“Primetime” stars Robert Pattinson, Merritt Wever, Skyler Gisondo, Phoebe Bridgers, Matthew Maher, and Bokeem Woodbine.  Released on September 25, 2026, the film follows Chris Hansen and the impact of his reality program on television.

The film featured the narrative feature film debut of Lance Oppenheim.  He’s helmed documentaries like “Some Kind of Heaven” and “Spermworld”, as well as short films like “The Dogmatic”, “Long Term Parking”, and “The Paradise Next Door”.  It is based on the 2007 Esquire article “Tonight on Dateline This Man Will Die” by Luke Dittrich.  We’ve seen many people make their mark on television, whether through an incident that’s trending for the right or wrong reasons or through a program that revolutionizes it.  Either way, television has been a gateway that introduced people to some of the most popular celebrities of all time for their accomplishments.  Of course, that includes those deemed “bold” or “challenging” at the time, given television’s rating conditions.  One such TV celebrity made an accomplishment so risky and so disturbing that it changed everything for those involved and even the network: television journalist Chris Hansen.

In November 2004, Chris Hansen pulled off a daring feat by hosting a reality television series for Dateline NBC called “To Catch a Predator”.  The 20-episode series involved Hansen performing sting operations to arrest adult men looking to do the “icky” with a minor.  I’m not kidding.  That’s exactly what it’s about.  The show was canceled in 2008, reportedly because it had run its course, as Hansen stated, yet the host later ran two spiritual successors.  However, the show’s run remains infamous for its concept and representation of the sting operations it depicted, as well as the suicide of Texas assistant district attorney Bill Conradt.  Given how disturbing and controversial it is, it would make sense for Hollywood to take a crack at reflecting its production journey, one that takes a toll on television and even those involved.  Does it deliver an unhinged exploration that would make for good television, or should audiences switch to a different channel?  Let’s find out.

The story chronicles journalist Chris Hansen (Pattinson), who hosts an innovative reality show called “To Catch a Predator” for NBC.  The series follows him and the anti-pedophile group called Perverted-Justice as they catch would-be predators looking to engage in sex with a minor.  The show’s strong ratings earned it a primetime slot.  However, it also led Chris to develop a dangerous obsession with making his show the biggest in television history.  As he confronts obstacles outside of television, his actions lead to an unforeseen circumstance that could pull the plug on his success.

I was very unfamiliar with “To Catch a Predator” when it first came out, mainly because I was busy ignoring what’s happening in real life.  But “Primetime” immediately captured my attention for two reasons.  First, I’m usually intrigued by how specific parts of history are represented in film, and the controversial history of the pedo-catching reality show is no different.  Second is Robert Pattinson, who not only produces the movie but also aims to portray Chris Hansen in his main role.  Like Anne Hathaway and Zendaya, Pattinson has had a fantastic year in his acting career.  However, I will also note that he continues to become a stellar actor whose post-Twilight phase remains one of the most impressive comebacks worthy of our attention.  These aspects made “Primetime” another film I was looking forward to. But given how unhinged and alienated it looks, it’s not without concerns that may turn general audiences away from Hansen’s wild idea.  After finally watching it, I can definitely see why it may not be for everyone.

“Primetime” is another movie that matches its unnerving, dangerous topic with a narrative that reflects its tense, stylized journey.  Given how risky and terrifying Hansen’s show was, the film had to ensure audiences were in for the most stressful ride of their lives, even if its ideas may not suit them well.  Yes, that includes the actual Chris Hansen himself, who was pretty critical of the film.  Based on what I saw, I think it passed with flying colors.  “Primetime” is an incredible, consistently disturbing depiction of justice in the world of reality television that isn’t afraid to show the complexities of this pursuit.  It’s unnerving, discomforting, intense, and even insane, just like the iconic television show it’s based on.  Now, I’m not going to go out of my way to say it’s a “life-changing” experience or anything like that.  But I will say I was highly impressed with how it lets me think about its underlying themes while delivering nail-biting entertainment fit for primetime.

Lance Oppenheim is best known for his work on documentaries, with his upcoming film about Elizabeth Holmes slated for release later.  Despite not seeing any of them, I was curious as to how his documentary tactics would translate into a feature film.  The answer is the film’s combination of a narrative structure with clips from other television shows.  At times, it may feel like a documentary without the actual interviews.  However, at its core, it’s more of an experience that delves into the process Hansen was willing to go through to make television history.  As his first narrative feature film, I was honestly impressed by how Oppenheim captured its surreal, electrifying tone.  In terms of pacing, aura, and presentation, Oppenheim grabbed my attention immediately without having to build itself from the ground up.  He introduced the direction it’s going in, as Hansen’s show did, and once that’s done, it keeps its grip on me throughout the entire runtime until the end.  It’s one of the movies that instantly grabbed me by the arm and never eases up.  It’s disturbing, but it kept me engaged enough to prove the demoralizing content isn’t just for show.  From an enticing beginning to its shocking conclusion, Oppenheim blurs the line between reality and hallucinogenic energy with an engrossing, highly stylized spectacle worthy of my five-star rating.

In terms of the screenplay by Ajon Singh, “Primetime” may seem like another standard biographical film about a well-known celebrity and their personal struggles amid their success.  However, it’s actually more of a stylized retelling of the production of “To Catch a Predator” from the perspectives of those involved.  It does show Hansen at his best and at his worst, notably his extramarital affair outside of the show, but it’s not about his entire life.  It’s about Hansen’s striving for success and the need to cleanse the world of evil through his protocols.  In the world of broadcast television, we’re all willing to do what we can to secure that success and more.  The same goes for its depiction of justice, where Hansen and Perverted-Justice are willing to expose child predators through their reality show.  However, the striving for both can come with a hefty price.  Of course, I’m not just talking about what happened with Bill Conradt.  I’m also referring to the mentality of those who took part in Hansen’s unconventional strategy.

