Category Archives: Movie Reviews – A

REVIEW: “Anaconda” (2025)

by

15

I’m not sure anyone in 1997 expected us to still be talking about “Anaconda” nearly thirty years later. The original feature was an adventure horror film with Jennifer Lopez, Ice Cube, Jon Voight, Eric Stoltz, and Owen Wilson making up its cast. Certainly to my surprise, the film became a cult classic, spawning three sequels and a wacky 2015 crossover with “Lake Placid”.

And now here we are with a new film, also titled “Anaconda”. This one is an action comedy that can be best described as a meta reboot of the original 1997 film. Director Tom Gormican (who also co-wrote the script with Kevin Etten) attempts to tap into the nostalgia that some people apparently have for “Anaconda”. But he does so through a movie that lacks the laughs necessary for good comedy and the thrills you look for in good action.

Image Courtesy of Sony Pictures Releasing

Growing up as best buddies in Buffalo, Griff (Paul Rudd) and Doug (Jack Black) dreamed of making movies together. When they got older, Griff moved to California to pursue acting, but his career never took off. Doug stayed behind where he ended up getting a job making wedding videos. Neither are happy with how their lives have turned out. But that has a chance to change when Griff shows up back in Buffalo with an outrageous idea.

Griff informs Doug and their childhood friends Claire (Thandiwe Newton) and Kenny (Steve Zahn) that he has acquired the rights to their favorite movie, “Anaconda”. Even more, it has inspired him to reboot the 1997 film with him starring, Doug directing, Claire co-starring and securing funding, and Kenny shooting it. It takes some convincing, but his friends eventually get onboard. And after Doug pens the script, the four head off to the Amazon rainforest.

Once in Brazil, our filmmaking foursome meet their eccentric snake handler, Santiago (Selton Mello) who accompanies them into the jungle to begin shooting. But things come to a halt after Griff panics and accidentally kills Santiago’s snake. While searching the jungle for a replacement, the group is suddenly attacked by an enormous anaconda, putting them in the same predicament as the characters in the movie they’re rebooting.

The sheer absurdity of it all isn’t really an issue, mainly due to the film’s obvious self-awareness. Instead the problems lie in the half-baked storytelling which is sloppy at best and incoherent at worst. The script takes numerous shortcuts leading to moments that make no sense at all. Adding to the messiness is an entire side story(ish) about a young woman named Ana (Daniela Melchior) on the run from some illegal gold miners. You could cut it out entirely and the movie wouldn’t be impacted at all.

Image Courtesy of Sony Pictures Releasing

But worse than anything else is sitting through a “comedy” that is woefully unfunny. It tries really hard, but its attempts generated mostly silence rather than laughter at the screening I attended. We do get the occasionally amusing inside gag that’s having fun at Hollywood’s expense. But too much of the humor never registers, often ranging from bland parody to more embarrassingly juvenile bits.

As for the stars, Rudd is dealt an especially shallow hand. Black does his usual thing but to no avail. Zahn’s character is nothing more than a pill-popping moron. And Newton feels like a tag-along who’s given nothing to do. Together, the cast’s efforts can’t save a movie that runs out of gas early before having to be dragged across the finish line. Even needle-drops from Credence Clearwater Revival, Motley Crue, and AC/DC feel weird and out of place in this unfortunate misfire.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

REVIEW: “Avatar: Fire and Ash” (2025)

by

11

It goes without saying, but there will be a lot of eyes on “Avatar: Fire and Ash”. And they will be watching for a number of reasons. For fans, it will be for another chance to visit the breathtaking world of Pandora. For tech lovers, it’s to see how James Cameron once again pushes technical boundaries. For box office prognosticators, it will be to see if Cameron’s third Avatar movie can hit the $2 billion+ mark like its predecessors. For the studio, it’s to see if it makes enough money to green-light the final two films in Cameron’s groundbreaking franchise.

After the enormous success of 2009’s “Avatar”, it took the franchise’s creative mastermind James Cameron thirteen years to make and release its sequel, “The Way of Water”. To many people’s surprise (more specifically, my own), the second film was also a major box office success, clearing over $2.3 billion at the box office. It was also an incredible cinematic experience that not only expanded the Avatar universe, but made the narratively shaky first film better.

