Author Archives: Keith Garlington

REVIEW: “Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die” (2026)

by

8

Oscar winner and all-around hoot Sam Rockwell gets a wonderfully offbeat role in “Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die”, the latest crazy concoction from Gore Verbinski. It’s the director’s first feature film since his 2016 psychological horror film “A Cure for Wellness”. This is a much different movie, and from its earliest frame you can tell Verbinski and everyone else involved is having a blast making it.

You could categorize the film as a lot of things and you wouldn’t be wrong. Science-fiction, comedy, action, horror – it checks all those boxes. But at its core, “Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die” is a blistering satire of our current social media and selfie culture. And make no mistake, society’s all-consuming digital addiction gives Verbinski and screenwriter Matthew Robinson ample subject matter to satirize.

Image Courtesy of Briarcliff Entertainment

The story begins during a busy evening at Norm’s diner on the outskirts of Los Angeles. At exactly 10:10 PM a disheveled man walks in wearing a wild getup announcing that he is from the future. We never get his name, but he’s played by Rockwell who gives the stranger a snarky wit to go along with his obvious frustration. The stranger informs the startled diners that he has traveled back in time, not only to warn them of impending doom, but to prevent it from happening.

The stranger goes on to explain how society crashed as the planet’s population lost themselves in the digital zeitgeist. As he does, Verbinski and Robinson steadily poke at today’s culture which is shaped more by the screens we hold in front of our faces than the people who hold them. And much like us, the diners ignore his warnings although not without cause, especially as his story gets more and more outrageous.

The stranger claims this is the 118th time he has been in the same diner giving the same speech to the same people. Even more, he’s there to find recruits to save the world. The trouble is he has yet to find the correct configuration out of the 47 people in the diner. Without just the right combination of people, his mission fails.

Among his picks this time are Mark (Michael Peña) and Janet (Zazie Beetz), two teachers who have a creepy encounter at their high school. The suspicious Susan (Juno Temple) who recently lost her son in a tragedy. And a suicidal birthday party princess named Ingrid (Haley Lu Richardson) who is allergic to cell phones and Wi-Fi. Each get their own individual flashback that tells their uniquely strange yet equally compelling backstories.

Image Courtesy of Briarcliff Entertainment

From there the less revealed the better. Just know that “Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die” goes places you’ll never see coming. Rockwell anchors the craziness with a hilariously endearing eccentricity. Richardson is equally good, embodying a complex yet darkly funny character who deserves a movie all her own. Throw in a planet-killing artificial intelligence, thugs in pig masks, and a mythological-ish beast the size of a skyscraper (among other things) and you have a movie that almost defies a definition.

Yet among all the comedy and chaos is a message we might want to listen to. Verbinski pushes it to the point of absurdity. But the mirror he holds up has a lot to say. The story isn’t always coherent, but it’s wildly entertaining and genuinely funny, from the witty dialogue to the amusing tips of the hat to “Night of the Living Dead” and “The Terminator”. Best of all, Verbinski keeps you on your toes as he takes one wild swing after another. They don’t always connect, but it’s a blast when they do. “Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die” opens in theaters February 13th.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

First Glance: “Star Wars: Maul – Shadow Lord”

by

8

Unlike any other franchise, Star Wars has taken the idea of canon and continuity to places no others have. What started in a series of feature films has blossomed to novels, comics, video games, animated and live-action television. And all of it interconnected through the same sprawling epic timeline. It’s true that Star Wars has hit some recent rough patches. But the overall world is still precious to fans like me, and one area where it continues to thrive is in its animation.

“The Clone Wars,” “Rebels,” and “The Bad Batch” have expanded Star Wars lore in exciting ways. That trend looks to continue with “Maul – Shadow Lord”. Set in the aftermath of the Clone Wars, this new series follows one of the franchise’s most compelling characters, Maul, as he builds his underworld syndicate, trains a new apprentice, and keeps his vengeful eye on the power-mad Empire. The first trailer gives us a thrilling look at what may be the darkest animated series yet. Even more, the show will feature the voice work of a returning Sam Witwer and recent Oscar nominee Wagner Moura. This looks amazing.

