reminder Mother Nature is undefeated in any attempts to tame her. That fatal error of judgment was enough to send Kate behind a desk in the New York office of a weather service. She’s put her wild days behind her, which we all know isn’t true because we’re only ten minutes into a two-hour movie. Javi calls her back into the fold once an even deadlier series of storms starts ripping through her state. This time they’ve got the advantage of upgraded technology and a team full of PhDs, a combination that could help them answer the elusive question of how to prevent and stop these storms. The implementation of serving the common man as a reason to be in this line of work is sold well by Edgar-Jones and Ramos, both of whom carry a small amount of traumatized weight in their performances. Screenwriter Mark L. Smith doesn’t give them much of anything to work with, nor does he have regular Joes like you and I do anything more than get swept up in storms and look solemn after their towns have been destroyed. There’s an underdeveloped subplot about Javi’s boss acting as an ambulance chaser, buying up the ripped-up land at rock-bottom prices under the guise of offering a fresh start to those who have nothing left. That aspect could essentially be mirrored onto the film itself, with Smith and Chung always talking about their love for people, yet the way they walk illustrates otherwise. This is where Glen Powell enters the scene as “tornado wrangler” Tyler Owens, his good-ol’-boy charm and looks implemented to distract from the film’s mental problems. That strategy works more times than it doesn’t, with Powell’s movie star swagger perpetually threatening to burn a hole through the screen. It’s no surprise that the most impactful moment of weather is just a drizzle of rain while he dons a cowboy hat and white T-shirt while striding to his mammoth pickup truck. But the simplicity of that breathless moment instantly becomes a double-edged sword, as the weightless scenes with millions of dollars worth of special effects feel even more disappointing in comparison. The theater roars and the screen fervently flashes, but the bone-chilling feeling of real danger is never felt. There’s a moment where Kate and Tyler rescue a mother and child by clinging for dear life at the bottom of a hotel pool. Chung holds the camera on their fear-stricken face as an act of humanistic connection, yet the CGI debris and wind effects rob those feelings from truly bubbling to the surface. To incorrectly apply a famous phrase: it’s full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Twisters may still end up being one of the better blockbusters of the summer on account of it’s central characters being the secret main attraction, although I’m not exactly sure that’s how the plan was drawn up at the Universal offices. The rusty old door has been opened with care that it needed, while the well-greased one seems to be giving the most trouble. 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

Daddio June 24, 2024 By: Button Hunter Friesen A 2024 release that could have easily found a better home in 2020, Christy Hall’s Daddio is one of those single-location films that popped up time and time again on streaming services during the waning days of the pandemic. It was almost a cheat code for stars and filmmakers to keep themselves active, limiting the action of the project to one location and keeping the number of cast members to less than you can count on one hand. The problem was that many felt exactly like that: an excuse to get back to work rather than a genius idea that plays with time and setting (examples include Locked Down and The Guilty ). But there were also some gems like One Night in Miami… and The Outfit . Daddio falls somewhere in the middle, never irritating because of its pandemic-esque presentation, but never unique enough to break through this subgenre. The concept is as simple as the setting: An unnamed woman (Dakota Johnson) hails a cab from JFK airport to get home. The driver, Clark (Sean Penn), and her start to share a bond during their late-night journey, striking up conversations as they deal with traffic, construction, and all the other things New York throws at them. Clark is a vulgar driver, one of those who “tells it like it is” as he spouts some pseudo-intellectual mumbo jumbo about the way humans behave. At first, he’s pretty courteous, complementing Johnson’s character for not being on her phone as they drive away. Quickly that turns into a monologue that starts with him saying “We used to be a culture…” filled with mini-rants on credit cards, technology, and apps. It’s this opening stretch of Daddio that’s the roughest, as Hall’s weakest material is used to acclimate us to these characters and setting. The weakness has less to do with the quality of the writing, lying more with the tiredness that comes from the specific points it is trying to make. The generational archetypes that these characters possess have been mined over and over again throughout the years, almost to the point where there’s nothing left to explore. That’s not to say that filmmakers should steer away from the material