The first film in Zack Snyder’s original two-part space opera “Rebel Moon” was met with the ever so predictable panning, much of it from those who seem triggered by the mere mention of the director’s name. The movie wasn’t nearly as bad as fashionable sentiment declared and it did a good job setting the next film which Netflix was onboard to release as part of their exclusive deal with the strangely polarizing filmmaker.

But in fairness, “Rebel Moon – Part One” was far from a flawless film in large part due to a particular demand in Netflix’s deal with Snyder. It seems Snyder had always envisioned “Rebel Moon” to be epic in scale and R-rated. Netflix agreed to let him fully realize his vision but demanded that he first release a shortened PG-13 cut of both films. This led to “Part One” feeling shortchanged in some key places including its character development and even the action.

That problem is even more pronounced in “Rebel Moon – Part Two: The Scargiver”, a movie that eventually gets to the big showdown both films have been building towards but that feels as though large chunks are missing. To no surprise it’s a visual feast and the performances bring these characters to life. But the action, while often beautifully shot, is once again pruned as evident by noticeable camera zooms and awkward cutaways to avoid violence that may push to an R-rating. And then there is the story which (in this version) tries to get by on the bare basics. You can tell there’s much more than what we get.

“Part Two” begins with Kora (Sofia Boutella) and Gunnar (Michiel Huisman) returning to their village with the warriors rounded up in “Part One” who have agreed to help the villagers defend themselves against the oppressive Imperium. Those warriors are a former Imperium general Titus (Djimon Hounsou), a cyborg swordmaster Nemesis (Doona Bae), a prince-turned-blacksmith Tarak (Staz Nair), and a young rebel fighter Millius (Elsie Duffy).

What they didn’t realize is that the ruthless Admiral Atticus Noble (Ed Skrein), who Kora killed in the first film, has been resurrected and is now set to lead his forces on a siege of their village. So Kora and the warriors quickly begin training the inexperienced farmers in order to mount some kind of defense against Noble’s army. The full final hour of the movie is dedicated to the epic battle as it unfolds in the air and on the ground.

But getting to that final hour is a little rocky. That’s because “Part Two” takes too long to get going. The first hour has its moments and Snyder takes the time to give his characters more to do than just fight. But there’s not enough compelling drama and lengthy exposition is no substitute. I hate to beat a dead horse, but it’s another case where it feels like segments are missing. Again, it’s trimmed down to the bare basics with only a handful of scenes that actually feel as though they’re adding anything of value to the characters or the overall story.

But then the second hour kicks in and Snyder gets down to doing what he does best. The glacial pacing of the first 60 minutes gives way to an action-packed second half that’s full of exciting set pieces and cool combat in spite of its obvious PG-13 edit. Snyder’s creativity really shines as he turns a farmland into war zone and even more so when the fight is taken to Noble’s massive starship hovering in orbit. And the inevitable second round between Kora and Noble is nothing short of jaw-dropping.

“Rebel Moon – Part Two: The Scargiver” directly continues the story of the first film in such a way that it’s hard to see it as its own movie. For many (like me) that’s hardly a dealbreaker. But if you didn’t like “Part One” it’s hard to imagine this one will change your mind. Most of the same limitations remain but to a greater degree. This is especially true with the characters who get the worst end of the PG-13 edit (take Jimmy, a robot knight voiced by the great Anthony Hopkins who is all but forgotten for most of the film). Snyder still nails his strengths. We’ll just have to wait to his director’s cuts to experience his full vision. “Rebel Moon – Part Two: The Scargiver” is now streaming on Netflix.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

There is no shortage of trends within the current movie landscape. In recent years one of the most popular involves the many sequels, reboots, and remakes of 1980s movies. “Top Gun”, “Ghostbusters”, “Beverly Hills Cop”, Bill & Ted”, even “Beetlejuice” are just some of the films that have been given the treatment or are on the way. I can honestly say that out of all of the movies to remake, 1989’s “Road House” wasn’t one of the first to come to mind.

The original “Road House” wasn’t a great movie. It was silly, full of cheesy action, and it latched onto the immense popularity of its star Patrick Swayze. Yet the movie had its charms. It also had the infinitely watchable Sam Elliott. In several ways 2024’s “Road House” is much the same. It’s not a great movie and is hampered by shallow characters, stilted dialogue, and an outrageously bad debut performance that we’ll get into shortly. Yet it admittedly has its moments – maybe enough to make it a pretty good bad movie.

