​“Now You See Me: Now You Don’t” stars Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Dave Franco, Isla Fisher, Justice Smith, Dominic Sessa, Ariana Greenblatt, Rosamund Pike, and Morgan Freeman.  Released on November 14, 2025, the film has the Four Horsemen confronting a family crime syndicate.

The film was directed by Ruben Fleischer, who also directed films such as “Zombieland”, “Gangster Squad”, “Venom”, and “Uncharted”.  It is the third installment in the “Now You See Me” film series.  The intriguing aspect of magicians is that they always have tricks up their sleeves to captivate and astonish their audiences.  While these enchanting illusions may appear harmless at first glance, they can also be cleverly employed to swipe something right from under your nose, leaving you unaware until the pieces come together.  This concept perfectly encapsulates the media franchise fittingly titled “Now You See Me”, which merges the heist genre with some of the greatest tricks you would typically see in a magic show.  Despite mixed reviews from critics, both “Now You See Me” and its sequel achieved financial success and were well received by audiences eager to see magicians turn into clever thieves through their illusions.  However, this particular magician group didn’t reappear out of thin air until nearly a decade later, with Ruben Fleischer at the helm of their long-awaited comeback tour.  Was the Four Horsemen’s latest heist worthy of their return, or should they have remained disappeared forever?  Let’s find out.

The story once again revolves around the Four Horsemen, a team of illusionist thieves led by J. Daniel Atlas (Eisenberg), who operate under the secret society known as “The Eye”.  Following their latest heist that forces them to part ways, Atlas recruits three novice magicians, Charlie (Smith), Bosco Leroy (Sessa), and June McClure (Greenblatt), to undertake his most ambitious trick yet.  Their mission involves stealing “The Heart”, the world’s largest diamond, from a worldwide crime syndicate headed by Veronika Vanderberg (Pike).  This endeavor also reunites Atlas with his former team members: Merritt McKinney (Harrelson), Jack Wilder (Franco), and Henley Reeves (Fisher).  When Vanderberg puts a target on their heads, Atlas and the Horsemen must utilize their magical skills to take down the notorious syndicate.

“Now You See Me” is another franchise that I haven’t revisited frequently.  I remember catching parts of the first film on television, which prompted me to watch “Now You See Me 2” in theaters.  I enjoyed it for its talented cast and illusion-inspired visuals, even though the final twists felt somewhat predictable.  Since then, I haven’t returned to these movies until recently, as I prepared for the upcoming installment.  While I may have enjoyed “Now You See Me 2” a bit less on my second viewing, I still appreciate these movies for their entertainment value.  This leads us to the franchise’s long-awaited third film, fittingly titled “Now You See Me: Now You Don’t”, which brings back the original team alongside some fresh magicians and promises to deliver another magic trick worth waiting for.  Yes, it does feature another heist, but it also introduces an antagonist that could challenge their skills and dynamics, at least according to the marketing.

But even with these elements, this latest installment still needs to deliver enough convincing tricks to keep longtime fans and newcomers eager for more.  After watching the film, it’s evident that fans of the previous two movies will appreciate more of the magical antics conjured by the Horsemen.  However, there aren’t many other tricks up its sleeve to captivate those hoping for something refreshing in its narrative.  To be fair, though, the “Now You See Me” movies aren’t exactly known for their award-winning storytelling, prioritizing visual spectacle and plot twists over character development.  So, it’s no surprise that “Now You Don’t” would use the same narrative tricks as before.  Unfortunately, it’s also becoming very clear that the film's magical allure is degrading as it progresses, even with its interesting surprises.

In addition to the enchantment of their tricks, the “Now You See Me” films are known for having different filmmakers express their illusion-filled visions in each installment.  Louis Leterrier helmed the first movie, while the second movie was directed by “Wicked” filmmaker Jon M. Chu.  “Now You Don’t” introduces another director, Ruben Fleischer, who aims to revive the franchise’s magic.  If you’re familiar with Fleischer’s other works like “Zombieland” and “Uncharted”, you’ll recognize some of his signature elements in this film, including the swift framing of the action scenes and the creatively displayed location names.  It’s evident that his movies can be hit-and-miss, but he’s one of the filmmakers who can infuse the main cast with charismatic flair and entertainment against international backdrops and expansive shot compositions.  His contribution to “Now You Don’t” is no exception, as Fleischer elicits plenty of enjoyment in the action, visuals, and humor.  Despite a few rough CGI effects, the visual representation of the tricks is still pretty astounding, showcasing its cinematic trickery with enchanting flair.  However, it seems Fleischer is somewhat confined by the franchise’s established magical framework, limiting his directorial expression.

A significant part of the film’s charm lies in the main cast, who once again reprised their roles for yet another magic show.  Of course, this includes Isla Fisher, who didn’t appear in the second film due to personal reasons, so you could say that the original Four Horsemen are back in business.  Jesse Eisenberg effectively maintains Danny's haughty yet charismatic persona, despite his character having limited development, as in earlier installments.  Those who weren’t fond of Danny’s arrogance in the previous films will likely want to make the Horsemen’s leader disappear.  But, regardless of what you thought of Danny, it’s hard to deny that Eisenberg remains a fitting choice to portray this thieving magician in terms of the actor’s talents.  Woody Harrelson and Dave Franco also provided some enjoyable moments as Merritt and Jack, respectively, particularly the former.  As for Rosamund Pike, she did a suitable job giving Veronika Vanderberg a formidable presence, not just because of her company’s history but also the character’s own past.

