Review by Adam Donato

Review by Dan Skip Allen

Review by Dan Skip Allen

​Jack Ryan is one of Tom Clancy's most popular characters. He had five films before he got his own series on Prime Video starring John Krasinski. The first season was very good, introducing fans to a new iteration of this character. The second season was not as good, but it was entertaining nonetheless. This December, the third-season premiers and fans will be in for the ride of their lives with a lot of espionage and spy games.

Clancy has focused on Russia in some of his works, so it makes sense that Jack Ryan (John Krasinski) tackles this Eastern European juggernaut in his series. CIA Agent Jack Ryan gets accused of the murder of a Russian soldier, which ends up getting him in prison, but he escapes and has to figure out who set him up and what this has to do with their actual plan: starting World War III between the US and the Russians. 

The series is very complicated and deals with topics very close to home regarding the war in Ukraine and Russia's involvement. Ukraine plays a significant part in the show this season. Nina Hoss plays the president of Ukraine, and her father, played by Peter Guinness, is an ex-Russian patriot who has dreams of the motherland and bringing it back to prominence as a world power once again.

There are many moving pieces involving a cue in Russia and problems within the ranks of the CIA which get the top brass of the US involved. Krasinski's Ryan gets some help from a few friends from past seasons: James Greer (Wendall Pierce) and Mike November (Michael Pierce). He needs all the help he can get as this show spans a lot of history and European grounds. This season, the show goes to Austria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, Russia, and of course, the United States. It's part of what makes this series so good.

​This season, there is a historical aspect to the show regarding the Russian side of the story. It gives a backstory to what motivated them to do these things they are attempting to do in the present time. Guinness and James Cosmo play ex-Russian soldiers, and their characters are focused on as young men in the flashbacks. This gives a lot of context to the series this season.

Like always in this show, there are plenty of action scenes and set pieces, but not to the level of something like a Mission: Impossible film. They have to work within a budget. That's not to say this series isn't action-packed or dull in any way. It just has to do things in a less-than-explosive way. There is more espionage this season than in seasons past. That makes sense because of who the show is dealing with. Both the Russian and US sides of the story have a lot of intrigue and subterfuge. It is hard to follow along with who we, as viewers, can trust and not trust throughout the series.

That being said, this season lacks a little extra oomph that other seasons had. There is much more talking and walking and men in prison, and not enough of what I've come to expect from this series thus far. I think a reason for that is the pandemic. I believe this show was plagued by problems because of restrictions from COVID-19. Many countries had stringent laws involving their borders, mask mandates, and so forth. That may have played a part in why this season was more grounded and less explosive.

Krasinski and company were fantastic in season three of Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan, given the pressure they were under while making this show this season. The story was very good, and the backstory helped develop some newer characters, especially the Russian ones. The connection to Ukraine has made it a show people will watch. That was a nice touch trying it to recent events. The series as a whole was entertaining, but I would have liked to see what they could have done had this not been filmed during the pandemic years — maybe more action and explosions instead of so much talking and exposition.

Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan streams on Prime Video beginning December 21.

Rating: 3.5/5

Review by Camden Ferrell

Movies are a wonderful medium that captivates people all over the world. Many people contribute to the final product, and one aspect that is crucial to filmmaking but can sometimes get overlooked is visual effects. Jurassic Punk is a documentary that follows the work of VFX pioneer Steve Williams and the role him and his colleagues played in the introduction of CGI in movies. Directed by Scott Leberecht, this movie had its premiere at the 2022 SXSW Film Festival. It may lack charisma and might have some weird narrative shifts, but this documentary is quite educational and insightful into the VFX work of some timeless classics.
 
In this documentary, we get to hear from industry legends and professionals about the work that went into the visual effects for various movies in the late 20th century. We get an in depth look into the actual technology, techniques, and methods that were used to achieve groundbreaking effects, and we also get a behind the scenes look at the studio politics of the time. This is an interesting period in film history, and it’s one that is important to learn as it plays a big role in so many of our favorite movies.
 
I really enjoyed a lot of the interviews and guests they got to star in this, and for people who thrive behind camera, they are quite interesting to watch talk in front of it as well. They have great anecdotes to tell about their jobs and the famous people they’ve worked with, and they have a light sense of humor that makes the film feel quite fun at times. It also has some great archival footage and VFX test footage to help audiences get a feel for what the work was like at the time.