The movie isn’t just about Hansen; it's also about the actor Dan Plum (Gisondo), who joined Hansen’s show to get his acting career off the ground.  Unsurprisingly, like real acting, it’s not as easy as it looks, especially when you’re on a reality show with no rehearsals, no prep time, and no second chances.  This is easily one of the better aspects of Singh’s script, as it authentically reflects the mental stress and unease of being in a reality show, notably one about catching actual pedophiles.  It’s a well-defined outlook on how “To Catch a Predator”, despite its success, can take a toll on an actor, especially when they’re at risk of being sexually abused by an older predator.  This not only drives the movie’s gripping suspense but also helps Singh’s screenplay move away from the usual biopic tropes we’re used to, especially in its characters.  Hansen isn’t seen as the film’s hero or its villain regarding his actions.  He has a complex view of success through performative justice and ratings, which leads him to take a risk that doesn’t go exactly as he hoped.  While the narrative is brief in its exploration, the script never lost sight of exposing the uneasy truth behind the process of reality television, and let me tell you.  It is one hell of a truth to behold.

However, the film deserves the most flowers for David Bolen's cinematography.  It was printed onto 16 mm film before being digitized to recapture the feeling of watching the show itself.  Through color grading, eerie saturation, and distortion, Bolen replicated the visual essence of watching something on a television model made in the 2000s…in modern times.  More importantly, it also explores Hansen’s “ego” through dreamlike lenses and a disheartening aura.  I may not be fully nostalgic for “To Catch a Predator”, but I do remember the days of watching television during the 2000s, though my fond memories are usually cartoons.  So its presentation reminds me of how the screen looked on an older television.  It’s one of the elements of filmmaking I enjoyed the most because of the authentic feeling of watching something as if it was made in that era.  “Primetime” further proves that theory with its near-perfect replication of the show’s broadcasts and sting operations, capturing the heart-pounding feel of experiencing them on television, whether it’s the first time or the tenth.

As mentioned earlier, I have a profound respect for Robert Pattinson for tackling bold roles recently and hitting a home run in all of them.  In “Primetime”, he took on the challenge of conveying Chris Hansen and his journey of justice, and guess what?  He absolutely crushed it!  In fact, I think this might be the role that may earn him an Oscar nomination.  Pattinson’s ability to disappear into the role is once again worth noting, as he effectively portrayed the mannerisms and restrained, unhinged edge of a journalist willing to maintain his primetime success.  Every scene involving him is a fantastic sight to behold. Pattinson's presence made me feel a bit uneasy, yet I found it impossible to look away.  He is undoubtedly one of the best parts of the film.  I might even say that this is also the best performance I’ve seen from Pattinson.  If “To Catch a Predator” were to be revived, I would definitely nominate him as the next host.  I was also very impressed with Skyler Gisondo and his terrific performance as Dan Plum.  He only caught my attention through his role as Jimmy Olsen in James Gunn’s “Superman”, but seeing him in this makes me hopeful that he’ll end up getting more roles like this in the future.  Gisondo did a great job conveying the character’s disturbed nature without overdoing the genuine emotion, making him another actor worth keeping my eye on.  Merritt Wever was also really good as Andie Bender, and Alex Winter made a strong impression on me with his haunting role of Bill Conradt.

Overall, “Primetime” televises a deeply unsettling yet highly engrossing perspective on the dark side of reality television.  It not only captures the uneasy experience of the controversial reality show that made television history, but also the gritty, disturbing aura of a surreal fever dream that highlights Chris Hansen’s risky pursuit of justice.  Lance Oppenheim and writer Ajon Singh took a bold swing at subverting the biopic tropes we’d normally see in other familiar fact-based movies, both in storytelling and technique.  The result may not work for those already uncomfortable with the show’s dangerous concept.  However, it is still a consistently tense, well-written, and impeccably directed roller coaster that helps me rethink my view of reality television.  Though brief in terms of exploration, the thrills and unsettling aura are more than enough to make this program worthy of its primetime slot.  With its outstanding cast, Oppenheim’s strong direction, tight screenplay, and great cinematography, the film found its own sense of justice by delivering an excellent experience from beginning to end. ​

​“Digger” stars Tom Cruise, Riz Ahmed, John Goodman, Sandra Hüller, Michael Stuhlbarg, and Jesse Plemons.  Released on October 2, 2026, the film follows an oil tycoon as he attempts to save humanity from a disaster he created.

The film is directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu, who also directed films such as “Amores perros”, “Babel”, “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)”, and “The Revenant”.  When you’re the most powerful being in the world, you feel like you can do just about anything your heart desires.  Still, millions of people count on you to ensure humanity's safety and well-being.  However, it’s far from easy when you're also responsible for the planet’s impending destruction.  Being high and mighty isn’t all that’s cracked up to be, as they always say.  We’re now getting more potential award contenders from major studios this month, with Warner Brothers seeking another Oscar domination like last year’s “One Battle After Another”.  This time, it’s the latest comedy from Alejandro González Iñárritu, featuring action star Tom Cruise trading his gadgets for a shovel and tons of makeup.  Boy, he really let himself go after starring in “Mission: Impossible 15”.  Does it prove to be the savior of cinema or a big-screen disaster of epic proportions?  Let’s find out.

The story centers on Digger Rockwell (Cruise), a wealthy oil tycoon whose company made him the world's most powerful man.  However, his arrogant persona and faulty oil rig lead him to create a global catastrophe in Greenland, triggering a massive iceberg heading toward Europe.  Realizing what he has wrought, Digger finds himself in the crosshairs as he seeks to find a solution to prevent the disaster he unintentionally created.