But what about the additional members of the Horsemen, you ask?  Well, they’re far from immediate fan favorites, but the actors, including Justice Smith as Charlie, made the most of their efforts to make these young magicians engaging.  The only standout in my eyes was Dominic Sessa, who made his fantastic acting debut in “The Holdovers”.  This is only my second encounter with the young actor, and after seeing his performance, I could definitely see him in more projects sooner rather than later.  Sessa’s performance as Bosco may not rival his breakout role, but his own magnetic presence is worthy of sharing the spotlight with Eisenberg’s Danny.  Plus, his “Atlas” joke was admittedly hilarious.  Ariana Greenblatt also isn’t without her moments as June, but I can’t help but acknowledge that her line delivery occasionally feels lackluster.  The film also features a couple of surprise additions that will undoubtedly win over the franchise’s fans, but as they say, a magician never reveals their secrets, so I’ll refrain from doing so for those who wish to experience the movie without prior knowledge.

As previously mentioned, “Now You Don’t” presents a narrative filled with several tricks we’re familiar with and nothing else.  Those narrative tricks are drawn not just from the previous installments but also from other heist films that influenced “Now You See Me”.  The third film brings in several new writers on board instead of Ed Solomon or the franchise’s creators, Boaz Yakin and Edward Ricourt, who penned its predecessors.  That includes Fleischer’s collaborators, Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick, known for scripting “Zombieland” and its sequel.  Unfortunately, even with the new writers at play, it couldn’t uncover the secrets to crafting a more interesting movie amid its magical appeal.  Aside from the “Atlas” joke, the dialogue can be somewhat rough at times, and the character arcs, except for one of the Horsemen’s members, couldn’t conjure the right spell to enchant me outside their magic.  It’s a shame, since it introduced some intriguing elements that could’ve been expanded further, including generational magic through deepfakes and the dynamics of the young magician trio.  However, they seem to have been set aside in favor of a straightforward and derivative magic act that lacks the sparkle of previous installments. 

Overall, “Now You See Me: Now You Don’t” maintains the magical flair of its predecessors, yet it lacks any other fresh tricks to keep this magic act from losing its enchanting allure.  Ruben Fleischer made a commendable effort to move the franchise forward with his directorial vision, especially in his handling of the action and visuals.  Sadly, he can only do so much before the film reverts to its familiar illusions to attract an audience.  While these tricks provide some enjoyable moments that made the previous installments successful, primarily the cast’s chemistry and surprises, the diminishing wonder in the film’s narrative trickery makes the Four Horsemen’s comeback tour feel less spellbinding than a simple card trick.  With a weak screenplay, cliched tropes, and Greenblatt’s phoned-in performance, this latest cinematic magic trick is best kept under wraps.  If you enjoyed the earlier installments, you might find elements to appreciate in “Now You Don’t”, but don’t expect its story to blow your mind like the Horsemen’s magic.   

​“The Running Man” stars Glen Powell, William H. Macy, Lee Pace, Michael Cera, Emilia Jones, Daniel Ezra, Jayme Lawson, Katy O’Brian, Sean Hayes, Colman Domingo, and Josh Brolin.  Released on November 14, 2025, the film has a man surviving a dangerous game show.

The film is directed by Edgar Wright, who also directed films such as “Shaun of the Dead”, “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World”, “Baby Driver”, and “Last Night in Soho”.  It is based on the 1982 novel by Stephen King.  There are numerous benefits to participating in a game show.  You get to test your skills, both physical and mental, while aiming to accomplish various objectives, and you have the chance to win plenty of awesome prizes, including cash.  Plus, you get the thrill of being on television.  One particular televised competition shares these similar qualities, but it’s also one where losing doesn’t mean you walk away empty-handed…or even alive.  Stephen King’s 1982 novel introduced this harrowing game show, “The Running Man”, which depicts a perilous hunt in a dystopian world where contestants must survive those intent on murdering them.  Like many of King’s works, this take on society and the corruption of televised entertainment was adapted for the big screen in 1987, with Arnold Schwarzenegger competing for his life as the book’s protagonist, Ben Richards.  Fast forward to the present, and we have a new runner ready to navigate this lethal game show: Glen Powell.  It didn’t take us long to have another Stephen King adaptation arrive in theaters following the brutally emotional adaptation of “The Long Walk”.  Although this marks the second adaptation of “The Running Man”, this version aims to be more faithful to the source material than the 1987 film.  Was this direction able to deliver a thrilling game show worth watching, or will it force viewers to change the channel?  Let’s find out.

The story centers on Ben Richards (Powell), a working-class husband striving to provide for his wife, Sheila (Lawson), and their infant daughter in a society dominated by a manipulative system.  He constantly faces the challenge of earning enough money to afford the necessary medications for his daughter’s illness.  As a last resort, Ben reluctantly agrees to the conditions made by television producer Dan Killian (Brolin) to participate in a popular yet dangerous game show called “The Running Man”.  This competition has contestants evading professional assassins for 30 days to claim a cash prize, with each threat being more severe than the last.  Ben’s quick thinking and rebellious spirit unexpectedly made him a fan favorite during the televised contest, but they also made him a target for the system, fixated on high ratings.  This predicament plunges Ben into a race against time, compelling him to triumph in this twisted game while exposing the truth behind its nefarious creators.

While I was familiar with “The Running Man”, it wasn’t until I experienced the 1987 adaptation a couple of months ago that I got fully invested in its concept.  I can say it was another delightful Schwarzenegger cheese-fest that highlighted the actor’s ability to carry a movie with his charisma and one-liners.  Even before watching the 1987 version, I was pretty eager to see this latest Stephen King adaptation, particularly because of filmmaker Edgar Wright’s involvement.  It bears repeating that I’ve been a big admirer of Wright since I first watched “Scott Pilgrim”, primarily due to his unique approach to comedy and kinetic storytelling.  When I learned that he was helming a new version of “The Running Man”, I felt confident that his energetic vision would be a perfect fit for this violent dystopian setting.  After all, it revolves around a game show where expert killers pursue a runner.  Surely, Wright’s directorial flair would be able to elevate this concept to new heights, right?  Well, the answer to that question is both yes and no.

