|
Review by Joseph Fayed Rose Styron, now 95 years old, has lived through it all. More accurately, she has been a living witness to so much history, as she gleefully recounts her life in the documentary In the Company of Rose. Rose Styron has been everywhere and met everyone, but those intriguing moments Rose reflects on are few too little. Director James Lapine, mostly known for his contributions to the theatre, meets with Rose Styron over a series of several summers on Martha's Vineyard. Across the span of that time, the documentary pieces together Rose's life, from her childhood to her career with Amnesty International. But a significant portion of the feature has Rose explaining the decades she spent married to her husband, author William Styron. Rose has an energy that draws people towards her, and the relationships she has formed prove that. Covering 95 years in an 85-minute runtime is nearly impossible. James Lapine tries his best to cover the most crucial parts of Rose's life, without any noticeable gaps. Rose recounts her life in much detail when asked various questions by James Lapine, and without the interference of interviews with those who may have influenced her. James Lapine lets Rose take center stage in narrating the events of her life. So many documentaries feel trapped through archive footage, and when the subject is a living person, that could be especially troublesome. The intimate approach Lapine takes here provides more context than your average documentary, consisting of voiceovers and family albums. The two highlights of the documentary are Rose's work with Amnesty International and William's battle with depression. They deserved lengthier standalone segments. Rose's observations from her career battling injustices across the world to the mental decline of her husband are rich with insight from someone who was mostly overshadowed during her life. Two blocks of the documentary discuss her husband's novels, and the most interesting parts were Rose thoroughly explaining why and how they were written. Rose in conversation gives the most important context authors could provide when discussing their works. In contrast, so little of Rose's own published materials are given attention.
Rose Styron is a storyteller. She is by trade, whether it's poetry or in addressing human rights. Ironically titled In the Company of Rose, Rose single-handedly makes this documentary better than any family member or friend if they were interviewed could have done. The intimate approach requires nothing to be done to dramatize Rose's life story. James Lapine was fortunate enough to cross paths with his documentary subject in Martha's Vineyard, and if I visit someday, I sure hope I get to meet Rose too. In the Company of Rose is now in theaters and on VOD. Rating: 4/5
0 Comments
Review by Sean Boelman
Ask anyone on the street, and they likely know the musical duo Wham!, who is behind some of the biggest hits in pop music — from “Last Christmas” to “Wake Me Up Before You Go Go” and more. Wham! is an extraordinarily fun music documentary, but its sleek approach and narrow focus has the unintentional effect of being slightly disrespectful to parts of its lead singer’s legacy.
The film tells the story of the legendary pop duo Wham! — George Michael and Andrew Ridgeley — as they went from being a couple of best friends in the 1970s to being one of the biggest musical acts in the world. Although it does often feel like a “greatest hits” type of documentary, it does a good job of finding a satisfying balance between nostalgia and substance. The documentary does a really good job of exploring the friendship between Michael and Ridgeley, and how their relationship evolved due to factors including the spotlight, growing older, Michael’s sexuality, and more. And given that the movie completely eschews talking head interviews, it feels quite personal. Filmmaker Chris Smith presents the film almost entirely through archive materials, performance footage, and music videos, and he manages to infuse the movie with an undeniable level of kineticism. Smith has a rare gift for creating documentaries that feel like they are transporting their viewer back in time to witness cultural events live.
This electric pacing also contributes to an infectious feeling of fun that allows the film’s 90-ish minute runtime to breeze by. Although fans of the group likely won’t learn anything they don’t know about the iconic musicians, the movie serves as a wonderful reminder of why the duo became such an important cultural keystone in the first place.
