This is not your ordinary Christmas movie. “Carry-On” is a surprise end-of-the-year action thriller from Netflix that’s sure to add some spice to your holiday season viewing. The film is directed by Jaume Collet-Serra who is probably known best for his past collaborations with Liam Neeson and Dwayne Johnson. With “Carry-On” he and screenwriter T.J. Fixman put together a no-nonsense throwback genre movie with clear “Die-Hard” inspiration.

“Carry-On” kicks off on Christmas Eve as a shadowy man meets with two members of the Russian mafia at a Christmas tree lot. The man, whose name is never revealed, quickly offs the two mobsters and leaves with a mysterious suitcase. The man (who I’ll refer to as the Antagonist) is played by Jason Bateman who is marvelously working against his usual comic type. It’s a rock-solid performance.

Elsewhere we’re introduced to a young couple, Ethan (Taron Egerton) and Nora (Sofia Carson). Both work at Los Angeles International Airport – he as a TSA agent and she as an airlines operations manager. They’ve also found out Nora is pregnant with their first child which has Ethan a little antsy. He’s been frustrated since being rejected by the police academy. Since then he has spent three years in an entry level position with the TSA and showing no incentive to move up.

With reality setting in, Ethan convinces his supervisor (Dean Morris) to give him a chance to earn a promotion. He’s tasked with monitoring one of the baggage scanners where someone leaves an earbud in one of his trays. Through it he’s contacted by the Antagonist who orders Ethan to allow a certain piece of carry-on luggage to pass through the scanner otherwise Nora will be killed. Ethan tries to outsmart the Antagonist but quickly leans he is always one step behind.

Meanwhile, LAPD detective Elena Cole (the always welcomed Danielle Deadwyler) traces the murder of the two Russian mobsters to a potent nerve agent. Her investigation eventually leads her to LAX where she becomes yet another player in Collet-Serra’s high-stakes game of cat-and-mouse. From there it’s all about moving his players from point to point while keeping the audience guessing about how things are going to play out. “Carry-On” certainly succeeds in doing that.

It’s hard to make the case that “Carry-On” breaks new ground in the action-thriller genre. But as I’ve preached before, not every movie needs to. There’s always room for well-written, well-directed, and well-acted features that know exactly what kind of movie they want to be. That’s precisely what “Carry-On” is. And cheers to Jaume Collet-Serra for knowing what he wanted to make and sticking by those convictions. His movie benefits from it and so do we. “Carry-On” is now streaming on Netflix.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

I was sold on seeing “Conclave” just by the sheer force of its cast. Ralph Fiennes, Stanley Tucci, John Lithgow, and Isabella Rossellini instantly put the film on my radar. But for me the biggest draw was Edward Berger, the director, co-writer, and producer of the 2022 Academy Award-winning masterpiece “All Quiet on the Western Front”. Whatever the acclaimed filmmaker delivered as his next feature would be an instant must-see.

“Conclave” is an absorbing thriller that’s fueled by powerhouse performances and driven by a filmmaker who maintains an assured grip until he loses it in the final ten minutes. The film is a mostly captivating experience, frustrated only by a curveball ending so out of left field that it derails the near perfection that came before it. It’s a wild final swing that is little more than an eleventh-hour plot device, desperately aiming to be provocative, but too underdeveloped to be anything other than outrageous.

“Conclave” is based on the 2016 international best-selling novel of the same name by Robert Harris. For the majority of its time, screenwriter Peter Straughan’s adaptation plays like a high-stakes political thriller. It’s cloaked in mystery with several big reveals, some unexpected twists, and a lingering sense of paranoia. You can’t help but be sucked in by this ecclesiastical potboiler set within the hallowed halls of the Vatican.

The movie opens with Cardinal Thomas Lawrence (Ralph Fiennes) arriving at the Vatican after getting word the pope has suddenly died. After carrying out the ceremonial rites, the throne is officially declared vacant. From there, Father Lawrence is tasked with overseeing the papal conclave – a gathering in Rome of Cardinals from around the world for the purpose of electing a new pope.

