Review by Sean Boelman

There is no question that The Lord of the Rings is one of the most beloved fantasy franchises of all time, and fantasy television is hot right now thanks to the popularity of the Game of Thrones spin-off House of the Dragon. Yet despite having the beast of an IP behind it, the exuberantly expensive The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power is a dud, a largely dull — albeit gorgeous return to Middle Earth that does not know what to do without Tolkein’s source materials.

Set years before the events of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, the series follows a group of heroes as they set out on a quest to defeat the forces of evil. The series takes characters and parts of the world that was crafted so intricately by Tolkein and builds upon them in a way that lacks the magic of his extraordinary craftsmanship as a writer.

Like the properties actually based on source material actually written by Tolkien, there isn’t a whole lot of story in these first two episodes. It’s essentially setting up the quest to come in a way that will hopefully pay off in later episodes (the show is starting off with a two-season greenlight, after all) but is quite frankly boring to watch, even if you are invested in the world thanks to the previous films.

However, perhaps the single biggest mistake the series makes is turning this into an ensemble series from the start. The Fellowship of the Ring gives the audience the opportunity to get acquainted with the group dynamic from the start before splitting them up to have their own arcs in The Two Towers. The Rings of Power attempts to juggle multiple storylines from the get go, and as a result, it lacks that all-important connection.

The series features a combination of returning characters and new additions to the on-screen lore. Headlining the cast is Morfydd Clark as Galadriel, and she is no Cate Blanchett. Granted, it is entirely possible that she just wasn’t given enough to work with in these first two episodes, and the rest of the season will fare much better for her.

Indeed, there is a pretty shocking lack of A-list stars in the ensemble cast given that this is quite possibly one of the biggest intellectual properties on Earth. While the casts of The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit trilogies might not have been household names prior to the films coming out, they at least had a few established legends and promising up-and-comers. The only notable actor in The Rings of Power is Ismael Cruz Cordova, who truly deserves a big breakout like this.

While it’s hard to base off the first two episodes alone, and it is entirely possible that it will improve over the course of the season, The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power is a massive disappointment so far. In terms of fantasy in general, it’s not terrible, but given the budget and IP that went it to this, it should have been fantastic and it simply isn’t.

The Lord of The Rings: The Rings of Power streams on Prime Video beginning September 1 with subsequent episodes airing Fridays. Two out of ten episodes reviewed.

Rating: 2.5/5

Review by Dan Skip Allen

George MacKay had a good year when 1917 came out. He was riding the wave of all the awards coverage and potential nominations for himself and the film. He hasn't been in many of the most notable film and television projects since then. I Came By is the latest film he's in, but he's not the only established star in the movie, or even the main star, for that matter. Sadly, they are all wasted in this muddled mess of a film.

MacKay's character and his friend (Percelle Ascott) are petty thieves who like to tag their jobs with the moniker "I Came By." While working for a man named Hector Blake (Hugh Bonneville), doing yard work, they notice he's pretty well off, and they set up another score. The problem is Ascott's character wants out because he and his girlfriend are having a child together. He doesn't want this life anymore. He wants to go straight. The MacKay character decides to do the job on his own and finds something disturbing at the man's estate in the cellar.

MacKay's character's mother, played by Kelly MacDonald, notices something is bothering him. He doesn't key her into his situation, instead getting in a fight with her and storming out. What he saw still bothers him, so he goes back to investigate the situation a little more. This wasn't a good decision because the Bonneville character was waiting for him and ambushed him in the cellar. His mother and friend start to get concerned about him after that night he disappeared.

This film has a vibe of Rear Window mixed with Disturbia. These shady characters have the authorities looking at them, and then they get out of whatever accusations are thrown against them. That's a trope in suspense thrillers like this. The problem is the other two films I mentioned are much better than this one. This film doesn't know what it wants to be, so it's all over the place.

The Bonneville character is set up as a judge who has some sexual proclivities. He's hiding some things from the authorities, and all these people are trying to get him. The filmmaker, Babak Anvari, and writer Namsi Khan didn't set up the story properly. It doesn't justify why people care so much about this man and his secrets. They are the ones in the wrong from my point of view. If they had never tried to rob him, none of the extra activities in the film would have happened. 

This film is based on contrivances to justify why all these characters do what they do, which isn't good from the start. The film doesn't look bad from a cinematography point of view. It's shot very well and has some nice camera angles. The performances are fine even though they are wasted in a ridiculous story from beginning to end. The concept of graffiti taggers robbing houses and using "I Came By" as their moniker was an interesting premise, but it went totally wrong in the end.​

I Came By streams on Netfix beginning August 31.

Rating: 1.5/5

Review by Camden Ferrell

As the summer movie season comes to a close, a light-hearted family film will fill the void this coming weekend. Gigi & Nate is a comedy-drama film from director Nick Hamm and writer David Hudgins. Despite being a predictable and by-the-books movie for all audiences, this movie is harmless and decent, proving itself to be more competent than expected.
 
