Tag: Vanessa Kirby

Review: ‘Eden’ (2025), starring Jude Law, Ana de Armas, Vanessa Kirby, Daniel Brühl, Sydney Sweeney, Toby Wallace and Felix Kammerer

August 29, 2025

by Carla Hay

Jude Law and Vanessa Kirby in “Eden” (Photo by Jasin Boland/Vertical)

“Eden” (2025)

Directed by Ron Howard

Culture Representation: Taking place from 1929 to 1934, on the Galapagos island of Floreana in Ecuador, the dramatic film “Eden” (based on real events) features a predominantly white cast of characters (with one Latin person) representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy.

Culture Clash: Several settlers on the remote island of Floreana have various conflicts with each other, which get worse as food resources become scarce.  

Culture Audience: “Eden” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of the movie’s headliners and filmmaker Ron Howard, and are interested in dramas based on true stories, but this movie is disappointing and mostly dull.

Felix Kammerer, Ana de Armas and Toby Wallace in “Eden” (Photo by Jasin Boland/Vertical)

Watching the shallow historical drama “Eden” is like being stuck on a miserable island with pretentious and/or predatory people. Although the characters are based on real people, most of “Eden’s” cast members have obvious fake accents. That’s not the only problem with “Eden.” A story that should be mostly suspenseful is instead mostly sluggish, with a clumsily handled showdown crammed in toward the end.

Directed by Ron Howard and written by Noah Pink, “Eden” had its world premiere at the 2024 Toronto International Film Festival. The movie takes place from 1929 to 1934, on the remote Galapagos island of Floreana in Ecuador. “Eden” is a dramatic version of real events, but the dialogue and direction make it look like a slightly pompous soap opera.

“Eden” (formerly titled “Origin of Species”) is told in chronological order and begins with a caption stating that in the year 1929: “The world economy has collapsed in the wake of World War I. Fascism is spreading. People are desperate for a way out.”

A German botanist named Dr. Friedrich Ritter (played by Jude Law) and his lover Dore Strauch (played by Vanessa Kirby) have relocated to Floreana to isolate themselves and to live in their own version of utopia. Dore has multiple sclerosis that has made one of her legs disabled. Friedrich has convinced Dore that living on the island can cure her multiple sclerosis. This unrealistic medical prediction is one of many indications of how out-of-touch Friederich is.

The caption in the beginning of the movie further states: “The world learns of Ritter’s isolated existence through his letters, picked up by the rare passing vessel. Ritter’s mission: to write a radical new philosophy that will save humanity from itself.”

Friedrich, who is atheist, is often seen typing letters that have his rambling anti-government philosophies. For example, Friedrich says in one of his rants: “Democracy leads to fascism, which leads to war.” The movie often shows Friedrich talking out loud to himself as he writes pretentious drivel such as, “What is the true meaning of life? Pain. In pain, we find truth. And in truth, salvation.”

For someone who wants to be “left alone,” Friedrich as a hypocritical way of showing it. Allowing his letters to be picked up by passing vessels is an indication that he definitely wants attention from the “outside world.” By the time the story begins in “Eden,” Friedrich’s letters have gotten media exposure, and he has become somewhat of a cult folk hero for disillusioned people who want better lives for themselves.

Not surprisingly, some people who know about Friedrich and his island existence have sought him out on Floreana. Two of these devotees are a married German couple named Heinz Wittmer (played by Daniel Brühl) and Margret Wittmer (played by Sydney Sweeney), who have sold all of their belongings to relocate to Floreana. The Wittmers hope to learn more about utopian living from Friedrich.

Heinz and Margret have moved to Floreana with Heinz’s son/Margret’s stepson Harry Wittmer (played by Jonathan Tittlel), who is 14 years old. Harry’s deceased mother was Heinz’s first wife. Soon after arriving at the island, Margret tells Heinz that she’s about three months pregnant.

Margret can be heard in voiceovers reading letters that she has written to her unnamed mother, who is never seen in the movie. Based on these letters, Margret’s mother seems to be stern and judgmental, because Margret gives an apologetic explanation for why Margret has radically changed her life by moving to Floreana: “I’m sorry for leaving without saying goodbye, but I cannot handle another lecture about marrying a man broken by the war. I am simply doing what you always taught me: supporting my husband.”

Friedrich’s voiceovers and Margret’s voiceovers somewhat clutter up the movie. Over time, these narrative choices for the film become more apparent because Friedrich and Margret (who’s a lot tougher than she looks) are the “alpha” partners in their respective relationships. However, these voiceovers don’t offer much substance to the overall movie because the depictions of these main characters are still very superficial.

Friedrich and Dore are standoffish to the Wittmers when the Wittmers first arrive on the island. Dore is especially skeptical that the Wittmers won’t be able to adjust well to the Foreana’s rough terrain. Food can become scarce. People on the island often have to deal with some of the island’s wild animals (such as packs of feral dogs) that want the same food. Floreana is also a tropical island that has deadly creatures, such as poisonous snakes.

Before moving to Floreana, Heinz was a personal secretary to the mayor of Cologne, Germany. Considering that Friedrich despises bureaucracy, you can easily predict his contempt for Heinz. Friedrich’s animosity toward Heinz grows even more when Heinz proves to be a better farmer than Friedrich.

However, the Wittmers definitely have difficulty adjusting to their new environment at first. Friedrich and Dore have an attitude that the Wittmers need to fend for themselves. There’s a scene were Dore coldly makes this comment about the Wittmers to Friedrich: “They’re clearly suffering.” And then, in the next sentence she abruptly says to Friedrich: “Shall we fuck?” It’s an example of the movie’s awful dialogue.

The island gets more residents with the unwelcome arrival of a seductive diva who loves to be the center of attention. She calls herself “Baroness” Eloise von Wagner-Bousquet (played by Ana de Armas), who has a murky background but clams to be a wealthy royal from Europe. It’s implied that the Baroness is a con artist with a phony identity.

The Baroness is accompanied by her two lovers, whom she treats like servants: Robert Phillipson (played by Toby Wallace) is an extrovert. Rudolph “Rudy” Lorenz (played by Felix Kammerer) is an introvert. The Baroness is a manipulator who likes to make Robert and Rudy compete for her affections and attention. She’s also very high-maintenance and expects to always have the best possible food on the island, even if Robert and Rudy have to steal from their neighbors.

The Baroness and Margret clash with each other because they are complete opposites. Margret is offended by Baroness’ bawdy talk and indiscreet expression of sexuality. The Baroness has a dog named after the notorious sexual sadist Marquis de Sade. Margret is the type of person who gets upset just by seeing adults naked.

Most of “Eden” is about how all of these people have a very uncomfortable existence on the island. Jealousies, resentments, hunger and greed all get mixed into an emotional cauldron that reaches an exploding point. Friedrich isn’t the only delusional egomaniac on the island. The Baroness talks about her big plans to build a luxury resort on Floreana. It’s an idea that Friedrich and Dore obviously hate.

Unfortunately, “Eden” is a display of bad and unconvincing accents by many of the cast members. The worst offender is de Armas, whose stilted delivery is too affected, even if she’s portraying a con artist. Sweeney’s German accent isn’t consistent, although she does make the necessary effort to depict her Margret character as more interesting than Margret first appears to be.

Law gives a compelling performance as the brooding and sulking Friedrich, but like most of the “Eden” characters, there’s not much depth to Friedrich’s personality. Brühl (one of the few “Eden” cast members who is of German heritage in real life) doesn’t have an accent problem, but his character is written as too bland. Kirby doesn’t have much that she can do to give inscrutable and moody Dore any charisma because Dore is ultimately living in the shadow of Friedrich.

“Eden” stumbles by mishandling the irony of how Friedrich, who hates bureaucracy and rules, wants be the leader of this motley community, and he expects others to follow his unwritten rules. Instead, there are disjointed scenes that are meant to be provocative, but the impact is diluted by cringeworthy conversations or performances that look too manufactured. And there’s a childbirth scene in the movie that looks utterly fake.

One of the worst aspects of the movie is how unrealistic the costume design looks for characters who are supposed to be living on a remote island for a long period of time. The island doesn’t have laundry service or beauty salons, but you’d never know it from how polished everyone and their clothes look. Dore’s slightly messy hair is about the only thing that comes closest to what realistic hygiene would look like on a remote island with no basic amenities. A big part of the story is about the characters experiencing starvation because of the island’s food shortages, yet all the characters in the movie look very well-nourished.

“Eden” goes around in circles with repetitive fighting and betrayals until the inevitable descent into mayhem where not everyone gets out alive. By the time the movie comes to its messily contrived end, viewers will feel like “Eden” is an empty exercise that didn’t tell enough about the real people involved. For a more meaningful account of the real story, watch the documentary “The Galapagos Affair: Satan Came to Eden,” which was released in 2014, and directed by Dayna Goldfine and Dan Geller.

Vertical released “Eden” in U.S. cinemas on August 22, 2025.