This reimagining from director Doug Liman and co-writers Anthony Bagarozzi and Chuck Mondry sets out to tell a story similar to the ‘89 film but with a “modern twist”. Minus a few surface-level changes, I’m not so sure about the “modern twist” part. In many ways their “Road House” is a pretty by-the-numbers action flick and its adherence to the old formula pretty much strips it of any suspense whatsoever.

On the flip side, “Road House” (smartly) doesn’t take itself too seriously. The movie is peppered with some genuinely funny lines and its efforts at being rowdy can lend to some pretty good laughs (though maybe not always intentionally). As for the fight sequences, they are fittingly brutal. And the larger action set pieces (despite the occasional shaky CGI enhancements) deliver some big jolts.

The movie is also helped by its star, Jake Gyllenhaal. His performance is a weird one in that it takes some time to get a feel for what he’s going for. At first he almost seems disconnected and uninterested. But over time what he’s doing begins to feel more in tune with his character. That isn’t the case for everyone we meet. Again, more on that in a moment.

Gyllenhaal plays Elwood Dalton, a down-on-his-luck former UFC fighter who now dukes it out in rigged underground fights to make ends meet. One evening he’s approached by a woman named Frankie (Jessica Williams) who owns a beachside Road House in the Florida Keys. Lately her establishment has been attracting the wrong clientele – a pack of rowdy bikers who come in every night and trash the place. Desperate for help, she convinces the equally desperate Elwood to take the job as her head bouncer.

Elwood hits it off with several of the locals including a young girl named Hannah (Hannah Lanier) who owns a small bookstore with her father (Kevin Carroll). He also connects with an attractive nurse named Ellie (Daniela Melchior) who becomes his semi-explored love interest. But he also discovers that the island is full of trouble, namely in the form of Ben Brandt (Billy Magnussen), the spoiled and obnoxious son of a local crime boss who’s running his family’s business while his father is in prison.

In a nutshell, the Brandt’s want Frankie’s place for a lucrative land development deal. She doesn’t want to sell. So they send their goons, under the protection of a crooked sheriff (Joaquim de Almeida) to make a mess of things. But they run head-first into Elwood who is no pushover. In fact, we learn he has a particularly violent past that makes him a nightmare for bullies like Brandt.

As you can guess lots of bloody knuckles, busted noses, and broken bones ensue. And the violence only ramps up with the arrival of one ridiculously over-the-top Conor McGregor. He plays a brutish mob enforcer named Knox who’s called in to take care of Elwood once and for all. Admittedly, Knox is meant to be unhinged and sociopathic. But McGregor’s wildly overly exaggerated performance turns the character into a cartoon rather than a menacing threat. He’s laughably bad and a huge distraction whenever he pops up on-screen.

So this new iteration of “Road House” ends up being a hard movie to figure out. For everything it offers that’s entertaining, there are just as many problems that leave you scratching your head. It’s as harmless as it is forgettable which may not be a ringing endorsement. But it’s a fitting description of this kinda fun yet glaringly flawed time-passer. “Road House” is now streaming on Prime Video.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS

Chiwetel Ejiofor impressed with his terrific yet underseen 2019 directorial debut “The Boy Who Harnessed the Wind”. He hits his mark again with his sophomore effort “Rob Peace”, a biographical drama in the same vein of his first film. This time he tells an empathetic and earnest true story of an inner-city kid with big dreams but a hard to shake past. Following in the footsteps of his debut, “Rob Peace” had its premiere at this year’s Sundance Film Festival hoping to earn a sizable distribution.

Ejiofor also wrote the screenplay which is based on the 2014 biography “The Short and Tragic Life of Robert Peace” by Peace’s good friend Jeff Hobbs. While the film at times plays like a conventional biopic, Ejiofor takes it in a number of compelling directions as Rob’s life intersects with issues of race, urban housing, criminal justice, the education system, and more. The story explores the blessings and curses that come with family and community particularly through the Black experience. It results in a film that can be a little uneven but is mostly involving.