So far, I have only seen two films from Iñárritu: “Birdman” and “The Revenant”.  I considered seeing his last film, “Bardo, False Chronicle of a Handful of Truths”, four years ago, but its divisive reviews and lengthy runtime made me a tad hesitant.  Regardless, the two films I mentioned helped me appreciate Iñárritu’s bold cinematic vision, especially in his direction of the wide-angle cinematography and production design.  It’s one of the reasons behind my intrigue with “Digger”, along with Tom Cruise’s ambitious role and its premise, which I’ve heard is pretty wild.  However, in terms of his writing, Iñárritu is also becoming one of the few filmmakers whose bold swings in storytelling can spark “interesting” conversations among critics and audiences.  Apparently, “Digger” is no exception, as its reviews range from “brilliant” to “a painful mess”.  But, knowing me, I’m always willing to give obscure and polarizing films like this a shot.  Besides, who doesn’t love watching something weird, unorthodox, and balls-to-the-walls nuts?  

When referring to a film like “Digger”, it’s undoubtedly weird and surreal, which is fitting for Iñárritu’s mindset.  But is it also as nuts as it wanted itself to be?  Well, that’s where I can see where the divisive reviews are coming from.  This is another movie that’s well-polished, impeccably filmed, and weirdly imaginative, especially with how it reflects on what the future may bring if we sit back and watch it happen.  But when it comes to the experience it brought, the film is also a shallow and surprisingly disciplined satire whose ironic bite fails to match the impact of its crucial commentary.  This was another film that really left me puzzled for a bit after the credits stopped rolling.  It was definitely an interesting experience to see on the big screen, not just for the ride itself, but also for the ambition behind Iñárritu’s unorthodox filmmaking.  As for everything else, it certainly got me thinking about whether it could happen in real life.  However, the execution of its premise somehow lacked the energy and satirical edge it needed to make the experience truly special for me.

While I wouldn’t say “Digger” should dig its own grave, I can’t say it’s a superb look at a tycoon’s biggest oopsie.  As mentioned earlier, “Digger” is another impressively made film that highlights Iñárritu’s ability to immerse audiences in the world he created.  While not as realistic as “The Revenant”, it does capture the surrealist vibe seen in “Birdman” regarding its blend of realism and eccentricity.  Even if he doesn’t go all out with the film's oddball shenanigans, Iñárritu’s restraint gave me plenty of room to admire his astoundingly vibrant vision amid the film’s mild kookiness.  Emmanuel Lubezki’s cinematography is unsurprisingly top-notch, given how incredible it looks.  It was shot on 35 mm film using VistaVision, the latest movie to use this technique following “Wuthering Heights”.  Using his usual tricks like natural lighting and continuous, uninterrupted shots, Lubezki effectively depicts the bizarre yet eye-catching alternate reality through immersion and visual flair.  It’ll likely earn him another Oscar nomination, further solidifying him as one of the best cinematographers working today.

The movie should also be recognized for its production design.  This is another example of a film where the settings play a role in the story.  The settings it provides, including those crucial to the movie's bigger meaning, evoke a larger-than-life scale that's also a gray yet remarkable visual treat.  They offer a practical, theatrical vibe similar to films from Wes Anderson, but Iñárritu drew on those inspirations to create his own alternative world.  With solid visual effects, it delivers a series of bizarrely engrossing backgrounds that reflect the irony of the higher-ups’ selfishness, as well as the outlook on climate change and the genre itself.  I also thought the music did a decent job of highlighting the film’s outlandish yet restrained tone.  English musician Cosmo Sheldrake composed the score in his feature film debut, and his take on improvisation and the sonorous environment was a fitting choice in evoking the surreal atmosphere of the experience.

Unfortunately, its technical strengths can only take the film so far when it comes to the story’s flawed execution.  In terms of its screenplay, the film serves as a satirical reflection on climate change caused by selfish business actions by higher-ups, including oil tycoons.  It showcases the consequences of those actions from the perspective of those who caused the disaster.  But as the film progressed, it also took on the irony of the genre it identified itself as, as we learn the true nature of the narrative.  In a way, it satirizes the rich people’s stupidity and even the satire genre itself.  While ambitious and thoughtful in what Iñárritu and the other writers are going for, their script just didn’t hit the right notes with its impact, pacing, and dialogue.  The humor, while amusing in some cases, didn’t have the edge to make the journey wilder than it should have, and the characters lack the lasting charm of their despicableness.  They’re intentionally unlikable to evoke the film's satire, but without the charisma to back it up, they just come off as annoyingly loathsome.  Again, Iñárritu has the proper vision to say what needed to be said about the world we live in.  However, the satirical essence felt surprisingly bland and forgettable, leaving me with a message that’s drowned out by his lack of parodic bite. 

As for the cast, I'd give Tom Cruise the most credit for his performance as Rockwell.  Cruise has earned my respect for going far and beyond to support the cinematic experience, especially through his dangerous stunts in the “Mission: Impossible” movies.  Whether it’s action, comedy, or drama, Cruise is another actor whose charisma and presence shine brightly, even if the movie he’s in may or may not be good.  In “Digger”, Cruise tackled the task of portraying the most arrogant oil tycoon in the world, and the result is exactly what I expected from the actor.  Like his performance as Les Grossman in “Tropic Thunder”, Cruise delivers his usual energetic appeal to make an unlikable character like Rockwell…well, more tolerable.  What we got from that was another strong performance from Cruise, whose ability to disguise himself in the role is enough to excuse the inconsistent narrative flow.  While I doubt it would earn Tom Cruise an Oscar nomination, I still respect the actor for tackling a role like this and coming out swinging.  Riz Ahmed also did a solid job as Ganesh, a scientist who joins Rockwell on his mission.  As for John Goodman, he certainly had the time of his life portraying the president who’s just as selfish and narcissistic as Rockwell.  His yelling can get a bit obnoxious at times, but for the most part, he played the part well.  

