Welcome to my blog dedicated to movie riffing! Here we will journey through the many episodes of Mystery Science Theater 3000, the files of RiffTrax, the DVDs of Cinematic Titanic, and hopefully many others.
Join me, won't you?
Starring: Matt Damon, Anne Hathaway, Tom Holland, Robert Pattinson, Lupita Nyong'o, Samantha Morton, Zendaya, Charlize Theron, Jon Bernthal, John Leguizamo, Himesh Patel, Elliot Page, Mia Goth
Last year, we got a film adaptation of one of my favorite stories from one of the most talented auteurs in the business right now, as Guillermo del Toro offered up his take on Frankenstein. This year, another one of my favorite stories was adapted by another auteur I respect, as Christopher Nolan brings The Odyssey to the big screen. Unlike Frankenstein, adaptations haven't been particularly kind to The Odyssey. There is an an Italian film from the 50's starring Kirk Douglas, a 90's TV miniseries, and a stripped down Ralph Fiennes movie from a few years ago, and none are particularly notable. Outside of that, the best you're going to do is the Coen Brothers reimagining O Brother, Where Art Thou? Finally, a big lavish Hollywood version of the epic poem by Homer Simpson has arrived. Is it all it can be?
It's pretty okay. Good, even. Fine, it rattled my bones and it's pretty fucking great. There. Is that what you want to read?
Based heavily in Greek history and mythology, The Odyssey sees Matt Damon taking the role of Odysseus, the King of Ithaca, who must journey back home after winning the Trojan War. Of course, like most things in ancient Greece, that's easier said than done. The journey takes years, as Odysseus and his men encounter obstacles creatures and mythical beings, which make the journey near impossible. The movie is primarily told in the framework of Odysseus trapped on the island of Calypso, as he regains his memory through flashback. Meanwhile, his wife Penelope maintains hope that he will return while their land is overrun by uncouth suitors who seek the throne. Nolan's love for nonlinear storytelling works pretty well here because a lot of this would be crammed in at the end of the film, otherwise. Knowing that there is more at stake than just Odysseus returning to his loved ones keeps his journey urgent throughout the movie, even though a lot of the events take place a decade prior to this.
Nolan's usual grounded stylization concerned me a little bit in this adaptation. Sometimes when Nolan mixes this with a fantastical element, it comes off uneven and I find myself in a lukewarm state. I think this really hurts The Prestige (though, I admit I'm alone in that opinion), makes Tenet more convoluted than it needs to be, and it holds me back from genuinely loving Inception as much as everyone else. With The Odyssey, Nolan tries to bend the fantastical to his stylization, trying to make the world of gods and monsters look feasible, and I think it's one of his more successful efforts. The creature design fits the grim and dangerous world he has crafted, and he also looks for unique takes on magic that are always interesting. Circe's island was a highlight for me, because he used elements of body horror that I've never seen him try, and I thought it was uniquely disturbing.
One thing I was less won over by is that the movie sometimes makes scenarios where Odysseus traditionally won by using his wits and allowed him to brute force his way through them. It felt to me like Nolan was trying to avoid whimsy, but it also occurred to me that by doing this, he was dumbing the character down and making him more action-focused. I had some back-and-forth over how much this bothered me, but I think the film comes together quite nicely in spite of it, so I'm willing to ignore it. The fact of the matter is the journey is long and hard, as it's supposed to be, and once we reach the conclusion, it settles in that we've fully earned the moment of reunion that we've been building toward. This might be Nolan's best movie. I'm not sure, but it's one that hit me harder than others. And it's an excellent version of a story that I am very fond of, which wins it some points in my heart.
Netflix & Chill
Black Box
⭐️1/2
Streaming On: VOD
Genre: Horror, Science Fiction
Director: Stephen Quale
Starring: Tom Brittney, Holly White, Boadicea Ricketts, Betsy-Blue English, Georgi S. Georgiev, Georgina Leonidas, Vaughn Johseph, Weronika Rosati, Cel Spellman
So, I guess The Odyssey is kinda the Grand Theft Auto VI of cinema and Nolan bullied all other movies out of competition this week, so I was left with limited options for expansion. I almost saw a movie called Honeyjoon at my arthouse, but I overslept and missed the showtime. Other than that, this movie hit VOD this week. Sure. Why not?
Black Box is very B-movie. It has a very thin script, looks like it was filmed quickly on a tight budget, and has mostly no-name actors who stiffly deliver expository dialogue and meaningless padding. I think the intent is to be an homage to 1950's paranoia sci-fi and a mish-mash of Twilight Zone elements, but it's so haphazardly thrown together that it feels like Roger Corman filling in for Rod Serling. The story, as it is, mostly takes place on an airplane, where passengers experience strange symptoms and weird phenomena happens surrounding their craft. People start getting panicky, until they find that whatever is on the outside is trying to take them. It's hard to explain what's going on in the movie and what does and doesn't work without getting into the nitty-gritty of the spoilers, but it's one of those movies that feels like it was written around an ending. And it's a pretty solid ending, if derivative of other works. The problem is that the destination doesn't make up for a script that doesn't feel interested in how we get there. Every character is a base personality that exists only to be cannon fodder, while the more fleshed out characters have defined traits that are practically meaningless to the story its telling, so who they are largely doesn't matter. The movie is a cheap, eighty minute throwback. If one had adequately low expectations, it might make for a quick free stream on Tubi. It's hard to justify the money I paid to rent it, though.
I hope you've said your prayers. Actually, it probably doesn't matter. Evil Dead is back to swallow your soul whether you've done that or not. The series continues to try and franchise itself out beyond the legendary Sam Raimi trilogy that brought horror fans so much joy many years ago. The general consensus is that us DeadHeads (suck it, Grateful Dead fans, it's our term now) are open to this. We were slow to accept a remake in 2013, but we've come around on it. Then Evil Dead Rise came to awaken a desire for more mayhem with the franchise name, even without Raimi at the helm or Bruce Campbell as the face. To further show off what the modern version of the Evil Dead franchise can be is Evil Dead Burn, which continues on from the previous film, where Jessica, the Deadite of the lake from Rise (sadly, she has been recast), tears a few fishermen apart before stepping out in front of a moving car. The driver is burned alive in the ensuing crash and we time jump to his funeral, where his traumatized wife is staying with his family, who blame her for their son's death. Of course, the Deadites jump from the corpse to the people in mourning. If you've seen an Evil Dead movie, you know what happens next.