Ejiofor makes stops at key points in Rob Peace’s life beginning in 1987. That’s where 7-year-old Rob (played by Jelani Dacres) lives with his supportive and hard-working single mother Jackie (a sublime Mary J. Blige) in East Orange, New Jersey. He looks up to his father, Robert “Skeet” Douglas (played by Ejiofor), an irresponsible man who loves his son and preaches unwavering loyalty to his people and neighborhood. The instillment of that mindset from father to son reverberates through the entire story.

From the earliest scenes we’re shown Rob’s brilliance. He enjoys school and has a special interest in science. But his promising life hits a speed bump after his father is arrested and convicted of a double murder. Skeet is sentenced to life in prison despite vehemently proclaiming his innocence. Jackie doesn’t want the same for her son so she takes on three jobs in order to save money for Rob’s education. She wants him to leave East Orange behind for a better life – the exact opposite of his father’s desire.

From there we jump ahead to 1994 where teenage Rob (now played by Chance K. Smith) is attending St. Benedict’s Prep School in Newark. He excels thanks to the steady encouragement of his teacher, Reverend Edwin Leahy (Michael Kelly). Between schoolwork and taking small jobs to help out his mom, Rob begins studying his father’s case, determined to prove his innocence and get him out of jail.

Most of our time is spent a few years later as Rob (portrayed via newcomer Jay Will’s star-making performance) is accepted into Yale. Things start out great as he earns several opportunities to pursue his passion for science. He makes new friends and catches the eye of girl named Naya (an underused Camila Cabello). But his unhealthy loyalty to his father puts everything he has accomplished in jeopardy. Cracking under the pressure of prison, Skeet pushes Rob to help him raise money for a lawyer. It ultimately sends the young man down a path that could cost him everything.

While there is a degree of predictability to the film and it doesn’t stretch too far beyond the conventional, Ejiofor’s grounded and focused approach to telling Rob Peace’s story keeps it from being overly sentimental despite some big emotional beats. He does throw in unneeded voiceover rather than leaning on his capable cast and some of his dialogue is a bit clunky. Also the final act stretches out beyond what’s necessary.

But those things are overcome by Ejiofor’s commitment to Rob’s story and all of its complexities. He thoughtfully guides us through a life marked by ambitious dreams and inspiring successes. It’s also a life that sees firsthand the different set of rules for someone poor and Black – rules that lead to bad choices with tragic results. It’s all relayed through some incredible performances, most notably Blige’s quiet strength and a magnetic Jay Will. It’s a breakout turn from the young Julliard-trained actor and a big step towards what should be an exciting career.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

Just hearing the name Zack Snyder seems to invoke wildly different impulses and reactions depending on which side of the filmmaker you sit. In one group you have the Snyder loyalists who saturate any and everything he puts out while pushing back on even the slightest criticism of his work. But just as feral and often more belligerent are the anti-Snyder mudslingers who never pass up on a chance to belittle and berate Snyder’s movies and his fans.

That brings us to his latest project, “Rebel Moon – Part One: A Child of Fire”. Mark it down, you can expect fans to love it and defend it till their dying breath. Meanwhile Snyder carpers will be chomping at the bit to tear it down early and often. But how is it really? Once you weed out the voices of the predisposed and get beyond the hyperbole and grandstanding, is “Rebel Moon” any good? It’s actually quite good although you can tell it’s only a slice of a bigger and better whole. The existence of a director’s cut is out there and this current cut all but confirms it.

To Snyder’s credit he gives us a good taste of this new original universe he has created. The world is full of vibrant and diverse locations. There are plenty of interesting people, races, and creatures. And the battle lines are clearly distinguished between an oppressive militaristic regime and the valiant group of rebels who rise up to fight back. But they’ll need a leader who can bring together the fiercest warriors from across the galaxy if they are to have any chance of winning.

That’s hardly what you would call an original story, but Snyder is fine with that. He hasn’t been shy about honoring his inspirations, and he doesn’t attempt to hide his open embrace of numerous classic science-fiction tropes. He has set out to make a dark space fantasy that plays like “Seven Samurai” meets “Star Wars”. It’s not that his story is bold and unique. It’s that it is unfolding with characters he has crafted and within a world he has created.