Review: ‘The Fantastic Four: First Steps,’ starring Pedro Pascal, Vanessa Kirby, Ebon Moss-Bachrach, Joseph Quinn, Ralph Ineson, Julia Garner, Natasha Lyonne and Paul Walter Hauser

July 22, 2025

by Carla Hay

Ebon Moss-Bachrach, Vanessa Kirby, Pedro Pascal and Joseph Quinn in “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” (Photo courtesy of 20th Century Studios/Marvel Studios)

“The Fantastic Four: First Steps”

Directed by Matt Shakman

Culture Representation: Taking place in the late 1960s, in New York City and in outer space, the sci-fi/fantasy/action film “Fantastic Four: First Steps” (based on Marvel Comics characters) features a predominantly white cast of characters (with some African Americans, Latin people and Asians) representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy.

Culture Clash: Four astronauts with superpowers join forces against an evil, planet-eating god that lives in outer space and has recruited a silver-armored surfer to be his warrior messenger.

Culture Audience: “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” will appeal mainly to people who are fans of superhero movies, Marvel Comics, and action films where the superhero team is a tight-knit family.

Julia Garner in “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” (Photo courtesy of 20th Century Studios/Marvel Studios)

“The Fantastic Four: First Steps” is a step in the right direction for relaunching Marvel Comics’ Fantastic Four characters into a movie series for theatrical release. It’s an entertaining but not exceptionally outstanding improvement from 2005’s tepid “Fantastic Four,” 2007’s underwhelming “Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer” and 2015’s dreadful reboot “Fantastic Four,” which had completely new cast members from the previous “Fantastic Four” movies. Instead of being an origin story about how these superheroes got their powers, “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” shows this quartet as an established group of beloved superheroes whose loyalties to family and the world are put to the test. Great action sequences and a unique plot outweigh the film’s mixed-bag chemistry and bland villains.

Directed by Matt Shakman, “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” was written by Josh Friedman, Eric Pearson, Jeff Kaplan and Ian Springer. The movie takes place sometime in the late 1960s in New York City (the home city of the Fantastic Four) and in outer space. The movie’s Earth is an alternate version called Earth 828. It’s revealed near the end of the film that 828 stands for August 28, the birthday of Fantastic Four creator Jack Kirby, who died in 1994 at age 76. (“The Fantastic Four: First Steps” was actually filmed in London and in Spain.)

The Fantastic Four, who all live together, are heroic astronauts who are at the forefront of the Space Race, which had the United States competing to be the world leader in outer-space travel. The Fantastic Four have the nickname the First Family of Marvel because they were Marvel Comics’ first group of superheroes to be members of the same family. Here are the members of the Fantastic Four, who all got their superpowers four years earlier, during a space mission that went awry because of a cosmic storm:

  • Reed Richards/Mister Fantastic (played by Pedro Pascal) is the intellectual scientist/inventor of the group. His superpower is the ability to stretch like rubber for great lengths. Reed is the one who is most likely to obsess over scientific theories and mathematical equations to find solutions to problems. Reed also still feels guilty about the botched mission that made their lives anything but normal.
  • Sue Storm/Invisible Woman (played by Vanessa Kirby) is Reed’s level-headed wife. Her superpower is the ability to be invisible and to move large objects with her mind. Sue is the best out of the four when it comes to diplomatic relations with the public. She is also the head the Future Foundation, where she does a lot of work as a diplomat to help bring about world peace.
  • Johnny Storm/Human Torch (played by Joseph Quinn) is Sue’s impulsive, daredevil younger brother. His superpower is the ability to turn his body into a flaming torch and to shoot fireballs. Johnny is a bachelor who is considered the “heartthrob” of the group. And true to his Human Torch nickname, he’s a bit of a “hothead.”
  • Ben Grimm/The Thing (played by Ebon Moss-Bachrach), a former fighter pilot, is Reed’s best friend since their college days. His superpower is his extraordinary strength because the outer-space accident left him looking like a large man made of rocks. Ben is also a bachelor and is actually a gentle giant underneath his fearsome exterior.

“The Fantastic Four: First Steps” begins by showing Sue finding out the results of a home pregnancy test that she’s taken. She’s pregnant, after two years of trying to conceive a baby. Sue shows Reed the results of the test. They are both happy but also cautiously optimistic because they don’t know if their child will be biologically “normal” or not.

Reed and Sue say to each other about having this child: “I really want to do this.” Sue then tells Reed, “Nothing’s going to change.” We all know she’s wrong about that because this movie would not exist if everything stayed the same for the Fantastic Four. Reed and Sue later find out that their unborn child is a boy.

Also living in the Fantastic Four household is a robot named H.E.R.B.I.E. (Humanoid Experimental Robot B-Type Integrated Electronics), who resembles the robot title character of 2008’s “WALL-E.” H.E.R.B.I.E. (voiced by Matthew Wood) is a helpful assistant with numerous skills that come handy in the lab, the kitchen or wherever he’s needed. H.E.R.B.I.E. also has the same qualities of being like a cute pet.

One of the best things about “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” is that it’s not overstuffed with characters and subplots. The story is fairly uncomplicated and easy to follow, but there are some moments that get a little mundane and predictable. And, quite frankly, there are more fascinating and more appealing superhero groups in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), such as the Avengers and Guardians of the Galaxy.

A mysterious being called the Silver Surfer (played by Julia Garner), who is completely silver and travels through space on a surfboard, arrives on Earth, announces to the Fantastic Four that she has a message to deliver to Earth from a giant god named Galactus (played by Ralph Ineson), who lives in outer space and eats planets: “Your planet is marked for death. Your planet will be consumed by the Devourer … There’s nothing you can do about it.”

Marvel Comics and other on-screen depictions of the Silver Surfer made this character a male character. The gender swap of the Silver Surfer in “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” results in a subplot of Johnny developing a physical attraction/infatuation with her. It’s later revealed that the Silver Surfer’s real name is Shalla-Bal. Flashbacks briefly show some of her personal background, but she’s still an underdeveloped character who doesn’t say much.

After the Silver Surfer delivers this gloom-and-doom message and leaves to go back to outer space, Johnny follows her to see where she came from, but she fights him off like he’s a stalker, because he basically is a stalker in this moment. Johnny is defeated and falls back down to Earth, but he’s smitten, even though the Silver Surfer barely talks to him. Maybe Johnny is attracted to the skin-tight metallic silver body suit that she seems to be wearing.

Later, Johnny describes her as a “sexy alien” and says he “had a moment” of connecting with her. It’s kind of a strange part of the movie because Johnny could have his pick of many women on Earth. But if this is the movie’s way of saying that Johnny has some kind of kink for outer-space aliens who don’t look entirely human, who are we to judge? Later, in a battle scene when Sue tells Johnny to kill the Silver Surfer, he quips like a dejected bachelor: “Just when I thought I met someone interesting.”

The Fantastic Four then travel by spaceship to track down Galactus on their own, as if no one else on Earth can go in a spaceship to find this monster. Official marketing materials for “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” have already revealed that the son of Reed and Sue is born in this movie. Fans of the Marvel Comics already know that this son will be named Franklin.

However, the birth of Franklin in this movie is definitely not like it was in the comic books. The childbirth scene is like no other scene in the MCU. What also sets “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” apart from other MCU movies is how it shows superheroes becoming first-time parents because most superheroes are never shown as parents. “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” makes parental love the central focus of the movie’s biggest dilemma/conflict in fighting the villains.

“The Fantastic Four: First Steps” has top-notch production design and very immersive visual effects. And there’s no doubt that the movie has a talented cast. Pascal, Kirby, Quinn and Moss-Bachrach all bring charismatic sparks to their respective characters while staying true to the characters’ original personalities from Marvel Comics. It’s just that the characters’ dialogue in this movie isn’t particularly special. Garner and Ineson are perfectly fine in their roles, considering the Silver Surfer and Galactus are very robotic in “The Fantastic Four: First Steps.” Almost nothing in this movie is shown or told about Galactus’ origin story.

Supporting characters include Lynne Nichols (played by Sarah Niles), the Fantastic Four’s chief of staff, who doesn’t do much except stand by and act like a loyal administrative employee. She’s a member of the Fantastic Four entourage, but Lynne isn’t the type of trusted “inner circle” employee who’s privy to all of the Fantastic Four’s secrets, in the way that Alfred Pennyworth is for Batman. Most of Lynne’s screen time consists of her reacting with approval to whatever the Fantastic Four are doing or have done. Another side character is Ted Gilbert (played by Mark Gatiss), the host/star of a “Tonight Show”-styled variety show called “The Ted Gilbert Show,” who makes commentary on his show about the Fantastic Four.

“The Fantastic Four: First Steps” makes a half-hearted attempt to give Ben a love interest when he develops a mutual attraction to Rachel Rozman (played by Natasha Lyonne), who works for a community center. Ben meets friendly Rachel when he returns to his childhood home on Yancy Street. Some children behind a fence at the community center ask him to lift up a Volkswagen Beetle on a nearby street, he accommodates their request, and Rachel comes out of the building to talk to Ben.

The short interactions between Ben and Rachel are limited to only two scenes that are far apart from each other. “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” has a few other scenes that show how lovelorn Ben feels isolated from having a “normal” life because of his physical appearance. This aspect of Ben’s personal life is really sidelined in the movie because the main focus is on Reed and Sue becoming parents.

