With a straightforward title like “Werewolves” it’s not hard to imagine what kind of movie you’re in for. But to director Steven C. Miller’s credit, “Werewolves” isn’t as single-minded as its title suggests. It’s every bit of a genre mashup, throwing in helpings of horror, science-fiction, black comedy, and over-the-top action. That’s more than enough to grab the attention of genre filmmaking fans like me.

But unfortunately “Werewolves” never quite goes far enough with any of the genres it taps into. The film generates a little tension, but there’s nothing remotely scary about it. It throws out a handful of sci-fi ideas but never sees any of them through. It has a few funny bits, but it never treats its material as silly as it actually is. And despite the occasional gore-splattered moment of violence, the action is waaaay tamer than it could have been. Some of it may be due to budget constraints. But that doesn’t change what feels like a missed opportunity.

Written by Matthew Kennedy, the story is built around a hokey but moderately entertaining premise. The earth is one-year removed from a supermoon that triggered a global calamity. A supermoon isn’t unusual. It’s an annual phenomenon where the moon appears particularly large due to it being in its closest orbit to our planet. But last year’s supermoon was different in that over the course of a single night one billion people violently transformed into werewolves resulting in the death of millions worldwide.

Now with this year’s supermoon on the way, people around the world frantically make preparations for the unknown. Leading the science world’s search for answers is Dr. James Aranda (Lou Diamond Phillips), the CEO of Aranda Corp. His company has invented a substance called Moonscreen (yep, you read that right) which is meant to form a barrier between moonlight and human DNA. If effective, Moonscreen could prevent people from turning into werewolves. But it has to be tested.

Elsewhere an ex-military man named Wesley (an always fun Frank Grillo) is busy wolf-proofing the home of his sister-in-law Lucy (Ilfenesh Hadera) and niece Emma (Kamdynn Gary). He boards windows, places bear traps in the yard, and puts up high fences wrapped in razor wire, all in an effort to fulfill his pledge to protect his late brother’s family. As evening approaches, Lucy and Emma plead with Wesley to stay with them. But he leads the Rapid Response Team for Aranda Corp. and is needed to provide security for the company’s upcoming test.

To no surprise the tests go terribly wrong once the supermoon comes out. Dr. Aranda’s human test subjects turn into werewolves and break from containment, killing everyone in sight. But Wesley manages to escape with Dr. Amy Chen (Katrina Law). Meanwhile back at Lucy’s place, her cartoonishly gung-ho neighbor Cody (James Michael Cummings) succumbs to the supermoon, somehow forms a pact with other werewolves, and sets his sights on Lucy’s home.

Of course the two story angles eventually merge as Wesley and Amy make their way across town while Lucy holds off her rabid furry invaders until they arrive. Miller and Kennedy borrow certain story beats from movies like “The Purge” to add some extra peril. At the same time, goofy one-liners like “It’s go time”, “Bite me”, “Come fetch” add some levity. And watching tough guy Frank Grillo chew the scenery in a story this ridiculous is entertaining in itself.

But “Werewolves” still manages to be a frustrating experience largely because it never pushes any of its crazy ideas far enough. It needs be sillier, scarier, and/or gorier in order to be the kind of movie it seems to want to be. With a little more audacity (and probably a little more money) this could have a been an insanely fun ode to grindhouse cinema. Instead it’s a blend of ideas that never gels into the madcap genre entertainment it clearly wants to be.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS

Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh shine and carry “We Live in Time”, a romantic drama built upon and sustained by the sparkling chemistry of its two leads. The film is directed by John Crowley and is more in sync with his terrific “Brooklyn” (2015) than his lesser “The Goldfinch” (2019). Despite being low on theatrics, it’s still a little soapy around the edges. Yet Crowley and screenwriter Nick Payne succeed in telling a modern love story with an earnest classical tenor.

“We Live in Time” is very much an actor’s movie, and no matter where the story goes, it’s Garfield and Pugh who keep its gears turning. There’s nothing here we haven’t seen before and it’s a testament to their acting savvy that we care for their characters as much as we do. It’s fair to say that without them “We Live in Time” could easily fall apart and be tossed in a pile with so many other movies of its kind.

Crowley begins his film by telling us exactly where it’s going. We’re introduced to Almut (Pugh) and Tobias (Garfield), a young couple who we see fall in love, have a child, and receive tragic news, all in the first few minutes. The bad news is that Almut has stage 3 ovarian cancer. From there the movie bounces back-and-forth between different points in their relationship, often with no discernible rhythm. It’s a choice that feels unnecessary, but at the same time helps divert our attention away from the conventional aspects of the story.

