Woman of the Hour (2024)

Woman of the Hour manages quite effectively to be a few things at once and in doing so shows a lot of promise for Kendrick as film maker. She takes a genre, true crime thriller, and not only makes a successful example of that genre, but bends its tropes and styles into a critique of the genre at the same time as well as making a higher level social commentary about the way American culture perpetuates violence within heterosexual relationships at multiple levels. 

There are two narrative threads happening in Woman of the Hour. Kendrick blends them so well they feel natural despite their incongruity. There is the story of a serial killer who attacks women he dates, and the story of an aspiring actress who appears on The Dating Game on the same episode the same serial killer also happens to appear on. 

The first thread starts to lay out the genre cliches closely before subverting them to focus attention away from the violence suffered by the victims and, by the climax, on the way a survivor brings the killer to justice. The second is almost a blip in the story, one that is rather sensational due to the television aspect but it is used so cleverly to highlight so many of the little ways pop culture, dating culture, gender roles, and polite society, subject women to violence structurally. 

Kendrick uses her own on screen persona to effectively centre her character instead of centring the killer. She is smart and charming and exasperated. Her moment is how the film is built yet it is only a small moment in a series of women's lives that were lost due to the blindspots we have. The moment is also just a small part of her experience. Like most heterosexual women she has suffered much through her interactions with potential suiters and her experience saves her. She recognizes threats, whether they be small or deadly. She narrowly misses becoming another victim partially through luck and partially through her instincts built developed from her lived experience. 

Woman of the Hour is fascinating for how well it uses the prescribed tools of a rather exploitative genre to challenge that exploitation and transform it into another purpose. 

Woman of the Hour

Starring: Anna Kendrick, Daniel Zovatto, Nicolette Robinson, Tony Hale

Director: Anna Kendrick

Writer: Ian McDonald

Babygirl (2024)

I was quite blown away by Reijn's directoral approach in her film Babygirl. The way she tackles her story, through a dreamlike means of weaving her narrative, is both gorgeous and fascinating. It adds layers to her tale of a woman finding her way to sexual discovery that a more traditional means of story telling would miss. Instead of just moving from one event to another, she overlaps moments and emotional beats so they blend together. They also don't always feel quite real, a brave choice in light of her story and central character. I questioned a few times how much of what I was seeing was "true" and how much was fantasy. This blending is essential, I felt, to communicating Reijn's story as so much of sexual fulfillment in our lives is fantasy and the fantastic elements, the connections going on in our minds that may or may not be loosely connected to what we do with our bodies. 

Babygirl will likely make many uncomfortable, as it explores a number of scenarios that are admittedly inappropriate but also deeply personal. Kidman's character is both morally blameworthy and completely human. She is fumbling her way into a discovery she was never taught she could have. Babygirl could have easily been a cautionary tale critiquing her desires, but it doesn't do that. The film continuously pulls the rug out from underneath us as we, like our protagonist, aren't she she should be getting what she wants. But that's the point. She is entitled to what she wants and to not feel shame for wanting (or getting it) but because of all the walls that have been put up around her, neither she nor her audience are comfortable with her getting it. And the route to which she achieves it is problematic and fraught.

The men in Babygirl are thinly drawn, on purpose I believe. Dickinson is clearly painted as all fantasy, which is why I questioned a few times whether the film as giving us a potential dream sequence in moments. Banderas is unfortunately written the poorest. He is two dimensional mostly, and near the end falls into some pretty seriously cliched moments. If I had any problem with Babygirl it was how little interior it gave the male characters. I understand intellectually why this may have been a choice, but some of the film's best moments are when they get to have real feelings, like Dickinson's exploration of rules or a lovely moment where he asks to be held. I'm not sure Banderas' character gets any of that. 

But it's not just the male characters which are barely there. There is a subplot with Wilde which feels like it also could have had more nurturing. When she flips her character it almost comes from nowhere and I wish the film had given us more context with her. 

But this isn't there story. Like the main character the film fumbles a bit towards its rather glorious ending.  As it crescendos to some wonderful moments (like her telling off a colleague - despite him being another character pulled out of the blue) or the sweetly handled last scene of final liberation, I appreciated all I had seen. This isn't a film condemning its subject for her missteps. It celebrates her for achieving what she wants, fantasy and all. 

Babygirl

Starring: Nicole Kidman, Harris Dickinson, Sophie Wilde, Antonio Banderas 

Writer/Director: Halina Reijn

Nosferatu (2024)

Until 2024 I hadn't watched the 1922 silent film that inspired this. I had seen images from it many times and understood much about its story, background, and legacy. But finally watching it gave me much to think about. The film is clearly playing off of some fairly prevalent antisemitic impulses of the audience of its day in a way that is rightfully upsetting to modern viewers. It is a film that is terrified of the foreign insidious invader. In spite of this the film quite surprisingly centres the female character, not only making the story about her, but empowering her to be the only one who has the wherewithal to confront and defeat the monster. While none of the men are able to resolve the problem, she steps up to be the hero of the piece. 

2024's Eggers adaptations upends all of this. It (thankfully) disposes of any anti-Jewish stereotypes and throws out the metaphor of an invading foreign horde, traded in for an evil that is invited in by one of our own. But in doing so it scapegoats its central woman. Instead of seeing its main female character as the power to stop evil it takes the opposite approach, basically blaming her for the problem in the first place. Eggers takes from the Garden of Eden story by having his Ellen summon the creature, tempted by the evil and guilty for the sin of giving in. The implication is that she is at fault due to her weakness and she must take the monster down with her.

Eggers' Nosferatu imports possession tropes, evoking Exorcist imagery. The vampire is less predator and more inhabiting spirit. Depp ends up acting overtly sexual while also flipping between manic states of anger and panic relentlessly. In this way the film falls into rather common horror tropes that are frankly, if not solely slut shaming, but blatantly misogynistic. Her "sacrifice" at the end is presented less as powerful or heroic and more as penance that she deserves. 

While the story is problematic, the film itself is horribly beautiful. Eggers creates the illusion of a B&W film despite being in colour. He keeps much in shadow... until he doesn't. Which is an effective way to build some horror. Skarsgård's Orlok is kept in the shadows for a long time too, not revealing his form until it best used for effect, showing us a almost completely revised nosferatu, that feels more like a corpse kept alive than a supernatural vampire. Visually the film is stunning. The problems I have with appreciating this take come down to its point of view, one that just didn't resonate for me. 