The Fantastic Four are the MCU’s most serious-minded group of superheroes so far. Don’t expect any wisecracking comedians in this quartet. Some of their jokes fall kind of flat. The movie’s funniest character is Harvey Elder/Mole Man (played by Paul Walter Hauser), a former Fantastic Four enemy who has created a society of Moleoids, who live underground with him in a community called Subterranea. Harvey, who is depicted as an unpredictable eccentric, brings some comic relief to the movie. There’s an entire backstory about Harvey that the movie ignores because he’s not in the movie long enough to warrant a lot of information about his past.

The chemistry between the characters in this version of the Fantastic Four isn’t entirely convincing. Ben is supposed to be Reed’s best friend, but Ben spends more time hanging out with Johnny. As for any marital passion between Reed and Sue, there’s more heat generated from four lit matchsticks than any romantic love that these two spouses show on screen. In this movie, Reed and Sue seem more like very compatible co-workers than a husband and a wife who are supposed to be in love with each other.

Despite these shortcomings, “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” isn’t boring. It’s certainly engaging in many ways, and it can be enjoyed as a stand-alone film—unlike other MCU films that make people feel like they need to watch several previous MCU films and TV series to understand what’s happening. In “The Fantastic Four: First Steps,” the mid-credits scene takes place four years after the events in the movie and is a preview of 2026’s “Avengers: Doomsday.” The movie’s end-credits scene is a non-essential animated 1960s-styled homage to the Fantastic Four. Ultimately, “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” isn’t top-tier MCU, but it’s better than the average superhero movie.

20th Century Studios will release “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” in U.S. cinemas on July 25, 2025.

Review: ‘Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning,’ starring Tom Cruise

May 14, 2025

by Carla Hay

Pom Klementieff, Greg Tarzan Davis, Tom Cruise, Simon Pegg and Hayley Atwell in “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” (Photo courtesy of Paramount Pictures)

“Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning”

Directed by Christopher McQuarrie

Some language in French with subtitles

Culture Representation: Taking place in various parts of the world, the action film “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” (the eighth movie in the “Mission: Impossible” movie series) features a predominantly white cast of characters (with some black people, Asians, Latin people and Native Americans) representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy.

Culture Clash: American rogue superspy Ethan Hunt and his international allies race against time to stop a massive artificial intelligence force called the Entity from destroying the world. 

Culture Audience: “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of the movie’s headliners, the “Mission: Impossible” franchise and action movies that are over-the-top spectacles.

Nick Offerman, Angela Bassett, Mark Gatiss and Janet McTeer in “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” (Photo courtesy of Paramount Pictures)

“Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” is overstuffed, goes on for too long, and comes dangerously close to the ridiculousness of the “Fast & Furious” franchise. However, the engaging characters and superior stunts outweigh the movie’s flaws. It’s by no means the best “Mission: Impossible” movie in the series, but it’s certainly the one that expects viewers to think the hardest about a convoluted plot that doesn’t deserve overthinking.

Directed by Christopher McQuarrie, “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” (the eighth movie in the “Mission: Impossible” series was written by Erik Jendresen and McQuarrie. “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” had its world premiere in Tokyo and its European premiere at the 2025 Cannes Film Festival. McQuarrie also directed and co-wrote 2015’s “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation,” 2018’s “Mission: Impossible – Fallout” and 2023’s “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One,” whose title was later shortened to “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning” after the movie underperformed at the box office. The “Mission: Impossible” movie series is inspired by the TV series “Mission: Impossible,” which was on the air from 1966 to 1973.

“Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” is essentially “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part Two,” but you don’t need to see “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” to understand “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning.” That’s because “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” is filled with exposition dumps of characters explaining what happened in previous “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” and other previous “Mission: Impossible” movies, as well as over-explaining what they’re about to do in “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning.”

One of the most unintentionally laughable things about “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” is how the characters take turns in their exposition-dump dialogues by each saying things with perfect timing, as if they know each other’s lines and never talk over each other or interrupt each other during these overly choreographed conversations. It never looks like real conversations, especially in the high-pressure situations that these characters experience. There are also several flashback montages for nostalgia’s sake and to inform viewers who might not have seen or who might have forgotten some key moments in previous “Mission: Impossible” movies.

At the end of “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One,” American rogue superspy Ethan Hunt (played by Tom Cruise)—an operative of the secret agency Impossible Missions Force (IMF)—escaped from with one of two keys that have the power to destroy a massive artificial intelligence villain called the Entity, which is intent on taking over the world. The Entity is not physically embodied in any one being because the Entity is a virtual enemy that can spread wherever and whenever it chooses. However, the biggest human enemy in the “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” and “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” is Gabriel (played by Esai Morales), an assassin liaison for the Entity.

“Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” begins with an outer-space galaxy image and a male voice intoning the “Mission: Impossible” movie motto that gets repeated multiple times throughout this film: “We live and die in the shadows of those we hold close and those we never meet.” The voice adds, “The world is changing. War is coming.”

The praise gets a little corny and starts to deify Ethan as a female voice thanks Ethan for hs service, as several scenes from previous “Mission: Impossible” movies are shown like a greatest-hits playlist. The voice adds: “Every personal sacrifice you made has brought us another sunrise,” she says. “And although you never followed orders, you never let us down.

It’s also explained in the beginning of the movie that every corner of cyberspace has been corrupted by the Entity, which has inspired a doomsday cult. These fanatics have infiltrated every level of law enforcement, government bureaucracy and the military. “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” doesn’t do a lot with this “worldwide cult” plot development, because most of the movie shows Ethan mostly hanging out or fighting against a small group of people, most of whom are familiar characters.

Ethan is under orders to surrender to the U.S. government and hand over the Entity key that Ethan has in his possession. Ethan as other plans. His first order of business in “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” is to a prison break of former Gabriel cohort Paris (played by Pom Klementieff), a French assassin who is currently in prison in Austria because of the events that happened in “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One.”

This review won’t go into too many more details about what happens, but it’s enough to say that “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” has a lot of dazzling action scenes but the story doesn’t do much that’s surprising. Ethan is joined by Ethan is joined by his two most loyal sidekicks: IMF computer technician Luther Stickell (played by Ving Rhames) and IMF technology field agent Benji (played by Simon Pegg), who have opposite personalities. Luther is laid-back and cool. Benji is high-strung and nervous.

Also along for the ride are Paris and two other of Ethan’s enemies-turned-allies who first appeared in “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One”: arms dealer Alanna Mitsopolis (played by Vanessa Kirby); former U.S. intelligence agent Degas (played by Greg Tarzan Davis); and masterful thief Grace (played by Hayley Atwell), who has a mutual growing attraction to Ethan. Alanna is the daughter of illegal arms dealer Max Mitsopolis (played by Vanessa Redgrave), who died in 1996’s “Mission: Impossible,” the first film in the “Mission: Impossible” movie series. “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” reveals that another character in the movie has a parent who died in the first “Mission: Impossible'” movie.

Erika Sloane (played by Angela Bassett), who was the director of the CIA in “Mission: Impossible – Fallout,” is now the president of the United States in “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning.” Field agent Jasper Briggs (played by Shea Whigham) also returns and continues to hunt Ethan. He has a much smaller role than he did in “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One.”

Other government officials who are featured in the movie are U.S. Army General Sidney (played by Nick Offerman), who is chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; U.S. Secretary of Defense Serling (played Holt McCallany); Walters (played by Janet McTeer); CIA director Eugene Kittridge (played by Henry Czerny); U.S. Navy Admiral Neely (played by Hannah Waddingham); U.S. Navy Captain Bledsoe (played by Tramell Tillman); and National Security Agency chief Angstrom (played by Mark Gatiss). They mostly just stand around and worry about decisions they have to make because of Ethan’s actions.

“Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” has a lot of expected globetrotting, mostly in Europe, North America and Africa. (The movie was actually filmed in South Africa and England.) The trekking includes a stop in Alaska, where CIA analyst William Donloe (played by Rolf Saxon) and his wife Tapeesa (played by Lucy Tulugarjuk) play crucial roles in the story. William was previously seen in the first “Mission: Impossible” movie. It’s explained in Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” what William been doing since then.

The expected fist fights, explosions and gun shootouts occur, but the two most impressive action sequences involve (1) a deep-sea dive to go inside a shipwrecked submarine and (2) a battle to reach Gabriel flying in a single-passenger plane. (These action sequences are glimpsed in the movie’s trailers.) The deep-sea sequence is marred only by unrealistic-looking actions where Ethan does certain things without an oxygen tank or pressure suit, which would definitely kill someone in real life in a deep-sea environment.

Cruise famously does many of his own stunts. But the visual effects in these fake-looking scenes don’t look convincing because they make Ethan look superhuman, which defeats the “Mission: Impossible” purpose of showing Ethan as a flawed human being. The filmmakers should’ve left it so Ethan could be a superhero without superpowers that go beyond human capacities.

And in case it wasn’t clear enough, even though it’s repeated enough times in the movie: It’s up to Ethan to save the world. And if he doesn’t save the world, as someone in the movie quips, it’s all Ethan’s fault. The elevating of Ethan to almost messianic levels becomes a running joke in the movie. The concept of Ethan being a superhero is obvious and doesn’t even need to be said out loud. However, it’s good to see that the movie is in on the joke and doesn’t take itself too seriously.