Overall, “Digger” is anything but a cinematic disaster, but its flawed satire makes it struggle to dig its way out of that said disaster.  Undoubtedly, this is another impressively engrossing film that benefited greatly from its technical aspects, notably its immersive cinematography and surreal production design.  They not only provide the oddball nature of climate change caused by selfish business owners, but also highlight Alejandro González Iñárritu's ambitious vision.  Sadly, despite those promising intentions, the movie is held back by its lack of a parodic edge, making the experience feel emptier and tamer than wild.  It does offer a worthy message about the direction we’re heading toward if we let history repeat itself.  However, its portrayal doesn’t quite capture the impact it’s aiming for in its direction and storytelling, resulting in a mild catastrophe that’s far from crucial but not harmless either.  Tom Cruise is one of the stronger aspects, thanks to his charismatic performance, and its ambitious swing is worthy of my respect.  Other than that, I can't see myself digging my way back to the cinema to see it again immediately.

“Forgotten Island” stars H.E.R., Liza Soberano, Dave Franco, Jenny Slate, Manny Jacinto, Dolly de Leon, Jo Koy, Ronny Chieng, and Lea Salonga.  Releasing on September 25, 2026, the film follows two best friends as they navigate through a mystical island.
​
The film is written and directed by Joel Crawford and Januel Mercado, marking Mercado's directorial debut.  Crawford is known for directing “Trolls Holiday”, “The Croods: A New Age”, and “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish”.  One of the best things that shapes our sense of self is the memories we keep in our brains.  Whether they’re good, bad, or downright silly, it’s always a treat to take a trip to the past and relive those experiences, especially when they involve our best friends.  Those memories, in particular, can even last a lifetime when the bonds between them are stronger than anything, which may or may not include a fantasy island known for forgetting them.  Following its dive into live-action territory last year, DreamWorks Animation returns to its original roots with another animated feature that aims to delight kids with its wackiness and maybe make adults tear up with its storytelling.  That doesn’t mean the studio isn’t trying the live-action route again, since the sequel to the “How to Train Your Dragon” remake is releasing next year, for better or worse.  But until then, we can admire that DreamWorks hasn’t lost sight of its animation department, with this one promising to be another classic in its lineup.  Is this cultural fantasy adventure worth remembering for years, or will audiences forget it in a day or two?  Let’s find out.

The story is set in the Philippines in the 1990s.  Jo (H.E.R.) and Raissa (Soberano) are two childhood friends who get into plenty of misadventures since they first met.  After graduating high school, Jo learns that Raissa is preparing to move to the United States to attend college.  Fearing the loss of their bond, Jo hosts their last day together as an attempt to convince Raissa to stay.  Their final moment is interrupted by a portal that transports them to Nakali, a mystical island said to make its residents forget their memories the longer they stay.  With their memories and friendship in danger of extinction, Jo and Raissa test their bond as they attempt to escape the island before they forget each other.

It has been at least three years since we saw something original from DreamWorks Animation.  The last time a new idea graced the screen from DreamWorks was “Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken”, which floundered financially despite mixed reviews.  Still, it’s nice to see DreamWorks hasn’t entirely given up on expressing its originality amid the sequels and live-action remakes, and “Forgotten Island” is no exception.  With a concept that blends its timeless message about friendship with inspirations from Filipino mythology, the film already made my list of the most anticipated movies of this year’s fall season.  Of course, with early word-of-mouth coming out strong from premieres at CinemaCon and Annecy International, it has the promise of being another modern masterpiece in DreamWorks’ lineup, akin to “The Wild Robot”.  

Fortunately, I don’t have to wait too long to see if it’s worth the hype, as I attended a surprise early screening of “Forgotten Island” a week ago.  The good news is that it was another great cinema-going memory I won’t forget anytime soon.  The better news?  The movie is just as fun and heartfelt as people said.  Would I say it’s another animated masterpiece?  Well, not exactly, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t plenty to admire about its quality.  “Forgotten Island” is a constantly wild, humorously delightful, and vibrantly dynamic blast of eye candy that never forgets the emotion within its core.  While it can get a bit too ridiculous in its pacing and abundance of 90s references, I still had a blast watching two best friends explore a Philippines-inspired island and encounter plenty of creatures that are either oddballs or pretty frightening.

On the surface, the film is a tale of two friends on the verge of separation who go on a memory-searching adventure in Nakali.  It’s what I would call a PG version of “The Hangover” on a magic island.  It sounds pretty simple for a movie seemingly made for kids, although there are a few moments that can make younger ones pee their pants, mainly ones involving Manang (Lea Salonga), the vicious Manananggal.  Even so, the film reflects the power of memories, especially in friendships.  I can’t go into specific details without spoiling the experience, but I can say that the movie will make you see your treasured memories differently.  It’s the kind of message that follows a similar narrative routine, especially the “friends separating” trope.  But with the right execution, it can create a heartwarming recollection that reminds audiences of the times they shared with their friends and the memories that form them.  “Forgotten Island” happens to be that occasion, thanks to Joel Crawford and Januel Mercado’s screenplay.

Despite a few tropes that limit its narrative potential, Crawford and Mercado mostly compensate with a compelling exploration of the film's themes, humor, and representation.  Since the film is set in the 1990s, it makes sense that it includes plenty of jokes and songs from that era in the Philippines.  I’m basically a 90s kid at heart, so I can very much relate to the references and even laugh at them.  “Forgotten Island” has that witty touch that makes every bizarre and messed-up moment more charming and hilarious than the last, especially the fart joke involving Jo that was more amusing than annoying.  Most people who grew up past the 90s may or may not get all the references, but for those who do, it'll feel like a celebration of the good times they once shared in that decade.  You know, back when the world made sense before all the bad stuff happened.  But hey.  That’s what memories are built for, right?  Of course, it also showcases the love and craft of the Filipino culture through its inspirations and designs.