However, the narrative device of the documentary is a bit of a double-edged sword in that it also feels somewhat manipulative. By having Michael and Ridgeley “narrate” the story through audio interviews, and stopping well before Michael’s passing, the film would almost have viewers believe that Michael is still alive unless they watch to the *very end* of the credits to see the “in loving memory” tribute to Michael. Indeed, with a few exceptions — like “Careless Whisper” — the movie focuses almost exclusively on Michael and Ridgeley’s career as a duo. Not only does this leave out Michael’s prolific career as a solo recording artist, but also his work as an activist for HIV/AIDS awareness. Although the portions of the film which deal with Michael’s identity crisis and coming out as a gay man are effective, it feels like the later portion of his life is a glaring omission. Wham! is an entertaining dive into the history of the iconic musical act, but there’s something that will rub viewers the wrong way about its presentation. For a movie that is so committed to honoring the legacy of these legendary musicians, it’s surprising to see them ignore such an important part of it, but it’s entertaining nonetheless. Wham! hits Netflix on July 5. Rating: 3.5/5 Review by Dan Skip Allen Netflix has had a few popular shows for young audiences, such as Cobra Kai, Stranger Things, and The Witcher. The Witcher is based on a video game and book series. The show represents those two separate mediums nicely; but also stands on its own as an entirely different thing unto its own. Henry Cavill, as Geralt of Rivia, the title character, is quite the draw, however, that will only last for this third season. He's gone after this season, so season three has to deliver. As we pick up season three of The Witcher, the three main characters — Geralt (Henry Cavill), Yennefer (Anya Chalotta), and Ciri (Freya Allen) — are on a journey through some random woods. The purpose of their journey is to keep Ciri safe. There are plenty of people trying to capture her and return her to her place or use her for nefarious reasons. Using a bit of sneakiness involving the bard Jaskier (Joey Batey), they figure out that a member of the Brotherhood is trying to take over the North. The Witcher has always had a way of being entertaining. It's a show with some good genre sensibilities. One of those is the monsters the characters fight. This season has three nasty monsters Cavill's character has to fight. The creators are good at coming up with interesting and creepy-looking creatures for the world. One of the things about The Witcher that has improved from Season 1 to 3 is the production value/design. It seemed a bit amateurish in season one, and now it seems Netflix has spent some money on this show. The look of it is much better. The sets don't look cheap. It seems like people have taken more pride in this series and put more effort into making it look better. Now, it'll never look as good as Game of Thrones, but it's better than it has been. Another season this season is better than the previous ones is the writing. The scripts by Lauren Schmidt Hissrich and many others have been better than previous seasons. They have a more nuanced feel, where multiple characters have separate arcs, but also fit into an overall storyline for the entire season. Split into two halves, the first five episodes of season two do a great job of setting up the second batch of episodes.
The best episode of this batch of episodes is the fifth episode. It features a ball where all the main players except two are in play. They literally have a dance around this big ballroom where they are trying to manipulate and gain favor from Cavill's character. The games they play in this episode show how much the direction and writing have improved from season one to three. The various moving around and switching partners made for interesting television. This was a good change from all the fantasy stuff the show is known for. There are just so many different hands on this season that it has me excited for the second half. Various subplots and character arcs make me intrigued by what's in the future of the show. The three main actors have come a long way from season one of The Witcher. Henry Cavill, which was the main draw going into this series, is now part of a true ensemble of actors who bring their best to the table. Add in better production design, creatures, and writing, and you have a good first part of season three of The Witcher. The Witcher is now streaming on Netflix. Five out of eight episodes reviewed. Rating: 3.5/5
Review by Sean Boelman
The Afterparty was a fan-favorite with its first season, a great blend of mystery and comedy that kept viewers guessing while laughing the whole time. Season two of The Afterparty is another strong entry in the mystery-comedy series — with some aspects that improve upon its predecessor and others that stay at a consistent level.
The show follows last season’s protagonists, Aniq (Sam Richardson) and Zoe (Zoë Chao), as they find themselves caught up in another crime scene, having to investigate a murder at a family wedding. Apart from the contrivances associated with these characters getting involved in another murder, it’s another wacky, fun adventure. This time around, the show leans even more heavily into its style, each episode having a distinct stylistic approach. The only repeat — at least in the nine episodes screened for press — is the romantic comedy style for Richardson’s returning character. Other styles added to the mix include film noir, steamy erotic thriller, heist movie, and more. The cast — while not necessarily a step up from the first season’s — contains plenty more recognizable A-listers. The best new addition is Jack Whitehall, whose performance is probably the funniest of the bunch. Paul Walter Hauser is also funny, but too often feels like the butt of the joke. John Cho gets some funny moments too, as does Ken Jeong, but they don’t shine as much as Whitehall.