While it is interesting and engaging at times, it also doesn’t have a whole lot of personality in its execution. It plays like a very solid History Channel special, but it purely relies on its subject matter to engage audience and doesn’t really do anything creative with the way it tells its story. That being said, it is full of great trivia and information about the VFX work of great movies like Jurassic Park, The Abyss, and Terminator 2: Judgment Day.
 
One thing that stuck out was the drastic tonal shift the movie makes in its final half hour. While it was always concerned with the work of Steve Williams, it takes a sharp turn into his personal life towards the end. His story is an emotional one, but this aspect feels oddly shoehorned into the movie, and it ruins the flow of the documentary greatly. His personal story could have been hinted throughout or slowly developed, but it seems to abandon its objective and thesis at the end to almost exclusively focus on his personal struggles.
 
Jurassic Punk won’t win any points for innovation like its subjects, but it is an interesting look at the world of VFX. It’s a great starting point to learn about the history of computer-generated graphics in film and a chance to hear from the people who pioneered that. It is a little clunky towards the end, and it’s execution leaves a lot to be desired, but this is still quite informative and enjoyable for a casual viewer.
 
Jurassic Punk is in theaters and on VOD December 16.
 
Rating: 3.5/5

Review by Sean Boelman

With the one-two punch of Whiplash and La La Land, Damien Chazelle cemented himself as one of Hollywood’s favorite filmmakers. As such, it was pretty shocking when it was revealed that his newest film, Babylon, would be a hard-R portrait of the success of the industry. While the movie is undeniably entertaining, Chazelle’s film bites off a bit more than it can chew, holding it back from greatness.

The movie follows the rise and fall of a group of movers and shakers in the Golden Age of Hollywood, from silent movie stars and starlets to wannabe big shot movie producers. There are plenty of obvious comparisons to be made — Singin’ in the Rain, Boogie Nights — but one thing is clear: what Chazelle has made is disappointingly derivative despite its constant attempts to stand out.

The sense of humor in the film is nothing like one would expect from Chazelle, with a level of crudeness that often approaches gross-out. Within the first five minutes, audiences will immediately be able to tell if they are on the same wavelength as the movie’s crass humor. And for much of the first hour and a half, it’s pretty damn hilarious.

Unfortunately, in the second half of the film, it gives up on being a whimsical, excessive Hollywood farce and turns into something much darker and more existential. That isn’t to say it’s any more restrained — it’s still thoroughly over-the-top — but the feeling of fun is removed from the equation. It’s at this point where Chazelle starts taking the characters in directions that don’t make a ton of sense.

Margot Robbie is mostly playing the same character she always does. That is to say, she’s very good in the role, but it’s nothing new for her — over-the-top, ditsy, and alluring. Her co-star, relative newcomer Diego Calva, has some ups and downs. In some moments, he struggles to keep up with the veteran performers acting circles around him, and in others, he completely commands the attention of the viewer.

Brad Pitt, on the other hand, gives what might be the best performance of his career. While exuding the same level of charm that he always does on screen, Pitt also channels a breathtaking level of vulnerability. His character is undeniably the movie’s most compelling, and it is in large part due to Pitt’s extraordinary turn.
​
Unfortunately — and perhaps most surprisingly, given Chazelle’s track record — the film is simply ugly to look at. Although there are certainly some innovative technical accomplishments throughout, such as the opening scene tracking shots through the party, lots of it is unexpectedly out-of-focus. A grimy aesthetic was clearly purposeful, but it becomes distracting at a point.

Babylon might be Chazelle’s most entertaining movie yet, as there isn’t a single boring moment in its over three-hour runtime. Yet, despite the hyperactive pacing and a wealth of excess, it never manages to capture the magic of the films to which it pays homage — or even Chazelle’s previous ode to Hollywood, for that matter.

Babylon hits theaters on December 23.

​Rating: 3.5/5

Review by Dan Skip Allen

New shows premiere on Netflix every week. Some of them get noticed by fans and critics right away because they have some buzz behind them or awards chatter. Other times, they go unnoticed by most people. That is until word of mouth gets around and people start watching said film or show. One of those shows is The Recruit, the new dramedy starring Noah Centineo as the titular title character.

Owen Hendricks (Noah Centineo, Black Adam) is a new young lawyer for the General Council in the CIA. He is the guy that older members in his office, Lester and Violet (Colton Dunn, Arti Mann), pick on. As a joke, he gets to go through a bunch of old mail the CIA got. His life changes when he receives a mailer from inmate Max Maladze (Laura Haddock). This starts them down a road of international espionage and a cat-and-mouse game he never expected to be involved in.