The movie starts in slow burn (mind the pun) because it's setting up a lot with these characters. This is probably the most thorough pre-Deadite character exploration we've ever had in any of these movies. The movie starts to feel its runtime as it pauses and waits for the Evil Dead to actually do Evil Dead things and hits us with some heavy melodrama in the meantime. The movie is a 110 minutes, which is considerably longer than the eighty-to-ninety-minute norm for these movies and I'm pretty sure it's because of this opening. But once the movie gets going, there is no stopping it. The movie spirals into the most mean and angry carnage of the entire series. Evil Dead Burn builds its chaos like a pile of Legos, constantly stacking them until the tower collapses. The movie is also funnier than the last two, trying to work back into some sillier moments that the original trilogy was known for. This almost becomes a problem, because the film's melodramatic opening and the heavy themes of abuse and trauma that come with it gets into a head-on collision with the movie's harsh violence and it's desire for lighthearted moments in the middle of it. Tonally, this movie is a mess. Whether or not you're willing to live with that depends on whether you're also into the fact that it's grabbing its audience by the genitals and twisting them while it's doing all of this. We come to Evil Dead for chaos, and Evil Dead Burn has the goods.
I liked the movie despite it being uneven like this. I may have liked it more than the last two. I might have to watch it again before I make a decision about that. I like how unrelentingly hard the 2013 film went and I got a kick out of Rise, likely because Alyssa Sutherland played the best Deadite of the entire series, though it was a bit too glossy and leaned heavy into weak fan-service at times. What is attracting me to Burn is that it's more playful and expansive. It takes the lore of the Evil Dead franchise and tries to do more with it, setting out a course for what the Evil Dead franchise can be. It also takes steps to try and unite previously established franchise lore by continuing off where the previous film ended and utilizing the previously established Kandarian Dagger as a McGuffin, giving the Deadites an actual goal outside of leaving people's insides on the floor. The movie also briefly shows a Necronomicon for a split second, looking a lot like the one from the 2013 remake, alluding that maybe that film is also canon. Also, that post-credit scene made me nerd out more than I want to admit, as I demand to know if this is going to come back or if the movie is just blowing smoke up my skirt. This movie took me for a ride then made me curious about what type of ride it's going to put me on next. That makes me pretty excited, if I'm being honest.
Gail Daughtry and the Celebrity Sex Pass
⭐️⭐️⭐️
Genre: Comedy
Director: David Wain
Starring: Zoey Deutch, John Slattery, Ken Marino, Miles Gutierrez-Riley, Ben Wang, Sabrina Impacciatore, Jon Hamm, Jennifer Aniston
I have to admit when I'm wrong about a movie. I saw that there was a sex comedy starring Zoey Deutch on the slate this week and I just resigned myself, accepting that I'm going to watch it even though I really didn't want to. I think I assumed it was another one of Deutch's attempts to bring the raunchy romcom back, and my only thought was "I already sat through The Threesome, and I'm not in the mood to do it again." Color me pleasantly surprised because this movie was not what I was expecting at all. Movies like Gail Daughtry and the Celebrity Sex Pass are why it pays off to go into movies blind sometimes.
The premise of the movie is simple, playing on that in-joke of a "free pass" in marriages where you're allowed to have sex with one specific celebrity if the opportunity arises. It's more of a hypothetical mind game to find out who turns your partner on and nobody ever thinks it will actually happen. That is, until it does. I'm just saying, any potential significant other and I need to have an understanding that during the inevitable event that I'm being straddled by Kate Beckinsale, I am not responsible for my actions. But in the case of this movie, Deutch plays the title role of Gail Daughtry, who finds that her fiancée had an opportunity to have sex with his "pass," Jennifer Aniston, and the news hits her like a ton of bricks. Now questioning her relationship, Gail believes the only way to repair her faith in it is to journey to Los Angeles and have sex with her "pass," Jon Hamm.
It's an amusing concept, but what really sells it is the whimsy that it chooses to flavor it with. This movie is addictively peppy with its innuendo. It's like a Disney Channel movie taking place in the world of Married...with Children. Gail skips around on what feels like a magical journey into La La Land, where she meets quirky characters who all earnestly vow to help her get laid. It's a crazy experience, but something about this movie was really hitting a nostalgic chord that I was having trouble pinning. Then during the climax it suddenly hit me that the movie was a retelling of The Wizard of Oz as a sex comedy. Gail is Dorothy (and Dorothy's last name was "Gale," just as an FYI), Miles Gutierrez-Riley is Toto, Jon Hamm is the Wizard, Los Angeles is Oz, Sabrina Impacciatore is the Wicked Witch, and John Slattery, Ken Morino, and Ben Wang are the Cowardly Lion, the Scarecrow, and the Tin Man, in no particular order. It's just that in order to get back to Kansas, Dorothy really needs to sit on the Wizard's face. Suddenly, the movie's presentation as a children's fantasy took on a different definition and I started replaying the entire movie in my head trying to catch the hints, which also explained the quirk of the movie switching aspect ratios after reaching L.A., which I'm assuming is a reference to how Wizard of Oz starts in black and white and switches to Technicolor once it reaches its magical land. What a trip. I might have to watch this movie again and pay closer attention to its structure.
Zoey Deutch is really good in this. I've seen her in stuff but I've never really paid much attention to her. This is the first time I've seen her in a movie and thought "Wow, she is really crushing it." She has a perfect look of childlike wonder in this movie, and her delivery of dirty dialogue with a chipper tone and a winning smile makes the movie feel so warm and lovable. She also works pretty well with a sorta Dumb & Dumber style caper subplot that she is completely oblivious to. But if there is one thing I feel like would have enriched this movie, it would have been a stronger theme of her coming to terms with her boyfriend's actions in her mindset. We understand that he's her motivation, but the movie misses some beats in how this adventure is therapeutic for her. By the time we get to the end, we discover maybe he was just always an asshole. It would have been a better reveal if Gail had been realizing this throughout the movie. It might have made a stronger character journey than just sex. But the movie is a lot of fun and I'm really glad I sat down and watched it. I also can't wait to watch it again. This might be a go-to comfort movie in my future.