“The Way of Water” once again delivered cutting-edge action sequences and world-building. But its story shifted its focus to family and all of its complexity as seen through the lenses of love, loyalty, sacrifice, and tragedy. “Fire and Ash” sees Cameron picking up where he left off, with Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) and Neytiri (Zoe Saldaña) navigating their family through grief following a devastating loss. And while they’ve found a home with the aquatic Metkayina clan, that doesn’t lessen the blow of losing one of their own.

Image Courtesy of 20th Century Studios

Cameron’s script (which he co-write with Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver) expands the drama within the Sully family, adding more depth and conflict to the relationships that flourished in the previous film. Back is Kiri (Sigourney Weaver), Jake and Neytiri’s adopted daughter with a special unrealized bond to the planet; Lo’ak (Britain Dalton), the middle child who also serves as the film’s occasional narrator; and Tuk (Trinity Jo-Li Bliss), their birth daughter and youngest child.

Each member of the Sully family is mourning in their own way. Jake spends his time keeping busy rather than facing his grief. Neytiri has shut herself off and is slowly being consumed by hate. Lo’ak is overwhelmed with guilt, believing his actions led to the previous film’s tragedy. Kiri is struggling to find her purpose while wondering if she could have done more. And Tuk is lost among her grieving family and unsure how to process everything she is witnessing.

Also returning is the Sully family’s chief antagonist, the obsessed Colonel Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang). Once the human military commander who brutally oversaw the colonization of Pandora, Quaritch is now a Na’vi mercenary who is still persecuting the native tribes, all in the name of revenge. But this time he has found a formidable ally in Varang (Oona Chaplin), the hardened leader of the volcano-dwelling Mangkwan clan. While she isn’t fleshed out as much as she could be, her goal is clear – to spread her fire across Pandora.

The story’s wild card is Spider (Jack Champion), the human son of Quaritch who was taken in by Jake and Neytiri after his ruthless father was killed in the first film. Spider’s story takes several specific turns that make him wanted by nearly everyone but for much different reasons. Spider was a little annoying in the last film. But here he’s more of a sympathetic figure who’s being pulled in numerous directions and for nothing that he can control.

Image Courtesy of 20th Century Studios

As you may be able to tell, “Fire and Ash” is very much a direct sequel to “The Way of Water”. In fact, their connections are so close that you can only really view it as an extension of the previous film. The two are narratively inseparable which is why some might see their similarities as repetitive. But Cameron infuses every scene with purpose, whether they’re personal for individual characters or building up the growing conflict that is thrusting Pandora into all-out war.

Once again, “Fire and Ash” is every bit the jaw-dropping spectacle you expect. While is doesn’t feature a technical leap as significant as we saw from film 1 to film 2, it’s still a stunning visual showcase for digital animation, practical effects, and performance capture. And it remains the only franchise where seeing it in 3-D is a must. It’s all enhanced through a crisp high frame rate which some have criticized but that I personally love.

“Fire and Ash” may feel like “The Way of Water: Part 2”, but it brings some things of its own. The menacing Varang and the Mangkwan clan, the Wind Traders and their massive organic barges; new sea creatures from the deep – they all make great additions to Cameron’s already rich cinematic world. Yet it does have its shortcomings. Older characters pop up with nothing much to do. The movie’s length doesn’t quite feel as earned as before. And it uses some of the same action beats as the last film. But “Fire & Ash” is still a grand science-fiction epic that once again transports us to an awe-inspiring world that could only come from the imagination of James Cameron. And I loved being back.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Affection” (2025)

by

6

“Affection” opens with a startling shot of a car in the center of a rural road, its headlights illuminating the dark. The camera then cuts to a severely injured woman lying motionless on the pavement, bloodied and bruised, her eyes blankly staring as a small tear leaks across the bridge of her nose. Suddenly she gasps, has a violent convulsion, manages to stand, and then frantically walks away, only to be plowed over by a speeding car.

Writer-director BT Meza’s well-conceived and well-shot opening sequence does a good job piquing our interest. The woman is played by Jessica Rothe, a seriously underrated actress whose impressive range has shown from “La La Land” to “Happy Death Day”. The mysterious table-setting and a talented lead gets things started on the right foot. But over time, “Affection” loses its intrigue, not because of premise or performance. But due to its convoluted storytelling which leaves us with too many questions.

Rothe plays Ellie Carter…or does she? That’s a question at the center of “Affection”. Ellie wakes up after a terrible dream. She’s in bed next to a man she doesn’t know, in a house she doesn’t recognize, and with a young daughter she doesn’t remember. In what she believes is self-defense, Ellie attacks the man but stops when she sees the terrified expression from the little girl who calls her “Mommy”. A confused and distraught Ellie crumbles to the ground where she’s embraced by her family(?).

