Tag: Tribeca Film Festival

Review: ‘In the Summers,’ starring René Pérez Joglar, Sasha Calle, Lío Mehiel, Allison Salinas, Kimaya Thais Limòn, Luciana Quiñonez and Dreya Renae Castillo

August 2, 2024

by Carla Hay

Dreya Renae Castillo, Luciana Quiñonez and René Pérez Joglar in “In the Summers” (Photo courtesy of Music Box Films)

“In the Summers”

Directed by Alessandra Lacorazza Samudio

Culture Representation: Taking place over an approximately 15-year period in Las Cruces, New Mexico, the dramatic film “In the Summers” features a predominantly Latin cast of characters (with a few African Americans and white people) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: Two daughters have a volatile relationship with their father, who has a bad temper and who spent time in prison. 

Culture Audience: “In the Summers” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in watching well-acted dramas about emotionally difficult family relationships.

Lío Mehiel, Sasha Calle and René Pérez Joglar in “In the Summers” (Photo courtesy of Music Box Films)

“In the Summers” is a well-acted portrait of two daughters and their troubled father, in a story that spans several years. More character development was needed for the daughters’ adult years, but the movie has impactful authenticity. Do not expect “In the Summers” to answer all of the questions that viewers might have about these characters. The narrative for the movie is a journey where certain time-period gaps in the characters’ lives are not shown or explained.

Written and directed by Alessandra Lacorazza Samudio, “In the Summers” is Samudio’s first feature film. “In the Summers” had its world premiere at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival, where it won two awards: Grand Jury Prize: U.S. Dramatic (the festival’s highest accolade) and Grand Jury Prize: U.S. Dramatic and Directing Award: U.S. Dramatic. “In the Summers” had its New York premiere at the 2024 Tribeca Festival.

The two daughters in the movie are named Violeta and Eva. Their ages are only about 12 to 18 months apart from each other. Violeta is the introverted and moody older daughter, while Eva is the extroverted and fun-loving younger daughter. “In the Summers,” which takes place over a span of about 15 years, is told in chronological order in three chapter-like sections, with each section focusing on Violeta and Eva at certain points in their lives.

When Violeta and Eva are underage, they visit their father Vicente (played by René Pérez Joglar, also known as rapper Residente) during the summer seasons at his home in Las Cruces, New Mexico, as part of a custody arrangement that he has with the mother of Violeta and Eva, who live with their mother in California. This mother (who is unnamed in the movie) and Vicente were never married. She is also not seen in the movie, but she is mentioned multiple times in ways that make it obvious that she and Vicente had a bitter breakup. Her absence from the movie indicates that the mother of Violeta and Eva wants as little to do with Vicente as possible.

The first third of “In the Summers” shows Violeta (played by Dreya Renae Castillo) at about 9 or 10 years old and Eva (played by Luciana Quiñonez) at about 7 or 8 years old. The middle of the movie shows Violeta (played by Kimaya Thais Limòn) at about 13 years old and Eva (played by Allison Salinas) at about 12 years old. The last third of the movie shows Violeta (played by Lío Mehiel) at about 25 or 24 years old and Eva (played by Sasha Calle) at about 24 or 23 years old.

“In the Summers” begins by showing Vicente picking up tween Violeta and Eva to take them to his house, where the two girls hang out by the swimming pool. Vicente mentions that even though he was born in Puerto Rico, all of his friends are in the United States. “This is my home now,” he says of his place in New Mexico.

Vicente takes Violeta and Eva to a bar where he frequently hangs out and introduces them to bartender Carmen (played by Emma Ramos), whom Vicente has known since childhood. Vicente teaches Violeta and Eva how to play pool at this bar. Carmen treats Violeta and Eva with kindness and respect.

It all seems like enjoyable family time, but Vicente’s flaws start to show when he takes Violeta and Eva to an amusement park, where he and the girls go on a Tilt-A-Whirl ride. After the ride is over, Eva get sick and vomits in a garbage can. A concerned passerby woman (played by Erin Wendorf) asks if they need any help. Vicente gets very angry at the woman, curses at her, and tells her to mind her own business. It won’t be the last time that Vicente loses his temper in a very hostile way.

Through conversations, it’s revealed that Vicente spent time in prison and has a hard time finding or keeping a job. He also appears to have alcoholism—or, at the very least, he gets drunk in ways that are excessive, embarrassing, and potentially dangerous to himself and people around him. Vicente is also fond of smoking marijuana. It’s unclear where Vicente is getting money to pay his bills and party habits when he’s unemployed.

“In the Summers” is told from the perspectives of Violeta and Eva, who aren’t old enough at this point in their lives to get professional help for Vicente. And if even if they were old enough, it wouldn’t matter because insecure and arrogant Vicente gives the impression that he wouldn’t want the help. He has a macho personality that is quick to deny that he has any weaknesses or vulnerabilities.

The sisters are tight-knit and rely on each other for emotional support. As an example of their different personalities, there’s a scene where Vicente is driving Violeta and Eva at a high speed in his car on a street, just because he feels like being a daredevil. Violeta is fearful during this reckless driving, while Eva loves it.

Near the end of the movie’s segment that shows tween Violeta and Eva, there’s a scene where Violeta asks Eva to cut her hair short. Violeta will keep her hair short for the remainder of the years shown in the movie. She also stops wearing traditionally “feminine” clothes and wears outfits that are more unisex or “masculine.”

During the period of time depicting the adolescence of Violeta and Eva, it becomes much clearer to Violeta that she is a lesbian or queer. She becomes romantically attracted to a girl who’s about the same age named Camila (played by Gabriella Surodjawan), who shows up at one of the many house parties that Vicente likes to host. Vicente is very homophobic, so Violeta is afraid to tell him about her true sexuality.

Violeta becomes increasingly alienated from Vicente, who senses that Violeta is not heterosexual, but he doesn’t want to talk about it with her. Because he is such an irresponsible parent, Vicente thinks that one way he can bond with teenage Violeta is to teach her how to smoke marijuana. But he still has a raging temper that comes out in very ugly and harmful ways. Later, Carmen (who is an out lesbian) becomes an important role model and confidante to Violeta.

“In the Summers” has a somewhat awkward and abrupt transition to the last third of the movie that shows Violeta and Eva in their early-to-mid-20s. By this time, they no longer have to visit Vicente or spend any time living with him. Vicente has a much-younger live-in girlfriend named Yenny (played by Leslie Grace), and they have an infant daughter named Natalia (played by Indigo Montez), who are accepted by Violeta and Eva.

By the time the movie shows Violeta and Eva in their early-to-mid-20s, there are many unexplained and unspoken things that happened in between their early teens and their early-to-mid-20s. “In the Summers” doesn’t adequately show or tell what Violeta’s and Eva’s interests or hobbies are, as indications of their hopes and dreams. Instead, “In the Summers” defines Violeta and Eva in terms of how they cope with their father’s messy parenting.

Viewers learn that by the time adult Violeta and adult Eva see Vicente again after a period of estrangement, Violeta is in grad school. What type graduate program? The movie never says. However, it’s easy to predict what will happen when adult Violeta and single mother Camila (played by Sharlene Cruz) encounter each other after not seeing each other since they were in high school. As for adult Eva, at this point in her life, she’s unattached and having meaningless flings with men.

Mehiel and Calle give perfectly fine performances as adult Violeta and adult Eva, but there are too many unanswered questions about Violeta and Eva as adults. How did their upbringing affect their relationships with other people? What type of relationships do they have with their mother? What are the most important things in life to Violeta and Eva? The movie’s story really didn’t need the parts where Violeta and Eva are under the age of 10 and should have spent more time developing the characters of Violeta and Eva as adults because those questions are never answered in the movie.

The meaningful and best-acted part of “In the Summers” is in the middle section, when the tensions between teenage Violeta and Vicente flare up and boil over into angry conflicts. As an underage teen, Violeta is too young to be able to get out of this custody visitation with her father, but she’s too old to no longer be fully controlled by Vicente, in terms of what she does in her free time and what types of clothes she wants to wear. Violeta wants to assert her independence, but as an underage teen, she still has be somewhat under the control of a parent (Vicente) whose life is very much out of control.

Joglar gives a naturalistic performance as Vicente, who has a lot of flaws, but there are many people in real life who are like Vicente or who have parent similar to Vicente. The movie doesn’t sugarcoat or make excuses for Vicente’s bad decisions and awful temper, but instead presents these characteristics as harsh realities. “In the Summers” is more of a “slice of life” film than a fully complete story about this dysfunctional family that’s trying to heal from emotional wounds. The movie isn’t groundbreaking, but it offers several poignant moments that are credibly acted.

Music Box Films will release “In the Summers” in select U.S. cinemas on September 20, 2024. The movie will be released on digital and VOD on November 5, 2024.

Review: ‘I’m Your Venus,’ starring John Pellagatti, Joe Pellagatti, Louie Pellagatti and Gisele Xtravaganza

July 28, 2024

by Carla Hay

An archival photo of Venus Xtravaganza in “I’m Your Venus” (Photo courtesy of Stick Figure Productions)

“I’m Your Venus”

Directed by Kimberly Reed

Culture Representation: Taking place in New York and New Jersey, the documentary film “I’m Your Venus” features a white and Latin group of people (with some black people) who are involved with trying to get answers and justice for the unsolved murder of “Paris Is Burning” co-star Venus Xtravaganza, 23, who was strangled to death in New York City, in 1988.