It is hard to separate this story from its inspiration, the Dracula novels and subsequent films, which tap into something for me that just connects more successfully. There is something about the nuances of this specific adaptation that just felt off. Originally Nosferatu was an unauthorized adaptation of Bram Stoker's Dracula novel and the changes made to avoid comparisons move it in directions I find far less interesting. Despite this critique, the original's imagery remains hauntingly terrifying yet this film rarely made me unsettled or fearful. Mostly I appreciated the film's visuals and not a lot more. 

Nosferatu 
Starring: Lily-Rose Depp, Bill Skarsgård, Nicholas Hoult, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Emma Corrin, Willem Dafoe, Ralph Ineson, Simon McBurney

Writer/Director: Robert Eggers

A Complete Unknown (2024)

Even the lives of fascinating people don't always make for great cinema. Mangold does what he can but his Bob Dylan bipoc just doesn't have the story to make it super compelling. He toys with the whole effort to defy categorization thread. He tries with the failed love story thread... twice. But generally A Complete Unknown is the story of a successful artist, who according to this film, just falls into his success due to his incredible talent and there just isn't that much meat on these bones. 

Much is made of Chalamet's performance and admittedly it is very good. However, he's always pretty good and I don't necessarily feel that this is his triumphant role. I struggle with finding that much interesting about performances that are mostly "impressions" but they are certainly popular when it comes to Oscars and such (come on, can we all admit The Iron Lady is far from Streep's best work?? Sure it is a good job of mimicking and she's still Streep! But she's done a lot better). My hot take is that's what we're seeing here; a truly talented actor is going to be rewarded for basically copying another famous person. 

My problem isn't that he's doing a good Dylan impression. It's that there is so little to A Complete Unknown's Dylan that the most Chalamet can do is act mysterious and do the voice. He does all of that really well. But the film doesn't have a theory on Dylan that is very nuanced or intricate. He's just there a lot of the time and we are make assumptions about cliches like how hard fame is or that great artists need to be assholes a little bit to be great. I don't feel the film makes a compelling case for any of that and honestly there are far more captivating performances out there this year. 

The one who really captured my attention is Barbaro who is stunning on screen and honestly plays her take on Joan Baez so subtly and with just a quiet spark of defiance that I couldn't take my eyes off her. Honestly the entire cast is quite good. I just rarely found they gave them much to do. Holbrook's Cash feels like a dues ex machina and Fanning's long suffering girlfriend is never fleshed out enough for either of these talented actors to do much with. 

Mangold's direction is respectable. A Complete Unknown is a beautiful film and despite running a little long, rarely drags. I was just never that engaged in the struggle of this story. The struggle is so meager it just never grabbed me, at least not for a full 140 minutes. I am thrilled for Dylan that his life has been as good as it has that his film doesn't have much to work with. He's an incredible talent that has changed music. But watching him be just a bit of a dick and making legendary art while rejecting calls to conform and being a really bad boyfriend just isn't what makes for great cinema.  

A Complete Unknown

Starring: Timothée Chalamet, Edward Norton, Elle Fanning, Monica Barbaro, Boyd Holbrook, Dan Fogler, Norbert Leo Butz, Scoot McNairy

Director: James Mangold

Writers: Jay Cocks, James Mangold

 

Juror #2

Warner Brothers sort of dumped Juror #2 with very little of a theatrical release and having it show up on Max with little fanfare. Many were up in arms about how they handled this, praising the film as one of Director Eastwood's best after a long career. So I went in with high hopes but as I watched it it became clear to me why WB didn't have a lot of confidence in this particular film. Juror #2 feels like TV. It feels like an episode of one of those long running cop/court room dramas that are rather disposable but audiences eat up with their gimmicky plots and twisty premises. There are ideas in Juror #2 but they aren't explored well and there isn't much drama. Worse, there isn't much in terms of artistic flare. It feels more like a director for hire going through the motions of a gotcha style legal story that would end with "next time on...". 

I'm not saying the problem at the heart of Juror #2 isn't an interesting one but I will argue that I felt the pedestrian approach to how the film was made steals away most of that oxygen and lets the film drag a bit. I am happy to report the strong cast all do well with what they are given but I never felt there was much going on in their interiors. Their motivations are all so thin and one dimensional. The dialogue in this script doesn't help where people say very simplistic lines exposing their viewpoints instead of talking like real people. And the film doesn't really want to build characters, as it's only focusing on it's moral question. 

So could I just give it points for being a wonderfully fascinating breakdown of some specific moral question and critique of our justice system even if it doesn't work wonderfully as a film? Well if only it was. It felt like it's analysis was the most basic of basic. There is no question there is reasonable doubt from the first moment the trail concludes and yet we are constantly asked to rehash the most conventional conversational discussions which don't even begin to scratch the surface of what "justice" means or the purpose of a justice system in the first place. Instead we are distracted by simplistic motivations of oversimplified characters with very little nuance. 

And it's all filmed in a very pedestrian manner that does nothing to make it's rather dull morality play plotline more interesting. The questions here are too easy. The answers seem too black and white no matter how much Eastwood tries to dive into the moral murkiness. If there was any moment in the film I liked at all it was the final shot, one that will likely annoy the very audience that likes this sort of film. It is hard to get excited about the late career work of a film maker who tackles these sorts of stories in such predictable ways. 

Juror #2

Starring: Nicholas Hoult, Toni Collette, J. K. Simmons, Chris Messina, Zoey Deutch, Cedric Yarbrough, Kiefer Sutherland< Francesca Eastwood

Director: Clint Eastwood

Writer: Jonathan Abrams 

Mufasa: The Lion King (2024)

I am not a big fan of Disney's "live action" remakes of their animated classics and I didn't love the Lion King remake from director Jon Favreau. But this is an "original" story and is from one of my favourite working directors Barry Jenkins so I went in with some hope. But it wasn't too far in to Mufasa: The Lion King that it became clear that this film wasn't going to be more than its connected films. But having said that there was one aspect of the film I truly appreciated and give it credit for. 

I'll start with what I didn't love. The film's plot has all the hallmarks of a story that is reverse engineered to reach a goal than a story told for it's own sake. Yes I get that it's a prequel and that this is an inherent problem with that sort of a story, but may good prequels overcome this (see Rogue One or even Godfather Part II). Mufasa cuts a lot of corners... a lot... in how it moves its characters along its narrative. So often a character will take a position strongly and then be convinced to reverses their conviction within seconds from one line of dialogue. This is especially true with the Taka/Scar character who's character is so one-dimensional that he makes all the other thinly drawn characters seem robust. 

