Psychological horror and Hugh Grant. Now that’s a combination I couldn’t possibly turn down. It also happens to be the recipe for one of the year’s most intriguing movies. In “Heretic” Grant plays a suave and mannered Englishman who lures two young Mormon missionaries into a harrowing game of cat-and-mouse. It’s a juicy role custom-made for this second phase of Grant’s exceptional acting career.

“Heretic” comes from the writer-director duo of Scott Beck and Bryan Woods whose last film was 2023’s underrated science-fiction thriller “65”. “Heretic” is a much different movie. It’s a frightening examination of belief or (depending on your perspective) unbelief. We’ve seen countless horror movies centered around religious fanatics who wield their “faith” in all sorts of dark nefarious ways. Beck and Woods flip the script leading to something strikingly fresh yet equally chilling.

“Heretic” opens by introducing us to two twentysomething missionaries from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There’s the devout Sister Paxton (Chloe East) and the slightly more worldly Sister Barnes (Sophie Thatcher). The pair venture to a house on the outskirts of town in response to a request for more information about the church. As a storm begins brewing the two girls rap on the front door and soon greeted by Mr. Reed (Grant), a cheerful Brit with a skeptical interest in religion.

Mr. Reed invites the girl to come in out of the weather to which they politely decline, telling him they’re not allowed to come inside unless another woman is present. He informs them his wife is in the kitchen tending to a freshly baked pie which is enough to convince them. Obviously it’s a bad idea – we know it immediately. But Grant’s infectious natural charm is such that even we can feel the tug of persuasion with each playful smile and kindly word.

As the three have a seat in the living room, the girls begin their well-rehearsed presentation. But Mr. Reed cordially interrupts with a variety of questions of his own, some about church history and Mormon doctrine, others about things as simple yet intentional as favorite fast food restaurants. It’s a fascinating exchange that slowly begins to reveal Mr. Reed’s (and the movie’s) more sinister intentions.

I wouldn’t dare reveal much more. As mentioned above, their genial conversation turns into a psychological game of cat-and-mouse before eventually giving way to an even darker and nastier third act. Sister Paxton and Sister Barnes are forced to navigate the thorny ground of belief versus disbelief if they are to make it out of Mr. Reed’s labyrinthine house alive.

While the final 20 minutes or so takes a slightly more traditional horror movie form, “Heretic” never loses its welcomed originality or simmering sense of dread. The smart and crafty script is one of the year’s best, tackling the themes of faith and skepticism while also diving into the subject of extreme obsession.

While “Heretic” is well-written and well-directed, it’s the performances that may be its ace in the hole. Grant is the standout, juggling effortless charm with unnerving sadism to deliver some of the year’s best work. He’s also devilishly funny, even hitting us with a Jar Jar Binks impression none of us knew we wanted. But East and Thatcher hold their own, heightening the stakes by effectively conveying both innocence and dread. All three are terrific and are crucial threads in the terrifying web Beck and Woods have spun.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

Robert Zemeckis and Tom Hanks have a history of making some pretty good movie magic together. 1994’s “Forrest Gump” won six Academy Awards. 2000’s “Cast Away” remains a personal favorite of mine. 2004’s “The Polar Express” has become a perennial Christmas classic for many. And regardless of what my film critic colleagues say, 2022’s live-action “Pinocchio” had more than enough heart, charm, and creative vision to “justify its existence”.

Now Zemeckis and Hanks team up for the fifth time with “Here”, a warm-hearted drama built around a gutsy high-concept idea that works in more ways than it doesn’t. The film is based on a six-page comic strip by Richard McGuire that was published in 1989 and turned into a graphic novel in 2014. Written for the screen by fellow Oscar winners Zemeckis and Eric Roth, “Here” is a bold and ambitious adaptation that may not reach the full potential of its concept, but that swings for the fences nevertheless, challenging cinematic norms and touching our souls along the way.

A part of me wonders if we’ve grown too cynical and jaded for a movie like “Here”. Not so much for its technical conceit, but for its earnest and open-hearted vision. There’s little resembling a cohesive plot. Instead “Here” functions as a thematically rich experience you absorb and relate to. It can be sweet and unashamedly sentimental. But it’s also honest and straightforward with its intentions.