Culture Clash: Some of Venus Xtravaganza’s family members have to come to terms with their past transphobia and the transphobia that causes hate crimes and a more complicated and difficult legal process for transgender victims.

Culture Audience: “I’m Your Venus” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in documentaries about transgender people, true crime and New York City trans/LGBTQ ballroom culture.

“I’m Your Venus” is a poignant and commendable documentary about how the loved ones of “Paris Is Burning” breakout star Venus Xtravanganza are trying to get justice for her unsolved murder. The movie is also a call to action for transgender rights. “I’m Your Venus” shows in unflinching ways how the family members of deceased transgender people have an extra set of challenges, including dealing with transphobia and the legal procudures to posthumously change the gender and name of a transgender person.

Directed by Kimberly Reed, “I’m Your Venus” (which had its world premiere at the 2024 Tribeca Festival) is the story of two families: Venus Xtravaganza’ biological family (mostly her three brothers) and her LGBTQ family (including House of Xtravanganza mother Gisele Xtravaganza) in New York City’s LGBTQ ballroom scene. Her biological family members get most of the screen time in showing their quest for justice because, legally, they are the ones who can get access to law enforcement’s documents on the case.

The 1990 documentary “Paris Is Burning” (directed by Jennie Livingston) is considered a breakthrough LGBTQ documentary because it was the first mainstream documentary feature to chronicle the New York City ballroom culture of drag queens and transgender people. Most of the participants in the documentary were African American and Latin. And in a movie fllled with larger-than-life personalities, Venus Xtravanganza (a petite and sassy blonde) was one of the standouts in “Paris Is Burning.” Venus was featured on an alternative version of the movie’s official poster that showed her strutting in a ball gown during a ballroom competition.

Tragically, Venus never got to see “Paris Is Burning” because she was strangled to death at the now-defunct Fulton Hotel in New York City in December 1988. She was 23. An autopsy report revealed that Venus had been found a few days after her death. No suspects have been named, but the New York Police Department has the killer’s DNA, which does not match anyone in the DNA databases used by law enforcement. A person of interest confessed to her murder in 1990, but then he committed suicide. “I’m Your Venus” shows what was done by the family members and law enforcement to follow up on this information.

Venus was born in Jersey City, New Jersey on May 22, 1965, and was given the name Thomas Pellagatti. Her father was Italian American and her mother was Puerto Rican. Both of her parents are now deceased. Her three surviving siblings are oldest brother John Pellagatti, middle bother Joe Pellagatti and youngest brother Louie Pellagatti. Venus was younger than John and Joe and was older than Louie.

John is the bossiest and most outspoken of the three bothers and considers himself to be the leader of the siblings. Joe is sensitive and thoughtful and more likely to express his vulnerability. Louie is the least talkative brother and is the one who (by all accounts) was the brother was the most accepting of Venus’ gender identity when she was alive.

Venus is buried at Holy Cross Cemetery and Mausoleum in North Arlington, New Jersey. Part of “I’m You Venus” is about showing her three brothers’ process of legally getting her name changed to Venus Xtravaganza in her death records and on her gravestone. These are among the most emotional scenes in the documentary because it was the first time that New Jersey had allowed this name change for a transgender person. The documentary calls attention to the fact that several states in the U.S. still do not have laws allowing these types of changes for deceased transgender people.

Venus grew up during a time when there wasn’t a word to describe transgender people who didn’t have gender affirmation surgery. Transgender people are often misidentified as cisgender people. She began calling herself Venus in her teens. By 1983, when she was about 18 years old, she joined House of Xtravaganza. In the LGBTQ ballroom scene, a house is a group of ballroom competitors.

In “I’m Your Venus,” her brothers describe having a broken family after their parents got divorced. The siblings had an abusive stepfather named Hoppy. Their mother left to move to California in the early 1980s when John and Joe were young adults. With no mother figure in her life, Venus became closer to her paternal grandmother. Venus was often a babysitter for younger brother Louie, who remembers how Venus was protective of him when their parents argued. Louie also says he knew from an early age that Venus was female and wanted to live that way.

By contrast, her older brothers John and Joe admit they had a hard time understanding why Venus was the way she was. John says he used to bully Venus for being a “sissy.” John describes an incident when he got so angry at Venus for not acting like a boy, he picked her up, turned her upside down, and began shaking her.

Things did not change for the better with her family when Venus became a young adult and lived as a woman. John says in the documentary: “I did a lot of shit that fucked her up.” One of the hurtful things that John confesses to doing to Venus was ordering her not to dress like a woman if Venus was out in public with John’s son Mike, who is now an adult and is shown in the documentary. In the documentary, John expresses regret over this harmful bigotry.

John was the brother who had to identify Venus’ decomposed body. He also expresses remorse that during a long period of time leading up and after to Venus’ death, he was ashamed and confused over having a transgender sibling. “Losing my sister weakened me,” John says. “I was more worried about my image than hers.” John has harsh words for the 2013 off-Broadway play “The Murder of Venus Xtravaganza,” which he says was created by an “asshole” who did not have the permission of Venus’ family to do the play.

In “I’m Your Venus,” a woman only identified as Helen, who describes herself as a friend of Venus, says she gave Venus to stay when Venus became homeless. “Venus loved her brothers and loved her family,” Helen says. According to Helen, Venus did not want to ask her Pellagatti family for help because she felt they would shame her and blame her transgender identity for why she was having problems.

Gia Love, a transgender activist who knew Venus, describes Venus as a “beautiful free spirit, comfortable with who she was.” However, Love says that most people join ballroom houses to get a new family because their biological relatives have rejected them or emotionally damaged them. At the time Venus died, she had been estranged from her family.

“I’m Your Venus” includes some previously unreleased and re-edited “Paris Is Burning” outtakes. In “Paris Is Burning,” Venus talked about her dreams of getting married someday and said in an much-quoted line that she wanted to have a life where she was “a spoiled, rich, white girl living in the suburbs.” At the time she filmed “Paris Is Burning,” Venus had been saving her money to able to afford gender affirmation surgery. Sadly, those dreams never came true for Venus.

Like many transgender women forced to live outside the margins of society because of being discriminated against to find employment, Venus turned to sex work to make money. She was open about it in “Paris Is Burning” and talked about how she knew the risks of sex work, including the possibility of being murdered by a customer who had a problem with her being transgender. It’s mentioned in the documentary that Venus, who also struggled with a crack cocaine problem, was most likely killed directly or indirectly because her sex work because she was found murdered in a hotel room.

One of the more inspirational aspects of “I’m Your Venus” is how it shows Venus’ two families meeting each other and getting to know each other for the first time. Gisele Xtravaganza—a stunning and statuesque woman who looks like a model and also uses the name Gisele Alicea—shares stories with Venus’ brothers about the Venus she knew. Not everything that Gisele tells the brothers is heartwarming. Gisele is candid about how much Venus felt alienated by her family because of all the rejection she got from certain family members because of her transgender identity.

House of Xtravaganza members who are also featured in the documentary are Jose Disla Xtravaganza, Gabriel Xtravaganza and Amara Xtravaganza. Also in the documentary are attorneys John Walden and Deanna Paul of the New York City-based law firm Walden Macht & Haran. Celeste Fiore, founder of the Gender Affirming Alliance, has educational meetings with Venus’ brothers.

Aside from the legal procedures for the murder case and for Venus’ transgender identity corrections, “I’m Your Venus” shows an impactful journey of what people from different gender identity communities can learn from each other. “I’m Your Venus” is a powerful testament to how these two families share the common pain of Venus’ death but are also sharing in a positive healing process. If Venus were alive, she would be very proud to see what her loved ones and other people have done to celebrate her life and the lives of other transgender people.

Review: ‘Made in England: The Films of Powell and Pressburger,’ narrated by Martin Scorsese

July 13, 2024

by Carla Hay

A photo of Emeric Pressburger and Michael Powell on the set of the 1948 film “The Red Shoes” in “Made in England: The Films of Powell & Pressburger” (Photo courtesy of Cohen Media Group)

“Made in England: The Films of Powell & Pressburger”

Culture Representation: The documentary film “Made in England: The Films of Powell & Pressburger” features Oscar-winning director Martin Scorsese narrating a retrospective of movies made by filmmakers Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, who were nicknamed The Archers and who made movies together from 1939 to 1972.

Culture Clash: Powell and Pressburger received both praise and criticism for making movies during World War II that were considered propaganda for Allied Forces.  

Culture Audience: “Made in England: The Films of Powell & Pressburger” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of Powell and Pressburger; narrator Martin Scorsese; and British films from the 1940s and 1950s.

A photo from the film set of the 1947 movie “Black Narcissus” in “Made in England: The Films of Powell & Pressburger” (Photo courtesy of Cohen Media Group)

“Made in England: The Films of Powell & Pressburger” is essential viewing for cinephiles. This informative documentary is not only a richly rewarding journey exploring the movies of Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, it’s also a tribute to cinema history. Martin Scorsese’s narration makes this retrospective film feel academic yet personal. It has the tone of someone who is teaching a class on Powell and Pressburger, but with the perspective of someone who is an Oscar-winning admirer who turns the lessons in the class into an absorbing cinematic experience.

Directed by David Hinton, “Made in England: The Films of Powell & Pressburger” features Scorsese narrating the film on camera and in voiceover. There are no “talking head” interviews, which would actually be unnecessary and counterproductive to the intimate style of Scorsese’s narration. The documentary consists primarily of footage that is edited together to demonstrate what Scorsese is saying. “Made in England: The Films of Powell & Pressburger” had its world premiere at the 2024 Berlin International Film Festival and its New York premiere at the 2024 Tribeca Festival.

