One Movie Punch

Hi everyone! It’s been a minute, hasn’t it? I’m back today with this special episode, covering a film that I saw just before the stay-at-home orders were issued in California for the current pandemic. It’s going to be an extended episode, with an update on things here at One Movie Punch, my review of THE REPORT entangled with an essay on how the pandemic has affected the film industry in the short term and the long term, and for those that stick around afterwards, a fun audio drama to tide you over during the extended absence. We last left you with our review of LETO back on March 14th, which feels like forever ago, and like yesterday. I had been following the news regarding the Coronavirus, and lamenting how little was being done to contain it, when things began to snowball in New York and New Jersey. Folks were already hoarding food, water, and apparently toilet paper. I remember standing in line, prior to social distancing and masks, listening to someone calmly argue with anyone willing to listen that this was all a hoax, even while dropping three months of food into their cart. I can still remember wondering if anyone around me had it, and if I was going to die, and when I got back to the house that day, I let the team know they could put their pending reviews on permanent hiatus. There was supposed to be a break anyway. I had a Patreon episode planned out that was announcing a three month break for the podcast so I could concentrate on two major projects: First, our website needs a massive update, and every episode we publish makes that task grow ever larger. We know folks can’t find much on our website right now, and we want to change that, while changing hosts. Second, as our team continues to grow, we need a better back-end system to manage our content. I needed some time to work on these projects, and couldn’t do that keeping a daily podcast going on. You’d think that with the pandemic, and the initial stay-at-home orders, that this would have been a slam dunk. Unfortunately, it was anything but that. I spent the first two weeks at home in a downward spiral, one driven by anxiety over whether I had contracted the virus standing in line, and amplified by the depression which followed each anxiety attack. The only way I could get it under control was to occupy myself, which I did by playing “The Witcher III: The Wild Hunt”. We felt reasonably safe after the first two weeks, but rationality doesn’t do much for anxiety and depression once it gets going. It wasn’t until about five weeks later (and completing “The Witcher III: The Wild Hunt”) that I came out of my spiral. Distance learning was limping along for One Movie Spouse and One Movie Spawn, and I decided to get to work with all the free time I had, spending more time reading and exercising, and more importantly to you all, spending four to six hours a day taking online training classes for SQL Server and C#, and building a custom application to help automate our process on the back end. I was making great progress, which came to a screeching halt as our plans were being developed for returning students (and teachers) to school. I was already behind schedule a little bit, and pushed back our restart date to 9/1 to accommodate the delay. Our districts were fortunate enough to adopt distance learning models, but until the final decisions were made, my anxiety and depression cycle started up again. It also meant we had to rearrange our tiny California townhome to accommodate one student and one teacher for distance learning, including rearranging rooms, assembling furniture, and doing some massive cleaning. It also came with some practical issues in continuing the podcast for the foreseeable future. The pandemic has required quite a few families to make sacrifices to accommodate work and school changes. Our family is no exception. The increased expectations for distance learning this fall now require One Movie Spouse and One Movie Spawn to be online for longer periods of time each day, which makes trying to watch a movie at home nearly impossible. There’s also a lot more housework to be done with three people around all the time, which eats into finding time to manage the podcast. I can’t really go back to producing the podcast the way I was before, at least until we’re done with distance learning, or when it feels safe enough for me to work elsewhere. What does that mean? Well, it means the regular podcast will be off the air for the duration of the pandemic. The best I can do right now is continue working on the custom application to automate our process as time permits, and wait patiently for our world to go back to some semblance of stability. Once there’s an opportunity to restart, then we will reach out to our critics, collaborators, and fans to figure out a schedule to bring us back on the air. If that’s possible before the pandemic is finished, I’ll let you know. In the meantime, I want to thank you all for your continued support over the past few years. Big up to our sponsors for their contributions! Thank you for all the work from our critics! And especially to you all, our fans, who we hope will be there when we return. Until then, stay safe and healthy! We’ll be back before you know it. Here we go! ///// Today’s movie is THE REPORT (2019), the political thriller written and directed by Scott Z. Burns. Daniel Jones (Adam Driver) is a congressional staffer who is tasked to investigate allegations of torture by the CIA in the wake of the terrorist attacks of 9/11, and the two occupations that followed. The film also stars Annette Bening as Jones’ boss, Senator Dianne Feinstein, and Jon Hamm as Denis McDonough, who eventually became Obama’s Chief of Staff. No spoilers. THE REPORT (2019) closes out an excellent year for Adam Driver, whose additional films in 2019 included Oscar-darling MARRIAGE STORY (Episode #668), fan favorite STAR WARS: THE RISE OF SKYWALKER (Episode #672), and the campy THE DEAD DON’T DIE, which received mixed reviews. This year follows an excellent filmography, which has also recently included BLACKKKLANSMAN (Episode #225), THE MAN WHO KILLED DON QUIXOTE (Episode #523), and LOGAN LUCKY (Episode #065). It seems like Driver appeared out of nowhere in the last few years, but the secret to his success has been his excellent choices in roles, since about 2012, leveraging regular work on “Girls” to take on a number of films with excellent and notable writers and directors, including Scorsese, Gerwig, Baumbach, and The Coen Brothers. All things said, Driver may also be the best thing about THE REPORT, aside from the uncanny resemblance between Bening and Feinstein, mannerisms and all. Everything else about the film is pretty standard, though, and that has to do with the subject matter. The story of Daniel Jones, and the investigation into CIA torture, is definitely an important story, but doesn’t have a satisfying ending. I don’t think this fact spoils the film, as the only satisfying ending to this story would have been trials and convictions for war crimes by everyone taking part, and that clearly didn’t happen. It’s also not the only example of war crimes being uncovered and remaining unpunished in US history. THE REPORT follows roughly the same investigatory and political machination track as Spielberg’s THE POST (Episode #353), but we get the satisfaction of the Pentagon Papers being published and some form of accountability. If it wasn’t for the cast, I’m not sure THE REPORT would have gotten as much attention as it did. I don’t think this takes anything away from Scott Z. Burns’ efforts. The film is still a hell of an accomplishment. It just has trouble competing in our ever-changing film industry, particularly in the wake of the pandemic. THE REPORT, along with THE POST for that matter, falls into a growing category of films that can be experienced pretty much identically at home or in the theater. It certainly wasn’t made for the box office, where it only gathered less than $250,000, but it was made for the growing streaming-only market, much like MARRIAGE STORY or THE MEYEROWITZ STORIES for Netflix. As an aside, that’s a secondary reason for Driver’s success – finding recognition through the growing streaming audience. The pandemic has seen a number of these “theater-independent” films continue to roll out on streaming services, whereas “theatre-dependent” films that try to bank on box office payouts have seen massive delays and declines, along with a few innovative attempts at screenlife films. Disney in particular has been scrambling to develop and solidify its online presence, while managing the previously sunk production costs and the hemorrhaging tourist-driven income of parks and resorts. I’m very much looking forward to the return of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, not to mention all the films that really benefit from a theatrical presentation. But I don’t really want to see BLACK WIDOW or MULAN if it’s not on a big screen first. I also don’t think the $29.99 premium VOD purchase point is going to workout, although I’m curious to see the long-term viability. That’s one half of what I would call “theater-dependent” films. The other half are films that benefit from having a large audience, one who is especially engaged to see the film. I hesitate to say “audience-dependent”, because there’s a much different vibe between friends gathering at a home to watch a film, and enjoying a premiere with other film fans. The best film I’ve seen during the pandemic that fits this description is THE LOVEBIRDS, which made a Netflix debut in lieu of waiting for the theaters to reopen. One Movie Spouse and I saw the film, and laughed quite a bit, but I think we both knew that seeing this film with a packed house would have been even better, especially for the raunchier parts of the comedy not spoiled by the trailer. I’ve been really missing both kinds of “theater-dependent” films, mostly because I got a Regal Unlimited pass late last year before everything shut down. It may be the most important distinction the pandemic has made within the industry: that some films require a theatrical experience, and that the industry will remain after this pandemic, in lieu of an all “at home” experience. It doesn’t mean there won’t be fallout among the major movie chains, especially those invested in expensive markets. I fully expect to see some chains go bankrupt and get bought up by Netflix, Amazon, Warner, and Disney as outlets for group-themed premieres of streaming favorites, as well as those “theater-dependent” films. Amazon might have even made a profit from THE REPORT, if they owned a chain to show it in. THE REPORT is a pretty standard government investigation film, elevated by its above average cast, and anchored by a great performance by Adam Driver as Daniel Jones. Scott Z. Burns leverages the Amazon loss leader model to produce his second writer/director feature, which deserves a larger audience, despite its depressing subject matter. Fans of films about government, or fans of Driver or any of the cast members, will definitely enjoy this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 81% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 66  One Movie Punch: 8.0/10 THE REPORT (2019) is rated R and is currently playing on Amazon Prime. ///// JOSEPH: “And now, what absolutely did not happen back in March 2020, nor will be used as a bridge to relaunch the podcast when conditions permit...” JOSEPH: “Really not liking the news lately. The virus looks like the real deal. It’s a good thing One Movie Punch Tower is completely self-sufficient, with power, food, air, and water for up to five years.” EILEEN: “Have we tried any of these items installed by Belko Industries?” JOSEPH: “No, but I’m sure everything will be just fine. They’re a very trusted name in the industry. Built buildings all around the world. Didn’t go with the neural implant upgrade, though. I mean, I’m not stupid.” AMY: “What’s that?” JOSEPH: “Looks like the stay-at-home order has been issued for California. All right, no time like the present to test things out. One Movie Spawn, go press the button for PANDEMIC.” JOSEPH: “Once that’s pressed, the tower begins sealing up. And we should be able to disable it with no problem... Oh BEEEP!” AMY: “What?” JOSEPH: “What button did you press?” EILEEN: “The one labelled PANDEMIC, like you said, on the end.” JOSEPH: “It’s activated the nuclear fallout option!” AMY: “Can we just turn that off?” JOSEPH: “No, it’s set to lock things out for five years minimum.” AMY: “Can’t we just call someone to help us?” JOSEPH: “No. It shuts off all communications. I mean, who was supposed to be left?” EILEEN: “Wait, you mean we’re trapped in here together for five years? I’m supposed to go to college!” JOSEPH: “I’ll get started on getting us out, but it’s going to take some time. How much, I’m not sure. You know, it looks like the buttons were switched on the panel! Did you do this?” EILEEN: “Are you kidding me?!” JOSEPH: “Did YOU?!” AMY: “Of course not!” JOSEPH: “I wonder who did it, then...”

Hi everyone! We’re closing out the week with our final entry for this quarter in our series “Under the Kanopy”. Kanopy is a library and university funded streaming service that grants card holders six free streams a month, featuring a combination of classic, mainstream, independent, and international films. They currently have streaming deals with some of our favorite distributors, like A24 and Kino Lorber, which offer the critically acclaimed, if not commercially successful films. Today’s film I sort of chose at random when filling out the schedule for the quarter, not really realizing it was a Russian film, or a black and white film, or would have a bunch of awesome experimental editing and storytelling. Finding these surprises is part of the great fun of exploring the films on Kanopy. I’ll be up in a bit with my thoughts on LETO, or Summer in Russian, but for a few other films in this series, check out THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS (Episode #738), MARIANNE AND LEONARD: WORDS OF LOVE (Episode #731), and HAVE A NICE DAY (Episode #724). Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friends at the Cinema Recall podcast. Every episode, The Vern takes a look at iconic scenes in classic movies. You can find them on Twitter and Instagram @cinema_recall, and also subscribe to their podcast at anchor.fm/cinemarecall. Don’t miss a single episode! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is LETO (2018), the Russian biopic directed by Kirill Serebrennikov, and written for the screen in collaboration with Lily Idov, Michael Idov, and Ivan Kapitonov, based in part on the memoirs of Natalya Naumenko. It’s the summer of 1982 in Leningrad. Mike Naumenko (Roman Bilyk) is the leader of Zoopark, a Russian rock band, and a member of the Leningrad Rock Club. While visiting the countryside with his wife Natalia (Irina Starshenbaum), he is introduced to Viktor Tsoi (Teo Yoo), an aspiring musician Mike takes on as a prodigy, which ultimately leads to the formation of the band Kino. No spoilers. So, since this is the last Under the Kanopy segment for a while, I’ll let you in on a little secret on how I choose which films to watch. Every week, I keep track of all the films which were released in the theaters which receive a Certified Fresh rating at Rotten Tomatoes. A lot of those films rarely make it outside the Los Angeles and New York markets, often films imported by smaller distributors like Kino Lorber, Oscilloscope, and today’s distributor, Gunpowder & Sky. Every quarter, then, when I’m planning I take a look at the films off that list which make it to Kanopy, and pick whatever eleven films are available. And it generally leads to a wonderfully diverse assortment of films. LETO was one of those films this quarter, which I just added to my Kanopy queue and watched as time permitted. I didn’t remember what the film was supposed to be about at all, and was honestly worried it was going to be a Jared Leto biopic. But like most films in this series, I went in with an open mind and an open heart, despite being nervous about watching a black and white Russian film, the last one I watched being HARD TO BE A GOD, Aleksey German’s final film, which was kind of long and boring at times. Thankfully, LETO is definitely not that. LETO is actually more akin to Aleksei German, Jr.’s most recent film DOVLATOV (Episode #307), which gave me a contemporary film that peeked behind the Iron Curtain to look at non-propagandized life in Russia from an artistic point of view, in this case, notorious writer Sergei Dovlatov. LETO takes place just over a decade later, in the early 1980s as Russia is beginning to shift more and more towards glasnost. The underground parties and black markets for American goods in DOVLATOV’s time period were slowly being integrated into the rock clubs and import/collectors markets in LETO. Both films obviously have a specific point of view about Soviet Russia, but for me, the real joy is seeing just how similar lives were between the US and Russia. The most important cultural similarity explored by LETO is the sense of rebellion among the youth, a punk spirit that was finding more traction and airtime in the west, but was also finding a similar subversive expression in the east. I had never heard of either Zoopark or Kino before seeing this film, but LETO explores the two musicians who head up each group, working around censors to make sure talent gets heard. LETO also explores the influences for many of the more famous songs by both bands, told as these amazing long-take music videos, saturated with layered ink pencil like edits. Each music video segment takes the viewer away from the realism of the main story, for a more surrealist look at what is happening, and usually ending with a character playing the personification of punk reminding us that the music video events didn’t actually happen. Kirill Serebrennikov does excellent work here. LETO isn’t just a story about the music, though. In addition to the history lesson, we’re also invited into the complicated politics and relationship of Mike, Natalia, and Viktor. Natalia develops a crush on Viktor, which Mike doesn’t have a problem with until, predictably, he does, causing creative and political turmoil. The complicated interplay between the three is at times familiar to many other love triangles, but also insightful set against the context and time period. Cutting the film in black and white allows the film’s realistic drama elements and surrealistic musical elements to gel together for a great picture. But as the film comes to a close, Serebrennikov begins to inject color back into the film, even showing previous black and white film pieces and segment now in filtered color, a shocking accent mark against a beautiful filmscape. I can’t think of many films where I get to learn something, and feel something, and be surprised by something, but LETO did all three for me. After watching LETO, I also gave both bands a listen, and discovered even more to love. Honestly, I can’t think of a better way to end this quarter’s Under the Kanopy series. LETO is a film for music fans, particularly fans of the punk and new wave movements in the early 1980s. Kirill Serebrennikov smashes together a quick history of two Russian rock musicians with the emotional turmoil of their love triangle, set against a lovely black and white backdrop with the occasional surrealist transition. Music fans, fans of contemporary Russian cinema, or folks wondering what life was like behind the curtain, should definitely check out this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 78% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 69 One Movie Punch: 8.5/10 LETO (2018) is not rated and is currently playing on Hoopla and Kanopy.

Hi everyone! It’s Friday, so it’s time for another Fantastic Fest feature from Andrew Campbell. Today’s feature had a very limited run in the theaters from podcast favorite IFC Films, picked up from the flurry of content that debuts at Fantastic Fest every year. Andrew will be up with his review of SWALLOW in just a bit, but for a few other reviews from Andrew, check out AFTER MIDNIGHT (Episode #737), JALLIKATTU (Episode #730), and BLISS (Episode #723). Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friends at the Book of Lies Podcast. Every week, Brandi Fleeks and Sunni Hepburn take a look at a fraud case or famous con artist, breaking down the methods, the signals, and how to spot similar scams in your life. You can find them on Twitter @Bookofliespod and on Facebook and Instagram @bookofliespodcast. Be sure to like, retweet, share, review, and subscribe! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello film fans! Andrew here. Just two movies left for me to cover before we close out the first quarter of 2020, so I thought I would end on a couple of high notes. This week and next I have two films about women on the brink living vastly different lives, both delivered by writer/directors making their feature film debut. These movies are unique to anything you’ve seen before - gorgeously shot by creators with clear artistic visions. You’re going to want to be the one that tells their friends about these films. Today’s movie is the psychological thriller SWALLOW (2019), the debut film from writer/director Carlo Mirabella-Davis. SWALLOW stars Haley Bennett as Hunter, a woman with grew up underprivileged who now finds herself married at a young age to Richie (Austin Stowell). Richie grew up in wealth with well-connected parents who remain hyper-involved in the lives of Richie and Hunter. The parents gifted their son a stately home as a wedding present and along with it comes a mountain of social expectations. In turn, Richie foists upon Hunter his ideas of how a subservient housewife should behave - curating a meticulous home, providing dinner on the table, and serving his every need, while living no life of her own. Feeling imprisoned by her posh lifestyle, Hunter develops a very serious and very real psychological disorder known as pica - wherein sufferers consume non-nutritive indigestible objects. First off, Haley Bennett is terrific as Hunter. There are a half-dozen or so characters that she interacts with throughout the film, but much of the gravitas of the story is conveyed during the quiet moments when Hunter struggles to find meaning in her life and begins to give in to her disorder. It starts subtly with a marble which she quickly swallows and later retrieves. It’s such a bizarre affliction, but director Mirabella-Davis handles it with grace, sometimes eliciting nervous laughter from the audience and at other times forcing viewers to turn away. If you’re concerned that the writer/director is exploiting a peculiar and somewhat arresting affliction as the basis of story of a tortured woman, rest assured that’s not the case. The director was present at the screening and very candid with the audience afterward. His grandmother has psychological issues, including some form of pica, which gave him some family history with the illness. He has also experienced personal issues with self-identity and societal expectations as depicted in the film. During his 20’s, Mirabella-Davis, who now self-identifies as male, spent a four-year period living as woman at a time well before the modern-day social concept and growing acceptance of gender fluidity. Stylistically, this film is quite striking. If the unconventional and personal story is not convincing enough to give it a watch, take a look at the trailer. The framing and set design feels as if the world of the television series “Mad Men” had never evolved more than half a century later. Every shot is framed like a painting. In the more still moments when Hunter is contemplating devouring household objects, the sound design is spectacular. The silence of the hermetically-sealed home in which Hunter spends so much of her life alone juxtaposed with the sound of metal on teeth is subtle domestic horror. As a first-time filmmaker (feature-length anyway), Mirabella-Davis exerts exacting control over every aspect of the film, just as Hunter’s husband and in-laws seek to maintain her over her. What makes SWALLOW fantastic?Everything just coalesces beautifully in this film. It’s a story that feels like it’s treading all new ground while allowing viewers to identify with the core message, even if Hunter’s disorder is a little tough to swallow (please pardon the horrendous pun). I would put a slight trigger-warning on this one as this is an emotional story of a woman confronting trauma and living with a troubled psyche, but it’s told with such compassion that I wouldn’t recommend anyone avoid it. SWALLOW is a deeply affecting tale of empowerment, masterfully captured by a fresh new storyteller. Fans of films with women dealing with psychological problems and confronting identity issues such as THE HOURS or SECRETARY will enjoy this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 89%  Metacritic: 62 One Movie Punch: 8.6/10 SWALLOW (2019) is rated R and is currently playing in limited theatrical release and available on VOD. Come back next Friday for SAINT MAUD. One last film before our regular podcast hiatus, so let’s go out with a bang. There is a glut of religious based horror films out there, usually centered around exorcisms. SAINT MAUD is the antidote for those boring, predictable, jump-scare laden movies. It tells the story of a young home health care nurse with strongly-held religious convictions, to put it mildly. In a world of doubters and sinners, Maud finds it more and more difficult to relate to those who don’t see the path that’s so clear to her. Get ready for the year’s best horror film. See you then!

Hi everyone! Happy Thursday! We’re welcoming back Christina Eldridge to the podcast with a review of the latest offering from GKIDS, a remastered cut of 2003’s critically acclaimed TOKYO GODFATHERS. We’re lucky to have Christina’s long-term love of anime on board here. For a few other recent reviews, check out RIDE YOUR WAVE (Episode #722), KLAUS (Episode #708), and her debut review for WEATHERING WITH YOU (Episode #687). Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our friends at the Pop Pour Review podcast! Every week, the PPR crew review a film, then craft a cocktail based on the movie. I don’t drink myself, but I know a few people that do, and every recipe fits in surprising ways. You can find them on Twitter and Instagram @poppourreview, or by searching for Pop! Pour! Review Podcast on Facebook. Thanks for all your support last year! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello, everyone! This is Christina Eldridge with Durara Reviews (a part of One Movie Punch). Since my last review of RIDE YOUR WAVE (2019), I’ve been house hunting so wish me luck! If you’re not already following me @Durarareview, or @OneMoviePunch, go do it! I promise to continue to bring you the latest and greatest of anime movies! Today’s movie review is for TOKYO GODFATHERS (2003). This is one of my personal favorite Christmas movies. Satoshi Kon directed this classic comedy/drama. It was produced by one of the mainstays of anime, Madhouse, and is currently distributed to the United States by GKIDS. TOKYO GODFATHERS is about three homeless people who find an abandoned baby on Christmas Eve and decide to find the mother rather than take her to the cops as to avoid the foster system. This review is spoiler free. Gin (Toru Emori) is a middle-aged homeless man who loves to drink. He survives with Hana (Yoshiaki Umegaki), a former drag queen club star who now lives as a trans woman, and Miyuki (Aya Okamoto), a high school aged runaway. The three attend a Christmas Eve play and a soup kitchen together, then decide to look for books in the garbage. While digging, they hear the crying of a baby and discover an infant girl with a note asking to take care of her. They also find a bag containing photos, business cards, and a locker key. The only person in the threesome who is excited about this discovery is Hana, as she would never be able to have children on her own. Gin tries to talk her into giving the child to the police, but Hana refuses, as she was a product of the foster system herself. She elects to find the baby’s mother from the clues in the bag instead. The three set out on a journey that takes them not only on an adventure, but on a discovery of themselves and why they really are on the street, rather than the false images they have given each other, no matter how horrifying or shameful these reasons really are. Satoshi Kon is one of anime’s most celebrated directors. He is responsible for such masterpieces as PERFECT BLUE (1997), which is one of my all-time favorites, PAPRIKA (2006), MILLENIUM ACTRESS (2001), and the series PARANOIA AGENT (2004). Kon-san’s favorite theme of blurred reality combined with fantasy is present in most of his works, even TOKYO GODFATHERS (2003), although it is not as apparent. Kon-san’s artistic directing style has been copied by other directors, most notably, Darren Aronofsky. In REQUIEM FOR A DREAM (2000), Aronofsky acknowledged the shot-for-shot bathtub scene from PERFECT BLUE (1997) but denies that BLACK SWAN (2010) is in any way adapted from it. Christopher Nolan’s INCEPTION (2010) was also accused of being an off-shoot of PAPRIKA (2006), that includes plot similarities, specific scenes and characters, to which he denied. To public knowledge, Kon-san never took legal action on either of the directors, assuming the ‘imitation is the sincerest form of flattery’ moniker instead. The film was released in North America by Sony Pictures on December 29th, 2003 in an attempt to get an Academy Award nomination for Best Animated Feature, but it was unsuccessful. The domestic release brought in a total of $128,985 and the International release brought in a total $480,540. GKIDS’s re-release will include a 4K restoration and a new English dub. TOKYO GODFATHERS is an unwilling adventure of three friends who depend on each other for survival by homelessness. Finding an abandoned baby together forces them to not only care for someone else, but for themselves through self-discovery, and to confront the lies they tell themselves in order to maintain their status quo. This movie will make you laugh, make you cry and, most importantly, make you think. Rotten Tomatoes: 90% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 73  One Movie Punch: 10/10 Children Loved By God TOKYO GODFATHERS (2003) is rated PG-13 and will be re-released in select theaters on March 9th and March 11th. Minasan, domo arigatou! Be on the lookout for my next review of the Wuxia action packed film SHADOW (YING) (2018) later this month. This time, I promise! Until next time!

Hi everyone! For those of you outside the United States, or perhaps living under a rock within the United States, we’re currently going through a presidential primary campaign. It’s been a bumpy ride so far, with a lot of noise and very little substance. But it has also been driven, at least in part, by the lesson of the previous election cycle, which involved the use of Big Data to collect information on US voters. Up to 5,000 data points per voter. You all know how biased I am when it comes to US politics, so that’s why we’ve brought in Shane Hyde today to review THE GREAT HACK, as part of his Horror Stories series. Because some horror stories are real. For a few other reviews from Shane, check out THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL (Episode #728), WOUNDS (Episode #694), and RUST CREEK (Episode #654) Before the review, we’ll have a quick promo from our good friend Kolby Told Me, one of our biggest supporters of the podcast last year, as demonstrated by his near domination of the Follow Friday boards. You can find him on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram @kolbytoldme. And if you take up one of his recommendations, let everyone know that Kolby Told Me! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hi, I'm Shane Hyde, and while the world burns down around us I'm going to keep reviewing for One Movie Punch. And that's a fact! Today’s movie is THE GREAT HACK (2019), directed by Karim Amer and Jehane Noujaim. This is one of those films that will pit Twitter user against Twitter user, Subreddit against Subreddit, Facebook grannies against 'woke' anti-Facebook pilgrims, Russian bots against other Russian bots. But no matter your political leaning, whatever label you choose for yourself, there's a story here and they're trying to tell it. The story focuses in on Brittany Kaiser, and through interviews and supporting characters and archive footage, it puts a framework that seems like it's asking you to feel sorry for Cambridge Analytica, their exposure, their role in the 2016 US Presidential Elections, the Brexit vote. They were hired to do a job, given data from Facebook and information about their targeted audiences, and they say in THIS FILM that they exploited psyops that should be regulated by the UK Government. But, you know, they exploited it anyway, and exposed the most vulnerable in the world's populations to seek a particular outcome. This is a film that aligned itself kinda with my left-leaning worldview, but then asked me to have sympathy for those involved at a personal level, and then asked me to consider the ramifications of these psychological operations at an international level. And I think it does these things well. Do I have sympathy? Well, no. Am I considering the impact psyops at an international level? Yes. But I fear I'm ill-equipped to deal with it. But we know there will be no satisfactory ending here although THE GREAT HACK attempts to wrap it up. There is no neat bow to go on top. We know now that Cambridge Analytica didn't survive the scandal (although they're still behaving in the same garbage way as another business). We know that Brittany Kaiser dramatically left England but didn't need to. And we know that there's been no real justice here, because there's been no real crime - despite military grade psyops being utilised against a civilian audience. This is a movie that should have us all outraged. It tells the story of our own data used against us to target us for our baser instincts. And the (attempted) undermining of democracy pursuant to a pound or two from the Brexit campaign. Instead I came away... well, tired. A bit over it all really. THE GREAT HACK feels like it underscores the fact that honesty and integrity are dead and this is the post-script. Last time I reviewed a documentary that was FYRE: THE GREATEST PARTY THAT NEVER HAPPENED (Episode #398) and I feel that was a more honest account than THE GREAT HACK. Since our world has devolved into a Bandersnatchian "Relax: 1/ Don't 2/ Do it" dichotomy, THE GREAT HACK is either telling us a small bit of a larger puzzle or diving into whack-job liberal conspiracy theories. You can't relax in THE GREAT HACK. They either did it. Or they didn't. And look at where we are today. Rotten Tomatoes: 88% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 67 One Movie Punch: 6.0/10 THE GREAT HACK (2019) is rated M and currently streams on Netflix.

Hi everyone! One of our goals before we close out the quarter is to review every film nominated for either a Golden Globe or an Oscar this year. Sometimes this can be tough, especially for international films that get very limited showings in the United States and even fewer streaming opportunities. Sometimes it can be tough when an underseen film gets the nomination, like today’s review for MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN. We’re lucky to have Jon-David back to help us out with today’s review. For a few other reviews from Jon-David, check out MALEFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL (Episode #713), THE CAVE (Episode #706), and RICHARD JEWELL (Episode #692). As you can see, he’s been very helpful in getting these award nominees reviewed this year! Before the review, we’ll have a promo for Jon-David’s serial comedy crime podcast, the Mafia Hairdresser Chronicles. This campy serial podcast is based on Jon-David’s time cutting hair for a cocaine-trafficking couple in the 1980s. All the voicework is done by Jon-David, with the help of a few filters and editors. Don’t miss a single episode! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello, this Jon-David aka Mafia Hairdresser, the writer and performer of the podcast The Mafia Hairdresser Chronicles, a campy crime comedy based on my time as a celebrity hairdresser in Hollywood in the 80s. Today’s movie is MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN (2019), a crime drama mystery rated-R film written, directed, and starred in by Edward Norton. Released in 2019, MOTHERLESS BROOKLYNalso stars Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Bruce Willis, Willem Defoe, Bobby Cannavale, and Ethan Suplee. No Spoilers. This is the film I was really looking forward to watching, but it did not do great at the box office. I saw the trailers and the movie starred Edward Norton. The trailers looked good. And I love Edward Norton as an actor. But I had my first negative foreboding moment about this film when I saw that this film was written for screen by Edward Norton and directed by Edward Norton in the opening credits. Sometimes studios throw money at their talent because of the films the actor has agreed to be in. The studio then rewards the actors by letting them make a movie. That could be good or bad. The story of MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN focuses on Norton’s character, Lionnel Essrog, called Freakshow because of his Tourette’s Syndrome, and he comes to the rescue of his shady detective agency boss, Frank Minna (Bruce Willis), who may or may not have been “detectivizing” on a case for the love of money or the love of justice. Freakshow and his detective co-workers, played by Bobby Cannavale and Ethan Suplee, end up having to take over the detective agency and they try to get to the bottom of the case Willis was working on, and which cost him everything. The time is the 50s. Brooklyn. Men wear hats. Proper women wear gloves. And Edward Norton’s character is a man with troubles. The reason Freakshow pursues the case, which lead him and his friends into the world of corrupt politicians’ illegal use of eminent domain and profiteering by gentrification, is his love for his boss, as well as falling for the housing rights activists caught up in the middle, played by Gugu Mbatha-Raw. Norton’s character Lionel, Freakshow, may have tics and seemingly random burst of words that actually tell each character he is in the scene with what he thinks of them, shows us how hard he has to work to get the information that he wants to solve the crimes of the politicians. But Freakshow also has a superpower, and that is that he is brilliant finding clues and leads, and he is tenacious and in love. What really didn’t work for me in this film was that each character that Freakshow has a scene with, whether it be Alec Balwin who plays Moses Randolph, the evil city planner architect whom all the murder and crime clues lead to, and Gugu Mbatha-Raw’s Laura Rose, whom he tries to protect and falls in love with, is that the scenes just don’t have passion. I didn’t ever feel that Baldwin’s character was a great villain, and I never saw the chemistry between the leading man and the damsel in distress in any of their scenes together. In this film, no one is really who they appear to be when introduced in the story. Willem Defoe plays Paul, a troubled and mentally unstable man connected to Moses and Laura, and he seems to have all the answers. In fact, in almost every scene, he pretty much tells Freakshow everything he needs to know to find the next clue. If this were a book, it might be interesting, but in this film, it is just lazy, obvious, expository dialogue. Leslie Mann, one of my favorite actresses shows up, in a small part in this film, against type, and she plays the wife to Bruce Willis’ Morton, and I loved every scene she was in. I liked this story. And nothing was too technically wrong with this film, and yet I didn’t feel the art direction, the writing, the directing, nor the editing in this film matched the expectations a big budget popular book adaptation it should have had. MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN had the obligatory scenes of Norton’s character getting roughed up in an alley (but why they thugs didn’t kill him in the scene was beyond me), and it had the cool older model cars and fedoras and even the jazz night club scenes. But there was no lift off, or big twists that shocked me. No scene where I thought, ‘Wow, that was a great performance!’ And I could have done without the narration because the movie never really felt like a classic noir or gangster or gumshoe movie. I just feel that Edward Norton didn’t have a team of tried and true auteurs to hash out and work on the details in this film before they locked in scenes and story. MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN aspires to be Chinatown but just didn’t do it for me. Rotten Tomatoes: 63% Metacritic: 60 One Movie Punch: 5.5/10 You can now stream this film on Amazon, YouTube, GooglePlay, and Vudu.

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another Matinee Monday. Some weekends it’s easier to pick a film than other weekends. And generally, whenever Pixar releases a new film, we’re first in line to check it out. Stay tuned for my review of ONWARD in a minute, but for a couple other Pixar films we’ve reviewed, check out INCREDIBLES 2 (Episode #169) and TOY STORY 4 (Episode #531). Before the review, we’ll have a brand-new promo from our good friends at The VHS Strikes Back podcast. Every week, Dave and Chris blow the dust off an actual VHS cassette, then watch and discuss the film. You can find out more on Twitter @vhsstrikesback or on Facebook and Instagram by searching for The VHS Strikes Back podcast. Don’t miss their two guest episodes during last year’s Reign of Terror 2019, with reviews for ALIEN VS PREDATOR (Episode #605) and 30 DAYS OF NIGHT (Episode #626). And don’t miss their recent guest review as Comics in Motion for BIRDS OF PREY (Episode #720)! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is ONWARD (2020), the Pixar animated film directed by Dan Scanlon and written for the screen in collaboration with Jason Headley and Keith Bunin. ONWARD takes us to a world of magic, populated by fairy tale and mythical creatures, but after science has replaced magic in their everyday lives. Ian Lightfoot (Tom Holland) is an elf living at home with his mother Laurel (Julia Louis-Dreyfus) and his older brother Barley (Chris Pratt). On his sixteenth birthday, Ian and Barley are given a staff from their long-dead father, which contains a spell to bring him back for one day. But when the spell fails halfway, the brothers embark on a quest to find a gem to finish the spell and see their father one last time. If you’re not crying right now, I don’t know what’s wrong with you. No spoilers. In addition to being a movie nerd growing up, I was also a role-playing nerd. I absolutely loved to play Dungeons & Dragons, but like most folks, I had trouble finding a group that could meet regularly. My love for fantasy transferred into reading multiple franchise novels and playing the many RPG video games making their way to consoles. Before nerd culture was accepted, I was teased for all of that. After the explosion in nerd culture, I’m just one of the many unshowered masses at conventions and theaters. All those intellectual properties and characters I loved growing up are now heading to the big screen, at least seven of which we previewed before ONWARD. I’m really happy about all of that, but sometimes seeing those adaptations comes to life and having everything at your fingertips takes away... well, the magic of it all. And that’s the key theme being explored in ONWARD. ONWARD is definitely a coming of age story disguised as a family road trip film, built within an amalgamated, modernized fantasy world. You can catch all that from the trailer. But as happens with most Pixar films, there are always more than one larger subtexts to explore. ONWARD, in many ways, builds off the same themes of fantasy and reality, and coming of age, as seen in the TOY STORY franchise. But ONWARD also looks at what our world becomes when we lose the magic in our lives, even when magic is all around us. The fantasy creatures and the idea of magic in ONWARD are easily substitutes for ourselves and the miracles of the technology around us. We’re often told to let go of that magic in our lives, and ONWARD meditates on what happens when we wildly give into that magic, even when it seems hopeless. Worldbuilding is always important to Pixar franchises, created with a sense of embedded meaning, and operating by a specific set of rules crucial to the overall story. ONWARD not only opens with a brief history for the technological evolution of the world, but also walks us through a day in the life of Ian Lightfoot, and his awkward relationship to his family. Awkward not just for the usual sixteen-year-old reasons, but because their father Wilden Lightfoot (Kyle Bornheimer) died of an unnamed disease before Ian was born. He lives vicariously through his brother’s precious few memories, and lives with the odd phantom pain of never knowing one of your parents. We get everything we need to know before we take off on our journey, knowing full well we’ll also discover magic along the way. The world in ONWARD is pretty much built like ours, with an electrical infrastructure and a capitalist economy, and allows us to identify just enough with all of the characters wherever we might be in our lives. In addition to Ian, we also begin to learn more about Barley, mostly through his actions, and his custom-built straight-from-the-80s wood-paneled van named Guinevere. The two brothers, and their half-dad, head out, taking both the direct and scenic routes, in their quest to complete the spell. It’s a journey that begins with wonder, and steadily builds tension, because as you begin to know and love these characters, you also realize just how incredibly high the stakes actually are, especially if you‘ve ever lost a parent. It’s a subtle point, but Scanlon and company absolutely pluck that heartstring, and more steadily as the film, like all journeys, draws to its incredible close. As always with Pixar, the animation in ONWARD is top-notch. Everything from the sweeping vistas to the microdetails is rendered beautifully, somehow finding the right mixture of magic and realism to fit each mood. The film has great voicework, great pacing, and ticks all the boxes of a consistently excellent Pixar film. Ironically, Pixar has made their brand of movie magic so commonplace, with such consistent quality, that they have trouble making their films stand out amongst their overall filmography. ONWARD is an excellent film, but a pretty standard Pixar film. And that’s definitely enough for this critic. One oddity from seeing this film. In addition to the seven previews One Movie Spouse and I had to endure prior to the film, we were also treated to a Simpsons short as an appetizer. Film Twitter and pop culture nerds have had a lot of hot takes about what this means for Disney, aside from the obvious brand synergy. Some folks are rehashing the Fox/Disney arguments. I’m not actually sure what to make of it, other than this might be the new normal now that many of the Pixar shorts are debuting directly on Disney+. It’s not bad, but felt out of place, less synergistic and more dissonant, thematically speaking. I’m sure this won’t be the only weird stumbling moment as the media empire continues to coalesce. ONWARD is a top-notch animated film from Pixar, using one boy’s coming of age story, and a family road trip, to explore the loss of magic in our lives. Scanlon and his team do a great job of worldbuilding, character development, production design, and pacing to deliver a solid experience with one or two surprises. Animation fans, especially Pixar fans, and role-playing nerds should definitely check out this film. And bring a lot of tissues. Rotten Tomatoes: 87% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 62 One Movie Punch: 9.0/10 ONWARD (2020) is rated PG and is currently playing in theaters.

Hi everyone! Welcome back for our last two weeks of One Movie Punch for first quarter. We’re wrapping up the quarter with a bunch of great films from your favorite critics. Today, I’ll be reviewing THE ART OF SELF-DEFENSE and talking about toxic dojos. And tomorrow, I’ll be reviewing ONWARD, the latest Pixar offering. On Tuesday, Jon-David returns with 2020 Golden Globe nominee MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN. On Wednesday, Shane Hyde returns with his review of THE GREAT HACK, a real-life horror story happening right now. On Thursday, Christina Eldridge returns with a review of TOKYO GODFATHERS, recently remastered and released back in theaters by GKIDS. On Friday, Andrew reviews SWALLOW, another Fantastic Fest indie pickup in theaters. And on Saturday, I’ll return with a review of LETO, a Russian film about the band Kino, as part of our Under the Kanopy series. Over on our Patreon page, at patreon.com/onemoviepunch we just posted our full interview with Swedish filmmaker Jimmy Olsson, where we talk about his latest short film ALIVE, his upcoming feature film SECOND CLASS, and about ableism and representation in cinema. It’s a short interview, but we were glad he could make the time. You can check out our review for ALIVE in Episode #735 from last week. While you’re at our Patreon page, be sure to sign up at any level to help fund future content. Your contributions go to help paying our expenses and to help us grow with our audience. You’ll also become eligible for Sponsor Sundays, where you get to force me to review a film of your choice, as long as we haven’t reviewed it yet, with just a few exceptions. A promo will run before the review. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is THE ART OF SELF-DEFENSE (2019), the dark comedy written and directed by Riley Stearns. Casey (Jesse Eisenberg) is an introverted accountant, who struggles to connect with other people, and lives alone with his lap dog. But when his worst fears come true one evening, leaving him beaten nearly to death, he enrolls at the local karate dojo to learn the art of self-defense. And ends up learning a whole lot more. No spoilers. Content warnings for abusive relationships. When folks think about martial arts, they generally see it through one of two lenses. First, the rise in mixed martial arts and other fighting competitions, where two individuals square off following a strict set of rules. Second, the immense library of well-choreographed martial arts films, often more effective at entertaining audiences than in actual combat. Both lenses give parts of the truth about the martial arts, and often serve as a draw for potential students, but fantasy and reality are often two very different things. Films like the IP MAN franchise have helped to show the more realistic origins of modern martial arts schools, and have also lead to confronting the more shameful and abusive practices within some historical and modern martial arts schools. Of course, the lens through which I learned about martial arts was THE KARATE KID (Episode #278), probably the most famous film about toxic dojos, and a clear influence on today’s film. THE ART OF SELF-DEFENSE takes a closer, darker look at martial arts, specifically at the dojo or gym level, with a dojo that is like Cobra Kai on steroids. Male-dominated, highly hierarchical, and lead by a very toxic Sensei (Alessandro Nivola). Casey’s quest to learn how to defend himself becomes our journey into just about every toxic aspect of modern dojos. THE ART OF SELF-DEFENSE isn’t just about toxic dojos, but the kind of students that are attracted to these locations. Casey is the timid beta male looking to not just defend himself, but to gain confidence in his everyday life, a claim often made by martial arts schools. And it’s true, most martial arts students do gain a sense of self-confidence after learning the basics, or as we learn in Casey’s case, perhaps too much confidence. Jesse Eisenberg plays this role well, a familiar kind of role given his filmography, but by no means his entire range. Anyone who has been bullied in school or in the workplace will easily empathize with Casey, especially his faults, and may even live vicariously through him. Another kind of student drawn to toxic dojos are those who are looking to prove themselves. Imogen Poots plays Anna, a brown belt children’s instructor who tries to help Casey assimilate to the dojo, but also feels frustrated as men keep earning their black belt before her, despite her having the skills. Anna also gets to represent the feeling of being a woman within a male-dominated, testosterone-fueled community, subjected to all kinds of direct and indirect sexism. It’s another real problem with the larger martial arts community, something experienced to a greater or lesser degree by every woman training in martial arts, in much the same ways that women experience sexism in the larger community to different degrees. Poots does great work with Anna’s character, from start to finish. Riley Stearns loves to play with light and darkness throughout the film, with the amount of light within a particular scene being an indicator of how much danger is present. We actually get to see this directly between the day and night class at the dojo as well. Stearns also uses more distinct colors within the martial arts community, particularly the belts, and using more drab colors and filters for the world outside the dojo, or in Casey’s home. The film is very well put together, even when it goes to very dark places, and absolutely lands more than a few clever jokes as it wraps up. However, THE ART OF SELF-DEFENSE is definitely not a recruitment story like THE KARATE KID, and it’s here where I have most of my problems with the film. I think this film does a great job at exploring the concept of toxic dojos, and raising a lot of issues within the martial arts community when it comes to abusive relationships. I know a lot of MMA gyms have become recruitment grounds for hate organizations, mostly by forming relationships as seen in today’s film. But I also know a lot of dojos and communities that are not abusive or exploitative. My experience practicing Aikido for the past two years has been nothing but supportive, and many communities are evolving past abusive teaching methods. And I do think that folks like Casey, when finding the right community, can radically improve their lives through not becoming a prisoner of their own fears. THE KARATE KID gave us both kinds of relationships, but THE ART OF SELF-DEFENSE only gives us one, and the worst one at that. THE ART OF SELF-DEFENSE is a dark comedy about toxic martial arts schools, as told through a dark journey by one timid accountant, well played by Jesse Eisenberg, and well supported by Imogen Poots. Riley Stearns delivers a well put together film, with a story that truly punches with its feet and kicks with its hands. Martial arts fans, or fans of dark comedies, should definitely check out this film, but beware that it is NOT a recruitment tool. Rotten Tomatoes: 84% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 65  One Movie Punch: 8.0/10 THE ART OF SELF-DEFENSE (2019) is rated R and is currently playing on Hulu and Kanopy.

Hi everyone! We’re closing out the week with another entry in our series, Under the Kanopy. Kanopy is a library and university funded streaming service that grants card holders six free streams a month, featuring a combination of classic, mainstream, independent, and international films. They currently have streaming deals with some of our favorite distributors, like A24 and Kino Lorber, which offer the critically acclaimed, if not commercially successful films. Today’s film was one recommended early last week, when I was suffering from a migraine and looking for distraction while the medicine worked. While not getting any recommendations on Twitter, I got an avalanche of films on my Facebook page. A good friend had been recommending this film for quite some time, and after catching it on Kanopy, I can see why he was so excited. I’ll have my thoughts on THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS (1966) in a moment. For a few other films in this same series, check out MARIANNE AND LEONARD: WORDS OF LOVE (Episode #731), HAVE A NICE DAY (Episode #724), and TO DUST (Episode #717). Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friend Rory Mitchell, from the Mitchell Report Unleashed podcast. He was gracious enough to have yours truly on as a guest recently, which you can check out in Mitchell Report Unleashed Episode #173. You can follow Rory on Twitter @officallyrory, on Facebook @mitchellreportunleashed, and on Instagram @re3684. You can also subscribe to the podcast at anchor.fm/rory-mitchell8. Don’t miss a single episode of his insightful interview-driven show. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS (1966), directed by Gillo Pontecorvo, and written for the screen by Franco Solinas, based on a story developed by both. In 1954 French-occupied Algeria, Ali La Pointe (Brahim Hadjdadj) is recruited into the FLN (National Liberation Front) by Djafar (Yacef Saadi). Over the next three years, the FLN recruits and organizes the people into a revolution against the French, which escalates into a full-out counter-insurgency operation lead by Colonel Mathieu (Jean Martin). No spoilers. Growing up in the 1980s and 1990s, I knew a lot of people who served for some period of time in Vietnam. Up until our occupation of Afghanistan, Vietnam was the longest war the United States was ever involved in, spanning roughly twenty years from 1955 through 1975. An entire generation of soldiers committed to occupying a foreign country. It’s a strange position for the United States to find themselves within, having kicked off the decolonization era with the American Revolution, but the United States also wanted to get in on the colonization action wherever it could after World War II, especially if France was withdrawing. It would take us twenty years to learn what the French did before withdrawing: occupying another country without the consent of the people is generally impossible without the application of brutal, draconian policies. Of course, the French didn’t actually learn the lesson after withdrawing from Southeast Asia. France simply couldn’t support a long-term war halfway around the world and rebuild at home, so after relinquishing their claim in 1954, they consolidated around their other colonial territories, including Algeria in North Africa. The French had already segregated Algiers into European and non-European quarters, along with segregating the economy along those same lines. Revolution was in the air, especially after the French were kicked out of Asia, and rather than accept that colonialism was being dismantled, the French doubled down in Algeria, leading to the first major phase of the Algerian War for Independence, documented in today’s film. THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS has two key strengths. First, and foremost, is the straight-ahead storytelling. All too often when it comes to films about timely political topics, the filmmakers take a particular perspective, usually siding with one side or the other, and calibrating the characters and plot to further that perspective. Think of any of the many films about US soldiers stationed in the Middle East facing down caricatures of radicalized local residents. But Pontecorvo and Solinas don’t sugarcoat the war between France and Algeria, as Italian filmmakers, happy to show the real concerns of the colonial authority and the revolutionary front, as well as the horrific torture techniques by the French and the civilian bombings by the revolution. We see the equal terror on European and Algerian, as collateral damage in the larger struggle. They let the story speak for itself. Second, and probably more important, is the almost play-by-play handbook for engaging in guerilla insurgency, and how it escalates from peaceful oppression, if such a term is even possible, into an all-out armed conflict. We see what passes for an unequal and exploitative peace, how the people are organized first in secret, then publicly in disobedience, and how the violence escalates based upon the colonial power’s response to each protest. Pontecorvo and Solinas also don’t waste a whole lot of time on character development, letting history and actions speak where dialogue would in most historical epics. The film serves as an accounting, a handbook, and a cautionary tale all in one. THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS keeps a steady pace throughout, never failing to engage the viewer, much in the same way as THE IRISHMAN (Episode #658). Ali La Pointe and Colonel Mathieu represent the revolution and the colonial authority, with commanding performances by Hadjadj and Martin. And helping to bring it all together is a wonderful score by Ennio Morricone in collaboration with Pontecorvo, a delightful guitar-driven affair that captures the espionage like quality to the guerilla tactics. The result is a film that makes it so clear not just what happened, but what went wrong, and why. It also became an inspiration for other revolutionary movements, against colonial powers or otherwise. One would think that anyone who saw this film would see the futility of military occupation. The United States was already 12 years into the Vietnam War when THE BATTLE FOR ALGIERS was released, steeped in political drama at home that made leaving difficult. We should have learned our lesson after that travesty, and yet, the United States is currently occupying another two nations since 2001, lasting so long that it has become the new longest war in United States history, despite rebranding efforts. And we continue to make the same errors the French made in Algiers, the most heinous of which is believing we can make it work this time, as if fixing the errors of the present would help us fix the errors of the past. Hopefully future nations are wiser. THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS is a landmark military epic that doubles as an important fictionalized documentation of the historical record. Pontecorvo and Solinas deliver a well-paced, even-handed look at the French occupation of Algeria, and the stakes that rapidly escalated. Fans of historical epics, or folks who want to learn more about the decolonization era in North Africa, should definitely check out this film. I’ll be playing the score on repeat tonight. Rotten Tomatoes: 99% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 96 (MUST SEE) One Movie Punch: 10/10 THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS (1966) is not rated and is currently playing on The Criterion Channel and Kanopy.

Hi everyone! It’s Friday, so we’re back with another Fantastic Fest review from Andrew Campbell. After trying to guess the plot for the last few movies, I have decided to stop doing that. I think this film was entitled AFTER MIDNIGHT, but it was actually SOMETHING ELSE. That was the original title, actually. SOMETHING ELSE. Andrew’s gonna let it all hang out in a minute, but for a few other recent reviews from Andrew, check out JALLIKATTU (Episode #730), THE CALL OF THE WILD (Episode #726), and BLISS (Episode #723). Before the review, we’ll have a promo from the Ocho Duro Parlay Hour. Every episode, the ODPH Crew covers a wide variety of topics from sports and popular culture, with a little something for everyone. A huge shout out to Ken at ODPH for becoming a sponsor of One Movie Punch. We can’t thank you all enough for your constant support! You can find them on Twitter and Instagram @odparlayhour and on Facebook @ochoduroparlayhour. Get the avalanche of content you deserve! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello film fans! Andrew here. Back with your weekly dose of Fantastic Fest goodness. Today’s movie is the first film from last year’s Fantastic Fest that I got that chance to watch - not at the festival itself, but at home the week beforehand. I got a screener link to this one and my excitement for checking out really any film from the upcoming festival was ratcheted up to the max. I’ll be up front and say that this one did not live up to my overly lofty expectations, but in hindsight this is a film that has stuck with me more than most. Today’s movie is AFTER MIDNIGHT (2019), written by Jeremy Gardner and co-directed by Gardner and Christian Stella. Gardner directs himself in the lead role of Hank, a bar owner in a rural southern town. Hank and his girlfriend of ten years, Abby (Brea Grant), reside together in an old ancestral home surrounded by overgrowth and with no neighbors in sight. Discontent with their simple life waiting for marriage that may never happen, one day Abby disappears, leaving nothing but a note behind. Beleaguered Hank begins to lose his grip, spending his days with his buddies at the bar and his evenings protecting his house from what he insists is a monster that visits each night and left its mark on his front door. This is a low-budget independent film so it’s kind of an easy target to nitpick. The film uses a series of flashbacks to set up the early days of Hank and Abby after they first move into the house. These scenes drag on longer than needed and feature both forced acting and sugary prose. The film’s atmospheric score feels misplaced here and (at least with the cut I saw) is loud enough to wash out parts of the dialogue. From a character perspective, every scene centers on Hank. We eventually get a good sense of who Hank is, though his likability may vary by viewer. Abby receives short shrift in the establishing shots - she’s cute and affable, yet fairly one-dimensional. But do not despair. If this were a relationship drama, I might have checked out early on. However, this is a Fantastic Fest selection, so you know the story is going to go somewhere unexpected. What initially drew me to this film was two of the producers, Justin Benson and Aaron Moorhead. Together, Benson and Moorhead co-directed two Certified Fresh films beloved to genre film fans. 2014’s SPRING unleashed the body horror and 2017’s THE ENDLESS told the story of a UFO death cult. Well, that duo returned to Fantastic Fest in 2019 with their producer credit on AFTER MIDNIGHT, as well as the US premiere of their co-written and co-directed film SYNCHRONIC starring Jamie Dornan & Anthony Mackie which, six months after the festival, I have still yet to see. Back to the movie at hand. You can see some of the same touches that worked so well in the other Benson and Moorhead films. These are tales of unremarkable people going about their days in a world where mystical forces that may or may not be real lurk just out of sight. Some indie horror films come out of the gate swinging and hit a lull by the midpoint, but AFTER MIDNIGHT does the opposite. It takes a little time getting into and improves leaps and bounds after the first twenty minutes as you settle in with these characters and wait for the other shoe to drop. What makes AFTER MIDNIGHT fantastic? The film patiently holds back its best bits for the end. In a movie that clocks in at just over 80 minutes, Jeremy Gardner inserted a 13-minute single-camera, slow-zoom, uninterrupted, heart-to-heart chat between Hank and Abby that is near-perfect and sits in stark contrast to their shared scenes near the beginning. You also get Hank singing Lisa Loeb’s “Stay” nearly in its entirety at a dinner party before a particularly rude interruption. Gardner may have struggled to start this movie, but he sure knows how to end it. AFTER MIDNIGHT is a southern, homestyle slow-burn mystery that straddles multiple genres. Fans of relationship-driven genre films such as the aforementioned SPRING, WARM BODIES, or the hidden gem BOKEH, starring Maika Monroe, will enjoy this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 86% Metacritic: 54 One Movie Punch: 7.0/10 AFTER MIDNIGHT (2019) is rated TV-MA and is available now on VOD. Come back next Friday for SWALLOW, a visually stunning picture about a woman suffering in an abusive relationship who develops a rare disorder known as pica, in which she finds herself eating household objects. It’s a dark, emotional ride, well out of my comfort zone, so listen to me struggle to analyze this one as it comes out in limited release. See you then!

Hi everyone! Today we’re welcoming back Keith Lyons for another review. We’re batting cleanup this month with a few Oscar and Golden Globe nominations. PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE was recently re-released in US theaters, and we’re lucky to have Keith on the case. Of course, we’ll just have to forget about that whole finding Keith an English-language film thing from last time. For a few other recent reviews from Keith, check out HONEYLAND (Episode #715), LES MISERABLES (Episode #680), and ATLANTICS (Episode #669). Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friends Aicila and Erik at Bicurean. Every episode, they explore a different topic, looking for the underlying issues, and finding common ground whenever possible. You can find them on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram @bicurean, or check them out at bicurean.com. Be sure to like, follow, rate, and subscribe! And don’t forget to check out their recent guest review for FROZEN II (Episode #685). They’ve been huge supporters of One Movie Punch over the past year, and we cannot recommend them enough! A promo will run before the review. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hi, Philly Film Fan here with another review for One Movie Punch. You can follow me on Twitter @PhillyFilmFan. Today’s movie is PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE(2019), the 18th century French drama written and directed by Céline Sciamma. I wasn’t able to catch PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE when it played the Philadelphia Film Festival but I’m delighted to be catching up with it now. No spoilers. Since its debut at Cannes, where it won Best Screenplay and a Queer Palm, PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE has continued to rack up awards, nominations, and accolades, including Best Foreign Language nominations at the Golden Globes and BAFTAS. It was also nominated for 10 Césars (France’s equivalent to an Oscar) but only managed one win for cinematography. The top prize went to LES MISÉRABLES (Episode #680) and if you’d like to hear my review of that film, check out episode 680 of One Movie Punch. But the big headline from this year’s César Awards was definitely the announcement of Roman Polanski’s win for best director, immediately followed by Adèle Haenel leading the entire PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE team as they walked out of the theater in protest. Haenel has been an outspoken critic of the French film industry’s tepid response to the #MeToo movement and Roman Polanski drugged and raped a 13-year-old child. You might be wondering: What is wrong with the people in charge of the César Awards? And while we don’t have time to get into that now, I can tell you that the entire board of directors resigned a month ago. PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE begins on a rowboat, with Marianne (Noémie Merlant) making a journey to a small island off the coast of Brittany in France. Marianne is an artist and she has been commissioned to paint a portrait of Héloïse, played by the aforementioned Adèle Haenel. But when Marianne arrives she discovers that Héloïse refuses to sit for a portrait, and that Marianne must pretend to be Héloïse’s companion, in order to observe her, then retire to her room to paint Héloïse’s face by memory. This is all necessary to marry Héloïse off to a Milanese nobleman, a scheme concocted by Héloïse’s mother, La Comtesse (Valeria Golino)... you know, from HOT SHOTS! ...and BIG TOP PEE-WEE! ...and HOT SHOTS PART DEUX! The relationship between Marianne and Héloïse is central to PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE. Héloïse is a member of the nobility, but her privilege comes at a price. She is treated by her mother like a helpless child, and is not even permitted to go for a walk unsupervised. Héloïse’s entire life has been mapped out for her, and she must marry a man she has never even met because it is her duty to strengthen her family’s position. Marianne, on the other hand, is a woman of modest means, but she has the freedom to pursue her career as an artist. This job requires her to closely observe Héloïse, so that she can capture her essence on canvas. Héloïse is accustomed to being watched by the help, but before Marianne arrived she had never really been seen. As the two get to know each other, an intimacy develops between them and here, on this sparsely inhabited island, practically at the ends of the earth, they create a space where they feel like the only two souls in the world. PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE is a gorgeously photographed film about two women forming an intense bond. And, like all the best romances, it is tinged with the sadness of knowing that our time here is limited, and that all things must come to an end. But melancholy is a much deeper emotion than happiness could ever be. Rotten Tomatoes: 98% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 95 (MUST SEE) One Movie Punch: 9.0/10 PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE (2019) is rated Rand is currently playing in theaters. This jawn was brought to you by Philly Film Fan. For more movie reviews, follow me on Twitter @PhillyFilmFan where I’m participating in the #366Movies challenge. That’s P-H-I-L-L-Y-F-I-L-M-F-A-N. Thanks for listening.

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another Indie Wednesday. Every Wednesday we like to feature a microbudget or independent production, and sometimes we’re lucky enough to chat with the filmmakers themselves. Today, I’ll be reviewing ALIVE, the latest short by Swedish filmmaker Jimmy Olsson, which takes a fun look at sex and ableism. We’ll hear a few snippets from our interview with Jimmy during this review, but for a few other similar episodes, check out our reviews for TURBINES (Episode #721), CLOSURE (Episode #707), and SANDOW (Episode #693). We’ll have a bit of format switch today. Before the review, I’ll run the audio for the full teaser trailer for ALIVE. Check the show notes for a link to the video, along with English subtitles for those who need them. Throughout the review, I’ll be splicing in segments from our short interview. You can listen to the full interview on our Patreon page this coming Sunday. I was very thankful for the opportunity to speak with Jimmy Olsson. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is ALIVE(2020), the dramatic short written and directed by Jimmy Olsson. Victoria (Eva Johansson) was a combat athlete until she suffered a brain hemorrhage, leaving her partially paralyzed and with a case of aphasia. She’s cared for by Ida (Madeleine Martin), who helps her with regular tasks and transportation, and spends time with her boyfriend Anton (Philip Oros). When Victoria asks Ida if anyone would want to be intimate with her, they create Victoria a Tinder page, which leads to a tense moment. No spoilers. Growing up in rural Illinois during the 1980s and 1990s, I didn’t have much interaction with the disabled community. Most of my exposure was with individuals who were once able-bodied, but lost a limb, or had acquired a degenerative illness. It was also the vast majority of the noble depictions of the disabled community on the big and small screen, and it gave me the mistaken impression that being disabled was a matter of bad luck or old age. It didn’t help that our district’s approach to specialized education at the time was grouping and isolating them, and the big and small screen gleefully mocked those individuals. It wasn’t until college when I met someone with cerebral palsy that I had my own notions challenged. It forced me to greatly expand my notion of what disabled meant and how it affected people differently. It also made me want to see more realistic depictions of the community in film and television. The last twenty years have seen a great expansion for representation, beginning with mostly token roles and expanding into multiple shows and feature films. Which made me wonder where Jimmy got the idea. JIMMY: “I listened to a podcast last summer and I heard a similar story about a carer and the disabled person. It was a similar story about a disabled person who wanted to have an, I think it was an escort, or something. There was a moment the carer wasn’t allowed in the disabled person’s home when the escort was arriving. I saw a drama there, if the carer doesn’t know who’s showing up, and what could happen, and what will happen, and who’s fault is it if something goes wrong? That inspired me to write this story.” One of those topics, previously thought to be taboo about the disabled community, is sex. We speak so much about the social integration of the disabled community that we forget that each person is more than their disability, including very real, very powerful sexual feelings. Film and television abound with able love stories, but ALIVE allows us to consider the possibilities of love and sex for the disabled community in the modern age. JIMMY: “I think many, many people... many able people have a certain view of disabled people, how they look, and they judge people if they look a certain way or behave a certain way. I think we need to shine a light on disabled people that they are exactly the same as everyone else.” Victoria, as a character, is obviously central to making ALIVE work as the lead character. Her past as a combat athlete and her present as a disabled person due to injury allows her to appeal to both populations and challenge our perceptions. The film opens with Victoria out with Ida in public, with Olsson capturing shots at Victoria’s wheelchair level. We’re quickly invested into Victoria as a character, getting a sense of how others see her, largely because of the excellent casting of Eva Johansson. JIMMY: “I saw Eva, and she did a lot of research. She was very interested in the role and so I went with my gut feeling, because she’s a real character actress. She does a lot of theater. She really went into the role immensely, like, she researched for two months before we shot it.” Aphasia is a difficult condition to replicate, but Eva’s preparation pays off big time, finding the right balance between realism and pacing for cinematic effect. Eva communicates so much with her face and body while Victoria struggles to get the words out. You can feel any misguided expectations melting away as Victoria’s story progresses, especially when the suitor shows up, played by Jimmy Olsson himself. I had to ask him if he wrote the role with himself in mind. JIMMY: “No, it’s just coincidence. Basically, I did it in my last film as well, but it was basically, because we shot it without money, and the producer said, ‘Why don’t you do it?’ And I was like, ‘Ah, what the hell! It’s no dialogue. I look kind of shady. Why not?’” ALIVE is a dramatic short that challenges our expectations about the disabled community. Coming in just over twenty minutes, Olsson weaves a nicely encapsulated tale, anchored by an incredible, expressive performance by Eva Johansson. Fans of films about the disabled community, or folks looking to expand their notions about the community, should definitely check out this film. Rotten Tomatoes: NR Metacritic: NR One Movie Punch: 8.0/10 ALIVE (2020) is not rated and will be playing at the Cleveland International Film Festival, running from Wednesday, March 25th, 2020 through Sunday, April 5th, 2020. Head over to clevelandfilm.org for more information, including a schedule. We’ll link back to the review here once it’s available for streaming.

Hi everyone! It’s Tuesday, and today we’re welcoming back One Movie Spouse to the podcast, with a review of a film she’s been wanting to see for a very long time. In many ways, the film reminds me of how she and I first met, and how unlikely we seemed to so many people. Of course, I wasn’t able to watch it with her, so I’ll just have to assume that everything works out fine. For a few other recent reviews from One Movie Spouse, check out MISS AMERICANA (Episode #725), BOMBSHELL (Episode #701), and LITTLE WOMEN (Episode #673). Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friends at the How I Met Your Friends podcast. Every episode, Julie and Kathleen examine one episode of each hit sitcom, exploring the hidden connections and easter eggs within each episode. Don’t miss their recent guest review for CATS (Episode #699), along with the reason they got stuck with the review. You can find them on Twitter @himyfriendspod, and on Facebook and Instagram @howimetyourfriendspod. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello! It’s me Amy, AKA One Movie Spouse, back for another review. MWAH! A week-long break from school has me catching up on films I've been dying to see! Today’s film features two of my favorite actors, Seth Rogen and Charlize Theron. Listen to my review, then catch me on Twitter @OneMovieSpouse to keep the conversation going. Here we go! Today’s movie is LONG SHOT (2019), directed by Jonathan Levine and written for the screen by Dan Sterling and Liz Hannah, based on a story by Dan Sterling. The film follows the unlikely relationship between two old neighbors: a shlubby journalist named Fred Flarsky (Seth Rogen) and a high-powered diplomat Charlotte Field (Charlize Theron). This comedy is about politics, social status, compromise, and above all else, trusting your heart *and* your gut. No spoilers! LONG SHOT is both a political comedy and a romantic comedy rolled into one. The film opens to Fred as a passionate and unapologetic journalist, reporting on issues that matter to the world, when his newspaper is bought out by a large media conglomerate. Highly relevant to real-life today! Fred sees himself as a voice for the voiceless. We turn then, like most romcoms, to introducing the highly influential Charlotte, who never stops working. They couldn’t be any more different, and are living in two different social spheres, when an unexpected event brings them together. I enjoy both of these actors very much and was pleased from the very beginning of the film. They make their somewhat cliché opposites attract story seem believable and enjoyable! In addition to a fun love story, LONG SHOT also tackles some highly relevant issues today. Fred, as a journalist, is highly passionate about the environment, which Charlotte also shares, but while Fred is an idealist, Charlotte is a realist. Throughout the film, compromise is a key theme. Compromise (right or wrong) happens all the time as deals are negotiated and evolve. Compromises are also often disappointing and highly frustrating. Charlotte is under immense pressure as a diplomat to negotiate a compromise, which challenges Fred’s idealism. Charlotte and Fred’s relationship becomes a small mirror examining international relationships and our own decisions and compromises. This film also had an excellent supporting cast adding to the richness of their story. Lance (O’Shea Jackson, Jr.) is Fred’s best friend, who wants nothing more than to see his bro succeed and be happy in life! His presence throughout the film is reassuring, and made you feel like you were one of their friends. Maggie Millikin (June Diane Raphael) does an excellent job in her role as a personal assistant to Charlotte, giving just the right amount of tension and skepticism toward Fred as he re-enters Charlotte’s life. If you’ve watched any political comedies or dramas, such as “Veep” or “Scandal”, you know there are NO secrets allowed for those who serve the public. LONG SHOT generally keeps a nice balance between political and romantic comedy, but about two-thirds into the film, an event occurs where drama overtakes the comedy very abruptly. I am ok with it, but it was jarring upon initial viewing, and a little off-tone. After that, though, my sappy side took over and just wanted them to be genuinely happy! LONG SHOT is a political and romantic comedy, about status, compromise, and trust. Like me, I hope you find yourself cheering for an elite woman and an ordinary man against all odds. Fans of Seth Rogen, Charlize Theron, and “underdog” films should really enjoy this film! Keep an eye on that R-rating, though, if you plan on watching with teenagers, to avoid some potentially uncomfortable moments. Rotten Tomatoes: 81% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 67  One Movie Punch: 8.0/10 LONG SHOT (2019) is rated R and is currently playing on HBO and DIRECTV.

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another Matinee Monday. You know, trailers usually go one of two directions for me. I generally try to avoid them to enjoy that pure initial viewing experience. Some trailers I get really sick of, really quick. But the trailer for THE INVISIBLE MAN has been nothing short of exciting, especially after being blown away by 2018’s UPGRADE (Episode #155). If you’re turned off because of the SAW and INSIDIOUS franchises, I assure you that today’s film is not that. It’s something much, much more. Before the review, we’ll have a promo from the Honey, You Should Watch This podcast. One Movie Spouse and I had the pleasure of guesting on their show recently to discuss ONE CUT OF THE DEAD, which Andrew Campbell reviewed in Episode #625, and which has become one of my favorite films of all time. You can find them on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram @HoneyWatchThis, or check out all their episodes, including ours, at honeyyoushouldwatchthis.podbean.com. Don’t miss a single episode! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is THE INVISIBLE MAN (2020), the Dark Universe franchise film written and directed by Leigh Whannell, based on the classic novel by H.G. Wells. Cecilia Kass (Elisabeth Moss) narrowly escapes from an abusive relationship to a multi-millionaire optics engineer named Adrian Griffin (Oliver Jackson-Cohen). After Adrian commits suicide, Cecilia receives some unexpected benefits, which come with some unseen drawbacks. See what I did there? Or rather, didn’t? No spoilers. However, definitely content warnings for abusive relationships and sexual assault. At the top of the episode, I gushed a lot about Whannell’s last film, UPGRADE, which took folks by surprise in 2018. I’m not a huge fan of the SAW franchise, nor did I care for INSIDIOUS, but that particular week there wasn’t much else playing, and I was glad I took the time. In particular, Whannell used a great fixed-point camera trick that made the fights within the film have a realism and focus necessary to use an otherwise played out, high-tech version of body possession. That new take on an old idea was what made his helming of THE INVISIBLE MAN so exciting to me. My excitement only increased when Moss was announced for the lead, after her incredible work on “Mad Men” and “The Handmaid’s Tale”, along with her underseen role last year in HER SMELL (Episode #650). All of that experience clearly fed into THE INVISIBLE MAN, which focuses on gaslighting in abusive relationships, instead of the other serial-killer and/or misunderstood monster plot lines from before. We were going to get something new, with the right skill set at the helm and in the lead role, and let me tell you, it is excellent! The trailer gives you all the setup you need to know the basic opening of this film. The film opens with Cecilia’s daring escape, much more difficult than you might expect when someone is an obsessive controlling force. Adrian commits suicide, leaves her money, and then someone begins terrorizing Cecilia at the house she was staying at after her escape, and wherever she seems to go. The terrorism begins like patterns familiar to anyone who has been in an abusive relationship. Little gaslighting events that make Cecilia question her reality, and others to question her sanity. It’s a slow build up, but once it takes off, it really takes off, with two gasp-inducing events sure to shock anyone out of their listlessness. Once Cecilia knows she’s fighting against an invisible foe, we get to see the real power of Whannell’s direction and camerawork, utilizing a lot of practical and greensuit effects to create gorgeous long-take fight scenes. You get a taste of the hallway fight in the trailer, but there are three other scenes that expertly execute and reformulate the same practical effects of yesteryear for invisibility in cinema. As a long-time classic movie monster fan, seeing this version absolutely delighted me, when it wasn’t shocking me in all the right places. I don’t want to spoil anything, so let me just end the review by talking a bit about the Dark Universe reboot era. This is the first really great film in this latest era of the Universal Monsters. The first two entries, DRACULA UNTOLD and THE MUMMY, were both derided by critics and fans, leading to the collapse of the shared universe. But luckily that didn’t stop Universal from moving forward with more contemporary versions of the films, and perhaps the standalone model might work better. I can definitely see a shared universe still, perhaps on this smaller, more personable scale of THE INVISIBLE MAN. However, the new scattershot approach to development might not make that possible, although I could definitely see pressure to link the announced THE INVISIBLE WOMAN to Whannell’s excellent entry. Only time will tell. THE INVISIBLE MAN is an incredible adaptation of both the classic novel by H.G. Wells and the long series of adaptations in multiple media. Leigh Whannell brings his unique take on storytelling, anchored in an impressive performance by Elisabeth Moss, to deliver one of the best adaptations in recent history. Classic movie monster fans, folks who like films exploring abusive relationships, or fans of either Whannell or Moss, will definitely appreciate this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 90% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 71  One Movie Punch: 9.0/10 THE INVISIBLE MAN (2020) is rated R and is currently playing in theaters.

Hi everyone! Welcome to March! Things have been super busy around here at One Movie Punch as we begin to wrap up first quarter. This week we’re coming in with a slate of five Certified Fresh films, including tomorrow’s review for THE INVISIBLE MAN, Tuesday’s review of LONG SHOT from One Movie Spouse, Thursday’s review of PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE from Keith Lyons, Saturday’s review of THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS from your truly, along with today’s review of THE ASSISTANT. Andrew will be back on Friday with his review of recent VOD release AFTER MIDNIGHT as part of his Fantastic Fest coverage. And on Wednesday, I’ll be reviewing ALIVE, a short film from Swedish filmmaker Jimmy Olsson, with interview clips. We’re so busy, in fact, that we actually won’t have a Patreon episode today. But don’t let that stop you from heading on over to patreon.com/onemoviepunch to check out our exclusive content, including interviews with filmmakers, update episodes, and series like “One Movie Punch Presents: Zero Percent”, where I review films which have achieved the lowest possible score at Rotten Tomatoes. And if you sign up to become a patron, you will become eligible for Sponsor Sundays, where I’ll review a film of your choice, with just a few exceptions. A promo explaining things will run before the review. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is THE ASSISTANT (2019), the slice of life drama written and directed by Kitty Green. The film follows a day in the life of Jane (Julia Garner), an assistant to a high-power media executive, as she navigates the mundane and the horrific aspects of her entry-level position. No spoilers. However, a content warning for sexual harassment, abusive work relationships, and toxic work environments. Toxic work environments abound in our society. It doesn’t matter whether it’s private or public, for-profit or non-profit. It can be a minimum wage job, or in the case of THE ASSISTANT, a high-power corporate environment managing a great deal of money. Wherever you have an organization with a hierarchical structure, some percentage of those who are promoted into managerial positions will let that power go to their head, and will begin to cultivate toxic environments. Because unless you have a strong union contract, chances are you are employed at will, and no matter how much your boss wants to be your friend, they will always choose to fire you if it becomes necessary. At-will workplaces tend to have the most toxic environments and we get to see it on full display in today’s film. Whereas BOMBSHELL (Episode #701) was clearly focused on the three leading actors, and covers the highlights and major events of the Fox News scandal, THE ASSISTANT takes a more mundane and grounded approach with its slice of life framing. Jane’s story unfolds before our eyes, from catching a ride to work to open the office, all the way through closing up for the night, at her employer’s insistence. Jane has been an assistant for two months, so she still has to deal with the scut work, not just making copies or picking up lunches, but even washing dishes and taking out trash and whatever someone else doesn’t want to do, including her fellow assistants with more experience. This perspective alone provides incredible insight into toxic work environments, but THE ASSISTANT also explores the effects of sexual harassment and abusive bosses, which is where it really takes off. It’s pretty obvious the target of THE ASSISTANT is Harvey Weinstein, or any number of highly paid media moguls who hold unspeakable power over their companies, if not their industries. We actually never get to see Jane’s boss, which allows us to insert whatever toxic boss we may have had in our past. But we do get to hear his voice, an effective technique as Jane gets dressed down after getting sucked into the general chaos of the day. She’s not in control of any of her environment, a fact she learns painfully when she seeks assistance, because toxic work environments have an inertia that’s tough to break, legally speaking, especially when checks can be written to guarantee silence. This abusive environment also engenders a sense of solidarity in the office, especially among the assistants. Despite getting scut work, both assistants help Jane with apologizing after getting chewed out. Jane is still learning her environment, not as it should be, but as it is. And we are as well. Julia Garner absolutely carries Jane from beginning to end, adopting a character familiar to anyone who has worked in toxic environments, and delivers what will be one of the best performances this year. Kitty Green nails the drab tones of the stale, mismanaged office environment, along with a more hive-minded, cacophonous cubicle farm. The stark, sharp angles of the corporate environment are leveraged to draw our eyes to all the important details, as we get to observe Jane observing others. THE ASSISTANT develops tension slowly, then manages it all the way to the thematically unsatisfying, but exceptionally realistic ending. A feeling that anyone who has worked in a toxic work environment will appreciate when they’ve left for the day. We get less spectacle and more realism, and the film is all the better for it. I just wish the film had the courage to market the film it actually was, instead of what the trailer made it seem. Honestly, I hadn’t heard much about the film before it hit the marquee of our local independent theater, so when One Movie Spouse and I were looking for a date night film, we checked out the trailer. As you might have noticed during this review, it’s pretty intense, giving the sense that something massive and dramatic happens. And that’s not the film you’re going to get in the theater. It’s actually better than the film that’s advertised, to be honest. THE ASSISTANT is a slice of life drama looking at a day in the life of one assistant for a powerful media mogul. Julia Garner anchors this think piece, which oscillates between the mundane and the stressful, against a well-chosen and well-paced backdrop. Drama fans, or folks looking for a more realistic, less sensationalized look at toxic work environments driven by sexual harassment and abusive relationships, will definitely enjoy this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 90% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 77 One Movie Punch: 8.0/10 THE ASSISTANT (2019) is rated R and is currently playing in theaters.

Hi everyone! We’re closing out the week with another entry in our series, Under the Kanopy. Kanopy is a library and university funded streaming service that grants card holders six free streams a month, featuring a combination of classic, mainstream, independent, and international films. They currently have streaming deals with some of our favorite distributors, like A24 and Kino Lorber, which offer the critically acclaimed, if not commercially successful films. Today’s film covers one of my favorite artists, both while growing up, and in retrospect as I have time to learn about him. Leonard Cohen was a Canadian writer, probably best known for his musical work, and especially a track called “Hallelujah”, which was used in almost hilarious fashion in Zach Snyder’s WATCHMEN. Today’s documentary looks at his time with early muse Marianne Ilhen, and the development of his music during their time on the isle of Hydra in the 1960s, long before heartache, depression, and disease crept in throughout his life. I’ll have my thoughts on MARIANNE AND LEONARD: WORDS OF LOVE in a moment. For a few other films in this same series, check out HAVE A NICE DAY (Episode #724), TO DUST (Episode #717), and TRANSFORMER (Episode #710). Before the review, we’ll have a promo from the Top 5 from Fighting podcast. Every episode, Greg and Mike discuss a wide range of topics, and when they disagree, you know they’re gonna fight about it! Always fun, but always contentious, you don’t want to miss a single episode. You can find them on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram @Top5forFighting. They have been some of our biggest supporters from last year. Shout out to their Marketing Angel. You know who you are! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is MARIANNE AND LEONARD: WORDS OF LOVE (2019), the documentary film from long-time documentarian Nick Broomfield. The film follows the troubled relationship between writer/singer/songwriter Leonard Cohen and his muse, Marianne Ihlen, from their meeting on the isle of Hydra to their ultimate breakup over Cohen’s obsession with his musical career. No spoilers. We have a tradition in our household of giving books to each other for Christmas. I try to find a book or two for One Movie Spouse and One Movie Spawn, and they try to do the same for me and each other. I have a list of books I’m always looking for, which I send along ahead of time. But Amy always tries to find a book that I might enjoy, but didn’t ask for, and this year that was Leonard Cohen’s “The Flame”, a collection of his old writings, song lyrics, and last works, compiled after his death in 2016. I have been a fan of Leonard Cohen’s music, having been turned on to him after picking up a Greatest Hits CD at the library a while back, and realizing I knew a lot more of his songs than I thought. But I didn’t know much more than the music, and even less about the man himself. So, I thought it was a fun treat to get to do just that. And ironically, after I finished reading a book by Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh, I dove right into “The Flame” for an education. Subconsciously, I think what appealed to me about Leonard Cohen is how similar his spiritual outlook was to that of Jack Kerouac. I got a taste of that while reading “The Flame”, but the parallels really hit home while watching MARIANNE AND LEONARD. Both had roots in Canada, came from middle-class homes with strong religious influences, both fancied themselves as writers, and spent their lives travelling to find inspiration for their writing. In fact, if there’s any major difference, it’s the choice of drugs and location. Kerouac traveled around the United States, looking for his inspiration, fueled mostly by alcohol, marijuana, and speed. But Cohen eventually found a home on the isle of Hydra, where he took massive amounts of speed, but also acid, while writing poetry and novels, and with the help of who would be his greatest muse, Marianne Ilhen. When people think about the counter-culture of the 1960s, they generally think of the group as one homogenous unit, a stereotype that exists to this very day. Beatniks were not the same hippies, nor were yippies the same as communists. While these populations might have been pushing back against the mostly homogenous representation of society and culture appearing on the radio and television, each group had different reasons and approaches to that pushback. MARIANNE AND LEONARD looks at one dynamic corner of that world, secluded away on Hydra, where the two would meet and eventually fall in love. Marianne Ilhen was running away from a life she didn’t want in Norway, with her son in tow. Leonard Cohen was looking for inspiration, and found it in Marianne. Hydra was just one of a number of locations and neighborhoods that existed around the world, as yet untouched by tourism or gentrification, similar to the kind of artistic awakening happening in Haight-Ashbury in San Francisco. We get to see the kind of routine they had in life, which was comprised of writing and roaming around Hydra, making steady progress, and enjoying life otherwise. It sounds like a writer’s paradise, and yet, for both Kerouac and Cohen, there’s also an uneasiness that comes with staying in one place too long, a stagnation that begins to stifle creativity, and this wandering urge would eventually be the beginning of the end for their relationship. And these mythical communities eventually fall apart as well, which Broomfield examines by going back to Hydra and examining the long-term effects of many individuals from that community. Daily acid trips generally don’t make for well-adjusted individuals. A wandering spirit and heavy acid trips aren’t enough to pull someone away from the people they dearly love. But once Leonard Cohen found success as a singer/songwriter, he was gone longer and longer from Hydra, and by extension Marianne. It’s at this point in the documentary that Broomfield gets a little unbalanced in telling the story, turning mostly into a rapid-fire overview of Leonard’s career and controversies, and almost passing mentions for Marianne. It might be an apt metaphor for their relationship, especially as it deteriorated, but it seems to distract from that same relationship in the process. We get a mini-biography, then a moving ending where Leonard’s last letter to Marianne is being read to her on her death bed. I really wish we had heard more from Ilhen as part of the documentary, but I can imagine finding footage of Leonard to be much easier than Ilhen. The only other stylistic difference I had with the film was the framing for the interviews. Broomfield has the guests speak directly into the camera, instead of at an angle, which can feel disconcerting to some viewers, especially when we know the person is speaking to Broomfield, not the viewer. I often found myself wanting to look away while they were speaking, which is not generally the effect a documentarian wants. I think it can work in the right circumstances, but here it just felt weird. MARIANNE AND LEONARD: WORDS OF LOVE is an expansive documentary, looking at the loving and creative relationship between Leonard Cohen and Marianne Ilhen. Nick Broomfield takes us from their meeting on Hydra all the way to their death beds, covering all the peaceful and tumultuous times in-between. While the content skews more towards Leonard Cohen, the documentary remains informative and insightful into the core relationship. Documentary fans, especially fans of older music like One Movie Spouse, should definitely check out this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 79% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 69 One Movie Punch: 8.0/10 MARIANNE AND LEONARD: WORDS OF LOVE (2019) is rated R and is currently playing on Kanopy.

Hi everyone! It’s Friday, so it’s time for another Fantastic Fest feature from Andrew Campbell. This week will feature absolutely no BS. No wait, I’m sorry, this film will be full of BS, and I mean actual bullshit. Not a bunch of lies and stories for which the term bullshit is used, but actual bullshit, along with actual bulls, who have an actual prize tied to their horns called... JALLIKATTU! Don’t miss Andrew’s other recent reviews for THE CALL OF THE WILD (Episode #726), BLISS (Episode #723), and SCHOOL’S OUT (Episode #716). Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friends at the Moviedrone podcast. Every week, Steve & Marc focus on one feature film, assign each other homework, interact with the audience, and of course, the incredible stylings of Marc’s Movie Impressions. You can find them on Twitter and Instagram @movie_drone and on Facebook @Moviedronepod. Be sure to like, retweet, share, follow, and most importantly, subscribe! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello film fans! Andrew here, back today with wild film out of India. When discussing the Indian and American film markets, people generally compare Bollywood versus Hollywood. When you get into the weeds on these terms, Bollywood refers specifically to films produced in Mumbai (which was known as Bombay when the term “Bollywood” was originally coined). Now, the term has taken on more of a colloquial meaning to describe the sum total of all films produced in the country, which includes smaller studio markets such as Tollywood and Kollywood among others. Likewise, “Hollywood films” once referred to movies made in the L.A. suburb that housed most of the major film studios, but now typically refers to American films made anywhere in the country but within the larger studio system, which excludes independent films. Hey Joseph, you’re gonna fact check all this, right? JOSEPH: “Seems legit.” In any case, there were roughly one thousand films released in the United States last year and roughly double that figure in India. Let’s see if we can figure out why this one broke out of the herd and got picked up by Fantastic Fest. Today’s movie is JALLIKATTU (2019), written by R. Jayakumar & Hareesh S., and directed by Lijo Jose Pellissery. The film stars Antony Varghese as Varkey, the lone butcher in a remote Indian village. Varkey is preparing a buffalo for slaughter when the massive animal breaks free and runs rampage through the town and surrounding jungle. With the buffalo wreaking havoc, the women and children take shelter while the men attempt to recapture the beast. Mobs begin to form and the petty squabbles that have existed between the men of the village for years get in the way of the task at hand. The film opens with a little bit of character work, giving us a soft introduction to a number of the villagers. However, once the buffalo breaks loose, the film quickly descends into chaos. Maybe it’s cultural differences, or the way the story spends the next hour shunting between one chaotic scene to the next, or the exponential growth of extras as more and more men show up, but I lost track of all the main characters and their collective personal dramas. This left me fairly bored and all but disengaged for the bulk of the film’s runtime. Nearly every moment of the film is filled with men talking over each other, men shouting at one another, or men abusing their spouses. The film stampedes the viewer with constant cacophony… but maybe that’s the point. Stepping back and looking at the movie from a distance, it’s clear that the film was not made with the western audience in mind and the creators were probably pleasantly surprised to see it picked up by TIFF (the Toronto International Film Festival), Fantastic Fest, and likely others. With that in mind, it’s probably more fair to grade this one on a curve and view it as an outsider looking into a massive country with a vibrant cinema scene that I know nothing about. In the film itself, every time a character smokes or drinks alcohol, a “warning label” (for lack of a better term) appears noticeably on screen to warn the audience against the danger of such vices. The film simply comes from a far different world than I am used to. What JALLIKATTU gets right is the one thing that easily translates into any language - that sweet, sweet buffalo action. There are several scenes where you get real shots of the massive animal running around doing its own thing, but there’s a great mix of practical effects as well. There are some thrilling third-person shots that any fans of the indie video game Goat Simulator are certain to enjoy. Then the film sprinkles in some buffalo cam shots as the viewer bounds around and sends villagers flying. Were this an American film, you know it would all be CGI, but the live action stunt-work here is what makes the film worth sticking with through some of the rough patches. What makes JALLIKATTU fantastic?The ending of this film... absolutelygoes for it. What felt like a fairly realistic depiction of the more toxic aspects of masculinity in the Indian culture transcends into something so outlandish that it may literally be jaw-dropping. If you give this one a shot and find yourself losing interest during the protracted second act, just ensure that you zoom ahead and check out the last 15 minutes for a startling visual metaphor. JALLIKATTU is a step outside the comfort zone for American audiences that delivers a dull roar punctuated by the occasional violent hoofbeat. Fans of films that descend into surreal chaos such as TUMBBAD (Episode #432), CLIMAX (Episode #459), or MOTHER! (Episode #245) will enjoy this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 93% Metacritic: NR One Movie Punch: 6.2/10 JALLIKATTU (2019) is not rated and is now streaming now Amazon Prime Video. Come back next Friday for a light-hearted midnight horror flick appropriately titled AFTER MIDNIGHT. This movie showcases what a filmmaker can do on a shoestring budget. It’s equal parts Deep South break-up drama and psychological terror with a monster in the woods that may or may not actually exist. I promise it’s a fun one. See you then!

Hi everyone! We’re back with another review from Jon-David, aka the Mafia Hairdresser, who is absolutely determined to pick up all our missing award nominees and winners from last year, including today’s underhyped film, PAIN AND GLORY, featuring a commanding performance from Antonio Banderas. We’re excited to get Jon-David’s take on the film. Don’t miss his recent reviews for MALEFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL (Episode #713), THE CAVE (Episode #706), and RICHARD JEWELL (Episode #692). His promo will run before the review. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello, this Jon-David aka Mafia Hairdresser, the writer and performer of the podcast The Mafia Hairdresser Chronicles, a campy crime comedy based on my time working for a Hollywood cocaine trafficking couple in the 1980s. Today’s movie is PAIN AND GLORY (2019), written and directed by internationally-acclaimed Spanish filmmaker Pedro Almodóvar, and stars Antonio Banderas, Penélope Cruz, Leonardo Sbaraglia, and Asier Etxeandia. No spoilers. PAIN AND GLORY stars Antonio Banderas as writer/director Salvador Mallo. The film opens to Mallo’s memories of childhood, growing up poor with his mother, Jacinta (Penélope Cruz). As the story moves along, we see Salvador Mallo’s physical pain as an adult, which makes you think he might be nearing the end of his career of writer/director. Between the storylines of Antonio Banderas, as Mallo, rejecting the call to write and direct again (which is, figuratively, the breath of his life), and his romanticized flashbacks of Penélope Cruz raising him and molding him into the artist that he has become, you’ll begin to notice how the real director of the film, Almodóvar, uses music, light, color, and even his actors to tell his story. You see, in the films of Pedro Almodóvar, the story is not only enjoyable and straightforward or complex, he is also commenting on the subject of his stories. In this film, PAIN AND GLORY, he is commenting on the PAIN his main character has to endure when he feels his GLORY days as a film director are over. PAIN AND GLORY is rumored to be highly autobiographical and includes straight up tellings of Almodóvar’s religious education and his family expectations that he would become a priest. Antonio Banderas, as the film director, has to address his own ego and the way he has gone through life soaking up lovers, friends, colors, and experiences, but not fully experiencing them. Only writing them and filming them. I hope that when you see PAIN AND GLORY, you’re with a group of friends who likes to view film and talk about them afterwards. This film is actually not just autobiographical, a story, or a portrait. It is a statement from Pedro Almodóvar. He is showing you the brushes, his tools in which he paints his stories with. Although the main character is a film director who suffers for his art, you will see his tortured contemplation of his past films, brilliantly played by Banderas, who tries to maintain relationships, at arm’s length, to protect his own drug use. Almodóvar, the openly gay director, loves to tell the public what he thinks. He loves to show you his opinions in his films, and PAIN AND GLORYis his conversation directly with his film fans. He is telling us that, as close to the truth about his life and demons that he can show you, it will never be enough or real enough. But that the pursuit of showing you is the best anyone can do. Filmmaking, to him, and his main character, is like “chasing the dragon”, a term used by heroin users, also depicted in this film by Banderas, who suffers and strives to tell stories by making movies which only achieves him finite glory once his films are completed. Both the use of Antonio Banderas and Penélope Cruz in this film, along with his use of color, is another example of how Almodóvar uses his favorite actors, commenting that they are one of the many tools to tell a story. Personally, I would particularly to like know what people who have seen this film think of Almodóvar’s use of white, such as the cave-home dwelling his childhood main character grew up in, the stark white hospital scenes his grown up main character must endure, and what the use of whiteboards and the words “whitewash” mean in this film. Feel free to comment if you’re listening. Or chat us up on Twitter or Instagram. I have my own opinions. PAIN AND GLORY was nominated for a 92nd Best International Feature Film Academy Award. The writer director Pedro Almodóvar is already an Academy Award winner for Best Foreign Language Film in 2000 for ALL ABOUT MY MOTHER (1999), and Best Original Screenplay in 2003 for TALK TO HER (2002). Antonio Banderas won Best Actor at Cannes for his role in PAIN AND GLORY, and he was also nominated for an Academy Award for Best Actor. If you’re a fan of Pedro Almodóvar, you’ll see this film and become a bigger fan. And, if this is the first of his films you view, you will become a fan. Rotten Tomatoes: 97% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 87 (MUST SEE) One Movie Punch: 8.3/10 PAIN AND GLORY (2019), rated R, can be streamed on Amazon and iTunes. This is Jon-David, aka Mafia Hairdresser, the writer/performer of the Mafia Hairdresser Chronicles, my comedy crime podcast.

Hi everyone! All right, we’re hitting the pause button on Indie Wednesdays for another contractually-obligated review from Shane Hyde, due to the peace accords signed after last year’s Reign of Terror 2019. Shane and I had a minor month-long disagreement you can check out beginning with One Movie Spouse’s review for CAN YOU EVER FORGIVE ME? (Episode #594), and heading through the entire month of October. Today we’ll have another installment of his beat we like to call Horror Stories, and today’s a gem from 2009 entitled THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL. Don’t miss his recent reviews for WOUNDS (Episode #694), RUST CREEK (Episode #654), and NIGHTMARE CINEMA (Episode #647). Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friends at the Cinema Recall podcast. Every episode, The Vern takes a look at iconic scenes in classic movies. You can find them on Twitter and Instagram @cinema_recall, and also subscribe to their podcast at anchor.fm/cinemarecall. Don’t miss a single episode! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Kia ora! I’m Shane Hyde, back to review another movie for you all. I’m a Kiwi living in Australia. Everything down under is currently on fire or underwater so I’m staying inside and reviewing movies. Let’s go! Today’s movie is THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL (2009), written and directed for the screen by Ti West, and starring Joselin Donahue and Tom Noonan. This film is written and directed by Ti West. Not a huge name but he works almost exclusively in horror and will later go on to direct THE INNKEEPERS (2011), which was pretty fabulous. In THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL, his work is readily evident in the direction. Sometimes almost too evident in these long, lingering shots. They went on. And on. 2009's HOUSE OF THE DEVIL takes a rather interesting approach to the movie's tone. The whole setup is in homage to the horror films of the 1970s and early 1980s. Everything from the type of film used, to the title card of the film, is something of a throwback. This deliberate design choice lends itself to a kind of 'rediscovered treasure' feeling of the film. And for the whole, it's really effective. And this tonality, the camera work, colour grading all fits together with the script. It's a slow burner, almost innocent for the most part. This HOUSE OF THE DEVIL lacks devils, but makes up for it with a small, odd assortment of characters. Samantha (Jocelin Donahue), and our proxy in this film, is a young woman motivated to take on a babysitting job due to a shortness of cash. I love her role in this film; she has agency and drives the story along. Even towards the climax of the film, she keeps on fighting. Our main antagonist, Mister Ullman, played with not-too-creepy desperation by Tom Noonan, looms over each scene he's in. His on-screen wife Mrs. Ullman (Mary Woronov) almost too macabre, but not quite Addams Family camp. Both are glorious and luscious additions to the film. In the end, I keep trying to convince myself that this is a good film. Aside from a few notable and minor scenes, there's nothing to hint that this house is indeed THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL. In fact, once she's situated as the babysitter, there's nothing much about the house that makes your skin crawl, or even Samantha’s skin crawl. But isn't that what the 80s Satanic Panic was all about? Your neighbors might have been worshippers, appeared normal, had neighborhood bbqs like anyone else? And then presto-change-o! They're painting pentagrams in blood and playing Dungeons and Dragons. This isn't a bad movie, it’s just not a great movie. The pacing doesn't match with our modern sensibilities. The artistic choices and camera work definitely play into its favour, but at its core it’s all sizzle, no bacon... and in the end, the truth is that there's something truly wrong with all of the pizza in this movie. Perhaps this is the TRUE horror at the heart of THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL? Rotten Tomatoes: 87% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 73 One Movie Punch: 7.0/10 THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL (2009) is rated R. JOSEPH: “Unless you’re in the United States, where it’s currently playing on Amazon Prime, Hoopla, and Shudder.” Also, Tom Noonan, who played Mr. Ullman in the film, is a... I am a bit of a fan, ever since I saw the short film on YouTube, THEY ARE MADE OUT OF MEAT (2005). Look it up. You won’t be disappointed. LINK: youtu.be/7tScAyNaRdQ Anyway, I’m Shane Hyde, and that’s a review.

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another Takeover Tuesday, and this one is going to be a real treat. I’m not going to lie. Kolby’s been straight teasing me about being on this podcast for about 18 months. Yeah, sure, he’s got his own podcast entitled Kolby Told Me, which you’ll hear about before the review. Yeah, sure, he’s co-host for the Minorites Report Podcast, that drops weekly doses of perspective on popular culture. But, it wasn’t until I sent him the Puss In Boots meme with the saucer-eyes and welling up tears that he finally broke and said he would do it. That’s because we get our guests here at One Movie Punch the old-fashioned way. By guilt-tripping. Kolby will be up in a moment with his review, along with his personal promo beforehand. Thanks for making the time, Kolby! Speaking of Takeover Tuesday, do you think you have what it takes to guest on One Movie Punch? Head over to onemoviepunch.com/takeover-tuesday and learn more about how you can guest here at One Movie Punch. We still have three (3) slots available this quarter for aspiring and established film critics to take the reins for an episode. We’ll run your promo before the review and will place it in regular rotation for the quarter. If it sounds like something interesting to you, reach out to us over social media. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// THE PHOTOGRAPH (2020) centers on Michael Block (LaKeith Stanfield), a journalist touring a distressed town in Louisiana, set to interview one of its residents, Isaac (Rob Morgan). Isaac details his life, his struggles, his accomplishments and regrets. Michael comes across a photograph of a striking young woman who he’s told is Christina Eames (Chanté Adams), a famed photographer from New York who was his greatest love that got away. Michael’s focus shifts and so does his story which leads him to Christina’s daughter, Mae (Issa Rae). She’s been grappling with the complex emotions of Christina’s recent and unexpected passing and it’s not made any easier because of their estranged relationship. She finds several letters and a photograph tucked away in a safe-deposit box. She begins delving deep into her mother’s early life and this photograph serendipitously unites her and Michael in an unexpected romance that changes the way they both view life and love. Writer/Director Stella Meghie crafts a simple and tender love story between two couples across different periods in time. The narrative construction of the screenplay is very much poetic and almost lyrical in its design. Her direction is sleek and displays an intentional highlight of the characters in this story and how they move in the world she’s built. There’s a subdued, yet melodic and jazzed grit to the outer New Orleans 1980s love story between Isaac and Christina, juxtaposed to the smooth and refined Neo-Soul infused eroticism of Michael and Mae’s New York romance. Both distinct, but both tracing similar journeys of intense passion and unmet expectations. The dueling stories progress the plot delicately to both Michael and Mae, that takes twists neither of them could’ve expected yet are fulfilled authentically in the end. I was skeptical of what LaKeith and Issa could bring to the screen in their 1st big shot at leading roles, and I’m glad to say they blew me away. Their chemistry was evident, and their sexuality was steamy. The entire ensemble worked well balancing the other injections of comedy and drama throughout the film, particularly, Lil’ Rel Howery’s Kyle, older brother to Michael. He was an always welcomed sage, offering these anecdotes of wisdom with his comedic flair. What makes this story unique, is not the grandiose love affair we’ve become inundated with, but how this film revels in its simplicity. Which may also serve to what could limit this films appeal to some audiences. It’s not often we are given Black love stories not infused with overt comedy. Comedy paces a film, and without it, were left to stew in the aches of an all too real love that takes work. That can get uncomfortable. It can leave you having a tougher time investing in this honest love story were sharing with these characters and, if you can’t relate, you can feel detached. I contend, its these smaller love stories that make this film all the more special. THE PHOTOGRAPH should serve as a reminder of the small stories in our own lives we take for granted we don’t get the chance to see play out in cinema and how fighting for love is always worth it. THE PHOTOGRAPH (2020) is simply gorgeous. I’m filled with pride over this film’s production, its intention of offering a Black Love story, lead by a majority Black Cast, centered on these characters not in a Black Struggle, written and directed by a Black Woman, and catered to an audience that needs more of these narratives on the big screen to normalize the small stories we should celebrate of our Black experience, but is also universal as well. Rotten Tomatoes: 75% Metacritic: 63 One Movie Punch: 9.0/10 THE PHOTOGRAPH (2020) is rated PG-13 and is currently playing in theaters.

Hi everyone! Andrew’s taking the helm for today’s Matinee Monday, with a review from the debut offering from the recently renamed 20th Century Studios. Like that Fox brand might be toxic or something. Anyway, Andrew will be up in a minute with his review of THE CALL OF THE WILD. Don’t miss Andrew’s other recent reviews for BLISS (Episode #723), SCHOOL’S OUT (Episode #716), and COME TO DADDY (Episode #709). None of those are family films, by the way. Not even COME TO DADDY. Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friends at the Book of Lies Podcast. Every week, Brandi Fleeks and Sunni Hepburn take a look at a fraud case or famous con artist, breaking down the methods, the signals, and how to spot similar scams in your life. You can find them on Twitter @Bookofliespod and on Facebook and Instagram @bookofliespodcast. Be sure to like, retweet, share, review, and subscribe! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello film fans! Andrew here, pinch-hitting today with... a Disney film. Don’t worry, I’ll be back on Friday with my usual dose of death and destruction. One of the perks to being an accredited film critic (well, actually, the only perk) is access to check out the occasional film at a press-screening or through a screener link or on DVD during awards season. Somehow, I didn’t even know of the existence of today’s film until I got my invite to go check it out at arguably Austin’s dingiest theater - remarkable, considering the budget was in the $150M range. What secured my RSVP was the ability to bring along my three kids and gauge their response to a film that has been marketed to both parents and children. Today’s movie is THE CALL OF THE WILD (2020), with a screenplay by Michael Green based on the Jack London novel, directed by Chris Sanders. THE CALL OF THE WILD tells the story of Buck, a St. Bernard / Scotch Collie mix and his adventures in the late 19th Century. After Buck is abducted from his mischievous life on a bucolic California estate, he’s shipped by boat up to the Yukon territory on the US-Canadian border. Buck is soon acquired by a kind couple in charge of delivering mail to the remote Alaskan town of Skagway. At first a reluctant member of a sled dog team, Buck begins to learn life lessons, as all dogs do, maturing and gaining confidence along the way. And I haven’t even gotten to the Harrison Ford part yet. Director Chris Sanders has three other directorial efforts to his name, all of which are animated - LILO & STITCH, HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON and THE CROODS. This makes a ton of sense after the fact as the film is live action except for the dogs and a few other animals you meet along the way. The sequences that rely heavily on the animals feel very much like a cartoon, albeit a well-crafted one, though thankfully none of the animals talk or provide the narration. Harrison Ford steps into the narrator role and does excellent work. Ford is always such a curmudgeon in real life that I was worried the whole film would feel like he was just showing up for a Disney payday, but his voice feels genuine, keeping the larger narrative aloft until his on-camera role expands in the second half of the picture. Dan Stevens and Karen Gillan appear as well, but feel miscast as the film’s villains. Bradley Whitford kicks off the story as Buck’s original owner in another strange bit of casting, putting a noteworthy actor in a role that barely outlasts the film’s credits. And the unsung hero is motion-capture actor Terry Notary who apparently stood in for Buck. I didn’t learn this until after the film and it’s certainly not apparent during the viewing, but hey, that’s good work if you can get it. One minor complaint is that the story itself feels more episodic rather than having a traditional three-act structure. Maybe it’s just because we are in the age of peak TV, but the whole thing might have worked better as 6-episode Disney+ series. Almost a full hour goes by before Buck inevitably hooks up with Ford’s John Thornton and it feels like everything prior is just a lead-up to this point. The primary problem with THE CALL OF THE WILD is that it tries too hard to be everything to everyone. The source material is not as light-hearted as the film would have you believe. The film features a number of violent scenes, even including some ambiguous allusions to death, though it sands down the corners to deliver the sanitized Disney version that audiences expect. (Incidentally, I have heard the live-action MULAN remake will be PG-13 and I am curious to see what that means for both the film itself as well as the box office). What did not work for me, for at least the first hour, was the juxtaposition of a rugged survival tale with humanized dogs that are uncannily expressive. I get that much of what was required of the dogs in this film probably could not have been done with actual animals, but it feels like the CGI went one step too far, making Buck in particular feel more like a cartoon animal living in the real world. What makes THE CALL OF THE WILD fantastic? THE CALL OF THE WILD is not afraid to take its time. There are just enough action scenes to keep the kids engaged and plenty of slapstick comedy, but there are also more moments of reflection (quiet or narrated) than you’re used to seeing a modern family film. My viewing experience recalled how I felt watching family adventure films growing up in the 1980s, like THE JOURNEY OF NATTY GANN, CHEETAH, or the made-for-tv movie STONE FOX. I really enjoyed experiencing this one with my kids, which has to be a much better sit than subjecting them to SONIC THE HEDGEHOG or the critically-derided DOOLITTLE. THE CALL OF THE WILD is a throwback family film that provides ample, if not particularly memorable, entertainment for all ages. Fans of adventure films that merge live action and CGI-animation such as THE JUNGLE BOOK or PETE’S DRAGON will enjoy this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 70% Metacritic: 53 One Movie Punch: 7.6/10 THE CALL OF THE WILD (2020) is rated PG and is playing in theaters. Come back on Friday and we’ll get back to the wild ways of Fantastic Fest with JALLIKATTU. In a rural Indian village, a buffalo has broken loose, damaging the town while mobs of men begin to form, seeking to restore order. You’ve seen movies with every other kind of killer animal, so why not a buffalo! See you then.

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another week of reviews! This week, we’ll be closing out February with a fun mix of reviews. Tomorrow, Andrew Campbell will takeover Matinee Monday with his review of the recently renamed 20th Century Studios distribution, THE CALL OF THE WILD. On Tuesday, we’ll finally get the elusive Kolby Told Me on the podcast, with his take on THE PHOTOGRAPH as part of Takeover Tuesday. On Wednesday, Shane Hyde returns with his review of 2009’s THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL, recently made available on streaming services. Thursday will see yet another review from Jon-David, aka the Mafia Hairdresser, reviewing the sleeper hit PAIN AND GLORY. On Friday, Andrew is reviewing another animal-focused thriller entitled JALLIKATTU, which will have plenty of BS. And I’ll be closing out the week with a review of MARIANNE & LEONARD: WORDS OF LOVE as part of our Under the Kanopy series. But today, we’re super excited to be welcoming back One Movie Spouse to the podcast, with today’s review of one of her favorite musical artists. It’s probably better that she reviews MISS AMERICANA as I don’t have very informed opinions on Taylor Swift. And before anyone asks, I did not make her do this review, so please shake it off. I’m sure there are tons more puns I could do, but I’m going to stop right there. Over on our Patreon page, at patreon.com/onemoviepunch, we just put up our full interview with writer/director Igor Breakenback, where we discuss his low-budget thriller TURBINES (2019). We also talk about his extensive work as a stuntman and any new projects on the horizon. The interview will be publicly available for a limited time, but you can maintain access by contributing to One Movie Punch at any level. All contributors become eligible for Sponsor Sundays, where you can force me to review a film for the podcast, as long as we haven’t reviewed it, with just a few exceptions. Check back next week for another Year Three Update, where I give you some updates on what’s happening behind the scenes at One Movie Punch. A promo for Sponsor Sundays will run before the review. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello, It’s me Amy, AKA One Movie Spouse, back for another music documentary review. MWAH! I love, love, loved today’s film! Listen to my review, then catch me on Twitter @OneMovieSpouse to keep the conversation going. Here we go! Today’s movie is MISS AMERICANA (2020), a fabulous documentary directed by Lana Wilson. MISS AMERICANA follows Taylor Swift’s early musical career, her rise to fame, and an inside look as to how she discovers the power of her voice. No spoilers! I was excited to watch MISS AMERICANA. I have been a passive fan of Taylor Swift since the release of her album “1989”, which was released during my first year of teaching. It was my “go-to” album during those late nights and weekend hours I spent in the classroom prepping for the week ahead. At that time, I was a bit embarrassed to admit I was a fan, but that may have been due more to the teasing from our 10-year-old daughter, “You like Taylor Swift? But you’re a MOM!” This makes me laugh out loud now, but I’ll admit I was a “secret fan” for a few years. I share this anecdote because I didn’t know much about Taylor Swift’s early years. I knew that she started performing as a young country music star, but not to the full extent showcased in this documentary. I enjoyed this retrospective look at her career and the shifts in her musical style and performances. It also makes me eager to go back and check out some of her earlier work. One of things that I LOVE about music documentaries, this one especially, is watching the behind-the-scenes studio footage as songs come alive. Watching Taylor Swift dabble with melodies, word play, and collaboration with other artists and production engineers is truly magical! After watching this film, I dare you *not* to sing and dance along with “Me!” This documentary is also a snapshot of the making of her 2019 album, “Lover”, so a handful of the songs are getting a lot of air-time on the radio, making it interesting and timely for viewers. I downloaded this new album immediately after watching the film. Lana Wilson did an excellent job sharing the chronology of Taylor Swift’s career, as well as the social media issues that surfaced during her rise. One of the most memorable was during the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards when Swift was awarded Best Music Video for “You Belong to Me”, and Kanye West stormed the stage announcing that Beyoncé had the best video. Footage shows her completely shocked at this disruption and then shows segments of her response to being completely bulldozed by another celebrity. She was truly a display of “grace under fire” and this message carried throughout as the film also showcases some other social media issues. Without spoiling anything for viewers, I appreciated her candid responses and “real talk” about issues she and other women face. MISS AMERICANA humanizes this superstar and made me love her even more as a human being! This documentary does an excellent job showing Taylor Swift’s growth from young woman to a superstar performer. Along with this growth is her desire to use her voice as an influencer regarding social, political, and environmental issues. I found this part of the documentary to be especially touching, filled with several “Hell Yeah!” moments, cheering on her willingness to speak up even as others were trying to silence her. Taylor Swift, now 30, isn’t afraid to speak up and she won’t be silenced. It really is a beautiful thing to witness, and I cannot wait to see what’s next for her. As the documentary ended I jotted down a sentiment she shared: “Sharp pen. Thin skin. Open heart.” This really stuck with me! I finished this documentary with a greater appreciation for her music and life than I ever imagined. Also, I’m no longer embarrassed to admit I *am* a Taylor Swift fan! MISS AMERICANA is a fabulous documentary showcasing Taylor Swift’s early musical career, and her life as she emerges into the superstar performer that she is today, all while working on her most recent album, “Lover”. Fans of Taylor Swift, musical documentaries, and social media influencers will really enjoy this film! Rotten Tomatoes: 93% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 65 One Movie Punch: 10/10 MISS AMERICANA (2020) is rated TV-MA and is currently playing on Netflix.

Hi everyone! We’re closing out the week with another entry in our series, Under the Kanopy. Kanopy is a library and university funded streaming service that grants card holders six free streams a month, featuring a combination of classic, mainstream, independent, and international films. They currently have streaming deals with some of our favorite distributors, like A24 and Kino Lorber, which offer the critically acclaimed, if not commercially successful films. Today’s film is a Chinese film that has some of the best soundtracking I’ve ever heard, especially for an animated film. It’s a film more akin to a motion comic, but with a story that screams Tarantino crime thriller. I’ll be up in a moment with my thoughts on HAVE A NICE DAY. And for a few other films in this series, check out my reviews for TO DUST (Episode #717), TRANSFORMER (Episode #710), and FOR SAMA (Episode #703). Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our friends at the Pop Pour Review podcast! Every week, the PPR crew review a film, then craft a cocktail based on the movie. I don’t drink myself, but I know a few people that do, and every recipe fits in surprising ways. You can find them on Twitter and Instagram @poppourreview, or by searching for Pop! Pour! Review Podcast on Facebook. Thanks for all your support last year! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is HAVE A NICE DAY(2017), the Chinese animated film written and directed by Jian Liu. Xiao Zhang (Zhu Changlong) is a mob driver who steals 1 million yuan to fix his girlfriend’s failed plastic surgery. Once on the run, he’s pursued by an ensemble cast of characters, each of which is happy to screw over another for the stolen bag of cash. No spoilers. Animation is a fascinating medium, which has a long and dynamic history, which predates even film. Before animation would ever grace film, a variety of different contraptions like the zoetrope or flip book would use static drawings and mechanical devices to give our eyes the impression of movement. Penny arcades across the globe used to sport these for a penny a viewing. I loved the one they had at this Wild West Museum near where I grew up. The frames were eventually translated to film stock, and eventually the rise of Disney with 1937’s SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS. It wasn’t the first animated feature, but it would launch animation as a viable and profitable venture. The early animation houses worked by leveraging floors of artists, all working underneath managing artists who helped work out the frames to get a scene from point A to point B. While early animation required a great deal of repetition, it also thrived on a reductionist approach to animation, using as few movements as possible, and re-using content and faces. The jump to computer animation, at least at first, looked to automate this process, before motion-capture and other advanced techniques at Pixar would change the entire approach to animation. When we think of modern animation, we think of these sleek, detailed figures engaged in complex animation based on algorithms and rendering. Sometimes we forget about the power of more minimalist animation, which is why HAVE A NICE DAY is such a treat for animation fans. I got really sick of Disney animation growing up, not because I couldn’t appreciate the films, or wouldn’t roll tears while watching them, but because I couldn’t believe there wasn’t more adult-oriented animated affairs. It seemed to either be cartoons or Disney features, with the occasional stop-motion relic. All that changed when I was given a copy of 1981’s HEAVY METAL, which was based on the adult-oriented illustrated magazine of the same name. Not only did it tickle my teenage lizard brain with all its tantalizing content, but it also featured a collage of animated styles and stories using its loosely connected anthology format. The lack of adult-oriented animated content would eventually lead to the rise of shows like “The Simpsons”, “South Park”, and “Family Guy”. In fact, I’m kind of surprised no studio has thought to reboot Heavy Metal into an anthology series. HAVE A NICE DAY, style-wise, most accurately reflects a motion-comic approach to its animation. It reminded me immediately of the opening futuristic cab driver story from HEAVY METAL. Liu’s incredibly detailed backgrounds provide a nice backdrop for minimalist, repetitive animation. Once you get a feel for the animation style, your eyes are free to roam around the backgrounds, picking up clues and bits and details. The content may not be as tantalizing as HEAVY METAL, but the style makes for a gorgeous viewing experience, especially for early animation fans. What really separates HAVE A NICE DAY from other motion comics is the beautiful soundtracking added to every frame. Just like animation tricks the eye into processing still frames as motion, the soundtracking also helps elevates the pictures we see into something more with the sounds that we hear. Liu’s soundtracking is full of incredible detail, with rich ambient noises and clear vocals, that matches the detailed backdrops and the pacing for the story. Liu also leverages excellent music for transitions, montages, and action scenes. It’s the same synergy that makes today’s console games so immersive, leveraging the ability to make incredible sounds to help elevate animated visuals. The only barrier to the film is the content. Ensemble crime thrillers, especially darkly comedic ones, are definitely not everyone’s cup of tea. The film runs about 75 minutes, and the story begins in media res, leaving the viewer a bit off-kilter as the characters are introduced. It takes a while to finally catch on to the story, and when you do, it’s also heading towards its unexpected ending. If you don’t like the story, then you aren’t really going to appreciate the animation techniques or style. Many wholesome Disney fans will never appreciate HEAVY METAL, and likely for the same reasons they will never appreciate HAVE A NICE DAY. The content hurdle will simply be too much for some viewers. Just not for this one. HAVE A NICE DAY is an exquisitely animated and soundtracked motion comic. This get-the-money comedic thriller features a cast of engaging characters, once you are able to engage with the story, assuming the content is not too much for the viewer to bear. Animation fans owe it to themselves to see a more minimalist approach to animated film. Everyone else, if you like darkly comedic crime thrillers, then you’ll love this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 77% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 77 One Movie Punch: 8.5/10 HAVE A NICE DAY (2017) is not rated and is currently playing on Shudder and Kanopy.

Hi everyone! It’s Friday, so it’s time for another Fantastic Fest feature from Andrew Campbell. This week we’re getting a Shudder exclusive, so if you’ve ever been thinking about taking the plunge into this genre-driven service, now is the time! It’s the only place you’ll find independent darlings like PREVENGE, REVENGE, MANDY, and podcast favorite, ONE CUT OF THE DEAD (Episode #625). Don’t miss Andrew’s other recent reviews for SCHOOL’S OUT (Episode #716), COME TO DADDY (Episode #709), and THE LODGE (Episode #702). Before the review, we’ll have a brand-new promo from our good friends at The VHS Strikes Back podcast. Every week, Dave and Chris blow the dust off an actual VHS cassette, then watch and discuss the film. You can find out more on Twitter @vhsstrikesback or on Facebook and Instagram by searching for The VHS Strikes Back podcast. Don’t miss their two guest episodes during last year’s Reign of Terror 2019, with reviews for ALIEN VS PREDATOR (Episode #605) and 30 DAYS OF NIGHT (Episode #626). And don’t miss their recent guest review as Comics in Motion for BIRDS OF PREY (Episode #720)! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello film fans! Andrew here, back today with a psychedelic horror film that cribs from the book of MANDY. As amazing as Fantastic Fest is at stretching genre boundaries and traveling far outside the US border to capture films the world over, each year there tend to be a few films that overlap in a six-degrees-of-separation sort of way. Last year, it was actor James Badge Dale appearing in three films: DONNYBROOK, THE STANDOFF AT SPARROW CREEK (Episode #537), and HOLD THE DARK (Episode #272). This year there were two films with direct connections to today’s entry. Supporting actor Jeremy Gardner appears in this one, but he also brought to the festival his low-budget romantic monster movie AFTER MIDNIGHT, which I’ll be covering in a couple weeks. Joe Begos, however, pulled off a rarer feat, directing both today’s film as well as VFW wherein a band of veterans defend their VFW lodge from “an army of mutant punks”. So without further ado... Today’s movie is BLISS(2019), the newest heavy metal nightmare from indie horror writer/director Joe Begos. BLISS stars Dora Madison as Dezzy, a starving artist in the underground Los Angeles art scene. Dezzy hits a particularly nasty creative block, struggling for weeks to complete her new painting. With her agent and her landlord breathing down her neck, Dezzy turns to drugs for a little inspiration. A potent mixture of cocaine and the hallucinogenic DMT leads to an out of control night of partying along with some dark visions that spark her creativity. Finally making progress on her self-proclaimed masterpiece, Dezzy continues her drug-fueled bender. Unfortunately for the people around her, violent side effects begin to take hold. For a film that clocks in well short of 90 minutes, BLISS starts out a bit slow. The storyline necessitates this and I appreciate the fact that the film takes its time to introduce you to the main character in all her abrasive glory before her life starts to unravel. BLISS is told over the period of just a few days as Dezzy turns to partying in order to take her mind off the looming deadline to deliver a half-finished painting on an oversized canvas. She has the background complete and it’s obviously going to be a very dark piece even before she begins fueling herself with drugs and alcohol. It would have been helpful (but maybe not in the film’s budget) to show off a few more of her completed works to help establish the character. Dezzy likes to party, but she mostly likes to fight and argue with friends, employers, strangers, whoever gets in her way. The audience is given a sense of her character, but I don’t think director Begos intended to engender much sympathy for her situation. If you can survive the poor acting and rough dialogue for the first half-an-hour, Dora Madison goes on to deliver a solid performance as the film careens in a violent direction. When Dezzy gets a hold of her new favorite drug cocktail, she becomes borderline vampiric and it's hard to look away. As with any out-of-control substance-abuser, the hangovers are the worst and watching Dezzy try to piece together her actions from the night before is just as much fun as watching her wreak havoc. Once you get a handle on the story, there really isn’t much in the way of twists and turns. The film really does get more entertaining as it trucks along, but the plot is razor-thin. What makes BLISS fantastic?The thing you have to admire about a film like BLISS is that it knows exactly what it wants to be. The film is clearly a labor of love created by a rock-n-roll writer/director who looks the part. With a limited budget, Begos is able to use some creative camera angles and dark red ambient lighting along with a blasting soundtrack and tons of quick cuts to make several violent scenes really crackle. This one was not for me, but I see what he’s going for and I respect the hustle. Based on the 90%-plus Rotten Tomatoes score from critics and the 69% audience score, BLISS is clearly being enjoyed by the hardcore horror fans and critics for whom it was intended. BLISS is rough-around-the-edges blood-and-guts B-movie horror in an economical 80-minute package. Fans of films such as MANDY, UNDER THE SKIN, or LORDS OF CHAOS (Episode #551) will enjoy this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 92% Metacritic: 53 One Movie Punch: 6.2/10 BLISS (2019) is not rated and is now streaming on Shudder. Come back on Monday, where I will be pinch-hitting with a movie just a bit more kid-friendly than today’s film. Disney’s THE CALL OF THE WILD is the first theatrically-released adaptation of the hundred-year-old Jack London story since the Charleston Heston version in 1972. Whether you’re seeing it this weekend or holding out for some word-of-mouth, I’ll have full rundown on this classic tale of an aging Han Solo and his CGI pup. See you then!

Hi everyone! Today, we’re welcoming back Christina Eldridge, aka Durara Reviews, with her take on another domestic GKIDS distribution, their first of 2020, entitled RIDE YOUR WAVE. As always, Christina will give you her thoughts on the film, but be sure to check out her recent reviews for KLAUS (Episode #708) and her first review at One Movie Punch for another GKIDS distribution, WEATHERING WITH YOU (Episode #687). Both films are well worth checking out. Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friend Rory Mitchell, from the Mitchell Report Unleashed podcast. They were gracious enough to have yours truly on as a guest recently, which you can check out in Mitchell Report Unleashed Episode #173. You can follow Rory on Twitter @officallyrory, on Facebook @mitchellreportunleashed, and on Instagram @re3684. You can also subscribe to the podcast at anchor.fm/rory-mitchell8. Don’t miss a single episode of his insightful interview-driven show. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello, everyone! This is Christina Eldridge with Durara Reviews (a part of One Movie Punch). Since my last review of KLAUS, I’ve been trying to get my name out there via social media. So if you’re not following me @Durarareview, or @OneMoviePunch, go do it! I promise to continue to bring you the latest and greatest of anime movies the day they release! Today’s movie review is RIDE YOUR WAVE (2019), or by its original Japanese title, KIMI TO, NAMI NI NORETARA. Masaaki Yuasa directed this effortless romantic drama, produced by Science Saru Inc. and is distributed to the United States by GKIDS. RIDE YOUR WAVE is about a carefree college student and a hardworking fire fighter trainee who fall in love under simple circumstances that lead to complex situations, and what it really means to RIDE YOUR WAVE. This review is spoiler free. Hinako Mukaimizu (Rina Kawaei) moved to a seaside town to attend college, or so she told her parents. Her real motive is to be able to live as close to the water in order surf to her heart’s content. Her style is admired by Minato Hinageshi (Ryota Katayose), who watches her surfing from the fire station rooftop. A chance fire at her apartment building finally brings them together. The pair start to date seriously while she tries to teach him how to surf. After some time, Minato offers to move in with Hinako. As the two are preparing to launch their lives forward, disaster strikes, leaving Hinako alone and left to ride her own wave. Anyone familiar with Yuasa-san’s work may be a bit surprised as to how plain this movie is. His projects usually infringe on the weird and avant-garde. The DEVILMAN CRYBABY (2018) series was a visual orgy of gore that involved the ultimate battle of good and evil. THE TATAMI GALAXY (2010) series centers around parallel universes that make the viewer feel like they’re the one who’s traveling dimensions. A simple romantic story involving grief and the difficult process of moving on seems a bit off kilter for a fan of Yuasa-san. The art style and frequent point of view scenes do make it his own so fans won’t feel completely alienated. The film was released in 299 theaters in Japan on June 21stof 2019. Despite high publicity efforts, it debuted at 9thplace at the box office, bringing in a disappointing 80 million yen. Compare this figure to the ALADDIN (2019) movie that hit number one the same weekend, bringing in 5.51 billion yen. Yuasa-san’s previous release, LU OVER THE WALL (2017), also didn’t debut hot but it won a Cristal for Best Feature Film in 2017 and an Ofuji Noburo Award in 2018 so RIDE YOUR WAVE isn’t in the can just yet! RIDE YOUR WAVE is about perseverance through grief and learning how to let go. Hinako’s journey from lost college student to grieving girlfriend to an empowered, contributing member of society is a progression of pure delight. If you decide to watch this one, make sure to bring some tissues. Rotten Tomatoes: 82% Metacritic: NR One Movie Punch: 8.0/10 Baby Turtles RIDE YOUR WAVE (2019) is not rated and will be played in select theaters. Minasan, domo arigatou! Be on the lookout for my next review of the Wuxia action packed film SHADOW (YING) (2018) next month. Until next time!

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another Indie Wednesday review. Before we get started with today’s review, I want to shout out Yolandi Franken for passing along today’s film for consideration. She was also instrumental in passing along last year’s TABERNACLE 101 (Episode #619) and helping to line up an interview with writer/director and microbudget instructor Colm O’Murchu. She’s quickly becoming my gateway into low-budget Australian cinema, especially after connecting me with writer/director Igor Breakenback for today’s review. Thanks, Yolandi! We’ll have a bit of a format switch for today’s episode. Rather than interspersing trailer segments, I’ll be running the full trailer audio up front. Throughout the review, I’ll instead be adding segments from my interview with Igor Breakenback. Be sure to catch the whole interview this coming Sunday on our Patreon page at patreon.com/onemoviepunch, where you can also sign up to be a contributor at any level. The interview will be publicly available for a limited time before heading behind the pay wall. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is TURBINES(2019), the psychological thriller written and directed by Igor Breakenback and Shane Borza. The film follows Attila (Igor Breakenback) and his new wife Jana (Bianca Bradey), after moving to rural Australia to work near a wind farm as part of a government program, complete with stress and anxiety for their new child. After five years, however, something snaps, and people begin dying throughout the region. No spoilers. Low-budget films tend to center around a number of specific genres, usually exploiting tantalizing content as a means of distracting the viewer from the rougher parts of the production process. That’s why if you cruise the endless digital shelves of Amazon Prime, or the growing shelves of low-budget cinema at services like Tubi, you’ll see an overwhelming avalanche of horror films, and a modest showing of comedies and thrillers full of softcore sexual content. The advances in special effects over the last few years have added all sorts of science fiction and action films as well, for better or worse. Usually, shocking scenes with a lot of filler content with all the dialogue composition of classic pornographic films. The reason, of course, is money. Unless you are working on a passion project, most filmmakers are looking for a return on their investment, or at least to cover the production costs, either at the box office, or through distribution deals. Until about five years ago, renting a camera team to shoot a film was a very expensive proposition, and purchasing high quality cameras even more expensive. And until about ten years ago, editing and splicing film together was even more difficult before the major shift to digital processing. But now that costs are coming down, that means more filmmakers are trying their hand using much cheaper, higher quality technology. And they are also trying to move beyond the old formats that sell. IGOR: “I think the tricky part today is that trying to make a film that doesn’t instantly give you those quick cuts in the action and try to keep you on the edge of your seat, is very well overlooked by today’s audience, because they are so used to quick cuts. They are so used to the stories constantly changing. A lot of them won’t sit, necessarily, through a slow burning type of film, that kind of builds the story over a certain period of time. But I was really interested in that, because it is really is a slice of life, and that’s kind of how life happens. Trying to give film a very realistic output, I think it’s very tricky today, and doesn’t appeal to everybody.” TURBINES is a film told in two parts. The first act really takes its time to establish the characters of Attila and Yana, along with Attila’s work supervisor, and the community they live within. If you’re expecting the killing to begin right away, you are definitely going to be disappointed, despite a flash forward cold open. All this introduction is peppered with a few classic scenes of foreshadowing, particularly the perceived effect of the wind turbines, along with the stress and exhaustion of a newborn, creating a sense of madness within Attila. It’s a decent setup for the second half, but it’s not going to appeal to all thriller fans, and Igor found that out in the reviews. IGOR: “We either have people who love it, or people that hate it. The people that love it, they enjoyed that part. They enjoyed the slow build before suddenly this film turns. And the people that hated it, that’s exactly the part that they hate. They thinking it’s a little too slow in the beginning, and not to wait until the very end to see how the film changes and gets into those darker parts. For me, it was important to work the drama side of things, and I said I always wanted to have a balance in our filmmaking, especially for me from an acting point of view, I always like to have a balance, where the drama doesn’t overtake the action, or vice versa. It’s tricky to try and balance that in the script, and then obviously in the acting and the action part, and then in the delivery of the final product of the film. But I think the challenge is what makes it so interesting.” The second act begins after a five-year jump in the narrative, which allows us not only to imagine the long-term effects on Attila of working near the wind farm, but also allows time for his son to grow up. Folks begin to steadily die, and we’re not really sure what Attila’s full part is in it, at least at first. This second half is like a slasher film on fast forward, as more and more people die, all the way until we loop back around to the opening scene. We also get to see something I like to call the Hammer Cam, which is like a Go Pro attached to the business end of the hammer. IGOR: “With TURBINES, it was the same. The question was... I mean, horror has been done. Psychological thrillers have been done. How can we do something once people see, they’ll say, ‘Okay, I’ll remember that. If I don’t remember anything else, I’ll remember that.’ And killing someone on screen is an art. Regardless if it’s a horror film or an action film. And then going back to smaller budgets, how can I do something that’s practical effects. Because today, when somebody gets hit, it’s a lot of CGI, there’s a lot of special effects, there’s a lot of camera work involved. The question was how can I do something that’s going to be memorable, but done in a way where it’s still a practical gag and looks real. So, we’re not using... that actor is behind the hammer. Yes, we’re using a little bit of makeup, but that’s about it. And then the question was, how can we cut it in a way that even if it’s just a few seconds, it will stick with you.” It’s really roughly done, given the budget, but it does make you stop and take notice, very similar to the way the unique camera work in 2018’s UPGRADE (Episode #155) elevated that horror thriller to something else. A hammer hit is vicious enough, but seeing it from the business end is something else entirely. In fact, despite the slow opening, the back end is packed with excellent, wince-inducing action, much more in Igor’s comfort zone of stunt work and fight choreography, which makes up for the somewhat weaker first half. That’s probably my biggest criticism of TURBINES – how uneven the film ends up playing between the first and second half. The film definitely has a balance between the drama and horror, but it doesn’t blend the two very well together in terms of keeping a consistent feel to the film. The easy way out would have been to make it a straight-ahead slasher thriller, but despite this uneven feel, I still appreciate Breakenback going for the full dramatic experience over something way more derivative. TURBINES also suffers from its production cost and the amount of time it took to deliver the film. Overall, Igor ended up spending around $200,000 over seven years time to finish up the film, doing the initial photography in about three weeks time over two months, while in the midst of other projects. Igor is a very busy guy, not only making his own films, but working on other films, as an actor and a stuntman, running an MMA gym to train combat athletes, and is even a partner in Sydney’s first cat café. But it wasn’t any of that that kept him away from getting TURBINES done quickly. TURBINES would languish for years while Igor worked on a more important project. IGOR: “The reason was that I had kids, so I had my first born. What happened then, the first few years I just couldn’t get down to finish the film. And whoever has had kids, they would know. And since my wife and I live on our own here in Sydney. We didn’t have family here, so we had nobody to help us out, so we always had to be with our first born. And then later, I had my second born, and then so I had two kids, and then postponed it basically again. So, just before my second one turns two years, I just felt like I was in a spot where I can now take six months again off.” I remember well myself having to put down my own projects when my daughter was born, having to make hard choices about the time I had for the time she required. Losing momentum is tough in the independent film world, not just because of time, but because everything costs more to put away and start back up. Igor’s team would do some pickups, even incorporating his first born into the film, but it takes a longer time than you think, especially when someone else is tugging at your pant leg. Here’s another choice I fully agree with that Igor made. TURBINES is a psychological thriller divided into two distinct halves: an initial dramatic act, followed by a much faster final act. While the premise may seem like just another low-budget slasher, the execution is something more, even while hamstrung by its production budget. Low-budget fans, especially low-budget thriller fans, and anyone interested in the Hammer Cam, should definitely check out this film, but expect a slow burn at the beginning. Rotten Tomatoes: NR Metacritic: NR One Movie Punch: 5.2/10 TURBINES (2019) is not rated and is currently available on VOD. Please consider renting or purchasing the film to support independent cinema. But if you do stream it, consider giving back at breakenback.com using their donation button.

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another Takeover Tuesday. You know, when I saw today’s movie was coming up, I knew I had to call in the big guns for this review. And when they weren’t available, I called up Dave and Chris at the Comics in Motion Podcast, because they are gluttons for punishment, but also have a lot of insightful things to say about comics books on the big and small screens. Today’s review will be covering the DCEU’s latest installment, HARLEY QUINN: BIRDS OF PREY, but don’t miss their previous reviews for ALIEN VS. PREDATOR (Episode #605) and for 30 DAYS OF NIGHT (Episode #626), both of which were for Reign of Terror 2019. Their promo will run before the review. Speaking of Takeover Tuesday, do you think you have what it takes to guest on One Movie Punch? Head over to onemoviepunch.com/takeover-tuesday and learn more about how you can guest here at One Movie Punch. We still have three (3) slots available this quarter for aspiring and established film critics to take the reins for an episode. We’ll run your promo before the review and will place it in regular rotation for the quarter. If it sounds like something interesting to you, reach out to us over social media. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello and welcome! I’m Chris Phelps, and I’m Dave Horrocks. And we are Comics In Motion. What we like to do is to review exclusively movies and TV shows that are based on comic books. We of course review the well-known and recognizable properties with plenty of spandex, but also some of the less well known that have made that transition from the page to the big and small screens. Today’s movie is the recently renamed HARLEY QUINN: BIRDS OF PREY. This is the eighth installment of the DC Movie Universe and is directed by Cathy Yan and written by Christina Hodson. Though Harley herself was created by Paul Dini and Bruce Timm and made her debut in the 90’s Batman Animated Series before appearing in comics. And the first Birds of Prey team also made their debut in the 1990’s and was created by Chuck Dixon and Jordan B. Gorfinkel. We pick up the story sometime after the events of the 2016 SUICIDE SQUAD and after a less than mutual break-up for Gotham city’s most toxic couple, Harley Quinn finds herself a target for a long list of people with various grievances against her over the years. At the front of the queue is nefarious villain Roman Sionis and his right-hand muscle, Victor Zsasz. Harley has an uneasy alliance with the gangster and agrees to search for the young Cassandra Cain and on her journey, has an unlikely super-hero team up. This review will be spoiler free. Warner Brothers more recent focus has been on producing good quality stand-alone movies for their DC properties, like AQUAMAN (Episode #366), SHAZAM! (Episode #455), and the recent Oscar winner, JOKER (Episode #630). And expectations were high they could continue this recent streak of good form. The movie flaunts its R-rating with some grisly early scenes and there are a number of impressive action sequences, often accompanied with an explosion of color bursting out of the screen to really give that comic book feel. The change from the original title BIRDS OF PREY (AND THE FANTABULOUS EMANCIPATION OF ONE HARLEY QUINN) to simply HARLEY QUINN: BIRDS OF PREY reflects the movie’s star and the captivating performance of Margot Robbie who commands your attention whenever she’s on screen and is the undoubted star of this show. Robbie’s charismatic performance can be a double-edged sword as it leaves some of her co-stars without enough character growth or even screen time for a movie which runs for almost 110 minutes. Ewan MacGregor does an adequate job as the main villain and there are some tense scenes which are really quite uncomfortable to watch. But to really invest in our heroes, we need an A-class antagonist and unfortunately, he falls just short. The tone of the movie can range from hyper-violence, to solidify its R-rating, to more PG fight scenes which wouldn’t look out of place in the 1997 Joel Schumacher directed BATMAN & ROBIN. Margot Robbie has made this character her own on the big screen and her star quality is unquestionable. The R-rating does limit the audience, possibly unnecessarily, as a team of kick ass, strong women would appeal to many younger fans. HARLEY QUINN: BIRDS OF PREY is a colorful comic book spectacle with Margot Robbie’s Harley Quinn, definitely front and center. The dynamic action scenes and cinematography are best consumed on the big screen and so we recommend you make sure you go catch this one in theatres while you can! Rotten Tomatoes: 79% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 60 (METACRITIC MUST SEE) One Movie Punch: 7.0/10 HARLEY QUINN: BIRDS OF PREY (2020) is rated R and is available in theaters now.

Hi everyone! You know, when I first met Ryan, when he arrived at the One Movie Punch Secret Island Base, he told me one of his biggest fantasies was to review a film on One Movie Punch for Matinee Monday. So, without him knowing, I actually sold the island to Blumhouse Productions last year, with the stipulation that he would be allowed to review the movie. They looked at me like I was an idiot, but I think we’ll all see in a moment who got the better end of the deal. Especially when they found out I bought that island from J.J. Abrams after “Lost” ended. Was BLUMHOUSE’S FANTASY ISLAND everything Ryan hoped it would be? You’ll find out in a moment! Don’t miss Ryan’s recent reviews for WHERE’D YOU GO, BERNADETTE? (Episode #684), JUDY (Episode #677), and THE GOOD LIAR (Episode #662). You’ll also find out more about Ryan when his promo runs before the review. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is BLUMHOUSE’S FANTASY ISLAND(2020). The big screen adaptation of the classic TV show with a horror twist. FANTASY ISLAND stars “Pretty Little Liar”’s Lucy Hale, also starring Maggie Q, Michael Peña, Parisa Fitz-Henley, and Michael Rooker. Directed and co-written by Jeff Wadlow, also Jillian Jacobs and Christopher Roach. The IMDb plot summary is, “The enigmatic Mr. Roarke makes the secret dreams of his lucky guests come true at a luxurious but remote tropical resort. But when the fantasies turn into nightmares, the guests have to solve the island's mystery in order to escape with their lives.” When I saw the first trailer for BLUMHOUSE’S FANTASY ISLAND, I was totally sold! Taking the classic TV show and putting a horror spin on it? Yes please! From the first scene of a young lady running through the woods to the arrival of the guests, the movie displays some promise of a thrilling excursion. Knowing that the resort guests have been warned that each must see their respective fantasy to its natural conclusion makes for a sense of creepiness that I wish had been at the bedrock of the movie. There is a sort of “Twilight Zone” feeling in the setup of the movie that was clearly supposed to drive a subtext of various themes and social commentary. It even creates a fantastic atmosphere for the story that is about to unfold. But unfortunately, that overwhelming sense of ominous dread quickly gives way to on-the-nose, predictable tropes, and paint-by-the-numbers plotting. While I wasn’t expecting FANTASY ISLANDto be on the levels of GET OUT or HALLOWEEN, I hardly thought that it would be what we got, which was on the level of TRUTH OR DARE, also written and directed by Wadlow. Blumhouse has a few hits, but quite a lot of flops. Consistency in quality is certainly lacking in the horror-centric production company. Often the movies that eventually flop start out with strong premises, and intriguing initial setup, but the second and third acts devolve into outrageously bad conflict, often ignoring any rules that were setup, and even simply logic. And the showdown is predictable and anti-climactic. Little room for subtext is left. I mean how can there be when everything is so on-the-nose. Of course, we all knew that the maxim “be careful what you wish for” would be the central theme in the movie, but I was hoping for a challenging original expression of that idea. Not the story we got, which was incredibly trite and derivative. It doesn’t get any more PG-13 than this. This movie doesn’t even try to push the boundaries of a PG-13 rating. It sits comfortably in the middle, if not skewing towards PG. While there is some violence and mildly disturbing imagery, it is pretty tame as horror movies go. Very SyFy Channel original movie. Blumhouse’s interpretation of FANTASY ISLAND, as a horror movie, actually has many of the individual elements needed to craft a thrilling and even terrifying story. But it’s like all the writers did was have disconnected ideas and never thought of how to structure them in a way that scenes are connected by not only cause and effect, but by character reaction and emotion. A properly written scene has a beginning, middle, and end, in and of itself. And that scene sets up the beginning of the following scene. There is simply no meaning behind anything that happens in this movie. Releasing a horror movie on Valentine’s Day isn’t anything new. 1933’s DRACULAand the Big 5 Oscar winner THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBSwere both released during Valentine’s season. And who could forget the quintessential Valentine’s horror movie 1981’s MY BLOODY VALENTINE. Unfortunately, this movie shares little in common with the storytelling of any of the aforementioned. Virtually everything after the setup is absurd and laughable. Rotten Tomatoes: 9% Metacritic: 20 One Movie Punch: 4.0/10 JOSEPH: “And let’s see what Ryan rated his trip to FANTASY ISLAND. Four out of ten? Yikes.” Planes to BLUMHOUSE’S FANTASY ISLAND are now boarding at a theatre near you. But I am sure, not for long after a slew of one-star Yelp reviews. JOSEPH: “Really glad I sold that island, now. Probably should have told them about the number sequences they needed to keep entering. Oh well. Too late now.”

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another week of reviews! This week, we have so much in store for everyone! I’ll get to today’s exciting Sponsor Sunday review in a bit, but that’s just one of seven amazing reviews for you this week. Tomorrow, Ryan L. Terry returns for Matinee Monday with a review for the comedy horror reboot, BLUMHOUSE’S FANTASY ISLAND. Tuesday, the Comics in Motion Podcast return to cover the DCEU’s latest entry, BIRDS OF PREY. On Wednesday, I’ll be reviewing the low-budget, independent thriller TURBINES, featuring interview segments from writer/director Igor Breakenback. On Thursday, Christina Eldridge returns with her review of the latest GKIDS distribution, RIDE YOUR WAVE. On Friday, Andrew Campbell returns with his review of Shudder Exclusive BLISS. And I round out the week with a Chinese animated film called HAVE A NICE DAY, as part of our Under the Kanopy series. But today is Sunday, and more importantly, Sponsor Sunday, thanks to the monthly contribution by Ken at the Ocho Duro Parlay Hour. Sponsor Sunday is one of the benefits you receive when you sign up as a sponsor at patreon.com/onemoviepunch, where you get to force me to review a film of your choice, as long as we haven’t reviewed it yet, with just a few exceptions. Honestly, I’m really starting to wonder if people don’t realize what forcing actually means, because you do NOT have to force me to watch 2008’s THE DARK KNIGHT, easily one of my favorite films with one of my favorite performances. I also have a fun story about catching the midnight showing, and the power of avoiding trailers. But that’s not all! Over at patreon.com/onemoviepunch, we just posted our next installment in “One Movie Punch Presents: Zero Percent”, where I review films which have acquired the lowest possible rating at Rotten Tomatoes. This installment we look at 10 MINUTES GONE (2019), a crime thriller that didn’t fare well with the critics at all. The review is available publicly for a limited time, but you can maintain access by contributing to One Movie Punch at any level. And then you can participate in Sponsor Sundays. Also, check back next week for our full interview with Igor Breakenback for his most recent feature film, TURBINES (2019). Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// > ///// Today’s movie is THE DARK KNIGHT(2008), the landmark comic book film directed by Christopher Nolan and written for the screen in collaboration with Jonathan Nolan, based on a story by Christopher Nolan and David S. Goyer, based on the characters by Bob Kane, Bill Finger, and Jerry Robinson. In the wake of BATMAN BEGINS, Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) has escalated his campaign as The Batman against the criminal underworld of Gotham, while a new District Attorney named Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart) is putting mobsters behind bars in the courts. But when a mysterious new criminal shows up, inspired by the actions of The Batman, he begins to change Gotham for the worse, one terrorist act at a time. Oh, we’re definitely spoiling things. I mean, how have you NOT seen this film? I love the midnight showing. It used to be that the midnight showing was for the limited run independent feature, or the classic throwback picture, usually with a raucous, slightly intoxicated crowd. Eventually, the distributors and theaters got wise to this social phenomenon and started offering midnight premieres for blockbusters. My first taste of this STAR WARS: EPISODE I – THE PHANTOM MENACE, in 1999, which could have had a better theater and a better movie, but I loved it. It wasn’t until I moved to Denver, and was working in Los Angeles, that I saw more of the independent fare. Two years of midnight showings, whenever practical, and back then, I had all the energy in the world. And then a kid showed up and I spent more time as a parent and settling into a new job. It was the beginning of my second major movie drought, where I mostly watched films on DVD, and before online streaming was really a thing. I sure as hell missed BATMAN BEGINS in the theaters, with a one year old, a busy job, and frankly, not enough desire to see what the guy who did MEMENTO might do with Batman. I mean, I saw INSOMNIA, and it wasn’t as mind-blowing. What could Nolan possibly do? And a bunch of other things I told myself, because what I really wanted to do was get out of the house. The folks who saw it seemed to like it, though, and I just missed making it to the theater before the longer wait for DVD. My life got a little easier a few years later, though, and I went back to watch BATMAN BEGINS via rental before organizing a bunch of friends for a midnight showing at our local IMAX theater for THE DARK KNIGHT. We went out for drinks, then made our way to the theater, and settled in for what I hoped would be at least as good as BATMAN BEGINS. And I walked out of the film at the end completely and quite literally speechless. If you haven’t been able to tell on this podcast, I generally have a lot to say. So, to leave a theater speechless, born out of complete admiration, means something phenomenal has happened. The last time this happened to me was the first time I walked out of JURASSIC PARK, completely in love with the film, and returning to see it in the theater about eight times, most of which were packed weekend dollar showings. I wouldn’t have the luxury of doing that for THE DARK KNIGHT, no matter how much I wanted to, but I did sneak back a second time for the details I missed picking my jaw up off the floor. I spent a full week processing how great it was, and not being able to communicate how great it was to anyone. It wasn’t just that I was afraid of giving away spoilers. I didn’t have the critical vocabulary to describe what I had just seen, nor did anyone I know understand Batman the way comic book nerds did. Geek culture hadn’t quite hit its crescendo in 2008, so when most people thought about Batman, they thought about four properties: the original Batman television show; the original, fragmented, and flawed film franchise; “Batman: The Animated Series” and its successors; and the aforementioned BATMAN BEGINS. Most people who were Batman fans didn’t even read the comic books, or not as obsessively as I did. My uncle would feed me trade paperback at birthdays and holidays, including “Batman: The Killing Joke” and “The Dark Knight Returns” and a host of others. I picked up a few series, even, before I had to ship off to college. I knew I didn’t want a Nicholson repeat, or a cartoon Joker. I wanted the real deal, from the comics I loved, and I was convinced a PG-13 rating just wasn’t going to cut it. I didn’t know how to communicate that to anyone. And luckily, I wouldn’t have to, because the Nolan Brothers would do just that. If there’s one thing I admired with BATMAN BEGINS, it’s that they didn’t lead with the Joker, but made it that exciting teaser bit at the end. As mentioned in my review for JOKER (Episode #630), Joker wasn’t really intended to have an origin story, at least not Jerry Robinson’s version. Joker just explodes on the scene as a full-blown psychopath before the Comics Code took the sting out of him. The Nolan Brothers take the same approach to Joker, swooping in to thrive on the chaos created by Batman’s campaign against organized crime. The opening sequence gives us a taste of what Joker has in store for Gotham thematically, setting his fellow bank robbers against each other with their greed, and revealing his motivations are not guided by money or even power. It also gives us an idea of how this war will be waged, with very real modern weapons and none of the circuses, clowns, or playing cards of the previous renditions, aside from the wry masks they are all wearing. Most importantly, it brings the story back down to the street level, where Batman flourishes best. Let’s face it, when the Justice League gets together to square off against the world-destroying entities that threaten the planet, you kind of wonder why Batman and Green Arrow are even on the team compared to the rest of the superheroes. I mean, aside from their multi-billion dollar fortunes depending on the timeline and incarnation. I always think Batman looks a little stupid against those massive threats, which is part of the reason BATMAN V SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE never really sat well with me, despite pulling heavily from “The Dark Knight Returns”. Opening with a bank heist and keeping the scope of each target or objective relatively narrow throughout THE DARK KNIGHT only enhances the believability, and with that firm base in realism, we get to go on the ride of a lifetime. Clearly the major star of this picture was Heath Ledger as Joker, for which he won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor posthumously, but not undeservedly. Ledger made his own Joker, taking the thematic influences for the script, and developing a character that I still cannot believe was played by the same guy who was William Thatcher in A KNIGHT’S TALE. His speech and mannerisms and entire performance combines with the incredible costuming and make-up to make a perfect character, which the Nolan Brothers then take him through a genius script. I actually argued at the time that he should have been put up for Best Lead Actor, but that was probably my heart talking more than my head. Little did I know that would come later for Joaquin Phoenix. The rest of the cast is also great, building off the genius casting for BATMAN BEGINS, with the obvious and unavoidable anomaly of Maggie Gyllenhaal taking over Rachel Dawes, after Katie Holmes declined to return. With the exception of a few lines where Bale can’t breathe through the mask, nearly everything is perfect. I’m not sure how many times I’ve seen this film. I must have watched it at least ten times when I got the DVD, and then our family went through the whole trilogy one summer with our daughter. But each time I watch it, I see different things. This time around, I was struck by how each scene reflected the main character, with stark, empty spaces for Bruce Wayne/Batman; crowded, chaotic places for Joker; and destroyed places when we too briefly get to see Aaron Eckhart’s Two-Face. I also loved the humor, which poked fun at BATMAN BEGINS in some funny ways, along with the property as a whole. I laughed out loud when Alfred realizes he’ll end up being an accomplice, and Bruce quips he planned to say the whole thing was Alfred’s idea. For me, the mark of a truly great film is one that you can watch over and over again and continue to discover new things. Christopher Nolan has spent a lifetime building a filmography of truly great films. THE DARK KNIGHT is such a great second act film that I wish we would have had a few more films before ending on THE DARK KNIGHT RISES. A Nolan Riddler, or a Nolan Poison Ivy all have a lot of potential. But I wouldn’t trade any of Nolan’s recent work for those films. And I suspect that would have been the price for such fantasies, aside from the coming comic book film avalanche. I will continue to re-watch this film and will continue to find new things about it that I like, as all great art does. I came to understand film better because of THE DARK KNIGHT, and this past viewing has shown me that I still have things to learn. THE DARK KNIGHT is probably the greatest comic book movie ever made, a near perfect adaptation of source material for the modern era, proving comic book movies could be something truly profound. The Nolan Brothers would return for an excellent second act film, building off their work on BATMAN BEGINS, and providing a backdrop for one of the greatest performances of all time. I would recommend this film to everyone, as many times as possible. Rotten Tomatoes: 94% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 84 (MUST SEE) One Movie Punch: 10/10 THE DARK KNIGHT (2008) is rated PG-13 and is currently playing on Netflix and Roku.

Hi everyone! We’re closing out the week with another entry in our series, Under the Kanopy. Kanopy is a library and university funded streaming service that grants card holders six free streams a month, featuring a combination of classic, mainstream, independent, and international films. They currently have streaming deals with some of our favorite distributors, like A24 and Kino Lorber, which offer the critically acclaimed, if not commercially successful films. Today’s film deals with grief in unexpectedly funny ways, while also exploring some of the weirder relationships between faith and science. My review of TO DUST will be up in a minute. Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friends Aicila and Erik at Bicurean. Every episode, they explore a different topic, looking for the underlying issues, and finding common ground whenever possible. You can find them on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram @bicurean, or check them out at bicurean.com. Be sure to like, follow, rate, and subscribe! They’ve been huge supporters of One Movie Punch over the past year, and we cannot recommend them enough! A promo will run before the review. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is TO DUST(2018), the melancholic dramedy directed by Shawn Snyder and written for the screen in collaboration with Jason Begue. In Upstate New York, a Hasidic cantor named Shmuel (Géza Röhrig), has lost his wife, leaving him alone with his kids Naftali (Sammy Volt) and Noam (Leo Heller). Struggling to make sense of his situation, he seeks out a community college professor named Albert (Matthew Broderick), who finds himself helping Shmuel with a bizarre experiment in an effort to help Shmuel process his grief. No spoilers. Earlier this week, I reviewed BREAKTHROUGH (Episode #712), which was a film targeted towards evangelical Christians and with a particular evangelical mission, as told through a boy almost drowning. One of the insights I had in writing that review is that the very elements that appeal to evangelical Christian film’s core audience, which is to say other evangelical Christians, are the very elements that often turn away the non-evangelical audience. Everything is generally very certain in the storytelling. There are no gray areas. And there is only darkness if there is also redemption. It generally feels ham-handed and a little overtly judgmental of undesirable viewpoints or conflicting ideas. There’s a specific worldview, generally a Creationist one, and one that can be manipulated through faith and miracles. And if you don’t buy into that, it’s hard to accept the rest of the story. By contrast, films about the Jewish community always seem more integrated into the world as it is. Perhaps that comes from a long history of being a diasporic community, learning to live among other cultures, sometimes peacefully, sometimes under devastating oppression going back to the Middle Ages, and sometimes now as the oppressor as seen in the Middle East. The viewer is generally asked to accept the world as it is, or as we have come to know it scientifically and socially, and the story is told against that backdrop. I’ve also found a lack of certitude in the storytelling, one that doesn’t seek to provide answers as to ask questions. Of course, this is in addition to exploring themes common to most spiritual practices, like faith and reason, life and death, love and loss, and our place in the larger community. We’re not sure if we’re getting miracles, or even answers, and that’s where we find Shmuel, right in the opening scene as he’s saying goodbye to his wife. Shmuel is part of the ultra-Orthodox sect of Hasidic Judaism, which arose as a revivalist movement in Western Ukraine during the 18thCentury, adopting a number of specific religious and social customs. Among the larger Jewish population, roughly 15 million worldwide, the Hasidic community is a small percentage of that population, about 130,000 households. They are also a more insulated community, generally handling matters internally, which has caused them to come under fire from accusations of domestic abuse. For more information, check out the Netflix documentary ONE OF US, which speaks to some women who have left the community, often at great expense. Or for a more transgressive criticism, check out my review for DISOBEDIENCE (Episode #248). I was actually worried this film might be another criticism of the Hasidic community, but TO DUST thankfully does not address these darker issues, and that’s definitely part of the film’s charm. The good news is that Shmuel is definitely not an abuser. He’s a cantor for his local community, a devoted father, and up until his wife’s untimely death, a loving husband. Moreover, Shmuel is played by Géza Röhrig, a Hungarian poet and actor, who is a convert to Hasidism, which allows him to understand the world both inside the community and from the outside looking in. Röhrig’s portrayal of Shmuel becomes our gateway into the Hasidic community of upstate New York, full of seemingly alien customs which Snyder highlights as part of the film, without any overt explanation or messaging. We might not understand everything happening, but we understand its meaning to Shmuel in the larger community. His awkward encounters with the larger community are often filled with playful comedy, the kind that comes from miscommunications and blissful ignorance. And most importantly, we get to see that even the ultra-religious have crises of faith, which is where the story really takes off. Like everyone, Shmuel is looking for answers, and when he is unsatisfied with the answers from his own community, he looks outside, ending up in the classroom of a science professor named Albert, who is ironically unsatisfied with his own life teaching students who obviously don’t care. Each ends up turning to the other to find meaning in their life, an obvious representation of faith and science attempting to solve the problem of Shmuel’s grief. The darkly comedic part of this film is the source of his grief. Shmuel is obsessed with knowing when his wife’s body will be fully decomposed, and Albert unwittingly finds himself conducting a series of experiments to help him understand the process, each of which gets darker and more surreal, and eventually ends in a very unexpected, extremely cathartic place. The two work well together on screen, even if the story remains focused on Shmuel when they’re not together. In addition to the great story and excellent performances, Snyder does a great job framing key scenes, finding a nice color pattern and muted filters to create a consistent picture. The film has a nice mix of stoner rock, especially when Albert’s on screen, and an excellent score by multi-instrumentalist Ariel Marx. Sets and locations are all well-chosen and well-framed. Everything really comes together in the end, for an impressive debut feature film from Shawn Snyder. I sincerely hope he has more features in store. TO DUSTis a very poignant look at faith and reason, and life and death, masquerading as a surreal buddy comedy. The film has its strengths in its story and its performances, but is also carried by great production design, a wonderful soundtrack, and an impressive score from Ariel Marx. Drama fans, especially for films about grief and the grieving process, will definitely enjoy this film, as well as anyone looking for a peek into the less controversial side of the Hasidic community. Everyone else, just know going in that it will have a lot of heady discussion at times, as the subject matter demands. Rotten Tomatoes: 88% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 66 One Movie Punch: 8.6/10 TO DUST (2018) is rated R and is currently playing on Amazon Prime, Hoopla, VUDU, and Kanopy.

Hi everyone! It’s Friday, so it’s time for another Fantastic Fest feature from Andrew Campbell. After completely missing the mark on the subject matter for last week’s COME TO DADDY (Episode #709), Andrew gave me some bullet points for the film, which he’s assured me is not a documentary about the famous end of school year anthem. So, on this Valentine’s Day, this romantic comedy concerns a group of honors students... who gather together as their teacher... oh. Oh my. Definitely letting Andrew handle this one. Don’t miss his other recent reviews for THE LODGE (Episode #702) and COLOR OUT OF SPACE (Episode #695). Yeesh! Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friends at the How I Met Your Friends podcast. Every episode, Julie and Kathleen examine one episode of each hit sitcom, exploring the hidden connections and easter eggs within each episode. Don’t miss their recent guest review for CATS (Episode #699), along with the reason they got stuck with the review. You can find them on Twitter @himyfriendspod,and on Facebook and Instagram @howimetyourfriendspod. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello film fans! Andrew here, back today with a simmering French drama that feels a bit out of step with the typical genre fare that Fantastic Fest espouses, forgivable because it’s just so darn good. The closest comparison I can draw to today’s film is Paul Verhoeven’s 2016 film ELLE which highlighted a fearless performance from Isabelle Huppert. That French drama centered around a traumatic event and followed Elle through a shifting narrative that never really let the audience anticipate where the story was headed. Today’s film has much the same vibe. Today’s movie is SCHOOL’S OUT(2018), the French thriller written by Christophe Dufossé, Elise Griffon & Sébastien Marnier, and directed by Marnier. SCHOOL’S OUT made its North American premiere at last year’s Fantastic Fest - Marnier’s sophomore directorial effort following up on 2016’s FAULTLESS, which also opened at the festival. The film stars Laurent Lafitte as Pierre Hoffman, a self-assured yet inexperienced teacher given the unenviable task of taking over a class after the death of a teacher. The school is an elite secondary institution, and this is the gifted class. Within the class exists a small group of friends, mature beyond their years, that have trouble relating to their peers within the school. When Mr. Hoffman tries to pick up where their beloved teacher left off, he encounters resistance, growing suspicious of his students as he tries to understand what makes them different. No spoilers. Well, I lied, a little spoiler, lifted directly out of the one-sentence plot summary and the very first scene of the film: their teacher didn’t die of natural causes. After politely waiting for the opening title cards to wrap up, the teacher calmly opens up the third story classroom window in the middle of a test and walks out. It’s a distressing opener that sets the tone for a tense film, staged in a way that it does not sensationalize the violence, instead capturing a genuine reaction to the shocking event. SCHOOL’S OUT is a slow-burn but stick with me. When I hear a film described that way, it’s generally a bit of turn off. I mean, I barely watched 200 films last year. I don’t have time for slow-burns; I need action! But with SCHOOL’S OUT, director Marnier has crafted a film with such intrigue that everyday moments like choir practice and teachers’ meetings feel like they contain clues to solve a mystery. Better still, the audience is never really certain exactly what mystery we’re trying to solve. The kids aren’t alright, but we don’t know why. One other thing SCHOOL’S OUT has in common with ELLE is lead actor Laurent Lafitte, who played a key role in ELLE. Laurent is a veteran French actor yet to break into the Hollywood film scene and he commands attention here. His frustrations with the cabal of brilliant teens within the gifted class begin to grow and he struggles mightily to understand them as he begins to witness increasingly unsettling behavior. Lafitte’s not-so-quiet intensity builds to a boiling point and never do the cultural differences nor subtitles get in the way of appreciating his performance. Though he does much of the heavy lifting, the young adults playing Mr. Hoffman’s students are also quite compelling. What makes SCHOOL'S OUT fantastic? As I mentioned at the top, this one really didn’t feel like a genre film would appeal to the Fantastic Fest programming team. However, upon repeat viewing, I was able to key in on some of the more subtle (and less subtle) clues that ultimately paid off in what I consider a picture perfect ending. It’s far easier to sustain an enigmatic story through the first two acts of a film than it is to bring it all together in the finale, but SCHOOL’S OUT succeeds on all fronts. SCHOOL’S OUT is DEAD POET’S SOCIETY through the nihilistic lens of FIGHT CLUB. Fans of films full of existential dread such DONNIE DARKO, MULHOLLAND DRIVE or MELANCHOLIA will enjoy this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 100% Metacritic: NR One Movie Punch: 8.2/10 SCHOOL’S OUT (2018) is not rated and is streaming now on Amazon Prime video. Come back next week for something completely different - a nightmarish descent into Hell set against a drug-fueled LA art scene. BLISS is the spiritual successor to Nic Cage’s MANDY - an 80-minute acid trip that just hit Shudder. Let’s find out if it’s worth the ride. See you then!

Hi everyone! We’re continuing our Oscar cleanup week with a review from Keith Lyons, aka Philly Film Fan, covering HONEYLAND, a nominee for Best Documentary Feature, all the way from Macedonia. He’ll be up in a minute with his thoughts, but don’t miss his recent reviews for LES MISERABLES (Episode #680), ATLANTICS (Episode #669), and I LOST MY BODY (Episode #646). I should probably get him an English-language film to watch here at some point. Before the review, we’ll have a promo from the Top 5 from Fighting podcast. Every episode, Greg and Mike discuss a wide range of topics, and when they disagree, you know they’re gonna fight about it! Always fun, but always contentious, you don’t want to miss a single episode. You can find them on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram @Top5forFighting. They have been some of our biggest supporters from last year. Shout out to their Marketing Angel. You know who you are! Oh yeah, speaking of that Marketing Angel, One Movie Spouse and I will be guesting on the Honey, You Should Watch This podcast. We’re recording this weekend, covering easily the best new to me film I saw last year, and made my family sit through twice afterwards. More on that via social media as details emerge. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hi, Philly Film Fan here with another review for One Movie Punch. You can follow me on Twitter @PhillyFilmFan. Today’s movie is HONEYLAND(2019), the film directed by Tamara Kotevska and Ljubomir Stefanov. It is an extraordinary film that has already made history by becoming the first film nominated for both Best Documentary and Best International feature at the Oscars. These are also the first two Oscar nominations ever to go to a Macedonian film. Mild spoilers ahead but this isn’t the kind of film you can ruin with spoilers. HONEYLAND introduces us to Hatidze Muratova, a woman who seems to be displaced in time. She lives less than 35 miles from the capital of Macedonia but she may as well be living in another century. She shares a small hovel with her elderly mother, Nazife, who is nearly blind. They have no electricity or running water and providing basic amenities, such as light and heat, seems like a monumental task for Hatidze. Her only source of income is the sale of wild honey, which requires her to make an arduous journey to her customers in the capital. All of this is captured by the filmmakers in beautiful shots, unencumbered by narration, which gives us the illusion that we are right there with them. Clumsy documentaries often feel like propaganda. They use narration or talking heads to make an explicit argument that the filmmaker wants to convey. But the best documentaries feel like they’re showing you the truth without trying to convince you of anything. Of course, every film has a point of view, but the great ones allow you the space to come to your own conclusions. HONEYLAND doesn’t need to make any bold statements about how short-sighted industrialization is depleting our planet of limited resources and poisoning the land to make those resources even more rare. It only needs to show us an old woman scaling a treacherous cliff to access a wild beehive and, once there, proclaiming her philosophy of “Take half, leave half.” This is how she has always survived, taking only what she needs while leaving enough for the bees to survive the winter and produce a new batch next year.  Unfortunately, Hatidze’s message of sustainability is completely lost on her new neighbor. Hussein is a father of seven and clearly struggling to provide for his family. He needs money now and sees an opportunity in honey. Hatidze warns him to only take half of the hive’s honey, leaving the other half for the bees to feed on. But Hussein is a stubborn chauvinist and he ignores the advice of a woman. His actions will end up threatening both of their livelihoods, as well as the survival of the bees. If this was a fictional film, I’d probably complain that this conflict was a too “on the nose” metaphor for industrialization and climate change. But this is just a documentary capturing a small-scale example of a much larger trend. The whole situation would feel hopeless if it wasn’t for Muzafer, Hussein’s sensitive son. He is fond of helping Hatidze and listens reverently as she imparts her wisdom. Watching his face, you can tell that he will be a different man than his father. And that is reason enough to be optimistic. HONEYLAND is a beautifully photographed documentary that tells one story about little people, but its narrative deals with universal themes. It’s a quiet film that not everyone will have the patience for, but if you’re able to sink into its rhythms, you’re in for a transcendent experience. Rotten Tomatoes: 99% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 86 (MUST SEE) One Movie Punch: 9.0/10 HONEYLAND (2019) is unrated and currently streaming on Hulu. This jawn was brought to you by Philly Film Fan. For more movie reviews, follow me on Twitter @PhillyFilmFan where I’m participating in the #366Movies challenge. That’s P-H-I-L-L-Y-F-I-L-M-F-A-N. Thanks for listening!

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another Indie Wednesday. I thought that I would receive a flood of requests for film reviews from low-budget and independent distributors after starting this segment. Granted, we’re only a few weeks into the year, but I know whenever the requests stop flooding in that Amazon Prime has my back for finding low budget films out there, as part of their Prime Video Direct agreement. You can peruse literally thousands of films, all looking for their audience. And with today’s low-budget adaptation of an H.P. Lovecraft story, I am definitely a part of the audience for today’s film. Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friends at the Moviedrone podcast. Every week, Steve & Marc focus on one feature film, assign each other homework, interact with the audience, and of course, the incredible stylings of Marc’s Movie Impressions. You can find them on Twitter and Instagram @movie_drone and on Facebook @Moviedronepod. Be sure to like, retweet, share, follow, and most importantly, subscribe! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is THE DARK SLEEP (2012), the cosmic horror film written and directed by Brett Piper, based in part on the short story “Dreams in the Witch House” by H.P. Lovecraft. After a particularly bad divorce, writer Nancy Peterson (Ashley Galloway) comes to a financial arrangement with her ex-husband Pete (Steve Diasparra). Nancy forgoes alimony in exchange for a house with a strange stipulation in the deed, which requires a strange artwork in the basement from being painted over, which also contains a gateway to a strange, maddening dream realm. No spoilers. With the rising success of COLOR OUT OF SPACE, and its spiritual ancestor MANDY, Hollywood is finally turning their attention to the immense work of H.P. Lovecraft. There are many reasons for this, but here are two very big ones. First, Lovecraft’s works are nearly all in the public domain now, despite some varied legal challenges, which means literally anyone can adapt the works for other media, or even print the original stories. Today’s film is a testament to that ability. And second, we’re finally getting to a point where the special effects on the screen are catching up with the special effects in Lovecraft’s mind. Today’s film is NOT a testament to that aspect, but it definitely swings for the fences. It’s also an adaptation of “Dreams in the Witch House”, which is a short story that bridges two distinct phases in Lovecraft’s fiction. First, it is a story firmly entrenched in the popular Cthulhu Mythos, really during the golden age of his work, playing with his bizarre melding of technology, fantasy, cosmic, and gothic horror. But second, it also hearkens back to his earlier short story work, as part of his so-called Dream Cycle works, heavily influenced by Edward Plunkett, known in the literary world as Lord Dunsany. He is one of the forgotten proto-fantasy writers, who wrote these elaborate dream stories that Lovecraft first mimicked, and then reconsidered through the darker lens of cosmic horror. And today’s film manages that... pretty well. Writer/director Brett Piper has been an unstoppable force of nature within the low-budget science-fiction world, having written and directed productions all the way back to 1982, when special effects were mostly stop-motion and practically-based. If there’s anything I admire as much as tackling this particular Lovecraft story, it’s the inclusion of the old stop-motion models in many of the dream sequences, blended roughly with more advanced green screen techniques. Compared to the multi-million dollars special effects companies of today, the effects in THE DARK SLEEP would be considered barely passable, but as I said in my review for 1984’s DUNE (episode #704), older science fiction fans are willing to forgive a lot, and Brett Piper has made a modest living because of that, despite the criminally low budgets. And if that’s a deal breaker for you, then steer very clear of his entire filmography. For the rest of us, especially fans of low-budget cinema, there’s nothing more exhilarating to watch than a writer/director swing for the stars. Granted, it does create a lot of opportunity for ridicule, as seen in more than one of his films getting lampooned by Mystery Science Theater 3000 or RiffTrax. But it also nearly always provides a lesson on filmmaking within constraints, which is endlessly fascinating to me, especially as the major equipment hurdles towards filmmaking are rapidly disintegrating. It also makes me wonder what he could do with a few million, and a larger team, because honestly, I suspect it could go either way. Piper has a niche, and we all get to explore it. The casting for THE DARK SLEEP is pretty great. Ashley Galloway, by design, has to carry nearly the entire film as Nancy Peterson, playing a particularly unlikeable character in a modern adaptation of Lovecraft. Lovecraft was not an inclusive author by any means, sometimes outright racist, so casting a woman in the role, and including a lot of perspective from women is a welcome shift. However, as with many of Lovecraft’s stories, some elements don’t play as well when taken out of the turn of the century context, like inserting today’s complicated legalese that feels more Kafka than Lovecraft, or attempting to have a Miskatonic University character like Walter Gilman (Ken Van Sant). We don’t get a lot of growth in Nancy’s character, but we do get a consistent performance from Galloway, and that smooths over plenty of the rougher edges. I’m not going to say this is a great film, but it is fun to watch and admirable in its attempt, and Lovecraft fans are going to enjoy it. So are fans of the stock sounds included with Garageband and Final Cut Pro. Perhaps the most hilarious part of watching this film was when I started hearing the same stock sounds I use for this podcast. So, if you’re wondering why I’ve been manipulating the background sound, it’s because each of these were used in the film. And for a Lovecraft fan, who starts hearing very familiar sounds late at night, wondering if he’s going mad, well, Mr. Piper, to you I say, “Well played, sir. Well played.” Piper may not have a wide audience, but I am happy to count myself among it, warts and all. So, be ready for another Brett Piper production on this segment next quarter. Hell, maybe I can even get Piper on the phone. THE DARK SLEEP is a low-budget, present day adaptation of one of H.P. Lovecraft’s later works, bridging the Cthulhu Mythos and the Dream Cycle in exciting ways. The low-budget is stretched the furthest it can be in the hands of Brett Piper, and the film is carried along the way by a strong performance from Ashley Galloway. Low-budget cinema fans, or Lovecraft fans, should definitely give this one a watch. Everyone else, just know the quality is radically lower than your average film, and enjoy it for what it is. Rotten Tomatoes: NR Metacritic: NR One Movie Punch: 5.0/10 THE DARK SLEEP (2012) is not rated and is currently playing on Amazon Prime.

Hi everyone! Welcome back for the second review this month from Jon-David, aka the Mafia Hairdresser, who is picking up today’s review for Oscar nominee MALEFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL as part of our cleanup week. Check social media to see if they took home the gold, as this episode was pre-produced before the ceremony. And regardless of whether it wins, Jon-David will be up in a minute with thoughts, along with a promo for his serial podcast The Mafia Hairdresser Chronicles. Don’t miss his previous two reviews for One Movie Punch, including RICHARD JEWELL (Episode #692) and last week’s review for THE CAVE (Episode #706). Speaking of Takeover Tuesday, do you think you have what it takes to guest on One Movie Punch? Head over to onemoviepunch.com/takeover-tuesday and learn more about how you can guest here at One Movie Punch. We still have three (3) slots available this quarter for aspiring and established film critics to take the reins for an episode. We’ll run your promo before the review and will place it in regular rotation for the quarter. If it sounds like something interesting to you, reach out to us over social media. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// JOSEPH: “And now, in Recording Room 26 at One Movie Punch Tower...” JON-DAVID: “Hello, this Jon-David aka Mafia Hairdresser, the writer and performer of the podcast “The Mafia Hairdresser Chronicles”, a campy crime comedy based on my time as a celebrity hairdresser in Hollywood in the 1980s. But, enough about my fairy tale, let’s talk about the Disney Film, MALEFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL.” JOSEPH: “Sorry, Jon-David. It’s MALEFICENT. Let’s take it from the top.” AMY: “He seems agitated today.” JOSEPH: “Yeah, I know. Keeps looking at his phone, too.” JON-DAVID: “Today’s movie review is the more sensationally titled sequel MALEFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL. Released in 2019, this fantasy family action film was directed by Joachim Rønning, and written for the screen by Linda Woolverton, who also wrote MALEFICENT.” JOSEPH: “Jon-David. MALEFICENT.” AMY: “Should I go talk to him, or...?” JOSEPH: “No, he seems fine...” JOSEPH: “Wait, where did he go?” AMY: “He was just there a minute ago!” JOSEPH: “Wait a minute...” AMY: “Is it a new sponsor?!” JOSEPH: “No. A text from Jon-David.” JOSEPH: “Dear Joseph. Sorry for bailing like that. I was hoping to finish recording, but some guy who paints houses needed me to cut some hair. Will be back as soon as I can. Jon-David.” JOSEPH: “He put paint houses and cut some hair in quotes. Not sure what that’s all about.” AMY: “Umm, don’t you remember in THE IRISHMAN...” JOSEPH: “Why should I remember THE IRISHMAN? The Academy sure didn’t.” JOSEPH: “Thank you, I’ll be here all night! Recording Jon-David’s review for him. Should have never agreed to the hair-cutting clause in our extensive contract. Can you get things set up to record?” AMY: “Sure thing.” AMY: “And, go!” JOSEPH: “But, enough about his fairy tale, let’s talk about the Disney Film, MALEFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL.” AMY: “Joseph. MALEFICENT.” JOSEPH: “Now he’s got me doing it... FROM THE TOP!” ///// Quick Note: I’m Joseph Dobzynski, Jr., reading for Jon-David, who was actually pulled away at the last moment and couldn’t finish recording the review. He did send me the written review, though, for MALEFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL and his dulcet tones will be back later in the month with a review for the Oscar-nominated PAIN AND GLORY. Without further ado... Today’s movie review is for MALEFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL, the more sensationally titled sequel to 2014’s MALEFICENT. Released in 2019, this fantasy family action film was directed by Joachim Rønning, and written for the screen by Linda Woolverton, Micah Fitzerman-Blue, and Noah Harpster. All characters are based on Charles Perrault’s short story, “La Belle Au Bois Dormant”. That’s right, Sleeping Beauty, in 1903. No spoilers. Hopefully you’ve heard the tale of Sleeping Beauty, the story of Princess Aurora who pricked her finger on an enchanted spindle which put her entire kingdom to sleep - until a prince rescued her. Maybe you’ve seen the Walt Disney Pictures classic animated film? Agh, no matter. Disney made a semi-reboot of this family friendly story starring Angelina Jolie as a powerful horned fairy, with spikey CGI wings and extreme cheekbones, and she’s the creature who actually created the sleeping curse and then bonded with the princess, which ultimately begot love and peace between humans and fairies, for a while. That film was 2014’s MALEFICENT. It had a decent box office of $758.5 million against its roughly $200 million budget. Disney’s MALEFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL did not do nearly as well, box office-wise, as its predecessor, probably because it came out nearly five years after the original hit. When a studio waits that long to stoke the fire, the flames may have died down a bit. MALEFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL was a nice tale and a pretty film, and yet, I thought, it could have been a little bit darker. In this film, there were battles between fairies and humans, but they wrapped up very quickly, with no epic battles with the big visual wow we are used to seeing in other films. At least Disney’s latest STAR WARS release, THE RISE OF SKYWALKER (Episode #672), had that visual ocean battle to draw people in, but this film had no such scenes. There was nothing particularly eerie, creepy, or spine-tingling about this film, unlike BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (Episode #030). It stayed too light. In fact, I wish that they geeked out a little bit more on the fantasy stuff. Maleficent finds “her people”, so to speak, and where she might have originated from. That would have been an interesting storyline to pursue, if not base the entire film on. Instead, this plotline was relegated only to illuminate the man-versus-nature theme that ran throughout the film. This film glossed over Maleficent’s special powers, how she got them, and her special relationship with her own kind. And the film, in my opinion, threw away a great new charismatic fairy character, introduced as Conall, played by Academy Award winner Chiwetel Ejiofor. I do love the casting of Elle Fanning as Aurora and Angelina Jolie as Maleficent. Opposites in every way and the scenes with these two have great tension in them due to Fanning’s unwavering hope and confidence that her mother, Jolie, will do the right thing when called to do so. Both actors fight each other hard and yet the love for each other is palpable and redeeming. Michelle Pfeiffer as Queen Ingrith is evilicious! I just wish this film could have been about the big battle between Queen Ingrith and Maleficent. That would have made me happier. Perhaps, having too many writers on this film and utilizing three or four good storylines watered down this film’s greatness potential for me I do recommend this film because it’s a feel-good movie. And the special effects and CGI... they’re fine, just fine. Especially when applied to the scenes Jolie are in. It's an enjoyable film to watch. There’s the CGI kingdom and the CGI forest. I remember that MALEFICENT came out in 3D. And personally, I know the man who did that film’s 3D for Sony. (So, I know, “stuff.”) But I didn’t see MISTRESS OF EVIL in 3D, and I think it might have been a better film in 3D, because this film was brighter than the darker-colored 2014 predecessor, meaning, not gray tones, which seems to be better for 3D movie watching. MALEFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL is the story of Sleeping Beauty’s much maligned adoptive mother, a powerful fairy bent on seeking revenge on the humans who continually threaten the life and beauty of her forest realm. This is a fun family film. I enjoyed it. And so did many others, with a Rotten Tomatoes Audience Score of 95%. Just not so great with the critics. Rotten Tomatoes: 40% Metacritic: 43 One Movie Punch: 6.5/10 MALEFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL (2019) is rated PG and is currently is available in limited theaters and on VOD.

Hi everyone! It’s another catchup week here at One Movie Punch, especially in the wake of the 92nd Academy Awards yesterday evening. Most of our episodes went into pre-production before the ceremony, so I can’t tell you right now whether today’s film, BREAKTHROUGH, won the award for Best Original Song, after being nominated seemingly out of nowhere. So, in lieu of Matinee Monday, and with BIRDS OF PREY being covered by the lovely folks at the Comics in Motion Podcast during next week’s Takeover Tuesday, I figure this is my opportunity to check this one out for all of you. Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friends at the Cinema Recall podcast. Every episode, The Vern takes a look at iconic scenes in classic movies. You can find them on Twitter and Instagram @cinema_recall, and also subscribe to their podcast at anchor.fm/cinemarecall. Don’t miss a single episode! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is BREAKTHROUGH(2019), the religious drama directed by Roxann Dawson and written for the screen by Grant Nieporte, based upon the book by Joyce Smith. The film follows the tragic story of John Smith (Marcel Ruiz), who falls into a frozen lake and is rushed to a hospital, pronounced dead. When his adopted mother Joyce Smith (Chrissy Metz) whispers a prayer over his inert body, his heartbeat suddenly returns, putting the faith of the community to the test. No spoilers. I’ll be honest; I was really hoping someone else would pick up today’s film for review. I don’t have a great track record when it comes to evangelical Christianity, whether that’s dealing with preachers screaming at students and telling them that they’re going to hell, or the gross alliance between the so-called Moral Majority and the Republican Party which re-launched the culture wars, or any number of horrific incidents with the more strident members of that particular sect of Christianity. Opinions are one thing. Actions are another. And quite often the two are in conflict with that particular. Granted, I know some of that criticism is very personal, but some of it is also very public, especially when megachurch owners accumulate massive funds, which go to the actual oppression of the LGBTQ community. The same wealth has been used to fund and distribute a growing library of evangelical Christian pictures, from companies like veteran Pure Flix and up-and-coming Kingdom Studios. There’s definitely money to be made, especially on the backs of the best-selling Left Behind series, which gave evangelical Christians their own post-apocalyptic world to explore, and two attempts at a film franchise, based around an esoteric idea of The Rapture. It’s not just about the money, however, but also the belief that these films are meant to be evangelical efforts, not just telling a good story, but delivering the good news, and to help grow their ranks. And it’s this evangelical component that generally gets in the way of what could otherwise be a decent film. Films with an evangelical bent are trying to convert you, generally by either proving to you the power of God in our everyday lives, or by presenting a community that will accept you should you wish to change your life. The films also adhere to strict Christian principles, staying away from obscene language, sexual themes outside of abstinence, and nearly any competing viewpoints, unless they are to be disproven, as in the GOD’S NOT DEAD franchise. We’re not getting the full realism of our everyday lives, but a sanitized version of reality, which means while the films might be intended as a form of evangelization, they generally only appeal to other evangelical Christians, which can be seen in both the critical and the audience scores. BREAKTHROUGH, as such, did not appeal to me in the least bit. I found the film to be almost consistently ham-handed when talking about God, trying too hard to emphasize how much of a miracle John’s recovery is, or how strong of a faith his mother has, or how important the church is within their community. God is clearly the focus in the film, both thematically and story-wise, as personified in Joyce’s adherence to her faith and examination of her own flaws. Chrissy Metz is easily the best thing about this film, turning in a convincing performance that elevates key scenes from the usual dramatic sequences into tear-jerking experiences. But with God being overtly inserted all the time, each small faith lesson short-circuits the other stories that are attempting to be told. Thematic content aside, the film also suffers from feeling too much like a television show, or a made-for-television movie. Director Roxann Dawson crosses over from her most recent career as a television director for her first feature with BREAKTHROUGH, and her extensive television experience shows in the pacing and framing. Over two hours, we get a lot of great scenes for television, when time generally needs to be filled, but take away from the overall pacing of John’s recovery story. However, there are also some incredible shots that work well for the film, particularly the more artistic underwater shots and the overall composition of the community’s visit to the hospital. Not bad for someone who found their break as B’Elanna Torres on “Star Trek: Voyager”! I also think that Grant Nieporte’s adaptation of the source material has a lot to do with the overbearing themes and pacing issues. Joyce Smith’s account of her son’s drowning and recovery, in book form, can take the time to talk about her son’s life, and his unique circumstances, and his challenges at school and home, along with her own struggles with faith. Adaptations generally need to make choices, and BREAKTHROUGH doesn’t make enough of them. We shouldn’t have to wait roughly forty minutes to get to the major conflict, nor should we try to set up multiple focal points for the film. We should focus either on Joyce’s faith, or John’s recovery, or the community as a whole, and leave loose ends like adoption, haircuts, and sign-up sheets for a limited series or television format. It works, and it will land with the evangelical audience, but it will fail as an evangelical piece, because the same parts that attract their core audience will be turn away their target audience. BREAKTHROUGH is an evangelical drama that tells the story of a young man who miraculously survived drowning. While the film will delight those already evangelized, it will frustrate non-evangelical viewers with its ham-handed approach to God and its lack of thematic focus throughout. Fans of heartwarming dramas, or evangelical pictures, will definitely appreciate this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 61% Metacritic: 46 One Movie Punch: 5.5/10 BREAKTHROUGH (2019) is rated PG and is currently playing on HBO.

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another week of reviews! Tonight’s the big night! The 92nd Academy Awards will be held today at 5:00pm PST, and we’ll see just how the Academy distributes their praise. We’re also catching up on a number of Oscar nominees this week, including today’s review for one of the more insightful documentaries from last year, and an Oscar nominee for Best Documentary Feature. I’ll be up in a minute with my thoughts on 2019’s THE EDGE OF DEMOCRACY. Be sure to stay tuned with us all week! Tomorrow I’ll be reviewing perhaps the most unknown of the nominees, 2019’s BREAKTHROUGH, which is not my usual cup of tea. On Tuesday, Jon-David returns with his review of 2019’s MALEFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL. On Wednesday, I’ll be reviewing a low-budget adaptation of an H.P. Lovecraft story, in a film titled THE DARK SLEEP. On Thursday, Keith Lyons returns with his review of Oscar nominee HONEYLAND. On Friday, Andrew has another Fantastic Fest offering, this time a challenging and thought-provoking French film. And on Saturday, I’ll be reviewing TO DUST, a dark comedy about dealing with loss, as part of our Under the Kanopy series. Over on our Patreon page, at patreon.com/onemoviepunch, we just put up our full interview with writer/director Alex Goldberg, where we discuss his low-budget daytime noir film CLOSURE (2019), starring his spouse Catia Ojeda. We also talk about his extensive work as a playwright and what it’s like working with your spouse. The interview will be publicly available for a limited time, but you can maintain access by contributing to One Movie Punch at any level. All contributors become eligible for Sponsor Sundays, where you can force me to review a film for the podcast, as long as we haven’t reviewed it, with just a few exceptions. Check back next week for a Sponsor Sunday episode reviewing 2008’s THE DARK KNIGHT, thanks to the generosity of the Ocho Duro Parlay Hour. A promo for Sponsor Sundays will run before the review. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is THE EDGE OF DEMOCRACY(2019), the political documentary directed by documentarian Petra Costa, and written for the screen in collaboration with Carol Pires, David Barker, and Moara Passoni. The film reviews the rise and the current fall of Brazilian democracy, looking at how media moguls divided the population in two, which allowed a far-right government to take power, all from Costa’s unique perspective and with her unique access to top government officials. No spoilers. About a year ago, I had to stop taking in the daily news. I used to listen to two plus hours of news, mostly Democracy Now and The Intercept, along with a handful of commentary shows, and a couple anarcho-communist podcasts specifically about community organization and resistance. I was a political animal, tracking elections, major news stories, evaluating sources, and coming to three very clear conclusions: (1) we spend way too much on the military and not enough on social programs; (2) massive wealth inequality, if not addressed, will become a massive social flashpoint; and (3) if we don’t address the impending climate collapse in due time, our entire civilization will be put at risk. All of these conclusions come from a combination of scientific consensus and common sense, but this reality-based outlook has been under assault by the billionaires who control most of our media. And most people are media illiterate, generally believing that media literacy is hearing a bunch of different opinions and making up your own mind. Very few people will take the time to consider the sources, sift through rhetoric, examine data, and all the other parts of media literacy. Very few people also acknowledge that their favorite news programs have billionaire-driven agendas, or at the very least, advertising-driven agendas. Cable news is a for-profit venture, and we should all be careful, regardless of political persuasion. Once you realize that, listening to the stories their channels choose to cover becomes nauseating, across the spectrum. Especially when they unjustly stoke the flames of social unrest through creating divisions. It’s why I still mostly rely on the fact-based journalism of Democracy Now and The Intercept, both of which are featured heavily in today’s documentary, even if they have a so-called “left-leaning slant”. It’s also why watching THE EDGE OF DEMOCRACY is so important, because Petra Costa documents the very destructive power of the media in Brazil, which could easily be a template for similar governmental takeovers. I came into THE EDGE OF DEMOCRACY with a distinct advantage over most people, given my past media consumption. Costa calmly lays out all the major events, from the first fights for democracy by her parents under the US-backed military dictatorship, all the way to the present day. Most of the major events featured in the documentary were stories I heard live on Democracy Now as they happened. And each of those major events, at the time, came with a host of political analysis from journalists and pundits, most of which are arguing comfortably from studios for a mostly myopic audience. Each event is generally taken out of its important context, and abstracted into some argument about “liberty” or “freedom”, usually with more than a few lies from the more deceptive news outlets. The real value of Costa’s work is that it places all of these individual events back into their necessary context. Lula isn’t reduced to some alleged criminal politician, but also a long-time labor organizer who brought in Brazil’s great economic prosperity through sensible policies. Dilma Rouseff isn’t just another alleged criminal politician, but a former revolutionary who endured torture at the hands of the military dictatorship. We don’t get the headlines that shocked the populace and the world; we get the actual trumped-up charges and corrupt actions of politicians and judges. We get a full, complete, and consistent story – which completely shreds nearly all the mainstream political analysis in the United States. THE EDGE OF DEMOCRACY may not be able to stop the rapid descent into Brazilian fascism, but it will serve as an important addition to the historical record. THE EDGE OF DEMOCRACY should also serve as a warning tale for our own political situation in the United States. Just as media literacy requires much more than evaluating opinions, media criticism needs to be a lot more than simply calling things “fake news”. I am most definitely an advocate for both freedom of speech and freedom of the press, but I am not an advocate for the ability to lie, whether directly or by omission. The United States used to have a fairness doctrine in place for the media, but that was mostly revoked under Reagan, which gave rise to the cable news of today. They yield enormous power, can drive public opinion, and receive regular injections of capital every four years from our election process. I don’t want to disband the press, or censor anyone, but a re-instatement of the fairness doctrine would be a good first step towards bringing sanity back to our new media. Towards the end of THE EDGE OF DEMOCRACY, and as we get closer to the present day, we see the full force of the Brazilian media begin demanding that corruption is rooted out from the Brazilian government. We see their readership rise and their pundits get more air time, and government officials compromising themselves and their colleagues to survive the bloodletting. We see the same kind of political power of the press in the United States, because conflict sells. We also see the power of billionaires buying advertisements on those same stations and papers, which lead to stories attacking progressive populist candidate Bernie Sanders. And rest assured, those same media outlets will attempt to have a field day with Sanders should he win the presidency, likely using the same tactics documented in THE EDGE OF DEMOCRACY, because his policies run counter to their bottom lines. We need to be literate and critical if we want to prevent what happened in Brazil from happening here, assuming it’s not already too late. THE EDGE OF DEMOCRACY is a powerful documentary that documents the rise and near collapse of Brazilian democracy, from the revolution against the dictatorship through the present rise of the far-right fascist government. While expertly placing each major event into a consistent context, the film also serves as a warning tale for other media-driven societies, and a plea for real media literacy and criticism. Documentary fans, or folks who want a succinct, if depressing look at recent Brazilian politics, should definitely check out this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 97% Metacritic: 81 One Movie Punch: 8.5/10 THE EDGE OF DEMOCRACY (2019) is rated TV-14 and is currently playing on Netflix.

Hi everyone! We’re closing out the week with another entry in our series, Under the Kanopy. Kanopy is a library and university funded streaming service that grants card holders six free streams a month, featuring a combination of classic, mainstream, independent, and international films. They currently have streaming deals with some of our favorite distributors, like A24 and Kino Lorber, which offer the critically acclaimed, if not commercially successful films. Today’s film was initially produced by the CBC and distributed by Gravitas Ventures, and follows the touching story of transgender powerlifter Janae Kroczaleski, while also showing just how far we have to go in society for fuller transgender acceptance. My review will be up in a minute. Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friends at the Book of Lies Podcast. Every week, Brandi Fleeks and Sunni Hepburn take a look at a fraud case or famous con artist, breaking down the methods, the signals, and how to spot similar scams in your life. You can find them on Twitter @Bookofliespod and on Facebook and Instagram @bookofliespodcast. Be sure to like, retweet, share, review, and subscribe! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is TRANSFORMER(2017), the documentary directed by Michael Del Monte and written for the screen in collaboration with Samuel Fussell and Paul Kemp. The film follows the true story of Janae Marie Kroczaleski, as she manages her transition in the wake of being outed as transgender in 2015. In the face of direct and subtle discrimination, she reflects on her past, present, and future in a rapidly changing world, in an effort to ultimately find herself. One day. No spoilers. I can remember the first time I saw a transgender character on the big screen, and it wasn’t a good one – 1994’s ACE VENTURA: PET DETECTIVE. One of the main characters is a transgender woman, who kisses Ace Ventura, and Ace’s reaction upon learning she is transgender is to go through an elaborate comedic take on THE CRYING GAME, another less than desirable portrayal of transgender women. In fact, nearly every portrayal of transgender women in Hollywood perpetuates one or more common stereotypes: either the helpless victim, or the sexual deviant, or the comic relief, or the flamboyant cross-dresser. Thankfully, it was also around this time that there were more positive, realistic roles about transgender characters, especially 1996’s THE BIRDCAGE, one of my favorite films not just for excellent performances by Williams and Lane, but because it was the first film that challenged me directly to reconsider my notions of the LGBTQ community. I mention these films because they are the same portrayals of transgender women that were most prominent while Janae, then Matt, was serving in the Marines and participated in powerlifting tournaments, while struggling with her identity. And it wasn’t just on the big screen, but multiple unflattering portrayals and outright mockery on the small screen, within stand-up comedian sets, along with the very real violence against transgender women in the news that most folks overlooked. Janae talks a lot about her own struggles, but also the social pressures her three sons might face. No one but the transgender community understands this feeling, but Janae’s story in TRANSFORMER will help the cis community to understand it a little bit more, especially in our rapidly changing world. I’d like to believe we can all live in a society where people are free to be who they want to be, as long as it isn’t hurting anyone else. I know we don’t live in that pluralistic utopia, but we have come a long way towards it compared to a hundred years ago. It doesn’t stop me from still believing we can’t get there fast enough. Movies and television shows have done a lot to help with this acceptance, not just featuring more realistic and complex depictions of transgender characters, but also more normalized depictions that blend in rather than stand out. We’re also getting a lot more of the unvarnished history of the transgender experience, with multiple documentaries about Stonewall, including THE DEATH AND LIFE OF MARSHA P. JOHNSON (2017), and the New York drag scene in 1990’s PARIS IS BURNING. TRANSFORMER takes us into another corner of the transgender experience, with a mixture of elements common to many transgender stories, along with the unique experiences that Janae has. In her own words, she describes being pulled between training as a bulked-up powerlifter and wanting to feel comfortable with herself as a woman, a seemingly impossible mix. Not because there isn’t a transgender powerlifting scene; we’re actually introduced to that community in parts of this documentary. It’s seemingly impossible because other people still have trouble accepting her life, which ultimately makes it hard for Janae to accept herself. It doesn’t matter if that’s Janae’s physique that puts some women off, or if that’s cis powerlifters laughing uncomfortably while stumbling over pronouns. Or how members of her own family treat her, including her two ex-wives. We may have come a long way, but we still have a long way to go. Perhaps the worst part about Janae’s story is what became part of the impetus for this very project. In 2015, Janae was outed in an internet video which was doing side-by-sides of photos of Matt and photos of an Instagram account Janae was using privately. Janae used the admission to come out, but it was overshadowed by the media storm surrounding Caitlin Jenner’s coming out, which also brought all the thinly-veiled transphobic stereotypes back out. Outing someone is probably the worst thing you can do for someone in the LGBTQ community, because it’s not just the person you affect, but their family and possibly their friends, and that’s doubly so for someone who is transgender. I’m glad to see Janae take control of her story, even as she struggles to understand it, which ultimately ends up being a positive affirmation. Technically speaking, TRANSFORMER is a nice combination of archived footage and naturally filmed interviews with Janae, her family, and her friends. Some of the captured scenes can feel staged, especially filming Janae out on the town with friends, or when they visit Jane’s family to learn about their feelings, but that comes with the territory of similar documentaries which shadow their subjects. Director Del Monte also captures some classic lifting shots, often used for transitions between segments, and some important shots about transitioning, like doctor’s appointments and surgeries. When it all comes together, it succeeds in telling Janae’s story, and when it’s all over, I couldn’t help but want to give her a big hug, just to let her know she’s loved and accepted for who she is, wherever that journey takes her. TRANSFORMER is a powerful documentary about transgender powerlifter Janae Marie Kroczaleski, produced in the wake of being outed in 2015. We learn about Janae’s history, her current joys and struggles, and her hopes and fears for the future. Her story is both similar to other transgender experiences, and unique to her particular experiences. Documentary fans, or folks looking to understand the transgender experience, should definitely check out this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 100%  Metacritic: 78  One Movie Punch: 8.0/10 TRANSFORMER (2017) is not rated and is currently streaming on Kanopy and Netflix.

Hi everyone! It’s Friday, and Andrew’s bringing the Fantastic Fest fire with today’s film, a behind-the-scenes documentary into the origins of Aphex Twin’s 1997 album, “Come to Daddy”. We’ll get everything from the influences behind the composition, along with the cult music video, which... What’s that? This is a comedy horror film starring Elijah Wood? But influenced by the album, right? No? Right, well, I don’t know what today’s film is about, but Andrew does, and he’ll be up in a minute. I guess I can just shelve this thirty-minute spoken word audio tribute I had ready to go. Oh yeah, be sure to check out Andrew’s recent reviews for THE LODGE (Episode #702), COLOR OUT OF SPACE (Episode #695), and STARFISH (Episode #688). Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our friends at the Pop Pour Review podcast! Every week, the PPR crew review a film, then craft a cocktail based on the movie. I don’t drink myself, but I know a few people that do, and every recipe fits in surprising ways. You can find them on Twitter and Instagram @poppourreview, or by searching for Pop! Pour! Review Podcast on Facebook. Thanks for all your support last year! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello film fans! Andrew here, back today with the book-end to last week’s review of THE LODGE. I’ve got another film that takes place almost entirely in a remote home that’s much too large and far too well-appointed to be called a cabin. THE LODGE opens wide today, an incredibly dark and humorless tale. As a counterpoint, today’s film also opens wide today and is also incredibly dark, but... it does have a bit of humor. Incredibly dark humor. Let’s get to it. Today’s movie is COME TO DADDY(2019), written by Toby Harvard and Ant Timpson and directed by Timpson. The film made its Texas Premiere at the 2019 Fantastic Fest, marking the directorial debut of Timpson as well as the second feature film screenwriting Harvard, following up on 2016’s THE GREASY STRANGLER. (I’ve seen THE GREASY STRANGLER. Do not watch THE GREASY STRANGLER.) COME TO DADDY stars Fantastic Fest mascot Elijah Wood as Norval Greenwood, a man in his mid-30s who has been summoned out of the blue by a handwritten letter to reconnect with his long-estranged father at a remote Oregon home overlooking a lake. After his father walked out when he was five, Norval’s mother raised him alone in Beverly Hills. Norval has largely failed to capitalize on his privileged beginnings, living the life of an unsuccessful musician, still residing with his mother and, perhaps most egregiously, sporting a catastrophically bad haircut. Norval is readily willing to bury three decades of deep resentment for a chance to connect with the father he never knew, but soon learns that time does not heal all wounds. Problems ensue. The trailer for COME TO DADDY does the film a severe injustice, which is unfortunate as this was a great experience to enter blind. (Of course, I mean after you’ve listened to my review a handful of times.) A LOT happens in this movie - twists and turns that turn the plot on its head multiple times - early and often. The trailer doesn’t overtly spoil any of what’s about to unfold in the film, but it does set your brain up to anticipate how certain scenes will come to play out. Its sheer unpredictability is what I loved most about the film. The writers took the kitchen sink approach to the script, “yes, and”-ing themselves into a wild story. The way in which the trailer (perhaps necessarily) reveals images of what’s to come after a few of the key plot pivots also make the film look a bit pedestrian, when in reality it is unique unto itself. Elijah Wood is as charming as ever as the lovable loser about to go off the deep end. It’s been nearly twenty years since the end of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy and over that time period he has become more and more immersed in genre films that appeal to his personal tastes. Perhaps he sparked the trend that saw other young franchise stars like Daniel Radcliffe, Kristen Stewart, and Robert Pattinson make their millions on big studio properties and transition into more interesting roles. Elijah Wood’s even been quietly involved as producer on perhaps Nic Cage’s only decent films of the last five years, COLOR OUT OF SPACE (Episode #695) and MANDY (Joseph, when are we getting your take on Mandy already?). JOSEPH: “First of all, you are forgetting the delightful MOM AND DAD (Episode #475). And second, see patreon.com/onemoviepunch for details about Sponsor Sundays, where you can force me to review a movie. MANDY wouldn’t feel like much of a force, though, to be honest.” Wood’s commitment to this role in his out-there film that he has to carry for all 90 minutes is obvious at every second. Earnest Norval could have just as easily stepped out of a character drama, with Wood wearing every bit of his insecurities and bitterness on his sleeve even as his surrounding story grows chaotic. What makes COME TO DADDY fantastic? The film just never lets up. If anything, the only knock on COME TO DADDY is that it can be a bit of a punishing sit. There is levity throughout the film, but overall it’s fraught with such unyielding tension and had me pulled in so deeply, that I found it an exhausting experience. However, like with all films, you only get one chance to see them for the first time and you may or may not be in the perfect headspace at that moment. I think that’s the case here... and no I don’t think I can survive it again. COME TO DADDYis a blackly comic, scattershot riot that becomes a brand-new film every 15 minutes. Fans of chaotic and unpredictable films such as GREEN ROOM (Episode #054), BLUE RUIN (Episode #456), or Elijah Wood’s I DON’T FEEL AT HOME IN THIS WORLD ANYMORE will enjoy this film. JOSEPH: “There’s another one I wouldn’t feel forced to review!” Rotten Tomatoes: 91% Metacritic: 61 One Movie Punch: 7.8/10 COME TO DADDY (2019) is rated Rand is available today in theaters and on VOD. Come back next week for a riveting film that you’ve never heard of. I’ll be covering SCHOOL’S OUT, a French film that was given a horrible English title translation that makes it sound like a 1980s slapstick teen comedy. In fact, it’s actually a mysterious daytime noir set in an honors classroom after a devoted teacher jumps from the third-story window. I’ll see you then.

Hi everyone! Christina’s back today with a look at one of the more unlikely nominees for Best Animated Feature, 2019’s KLAUS. It’s always nice when a film gets recognition that’s not from one of the ginormous animation houses. But I ask you, is a tagline like “Welcome to the Jingle” really what you think of when you think of an Oscar film? While that might have deterred me, it did not deter Christina, who will be up in a moment with her review. Don’t miss her debut review at One Movie Punch for WEATHERING WITH YOU (Episode #687), distributed to the United States by GKIDS. She’ll be back with their most recent import, RIDE YOUR WAVE, later in the month. Before the review, we’ll have a quick promo from our good friend Kolby Told Me, one of our biggest supporters of the podcast last year, as demonstrated by his near domination of the Follow Friday boards. You can find him on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram @kolbytoldme. And if you take up one of his recommendations, let everyone know that Kolby Told Me! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello, everyone! This is Christina Eldridge with Durara Reviews (a part of One Movie Punch), and I’m back with another review. Since my first review of WEATHERING WITH YOU (2019), I’ve been trying to promote myself and One Movie Punch by social media presence, so if you’re not following my Twitter, @durarareview, or @OneMoviePunch, please go give us a follow! Today’s movie is KLAUS (2019), which was written by Sergio Pablos and co-written by Zach Lewis and Jim Mohoney. KLAUS (2019) is an alternative origin story of Santa Claus, set in a fantasy world that resembles a gloomy 19thcentury. A chance meeting by a spoiled son of a postmaster and a hermit woodsman gives life to a town plagued by a feud and begins the Christmas tradition. This review is spoiler free. This light-hearted comedy is the Spanish animated directorial debut of Sergio Pablos, who is best known for his work in Disney’s animation department. He has worked on such hits as  HERCULES (1997), TARZAN (1999), SMALLFOOT (2018) and is probably known best for creating the entire DESPICABLE ME universe. KLAUS (2019) was produced by Sergio Pablos Animation Studios and is currently distributed in the United States by Netflix. The film was animated electronically, but Pablos used his experience at Disney to make 2D look more 3D. His work paid off with an Oscar nomination for Best Animated Featured film. Jesper Johansson (Jason Schwartzman) is the son of a highly successful and wealthy postmaster. He has no aspirations other than to leach off the family wealth. Jesper is forced to enroll in the Royal Postal Academy and purposely tries to fail so he can go back home to his pampered life.  Instead, it is decided that he will become postmaster of Smeerensburg, a Northern island town, and will be tasked with posting 6,000 letters in one year’s time or he will be cut out of the family estate. Jesper meets a ferryman in town named Mogens (Norm MacDonald), who quickly introduces Jesper to Smeerensburg’s forever feud perpetuated by two families: the Krums and the Ellingboes. Because of the feud, no one writes letters or even goes to school, as explained by the teacher turned fishmonger, Alva (Rashida Jones). After countless attempts to get anyone to mail anything, Jesper decides to try the only person left in town he hasn’t talked to: the lonely woodsman to the East, Klaus (J.K. Simmons). After a misunderstanding related to perception of character, he and Jesper set out to improve the town, which secretly will help Jesper fulfill his mission. Even though KLAUS (2019) is based on the tired trope of family feuds in the Hatfield/McCoy tradition, the story is charming enough to keep it from feeling stale. The friendship that evolves between Jesper and Klaus and their determination to make the children in town happy is touching, entertaining and powerful. I did have two issues with this movie, starting with its predictability.  From the start, you can guess exactly how it will end. Since this is a family movie, and children probably can’t follow complicated plot lines, I didn’t let it spoil my experience. My second issue is Jason Schwartman’s voice acting attempt. It felt a little over done and like he can maybe use another voice acting class or two, but it sort of works for a family film. KLAUS is the tale of a long con perpetrated by a sheltered brat that turned into a character-building life lesson. His motto goes from, “Everyone’s out to get something” to “A true selfless act always sparks another”. Everyone should watch it with their family at least once, and possibly add it to the holiday movie list if the kids are into it. Rotten Tomatoes: 93% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 64  One Movie Punch: 8/10 (Posted Letters) KLAUS (2019) is rated PG and is currently streaming on Netflix. Thank you, everyone!  Keep an eye out for my upcoming review, RIDE YOUR WAVE (2019), coming next month. Until next time!

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another Indie Wednesday spotlight. One Movie Punch continues to extend our network with today’s segment, allowing both myself and our audience a taste of the microbudget and independent features being produced. Sometimes we find hidden gems. Sometimes we find films that have problems. Today’s film is a daytime noir that definitely sits in the former category, especially if you live in, or like to make fun of, Los Angeles and its quirkier denizens. Even better, I had a chance to speak with writer/director Alex Goldberg about the film, which stars his spouse, Catia Ojeda, in the lead role. We talk about the film itself, what it’s like to work with your spouse, Los Angeles, and a whole lot more. I’ll be interspersing segments from that interview throughout the review. In lieu of running a promo, we’ll be playing the full trailer audio beforehand for CLOSURE (2019). Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is CLOSURE (2019), the daytime comedy noir film written and directed by Alex Goldberg. After making a promise to her dying mother, and in the midst of the fallout of her long-term relationship, Nina (Catia Ojeda) has flown out to Los Angeles in search of her estranged sister to deliver the news. But when she learns from her former roommate Yasmina (Cynthia Addai-Robinson) that her sister’s been missing for weeks, Nina begins a search around Los Angeles, which leads her to some dark and funny places. No spoilers. I can remember the first time I landed in Los Angeles. It was a very busy time in my life, having just graduated college and accepted a job at a consulting firm, with a project based in the San Fernando Valley. I arrived late at night, and after arguing with the car rental place over my age, started driving in one of the largest cities in the world. This was before GPS was really a thing for consumer use, or even before you could get directions printed off the Internet, so I ended up driving around lost for about two hours, getting more and more frustrated, and scared, and not finding help from just about anywhere I stopped. I remember checking into the hotel, passing out from exhaustion, and very little of the orientation the next day. It was the first major culture shock of my life, where I was all alone in a completely new place. I was just twenty-three years old, and it was a mess of emotions. I spent the entire first week learning the highways, finding places to eat, discovering the huge diversity in radio stations, and learning about the people around me. And they were... different. ALEX: “Well, the inspiration was when my wife, Catia Ojeda, and I had moved to Los Angeles. We had been working in New York, and we came to LA, and there’s a bit of a culture shock. Not as dramatic as say... I mean, New York is a big metropolis, as is Los Angeles. In our field, we found a lot of people who were really self-driven and you’d meet them and they would talk a lot about themselves. I wanted to spin a tale where someone needs to solve a mystery, and no one is not only helping them out, but doesn’t particularly care.” I don’t mean different in a bad way, but compared to my mostly monochromatic upbringing, in Los Angeles, I was being exposed to new people and lifestyles at a very rapid pace, doing my best to adapt while not offending anyone. My experience is why I connected so much with Catia Ojeda’s excellent fish out of water performance as Nina. I’ve seen plenty of films where actors have clearly forgotten those initial, tumultuous feelings, but Ojeda nails that combination of uneasiness and excitement in an accessible, genuine way. Her reactions to those around her, as she’s introduced to spiritual practices, alternative diets, and open relationships, feels very authentic, probably because Alex and Catia have lived it. ALEX: “Here’s a big story, actually. So, when we came to LA, we brought my play ‘It is Done’, which she starred in. So, we did a production in Hollywood. It got great reviews. We did well. She started working and the play got optioned into a movie. So, when I signed the option agreement, I realized a couple of things. One, they could fire me at any time. That’s normal. It’s my idea, but they could take me off it. And there’s really no shot she would get to play the part, let alone audition for it. And that’s standard. So, I’m getting some work going on over here. She’s getting work over there, and we’re like, let’s try to create something where we can work together on something. So, that’s why I wrote it with her in mind.” Surrounding Nina is a host of unique characters, including: her sister’s current roommate, Yasmina, a pan-spiritualist actor/model; her sister’s neighbors, the ironically named Prudence (Milena Govich) and her probably over-tolerant boyfriend Jack (John Sloan); and eventually, Hugo (Tom Choi) a rich man looking for a long-term relationship using a bizarre method. Tom Choi is one of the hardest working actors in the business, with a filmography that is a CVS receipt long, and he was perfect for the character. ALEX: “He’s awesome. There’s a couple things about Tom. One is, yeah, he was perfect for the role, because he’s got these rugged, leading man looks, but he also projects a nice guy and a funny guy, which is important because after all of these characters, in this particular venue, when she meets this guy, you don’t want him to be sleazy, at least not at first. You want him to be someone that oh, maybe she can trust this guy. And for the most part, he is trustworthy and it comes across that way.” A great story and a great cast are paired with some very excellent musical selections. CLOSURE’s soundtrack is a combination of straight-ahead jazz scoring and more contemporary, groovier, even electronic jazz of today. Noir works best with jazz, but modern noir needs modern sounds, and this particular pairing is the result of two key individuals involved with the project. ALEX: “I met a guy named Zak Shelby-Szyszko, who is big in the modern jazz world. He works for a couple of labels and the Angel City Jazz Festival. And I brought him the script, and I said, ‘Do you think you can help me find contemporary artists: (1) who would be interested in this, and (2) who would work on our very limited budget?’ He was able to pull a bunch of names. Some very well known in the jazz circle. Some up and coming. So, we had a lot of choices to work from. The other person is Jamie Christopherson, who is our composer. And he came to us through our producer. And he liked the vibe we were doing. He had already heard some of the pieces that Zak had brought in, and said, ‘Let’s... I can score around this.’ So a lot of the more traditional jazz elements were his pieces, including that trumpet you mentioned, which is so great. Are there any drawbacks to CLOSURE? Not any more than other low-budget and independent productions. That’s doubly so around Los Angeles, where permitting is some of the most tedious and most expensive to acquire. It was also shot over twelve days, due to the competing schedules of the principle cast, which makes the final output quite remarkable. CLOSURE might lack a great deal of the polish that can only come from massive budgets and exclusive schedules, but it more than makes up for it between Goldberg’s excellent story and Ojeda’s authentic performance. So, how much did this incredible daytime noir cost? ALEX: “I don’t have the exact number. We’re in the $100,000 range, so between $100,000 and $200,000. I know people are making movies for $7,000 and $10,000. That’s ultra. That’s super low-budget. I mean, we had a crew, and that’s how you do it in twelve days. You have a DP who’s awesome, who brings in her own camera people she trusts. Our art department... department in quotes, it’s a small group... they were like, ‘Let me bring in my people so we can move quickly.’ Yeah, twelve days is tough. So, it was two six-day weeks of principle photography, then we had three splinter days where we had really limited crew. The second and third splinter day, we didn’t have audio. We just shot MOS.” Sometimes producers like to hide budget numbers, especially in an age of box office comparisons, but I’ll just say that you won’t find many other modern films being made for $200,000 that are this well put together. Especially in Los Angeles. Kudos to the whole team involved in this picture. CLOSURE (2019) is a daytime noir picture about a woman searching for her lost sister in the City of Angels, with the mostly unhelpful assistance of those around her. Catia Ojeda plays an excellent fish out of water, as her character moves between mystery and comedy, all accompanied by an excellent jazz score and soundtrack. If you are looking for a fun and engaging film, that pokes fun at the quirkier sides of Los Angeles, absolutely look no further. You won’t regret spending ninety minutes on this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 80% Metacritic: NR One Movie Punch: 8.1/10 CLOSURE (2019) is not rated and is currently available on VOD and with ads on Tubi.

Hi everyone! We’re in the final stretch for the Oscar season! Instead of the usual Takeover Tuesday episodes for the next two weeks, we’re going to take the slot each week for two important things. First, we’re going to catchup on the Oscar nominees (and potential winners). We’re down to just four more we haven’t reviewed yet, which is a much better place than last year. More importantly, however, is the second thing we’re doing, which is introducing Jon-David, aka the Mafia Hairdresser, as a regular contributor at One Movie Punch. It’s funny, when I sent out the e-mail to our usual network of participants for First Quarter Takeover Tuesday reviews, he was the first to reply. And after the Oscar nominees were announced, I sent a list of films we hadn’t yet reviewed to see if anyone would pick them up. He asked me when they had to be done. I gave him a deadline and asked which ones. He said all of them. Of course, that’s not really fair to the other critics, so we negotiated down to the two for this month, and many more for the future. His promo for the Mafia Hairdresser Chronicles, his audio drama podcast, will run before the review. Speaking of Takeover Tuesday, do you think you have what it takes to guest on One Movie Punch? Head over to onemoviepunch.com/takeover-tuesday and learn more about how you can guest here at One Movie Punch. We still have five (5) slots available this quarter for aspiring and established film critics to take the reins for an episode. We’ll run your promo before the review and will place it in regular rotation for the quarter. If it sounds like something interesting to you, reach out to us over social media. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello, this Jon-David aka Mafia Hairdresser, the writer and performer of the podcast The Mafia Hairdresser Chronicles, a campy crime comedy based on my time working for a Hollywood cocaine trafficking couple in the 80s. Today’s movie is THE CAVE(2019), the documentary film from Feras Fayyad. THE CAVE is a narration-free, eye-of-the-storm view of the life of six years in the life of Dr. Amani, the female head of a hospital built, carved, and constructed, epicly, in criss-crossing tunnels under the city of Al Ghouta, Syria, during the war and the use of chemicals against her people. The film opens. No sound. No music. Just a city. Al Ghouta, Syria. A bomb goes off. Clouds of smoke. Another bomb. Smoke. Bombs. Smoke. Bombs. This film was shot at great peril to Fayyad and his team of camera people. They shot over one thousand hours of film, following the doctors as they tended to the wounded citizens, besieged victims of bombings, the intended victims of genocide via chlorine bombs. Between 2012 to 2018, over the time this documentary was filmed, the underground hospital that was filmed, was maintained and built, and constantly rebuilt by engineers and construction workers for the medical professionals made up of doctors, volunteers, and med and nurse students. The close ups of a few of Dr. Amani’s co-workers show that they are all just trying to save the lives of their people from extinction. But it is a scene where Dr. Amani has a human moment to herself, after years of saving lives, bombs coming down on her, experiencing death over and over, that really show how amazing a person she is. This film shows us tragedy and war, and what it was like for these Syrian people under the Bashar al-Assad regime and his Russian allies. But we also get to see that there are people who exist who are so good and they will stay and help their own people. Against odds. At their own peril. Day after day. Year after year. To see this film and to know Dr. Amani is to know that there is pure goodness in the world. It exists. And we can all sleep a little better knowing that; even if Dr. Amani and her team may never have a night of sleep without nightmares of the world that they have had to experience. Of course, I was emotional when I saw the suffering of so many lovely, sweet, innocent children in this documentary. But I was touched, deeply, seeing Dr. Amani, no matter how rushed, or emotionally crushed she was, how she would comfort every child that crossed her path. She took the moment to put her face close to the face of each child. She kissed them. She whispered prayer, love, and hope with her breath and her words and her mouth, from her soul. Dr. Amani was the main reason so many lives were saved, and the figurehead of strength that kept the life-saving underground hospital going for as long as it did. What I found infuriating was that, even as she managed her female and male medical colleagues competently, with grace, under extreme pressure, that she had to deal with this outright sexism and archaic ways of life her own people still clung to. Babies and children were starving in the city above “The Cave” Hospital. Women had to sneak out of their homes to come to the hospital to receive food and medicine for their malnourished babies. And all because their husbands would not allow their wives to work and provide. The men would rather let their own children die than let their wives be able to work. Dr. Amani helped any mother and child that she could, and, many times, for good reason, without the father’s knowledge. Above ground, over the tunnels that made up the hospital, there was war, hypocrisy, misogyny, sexism and outright abuse of women. All over Al Ghouta there was regime propaganda. But, in the tunnels, the women and men who worked together had formed a society worth fighting for. The women, the volunteers, the men doctors, the lady helpers, the patients, old and young, male and female: All were equal. All were worth fighting for. All were worth saving. There are several scenes in this film of the men and women who worked in the underground hospital, joking with each other, comforting each other. THE CAVEis a documentary by Feras Fayyad, a Syrian film director/filmmaker who was nominated for Best Documentary Film Feature for LAST MEN IN ALEPPO, a 2017 film about the Syrian Civil War, also an unflinching, captivating, and sometimes uncomfortable film. THE CAVE is also nominated for an Academy Award in this same category. The Cave has no narration. Just real people. The real heroes and their own voices, subtitled for viewers, and available in many languages. At the end of the documentary, Fayyad gives you a few more facts about the hospital and what has happened to the lives of those shown in the film. In post research, I found that the life and passion of Feras Fayyad, regarding the making of this film, to be fascinating, if not harrowing. I invite you to learn more about this courageous director and you can start by going to Variety.com and read the Jan 4th, 2020 article written about him. Rotten Tomatoes: 96% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 83 (MUST SEE) One Movie Punch: 9.0/10 You can stream THE CAVE now on Amazon Prime, Fandango Now, Apple TV and VUDU. This is Jon-David, aka Mafia Hairdresser, for One Movie Punch.

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another Matinee Monday. This week, I had the pleasure of taking in Blake Lively’s latest film, THE RHYTHM SECTION, especially after seeing her performance alongside Anna Kendrick in 2018’s stylish daytime noir, A SIMPLE FAVOR (Episode #274). I’m sure raising children, including adult man-child Ryan Reynolds, takes a great deal of time. Does THE RHYTHM SECTION continue to expand the range of a post-Gossip Girl Blake Lively? You’ll find out in a moment. Before the review, we’ll have a brand new promo from our good friends at The VHS Strikes Back podcast. Every week, Dave and Chris blow the dust off an actual VHS cassette, then watch and discuss the film. You can find out more on Twitter @vhsstrikesback or on Facebook and Instagram by searching for The VHS Strikes Back podcast. Don’t miss their two guest episodes during last year’s Reign of Terror 2019, with reviews for ALIEN VS PREDATOR (Episode #605) and 30 DAYS OF NIGHT (Episode #626). And don’t miss their upcoming guest review as Comics in Motion for BIRDS OF PREY later in February! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is THE RHYTHM SECTION(2020), the art-house action film directed by Reed Morano and written for the screen by Mark Burnell, based on his novel of the same name. The film centers around Stephanie Patrick (Blake Lively), a young woman who has given up on life after her family died in a plane crash three years ago. After meeting a journalist who has evidence the plane crash was actually triggered by a bomb, she seeks out the mysterious B (Jude Law) to help her get revenge. No spoilers. We’ve seen an explosion in female-led thrillers in the past few years. We’ve also covered quite a few of them on the podcast, including ATOMIC BLONDE (Episode #324), MARIA (Episode #514), and TOMB RAIDER (Episode #358). In fact, 2018 was littered with female-led thrillers, including Jennifer Lawrence’s RED SPARROW; Jennifer Garner’s PEPPERMINT; and Taraji P. Henson’s PROUD MARY. With the exception of ATOMIC BLONDE (and a soft spot in my heart for TOMB RAIDER), the latest crop of female-led action thrillers have all been just so-so. I’m going to say up front that I am delighted to see the number of female-led action thrillers hitting the big and small screens, and despite the problems with some of those films, it’s great to see the film industry finding gender parity. It also stands to reason that because of this explosion, we’re also going to see a lot of mediocre female-led action thrillers, based purely on the law of averages. This is absolutely not because women are in the lead roles, or because these stories seem unrealistic, or because of any number of thinly-veiled sexist arguments. In nearly all of the above cases, it wasn’t the women in the lead roles which were the problem, but the characters they were asked to inhabit and the story being told around them. Blake Lively is easily one of the highlights of the film, despite playing one of the more challenging roles in this budding genre. Without spoiling the story for anyone, Stephanie Patrick has a very troubled life prior to seeking revenge, and Blake Lively carries the character down the path, for better or worse. I have no doubt she could carry this franchise forward, and would love to see a Stephanie Patrick with a lot more confidence taking on another mission. But I do think it will need some retooling, because THE RHYTHM SECTION falls firmly into the mediocre range. THE RHYTHM SECTION is visually beautiful, which is to be expected from director Reed Morano. She was best known as a cinematographer for the first part of her career, working on a ton of projects you can peruse at her IMDb page. She also helped produce and direct the first three episodes of “The Handmaid’s Tale”, the stunning adaptation of Margaret Atwood’s dystopian novel. THE RHYTHM SECTION has a number of beautiful shots, moving between London, Scotland, Madrid, and Tangier, among other locations. Great framing is paired with great costumes, all matching each scene’s color palette. I felt the action scenes were great, especially a long-take car chase that reminded me a great deal of the Uncharted video game series. I also felt that Morano struggled with pacing while trying to capture those same beautiful shots. Taken apart, every scene or sequence looks technically amazing, but when they are placed in sequence, they can also linger just a little too long, and sometimes way too long. It creates a weird effect where the film’s parts are actually greater than their sum, which is one of the more difficult knots to untangle, especially given the film’s translation to the screen. It’s the story where I have a great number of problems. Mark Burnell is the author of the Stephanie Patrick book series, and wrote the screenplay for the film. I have not read the novel, although I and One Movie Spouse are looking forward to checking them out, especially as fans of the Lisbeth Salander series. (Shoot, forgot to mention those movies earlier as well!) However, you can tell there’s a lot of story missing, which ends up being told in montages and soft-focus flashbacks, but likely helped flesh out Stephanie’s character. And you can tell that what we are seeing feels very rushed, because the scope of the story is quite large, once things get going. Stephanie has to track down a number of people to extract her revenge, but after a long setup and training sequence, we end up speeding through the food chain towards the hidden mastermind. You can tell a meandering story in a novel as opportunities and ideas arise. But you can’t always fit that story into a feature film, not without feeling short-changed. I saw the same difference between reading Robert Ludlum’s original Jason Bourne novels and seeing the feature film adaptations in the 2000s. Each novel tells a wide and sweeping story, delving into details and characters, and exploring the lore behind the story, especially Treadstone. The movies, however, don’t even try to capture that same level of immersion, and distilled the stories down to their barest elements, mostly focused on action for better or worse. I think the only two ways THE RHYTHM SECTION works on the screen, to capture the full story, would be to either play it as a limited-series, so we can grow with Stephanie as a character, with time to marinate between segments, or distill it down into action and intrigue that keeps a good pace, similar to the aforementioned ATOMIC BLONDE. In today’s film, it feels like Burnell falls into a common adaptation trap, trying to keep all the important scenes from the book even if they may not be important scenes for an effective film. THE RHYTHM SECTION is an adaptation of Mark Burnell’s novel of the same name, written for the screen by Burnell and brought to life between Reed Morano’s beautiful cinematography and Blake Lively’s effective performance. However, the film suffers in its adaptation for the screen, trying to tell too large of a story in too short a time. Action and espionage fans should definitely check out this film, despite its adaptation issues. Everyone else should keep in mind this film deals with some very difficult subject material, right from the start, and throughout the film, in addition to a standard revenge tale. Rotten Tomatoes: 33% Metacritic: 44 One Movie Punch: 6.0/10 THE RHYTHM SECTION (2020) is rated R and is currently playing in theaters.

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another week of reviews here at One Movie Punch! This week, we have a mixture of film reviews for your enjoyment. On Monday, I’ll be reviewing THE RHYTHM SECTION (2020), starring the incredible Blake Lively in a potential franchise launch. On Tuesday, we’ll be picking up the first of two reviews from Jon-David, aka Mafia Hairdresser, who will be joining the podcast as a regular contributor going forward. He’ll be reviewing THE CAVE (2019) this week, an excellent companion piece to last week’s FOR SAMA (Episode #703). On Wednesday, I’ll be reviewing CLOSURE (2018), a daytime comedy noir which will include interview segments from writer/director Alex Goldberg. Thursday will see the return of Christina Eldridge, aka Durara Reviews, who will be tackling perhaps the most unlikely animated film nominee at this year’s Oscars, KLAUS (2019). Andrew returns on Friday with another Fantastic Fest feature, this one heading towards a limited to wide distribution in theaters, entitled THE LODGE (2019). And on Saturday, I’ll finally be reviewing the powerful documentary TRANSFORMER (2017) as part of our Under the Kanopy series. Of course, today we have our first Sponsor Sunday event for the year, with a film chosen by our third sponsor, Matthieu Landour Engel. We had the pleasure of reviewing Matthieu’s short ZERO M2 late last year in Episode #661, along with the full interview in Patreon Episode #P019, still publicly available at patreon.com/onemoviepunch. We were very honored to have him join the growing list of sponsors last year, and that made him eligible for Sponsor Sundays today. Every sponsor at One Movie Punch gets the opportunity to force me to watch and review a film, but I can’t really say watching David Lynch’s DUNE (1984) is something I need to be forced to do. If you want to get in on the action for Sponsor Sunday, head over to patreon.com/onemoviepunch and sign up at any level. A promo will run before the review. Also, because Matthieu is such an awesome person, in lieu of any specific promotion of his projects, he’s asked me to put a plug in for Darcy Prendergast’s recent short film TOMORROW’S ON FIRE, which is currently available on Vimeo. The short film is being used to raise awareness and funds for the recent Australian wildfires. As someone who has had to evacuate twice due to wildfires, I can certainly appreciate this effort. You can find Darcy’s work on Twitter at @d_prendergast, on Facebook @ohyeahwow, and on Instagram @dancy_predatorghast. Check the show notes for a link to the short film, or check social media. Tomorrow’s On Fire by Darcy Prendergast LINK: https://vimeo.com/383034313 Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// JOSEPH: “And now, One Movie Punch presents an interview about the real star of DUNE (1984), the unnamed House Atreides pug, with his only remaining descendent, in a segment we like to call...” JOSEPH: “PUGS! IN! SPACE!” JOSEPH: “Translations will be handled, as always, by One Movie Spouse. So, what is your name?” AMY: “I do not have a name. My father did not have a name. My father before him did not have a name, who played in the film. In fact, I find names to be outdated, human concepts, which David Lynch was trying to move beyond in this questionable adaptation.” JOSEPH: “Wow, that’s a very... uhhh, astute observation.” AMY: “Thank you. You are a lot more polite than your other human counterparts.” JOSEPH: “Right. So, let’s get to the movie. What was it like for him to be the only pug on set?” AMY: “It is my understanding that he faced major discrimination because of his breed. You know, pugs were originally bred as companions for Chinese Emperors, before they became the toast of the town in Europe. But even back then, my ancestor could feel the rising anti-pug discrimination we see in today’s Internet memes and videos.” JOSEPH: “That’s quite insightful. Did everyone treat him as a mere animal, or...?” AMY: “I must say that he had nothing but praise for a then young Patrick Stewart, enjoying most his time filming the battle scene. They often talked about the lack of enthusiasm he had for the part, but my ancestor assured him things would work out. And wouldn’t you know it, three years later Patrick Stewart would become Captain Jean-Luc Picard of the Starship Enterprise.” JOSEPH: “We have to wrap up here. Do you have any thoughts on the upcoming adaptation by Denis Villeneuve?” AMY: “If casting is any indication, then we might be in for a real treat. Of course, with no mention or images of the House Atreides Pug, I’m not sure this new adaptation could ever have the same refined audience.” JOSEPH: “Well, I appreciate you taking the time. I know it must have been... rough to fit us into your schedule.” AMY: “Really? A dog pun?!” JOSEPH: “My bad. On to the review...” ///// Today’s movie is DUNE (1984), the science-fiction epic written and directed by David Lynch, based on the novel written by Frank Herbert. On the desert planet of Arrakis, nicknamed Dune, a precious resource known as the spice is mined, which contains the ability to fold space. As House Atreides assumes command of the planet, young Paul Atreides (Kyle MacLachlan) discovers his destiny, gets glowing blue eyes, rides a giant worm, and, yes, has a pug companion. No spoilers. I have always been a voracious reader. Before we could carry the Internet in our pocket, or stream whatever we wanted, whenever we wanted, I would throw on some instrumental music and read. It began as a steady diet of young adult detective novels, especially Alfred Hitchcock’s “The Three Investigators”. It turned into reading nearly all the available Dungeons & Dragons novels, during the heyday of TSR, Inc., before they were bought out by Wizards on the Coast. And after I made it to college, and the Internet became a thing, an older gentleman I met in a Stephen King newsletter group recommended Frank Herbert’s “Dune”. I had seen the movie, of course, which I thought was so-so. He laughed (or however we did that before text abbreviations over e-mail) and said I owed it to myself to read the first book, or the first three, or all six of them if I felt so inclined. And after a trip to a second-hand bookstore, littered with cheap mass market paperbacks, I picked up the six for a song and placed them on the shelf for break. I was working full-time at the university during the summer, but after work I went home, made dinner, watched a little television, then headed to my room for some music and started reading “Dune”. Three weeks later, I had finished all six of them, reading voraciously on breaks, back at the apartment, even at the bar waiting for friends to show up on the weekend. I absolutely loved the books. Frank Herbert’s “Dune” series is easily one of the best science-fiction series out there. He nails that combination of hard science-fiction, not just with the science itself, but with the social and political structures, all while blending in a clear messianic hero story. Translating that rich, immersive world to the screen has mixed results, a combination of special effects limitations of the time, and the fool’s errand of trying to cram a multi-year political saga into just two hours. Contextually speaking, the practical effects are really good for 1984, a melding of classic Dino de Laurentiis production values (think CONAN THE DESTROYER and a host of lesser-known sword and sorcery films) and some attempts at cutting edge digital effects, including a shielding mechanism and the classic glowing blue Fremen eyes. Die-hard science fiction fans have learned to be forgiving with effects over the years, but not so much the general audience. Many critics, and many audience members, probably couldn’t help but lump DUNE into the other de Laurentiis pictures, much like how science-fiction is often lumped into fantasy and the other so-called pulp fiction. I adore the film score and soundtrack, by Brian Eno and the band TOTO. The sets and costumes are all excellent, and actually do the lion’s share of the world-building. World-building is where DUNE tends to struggle the most, which isn’t just trying to collapse everything into two hours. From the opening monologue, we are assaulted with information, an attempt to collapse the history into something manageable, but also I think to get the petty details out of the way for Lynch to take us on a more surreal journey through this universe, focused more on the emotions and the meaning. DUNE is chock full of Lynch’s emotional storytelling, which runs counter to Herbert’s storytelling style. The clipped dialogue and the internal monologues, all staple Lynch features, felt out of place. And once everything is set up, we go through what could easily be eight hours of content in about ninety minutes, including a two-year resistance movement. Perhaps if Lynch had the space, or the inclination, to develop the world, we could have seen a science-fiction “Twin Peaks”. I thought the film was so-so when I first saw it, and after reading the novels and seeing it again, I think I still only find it so-so. I want to close on some thoughts about the franchise, especially with the upcoming remake by Denis Villeneuve. My desire to read all six novels back in college wasn’t just because they were so great. I was also hoping to finish the novels before taking in the mini-series produced for The Sci-Fi Channel, which I found far superior to today’s film. Better effects, more time to explore, more time to marinate. I was also impressed by their follow-up series, which collapsed the next two novels to close out the initial trilogy. It didn’t do as well as hoped, either critically or with the larger audience, and there was the small franchise reboot that found massive success called, and let me check my notes here, BATTLESTAR GALACTICA. I streamed that in a couple months as well. Twenty years later, we’re getting another attempt at a remake. If anyone can manage this, it’s Villeneuve, as ARRIVAL cements his understanding of hard science-fiction, and BLADE RUNNER 2049 (Episode #332) certainly shows he knows how to take care of a franchise. Can he do what Lynch could not in 1984, with even better special effects, and a side-car television series? We’ll find out in December 2020, or maybe if it’s pushed for reshoots. I would actually want a Game of Thrones style show, starting with the prequel novels based on Frank’s notes to build up the houses, and explore the larger universe. For me, watching 1984’s DUNE is the equivalent of cramming the entire first season of Game of Thrones into a two-hour film. It was hard enough collapsing it into ten episodes, but it was such a masterful translation. “Dune”, as a franchise, would be incredible in a similar vein, especially now that producers know audiences don’t mind humongous casts, intricate plots, political intrigue, immense worlds, and tenuous characters. The series could continue into the core six novels, with the obvious series bail out points being the end of the first novel, the end of the third novel, the end of the fourth novel, and the end of the sixth novel. You could even do a split timeline show, inserting the prequels and a larger, more drawn out story of Paul Atreides on his journey. I know I would. DUNE is Lynch’s so-so attempt to adapt Herbert’s epic science-fiction novel for the big screen, perhaps an irreconcilable difference in storytelling focus. It looks and sounds great for 1984, with many of the correct pieces in place, but ultimately feels too rushed being shoehorned into a feature-length film. Science-fiction fans owe it to themselves to see the film, and I would further recommend the first novel, which fills in so many of the details missing from the film. Everyone else, just know the film also has many, many good parts, even forward-thinking parts, that are definitely worth a single viewing. Rotten Tomatoes: 53% Metacritic: 40 One Movie Punch: 6.5/10 DUNE (1984) is rated PG-13 and is currently playing on VOD.

Hi everyone! We’re closing out the week with another entry in our ongoing series, Under the Kanopy. Kanopy is a library and university funded streaming service that grants card holders six free streams per month from a variety of classic, mainstream, independent, and international releases. They also have streaming agreements with excellent distributors, like A24 and Kino Lorber, who often produce and distribute the critically acclaimed, if not commercially successful films. Today’s film, FOR SAMA, was originally available on Kanopy, but has also recently become available on Amazon Prime, YouTube, and PBS after this year’s nomination for Best Documentary Feature at the Oscars. It is not an easy watch, as it deals with the siege of Aleppo in Syria, from the perspective of a journalist and doctor raising a child in a makeshift warzone hospital. We’ve previously covered Syria in our review for LAST MEN IN ALEPPO (Episode #032), which tackled the noble White Helmets, a community-organized first responder squad which rescued civilians from bomb sites and transported them to hospitals like those in FOR SAMA. Both documentaries are very powerful, but also very graphic, as one might expect. Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friend Rory Mitchell, from the Mitchell Report Unleashed podcast. They were gracious enough to have yours truly on as a guest recently, which you can check out in Mitchell Report Unleashed Episode #173. You can follow Rory on Twitter @officallyrory, on Facebook @mitchellreportunleashed, and on Instagram @re3684. You can also subscribe to the podcast at anchor.fm/rory-mitchell8. Don’t miss a single episode of his insightful interview-driven show. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is FOR SAMA(2019), the powerful documentary directed by Waad Al-Kateab and Edward Watts. Set within the city of Aleppo, FOR SAMA is a love letter from Waad Al-Kateab to her daughter Sama, born during the brutal siege after the revolution. It is comprised of video shot by Waad Al-Kateab, centered around the makeshift hospital operated by her husband, Hamza Al-Kateab. No spoilers, but a very serious content warning for graphic violence. FOR SAMA is video taken within a war zone, showing the true horrors of modern warfare. It is an important film, but the destruction is very real, and therefore may not be suitable for all viewers. If there’s one blind spot I had last year, it was documentaries. I used to do a regular feature here at One Movie Punch called Documentary Thursdays, and I loved using the opportunity to keep up with theatrical documentaries, or to take in something I wanted to learn more about. 2019 was a very busy year for the podcast, so before today’s film, I had only reviewed one of the current Oscar nominees, AMERICAN FACTORY (Episode #585). Jon-David will be up next week with his review of THE CAVE (Episode #706), another documentary from Syria about another makeshift hospital. We’ll pick up the other two in the coming weeks, but many suspect the award with go to one of these three documentaries. We know AMERICAN FACTORY has reached many viewers thanks to producers Michelle and Barack Obama, but why are there a surprising two documentaries about Syria? Well, because the situation in Syria is horrific. In the early 2010s, the so-called Arab Spring spread across North Africa and the Middle East, a series of popular uprisings against existing governments and dictators, starting in Tunisia, and spreading in large measure to five countries: Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, and Syria. Without getting into the politics of each specific situation, the governments each responded in different ways, most with extreme forms of violence. Syria’s situation, in particular, is horrific thanks in very large part to their current dictator, Bashar al-Assad, and his use of chemical weapons and other forms of collective punishment against the people. This brutal response brought condemnation from the international community, but apparently not enough to push forward with another regime change. This internal conflict would be enough to create a terrible situation, but Syria is also involved to some degree in three external conflicts: sitting next to a volatile situation between Israel and Palestine; a larger regional power struggle with new factions formed out of the chaos of the US occupation in Iraq; and perhaps the most volatile of all, a growing perceived cold war between the United States and Russia, both of which are involved on the ground in Syria for dubious, sometimes confused reasons. The news cycle, especially in the United States, flips between scenes of extreme destruction and very privileged pundits talking about the situation like a geopolitical chess game. They rarely discuss the effect on the actual people on the ground, because they refuse, or are not allowed, to send reporters. So when video evidence is smuggled out, as with FOR SAMA, the truths they reveal become all the more important. That’s the key strength of FOR SAMA: it’s very human focus. Nearly everything we see in FOR SAMA is being captured by Waad al-Kateab, using a decent video camera, and whatever software was available. Waad is a journalist before a documentarian, but FOR SAMA blurs that line a great deal. While news outlets tend to use aerial photos, maps, and staged interviews to discuss the situation, Waad is capturing everything from a very human perspective. Not just bringing her eye to the events around her, but literally capturing things at eye-level and in real-time, during bombings, emergency room trauma, and other regime-induced horrors. Simply put, there is no other record for the horrors taking place in Aleppo except for the footage being captured inside, which is exactly why both FOR SAMA and THE CAVE are very important documentaries, not just for last year, but for the larger historical record. For me, this ground-level focus of FOR SAMA is as important as other works that look at or discuss the horrors of war for everyday citizens. Last year, One Movie Spawn covered IN THIS CORNER OF THE WORLD (Episode #562), which looked at the horror of bombing Japanese civilians during World War II, which was a different take on similar themes in 1983’s BAREFOOT GEN, set in the aftermath of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. Or the impact of reading Kurt Vonnegut’s “Slaughterhouse Five”, based in part on his experience being a prisoner of war in Dresden during the Allied bombings. All these works show the perversely described “collateral damage” of war, waged in our names, and for which we bear responsibility in equal measure for our support of said actions. And all of which should give us caution in pursuing war at all. Finally, what’s especially important about FOR SAMA is that it is told from a female perspective, and further, from both a mother’s and a daughter’s perspective. I don’t mean this in the sense that crimes against women and children are categorically worse, even if they are in nearly all cases. I mean this in helping men to understand a basic question asked right now, not just in war-torn regions, but in looking towards the coming climate catastrophe: Why bring any life into this world at all? It’s a decision every potential mother will have to make going forward. And yet, when Waad looks at Sama through the camera, and when Sama looks back at her, and through that same camera at us, we know instinctively why. Women have the incredible capability to bear children, and as such, bear the truly awesome responsibility of answering that specific question about bringing life into this world. There is no universal answer to that question, but by the end of FOR SAMA, we all can understand a little more about Waad’s answer. And I suspect mothers will understand her decisions a lot more, in ways I can understand as a father, but also in ways I cannot as a man. FOR SAMA is a poignant, effective, and necessary addition to the historical record, capturing a ground-level look at the siege of Aleppo, from the point of view of director Waad al-Kateab. While capturing the real-life horrors of modern war, it also meditates very well on the larger question of bringing life into a destructive world, provides at least one answer to that question, and importantly all from a mother’s perspective. Documentary fans, or folks who want to learn more about the effect of war on civilians, should definitely check out this film. But please heed all the graphic content warnings! Rotten Tomatoes: 99% (CERTIFIED FRESH) Metacritic: 89 (MUST SEE) One Movie Punch: 10/10 FOR SAMA (2019) is rated TV-PG and is currently playing on Amazon Prime, Kanopy, PBS, and YouTube. Check the show notes for a link to the full film on YouTube. FULL FILM: youtu.be/8jFHbo0Cgu8

Hi everyone! It’s Friday, so that means another Fantastic Fest feature from Andrew Campbell. The festival, in addition to screening the best and weirdest genre films every year, has also become a film market for those same features. And now thanks to whatever clerical error resulted in Andrew receiving press credentials last year, we’re reaping the rewards as the purchased films begin receiving limited and independent screenings, including today’s pickup from podcast favorite distributor, Neon. Check out Andrew’s recent reviews from Neon for PARASITE (Episode #628), BORDER (Episode #480), and BODIED (Episode #383). Before the review, we’ll have a promo from the Ocho Duro Parlay Hour. Every episode, the ODPH Crew covers a wide variety of topics from sports and popular culture, with a little something for everyone. A huge shout out to Ken at ODPH for becoming a sponsor of One Movie Punch. We can’t thank you all enough for your constant support! Let us know what Sponsor Sunday movie review you want as soon as possible! You can find them on Twitter and Instagram @odparlayhour and on Facebook @ochoduroparlayhour. Get the avalanche of content you deserve! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello film fans! Andrew here, back today with an absolute white-knuckler of a film. As always, I’ll keep my distance from spoiler territory, but after today’s review you will either be psyched for its upcoming release or will know that this is one for you to avoid. Over the last few years, many of my favorite horror films have come from two auteurs writing and producing their first two original films: Jordan Peele and Ari Aster. Peele’s GET OUT and US brought the so-called elevated horror with their social themes complimenting his expert direction and memorable performances. Though Peele had shot to fame thanks to the deserved success of KEY & PEELE on Comedy Central, Ari Aster came out of nowhere to deliver HEREDITARY and MIDSOMMAR just 13 months apart, with the latter commencing principal photography while HEREDITARY was still raking in the millions theatrically based on exceptional word-of-mouth. The co-writer/directors of today’s film aren’t household names yet, but with THE LODGE serving as their follow up to the disturbing, criminally underseen 2014 German-language horror film GOODNIGHT MOMMY, they should be on your radar. Today’s movie is THE LODGE (2019), written by Sergio Casci, Severin Fiala, and Veronika Franz, and co-directed by Fiala and Franz. THE LODGE is distributed by Alamo Drafthouse’s distribution company NEON, making its Texas premiere at the 2019 Fantastic Fest after being bumped from its original Fall 2019 release date to February 2020. THE LODGE stars indie-darling (and Elvis Presley granddaughter) Riley Keough as Grace, a young woman with a dark childhood who finds herself engaged to a recently-divorced older man, Richard (Richard Armitage). Richard, Grace, and his two teenage children head to a remote and snowbound mountain lodge with the goal of breaking down the children’s icy barriers when it comes to this new mother figure. When business calls Richard back to the city, Grace steps up to watch the children alone for a few days as the tension begins to boil over. The trailer for THE LODGE is excellent. Yes, it does give away some key imagery from the film, but it’s out of context and doesn’t detract much from the story. It’s haunting, it looks and sounds gorgeous, and really refrains from giving away much of the plot. However, with the whole ‘trapped in a sinister house’ motif, I’m afraid it may come off like a film full of played-out jump scares. That’s not at all what you’re getting here. I tried sitting through the new THE GRUDGE remake recently and walked out after the first few dozen times I heard... ...and a nightmarish image popped into the frame. Yes, THE LODGE has a few of those pulse-accelerating scares, but it has far more in common with the existential familial dread of HEREDITARY, even down to the usage of a dollhouse in the story. THE LODGE is not about the big scares, rather it starts out by knocking the audience for a loop in the first ten minutes and then sustaining that dread for nearly two uncomfortable hours. If you’re a horror fan, you may recall how it felt walking out of HEREDITARY or MIDSOMMAR in a daze, relieved that the film is finally over, but certain you just saw something pretty special. THE LODGE is not great date night horror fare, unless you’re ready to take a bit of a mental pounding. What it also provides is some lush visuals that put all of the over-processed studio horror-films to shame. Fiala and Franz have an eye for framing scenes, transforming even the most benign interactions between Grace and the children into something unsettling. Though much of the film keeps us trapped inside the lodge, there are several well-shot scenes in the snowy surroundings and the shots of the lodge from on high recall the same foreboding feelings you get instantaneously from seeing Kubrick’s Overlook Hotel in THE SHINING. What makes THE LODGE fantastic? This is a horror film marketed to mainstream audiences that refuses to pander to them. After Ari Aster’s two amazing films, I’ve been searching for that next fix and THE LODGE is as close as I’ve come to reaching those artistic horror highs. Fortunately, Fantastic Fest delivered two dynamite films on the same wavelength this year, so check this one out and watch out for my review of A24’s SAINT MAUD in mid-March if you love to feel bad at the movies. THE LODGE is a rewarding endurance test that all self-professed horror aficionados should see on the big screen (and you’ll never want to watch it again). Fans of unrelenting dread and films where it does always turn out okay in the end, such as HEREDITARY, MIDSOMMAR or, I’ll say it, CATS, will enjoy this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 80% Metacritic: 70 One Movie Punch: 8.2/10 THE LODGE is rated R and opens nationwide next Friday, February 7. JOSEPH: “Dude, this movie hasn’t even come out. Why are you talking about a movie our listeners can’t even watch yet?” Joseph, I’m glad you asked. Come back next week for the conclusion of my two-part review arc entitled “Films Premiering on February 7 That Feature Horrible Things Happening at a Remote Cabin”... JOSEPH: “That old chestnut, eh? I like it!” ...where I’ll be discussing COME TO DADDY, starring Elijah Wood as a troubled man trying to reconnect with his estranged father. It’s not quite as dark as THE LODGE, but it comes close. I’ll see you then.

Hi everyone! I can think of a number of bad films for date night, but today’s film just might take the prize. One Movie Spouse and I went to see the film on one of our weekly movie dates, and it was a real buzzkill. Not for the excellent performances, incredible costuming, or insightful storytelling, but for the vile, true story behind Fox News. She’s going to be up in a bit with her thoughts, about the movie itself and the story behind it. I’ll just be over here swearing to no one in particular that Fox News is even still operating. Now, whenever I feel passionate feelings come up, I turn to Aicila and Erik at Bicurean to help me sort things out. Every episode, they explore a different topic, looking for the underlying issues, and finding common ground whenever possible. You can find them on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram @bicurean, or check them out at bicurean.com. Be sure to like, follow, rate, and subscribe! They’ve been huge supporters of One Movie Punch over the past year, and we cannot recommend them enough! A promo will run before the review. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Hello, It’s me Amy, AKA One Movie Spouse, back for another review. MWAH!  Listen to my review, then catch me on Twitter @OneMovieSpouse to keep the conversation going. Here we go! Today’s movie is BOMBSHELL(2019), the drama directed by Jay Roach and written for the screen by Charles Randolph. The film sheds light on the sexual harassment scandal at Fox News, involving the exploitation of women by Roger Ailes (John Lithgow), focused on former anchor Megyn Kelly (Charlize Theron), former co-host Gretchen Carlson (Nicole Kidman), and an entry-level aspiring employee named Kayla Pospisil (Margot Robbie). No spoilers. “Bombshell” is filled with an all-star cast including Academy Award® winners Charlize Theron and Nicole Kidman, and Academy Award® nominees John Lithgow and Margot Robbie. This film is based on the real scandal inside the most powerful and controversial media empire of all time, Fox News. The film is an explosive story of the women who brought down the infamous man who helped turn Fox News into a financially successful and socially damaging news channel. I did not know the extent of the scandal at Fox News and was shocked to see it all laid out during this nearly two-hour film. Without giving details beyond what’s revealed in the film trailers, the most powerful and lingering thought I have after seeing the film is the courage and tenacity of these women. They had to endure years of sexual harassment at Fox News, and the impact of taking a stand against it. I was horrified to see what Megyn Kelly, Gretchen Carlson, and Kayla Pospisil had to endure to receive in order to keep their jobs and/or advance their careers. My husband and I have been enjoying “Mad Men”, and at times during BOMBSHELL, I had to stop and remind myself that fifty years later the same shit was still happening in the workplace. This film struck many emotional chords with me: disgust, anger, anxiety, and eventually some relief as their full story came to light. No woman should have to endure what these women did in order to have a career. PERIOD. Casting and makeup was phenomenal in this film! It is remarkable to see the resemblance between Charlize Theron and Megyn Kelly, put their photos side by side, and it’s near impossible to tell who’s who and their similarities are uncanny right down to their mannerisms. Go ahead, Google it quick and then come back if you haven’t already made the comparisons. WOW, right?! And let’s talk about John Lithgow’s makeup and performance for a moment. Roger Ailes (John Lithgow) is a human piece of garbage! There are few times in my life have I hated a man more than this. I felt physical revulsion when he came on screen. BLECH! I don’t want to end this review on a vile note, however. There’s a reason these talented actors were cast in these roles. They tell a powerful, albeit uncomfortable tale. It is my hope to anyone seeing this film that is being harassed or has been exploited at work to have the courage to speak up and receive assistance. There is no shame in sharing your story and asking for assistance. BOMBSHELL is an eye-opening story shedding light on the scandal at Fox News. It tells a powerful tale of three women who had the courage to speak up and make change in this powerful media empire. Rotten Tomatoes: 69%  Metacritic: 64  One Movie Punch: 7.0/10 BOMBSHELL (2019) is rated R and is currently playing in theaters.

Hi everyone! It’s Episode 700! Thank you all so much for your support since 2018! One Movie Punch has always been a labor of love, and today’s episode is no exception. In fact, today’s film might have required a bit more labor and a little less love to get through, and write, but here it is. You might be wondering why I would be covering a movie like today’s film, and at least in this case, it’s because this film co-stars Kyle Hester, who I had the pleasure of interviewing last year for his role in THE CHAIR (Episode #550), along with a two-part exclusive interview on THE CHAIR, PREACHER SIX, and other projects, including ZOMBIE WITH A SHOTGUN. It’s very low-budget. It’s very independent. And it’s got problems... but also some very interesting ideas. Before the review, we’ll have a promo for the Super Media Bros. They were part of last year’s Big Heads Media Takeover, reviewing CLOVERFIELD (Episode #519), which you should definitely check out. I’m throwing their promo on this episode because this film is right up their alley for their Cult Cinema Showdown segment. I’m also kind of hoping they come back on the podcast for Takeover Tuesday, but don’t let them know that! You can find them on Twitter @SuperMediaBros_, Facebook @SuperMediaBros, and Instagram @supermediabrospodcast. If you love cult cinema, and the more obscure corners of the media universe, let Midnight Agent Raw and Okami guide you! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is ZOMBIE WITH A SHOTGUN(2019), the film adaptation of the cult web series written and directed by creator Hilton Ariel Ruiz. The film follows Aaron Walker (Braeden Baade), a man infected with a zombie virus which his body is somehow fighting off, along with his shotgun, played by, well, a shotgun. He’s on the run with his girlfriend Rachael Young (Kathryn Kuhn), who may know more about his condition than she realizes. And there’s black magic, ruined buildings, soft focus softcore love scenes, and friend of the podcast, Kyle Hester. No spoilers. I was drawn to ZOMBIE WITH A SHOTGUN because this film has two of my favorite film plot devices: zombies and shotguns. My love of zombies was nurtured in large part by George Romero’s groundbreaking work, and developed more recently by “The Walking Dead”, “Z Nation” and the explosion in zombie-related content that has followed. One of those corners of the zombie world has been Ruiz’s largely fan-supported independent intellectual property “Zombie with a Shotgun”, which has been adapted as an experimental web series in 2012, and more recently as a comic book through Rats & Crows Publishing in 2017, intended as a companion to today’s feature film adaptation. My love of shotguns was born, hilariously, during Tarantino and Rodriguez’s “Grindhouse” double-billing, when a trailer for a fake film called HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN was played, but then eventually picked up and produced for home markets, an homage to the exploitation microbudget films of yesteryear. My love was nurtured with a three-year obsession with Destiny on PlayStation, where I both loved using and hated being taken out by the close quarters weapon. I’m not an ammosexual by any means, but there’s something about shotguns in films that imply a lot more than the scene would suggest. So, put the two together, and you would think you’d have a hit. Unfortunately, ZOMBIE WITH A SHOTGUN begins with my least favorite plot device, in media res, which literally translates  to “in the middle of things”, and that’s where we end up, not just with an opening flash forward to a standoff between the authorities and said zombie with said shotgun, but then a flash back to Aaron and Rachael on the run. The film acts as a combination reboot and continuation of the web series, featuring the same lead male, but a new lead female. I suspect the film rewards more than frustrates fans with these opening moments, especially if they know the lore. For the uninitiated, the film only makes a semblance of sense about two-thirds of the way in. We do get pieces of the story along the way, sometimes in further flashbacks, like some weird and unexplained sexual satanic ritual with some sort of connection to the zombie virus, or the odd scene that targets the bizarre relationship between Aaron and Rachel, who apparently still engage quite frequently in physical intimacy. Ruiz marketed this film as one that would throw out all the rules for zombie films, but when it comes to world building, you can’t break rules without establishing other ones, which we desperately need early on. Storytelling choices aside, the film also struggles with the multiple curses that come with low budget cinema. Film quality is inconsistent, with high-resolution drone shots smashed up against lower-resolution camera shots. Sound is inconsistent, sometimes competing with ambient noise. And yet, the film still has a hypnotic feel to it, a combination of tantalizing scenes injected to re-engage interest, along with a sense that we’re going to end up somewhere. And we do end up somewhere, with a decent introduction to the world, but it’s only an introduction, and that’s what makes the film ultimately disappointing. ZOMBIE WITH A SHOTGUN needs a lot of work to unlock the obvious potential in the property. More storytelling and world building up front. More consistent production levels. Definitely step away from the soft focus softcore scenes, until they can be relevant to the feature. I think I’m so harsh on this because I see so much more potential, which can explore this weird kind of zombie romance art-house vibe in the same way that 2015’s MAGGIE was able to do with zombies and the parent/child relationship. I want to see this franchise find a larger audience, because we still have a lot of territory to explore with zombies, and despite its flaws, the film has the potential to tell so much more. ZOMBIE WITH A SHOTGUN is a low-budget adaptation of a cult intellectual property, which deserves a larger budget and better production. What this film lacks, however, is compensated by the interesting idea, which managed to captivate this zombie film fan all the way to the abrupt ending. It is definitely not a perfect film, but it has a lot of potential, and a few interesting ideas worth future exploration. Rotten Tomatoes: NR Metacritic: NR One Movie Punch: 4.3/10 ZOMBIE WITH A SHOTGUN (2019) is not rated and is currently playing on Amazon Prime.

Hi everyone! It’s Takeover Tuesday, and we’re welcoming back our good friends at the How I Met Your Friends podcast! Today, they’re tackling the film everyone loves to hate this year, the cinematic trainwreck known as CATS. I’m actually disappointed with the reviews so far, because one of my favorite CDs in my youth was a collection of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s greatest hits, including “Mr. Mistoffelees”. I’m not exactly sure how they could possibly translate this song to the screen, but I think we know now how not to do it. Or do we? Julie and Kathleen will be up in a moment with two very different views. Do you think you have what it takes to guest on One Movie Punch? Head over to onemoviepunch.com/takeover-tuesday and learn more about how you can guest here at One Movie Punch. We still have five (5) slots available for aspiring and established film critics to take the reins for an episode. We’ll run your promo before the review and will place it in regular rotation for the quarter. If it sounds like something interesting to you, reach out to us over social media. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// JOSEPH: “All right, let’s call this meeting to order. Thank you all for joining us, in person here and around the world via conference call. We’ll skip the roll call and get to it.” JOSEPH: “First order of business, and we’re running out of time folks. I’ve got a review that needs to get done right away, and I’m looking for a volunteer. Amy, can you take this one?” ONE MOVIE SPOUSE: “I am One Movie Spouse, after all. Saving you is kind of my thing!” JOSEPH: “Great, it’s CATS, so...” ONE MOVIE SPOUSE: “Well, you see...” JOSEPH: “Okay. One Movie Spawn?” ONE MOVIE SPAWN: “ARE YOU SERIOUS?!” JOSEPH: “Okay. No need to be so touchy. Andrew. Buddy.” ANDREW: “Um, yeah. I’ve got to take care of some other stuff.” JOSEPH: “I’m seeing a pattern here. Keith, are you begging off as well?” KEITH: “I mean, sure, now it might seem like...” JOSEPH: “Okay. Ryan, this one’s got your name on it!” RYAN: “I’m not entirely sure how you can place the entire blame on me...” JOSEPH: “Blame? I mean, it’s bad, but... Shane?” SHANE: “No! NO!” JOSEPH: “How about anyone out there on the conference call?” GROUP: *CHATTER* JOSEPH: “Okay, fine. Let’s just see who didn’t make the call today... Oh. Oh, I know who can review this one. That’s the last time they miss a meeting. Okay, that’s settled.” JOSEPH: “Item two...” ///// Today’s movie is CATS(2019), just released at the end of 2019, the musical film directed by Tom Hooper and based off of the stage production of the same name by Andrew Lloyd Webber. CATS has something for everyone, as long as you already love musicals and are familiar with this one. It's probably best if you're into ballet, too. No spoilers in this one, folks. CATS, the movie musical, is based on the stage production of the same name by Andrew Lloyd Webber. It opens on a white kitten named Victoria (Francesca Hayward) being dumped in the London streets. Other strays find her and take her along for the evening ahead. The strays are Jellicle cats and it is the night of their yearly gathering, the Jellicle Ball. Throughout the night, we meet the cats contending for a chance to go to the Heaviside Layer and start a new life. Victoria meets many cats along the way. Mr. Mistoffelees (Laurie Davidson) is a magician cat who develops a crush on her. Rebel Wilson plays Jennyanydots the Gumbie Cat, who is also competing to go to the Heaviside Layer. Wilson and James Corden, playing Bustopher Jones, steal the show with hilarious quips and inside jokes. By the end of the evening, we've been entertained by all the contenders and followed a budding romance. Dame Judi Dench, who missed playing Grizabella in the original production because of an injury, plays Old Deuteronomy, the Elder of the Jellicle cats, who will select this year's winning contestant. CATSis a magically weird little movie that doesn’t quite live up to the hype. We definitely recommend this to fans of musicals and the original CATS. Not a fan of either of those? Perhaps skip this one. Rotten Tomatoes: 20%  Metacritic: 32  One Movie Punch: 5.0/10 CATS (2019) is rated PG and is available in theaters.

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another Matinee Monday! This week, I’ll be covering Guy Ritchie’s new film, one of my favorite directors once upon a time, especially for classics like LOCK, STOCK, AND TWO SMOKING BARRELS and SNATCH, along with a host of English gangster films. He’s hit a rough patch as of late, but will today’s film be a return to form? You’ll find out in a moment! Before the review, we’ll have a promo from the Top 5 from Fighting podcast. Every episode, Greg and Mike discuss a wide range of topics, and when they disagree, you know they’re gonna fight about it! Always fun, but always contentious, you don’t want to miss a single episode. You can find them on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram @Top5forFighting. They have been some of our biggest supporters from last year. Shout out to their Marketing Angel. You know who you are! Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is THE GENTLEMEN(2020), written and directed by Guy Ritchie, based on a story developed with Ivan Atkinson and Marn Davies. The film follows an attempt by American-born Irish drug lord Mickey Pearson (Matthew McConaughey) to sell his extensive marijuana business to Oklahoma billionaire Matthew Berger (Jeremy Strong). After an attack on one of Pearson’s growhouses puts the deal in jeopardy, Pearson must manage the repercussions, even as other players seek a more hostile takeover. No spoilers. I remember when I began my career out of college, traveling to Los Angeles in 2001 for a consulting gig, where I met one of my good friends, who was also a fan of movies. Movies hadn’t yet moved to streaming services, but he had grown up closer to Chicago than I had, and as such, had access to a much more extensive selection of films than either my corn town or state university rental stores had to offer. So, once we got to talking about movies, he asked if I knew about Guy Ritchie, and I said no, and his jaw hit the floor. So, that weekend I went to our rental store in Denver, checked out LOCK, STOCK, AND TWO SMOKING BARRELS (1998) and SNATCH (2000), and immediately fell in love with UK gangster films as a whole. Every few years, Ritchie would put out another gangster picture, including REVOLVER (2005) and ROCKNROLLA (2008). There was also SWEPT AWAY (2002), but we don’t talk about that one. Ritchie’s star was really on the rise when he was given the green light for his SHERLOCK HOLMES franchise, which completed two films before Robert Downey, Jr. disappeared into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It opened up his schedule to pursue a number of mainstream films, all of which only did okay critically speaking, including THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. (2015), KING ARTHUR: LEGEND OF THE SWORD (2017), and strangely, the recent live-action adaptation of ALADDIN (2019). It seems like a strange direction for the previous monarch of UK gangster films, but that’s because other things have been in the works, most notably the successful “Snatch” television series, expanding on the story from the 2000 film in the same way the “Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels” television series followed the 1998 film. And clearly, that has most recently influenced today’s film, THE GENTLEMEN, a return to form for Ritchie, but in some ways, maybe from a bygone era. There are a lot of things I liked about Ritchie’s gangster films, but most especially his combination of characters and story he brings to whatever project. THE GENTLEMEN is driven by both characters and story, told on multiple levels. Initially, the story begins as a conversation between Pearson’s reserved right-hand man Ray (Charlie Hunnam), and an almost unrecognizable Hugh Grant as the hilarious, pansexual reporter Fletcher, who has stumbled across the deal to sell Pearson’s operation. In fact, Fletcher playfully narrates the story, which he’s also developed as a script, and which allows Ritchie to engage in multiple homages to film-making as a whole, including a reference to Francis Ford Coppola’s surprise hit, 1974’s THE CONVERSATION (Episode #091). The story takes a little bit to get going, especially as Fletcher’s narration needs to put a lot of chess pieces on the board, and on multiple levels. Pearson interacts with the big dogs, like Matthew, and the up and coming Asian gangster, Dry Eye (Henry Golding), which leaves the supporting and adjacent cast largely to deal with the repercussions, often to violent and comedic effect. Everything escalates, however, after the growhouse gets attacked, involving a group of ruffians known as the Toddlers, who are trained by their coach named... well, Coach, played by Colin Farrell in one of his best performances. The cast is excellent. Once all the pieces are on the board, the film then steadily and delightfully accelerates towards its final destination. Every viewer will need two key traits, however, to extract the maximum enjoyment out of this film. First, you cannot be squeamish when it comes to graphic subject matter, especially sex and violence. THE GENTLEMEN does not pull any punches with its violence, sometimes graphic and often extreme. That’s a staple for Ritchie gangster films, though, and while it can be gruesome, it is never really torturous. It’s actually a nice balance of scary calm, instant escalation, and real gangster shit. But it is not going to be for everyone. Second, however, is that you cannot be easily offended, and it’s here where I had quite a few problems with the film. THE GENTLEMEN is also awash with sexist, racist, and homophobic humor. Sometimes it’s done very well, like a direct conversation about racism between Coach and one of the Toddlers. Sometimes it’s done almost purely for shock value, or in a mistaken attempt at realism, especially the anti-Asian and homophobic jokes that did absolutely fuck all for the story. With violence we know the people on screen are not actually being hurt, but offensive comments also target people in the audience. I can tolerate the cultural differences in the UK regarding the impact of the c-word, which also permeates the film. But I can’t accept the same anti-Asian and homophobic tropes seen in the film industry since its founding. THE GENTLEMEN is a return to Guy Ritchie’s UK gangster roots, a violent film set in the modern day influenced perhaps too much by the social norms of yesteryear. An excellent cast and a strong story end up struggling with needlessly sexist, racist, and homophobic dialogue, which can sometimes hit upon insight, but often feels injected purely for shock value. Fans of Ritchie’s gangster films, who are not squeamish with violence or easily offended by bigoted dialogue, will definitely enjoy this film. Everyone else needs to know this is Ritchie back in his independent roots, not his most recent string of accessible mainstream films. Rotten Tomatoes: 77%  Metacritic: 51  One Movie Punch: 7.8/10 THE GENTLEMEN (2020) is rated R and is currently playing in theaters.

Hi everyone! Welcome back for another week of reviews. This week, we have a wide variety of films for you, truly something for everyone this week, and maybe at least one or two films for nobody. Today, I’ll be reviewing another feel-good family film, this time on Amazon Prime, followed by my review for Guy Ritchie’s latest film, THE GENTLEMEN, tomorrow. On Tuesday, the How I Met Your Friends podcast will be covering CATS, the film everyone loves to hate. On Wednesday, we’ll be dropping Episode #700, and it’ll be a doozy called ZOMBIE WITH A SHOTGUN. On Thursday, One Movie Spouse returns to unleash a rant like no other over BOMBSHELL. Andrew Campbell returns on Friday with his review of the upcoming THE LODGE, recently picked up by Neon for a limited release. And on Saturday, I’ll be reviewing FOR SAMA, another difficult documentary about the situation in Syria. Over on our Patreon page, we have an interview with Alexander Cooper, writer/director of last week’s SANDOW (Episode #693), where we talk extensively about that film, another feature film he produced called PARALLEL, and even a little bit about FIRST BLOOD. You can listen to the full interview publicly for a limited time at patreon.com/onemoviepunch. While you’re there, sign up at any level to maintain access to our exclusive content, along with becoming eligible for Sponsor Sundays. All contributions go to paying our expenses and will help us to grow with our audience. A promo about Sponsor Sundays will run before the review. Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is TROOP ZERO (2019), the feel-good family film directed by Katie Ellwood and Amber Templemore-Finlayson, who go by the moniker Bert & Bertie, and written for the screen by Lucy Alibar. The film follows Christmas Flint (Mckenna Grace), a misfit girl in 1970’s rural Georgia, who learns about an opportunity to be recorded for NASA’s Golden Record, and sent out with Voyager 1, as long as she is the winning Birdie Scout troop at the upcoming talent show. After being rejected by the local troop, she assembles a ragtag group of kids to form Troop Zero, and take their shot at interstellar glory. No spoilers. Feel-good films are important. We probably don’t review enough feel-good films here at One Movie Punch. Part of that is because our critics, on the whole, tend towards dramas and genre films, at least genres that aren’t explicitly feel-good. But a larger part of that is the lack of quality feel-good cinema being produced. I mean, there are plenty of family films being produced, especially for the streaming markets, but very few of the classic feel-good family films make it to the big screen anymore, outside of the animated features from the big name distributors. The question is why? I think that falls into two categories. First, the old theater to VOD to streaming pipeline is in the middle of another shakeup as the remaining streaming giants are brought online. Even as theaters are offering their own versions of the MoviePass model, more and more features that don’t require a theatrical experience are being moved to streaming services. In some cases, like last week’s TOGO (Episode #690), it might be the case of leaving money on the table, since at least two scenes would have been incredible on the big screen. But perhaps with today’s film, it might have saved money that would otherwise have been lost in distribution. That’s not to say TROOP ZERO is a bad film, just not a great candidate for the theater, but still an excellent feature for the streaming market. TROOP ZERO feels built off the template of feel-good family features of the 1980s and 1990s, especially the immense family film home markets. It has a predictable, heartwarming story about misfits finding acceptance. It is driven by unique characters who have forgivable flaws, with the exception of any specific villains. And it doesn’t have any high stakes conflicts, at least from an adult perspective, even if the story has plenty of low-stakes conflicts, often played to comedic effect. And, thematically, it deals with both universal pre-teen and adolescent concerns (including trauma, bedwetting, and social inclusion) and specific concerns from the time period (gender roles and expectations). Casting is a huge highlight of this film. Mckenna Grace, probably the only actress that will ever play both a young Carol Danvers and a young Tonya Harding, continues her impressive filmography with another solid role, playing off her natural charm and extensive experience. Her troop is comprised of equally enjoyable characters, including: her flamboyant, fashion-conscious best friend Joseph (Charlie Shotwell), neighborhood bullies Hell-No Price (Milan Ray) and her muscle Smash (Johanna Colón), and well-meaning evangelical Christian Anne-Claire (Bella Higginbotham) who only has one working eye. They are supported by Christmas’ father Ramsey Flint (Jim Gaffigan), who is apparently a good old boy lawyer with a heart of gold, and his assistant at the law practice, Miss Rayleen (Viola Davis), who eventually helps with the troop activities. Opposite Troop Zero, of course, is the local troop lead by social gossip Miss Massey (Allison Janney) and headed up by ultra-snot Piper Keller (Ashley Brooke). The storytelling remains focused mostly on the children, and their aspirations, but the viewer is also treated to a few scenes involving the adults. Visually speaking, TROOP ZERO works with the late 1970s color palettes very well, especially for rural Georgia. The natural dark greens, browns, oranges, and yellows of Georgia are complemented well by the period-appropriate costuming. Everything looks great, but also sounds great, with the right mix of film scoring and period-specific tunes, including a lovely number by Troop Zero at the competition. However, I did have some issues with the story, especially for the time period. I’m not sure about the specific politics of rural Georgia in the late 1970s, but I do know that racism and homophobia were still overt issues, especially in rural areas, and in many cases still are. Clearly, a feel-good family film should stay away from dealing with the worst of these period-specific concerns, but I can’t shake the feeling that many members of Troop Zero would have faced much greater concerns than some light bullying. Also, I was pretty shocked at how snotty the Birdie Scouts could be towards the misfits. It’s a great juxtaposition, but since One Movie Spouse is a Girl Scout leader, I am obliged to say that most of the behavior by the other troops is reprehensible, and would have resulted in a lot of troop leaders screaming at their scouts. Most of that behavior goes unchallenged, though, for the sake of making a larger point about what’s important in life. TROOP ZERO is a heartwarming, feel good family film, set in a necessarily sanitized version of late 1970s Georgia. While written off the feel-good family templates of the 1980s and 1990s, the film delivers a solid viewing experience, with a few unexpected fun moments, and frankly, one of the strangest denouements I’ve seen in a while. Feel-good family film fans (say that three times fast) will definitely enjoy this film, especially pre-teens and adolescents. Scout leaders, however, may find last year’s review for LITTLE MONSTERS (Episode #639) a tad more cathartic. Rotten Tomatoes: 66%  Metacritic: 58  One Movie Punch: 7.5/10 TROOP ZERO (2019) is rated PG and is currently playing on Amazon Prime.

Hi everyone! Now that we’ve caught up on most of our award nominations, I’m going to close out the quarter on Saturdays with a continuation of our Under the Kanopy series. Kanopy is a library and university funded streaming service that grants card holders and students six free streams per month, from a variety of classic, international, and independent films. They also have streaming agreements with excellent distributors, like A24 and Kino Lorber, who often produce and distribute the critically acclaimed, if not commercially successful films. Today’s movie is a surrealistic look at gender in all its forms – biological, cultural, social, personal – however you define it, this film will both resonate and challenge, in an almost pure art house fashion. It’s also definitely not safe for work or for kids, which I’ll mention again at the top of the review. Before the review, we’ll have a promo from our good friends at the Book of Lies Podcast. Every week, Brandi Fleeks and Sunni Hepburn take a look at a fraud case or famous con artist, breaking down the methods, the signals, and how to spot similar scams in your life. You can find them on Twitter @Bookofliespod and on Facebook and Instagram @bookofliespodcast. Be sure to like, retweet, share, review, and subscribe! Subscribe here to stay current with the latest releases. Contribute at Patreon for exclusive content. Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. Here we go! ///// > ///// Today’s movie is THE WILD BOYS(2017), or in the French, LES GARÇONS SAUVAGES, the surrealist art house drama written and directed by Bertrand Mandico. After the brutal murder of a woman on La Réunion, five young men (all played by women) are taken from their wealthy families by a Dutch captain (Sam Louwyck) for rehabilitation, on an island that begins to affect their gender, in all its forms. And then stuff gets really weird. No spoilers. However, a content warning for sexual assault and pervasive sexual themes for the film itself. When I first saw the listing for THE WILD BOYS on Rotten Tomatoes, I immediately thought about the novel of the same name by Williams S. Burroughs, the notorious Beat Generation author. In the novel, Burroughs depicts a future gay youth movement intent on the downfall of modern society. I’m a huge fan of Burroughs, nurtured by a combination of his spoken word album produced in part with Michael Franti entitled “Spare Ass Annie and Other Tales”, along with a deeply affecting viewing of 1991’s NAKED LUNCH from David Cronenberg, my first real look at art house and surrealist cinema. I greatly appreciate the way he wrote about being bisexual, often challenging his readers and society in general with works that test the boundaries of good taste, but also smash the boundaries of LGBTQ inclusion in literature. THE WILD BOYS, today’s film, is not an adaptation of that novel. However, it does play with gender in many of the same ways. Gay men often mis-gender themselves and each other, calling each other queens and girl and bitch and other female terms. A lot of this self-identification comes from not conforming to the previously established, heteronormative gender roles, wanting to separate themselves from the toxic masculinity. We used to see sex and gender as an either/or, instead of the non-linear spectrum and incredible diversity in both sex and gender we understand today. Burroughs didn’t have the vocabulary back then to talk about gender fluidity, but his novels and characters would sometimes transform from male to female, and back again, and into inexplicable additional genders. Just another groundbreaking aspect of Burroughs’ work. So, it’s hard not to see today’s film at least partially inspired by the novel, as David Bowie, Joy Division, and Patti Smith were all inspired by the same work. I find the real genius of today’s film in the casting of the five primary protagonists with young women, including: Pauline Lorillard as Romuald, Vimala Pons as Jean-Louis, Diane Rouxel as Hubert, Anaël Snoek as Tanguy, and Mathilde Warnier as Sloane. While each character has their own unique traits, they all encompass a sort of character type similar to the droogs in 1971’a A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, based on Anthony Burgess’ incredible and often overlooked novel. However, instead of the leader being send for rehabilitation, the entire gang is sent to the island, and all predictably turning on one another as their bodies begin to change. Whereas Burroughs lacked the vocabulary to talk about gender-fluidity, Mandico takes the concept to new levels. On the island, the more the young men indulge themselves with the island’s pleasures, the more they begin to transform physically into women. Prior to the actual transformation, Mandico uses costuming, hair, and makeup to make all five young men look like tomboys, clearly feminine (whatever that means), but wearing masculine (again, whatever that means) clothing. The fluidity only kicks into high gear as the costumes come off, revealing new physical traits even as other physical traits begin to, we’ll say, fall off. We find that the more the men transform into women, the more they become the targets of their friends. We should be rightly horrified by five young men raping and murdering a high society woman, just as in the most shocking scene of A CLOCKWORK ORANGE. But because we know the actors are women, it makes the scene different, playing on our expectations, and perhaps even the exploitation of women in film overall. I think these acts are also blunted by Mandico’s cinematography, a combination of actual locations, crazy filters applied to actual locations, and a layered staging of other sets, all of which amp up the surrealism in a way that continues to let us explore the themes in play. This is definitely an art house film complete with nascent progressive themes and challenging subject matter, but it is also well done for fans of the genre. THE WILD BOYS is a surrealistic look at gender fluidity, starring five young women as five young men, whose rehabilitation begins to change their sex, gender, and by extension, identity. Using a combination of themes clearly inspired by the Burroughs novel of the same name, with some clear homages to A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, Bertrand Mandico creates an excellent meditation on gender, in all its forms. Fans of surrealist films, or films about the LGBTQ experience, especially in a world of increasing gender fluidity, should definitely check out this film. Rotten Tomatoes: 90% Metacritic: 64  One Movie Punch: 8.8/10 THE WILD BOYS (2017) is not rated and is currently playing on Kanopy and Shudder.