“Star Wars: Maul – Shadow Lord” will premiere April 6th exclusively on Disney+. Check out the trailer below and let me know if you’ll be seeing it or taking a pass.

REVIEW: “Grizzly Night” (2026)

by

8

Let me pose an utterly pointless question. Are we currently witnessing the genesis of “bearsploitation” cinema? Of course I ask that with my tongue firmly lodged in my cheek, but it does seem like there has been a rather noticeable wave of movies featuring man-eating bears, much like we’ve seen with sharks. Either way, “bearsploitation” sounds hilarious so I’m sticking with it.

The latest entry into this potentially made up subgenre is “Grizzly Night”, although in fairness it attempts to be a much more serious-minded movie. This survival thriller is based on a true story as told in John Olsen’s 1969 nonfiction book “Night of the Grizzlies”. In 1967, on the night of August 13th, two 19-year-old girls were killed in separate bear attacks some nine miles apart. Both were mauled to death by grizzlies while camping at Glacier National Park in Montana.

Image Courtesy of Saban Films

Regardless of how its title may sound, “Grizzly Night” is a sincere dramatization of the deadly attacks and the subsequent search and rescue attempts made by park rangers and fellow campers. On that fateful night, Julie Helgeson (Brec Bassinger) heads off camping with her boyfriend Roy (Matt Lintz) near Granite Park Chalet. Nine miles away, Julie’s friend, Michelle Koons (Ali Skovbye) is camping at Trout Lake with four friends. And that’s when the unthinkable happens.

Despite there being no bear attacks in the park’s 50-plus years of recorded history, two happen on that August night in Glacier National Park. The first attack comes when Roy is mauled by a Grizzly who quickly turns its attention to Julie, dragging her deeper into the forest. A bloodied Roy manages to get help from other campers who are on an overnight hike led by a rookie park ranger named Joan Devereaux (Lauren Call). Thrust into a harrowing position, the young ranger must get Roy medical attention while finding the missing Julie.

Joan finds help from the fellow campers including a doctor (Oded Fehr), a minister (Joel Johnstone), and a wildlife expert (Skyler Bible). The bulk of the movie follows their efforts to save Roy and search for Julie. Screenwriters Katrina Mathewson and Tanner Bean develop a handful of fairly interesting side characters, some of whom shed more light on the details surrounding the true account. Others don’t fair as well, serving more as filler while being peppered with shaky performances.

Image Courtesy of Saban Films

As for Michelle, she too is attacked by a grizzly bear. But the majority of her story is crammed into the final 20 minutes. Compared to Julie’s, Michelle’s story is strangely rushed and underdeveloped which strips it of any real impact. It’s the same with the film’s clunky and abrupt ending that fails to leave the impression it hopes to. To its credit, “Grizzly Night” sticks close to the real-life events. But dramatically, it limps along without ever delivering the dramatic punch it needs.

First-time feature film director Burke Doeren does what he can with an unbalanced script and a tight budget. He manages to hold our interest, and there’s no shortage of gorgeous Montana scenery to take in. But its wonky narrative structure shortchanges major points of the story. And the lack of a strong punctuation mark at the end keeps us from connecting with the movie’s dramatic ambition or bigger message.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

REVIEW: “Mercy” (2026)

by

2

The pre-release reactions haven’t been kind to “Mercy”, the latest film from screenlife innovator Timur Bekmambetov. The critical shalacking it’s getting is especially surprising considering the star power of the movie’s two leads, Chris Pratt and Rebecca Ferguson. Both are talented and charismatic performers who almost always make whatever movie they are in better.

The good news is “Mercy” isn’t nearly the unmitigated disaster it has been made out to be. It’s an easily digestible science-fiction thriller that doesn’t require much from its audience. It seems well enough aware of its own outlandishness, yet it takes itself just serious enough that we do too. It results in a movie that’s about as entertaining as it is preposterous.