altogether, but there definitely needs to be something truly special to incite even a modicum of interest. Hall doesn’t possess that with her script, even if the actors show a great ability to hold our attention. Johnson often lives and dies by the material she’s been given (see The Lost Daughter compared to Madame Web ), with this being closer to the former example. There’s an aura of confidence radiating from her in attempting the one-location challenge, something that Penn also matches from the front seat. His casting is almost too perfect, which maybe comes from the fact he played a very similar role as a no-nonsense ambulance driver to a much younger co-star in Tye Sheridan in last year’s Asphalt City . The streetlights glittering the highway are always perfectly angled to illuminate Penn’s eyes, and the distant skyscrapers reflect in the windows. Cinematographer Phedon Papamichael makes the brief glimpses outside the cab incredibly gorgeous, with the steam from the sewers and stoplights creating a smoky cool setting. The edges of the frame are tinged black, almost as if you’re looking through a half-awakened eye that just got off a red-eye flight. Hall places importance on the little things inside the cab just as much as what goes on outside of it. The camera will catch a twitch of the eye or a certain hand gesture, all of them adding up to reveal more about the characters. It’s an impressive showcase for her as a director, one that inspires confidence for 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

Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret April 26, 2023 By: Button Hunter Friesen I thoroughly hated the experience of watching Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret. I hated it so much that I looked away from the screen for about a quarter of the runtime, as any continuation in staring would be a detriment to my physical and mental health, which was being depleted as if I was in a bare-knuckle brawl. I breathed a sigh of relief and my shoulders finally dropped back down to their normal position once Hans Zimmer’s score (yes, you read that right) took over once again and the credits began to roll. But my displeasure and exhaustion were not spawned from the quality of the movie but of its content. I despise feeling second-hand embarrassment more than anything else in the world. Unluckily for me, both the Judy Blume book and film adaptation of Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret. are the most efficient and unfiltered deliverers of that exact nauseating feeling. First-hand embarrassment is no picnic either, but at least that comes from my own actions. Why would anyone on Earth want to have that feeling shared with them when they’ve done nothing to deserve it? I’ve avoided most of the entire subgenre of cringe comedy, even though some of them look like they could be fun from time to time ( Curb Your Enthusiasm ). The Office narrowly avoids my disdain on account of its over-the-top antics that are beyond relatability. The story centers on the 11-year-old titular character (Abby Ryder Fortson) in the 1970s as she navigates the time between childhood and adulthood. Her family has just moved from New York City to a suburb in New Jersey, one where people rake leaves, wash cars, and play in the street. Margaret and her newfound friends go through the experience of their changing bodies, developing feelings for the other gender, and every social situation being the most important thing in your entire life. But Margaret is not riding alone in this arduous journey. It’s actually a three-generation affair as her mother Barbara (Rachel McAdams) and grandmother Sylvia (Kathy Bates) are also dealing with new surroundings and roles as caretakers. It goes to show that you’ve never really mastered life no matter how many times you’ve been around the block. The best kinds of movies are the ones that make you feel something. Despite hating every feeling I experienced here, I know it all came from a good place. Writer/director Kelly Fremon Craig ( The Edge of Seventeen ) keeps both the specificity of the story and the universality of the themes intact, allowing everyone to apply Margaret’s journey to their own lives. All those painful memories of the stupid things you did as a teenager flood back to the surface. That pain is a good kind of hurt to authors Blume and Craig, as you haven’t really grown as a person if you can’t look back on your past mistakes. Just as I give Craig credit for finding the emotional core of the movie, I also have to fault her for losing the stakes and structure. Almost all of the final act resolutions come too quickly and feel unsubstantiated. Everything being tidied up in a neat little bow also breaks the complexity and authenticity of the story. Fortunately, the central female trio are all great and do a lot to cover this pothole. Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret may tell an oversimplified story, but its low sights allow it to hit its target with precision. I can’t say I enjoyed it or will ever think about watching it again. Nonetheless, it’s a force that is trying to do good in the world, so I recommend people give it the chance to do just that. 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