With “Here”, Zemeckis presents a multi-generational saga that explores the various phases of life, the persistence of time, the immeasurable value of family, and the power of unfailing love in light of our human fallibility. And it all unfolds through the lens of a single static camera with a fixed point-of-view, set upon one small parcel of New England land. As the camera sits stationary for the duration of the film, centuries of life play out before our eyes, most involving a single family and the colonial house they share.

“Here” takes a non-linear approach to storytelling, artfully moving us back-and-forth to different points on the timeline while telling several stories along the way. We see the house being built in 1911 and meet the first of several generations of residents, an aviation enthusiast (Gwilym Lee) and his disapproving wife (Michelle Dockery). A little later it’s occupied by an easygoing inventor (David Flynn) and his high-energy wife (Ophelia Lovibond). And in our current day, it’s a young couple (Nikki Amuka-Bird and Nicholas Pinnock) and their teenage son (Cache Vanderpuye). We also get (briefly), dinosaurs, Native Americans, and Ben Franklin.

But the bulk of its time follows the Young family. In 1943, Al (Paul Bettany) and his wife Rose (Kelly Reilly) buy the house after he returns from World War II. Al is a heavy drinker and struggles with PTSD. But he’s a hard worker who desperately wants to provide for his family. Meanwhile Rose proves to be the home’s stabilizing force. They go on to raise three kids in the house, one of them being Richard (Tom Hanks), the film’s most prominent character.

Richard meets and falls for Margaret (fellow “Forrest Gump” alum Robin Wright) who he brings home to meet his family. Later, after discovering Margaret is pregnant, the two get married and end up living with Al and Rose. Before long their daughter Vanessa is born. From there we follow the ebb and flow of the Young family’s life playing out in their living room. And similar to the bustling world outside of their big bay window, there’s a lot of beauty, chaos, and change to behold.

As Zemeckis plays hopscotch across his timeline, he uses a variety of young performers and digital de-aging technology to follow his characters through various stages of their lives. The effects work can occasionally be jarring, but it’s often mind-blowing. Meanwhile the evocative score from Alan Silvestri (yet another “Forrest Gump” alum) is teeming with warmth yet with an ache that’s befitting of the realities being explored.

“Here” is an experiment for you to sit back and emotionally savor as it chronicles the circle of life with all of its joy, sorrow, and bittersweetness. It’s not a movie custom-made for social media buzz. It doesn’t milk the celebrity status of hot young stars. It doesn’t cater to any edgy popular trend. It’s simply a movie about life where we watch significant events unfold on screen that distinctly relate to our own real-world experiences. It’s all conveyed through amazing visual craft and a cast putting every bit of themselves into realizing a powerful shared vision. “Here” is in theaters now.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

The directing duo of Karrie Crouse and Will Joines make impressive feature film debuts with “Hold Your Breath”, a psychological horror-thriller set during the devastating Dust Bowl of the 1930s. Anchored by a wrenching Sarah Paulson lead performance, “Hold Your Breath” combines devastating elements from American history with familiar genre tropes to form a well-made and thematically rich movie. It’s a little too ambitious, but I appreciate its big swings.

Set in 1933, Paulson plays Margaret, a mother with two daughters struggling to get by in the dust-ravaged Oklahoma panhandle. With their farmland decimated, Margaret’s husband Henry has been forced to take a far-away job in hopes of earning money to send back home. That leaves Margaret, her oldest daughter Rose (Amiah Miller), and her hearing-impaired youngest, Ollie (Alona Jane Robbins) to scrape by with one old cow, no crops, and no way to leave their situation.

Margaret loves her daughters and does everything in her power to protect and provide for them. She’s also seen as a stabilizing presence in their small rural community. But deep down she has issues of her own that torment her. She’s been haunted by the same reoccurring dream since losing their first child to Scarlet Fever. And as their circumstances get worse, Margaret begins to lose her grip on reality. Or is there something else at work – something malevolent and sinister.