After things calm down, the unctuous man tells Ellie he is her husband, Bruce (Joseph Cross) and the little girl is their daughter, Alice (Julianna Layne). Bruce goes on to describe a horrible accident that left her severely injured. As a side-effect of her trauma, Ellie is suffering from petrifying memory resets – a condition where her mind takes pieces of information from her life and twists them into false memories. Their neuro specialists have prescribed isolation as a part of her recovery leading Bruce to buy a remote farmhouse with no phone, no internet, and no neighbors. There they hope to rebuild the connections to her real memories.

Rothe superbly navigates Ellie’s inner turmoil which alternates between perplexity, frustration, and despondency. Adding to her emotional conflict are vividly detailed memories of a much different past. A past where her name was Sarah Thompson and she had a different husband and a son. She had other parents, other friends, and another childhood. These invasive memories clash with the old pictures, home videos, and passionate testimonies of Bruce and Alice.

But around the 40 minute mark the story takes a sharp turn, revealing what we already know – that things are not as they seem. Unexplainable tremors, nightmarish visions, a strange wound near the base of her neck, and so on. It all points to a mid-movie twist that I don’t dare spoil even though it’s fairly simple to figure out. The problems are with the details. The general idea is easy enough to grasp. But the convolution comes in understanding how it all fits together. Again, I’m keeping it vague, but I found myself left with too many significant questions.

That’s not to say “Affection” doesn’t have its strengths. The three-person cast is more than proficient with Rothe carrying the bulk of the load on her capable shoulders. The movie takes some admirable big swings which opens the door for some delightfully grisly makeup and effects. And to the film’s credit, it makes a poignant and personal statement on grief and isolation – both themes pulled directly from Meza’s own life experience. Sadly, the movie’s second-half incoherence ends up seriously impacting the payoff. It’s unfortunate considering the many things the movie gets right.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Anniversary” (2025)

by

6

“Anniversary” travels a pretty crazy path. It begins as a domestic thriller before flirting with becoming a psychological thriller and ultimately ending as something resembling a dystopian thriller. It’s a movie filled to the brim with clever ideas, some of which sizzle with intrigue and tension while others have a hard time connecting to everything else we see. Ultimately, I love that “Anniversary” takes some wild swings, even if it doesn’t hit everything it swings at.

“Anniversary” comes from director Jan Komasa who’s working from a screenplay written by Lori Rosene-Gambino. The film sports a terrific ensemble that features Diane Lane, Kyle Chandler, Zoey Deutch, Phoebe Dynevor, Dylan O’Brien, McKenna Grace, Madeline Brewer, and Daryl McCormack. All play characters caught up in a whirlwind of family dysfunction. Some stems from buried issues from their pasts. But most come with the introduction of a new person into their lives.

Image Courtesy of Lionsgate

The movie opens with the Taylor family gathering to celebrate the 25th wedding anniversary of Ellen (Lane), a Georgetown University professor, and Paul (Chandler), a restaurant owner. Joining the honored couple are their children, Cynthia (Deutch), a stuffy environmental lawyer who brought her disillusioned husband Rob (McCormack), Anna (Brewer), a provocative stand-up comedian, Josh (O’Brien), a smarmy and angsty struggling writer, and their geeky science-loving youngest, Birdie (Grace).

But it’s an outsider brought into their fold who swiftly turns things upside down. Accompanying Josh is his new girlfriend Liz (Dynevor). Josh is smitten with Liz and from all indications she feels the same way about him. But Liz is nervous about meeting his family. We see why once Josh introduces her to his mother. It turns out Ellen and Liz have some bad history dating back to an incident at the University. The sheepish yet cryptic Liz says it’s all behind them while a skeptical and cautious Ellen believes it’s no coincidence that Liz has attached herself to her son.

This first segment sees Komasa planting several narrative seeds as he sets up this complicated family dynamic. From there he jumps ahead eight years, and then two years, and so on. At each stop on the timeline we revisit the Taylors and witness another phase of their deterioration. Ellen’s frustrations with Liz festers, Cynthia battles depression as her relationship with Rob sours. Anna has a violent encounter at one of her shows. And the observant Birdie quietly soaks it all in.