“The Running Man” is another film that aims to be nothing more than a pure adrenaline rush.  It’s swift, action-packed, and above all else, full of charm and entertainment, just like any other game show we got on television.  It’s not without a few pieces of social commentary on television executives that would make us see reality TV differently.  Outside of that, though, the movie is something you go in, have some popcorn, relax, and enjoy the mayhem.  Part of the fun is due to Edgar Wright’s ability to infuse his dynamic flair into a film’s presentation.  Whether through creative transitions, quirky visuals, or slick action sequences, Wright is a filmmaker capable of tweaking the genre wheel to make a movie polished, innovative, and smoothly paced.  The 2025 adaptation of “The Running Man” offers a few moments distinctly marked by Wright’s style, including dynamic action, snappy editing, and the film's conspiracy-themed videos.  However, compared to his notable works like “Shaun of the Dead”, “Scott Pilgrim”, and “Baby Driver”, this film feels somewhat conventional outside these elements.  It maintains the energetic thrills and charisma the director is known for, delivering an explosive sprint through hell and back.  Sadly, in terms of his “inventiveness”, it didn’t exactly run as much as it could walk at a smoother pace, which can grow a bit tiresome once the second half rolls around.

Fortunately, Edgar Wright wasn’t the only player capable of boosting the film’s charm ratings, as Glen Powell successfully took over the reins of Ben Richards following Schwarzenegger’s run in the 1987 film.  Powell has proven himself to be a draw when it comes to his charisma and cinematic attractiveness, but he also showed himself to be a confident movie star regarding the action and romance genres, as evident in “Top Gun: Maverick” and “Anyone But You”.  Unsurprisingly, Powell managed to prove that further through his performance in “The Running Man”.  His character, Ben, was portrayed as a well-meaning but occasionally short-tempered family man who is constantly screwed over by a system that promotes crappy reality television and savage game shows.  Though reluctant over what this infamous show is capable of, Ben possesses a sense of justice and strives to support his family and expose the game’s rigged nature.  Like his previous performances, Glen Powell maintains a charming personality, making this struggling lower-class worker likable while respectfully expressing the character’s rage without overselling it.  He is easily one of the film’s highlights, regardless of the quality.

As for the supporting cast, they did well in following in Powell’s appealing footsteps, with some having just as fun as the lead actor.  One such case is Colman Domingo as Bobby T, the host of “The Running Man” show.  I’ve seen enough projects featuring Domingo to realize his exceptional acting talent, most of which were award contenders.  His role as a highly dynamic host may be the most enjoyable I've seen from him.  He just went on stage and gave it his all, delivering a lively, compelling performance that kept me from switching channels.  I would even say it’s enough to want to see Domingo host an actual game show someday.  Josh Brolin was also pretty good as the unscrupulous Dan Killian, who plans to use Ben to boost the show’s ratings.  Killian is the kind of person you’d love to hate due to his obsession with televised success, and Brolin immediately conveyed that from the first scene to the last.  Michael Cera also made a decent appearance as one of the rebels aiding Ben after previously collaborating with Wright on “Scott Pilgrim”, notably for his Home-Alone-like booby traps.  Though they sadly didn’t compete with the ones seen in “Violent Night”.  That scene is exactly how you emulate a fun R-rated version of “Home Alone”.

It’s easy to admit that “The Running Man” works well as a cinematic thrill ride.  However, it’s also hard to deny that it struggled to combine its thrills with a script that emphasizes its themes yet lacks the genuine depth of its frustratingly relatable topics.  Like the 1987 film, “The Running Man” explores a corrupt television system that prioritizes success for the upper class, ultimately leaving the majority in poverty.  It tackles the dark side of reality television, where the pursuit of fame and fortune often hinges on manipulation and deceit.  The show dehumanizes the runners as merciless criminals through the use of AI deepfakes, highlighting the extent to which the truth can be distorted for personal gain.  It showcases that even though game shows can be fun, they can also be irritating once you uncover what actually goes on when the cameras are off.  While its themes are worth noting, especially in today’s media landscape, its screenplay can be a bit too blunt in its commentary.  There were even times when it tried to evoke some emotion, whether sadness or frustration, only to fall short in making the sentimentality feel justified, including the third act.  The third act was unexpected direction-wise, but I didn’t think it lived up to the buildup leading towards it.  The film also dragged on a bit longer than it should have, with an over-two-hour runtime, especially as its action finesse started to die down under its repetitive structure.  This is one of the concepts that might have been more effective with a tighter, shorter duration. 

Overall, “The Running Man” strides along at a smoother pace with its thrills and charm, but its bloated, message-laden narrative hinders it from sprinting past the cinematic finish line.  Its aim to deliver an entertaining, vividly violent ride is commendable at best, with director Edgar Wright showcasing his directorial edge through its slick style and fun atmosphere.  Unfortunately, it doesn’t offer much else beyond that to boost its ratings, and its story struggles to elevate its relatable commentary and inventive action throughout its lengthy runtime.  It’s far from another innovative film from Wright, akin to “Scott Pilgrim” and “Baby Driver”, but for those seeking a cinematic adrenaline rush featuring Glen Powell in a towel, this channel is certainly worth tuning into.   