Nate is a young, active boy, but he soon finds his life changed. After meningitis leaves him hospitalized, he becomes quadriplegic. After this event, his life changes for the worst as he finds himself falling into depression. However, everything changes when he receives an unlikely service animal. Gigi is an intelligent capuchin monkey that gives Nate the companionship and hope he desperately needed. This is a unique and inspiring story that is simple, accessible, and easy to consume for all ages and audiences.
 
Hudgins has experience writing a lot of network television, and this screenplay feels on par with the quality of writing he has typically done on television. It’s not bad by any means, but it also isn’t particularly compelling or fresh. It is sufficient in telling its story, but it does seem to gloss over Nate’s initial struggles more than one would hope, but it also was fairly bloated as is at almost two hours.

The acting is decent from everyone involved, but it’s nothing that stands out as moving more so than the average drama. Charlie Rowe leads the film as Nate, and he’s a charming enough lead to carry the movie. He’s not perfect, but like everything else in this movie, he’s good enough. He has enjoyable chemistry with his co-stars like Josephine Langford, Marcia Gay Harden, and Jim Belushi, but none of them give memorable performances despite their competence.
 
This is standard family-friendly fare that aims to tug on the heartstrings with mixed results. It’s extremely undemanding of the viewer and can be some low effort viewing that could prove entertaining to many. Once you can look past the weak visual effects to bring Gigi to life, there’s more to like in this movie than dislike.
 
Gigi & Nate is a comedy drama with no shortage of cheesiness, and this can be a pro or con depending on who you are. It will definitely find many fans due to its inspiring story even if it is content to be unambitious. Overall, this is a harmless and not bad way to spend two hours.
 
Gigi & Nate is in theaters September 2.
 
Rating: 3/5

Review by Adam Donato

Review by Paris Jade

Review by Camden Ferrell

The Good Boss premiered at festivals in 2021 and was the official selection of Spain for Best International Feature at the 2022 Academy Awards. This movie is directed by Fernando León de Aranoa, a veteran filmmaker who is no stranger to big actors and big stories. This film can both revel and suffer in its small-scale story, but it serves as a decent showcase for the always talented Javier Bardem.
 
Blanco is a successful man who is the boss of a factory that produces scales. The movie follows each day in a week for him as he awaits the inspection of a local committee for an award. With a possible award on the line, he does what he can to deal with professional and personal turmoil to ensure his goals are met. This is a nice and simple story that isn’t ambitious in its narrative and has the potential for great character exploration. 
 
The writing is decent yet forgettable throughout. It does enough to maintain one’s attention through its story, but it also doesn’t really have anything original to bring to the table. The dialogue isn’t compelling but is still far from weak. It does what it needs to do without attempting to elevate the film as a whole.

By far and away, the best part of this movie is its leading performance. Javier Bardem is one of the best actors working today, and he leads this film wonderfully from start to finish. He brings a lot of emotion and complexity to a seemingly simple character, and if this movie stands the test of time, it will be due entirely to his turn as Blanco.
 
While Bardem is the standout, there are other aspects of the movie that shine. The direction and pacing are consistent and fairly strong throughout. It’s nearly two hours, but it never feels dull or slow, and this is commendable due to how simple its story and script are.
 
The Good Boss is a nice story that is propelled by Bardem’s fantastic leading performance. This, along with some confident direction, help elevate an average script. Not particularly ambitious, this is a movie that might speak to a wide range of audiences with its character moments and relevant themes and drama.
 
The Good Boss is in theaters August 26.
 
Rating: 3.5/5

Review by Sean Boelman

The latest victim… er… repurposed film of the MGM/Amazon merger that was originally set to go to theaters but now heads straight to Prime Video is Samaritan, a big-budget starring vehicle for the iconic action hero Sylvester Stallone. Unfortunately, the movie doesn’t seem to know who it’s for — be it younger audiences into the superhero craze or older audiences who were fans of Stallone in his prime — resulting in an end product that will please no one.

The film follows a young boy who discovers the secret identity of a superhero who was thought to have disappeared decades earlier, forcing him to save the world one last time. There have been plenty of movies that have attempted to take this “grounded” superhero approach, but few have been as outright lifeless as this.

For an action movie starring Sylvester Stallone, this film is miraculously and dreadfully boring. The action sequences are few and far between, and while the ones that allow Stallone to go full badass are at least mildly entertaining, that’s only around five minutes of the hour and forty-minute runtime.

Like… literally almost every other superhero story to ever be told, the central theme of this movie is that with great power comes great responsibility. Yet despite the extremely basic nature of the film’s themes, it manages to feel like it isn’t saying much at all. Simply showing Stallone’s character refusing to use his powers before embracing them for the greater good is very shallow.