Scorsese (who was born in New York City in 1942) begins the documentary by telling a personal story of how Powell and Pressburger influential to him in his childhood. Scorsese’s childhood asthma prevented him from playing outside a lot or engaging in sports like many of his peers. Instead, when he was at home, he often stayed inside and watched a lot of TV. It was through television that Scorsese says he discovered the films of Powell and Pressburger.

“Some of the very first moving images I remember seeing are from ‘The Thief of Baghdad.’ I didn’t know it then, but Michael Powell was one of the directors on that film,” Scorsese says near the beginning of the documentary. “And, for a kid, there can be no better initiation into the Michael Powell mysteries. This was a picture made by a great showman. And every image filled me with great wonder. The power a movie can hold—it absolutely enthralled me.”

Scorsese says that he experienced these movies for the first time on a black-and-white TV screen instead in Technicolor in cinemas. “And yet, it still had the power to grip me and stay with me forever in my mind.” Scorsese then explains that British films had a major impact on him because at the time, British film distributors would license their films to American television, but American distributors typically would not.

Powell (who was born in 1905 and died in 1990) and Pressburger (who was born in 1902 and died in 1988) were nicknamed The Archers, which was also the name of their production company. Powell was born in England, while Pressburger was a Hungarian native who immigrated to England in 1935, to escape from Nazi invasions. They collaborated on 24 films between 1939 and 1972—mostly lushly filmed dramas, whimsical comedies or intense action-adventures, sometimes with hints of scandals or controversies, and many that were anti-Nazi World War II films.

Their first movie together was 1939’s “The Spy in Black.” Some of the duo’s most notable films include 1941’s Oscar-winning “49th Parallel”; 1943’s “The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp,” which Scorsese says is the first masterpiece” from Powell and Pressburger; 1944’s “A Canterbury Tale”; 1946’s “A Matter of Life and Death”; 1947’s “Black Narcissus”; 1948’s “The Red Shoes”; 1957’s “The Tales of Hoffmann.” All of these movies are featured in this documentary.

As for how they worked together, they would co-write their screenplays. Pressburger (the more introverted partner) would usually outline the movie’s scenes, while they both worked on the dialogue together. Powell (the more extroverted partner) usually directed the movies they did together, although they shared director credits for almost all of their movies. Powell and Pressburger also shared producer credits for their movies. Pressburger was more involved in their movies’ film editing than Powell was.

In the 1970s, after Scorsese became a successful filmmaker, he got to know Powell even more, especially after Powell relocated to the United States and was hired out of semi-retirement to work as a creative director for Francis Ford Coppola’s Zoetrope production company. Scorsese also talks about another personal connection to Powell: His longtime film editor Thelma Schoonmaker (another Oscar winner) was married to Powell from 1984 until his death in 1990.

Because of Scorsese’s more personal connection to Powell, this documentary tends to focus more on Powell than on Pressburger, in terms of what happened to Powell and Pressburger after they amicably ended their creative partnership as filmmakers. The documentary includes some archival footage of Powell and Pressburger doing interviews separately and together. There’s also some behind-the-scenes footage of Scorsese and Powell together on the set of Scorsese’s 1983 film “The King of Comedy,” starring Robert De Niro and Jerry Lee Lewis.

The documentary’s visual tour of Powell and Pressburger’s filmography is told by Scorsese with an appreciation that makes it evident that he is still in awe of their talent but doesn’t shy away from talking about the low points in the duo’s collaborations. There are also some behind-the-scenes stories of how Powell and Pressburger films were made and how they influenced Scorsese’s own moves. For example, In Scorsese’s analysis of “The Red Shoes,” he talks about how the 15-minute uncut ballet sequence influenced how he filmed the boxing sequences in Scorsese’s 1980 film “Raging Bull.”

Scorsese has a storytelling style in his narration that is thoroughly engaging. Adrian Johnston’s beautiful musical score is another perfect part of this documentary. While watching this documentary, if you don’t feel transported to the time when these films were made, then you must not be paying any attention. “Made in England: The Films of Powell & Pressburger” is shaped largely by Scorsese’s unabashed fan testimonials to this often-underrated duo but the documentary serves as a definitive story of an impactful collaboration that can never again be recaptured.

Cohen Media Group released “Made in England: The Films of Powell & Pressburger” in select U.S. cinemas on July 12, 2024.

Review: ‘Reverse the Curse,’ starring Logan Marshall-Green, David Duchovny, Stephanie Beatriz, Jason Beghe, Evan Handler, Santo Fazio, Daphne Rubin-Vega and Pamela Adlon

July 11, 2024

by Carla Hay

Pictured clockwise, from left to right: David Duchovny, Stephanie Beatriz and Logan Marshall-Green in “Reverse the Curse” (Photo courtesy of Vertical)

“Reverse the Curse”

Directed by David Duchovny

Culture Representation: Taking place in New Jersey, mostly in 1978 (and briefly in 1956 and 2004), the comedy/drama film “Reverse the Curse” (based on the novel “Bucky F*cking Dent”) features a predominantly white cast of characters (with a few Latin people) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: An aspiring writer and his terminally ill father try to mend their rocky relationship during the 1978 Major Leage Baseball season that had a World Series competition between the Boston Red Sox and the New York Yankees. 

Culture Audience: “Reverse the Curse” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of director/star David Duchovny and movies about father-son relationships that alternate between being cynical and sentimental.

Logan Marshall-Green and David Duchovny in “Reverse the Curse” (Photo courtesy of Vertical)

“Reverse the Curse” awkwardly fumbles its attempts to balance sarcasm and sappiness. This comedy/drama has too much phony-sounding and lackluster dialogue in portraying a volatile father-son relationship affected by the 1978 World Series. Perhaps because of the maudlin and frequently dull screenplay, the principal cast members look like they’re trying too hard to be convincing as their often-unhappy characters. And that desperation just ends up being a distraction.

Written and directed by David Duchovny, “Reverse the Curse” is based on his 2017 novel “Bucky F*cking Dent,” which was the original title of the movie. After the movie had its world premiere at the 2023 Tribeca Festival, Vertical acquired the film and changed the movie’s title to “Reverse the Curse.” The “Reverse the Curse” title refers to the theory that the Boston Red Sox baseball team was cursed from winning the World Series after trading Babe Ruth to the New York Yankees in 1919.

“Reverse the Curse” begins by explaining this theory in a scene taking place in New Jersey in 1956. In a household living room, 11-year-old Theodore “Ted” Fullaker (played by Liam Garten) is watching a TV news report about how the Boston Red Sox hasn’t won a World Series because of this supposed curse. The movie then abruptly shifts to 1978, to show 33-year-old Ted is now working as a peanut vendor at Yankee Stadium.

Ted is divorced, has no children, and still lives in New Jersey. (“Reverse the Curse” was filmed on location in New Jersey.) What Ted really wants to do for a job is be a novelist, but he hasn’t had luck getting any of his manuscripts published. It doesn’t help that Ted would rather get stoned (he has a fondness for marijuana) instead of working on his craft. It’s mentioned several times that he doesn’t do much except smoke marijuana and watch TV when he’s at home.

One of the problems with “Reverse the Curse” is that it never really shows if Ted is a good writer or not and therefore doesn’t give viewers anything to root for when it comes to Ted wanting to fulfill his dream of becoming a professional writer. His writing aspirations are sidelined and overshadowed by the repetitive bickering that Ted has with his father and other people. It all becomes tiresome and annoying to watch after a while.

An early scene in the movie shows Ted in a meeting with a book publisher or a book agent named Blauner (played by Pamela Adlon), who tells Ted: “You’re a real writer. You’re a goddamn writer. But you’ve got nothing to write about. You write as if you haven’t lived … You haven’t suffered—and it shows.” She then advises that Ted commit a crime so that he can go to prison and get raped in prison. If you think this type of conversation is hilarious, then “Reverse the Curse” is the movie for you.

Ted’s cranky father is Marty Fullaker (played by Duchovny), a widower who is 60 years old and has heart disease and terminal lung cancer. Marty has declined any further medical care and just wants to die at home. During his stay in a hospital, he was assigned a nurse named Mariana Blades (played by Stephanie Beatriz), who calls herself a “death specialist”—someone who gives counseling to patients to prepare them for death.

Ted meets Mariana for the first time at the hospital where Marty will soon be discharged. Mariana tells Ted that Marty been working on a “biographical novel.” Mariana tells Ted that Marty wants Ted to help him finish the book. Mariana has this to say about Marty: “He’s been a villain. He’s been a scapegoat. Now, he just wants to die a hero.”

Marty is a longtime Red Sox fan who believes that he will live to see the Red Sox “reverse the curse” and win the World Series. In 1978, the Red Sox get closer and closer to making it to the World Series. Ted is a Yankees fan. One of his favorite players is Bucky Dent, who was a short stop for the Yankees at the time.

“Reverse the Curse” makes Marty an Archie Bunker-type character who is curmudgeonly and openly racist but is supposed to be “loveable” anyway. When Marty introduces Mariana to Ted, Marty calls her a racial slur for Hispanics. Mariana shrugs it off and says to Ted: “Your father and I are friends. Epithets can sometimes be endearments. It’s all in how you tell the story.” She then adds by saying to Marty: “Right, honky?”