Discover a new dimension of storytelling as we delve into the world of cinema, sharing our perspectives and sparking conversations about the latest and greatest movies. Reviews Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. 1/1/2035 By: Author Name Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. 1/1/2035 By: Author Name Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. 1/1/2035 By: Author Name Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. 1/1/2035 By: Author Name Reviews by Hunter Friesen Reviews by Tyler Banark

Sentimental Value September 5, 2025 By: Button Hunter Friesen Sentimental Value had its North American Premiere at the 2025 Toronto International Film Festival. Neon will release it in theaters on November 07. Except for its horrendous opening scene conversation between whistleblower Matthew Maher and CEO Victor Garber (going uncredited for his brief cameo), Relay consistently punches way above its weight class. It's got an interesting premise, great talent both in front of and behind the camera, and an eagerness to entertain. Now all it needs is an audience to pick up what it's putting down, or else this will be just another case of a mid-budget film exemplifying the age-old adage of "If a tree falls in a forest..." While Maher's character may be a whistleblower in possession of incriminating documents, his meeting with Garber doesn't serve the purpose we would normally assume. This isn't about one final showdown before the bad guy gets their comeuppance. No, this is about doing the (depressingly) logical thing, which is to give the documents back and live to see another day. Being a hero costs a lot more than anyone is willing to pay, and the bad guys are getting more ruthless and efficient. his unofficial surrender doesn't come easy, which is where Tom (Riz Ahmed) comes in to work his magic. He's the unofficial agent for the whistleblower, handling every interaction between them and the company. Of course, this line of work can get quite dangerous. Tom protects his anonymity from everyone by communicating through the Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS), which enables people who are deaf to communicate with standard telephone users. Sarah (Lily James) is the newest client for Tom. She's stolen documents proving the cover-up of the fact that her company's newest lab product has cancerous side effects. Sam Worthington's team of ex-special forces operatives has surveilled and harassed her day and night on behalf of the company, and it's Tom's job to get her out of the mud. Ahmed may already be an Oscar nominee for his work in Sound of Metal , but Relay provides the most powerful example of his leading man capabilities. His first line of dialogue doesn't come until the film enters its second act, allowing Ahmed to flex his presence throughout the cat-and-mouse proceedings. He dons a few disguises, pulls some switcheroos that would make Ethan Hunt blush, and has a no-nonsense attitude about getting the job done with as little interference as possible. Movie logic dictates that the main character's strict moral and/or professional code must be broken on the next job they take, especially if said job is supposed to be their last. Screenwriter Justin Piasecki doesn't shy away from those clichés, wrapping them around strong characters to bolster the narrative. We follow the job from beginning to end, learning the complex directions (and misdirections) Tom must follow in order to keep himself one step ahead. It's incredibly physically and mentally draining work, with no affirming reward beyond the simple act of survival. Director David Mackenzie, returning to the silver screen after a seven-year hiatus that included a detour into television, makes sure that the struggle is incredibly satisfying to watch unfold. The kineticism is akin to an espionage thriller, with Tony Doogan's late-night score providing a smoky, cool atmosphere. The camera flows freely within the real-life settings, lending authenticity to this life-and-death story that goes unnoticed in plain sight. More Reviews Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. 1/1/2035 By: Author Name Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. 1/1/2035 By: Author Name Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. 1/1/2035 By: Author Name Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. 1/1/2035 By: Author Name Author Name