The movie attempts to use the bond that forms between the young protagonist and Stallone’s character as a means of characterization for both of them, but it’s very generic and ineffective. Thankfully, the kid isn’t annoying like most young protagonists of movies like this can be, but he’s still not interesting.

For the more action-oriented parts of the movie, Stallone seems like he is actually having fun again, which is not always the case with his newer films. However, in the dialogue-driven portions, he’s phoning it in. Considering that the character is meant to be gruff and distant, it almost works, but there are several moments that are just too clunky to forgive.
​
The CGI is definitely not of the highest quality, but this could have been excusable were it not for the horrendously dull action choreography. There are two or three decent hammer-based action scenes, but given that Stallone is such a legend of the genre, it’s frustrating to see a movie treat him as geriatrically as this.

Samaritan wasn’t ever going to be a masterpiece, but it manages to fall short delivering on even the most basic expectations of a film like this. This movie is obviously meant to pay homage to Stallone’s legacy as an actor, but all it does is attempt to capitalize on his image to no avail.

Samaritan hits Prime Video on August 26.

Rating: 1.5/5

Review by Cole Groth

Review by Cole Groth

​The first hour of this film is very different from its last 46 minutes. While the first act serves as a good commentary on vigilante justice and the current state of social media, the last two are sloppy, poorly-written, and aggressively paced. After a twenty-minute dialogue sequence in the middle, the film goes from simply tense to over-the-top and ridiculous. Violent twists and turns are too ambitious to keep this grounded in reality, and that's where the film works the most. As the tensions grow, Benny becomes a cartoonish villain and a complete shell of who he first represented, which will surely leave audiences struggling to find out where it all went wrong. People just do not act like this in real life. It's frustrating to watch people go crazy for internet fame, especially when it isn't well-written enough to justify it. Movies like these run into these sorts of problems. Young writers want to create slick thrillers to represent their generation's problems, but it just doesn't work when they turn to violence to solve their problems. This film, in particular, struggles with cringeworthy dialogue, and it only gets worse over time.

One of the definite highlights of this film is how it presents itself in terms of social media. In a sea of bad YouTube clones and lame parodies, this one does a solid job of recreating what actual internet content looks like. Benny is a believable protagonist at first, and how he looks at the world comes from a genuine place of delusion. Flawed protagonists make for satisfying endings, so it's only more baffling when the last ten minutes throw all character development out the window in an attempt to one-up itself constantly. Without going into particular plot details, it's hard to describe what's wrong with this movie because most of its flaws come from the story. The acting is mostly sub-par, but beyond that, it's competent from a production standpoint. Just like Spree, you can expect a fatally flawed journey in Low Life, but if you're a fan of neo-thrillers, you might find a new perspective.

Low Life will premiere on VOD starting August 25th.

Rating: 2/5

Review by Sean Boelman

Many indie movies have their profile boosted thanks to a high-profile star in the leading role, and that is the case with M. Cahill’s family comedy Adopting Audrey. Elevated beyond standard indie film material thanks to a strong performance from Jena Malone, the movie doesn’t live up to the potential of its intriguing premise.

The film follows an adult woman who, feeling a void in her life, decides to put herself up for adoption and forms an unorthodox bond with the irritable patriarch of her adoptive family. Inspired by a true story, the movie is nonetheless overly melodramatic to the point of losing authenticity.

With a premise as bizarre as this, one would expect it to take a darkly comedic approach. But unfortunately, Cahill settles for a straightforward family drama approach. There are certainly some heartwarming moments throughout, but it generally can’t escape the feeling of being contrived and trite.

There are some compelling themes about acceptance and compassion, but its resonance is hindered by a script that largely feels like it is more suited to a movie of the week than a high-quality feature film. The script also hardly explores the idea of a family unit, which should have been central to this story.

The character development is largely lacking. Malone’s character is given a backstory to justify her somewhat bizarre actions, but it’s rather bland and shallow. The dynamic she has with her adoptive family is a very standard arc of a young person teaching an older person the error of their ways.

Malone’s performance is the main draw of the movie. She brings a lot of empathy to a character that is ultimately a bit on the absurd side. Robert Hunger-Bühler gives a turn that is very generic and perhaps too exaggerated, but his chemistry with Malone is strong enough to make things work.

The film is shot in a way that is very straightforward but competent. Everything about the movie is done in a way that feels saccharine and trite. Given that the film did not opt to go for the satirical angle, it makes sense that everything feels rather muted, but it also ends up being largely unmemorable and unspectacular.

Adopting Audrey does exactly what it sets out to do, but it never exceeds its modest ambitions. Jena Malone turns in yet another astounding performance, but apart from her contributions, the film is largely underwhelming.

Adopting Audrey hits theaters and VOD on August 26.

​Rating: 3/5