In order to help Marty finish his book, Ted reluctantly spends more time with Marty. And what a coincidence: Every time Ted is visiting Marty, Mariana just happens to come over to visit too, even though Marty is technically no longer her patient. It’s the movie’s predictable set-up for a romance to start between Ted and Mariana, who have the type of attraction to each other that they try to hide but it’s very obvious.

Ted (who’s not very smart and is self-defeating) and Mariana (who is quick-witted and ambitious) have the type of “opposites attract” banter that a would-be couple can have in movies where they spend quite a bit of time clashing before admitting that they want a romantic relationship with each other. It’s all so predictable but made very boring because Ted and Mariana don’t really have great chemistry with each other. While Ted opens up to Mariana about his past, she’s very emotionally guarded and doesn’t want to talk to Ted about her personal life.

There are the inevitable father-son arguments that are extensions of long-simmering resentments from the son’s childhood. (Benny Mora plays a young adult Marty in flashback scenes.) It should come as no surprise that Marty wasn’t a great husband and father and now has some regrets. Marty has a habit of treating Ted as kind of a loser who didn’t live up to Ted’s potential. Will Ted and Marty heal their grudges against each other before it’s too late? Hint: Did the Red Sox ever “reverse the curse”?

It would be enough for “Reverse the Curse” to have subplots about the writing of Marty’s novel; Marty’s battle with a terminal illness; the possible romance between Ted and Mariana; and Marty’s obsessions with the Red Sox reversing the curse. But no. The movie throws in yet another subplot about Marty pining over a long-lost mistress he fell in love with when he was married to Ted’s mother.

The name of this long-lost love is Eva Maria Gonzalez (played by Daphne Rubin-Vega), who is portrayed by Kathiamarice Lopez in flashback scenes. It leads to a meandering part of the story where Ted enlists Mariana’s help to look for Eva in neighborhoods where people mostly speak Spanish. The movie shows if Eva and Marty reunite or not.

“Reverse the Curse” also has some time-wasting nonsense about Marty’s friends at a barbershop who plot ways for Marty to not find out if the Red Sox lost a game this season. These barbershop friends are yammering meddlers named Benny (played by Evan Handler), Shticker (played by Santo Fazio) and Tango Sam (played by Jason Beghe), who tell Ted a bizarre story about how Marty thinking that the Red Sox is a winning team has direct links to Marty’s health.

Years ago, when Ted was too young to remember, Marty was sick and had to use a wheelchair. Benny said that he fabricated a newspaper story about the Red Sox winning a game (when in fact, the Red Sox lost the game) and gave the fake newspaper article to Marty. Benny says that after seeing the newspaper article, Marty “miraculously” stopped needing to use a wheelchair.

Marty’s barbershop pals think the same tactic can work on Marty again to improve his health. And so, there are entire segments of the movie where Marty’s barbershop friends and Ted go to great lengths to keep any news from Marty that the Red Sox lost a game, including the old trick of fabricating newspaper articles. Marty doesn’t watch TV, which makes it easier for him to not find out the truth. “Reverse the Curse” fails to be believable in this subplot of “hiding the real Red Sox game scores from Marty” because the movie doesn’t want viewers to think that avid Red Sox fan Marty, who has a lot of time on his hands, could easily and realistically find a way to get Red Sox game scores on the radio.

All of these subplots and shenanigans are rarely amusing to watch in this very uneven movie. It seems as if writer/director Duchovny was too enamored with the “Bucky F*cking Dent” book to leave out the parts of the book that didn’t need to be in the movie. Ted is such a mopey sad sack, and Marty is such arrogant bore, it’s hard to care that they’ve made their own lives miserable.

For most of the film, Marshall-Green wears a fake-looking hippie wig that’s very distracting because it looks so artificial. In “Reverse the Curse,” Marshall-Green also looks too old to be 33-year-old Ted. In fact, Marshall-Green was in his mid-40s when he filmed the movie. Because of this noticeable age miscasting, Duchovny (who is only 16 years older than Marshall-Green) and Marshall-Green do not look convincing as father and son.

But that’s not the only problem with this movie. There’s so much cringeworthy dialogue, it diminishes the intended emotional impact of the story. “Reverse the Curse” lurches around from one subplot the next, like the rambling novel that Marty’s book seems to be. “Reverse the Curse” crams in some heavy-handed schmaltz in the last 20 minutes, but by then, it’s too late to save this well-intentioned but mishandled movie.

Vertical released “Reverse the Curse” in select U.S. cinemas, on digital and VOD on June 14, 2024.

Review: ‘The Devil’s Bath,’ starring Anja Plaschg, Maria Hofstätter and David Scheid

July 10, 2024

by Carla Hay

Anja Plaschg and David Scheid in “The Devil’s Bath” (Photo courtesy of Shudder)

“The Devil’s Bath”

Directed by Severin Fiala and Veronika Franz

German with subtitles

Culture Representation: Taking place in Austria, in 1750, the horror film “The Devil’s Bath” features an all-white cast of characters representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: A young newlywed becomes mentally ill in a conservative and judgmental religious community.  

Culture Audience: “The Devil’s Bath” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of the movie’s directors and horror films with religious themes.

Anja Plaschg in “The Devil’s Bath” (Photo courtesy of Shudder)

“The Devil’s Bath” is not easy to watch for people who expect horror movies to have quick pacing and obvious jump scares. This “slow burn” film, set in 1750 Austria, shows the terror of untreated mental illness in a strict religious community. It’s worth watching until the very end to understand the true impact of the story.

Written and directed by Severin Fiala and Veronika Franz, “The Devil’s Bath” is based on historical research by Kathy Stuart. The movie had its world premiere at the 2024 Berlin International Film Festival and its U.S. premiere at the 2024 Tribeca Festival. “The Devil’s Bath” swept the 2024 Austrian Film Awards, winning seven prizes: Best Feature Film; Best Actress (for Anja Plaschg); Best Supporting Actress (for Maria Hofstätter); Best Film Editing; Best Production Design; Best Score; and Best Makeup.

The movie (which takes place in an unnamed Austrian village in 1750) begins with a terrifying scene of a woman named Ewa Schikin (played by Natalya Baranova) is walking through a wooded area with a baby (played by Frieda Seidl) until she reaches a cliff with a waterfall. Ewa then throws the baby over the waterfall. After committing this murder, she makes the sign of the cross on herself, calmly walks to a house, knocks on the door, and says to the unseen person opening the door: “I committed a crime.” Was is then shown beheaded, with her head on the ground. An unseen person cuts off one of her fingers.

And why did she commit this murder? That question is answered toward the end of the movie. In the meantime, a young couple named Agnes (played by Plaschg) and Wolf (played by David Scheid) are shown getting married. At the wedding reception, the guests play a game to behead a chicken while blindfolded.

Agnes and Wolf are living in a small shack-like house, near the house of Wolf’s mother Gänglin (played by Hofstätter), who has a close relationship with Wolf. Before Wolf and Agnes got married, the couple lived with Gänglin. Agnes liked living there and expresses disappointment to Wolf that the couple will now be living in this much smaller house. Wolf tells Agnes that he will soon inherit his mother’s farm, which is another way of saying he doesn’t expect Gänglin to live much longer.

This village community is very religious. Every time a clock chimes in the village, several of the residents make the sign of the cross. Women are expected to be wives and mothers. Young and healthy women are expected to out with any physical work that the men do.

Many of the villagers make their living by fishing for catfish. However, later in the movie, it’s shown that the village is experiencing a food shortage. Loaves and bread are rationed. This rationing leads to some tense moments where people have disputes about how much bread they deserve to get.

One day, Agnes is walking through the woods and looking for Wolf when she sees a drawing on a tree. The drawing depicts Ewa throwing a baby over a waterfall and later being beheaded while she was in prison. She also sees that Ewa’s beheaded body on display with Ewa’s head nearby in a small cage. It’s later revealed that Agnes now has the finger of Ewa that was taken from Ewa’s body.

Another death soon happens in the village: A young man named Lenz (played by Lorenz Tröbinger) has committed suicide by hanging. At Lenz’s funeral, a priest gives a sermon has this to say about Lenz’s suicide: “What he did is worse than murder.”

Agnes wants to become a mother but gets frustrated that she hasn’t gotten pregnant. She falls into a deep depression where she refuses to get out of bed. Agnes also overhears her mother-in-law Gänglin tells Wolf: “You should’ve married a local girl … someone who’s a better worker and can get pregnant.”

The movie’s title refers to 18th century Austrian vernacular that described depression as being trapped in “the devil’s bath.” Because psychology wasn’t developed as a science until the late 1870s, religion in Agnes’ 1750s community is used as an explanation for mental illness. In many of today’s communities, religion instead of science is still used as a “cure” or treatment for mental illness and other psychological issues.

“The Devil’s Bath” shows Agnes’ further mental deterioration as she continues to isolate herself. Some extreme things happen that are meant to be shocking but also demonstrate what can happen when desperate people do certain things when they feel trapped and take what they think is the best option. Religious oppression is inescapable in this story.

There are some haunting images scattered throughout the movie. For example, there’s a scene showing decapitated human arms floating in a barrel filled with water and catfish. Another is a scene where moths come out of Agnes’ mouth.

Some of the most squirm-worthy imagex are how the “treatments” that Agnes gets from Wolf in attempts to “cure” her of her depression. Leeches are put on Agnes to “let the melancholy out.” Wolf also uses a needle to thread a dangling string horizontally across the back of her neck, where Agnes tugs the string back and forth. It seems like a very crude and misguided way of treating nerve pinpoints, like a warped version of acupuncture.