More importantly, the film showed how much Joel Crawford has grown as an animation director.  After directing a “Trolls” holiday special and a fine-enough “Croods” sequel, Crawford stepped up his game with “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish,” not just in its all-ages storytelling, but also in its distinctive presentation.  He utilized animation to emphasize the creativity and vibrancy of the world-building and metaphorical themes, creating a consistently joyous and soulful experience for all ages.  Unsurprisingly, Crawford’s vision hasn't changed for “Forgotten Island”, which has him fully committed to going all out on its visual zaniness and influences, especially those involving anime.  It’s well-paced and entertaining enough to get the message across, but it also doesn’t overshadow the heart that stems from the power of memories, creating a blend that’s impossible to forget.  However, despite the pacing, the film felt like it ran a few minutes too long, especially given how scattershot its tone can be.  While that may dampen the wild mood the two friends embrace, I can still see kids being entertained by its erratic nature, while adults can join in on the nonsensical ride and admire its influences.

Now, I’m not joking when I say that Crawford goes all out on the animation, because the style it chose was pretty amazing.  It’s got the blend of Spider-Verse, “Bad Guys”, and anime-influenced gags we’re familiar with from other recent animated movies, which is basically the new norm for animation.  But, to be honest, I still don’t mind the change, not just because of the creativity and immersion it brings, but also because of the unique charm and amusement from that presentation.  For “Forgotten Island”, the animation is a continuous blast of zany charisma and vibrant chaos that’s relentless to a tee, but also visually pleasing for its heartfelt moments.  What really drives the animation is its inspiration from anime and Filipino culture, especially the mythical creatures and the island of Nakali.  No joke, the world of Nakali is downright beautiful for its lively colors and imaginative settings, and the creatures themselves are suitably designed, especially Manang, who, again, is very terrifying.  As mentioned, its runtime may make the presentation feel pretty exhausting to watch after a while. But creatively, it's another example of how stylized animation can make stories and worlds feel more alive and innovative.

Finally, we have the voice cast, with some actors from their Filipino heritage.  I haven’t listened to much music by H.E.R., but when I do, I would admit she’s good at what she does best.  In terms of acting, her big cinematic debut in the 2023 adaptation of “The Color Purple” showed potential for her to become another singer-turned-actress worthy of our attention.  However, her real test came in performing as the main lead, let alone voicing the main character in an animated family movie.  Safe to say that she passed with flying colors.  H.E.R. did a surprisingly stellar job conveying Jo’s wild, energetic personality, which was used to hide the character’s insecurities about her future.  Packed with laugh-out-loud humor and warmth, this is definitely the best performance I’ve seen from the R&B singer so far outside her music career.  Liza Soberano was also great as Raissa, portraying her as the opposite of Jo while still carrying the dynamic wackiness of her friend, highlighting the irresistible chemistry that feels as real as their bond.  This is another moment where the two leads’ charisma toward each other and the story’s heart make for an unforgettable treat.  Dave Franco also kept his recent cinematic streak going this year, thanks to his humorous performance as Raww, a were-aspin who couldn’t control his transformation ability.  I would also credit Lea Salonga for making Manang one hell of a monster to fear, thanks to her vocal range.
   
Overall, “Forgotten Island” is an unforgettable all-ages adventure that remembers its blend of visual chaos and heartfelt vibes and how to have fun with its kookiness.  Drawing on Filipino culture and 90s references, the film is an immensely entertaining and visually dazzling celebration of the memories that shape us and the everlasting bonds between best friends.  It also highlights Joel Crawford’s continued growth as an animation director, especially his ability to embrace the format’s distinct stylization while balancing it with strong storytelling.  It occasionally resorts to familiar narrative tropes, and its slightly long runtime can be a tad exhausting given its energetic presentation and frightening moments.  Other than that, this is one of DreamWorks Animation’s most satisfying films that’s equal parts charming, hilarious, and heartwarming.  One that its target audience won’t forget about anytime soon.  If you and your best friend share an unbreakable bond, or you’re in the mood for an animated adventure that isn't strictly made for kids, this memorable trip to Nakali is definitely worth taking. 

​“Resident Evil” stars Austin Abrams, Zach Cherry, Kali Reis, Johnno Wilson, and Paul Walter Hauser.  Released on September 18, 2026, the film follows a medical courier as he survives a viral outbreak of infected monsters.

The film is directed by Zach Cregger, who also helmed “Miss March”, “Barbarian”, and “Weapons”.  It is the second reboot and eighth installment in the “Resident Evil” film series, based on Capcom's video game series.  Since its inception three decades ago, “Resident Evil” has become one of the most popular franchises in gaming history for its take on zombie survival horror.  Through its recognizable characters and varied gameplay mechanics, the IP has left a huge bloodstain on the video game industry, redefining the survival horror genre and reintroducing zombies to the mainstream audience.  The franchise is still going strong with its recent game, “Resident Evil Requiem”, and a “Code: Veronica” remake is set to come out next year.  But what about the movie adaptations based on the games?  Well, they have been recognized for the right and wrong reasons.

The “Resident Evil” films became solid money-makers, thanks to Paul W.S. Anderson and Milla Jovovich’s star power as Alice, a new character created only for the movies.  However, those mild successes were overshadowed by their mixed-to-negative reviews from both critics and audiences for deviating from the games.  But at least they have some fans who couldn’t get enough of their cheesy biopunk goodness.  After that, Hollywood tried to get the games’ faithfulness right with the reboot, “Welcome to Raccoon City”, but apparently not many people were willing to watch a “Resident Evil” movie without Jovovich.  So, of course, the best course of action is to reboot it once again with an even more different direction.  Under the guidance of rising horror filmmaker Zach Cregger, this latest take on the horror franchise aims to capture the chilling aura of the games while focusing on a different character outside of those like Leon Kennedy or Chris Redfield.  Is the third time the charm for this popular zombified source material, or is it just another brain-dead reinvention with no bite?  Let’s find out.

The story centers on Bryan (Abrams), a young man who works at a hospital as a medical courier.  After his recent delivery, Bryan immediately takes on one more job that pays extra, sending him to Raccoon City to deliver a mysterious package.  What seems like another ordinary delivery slowly descends into a haunting nightmare, as Bryan confronts numerous inhumane creatures.  This pits Bryan in a heart-pounding fight for survival, as he relies on his instincts to fight through the outbreak affecting Raccoon City.