'Immaculate' Review March 27, 2024 By: Tyler Banark In recent years, Hollywood has found a knack for releasing random religion-themed horror films that either get overlooked or flop altogether. This was evidenced when I saw Neon’s latest fright fest, Immaculate , and got a trailer for the upcoming 20th Century Studios horror film The First Omen . Director Michael Mohan and screenwriter Andrew Lobel craft a twist on the Rosemary’s Baby narrative with one of the hottest actresses working today, Sydney Sweeney. The movie looked like an intense, bloody horror show from the trailers. Ultimately, it’s a boring film that restrains itself from being the scariest thing to come out of 2024. After her parish shuts down in her hometown, American nun Cecilia (Sweeney) is assigned to a convent in rural Italy. As she settles in, she miraculously becomes pregnant and is proclaimed the next Virgin Mary. However, the more her pregnancy progresses, the more Cecilia learns of the convent’s darkest secrets. Although the synopsis seems too familiar, Immaculate initially appears to have the intention of breaking that formulaic mold through some solid cinematography and the casting of such a modern-day actress in Sweeney. But between Will Bates’ stock score and repetitious cycle of loud jumps scares and gotchas, this just feels like another entry in the already watered-down The Nun franchise. Sweeney is on a fascinating streak right now as Immaculate comes nearly one month after the disastrous Madame Web , which in turn came out a month and a half after the box office hit Anyone But You . Both of those polar opposites (as well as this project, which she produced) came after years of her presence on HBO with Sharp Objects , The White Lotus , and the controversial drama Euphoria . Her performance here might not break any new ground, but it does check off the box of being a solo leading lady who can sell a project on a concept and her acting abilities. She has a scream near the end where she’s caked in blood that echoes the signature outbursts from Janet Leigh in Psycho and Jenna Ortega in X . Aside from Sweeney, the cast isn’t very noteworthy, with everyone playing cookie-cutter horror characters. You’ve got the strict mother superior nun, the freaky priest who tries to defuse the situation but doesn’t help, the rebellious friend, and the one nun who thinks she’s better than everyone else. The only one that comes close to breaking out is Benedetta Porcaroli as Sister Gwen, the rebellious nun. When she and Cecilia are talking to each other and making humor out of whatever they’re doing, it’s cute, but it feels forced. If Immaculate is going to accomplish anything, it’s likely just that it’s a horror movie starring Sydney Sweeney and nothing else. There’s a moment where the nuns have a ceremony for Cecilia after the word of her pregnancy gets out. Cecilia is dressed in a lavish blue and yellow dress with a gold crown and see-through veil, metaphorically spotlighting her as the Virgin Mary. Everyone else is smiling and bowing their heads to her, reflecting how numerous viewers see Sweeney today. Then, in an instance, there’s a close-up of Cecilia shedding a tear, a callback to a certain shot of Sweeney in the second season of Euphoria . Are we as a society beginning to worship her as royalty this fast in her short career? Only time will tell, but I can guarantee people won’t look back at Immaculate as the primary reason for her ascendency. Must Read 'Immaculate' Review If this is going to accomplish anything, it’s likely just that it’s a horror movie starring Sydney Sweeney and nothing else SHOP 'Snack Shack' Review I hope to see Hollywood starting to see more of Nebraska than they’ve presumed, and Snack Shack was the first step in the right direction toward getting there. SHOP 'Road House' Review For as much as its faults are glaringly apparent, there’s nothing offensive about it. SHOP 'Robot Dreams' Review It speaks volumes, while never containing a single line of dialogue. SHOP 'Shirley' Review Good intentions canceled out by poor filmmaking and an overly basic approach SHOP

'Snack Shack' Review March 22, 2024 By: Tyler Banark My fellow Nebraskans and Midwesterners, we have a big-name movie set and shot entirely in Nebraska for the first time in years. If you’re reading this and don’t understand the significance, Nebraska is a state that NEVER gets the Hollywood spotlight. When it does, it usually showcases only farmland, cornfields, and the nature of the panhandle/western part of the state. The only times Nebraska has been seen in a light where that’s not the case is in Alexander Payne’s filmography ( Citizen Ruth , Election , About Schmidt , Nebraska ). With Snack Shack , director Adam Carter Rehmeier crafts a love letter to his hometown of Nebraska City, a small town with roughly 7200 people. It’s a delightful treat, as Snack Shack doesn’t focus on the cliches Hollywood created for the Cornhusker State. Instead, it’s a simple teen comedy with the small town as the backdrop and a great heart. It’s 1991, and we meet our two leads, AJ (newcomer Conor Sherry) and Moose (Gabriel Labelle, in his follow-up role to The Fabelmans ), who are skipping their school field trip to the Omaha Zoo to bet on dog racing. These ambitious fifteen-year-olds want nothing more than to make a buck without doing any hard work. AJ’s strict parents catch wind of their rendezvous, and he’s forced to find a real job for the summer. While the two seek a job, their much older friend Shane (Nick Robinson) suggests buying the pool’s snack shack from the city. The two do it, and the shack becomes a hit as kids of all ages pay them hand over fist to get whatever they desire. Meanwhile, they both vie over Brooke (Mika Abdalla), a new lifeguard at the pool that puts their friendship to the test Rehmeier penned the script and does so flawlessly, taking the tropes of the coming-of-age teen comedy and applying them to his own methods. AJ and Moose are ambitious boys who are similar to the likes of duos we’ve seen in the past from the genre (i.e., Evan and Seth from Superbad , Ferris and Cameron from Ferris Bueller’s Day Off ). They try to scheme something big despite being in their early teens and do everything from making/selling their own beer to painting house numbers on curbs. One, in this case, Moose, can be seen as a bad influence while the other is playing along despite his parent's disapproval. It helps that Sherry and Labelle’s chemistry is fun and quick-witted, with comedic timings balancing each other out. Sherry brings a welcoming introduction as he fits the role of AJ perfectly. He doesn’t go overboard or play it safe; instead, he interprets the character to his own persona. AJ’s a dorky kid, and whenever he talks to Brooke, he tries to play it cool simply to impress. Luckily, Brooke finds him cute, and they build something together. On the other hand, Labelle continues to prove why The Fabelmans wasn’t a one-and-done situation. I feared he may not have much of a career after the 2022 hit, but I was proven wrong. Moose is the brains of the duo, but he often gets carried away in their plans to the point where he bosses AJ around. He can often be unlikable, and Labelle ensures that audiences feel that way whenever he does wrong by AJ. His train looks to keep going at full speed as he’s got another big project on the horizon in Jason Reitman’s SNL 1975 , which has become my most anticipated movie ever since Barbenheimer. The rest of the ensemble is fun to see on screen with Sherry and Labelle. Nick Robinson’s Shane is the big brother figure to AJ, and he nails the role. There’s a scene where AJ and Shane eat runzas at a lake when Shane gives AJ the best advice on handling Brooke and Moose. David Costabile and Gillian Vigman play AJ’s parents and are surprisingly funny whenever they scold the boys. Mika Abdalla as Brooke is also a great turn as she casually jokes around with AJ before their relationship blossoms into something more. Some viewers may see her character as one-dimensional or kind of a bland love interest. Yet, Brooke comes off as a love interest who initially intends to build a friendship with AJ, and the sparks fly when they spend time together. Rehmeier paints Nebraska summers just like how I remember them as a teenager. The plot of Snack Shack could have taken place anywhere, but he chose Nebraska City, which was a solid choice. At no point does Snack Shack present what moviegoers expect to see in a movie set in Nebraska, and it’s so satisfying that filmmakers understand that there’s more to the state than rural areas. Although Nebraska City is nowhere near as big as Omaha, it’s a neighborly town where you won’t need cornfields and farms if you find the right places. It also helps that cinematographer Jean-Philippe Bernier captures little idiosyncrasies that encapsulate a Nebraska summer, most notably whenever there’s a shot of a street at dusk with the streetlights starting to turn on. Bernier showcases the humid atmosphere of hot summer nights and how one would want just to stand outside and take it in wherever they are. Whether our characters are at a party, having a cookout, or going for a swim, it’s a refreshing sight to see. Above all, it’s a comforting feeling that only natives would understand, and those unfamiliar need to experience it to understand. Bernier also has some long takes in certain scenes, which looked great, but it made me wish it was done more often. If Snack Shack falters in any other way, it tends to milk a joke too far. When AJ and Moose open the shack, they sell candy, soda, and hot dogs. However, AJ gets the idea to write an obscene word on the hot dogs and charge 75 extra cents. Once the joke is introduced, it recurs numerous times, and by the time the film is over, it’s not as funny. Despite the humor wearing off, Snack Shack is still a fun teen comedy posing as a love letter to the small-town Nebraska that’s never seen on screen. Thanks to Sherry and Labelle's leadership and a solid script, Rehmeier knew precisely what he was going for and accomplished it satisfactorily. There’s no denying Sherry and Labelle’s fun banter and quick reactions with each other and their costars. I can guarantee these two are set for a bright future in Hollywood, especially Labelle, who has nowhere to go but up. As for Rehmeier, he made a statement for himself and the state of Nebraska. In time, I hope to see Hollywood starting to see more of Nebraska than they’ve presumed, and Snack Shack was the first step in the right direction toward getting there. You can follow Tyler and hear more of his thoughts on Twitter , Instagram , and Letterboxd . Must Read 'Snack Shack' Review I hope to see Hollywood starting to see more of Nebraska than they’ve presumed, and Snack Shack was the first step in the right direction toward getting there. SHOP 'Road House' Review For as much as its faults are glaringly apparent, there’s nothing offensive about it. SHOP 'Robot Dreams' Review It speaks volumes, while never containing a single line of dialogue. SHOP 'Shirley' Review Good intentions canceled out by poor filmmaking and an overly basic approach SHOP 'Love Lies Bleeding' Review Every character is ready to pop at any moment, each outburst promising gory results that beg you to look away. SHOP