But what about Josh and Liz? The couple marry and soon have twins. Later, Liz writes a controversial book called “The Change” which becomes a cultural phenomenon. The radically political manifesto sells over 10 million copies, making Liz and Josh a wealthy and powerful couple. The success of Liz’s book not only tightens the tension within the Taylor household. It lays the groundwork for an authoritarian dystopia which ends up affecting the story in ways we never see coming.

Image Courtesy of Lionsgate

From the very start there’s no denying the movie’s mammoth ambition. It’s melding of domestic and sociopolitical chaos is bold, but it’s a bit too much for it to handle. Still, the steady screw-tightening creates the kind of ever-intensifying, anxiety-riddled drama that keeps you glued to every harsh word and hateful stare. Meanwhile Komasa opens up a wealth of themes which he examines with the subtlety of a sledgehammer. He doesn’t hide his provocative prodding or his blunt-force messaging which overall works for and against his film.

As the film zips from point to point, certain family troubles escalate too quickly and without much explanation. Others feel oddly disconnected from the bigger story. But Komasa steadily propels his story forward, leaving us with little time to dwell on the negatives. He also lets his cast go for the jugular leading to some savory performances. Lane gets one of her meatiest roles in years. Chandler is a stabilizing force. O’Brien exudes detestability. Dynevor is a mystery who never tips her hand. They are all crucial ingredients that make this enthralling, swing-for-the-fences effort work.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

REVIEW: “A House of Dynamite” (2025)

by

6

Kathryn Bigelow’s highly anticipated and long awaited next movie has finally arrived via Netflix. It’s “A House of Dynamite” and it’s Bigelow’s first feature film since her 2017 historical crime drama “Detroit”. This is another audacious swing from the Oscar-winning director who delivers a harrowing ‘what-if’ nail-biter that’s infused with a sobering sense of urgency. It’s one of the best films of the year.

“A House of Dynamite” is a riveting thriller that can also serve as a pressing wake-up call to the ever-present danger of living in this new nuclear age. Written for the screen by Noah Oppenheim, the story plays like a hardcore military/political procedural laced with 1990s thriller vibes. But it’s Bigelow’s striking efficiency and razor-sharp precision that makes the movie’s engine hum. She maintains such control of the story’s many moving parts while keeping her audience firmly in her grip for the duration.

Bigelow is helped by a star-studded ensemble who fill out this three-pronged story. The narrative structure follows one significant event but tells it from three distinct yet interconnected perspectives. It begins at the 49th Missile Defense Battalion at Fort Greely, Alaska. Major Daniel Gonzalez (Anthony Ramos) and his unit pickup an unidentified ballistic missile in the air. At first they believe it’s a test. But by failing to detect the launch’s point of origin, they don’t know for sure.

Image Courtesy of Netflix

Fort Greely informs the White House situation room in Washington DC where Captain Olivia Walker (Rebecca Ferguson) and her team monitor potential threats to the country. Experts soon inform Walker that the missile is not a test and is only 19 minutes away from striking the continental United States. Multiple agencies spring into action, making efforts to intercept the missile while narrowing down its impact zone. As the clock counts down, fear and anxiety sets in.

We then hop back in time to when the missile was first detected but shift our focus to Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska where General Anthony Brady (Tracy Letts) leads the US Strategic Command and Control. Brady’s team is able to determine the missile’s target to be Chicago and its 9.2 million people. With a nuclear attack seeming imminent, Brady pushes for the President to immediately consider a counter attack. But Deputy National Security Advisor Jake Baerington (Gabriel Basso) disagrees, insisting they get more information before thrusting the world into a nuclear war.

The movie transports us back once more, this time focusing on the President of the United States (played by an impressively grounded Idris Elba). We follow him as he gets word about the inbound missile and works under immense pressure to decide the best course of action. Does he follow Brady’s recommendation and counterattack before their window closes? Or does he listen to Baerington and wait, despite the dangers of doing so?

Image Courtesy of Netflix

The cast is full of other supporting players who have their own roles in the story. Jason Clarke plays the senior Situation Room officer and Walker’s boss. Greta Lee plays an intelligence agent with the NSA. Moses Ingram plays a FEMA official. Jared Harris plays the Secretary of Defense. Renée Elise Goldsberry plays the First Lady. Jonah Hauer-King plays the President’s retaliatory adviser. These are just some of the characters serving as key pieces in the story, who either provide vital information that moves the plot forward or add needed humanity to the chaos.

