Review by Chadd Clubine

Co-written and directed by Jonah Hill and featuring an ambitious all-star cast, this film should work. It doesn’t—at least not in the way it intends. The outcome feels heavily shaped by Hill’s own experiences with fame, and like Jay Kelly, it aims to humanize celebrities by reminding us they’re just people. It’s a compelling premise, but the execution never rises above that initial idea. Instead, the film plays like a collection of half-formed thoughts, never fully developed or meaningfully resolved. It resembles a weak thesis—full of intention, but lacking a clear argument or conclusion, leaving little for the audience to take away. Even at just 84 minutes, it somehow feels overstretched, as if it lingers far longer than it deserves.

The most disappointing element here is Jonah Hill’s own performance. He proves to be far less effective when directing himself, and based on this, it’s a pairing that doesn’t play to his strengths. With another self-directed, lead-role project on the way, it’s hard not to feel a bit apprehensive. What makes this misstep more surprising is that it follows the genuinely strong Mid90s and Stutz—films that showed a much more confident and focused filmmaker. Here, the issues run deeper, from awkward, unnatural dialogue to character behavior that never quite feels authentic. Ironically, someone like Adam Sandler might have been a better fit for Hill’s role, bringing a more grounded or nuanced presence. Instead, Hill swings big in his performance and completely misses the mark.

The film’s visual aesthetic is certainly a choice—one that initially looks intriguing in trailers and stills but quickly falls apart in execution. Rather than creating a euphoric or stylized atmosphere, it often comes across as goofy and out of place. The look is so distracting during dialogue-heavy moments that it undercuts whatever emotional or thematic point Hill is trying to convey. It’s especially frustrating given the backing of Apple TV, which suggests the resources were there to do something far more cohesive and polished. If the film was going to commit to such a distinct style, it needed to fully lean into it. Instead, there’s a noticeable imbalance: exterior shots frequently look rough and unconvincing, while interior scenes are merely passable. That inconsistency only widens the gap between the film’s ambitions and what actually ends up on screen.

At just 84 minutes, the film might seem brisk on paper, but in practice, it feels far longer. Weighed down by an overload of half-developed ideas—both thematic and comedic—it drags instead of moves. There are occasional flashes of intrigue, some of which are buoyed by Reeves’ natural likability, but even that can only do so much. The film never convincingly allows his character to feel genuine emotional pain, leaving those moments hollow and unearned. Comedically, it fares even worse. Not a single joke truly lands, and when the film reaches for humor, it often relies on Hill leaning into an exaggerated, grating performance that comes off as more irritating than funny.

The cast is undeniably stacked, which raises an obvious question: what did everyone see in this script? At times, it feels less like a deliberate ensemble and more like a group of friends signing on out of loyalty rather than conviction. Martin Scorsese, in particular, feels miscast and unconvincing, as if his involvement is more a returned favor after Hill’s role in The Wolf of Wall Street. Cameron Diaz’s return to acting is similarly underwhelming—an unfortunate and undeserved stumble given her long absence. Meanwhile, Matt Bomer does what he can to elevate the material, but the writing and direction work against him, repeatedly leaving the audience wondering why his character is there at all.
​
Overall, Outcome isn’t just a disappointment—it’s one of the worst films of the year. It certainly isn’t a reason to subscribe to Apple TV+ if you haven’t already, especially when the platform offers far stronger content. Whatever spark Jonah Hill once showed as a filmmaker feels absent here, replaced by a project that never finds its footing. At the very least, the cast remains likable enough that this misfire is unlikely to do any lasting damage to their careers.

Outcome streams on Apple TV April 10th!