Still, this cut of “Rebel Moon” is more enticing than fulfilling. I found myself thoroughly riveted while in its world yet it left me needing more of it. For example, the action in this version feels sanitized, with the camera too often turning away to ensure a PG-13 rating (Snyder has said his full cut is wilder and edgier). But more than that, key supporting characters often feel like sketches rather than portraits. Their motivations are vague and their backgrounds (which in this movie play a big part in defining them) are mostly mysteries. More than anywhere else in the film, it’s here that the cuts stand out most.

The cast is made up of an intriguing array of talent led by Sofia Boutella. She plays Kora who lives a quiet life in a small, tight-knit farming village on the mostly peaceful planet of Veidt. Though considered independent, Veidt exists in the shadow of the Motherworld which is ruled by Regent Balisarius (Fra Fee). The Motherworld was once devoted to peace and prosperity. But following the mysterious assassination of its King, Queen and Princess, the then ambitious senator Balisarius rose to power. He created a massive military known as the Imperium and has used it to strengthen his reign and expand his empire.

Kora’s village is visited by an Imperium squad under the command of Admiral Atticus Noble (a fittingly vile Ed Skrein). He’s on a mission to hunt down and destroy pockets of resistance that are believed to be hiding among the outer planets. Noble forces the village into a pact to provide an unreasonable amount of grain for his armies. He gives them ten months to have it ready before showing them the consequences of failing him.

After a group of remaining Imperium soldiers attempt to rape a young local girl, Kora kills them all, revealing a side of herself she has kept hidden from her community. Due to her secret past with the Imperium, Kora knows Noble will retaliate after hearing his soldiers are dead. So she sets off to recruit warriors to help stand against the Imperium. She convinces a fellow villager named Gunnar (Michiel Huisman) who has connections with the resistance to accompany her. They’re helped off the planet by a mercenary and smuggler named Kai (Charlie Hunnam).

From there Snyder whisks us from one visually rich and interesting planet to the next, recruiting a new member to his band at each stop. They include a former Imperium general (Djimon Hounsou), a cyborg swordmaster (Bae Doona), a prince in bondage (Staz Nair), and a fierce freedom fighter (Ray Fisher). Together they make a formidable team despite many of them lacking in individual detail.

As with other Snyder movies, “Rebel Moon” features most of the filmmaker’s visual trademarks. There’s the jaw-dropping CGI, lots of stylish slow-motion, and crisply choreographed action sequences, all of it shot by Snyder himself. And as the story progresses we get several fun nods to past movies, television shows, and genres. As the full title clearly indicates, this is just the first part of Snyder’s opus. But he does bring it to a kinetic climax before setting up his next film due out in April.

Of course before the next film releases we will be getting the extended cut of Part One in early 2024. This begs the question, why release the first film like this? From every indication it was a Netflix decision. It seems Snyder was given the green light to “go nuts” and create whatever he wanted under the agreement that Netflix would release a neutered PG-13 version first. Was it to make a version of the film that was suitable for a broader audience? Was it some bizarre tactic to try and recreate the Snyder Cut zeal? Either way, this cut certainly entertained me. But what it did most was excite me for the potentially better extended cut that’s just around the corner.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

Director Kitty Green’s latest feature “The Royal Hotel” sees two Canadian best friends, Hanna (Julia Garner) and Liv (Jessica Henwick) backpacking across Australia. Their hard-partying adventure has drained them of cash. So to make some quick money the two take jobs bartending at the Royal Hotel, a rough and rowdy pub in a remote mining community deep in the Outback. But the young women come to realize they’re in way over their heads.

With “The Royal Hotel” Green uses the framework of a psychological thriller to shrewdly examine gender dynamics and skewed masculinity. She delivers a slow-burner that possesses a steady sense of discomfort and dread yet that never quite reaches the satisfying crescendo it’s moving toward. Things do intensify in the final few minutes, but it’s abrupt and over before ever having the impact it could have had.

But that’s not to discount what Green has accomplished. From her direction to the script she co-wrote with Oscar Redding, the ability to create and develop the kind of tension she does is no small feat. It begins the moment Hanna and Liv arrive at the off-the-map pub. Everything from the dirty uninviting location to the introductions to the queasy clientele creates a feeling of unease. The film is based on Peter Gleeson’s 2016 documentary “Hotel Coolgardie” and Green does a good job generating the same sense of discomfort and fear.

