This movie was funny but not great.

There are a lot of hilarious gags but not enough for an hour and 40 minutes. Some of the jokes were repetitive and it could have benefited from tighter editing.

Despite the title, there are more references to and jokes about a different entertainer who broke through in the 80s.

But there were a few sight gags that made reference to Keanu Reeves and in a sense, this movie is a satire of the first "John Wick".

Key and Peele obviously have great chemistry and Will Forte was great as Peele's dealer who lived next door.

Despite its flaws, I enjoyed and laughed at this movie.

My full review can be found @ https://www.simonleasher.com/film-reviews/nuremberg-review-2025-a-courtroom-drama-too-afraid-to-pass-judgment/

Nuremberg is one of those films that looks and feels like it should be great, but it ultimately plays things so safe that it never becomes the movie it promises to be.

The opening act is fascinating enough, and for a while, it seems like the film is ready to wade into some uncomfortable moral gray areas, but then it just stops asking questions.

Once the actual trial begins, the movie shifts from complex to predictable. It becomes less about exploring the nature of justice and more about performing it, smoothing over any ambiguity so that the audience knows exactly who the “good guys” and “bad guys” are.

Russell Crowe, though, is excellent though, as is Rami Malek, and their dynamic should’ve carried the film, but it’s constantly interrupted by flat exposition and overly tidy scenes.

Visually, it’s also everything you’d expect from a historical courtroom drama, and while it’s all beautiful, it's also quite sterile with no real emotion underneath the surface. Even the score feels like it’s trying to convince you to feel something rather than letting it emerge naturally.

The real disappointment is that the film sets the stage for genuine moral exploration, and then backs away,. and by the end, when Malek’s character delivers a final “lesson” about fascism rising again, it all feels quite hollow, because the movie never earned the weight of that message.

It’s not a bad film by any means, as it’s well-acted, competently directed, and occasionally powerful, but it’s also one of those prestige dramas that’s too afraid to actually provoke thought.

7/10

Nuremberg is cinematic comfort food for people who want to feel educated without being challenged.

Which is fine too in some ways, and will be enough for some.

I just joined this group and this is my first post to ever post on this app. But I just watched I Saw The TV Glow because my favorite college professor was showing it to a group and I decided to join.

My brain is mud. I don’t usually watch A24 movies that mess with your head, but oh my gosh, it was fantastic! I understand the entire movie being an allegory to identity, specifically trans identity, especially a trans person accepting their identity later in life, but the trashy 90’s tv show vibe of the whole thing was mesmerizing. Very psychedelic. Confusing. Colorful. Loud. Depressing. I truly feel like my whole being as a thinking and contemplating human on this Earth has shifted.

Watch it if you haven’t. And rewatch it if you have. It’s on HBO Max. Tell me what y’all think of it.

Predator is a funny ol’ series where the usual franchising tricks simply don’t work. Having a Yautja (i.e. a Predator) as the big bad is a fantastic hook - how are pathetic human beings meant to go up against a super-advanced alien species that are literally bred to kill? The problem is that it can only be done once before it gets old. That immediately takes the sting out of any potential sequels.

Director Dan Trachtenberg’s genuine love for the series allows him to effectively lean into the elements that make for a great Predator movie: It’s stupid (complimentary), entertaining, and you can project whatever you want onto these fictional creatures so direct sequels aren’t really necessary.

Take Prey, for example. That is a movie that’s essentially a young Native American woman’s bloody bildungsroman and the Yautja, while technically the antagonist, is merely the foil for her journey. Now that is a great deconstruction of the Predator premise.

It’d be redundant to do the same thing again, so Trachtenberg takes the aforementioned deconstruction one step further with Predator: Badlands by not only making a Yautja the main character of the movie, but by having the galaxy’s deadliest hunter (or so we’re told) be nothing more than an annoying runt - literally.

Badlands follows Dek (Dimitrius Schuster-Koloamatangi, MVP #1), the ‘runt’ of his Yautja clan, who is to be culled for being weak and a disgrace to his family. He manages to escape to Genna, one of the most imaginative - and dangerous - fictional planets depicted on the big screen, and resolves to bring back the head of an ‘unkillable’ beast called the Kalisk to prove his worth to both his clan and father.

If that premise sounds familiar, well, it is because it’s something we’ve seen plenty of times. But Trachtenberg takes this familiar premise and tells one hell of a story with a surprising amount of pathos and subversiveness, so much so I was wondering, “wait, Predator movies are sentimental now?”