Cruise and the rest of the cast members are serviceable in their roles. But there’s sort of a cold disconnect in how most of the characters don’t mention the human stakes of saving their loved ones in this possible apocalypse. The only hints that any of these characters have lives outside of their work are brief glimpses of Erika showing affection and concern for her unnamed adult son (played by Kwabena Ansan), who’s in the U.S. military. William and Tapeesa are the only couple shown in the movie.

One of the drawbacks of making the chief villain an abstract virtual enigma instead of something tangible: It removes the possibility of having a villain with a unique personality. Human villain Gabriel is not in the movie for very long, considering the 169-minute runtime. Although there’s nothing wrong with Morales’ performance, Gabriel is an underdeveloped character and comes across as an inferior imitation of a villain in a James Bond movie.

Does anyone with knowledge of the movie business really believe that “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” is the last “Mission: Impossible” movie? No. “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” is not a great movie, but it’s good enough in delivering what fans expect. And what people can expect is for this franchise to continue in one way or another.

Paramount Pictures will release “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” in U.S. cinemas on May 23, 2025.

Review: ‘Napoleon’ (2023), starring Joaquin Phoenix

November 15, 2023

by Carla Hay

Joaquin Phoenix in “Napoleon” (Photo courtesy of Apple Studios/Columbia Pictures)

“Napoleon” (2023)

Directed by Ridley Scott

Culture Representation: Taking place in various countries in Europe from 1789 to 1815, the dramatic film “Napoleon” (a biopic of French emperor Napoleon Bonaparte) features a predominantly white cast of characters (with a few black people) representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy.

Culture Clash: Napoleon Bonaparte rises from humble beginnings to become emperor of France, but his life is plagued by power struggles, marital problems, and deep insecurities. 

Culture Audience: “Napoleon” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of star Joaquin Phoenix, director Ridley Scott and history-influenced war movies that put more importance on battlefield scenes than crafting compelling stories.

Vanessa Kirby and Joaquin Phoenix in “Napoleon” (Photo courtesy of Apple Studios/Columbia Pictures)

The long-winded “Napoleon” is a film that acts as if epic battle scenes are enough to make a great war movie. Overrated director Ridley Scott continues his awful tendency of shaming female sexuality more than male sexuality. Napoleon has an American accent. Historical inaccuracies aside—and there are plenty of these inaccuracies in the movie—”Napoleon” (which clocks in at a too-long 158 minutes) is ultimately a very superficial film that is more style than substance.

Although people can agree that “Napoleon” star Joaquin Phoenix is a very talented actor, there’s no legitimate reason for why he has an American accent in portraying a well-known French leader such as Napoleon Bonaparte, when all the other “Napoleon” cast members portraying French people do not have American accents. (They have British accents.) It wouldn’t have been that hard for “Napoleon” director Scott to require Phoenix to not have this phony-sounding and distracting American accent in this movie and instead have Phoenix be consistent with the other cast members’ accents for those portraying French people. It’s just lazy filmmaking, albeit on a very big budget for this overpriced film.

“Napoleon” takes place from 1789 to 1815. He was emperor of France from 1804 to 1814 and part of 1815. Napoleon died in 1821, at the age of 51. The movie has some moments of unexpected comedy, but a lot of that comedy is unintentional. Many lines of dialogue in the uneven “Napoleon” screenplay (written by David Scarpa) are so cringeworthy, they’re funny—as in, viewers will laugh at the dialogue, not laugh with it. The relationships in the movie are presented as very shallow, with poorly written conversations as flimsy substitutes for what are supposed to be meaningful emotional bonds.

As an example of the type of junk that viewers have to sit through when watching “Napoleon,” there’s a scene where quarrelling spouses Napoleon and Josephine (played by Vanessa Kirby) have one of their many arguments during a meal at a dinner party in their palatial home. Josephine calls Napoleon “fat” in front of their guests. Napoleon replies, “I enjoy my meals. Destiny has brought me here. Destiny has brought me this lamb chop!”

Napoleon’s courtship and subsequent marriage to Josephine are portrayed as fueled primarily by lust on his part (and his desire for her to give birth to a male heir) and desperate gold digging and social climbing on her part. Napoleon met Josephine after she was released from prison and essentially destitute. Napoleon gets Josephine’s attention when he sees her playing cards at a dingy nightclub and stares at her like a stalker. Their relationship in the movie consists of a few robotic-like sex scenes and more scenes of them having a dysfunctional and twisted rapport of insulting each other.

“Napoleon” makes it clear that petulant Napoleon and manipulative Josephine got some kind of sexual arousal from their war of words/verbal abuse, where each tried to assert control and dominance over the other. Very little is shown about how Josephine and Napoleon were as parents. Kirby and Phoenix give very capable performances, but neither performance rises to the level of outstanding, due to the substandard screenplay and the bloated direction for “Napoleon.”

Napoleon and Josephine were both admittedly unfaithful to each other during their marriage, but Josephine’s infidelities are repeatedly shown on screen, while Napoleon’s infidelities are not shown on screen and almost excused. The overwhelming sexist tone of this movie is that Napoleon deserved more sympathy for being cheated on, while Josephine is portrayed as a heartless “harlot” who deserved very little or no sympathy. It can’t be blamed on sexism in the 1700s and 1800s. “Napoleon” director Scott made the choices on what to show and what not to show in this movie.

Even though he is an unfaithful husband, Napoleon hypocritically thinks that he’s entitled to his infidelities, while Josephine gets no such entitlement. Napoleon’s jealousy goes beyond the norm and crosses the line into obsessive possessiveness. A scene in the movie shows Napoleon abruptly leaving his military duties on the battlefield to go home to Paris, to show Josephine that he “owns” her, after he hears that she has another lover. When Napoleon is later asked why he made such a sudden (and temporary) departure from his military command, Napoleon replies: “My wife is a slut.”

Napoleon was famous for his abrasive and cocky personality in real life. In this movie, Phoenix depicts not only that unlikeable side to Napoleon but also portrays Napoleon as an emotionally wounded man-child whose feelings get hurt if Josephine doesn’t act as if she’s a submissive wife who worships him. When Josephine doesn’t get pregnant as fast as he wants her to get pregnant, Napoleon blames her and acts personally offended that her body is not conceiving and delivering the heirs that he wants in the timetable he expects them to be born.

Napoleon’s family members are side characters who ultimately exist to react to his ego and whims. Napoleon’s younger brother Lucien Bonaparte (played by Matthew Needham) benefits from Napoleon’s political power. For a while, Lucien is Napoleon’s trusty sidekick, but then Lucien disappears for large chunks of the movie with no real explanation. Napoleon’s mother Letizia Bonaparte (played by Sinéad Cusack) was strong-willed and meddling in real life, but in this movie, she’s an underdeveloped and sidelined character.

“Napoleon” (which was filmed in Malta) becomes a repetitive slog of battle scenes on the field, his marital problems, and the occasional exile. It’s all formulaic at a certain point. Napoleon’s opponents and allies are nothing but hollow historical figures in this movie, which has admirable costume design and production design. Napoleon’s trusted political adviser Paul Barras (played by Tahar Rahim) has a hopelessly generic personality before he disappears from the story. British military commander Arthur Wellesley (played by Rupert Everett) has some of the most embarrassingly terrible lines in the movie.

Yes, the action scenes in “Napoleon” are visually impressive. But there are plenty of war movies with better action scenes. What happens in between those scenes are watchable moments at best and disappointing missed opportunities at worst.

Apple Studios and Columbia Pictures will release “Napoleon” in U.S. cinemas on November 22, 2023.

Review: ‘Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One,’ starring Tom Cruise, Hayley Atwell, Ving Rhames, Simon Pegg, Rebecca Ferguson, Vanessa Kirby and Henry Czerny

July 5, 2023

by Carla Hay

Hayley Atwell and Tom Cruise in “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” (Photo courtesy of Paramount Pictures)

“Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One”

Directed by Christopher McQuarrie

Some language in Italian and French with subtitles

Culture Representation: Taking place from various parts of the world, the action film “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with some African Americans, Latinos and Asians) who are connected in some way with government operations or criminal activities.

Culture Clash: IMF (International Mission Force) rogue agent Ethan Hunt is once again on a mission to save the world from deadly villains. 

Culture Audience: Besides appealing the obvious target audience of “Mission: Impossible” fans, “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of Tom Cruise and spy thrillers with death-defying action stunts.

Pom Klementieff in “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” (Photo courtesy of Paramount Pictures)

By now, most movie fans know that the “Mission: Impossible” movie series, starring Tom Cruise as IMF rogue agent Ethan Hunt, will have a lot of amazing stunts and action sequences. Cruise famously does his own principal stunts for these films. The “Mission: Impossible” movie series (based on the TV series of the same name) began in 1996. Instead of slowing down with these movies, Cruise seems determined to do even more outrageous stunts. In “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One,” the stakes get even higher when Ethan and all the main characters face the challenge of an entity that can create false images and alter people’s perceptions of reality.