I’ve been saying this plenty of times in my previous “Resident Evil” reviews, and I’ll gladly say it again for this one.  I have never played a single “Resident Evil” game in my life, mainly because I wasn't a fan of horror games.  I can handle horror movies, but the games?  Nah, I’m better off playing a Disney game.  However, I do have some experience with the movie adaptations.  I was okay with most of the installments featuring Jovovich’s Alice, but “The Final Chapter” was excruciatingly terrible from start to finish.  “Welcome to Raccoon City” was a slight improvement over that scattershot finale in terms of faithfulness, but aside from that, its narrative execution was nothing special.  Despite that, I was willing to give the franchise’s cinematic treatment another chance because of Zach Cregger’s involvement.  That dude has delivered back-to-back original horror hits that were well-directed, well-told, and unnervingly frightening.  This alone left me hopeful that he’ll go for three with his own take on the horror franchise.  

But, as before, this is another scenario where a promising filmmaker went from helming original, low-budget movies to directing a popular IP, which doesn’t always bode well for some.  However, there are actually a few elements in the new “Resident Evil” movie that could work in Cregger’s favor.  One is its approach to the adaptation: it forgoes the excessive biopunk style of the Jovovich-led films in favor of a grounded, visually bleak, haunting delivery through hell.  Additionally, the story doesn’t have the game's characters coming in to slay the infected monsters and wink at the audience.  Instead, it tells an original story set in the games’ universe, focusing on a new character’s perspective on the outbreak, similar to what Paul W.S. Anderson’s “Resident Evil” did for Alice.  It still features some of the mechanics seen in the earlier games, such as the limited resources, but everything else is its own thing, just with the “Resident Evil” sticker slapped on it.

This approach can either impress or disappoint the franchise’s fans depending on their expectations.  Based on recent social media reactions, I’m guessing it’s leaning toward the latter with its fanbase.  If they want a “Resident Evil” movie that follows the games’ stories and features their favorite characters front and center, guess what?  We have “Welcome to Raccoon City” for them to watch instead.  But if they’re looking for another Zach Cregger-directed horror film that’s dark, horrifying, entertaining, and somehow nuts, great news!  The new “Resident Evil” movie is right up their alley!  As mentioned earlier, this isn’t the “Resident Evil” that’s all cool and stylized with its biopunk energy and balls-to-the-wall action.  This is a “Resident Evil” film that’s downright terrifying, real, and smaller in scale.  It’s obviously far from an exact adaptation of the games, but that’s what makes it better in my eyes.  Rather than succumb to an abundance of Easter eggs and familiar cameos, Zach Cregger found the right blend of adaptation and originality in its lore.  The result is an insane, constantly tense horror experience that utilizes both craft and frights to finally deliver a good “Resident Evil” adaptation.

It’s unbelievable that after 24 years of mediocre “Resident Evil” movies, we have one that’s not only tolerable and fresh in its storytelling, but also genuinely scary in its use of survival-horror tropes.  This is because Zach Cregger handles the horror genre skillfully in an era when comedians can make people scream rather than laugh.  Similar to his previous works, “Resident Evil” showcases Cregger’s talent for infusing terror and eeriness into a film’s atmosphere while also highlighting its polished framing, which immerses audiences in a gradual nightmare.  The movie includes a few jump scares, but it uses them effectively to amplify the protagonist's growing anxiety as he navigates the mysterious outbreak.  In case you're wondering, I did get spooked by these moments.  Of course, its scares aren’t the only elements that drive the experience, as they’re efficiently combined with suspense, gore, and atmospheric terror, creating a small-scale yet hellish delivery route that’s mildly absurd and frightening, but also surprisingly humorous.  Yes, you read that right.  A “Resident Evil” movie that’s genuinely funny in its corniness despite its bleaker tone.  Not all of them worked, but when they do, it’s enough to forget that the courier may or may not be making his last delivery.

However, Cregger deserves the most credit for his take on the franchise’s mechanics.  As I said, it’s not an exact adaptation of the games in terms of the story, but rather an adaptation of the games’ universe and genre, notably survival horror.  The film hearkens back to earlier survival-horror adaptations like “Resident Evil 2” and “Nemesis”, and has it set in an alternate timeline of the Raccoon City outbreak.  So you might recognize elements you're familiar with from those games, like limited resources, guns, and whatnot.  With the film centering on an inexperienced protagonist, it also captures the feeling of playing a “Resident Evil” game for the first time, but in cinematic form, especially in the choices they make.  In a way, Cregger didn’t adapt the “Resident Evil” storyline.  Instead, he adapted the experience of playing a “Resident Evil” game as a newbie, which I find to be refreshing amid the usual route of retelling the games’ premises as movies.  That opens the door for more casuals who either haven’t played them or are curious about the games’ mechanics to experience what they might get themselves into.  As for the fans, I would say they’ll be glad to see the movie be more in line with the earlier games, even without Leon or Chris around.

Additionally, I would argue that “Resident Evil” is one of the best-looking video game adaptations I’ve seen, mainly because of the cinematography.  Dariusz Wolski, known for his collaboration with Ridley Scott, understood what a “Resident Evil” movie should look and feel like. He achieved this not through kinetic action and nauseating editing, but by creating a creepy and immersive atmosphere.  His cinematography is another example of Cregger adapting the feel of playing a “Resident Evil” game, especially the third-person POV shots.  A few scenes show the camera following Bryan from behind, mimicking how a camera follows the protagonist in several third-person games, along with some first-person shots.  These sequences capture the uneasiness and tension of surviving something we barely understand, as well as the feeling of watching a rookie play a “Resident Evil” game for the first time.  I also enjoyed the music by Hays and Ryan Holladay for conveying the film’s dreary haunts through their melodies.