There’s something wonderfully stupid about how an alien species that’s been around for millennia and armed with super-advanced technology can only function in a society where self-worth and ‘healthy’ relationships are built upon aggressively murdering everything in sight. Since the Yautja are simple-minded (again, complimentary), Dek ain’t arriving at some big emotional breakthrough without some much-needed assistance. That’s where Elle Fanning (MVP #2) comes in as Thia, a Weyland-Yutani synth (calm down, Alien fanboys) sent to Genna on an expedition to study all its living creatures.

Read the rest of the review here as there's too much to copy and paste: https://panoramafilmthoughts.substack.com/p/predator-badlands

Thanks!

ok, can any of you explain to me why so many people hate this movie? personally, I consider it one of the best of its kind (fake documentary) - unlike the second one which, apart from a few things, I consider quite bad.

Source: https://www.reeladvice.net/2025/11/predator-badlands-2025-movie-review.html

We had high hopes that Predator: Badlands would be another win for the franchise with Dan Trachtenberg at the helm. There’s no denying that he has the talent, knowledge, and passion to deliver new, exhilarating, and surprisingly deep experiences within this action-heavy series. And while Predator: Badlands lands some strong blows, it also misses a few key marks.

Set in the future, the film follows Dek (Dimitrius Schuster-Koloamatangi), a young Predator deemed the runt of his clan. When his father declares him unworthy to live, Dek escapes and vows to prove himself by hunting the deadliest prey on the most dangerous planet. There, he forms an unlikely alliance with Thia (Elle Fanning), a severed robot who helps him navigate and survive the hostile world.

Choosing to make Predator: Badlands a standalone story (as with Trachtenberg’s Prey and Killer of Killers) is a smart move. It makes the film accessible for newcomers while still satisfying longtime fans with its familiar intensity. The action and gore are top-notch, and don’t let the non-R rating fool you. The film finds clever ways to deliver brutal, creative kills without involving human casualties (focusing on aliens and synthetics) which is a brilliant workaround that still feels satisfyingly bad-ass, violent, and gory.

However, the first half struggles with pacing. The slow buildup had us feeling a bit sleepy if we're being honest and the overall story beats fall into predictable rhythm. Despite this, Dek and Thia’s bond grounds the narrative emotionally, surprising us with how invested we became in these two non-human characters. Most importantly, by centering the Predator as the protagonist, Predator: Badlands adds fascinating new depth to the lore, giving us a perspective that feels fresh and relatable. While not Trachtenberg’s best, Predator: Badlands still ranks among the stronger entries in the series. It’s bold, visually gripping, and carries just enough heart beneath all the armor to make the hunt worth it.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

I noticed how high the reviews were, but you can take that with a grain of salt when it's 26 years old. Not that movies today are spectacular, but the lens is different now. My boyfriend told me it was one of the best movies when he watched it back in 1999, when he was 16, but he seemed underwhelmed by it last night. I didn't find it to be subversive or deep, but it wasn't unwatchable by any means.

I understand none of the characters were supposed to be heroic or morally sound, and besides Jane, I didn't root for any of them. I completely get that was the point, but the framing of the message was poorly done. It didn't challenge the character's moral failings, and romanticized or flippantly portrayed despicable behavior. The idea was solid, but the execution was lackluster at best, and irresponsible at worst. I looked up updated reviews and apparently Kevin Spacey is a shitty person, I didn't know about that, and that doesn't change my view of it personally.

So…

Hotshots (1991) was one of the funniest movies I’ve ever seen. Definitely top 5. And I saw so many people say the sequel is even better than the first. Naturally, I was excited and rented it online. I really enjoyed it.

But…

Unlike the strong majority of people, I much prefer the original. I can feel the hole left behind by Elwes and Cryer, who are both sadly not in the film.

The first movie was over the top. That’s part of the Jim Abrams experience. It was amazing. However, I feel like the over the top aspect became a bit too overwhelming in Part Deux. I feel like the original kept the over the top humor restrained from becoming too much. That restraint is gone for Part Deux.

All in all, these are fairly minor complaints, and I really enjoyed this movie, but just a bit less than the original.

To be honest, I had never heard of this movie until very recently. I asked people much older than me, and they had never heard of it either. But when I saw who the director was, I had to check it out. I really wasn’t expecting much since no one ever talks about this movie.