That burning question drives much of “Hold Your Breath”. There’s a lot going on in the story (written by Crouse) narratively, thematically, and psychologically. There are constant threats – some real and others imagined. There are the howling dust storms, children getting sick, potential starvation, and even the sudden appearance of a mysterious preacher named Wallace (Ebon Moss-Bachrach) who claims to be a friend of Henry’s. It all leads to an intensifying sense paranoia that culminates in a harrowing and heart-rending final act.

A key strength of the film is found in its recreation of the Dust Bowl era. Crouse and Joines shot in several locations around New Mexico in order to capture the stark barren landscapes of 1933 Oklahoma. They’re just as attentive when it comes to conveying the punishing conditions. The dust storms are ferocious and you can almost taste the grit in your mouth and feel the wind-blown sand stinging your eyes.

Then you have the film’s meticulous attention to details. It’s seen most in the terrific costume and production designs. But also in seemingly small things, such as Margaret using strips of fabric to seal their house from the sand. Or the masks they sometimes wear outside that are plucked directly from old archived photos. It all adds a heavy layer of realism to a movie than (especially in the second half) leans heavy on the psychological.

Thematically, “Hold Your Breath” has a lot it’s trying to say. Motherhood, grief, societal pressure, and isolation are just some of the topics that Crouse and Joines touch on. Some of them are more present than others but none are deeply explored – a side-effect of having too much on their minds. But the movie has some notably tense and unsettling moments, most seasoned by the eerie tones of composer Colin Stetson. And the committed performances from Paulson and Miller add a resonance that gives the movie its emotional kick. “Hold Your Breath” premieres October 3rd on Hulu.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

The impending death of their ailing father forces three estranged sisters back together in “His Three Daughters”, an intimate family drama written and directed by Azazel Jacobs. The movie had its world premiere over a year ago at the Toronto International Film Festival where it was picked up by Netflix for $7 million. What a bargain.

“His Three Daughters” is surprising in its simplicity. The opening line in this review is really the movie in a nutshell. But it’s that very simplicity that allows the film to set its feet and hone in on the raw, tangible emotions that drive its story. And Jacobs has just the right actresses to pull it off. Carrie Coon, Elizabeth Olsen, and Natasha Lyonne deliver unbridled performances of such authenticity and weight. Each help to anchor the film in their own distinct yet interconnected ways.

As their father’s battle with late stage cancer reaches its end, his three daughters, Katie (Coon), Rachel (Lyonne), and Christina (Olsen), gather at his apartment in New York City to be with him during his final days. They meet their hospice representative Angel (Rudy Galvan) who fills them in on what to expect and informs them that their goal should be to make their father’s remaining days as painless and peaceful as possible.

But the main drama is found in the frayed relationships between the three women. Each has their own unique personalities and baggage. Some of the tensions have been packed away for years, and their overall lack of communication and connection has led all three to reach very different conclusions about the others. They try to put those conclusions aside for the sake of their father. But it’s only a matter of time before their proverbial lids blow off.

Katie is the oldest and has a hard time holding back her opinions. She’s prickly, obsessive, drinks when she gets anxious, and is always quick to criticize Rachel. It’s a reflection of her own trouble back home which she keeps bottled up. As for Rachel, she’s crass, detached, and spends the majority of her time smoking pot and betting on sports. It helps her to keep her emotions buried while avoiding the inevitable. Then there is the gentle Christina who spends the bulk of her time keeping the peace between her warring sisters. She is open-hearted and optimistic to a fault, often so aggressively looking for the bright side of things that she misses reality.

The more time we spend with these three women, the more we learn about them. And the more we learn, the better we understand them. Jacobs’ incisive script adds layers to each woman, taking the necessary time to allow them to fully form. Emerging bitterness and resentment leads to confrontations, yet Jacobs never paints anyone as the bad guy. They don’t always earn our approval, but they do earn our empathy. It’s due to the characters being sharply written and achingly authentic in nearly every regard.

If you have experienced watching a loved one die, “His Three Daughters” will speak to you in a number of profound ways. Jacobs approaches his subject with honesty and clarity, avoiding theatrics and never hitting a false note. But even as his characters navigate the valley of death, they insightfully speak to the deeper meaning of life. It’s all anchored by the sublime performances from Coon, Lyonne, and Olsen who make us laugh and break our hearts. And they do so while giving us hope that good can come from life’s most painful events. “His Three Daughters” is now streaming on Netflix.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

Expecting a proudly classical, old-fashioned Western to be anything other than polarizing in our modern movie climate is a bit naive. And I say that as someone who didn’t initially consider the landscape when reading the first wave of reactions to “Horizon: An American Saga – Chapter 1” – the first big screen installment in Kevin Costner‘s decades-in-the-making, multi-film passion project. It only required a little thought for me to understand many of the responses that should have been easy to predict.

Truth be told, classic Westerns have (unfortunately) fallen out of fashion, and over the years tastes have changed dramatically. Today many people trend towards social-realistic dramas, pseudo arthouse edginess, and low-budget horror, occasionally cleansing their palates with a big studio blockbuster. So when something like “Horizon” comes along, it shouldn’t surprise us that it doesn’t resonate with everyone. And that’s perfectly fine.

But some of the shots taken at it have been petty and disingenuous. Such as labeling it a “vanity project”. Or the cries of nepotism because he cast his son in a small role. My advice: toss all of those things aside. “Horizon: An American Saga” is clearly near and dear to Costner’s heart which is a big reason he is personally bankrolling a huge portion of the films. And you can see his passion in nearly every second of this vast, immersive, and handsomely shot frontier epic.

As this first chapter clearly shows, the Horizon saga isn’t your prototypical narrative driven movie. As Costner himself has put it, “it’s a journey, not a plot movie” and some people may struggle with that. But having his intentions in mind, along with a grasp of his audacious multifaceted vision going forward, energizes “Chapter 1” and helps set the table for something that could be truly magnificent.

Make no mistake, there is a lot of introduction and table-setting in “Chapter 1” and all of it is building towards the release of “Chapter 2” which comes to theaters this August. Again, it is unquestionably unconventional. But it works extremely well mainly due to the attention Costner gives to the several main characters and their uniquely personal storylines. While Costner himself gets top billing, his character, Hayes Ellison, is only one piece of this amazing character-driven tapestry.

With “Horizon”, Costner sets out to give us a broad look at the American West through a variety of frontier experiences across Kansas, Wyoming, Montana, and other captivating territories. Written for the screen by Costner and author Jon Baird, the individual stories each have surprising depth and a dramatic heft that not only grabs your interest but leaves you looking forward to what lies ahead.

And while Costner proudly embraces the grand old-fashioned vistas and classic Western flavor, it’s impossible to put his film in such a tiny box. That’s because he takes a nuanced look at frontier life. Anything perceived as romanticizing the “Old West” is often countered by the realities of violence and savagery. And he doesn’t sugarcoat the numerous themes he unearths such as freedom, morality, justice, grief, family, greed, and retribution just to name a few.

Among the key characters we encounter is Costner’s Hayes Ellison, a former gunslinger who finds himself at odds with the thuggish Sykes family and their matriarch played by the always compelling Dale Dickey. He and a prostitute with a heart of gold named (go figure) Marigold (Abbey Lee) head to the mountains in hopes of avoiding a conflict with the Sykes bunch.

Elsewhere in the film’s most harrowing sequence, Frances Kittredge (a standout Sienna Miller) and her daughter Lizzy (Georgia MacPhail) barely survive a massacre of their settlement by an Apache war party. They’re taken in by the United States Calvary where she takes a liking to Lt. Trent Gephardt (Sam Worthington). We also meet members of a wagon train driven by their reluctant leader Matthew Van Weyden (Luke Wilson). And we follow a young boy, thirsty for revenge after his family is murdered. A series of unfortunate events puts him in the company of a brutal gang of killers butchering natives for profit.