That said, the fundamental flaw of this season is that — beyond the returning characters — there’s really no one for the audience to root for. The closest character to character to being likable is Hauser’s oaf, who is lovable at times, but he also makes some really creepy decisions that aren’t entirely support-worthy.
Even with the returning characters, their emotional connection to the story feels weak. Although Aniq and Zoe’s relationship lingers over the entire conflict, it feels like an afterthought. And the arc for Detective Daner (Tiffany Haddish), while often hilarious — particularly during her solo episode — feels shoehorned in as an excuse to bring Haddish back. However, what this season excels at most is creating a truly unpredictable mystery. Through the ninth episode, it’s nearly impossible to predict who the killer is, with the first season having been much easier to create theories. Very few whodunnits are able to be as utterly stumping as this, so that is an impressive feat. The Afterparty delivers another entertaining — and arguably more tightly-written mystery — even if the list of suspects isn’t as compelling as it was the first time around. It’s a “more of the same” type of second season, rather than a “bigger and better” one, but fans will hardly complain about that. The Afterparty streams on Apple TV+ beginning July 12. Nine out of ten episodes reviewed. Rating: 4.5/5 Review by Camden Ferrell The world of movies can be a great escape from the troubles of real life, or it can be a stressful reminder of how anxiety-ridden and embarrassing life can be. The feature directorial debut of Michelle Savill is clearly the latter. Millie Lies Low is a brand new cringe-inducing comedy that had its premiere in 2021 before playing at other festivals such as the 2022 SXSW Film Festival. Even though it could have done more to amp up its stakes and stressfulness, this movie is still a social nightmare of a movie that is carried by a confidently unconfident lead performance from Ana Scotney. Millie is a grad student from New Zealand who has landed a prestigious internship in NYC. On the plan to the U.S., she has a panic attack and gets off the plane. Unable to get a flight back, she is stuck back at home while the people in her life think she is off to bigger and better things. Unable to own up to the embarrassment and shame of what happened, she hides in plain sight, using social media to try and convince the world she is living and thriving in the Big Apple. This is a simple premise with the possibility of social humiliation lurking at every corner which allows the audience to feel on edge for most of it. Written by Savill and Eli Kent, the script mostly succeeds in crafting awkward scenarios. While its dialogue is solid, it doesn’t stand out in any way. It’s a simple story, but the writing makes the most of it, finding new situations and lies that Millie must navigate through albeit not always successfully. Underneath the surface of social anxiety, the movie does have a genuine message about mental health and the effect it has on many aspects of one’s life. It isn’t addressed in the most natural or subtle way, but it was interesting to see the more serious side of the film’s premise explored. Millie is played by the talented Ana Scotney whose prior film roles are rather limited. Despite this, she carries the movie excellently. As far as I’m concerned, this movie is mostly a one-woman show, and Scotney handles it like a veteran. She has a great way of bringing the audience into her shoes as she encounters every hardship on her quest to lie about her NYC life. It’s hard to watch at moments due to how embarrassing and awkward some moments are, but she plays these moments very well. She knows when to play up the lighter side of the film, and she knows when to remain grounded.
While there’s a lot to admire about a film of this caliber, it’s far from perfect. Despite a relatively short length, the movie can feel a bit too slow on occasion. There are some great moments throughout the movie that just don’t have the strongest connecting threads. These shortcomings can sometimes undermine the great social tension and cringe that had been built up by those aforementioned moments. Millie Lies Low is a great showcase for Scotney as a lead actor, and it shows massive potential for the directorial career of Savill. Not great, but definitely cringe-inducing, this is a movie that should be watched with discretion for those with social anxiety. It might not be continuously engaging, but it is a rather visceral experience. Millie Lies Low is in theaters June 30. Rating: 3.5/5 |
Archives
September 2025
Authors
All
|