​“Predator: Badlands” stars Elle Fanning, Dimitrius Schuster-Koloamatangi, Mike Homik, Rohinal Nayaran, Reuben De Jong, and Cameron Brown.  Released on November 7, 2025, the film has a disgraced Yautja searching for an ultimate adversary.

The film is directed by Dan Trachtenberg, who also directed “10 Cloverfield Lane”, “Prey”, and “Predator: Killer of Killers”.  It is the ninth film in the “Predator” franchise.  The Predator is often celebrated as one of Hollywood’s most iconic sci-fi villains ever to slash their way onto the big screen.  With its imposing physique, strategic mind, and relentless obsession with the hunt, this alien warrior poses a formidable threat to any human prey who dares to cross its path, as demonstrated in previous cinematic outings.  Since 1987, audiences have witnessed these ferocious, lethal, and highly skilled “Predators” pursuing their human prey.  However, this year sees the franchise introducing a Predator that is less experienced than the others—a mere runt thrown into the hunt for the very first time.  Following the release of “Predator: Killer of Killers”, director Dan Trachtenberg continues to keep the “Predator” train rolling this year with yet another installment under his belt, but with an intriguing twist.  Instead of a human battling a Predator, this film features the latter as the protagonist as it embarks on its first-ever intergalactic hunt.  Does this new direction provide a refreshing installment that further revitalizes the sci-fi film series?  Let’s join the hunt and find out!

Set in a distant future, the story centers on Dek (Schuster-Koloamatangi), a young Predator viewed as an outcast by both the Yautja clan and his father, Njohur (Schuster-Koloamatangi), due to his runt-like stature.  Eager to prove himself, Dek embarks on a perilous journey to the remote planet of Genna to hunt the formidable apex predator known as the Kalisk.  Given the lethal dangers surrounding the planet, Dek’s journey is far from easy.  During his quest, Dek forms an unlikely partnership with Thia (Fanning), a damaged Weyland-Yutani synth who accompanies him despite her condition.  As they traverse through the hazardous planet, Dek and Thia encounter a dangerous group of androids led by another Wey-Yu synth, Tessa (Fanning), prompting Dek to find the bravery necessary to become the ultimate Predator. 

I have no doubts when I say that Dan Trachtenberg has been single-handedly saving the “Predator” franchise through his innovative vision.  While “10 Cloverfield Lane” was when I first saw potential in his directorial expertise, it was “Prey” that truly demonstrated Trachtenberg’s ability to inject new energy into a franchise that seemed to be losing steam.  This was further illustrated by the animated anthology film “Killer of Killers”, which broadened the “human-vs-Predator” narrative across various parts of history.  For those who haven’t been keeping up with my reviews, I have genuinely admired both of Trachtenberg’s recent installments for different reasons, possibly more so than the earlier entries.  I enjoyed “Prey” the most for its fresh, gripping interpretation of the original film’s premise, but that doesn’t diminish the impressive moments in “Killer of Killers”, which I appreciated for its ambitious presentation and anthology format.  Of course, both these movies were released exclusively on Hulu rather than in theaters, which feels like a missed opportunity, as they certainly had the potential to shine as theatrical experiences, especially “Killer of Killers”.

Fortunately for us, “Predator: Badlands” successfully avoided this similar fate, marking the first installment to be released in theaters since “The Predator” in 2018.  Seven years is quite a long time to see our favorite lethal hunter back on the big screen, but the wait has proven to be worthwhile, in my experience.  “Badlands” delivers a cinematic blockbuster experience that “Prey” and “Killer of Killers” could have aspired to: a thrilling, delightfully savage hunt packed with moments that would make audiences wince and cheer.  Although its storyline stumbled a bit in its themes during the trek, the film maintains the essence that made the “Predator” movies so entertaining, while presenting a worthy tale that warrants its role-reversal reminiscent of “Terminator 2”.  However, it’s worth noting that “Badlands” is also the first “Predator” movie to receive a PG-13 rating, differing from its predecessors’ R rating due to the lack of human characters.  That is, if you don’t count “Alien vs. Predator” as a “Predator” installment since that’s more of a crossover film, though the synths from the “Alien” movies appear in “Badlands”.  So, you can technically say that “Badlands” could serve as a child’s first introduction to the violent sci-fi franchise, assuming they haven’t seen the previous installments or “Alien vs. Predator”.  Nonetheless, it still contains the level of carnage we expect from its predecessors, albeit with alien blood and android fragments instead of human gore.

With its teen rating, “Badlands” also tends to be a bit more light-hearted amid its violence, particularly with its humor.  Occasionally, the movie steps back from the hunt to deliver amusing interactions among Dek, Thia, and a small, indestructible creature named Bud (Nayaran).  On the one hand, it possessed levity that adds an unexpected level of enjoyment, akin to watching Dek navigate a planet-shaped death trap, primarily through the chemistry between Dek and Thia.  On the other hand, it also had a few comedic moments that may feel reminiscent of other properties under Disney’s umbrella, such as Marvel and Star Wars.  I wouldn’t classify that as a drawback, as I thought the humor integrates well with the gritty alien and android-centric bloodshed.  Yet, those seeking a hard-R “Predator” movie might want to search for a different planet to hunt on.  However, if you’re less concerned about the tone and eager to see some Predator action, regardless of the color of the blood spilled, you’ll likely feel satisfied with its rollicking and fast-paced adventure.