“The Devil’s Bath” succeeds in its intention to depict a dark and claustrophobic experience of someone’s mental illness gradually getting worse and being stuck in a community that equates mental illness with demon possession. Religion is used with rigid harshness to punish those who are mentally ill.

As the troubled Agnes, Plaschg gives a complex performance that is both harrowing and heartbreaking. “The Devil’s Bath” deliberately takes its time to reveal certain deadly motives. The truth has nothing to do with devil possession and everything to do real-life religious fears that human beings place on each other.

Shudder released “The Devil’s Bath” in select U.S. cinemas on June 21, 2024. Shudder premiered the movie on June 28, 2024.

Review: ‘Searching for Amani,’ starring Simon Ali

July 1, 2024

by Carla Hay

Simon Ali in “Searching for Amani” (Photo courtesy of Backroads Pictures and RandomGood Films)

“Searching for Amani”

Directed by Debra Aroko and Nicole Gormley

Culture Representation: The documentary film “Searching for Amani” features a predominantly black African group of people (with a few white people) discussing the 2019 unsolved murder of Kenyan nature conservancy employee Steven Ali Apetet while he was working on the job and the conflicts over land occupation that seemingly led to his murder.

Culture Clash: Steven’s middle child Simon Ali, who is an aspiring journalist, investigates his father’s murder but experiences many obstacles.

Culture Audience: “Searching for Amani” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in watching documentaries about true crime and rural African culture.

Levis Ali and Simon Ali in “Searching for Amani” (Photo courtesy of Backroads Pictures and RandomGood Films)

“Searching for Amani” is an emotionally impactful documentary about a teenage journalist’s quest for the truth about his father’s unsolved murder in Kenya. The movie also examines conflicts between native Kenyans and wealthy white land owners. On another level, the documentary is an observation of how climate change and a severe drought in Kenya turned land occupation into a deadly crisis.

Directed by Debra Aroko and Nicole Gormley, “Searching for Amani” had its world premiere at the 2024 Tribeca Festival, where Aroko and Gormley won the Albert Maysles Award for Best New Documentary Director. The word “amani” means “peace” in Swahili. It’s reportedly the last word that Steven Ali Apetet said when he was shot to death on October 15, 2019. He was 41 years old. At the time he was murdered, Apetet was working at his job as a tour at the Laikipia Nature Conservancy.

No suspects or persons of interest have been named in this murder case. There were witnesses (including three tourists who were with Apetet) but they have not been able to identify the killer or killers. The most popular theory is that the killer or killers belonged to a group of pastoral herders who were in conflicts with the Laikipia Nature Conservancy owners about using the conservancy’s land to herd and feed animals.

“Searching for Amani” was filmed with Apetet’s middle son Simon Ali, an aspiring journalist, was 13 years old. The other people in Simon’s tight-knit and loving family include his widower mother Lucy and his siblings (listed in order from eldest to youngest) sister Faith, brother Ken, brother Levis and sister Charlene. Simon is the middle child and is the voiceover narrator for the documentary. At one point, Levis is tasked with doing some of the interviewing in the investigation because he’s older than Simon and is allowed to travel to certain places while Simon has to stay in school.

Apetet is described as kind, hard-working “peacemaker,” who took this job at the Laikipia Nature Conservancy (which is about 100,000 acres of land) so he could afford to send his children to good schools. Apetet has been an employee at the conservancy for about 20 years and was shot in the morning, near the beginning of his works shift that day. In voiceover narration, Simon says that people tell him that out of all of his siblings, his personality is the most like his father’s personality.

Simon comments, “Everyone in my family wants justice. Why did they want to kill him?” Simon’s investigation includes interviews with several people, including some of his father’s former co-workers and Laikipia Nature Conservancy owner Sveva Makena Gallmann, whose mother Kuki Gallmann bought the conservancy. The former co-workers interviewed include mechanic Enock Nodkia, security officer Isaac Kateiya, lodge staffer Frederick Gikandi Kamuri and botanist Thomas Olekaichu. One of the most compelling parts of the documentary is when one of the tourist witnesses is tracked down and interviewed.

Simon (who comes from a farming family) gets support from his best friend/schoolmate Haron Lenges, who comes from a pastoral herding family. During the filming of the documentary, Simon sees Lenges’ family go through hardships because of the drought. It helps Simon have a more personal understanding of pastoral herders feeling desperate to use land to keep their herds alive. Simon’s father had many responsibilities in his job. One of them was to remove trespassers.

It’s mentioned in the documentary that the journalist Simon whom admires the most is Kenyan TV journalist/talk show host Jeff Koinange, who hosts the talk show “Jeff Koinange Live” on Citizen TV. Koinange is known for his investigative work in social and political issues, especially those pertaining to Africa. A montage epilogue in “Searching for Amani” show what happens in Simon’s quest to eventually meet Koinange.

“Searching for Amani” has cinematography by Simon Ali, Campbell Brewer and co-director Gormley. Simon, who is intelligent and inquisitive, clearly had a passion for journalism and has a bright future ahead in this profession. The family’s heartbreak over not knowing the full story of what happened in this tragic murder might never go away. However, “Searching for Amani” is a testament that Simon and the rest of his family are admirably carrying out the wonderful legacy of their departed family member who was taken way too soon from them.

Review: ‘The Wasp’ (2024), starring Naomie Harris and Natalie Dormer

June 25, 2024

by Carla Hay

Naomie Harris and Natalie Dormer in “The Wasp” (Photo courtesy of Shout! Studios)

“The Wasp”

Directed by Guillem Morales

Culture Representation: Taking place in an unnamed city in the United Kingdom, the dramatic film “The Wasp” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with a few black people) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: An upper-middle-class homemaker asks a working-class former schoolmate to do a deadly deed, and it leads to various conflicts and complications. 

Culture Audience: “The Wasp” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of the movie’s headliners and twist-filled psychological thrillers.

Dominic Allburn in “The Wasp” (Photo courtesy of Shout! Studios)

“The Wasp” is an apt title for this psychological thriller because it leaves such a stinging impression. Naomie Harris and Natalie Dormer give intense performances filled with suspenseful twists and turns in a murder-for-hire scheme. It’s the type of movie that has enough unpredictability and compelling acting, many viewers will want to see this film more than once.

Directed by Guillem Morales, “The Wasp” is adapted from Morgan Lloyd Malcolm’s play of the same name. Malcolm also wrote “The Wasp” screenplay. “The Wasp” had its world premiere at the 2024 Tribeca Festival. The movie was filmed on location in the United Kingdom. The story takes place in an unnamed city in England.

“The Wasp” begins by showing a close-up of an unhappily married homemaker named Heather Foxfield (played by Harris), who is crying outdoors by herself. Heather hasn’t been happy with her demanding and domineering husband Simon (played by Dominic Allburn) for quite some time. One of the reasons for their troubled marriage is that Heather hasn’t been able to conceive a child.

At the moment, soft-spoken and eager-to-please Heather has two other preoccupations. First, there seems to be a wasp infestation in their home, but Heather doesn’t know where the wasps have been living on the property. The other preoccupation that she has is Simon’s command for her to prepare the perfect dinner party for business colleagues who have been invited to Simon and Heather’s upper-middle-class home. Simon expects Heather to have a fabulous multi-course meal for this event, which he tells her is crucial for his career.

Without going into too many details in this review, the dinner party is a disaster. Simon blames Heather and storms out of the house. This conflict seems to be the last straw for Heather, who puts a plan into motion. As already revealed in the trailer for “The Wasp,” Heather contacts a prickly former schoolmate named Carla (played by Dormer) to hire her to kill Simon. Heather and Carla have not seen each other for about 30 years, when they were about 11 or 12 years old.

Carla is living in her own type of misery. She is having lot of financial problems that her supermarket cashier job can’t cover. And so, Carla is secretly a sex worker to make extra money. Carla is married to an unemployed gambling addict named Jim (played by Rupert Holliday Evans), who’s about 20 years older than Carla. She’s also financially supporting four underage children, who have different fathers. At the time this story takes place, Carla is about seven or eight months pregnant.

The rest of “The Wasp” shows how Heather convinces an initially reluctant Carla to be a part of this murder-for-hire scheme. There is a lot of symbolism in “The Wasp,” particularly in the fact that Simon keeps a framed collection of insects hanging in the house. One of the insects that is singled out as a favorite is the tarantula hawk, a certain wasp that has special meaning in the story. What the tarantula hawk is known for has greater meaning when the movie’s stunning ending is revealed.

Shout! Studios will release “The Wasp” in select U.S. cinemas on August 30, 2024.

Review: ‘Griffin in Summer,’ starring Everett Blunck, Melanie Lynskey, Owen Teague, Abby Ryder Fortson and Kathryn Newton

June 24, 2024

by Carla Hay

Everett Blunck in “Griffin in Summer” (Photo courtesy of Coveside Films)

“Griffin in Summer”

Directed by Nicholas Colia

Culture Representation: Taking place in the fictional city of Borwood, Virginia, the comedy/drama film “Griffin in Summer” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with a few Latin people) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: A 14-year-old boy is obsessed with having a professional production of his latest play that he’s written, and he unexpectedly gets distracted by his attraction to a young handyman who has been hired to do work at his house. 

Culture Audience: “Griffin in Summer” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of the movie’s headliners and movie about queer young people discovering their sexual identities.