As already shown in the movie’s trailer, Cruise’s biggest stunt in the film is driving custom-made Honda CRF 250 off of Norway’s Helsetkopen mountain, where he fell 4,000 feet into a ravine before opening his parachute about 500 feet from the ground. There are more stunts (some using obvious visual effects) involving planes, trains and automobiles. The movie also introduces a few intriguing new characters who will be appearing in more than one “Mission: Impossible” movie.

Directed by Chistopher McQuarrie, “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” is the seventh film in the “Mission: Impossible” movie series and the third consecutive “Mission: Impossible” film that McQuarrie has directed, following 2015’s “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation” and 2018’s “Mission: Impossible – Fallout.” Cruise and McQuarrie are the producers of “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One,” which was written by McQuarrie and Erik Jendresen. It’s the same writing, directing and producing team behind “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part Two,” which is set for release in 2024.

“Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” is the most ambitious of the “Mission: Impossible” movie series so far but in some ways is also the most ridiculous. In trying so hard to outdo its predecessors, the movie gets into cartoonish territory when characters don’t get any injuries in crashes and explosions that would kill or maim most people in real life. Some of the plot also gets too convoluted. Despite these flaws, what a thrill ride it is. This action-packed and suspenseful film mostly earns its total running time of 156 minutes, even though “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” still could’ve benefited from tighter film editing. (For example, the movie’s opening credits don’t happen until 28 minutes into the film.)

“Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” opens with a Russian submarine getting blown up after getting hit with a torpedo. The submarine’s video monitors and other computer systems were hacked by a mysterious entity that can create illusions to confuse the submarine’s occupants. These illusions caught the occupants off guard, which led to the torpedo destroying the submarine and everyone inside.

This all-powerful hacking tool is essentially on a computer flash drive, which is called a key. It should come as no surprise that every major terrorist group and every major governmental superpower is looking for this key, which is being sold to the highest bidder. Ethan works for a secretive government operation called International Mission Force (IMF), which gives him a new task in each “Mission: Impossible” movie. In “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” Ethan and his team have been tasked with finding the key before it gets into the wrong hands.

Ethan agrees to accept this mission, but he disagrees with the U.S. Director of National Intelligence, whose last name is Denlinger (played by Cary Elwes), who is also the head of a mysterious spy group called The Community. Denlinger (who is based in Washington, D.C.) thinks the U.S. government should be able to control this entity. Ethan thinks that the entity should be destroyed. Denlinger doesn’t know that IMF exists until he meets Ethan.

For this mission, Ethan is once again joined by his two trusty sidekicks who are computer technology experts and hackers: Luther Stickell (played by Ving Rhames), who is calm and logical, is Ethan’s oldest friend. Luther’s nicknames are Phinneas Freak and The Net Ranger. Benji Dunn (played by Simon Pegg), who is jumpy and neurotic, often follows orders from Luther.

Returning to the “Mission: Impossible” franchise are mercenary Ilsa Faust (played by Rebecca Ferguson), who has complicated relationship with Ethan; Eugene Kittridge (played by Henry Czerny), who was in 1996’s “Mission: Impossible” movie and who is now the director of the CIA; and the morally ambiguous Alanna Mitsopolis (played by Vanessa Kirby), also known as The White Widow. There’s a very memorable sequence on a train that involves Alanna/The White Widow.

During this globetrotting hunt, Ethan and his team go to various places, including the Arabian Desert, Abu Dhabi, Amsterdam, Rome and the Austrian Alps. They are being hunted by operatives from the U.S. government agency Clandestine Services. A Clandestine Services operative named Briggs (played by Shea Whigham) is leading this hunt. Briggs is a gruff taskmaster who likes to bend the rules, while his relatively new subordinate Degas (played by Greg Tarzan Davis) is very by-the-book and wants to follow the established protocol.

The movie’s chief villain is a mysterious agitator named Gabriel (played by Esai Morales), who has his ruthless sidekick Paris (played by Pom Klementieff) do a lot of his dirty work. Ethan and Gabriel share a past that has to do with a woman named Marie (played by Mariela Garriga), with this shared past explaining some of Gabriel’s motivations. Paris is the one who is most often seen trying to kill Ethan and a cunning thief named Grace (played by Hayley Atwell), who becomes Ethan’s reluctant and often untrustworthy accomplice in this race to get possession of the key.

One of the ways that “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” stands apart from so many other action films is that it doesn’t play into tired stereotypes of having a principal cast of people who mostly under the age of 40. Likewise, “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” also defies that action movie stereotype of having just one leading actress (usually someone’s love interest in the movie) among a slew of male leading actors. In “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One,” there are four strong women who have prominent roles in the movie.

Klementieff is a standout among “Mission: Impossible” villains. Her menacing Paris character is in stark contrast to the sweet-natured outer-space alien Mantis that Klementieff played in Marvel Studios’ superhero “Guardians of the Galaxy” blockbusters. In many ways, Paris outshines Gabriel, since Gabriel is more of a psychological villain than someone who can barrel through streets in a high-speed car chases or cause mayhem with an arsenal of weapons.

Atwell also holds her own in the action scenes, although some viewers might find Grace’s intentionally duplicitous personality a little annoying. Rhames and Pegg continue their sometimes-amusing rapport as Luther and Benji. Cruise does some of his best stunt work ever in the movie. If stunt work had a category at the Academy Awards, then Cruise would be a certain nominee if not winner for “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One.” It’s a breathtaking thriller that delivers beyond expectations for action scenes and spy intrigue. However, the “Mission: Impossible” filmmakers need to remember to have some of these action scenes more grounded in the reality of human frailties and the realistic consequences of being in these death-defying situations.

Paramount Pictures will release “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” in U.S. cinemas on July 12, 2023, with sneak previews on July 10, 2023.

Review: ‘The Son’ (2022), starring Hugh Jackman, Laura Dern, Vanessa Kirby, Zen McGrath and Anthony Hopkins

December 10, 2022

by Carla Hay

Zen McGrath, Laura Dern and Hugh Jackman in “The Son” (Photo by Rekha Garton/See-Saw Films/Sony Pictures Classics)

“The Son” (2022)

Directed by Florian Zeller

Culture Representation: Taking place primarily in New York City and briefly in Washington, D.C., the dramatic film “The Son” has a predominantly white cast of characters (with some African Americans and Asians) representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy.

Culture Clash: A workaholic corporate lawyer, his ex-wife and his current wife struggle with understanding the depression of his 17-year-old son from his first marriage. 

Culture Audience: “The Son” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of the movie’s stars and don’t mind watching movies about mental illness that awkwardly handle this serious subject matter.

Hugh Jackman and Vanessa Kirby in “The Son” (Photo by Rob Youngson/See-Saw Films/Sony Pictures Classics)

A talented cast can’t save “The Son,” a sloppily edited drama that mishandles issues about mental illness in a turgid and manipulative way. This is writer/director Florian Zeller’s sophomore slump as a feature filmmaker. Zeller triumphed with his feature-film directorial debut “The Father,” his stellar 2020 drama for which he and co-writer Christopher Hampton won an Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay. “The Father,” which is based on Zeller’s play of the same name, is a story told from the perspective of an elderly British man who has dementia. Anthony Hopkins portrayed the person with dementia in the “The Father,” and Hopkins won an Oscar for Best Actor for this performance.

Zeller brought Hopkins in for a short scene (which lasts less than 10 minutes) in “The Son,” and this scene is one of the highlights of this very uneven and ultimately disappointing movie. “The Father” and “The Son” are not similar to each other all, except for the fact that both movies are based on Zeller’s stage plays of the same names, and both movies are about families coping with a loved one who has a mental illness. The title character in each movie is the one dealing with the mental health issues.

Zeller and Hampton teamed up again to co-write “The Son” screenplay. “The Son” had its world premiere at the 2022 Venice International Film Festival. It also made the rounds at several other film festivals in 2022, including the Toronto International Film Festival, the BFI London Film Festival and AFI Fest in Los Angeles. Being at these high-profile festivals might seem like the “The Son” is a “prestige picture,” but it’s more indicative of the movie’s star power than the quality of the film. “The Son’s” clumsy treatment of a complicated issues such as depression is a lot like what you would see on a TV-movie made for a basic cable network.

“The Son” covers a well-worn topic that’s been the subject of numerous movies and TV shows: A workaholic father’s absence from home ends up causing resentment from some of his family members, and he might spend the rest of the story trying to mend any broken relationships caused by his lack of attention to his family. Arguments, grudges and sometimes physical altercations then happen. And then, depending on how predictable the story wants to be, a truce is usually called and people go on a path toward healing.

“The Father” was told from the perspective of the title character, but “The Son” is not told from the perspective of the title character. Instead, “The Son” puts most of its efforts in showing the thoughts and feelings of the son’s father. Up until a certain point in the movie, “The Son” is a formulaic story of a family damaged by divorce and not knowing how to deal with mental illness. But perhaps in a misguided effort to not have a typical ending, “The Son” does something so off-putting in the film’s last 15 minutes, it essentially ruins the movie.

In “The Son,” Peter Miller (played by Hugh Jackman) is an ambitious attorney who works at a corporate firm in New York City. Viewers will soon see that Peter (who is in his 50s) is highly motivated to succeed, and he expects excellence from himself and everyone around him. Peter lives in an upscale New York City apartment with his second wife Beth (played by Vanessa Kirby), who’s about 20 years younger than Peter. Beth and Peter, who’ve been married for less than two years, are parents of an infant son named Theo (played by twins Felix Goddard and Max Goddard).