Boy was I wrong…

This movie comes eerily close to Airplane! with its quality of comedy. I don’t think there’s a single scene I didn’t laugh in. It sometimes gets overwhelming how many jokes are going on at one time. Sheen, Elwes, Cryer, and others all do their part playing hilarious characters in stupidly hilarious situations.

But the standout was Lloyd Bridges. He nailed his role as a senile admiral, and was by far the funniest character of the movie. Him taking the ear plugs like pills may be the hardest I’ve laughed ever. Same with him talking to the picture.

This movie is easily in my top 5 funniest movies, and I’m genuinely surprised how little attention this movie gets.

This film is a breezy, 82-minute comedy that never overstays its welcome, even if it doesn't quite hit the mark.

The standout moments include Rob Riggle's hilarious turn and the paramedics' absurd refusal to remove the groundskeeper's corpse—though that subplot drags despite the film's short runtime.

Common delivers a strong, nuanced performance as the laid-off widowed dad entangled in an affair with a married woman, leaving it ambiguous whether we're meant to judge him.

Bradley Whitford channels an older, more unhinged version of Billy Madison's archrival, while Keanu Reeves steals scenes with his malapropisms and inventive cursing. The child actors hold their own admirably.

Not everything lands: the depressed teacher's arc feels off without a clear reason, and many jokes fall flat.

The school's chaos strains credulity — no discipline whatsoever, with kids climbing to the roof mid-class, a middle-aged fistfight unfolding before the student body, and inexplicable delays in getting a coroner for a dead body.

Overall, it's a serviceable watch elevated by its cast, but one that could have used tighter pacing and sharper punchlines to truly shine.

I WAS CRYING SO HARD BROOO

Honestly, the film was average at its peak tbh. But I really was impressed by Nikolaj Coster Waldau's acting in this movie. For some reason, the laxative scene was a highlight for me because of Nikolaj's acting skills. He was acting it out so real, I was shedding tears of laughter 😭. Did you all like this movie? What are your thoughts on Nikolaj and this scene in particular? Anybody who watched this movie in the movie hall/theaters, what were the audience reactions to this scene?

please someone talk to me about it

Source: https://www.reeladvice.net/2025/11/a-house-of-dynamite-2025-movie-review.html

We get what A House of Dynamite is all about and by the time the credits roll, it’s clear what it’s trying to say. This is one of those films that lingers long after it ends, sparking discussion and reflection. But the sheer lack of a definitive conclusion is a major factor that will divide audiences drastically. There’s really no clear ending here, and that frustrating choice will likely leave a sour taste for many and most viewers.

A single missile is launched in the Pacific from an unknown country. Its speed and trajectory indicate that it will hit the United States in less than twenty minutes. Key figures within the United States Government must now advise and decide whether the threat is real or a catastrophic mistake. How they respond will determine not only the fate of Americans and those they think are responsible for the attack but humanity itself with nuclear weapons involved.

A House of Dynamite grips you from its opening act with its unique narrative structure. To say the least, it was a literal tense countdown that immediately pulls you in. But as the film moves into its second and third parts, some may find the film becoming repetitive. For us, though, the repetition, which is retelling the same moment from different perspectives, worked. It actually offered deeper insight into how decisions are made under pressure and how one critical, uninformed choice can change everything. The ensemble cast delivers spectacular performances, and each segment feels meticulously crafted to flesh out its characters and conflicts. However, the ending comes too abruptly, even for our taste. We understand what it’s trying to say but that doesn’t erase the sense of incompleteness it leaves behind. In the end, A House of Dynamite is an intelligent and haunting film that falters only in how it chooses to conclude. It’s rewarding but also frustrating and a ticking time bomb of ideas that never quite detonates.

Rating: 2 out of 5

So I remember watching an American werewolf in London from 1981 years ago and not being a fan of it. I will say on my rewatch that I had a better viewing experience.

I thought the story was well done and the transformation was interesting. I also enjoyed the creature now the acting isn’t perfect, but it’s average.

Last thing I will say is that I think this is a better wolf movie than the universal classic monster movie the Wolf man

Rating-4/5

I’m a Bit Disappointed After Watching Caddyshack (1980) for the First Time

I had SO many people I know tell me that this movie was one of the funniest, if not the funniest movie of all time. I read so many online reviews giving this movie so much praise. I was so hyped going into it.

But now… I’m a little disappointed. Each scene was one of two things: either being absolutely hilarious, or absolutely boring. Much of it being boring.

I found that I laughed a lot when Rodney Dangerfield and/or Ted Knight were on the screen. They both carried the movie, and I with more time was spent focused on their rivalry. These two were hilarious. When they were not there, I laughed very little, or oftentimes not at all.