Owen Teague and Everett Blunck in “Griffin in Summer” (Photo courtesy of Coveside Films)

“Griffin in Summer” capably handles the nuances of telling the story of a teenage boy’s sexuality awakening without veering into lurid exploitation. The performances in this comedy/drama are memorable, even when the plot occasionally gets one-note. The movie’s protagonist is believable because he’s not a caricature and has very realistic personality flaws.

Written and directed by Nicholas Colia, “Griffin in Summer” had its world premiere at the 2024 Tribeca Festival, where it won two prizes: Best U.S. Narrative Feature and Best Screenplay (U.S. Narrative Feature). In addition, Colia received a special jury mention (the equivalent of second place) for the Best New Narrative Director Award. “Griffin in Summer” takes place in the fictional city of Borwood, Virginia. The movie was filmed on location in Virginia.

“Griffin in Summer” is a movie about a 14-year-old boy who gets a clear understanding that he’s gay or queer, even though he doesn’t have any sexual encounters in the movie. “Griffin in Summer” handles this sensitive subject with a tone that is frank without being explicit. For example, there are no sex scenes in the film or even discussions of homosexuality or queerness. The words “gay” and “queer” aren’t even said in this film to describe the teenage protagonist. Everything is presented in a matter-of-fact way, without any big, dramatic “coming out” moments.

“Griffin in Summer” begins by showing a student talent show at Borwood Middle School. This talent show takes place shortly before the school will be on a summer break. A boy named Mark (played by Ian Hernandez-Oropeza) and an unnamed girl (played by Aurora Richards) on stage are singing an off-key duet of Chicago’s 1984 hit “You’re the Inspiration.” Even though it’s a horrible performance, the audience politely claps.

Next up is 14-year-old Griffin Nafly (played by Everett Blunck), whose personality can best be described as precocious and prickly. Griffin is an aspiring playwright and has chosen to act out a scene from his play “Regrets in Autumn.” In this play excerpt, Griffin acts out the roles of an unhappily married couple named Harriet (a homemaker in her 50s) and her husband Walter, who’s a Wall Street banker.

Harriet accuses Walter of cheating on her. Walter accuses Harriet of abusing alcohol. It leads to a shouting match where Harriet blurts out: “Oh, and another thing, Walter: Those weren’t miscarriages. They were abortions!”

Needless to say, the audience of mostly students are taken aback by this intense drama and are stunned into mostly silence. Griffin doesn’t seem to care that only a small percentage of people are clapping with tentative applause. His performance got the desired effect of making everyone in the room pay attention to Griffin and his work. Griffin has big plans for this play, which he’s determined to make a reality before he starts high school after his summer break.

At home, Griffin’s supportive mother Helen (played by Melanie Lynskey), who works as a real-estate agent, asks Griffin (who is an only child) if he has any plans to “do anything else” for the summer. Griffin curtly tells her no. That’s because for this summer, Griffin has a single-minded goal to stage his first play in a real theater, which will be the first time any of his plays will be in a legitimate performing arts space instead of the basement of his parents’ home. The play, of course, is “Regrets of Autumn,” which Griffin describes as “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?” meets “American Beauty.”

Griffin plans to rent a small performance theater space “somewhere outside of Borwood” for the production. He has already decided who in his small circle of friends will be on his team for this production. Tyler Smoot-Rigsby (played by Gordon Rocks) will have the role of Walter, whom Griffin describes a “serial adulterer.” Winnie Hernandez (played by Johanna Colón) will have the role of Harriet, whom Griffin describes as an “alcoholic.” Pam Vanderworm (played by Alivia Bellamy) has the role of Scarlett, who is Walter’s “social-climbing mistress.”

Kara Pointer (played by Abby Ryder Fortson), who seems to be Griffin’s best friend, has been given the task of directing the play. However, it soon becomes very apparent that Kara has this title of “director” in name only because Griffin is the real director of the play, based on how he acts and the decisions that he makes. It would not be an exaggeration to describe Griffin’s bossy attitude toward his teammates as tyrannical and difficult.

Griffin wants intensive rehearsals that would require 60 hours week. It’s a lot to ask from anyone—let alone an underage teen—to give up that much of their time for an amateur, unpaid play. When Kara speaks on behalf of the castmates about this demanding work schedule and asks for them to rehearse for less hours per week, Griffin has this hostile reaction: “It’s the Equity standard!” (Griffin conveniently forgets that the Actors Equity Association standard also includes union-approved payments and insurance benefits, which obviously Griffin cannot offer.)

In the meantime, Griffin has been frantically putting the finishing touches of the play. He expects to work on the play in quiet solitude in his room. But those plans are disrupted when Griffin finds out that his mother has hired the young adult son of a neighbor named Mrs. Rizzo (played by Francine Berk) to do some handyman work inside and outside the Nafly family home. This handyman work inevitably involves using equipment noises that irritate Griffin.

The name of this handyman is Brad Rizzo (played by Owen Teague), who is an aspiring performance artist. Brad is not intellectual but he’s good-looking in a “lanky and laid-back” type of way. The first time Brad makes his noisy presence known, he’s doing some work on the front lawn, Griffin haughtily orders Brad to stop making noise because Griffin is working on writing a play. “Art comes from a quiet place,” Griffin tells Brad in a snooty tone.

Griffin wants Helen to fire Brad. She refuses. As Brad spends more time at the house, it soon becomes obvious that Griffin is attracted to Brad in a way that makes Griffin feel excited, confused and fearful at the same time. Griffin’s attraction to Brad becomes even stronger when he finds out that Brad is an aspiring performance artist who is only in Virginia to make enough money so Brad can go back to New York City and pursue his real goals of being a professional performance artist.

The rest of “Griffin in Summer” is how Griffin handles his feelings toward Brad while still juggling the stress of launching his “Regrets in Autumn” play. Things get complicated for Griffin when he finds out that Brad has a possessive and insecure girlfriend named Chloe (played by Kathryn Newton), who has known Brad since she and Brad were in high school. Without giving away too much information, it’s enough to say that “Griffin in Summer” pokes some fun at how power dynamics and decision making can change when sexual attraction is part of the mix.

“Griffin in Summer” also has a subplot about how the somewhat troubled marriage of Griffin’s parents affects Griffin’s outlook on life. Griffin’s father Bill (played by Michael Esper) is frequently away from home because of his job. This absence has taken a toll on his marriage to Helen. At one point, Griffin hints that Helen has a substance abuse problem when he tells someone that Helen is “only into Chardonnay and Klonopin.”

As a character, Griffin has a few predictable stereotypes that are often given to queer male characters in movies. Griffin is sassy, fussy and has more than his share of “drama queen” meltdowns. However, the dialogue in the movie rarely strays from sounding authentic. If stereotypes exist for a reason, at least Griffin embodies those stereotypes in a believable way that don’t make him look like a caricature.

What’s special about “Griffin in Summer” is that it does the opposite of what many movies often do that are about underage teens discovering their sexuality: It doesn’t make any of the teens in the film in a rush to lose their virginities. And these teens aren’t fixated on sex and don’t make constant crude jokes about sex, which are other predictable clichés in teen-oriented movies with sexuality as a major theme. Griffin and his friends are still in their early teens and don’t have to be portrayed as if they’re horny 17-year-olds.

Blunck gives a very expressive performance where his face and body language show a lot of what Griffin is really thinking. Meanwhile, Teague gives a credible performance as Brad, who doesn’t initially pick up on the queer signals that Griffin is giving. Brad mistakenly thinks that Griffin is growing attached to Brad because Griffin sees Brad as being like an older brother.

Lynskey gives a solid performance as a harried mother trying to keep her family together, Helen seems to know that Griffin is gay or queer, but it doesn’t seem to be something she wants to discuss with Griffin until he’s ready to talk about it. Newton’s portrayal of ditsy Chloe is intentionally campy. The other supporting cast members give good performances in their very limited roles.

Doing a movie about teenage sexual identity is a tricky thing to do in a movie when the protagonist is under the legal age of sexual consent and the protagonist has a crush on an adult. “Griffin in Summer” isn’t just about sexuality; it’s also about self-acceptance. Through ways that are comedic and often poignant, “Griffin in Summer” shows that it’s much easier to put a label on a sexual identity than it is to have the self-confidence to live authentically, no matter how much it might hurt.

Review: ‘How I Faked My Life With AI,’ starring Kyle Vorbach

June 23, 2024

by Carla Hay

Kyle Vorbach in “How I Faked My Life With AI”

“How I Faked My Life With AI”

Directed by Kyle Vorbach

Culture Representation: The documentary film “How I Faked My Life With AI” features a predominantly white group of people (with a one black person and one Asian person) who are connected in some way to filmmaker Kyle Vorbach or expertise on artificial intelligence (A.I.) technology.

Culture Clash: Kyle Vorbach makes a documentary film about fooling his friends and other people with various online fabrications about his life, with the fabrications made through A.I. technology.

Culture Audience: “How I Faked My Life With AI” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in documentaries about how A.I. can be used in elaborate con schemes or documentaries about online pranks or social experiments that are taken to extreme levels.

Kyle Vorbach in “How I Faked My Life With AI”

“How I Faked My Life With AI” blurs the line between being a vanity project and an informative chronicle about elaborate fakery using artificial intelligence. Kyle Vorbach is the director and star of this provocative but repetitive documentary. There are many times in the film where it seems like Vorbach just wants to show off his computer skills in creating complex hoaxes, rather than adequately explaining a meaningful purpose for these hoaxes. However, the documentary is saved because Vorbach includes perspectives of people who aren’t his friends and who can talk about the benefits and pitfalls of A.I. technology.