We do learn quite a bit about the two characters. Almut is an accomplished chef and restaurant owner. Tobias is an IT technician for Weetabix (a British breakfast cereal – I had to look it up). Both have their own strengths, quirks, and insecurities. But they share a connection that’s evident from the first moment they meet. And that happens after Tobias wanders into the street and is struck by Almut’s car. After he heals up, Tobias visits Almut’s restaurant. They begin dating and after a short time-hop they move in together.

Further down their timeline we see the couple deciding to have a child, struggling to get pregnant, and finally giving birth to their darling daughter Ella. And even further down we watch Almut and Tobias forced to make some painful decisions following her cancer diagnosis. As the movie oscillates between the different stages of their relationship, Pugh and Garfield navigate the small intimacies and seismic shifts with an artful precision.

Crowley’s choice to reveal his hand early is a bold one, but it does shortchange some of the drama. And when you peel back the nonlinear devices you find the makings of a pretty standard tearjerker. Yet the movie works because Crowley knows what he has in Garfield and Pugh. And Payne’s script provides plenty of serious-minded and grounded material for the actors to work with.

Reactions to “We Live in Time” are sure to vary. Some may have a hard time getting past its obvious conventions. Others may dismiss it for its delicacy and unwillingness to run its audience through the emotional wringer. But it doesn’t take much effort to look beyond those complaints to see an empathetic and authentic drama that explores life, death, and the intrinsic value of human connection. “We Live in Time” is in theaters now.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

Anna Kendrick makes her directorial debut and stars in “Woman of the Hour”, a well-made thriller based on the real-life crimes of sex offender and serial killer Rodney Alcala. Dubbed the Dating Game Killer, Alcala has been directly linked to eight murders. But it’s believed that his true number of victims may be as high as 130. He was arrested in July 1979 and sentenced to death. In 2021, Alcala died of natural causes at the age of 77 while still in prison.

Kendrick’s film examines Alcala’s killing spree through several different perspectives. She chronicles different murders, making stops in 1971 New York City, 1977 Wyoming, and for the majority of the film 1978 Los Angeles. That’s where we meet Sheryl Bradshaw (played by Kendrick), a struggling actress who is about to give up on her big Hollywood dreams. Out of options, Sheryl’s agent casts her to appear on The Dating Game in hopes of getting her some much needed exposure.

For those who don’t know, The Dating Game was a corny but popular game show where a young woman sitting behind a partition would ask silly questions to three bachelors sitting on the other side. After three rounds she would choose one bachelor as the winner. The show would then send the couple on an all-expense paid date.

On September 13, 1978 Cheryl Bradshaw made her appearance on The Dating Game. And among her three bachelors was none other than Rodney Alcala. By that time he had already raped and murdered several of his victims and been convicted of sexual assault. But somehow the show’s producers had missed his criminal record. It’s chilling footage to watch especially considering that Alcala not only appeared on the show but won the competition.

Kendrick and screenwriter Ian McDonald recreate that surreal broadcast, pulling from several first-hand testimonies while adding some fictional twists of their own. Most of their additions work to build the film’s statement on societal misogyny – a message which quickly and at times clumsily becomes obvious. But Kendrick maintains a steady sense of unease, having already established Alcala as a vicious killer leading up to their fateful encounter.

Alcala is played by Daniel Zovatto who conceals a killer’s brute evil underneath a psychopathic charm. Alcala’s methods were well thought out and he often preyed on innocence and vulnerability. We watch him lure in his victims by posing as a professional fashion photographer. Alcala then convinces them to let him shoot them for his portfolio. Once alone, he would rape and murder them.

The film gives Zovatto plenty of space to mine Alcala’s menace, but it’s Kendrick’s own performance as Sheryl (note the slight name change) that offers the most clarity. It’s seen most in one brilliantly directed and acted encounter she and Zovatto share in a restaurant. It’s intense and terrifying and it shrewdly relays the themes Kendrick is most interested in.

“Woman of the Hour” shines a spotlight on Anna Kendrick who delivers not only another well-calibrated performance but an assured directorial debut. She shows a firm control of her subject matter, capturing a harrowing sense of danger while steering clear of sensationalism or exploitation. Though a little too on-the-nose at times, her commentary on the everyday dangers of being a woman in a predatory society adds a compelling layer. Her two aims don’t always gel, but they highlight Kendrick’s ambition and willingness to take chances.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

Written and directed by F. Javier Gutierrez, “The Wait” (also known by its Spanish title (“La espera”) is a transfixing fusion of folk horror and Greek tragedy. It’s laced with elements from classic Westerns and dark fantasy. At times it resembles an absorbing morality tale and at other times a gritty revenge thriller. What’s impressive is how seamlessly its pieces fit together. And all because of Gutierrez’s meticulous craftsmanship and laser focus.