Conversations in the movie reveal that Beth and Peter had an affair while he was still married to his first wife Kate (played by Laura Dern), who was devastated when Peter left Kate to be with Beth. Peter and Beth met (ironically enough) at a wedding, and Beth knew from the beginning that Peter was married. Peter and Kate have a 17-year-old son named Nicholas (played by Zen McGrath), who is also emotionally wounded from his parents’ divorce. Kate has full custody of Nicholas, who lives with her in New York City.

Peter will soon find out how much Nicholas has resentment toward him and how depressed Nicholas is. It starts with a worried phone call from Kate, who tells Peter that she recently found out that Nicholas stopped going to school for almost a month. Nicholas pretended to her that he was going to school, but he was actually just spending time walking around the city, according to what he confesses later. When the school tried to contact Kate by phone and by email about Nicholas’ absence, Nicholas was able to intercept those messages until the truth came out.

Kate also tells Peter that she and Nicholas no longer get along with each other. “He’s not well,” Kate insists. Kate also ominously hints to Peter that Nicholas could be dangerous. She describes how Nicholas once looked at her with so much hatred, she thought he might physically hurt her. “He scares me, okay?” Kate says to Peter about Nicholas.

It’s reached a point where Kate (who feels helpless and confused) has reluctantly agreed to Nicholas’ request to live with Peter for the time being. Nicholas tells Peter why he wants to live with him when he describes how he fells about living with Kate: “When I’m here, I get too many dark ideas. I want to live with my little brother. Sometimes, I feel like I’m going crazy.”

Peter’s way of handling Nicholas’ problems is to try to find a logical solution. Peter tries to be understanding, but he often talks to Nicholas like a prosecutor interrogating a defense witness in court. At this point, Peter isn’t fully aware that Nicholas has a mental illness. Peter thinks Nicholas is just being a rebellious brat.

In one of the movie’s several emotionally charged conversations, Peter demands that Nicholas tell him what’s wrong. On the verge of tears, Nicholas tries to explain to Peter why he’s been skipping school: “I don’t know how to describe it. It’s life. It’s weighing me down.”

Peter tells Beth what’s going on with Nicholas and asks her if it will be okay if Nicholas lives with them for a while, even though it’s obvious that Peter has made up his mind that Nicholas will live with them. Kate and Peter also agree that Nicholas (a loner who has difficulty making friends) can transfer to another school. What they don’t do is try to get him into therapy. Peter is the type of person who thinks the family can solve this problem on their own.

At first, Beth is reluctant to have this troubled teen living with them when she’s already busy taking care of a newborn child. However, Beth agrees to let Nicholas live with them (they have an extra bedroom that Nicholas will have to himself) because she sees how much Peter wants to help Nicholas, and she doesn’t want to interfere in this father-son relationship. Beth has only known Nicholas for two years, so she feels she doesn’t have the right to make parental decisions about him.

The rest of “The Son” is a back-and-forth repetition of Nicholas seeming to improve while living with Peter and Beth, but then something happens to show that Nicholas is not doing very well at all. Eventually, Peter finds out that Nicholas self-harms by cutting himself. Peter and Kate go through various stages of denial, guilt, sadness and anger, while Beth has her guard up and doesn’t really want to deal with the family problems when they get too intense. Beth also has stepparent insecurities about how much a spouse cares about any children from a previous marriage, compared to how much the spouse cares about any children from the current marriage.

“The Son” has a not-very-interesting subplot about Peter getting a job offer to work for a U.S. senator from Delaware named Brian Hammer (played by Joseph Mydell), who wants to hire Peter for Senator Hammer’s re-election campaign. The job would require Peter to spend a lot of time in Washington, D.C., so Peter has to decide whether or not to take the job in the midst of all of his family problems. “The Son” uses this subplot as a way try to create some suspense over whether not Peter will accept this job offer. This decision isn’t as suspenseful as the movie wants it to be.

The Washington, D.C., area is also where Peter’s unnamed widower father (played by Hopkins) lives, so there’s a gripping scene where Peter visits his father while Peter is in the area to meet with Senator Hammer. It’s in this scene where viewers find out more about Peter’s family background and why Peter has the parenting style that he does. Even though Peter doesn’t want to admit it, he’s a lot like his father, when it comes to letting work get in the way of spending quality time with his family.

But unlike Peter, his father is cold, cruel and unapologetic for making work a higher priority than his family. Peter tells his father that Nicholas is now living with Peter, and this new living arrangement seems to be helping Nicholas with Nicholas’ problems. Instead of being concerned or empathetic about Nicholas, Peter’s father accuses Peter of telling him this information to make Peter look like a better father.

Peter denies it, of course. This unfair and paranoid accusation stirs up some deep-seated resentments, and Peter reminds his father how selfish he was not to visit Peter’s mother when she was dying in the hospital. Peter’s father responds this way: “Just fucking get over it.” Even though Hopkins has a standout scene in “The Son,” too many other scenes in the film are mired in predictability.

“The Son” puts so much emphasis on Peter, he’s the only main character who gets a backstory. The movie reveals nothing about the backgrounds of Kate and Beth, even though Kate has been Nicholas’ primary caretaking parent after the divorce, up until Nicholas began living with Peter and Beth. Viewers will never find out how Kate’s own upbringing affected her parenting skills.

The movie also gives no information about Nicholas’ background to indicate how long he’s been having these feelings of depression. Several times in the movie, Nicholas tells Peter that he blames Peter’s abandonment and the divorce for feeling depressed, but it all seems too convenient and intended to put Peter on a guilt trip. If Peter had been too busy with work to notice Nicholas’ problems, then what indications did Kate see? Don’t expect the movie to answer that question.

Instead, the most that viewers will see about Nicholas before he moved in with Peter are several cutesy flashbacks of a 6-year-old Nicholas (played by George Cobell) in happier times during a vacation that he took with his parents in Corsica. “The Son” keeps showing flashbacks of this family of three taking a trip on a small boat, and Peter teaching an adorable Nicholas how to swim in the sea. These superficial flashbacks are examples of lazy storytelling that doesn’t give viewers a chance to get to know Nicholas as a well-rounded person.

“The Son” gives no information about what Nicholas’ personality was like a few years before the divorce. It’s possible that he had depression when his parents were still married, but that information is never revealed or discussed in the movie. “The Son” brings up a lot of questions about Nicholas that the movie never answers. It’s a huge misstep in how this movie portrays its title character.

Considering these limitations, McGrath gives a compelling but not outstanding performance as Nicholas. A few times in the movie, Nicholas is described as looking “evil,” but the expression on his face just looks like he’s pouting and glaring like a spoiled child who didn’t get his way. People with enough life experience can see that Nicholas has depression problems, but he’s also very manipulative, and he knows how to make his parents (especially Peter) feel guilty about the divorce.

As for the other principal cast members, Dern gives an authentic performance for her underdeveloped Kate character when expressing the anguish of a parent who goes through what Kate goes through in the movie. Kirby gives some depth to what is essentially a “trophy wife” role, but so little is known about Beth, there’s only so much that Kirby can do with this often-aloof character. Beth also complains to Peter about how he spends more time at work than at home, which kind of makes her look like a ditz that she didn’t know he was a workaholic when she married him.

Ultimately, “The Son” comes across as a showboat movie for Jackman, because it spends so much time showing Peter’s life outside the home, as well as Peter’s feelings about his own “daddy issues.” Peter is supposed to be American, but Jackman’s native Australian accent can sometimes be heard in his performance of Peter, especially in scenes where Peter is shouting or arguing with someone. Jackman certainly delivers a heartfelt performance, but a lot of it seems overly calculated too, much like how the movie handles the most sensitive scenes.

Unfortunately, “The Son” has much bigger problems than actors trying too hard to be noticed in obvious “awards bait” roles. The movie’s editing is haphazard and sometimes baffling. For example, there’s a scene that’s interrupted by a five-second flashback of Peter and 6-year-old Nicholas frolicking in the water on that vacation. This brief flashback is so random and out-of-place, it makes you wonder why Zeller made such amateurish editing decisions for “The Son” when “The Father” was so brilliantly edited.

The last 15 minutes of “The Son” are what will really turn off viewers the most. The way the story ends is gimmicky and could easily be interpreted as crass exploitation, for the sake of having a “surprise” plot twist. If “The Son” intended to be respectful of people who deal with the same issues as the ones portrayed in this substandard movie, then “The Son” torpedoed any good will by conjuring up a truly awful ending that cannot be redeemed.

Sony Pictures Classics released “The Son” in select U.S. cinemas on November 25, 2022, with an expansion to more U.S. cinemas on December 16, 2022, and on January 20, 2023.

Review: ‘Italian Studies,’ starring Vanessa Kirby

January 29, 2022

by Carla Hay

Vanessa Kirby in “Italian Studies” (Photo courtesy of Magnolia Pictures)

“Italian Studies”

Directed by Adam Leon

Culture Representation: Taking place in New York City and briefly in London, the dramatic film “Italian Studies” features a predominantly white cast of characters (with some African Americans, Asians and Latinos) representing the middle-class and working-class.