The main character, played by Centineo, travels to Phoenix, Arizona, to visit Haddock's character. She is an enigma, though; he has to go back home to his two roommates, Hannah and Terrance (Fivel Stewart, Daniel Quincy Annoh), with his tail between his legs. He likes to confide with these two young people who are very similar to him in many ways. He even dated Stewart's character for a time, so there is that sexual tension that still lingers.
​
Like any great spy show, The Recruit is a globe-trotter. It goes everywhere, like Yemen, Vienna, Beirut, Belarus, Russia, and Washington, D.C., where it's set. Words like asset, State Department, Justice Department, Office of Technical Support, and Case Officer are thrown around like candy. This government and spy lingo helps the show be even more authentic than it already is. The showrunner and creator Alexi Hawley lathers this series in spy and espionage goodness. It's hard to keep up sometimes.

Review by Joseph Fayed

Twists and gore are two gifts you will not be receiving this holiday season from this film. The "mystery" surrounding Sally's disappearance is laid out for the viewers around the climax. As for gore, you won't be yelling "yaass queen" at Darlene during any physical confrontation she has with Jack. It is very run-of-the-mill because none of its ideas are original. Vengeance or getting justice serves as nothing more than driving you from point A to point B. When that or the only three characters your film chooses to focus on can't carry their weight, you really don't have much to say with your story. 

Jaycee Lee Dugard was not kidnapped and held captive for 18 years just to be name-dropped in this below-average thriller. The Apology is not accepted, as the film is not riveting enough to show the raw emotions or mysteries surrounding a missing persons case.  
​
The Apology is now in theaters and on VOD.

Rating: 1.5/5 ​

Review by Sean Boelman

Review by Sean Boelman

Review by Sean Boelman

James Cameron’s Avatar is the highest-grossing film of all time by a long shot, and while some have soured on it since its release, it still holds a cultural impact like few other original blockbusters do. The long-awaited sequel Avatar: The Way of Water is finally hitting theaters, and while one would hope that all of the delays would have resulted in a final product nearing perfection, it wasn’t worth the wait.

Set years after the original movie, this sequel follows Jake Sully as he lives with a new family and finds himself forced to protect the Na’vi people again when the humans return to the planet of Pandora. Promising bigger, better world-building and an expansion to more parts of Pandora, the film plays out with beats that are not only eerily familiar to the original, but also several blockbusters of the past ten years. 

Much like its predecessor, The Way of Water is an absolute behemoth of a movie. It’s three hours and ten minutes of gigantic, CGI spectacle. Yet, despite Cameron’s best efforts, it feels like it’s going through the motions. Certain aspects — like the underwater scenes — are clearly innovative, but other than that, the film hardly attempts to one-up the original that came out over a decade ago.

Cameron has insisted that nearly every showing in every theater across the country — at least the ones that are equipped to handle it — are shown in high frame rate. And while the 3D is impressive and the visual effects are undeniably ambitious, the HFR makes everything look like a video game cutscene, especially the action sequences. For a movie that is meant to immerse you in another world, this is wholly distracting.

For some reason, Cameron also thought it wise to bring back Sigourney Weaver playing a new, younger character. Although it is explained in the film, it’s about as stupid of a reason as they come. And worse, Weaver is distracting, as she plays a teenager despite clearly sounding like a seventy-year-old woman. They also bring back Stephen Lang, and while his part is not as dumb, it’s also frustratingly generic. 

The themes of the movie also don’t have the same emotional impact. Although they thankfully got rid of the terribly-named Unobtanium, this new movie targets the whaling industry. However, the way in which these scenes are shot is like an action sequence, lacking the same emotional resonance as the scene in which the forest was destroyed in the first film.

Additionally, in trying to pass the torch to a new generation of characters, Cameron bites off more than he can chew. There are seven children in the new generation, and despite the runtime, there simply isn’t enough room in the narrative to develop them all while still expanding the original generation’s arcs. The overarching family themes are nice, but individually, their stories leave something to be desired.

Avatar: The Way of Water reeks of no one telling the filmmaker no, but with someone as influential and groundbreaking as Cameron, who can blame them? It’s an ambitious swing and a miss — not quite a childhood-ruiner, but disappointing enough that you wish the Sky People (and Cameron) had left Pandora alone.

Avatar: The Way of Water opens in theaters on December 16.

​Rating: 2.5/5