Regarding its story, “Badlands” explores a more empathetic side of the savage Predator as Dek seeks acceptance within his clan.  Initially seen as a solitary figure who views others and human connection as weaknesses, Dek gradually learns the true meaning of strength through unforeseen alliances.  While it revisits themes of survival and revenge, “Badlands” also serves as a character-driven exploration of forging one’s own path, leadership, and loyalty.  Writer Patrick Aison has proven to audiences with his work on “Prey” that he can deliver compelling characters while still having fun with the deadly “Predator” action typical of the franchise.  Unsurprisingly, his work is no different in “Badlands”, particularly in the development of Dek.  Balancing the fearsome nature of one of the deadliest adversaries in Hollywood history with a touch of humanity was no small feat, but Aison managed to find that sweet spot to make this blend work for me.  However, the story is far from a perfect hunt, as its intended emotional core lacked the gut punch it aims for amid its straightforward, video-game-esque structure.  That’s not to say I wanted “Badlands” to be an overall tear-jerker, but in terms of the direction it took, I think it could have benefited from deeper exploration to elevate its storytelling stakes a bit more.

The film is under two hours long, a respectable length for a “Predator” movie, given its brisk pacing.  Much like Dek, “Badlands” wastes no time delving into the perilous world of Genna, with the story swiftly moving along without breaking a sweat.  While it slows itself down at times to explore its characters further, there’s actually never a dull moment that forces me to check my watch.  It kept me locked in from the sweeping opening shot to the thrilling spectacle in the third act.  There were a couple of instances where the pacing felt slightly rushed, as if they left some things on the cutting-room floor.  Nevertheless, the film’s pacing ensures audiences get what they came for — fast-paced action and thrills — without any human characters slowing its momentum.  This is mainly due to Dan Trachtenberg, who continues to show his full respect for the franchise while retaining his signature bleak yet stunning aesthetics and the intense energy of his previous works.  He continues to prove his worth in the industry, not just through his influential vision but also through his handling of its action scenes.  These sequences were undoubtedly brutal and thrilling, and Trachtenberg’s framing choices kept me close to the violence without relying heavily on quick cuts and shaky cam to achieve a teen rating.

The visual effects were also awe-inspiring, particularly for the planet Genna and its inhabitants.  Granted, the planet is chock full of nasty yet cleverly designed creatures that strive to eat those who dare step on their turf.  Heck, even the blades of grass can kill you with just one touch.  However, beyond those hazards, it also boasts some breathtaking views, crafted through somber color palettes, visual splendor, and Jeff Cutter’s cinematography.  Were it not for its deadly inhabitants, I might consider Genna to be a tourist destination worth visiting on your next vacation.  Finally, we have its cast, which was quite limited given its premise, but possessed enough skills in their performances to survive the hunt.  The film features two leads who provide dual roles: Elle Fanning and Dimitrius Schuster-Koloamatangi.  Fanning portrays two Wey-Yu synths, while Schuster-Koloamatangi takes on two Predator roles, each character distinct in their traits, allowing the actors to demonstrate their range.  This results in a captivating two-actor showcase that infuses the sci-fi adventure with fun and subtle heart.  Elle Fanning’s Thia may be perceived as a thorn in our sides regarding her quirky, talkative personality, but she actually turned out to be quite an endearing and humorous tool, thanks to Fanning’s nuanced performance.  She also delivered a noteworthy performance as Tessa, Thia’s not-so-amusing counterpart.  Schuster-Koloamatangi also made a strong impression with his portrayal of Dek, both in voice and physicality.  He has appeared in projects like “Red, White & Brass” and “Jonah”, but this film was my first encounter with the actor/stuntman.  Based on this performance, there’s a chance we might see more of him in some shape or form, potentially in future “Predator” installments.

Overall, “Predator: Badlands” revitalizes the sci-fi franchise further with an exhilarating intergalactic adventure that paints the iconic hunter in a new light.  Dan Trachtenberg has achieved the impossible of giving the Predator a “Terminator 2” makeover while maintaining the savage qualities of the character from earlier installments.  While the result isn’t perfect, it retains the thrill of the hunt through its action-packed premise and the road-trip-like chemistry between the protagonists.  Its brisk pacing can feel somewhat rushed regarding certain plot elements, and the emotional depth it’s going for is as defective as a malfunctioning synthetic.  Regardless, it is another cinematic hunt that’s worth joining, whether you’re a long-time fan or a newcomer seeking your first kill.  Fanning and Schuster-Koloamatangi delivered compelling performances that underscore their characters’ distinctive chemistry.  Additionally, Dan Trachtenberg once again demonstrated his promising directorial vision through his handling of the visual effects and action sequences.  Although I liked his previous “Predator” films a bit more, notably “Prey”, I still had a good time with “Badlands”, which is enough to further prove that Trachtenberg is indeed the right captain to steer this franchise’s ship back on course.

“Bugonia” stars Emma Stone, Jesse Plemons, Aidan Delbis, Stavros Halkias, and Alicia Silverstone.  Released on October 24, 2025, the film follows two conspiracists as they kidnap a high-powered CEO.

The film was directed by Yorgos Lanthimos, who also directed films such as “My Best Friend”, “The Lobster”, “The Favourite”, “Poor Things”, and “Kinds of Kindness”.  It is a remake of the 2003 South Korean film, “Save the Green Planet!”, written and directed by Jan Joon-hwan.  It’s no conspiracy that we are often surrounded by widespread theories shaped by people’s beliefs.  They can lead to either shocking revelations that surpass our understanding or to conclusions as pointless as an unsharpened pencil.  Of course, the journey in uncovering these theories can be just as wild as the destination, especially when theorists assert that someone is not from this world.  This encapsulates the latest absurdist comedy from the weirdly creative mind of Yorgos Lanthimos, which brings a South Korean black comedy to American audiences.  Never heard of it?  I hadn’t either until I did a bit of digging.  Given the film’s concept, Lanthimos seemed an ideal choice to reinterpret the premise through his distinctive vision.  But was this conspiracy theory truly worth exploring?  Let’s find out. 