Vorbach is not only the star and director of “How I Faked My Life With AI,” but he is also the movie’s screenwriter, cinematographer, editor and one of the movie’s producers. “How I Faked My Life With AI” had its world premiere at the 2024 Tribeca Festival. In the beginning of the documentary, Vorbach explains in a voiceover narration that ever since he was a kid, he liked to live in his own world. He thought he wanted to be either a rock star or a magician. (He dabbled in doing both jobs as an adult.)

However, when he got the idea to do this documentary (which Vorbach says was filmed over one year), it was at a low point in his life when he was an aspiring filmmaker based in Los Angeles but was temporarily living with his parents in Rochester, New York. He was trying to figure out what he really wanted to do with his life because his film career wasn’t going the way he expected. (Translation: He was unemployed and bored.)

It started as an online prank and grew into various schemes where he fooled his closest friends and many other people. The documentary includes the friends’ reactions when Vorbach told them the truth. It should come as no surprise when about midway through the documentary, Vorbach reveals to viewers that the narration for the documentary is not really his voice but is an A.I.-generated voice.

Vorbach says in the movie’s opening scenes that he felt isolated and lonely during this period of time in his life when he was living with his parents. His girlfriend Caitlin Vetere (who is seen in the documentary) was in another state, and she became one of the unwitting victims in his elaborate A.I. hoaxes. Vorbach said it started with him playing around with A.I. programs that take texted words and turned them into images. He tested these programs using the images of his dog and other dogs.

It wasn’t long before Vorbach began doing the same thing to photos of himself and combining them with photos of celebrities whom people said Vorbach resembles, such as Ryan Gosling and Macauley Culkin. The resulting images looked like slightly different versions of the real Vorbach. Vorbach says in a voiceover what he thought at the time: “If I’m already generating my pictures, why not generate a brand new life?”

Vorbach then created an avatar that he secretly called Ryan Gosling Person that he used for these schemes. Using this avatar and A.I. technology, Vorbach posted images on his social media accounts that made it look like Vorbach had taken exciting trips to New York City and Los Angeles, when in fact he had been staying the entire time at his parents’ home in Rochester. All of his friends were fooled.

Vorbach comments that he took his hoaxes a step further by fabricating other people by using A.I. technology. He says he was inspired by the true story of Donald Trump pretending to be his own publicist when communicating in writing or by phone with journalists and editors. (The documentary includes an archival clip audio recording of Trump doing this publicist impersonation.) Vorbach says, “If I could fake my own success, maybe I could feel that way all the time or at least a little bit longer.”

It led to Vorbach using an A.I.-generated photo of himself to create a publicist character representing Vorbach. Vorbach also created a fake website and a fake business for his fake publicist, who began pitching Vorbach to the media as an “A.I. expert” who authored a book called “Pandora’s Code.” (The book was secretly written entirely by A.I.) And sure enough, Vorbach began getting requests for interviews about his “A.I. expertise.” He even gave a TED talk under this new fake profession.

As seen in the documentary, the schemes got even more elaborate. They included Vorbach fabricating a news outlet called WHNY, which had the slogan “News From the Heart of New York.” Vorbach, using his own photos to make himself look like a middle-aged man, fabricated an A.I.-generated persona as a WHNY reporter named Chris Washington, who did videoconference interviews with Vorbach’s unwitting friends about Vorbach. Vorbach used A.I. to disguise his face and voice when doing these interviews as the fabricated journalist Chris Washington.

In another of his A.I. hoaxes, Vorbach posed as a successful DJ/dance music artist named Berkly Havoc, with help from real DJ/music producer David Block. Using the name Berkly Havoc, Vorbach created and released music using A.I. and was booked for a party, where he played music that was made entirely from A.I. technology. At the party, he pretended to be mixing songs live, when he was actually faking it. Some of the party attendees (who are not named in the movie) are seen reacting to finding out that the DJ was not really operating the equipment and was playing only A.I.-generated music. None of the people interviewed seemed to care because they said they liked the music and weren’t really paying attention to the DJ.

Vorbach did another art-related A.I. stunt by using A.I. to generate fake art paintings to look like hand-made paintings, with Vorbach credited as the artist. Each of the paintings had an image of Vorbach in some type of heroic or fantasy scenario. Vorbach went as far as renting art gallery space to have an exhibit for this artwork. At first no one showed up, but Vorbach figured out a way to get people to go to the gallery. The documentary doesn’t disclose what he did to get people to attend, but considering Vorbach already showed marketing skills online for his other schemes, it’s not surprising that he got unsuspecting people to look at this fake artwork in a real art gallery space.

The documentary includes real reactions from unsuspecting gallery attendees (who are also unnamed in the documentary) before and after they find out that the artwork was made entirely by A.I. technology. Most were surprised but not upset. One woman who expressed some displeasure said that artists have an ethical obligation to divulge if any of their art was A.I.-generated. Before she found out the truth, the woman commented that the artist seemed like a “playful nerd.” Another attendee said the artist looks like a narcissist.

When Vorbach’s friends (who are only identified by their first names) find out the truth about how they were fooled by Vorbach, there are varying reactions. Some are amused. Some are embarrassed. And one of the friends comes right out and says he is hurt and offended, especially by Vorbach posing as fake WHNY journalist Chris Washington. To Vorbach’s credit, he does make apologies and he includes some of the scathing criticism he received for these deceptive stunts. Almost all of the friends say they can no longer completely trust what Vorbach puts online about himself.

The general consensus from the friends is that they weren’t too shocked about Vorbach faking photos of trips that he never took. But they were surprised by the lengths he went to in creating people that don’t exist in real life. The movie has astute observations that anyone who spends so much time creating these complex con games is missing out on enjoying real life. It’s a commentary that Vorbach seems to understand and admit to but doesn’t really take to heart because he (by his own admission) became too caught up in making this documentary.

A few of his friends reveal later in the documentary that Vorbach has had some health-related traumas in life that probably caused him to develop obsessions with creating these A.I.-generated fantasies about himself. One of the traumas was that he experienced a horrific accident that derailed his music career and required long-term physical therapy. At the time of the accident, Vorbach was in a rock band that had been scheduled to be on the Warped Tour. And at the time that Vorbach had been living with his parents when he came up with ideas for his A.I. hoaxes, his mother had been battling cancer, and he was there to be a caregiver for her.

These stories seem to be in the movie to make Vorbach look more sympathetic. But it just raises questions that the documentary doesn’t bother to answer. If Vorbach was a caregiver for his terminally ill mother, what does that say about his caregiver priorities at the same time he was spending untold numbers of obsessive hours working on these elaborate A.I. hoaxes? Once this information is revealed in the documentary, it actually makes Vorbach look less sympathetic, considering he said multiple times in the documentary that he sequestered himself away from everyone in his life to make this movie. What type of caregiver does that?

Vorbach doesn’t really do any self-analysis about what his friends have observed about him. He does seem remorseful about any hurt or mistrust that he caused, but he also seems to shrug it off as collateral damage for the documentary he wanted to make. Overall, Vorbach comes across as someone who craves a lot of public attention, and this film is one way to get it.

After a while, the documentary becomes a repetitive string of scenarios of Vorbach showing ways in which he tricked people using A.I. and then dealing with the consequences later. Nothing he did was illegal, per se, but questions can certainly arise about the ethics of many things that he did. What really separates Vorbach from the untold numbers of people who also create false identities for themselves on the Internet is that he made a documentary about it that premiered at a major film festival.

“How I Faked My Life With AI” greatly benefits from perspectives of people who offer their takes on the larger implications of what Vorbach and other people do with A.I. technology and how it can affect society as a whole. A.I. professor De Kai (also known as Dekai Wu) and actress Taylor Misiak warn of the dangers of what “deep fake” images and videos can do to real people if used for nefarious reasons. “We need to question everything,” Kai says about what can be seen online.

A.I. artist/strategist Taryn Southern has a more optimistically cautious view of A.I. technology. She mentions the benefits that A.I. technology can have in medical care. However, she also raises alarming concerns about how A.I. is used for “deep fake” visuals, especially when it comes to creating fake pornography. “We have to combat that really quickly,” Southern says of illegal “deep fake” usage.

Voice actor Ian Cardoni says that it’s paranoid to think that A.I. technology is going to take over the world. He comments on actors’ fears that they will be completely replaced by A.I. technology: “I reject that notion entirely.” Meanwhile, filmmaker Paul Trillo thinks that A.I. will continue to grow but “life experiences are irreplaceable.” Other people interviewed in the documentary are author/journalist Molly Crabapple, conspiracy theorist researcher/debunker Jake Rockatansky, filmmaker Jim Cummings and artist/entrepreneur Olive Allen.

“How I Faked My Life With AI” is worth watching as a cautionary tale to make people more aware to not automatically believe everything that they see at surface-level. It’s also a fascinating portrait of filmmaker narcissism, although Vorbach’s antics get a little tiresome to watch. “How I Faked My Life With AI” is not the type of documentary that will become so beloved, it will inspire repeats viewings for most people. It’s one of those “one and done” movies that you can watch once out of curiousity, and you won’t be surprised if you don’t want to see the entire movie again.

Review: ‘Hacking Hate,’ starring My Vingren

June 19, 2024

by Carla Hay

My Vingren in “Hacking Hate” (Photo courtesy of Nonami/Elk Film/Fuglene AS)

“Hacking Hate”

Directed by Simon Klose

Culture Representation: The documentary film “Hacking Hate” features a predominantly white group of people (with one African American and one person of South Asian heritage) who are involved in some way with investigating online speech or activities by hate groups.