Review by Adam Donato

Review by Steve Barton II

Review by Steve Barton II

​Steven Soderbergh is a name that’s always near the surface of the vast ocean of iconic directors over the last 30+ years. Since his feature debut with Sex, Lies, and Videotapes (which earned him honor of youngest winner of the Palme d’Or at Cannes Film Festival), Steven’s career has been a mix both critically and financially. One thing that is always a constant with Soderbergh’s work is his ability to make the camera a character itself and engrosses the audience into this world he’s created. In the Oceans films or Logan Lucky, the dynamic camera makes you feel nervous and thrilled during the heists. With The Christophers, Steven makes the audience a fly on the wall seeing an artist wrestle with his impending departure from the world and the complicated emotions that come with it. The Christophers follows Lori (Michaela Coel), an artist who is hired to forge the unfinished works of a once regarded artist, Julian Sklar (Ian McKellen) by his children. As Lori begins to pull back the layers of Julian’s rough outer canvas, she uncovers the true artist behind his once iconic work.

Review by Chadd Clubine

Don’t be fooled—this is very much a new adaptation of Hamlet. It’s easy to confuse it with last year’s Hamnet, which, somewhat ironically, also stars Joe Alwyn, but the two are entirely different. For a story that has been revisited countless times, this version feels refreshingly modern, in the same spirit as Baz Luhrmann’s Romeo + Juliet. Despite the familiarity of its title and plot, what truly sets this film apart—and makes it worth watching—is Riz Ahmed’s compelling performance in the lead role.

There’s something enduring about Shakespeare’s work—it continues to feel timeless no matter the era. By bringing the source material into a modern setting, the film underscores just how relevant and revered his writing remains today. That said, for viewers unfamiliar with Shakespeare, the language and style may feel challenging, making it harder to fully grasp what’s happening. Still, for many, the experience offers a chance to see firsthand how his stories transcend time and to develop a deeper appreciation for his work. While Riz Ahmed delivers a powerful lead performance and the film offers a distinct perspective, it ultimately doesn’t venture far beyond what has already been done—especially for those who already know the story.
​
When you watch a play, there are no second chances—no cuts, no resets. The actors must fully inhabit the material, carrying it forward in real time. This new adaptation of Hamlet could have easily gone to a less prominent name, but Riz Ahmed takes on the project as both actor and producer, clearly demonstrating his deep respect for the source. Through extended, unbroken takes of Ahmed delivering lengthy monologues, the film captures something close to the immediacy of live theater. He brings a remarkable emotional intensity to the role, one that not only elevates the performance, but also deepens the sense of just how timeless Shakespeare’s work truly is.

The cinematography often feels like a deliberate and inspired choice. For much of its runtime, the film embraces a distinctly cinematic style, demonstrating how Shakespeare’s work can move beyond the stage and thrive on the big screen. There are several striking sequences throughout, including a standout moment in which Ahmed drives on the wrong side of the road—easily one of the film’s most memorable scenes. That said, the film occasionally betrays its limitations. In its quieter, more intimate moments, it can feel somewhat low-budget, and those scenes don’t always give the dialogue the weight it needs. For material like this, where language carries so much of the impact, the lack of intensity can dull its effectiveness.

For a story this familiar to stand out, it needs a clear and distinctive vision—and the film finds that, to an extent, through Aneil Karia’s direction. Each scene, whether large in scale or quietly intimate, feels purposeful in reinforcing the film’s themes. From Hamlet encountering his father’s ghost to more grounded, visceral moments like Hamlet grabbing a knife, every choice carries emotional weight. Given its contemporary setting and approach, the film might have benefited from a different title—one that signals a looser, more interpretive take on the material. Retaining elements of Shakespeare’s dialogue while more boldly reimagining the story for a modern audience could have helped it feel fresher. As it stands, the film could have pushed further in terms of originality to better distinguish itself, especially in an era where reinterpretations and remakes are so common.
​
Overall, this new version of Hamlet features one of Riz Ahmed’s strongest performances to date, as he pours an extraordinary amount of heart and soul into the role. The modern approach reinforces just how timeless Shakespeare’s work remains, while offering a fresh visual lens through which to experience it. Although the film doesn’t always achieve the level of originality needed to fully set itself apart, Ahmed’s performance alone gives it a distinct and compelling edge.

Hamlet (2025) is in theaters April 10th!