The story follows Michelle Fuller (Stone), the CEO of an upscale pharmaceutical company called Auxolith.  During her routine, Michelle’s life takes a surprising turn when she is abducted by Teddy Gatz (Plemons), a beekeeper obsessed with conspiracy theories, and his neurodivergent cousin, Don (Delbis).  They imprison her in the basement of their shared home and shave her hair completely.  Teddy and Don believe that Michelle is part of an alien race known as the “Andromedans”, who have infiltrated Earth, and they plan to use her as leverage to save the planet.  As the impending lunar eclipse approaches, Michelle attempts to find a way to escape the conspiracy-obsessed captors while they desperately try to extract a confession of the “truth” from her.

Following my experiences with “The Favourite” and “Poor Things”, I found myself immediately captivated by Lanthimos’s estranged visual style.  He’s one of the filmmakers who is unafraid to delve into the surreal absurdity of his concepts, particularly those that offer layered commentary.  While I enjoyed “The Favourite” for its arthouse surrealism, it was “Poor Things” that heightened my admiration for Lanthimos’s audacious vision.  Admittedly, its risqué black comedy and sexual content may not appeal to everybody, but the film’s technical surrealism and unconventional direction highlight its steampunk aesthetics, cast, and themes, making it my personal favorite in the filmmaker’s filmography.  Yes, you read that correctly: a film centered on a resurrected corpse engaging in constant sexual encounters is my top choice among Lanthimos’s films.  Who would’ve thought?  Unfortunately, I have yet to see “Kinds of Kindness”, so I can’t share how I feel about it.  However, I’ve heard it doesn’t quite measure up to Lanthimos’s earlier works, so perhaps I’ve dodged a bullet there.  

This brings us to the director’s latest absurdist comedy, “Bugonia”, which delivers the bizarre elements we’ve come to expect from his previous films.  The trailers featuring a bald Emma Stone and a pair of alien-obsessed kidnappers are intriguing enough for me to investigate this eccentric theory for myself.  Having witnessed this truth unfold, do I think it’s worth the investigation?  Yes, I do.  “Bugonia” undoubtedly represents Yorgos Lanthimos at his best, blending his absurdly creative vision with a grounded, often metaphorical reflection on contemporary society.  The film explores the dynamics of society's higher-ups, particularly through the character of Michelle, and the perceived exploitation of the lower class and patients, with the latter fueling Teddy’s determination to unveil the “truth”.  The movie also delves into Lanthimos’s perspective on misanthropy through the characters’ insane actions, prompting viewers to question whether we, as a society, are truly “worthy”.  It may not reach the surreal heights of “Poor Things”, and its comedic elements take a back seat to a more somber narrative.  Nonetheless, it remains a well-structured and consistently engaging experience that buzzes around its cinematic flower like a bee.

Those familiar with Lanthimos’s previous works will immediately recognize his experimental and quirky vision.  Even when a film is rooted in reality, he has a knack for twisting it into an offbeat and bizarrely demented shell of itself.  It’s unorthodox, yet you can’t help but keep your eyes glued to the screen, eager to discover what other weird element he has in store.  To no one’s surprise, “Bugonia” exemplifies how Lanthimos’s unique cinematic craft coexists seamlessly with his distinctively creative mindset.  In addition to his signature style, Lanthimos also knows how to make the film’s seemingly repetitive conversations between characters compelling and tense.  While the movie may seem long at first, clocking in at almost two hours, Lanthimos kept the pacing of these scenes smooth and steady.  There were a couple of moments where the narrative nearly lost me.  Fortunately, akin to what Teddy did to Michelle, the director kept me trapped in this scenario until he hit me with a dour yet respectfully restrained finale, and I mean that in a good way.  The film’s visual appeal is enhanced by Lanthimos’s trusted cinematographer, Robbie Ryan, who utilized 8-perf 35mm film to capture a traditional 1980s aesthetic, enriching both the dramatic scenes and the film’s conclusion.

The screenplay, penned by Will Tracy, provides an intriguing theory layered with metaphorical themes and robust dialogue.  Tracy, a former editor-in-chief of The Onion, has expertise not just in black comedy but also in satirical examinations of humanity and upper-class life, as evident in his previous works such as “The Menu” and “Succession”.  If you’re familiar with any of them, you’ll notice the resemblance in “Bugonia” regarding his approach.  The script delivered a few chuckle-worthy moments, but it became, somehow, less of a comedy and more of a tragedy as the film progressed.  It’s not a movie you would go to with popcorn and soda on the side and have a fun time.  It’s a film that scrutinizes humanity’s madness and may make us feel bad about ourselves, at least from my perspective.  Sure, seeing a bald Emma Stone is quite humorous out of context, but once you understand the clear picture, you might end up reconsidering your impulse to mock her haircut.  Due to its tone, some comedic moments may fall flat despite their inherent wit.  As for its ending, it’s undoubtedly grim, but it was also something I saw coming a mile away, which somewhat diminished the storytelling potential.  However, this was offset by the film’s impressive 1980s-inspired production designs.  Additionally, the film’s score was miraculously composed by Jerskin Fendrix, integrating vigorous orchestral harmonies into the film’s intense atmosphere.