Image Courtesy of Amazon MGM Studios

But that’s not to say “Mercy” is a great movie or even a memorable one. It’s built around a silly premise that seeks to explore both the potential for good and the dangers of modern technology. Unfortunately its treatment is surface-level at best. Significantly worse is the script which frantically tells a story that hinges on an endless array of conveniences and contrivances. And a late, seemingly random twist only adds to the silliness.

Set in 2029, the movie opens with robbery-homicide detective Chris Raven (Pratt) waking up in a room, strapped to a chair, and alone with Judge Maddox (Ferguson), an artificial intelligence adjudicator for the Mercy Court program. An exposition-heavy first act hurriedly establishes what the Mercy Court is and Raven’s connection to it. Essentially, the Mercy Count is a relatively new way of “quickly and efficiently” judging crimes. It was created to help clean up the crime-ridden Los Angeles, and Raven was one of its biggest proponents.

Here’s how it works: Due to substantial evidence, the accused are assumed guilty and forced to appear before an AI judge where they are given 90 minutes to bring their guilt probability down to 92%. To prove their innocence they’re granted access to a vast amount of digital data gathered through internet trails, social media accounts, surveillance cameras, cell phones, etc. If they fail to reach the threshold by the time the 90 minutes runs out, they will be executed on the spot.

Image Courtesy of Amazon MGM Studios

So why is Detective Raven there? It turns out he has been found guilty of brutally murdering his wife Nicole (Annabelle Wallis) earlier that morning. Overwhelming evidence against him has set his guilt probability to 97.5%. Yet while the events of the last several hours are hazy to him, Chris is sure he didn’t kill his wife. So he begins making his case to Judge Maddox, employing the help of partner Jaq (Kali Reis), his close friend Rob (Chris Sullivan), and his daughter Britt (Kylie Rogers). What he uncovers sends the film careening down an unexpected path.

Most of the story is told using a blend of screenlife and traditional drama. After rushing us through the setup, Bekmambetov slows things down just a tad to let his mystery unfold. Yet even it feels pushed along faster than necessary. Chris turns into a digital super sleuth, parsing through data at lightning speed and making out-of-the-blue connections that often don’t make sense. To its credit, the film holds your interest throughout. But it seems like there is much missing in the buildup and in how it all plays out.

Surprisingly the action really ramps up in the final act as the story’s far-fetched twist opens the way to a far-fetched action sequence. And maybe I had succumbed to the craziness, but the bonkers finish was a lot of fun. Absurd and underdeveloped, but fun nonetheless. And that describes “Mercy” as a whole. The blueprint is there for something a lot better than what we get. It’s not without entertainment value. But the untapped potential leaves us thinking more about what might have been.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS

First Glance: “Masters of the Universe”

by

13

My earliest encounters with He-Man and the Masters of the Universe came in my brother’s bedroom where he and I fought countless action figure battles against Skeletor and his evil forces. That was followed by a popular animated series and eventually a corny 1987 live-action feature film starring Dolph Lundgren. Who knew that decades later, well after its heyday, the franchise would be back on the big screen with a brand-new big-budgeted adaptation.

The new “Masters of the Universe” film is directed by Travis Knight (“Bumblebee”) and stars Nicholas Galitzine as Prince Adam aka He-Man. Mixing classic sword and sorcery with science-fiction, the film follows Prince Adam who was transported to our modern day as a young boy after his world was ravaged by a civil war. Once grown, he discovers the legendary Sword of Power which turns him into the mighty He-Man. He then returns to his home world to reclaim it from the clutches of the evil Skeletor. Idris Elba, Jared Leto, Alison Brie, Camila Mendes, Morena Baccarin, and Kristen Wiig also star.

“Masters of the Universe” hits theaters June 5th. Check out the trailer below and let me know if you’ll be seeing it or taking a pass.

Random Thoughts: The 2026 Oscar Nominations

by

11

The last stop on the lengthy awards season grind is the Academy Awards. It’s an event that I once adored. Yet in recent years I’ve slowly but steadily been losing interest. Awards season has gotten so homogenized with the same tiny group of nominees appearing everywhere. That’s made it extremely predictable, and never has that been more true than this year.