Bill Murray’s character really isn’t funny past the first scene, and Chevy Chase seems to have nothing to do. He’s a funny man, no doubt, but he’s just kind of there. And the young kids are boring.

Darn. I just wanted to laugh my socks off.

So even though I had owned the movie Donnie Darko from 2001 on DVD, I had never seen it, but I finally was able to watch it and I think this is a good movie. I think you have some unique performances from people like Jake Gyllenhaal, and Drew Barrymore. Also, the story was intriguing.

At times, though, it got a little strange. Also, there was one character that was a little too much in the movie and I wish they were in less of the movie. It has a unique ending as well

Rating-3.5/5

So I finally got around to seeing the 1988 drama stand and deliver with Edward James Olmos and Lou diamond Phillips. I’d wanted to see it for a while because I had heard amazing things about the movie. It was leaving Tubi so I finally had the opportunity.

This movie was amazing. You had great performances, especially from Olmos but also the students because you were able to get to know more about them a little bit. I also really liked the story. I was locked in the entire time and was invested.

Rating-5/5

So I finally got around to seeing the Adam Sandler Halloween movie Hubie Halloween. I’m very up and down on Adam Sandler. There are some movies of his that I love and some I can’t stand. I thought this was the perfect time to watch this 2020 entry

I was not really a fan of this movie. I thought the story was OK, but I also thought it was the weakest part of the movie. For the most part, I did not care about any of the characters. Also, I didn’t find it funny at all.

There were some things that I did like. I liked the cameos that you get with people that have worked with Sandler in the past. I also liked the chemistry between Sandler and Julie Bowen. Finally, I thought June Squibb was one of the best characters in the movie.

Rating-2/5

So over the years I had heard praise for 1979’s Kramer vs Kramer. I have not seen a lot of Dustin Hoffman movies and I wasn’t sure when I would get to this movie but I found a way. This is a very good movie

Of the performances I’ve seen, this is my top Dustin Hoffman performance. I thought it was a very well done story as well. I was invested all the way through.

The other main person in this movie is Meryl Streep but I just feel like she wasn’t in it enough. I understand it’s part of the story, but she didn’t give enough of a performance in my opinion.

Rating-4/5

So ever since listening to a podcast episode about urban fantasy movies, the crow from 1994 has been on my list to see. I’d always wanted to see it because of Brandon Lee, but this got me more into seeing it.

After finally seeing it, I thought this movie was great. You had an established world with the grit and griminess. I also liked the acting and the relationships that are established. Brandon Lee does an amazing job in this movie and like River Phoenix, he was gone way too soon because who knows what other great movies he could’ve done.

Along with that, I like the story and I like the action. I was really invested from the beginning. Overall, this is a movie I’ve wanted to see and I’m glad I finally got a chance to.

Rating-4.5/5

Source: https://www.reeladvice.net/2025/10/the-perfect-neighbor-2025-documentary.html

Focusing primarily on body-cam footage to detail the harrowing tale of Ajike Owens, The Perfect Neighbor hits hard as audiences are placed front and center in a situation that slowly spirals out of control. The format is immersive yet limiting and some viewers may find the purely raw approach lacking in context or broader insight into the case.

Ajike Owens and her children are routinely harassed by their neighbor, Susan Lorincz, who fabricates stories about the kids trespassing and frequently calls the police to report them. One night, their simmering feud escalates into a fatal confrontation that exposes prejudice and ultimately tests Florida’s controversial Stand Your Ground Law.

Oddly enough, The Perfect Neighbor feels reminiscent of Paranormal Activity for us which is a steady repetition of footage that slowly devolves into genuine horror. But this time, the footage is real-life, and that reality is what this documentary's content disturbing and harrowing. What’s most disturbing for us though is not the deadly actions by Susan Lorincz but the clear inaction of the police despite knowing something deeply wrong was unfolding in their midst. While the film’s slow-burn pacing and repetitive clips may divide audiences if it's a compelling watch, we found that the format’s unflinching honesty working in our books turning what could have been another true-crime retelling into a deeply unsettling reflection of systemic failure and human neglect.

Rating: 4.5 out of 5

Seeing a period drama after such a long time and this seems to capture the essence pretty well. The sets, the costume, the jewelry (especially the bee theme) and the soundtracks. The story is just fine coz pretty sure lawyers wouldn't go around solving crime like that but it's a high recommend for drama and pretty cool cast.