The Invite
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Genre: Comedy
Director: Olivia Wilde
Starring: Seth Rogen, Olivia Wilde, Penélope Cruz, Edward Norton
Consensual yet awkward extramarital affairs continue with this movie based on a Spanish production called Sentimental (the internet is telling me it's also called The People Upstairs, and I don't know which title supersedes the other, so I'll just use the one this remake credits). Seth Rogen and Olivia Wilde (who also directs) play a middle-aged married couple with relationship issues who invite the couple upstairs, Penélope Cruz and Edward Norton, to dinner in their apartment. As the tension between Rogen and Wilde begin to ruin the evening, the night takes a curious turn when it turns out that Cruz and Norton are polyamorous and they invite Rogen and Wilde to have group sex with them.
Thematically, the movie is a commentary on how a long-term monogamous relationship can feel sexually suffocating, as a marriage usually goes downhill when the sex stops being satisfying. We sit down with a couple who are long past having intimacy issues and are a trainwreck, compared to a couple that seems to be more put together, potentially because they've taken a more creative path. It's a story of contrasting the suppressed and the expressive, though it explores the issues and complexities of both and the strains they have. What's interesting is that Rogen and Wilde are both so deep in a rough patch that the idea of consensually having new partners, even if just for a night, intrigues them and sparks their curiosity, instead of an insistence that there is nothing wrong and their monogamy is healthy. It's fun to study their nervous excitement as soon as details reach the surface.
In vibes, The Invite is a blast. The movie is very Blake Edwards coded. It hits like those types of comedies from the 1960's that take place in a single room and garner laughter from quirky and awkward interaction. And it's a very thundering example of one, because it keeps stampeding with its verbal momentum. The tone and performances are off-beat and constantly funny, making its snowball effect of status quo shake-up energetic and exciting. The performers are all great, and Wilde knows exactly how to play them to their strengths. This is probably the best use of Seth Rogen I've ever seen, because he usually defaults into basic stoner roles and voicing cartoon pigs, and this movie shows a heavier dramatic flavor to his familiar screen persona that maintains just how funny he can be. Cruz is sultry and always in command of every room she is in and Norton projects smoothness every opportunity he gets. Wilde's own performance isn't ignored, taking her traditionally gorgeous self and making her look frumpy with a lot of unvoiced frustrations pushing her to a breaking point. She really polished the hell out of this movie. I've been rooting for Wilde's directorial career since Booksmart and was a little sad that it seemed to dwindle with Don't Worry Darling, which admittedly wasn't that great. I'm so happy she has finally swung back and hit a total home run with her third film. This is easily the best of the three and also one of the best movies of the year.
The Isolate Theif
⭐️⭐️1/2
Genre: Western, Thriller
Director: Jon Suits
Starring: Sean Bean, Mackenzie Foy, Odeya Rush, Joe Pantoliano, Ty Simpkins
Mackenzie Foy stars as an orphaned daughter manning a supply outpost during the Civil War. Outlaws show up, posing as Union soldiers, taking advantage of her shelter while looking for stolen gold that she might actually know more about than she lets on. Decently made, if theatrically dramatic. There is the skeleton of a good movie here, but certain aspects have developed lopsided in askew attempts to manipulate an emotional reaction. It's a film that feels like it was made by a promising amateur who is still learning satisfying dramatic beats. Foy is good in it, Sean Bean is good in it, and the thriller conclusion does hit reasonably well. I liked this movie, but I also can't overpraise it. Nor is there a lot to say about it except that it almost had something.
This one hurts. I don't want to say bad things about anything Moana. I'm such a huge fan of the first one and the mediocrity of Moana 2 was already bad enough. Now, Disney has handed us one of their weakest live-action adaptations, and then told us "You're Welcome." The original Moana is a very special and beautiful movie. In translating it to live-action, one would hope the primary ambition would be to keep its majesty. Instead, they made a live-action version of a cartoon that is made with real people but aspires to still be a cartoon. What can I say except "No, thank you."
Like the original, Moana is a young Samoan girl who journeys into the dangerous ocean to seek a demigod name Maui to help her return the Heart of Tafiti to the land that he stole it from. It was already turned into a great movie, so turning it into another one that is practically the same should be easy. Sadly, that's easier said than done, as we only need to think back to last year's How to Train Your Dragon remake and groan. The film lacks the cynicism of How to Train Your Dragon's production because there is a semblance of heart to this movie. That's not enough to recommend this movie, but it accounts for something. The problem is that the movie chooses to adapt nothing. It copies and tries to replicate the whimsy to the best of its abilities, but the quirks of animation are hard to replicate in live action. This was something that Disney's Aladdin remake knew quite well, when it knew it couldn't replicate certain things from the original in the new format so it found a new vibe that suited it. If Moana leaned into being a movie with showstopping song-and-dance numbers, they might have fixed this. The remake really wants to be just be Moana again, and in trying to produce a lavish live-action musical, it just looks weird.
And "weird" is just the one word that describes everything about this movie. I assume the only reason the movie was made was because Dwayne Johnson really wanted to play Maui in live-action, but the live-action Maui looks odd in how much they're trying to replicate the cartoon look and still make him identifiably Dwayne Johnson, right down to a goofy wig and a strange, nipple-less muscle suit (I'm still unclear on why Johnson needs a muscle suit, because he has never been not ripped, but I'm also not going to ask). Additionally, a character like Heihei doesn't really work in live-action. It's like if they kept the little Eddie Murphy dragon for the live-action Mulan. They opted against it, and while the movie wasn't great, it would have been much worse if they kept him. The same goes for Tamatoa, and the new rendition of "Shiny" is just an awkward nightmare.
On the positive side, Catherine Laga'aia really is a wonderful choice to play the title character. If the movie ever promises to actually work, it's because Laga'aia is fully embodying Moana's spirit. The roots of such a powerful story and an amazing character are here in this movie and it's frustrating to see the movie fumble it so hard. I love Moana. That will never change. The fact that a movie that went this wrong did nothing to waver me from that stance is a testament to how fucking good that original movie is.
Night Nurse
⭐️1/2
Genre: Thriller
Director: Georgia Bernstein
Starring: Cemre Paksoy, Bruce McKenzie, Eleonore Hendricks, Colleen Rose Trundy, Mimi Rogers
A newly hired nurse at a retirement community is assigned to a scam artist who plays psudo-sexual mind games with his nurses and enlists them to participate in phone scams on the residents around them. The film is made with a deft and intentional touch by first-time director Georgia Bernstein. She has a very specific vision for this movie and one can't say she doesn't go for it. It's a movie designed to make one feel uncomfortable but just made me feel impatient. Watching this movie felt like reading someone's oddly specific senior/nurse erotic fiction that was littered with spelling errors and plot inconsistencies that they tried to self-publish in hopes of it being the next Fifty Shades. I feel like I would be more forgiving of this movie if the psychology of the attraction between the main characters had a sensible allure to it. It feels like the movie never tries to understand the mental seduction taking place and asks us to just roll with it because it has no intention of justifying it. What we're supposed to believe is that somehow this guy has this hypnotic effect on every woman who looks him in the eye and he basically creates a harem of nurses for his own pleasure. It's amazing how much of a slow burn this movie is while just waffling around without actually fleshing itself out. I admire the commitment to an unconventional erotic crime noir, but there needs to be just as much effort in writing your screenplay as there is coming up with the vibe of your movie.
Netflix & Chill
Mockbuster
⭐️⭐️⭐️1/2
Streaming On: VOD
Genre: Documentary
Director: Anthony Firth
Starring: Anthony Firth
MSTies everywhere should be familiar with the Asylum, that little studio that makes low budget fare that are mostly knock-offs of upcoming blockbusters. Bad movie enthusiasts are most familiar with their Sharknado and Mega Shark franchises, while Atlantic Rim was featured on the twelfth season of Mystery Science Theater 3000. The most recent flick from them that I watched was Frankenstein's Bride, which I reviewed a couple months back and gave it the predictable bad rating. Most who have watched their films have likely done exactly the same, if they ever bothered to finish it. But there is another side to the coin and that's the industry that produces these oddities. Have you ever been curious about it? I mean, there are a lot of assumptive criticisms of the company: they're cheap, they rush production, they hire bad actors, they leech off of more successful productions, ect. Well, now we have a documentary to expose the reality behind the studio, and the reality is that all these criticisms are true. But while it's not exactly more complicated than that, the new Mockbuster documentary also shows you exactly who the people who make these movies are and what they get out of the experience. And there actually is a more soulful answer to that than you might expect.
Mockbuster follows struggling Australian filmmaker Anthony Firth, who could never get a foothold in the film industry. On a whim, he decided to send an email to Asylum, asking them if they were interested in a new director. They practically hire him on the spot ("I just asked this company if I could direct a film and they said yes. After all that, I just had to ask someone?"). He flies to Los Angeles to meet with them and is told that he will be assigned to make The Land That Time Forgot, an adaptation of the public domain Edgar Rice Burroughs novel, which was previously adapted into a film in 1975 (featured on MST3K's eleventh season) and also by Asylum themselves in 2009. When Firth asks why they would make the same movie twice, they just respond "That's a stupid question. I'm not answering that." But, if I were to answer that for them, they basically needed some dinosaur movie to leech off of Jurassic World: Rebirth in 2025. He is told he has six days to film the entire thing, they don't have a script yet, and pat him on the head, wishing him good luck.
There is a lot of spice to seeing the inner workings of Asylum and it's fun to see how the perceive themselves. They know what they make, but they justify it by saying Hollywood also makes bad movies, they just spend much more on them. They also claim that companies go bankrupt in chasing artistic ambition, which is why they don't try. To be fair, that actually is true. Selectively true, but it does happen. The budgets they talk about in this movie remind me of the discourse around Obsession and how it cost less than a million dollars to make. It's interesting to compare the type of movie Curry Barker made with preparation against the movies Asylum chooses to knock out with the same budget. One wonders what they could produce if they handed that type of money to just three starving artists like Barker and just let them cook. Maybe they'd lose money, but maybe they'd also hit the jackpot. But they won't because there is higher risk. They claim the most issues on their own productions happen when a filmmaker tries to get too artistic. That's why they don't want that. "We're barely above porn," they say. Disagree. Asylum is below porn. Porn has a thriving industry and countless independent "artists" that gain worldwide attention because of the wide appeal of what they're selling. Asylum has a product that only appeals in a small niche and barely anyone pays attention to.
"The trick is to get people who are new to the industry and don't know it's impossible to make a film in six days."
What I actually found charming was the actual filmmaking process. What's interesting is that, while you wouldn't know this from watching the films themselves, they do try to hire capable people. The problem is the production timeline. Everyone needs to be ready to shoot and ready to run. The actors aren't necessarily bad, they just need to hurry. They say their lines swiftly so they can get to the next scene, and if they fumble, they just have to rebound quickly. There is no time for nuance. And the inefficiency of the film's brief pre-production provides a roadblock. They lose valuable shooting time because the studio has yet to approve costume design and won't allow them to shoot until they greenlight it, which practically turns their six day schedule into five. And even still, they're left with a rushed script that is likely too ambitious for the money they have, which causes them to become creative, like their make-shift submarine hatch made out of wood that looks like a grey pipe in a Mario game. But there are some standards. "You can't film in front of a garage and say it's a battleship."
Mockbuster also has some interviews with somewhat respectable names who have gone through the Asylum process. They all seem to share a knowing smile of a secret of what it's like to film one of these movies. They are also upfront about what such projects lead to and the positives of them. It's interesting to put perspective on some of this, because movies like these are largely, and probably rightfully, dismissed. But it's worth hearing them out, because they seem to believe the experience is worthwhile. One could say the same for Firth, as he was on set every day, dealt with the frustrations, watched the tempers flare, but got to say he directed a movie. And he also got to film himself doing it. And while it wasn't always sunshine and roses, you got to see the joy on their faces when things are going smoothly and everyone is having fun. Maybe these movies are trash, but my respect for the people who directly made them grew just a little. After all, "A bad movie is better than no movie."
Starring: Carla Gugino, Lou Taylor Pucci, Katherine Isabelle
Carla Gugino takes in troubled cousin Lou Taylor Pucci while weird neighbor Katherine Isabelle looms around. Isabelle turns up dead, and Pucci is the main suspect, though Gugino discovers there is probably something supernatural at play. The most interesting thing about Lockbox is that it's based on, of all things, a podcast. I'm not sure how many movies I can say that about, but the only immediate one that comes to mind is Kevin Smith's Tusk. Lockbox is specifically based on an episode of a horror anthology podcast called Knifepoint Horror, which I know little about except that they seem to be audio plays of horror stories. I don't know if Lockbox's episode is considered the best example of it, but if it is, I can only assume something was lost in translation when it turned into a feature film. Quite frankly, the movie has a couple of inventive moments, but it's a flat and boring experience. There is an inefficiency to this movie that was constantly nagging at me. It was made with promising intrigue, but its delivery of it is clumsy and it only gets more awkward as it goes. The most power in the production is in Katherine Isabelle's iconic wig. Isabelle isn't used enough in this movie, and she totally commits to her quirky bit and vibes with what the movie is shooting for. Nothing else about the movie really aims as high as she does. The main mystery lingers too long and the resolution does not satisfy what interest they lay out, and the third act is a mess. The most positive feeling I have about this movie is that every time I read the title, it sounds out like the SNL version of Al Gore during the 2000 Presidental Election. That's a joy.
Minions & Monsters
⭐️⭐️⭐️1/2
Genre: Comedy
Director: Pierre Coffin
Starring: Pierre Coffin, Trey Parker, Allison Janney, Christoph Waltz, Jessie Eisenberg, Jeff Bridges, Zoey Deutch, Bobby Moynihan, Phil LaMarr
The only word of advice I ever give to any parents out there is that there are two things that are universally beloved across all children in the world that you better get used to: one is Toy Story and the other is Minions. And lucky us, we get a new movie for each in 2026 that come out within a few weeks of each other. And while I wouldn't label Toy Story 5 as the best of its franchise (despite being an uptick from the previous film and Lightyear spin-off), Minions & Monsters is easily the best Minions movie, the best Despicable Me movie, and is very likely the best movie Illumination's animation studios have produced up to this point. What's funny to me is that the Minions are more limited characters than Gru and his family, yet the Despicable Me movies lose their imagination as they go and the solo Minions movies somehow grow more inspired and stimulating.
Minions & Monsters predates all the other films in the Despicable Me universe, taking place primarily in the 1920's and 30's, while also sidelining the main Minions characters from the previous two Minions movies in favor of new ones who look and act exactly the same (I don't want to say "all Minions look alike," but...). The Minions of this movie continue their quest of finding villains to serve, and their quest leads them to Hollywood, California, though if they're looking for the most evil person there, they're a few decades too early for Harvey Weinstein. The Minions shenanigans proves to a strength in silent film, where they shine in their own Keystone Cops kinda film series. But like many in the silent industry, the Minions struggle to make the transition to sound, which means this is the same basic story as Singin' in the Rain, only with witchcraft, because the Minions concoct a scheme to make a monster movie by conjuring up some real monsters for what they hope to be their big cinematic opus.
I did not expect this movie to be this smart. Everything about the movie plays to the Minions' strengths. In terms of pure slapstick comedy, taking the Minions and setting them loose in old Hollywood is a genius idea. They shine when paying homage to their silent film inspiration, while the awkward transition to sound works because they speak mostly in gibberish. If your ambition is something so simple as non-verbal characters thrown through vignettes of scenarios strung together by a loose idea, this is the best way to do it. Nothing about the movie is overthought, and all the minor characters and villains mostly exist to scoot the Minions from one scene to the next. The movie's plotting can be a little choppy, but it's just so fun. I was grinning from ear-to-ear ten minutes into the movie and it didn't let up until the movie was over. It's like sitting down to a Roadrunner cartoon when you're a child. There is not much to it, but the imagination and the execution is what elevates it to being your favorite of all the Looney Tunes. Minions & Monsters is full of confidence in just how to maintain that level of cartoony mayhem and it's an absolute blast.
Young Washington
⭐️⭐️
Genre: Drama, War
Starring: Jon Erwin
Starring: William Franklin-Miller, Mary-Louise Parker, Kelsey Grammer, Andy Serkis, Ben Kingsley
Jim Henson's Founding Father Babies!
Angel Studios celebrates the 250th Independence Day with a movie dedicated to the first President of the United States, George Washington. Primarily, it focuses on a pre-USA Washington, who is trying to work his way into the British army as the Brits wage war with the French in the 1750's, and eventually becomes more protective of the Virginian colonists that raised him. The film tries to be a portrayal of Washington lighting up that little spark within himself that helped lead the American Revolution to victory. Based on that, the movie is perfectly fine. Inoffensive, if unambitious. Angel seems to desire to make sure the spirit of the Hallmark TV movie stays alive. If that's the only goal of a movie like this, one can't say that they failed. In a vacuum, many of the scenes in Young Washington are solid enough. But as the movie indulges in itself, that familiar feeling overcompensating melodrama begins to sink in and any engagement the movie might provoke starts to die. It's a movie that just cannot help itself, because it wants to hit an easy note of one-dimensional patriotism that just makes its audience nod there head and go "Oh yeah, 'Murica!" It's a very simplistic patriotic idea that its catering to, one that's uncritical of something that's pandering directly to them. For those who do think critically about what is playing in front of them, Young Washington is one-note on repeat for two hours. I didn't hate this, but I also need to call it out on its crap.
Starring: Angelina Jolie, Louis Garrel, Ella Rumpf, Garance Marillier
The Randy Couture Story!
Angelina Jolie stars as a filmmaker who has been diagnosed with breast cancer who finds herself coping with her diagnosis while in France away from her family. This half of the movie is pretty good. Jolie is pretty wonderful and it's a very realistic and engaging depiction. Unfortunately, that's not all that the movie is because it pads itself out with a subplot about supermodels that is very empty and just does not compliment the primary story. I think the purpose of the movie is to contrast a woman contemplating her mortality against a group of women who are starting the prime of their lives but only one of these stories has anything thoughtful in it. Watching Couture tears me in half because I want to praise the movie for Jolie but everything else just sucks the air out of the room. But that's just the truth when a perfectly good movie has cement around its ankles and is dumped into the ocean.
Jackass: Best and Last
⭐️⭐️1/2
Genre: Comedy, Documentary (kinda)
Director: Jeff Tremaine
Starring: Johnny Knoxville, Steve-O, Chris Pontius, Wee Man, Dave England, Danger Ehran, Preston Lacy, Rachel Wolfson, Jasper Dolphin, Dark Shark, Poopies, Zach Holmes
I don't care what you think. It's been a long week and I'm going to sit here and enjoy a Jackass movie.
For those who are unaware of the late Gen X/early Millennial legend, Jackass was a very short-lived series on MTV back in the day that was basically a very physical prank show, as the stars would find outrageous gags and stunts to pull on each other or just come up with obvious bad ideas then execute them just to see what would happen. I didn't think they'd have squeezed out five movies out of that, but whatever makes these guys happy. Best and Last is touted to be the final entry in the stunt series, which might be for the best. What seems to have been keeping this franchise going is the promise of bigger and bolder stunts, though they might have peaked as a "full package" in the second installment, which is probably still the most insane of any of these movies (and has the only prank that made me nearly vomit, and you know exactly which one I'm talking about). It's hard to keep the "WE ARE IMMORTAL" mid-twenties spirit of Jackass alive when everyone is in their fifties. As for this latest installment, what strikes me is that some of the pranks have more theatricality than usual and are less awe-inspiring. Many of the biggest laughs come from clips of previous installments ("Silence of the Lambs" is still one of the funniest things I've ever seen). I can't attribute that to this movie, but I did get jollies out of seeing the older material. The movie does offer some rarely seen footage from the MTV archives that the channel did not want to air for a variety of reasons (very valid reasons) and edits them into the movie. This includes the very first stunt that Johnny Knoxville filmed for the franchise, which is also, surprisingly, the very dumbest thing I've ever seen anybody on Jackass ever do, where Knoxville takes a loaded gun and shoots himself point blank in the chest while he's wearing kevlar. They, very rightfully, never aired this and, honestly, it's debatable whether or not it should be in this movie, either. But it's at the very least locked behind an R-rating in theaters, making it less likely a child will see it and try to replicate it. And they throw in an extra precaution with an added warning at the bottom of how dangerous this is while showing it, just to cover their bases. Other unaired TV footage includes Knoxville posing as an escaped convict in public, which went unaired because the cops became involved, and Knoxville getting pushed down the stairs in a cardboard box, which MTV didn't air because they found the stunt too easily imitatable.
New stuff is relatively tame and hammy by comparison, but the elder Jackasses are all masters of amusing themselves. Steve-O is still sticking things up his rectum, including a robot's finger for a "prostate exame." The problem with this stunt is that they're limited on edits and angles that they can actually show in the movie, so we get a lot of footage of Steve-O screaming, but the lack of footage of a robot "probing" him makes it just look like it's rubbing peanut butter on his ass. They have more success in playing with electricity, as Knoxville gives Steve-O light shocks while he's trying to give Zach Holmes a tattoo and later delivering them to Sean "Poopies" McInerney's groin region. Highlighting new bits is a series of stunts at the end called "Escape Room from Hell," which is a gauntlet of bullshit that almost turns into a Jackass version of a Saw movie. There is fun to be had here if you have an affection for Jackass. If you don't, then you shouldn't have bothered. Jackass is gonna Jackass, and they're very good at Jackassing. They might be hanging up their rocket shoes for good, but one might wonder if Knoxville might be open to letting the younger members of his team carry the torch for a new generation. Or he could just let it retire with a record of zero cast and crew killed while filming their nonsense. Sometimes you gotta quit while you're ahead.
Lucky Strike
⭐️1/2
Genre: War, Thriller
Director: Rod Davis Lurie
Starring: Scott Eastwood, Colin Hanks, Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor, Taylor John Smith
Scott Eastwood is stuck in German territory during the Battle of the Bulge and takes a long hike to get home in this rudimentary war film that really makes you wish it's better than it is. Lucky Strike seems written by someone who digests a healthy diet of 1940's war propaganda movies: filling dialogue with awkward exposition, getting into heavily staged scrapes along the way, and presented through boundless patriotism. What charm those movies have don't translate to the modern lens, and the movie just feels stilted and underdeveloped. On a more positive note, cinematography does a lot of heavy-lifting, as there is some inventive camerawork for a movie that is otherwise very lazy. Unfortunately, it's always focused on actors reading blocky, over-scripted dialogue while the suspense sequences ring get frustrating because it never portrays Eastwood's main character consistently. Some of the hurdles in the plot only happen because Eastwood's character is portrayed as an inobservant moron while the climactic sequence gains traction because Eastwood is eagle-eyed all of a sudden. And then there is a schmaltzy ending that left me more puzzled that heartwarmed. The ending twist is that the whole movie is a tender love story between a lost soldier and his dependable radio, which is something the movie never sets up at all. It's jarring when this becomes the case because his use of his radio is largely brushed over in the narrative.
Ultimately, this is a movie that seems primarily geared toward the elderly couple who was sitting behind me, who just wanted to watch a war movie and exclaimed out loud what was happening during every plot beat. "Oh my gosh, he's all alone!" "Oh my gosh, it's the Germans!" "Oh my gosh, he's under fire!" "Oh my gosh, he better run!" "Oh my gosh, IT'S AMERICA!" If that's the way you watch movies, Lucky Strike is a movie for you.
Starring: Milly Alcock, Jason Momoa, Matthias Schoenaerts, Eve Ridley, David Krumholtz, Emily Beecham, David Corenswet
It's time to check in on the new, rebooted (improved?) DC Universe with an outer space adventure with Supergirl, who spends most of the movie in a hangover, only vaguely doing superheroics. I'm not fully sure she knows where she is half the time, but Kryptonian Kara Zor-El is enlisted by a little girl who seeks revenge for the death of her family. Supergirl only becomes invested when everyone's favorite superpup, Krypto, is poisoned by the very bad guy the girl is searching for, giving the pair a common goal as Kara seeks the antidote for her beloved dog.
Watching Supergirl is a tale of two experiences. One is a flavorful adventure following a troubled character stumbling through chaotic scenarios. The other is one a dry stupor of tonal issues that gets less interesting as it goes. Any viewer who leaned into either is equally valid. Supergirl is both of these things at the same time. I should note that I probably enjoyed this movie more than I didn't. This movie is primarily about a broken girl who regains a reason to care whether she or anyone else lives or dies, and I found it compelling enough to stay engaged. Ultimately, how the movie executes it is pretty muddy. The movie has more of a story than last year's Superman, but it has less plot. Supergirl is a venture of fits and starts of Kara stumbling around with a clear goal but no actual plan except "Get the thing." The design of the movie is by purpose because she's not in a good state-of-mind, but the film never solidifies her with a rhythm to her chaos that satisfies as an actual plotline. Meanwhile, the movie has a lot of adventure but is never particularly adventurous because our character is never keen on exploring or saving people. She just finds herself in new surroundings and crashes out of them without allowing the audience to fully embrace or understand them, causing the film to feel somewhat loose and lacking in spectacle.
There is a potential counterweight to this and that lies in character value. Is Kara interesting or at least entertaining? She is both of these things. Milly Alcock plays this type of girl without hope with enough charisma to make her presence one of the film's strongest assets. Does it counter that the movie sometimes feels like it has less of its shit together than she does? Hard to say. It depends on how hard she wins you over. She's not enough to mask too many of the film's faults, so that's probably a problem. Supergirl is a flawed production, which is apparent by just watching it. The question is whether the primary thing it gets right is the most important thing. I belive it's maybe of fifty-one percent importance, so I'll give the movie credit.
Hugh Jackman went and made Logan again. Only this time with a bow and arrow. The Death of Robin Hood does exactly what the title suggests, while also offering an examination of the reality beneath a legend. Like Unforgiven, but with more Game of Thrones. The idea of using such a myth as an examination of what type of right bastard might have inspired it is intriguing. I kinda wish they devoted a whole movie to his actual actions and the interpretations that spread through word of mouth. They made this movie instead, where Robin Hood is a dangerous old fart who is a contrast to the righteous figure that his legends portray him as. That's okay for initial shock value, but the movie just kinda drones on in his own misery without really exploring how he inspires such a myth. One of the reasons Unforgiven works is because of Clint Eastwood's lifetime of making westerns that it acts as an epilogue to. Logan also works because of Jackman's history of making X-Men movies. The Death of Robin Hood struggles because while there is an entire history of Robin Hood lore, this is a version of the character we only barely know and we hardly know anything about his relationship to the lore itself. I like the movie's swagger, but I need more details.
Oh well. There is an episode of Firefly that kinda already did that, where Jayne accidentally drops a payload on top of an impoverished town and accidentally becomes a folk hero. The Death of Robin Hood only succeeded in making me reflect on that episode and also an episode of Doctor Who where Clara wants to meet Robin Hood and the Doctor insists he didn't exist, only to go back and find that he not only existed but he was the exact jolly swashbuckler he has always been stereotyped as. I am just now imagining how it would have went down if the Doctor and Clara met this Robin Hood instead. Never meet your heroes, I guess.
Girls Like Girls
⭐️⭐️
Genre: Drama, Romance
Director: Hayley Kiyoko
Starring: Maya de Costa, Myra Molloy, Levon Hawke, Zach Braff
This queer coming-of-age heartbreaker is almost part of a mini-franchise, as director Hayley Kiyoko has used the title "Girls Like Girls" as the title of a song and followed it with a novel that fleshes out the narrative of her music. Now she's here with a film adaptation of that novel, which tells the story of a teenage girl who befriends another girl and finds out they both have a mutual physical attraction to each other. Will they? Won't they? Should they keep it as a secret? And if they do, will the pressure that comes with that drive them both crazy? It's very basic, and that's not always a bad thing. What's frustrating about this movie is that something emotionally resonate always feels on the tip of its tongue but it always finds a way to stunt it's delivery of it, through shallow writing or wooden acting or both at the same time. The movie feels like it wants to be a film that sizzles with moments between two people that are unsaid and it can hit quite strongly when it is that. It loses that steam when those moments are interrupted with actual speech because very little of the dialogue is engaging. I feel bad for this movie because there is a very tender story about an outsider who is struggling to solidify her personal identity, the movie just did not make me feel anything. An undemanding viewer who just wants a queer love story might find enough here to give this a watch, but there are also better options out there.
Leviticus
⭐️⭐️⭐️1/2
Genre: Horror, Romance
Director: Adrian Chiarella
Starring: Joe Bird, Stacy Clausen, Mia Wasikowska
More queer cinema this week, from girls learning to not be afraid of kissing other girls to boys learning that they should be afraid of kissing other boys. Gay teens are taken to a "healer" in one of those "pray the gay away" type of things. However, this particular ritual attaches a demon to each of the boys, who takes the form of the person they lust after most and follows them wherever they go. Kinda like It Follows or Smile, only with LGBTQ flavored spice, just the way we like it. Leviticus is more allegorical than it is frightening. It actually makes you wait a really long time for a horror sequence. Not in a slow burn sense because it's always in momentum. It's just soaking in its thematic bath oils. The movie plays with worldbound homophobia from every angle resulting in a self-loathing homosexual trying to navagate when the view of everyone else looks upon them with discomfort. It's all very on-the-nose, and sometimes it wobbles from being powerful and just being too simplistic, not wanting to explain itself and hoping people just get it. The themes and the premise are both sturdy and effective despite its genre thrills never feeling fully developed, but there is a full movie here that is well worth watching.
Toy Story 5
⭐️⭐️⭐️1/2
Genre: Comedy, Fantasy, Adventure
Director: Andrew Stanton
Starring: Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Joan Cusack, Conan O'Brien, Scarlett Spears, Greta Lee, Shelby Rabara, Mykal-Michelle Harris, Craig Robinson
Welcome back, Toy Story. You always got a friend in me, even when your big Buzz Lightyear franchise doesn't pan out. Pixar's inaugural IP has always been very consistent, usually only brought back when they have an idea that works. That doesn't stop online film nerds from being cynical about it. Every Toy Story movie has been deemed "pointless and unnecessary" sight unseen since the second one. Meanwhile, Pixar is cooking in the background, laughing to themselves "lol we gonna make you ugly cry, bitch." I will admit that a Pixar movie hasn't hit that special note that I had gotten used to seeing from them in a while, since maybe Coco. Toy Story 4 was a part of that wave (which I still enjoyed but never felt compelled to revisit), so maybe my expectations for a fifth were room temperature. Maybe that's why I liked it quite a bit more than the fourth and am thinking it's probably the best movie Pixar has made so far this decade.
Toy Story 5 focuses more on Jessie than previous installments, which were mostly Woody focused. Jessie is the new head honcho of Bonnie's toy group, though as the youngster gets older, she starts becoming more shy around other kids. Jessie starts scheming to get Bonnie to interact with other children, only to find Bonnie's attention starts to be stolen by her new piece of tech, Lilypad. Bonnie's attention soon becomes more drawn to her screen instead of her toys, and it also makes making friends even more challenging for her. It's a very on-the-nose commentary on screen addiction and how it's generating generations of withdrawn people. There's also an allusion to social anxiety, though Bonnie's particular case doesn't seem to stem from screen addiction. She was shy before she got her Lilypad, and she used it as a conduit to actually make friends. But that aspect becomes more about peer groups because she's around other kids who don't really seem to like her at all.
What I liked about this story is that it's not about the toys going on a new adventure in a different environment that has its own toy culture. Each previous Toy Story sequel did that and it started to feel formulaic. There is a bit of a back-to-basics element to Toy Story 5 that I felt really works in this movie's favor. It's the most simple storyline since the original and it mostly keeps things in the toybox without overthinking it. Everything in the movie is about the bond between a child and their toy, and the imagination that stems from it (or lack of one where Lilypad is concerned). The most expansive part of the movie has to do with a detour back to the house where Jessie's first owner, Emily, which pays off both in the main premise while also bringing closure to that little bit of trauma that Jessie has been harboring since the second movie.
Also, there are about fifty Buzz Lightyears now because of course there are.
The movie is fun and touching, which is exactly what we want from a Toy Story movie. Personally, I liked it better than both the fourth film and the Lightyear movie. There are even parts of this movie I'd say hit harder than Toy Story 3, but Toy Story 3 is probably the better movie. Anyone with an affection for this series, or with wee ones who also love it, will find it delivers the goods.
Starring: Emily Blunt, Josh O'Connor, Colin Firth, Eve Hewson, Colman Domingo, Wyatt Russell
Aliens have landed yet again in Steven Spielberg's backyard, having created two genre-defining classics in Close Encounters of the Third Kind and E.T. The Extra Terrestrial, while doing his own take on H.G. Wells' War of the Worlds several decades later. Also, aliens were in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. People don't talk about that one. This time, he does yet another "first contact" story, basically reimagining Close Encounters as a chase thriller, filled with less wonder and more paranoia. Emily Blunt and Josh O'Connor play two people who have nothing to do with each other but each finding that they have some sort of way of communicating with extraterrestrial life. They both find themselves neck deep in conspiracy, being chased down by government agents who will kill them to keep the secret to themselves. Like Close Encounters, it's a film about communication and understanding with something strange and unusual. Disclosure Day, however, is also interlaced with untrustworthy humanity mucking it up. In Close Encounters and E.T. (and Crystal Skull), harm usually happens out of ignorance as opposed to maliciousness. War of the Worlds was an alien race who was an invading "other," only here because we were fun to squish. Disclosure Day does a toned down version of hostile relations but flips the sides, portraying a capitalist nation harming out of greed and power, while the aliens at play are just want them to fucking stop. War of the Worlds was very influenced by post-9/11 xenophobic politics, while Disclosure Day is just about political xenophobia.
It's an interesting movie, but it does tend to struggle at maintaining attention for a full two-and-a-half hours. This is probably on the mid tier of Spielberg's mostly stellar career, and probably the weakest movie he has made in the last decade or so (since The BFG, at least). The script is both bloated and somehow lightly written at the same time. There is a lot of running and chasing, and to where is not always clear. Often the way out is just a magic stick that can do anything. If Spielberg had balls, he would have made it Doctor Who's sonic screwdriver, but no. Just a vague tube that we have a hundred of for some reason. Characterization is also often underdetailed, as most people in this movie exist to give speeches and glower at each other. This ensures that Emily Blunt steals the show. She has the most interesting character, the best dialogue, great comedic beats, and throws herself entirely into the movie (WEATHER SHIMI!). It's only natural that the movie becomes less fun when she's not on camera, but even when it focuses on lesser characters, it never loses too much of its blood flow. Disclosure Day is solid sci-fi from someone who knows his way around it. It's worth a look if you're into it.
The Furious
⭐️⭐️⭐️1/2
Genre: Action
Director: Kenji Tanigaki
Starring: Xie Miao, Joe Taslim, Yang Enyou, Jeeja Yanin, Brian Le, Joey Iwanaga, Yayan Ruhian
No, this is not yet another Fast and the Furious movie, though I'm still waiting to see how Dom survived that dam blowing up, now that you mention it. If Taken was directed by Chad Stahelski with fight choreography by Jet Li you would probably find something as bonkers as The Furious, a movie that's not so much a story than it is a series of amazingly filmed martial arts scenarios strung together by revenge fantasy. Mute martial artist Xie Miao chases down the child trafficking ring that kidnapped his daughter. He teams up with journalist Joe Taslim and the pair join forces to basically beat the living snot out of everyone in their way. There isn't really a lot of meat here, and sometimes you need to ignore the logic that the film willfully glosses over to keep its plot in momentum, which is surprising for a movie this simple. It's all about the film's lengthy setpieces, though. If you come to see martial arts mayhem, The Furious is not a movie that shortchanges it's viewer. It's practically all it has up its sleeve, as once the set-up has been established, the movie sees no reason to slow itself down. It's all about who needs their ass kicked next and/or how many of them. The movie can feel like a video game mission, progressing from boss to boss until you reach the goal, and the movie's ending is an endless escalating beat down that probably lasts maybe twenty minutes. The movie will either exhaust you with its relentlessness or frustrate you with how it never stops to give the viewer anything else. But it's also the type of movie that action junkies will grin stupidly at and nod their head with until the end credits roll.
Pardon me if the idea of another spoof movie so soon after the Scary Movie reboot was something I wasn't too excited about. I felt like the genre was very thoroughly killed again after the rock solid Naked Gun reboot briefly resurrected it. But my advice to anyone who is equally trepidicious about giving Stop! That! Train! a chance is to just loosen up and enjoy the chaos. The movie plays to the strengths of a spoof movie a lot better than Scary Movie did last week, and while it can sometimes be a bumpy ride, it's a lot of fun and is always fabulous. Like a certain influence from 1980, Stop! That! Train! is a spoof of disaster movie tropes as a bullet train goes haywire into a deadly storm. It's drag performers to the rescue, as all of the stewardesses are played by them as they are called upon to save the day. It's like if Airplane! was hijacked by the cast of To Wong Foo. And of course, the queen of drag, RuPaul, is here also, playing the President of the United States who desperately needs the train to be stopped in order to save her dropping approval rating. One can argue that maybe the movie is a bit more hammy than the best spoof movies tend to be, which is also a knock I've repeatedly given the Scary Movie franchise. If I criticize it for them, I have to criticize it here. The difference for me is that Stop! That! Train! has some base ideas of parody at its core, taking tropes and actually playing around with them instead of copying scenes directly and using them as an excuse to mug for the camera. But I guess Scary Movie knows its audience, seeing how it's going to be the far more successful movie. Stop! That! Train! knows its audience too. It's a smaller audience, but they're likely to have a fun time with such a small movie.
MST note: Some fans might note a cameo from soap opera star Lisa Rinna in this movie, but us MSTies will remember her from her supporting role in Robot Wars.