“A House of Dynamite” wastes no time lighting its fuse and it steadily burns right up to the film’s gutsy finish. It’s a near certainty that some viewers will be upset with where Bigelow pulls the plug. But I can’t imagine a more effective ending for the kind of impression she wants to leave. The palpable fear, the unnerving uncertainty, the sobering real-world relevance – it all hits like a hammer in the film’s final shots which Bigelow lands just as intended.

With “A House of Dynamite” Bigelow reminds us of how close we are to annihilation and how helpless we would be once those dominoes started to fall. At the same time, her film maintains its human pulse, never losing sight of the personal stakes for many of the people involved. The changes in viewpoints work surprisingly well within the ticking clock formula in large part thanks to Bigelow’s laser-focused execution. The urgency is emphasized in Barry Ackroyd’s documentary-style cinematography while the tone resonates through the ominous groan of Volker Bertelmann’s score. It all creates a tension-fueled movie that offers a prescient warning for our current day. “A House of Dynamite” premieres October 24th on Netflix.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

REVIEW: “After the Hunt” (2025)

by

9

Luca Guadagnino puts aside some of his usual preoccupations in his latest feature “After the Hunt”. Known for his provocative fixations on sensuality, desire, and obsession, the enigmatic filmmaker can often get hung up on his own interests to the detriment of his characters and storytelling. There are remnants of that in “After the Hunt”. But it mostly feels like an interesting departure for Guadagnino, although one not without its own self-induced problems.

Guadagnino amasses a compelling ensemble led by Julia Roberts who’s given her most savory role in years. She plays Alma Imhoff, a highly regarded philosophy professor at Yale University. Alma is a complex woman of stature in the world of male-dominated academia. From one angle she’s an intimidating and impenetrable intellectual who relishes being the center of attention. From another angle she’s a troubled woman concealing her personal pain and bottling up anything resembling emotions.

Image Courtesy of Amazon MGM Studios

Alma’s tightly self-controlled world is shaken after her student and protégé Maggie Resnick (Ayo Edebiri) accuses Alma’s colleague and close friend Hank Gibson (Andrew Garfield) of sexual assault. The alleged transgression happened after a dinner party at Alma’s home. Hank admits to Alma that he walked Maggie home and even went up to her apartment for a nightcap. But he fiercely denies he assaulted Maggie.

There are dubious layers to Alma and Hank’s relationship that raises a number of questions. Professionally, both are pillars in the university’s philosophy department and they are the two finalists for the school’s lone tenure spot. Away from work they are uncomfortably close, to the point of kindling suspicions in Alma’s passive yet internally frustrated husband Frederik (played by a perfectly tuned Michael Stuhlbarg).

Alma’s relationship with Maggie proves to be equally complex but for much different reasons. She enjoys Maggie’s adoration and takes pride in being considered a mentor. But the two immediately clash over how to handle her accusations. Alma’s view is shaped by her own history, especially within the patriarchal construct. It causes her to be cold and unsympathetic, often thinking more about self-preservation and consequences than condemnation. Maggie shamelessly hides her real self behind various marginalized identities. In reality she’s dishonest, opportunistic and manipulative which quickly calls her credibility into question.

Guadagnino and screenwriter Nora Garrett make Alma their focus, following the character as she navigates the #MeToo minefield between the untrustworthy Maggie and the boozy flirt Hank. As they do, the filmmakers sling us into a thematic whirlwind of power dynamics, victimization, privilege, academia, support systems, culture shifts, and generational divides. Their storytelling strikes a peculiar balance between empathizing with Ivy League elites and excoriating them. But make no mistake, the film’s overall tenor ranges from morally murky to downright dastardly, with only a few measures of grace sprinkled in.

Image Courtesy of Amazon MGM Studios

Guadagnino and Garrett forsake ‘nice and tidy’ for something that challenges audiences willing to engage with the film on its own terms. There is an intentional ambiguity woven throughout the story that forces us to reckon with our own perceptions. Yet a later scene nearly undercuts that aim as Guadagnino seems to tip the scales in one direction. It’s a frustrating inclusion that obstructs the filmmaker’s intentions without fully derailing them.

“After the Hunt” is a technically savvy and narratively enthralling drama, anchored by awards-worthy performances from Roberts, Garfield, and Stuhlbarg, while offering a bold take on a sensitive subject that sparked a cultural flashpoint. The movie isn’t without flaws, such as a key plot point hinging on an absurd moment of pure happenstance. And an ending that leaves us questioning some things more than wrestling with them. Still Guadagnino impresses with his latest – an intelligent and guileful feature that’s both riveting and challenging.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS