​“The Phoenician Scheme” stars Benicio del Toro, Mia Threapleton, Michael Cera, Riz Ahmed, Tom Hanks, Bryan Cranston, Mathieu Amalric, Richard Ayoade, Jeffrey Wright, Scarlett Johansson, Benedict Cumberbatch, Rupert Friend, and Hope Davis.  Released on May 30, 2025, the film follows a strained father-daughter relationship in the family business.

The film was written and directed by Wes Anderson, who also directed films such as “The Darjeeling Limited”, “Moonrise Kingdom”, “The Grand Budapest Hotel”, and “Asteroid City”.  Family businesses can be just as challenging to maintain as any other type of business.  It’s essentially a matter of effective communication and succession planning to ensure a thriving team and longevity.  More importantly, it’s about balancing personal relationships with professional responsibilities, which often require a delicate touch and a deep understanding of family dynamics and business acumen.  This particular businessman may not have taken these elements to heart, especially when he’s wanted by several people eager to put him out of the job.  Following his adaptation of Roald Dahl’s bizarrely unconventional short stories, eccentric filmmaker Wes Anderson returns to take his unusually distinctive cinematic style to the realm of espionage, all while exploring the dynamics of a dysfunctional family business.  In case you asked, yes, it does come equipped with the whimsically deadpan wackiness we expect from Anderson’s other works.  But does it retain the entertainment value for a concept like this, or make us want to take our cinematic business elsewhere?  Let’s find out.

The story centers on Anatole “Zsa-Zsa” Korda (del Toro), a business tycoon and arms dealer in 1950s Europe.  His charismatic yet ruthless approach in interceding in any large deal makes him a target of several assassins, governments, terrorists, and the international business community.  After nearly surviving the latest assassination attempt, Korda decides to appoint his only daughter, a nun, Sister Liesl (Threapleton), as sole heir to his estate.  Additionally, Korda embarks on a new enterprise that has him overhauling the infrastructure of Phoenicia with slave labor.  However, his latest plan is put into a tailspin when a shady government monitoring Korda’s business, led by Excaliber (Friend), works to disrupt the approach.  Additionally, Korda, along with Liesl and Norwegian entomologist Bjørn (Cera), winds up in a series of mishaps that force him to confront the people targeting Korda.     

If you've read my reviews of previous Wes Anderson films, you’ll understand the intrigue I had with “The Phoenician Scheme”.  Since watching “The Grand Budapest Hotel”, I have developed a deep appreciation for Anderson’s uniquely imaginative vision, which sets him apart from the conventional cinematic craft.  In fact, I recently took the time to visit his earlier films, “Bottle Rocket” and “Rushmore,” for the first time.  Both of those movies carry a more traditional essence compared to his more recent projects, but they each offer their own merits, delivering enjoyment through their plots.  However, the concept in “Rushmore” can be pretty discomforting regarding the protagonist’s infatuation with an older teacher.  I just wanted to let everyone know that before they decide to delve into that film.  Despite Anderson’s previous projects not living up to his other classics, except for “Henry Sugar”, I found them enjoyable enough to see if Anderson can maintain his cinematic momentum.  So far, this film’s reactions from critics and audiences hadn’t quite gotten Anderson out of his “divisiveness” phase, but they’re decent enough to leave another mark in his unusually bizarre filmography.  But the real question I should be asking is whether this latest endeavor can resonate with me.  The answer to that question is yes, but it’s still pretty far from some of Anderson’s finest masterpieces.

“The Phoenician Scheme” is another distinctively quirky and amusing cinematic piece that showcases the brilliance of Wes Anderson and his adoring ensemble of A-list misfits.  However, similar to some of his recent works, it’s also another film that’ll highly depend on people’s taste in his unconventional presentation.  For those unaware, Wes Anderson possesses a uniquely uncanny vision that transforms seemingly simple concepts into a whimsically bizarre wonderland, rich with a vibrant color palette, deadpan humor, and a restrained yet unorthodox imagination.  In short, his mind is quite a kooky one to study.  Was it strange and possibly alienating?  Absolutely.  However, it possesses a specific charm and allure that captivates with its impassive strangeness, a quality we don’t usually see in conventional Hollywood movies.  Wes Anderson is the type of director who thinks outside the box in his presentation, storytelling, and direction, and I have nothing but pure respect for the filmmaker who pursues this path.  “The Phoenician Scheme” is undoubtedly another testament to this approach, as Anderson infuses his eccentric and weirdly poetic vision into the world of espionage and business industries.  

All the elements that existed in Anderson’s previous films were present in “The Phoenician Scheme”, including the practical effects that evoke a nostalgic, low-budget charm and the innovative production designs that pop with artistic flair.  Of course, you also have the cinematography, which consists of dynamic frameworks that capture its quirky bizarreness and panning shots that closely follow the characters’ interactions and actions throughout.  Notably, this film marks the first time Wes Anderson has not collaborated with his frequent cinematographer, Robert Yeoman.  Instead, it was filmed by French cinematographer Bruno Delbonnel, recognized for his work with other renowned directors like Tim Burton and the Coen Brothers.  Utilizing 35 mm film and a 1.5:1 aspect ratio, Delbonnel effectively conveyed Anderson’s distinctive style through his use of color palettes and grainy aesthetics while retaining the signature charm from the director’s other works.  Finally, there’s the music, which elegantly complements the director’s delightfully offbeat vision with a whimsical flair.  It also showcases Alexandre Desplat as another talented musician capable of his collaborations with Anderson and other esteemed directors.

However, even with these uncanny elements intact, there’s still the matter of its storytelling and whether it succeeds in carrying Wes Anderson’s craft.  Amid this quirky business journey, “The Phoenician Scheme” explores a traditional father/daughter relationship between Zsa-Zsa Korda and Liesl, which is fractured by Zsa-Zsa’s greed and self-serving business practices.  Throughout the film, Zsa-Zsa internally grapples with his own transgressions while facing judgment from a divine court, enhancing the film’s bizarre yet somehow symbolic exploration of its religious themes.  Like his direction, Anderson’s screenplay possessed a specific touch that challenged the viewers with its symbolism while also infusing humor through its deadpan wit.  It’s suitably written enough to overcome most of its formulaic aspects, delivering mild entertainment through the characters’ awkward interactions.  Unfortunately, it’s not without some issues that dragged its striving business down.

Besides some of its formulaic plot elements, the script had a structure that was initially amusing but gradually became a bit repetitive as it progressed.  The narrative primarily follows Zsa-Zsa and Liesl as they travel the globe to swindle Zsa-Zsa's investors to cover the percentage of their budget shortfall.  Despite having a few character moments that kept the structure interesting, the film relied on the same formula across three different scenarios, which struggled to consistently deliver its distinct humor.  The movie also had an issue with its pacing, particularly in its second act.  Despite the offbeat and eccentric tone, the film maintained a steady pace to avoid becoming too chaotic.  The first and third acts were able to retain my interest through the character interactions and presentation, but the middle part was where it lost that momentum before it picked back up again.  It’s certainly a well-defined screenplay that only Wes Anderson can come up with, but it doesn’t quite match the thematic heights of some of his earlier outings.  Additionally, its structure will heavily depend on your taste in his narrative craft.

The movie also didn’t shy away from Anderson’s crew of A-listers and promising young actors, especially the former consisting of the director’s frequent collaborators from earlier works.  As usual, the performances were often restrained, but they contributed significantly to the whimsically deadpan and meticulously crafted world that Anderson created.  Benicio del Toro was tasked with conveying Zsa-Zsa’s complex and scheming persona with charisma and depth, and he did so with ease.  This was his second collaboration with Anderson following “The French Dispatch”, and based on his performance in these films, it’s clear that the director has found himself a new member of his ragtag crew.  Mia Threapleton also made a solid impression in her first leading role as Liesl, with her performance highlighting the calm and heavenly aura of a nun who’s conflicted over her father’s greedy pursuit.  Michael Cera also deserves recognition for his unique portrayal of Bjørn.  His performance required him to bring authenticity to his accents while maintaining the awkward charm he’s known for.  It wasn’t an easy task, but Cera managed to accomplish it, showcasing more of his versatility outside his usual portrayals of awkward characters in earlier films.  I also thought Jeffrey Wright nearly stole the show with his energetically quirky portrayal of Marty, one of Korda’s investors, despite being only in a couple of scenes.

Overall, “The Phoenician Scheme” conjures up enough of Wes Anderson’s bizarrely kooky magic to scheme its way out of its narrative shortcomings.  This is another movie that’s understandably made with the director’s followers in mind, with its screenplay, pacing, and quirky tone being the major factors that could win over or turn off general moviegoers.  As someone who has been following Anderson’s works since “Fantastic Mr. Fox” and “The Grand Budapest Hotel”, I still admire his filmmaking craft for pushing the boundaries of cinematic storytelling, even if it doesn’t work all the time.  While not matching Anderson's previous movies regarding its hit-and-miss story, this film further solidifies my respect for the eccentric filmmaker through his unorthodox and delightfully offbeat examination of religion and business espionage.  With its solid cast, Anderson’s unique direction, remarkable cinematography, and effective musical score, the film swindled me well enough to accept this unusually peculiar business deal.  If you enjoyed some of Anderson’s previous films, this latest scheme is definitely worth investing in.

“The Life of Chuck” stars Tom Hiddleston, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Karen Gillan, Jacob Tremblay, and Mark Hamill.  It was released on June 6, 2025, and it chronicles the life of an ordinary man.
​
The film was written and directed by Mike Flanagan, known for directing horror films such as “Oculus,” “Hush,” “Gerald’s Game,” and “Doctor Sleep.”  It is based on the 2020 novella by Stephen King from his collection If It Bleeds.  Life is truly a gift that we can cherish, whether it's simple or complicated.  It doesn’t matter if you’re an ordinary person living your daily life or a gifted prodigy achieving extraordinary things. What truly matters is how much you value it.  This sums up the latest drama, which explores the aspects of life, both the ups and downs, but from a perspective that’s as fantastical as it's real.  To my surprise, this comes courtesy of two icons known for their works in horror, including Stephen King, who demonstrates that he can also inspire people through his works across different genres, not just frighten them.  This is an intriguing change of pace, as Mike Flanagan ventures into a different genre rather than horror in his latest directorial outing. But does this unique outlook on life prove to be a welcoming one?  Let’s find out.

The story is told in three chapters, chronicling the life of a man named Charles “Chuck” Krantz (Hiddleston).  Each chapter unveils a different phase of Chuck’s coming-of-age journey, including his childhood in a small community raised by his paternal grandparents and his adulthood.  Despite the challenges of growing up without his birth parents, Chuck finds solace and joy in dancing, often losing himself in the rhythm and movement that seem to express what words cannot.  As he’s determined to carve out a place for himself, Chuck would discover, through his friends and mentors, a deeper understanding of his passion as well as life itself.

As someone who has primarily experienced adaptations of Stephen King’s horror novels, I found “Life of Chuck” a different beast to cover, as it allowed me to broaden my understanding of the iconic author across various genres.  In fact, his sci-fi drama novella hadn’t been on my radar until I learned about its film adaptation.  It goes to show that my perspective on Stephen King is limited to his horror works.  Of course, that’s not the only reason for my interest in this drama, as it also featured horror filmmaker Mike Flanagan venturing into drama territory by swapping his signature atmospheric dread for a straightforward and laidback exploration of life.  Based on my impressions of the “Ouija” sequel and “Doctor Sleep”, I was confident that his vision would translate effectively into King’s novella.  Given its positive reception at last year’s Toronto International Film Festival, where it garnered the People’s Choice Award, it appears like this transition has been working splendidly in Flanagan’s favor.  From a business standpoint, this suggests that the director is capable of being more than just a one-genre filmmaker.  However, what matters is whether it can meet my own expectations.  After seeing it early, thanks to the mystery movie screening, I can say that it has.

“The Life of Chuck” presents a beautifully crafted and heartfelt examination of the human experience within the universe and the passions that contribute to our sense of wholeness. The narrative is as nuanced and elegant as a dance routine, employing a contemplative approach to explore its layered themes.  The thing to know about this film is that it’s presented in reverse chronological order, mirroring the structure of King’s short story.  It begins with the third act, resembling an "end of days" science fiction drama that’s somehow connected to Chuck’s death.  It then showcases Chuck’s life in reverse order, from him dancing with a young girl to his childhood days living with his grandparents.  With this structure, the film puts more emphasis on the mystery surrounding this particular man and why he’s worth remembering.  The final two acts help complete the narrative by exploring Chuck's life and the individuals he interacted with, primarily the schoolteacher Marty Anderson (Ejiofor).  This was a clever and respectful approach that honors King’s intentional structure in his short story as well as offering a subtly intriguing mystery that’s engaging and even contemplative. 

This was mainly due to Mike Flanagan’s screenplay, which, while simple, is rich with profound thematic layers.  It delves into the values of life, the moments it encompasses, and the universe around us, all without becoming overly complicated and detracting from its inherent charm.  The only issue regarding the script was that it may have had a few plot elements that were left unanswered, particularly regarding the events of “act three”.  I’m guessing that this was intentional to highlight the movie’s distinctively simple nature, particularly in its subtle sci-fi aesthetics.  No joke.  When comparing that act to the first two acts, it’s as if I was watching a completely different movie.  However, despite its contrasting vibe, Act Three still contained the emotional core of valuing what you have until…well, the end of days.  Of course, that includes the passion one possesses, such as Chuck being blessed with a love of dancing.  The film may not have all the answers to the questions it raises narratively, but truth be told, it’s a way of resembling life itself.  It doesn’t give you all the answers to its biggest questions.  However, the best way to understand them is to live it to the fullest.

As mentioned earlier, “The Life of Chuck” is a different type of film Mike Flanagan is tackling, as he’s mainly known for his works in the horror genre.  However, I still felt confident that his vision would translate well into the source material’s dramatic vibes.  Unsurprisingly, he met my expectations with his keen directorial eye.  In addition to his signature vision regarding the mysterious atmosphere, mainly in Act Three, Flanagan adopted a slow-burn technique that remains engaging without feeling tedious or overly drawn out.  He ensured that nearly every moment sparkled like a star in the night sky, whether it was for the characters or the gorgeous wide-angle shots provided by Eben Bolter’s exceptional cinematography.

Regarding the latter, the meticulous attention to detail in each scene was immersive for the story’s rich tapestry.  The interplay of light and shadow enhances the enchanting ambiance, making each scene feel like a carefully painted masterpiece.  I was also surprised to see that Flanagan has a pretty charismatic side in his system despite his horror movies being full of doom and gloom.  This is highlighted in Act Two, where Chuck dances with a young lady in the town square.  This sequence radiates the tone’s positivity and charm through its lively dance choreography, yet it also brings a tear to my eye due to what may occur after that act’s conclusion.  Mike Flanagan may have been recognized as an emerging force in horror filmmaking due to his impressive filmography, but this movie proved he’s capable of delivering the same results across various genres, all thanks to his skilled direction.

The movie also features a massive cast of recognizable actors offering both major and supporting roles.  Seriously, you can watch this film without knowing anything about it, and you’ll immediately recognize most of the people through their faces and voices.  Much like the direction and screenplay, the actors shine brightly through their engrossing performances, with some who could garner recognition during awards season when all is said and done.  Tom Hiddleston branches out once more from the Marvel Cinematic Universe to portray the film’s titular character, a man with a passion for dancing.  While his screen time is limited, Hiddleston made the most of it to deliver a consistently charming and layered performance that’s worthy of my smiles and tears.  Even though I love Hiddleston as Loki in the Marvel Universe, his performance as Chuck made me eager to see more of his talents outside the superhero world.  Jacob Tremblay was outstanding as the teenage version of Chuck during Act One, further showcasing his acting talents with the proper script in tow.  Chiwetel Ejiofor and Karen Gillan were also excellent in their roles as Marty Anderson and Felicia Gordon, respectively, and Mark Hamill delivered some tenderhearted moments as Chuck’s grandfather, Albie.  Whether he’s in “Star Wars” or any other project, Hamill knows how to impress with his charisma, drama or otherwise.

Overall, “The Life of Chuck” presents a beautifully layered journey that’s as valuable in its storytelling and cinematic craft as life itself.  The movie does have a few elements that may have been left unanswered, and its subtlety may not pull all of my heartstrings as intended.  However, these minor issues were easily overshadowed by its near-perfect balance of simplicity and thematic resonance.  It offers a thought-provoking and profoundly sincere reflection of life’s values and the passions that we cherish.  Its impressive ensemble cast was fantastic in their roles, and the cinematography brilliantly captures its simple yet stunning sceneries, particularly the nighttime sequences.  More importantly, it highlights Mike Flanagan’s ability to tackle genres beyond horror, thanks to his skillful direction and innovative, nonlinear screenplay.  In essence, it reminds us that even amid life's uncertainties, embracing life is always a worthwhile endeavor.  If you want a film that touches your heart, makes you smile, and reminds you how precious life is, I’m happy to say that “The Life of Chuck” is that type of movie worth valuing.

​“Ballerina” stars Ana de Armes, Anjelica Huston, Gabriel Byrne, Lance Reddick, Catalina Sandino Moreno, Norman Reedus, Ian McShane, and Keanu Reeves.  Released on June 6, 2025, the film has an assassin hunting down the people who murdered her father.

The film is directed by Len Wiseman, who also directed “Underworld”, “Underworld: Evolution”, “Live Free or Die Hard”, and the 2012 remake of “Total Recall”.  It is a spin-off of the John Wick franchise.  The world of “John Wick” is full of dangerous criminals and assassins who know no bounds in delivering their brand of justice.  One of which is the legendary “Baba Yaga”, who went through hell and back to avenge his puppy and escape from the High Table in the span of four chapters.  The other resides in the realm of assassins whose skills are more deadly than their graceful dances: the Ruska Roma.  First introduced in “John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum”, the Ruska Roma, led by the Director, consists of seemingly normal ballerinas who have trained in the assassin tradition, so you might not want to give them low scores for their dances for your sake.  With the announcement of “Chapter 5”, there’s no telling how the fate of John Wick will be after the ending of “Chapter 4”.  But until we know the answer, we have the critically acclaimed franchise’s first cinematic spin-off to tide us over, which further explores the Ruska Roma and one of its members who is hellbent on revenge.  So, you can say that John Wick isn’t the only killer willing to go above the limits to seek justice.  But is this revenge journey worth visiting outside of Wick’s adventure?  Let’s find out.

The story takes place between “Chapter 3 - Parabellum” and “Chapter 4” and centers on Eve Macarro (Armas), a young woman who recently lost her father at the hands of a mysterious cult.  Under the protection of the New York Continental Hotel, Eve is raised by the Ruska Roma, a crime syndicate led by the Director (Huston), comprising ballerinas trained to be deadly assassins.  After discovering clues about her father’s death, Eve sets out on a blood-soaked journey across the criminal underworld to find the cult responsible.  This puts her at a crossroads against the cult’s leader, the Chancellor (Byrne), and even the other killers sent to end her reign of violence, including the “Baba Yaga” himself, John Wick (Reeves). 

The “John Wick” movies are some of the most effective and stylishly neon-esque action thrillers I’ve seen in a while.  I’ll never forget the moment when I first saw “John Wick: Chapter 2” in the theater, which drew me further into the world it expanded upon.  While the eyes are still on John Wick’s quest to escape the High Table, the elements introduced in the franchise’s world-building show potential for further exploration, particularly the Ruska Roma.  I honestly didn’t think we needed an entire movie about this particular assassin group, but I was immediately won over by its trailers and the movie's retention of the violent and stylishly compelling aesthetics of the main installments.  Unfortunately, franchise director Chad Stahelski didn’t return to helm the spin-off, entrusting this responsibility to “Underworld” director Len Wiseman and serving as one of the movie’s producers.  However, it benefited from the involvement of Ana de Armas, who has proven her capabilities as a formidable action star through her roles in “No Time to Die” and “The Gray Man”.  Even so, it still had the task of justifying the expansion of this “Continental Cinematic Universe,” and I’m not just talking about the violent yet mildly ridiculous stunts.

“John Wick” was successful due to its world-building and well-choreographed violence.  But, these elements were all tied together with a refreshingly compelling take on its traditional revenge thriller plot, with the follow-ups focusing on John’s tension-filled quest for tranquility.  Instead of a murdered loved one being a typical person, the film took a daring approach of killing off a harmless puppy given to the protagonist as a final gift from his late wife.  If anything were to happen to my own dog, I would probably go apeshit on the people who killed it as well.  It’s undoubtedly heartbreaking, especially for dog lovers, but it also adds to the emotional core of John’s connection to his wife.  Thankfully, “Ballerina” doesn’t have any dogs to kill off, so the canine owners can breathe a sigh of relief.  However, it also resorts to utilizing the usual revenge thriller clichés we’re familiar with as Eve pursues the murderer who killed her father.  

After the expansive, rip-roaring adventures we experienced in the “John Wick” sequels, “Ballerina” returned to the contained basics of its storytelling, as seen in the first film.  This is another basic, revenge-driven, and restrained thriller that doesn’t let up on its violence from the first minute to the final curtain call.  This is obviously in the same veins as the main installments, which makes sense considering Shay Hatten, the writer of the previous two “John Wick” installments, returned to write “Ballerina”.  Given credit where it’s due, Hatten has done pretty well in weaving “Ballerina” into “Chapter 3” while keeping its own story separate despite its formulaic elements standing in the way.  But, the real challenge lies in making the audience see another assassin worth following in the form of Eve Macarro.  The movie maintained the franchise’s core themes of revenge and the repercussions of one’s actions as Eve goes rogue to pursue the mysterious cult tied to her past.  This journey leads her to a path of self-discovery, pushing her to contemplate the future she desires.  While her quest may not pack a punch in its emotional heft, I can admit that Eve is an interesting character whose inexperienced yet dangerous skills are as compelling and vulnerable as her personality and arc.       

Even with that case in mind, “Ballerina” couldn’t help but tread familiar ground in its narrative path.  This familiarity stemmed from its reliance on specific elements that were originally executed on a grander scale in the series’s main installments.  So, it’s unsurprising that the movie faced a tough battle in living up to the high expectations set by the “John Wick” sequels.  However, that doesn’t mean this spin-off is devoid of the white-knuckled, gun-toting excitement found in the assassin-filled realm.  It may lack the compelling emotional depth that characterized the first “John Wick” movie, but it compensated with the spin-off’s influential style, neon-esque grace, and, best of all, straightforward adult entertainment.  It’s a relentless, violent, and neon-infused thrill ride that captivates with its noir-coated aesthetics and authentic action sequences that give life to the film series. 

Len Wiseman had many expectations to fulfill regarding his direction of the spin-off.  He had to maintain the modern noir aura and authentic thrills Chad Stahelski provided for the previous installments while also balancing them with his own signature vision.  However, Wiseman has some of his own advantages that could help him accomplish this daunting task.  The first two “Underworld” movies demonstrated that he could make darkly lit and gothic-like scenes look stylishly convincing, and “Live Free or Die Hard” proved his worth in showcasing specific action scenes that were both entertaining and brutally rewarding.  After experiencing this film, I can confidently say that Wiseman’s directorial elements align nicely with the franchise’s influential appeal.  Len Wiseman’s direction may not match what Stahelski delivered, but he did manage to maintain his footing in honoring the violent world-building and consistent thrills, especially with its action choreography.

The stunt choreography may have taken a step down from the absurd yet grounded sequences in the “John Wick” sequels.  However, it’s still meticulously organized, with each move and kill executed with precision and flair, creating a ballet of combat that’s as mesmerizing as it is authentic and intense.  Regarding the action scenes I enjoyed the most, the ones that stuck with me were the flamethrower battle and Eve’s confrontation with John Wick, particularly in terms of the direction for its choreography and Jason Ballantine’s editing.  I was a bit concerned about how the movie would be edited compared to the previous installments, but those concerns dissipated when I saw how it maintains the movie’s focus on the violence at all times without resorting to quick-cut maneuvers and shaky camera work.  Those scenes only appeared in the movie’s third act, but the sequences before them were entertaining enough to keep me waiting until then.  The vibrantly noir color palettes and bleakly atmospheric lighting still persevere in Romain Lacourbas’s cinematography, matching the franchise’s influential style like works of art displayed in a museum.  With these elements, along with Stahelski’s assistance during the reshoots, Len Wiseman pays homage to its predecessors’s lore while infusing his own niche into its presentation.

Much of the cast returned from the previous installments to reprise their roles, but the main focus is on the new blood fighting their way through the criminal underworld.  As mentioned earlier, Ana de Armas has proven herself to be a promising star in the action genre, particularly in her roles in "No Time to Die" and “The Gray Man”.  “Ballerina” marked the true test of whether Armas could utilize her talents, both in acting and stunt work, in a leading role.  The result is another rewarding example of her skills as an action star.  Her stunt work was exceptional to witness, and her performance successfully conveyed the determined and resilient nature of Eve's quest for justice through acts of retribution and vulnerability.  Whether starring in high-octane thrillers or subdued dramas, Armas knows how to entertain her audience with her nuance and commitment to her roles.  Gabriel Byrne assumes the role of the franchise’s new baddie, The Chancellor, and while his performance was decent at best, I wouldn’t call this guy a formidable threat compared to the people John faced in other installments regarding his arc.  Speaking of which, I would also mention that Keanu Reeves is still a force to be reckoned with regarding his performance as John Wick.  What makes it better is that the film doesn’t treat Reeves’s character as a one-and-done cameo, giving him enough time to delight many fans of the Baba Yaga with his own set of skills.  It’s also nice to see Lance Reddick one last time regarding his role as Charon.  His screen time may be limited, but it serves as another poignant reminder of Reddick’s talents and the impact he left on audiences before his untimely passing, especially the franchise’s fans.        

Overall, “Ballerina” is a stylish and consistently engaging spin-off that gracefully dances through its path of revenge with a blend of elegance, bloodshed, and bullets.  By retaining the key elements that define the action-packed film series, the film left a mark that earns its place within the criminal underworld introduced in the first “John Wick” adventure, even if it appears more restrained than the previous installments.  Shay Hatten’s screenplay had multiple fumbles in its emotional core and genre formula that could’ve disrupted the entire dance routine entirely.  Fortunately, it managed to compensate for its shortcomings by delivering another worthy addition to the “John Wick” universe thanks to Ana de Armas’s compelling performance, Len Wiseman’s direction, captivating thrills, and well-choreographed action scenes.  If you enjoy the “John Wick” films for what they are, I can guarantee that you’ll have a decent time with the spin-off, which will tide us over until John Wick’s next cinematic adventure.

​“Friendship” stars Tim Robinson, Kate Mara, Jack Dylan Grazer, Josh Segarra, Billy Bryk, and Paul Rudd.  Released on May 9, 2025, the film follows a socially awkward man who yearns to be friends with his neighbor.

The film was written and directed by Andrew DeYoung in his directorial debut.  When making friends, it is essential to find those you can trust and respect and to earn their trust and respect in return.  Finding them can be easy if you’re willing to throw yourself out there.  However, sustaining such friendships can get pretty complicated, especially when your friends become a little too clingy for their own good.  Movies involving unexpected friendships often win over audiences’ hearts with their feel-good vibes and heartfelt charm, exploring the dynamics of companionship.  Of course, you can’t forget about the sentimental happy endings where they stayed friends forever.  However, this latest comedy appears to be flipping the script of the typical “friendship” story by having it go awry in an awkwardly humorous manner.  It goes to show that some connections are not meant to last, even among adults.  Was this particular companionship worth experiencing, or are we better off finding new friends in other cinematic offerings?  Let’s find out.

The story follows Craig Waterman (Robinson), a socially inept marketing executive residing in the small town of Clovis.  Craig has been left adrift by his recently recovered wife, Tami (Mara), who has rekindled her friendship with her ex-boyfriend Devon, and he is preparing to sell their family home.  One day, a misdelivered package leads Craig to encounter its intended recipient, Austin Carmichael (Rudd), a quirky yet unfulfilled meteorologist with aspirations of becoming the town’s daytime weatherman.  The two instantly become unexpected friends as they bond over their love of music, work frustrations, and restlessness.  However, an incident prompts Austin to distance himself from Craig, sending Craig into a downward spiral as he desperately tries to salvage their friendship, ultimately worsening his situation.

I enjoy a good “friendship” movie now and then, mainly due to the charisma and heart they deliver in the companions’ chemistry.  While “Friendship” seemed like it would be no different, its dark and awkward approach to the conventional topic, as previewed in the trailer, provoked my interest in seeing this descending bromance.  Another reason for my interest in this movie is its strong word-of-mouth.  It has garnered high praise since its premiere at last year’s Toronto International Film Festival and is performing well during its limited theatrical run.  With it playing at my local cinema, I couldn’t resist the opportunity to see it, especially since I had already caught up with the weekend’s other releases.  Of course, I couldn’t help but be a little bit concerned about how I would feel about it, as high expectations based on early reviews can often lead to disappointment as more people watch it.  Either I would say it’s good enough, or I wouldn’t understand the hype at all.  That’s the beauty of indie movies, I guess, particularly ones from A24.

Fortunately, this movie managed to make me realize it’s good enough to justify its acclaim.  “Friendship” is the type of film that has the makings of a traditional Hollywood story, particularly one involving two different people becoming unexpected friends.  However, by adding in its sense of realism, surreal antics, and awkward humor, it became an entirely different tale from what we usually expect.  Does it make the experience better?  I’d say it was, even if it’s not entirely perfect.  By combining its awkwardly weird tone with an equally compelling narrative, “Friendship” emphasizes the dissolution of the bromance rather than its birth, with enough cringe and surrealism to make it a highly enjoyable, albeit gleefully painful, exploration of a dissolving friendship.

The main reason “Friendship” stood out from other similar films was Andrew DeYoung’s unique approach to the topic, both in direction and screenplay.  The movie revolves around a friendship that was sparked by a coincidence and then began to gradually fall apart following an incident.  However, it’s mainly about an unhealthy type of bromance that worsened and worsened due to Craig’s actions.  With Craig depicted as a socially awkward man whose mind often strays from reality, it raises the question of how a person like him handles a dwindling companionship.  Well, the most obvious choice is to move on and find a new friend to hang out with, but apparently, Craig doesn’t seem to take that hint to heart.  His obsession with being friends with Austin led to his alienation from his family and job.  I would even say it’s close to resembling a psychological thriller about an obsession that has gone too far.  Fortunately, DeYoung skillfully balanced realism with awkward antics, avoiding a reliance on either one.  As a result, the movie portrayed a complex, toxic bromance that was both authentic and entertaining in its surreal cringe.

DeYoung’s screenplay offered a refreshing and consistently amusing take on the friendship narrative we’ve seen dozens of times, making the depiction more nuanced and surprisingly hilarious than cliched and boring.  The exploration of toxic friendships and mental health was skillfully addressed with a deft touch, particularly through his direction.  By balancing cringe-worthy comedy with authenticity, DeYoung offered a candid examination of an unhealthy relationship that feels both genuine and delightfully uncomfortable.  However, it’s not without its flaws that kept this friendship from growing further, including its runtime.  Despite it being under 100 minutes long, the film had a few scenes that dragged on a bit too long, including one involving Tami going missing due to Craig’s “date”.  The movie also had some mean-spirited moments that could leave audiences with a taste that’s more bittersweet than humorous.  Considering that it’s a dark comedy, it would make sense for certain characters to be jerks towards Craig.  Thankfully, its mean-spiritedness wasn’t enough to drag the experience down, as its effective cringe comedy maintained its charm throughout its entire runtime.

My experience with Tim Robinson was relatively minor compared to that of his co-actor, Paul Rudd.  He has been in a few supporting roles in television and movies, but the only time I’ve heard of him was when he voiced Ugly Sonic in the "Chip ’n Dale" movie.  His performance in that Disney+ movie was enough for us to tolerate the blue monstrosity that Paramount unleashed before its proper makeover saved the Sonic movies.  “Friendship” allowed me to see if Robinson’s traditional awkward humor could elevate his leading role, as he had in his previous works, and I must say, I was impressed with how it turned out.  Robinson was given the challenge to utilize his brand of humor to depict a timid yet unstable family man who seems likable at first, but his questionable actions and mentality reveal him to be a lunatic.  Regarding his layered performance, which combines dark humor with drama, I concur that Tim Robinson is another comedian I wouldn’t mind seeing more of in the future.  Paul Rudd also delivered another solid performance as the quirky and charming Austin, which was well-balanced with Craig’s awkwardness.  This further proved Rudd’s capability of elevating surreal indie films from A24 following his role in “Death of a Unicorn”.  I also thought Kate Mara, who I haven’t seen since “Chappaquiddick” in 2018, did a decent job with her subtle performance as Tami.

Overall, “Friendship” delivered a properly cringe-worthy and authentic depiction of a deteriorating bromance that’s both toxic and amusingly surreal.  On paper, it may seem like another traditional friendship story we’ve seen in many similar movies before it.  However, its refreshing perspective offers a distinctly different experience than what audiences are familiar with.  How they would feel about it would depend on their own expectations.  From my personal perspective, this approach effectively showcased the unhealthy obsession authentically while also having fun with its awkwardness without roughing up its intended tone.  Despite its minor shortcomings, including its runtime and mean-spirited elements, the film is a well-balanced and engaging directorial debut that signaled a promising future for Andrew DeYoung as a filmmaker.  Tim Robinson and Paul Rudd delivered an appealing chemistry that highlighted the film’s cringy tone, and DeYoung’s screenplay was refreshing enough to steer away from its usual narrative cliches, favoring originality rather than familiarity.  This is the type of film I wouldn’t mind continuing my friendship with…at least until another great friendship movie arrives to take its place.

​“Karate Kid: Legends” stars Jackie Chan, Ralph Macchio, Ben Wang, Joshua Jackson, Sadie Stanley, Aramis Knight, Wyatt Oleff, and Ming-Na Wen.  Released on May 30, 2025, the film has a kung fu student joining forces with Mr. Han and Daniel LaRusso to compete in a karate competition.

The film is directed by Jonathan Entwistle in his feature directorial debut.  Entwistle is known for creating and directing “The End of The F***ing World” and “I Am Not Okay With This”.  It is the sixth film in the Karate Kid franchise, serving as a direct sequel to the television series “Cobra Kai” and the 2010 remake.  Bullies can be a pain in the ass, especially when you’re at school or transferring to a new one.  They can pick on you based on your differences or just kick your butt for absolutely no reason to make themselves feel good.  Usually, the best way to handle the situation is to report it to an adult…unless one of them isn’t smart enough to take responsibility for a victim’s safety.  But, for moments like this, the way to make them leave you alone is to utilize karate to fight back in a tournament.  

This summed up the 1984 martial arts drama classic, “The Karate Kid,” which chronicled the coming-of-age journey of a teenager named Daniel LaRusso as he learned karate from a seemingly ordinary handyman to confront his bullies.  Regarding its cast, story, and thought-provoking themes, “The Karate Kid” became an instant classic that popularized karate and revitalized Pat Morita’s acting career.  It even spawned a franchise consisting of three sequels, a remake starring Jackie Chan and Jaden Smith, which focuses on kung fu, and a recently concluded television series, “Cobra Kai,” which rekindled the rivalry between Daniel and his adversary, Johnny Lawrence.  However, despite the show concluding the story that began with the first film, that doesn’t mean Daniel’s legend has ended, as the original “Karate Kid” returns once more to assist another young victim of a bully’s harassment in this latest continuation of the iconic franchise.  But this time, he’s getting assistance from Jackie Chan’s Mr. Han, bringing the remake into the original’s universe despite it being seen as a separate reboot.  Are these two branches strong enough to form a sturdy cinematic tree?  Let’s find out.

The story occurs three years after the events of “Cobra Kai”.  It follows Li Fong (Wang), a young Chinese prodigy learning kung fu from his great-uncle, Mr. Han (Chan), who’s now a revered shifu of a kung fu school.  Following the death of his older brother, Li and his mother, Dr. Fong (Wen), transferred from China to New York City to provide a fresh start in their lives.  As Li struggles to fit into the city and his new school, he encounters a karate prodigy named Conor Day (Knight), who continuously harasses him with his underground-style karate.  To confront this predicament, Mr. Han seeks the help of Daniel LaRusso (Macchio), a former karate teacher, to re-teach Li martial arts in preparation for an upcoming tournament.

“The Karate Kid” is one of the franchises that offer intriguing elements to the universe, despite its stories offering diminishing returns, especially in its sequels.  I was on and off with watching “The Karate Kid”, but when I do revisit these movies occasionally, they’re chock-full of fun and charm that convey their themes of bullying, karate, and self-esteem.  I even enjoyed the “Karate Kid” remake, even though calling it “Karate Kid” despite its focus on kung fu was one of the most questionable choices Hollywood has made.  Sure, they’re both styles of martial arts, but their styles and philosophies are far from similar.  Regardless, it’s one of the only films that made me realize Jackie Chan can pack a dramatic punch as effectively as his stunts.  As for “Cobra Kai”, it certainly has its moments, particularly with the return of original stars Ralph Macchio and William Zabka, as well as the impressive young actors like Xolo Maridueña and Peyton List.  However, by its sixth and final season, I had fallen off the show due to the characters making a few narrative choices that prolonged the confrontation unnecessarily.  Regardless, its refreshing perspective on Johnny Lawrence, relatable themes, and character development in the previous seasons was good enough to consider it a solid continuation of the “Karate Kid” legacy.

This brings me to the latest “Karate Kid” adventure, which unites the nostalgia of the franchise with new blood attempting to continue this legacy.  The term “Legends” partially comes from Ralph Macchio’s Daniel LaRusso, who’s been the franchise’s key role since the first film in 1984, so it makes sense that there can’t be a “Karate Kid” without the original “Karate Kid”.  Jackie Chan’s Mr. Han only appeared in the “Karate Kid” remake, which may not be enough to call this character a legend in the franchise.  However, it did grant people’s wishes for a continuation of the remake’s story, although Jaden Smith seemed to have retired from his kung fu days to focus on his music career.  Despite that, I was pretty stoked about seeing Jackie Chan and Ralph Macchio grace the screen together alongside the new “Karate Kid”, but what matters is whether its story can perform a crane kick gracefully to warrant this unification.  

The story in “The Karate Kid” is as straightforward as it sounds.  A teenager moves into a new place, falls in love with a girl, gets beaten up by bullies, learns karate from an experienced master, and stands up to the bullies at a tournament; end of story.  This narrative exemplifies a traditional underdog story that critically examines the diverse perspectives individuals hold regarding martial arts amid its sports cliches.  The bullies use it to harm others and bring dishonor to themselves, while others, like Daniel LaRusso, use it to promote peace and positive resolution.  It’s impressive to see people using martial arts techniques for stunts and defeating bad guys.  However, it’s also important to recognize that karate and kung fu can provide respect and tranquility for the mind and soul, especially when dealing with bullying or a tragic incident.  This topic has been one of the main branches that make this franchise as sturdy as a bonsai tree, and its latest installment, “Karate Kid: Legends,” succeeded in understanding this vital assignment.  However, when it comes to the execution of its narrative and pacing, it struck a “been there, done that” nerve, refraining from pulling any sentimental punches.  But that doesn’t make this latest butt-kicking installment any less fun.

So, what do I mean about “been there, done that,” you ask?  Basically, if you’ve seen “The Karate Kid” and the 2010 remake, you’ll know what to expect from “Legends”.  I would even dare myself to say that it’s the 2010 remake in reverse, with Li moving from Beijing to New York as opposed to Jaden Smith’s Dre moving from Detroit to Beijing.  The narrative closely resembled that of the two aforementioned films and other similar sports dramas, resulting in numerous predictable moments within the franchise's established underdog formula.  However, it did offer some differences to help it hold its ground against the other installments, with one being that Li already had experience with kung fu upon moving to New York.  The other is Li using his techniques to train a former boxer-turned-pizzeria owner, Victor Lipani (Jackson), who is also the father of his love interest, Mia (Stanley).  This moment not only provided a refreshing direction in the "Karate Kid" storyline but also emphasized the concept of boxing as another legitimate and valuable form of martial arts.  Besides those elements, though, It’s obviously “The Karate Kid” again with a New York aesthetic plastered all over the place.  It’s a formula that’s been the staple of the franchise since 1984, and it continues to be present here, for better or worse.

Giving credit where it’s due, Rob Lieber’s screenplay did provide some good ideas to keep the film from being a straight-up carbon copy of the original, mainly its themes.  Amid its familiarity, “Legends” examines Li as a troubled teen who’s internally haunted by the death of his older brother, resulting in his trauma and Dr. Fong forbidding Li from practicing kung fu.  This reflects the movie’s profound perspective on martial arts, illustrating that these techniques are not only used as methods of combat but also as pathways for healing from grief and achieving inner peace.  The movie also explores the significance of sharing and understanding cultural traditions, highlighting Li's mentoring of Victor, as well as Daniel and Han’s distinct martial arts methods.  Of course, we can’t forget about the aspects of bullying because let’s face it.  We’ve all grown sick and tired of people harassing others with violence.  These themes were the branches given to make “Legends” into a respectable bonsai tree, but regarding its execution, it may not be robust enough to provide a storytelling balance.

Jonathan Entwistle, known for his work on television, was an unusual choice to helm a film involving martial arts action, especially one featuring Jackie Chan.  While I haven’t seen any of Entwistle’s works, it still left me concerned about how he’ll approach this topic, as television directors for feature films tend to be hit-and-miss depending on their vision.  Unfortunately, upon watching Entwistle’s direction in action, some of my concerns were addressed through his basic and uneven approach to the thematic content, narrative, and violence.  One reason was the pacing, which provided snappy reflexes that were quick enough to block even the simplest of punches.  Clocking in at 94 minutes, the film is fast-paced and swiftly maneuverable, with Dana E. Glauberman’s editing matching the liveliness and kinetic flair of New York City.  While it’s quick enough to grab my attention, it also comes with the cost of its story and character moments feeling rushed and underdeveloped, including Li’s relationship with his mother and Li’s rivalry with Conor.  While Artemis Knight did a suitable job conveying Conor’s bullying nature, the character didn’t quite pose a formidable enough threat for Li to conquer, given his one-dimensional arc.  The pacing also applies to the “Lilo & Stitch” remake, in which both movies focus on keeping the audience’s attention rather than utilizing their fast-paced momentum to tell a good and well-constructed story.  Fortunately, “Legends” got the upper hand by invoking as much charisma and humor as it could into these rushed but heartfelt scenarios.  But, even if that’s the case, its messy pacing didn’t provide the film enough time to explore its story elements gracefully, resulting in its emotional depth whiffing more than they connect with its punches.

The other is the martial arts action, which was one of the main reasons why “Karate Kid” is still popular, even in today’s times.  With the film being as fast-paced as Li’s kung fu, it made sense for the violence to be just as swift as the movie’s narrative flow.  Unsurprisingly, the action scenes were just as entertaining and engaging as the previous installments, mainly due to the martial arts choreography and Jackie Chan’s amusing stunt displays.  Sadly, the only things holding them back from greatness were the rapid-fire editing and zoom-in shots that made some of those scenes a bit disorienting.  I understand that “Karate Kid” was supposed to be a family-friendly franchise, but I should also remind you that “Legends” is the first installment to receive a PG-13 rating, with the previous movies having PG ratings.  So, it should be okay to display the action fully without cutting away the impact multiple times with the editing, but I guess they didn’t get the memo.  I also think that I became so attached to action scenes being made through still framework and little to no editing that I’m starting to see other movies using shaky cam and snappy editing as inferior.  I wouldn’t say that Entwistle’s feature directorial debut was a complete disaster since he handled the charismatic and stylish appeal of its presentation pretty well, especially the Five Boroughs Tournament with its videogame-like graphics.  However, regarding everything else involving its thematic narrative and emotional heft, he still has some more training to complete if he wants to rise to the next level of cinematic direction.

Much of the film’s enduring charm and enjoyability stemmed from its cast, which included some familiar faces as well as some new talent entering the ring.  Ben Wang was chosen to be the next “Karate Kid” after appearing in several supporting roles in film and television, as well as in the main lead role in the “American Born Chinese” series, which I still haven't watched yet.  I’ve only known Wang from the Disney+ movie, “Chang Can Dunk,” where he plays the protagonist’s best friend, Bo.  So, I could say it’s enough for me to see if Wang was up to the task of carrying this legacy for Daniel LaRusso, especially since the film’s focus is solely on Li instead of the real “Karate Kid”.  Fortunately, he managed to pull off a suitably compelling crane kick to my heart, and I mean that in a good way.  Embodying the appeal and heart of Li’s character arc through his acting skills, Ben Wang effectively portrayed the new kung fu student in a manner that parallels Ralph Macchio's portrayal of Daniel in the 1984 film.  His endearing performance as Li was enough for me to keep a close eye on his rising career, as he’s set to star in the upcoming film adaptation of “The Long Walk” this fall.  Jackie Chan also delivered a performance that’s as charismatic and fun as his previous roles, particularly in his portrayal of Mr. Han.  However, I still prefer his version of Han in the 2010 remake due to Chan’s surprisingly good dramatic chops.  Of course, I can’t forget about the one and only Ralph Macchio as Daniel LaRusso.  Despite only appearing in the movie’s second half, Macchio still manifested the heart and soul of the original “Karate Kid” through his performance and irresistible chemistry with Chan to compensate for his half-baked arc.  Seeing Chan and Macchio together was more than enough to excuse most of its narrative trappings and pacing issues, providing some feel-good and even amusing entertainment in the process.  Also, stay for the mid-credit scene for another nostalgic treat.

Overall, “Karate Kid: Legends” crane-kicked its way to the enjoyability charts despite not reaching the similar heights of the karate-infused legacy it carries.  With a new young lead and a fresh director at the helm, there was plenty to be concerned about whether this branch was capable enough to hold the franchise together.  Fortunately, upon watching “Legends”, some of my concerns gradually dissipated due to how surprisingly enjoyable it turned out despite its flaws.  Granted, it’s not a perfect continuation of the “Karate Kid” legacy, falling just shy of the storytelling quality that originated from the original and even the first couple of seasons of “Cobra Kai”.  However, it still delivered enough moments of compelling charisma and heart in its cast, fast-paced action, and themes to honor some of the franchise’s traditional underdog elements.  The direction toward the pacing and average screenplay could’ve been more firm in the film’s emotional grasp.  Besides that, it’s a tolerable follow-up that punches more in its entertainment values than it does in its “been there, done that” narrative.