Set in 1970, the story follows a family man named Eladio (Victor Clavijo) who moves his wife Marcia (Ruth Diaz) and 10-year-old son Floren (Moisés Ruiz) to the parched Andalusian countryside after taking a job tending a hunting estate owned by the wealthy and powerful Don Francisco (Pedro Casablanc). Three years pass and Eladio begins preparing Floren to take on more responsibilities around the place. But things aren’t as agreeable with the disillusioned Marcia who misses her life in the city.

One day Eladio is approached by a local named Don Carlos (Manuel Morőn) who organizes area hunts for his wealthy clientele. Don Carlos is in a pickle. He has overbooked an upcoming hunt and wants Eladio to add three additional hunting stands to the property, raising the total to thirteen. But that would go against Don Francisco’s strict orders. So Eladio turns down a generous bribe and sticks to his principles. But Don Carlos secretly pays Marcia a visit and tells her of his offer. She immediately begins pressuring her husband, even calling him a coward for not taking the money.

Against his better judgment, Eladio gives in to Marcia and accepts Don Carlos’ offer. From the very moment he does we know he’s going to regret it. Almost immediately a sense of dread creeps in, and after a tragic chain of events, Eladio loses the two things he holds dearest – his wife and son. It leaves him all alone on the property, overcome with sorrow, haunted by visions, and tormented by guilt.

Gutierrez pushes Eladio to the brink of madness and the stoic Clavijo captures his descent with startling clarity. His searing performance conveys volumes, mostly through expression and physicality rather than dialogue. The pride and confidence that once filled his eyes is replaced by a cold emptiness. Grief fuels his anguish, but it’s a fit of drunken rage and its ensuing violence that sends him careening over a psychological edge.

The movie’s wicked second half takes a near primal turn as Gutierrez leans heavily on his film’s folk horror element. It ventures into the macabre and surrealistic to the point that we often question what’s on screen. Are the things we see real or are they grim manifestations from a troubled mind? Thankfully Gutierrez never allows Eladio to fully lose his grasp of reality. He’s kept grounded by clues that point to a mystery he’s determined to solve. It’s a mystery that drives the movie to its allegorically rich and painfully potent ending.

“The Wait” is a movie that truly earns its title. It’s a slow-burn in the best of ways, patiently plowing its themes and examining its main character’s psyche. The rugged rural landscapes form a fittingly harsh backdrop while intense close-ups makes even the everyday minutia a means to immerse us in this unforgiving world. It all works together in harmony to make this dark and twisted genre-bender worth every second of our investment. “The Wait” is out now on VOD.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

The 2017 coming-of-age family film “Wonder” was a surprise hit both with critics and at the box office. It was based on a 2012 children’s novel of the same name by R. J. Palacio which spawned several other books including a 2019 graphic novel titled “White Bird: A Wonder Story”. Now it too has received the big screen treatment in a tender yet powerful new film directed by Marc Forster (“Monster’s Ball”, “Finding Neverland”, “A Man Called Otto”).

“White Bird” serves as a spin-off sequel that follows the character Julian Albans (Bryce Gheisar), the repentant bully from “Wonder”. The story (adapted by screenwriter Mark Bomback) sees 15-year-old Julian attending a new private school, Yates Academy following the events of the previous film. In an effort to fit in, he has adopted a passive approach, “Don’t be mean, don’t be nice. Be normal.”

One day after school Julian arrives home to find his grandmother, Sara (Helen Mirren) visiting from Paris. She’s a renowned artist who is in town to be featured in a local museum’s retrospective highlighting her work. With Julian’s parents out for the evening, Sara sits down with her grandson to catch up. As she listens to him talk about his passivity, Sara is reminded of her own childhood which she has long chosen not to talk about. She makes the decision to tell Julian about her past in hopes of steering him away from a potentially regretful path.

From there we are taken to a flashback which makes up the majority of the movie. It’s where we’re introduced to a young Sara, earnestly and sensitively played by Ariella Glaser. It’s August, 1942 and Sara seems to have a wonderful life. Her father (Ishai Golan) is a surgeon and her mother (Olivia Ross) is a mathematics professor. They’re a loving and close-knit Jewish family living in a cozy French village.

The starry-eyed Sara sees the world through a comfortable and naive lens. Her days are mostly spent indulging her love for clothes, drawing, and hanging out with her equally oblivious friends. She stays out of anything that man invade her comfort zone including turning a blind eye to a bullied classmate with polio named Julien (Orlando Schwerdt). In reality, Sara and her family live under the shadow of Nazi occupation. The Germans had already marched into Paris, but their presence in the villages has been minimal.