I just couldn't buy the story or the characters. It all felt dishonest. Especially at the end when Mufasa and his band of refugees arrives at their long sought after Milele (what will become the Pridelands) and suddenly take over (basically they colonize the place) all of the animals who already live there all because they promise to protect them from worse colonizers. That and how annoying Eichner and Rogen's Timon and Pumbaa are as the story gets narrated to us truly took me out of the film, a film that has, at it's core, a message that truly did resonate for me and one that I appreciated seeing in such a mainstream Hollywood blockbuster type film. 

So this is what I did like about Mufasa: The Lion King. At its heart it is a strong critique of a concept I can only describe as "bloodism", the idea that is so prevalent in our society that makes bonds, "legitimacy", and family is biological connection. Mufasa tears at the heart of that idea, making the case for chosen family in a very compelling way despite all its narrative problems. Mufasa shows that true family, true honour, and true connection is made through our choice, through the bonds we build with each other, over who we happen to share blood with. This remains a shockingly controversial position in our culture (trust me put this out there online and you will be attacked) so to see the movie take this argument on was heartwarming. 

I just with the movie itself had been better. I haven't commented on Miranda's songs but they are certainly a disappointment from someone we just know can do better. I kinda liked Tell Me It's You but the rest were rather forgettable (except perhaps the truly grating Bye Bye). For a movie that makes so much out of poking fun at Hakuna Matata, a song that is heads and shoulders better than anything here not matter how overplayed it has become, they have some cahones when their music is just so blah...

Mufasa: The Lion King 

Starring: Aaron Pierre, Kelvin Harrison Jr.. Seth Rogen, Billy Eichner, Tiffany Boone, Jon Kani, Donald Glover, Mads Mikkelsen, Thandiwe Newton, Lennie James, Anika Noni Rose, Tiffany Boone, Preston Nyman, Blue Ivy Carter, Beyoncé Knowles-Carter

Director: Barry Jenkins

Writer: Jeff Nathanson 

 

Flow/Straume (2024)

The last time I remember an animated film that told its story almost completely without dialogue was 2003's The Triplets of Bellville. Flow couldn't be a more different movie despite both being gorgeously animated films from non-English language countries. Flow isn't comedy. It is a beautiful tragedy which takes on climate disaster head on and offers some limited hope with its central character, a nameless black cat. 

Western audiences are used to seeing anthropomorphized animals in animation who talk. That is not what Flow is about. Here the animals act as animals do in the real world. This is a story about survival as water levels rise. There are moments of humour and even some joy. But there are also intense moments of danger and concern. Flow is entirely appropriate for all but the youngest of children. 

I felt Flow didn't quite... flow... during some of the middle where it dragged. But it remains quite powerful throughout. The most incredible aspect is how it looks. The film was made through open source animation technology and looks more beautiful than most of what Disney put out this year. This is another 2024 example of just how democratized film making is becoming. 

Flow

Director: Gints Zilbalodis

Writers: Matīss Kaža, Gints Zilbalodis  

Queer (2024)

"I'm not queer. I'm disembodied."

William S. Burroughs wrote on the margins of gay liberation movements, often not identifying with it much at all, a setting his queerness outside of what even at the time was an unacceptable community. According to the author, Queer was written when he was off heroine, and therefore required to confront his same gender attractions and self-loathing.  Guadagnino, a queer artist of a completely different generation who embraces his sexuality and explores the complexities of queer life in his work, takes the first artist's work and transforms it, still capturing the tragedy of the central character's isolation and desperation, while finding release and power in his physical and emotional connection to the men he fucks, even when that's complicated. 

Craig is unflinchingly raw in what may turn out to be the boldest and best performance of his career. He is naked, literally and figuratively, and while the sex is explicit, it is also filmed with such a nuanced and rich narrative tone that it expresses so much about the characters and their relationships with each other, they are stunning in their power. Guadagnino is not afraid of sex on screen as tool for reaching the interiors of his characters and Queer is a masterclass in that. 

Guadagnino also isn't afraid to tell his story through dream logic. So much of Queer is filmed like remembrance or imagination, often explicitly moving into dream space. Filmed almost entirely on sets, Queer has a level of uncanniness that suggests we are in Lee's memories, experiencing these events as he recalls to narrate them to us, more than how they happened. Whether we are watching water colour memories, drug induced hallucinations, or dreams of another time, Queer offers us a truth in something less literal. 

Guadagnino doesn't always pace this story very well. The film can be plodding at times with bursts of humour (especially when Schwartzman shows up in what is likely my favourite role of his), passion, or terror. The final act draws on too long, but then collapses into one of the film's most powerful and revelatory moments, a scene of ultimate connection that manages to be powerfully terrifying and uncomfortably satisfying at the same time demonstrating just how powerful a film make he has become. 

Queer eschews the need to be comfortable for anyone, certainly not the mainstream straight audiences, but it doesn't pull its punches for gay audiences seeking representation on the screen either. This is part Lynchian nightmare, Mapplethorpe eroticism, and silver screen era decadence. No matter what you won't be able to stop thinking about it. 

Queer

Starring: Daniel Craig, Drew Starkey, Jason Schwartzman, Henrique Zaga, Lesley Manville, Andra Ursula, Omar Apollo

Director: Luca Guadagnino

Writer: Justin Kuritzkes

The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim (2024)

The one of a kind success of Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings Trilogy has lead to many attempts to mine JRR Tolkien's wealth of supplementary material to tell further stories to continue finding ways to make the lightning strike again. This attempt, an animated telling of the history (sort of origin story) of Helm's Deep, the centrepiece of The Two Towers film, is designed to be as much of a tie in as possible with all of it's direct linkages to the previous films with even the title sequence and score themes pulled right from the popular movies. I went in fully expecting this to feel like the sort of cash grab the Prime series often feels like. But there was something about this unique and discreet entry in the canon that made it more enjoyable than it likely should be. 

There is a damn good story here. It mixes a little Game of Thrones energy into the very Tolkien-ish world we've come to know, and feels just familiar enough, giving us just enough of the nostalgia feels, to let us appreciate that this is a new story that informs what we've seen before but it full of new, rich characters with their own tragedy and heroism. For all of the nostalgia porn Hollywood is cranking out right now, this one felt fairly honest in terms of being a story that deserved to be told in its own right. 