Culture Clash: Swedish investigative journalist My Vingren created fake online personas posing as white supremacist family members, in order for Vingren to find out more about an elusive leader of an online hate group.

Culture Audience: “Hacking Hate” will appeal primarily to people who want to know more about how online freedoms are abused by hate groups and how social media companies directly or indirectly enable and profit from this hate.

My Vingren in “Hacking Hate” (Photo courtesy of Nonami/Elk Film/Fuglene AS)

Considering the vast number of media reports and documentaries about how hate groups can entice people online, “Hacking Hate” offers nothing new or surprising. However, it’s an interesting but slow-paced chronicle of one investigative journalist’s work. Swedish investigative journalist My Vingren is at the center of this documentary and is presented as someone who did a lot of work by herself to find out more and track down a mysterious leader of an online white supremacist group.

Directed by Simon Klose, “Hacking Hate” had its world premiere at the 2024 Tribeca Festival, where it won the award for Best Documentary Feature. Vingren is the narrator of the documentary, “Hacking Hate” is not only about Vingren’s hunt for this elusive white supremacist but it’s also an unofficial indictment of the corporate-owned social media platforms that profit from this hate.

Vingren is also shown interviewing a small number of people in the documentary, which doesn’t really show a lot of the “grunt work” of the investigation. The documentary is more about Vingren telling what she found after the fact. Vingren is not a particularly charismatic person—she comes across as quiet, shy and a little nerdy—so making her the focus of this documentary also makes the film occasionally boring from a narrator perspective.

“Hacking Hate” could have benefited from more cohesive film editing. The movie starts off in a somewhat jumbled way. First, Vingren is heard commenting on creating fake online personas as part of her investigation: “There are ethical dilemmas with infiltration when you pretend to be someone else. It’s always a last resort.”

The documentary then shows a montage of video clips from white supremacists, including a certain blonde and muscular male influencer who goes by a screen name that won’t be mentioned in this review. This influencer’s YouTube videos are shown quite a bit in this documentary, but he appears to be too well-known for Vingren, who is looking for insidious influencers who are more underground. Vingren is then shown meeting with an unidentified female editor at Expo magazine and telling the editor that she wants to do an article on how far-right extremist groups influence people on social media.

But instead of Vingren creating fake personas as a “last resort,” the documentary makes it look like creating fake personas is one of the first things that Vingren does in her investigation. Vingren is shown going “undercover” online by creating several fake online personas. She doesn’t take photos of other people for these elaborate schemes. Instead, she uses disguises and computer technology to alter photos of herself and create different profile photos for these fabricated people.

Four of these fake personas are different members of a white supremacist family. Vingren created individual social media and email accounts for each of these fabricated family members. The Swedish white supremacist clan that she creates consists of a man in his late 30s or early 40s named Andreas, his wife Johanna, their teenage daughter Svea, and Johanna’s sister Ellie.

There’s not much that’s compelling or edgy about the fake family personas, mainly because Vingren doesn’t put much personality into these online profiles. Vingren says she made sure not to contribute to any hate speech with the fake family’s online activity. She says that she used hashtags such as #Sweden and #nationalism in social media posts. Vingren claims it didn’t take long for the fake family members to be invited to join private online groups for white supremacists.

“Hacking Hate” then shows a montage of news reports of well-known white supremacist hate crimes that have happened in the 2010s and 2020s. Almost all of these crimes were committed with some type of social media component involved. Vingren then says something that’s very obvious and isn’t exactly surprising news: White supremacist influencers online who want to incite others to commit violent hate crimes like to recruit “young white men who feel frustrated they haven’t fulfilled their dreams.”

“Hacking Hate” then switches gears to Vingren talking about how in 2017, she was hired by Radio Sweden (Sveriges Radio) to investigate the right-wing extremist group the Nordic Foundation. She revisits the Nordic Foundation again for Expo magazine. That revisit becomes the focus of her investigation shown in “Hacking Hate,” which should’ve gotten to this point much earlier in the film.

Vingren comes across an online Nordic Foundation leader with the screen name Strength38. Vingren later found out his true identity and various details about his life, as shown in “Hacking Hate.” Vingren exposes him as a vile criminal who has received possible funding from Russian officials invested in online hate-speech trolling. The full name of this perpetrator is not in the documentary, but his real first name (Vincent) is mentioned many times.

“Hacking Hate” zig zags between the hunt for this white supremacist and interviewing people involved with online activism aimed at exposing and preventing hate speech that could lead to violence. Anika Collier Navaroli, a former content moderator for Twitter and Twitch, is the interviewee who gets the most screen time in the documentary. She repeats much of the same whistleblower testimony that she’s publicly given in other places.

For example, Collier Navaroli says that based on problematic Twitter messages that she and her team were monitoring, she warned Twitter executives that there would be violence from Donald Trump supporters in Washington, D.C., on January 6, 2021, when Trump held a rally in the city that day to protest what Trump described as a presidential election that was “stolen” from him. Collier Navaroli says her warnings were ignored by Twitter executives, who decided not to suspend the Twitter accounts of people committing hate speech that could incite violence. Twitter later suspended Trump after the violence happened at the U.S. Capitol building on January 6, 2021.

Collier Navaroli also says she flagged trouble in advance to Twitch executives to warn that white supremacists on Twitch were planning violence against people protesting against police brutality at a scheduled rally in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on August 25, 2020. Collier Navaroli says her warnings were also ignored at Twitch. That protest event resulted in Kyle Rittenhouse (who was 17 years old at the time) shooting and killing two of the protesters.

In “Hacking Hate,” Collier Navaroli says she felt sick when she heard about these killings. Rittenhouse claimed self-defense. In 2021, he was found not guilty of all the charges against him: two counts of homicide, one count of attempted homicide and two counts of reckless endangerment.

Collier Navaroli (who is African American) also talks about how race probably factored into how everything happened when she tried to warn people at Twitter and Twitch, and her concerns were dismissed. She says at Twitter and at Twitch, she was one of the few black employees or only black employee in her department, and the executive decision makers were all white. Vingren and Collier Navaroli also talk about being the targets of cyberbullying, including gender-based threats of violence against them.

There’s the age-old debate over allowing freedom of speech versus restricting hateful/offensive speech. Most U.S.-based major social media platforms have policies against hate content that targets certain groups and identities that are protected by federal civil rights laws. However, Vingren is one of many people who have already pointed out over the years that these policies often go unenforced. And in many cases, a company is making money from ads that are placed on hate content that’s available on the companies’ social media platforms.

Vingren says in the documentary that it’s very difficult to get social media executives at big corporations to talk on the record to journalists about how they monitor and enforce their user content policies. However, she is shown interviewing a very uncomfortable-looking Sara Overby, a Google public policy and government relations executive in Sweden. Google is the parent company of YouTube, which is frequently named as one of the top social media platforms where hate content is allowed to thrive.

Overby says in the interview: “It’s very important to clarify that we don’t make money from extreme content.” When Vingren asks, “How is it possible not to make money from it?” Overby responds that advertisers don’t want to be associated with extreme content. (It’s not the same thing as social media companies placing ads on this extreme content anyway.)

The interview gets even more uneasy for Overby when Vingren asks: “What role do you think YouTube has played for far-right extremists?” Overby (who has a “deer in the headlights” expression on her face) takes a noticeable pause before she answers: “That’s a difficult question to answer because I don’t know the details.”

Imran Ahmed, founder/CEO of Center for Countering Digital Hate (an online watchdog group) states emphatically in the documentary that the biggest social media companies can and do knowingly profit from hate by putting ads on extreme hate content. These ads usually get removed if someone inside or outside the company “flags” or reports the offensive content. But by then, the company has already made money from these ads.

As for Vingren’s investigation of the evasive Vincent, she goes through a journey, some of which she leaves purposely vague. She interviews Geir Loe Winsrygg, a former neighbor of Vincent’s, who describes Vincent as an unfriendly loner who was generally dishonest, creepy and disgusting, based on things that Winsrygg says he knows Vincent did. (The graphic details won’t be described in this review.)

Vingren also interviews journalist Roberto Lovato, who was investigating Vincent for different reasons. It’s mentioned in the documentary that Vincent had various identities and juggled multiple contrasting lifestyles, some of which were in direct contradiction to the homophobic and racist rants that he had as the leader of the Nordic Federation. For example, Vingren found out that Vincent did masturbation porn for gay sex websites. Vincent also has children with multiple black women. Some of these women have accused him of domestic violence.

“Hacking Hate” shows Vingren’s work as solitary, which could be true in many ways. However, it doesn’t ring true that Vingren got all this information in her investigation without a lot of help. Whether it was her decision or not, “Hacking Hate” does not acknowledge or give credit to anyone else for helping in Vingren’s investigation. And for such a wide-sweeping investigation that spans multiple continents, she is shown interviewing very few people.

The documentary never shows Vingren checking in with her editor to give updates or get feedback or any of the other realistic steps in a long-term investigation assignment for a magazine. “Hacking Hate” pushes too hard on the narrative of a “lone crusading journalist,” to the point that this narrative looks kind of phony, just for the sake of making the documentary look more dramatic. “Hacking Hate” is also a bit dull in places where it shouldn’t be. Ultimately, “Hacking Hate” is only worth watching if viewers want further confirmation of how corrupt and nasty the Internet can be, which isn’t exactly shocking news.

Copyright 2017-2024 Culture Mix
CULTURE MIX