But that changes seemingly overnight. Her mother is promptly fired from the university and local stores begin denying service to Jews. But reality truly sets in when Sara’s school day is interrupted by Nazi soldiers sent to roundup Jewish students. After a harrowing escape attempt goes terribly wrong, Sara finds help from the most unexpected source.

Julien discovers Sara hiding and sneaks her out of town to his family’s farmhouse. His parents, Vivienne (Gillian Anderson) and Jean Paul (Jo Stone-Fewings) hide her in their barn, out of sight of their nosey Nazi sympathizing neighbors. As days turn to weeks and weeks turn to months, Sara and Julien grow closer. Their budding relationship helps form the heart of the movie. But the threat of being discovered is always looming, adding a steady tension that is palpable yet never overplayed.

Throughout the film’s swift two hours, Forster maintains a good grip on his premise and subject matter. It’s a tricky task, but he finds the right balance between a poignant coming-of-age story and a serious-minded Holocaust drama. Much of his world is shown through the eyes of children yet he never trivializes or downplays the gravity of what’s happening. Nor does he use the heaviness of history to manipulate his audience. Instead, the emotions he brings out are authentic and earned.

“White Bird” navigates its solemn subjects with an open-hearted optimism, incisively exploring its themes of kindness, cruelty, forgiveness, and sacrifice. The film doesn’t say anything especially new, but it head-on confronts the cycles of hatred that have long plagued humanity. It leads to a powerful and forever relevant message that is enriched by top-to-bottom terrific performances and a director who never takes his finger off the human pulse. “White Bird” opens in theaters on October 4th.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

If you ever needed evidence that the movie industry has changed, look no further than “Wolfs”. This new action comedy comes with a $200 million budget and is illuminated by the sheer star wattage of its two A-list leads, George Clooney and Brad Pitt. Those used to be the ideal ingredients for a robust big screen release. But not so with “Wolfs”. Instead (minus a very brief and limited theatrical run), “Wolfs” is releasing on AppleTV+. As I said, the industry has changed.

Much of the early conversations surrounding “Wolfs” have centered on its hefty budget, namely the salaries paid to the two stars (several outlets have reported $35 million each while Clooney has denied the figures). Either way, the movie will need to earn its money back without the aid of a theater release. It’s certainly possible, although for people like me, figuring up revenue generated on streaming services is akin to advanced calculus.

“Wolfs” is directed by Jon Watts whose most notable big screen credits are his three Spider-Man movies for Marvel Studios. Here he crafts a story that sees Clooney and Pitt playing two competing New York City fixers who are forced to work together over the course of one long winter night. There’s not much in terms of inspiration and the movie has its fair share of lulls. But the two stars pack enough individual charisma and comic chemistry to keep the movie afloat.

The movie opens in a $10,000 a night luxury penthouse where a prominent district attorney (Amy Ryan) finds herself in a pickle. In the middle of a rowdy fling, her much younger lover (Austin Abrams) winds up dead. Desperate to have her mess “cleaned” in order to avoid a reputation-killing scandal, the DA calls a number she was given in case she ever found herself in need. On the other end is a fixer played by Clooney (we never get his name) who specializes in handling such things. He immediately heads to the hotel.

Once he arrives he goes straight to work but is interrupted by another fixer played by Pitt (we never get his name either) who has been called to “clean up” the same mess. Against their wishes, the two are forced to work together. But what should be a simple job turns into a nightmare after they discover a backpack hidden behind a dresser containing $250,000 worth of heroin. Even worse, the dead body they’re supposed to dispose isn’t dead at all.

The majority of the movie follows our two fixers as they sort out who the drugs belong to and how they need to handle their college-aged tag-along. As they do, Watts offers up plenty of banter, much of which revolves around their mutual distrust and lone-wolf mentalities. Clooney and Pitt spit out several decent zingers but spend a lot of time lazily cursing on cue. Yet they remain effortlessly compatible on screen – a muscle they have previously flexed in their three Ocean’s films and other collaborations.

Still, great hair and million-dollar smiles from two former Sexiest Man Alive honorees can only carry a movie so far. A cluttered story, a few dull patches, and some comic misfires keep “Wolfs” from being the satisfying crowd-pleaser it could’ve been. But it’s still George Clooney and Brad Pitt – two actors who emanate charm and charisma. And when you put them on screen together, you have the kind of chemistry that makes overlooking shortcomings a little bit easier. “Wolfs” premieres today on AppleTV+.

VERDICT – 3 STARS