The choice to make this in animation was likely an economic one. But once again, this choice likely motivated for business purposes, was executed in a way that make the choice a very happy one. The animation here, fully embracing anime style, is gorgeously drawn. It is the sort of film that is just lovely to watch. The directoral choices here, what to show what not, are so wonderful decided. 

The story quite deftly deals with some of the insidious racism present in Tolkien's work while also centring a female character (one that could be quite explicitly read as queer or ace). Its story both looks back at the legacy of this IP while also looking forward to the sorts of stories that are resonating today. 

For some reason the film wasn't heavily promoted and perhaps this is just a place holder for keeping rights and not necessary the future of any Lord of the Rings franchise. But whatever the outcome and future I am just glad we have this very satisfying and enjoyable film. 

Lord of the Rings: War of the Rohirrim 

Starring: Brian Cox, Miranda Otto, Christopher Lee

Director: Kenji Kamiyama

Writers: Jeffrey Addiss, Will Matthews, Phoebe Gittins, Arty Papageorgiou 

Carry-On (2024)

I can't really say Carry-On is a "good" movie. It jumps the shark with its over the top plot so many times that I lost track. But it was fun. It may be pure B-movie, and not even in a so-ironic-its-brilliant way, just a straight up we're-making-a-silly-action-movie-so-get-onboard-for-the-ride sort of way. 

It has a bit of a slow start but the chemistry between Egerton and Bateman keeps the audience invested. Then there are some rather incredible action set pieces (a fight over a gun in a speeding car scene is completely over the top but so much fun) that keep you glued. And *spoiler* the everyman hero saves the day just like you think he would, and in a very satisfying way I might add. 

So yeah, is Carry-On any good? Not really. But was it a fun watch. Certainly. 

Carry-On

Starring: Taron Egerton, Jason Bateman, Marshall-Green, Sofia Carson, Danielle Deadwyler, Theo Rossi

Director: Jaume Collet-Serra

Writer: TJ Fixman

Red One (2024)

Sure Red One is a predictable, run of the mill buddy comedy action film that type casts its stars into their most identifiable archetypes... but it was still kinda fun. It has a lot of very questionable special effects and all of its Santa mythology is pretty basic... but I still enjoyed myself. 2024 produced a shit tonne of really terrible holiday themed movies and the best I can say about Red One is that it wasn't really that bad. 

Yes yes everything about the plot of Red One is a cliche from the rekindling of the strained relationship between Evans and his son to the Rock's finding new purpose in his long term career choice, but for a rather disposable watch it will do. It has some genuinely funny moments (again nothing brilliant) and the plot is enough to keep the story moving without getting boring. 

I can't see myself returning to this year after year. I don't think we have a new holiday classic on our hands. But in terms of just sheer background entertainment Red One passes the test.

Which is more than I can say for many of the crop of holiday films in 2024. 

Red One

Starring: Dwayne Johnson, Chris Evans, Lucy Liu, J. K. Simmons, Bonnie Hunt, Marc Evan Jackson

Director: Jake Kasdan

Writer: Chris Morgan

The Remarkable Life of Ibelin (2024)

With its calm yet emotional narration from those who loved him, this celebration of the life of a young man who died far too early is moving and insightful. It reminds us of how valuable we all are, yet also how important finding our community is. The Remarkable Life of Ibelin is the story of a severely disabled young man who found a rich life and strong community online in the world of MMORPG games. His family didn't come to learn of his reach until after his death. 

The film animates his story with a style from the World of Warcraft game he played. It is narrated by his friends and loved ones who share just how much of an impact he had in their lives despite never meeting in person. His family speaks quite eloquently of how sad they were that he would never know the simplest things in life we all take for granted such as spending time with friends and falling in love. However through the film we see he did manage to find all of that, in the world of the game. 

And like the rest of us Mats (or Ibelin) wasn't perfect and sometimes messed things up. But in the end he built a community that loved him anyway and took care of him. Sometimes it feels like such a missed opportunity that we keep so much of this hidden as Ibelin, near the end of his life, finds his online chosen family supporting him in those last days in ways he never expected. 

The Remarkable Life of Ibelin explores how much he was able to overcome and how much he wasn't, yet that he did live a life and he did matter, not just to his closest family but to an entire world. 

The Remarkable Life of Ibelin

Director: Benjamin Ree

Mary (2024)

I'll admit, the idea of a film about Mary and Joseph on the fun from Herod's troops sounded sort of intriguing to me. There is about 10 minutes of that near the end. The rest of Director Caruso's epic is a lot of boring cliched Sunday School regurgitations. There might be a movie in that idea somewhere but this isn't it. 

Hopkins is a legend but for every The Father or Silence of the Lambs he also has a lot of scenery chewing roles. Mostly his Herod falls into the latter. A few times I felt like there were glimpses of what makes this 2 time Oscar winner so compelling on screen. But mostly it was buried under a lot of overacting.  

Caruso doesn't have a filmography that inspires much but perhaps I was hoping there would be something interesting going on here. Unfortunately there really wasn't anything that didn't feel like an amateur passion play. 

Mary

Starring: Noa Cohen, Anthony Hopkins

Director: DJ Caruso

Writer: Timothy Michael Hayes 

 

Dear Santa (2024)

Full disclosure: I am not a fan of Bobby Farrelly's work. That being said, I believe even fans of his would be disappointed with this saccharin and truly unfunny story about the classic joke of mixing up a "Dear Santa" letter by misspelling the recipient's name. Jack Black oozes charm but he can't save this lump of coal. 

The story is just too basic and far too safe. But the worst part is that it just isn't funny. I barely smiled during any of the so called jokes. I really wanted to like it but the boredom kicked in early and overstayed its welcome. 

The worst part is how the film handles its weird resolution. It s fumble of sentimentality and schmaltz. And it's all kinda gross and awkwardly handled. I'm not sure how someone who went through a similar real tragedy would handle seeing this so badly used in this story. 

Perhaps we can all just pretend this film never really happened. 

Dear Santa

Starring: Jack Black, Robert Timothy Smith, Jaden Carson Baker, Kai Cech, Keegan-Michael Key, Post Malone, Ben Stiller

Director: Bobby Farrelly

Writers:  Ricky Blitt, Jack Black, Peter Farrelly 

Nutcrackers (2024)

The Ben Stiller Christmas movie is one series of cliches and not very funny jokes. It tries so hard to pull at our heartstrings that it pretty much snaps them. I'd be surprised if anyone could muster up the energy to care about this predictable and hollow "heartwarmer".

I think the thing that surprised me the most about Nutcrackers is just how unfunny it was. The jokes just never landed. Forget the fact that the film never builds an honest sense of how Stiller's disengaged uncle warms up to his orphaned nephews, of how they somehow warm up to him, but at least the movie could have had a bunch of laughs as the kids terrorized all around them in response to their trauma. But no. The film is about as unfunny as they come. 

It's not like that lack of humour is based on the film delving deep into the emotional issues of a family who lost their parents and have to make a new start. Nutcrackers is the kind of film that just goes through the motions and just asks its audiences to fill in the emotional blanks. Like we're supposed to just assume things about these kids, the cliche of the children who act out due to emotional pain. Perhaps the film suffers from the fact that another film that handles this so well and honestly (The Holdovers) was released just last year. Even without that though I imagine Nutcrackers would have rung false. 

Holiday movies often cut corners and assume the audience is just going to be onboard without doing the actual work of developing characters or its story. But was it really too much to ask for it to be somewhat funny? 

Nutcrackers

Starring: Ben Stiller, Linda Cardellini

Director: David Gordon Green

Writer: Leland Douglas

Hundreds of Beavers (2024)

Sometimes an independent film breaks into the public consciousness in a way that just demands it be seen. Cheslik's irreverent slapstick comedy Hundreds of Beavers has been the talk of festivals for a while before it became widely available on streaming. It is a remarkable project that is one of the most visually striking films around. It may appeal more to film nerds and those drawn more to more absurdist forms of entertainment. Mainstream audiences might not take to its audacious approach. However it is surprisingly charming even if for me it overstayed its welcome. 

At the heart of all of Beavers' artistry is a fun little story that is cleverly told and genuinely entertaining. It takes a bit to get into it but once it grabs hold it is a fun ride. For me it was a little long and I wish it had shown a bit more narrative restraint. When it rolled past the hour mark I did start checking my watch. However it's hard to fault it when it is so beautifully made. 

One noticed right away just how stunning a film it is to watch. Each shot feels meticulously put together and it shows the ingenuity such a passion project inspires. Made on a microbudget and basically a labour of love, Beavers is enjoyable for all that passion.

I've heard references to films like Eraserhead or the work of Wes Anderson and I very much see the similarities although I wouldn't go into this thinking you're going to see something as dark as Lynch's debut film or as slick as Anderson's oeuvre. This is a very joyous story, despite having a large amount of cartoony "gore", and for me it wasn't as snarky as an Anderson film with a lot more heart. Deep down it's about love. It's a love story and the amount of love it must have taken to make it is just incredible. 

Hundreds of Beavers

Starring: Ryland Brickson Cole Tews

Director: Mike Cheslik

Writers: Mike Cheslik, Ryland Brickson Cole Tews 

Moana 2 (2024)

Watching Moana 2 it quickly became apparent this was more like Frozen II than Toy Story 2. By that I mean, an afterthought, whose story and characters are solely designed to capitalize on the popularity of the previous film and not in any authentic way of continuing a story in exciting and or fascinating directions. I get it. Disney has struggled with new stories in recent years and returning to old wells is a safe bet for making money... which is the point right? But is that the point for the audience? I am not opposed to sequels. I find a truly good continuation of a story and taking beloved characters in new directions can be a very satisfactory narrative experience. But just recycling them into a similar version of their previous adventures just feels lazy. 

Also like the Frozen sequel Moana 2 has a story problem in that the "challenge" set our for our hero is one unbound by any natural constraints. It is metaphysical so that the writers can just write whatever solution to it that fits their time frame. The stakes just never feel like they are there. I never once doubted that they would pull off their nebulous mission which always just felt made up in the way a fortune teller makes up a "future" that can sort of fit into whatever box the listener wishes to place it. 

Moana 2 also exposes that outside of the title character and the scene stealing Maui, there aren't really characters we care about from the first film. Perhaps the grandmother but everyone else just feels like they could fade into the background and not be notices. Here we are introduced to a new crop of friends for Moana, each one blander and less interesting than the last. Her little sister is just every little kid character all melted into one cliche. I will give the film points for not feeling the need to give this princess a prince charming. The sheer lack of a love story is a strength of the first Moana and this film holds tight to that. Good choice. 

And one can't discuss a future animated Disney classic without discussing it's music. Well maybe in this case we can. The songs here all feel generic and forgettable. The centre piece song Beyond very much feels like an attempt to remake How Far I'll Go and it likely the most hummable of the bunch. 

Moana 2 is a surefire hit in that it sets out to give audiences exactly what they expect. However there is a message in this story about not knowing "the way" and perhaps needing to get lost to truly find it. I would rather Disney keep flailing around with original ideas and characters until they find another new original Moana instead of just retelling these stories over and over again. 

Moana 2

Starring: Auliʻi Cravalho, Dwayne Johnson, Temuera Morrison, Nicole Scherzinger, Khaleesi Lambert-Tsuda, Rose Matafeo, David Fane, Hualālai Chung, Rachel House, Awhimai Fraser, Gerald Ramsey, Alan Tudyk 

Directors: David Derrick Jr., Jason Hand, Dana Ledoux Mille

Writers: Jared Bush, Dana Ledoux Mille

Blitz (2024)

I have yet to meet a Steve McQueen (the director) movie I didn't like. The story in Blitz didn't excite me when I heard about it but it wasn't far into the runtime of this film when I knew I was in for another wonderful movie from this dynamic film maker. So much of this is in how he tells this story but the other key piece is the performance of Elliott Heffernan who is certainly a young actor to watch going forward with immense natural talent and screen presence. 

Blitz is the story of a boy sent away from London and his working class single mom during WWII to the country to avoid the bombings, who jumps off the train (therefore not discovering a wardrobe with a magic door to another world) and runs back to London looking for her amongst the chaos of the besieged city. Along the way he encounters some of the best and worst of humanity and suffers great loss. It is remarkably powerful and devastating, yet manages to find hope without descending into schmaltzy sentiment or coincidental conveniences. 

Heffernan is a revelation and carries this film so naturally. We experience war through the eyes of a child and this gives us the perspective to see its madness and cruelty. The "rational" actions of adults just don't make sense in this context or truly in any context. Blitz highlights this which is a big part of its genius. 

For the me the film's ending felt a bit anti-climactic after its quite honest and unflinching view on its events up to that point. The lack of a crescendo into some horrible revelation or triumphant reunion didn't take away from the rest of the film but also never delivered on the promise either. I get the point. The ending in its relative banality is likely far more realistic than what we expect in these sorts of films. But perhaps I just had hoped for a little more emotional resonance. 

Still Blitz is wonderfully engaging especially in moments of real joy and real terror. Scenes of Londoners partying, attempting to give a middle finger to the bombs raining down on them, were delicious while there are moments of sheer horror like the flooding of a tube station where people had taken refuge. Blitz continues a trend of McQueen having one of the strongest records of any of today's working directors. Bring on whatever is next! 

Blitz

Starring: Elliott Heffernan, Saoirse Ronan, Harris Dickinson, Benjamin Clementine, Kathy Burke, Paul Weller, Stephen Graham

Writer/Director: Steve McQueen

 

Wicked (2024)

A film adaptation of the popular stage musical Wicked, broken ostentatiously into two parts, really shouldn't be this good. But often I found myself so engrossed in its magic that I couldn't help but get inspired by its ambition. The film completely commits to not only attempting to capture the phenomenon that this musical achieved (and few truly reach these heights of zeitgeist) but also being part of a legacy connected to the classic film The Wizard of Oz. The cast are all in their ways amazing (more on that later) and Chu directs this like it is his magnum opus. Whatever kind of critique I could lob at the source musical's oversimplifying of a resistance message, the message remains and it is an important one, especially in these times, and Wicked delivers that in a truly magical way to its audience. Wicked Part One just hits right, even if it stops abruptly with a "to be continued..."

Chu completely builds the world of Oz in a way that both pays tribute to what's come before (the classic film and the stage musical both) but also by breathing life into it that feels authentic which is an achievement in a film with this much CGI and technicolor inspired art direction (again a tribute to where this all comes from). In all this there is a magic here that the Harry Potter films never really found. It's hard not to compare the two series as Potter steals so much from this (Wicked the book predates Potter by a couple years) and while the Wizarding World got bogged down in its own minutia, Wicked lets itself soar by giving us just enough back story to really feel it while sticking to its story. Chu seems to get that. For a 160 minute film that is only half a movie, the time flies and keeps you hooked throughout. 

And then there is the cast. First I'm going to call out the Grande haters. She is wonderful here. Sure she channels Chenoweth a bit but still puts her own spin on it. Her Galinda is complicated and a scene stealer. She nails the part and now I want to see her in other films. But she's not alone, Jonathan Bailey's star is rising and here he also gets to shine by making Fiyero a charismatic, difficult, and vulnerable person while being as hot as possible. But yes this film is Elphaba's story and Erivo who has been building a resume of strong roles really shines here as the only main character and by not playing to the rafters but letting her character emerge through a mask of rage and sadness with an almost impossible strength. 

While I do believe the musical adaptation has softened the revisionist iconoclast nature of its story with its almost chicken-soup-for-the-soul approach, and I know there will be critics falling all over themselves to highlight shiny-plastic sheen while ignoring the history of the whole Wicked experience are rooted in broadway and technicolor popcorn glory. But bedded within all that carnival showmanship a resistance narrative remains and it is in songs such as the iconic Defying Gravity where the marginalized often find inspiration to stand tall and fight back. The Wicked film captures that spirit... at least Part One does. We'll have to see if Part Two sticks the landing. After seeing the first instalment, I have a strong suspicion it might. 

Wicked 

Starring: Cynthia Erivo, Ariana Grande-Butera, Jonathan Bailey, Michelle Yeoh, Jeff Goldblum, Peter Dinklage, Ethan Slater, Bowen Yang, Marissa Bode, Idina Menzel, Kristin Chenoweth

Director: John M. Chu

Writers: Winnie Holzman, Dana Fox, Gregory Maguire

The Piano Lesson (2024)

We are so lucky that Denzel Washington has decided to produce film versions of August Wilson's plays. He knocked it out of the park with his own take on Fences and then with George C. Wolfe's exquisite adaptation of Ma Rainey's Black Bottom. Now we have a truly family affair. Denzel produced The Piano Lesson which stars his one son John David and is directed by his other son Malcolm. And it lives up to the legacy of this film cycle paying very respectful tribute to Wilson's work. 

The Piano Lesson is itself a very on the nose play (even the title's double meaning is obvious) but it is also very powerful. It's even a bit of a ghost story. That latter part is something the film leans into, embracing the ghosts of the past as fairly literal and not just symbolic. The director Washington films his story beautifully giving the film (which follows the stage-play fairly closely if I am not mistaken) a cinematic feel despite existing mostly in one space. For a debut film, this is a fairly impressive work. 

The cast is a big part of what makes this work. This feels like an ensemble in the truest sense with no one sticking out despite the star power of Jackson, the leading man looks of Washington, or the dreamy beef cake of Fisher. The cast is one completely whole who work together to bring this family and their history to life vibrantly. 

The Piano Lesson will give you so much to ruminate over, exploring ideas of legacy and how our history informs our past. But it is also just an entertaining two hours of cinema that shows just how talented this family is. And I hope Washington will keep producing more films based on Wilson's Century Cycle, a series which has so much to offer. 

The Piano Lesson

Starring: Samuel L. Jackson, John David Washington, Danielle Deadwyler, Ray Fisher, Michael Potts, Erykah Badu, Skylar Aleece Smith, Corey Hawkins 

Director: Malcolm Washington

Writers: Virgil Williams, Malcolm Washington

Gladiator II (2024)

Having recently rewatched 2000's Gladiator I can say that film holds up well and is perhaps misjudged when seen as being a "weaker" Best Picture winner. It has all the goods from an emotionally satisfying story, great performances, and Scott doing some of his best work. Sure it's a crowd pleaser and in all in good ways (aren't you entertained?) while exploring ideas of empire and corruption. Watching it again I felt exhilarated and moved, I adored Scott's visuals and the work of its cast. It really is one of those populist movies that actually earns it. 

Watching the long awaited sequel I had a few different thoughts. I'll get the negative ones out of the way first. I really don't think II is quite a "good" a movie. The first act feels rushed and much of the plot hinges on rather conceded coincidences. It feels somewhat less cohesive than the first and perhaps the stars just don't quite align. However with that out of the way I can talk about why I still really enjoyed it. 

This film may. cement Scott as one of his generation's greatest film makers. Not because this is some triumph for him but it shows that he can and does continue to make great films, films that are exciting and entertain. He has no reason to stop until he wants to. Gladiator II is a beautiful film that is not only a great experience to watch but also gets one thinking about a lot. He gives us something to chew on. Scott has made some of my favourite films of all time, some films I truly loath, and quite a few I could take or leave. But he clearly loves what he does and I'm always here to see what he's got up his sleeve next. 

Scott once again delves into a somewhat fictionalized version of Rome as stand in for our current world order. He is fascinated with empire and the corruption inherent in it, the way power can manipulate the masses and how fragile democracy is, perhaps even how much of an illusion it can be. This film explores a new aspect of that from the previous film. I do not agree with the critiques that this is too much like the first. Here his villain comes from outside power, using the tools of the empire against itself. The palace intrigue may not be quite as delicious as the first and the ending feels a little forced. But the ideas there are fascinating if you want to ruminate on them. Scott gives us much meat to chew on. 

Speaking of meat, the film is gory, more so than the first. While some of the staged "games" may not be overly historically accurate (Scott's Rome is a slightly alternate history anyway) but they are in how bloody disgusting they are. Be prepared to cover your eyes a bit and he pulls no punches. Like in his first film, Scott wants to make us somewhat complicit in the cruelty that is spectacle for the sake of empire. 

And that's what we get; spectacle and much of it. Mescal is a rising star and the camera lingers over his body for the fascination of those who would want it and those who would want to be it. He is also representing who we all want to be. But should we is part of the question II poses. I'm not sure it tackles this question as robustly but it's there. This film's two and a half hours fly by and never drag. Nielsen is as statuesque as ever, Pascal is tragically conflicted, and Washington shows us exactly how strong an actor he is in a powerful role that he keep balanced and nuanced, never giving in to chewing up the scenery.  

So the answer is yes. Gladiator II will entertain and earns that. But the shadow of the first film turns out to be just a little to long for this one to quite escape it. 

Gladiator II

Starring: Paul Mescal, Denzel Washington, Pedro Pascal, Quinn, Fred Hechinger, Lior Raz, Derek Jacobi, Connie Nielsen, Matt Lucas, Peter Mensah, Rory McCann

Director: Ridley Scott

Writers: David Scarpa, Peter Craig

A Real Pain (2024)

A Real Pain didn't work that much for me. Despite the reviews it's getting, especially for Culkin's performance, the film felt emotionally stilted and Culkin, while often brilliant, had a character written so thinly that I never felt connected to it. The film felt like it was telling us more than showing us most of the time with characters voicing their inner monologues instead of making us feel real. The connections between Culkin's characters and Eisenberg's also never felt earned. 

A Real Pain is rather short in duration and I feel this hurt it as it didn't have time to really create the characters or build their relationships in a way that felt real. So as they attempted to deal with trauma, it didn't resonate. The film relies on a lot of assumptions on how we are supposed to feel. The most powerful moments were near the end touring a concentration camp where Eisenberg allows us to just take in the images of that legacy of evil and suffering. But his attempt to connect that to the characters he had written wasn't successful.

I never bought into the relationship these cousins had in a way that made me invested in them. And the script didn't make Culkin's character either a clown nor a martyr. He was mostly just awkwardly existing in scene to scene. A Real Pain felt like a lot of potential that just never quite materialized. 

A Real Pain

Starring: Jesse Eisenberg, Kieran Culkin, Will Sharpe, Jennifer Grey 

Writer/Director: Jesse Eisenberg

Pedro Páramo (2024)

This ambitious film, from the cinematographer of films like Barbie, Brokeback Mountain, and numerous Scorsese films, and first time feature director, Prieto, is a winding story of ghosts and legends, attempting to chronicle Mexican history as well as a very personal story of a man searching for meaning by searching for his unknown father. It is a gorgeous film filled with fantasy and intimacy, and attempts to wed quite a few ideas and themes together throughout its tale. 

Pietro is already an excellent cinematographer and Pedro Páramo is visually an incredible film. But what struck me was his skill at taking on such a daunting task of adapting this sort of colossal story. While I am less familiar with the source novel and its relevance to Mexican culture and literature, he manages to make the grand and often fanciful narrative all feel very accessible. His film comments on identity, history, religion, and more while also telling a very compelling and personal story. 

The film's messaging is complex and nuanced, not just giving us a simplistic idea of what finding one's history means. Páramo isn't hero nor villain and our main character has to wrestle with that in whatever state he ends up through this tale. Pedro Páramo is fascinating for many reasons, the remarkable screen chemistry of star Rulfo for one, but especially because it gives us as many questions and answers. 

Pedro Páramo

Starring:  Manuel García Rulfo, Tenoch Huerta

Director: Rodrigo Prieto

Writer: Mateo Gil

Heretic (2024)

Heretic was the third widely popular horror film in 2024 that didn't work for me (after Late Night With the Devil and Longlegs) and my problems with each are similar. In each case there is a fascinating premise, shot in a truly engaging manner, featuring great casts, who third act (or second act - as in a two act play - in this case) just falls apart into a series of horror movie cliches and tropes that pull apart the threads of what made the ideas interesting in the first place. Heretic lost me about half way through and never was able to get me back as it became just another stereotypical thriller that was neither scary nor interesting. 

The first part had me going. Grant plays this well measured academic religion nerd ready to quite politely but forcefully debate and discuss with the young true believers (in this case Mormon missionaries) who have come to his door. Yes he's creepy but in that mansplainy way that men who think they have it all figured out can be. There are suggestions that he's not being completely honest with these inexperienced missionaries, who naturally are young women, which adds layers as it becomes a choose-the-bear-not-the-man sort of story and the game of cat and mouse can begin against the backdrop of a rather interesting discussion of religion as control. But then...

The film decides it's not just good enough to tell this story as a battle of wills and world views that might collide and potentially lead to ambiguity and doubt. It has to throw every horror movie cliche into the mix. From jump scares to horror basements (in an impossibly constructed house holding numerous prisoners) and people we thought were dead jumping back to life for one last strike. But the worst part is it jettisons any piece of what made it interesting in terms of theological debate. It attempts to tack some on at the end but it all feels too little too late as it simply becomes a final girl narrative. Even the final moment, the butterfly, is it there or is it imagined? it felt like so much of a cop out. The movie isn't prepared to commit to anything and try to be everything to everyone. That makes it feel like it's nothing to anyone. 

I want something more interesting when I see horror. Grant's character even promises this. He suggests that we (although he's talking to the girls) may be terrified and might even want to die. He's referring to contemplating the meaning (or lack there of) existence, the idea of societal control. But the film's elaborate and frankly just too convoluted to believe, kidnapper plot just never gets there leaving us nothing but creepy women in robes and cages, multiple stab wounds, and plenty of gore. But little to nothing to reflect on. 