'Road House' Review March 20, 2024 By: Hunter Friesen Remaking Road House for modern times doesn't sound like a good idea on paper, with immediate expectations slotting it next to the other misplaced-in-time remakes of Ghost in the Shell and Baywatch . There wasn’t exactly a compelling story to the 1989 original, just Patrick Swayze delivering cans of whoop ass on greasy goons with his black belt in karate. And for a film that made less money than you would think, its cultural footprint has persevered throughout the decades thanks to the funny title, cheesy concept, and, for kids closer to my generation, the frequent Family Guy parodies . Even with the setting being transplanted to the modern day, Elwood Dalton (Jake Gyllenhaal) is still a man stuck in the past. He has no phone, a clunker of a car, and simply drifts from town to town scraping by through low-end cage fights. For him, it’s harder to fight the rage inside than any opponent. He’s calm and composed, but there’s always a twinge of insanity ready to let loose. “You don’t want to know me” and “I’m not afraid of him, I’m afraid of what I’ll do,” he says a few times, with brief snapshots of his UFC past (all shot at an actual UFC event) explaining how he fell so far. Like the idea of remaking the film itself, the casting of Gyllenhaal to take over from Swayze is an odd choice. He’s an actor not exactly known for being relaxed, as evidenced by his previous work in Okja , Nightcrawler , and Velvet Buzzsaw . It’s perhaps a case of the chicken or the egg, with Gyllenhaal being a great piece of casting for this newer take on the character, or his involvement changing the tone. Either way, it works out, with Gyllenhaal’s grounded approach never taking away from the fun. Plus, he’s already had fighting experience with Southpaw , so the producers probably saved a nice chunk of change on training costs. Dalton is hired by Frankie (Jessica Williams) to be the bouncer/enforcer of her family bar called The Road House, just one of several hit-or-miss attempts at some tongue-in-cheek humor by writers Anthony Bagarozzi and Chuck Mondry. It’s located on a beautiful beach in Florida, with the only problem being the infestation of bikers and roid ragers. It’s nothing Dalton can’t handle, with his laissez-faire attitude towards kicking the crap out of someone almost making it more disrespectful. None of these guys were worth his time, which leads him up the food chain toward the head of the richest crime family in the area, Ben Brandt (Billy Magnussen). He’s got some dastardly plan and needs the bar taken out of commission by any means necessary, including kidnapping, murder, and explosions. The further the plot progresses, the less fun Road House becomes. It’s a bit of a bummer that the first fight where Dalton dismantles five bikers singlehandedly is by far the film’s best-set piece. Even if they are cartoonishly punchable, there is plenty of guilty pleasure in seeing some hooligans get their comeuppance. However, you can’t exactly fill a two-hour movie with your hero facing no resistance, so former UFC champion Conor McGregor has to be introduced as a bruising wildcard. McGregor won’t find himself with a lucrative acting career like former fighters Dwayne Johnson and Dave Bautista, but he fills his wildcard role enough here to be entertaining. Helming this bare-knuckle brawler is director Doug Liman, who helped revolutionize the action genre in the 2000s with The Bourne Identity and gave Tom Cruise another action vehicle outside of his usual Mission: Impossible films with Edge of Tomorrow . All that prowess quickly goes out the window the longer the fight scenes drag on, with questionable visual effects and camera movements overselling the brutality and undercutting the choreography. Once gasoline explosions and boat jousting get involved, things quickly go all the way overboard. Still, for as much as its faults are glaringly apparent, there’s nothing offensive about Road House . I guess that’s what you get when you do a remake of a movie that wasn’t that good to begin with and have it released exclusively on Prime Video. Must Read 'Road House' Review For as much as its faults are glaringly apparent, there’s nothing offensive about it. SHOP 'Robot Dreams' Review It speaks volumes, while never containing a single line of dialogue. SHOP 'Shirley' Review Good intentions canceled out by poor filmmaking and an overly basic approach SHOP 'Love Lies Bleeding' Review Every character is ready to pop at any moment, each outburst promising gory results that beg you to look away. SHOP 'Kung Fu Panda 4' Review Audiences were wishing for more skadoosh, but they got more of a whimpering pow instead. SHOP