As for the story, it’s essentially a simple survival-horror ride that doesn’t offer much beyond its tropes.  I would even say it aligns more with Cregger’s directorial debut, “Barbarian”.  Instead of being a discomforting horror film with underlying themes like “Weapons”, “Resident Evil” is a basic yet constantly thrilling ride that follows the protagonist going from point A to point B to deliver a special cargo to Raccoon City.  Its third act contradicts the grounded tone it’s meant to achieve, despite how surprising and bonkers it is.  Still, its simplicity delivers plenty of moments that are fun, terrifying, and a tad emotional, notably Bryan’s rocky relationship with his girlfriend.  It’s familiar by design, and the emotional beats don’t quite bite as hard as they should, but it makes up for it with entertainment value and scares.  As a “Resident Evil” movie, that’s more than enough to satisfy my horror tastebuds.

Another aspect that drove the movie was Austin Abrams, who makes his second collaboration with Cregger after impressing audiences with his supporting role in “Weapons”.  “Resident Evil” has Abrams taking center stage as a medical courier who takes a double-paying job that could be his last.  Bryan is undoubtedly another character who makes dumb decisions, especially given his inexperience with guns, but Abrams ensures Bryan’s stupidity is not only genuine but also captivating and humorous.  I can admit that Abrams is one of the best parts of the movie, delivering a performance that blends the character’s restraint and over-the-top reactions without coming off as annoying.  He was hilarious in some of his comedy moments, and he was also decent in the horror scenes.  The audience is stuck with him for an hour and a half, and Abrams made sure that time with Bryan is worth every minute.  Paul Walter Hauser was also good in the movie, mainly for the one scene involving his character and Bryan.

Overall, “Resident Evil” is a nightmarish delivery route that’s both terrifying and insanely fun enough to avoid its infected simplicity.  It's also a bold reinvention of the video game franchise that balances its originality with the games’ core elements.  The result may not win over all fans who wanted to see another cinematic interpretation of the franchise’s plots and characters.  However, it is a much-needed change of pace for the “Resident Evil” brand and video game movies in general, with Zach Cregger successfully adapting the experience of playing the games instead of adapting the storylines themselves.  Its simple storytelling doesn’t quite take a huge bite out of its survival-horror tropes and emotion, while its grounded tone is disrupted by its bonkers third act.  Besides that, this is the first good adaptation of the popular horror franchise that’s easily one of the better video game movies to date, all thanks to the horrifically splendid mind of Zach Cregger.  He rose to the occasion by offering something different to the IP, and as someone who hasn’t played a single “Resident Evil” game, I’m happy to say he passed with flying colors.  It may not work for everyone, but what matters most is that we finally got ourselves a good, if not great, “Resident Evil” movie.  I didn’t think it would happen, but it did, which should be a strong sign for the franchise’s future film adaptations.

​“Hope” stars Hwang Jung-min, Zo In-sung, Jung Ho-yeon, Taylor Russell, Cameron Britton, Alicia Vikander, and Michael Fassbender.  Released in South Korea on July 15, 2026, and in the United States on September 9, 2026, the film follows a group of people confronting mysterious creatures invading Earth.

The film was written and directed by Na Hong-jin, who’s known for directing “The Chaser”, “The Yellow Sea”, and “The Wailing”.  This year’s summer movie season came and went with the blink of an eye.  However, that doesn’t mean there are no more blockbusters heading our way as we approach the fall season.  September brings a few upcoming movies that’ll keep our cinematic taste buds satisfied until the holidays, including a reimagining of “Resident Evil” and an animated family movie about forgotten memories.  However, it’s also the month when we got not one, but two action-packed films from South Korea that have been making waves with strong word of mouth.  One was another zombie survival film from the mind behind “Train to Busan”.  The other was the country’s attempt to deliver its own epic blockbuster, with writer/director Na Hong-jin tackling the usual alien-invasion concept on a grander scale.  Does it deliver on the hopes of another strong piece of popcorn entertainment, or should audiences search for a better sci-fi thriller to invade?  Let’s find out.

The story centers on Ko Bum-seok (Jung-min), the police chief of Hope Harbor, a small village near the Korean Demilitarized Zone.  His second cousin, Ko Sung-ki (In-sung), asks him to investigate a cow that mysteriously died.  As Bum-seok returns to warn the town, he immediately finds that the village was destroyed and several of its townspeople were killed by a large monster.  With no reinforcements available, Bum-seok and rookie cop Im Sung-ae (Ho-yeon) set off to pursue the creature with the help of retired colonel and survivor, Ahn Nak-yeon (Lee Sang-hee).  Meanwhile, Sung-ki and his group of hunters attempt to follow the carnage in the woods, where they find that they’re not alone.  The two groups eventually discover a dangerous connection to the creatures that forces them to fight for the planet’s future or face annihilation.

Knowing me, I’m always in the mood for a sci-fi action film, let alone an epic blockbuster that aligns with the genre.  So seeing that “Hope” fits the criteria, along with some nifty shots shown in the trailers, made this another movie worth seeing.  We’re pretty much at a point where we have more opportunities to see movies made by international filmmakers, particularly those playing in more theaters.  While I may not be able to see all those types of films in theaters, I was nonetheless satisfied that more international movies are getting as much attention as modern ones.  As I said, we got two South Korean films playing in our theaters this month, but “Hope” is the one I’ve been anticipating most, mainly because of the director’s approach to its familiar plot.  Despite my inexperience with Na Hong-jin’s other works, I was eager and curious whether it could deliver something refreshing in its tried-and-true narrative from a storytelling and blockbuster perspective.

My only concern going in was its runtime.  Clocking in at two and a half hours, “Hope” seems to follow our summer blockbuster formula by turning a simple concept into a beefy spectacle filled with action set pieces and CGI chaos.  While they are crowd-pleasing in many similar blockbusters, they can also end up pretty exhausting if dragged out too long.  After watching it myself, I can conclude that “Hope” certainly has a few extended scenes of humans battling otherworldly visitors.  However, they’re not to the point of being overly aggressive in its set pieces or even draggy for the quieter scenes.  Na Hong-jin found the right momentum to keep the heart-pounding suspense in both types of scenes within its familiar yet engrossing narrative.  It’s undoubtedly long, but I was so busy being engaged by its awe-inspiring craft and action that I hardly noticed the length.  This is another example of a well-paced blockbuster that’s bigger in scope and length without overstaying its welcome.