The 2026 Oscar nominations offered no real surprise to anyone who has even casually followed awards season. Sure, there was a handful of snubs (or surprises, depending on your perspective), but nothing that would indicate an actual diversity of thought or taste in the whole process. Yet still, as I always do, here are a few random thoughts from this year’s Academy Award nominations.

  • To no one’s surprise, the Academy accomplished its goal of cramming “One Battle After Another” and “Sinners” into every category possible. It was expected, but it also led to several of the ‘snubs’ that I’ll talk about shortly.
  • Mission accomplished. “Sinners” broke a record by earning 16 Oscar nominations this morning. It was something that had started circulating a few days ago. Look, “Sinners” is a good movie. But it’s not THAT good.
  • Of course “One Battle After Another” remains the awards season darling and is the clear Best Picture frontrunner. Overall it earned 13 Oscar nominations and is on track to be the third subpar movie to win BP in the last four years. Congrats.
  • To their credit, nine out of the Academy’s ten nominees for Best Picture are good films. And they did include the year’s best film, “Train Dreams”. It doesn’t stand a chance at winning, but it’s nice to see it rightfully included.
  • It’s hard to believe “Frankenstein” received so many nominations yet nothing for Guillermo del Toro in directing. It’s a tremendous film that doesn’t get off the ground without his vision and craftsmanship. He should be the frontrunner. Instead he’s not even nominated.
  • Instead Josh Safdie gets a directing nod for “Marty Supreme”, an entertaining movie but a noticeably flawed one, in large part due to Safdie’s breakneck direction.
  • The Best Actress category belongs to Jessie Buckley and rightfully so. Of course the Academy remains smitten with Emma Stone so she gobbles up the last slot. But to her credit, she’s very good in “Bugonia”. Much better than her last Yorgos Lanthimos collaboration.
  • Staying with Best Actress, Chase Infiniti is the absolute best thing in “One Battle After Another” by MILES yet she doesn’t get nominated. You can’t make this stuff up.
  • Best Actor seems to be between Timothee Chalamet (“Marty Supreme”) and Wagner Moura (“The Secret Agent”). It’s good to see Michael B. Jordan nominated for “Sinners” but a shame that Joel Edgerton is snubbed for “Train Dreams”. Both deserve the win ahead of the frontrunners.
  • It wasn’t a good morning for “Wicked: For Good”. Unlike its predecessor, this mess of a sequel was completely shut out, receiving no nominations whatsoever. File this under something the Academy got right.
  • It was also great seeing “F1” among the Best Picture nominees. Again, it has no chance of winning, but the recognition is nice.
  • This is hard to believe, but Stellan Skarsgard is the very first international nominee to be included in the Supporting Actor category. Either way he deserves to win. His performance in “Sentimental Value” was one of the year’s very best.
  • The rest of the Supporting Actor category wasn’t as impressive. The Academy insisted on clogging it up with both Sean Penn and Benicio del Toro from “One Battle After Another”. They threw in Delroy Lindo from “Sinners” which sadly means no Paul Mescal (“Hamnet”) and no Adam Sandler (“Jay Kelley”). Whatever.
  • Best Casting is the first new competitive category at the Oscars in 25 years. Meanwhile stunt performers are still asking, “What about us?”
  • It’s hard to put much into this year’s awards when I think of the glaring omissions that have plagued the whole season. No Daniel Day-Lewis or Sean Bean for “Anemone”. No love for Josh O’Connor after the year he had. Nothing for “Nouvelle Vague”. Only one nomination for “Weapons”. No Russell Crowe for “Nuremberg”. Barely a mention of great films like “Warfare”, “Black Bag”, and “Eddington”. Again, there is no diversity of tastes or opinions. It’s mostly the same small pool of nominees at every stop.

And those are a few random thoughts from this year’s Oscar nominations. The 98th Academy Awards will be held Sunday, March 15th. What are your thoughts on the Academy’s crop of nominees?