Omaha Film Festival 2024 - A Recap March 17, 2024 By: Tyler Banark Three weeks ago, I attended the 19th edition of the Omaha Film Festival. Smaller in scale compared to the likes of TIFF, Cannes, Venice, Sundance, and NYFF, Omaha focuses on telling Nebraska-based stories along with narratives from around the country and even the world. Although other somewhat big-named movies were part of the festival lineup, such as the documentaries Frida , Chasing Chasing Amy , and the Oscar-nominated short Red, White, and Blue , there were also various feature-length and short films. Here are my thoughts on some of the films I saw this year. Lousy Carter Lousy Carter is a comedy starring David Krumholtz as the titular character, a low-life college professor who finds out he has a terminal illness. He tries to sleep with a student of his graduate seminar on The Great Gatsby and sleeps with his best friend’s wife, all while trying to complete an animated film. Krumholtz turns in a dry but entertaining performance, making Lousy into a character that lets the audience decide whether or not he’s worth cheering for. The supporting cast of Martin Starr, Olivia Thirlby, and Jocelyn DeBoer do their parts well as the other people in his life. Although the movie didn’t offer much other than its dry, dark humor, it’s still a fun comedy thanks to Byington's script. Brave the Dark Following the true story of Pennsylvania teen Nathaniel Deen, Brave the Dark is about a troubled high school student who tries to turn his life around with the guidance of his English teacher (played by Jared Harris). Easily the best I saw at the festival this year, Brave the Dark also won Best Film and Audience Choice Feature Film prizes. The movie is fearlessly made to evoke a no-filter look into a troubled teen’s upbringing and how it transpired into his life. Nathan (played by Nicholas Hamilton, best known for playing Henry Bowers in 2017’s IT ) went through the wringer with his parents, who raised him as a little kid, leading him to the foster care system. Hamilton is great, but Jared Harris is the real MVP. He embodies the inspirational teacher trope we’ve seen (i.e., Robin Williams in Dead Poets Society , Sidney Poitier in To Sir, With Love ) and runs with it as he fights tooth and nail to ensure Nathan gets a second chance at life. The movie’s tone does feel a little melodramatic at specific points, but it still leaves a lasting impression on viewers as it’s a tearjerker that wins over their hearts. Guacamole Yesterdays A spin on Michel Gondry’s 2004 sci-fi romance drama Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind , Guacamole Yesterdays follows a woman using a machine to manipulate memories of a relationship that ended in a painful separation. The two leads, Sophie Edwards and Randy Havens, showcase some excellent chemistry in not only the romantic side of their relationship but also in the darker moments. Hudson Phillips’ script benefits from this, and the movie acts as a meditation on grief and how people handle it differently depending on their situations. Guacamole Yesterdays does pull a plot twist in the vein of Shutter Island in the third act, preventing it from sticking to the landing. Overall, it’s a neat sci-fi drama that may be a bit on the nose regarding the movie it’s spinning off of, yet still gets the job done. Don't Get Eaten Don’t Get Eaten is a family comedy about YouTuber dad Noah, who takes his family on a weekend trip to a cabin in the woods. He hopes to unplug and reconnect with his wife, Rose, as their marriage is on the rocks due to his channel and her on-the-rise career as an entrepreneur. One night into the trip, he and his daughters are attacked by zombies and must hold them off before Rose finds out. This was hands down the worst movie I saw at the festival, as it was tailor-made for families to enjoy, with humor appealing mostly to the current generation of kids. Generational moments such as Noah using a GoPro or watching his videos on a live stream were some of the sight gags that don’t land. The other half of the movie’s head-shaking humor consists of dumb jokes viewers would expect to see from every other kid's movie ever (people getting severely injured from the smallest inconvenience, goofy noises, etc.). It’s a boring watch that families surely enjoyed at the screening, but for the typical viewer, it’s another headache-inducing mess. The Headliner Shot entirely in Omaha with a cast and crew entirely of Omaha natives, The Headliner is a comedy that follows a middle-aged comedian hoping to break out on the stand-up scene in Omaha. Director Tony Bonacci has been making several commercials and short films over the years, one of which is a short film version of this. He brings back Darrick Silkman to play the lead, Chad, a comedian who is out of touch with modern society and is estranged from his wife and daughter. Throughout the movie, audiences see various comedians doing their bits in the Omaha stand-up scene. Although it’s nothing compared to the likes of big cities such as Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City, Bonacci uses this chance to give comedians at this scale a platform to be seen. The choice is neat and does its job, but the film’s narrative