Heretic

Starring: Hugh Grant, Sophie Thatcher, Chloe East

Writer/Directors: Scott Beck, Bryan Woods

Anora (2024)

I haven't met a Sean Baker film I didn't like. Anora may be his highest profile movie with its win at Cannes and the Oscar buzz it is getting which makes it feel the closest to a mainstream break out for him since The Florida Project. Anora is even more accessible with its charming lead actor and hilarious story that almost any adult audience could enjoy. Yet it never once compromises or becomes safe. Anora is a beautiful, tragic portrait of a woman striving for happiness in a world that does everything it can to keep it from her. 

Yes so much about what makes Anora work so well is the singular performance of Mikey Madison. I loved how much she loved her character, consistently and constantly playing her with a power and strength, even when showing vulnerability. Her self-worth was evident throughout no matter what the others around her were doing to try take that away from her, consciously or subconsciously. The script only gives us a little to work with on who this woman is, and there are plenty of times we could make assumptions. She defies all of that but rounding her out as a fully realized human being, and one who knows who she is and advocates for herself. She is funny and sexy and smart and relentless... who she needs to be, even when she has weaker moments. 

Madison gives one of those performances that you'll remember. The rest of the cast is good as well, especially Evdelshteyn (as the adorable yet spoiled rich kid who makes you like him despite how much of a douchebag he is) and Borisov (the thug with a heart of gold who will never be good enough for her). But really this is all about Madison and how she tears through this movie like a force of nature. 

Anora had me thinking about a lot. The film overtly references the elephant in the room, Pretty Woman, but tells a very different story. This isn't a fairy tale yet it also isn't a nihilistic film either. Somehow we know Ani will be okay... as much as anyone can be. There is a joy in this story that is palpable despite the challenges that face our hero. Baker is good at telling these stories that offer us joy for characters who are really struggling. Anora's most powerful moment comes right at the end, and it is a catharsis that is wholly relatable and felt by all of us. I believe there are parallels here with the ending of Pretty Woman, although it is a very different ending, that just felt like such an honest release. It is the sort of ending that just leaves you stuck in your chair as the credits role, feeling all of it until you can collect yourself. 

Anora is a triumph. Madison is a force of nature. Do yourself a favour and let yourself experience this film.  

Anora

Starring: Mikey Madison, Mark Eydelshteyn, Yura Borisov,  Karren Karagulian, Vache Tovmasyan

Writer/Director: Sean Baker

Close to You (2024)

I didn't know the script for Close to You was extensively improvised by the actors until after I watched it but it made so much sense in how real it all felt. The scenes had an unscripted authenticity to them that had all the awkwardness and honesty of real conversations without the poetic posturing of many screenplays. I'm not saying I don't enjoy wittily crafted dialogue but Close to You just felt so raw and so realistic I was sweating during some scenes. 

This is a testament to the incredible cast headed by Page who gives one of the best performances of the year. Anyone connected to a trans person will recognize many of the moments in conversation that often come up and this film captures so much pent up emotional trauma from well meaning cis people. I was breathless in certain moments as the nerves were struck so credibly. 

Another strength of this truly impressive script is how it doesn't hold our hands and tell us exactly what is happening at every moment. There is a significant portion that could be perhaps fantasy, perhaps dream, but also credibly real. The film doesn't give us an answer, nor does it tell every moment chronologically. Instead it allows us to feel its moments... moment to moment. And that makes it end up feeling even more satisfying than it might have told more traditionally. 

Close to You is the sort of passion project that audiences are lucky to get from such creative talent. 

Close to You

Starring: Elliot Page, Hilary Baack, Peter Outerbridge, Wendy Crewson, David Reale

Writer/Director: Dominic Savage

 

Here (2024)

Here is an interesting experiment which never quite takes off. The "gimmick" of filming in one spot representing centuries of time actually works better than I had hoped but the problem mostly rests on the script which doesn't quite tell a compelling enough story. The film needed to focus on the connection between the physical space the people walking through it but that connection was mostly superficial. While Here never quite gets boring, it also never quite captures the audience's heart. 

Hanks and Wright are strong enough actors (along with their supporting cast, especially Bettany and Reilly) to pull off the range of the lives they are playing. I had no problem with the de-aging as in many ways it works much better than the aging make up films have put us through for decades. But the real test was how it would feel to watch a movie where the "camera" was placed in one spot the whole time. Surprisingly this worked for me. Zemeckis' use of the "space" along with different zones in the frame depicting different times, made it quite compelling.

As I mentioned it's the script that lost its way. It attempts to do so much and ends up doing so little. It becomes just a surface story for all the many threads it weaves instead of building any one of its narratives to a truly satisfying story. We are to be so moved by Hanks and Wright's final moments in the home but I found it hard to muster up much energy. 

So as an interesting experiment it had me quite fascinated, but as a story it didn't hold my attention. 

Here

Starring: Tom Hanks, Robin Wright, Paul Bettany, Kelly Reilly, Michelle Dockery, Gwilyum Lee, Ophelia Lovibond, David Fynn,  Zsa Zsa Zemeckis

Director: Robert Zemeckis

Writers: Eric Roth, Robert Zemeckis

The Wild Robot (2024)

Writer/Director Sanders is responsible for one of my all time favourite animated films, Lilo and Stitch. I love how wholly original and unlike anything else it is. He is also responsible for a film that mass audiences love a lot more than I do, How to Train Your Dragon. It's not that I don't like it (although I will pick apart its sequels), it just never resonated for me. The Wild Robot falls between the two for me. It is sweet and beautifully told if rather predictable and overly standard for my tastes. Still, it's hard not to appreciate a story that is so much about finding family. 

If I was going to nit pick anything it would be how little the film surprises you. Honestly anyone who has seen a movie before can tell you exactly what is going to happen at any point. Still, the art direction is gorgeous and the film just sticks to its story earnestly. I am a sucker for found family films, films that remind us that love comes from the least expected places and we can find our place amongst those who aren't anything like us. For that The Wild Robot overcomes any critique I have for lack of originality.  

The Wild Robot

Starring: Lupita Nyong'o, Pedro Pascal, Kit Connor, Bill Nighy, Stephanie Hsu, Mark Hamill, Catherine O'Hara, Matt Berry, Ving Rhames 

Writer/Director: Chris Sanders