Culture Clash: A British woman, who’s a book author with amnesia, wanders around New York City and tries to befriend a group of teenagers who are complete strangers to her. 

Culture Audience: “Italian Studies” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in watching meandering films that don’t have much of a plot.

Simon Brickner in “Italian Studies” (Photo courtesy of Magnolia Pictures)

“Italian Studies” is a misguided stream-of-consciousness drama about amnesia. Too bad the filmmakers forgot to make it an interesting movie. “Italian Studies” is an annoying and repetitive bore that’s trying desperately to be “artsy” and “meaningful,” but the movie ultimately isn’t very creative, and it has nothing to say.

Written and directed by Adam Leon, “Italian Studios” is essentially a 78-minute film where actress Vanessa Kirby plays a character who walks around and acts confused in New York City and briefly in London. In the movie, Kirby portrays a book author named Alina Reynolds, a Brit who has amnesia and no identification on her.

Don’t expect the movie to reveal how Alina got amnesia. Alina doesn’t find out her name until about halfway through the film, but she doesn’t do what most people with amnesia would do if they found out their names: Use that information to find out more about herself, where she lives, and if she has any loved ones who are looking for her.

Instead, the movie wastes a lot of time showing Alina, who is in her 30s, being fixated on hanging out with teenagers who are complete strangers to her. The teens, who are between 15 to 18 years old, are all part of a loosely knit social circle in New York City. Most of them are played by non-professional actors and most of the teenage characters in the movie don’t have names.

Some sections of “Italian Studies” try to go for a vibe that’s similar to Larry Clark’s 1995 teen movie “Kids,” by having several scenes of the teens partying and talking about their lives. The teenagers in “Italian Studies” aren’t as hedonistic as the ones in “Kids,” but they have the same concerns that a lot of teenagers do about finding their identities and where they can get acceptance from other people. Unfortunately, almost all of the teen characters in “Italian Studies” (including Maya Hawke in a small role as a character named Erin McCloud) are forgettable and don’t have distinct personalities. Expect to see these rambling teen scenes go nowhere in “Italian Studies.”

“Italian Studies” also has many scenes that drag out the repetition of showing Alina’s amnesia without her doing much to find out who she is. Before she finds out what her name is, Alina remembers that she was staying at a motel and the room number. She goes to the motel and asks the front-desk clerk (played by Sam Soghor) to give her a spare key to her room because she lost the key. When the clerk asks for her name, she says that she can’t remember, and she doesn’t have any ID on her.

Not surprisingly, the clerk gets suspicious and doesn’t give her the room key. Alina gets irritated that he won’t just hand over the key, which is an indication that not only has she lost her memory, she’s also lost her common sense. This is obviously a motel that doesn’t ask for photo IDs when people check in to get a room, which is why the motel has no record that her identify was verified before they gave her a room. Even if the motel has this lenient check-in policy, Alina should still know that motels don’t just hand out keys to anyone who asks, so her entitled attitude is not justified at all.

There’s another time-wasting sequence about Alina having a white poodle that she left outside on the street and tied to a street post when she went into a convenience store. When she left the convenience store, she forgot to take the poodle with her. It isn’t until an untold number of days later that Alina remembers that she had a dog, and she tries to find it. For anyone who’s not interested in seeing this movie, the good news is that she eventually finds the dog, which was being kept at the convenience store.

“Italian Studies” has some random moments that look like they were put in the movie as filler. While walking on a street in New York City, Alina passes by two young Hasidic Jewish men (played by Misha Brooks and Luca Scoppetta-Stern), who repeatedly ask her, “Are you Jewish?” She answers, “I don’t know.”

In other scene, Alina steals some candy from a convenience store, because she’s hungry and has no money. Not once is she shown making any realistic attempt to find out who she is, or even try to get substantial help in finding out her identity. (This movie takes place in the 21st century, when the Internet and cell phones exist.) Most people with amnesia would seek help, in order not to reach a point of desperation where they have to steal food because they have no money.

A moment that looks “only in a movie” phony is how Alina meets a teenage stoner named Simon Brickner, played by an actor with the same name. They’re in a fast-food place that sells hot dogs. Simon asks Alina if she can buy some of the hot dogs that he recently purchased there. He explains that he used a credit card to buy the hot dogs, because the place has a minimum monetary amount required to use a credit card. Therefore, Simon bought more hot dogs than he can eat, so he wants to resell them.

Alina declines the offer because she’s already eating her own hot dog. (It can be assumed she had a little bit of cash with her, because later in the movie she’s run out of money and steals candy for food.) Alina then tells Simon that she’s actually a vegetarian. Simon asks her why she’s eating a hot dog if she’s a vegetarian. She replies, “I’m taking a break.”

During this conversation, Simon asks if Alina wants to hang out with him. She says yes with no hesitation, as if it’s the most normal thing in the world for a person in her 30s with amnesia to not care about finding out who she is, and hang out and party with a teenager instead. The scenes with Simon and Alina are boring and very self-indulgent.

Viewers learn more about Simon than Alina in this movie. He’s a motormouth 18-year-old who’s not very smart and doesn’t know what to do with his life. He lives with his parents, he has no job, and he has no plans to go to college. Simon likes to smoke a lot of marijuana, which he shares with Alina. Simon keeps his marijuana stash hidden inside a book at a local library, because he says that his mother searches his room.

According to Simon, his parents think that Simon is a loser, and he despises his father, whom Simon calls “an asshole.” Simon also has a younger sister. (His family is not seen in the movie.) Later, there’s a cringeworthy part of “Italian Studies” where Alina makes out with Simon. It just shows that not only as she lost her memory and any common sense, she’s also lost good judgment.

The only reason why Alina eventually finds out her name and occupation is because a woman approaches her on the street and gushes to her about how much of a fan she is of her collection of short stories called “Italian Studies.” The adoring fan also tells Alina that she saw Alina doing a reading of “Italian Studies” two years ago. Because of this conversation, Alina finds out that she’s a successful author, and “Italian Studies” is her first book.

And so, off Alina goes to a library to find her “Italian Studies” book and to see if it could lead to more clues about her identity. It’s at the library that she finds out her name, but the movie is so stupid that it leaves out something that anyone with amnesia would do: Look at the part of the book that lists the author’s biography information.

The movie shows that the book is dedicated to two people named Ade and Richard, but Alina just ignores that information too. She also doesn’t think about contacting the book publisher, which is information that’s also listed. Instead, Alina wants to autograph the book.

Another library patron (played by Joshua Astrachan), who’s sitting at the same table, sees Alina writing in the book, and he tells her that she shouldn’t be doing that. She replies with indignation that she wrote “Italian Studies,” and then tries to shame him for daring to question who she is and why she’s writing in the book. It’s one of many indications of how Alina—amnesiac or not—is an unpleasant and somewhat arrogant person. Alina haughtily tells the man before she leaves the library in a huff: “You’re a cold world. A signed book is a warm world.”

More tiresome and incoherent scenes ensue as Alina hangs out with Simon and his group of acquaintances and friends. She finds out from some of the teens that her next book that she was working on before she got amnesia was going to be a novel about teenagers, so she was interviewing real teenagers as research. She decides to continue this research by interviewing Simon and his friends, who know that she has amnesia, but they don’t seem to care much at all. When one of the teens tells Alina that it isn’t very original to write a young-adult novel about teenage issues, Alina has this obnoxious reply: “Go fuck yourself!”

One of these teens in Simon’s social circle is a talented singer named Lucinda (played by Annabel Hoffman), and Alina becomes fascinated with her. After Alina sees Lucinda singing at a party, she starts showing up at places where Lucinda sings, such as a nightclub and a recording studio. Alina tries to befriend Lucinda, who is a little confused over why this older woman, who’s a stranger, is paying so much attention to her.

Alina tells Lucinda that she thinks Lucinda is very talented. Lucinda’s reaction to Alina is polite caution. Alina also keeps asking Lucinda’s friends for more information about Lucinda, and where Lucinda is if Lucinda isn’t there. It’s all very stalkerish, but none of this creepy behavior is questioned by anyone in the movie.

In fact, it seems like none of the filmmakers questioned the half-baked, irritating and pointless scenes that pollute this entire movie. As the amnesiac Alina, Kirby is hindered by playing such a vague, prickly and unrelatable character. It’s difficult to root for this protagonist. The acting in this movie is not very impressive.

To make matters worse, the dialogue in “Italian Studios” is atrocious and often very unbelievable. The end of “Italian Studies” abruptly throws in a scene that shows if Alina found any of her loved ones or not. But by the time this final scene stumbles into the movie, most viewers will have emotionally checked out and not care at all.

Magnolia Pictures released “Italian Studies” in select U.S. cinemas, on digital and VOD on January 14, 2022.

Review: ‘The World to Come,’ starring Katherine Waterston, Vanessa Kirby, Christopher Abbott and Casey Affleck

February 16, 2021

by Carla Hay

Vanessa Kirby and Katherine Waterston in “The World to Come” (Photo by Toni Salabasev/Bleecker Street)

“The World to Come”

Directed by Mona Fastvold

Culture Representation: Taking place primarily in 1856, in a rural area of Schoharie County, New York, the dramatic film “The World to Come” features an all-white cast of characters representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: Two farmers’ wives have a secret love affair with each other while unhappily married to their husbands.