is lacking because of it. Chad gets offered a stand-up gig in Montreal, which coincides with his daughter’s wedding on the same day. Screenwriter Christine Burright tries to juggle these subplots with others (Chad having an intimate relationship with one of his daughter’s besties and learning how to use an iPhone), but the result is messy. Chad comes off as a one-note character, which is partially Silkman’s fault and potentially Burright’s. In the big picture, The Headliner is a movie that highlights Omaha positively but doesn’t bring a story to keep audiences invested. You can follow Tyler and hear more of his thoughts on Twitter , Instagram , and Letterboxd . Must Read 'Shirley' Review Good intentions canceled out by poor filmmaking and an overly basic approach SHOP 'Love Lies Bleeding' Review Every character is ready to pop at any moment, each outburst promising gory results that beg you to look away. SHOP 'Kung Fu Panda 4' Review Audiences were wishing for more skadoosh, but they got more of a whimpering pow instead. SHOP 'Ricky Stanicky' Review Seeing how far Cena is willing to go makes up for a lot of other rougher stretches. SHOP 'Spaceman' Review The simple sight of the comedian in a lower register isn’t enough to cover up an oversimplified love story with liberally borrowed plot points. SHOP

'Kung Fu Panda 4' Review March 10, 2024 By: Tyler Banark As time has proved, it’s a risky choice for a franchise to leap beyond a trilogy and into a fourth entry. For every John Wick: Chapter 4 , Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol , and Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire ; there is Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Cyrstal Skull, The Bourne Ultimatum , and Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides . DreamWorks’ Kung Fu Panda 4 falls more into the latter bucket by providing the expected stunning visuals, yet also displaying an overfamiliar story that signals a franchise running out of steam and bound to implode. Kung Fu Panda 4 ’s biggest flaw is its script; penned by recurring writers Jonathan Aibel, Glenn Berger, and newcomer Darren Lemke. While the three previous entries mixed plenty of laughs and memorable moments, there wasn’t a single laugh-out-loud moment here, not even for the younger members of the audience. It didn’t help that most of these attempted jokes are featured in a senseless plot. Po has taken the next step in his journey by fulfilling the position of spiritual leader for the Valley of Peace. Because of this, he must step down as The Dragon Warrior and look to find a successor. As he does this, yet another power-hungry villain in The Chameleon (Viola Davis) threatens China by harnessing the powers of all of Po’s past villains. Tai Lung, Lord Shen, and General Kai all return, with Tai Lung being the only one in the spotlight since Ian McShane was the only original voice actor of the trio to come back. Also missing are Furious Five, with their absence being attributed to “other duties.” Of course, Jack Black returns as Po, a character he never seems to take for granted. He’s up to his usual antics, which is enough since seeing Black do his thing is enough of an enjoyable time. Viola Davis’ inclusion in the franchise is great on paper, but it’s not as great in execution considering her character’s copied and pasted motivations. Although he’s not given much screentime, Dustin Hoffman still phones it in as Shifu, which also marks his first appearance in a studio film since 2017’s The Meyerowitz Stories (New and Selected) . Zimmer returns to the maestro’s corner, collaborating again with Steve Mazzaro. Although there are no outstanding pieces, the duo does provide an interestingly Eastern-sounding rendition of “Crazy Train” during a chase sequence. And that’s not the only cover song to be prominently featured, with Black and his band, Tenacious D, covering Britney Spears’ “Baby One More Time” during the end credits. It’s a better use of Black’s musical talent than “Peaches” from The Super Mario Bros Movie . Kung Fu Panda 4 feels like a dishonor to the franchise, with almost every aspect being inferior to the previous entries. Even the DreamWorks opening credit logo lacked the personality it once had. From a franchise that has always been willing to take risks, this fourth outing is safe and forgettable. Audiences were wishing for more skadoosh, but they got more of a whimpering pow instead. Must Read 'Kung Fu Panda 4' Review Audiences were wishing for more skadoosh, but they got more of a whimpering pow instead. SHOP 'Ricky Stanicky' Review Seeing how far Cena is willing to go makes up for a lot of other rougher stretches. SHOP 'Spaceman' Review The simple sight of the comedian in a lower register isn’t enough to cover up an oversimplified love story with liberally borrowed plot points. SHOP 'Drive-Away Dolls' Review The results here are a bit scatterbrained, sort of touching on a few too many Coen trademarks with only half the potency they used to have. SHOP 'Dune: Part Two' Review Just as he did with 'Blade Runner 2049,' Villeneuve has accomplished what has long been thought to be impossible. SHOP