From the first moment we meet him it’s obvious that Cardinal Lawrence isn’t thrilled with his responsibility. We learn he has recently struggled with a crisis of faith leading to his desire to resign from his position and leave Rome. At the same time, he also proves himself to be the most qualified and capable person to handle such a significant task. Fiennes commands the screen yet works with a necessary restraint. His weary eyes and burdened gaze gives us a good look into his tired and troubled soul.

Soon after the cardinals are sequestered and the process begins, four frontrunners arise. There’s Cardinal Bellini (Stanley Tucci), a staunch liberal pretending to be uninterested but with a clear desire for the papacy; Cardinal Tedesco (Sergio Castellitto), a conservative caricature with hardline views that some feel would set the church back decades; Cardinal Adeyemi (Lucian Msamati), a Nigerian archbishop who quickly emerges as the favorite; and Cardinal Tremblay (John Lithgow), a politically savvy American bishop whose every action is driven by his ambition to be the next pontiff.

After none receive the required two-thirds majority, a second vote is held followed by a third and a fourth. Tensions rise as the candidates posture for position, use internal politics to their advantage, and in some cases resort to underhanded tactics to compromise their competition. Caught in the middle is Cardinal Lawrence who must navigate the accusations and potential scandals to ensure the integrity of the process. And what’s with the arrival of Cardinal Benitez (Carlos Diehz), the archbishop of Kabul who was secretly appointed by the late pontiff?

Berger goes to great lengths to make his film look as authentic as possible, recreating with painstaking detail everything from the Vatican’s ornate interiors to the vibrant priestly regalia. Meanwhile Stéphane Fontaine’s cinematography and Volker Bertelmann’s score add think layers of tension as the story progresses. And it all builds our anticipation for what should be a rich and juicy finish. But instead “Conclave” ends with a whimper, throwing in a last-second twist that’s given no buildup and has no notable narrative or dramatic connection to anything that preceded it.

For 110 minutes “Conclave” is hands-down one of the year’s best movies. Unfortunately its final 10 minutes turns it into one of the year’s most frustrating misfires. The ensemble is top-notch, the production design is stellar, the behind the scenes wrangling is riveting, and Berger’s direction is methodical and propulsive. It makes the film’s unraveling all the more discouraging. Rather than ending with a bang, “Conclave” is given a lazy, patronizing finish built more on sanctimonious intentions than good moviemaking judgements.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

Remaking a movie like “The Crow” was a pretty ambitious undertaking. The original film from director Alex Proyas gained a hefty cult following after its 1994 release. It was also a movie scarred by the death of its star, Brandon Lee, the son of martial arts icon Bruce Lee. While filming one of the movie’s most intense action scenes, Lee was fatally shot by a prop gun that hadn’t been properly checked. The finished movie was a success, but Lee’s death still looms over it.

2024’s “The Crow” is an adaptation of a 1989 comic book series created by James O’Barr and a reboot of the lackluster feature film franchise. It’s directed by Rupert Sanders who works from a script by Zach Baylis and William Schneider. It’s also a significant downgrade from the 1994 film and its comic book inspiration. There are numerous issues which compound to the point of being impossible to overlook. By the end, we’re left wondering how such an intense story can feel so drab and uninspired.

The problems reach to nearly every facet of movie. The first thing fans of the original film will notice is the absence of the dark gothic aesthetic. The world Sanders gives us is a little gritty and grimy in spots, but it doesn’t stand out at all. It lacks the grim and forbidding edge that proved vital to drawing us into the 1994 film’s story. Sanders chooses to dial back to a more generic city setting which ends up sucking potential energy out of the movie.

One thing the film doesn’t dial back is the supernatural element of the story. Baylis and Schneider make dramatic changes to the source material including several ill-advised choices that simply don’t work. Rather than a street-wise gang leader, here the main baddie is a wealthy uptown crime lord who works for the Devil. Even weirder, he’s able to possess people by whispering unintelligible words in their ears. Much like the world, he leaves no impression whatsoever despite being played by the great Danny Huston.

The supernatural silliness goes even further. A fundamental part of the story is the intense love between Eric (Bill Skarsgård) and Shelly (FKA Twigs). Sanders spends considerably more screen time developing their relationship yet it never feels organic or authentic. The two meet in a heavily secured rehabilitation center and then easily escape together. After a couple of scenes the two fall in love, and the next 15 minutes is spent convincing us they really do love each other. But Shelly has some history that’s about to catch up with her and Eric.

And that leads to another fundamental part of Eric and Shelly’s story – their murder. It turns out Shelly’s friend texted her a video that proves Vincent Roeg (Huston) is the Devil’s right-hand man. Vincent can’t let his demonic secret get out so he sends out his henchman to track down and murder Shelly and Eric. It’s a much more sanitized killing than what we witness in the 1994 film, but it’s also considerably less impactful.

Eric is resurrected from the dead in a way so vaguely defined that it’s best to not even try understanding the specifics. Some guy named Kronos (Sam Bouajila), who may or may not be from Heaven, gives Eric the lowdown. Rather than being an avenging angel, here Eric is given a chance to bring Shelly back from the dead. Kill everyone involved in Shelly’s death, including Vincent, and then she too will be resurrected. It’s a new twist to the story but one clogged by supernatural mumbo-jumbo that never makes much sense.

The performances are a mixed bag with Skarsgård being the real highlight. He gives a committed and fittingly moody performance that often elevates the material he’s trying to work through. Frustratingly, it isn’t until late in the film that we finally get to see him fully decked out in his Crow attire. FKA Twigs is a little shakier while the always reliable Danny Huston seems to be cashing an easy check.

“The Crow” admirably attempts to put a fresh spin on its material, but nearly every new idea it has falls flat. And while it may be unfair to continually compare it to the 1994 Brandon Lee cult classic, it’s hard not to when it falls short of that film in nearly every regard. It does get a third-act boost from a gloriously violent and savagely gory opera house scene that is expertly shot, edited, and choreographed. Unfortunately the movie needs a lot more than that to justify raising this IP from the dead. “The Crow” opens in theaters this weekend.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

“Crescent City” is a well-known nickname for New Orleans, Louisiana. “Crescent City” is also the title of a popular series of fantasy novels. But I’m not sure either of those have connections to the new “Crescent City” movie, a knotty crime thriller set and shot in and around Little Rock, Arkansas. Where does the “Crescent City” title come from you ask? I have no idea. That’s not to say it isn’t somewhere in the movie. But it would be easy to miss in a feature this overstuffed and convoluted.

Director R.J. Collins attempts to add spark to this overloaded and overplotted serial killer thriller, squeezing every drop of tension he can out of a mostly tension-free script. But much like his talented cast, there’s only so much he can do. Screenwriter Rich Ronat bites off more than he can chew, eventually adding twists on top of twists. As a result, his screenplay puts useful things such as coherence and plausibility out of reach, leaving Collins with more characters, more motives, and more plot pieces than he can handle.

The city of Little Rock is shaken following three grisly murders, each with a decapitated victim and the killer’s signature – mannequin parts. Two deeply flawed Little Rock police detectives are put on the case, Brian Sutter (Terrence Howard), a devout family man tormented by a past case gone wrong, and Luke Carson (Esai Morales), his short-fused and impertinent partner.

After another victim turns up, their frustrated Captain (a check-cashing Alec Baldwin) brings in Detective Jaclyn Waters (Nicky Whelan) to assist. She’s a Tulsa homicide detective by way of Sydney, Australia. Neither Brian or Luke are thrilled with an outsider joining their ranks, but they follow orders nonetheless. Before long the trio find themselves questioning a suspicious local pastor (Michael Sirow), investigating a satanic dating site, and navigating an internal affairs inquiry relating to an entirely different case.