An incredible ensemble not only brings these stories to life, but they also introduce personal stories within the stories. Admittedly it’s a lot to keep up with. But it’s worth the effort, in large part thanks to the superb performances from the main stars and sturdy reliables like Michael Rooker, Danny Huston, and Will Patton. Add in Costner’s bold and ambitious vision that trusts in his audience’s ability to understand what he’s going for as well as their willingness to go along on the journey. I know I’m ready. “Horizon: An American Saga – Chapter 1” is in theaters now.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

Richard Linklater has been cemented as a favorite filmmaker of mine for a long time and he seems to justify that status with every new movie he makes. Even films of his that may not hit every right note still do something to me that I have a hard time describing. At the risk of sounding corny, Linklater speaks a language in his movies that has always resonated with me in a number of fascinating ways. He does it again with his latest, the fun yet uneven “Hit Man”.

“Hit Man” is one of those Linklater movies that doesn’t hit every right note yet it had me in its corner from the very start. It’s a bit erratic, especially in regards to tone. And there were several times where it didn’t seem certain of the kind of movie it wanted to be. For example, the first third is vintage Linklater, brimming with his signature style and oddball humor. A little later the humor somewhat dries up as the movie takes a more romantic turn. Even later it turns into a Coens-lite crime thriller involving murder, dirty cops, and a big coverup.

Linklater’s “Hit Man” is based on a 2001 article of the same name that was written by Skip Hollandsworth and published in Texas Monthly magazine. It tells the “somewhat true story” of Gary Johnson, played by the current everywhere-man and regular Linklater collaborator, Glen Powell. Gary is an unassuming guy who seems to live a pretty mundane life. He’s a straitlaced psychology and philosophy professor at the University of New Orleans and lives quietly alone with his house plants and two cats, Id and Ego.

But Gary has a second job working in a surveillance van for the New Orleans Police Department. And that’s where his life takes a wild and unexpected turn. After the slimy lead undercover cop (Austin Amelio) gets suspended for beating up two teenagers, Gary is thrust in as a desperate last-minute replacement, wired and posing as a contract killer, tasked with getting the unsuspecting mark to hire him. Not only does he pull it off, but he’s stunningly convincing.

Gary becomes the police’s go-to undercover guy, drawing from all his geeky knowledge of movies and pop culture to tailor his hitmen for every individual client. Most of them are everyday ordinary folks with one small exception – they want to off their spouse, neighbor, business partner, etc. and are willing to pay for it to be done. Gary’s costumes and personas progressively get more outrageous and over-the-top, but his arrest rate only grows.

Admittedly it all sounds utterly preposterous. Would the police toss a civilian into such a situation with such little thought? Was there really an epidemic of people hiring hitmen that the cops needed a special task force dedicated solely to it? Isn’t this some shady form of entrapment? Linklater doesn’t bother with any of those questions and often just goes along with the absurdity of it all. How much these things stick out to you may very well impact how far you can go with “Hit Man”.

Gary’s transition from nerdy nobody to super-cool undercover agent is threatened following a coffee shop meeting with a women named Madison (a saucy Adria Arjona in full femme fatale mode). Distraught, reluctant, yet flirty, Madison wants him to kill her abusive slimeball husband. But Gary, working as a hunky self-assured charmer he calls Ron, discourages her from going through with it and saves her from being arrested. The move confuses his colleagues but leaves quite the impression on Madison. Before long they’re secretly dating on the sly which sees the movie take on a distinctly noir flavor.

Powell’s performance is a key ingredient that makes the film tick. Admittedly, it takes more than a pair of glasses and his hair parted to the side to truly sell him as a nerdy professor. Yet Powell makes it work thanks to his innate sincerity and slightly goofy charm. But its his leading man versatility that stands out most as the actor seamlessly transforms from one identity to the next. Arjona shines as well and builds some great chemistry with Powell despite the relationship between their characters needing more depth.

There’s a lot to like about “Hit Man” from the first-half humor, to Linklater shooting on location, to the unpredictable directions the story goes. Yet despite all of that, the movie is never quite as funny as you expect it to be, nor quite as sexy as it clearly wants to be, and not quite as thrilling as it could be. Still, Linklater is a filmmaker who always puts something compelling on the screen. That may sound like a strange compliment, but it testifies to what he delivers with “Hit Man”. “Hit Man” premieres June 7th on Netflix.

VERDICT – 3 STARS