Of course, Lanthimos isn’t the only reason for the film’s engaging dialogue-driven sequences, as its main leads cooperated effectively to ensure their performances deserve an audience like me.  Emma Stone and Jesse Plemons have previously collaborated with Lanthimos on their previous films, including “Kinds of Kindness”.  Given their experiences together, it’s inevitable that their latest collaboration will be nothing but child’s play for them, and my god, did they play me well through their effortless yet captivating talents.  Emma Stone delivered another fantastic performance that could potentially earn her another award nomination.  Her portrayal of Michelle displays a calm and well-meaning demeanor that’s convincing enough to be human, avoiding over-reliance on familiar damsel-in-distress tropes to elevate her performance.  Jesse Plemons also excelled in his performance, capturing Teddy’s restrained, subtle emotions, driven by his personal vendetta against the powerful CEO.  While it’s challenging for me to determine if it’s his best performance, it undoubtedly showcases Plemons’s impressive talent and presence in the film industry.  Aidan Delbis also contributes effectively in his role of Don, Teddy’s neurodivergent cousin, who assists in his mission to “save humanity”.

Overall, “Bugonia” is an eccentric and strikingly absurd conspiracy theory that underscores Yorgos Lanthimos’s signature oddity and its remarkable acting showcase.  It leans more towards absurdist tragedy than black comedy, with a rather predictable yet grim conclusion.  Fortunately, its dialogue-driven moments leading up to its bleak finale convinced me to appreciate the film’s distinctive craftsmanship and metaphorical themes, reminiscent of the director’s earlier works.  While it may not surpass “Poor Things” as my favorite film from the filmmaker in terms of absurdity and imaginative strangeness, the film is certainly a theory worth setting out to prove.  Emma Stone and Jesse Plemons continue to shine on screen through their engaging performances, while Lanthimos’s directorial style radiates with an air of anomaly and tension.  Will Tracy’s screenplay effectively reflects on modern society, and Jerskin Fendrix’s score complements the movie’s eerily weird atmosphere.  This is undoubtedly Yorgos Lanthimos at his finest, which should leave his fans impressed by his eccentric cinematic mind.  ​

​“Something Wicked This Way Comes” stars Jason Robards, Jonathan Pryce, Diane Ladd, and Pam Grier.  Released on April 29, 1983, the film follows two young boys as they encounter a mysterious carnival led by its ominous host.

The film was directed by Jack Clayton, who directed films such as “The Bespoke Overcoat”, “The Innocents”, “The Pumpkin Eater”, and “The Lonely Passion of Judith Hearne”.  It is based on the 1962 novel by Ray Bradbury, who also wrote the screenplay for the movie.  The 1980s are often regarded as the “dark age” for the Walt Disney Company.  After providing family-friendly content, particularly in animation, the studio adopted a more mature approach in its films, introducing numerous adult themes and unsettling imagery that could scar young viewers for life.  The outcome was a mixed bag at best, with most of the films from that decade failing to recoup their production budgets as Disney had anticipated.  However, the studio did deliver a few underrated gems that haunt our memories, especially those in the live-action department.  

One notable film was an adaptation of Ray Bradbury’s 1962 novel, which featured two best friends encountering plenty of spooky stuff from a traveling carnival.  It was plagued by troubling production issues, including rewrites, reshoots, and editing struggles.  Its repeated production slates didn’t translate into a healthy box office run, though it did receive some mixed reviews, which was better than nothing.  However, it didn’t get the re-release treatment until forty years later, debuting on Blu-ray as a Disney Movie Club exclusive in 2021, back when it was a thing.  Four years later, this long-forgotten Disney fright-fest finally became available for the first time on Disney+.  Better late than never, I suppose.  Now that we have another overlooked piece of Disney memorabilia available, was this wickedness worth experiencing again or for the first time?  Let’s find out. 

The story revolves around two best friends living next door to each other in Green Town, Illinois: the reclusive Will Halloway (Vidal Peterson) and the rebellious Jim Nightshade (Shawn Carson).  After serving time in after-school detention, the boys hear the news about a carnival coming to their town, sparking their curiosity to investigate.  Upon their arrival, Will and Jim encounter a series of strange and eerie occurrences surrounding the enigmatic carnival, including its ominous manager, Mr. Dark (Pryce), and a carousel that contains mysterious powers.  They soon learn that Mr. Dark holds the ability to fulfill people’s desires, but he is also a malevolent entity who feeds off the life force of those he enslaves.  This revelation leads the boys into a battle against their fears as they strive to confront and overcome Mr. Dark’s terrifying wrath.

I have a faint recollection of “Something Wicked This Way Comes” until it was mentioned in some shape or form.  From what I remember, I watched the film for the first time at school.  It might have been during my elementary school days, since I distinctly remember the carousel scenes being etched into my brain.  After that, I never had the chance to revisit this creepy-as-hell movie, mainly because it was pretty rare to find at the time.  That is, until I discovered that the film was made available for the first time on Disney+ this month.  I was surprised it hadn’t been released earlier, during the streaming service’s launch, especially during the Halloween season.  Regardless, it allowed me to confront my hazy childhood memory, now that I’m an adult who enjoys watching horror films every October.

After watching the film, I realized my memories of specific scenes were not entirely clear.  I either remembered certain scenes differently or had forgotten about them entirely by the time I transitioned to middle school.  Nevertheless, “revisiting” this dark Disney movie was definitely an interesting experience, not just for exploring the studio’s mature route during its “Dark Ages” era further, but also for seeing whether it’s worth adding to my annual Halloween watchlist.  Regarding the latter part, “Something Wicked This Way Comes” was wicked enough for me to consider visiting again each year, mainly because of my fondness for family-friendly horror.  It may not be a truly terrifying masterpiece that stands alongside other horror classics, but the film evoked a commendable blend of maturity, creepiness, and Disney’s signature pizazz to deliver an unsettling yet enjoyable Halloween treat.