The bar is owned by Billy (Hugo Weaving) who is about as close as Hanna and Liv get to having some kind of protection. But don’t be fooled, he’s no patron saint. He’s an unreliable boozer who is occasionally kept in check by his wife Carol (Ursula Yovich), the pub’s semi-compassionate cook. And he proves to be of little help from the belligerent drunks whose glaring toxicity and unwanted advances only intensifies with each passing visit.

Again Green does a magnificent job creating an uncomfortable atmosphere but the story has a couple of issues. One centers around Hanna and Liv’s questionable judgement which starts early and doesn’t get much better as the story progresses. Take a moment after their brutal first night of work. Hanna rightly wants to leave and it’s easy to see why. But she’s easily convinced to stay by Liv who is determined to stick it out for a few weeks to earn enough cash to continue their travels. It’s one of many head-scratching choices that comes back to haunt them. Green never excuses the objectification, misogyny, and eventual violence. But making sense of some of their decisions can be challenging.

And then there is the aforementioned ending which wraps up as quickly as it ratchets up. It’s a reasonably fitting finish yet one that lacks the bite it could have had. Still, the movie is anchored by Garner and Henwick who give nuanced performances and bring distinct personalities to their characters. And while it may not conclude on the strongest note, Green creates an environment that gets more physically and psychologically perilous from our protagonists while steadily getting more unnerving for us.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

I’ve always been a fan of Aaron Eckhart, but he’s an actor who rarely gets the kind of roles that does his talent justice. He gets one in the new film “Rumble Through the Dark”, a grimy rural thriller set in the Mississippi Delta that lets the 55-year-old Eckhart show his commitment and range both physically and dramatically. And while he doesn’t disappoint, the movie itself has a tough time matching its rather grand ambition.

From co-directors Graham and Parker Phillips and screenwriter Michael Farris Smith, “Rumble Through the Dark” is based on Smith’s own 2018 novel, “The Fighter”. It follows a broken down and tortured man fighting demons from his past while trying to preserve the few good memories he has left. It’s a sad and often bleak story, but it’s not without hope. The problem is its hope relies on a second-half convenience (or a twist of fate if you want to be nice) that’s pretty tough to swallow.

Eckhart plays Jack Boucher, a former bare-knuckle cage fighter who has fallen on hard times. He’s deep in debt with a dangerous local vice queen named Big Momma Sweet (Marianne Jean-Baptiste). He’s also on the verge of losing his dying foster mother’s old antebellum house to foreclosure. To make matters worse his health is rapidly deteriorating due to years of fighting. His body is battered and bruised. He has been steadily losing his memory. And he has crippling headaches that can only be relieved by popping illegal painkillers.

Jack’s backstory is told through a series of hazy flashbacks meant to give the movie some emotional heft. Through them we learn Jack was abandoned when he was an infant but later adopted by a caring woman who supported and encouraged him. There are some pretty big gaps in their story, mainly from his time as a young teen to the current day. We do see that she is in a nursing home suffering from dementia. And at some point during that time Jack got $30,000 behind with the bank.

Without getting into too many details, Jack is eventually faced with a near impossible predicament. If he doesn’t get some money he will lose everything his beloved foster mother entrusted to him. Oh, and he’ll also lose his life to Big Momma Sweet who has given him an ultimatum. But if he goes back to fighting (the only thing he knows) his beat-up body night not be able to take it.

The premise isn’t especially new, but a fiercely committed Eckhart and the rich Deep South setting make it interesting. Where the movie stumbles is in a side story involving a young woman named Annette (played by Bella Thorne). She’s an exotic dancer for a traveling carnival who unfortunately feels too much like a device. The Phillips brothers try developing her into someone compelling, and of course her path is destined to cross with Jack’s. But when they eventually meet, we’re hit with an impossible-to-buy ‘twist’ completely out of left field.

Though well-intended, the Jack and Annette relationship never feels organic and it can’t generate the emotional impact it needs. It tries to go somewhere unexpected, but it’s so out of the blue and you’re left wondering if that screen time could have been better spent. As it is, “Rumble Through the Dark” is a promising but weighted down thriller that gets by mostly on the shoulders of Eckhart. The material may not do him many favors, but he pours himself into his role which makes the story’s shortcomings a bit easier to maneuver. “Rumble Through the Dark” opens in select theaters November 3rd and On Demand and Digital November 10th.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS