THE NEW WAVE IS ALIVE & WELL & LIVING ON NETFLIX - My Quick Review of Richard Linklater's NOUVELLE VAGUE

 Might I be a tad pretentious?

If you watched my face react to each reveal of these titans who were part of one of the true great movements of worldwide cinema, you might compare it to someone who was reeling over an Avengers movie. But no...this movement I speak of is what was known in France as Nouvelle Vague or as we call it: The French New Wave. 

An era that began in the late 50s and lasted through the 60s, the term had been coined by the legendary film magazine Cahiers du cinema to essentially describe the work that many of its own writers would go on to create themselves.

You could argue that the shots were fired in 1954 by one its premiere writers, a man by the name of Francois Truffaut. This piece entitled Une certaine tendance du cinéma françai challenged the French film community for their overreliance on unimaginative works based around literary adaptations.

The idea of the movement was to take risks and explore what film could actually be. Experimentation and iconoclasm were the themes du jour, the cinematography and editing would be scrappy and immersive, and embracing existentialism would be welcomed at the expense of something that might be deemed easily accessible or palatable. 

This isn't to say the cinematic aesthetic of the New Wave was that unusual. Italian Neorealism, namely the works of Roberto Rossellini and Vittorio De Sica, certainly showed a grittier edge that would give way to the New Wave. You could argue that the major difference is that the gritty realism of those films gave way to a certain allure among the streets of Paris. 

In fact, there was one American film that Truffaut singled out as being key to capturing the vibe of the New Wave: 1953's Little Fugitive, a film I had seen as a young boy about a kid who ran away from his Brooklyn apartment to Coney Island due to a vicious prank by his older brother and his friends.

Film may be a visual medium, but while these smaller films may lack the sweeping shots of epics of the era like Giant or Lawrence of Arabia, there is something so exciting and vibrant and edgy about how a lot of these films were presented...even when they would eventually be presented in glorious color a la Jacques Demy's The Umbrellas of Cherbourg. 

While Claude Chabrol's 1958 film Le Beau Serge is usually seen as the first film released in the Nouvelle Vague mold (Agnes Varda's 1955 film La Pointe Courte would not get a commercial release until decades later), it was Francois Truffaut's 1959 masterpiece The 400 Blows that would put the movement on an international scale...and it is that release that begins Linklater's film. 

The 400 Blows is considered to be a masterpiece by everyone within the community...and it truly was. I do consider it to be one of my favorite films of all time, and it is the film I most associate with the movement for that reason. However, there was one critic writing for Cahiers who felt like he was falling behind and he wanted his chance to make his own film following the rapturous plaudits that Truffaut was receiving: Jean-Luc Godard. 

Considering the kind of filmmaker and cultural figure Godard would become, even up to his death in 2022, it does seem crazy to think about his beginnings with Breathless, his 1960 debut film that would further cement the reputation of this group.

Breathless was a film that starred Jean-Paul Belmondo as gangster-loving criminal Michel and Jean Seberg as an American who sells the New York Daily Tribune on the streets of Paris. In Nouvelle Vague, Belmondo is played by Aubry Dullin and Seberg is played by Zoey Deutch. 

These two, along with Guillaume Marbeck as Godard and Adrien Rouyard as Truffaut, are practically overwhelming at capturing the vibe and essence of these legends.

In fact, Zoey Deutch is pretty much a revelation here as Seberg, who has got to be one of the coolest actresses to have ever lived, and she brings her to life in a way that feels like a rare case of an actress truly disappearing into the role. In a just world, I would love to see her in the Oscar conversation. 

I feel like a lot of this review has been more in line with being a history lesson, but a lot of that is due to the fact that this is simply one of those films with a subject matter that truly invigorated me. 

The idea of watching a film that recreates the behind-the-scenes development of one of the most influential films ever made might seem a bit like a tall order that borders on the indulgent...and perhaps that might be true to an extent.

I wouldn't say that Nouvelle Vague is a masterpiece nor a film that I would necessarily revisit regularly, but I found it to be a remarkable love letter to an era of films that I have adored for most of my film buff life.

Richard Linklater has had a great year when you take into account the truly wonderful character study he gave us with Blue Moon, but with Nouvelle Vague, he made early 60s Paris come to life again and I loved being in the world of these icons by proxy of these artists. 

The hilarious thing is that Linklater is basically known as a master of the "hangout film" and in a lot of ways, this film has that vibe as we watch these genius artists reinvent the artform. Maybe this film doesn't reinvent anything necessarily, but I love it for all of the joyous emotions it made this snobby film lover feel.

NOUVELLE VAGUE

Rating: 8.5/10

A Heist Fit for a Tortoise: My Quick Review of Kelly Reichardt's THE MASTERMIND

 Why do some films succeed?

Why do some films fail?

Why do some leave you feeling...unsure of what to feel? Maybe that uncertainty is due to discomfort with the topic at hand or even just a sense of bewilderment at how the content is presented.

Nothing about The Mastermind is a failure, nothing about is uncomfortable, but I wouldn't necessarily say it succeeds. The work of Kelly Reichardt is actually an interesting case for me, because she is one of those filmmakers who hasn't exactly had a mainstream breakthrough...not that I suspect she wants one. I don't think I've ever talked about her on this blog before, and I figured this would be the perfect time to do so considering she is the kind of filmmaker whose work I greatly admire, but don't really connect with. 

Reichardt is one of those filmmakers who specializes in the art of "slow cinema", and if you aren't familiar with the term, you can likely make an educated guess as to what that might be. 

If you were to look it up on Wikipedia, this is what you would find:

Slow cinema is a genre of art cinema characterized by a style that is minimalist, observational, and with little or no narrative, and which typically emphasizes long takes.^[1][2] It is sometimes called contemplative cinema.^[3]

Reichardt, in particular, is a filmmaker who is very minimalist which in of itself is something to admire in a filmmaker. She loves tackling works that deal with people in their everyday lives, often with a subtle subversive slant. Perhaps it would be an understatement to say that the idea of her doing a heist film was not what I had on my 2025 Cinema bingo card. 

The Mastermind is set in 1970 Massachusetts with an unemployed man named named J.B. (Josh O'Connor) who has a wife named Terri (Alana Haim) and two sons. He repeatedly asks his parents (Hope Davis and Bill Camp) for money, but both are getting fed up with him. He uses a ruse of needing money to set up a potential gig to milk more money out of his mother, but the reality is he wants the money to pay three men to help him pull off a heist: stealing 4 Arthur Dove paintings from a small Framingham art museum. 

For a heist film, you could say that doing one with Reichardt's typical quiet and methodical pace is a game changer for the genre...and I have to admit that I do admire that about it, but I will also readily admit that it was hard to truly care as deeply while watching it. 

Josh O'Connor is thankfully such a fascinating and charming and compelling actor, and it is no wonder why filmmakers keep wanting to work with him after his stellar work as Charles on seasons 3 and 4 of The Crown. Ever since then, he has shown so much versatility from film to film. Not only is this the same guy who was making out with Mike Faist in Challengers but he has FOUR films in 2025, including his leading role opposite Daniel Craig in the latest Knives Out installment that are all distinctive and lived in and varied. 

Beyond that, I have to commend Reichardt for her world building because the setting/scenery combined with the luscious sepia-tinted cinematography by Christopher Blauvelt and the exquisite jazz-infused score by Rob Mazurek. In terms of those visual (and audible) aesthetics, I might actually consider this to be Reichardt's most invigorating film...but I am not sure it comes close to being the film I connected with most emotionally compared to something like Certain Women. 

In the end, I find myself wishing there was more bite to The Mastermind but I still keep thinking about it and I still expect Reichardt to one day truly wow me with one of her works. I am not sure the full package has been prepared just yet.

I came across a review on Letterboxd that proclaimed this was the first heist film that could "put you to sleep". No, I didn't fall asleep, but I can't argue that this is not a film for everyone. It is a very delicate balance when making a film with this kind of methodical pacing. 

It has its merits, but it still leaves me on the other end of the velvet robe at a distance from the work at hand.

THE MASTERMIND

Rating: 6/10

HE GREW ACCUSTOMED TO HIS FACE - My Review of James Sweeney's TWINLESS

*This review will contain SPOILERS*

Going into a film like Twinless, you might have an idea of what to expect but thankfully, the film digs a bit deeper than what anyone may have given it credit for. When it premiered at the 2025 Sundance Film Festival, the film won their Audience Award and earned high praise for its star Dylan O'Brien. 

Throughout all of 2025, all I kept hearing from a lot of pundits online was that Dylan O'Brien was someone who should be in the Oscars conversation but likely wouldn't be due to the film's smaller profile. It's sadly something that does happen with quite a few Sundance films; I am still highly bummed by the fact that 2023's Rye Lane got dumped onto Hulu that spring and slipped into the ether when I ended up considering it one of my 5 favorite films of that very strong year. 

Twinless seems to be suffering a similar fate, and that is a shame because this was a film that managed to strike quite the chord within me. This is the sophomore outing for writer/director/actor James Sweeney who was also behind the 2019 film Straight Up in which he plays a man with OCD who questions his sexuality...to put that film in the most simplistic of terms. 

That film showed a lot of promise, but I admittedly hadn't thought much about it in the last few years. While watching Twinless, I think I am ready follow his career from here on out.

The film begins at the graveside ceremony for a funeral. Roman's (O'Brien) twin brother Rocky has died; his mother (Lauren Graham) tries to help out but Roman's anger and grief are a bit much for her. Deciding he needs some kind of help, he joins a grief therapy group for people who have lost a twin.

While at his first session, he meets Dennis (Sweeney), a gay man who lost his twin brother Dean. Roman's brother Rocky was also gay and it seems like that connection makes Roman want to explore a friendship with Dennis as he regrets not being there enough for Rocky as they got older. 

And yes, an unlikely friendship forms between the straight bro and the sensitive artsy gay guy...and you think "Wow. Opposites are drawn to each other. How nice!" and even with that thought process, you could be wondering what conflict could arise there. What makes this dynamic worth investing in?

Well...deception, for starters.

We learn that Dennis actually doesn't have a twin at all. In fact, he had a one night stand with Rocky that we see via flashback. Dennis, as the go to hookup, learns that Rocky is a twin and is instantly fascinated to the point that he gets more aroused at the idea of another Rocky lookalike existing. After fucking, the two converse about Roman and how he had been such a supportive brother in their youth. 

Rocky seems a bit more promiscuous compared to Dennis, so when he won't return his calls, Dennis tries to stalk him and discovers him on a date with another man (Chris Perfetti, from Abbott Elementary). He starts lashing out at him, and while distracted by trying to talk to Dennis, Rocky is hit by a car and that is how he dies. 

And with that, we learn that Dennis goes to Rocky's funeral in disguise which we actually saw at the beginning of the film and then manages to slither his way into Roman's life via the support group.

So yes...there is a lot to unpack here. 

For starters, a lie snowballing and making things worse is a topic we've seen many times. However, it takes a fine hand to truly make all sides of it compelling. Thankfully, Sweeney takes this story and imbues it with such complexity that at times I found myself both hating and rooting for him...while also, at times, taking issue with the character of Marcie (Aisling Franciosi, whom I loved seeing her after her exquisite work in 2018's The Nightingale). Marcie is Dennis' perky and pesty coworker whom he finds annoying, but he manages to think she is harmless enough to match with Roman, who takes to her instantly. In a great stroke of storytelling, having Marcie be the one to unravel Dennis' deception is smart but what I really love about it is how her prying at first does come across as invasive and annoying...but in the end, she is clearly in the right. 

Also - her scene near the end of the film when she gently puts Roman in his place of one of his angry outbursts made me love her for her strength.

Odds are if you are reading this review at this point, it more than likely means than you have seen the film. I would hope that if you hadn't, you would've waited. However, with that in mind, you may be wondering why I devoted so much time to spelling out the synopsis. Well, maybe someone actually didn't see it and didn't care about the spoilers so I opted to go that route...but mostly it was for me to spell it out a bit for myself.

I wasn't expecting to have as strong a reaction to Twinless as I did. I am not a twin and I haven't grieved the loss of a sibling or a friend that was close in that manner. However, what I shared in the film was the sense of camaraderie that Dennis seemed to be seeking.

I never had a brother, and I find myself now as I enter my late 30s wishing I had brotherly connections because it is something I haven't consistently had over the years. There was something endearing watching this friendship form between these two despite us learning about Dennis' deception...and when we finally get to the scene where he confesses, I was truly tensing up almost in the same vein I felt tense during most of the runtime for Marty Supreme. 

I will say that once the reveal occurred, the film does slip into the predictable path that one might expect. Yes, it is nice to see the two of them slowly potentially reform their friendship but it also feels too quick and too neat. Having said that though, it is still enough for me to find the film rather successful.

Dennis has a line in the final scene about how people always say to "be yourself", and he adds "well, what version of me?". Even though the film takes on a concept that is a psychological thriller meets black comedy, I think you can look at the film as an analysis towards personal and even sexual identity...which judging by Sweeney's previous film Straight Up, it is a topic that fascinates him. 

I would like to think that I have become the best version of myself, or at least the best version of myself to the current moment. I personally would like to find better fulfillment in my work and also in my mental/physical health...but I would be lying if I said I didn't feel sorry for Dennis. He did a truly horrible thing, like an inexcusable and rather creepy thing, but somehow he manages to find the relationship he needs...even though it is actually a platonic one. 

As you get older, you truly understand the value of friendship as some of those friends from your life drift away and while I often accepted that with grace, I have found at this point in my life, I long to have a stronger social circle again. The pain that Dennis had was relatable to me even though the dire circumstance was far darker.

A lot of the emotions stirred up within me almost seem a bit hard to put into words...so maybe I will leave it at that for now.

Sweeney does a wonderful job here balancing a truly difficult acting job pared with that complex script and great direction that shifts tones with such grace that you would think he has been directing for over a decade rather than this being his sophomore effort. If you really want to see a far more insufferable look at a character who gets caught in a lie and has it spiral out of control, go check out the overrated musical known as Dear Evan Hansen and then you will only appreciate what Sweeney achieves here more.

He has become an artist to watch, much like Eva Victor did with Sorry Baby for me earlier in 2025. It is also wouldn't shock me if this is the role that nets Dylan O'Brien a wider range of script offers because this is a guy who managed to make me get misty while watching this.

The scene in the hotel room when Dennis has Roman talk to him as if he were Rocky is one of the rawest and emotionally intense moments I have seen an actor give in recent years...and even though this year's Best Actor race is far more competitive than it has been in quite some time, I would easily give O'Brien a nomination. He deserves to be right up there with Chalamet and DiCaprio and Hawke.

Twinless, for what it set up out to do, is (forgive me) peerless.

TWINLESS

Rating: 9.5/10

EMOTIONS RUN COLD IN NORWAY - My Review of Joachim Trier's SENTIMENTAL VALUE

   Every year, there is typically at least one film that has me so excited that I proclaim it "My Most Anticipated Film of the Year"...and while it is a clear sign of where my tastes are aligned, the 2025 film that earned that title for me was Sentimental Value.

As the latest work of acclaimed Norwegian filmmaker Joachim Trier, Sentimental Value delved into themes that were very much up my alley: you had acting and theatre and film involved...not to mention domestic drama. Everything about it just SCREAMED to be a film that would speak highly to me.

It also doesn't hurt that Trier has been behind some truly strong films in the last 20 years, namely his Oslo Trilogy which included Reprise (2006); Oslo, 31 August (2011); and perhaps the film that I consider to be his magnum opus to date: The Worst Person in the World (2021). 

Sentimental Value reteams Trier with his Worst Person star Renate Reinsve, which also added to the excitement I had for finally seeing this film. Oh, and I would be remiss if I don't bring up the fact that the film had a rapturous response at Cannes where it got a 19-minute standing ovation afterwards. 

I have been sitting with my thoughts on this film ever since watching it. In some ways, Sentimental Value ended up being a mild disappointment for me while also being incredibly beautiful at the same time. I will give you a little taste of the plot before I go deeper into what worked and what left me a tad cold. 

The film begins with the setup that film director Gustav Borg (Stellan Skarsgard) and his psychotherapist wife Sissel separate which leads him to leaving Norway to further expand his film career. He had used his two daughters in his work, Nora (Reinsve) and Agnes (Inga Ibsdotter Lilleas) but the latter opted not to continue an acting career, choosing to become a historian and is now married with a young son. Nora, on the other hand, did pursue an acting career...mainly on stage...but we learn she suffers from crippling bouts of stage fright that leads to panic attacks. 

When Sissel passes away, Agnes notifies Gustav who comes back to reclaim the old house. Nora and Agnes view Gustav as a distant and neglectful father, but he has a request for Nora: he wants her to star in his latest film playing a character inspired by his mother Karin, who had been a member of the Norwegian Resistance movement against the Nazis and had been tortured when she was captured by them. Later on, when Gustav was 7, she committed suicide in the very home he came back to claim. 

Nora is greatly disturbed by the idea of this and refuses to even look at the script...but Gustav's career has been struggling and he really wanted to do something that would fulfill himself. In order to obtain financing, he asks American actress Rachel Kemp (Elle Fanning) to join the project after she praises his work at a film festival retrospective. Having her enter the fray causes a bit of a discourse as she isn't entirely sure what she is getting into at first. 

As I stated before, this is the kind of film that I would consider to be tailormade for me. I've made a comment that of filmmakers coming out of Scandinavian countries in this century who could be something of an heir to the work of Swedish impresario Ingmar Bergman, it would likely be Joachim Trier. 

However...in the months since its been more widely seen in the US, I get the sense that this is a film that has been getting dragged a bit. I think the real issue with the film is that a lot of the stronger emotional beats don't hit as hard as Trier would expect them to hit. 

As a story concept, I am sold. However - I was a bit amazed at how I felt a bit distant from it all at times...and admittedly, some of how the film progressed did feel very much in line with what one might expect to be "an Oscar bait" film. There is still something still rather accessible about it in a way that Trier's other works weren't...even if if Worst Person managed to net a somewhat surprising though richly deserved Screenplay nomination (an award it should've easily won but lost to freaking Belfast). 

It was like I was waiting for the film to truly move me, but I am not so certain it ever did to the extent I expected it to. Instead, it would be moments that would strike my fancy whether it would be a particular story beat or how Trier constructed a scene, but if the film has any strength to truly place it onto a pedestal, it is the acting ensemble.

Reinsve, Skarsgard, Lilleas, and Fanning are doing sublime work here. I still think it is a shame that Reinsve never got swept up into the awards season for Worst Person because she should've been in winning contention for that. Here, she might not be the film's true sole focal point but she does well with Nora's dripping anxieties and depression.

Skarsgard is one of those actors who has never truly gotten his due, but this is a role where his gravitas shines through so beautifully. It is a very subtle performance, but I love how much we grow to appreciate the character more by the film's end.

Fanning has the smaller role of the quartet, but this is honestly the best she has been to date. It's truly a very meta role in that Fanning had never been to Norway prior and much like the character of Rachel Kemp, I'd argue that Fanning's career is still in a stage where she is building acclaim and respect to the point where she may have something to prove to the industry. I do think she would be worthy of an Oscar nomination here, because in a lot of ways, this was the most difficult role in the film. She has to play what a lot of European art house film aficionados might consider to be an airhead American type...and maybe that sensibility is sort of there. Still though, her emotional work in this is so rich, and I think her final scene with Skarsgard was so beautifully done when she has to make a choice that might go against her best interests.

However, the real find of this film was Inga Ibsdotter Lilleas as Agnes, who manages to go through the film as a grounding center but by the end, opens up into being a warm and emotional hug for Nora to climb into. I actually might go as far to say she might be who I would like to see WIN the Best Supporting Actress Oscar out of the major contenders I have seen. There is something about her that just feels so real and lived-in and natural that when she does let out the emotion, it felt so gratifying and well-earned. 

Honestly, Fanning and Lilleas would both make strong candidates to be considered for the win. Frankly, the Supporting Actress race is a bloodbath at the moment when you consider the likes of Teyana Taylor, Amy Madigan, Wunmi Mosaku, Odessa A'zion, and Gwyneth Paltrow.

So yes, Sentimental Value did not live up to the heights of some of Trier's previous work...but I do think there are enough aspects to it that I would recommend you checking it out if anything about domestic dramas or the arts appeal to you. If anything, I just hope it puts Trier on the map on a greater scale as I suspect we will see more greatness from him

And, I have to stress again, THE ACTING. Beautiful work here from this ensemble.

SENTIMENTAL VALUE

Rating: 8/10

Run Timmy Run!! - My Review of Josh Safdie's MARTY SUPREME

If I may be completely candid right off the bat, I have started this review no less than 4 times and erased everything that I typed up. You could argue that I am at a loss for words and that isn't too far from the truth.

I am not here to say that Marty Supreme is a masterpiece, but there are elements about it that still make it feel like a masterpiece. I will go through some of the issues I have with them film, but even in the grand scheme, they aren't detrimental. 

This is one of those films where I do think it is best to go in as blind as possible, but I will go ahead and give you the basic setup so I can start to dig into my thoughts on the absolute odyssey that this film is.

Set mostly in 1952 New York, we follow a very cocksure 23 year old named Marty Mouser (Timothee Chalamet) who has a dream to be a world famous and highly renowned Table Tennis player. He is working as a shoe salesman at a store owned by his uncle, but he not surprisingly feels this is beneath him. What he really wants is the money he needs to travel to London for the British Open to beat the defending champion Bela Kletzki (Geza Rohrig) so the prize can be brought home to America. 

However, it is clear that Marty is a young man who is on a war path and that the people in his life either can't trust him or they still love him as much as they maybe wish they didn't. He is a man who knows what he wants, does what he can to pursue it, and frankly feels he is entitled to those rewards.

He is, to quote Timothee Chalamet's SAG speech for his A Complete Unknown win, "in pursuit of greatness"...which makes one wonder: is Chalamet putting on an act?

This blitz of a campaign funded by A24 has had Chalamet coming off as insufferable, maybe even more so in some ways, than Marty Mouser. He has repeatedly stated how he hated losing the Oscar this past year to Adrien Brody for The Brutalist (my vote would've been for Colman Domingo in Sing Sing); continuing that thought process, he will add that he has been given great roles and doing great work and that none of us should be taking him for granted. 

Needless to say, if this is an act, it is a bit precarious BUT...I think this is the performance that will potentially solidify Chalamet as the actor of his generation.

I have always acknowledged that he had charisma and was an intriguing presence, but I never felt myself wowed by him. I will stand stand on the hill proclaiming that Call Me By Your Name was bafflingly overrated and while I do think he did do a good job in A Complete Unknown, it didn't leave me feeling that impressed beyond maybe some of the technical aspects of it.

I wouldn't be shocked if Marty Mouser becomes as synonymous with him as something like Jordan Belfort has for DiCaprio in The Wolf of Wall Street when it comes to great antihero roles...although Belfort is diabolical in different ways that are more unforgivable.

A lead character with despicable qualities can ruin a film for some, but in order to succeed, they have to be written well, guided well by the director, and you need an actor who can land the plane with those blueprints. Timothee Chalamet did that here, and while I wouldn't consider it to be "peak cinema" acting, I do see this as a strong performance that would be worthy of awards consideration.

Marty Mouser says and does some heinous things and yet at times, you find yourselves both rooting for him and also enjoying anytime he gets put in his place. It is particularly hard to watch him deal with his childhood friend and neighbor Rachel (Odessa A'zion) with whom is also sleeping with despite her being married. We also have Marty becoming obsessed with Kay Stone (Gwyneth Paltrow), a former actress who married a rich businessman named Milton (Kevin O'Leary????) and is clearly feeling no love for him...and despite being a bit of a thorn in both of their sides, these two do take something of a morbid fascination with him.

The casting of Kevin O'Leary as Milton Rockwell is perhaps one of the things I take issue with. On one hand, I don't think it ruins the film on any fundamental level because O'Leary IS Milton. After years honing the idea of "screen presence" on Shark Tank, it shows that he can at least be effective within his wheelhouse. I will say that O'Leary's comments about how Safdie should've used AI in crowd scenes to save money only add to the vitriol I have for him being in this.

As for the other two ladies I mentioned, it also seems very meta to have Gwyneth Paltrow in a film where she is playing a former actress who decides to make a comeback...albeit on stage like her character does here. Paltrow is someone who is primarily known for being the head of GOOP, but a lot film people still remember her rather infamous Oscar win for Shakespeare in Love and her truly grating acceptance speech where she cried to the point of being incoherent and seemingly putting off her mother Blythe Danner in the audience. 

However, her work here is rather lovely. I am not sure if I would necessarily nominate her for an Oscar but I do think she should be more in the conversation.

Speaking of being more in the conversation, if there is someone from this film that deserves to be nominated for an acting Oscar that isn't Chalamet, it is Odessa A'zion.

I had no familiarity with her prior to this film and didn't realize she is Pamela Adlon's daughter. As Rachel, she truly brings it and is a literal firecracker who holds her own against Chalamet onscreen. Even if she may not have an abundance of screentime, she makes the most of every minute onscreen and it is remarkable to watch her adapt to all of the lunacy that unfolds. She should be an easy Best Supporting Actress contender, but as of this writing, she is seen as a dark horse contender for even a nomination. I really hope that changes.

The truth is that it isn't really surprising that a lot of the supporting players wouldn't gain traction because most of the cast doesn't get significant screentime to shine, but whenever they are onscreen, they do good work. I wouldn't be shocked if this film wins the inaugural Best Casting Oscar because, ignoring the Kevin O'Leary of it all, you wouldn't imagine seeing this kind of cast assembled and yet it works so well!

You have Fran Drescher as Marty's mother, Sandra Bernhard as their neighbor, Penn Jillette as...a character I don't want to spoil, Isaac Mizrahi as Kay's publicist, Emery Cohen as Rachel's brutish husband, and perhaps the one who made the best impression of the smaller supporting cast: Tyler the Creator as Marty's cabbie friend Wally that is also very skilled at Table Tennis.

While I would've loved to see more of, let's say, Fran Drescher as Marty's mother, I do wish we got more of Tyler's Wally because his screen presence is so fun and joyous but he is also one of the character's we come across where when we watch his respond to the careless actions of Marty, you feel the exhaustion despite the fact it is clear he still loves the guy. 

Between this and also A$AP Rocky in If I Had Legs I'd Kick You, we have had a quite a year with rappers turning in very good work who hold their own against stellar performances opposite them.

As I wrap up here, I just want to leave you with a few general thoughts and vibes that Marty Supreme left me with. 

Does the film maybe go on a tad too long? Perhaps. I think Safdie and Ronald Bronstein (who co-wrote and edited this along with the other Safdie films) could've trimmed a little bit off of the film just to move it along a slightly quicker pace in some scenes but to be honest, so much of this film pulsates to the nth degree.

I have heard some criticisms that the film doesn't try to dig in too deeply to Marty's backstory, but honestly, the film clearly doesn't care much and neither does the character of Marty. There is a scene where he is flat out asked about his past and he mockingly tells the press a story that feels like one of those crazy origin stories that Hollywood studios would give their contract players in the 1930s. The script is honestly fantastic and I would fully support it winning Original Screenplay.

Like I stressed before, this is a film that I think needs to be enjoyed with as a little knowledge of the plot as possible. I tried my best to keep it at a minimum here, but I would love for people to check it out because I would love to hear all of the reactions to it. 

That pulsation is palpable and when you add in the truly epic musical score by Daniel Lopatin...actually wait...how have I not brought up this score yet???? Lopatin's synth-heavy score is so insanely effective and fits the whole aesthetic of the film which is even more surprising considering it sounds like something straight out of the 80s when the film is set in the early 50s. 

It is also a visually stunning film with such a dark, rich color palate and a lot of the shots staged by Safdie and filmed by cinematographer Darius Khondji felt instantly classic. I would love to see both of them receive Oscar nods for their work. 

Truthfully, I hope Marty Supreme gets many nods on Oscar nomination morning because it deserves that kind of recognition...but to get a tad cheesy for a moment if I may, I just want to add this.

I may not be giving Marty Supreme a perfect score today, but I do think it comes somewhat close. I think it is a great example of a film that might have a couple issues in feeling a smidge bloated at times while also having the likes of Kevin O'Leary in it...oh and right-wing playwright David Mamet is in this...I didn't catch that at first. Oh how far that man has fallen...but I digress.

Each year, there are films that we are all going to love but there are some that ignite a passion within you for one reason or another. While watching Marty Supreme, I couldn't help but feel like I was being jolted to life. It is so sweeping in its scope and manages to bring that electric energy of films like Good Time and Uncut Gems to a whole other time period and makes it work without feeling the least bit bizarre.

Oh, and here's a little Easter Egg for you to ponder on if you haven't seen it yet: Not since Look Who's Talking... ;-)

Simply put, Marty Supreme is the kind of film that makes me remember why I love this artform in the first place...and I am excited to watch it again.

MARTY SUPREME

Rating: 9.5/10

An Actor Ponders: My Quick Review of Noah Baumbach's JAY KELLY

When I think of the works of Noah Baumbach, my mind always goes towards scrappier indies like The Squid & the Whale or Frances Ha...and even if it may have had a bigger budget, Marriage Story fit right in line with the kinds of themes he often tackles. 

His last film, 2022's White Noise, which was based on a Don DeLillo novel, was a bigger scale departure for him that had a lot of people scratching their heads...even though I actually liked it quite a bit. 

Now that we've reached his latest effort, Jay Kelly, I feel like we have him diving back into a territory that seems more on brand for him, but the scale still seems a lot bigger. I keep talking about "the scale" and perhaps it may seem like I am on the brink of insulting his path of branching out to films that are not of his old indie vibe.

If there is any issue with Jay Kelly, it isn't the budget but rather not necessarily responding much to the script...but I am getting ahead of myself.

George Clooney plays our titular character, an actor who has been very beloved by the public for decades and he is reaching something of a breaking point when director Peter Schneider (Jim Broadbent), who gave him his first big break back in the 1980s, passes away. On top of this, he also struggles with the fact his youngest daughter is now 18 and preparing to go off to college. Considering he was always busy with work (something that affected his relationship with his eldest daughter a lot more), he is feeling a bit concerned about losing her without getting to connect with her.

After Peter's memorial, Jay has an encounter with Tim Galligan (Billy Crudup), a former friend he went to the same acting class with. While at a bar, Tim expresses an opinion about their past that leads Jay to finally spiral. Despite a film shoot beginning just around the bend, he insists to his loyal longtime manager Ron (Adam Sandler) and his publicist Liz (Laura Dern) that he is going on an excursion to Europe to try to connect with his daughter Daisy, who is going on a backpacking trip there before going off to college. 

Jay Kelly is the kind of film that feels like something that might've been more embraced had it come out 20+ years ago, but it does seem to be getting less of a positive response than many hoped for. I would say that I am definitely mixed on the final product. 

I viewed Jay Kelly as Noah Baumbach's (and co-writer Emily Mortimer's) modernish take on a Fellini film. While this film was nowhere near as surreal or exuberant as the work of Federico Fellini, I single out the legend because was a master at creating films around tortured souls (frequently artists) who were in the midst of a crisis. 

I certainly see elements of 8 1/2 and La Dolce Vita here, but I have to stress that I am not putting Jay Kelly on that level. As a script, I don't know if I truly got enough out of Jay's history to actually GET him or, frankly, even care. On top of that, we get Sandler's Ron having an arc as well which I would argue is maybe a tad more effective...but on the flip side, they do try to create a past between Sandler's Ron and Dern's Liz, but I am honestly amazed at how underutilized Laura Dern is in this film. She barely gets anything to do and when her character departs the narrative, I was like "Wait...is that it? Is she coming back?"

We do get to be witness to several flashbacks from Jay's life, with Jay watching them and relieving the happy times and also the difficult ones. To be fair, a lot of these are very well done and it must be said that this is film that does have fleeting moments of being truly engaging but for the most part, the interest level mostly remained at a level of mild interest. 

If I can commend the film for anything, it is the fact that an actor like George Clooney is the perfect choice to play our lead because he IS that beloved. He IS that charismatic. He IS someone who lights up the screen in a way very few actors can. I am not saying I would nominate him for an Oscar, but if the film has any real strength in getting you through, Clooney is the reason.

I would say Adam Sandler also does well here. I wasn't wowed by him in the same way I was with his work in Punch Drunk Love or especially Uncut Gems, but I do think one of these days, he will get the right vehicle to lead him to Oscar glory. I just don't think this role is it, but he could very well get his first nod with it.

Although the one I really need to single out is Billy Crudup, who is only on screen for maybe 8-10 minutes and manages to get the engine running for the film in a lot of ways as his big scene is the catalyst that leads to Jay snapping.

 I won't go too deep into spoilers here, but Crudup's Tim is no longer acting and had been presented as being the potential star of the class as he was the one who liked to be "method". Honestly, the flashbacks involving the acting class and the audition were maybe the most effective for me in the film and I actually wish we could've had more of Clooney and Crudup together.

To reiterate another point from earlier, I am so baffled by how little Laura Dern had to do in this. It wasn't like her role was as small as Crudup's, but it just felt truly thankless and a waste of her talent. 

As it stands, Jay Kelly was an easy enough watch, but I would argue that it's a concept I love more than how Baumbach brought it to light. It felt as though something was missing that made a lot of the emotion feel a bit too hollow.

I wouldn't say it is one you have to rush to watch, but if the concept of this storyline sounds intriguing, I would recommend checking out the two Federico Fellini films that I felt this film tried to flirt with: La Dolce Vita and 8 1/2.

JAY KELLY

Rating: 6/10

"Where Have All the Flowers Gone?" - My Review of Yorgos Lanthimos' BUGONIA (w/ major spoilers)

*This review will contain SPOILERS*

There are certain filmmakers that when you hear a new work of theirs is soon to arrive, you can't help but get hyped up. I think we officially have a very strong entry in that group of artists with Yorgos Lanthimos, the man who has given us the likes of Dogtooth, The Lobster, The Favourite, and Poor Things.

While Lanthimos has written some of his films, such as Dogtooth and The Lobster, he often will work with other screenwriters to bring their vision to the screen. With his latest film Bugonia, he works with writer Will Tracy, a brilliant satirist who had been a previous editor for The Onion and has worked on such shows/films as Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, Succession, and The Menu.

Tracy adapted Bugonia from Jang Hoon-hwan's 2003 Korean film Save the Green Planet back in 2020 with the intention of Jang coming back to direct this remake. Tracy still tried to keep this script as more of a standalone prospect than a beat-by-beat rehash, which also including the producing opting to swap the gender of the central character from a man to a woman.

When Jang dropped out due to health concerns, that is when Yorgos Lanthimos joined the film and brought along his muse Emma Stone to play the lead and Jesse Plemons to play the film's main antagonist.

Stone plays Michelle Fuller, a highly renowned and influential CEO of a pharmaceutical corporation known as Auxolith. When arriving back to her very sleek and modern mansion outside of Atlanta, she is kidnapped by two men: Teddy (Jesse Plemons) and his autistic cousin Don (Aidan Delbis, in his feature debut). They are convinced that Michelle is of an "Andromedan" alien species that has been terrorizing the earth for decades with the goal of eventually destroying humanity...with a particular focus on "Green" terrorism: killing honeybees. 

As a means to prevent Michelle from contacting her "mothership", they shave her hair as a means and cover her in an antihistamine cream as these are considered signal blockers in their eyes. Teddy wants to have a meeting with the Andromedan emperor and wants to use Michelle as a means to negotiate that meeting. His goal is to have their ship enter the Earth's atmosphere dealing a lunar eclipse so it will go undetected. 

*Sidenote: I love that when we see the Earth in the time elapsed interstitials, it appears flat. It seems wholly fitting for the subject matter and people we are dealing with. 

 Teddy is also revealed to be working for Auxolith in their shipping warehouse, and he actually has a direct connection to Michelle beyond the fact he works for her company. Via flashbacks, we learn that Teddy's mother (Alicia Silverstone, in a random cameo) was taking part in a clinical trial of one of Auxolith's new drugs and it leaves her all but catatonic and eventually comatose. 

With the plot in place, what did I think of Bugonia?

In the case of Yorgos Lanthimos, it is clear that with the content he makes, he is bound to leave a lot of people cold. I get the sense that Bugonia is not gathering a lot of passion compared to the likes of The Favourite or Poor Things. If I am being completely candid, I would rank as his 5th best film behind The Favourite, Poor Things, Dogtooth, and The Lobster...but that is no direct slam on Bugonia. It just means that Lanthimos has a pretty high bar and some films just won't reach that high.

Considering even Save the Green Planet! had something of a mixed response despite some passionate fans, it isn't shocking that Bugonia would face a similar fate. I still very much enjoyed it and appreciated the darkly sinister comedic tone that fits so snugly into the worlds that Lanthimos loves to take us into. 

As for the performances, Stone continues to work well as Lanthimos' muse as this is her 4th film with him...although if the film is stolen by anyone, I would argue it is Jesse Plemons as Teddy.

As something of an offbeat actor who has a truly unique screen presence that has made people take notice since his infamous and volatile turn as the villainous Todd on the final season of Breaking Bad, I feel like we are witnessing his best performance to date in Bugonia. I have already made comments like this for other performances, and I will do so here, too. There is still a good chance Plemons could slip into some acting races this year, but it does seem like he might be on the cusp considering Best Actor this year is far more competitive than it's been in a long time. I think it's a shame he doesn't seem to be more in the running as I would totally nominate him for this.

I also want to single out Aidan Delbis as Don. Much like how Stone's character was a gender-swap, so was Don. In the original, this character was a girl who had a very heated and passionate personality, and she took a liking to her partner in crime. Here, they made him a follower of his cousin whom he loves dearly and both Lanthimos and Stone (who served as a producer on the film) hoped to find someone who hadn't acted before to play the role. After his audition and screen test, they adored what he brought to the table and made sure he had all he needed to feel comfortable making his debut. His character is what you could argue is the heart of the film in many ways and considering the fact he is on the autism spectrum, it never felt like were forced to pity him. 

One thing I do appreciate about Tracy's script combined with the direction and performances is how well they work to trick the audience of the film's eventual reveal. 

Everything about a film like this screams that Teddy and Don are crazed conspiracy theorists who kidnapped an innocent woman...but thanks to the conviction of both Stone and Plemons and Delbis in their roles, there are times where you begin to wonder who is right and who is wrong. 

Stone does some of her best work towards the end when she does discover that Plemons' Teddy has captured and murdered multiple people whom he believed to be Andromedans. After pouring over all of his "work", she gives very passionate and descriptive monologue about the history of Andromedans and how they actually caused the mass extension of the dinosaurs and out of guilt, they are also the ones who created humanity and have tried for years to protect humans as a result...and it makes you wonder: is she somehow coming up with this on the fly based on his work she looked over or...was Teddy right all along?

Even the idea of her portal being in her office closet with a calculator being the means of making a signal seems preposterous...only made more convincing as such when Stone's performance screams of a person trying to be convincing that she is telling the truth but isn't. All that is further enhanced when Teddy reveals he is wearing a suicide vest that accidentally detonates and decapitates him. The image of Stone getting knocked unconscious by Teddy's flying head is a sight to behold.

However...Teddy WAS right, and we learn that she is, indeed, an alien.

Not only was he right, but even his spaceship model that he built is eerily similar to the actual ship. We see Stone teleport back to her ship and as she said to Teddy in her monologue, she feels they failed. Humans are, in their eyes, a disaster...so with the pop of a clear dome bubble, she kills human existence...with only animals remaining alive. We get a darkly humorous sequence where see humans lying dead around the world: kids in classrooms, people bathing on the beach, a couple mid coital, car pile-ups on highways...but dogs are roaming free which...yay for them living!

All the while, we get Marlene Dietrich's glorious rendition of the folk song "Where Have All the Flowers Gone?" while we see that honeybees are now alive and thriving again.

I don't know...I frankly was pretty pleased with the film. It wasn't perfect, but I do appreciate films that can take on these cynical but humorous tones and succeed. 

Oh, and do I have to call out the score of Jerksin Fendrix who also did the score for Poor Things and Kinds of Kindness. This is another epic piece of work by him that alternates between melodic and glorious to otherworldly and epic. Lanthimos gave him three words for inspiration: bees, basement, and spaceship...and with this, he came up with motifs that worked perfectly. I really hope he gets a Score nomination this year!

So yes, I was rather pleased with Bugonia! It is by no means a masterpiece, but it will likely end up being one of my favorites of 2025 at the very least.

---------

BUGONIA

RATING: 8.5/10