“Something Wicked This Way Comes” is another movie that, despite its PG rating, serves as a reminder that not all “family-friendly” movies are necessarily suitable for young children.  This is evident in the film’s mature themes and imagery, eschewing cheap jump scares in favor of a deeply unsettling atmosphere and an aura of dread.  You’ve got your never-ending supply of tarantulas, a sinister carnival manager, and a carousel capable of altering a person’s age.  Fun for the whole family, am I right?  Regarding its scares, the film didn’t offer much to make me terrified to go on any carnival rides in the near future.  Fortunately, it more than makes up for it with its unnerving mood and themes.  Sure, jump scares and the supernatural are typically the prime elements to make a horror movie scary.  However, it’s also the persistent fear of uncertainty — especially from a child’s perspective — that truly gives the film its spine-chilling quality.

Amid its spookiness, the film delves into themes of fear and temptation, underscoring the dangers of receiving something that seems too good to be true.  This fear extends beyond the seemingly benign carnival to life itself.  The film’s adult characters, such as Will’s father, Charles (Robards), and Ed (James Stacy), the amputee bartender, grapple with feelings of being past their primes, yearning to reclaim their youth through Mr. Dark’s “promises".  Charles, in particular, is troubled by his advancing age and its impact on his relationship with Will, pushing him to confront his regrets to protect his son.  The interactions between Will and Charles are certainly the film’s highlights, offering a mildly sweet reflection on their father-son relationship.  They also demonstrate Disney’s mature storytelling, delving into the uncertainties of aging from Charles’s viewpoint.  Ray Bradbury’s screenplay doesn’t offer much emotional resonance in its themes, due to iffy dialogue and restrained explorations, possibly from reshoots.  Nonetheless, the film’s heart beats strongly enough to complement its dreary, cautionary Twilight Zone-like tale about temptation.

Director Jack Clayton was renowned for adapting literature to film through his vision.  Although I’m not familiar with his other works, I can tell that he had a pretty decent streak in bringing specific famous books to the screen through his vision.  For “Something Wicked This Way Comes”, Clayton was tasked with retaining the book’s haunting aesthetics while making it somehow accessible for families with older children, because Disney.  The result was a pretty commendable effort from the filmmaker.  As mentioned before, I didn’t find myself scared at all, but I do admire Clayton’s ability to convey dread, terror, and suspense through a darkly lit atmosphere and unsettling visuals.  The scene where Will and Jim are besieged by tarantulas was one of the few sequences that effectively exemplified this approach.  However, that also means I won’t recommend this movie to viewers with arachnophobia.  

Regarding the visuals, there were a couple that appeared dated, but others managed to hold up well, especially given the $20 million budget, such as the 2D animated green smoke and the film’s climactic sequence.  I’m pretty sure that the visuals might have been impressive at the time, but I couldn’t help but be one of today’s viewers who point out which effects still shine and which appear less convincing.  I would also commend James Horner’s score for encapsulating the film’s eerie tone, balancing dread with a few moments of light-heartedness.  Originally, Georges Delerue was chosen to compose the music, which would’ve reunited him with Clayton following “The Pumpkin Eater” and “Our Mother’s House”.  However, his music was replaced by Horner’s due to concerns about it being “too sinister”.  I guess Disney didn’t want to go too far in scaring its young audience.  After hearing about what happened, I’m curious about checking out Delerue’s unused score someday and seeing how it compares to Horner’s work.

As for the cast, there are only a couple of standouts that made a wicked impression on me.  One of whom is Jonathan Pryce, who was relatively unknown during that time.  Fortunately for the studio heads, it seemed to become one of the roles that put Pryce on the Hollywood map, and I can see why.  Mr. Dark is quite a terrifying villain, mainly because he’s a devil in disguise.  His subtle attitude beneath his menacing aura evoked a discomforting feeling that warned me this guy should not be trusted, no matter how many “promises” he delivers.  Pryce delivered a performance that strongly captured that aura to a tee, especially during his confrontation with Charles in the library.  That scene alone showcases the remarkable talent he has in bringing these types of characters to life.  Another standout was Jason Robards as Charles Halloway.  I believe this was my first full-on exposure to Robards, as I hadn’t watched any of the other films he starred in before his passing.  Regardless, I thought he did a solid job with his performance as Charles, offering a compelling depiction of a man wrestling with his own mortality.  Vidal Peterson and Shawn Carson were also commendable in their roles as Will and Jim, respectively, though there were a few moments when their performances felt a bit phoned in.

Overall, “Something Wicked This Way Comes” is a wickedly spooky treat that suitably captures the source material’s eerie aesthetics and mature themes.  While it may not be a completely faithful and groundbreaking adaptation, this Disney horror film offers a creepily enjoyable narrative that balances a cautionary look at temptation with a subtly heartfelt tale about confronting one’s fears.  The result is far from perfect, as its desires were overshadowed by some iffy dialogue, restrained elements, and scare-free moments.  Nonetheless, it’s another piece of family-friendly horror that’s tempting enough for me to visit more often every Halloween.  Jonathan Pryce delivered a chillingly impressive performance as Mr. Dark, supported by a solid cast.  Jack Clayton’s directorial approach instills a solid sense of dread and discomfort throughout the film’s atmosphere and creepy visuals.  Along with some striking imagery and James Horner’s haunting score, the film is a worthy display of sinister woes and dark fantasy that fits within Disney’s “Dark Ages” era.  If you haven’t seen it yet or want to revisit it, the film is available on Disney+ for your spooky viewing pleasure.