As for the movie itself, “Hope” is another well-deserved crowd-pleaser that almost meets my expectations regarding its storytelling and blockbuster standards.  Before we get to the story, let’s address the obvious: its typical blockbuster elements.  These elements are what drive “Hope” to become an edge-of-your-seat, immensely insane adrenaline rush, and I enjoyed every minute of it.  Na Hong-jin definitely deserves his flowers for delivering an ambitious mid-budget blockbuster that’s equally balanced between action-packed chaos and grounded thrills.  Rather than becoming trapped in a Hollywood bubble, Hong-jin creates the best kind of blockbuster action by utilizing minimal CGI, real stunts, suspense, and exceptional craftsmanship.  Even in scenes that don’t involve much violence, Hong-jin shows a skillful hand that conveys the terror of the unknown and the persistence to fight for humanity's future.  However, he gets the most credit for blending its surprisingly humorous moments with the action without conflicting with its intended tone, making the experience all the more fun, let alone exciting.  I honestly did not expect myself to laugh that hard at its comedy bits, particularly the chemistry between Bum-seok and Ahn Nak-yeon.

The action sequences in “Hope” have been the talk of the town since its debut, and I can understand why.  Under Hong-jin’s guidance, the film delivers a series of consistently gripping action set pieces that are limited in setting yet highly engrossing in their violence and camerawork.  Hong Kyung-pyo's cinematography is some of the best work I’ve seen from him since Bong Joon Ho’s “Parasite”.  He captured every scene with great scope and focus, complete with effective lighting effects and incredible panning shots.  Kim Sun-min’s editing also made the action clearer, and the sound mixing was stellar in reflecting the immersive confrontation between humanity and the aliens.  The first hour and the final chase scene effectively demonstrate how filmmaking techniques can transform a seemingly typical epic action film into an ambitiously absorbing experience, especially the former.  The first hour features a remarkable build-up that cleverly conceals the monster’s reveal through a series of terrifying encounters from Bum-seok’s perspective.  This intense setup paid off exceptionally well when the monster finally shows its ugly face.

Unfortunately, even with the film’s impressive craftsmanship and thrilling action, “Hope” also didn’t have much else to elevate this experience, mainly in its story.  This is the type of blockbuster that leans more on production design and eye candy rather than its narrative.  The story of groups of people encountering strange creatures isn’t new, but it was entertaining enough to forgive the formulaic tropes it introduced and even the thin characters.  Although “Hope” is lengthy, it fails to develop its characters further before the aliens arrive.  Thankfully, they usually compensate by being either badasses or sources of comic relief.  It’s also worth noting that the film is surprisingly incomplete, with a cliffhanger ending that teases a possible continuation.  I’m usually mixed with these types of endings in movies, especially ones that don’t have a sequel announced yet.  Some leave me ecstatic to see how they continue, while others feel like a huge slap in the face if their journeys aren’t well executed.  In the case of “Hope”, it left me pretty curious about how they’re going to continue the story, but it can also be frustrating to those who wanted a complete narrative.

I also wanted to point out the main criticism that’s gotten people talking since its premiere in Cannes: the visuals.  Before heading into the film, I’d heard plenty of chatter that, even though people loved the movie, they weren't fans of how the CGI is presented.  This led me to think, “It can’t be that bad, can it?”  While watching the movie, I started to see where people are coming from.  However, I also don’t think the CGI is as terrible as people thought.  With a $46 million budget, “Hope” had some pretty decent visuals for its production designs and action scenes, and the CGI effects were solid for its alien designs.  However, when the aliens started doing something crazy, that’s where the illusion faltered a bit.  At times, the aliens have a sense of uncanniness in their movements that almost reaches TV-movie quality, but not in an overly distracting way.  The running animations for the aliens are some examples of this inconsistency, as they looked a tad goofy in how they were animated.  I’m not sure if it’s intentional because of the aliens’ distinct nature or simply an animation error.  Either way, I couldn’t help but internally laugh at how these monsters move.

As for the cast, they all did a decent job, with a couple of standouts.  Hwang Jung-min was good in his role as Bum-seok, conveying a chief who finds himself testing his self-confidence through something he hasn’t experienced before.  His blend of drama and comedy makes for a compelling character whose arc could be further explored in a possible sequel.  Jung Ho-yeon was also electrifying as Sung-ae, particularly for her grand entrance during the movie’s first act.  She’s got a suitable amount of fire in her talent to portray a rookie cop who may be more experienced than her chief.  I also really enjoyed Lee Sang-hee in the role of Nak-yeon, notably for the amusing chemistry between him and Bum-seok.  The movie also includes a few notable celebrities like Michael Fassbender and Alicia Vikander, but they’re only voicing the aliens.  Besides that, they were all right with what they were given.

Overall, “Hope” is a relentless, well-crafted adrenaline rush that answers people’s hopes for a proper blockbuster experience.  Regarding the technical aspects, Na Hong-jin delivers a persistently tense and balanced cinematic ride that’s equal parts fun, entertaining, and awe-inspiring.  While most sci-fi blockbusters focus on big-budget spectacle and CGI-heavy chaos, this film takes a more grounded approach to these traditional tools, while still keeping the thrills and excitement of its action set pieces and scope.  However, from a storytelling perspective, it can also be pretty iffy due to its incomplete structure and underdeveloped characters, and the CGI effects look a bit wonky at times.  Regardless, this is one of the better post-summer treats we got this year, further establishing Hong-jin as another filmmaker worth my attention.  In fact, it may have given me the courage to check out his previous films someday.  If you’re a fan of his works, there’s a good chance you might enjoy this as well.