Culture Audience: “The World to Come” will appeal primarily to people are interested in well-acted dramas about LGBTQ romances and how people cope with being in unhappy marriages.

Katherine Waterston and Casey Affleck in “The World to Come” (Photo by Vlad Cioplea/Bleecker Street)

The dramatic film “The World to Come” skillfully immerses viewers into a world filled with layers of oppression for the story’s two female protagonists. The two women are stifled by being in miserable relationships with their husbands; society’s bigotry against same-sex romances; and living in an era where wives could be considered property by their husbands. It’s a story that shows in understated yet poignant details how someone’s greatest love and passion could also be that person’s greatest heartbreak.

Directed with emotional intelligence and sensitivity by Mona Fastvold, “The World to Come” is based on Jim Shepard’s lyrical short story in the 2017 collection, each titled “The World to Come.” Shepard and Ron Hansen adapted the short story into the movie’s screenplay, which is told from the point of view of a farmer’s wife named Abigail (played by Katherine Waterston), whose diary entries are read in voiceover narration. The movie takes place primarily in 1856 in a rural area of Schoharie County, New York, but “The World to Come” was actually filmed in Romania to capture the type of landscape that no longer exists in that part of New York.

Abigail is an introvert who begins keeping a personal diary of her thoughts, after her husband Dyer (played by Casey Affleck) suggested that she keep a business journal for the farm, such as tools lent out and outstanding bills. Abigail begins her diary in January of 1856, and her subsequent voiceovers over the next several months are told with the dates in chronological order.

Dyer, just like Abigail, is quiet and unassuming. They seem to have an ordinary life with their daughter Nellie (played by Karina Ziana Gherasim), who’s 4 years old. But a tragedy strikes that puts both Dyer and Abigail down a path of depression and emotional turmoil.

By February of that year, Nellie has died from diphtheria. Abigail and Dyer, who are already introverted people, become more withdrawn from each other. Not long after Nellie’s death, Dyer becomes ill with a fever, which puts the productivity of the couple’s farm in jeopardy. (They are the only apparent people who work on the farm.)

Abigail barely has time to grieve while taking care of her ailing husband when another farmer couple moves nearby and unexpectedly changes Abigail’s and Dyer’s lives. Tallie (played by Vanessa Kirby) is a vibrant redhead, while her husband Finney (played by Christopher Abbott) is a brooding control freak. During this very depressing time in Abigail’s life, she writes in her diary: “I have become my grief.”

Dyer eventually recovers from his fever, but he and Abigail remain emotionally distant from each other. They refuse to discuss the death of their daughter, because it seems to be too painful for them to even talk about it. Abigail is expected to help Dyer with farm duties, but soon she’ll have someone who will be taking up a lot of her time and attention.

The first time that Abigail is shown talking about Nellie’s death to another person is in her first conversation with Tallie, who has stopped by Abigail’s home for a neighborly visit. Abigail and Tallie’s first conversation happens to be on the day that would have been Nellie’s fifth birthday. When Abigail tells Tallie this information, unbeknownst to the two of them, it’s the birth of something else: a budding romance between Abigail and Tallie.

The two women become fast friends and eventually confide in each other about their deepest feelings. But the respective marriages to their husbands are never that far from their minds. It’s easy for anyone to see that the passion has dwindled in Abigail and Dyer’s relationship. Tallie and Finney’s relationship is not as easy to read, although Tallie tells Abigail: “I suppose he’s unhappy with me because I have yet to give him a child.”

As Abigail says in one of her diary entries that she reads in a voiceover: “Finney and Tallie’s bond confounds me. At times, when their eyes meet, they seem yoked in opposition to one another, while at other times there seems a shared regard.” Abigail remarks in her diary about her growing romantic feelings about Tallie: “There is something going on between us that I can’t unravel.”

Abigail becomes fully aware of how deep her feelings are for Tallie after Tallie becomes ill from being caught in a snowstorm. Abigail becomes distraught over wondering if Tallie will recover. The snowstorm killed about half of the chickens on Abigail and Dyer’s farm, so the couple will be experiencing some hard times in the near future. However, Abigail is more worried about Tallie’s recovery than the farm’s financial loss from the snowstorm.

Tallie seems to appreciate Abigail’s introverted nature when Tallie tells her: “It’s been my experience that it’s not always those who show the least who actually feel the least.” And Abigail describes their blossoming love affair this way in her diary: “I imagine that I love how our encircling feelings leave nothing out for us to wander or seek.”

One day, Tallie gives Abigail an atlas, which is almost symbolic of their wishful thinking of how they could run off together and travel around the world. By the month of May, Tallie and Abigail’s romance of hand holding and hesitant kisses turn into more passionate displays of affection, and they eventually become secret lovers. Their infidelity to their husbands doesn’t come without feeling guilty about it, but Tallie tries to brush it off by telling Abigail: “I hear intimacy builds good will.”

Dyer and Finney can’t help but notice that their wives are spending more and more time together, sometimes for several hours a day. Dyer expresses frustration that Abigail’s devotion to Tallie has come at the expense of Abigail doing work on the farm. Dyer is annoyed, but he doesn’t become abusive about it.

By contrast, Abigail starts to see signs that Tallie is being abused, such as bruises and how Tallie seems genuinely fearful of Finney, while Tallie tries to pretend that everything is fine. Abigail also tries not to think about something Tallie told her soon after they first met: Finney is thinking about moving further west with Tallie. Later in the story, the two couples have dinner together at Tallie and Finney’s home. And it becomes very clear how cruel Finney can be.

The romance of Abigail and Tallie isn’t really a “sexual identity” story, because the movie never makes a point of declaring what their sexual identities are. There’s no big speech or enlightenment moment that Abigail and Tallie have about why they fell in love with each other. Viewers can speculate that Abigail and Tallie are closeted lesbians or bisexuals, or viewers can speculate that Abigail and/or Tallie don’t care what gender their love partner is. In 1850s America, there really were no specific terms for LGBTQ people, and the subject of any non-heterosexuality was so taboo that it was rarely discussed out loud.

“The World to Come” is really about showing how two lonely people met each other and filled a void in each other’s lives. In Tallie and Abigail’s private conversations, it’s clear that Tallie is more sexually experienced and less sheltered than Abigail, even though Abigail is older than Tallie. Abigail mentions that she married Dyer out of convenience, because he was the older son of a neighbor. By contrast, it’s hinted that Tallie is very aware of her allure and had her pick of suitors before she married Finney. It’s implied that Abigail was probably a virgin when she got married, while Tallie was not.

These hints about their sexual history provide some context for what happens later in the story and how Abigail and Tallie react to obstacles that inevitably occur in their relationship. Abigail is the only person who makes Tallie happy, and vice versa, but Abigail has the added emotional agony of losing a child. It explains why there’s a desperate way that Abigail wants to cling to her relationship with Tallie, no matter what the cost.

Waterston, Kirby, Affleck and Abbott all give commendable performances in their roles. As the story goes on, there’s a noticeable change in the personalities of Abigail and Tallie that Waterston and Kirby express in poignant ways. Abigail starts off very shy and unsure of herself, but becomes more determined and outspoken after she falls in love with Tallie. Meanwhile, Tallie starts off as more of a fun-loving free spirit, but she slowly loses her confidence under the burden of being in an abusive marriage.

Affleck’s Dyer stays on a fairly even keel of being a mournful spouse who has trouble expressing his emotions, but Dyer is someone who hasn’t completely lost his humanity and compassion. Abbott’s Finney is the most complex person of the four because, just like many abusers, Finney has a charismatic side and is skilled at fooling people into thinking that he isn’t as bad as he really is. There’s a scene in the movie that also realistically demonstrates how people who suspect domestic abuse often don’t want to be involved in reporting it or helping a suspected victim.

“The World to Come” is not a groundbreaking film, nor is it going to appeal to people who aren’t interested in deliberately paced dramas that take place in the 1800s. Some viewers might also be slightly annoyed by the film’s constant voiceovers by Abigail. However, her writings are a subtle nod to how articulate and intelligent Abigail is, considering that she was not a wealthy woman with the means to get a higher education, in an era when women were discouraged from being as educated as men.

Fastvold’s unfussy directing style is exemplified by the technical choices made in the movie’s costume design, production design and musical score, which all complement the creative aspects of the film without being overwhelming. The farm folks in this story live simply and quietly. If the movie had made Tallie and Abigail’s romance a big melodrama, it wouldn’t ring true for this rural culture of people who live discreetly and don’t want to call attention to themselves.

The actors in this movie’s relatively small cast make the most out of this intimate snapshot of a year in the life of these four people who have been damaged in some way by disillusionment. Tallie and Abigail experience glimmers of hope and a purpose to live because of the unexpected love that they found with each other. But it’s a love where people will inevitably get hurt, and decisions are made on how much of that love is worth any personal sacrifices.

Bleecker Street released “The World to Come” in select U.S. cinemas on February 12, 2021. The movie’s digital/VOD release date is March 2, 2021.

Copyright 2017-2026 Culture Mix
CULTURE MIX