Those things alone would be enough for a fully functional story. But the film throws in so many setups, coverups, and betrayals that they’re impossible to manage. The film also has an identity crisis. One minute we’re watching a police procedural, the next minute a whodunit, and even later a family drama. And all while the movie is working hard at being a competent crime thriller. In truth, it’s too much.

Howard and Morales are fine actors who are more than capable of carrying the film and here they certainly put in the effort. At the same time, Little Rock provides a strikingly fresh setting. But “Crescent City” eventually crumbles under the weight of its own ambition. It seems as if every character has secrets, numerous motivations are sketchy, and overall there are too many story pieces that don’t connect. In the end, so much time is put towards corralling it all that more necessary components suffer. “Crescent City” is now available on VOD.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

Rarely has a title fit a movie quite as well as “Cuckoo”. This bizarre yet original horror-thriller comes from the imagination of its writer and director, Tilman Singer. Reactions to this crazy concoction will probably be all over the map and understandably so. It’s undeniably fun and bonkers in ways that only horror movies can be. But narratively it’s a bit of a mess, and almost undone by an unsatisfying ending that leaves far too many unanswered questions and dangling loose ends.

Hunter Schafer plays Gretchen, a 17-year-old still grieving the recent death of her mother. As a result, she leaves America and moves to the Bavarian Alps to live with her father, Luis (Marton Csokas), his new wife Beth (Jessica Henwick), and their mute daughter Alma (Mila Lieu). With little in terms of explanation, Luis moves them to a vaguely defined mountain resort that’s ran by the enigmatic Herr König (Dan Stevens). But the change of scenery doesn’t help Gretchen. The only thing that offers her solace is leaving voicemails on her late mother’s answering machine.

As the family settles into their new home, König offers Gretchen a job as a receptionist at his hotel in an effort to help her adapt. But then weird things start to happen. There are the eerie screeches coming from the nearby forest. There are the unresponsive guests seen vomiting around the hotel. And what’s with the weird time loops (a question I’m still asking myself). Most concerning of all are Alma’s sudden seizures. Of course we learn quick that there is more going on at König’s “resort”.

From there the movie hits us with one deliriously demented turn after another. There are several gnarly pieces to Singer’s twisted puzzle including König himself, whose slipperiness makes it clear that he’s hiding something. You have the terrifying blonde-haired woman in a long trench coat, with glowing red eyes that she hides behind large gaudy sunglasses. And then there’s the appearance of Henry (Jan Bluthardt), a police investigator who knows more than he’s letting on. He convinces Gretchen to join his secret investigation to stop whatever König is up to.

While the gonzo and sometimes grisly horror elements are a lot of fun, not everything in the story gets as much attention. For example, Gretchen makes several knee-jerk choices that seem out of the blue. None are bigger than her seemingly random attraction to a free-spirited guest named Ed (Àstrid Bergès-Frisbey). Their actions that follow have no weight because their connection is too thinly drawn. It’s the same with Luis and Beth and some of their unexplained motivations.

But where the movie disappoints most is in its ending. Singer begins pulling back the veil on his twisted and macabre mystery leading to a bloody final showdown that attempts to put a cap on all he has revealed. Interestingly, it’s the resort’s crazy cryptic mystery with all of its deranged moving parts that comes together best (not seamlessly, but best). But outside of it, too much is left unresolved from character arcs to plot logic.

“Cuckoo” succeeds at luring you in and keeping you anticipating the next wacky turn it takes. But by the time the end credits roll, it’s hard to shake the feeling of being shortchanged. Still that doesn’t disqualify Tilman Singer as being an exciting emerging voice. Dan Stevens delivers another deliciously creepy and slyly hilarious performance (I dare you not to laugh when he pulls out his wooden flute). Meanwhile Schafer is a sturdy enough lead to guide us through the film’s big ideas and its hole-riddled storytelling. “Cuckoo” is in theaters now.

VERDICT – 3 STARS