Review by Chadd Clubine

Backrooms is many things at once, and it’s all the more compelling for refusing to provide easy answers. Designed to leave you questioning what you’ve seen, the film showcases extraordinary talent across the board, from its cast to its production design. Its abrupt ending lingers long after the credits roll, inviting reflection and debate. It’s best experienced with others, as the film practically demands discussion and interpretation. More unsettling than outright horrific, Backrooms leaves behind a creeping sense of unease that burrows into your mind and stays there, regardless of how you ultimately feel about the experience.

Four years ago, YouTuber Kane Parsons released The Backrooms on YouTube at 16 or 17 years old. Now, after being hired by A24 as the studio’s youngest theatrical director, he has expanded his vision from a viral web series to the big screen. What’s remarkable isn’t just that someone so young created something so conceptually unique, but that he infused it with genuine thematic depth. Even if the ending leaves you wanting more, there’s no denying the care Parsons brings to the film, communicating crucial information through visual storytelling rather than exposition. It serves as a compelling reminder of why cinema works best when it shows rather than tells.

Parsons balances his two leads, Chiwetel Ejiofor and Renate Reinsve, with sharp precision. Although Ejiofor receives top billing, both performances carry equal weight, and there’s a strong case to be made that Reinsve is the film’s true protagonist. While the film’s themes are open to interpretation, obsession emerges as its clearest throughline. Both characters enter this newly discovered space with seemingly noble intentions, yet neither truly needs to be there. Their pursuit of something greater—meaning, purpose, fulfillment—ultimately reveals the hollowness of their ambitions. The liminal spaces become more than a mystery to solve; they act as mirrors, reflecting the characters’ deepest desires and the emptiness that lies beneath them.

For such a young director, it’s especially impressive to see the performances Parsons draws from Chiwetel Ejiofor and Renate Reinsve. In fact, both actors may have delivered some of the year’s finest performances. While portions of the first act feature dialogue that can initially feel somewhat unnatural, those choices ultimately serve a larger purpose, deepening our understanding of the characters as the story unfolds. It’s in the later stretches of the film where both performances truly come alive, revealing new layers as the characters become increasingly shaped by the strange world they’ve entered. By the third act, the tension is almost unbearable, with Ejiofor and Reinsve delivering emotionally charged performances that will leave your palms sweating.

It should come as no surprise that the film boasts exceptional production design. Every detail suggests that Parsons and his crew had a complete understanding of this world, even if they wisely choose not to reveal all of it. The film offers only glimpses into its mysteries, rewarding attentive viewers with subtle details that heighten its sense of unease. Miss a moment, and you may miss something genuinely unsettling. The cinematography is equally effective, carefully controlling what the audience sees—and, more importantly, what it doesn’t. Sounds often emerge from beyond the frame, creating a constant sense of dread as you wait to discover whether something is actually there, mixed in with the creepy and effective score. The handheld POV sequences add another layer of immersion, placing viewers directly within these disorienting liminal spaces. The result is a world that feels hauntingly tangible, one that captivates on screen, but is clearly a place no one would ever want to encounter in real life.

Overall, Backrooms feels like exactly the kind of film modern cinema needs—a bold, thought-provoking work that lingers in the mind long after the credits roll. Parsons crafts an experience that invites reflection rather than providing easy answers, trusting the audience to engage with its mysteries. From its assured direction and exceptional production design to the outstanding performances at its center, the film showcases remarkable craftsmanship in every department. Its ambiguous ending raises more questions than it answers, but that uncertainty is precisely what makes it so compelling. Backrooms is the rare kind of film that demands discussion, interpretation, and revisitation long after you've left the theater.

Backrooms is now playing in theaters!

Review by Chadd Clubine

Many viewers may feel that World War II stories have been explored from every possible angle. What sets Pressure apart is the way it reframes history through a perspective many audiences likely haven’t considered before. Backed by a talented cast, meticulous production design, and a brisk runtime, it initially feels like essential viewing. While the film is undeniably tense and entertaining, it ultimately lacks the lasting impact of the genre’s most memorable World War II dramas.

Seeing Academy Award winner Brendan Fraser featured prominently in the marketing was an easy draw, and somewhere within Pressure exists a far more compelling film told entirely from his character’s perspective. Instead, the story unfolds through the eyes of Andrew Scott. Scott is every bit as talented as Fraser, but the issue lies in how the screenplay handles his character. He’s given little meaningful development, making it difficult to fully invest in his motivations or emotional state. Beyond the fact that he’s leaving behind a pregnant wife, the film leans on familiar and predictable dramatic beats. Ironically, the narrative seems far more interested in helping the audience understand Fraser’s perspective, which only highlights the lack of emotional connection at the story’s center.
​
While its lean runtime may appeal to audiences looking for a quick, efficient watch, there ultimately isn’t enough substance to justify the film’s constant sense of urgency. Much of the story boils down to men arguing over weather forecasts, elevated primarily by the strength of the cast and the film’s meticulous production design. To its credit, the film drops viewers directly into the situation without overexplaining the historical context, but anyone familiar with the events being depicted will likely find it easy to predict where the story is headed.

The film’s third act finally underscores the true significance of the events unfolding. Rather than ending where Saving Private Ryan begins, it revisits the battle itself with striking visual and sound design. As with the rest of the film, the production design is deeply immersive, and experiencing the devastating consequences of these men’s decisions on the battlefield carries real weight in a theater setting. Yet the emotional impact never fully lands because the film offers little to no meaningful characterization for the soldiers fighting on the ground, diminishing the human cost of what they endured that day.

The film succeeds in exploring a largely overlooked perspective of history, and its exceptional production design creates an impressively immersive atmosphere throughout. However, the lack of meaningful characterization among the supporting cast is hard to ignore. Kerry Condon continues to elevate nearly every project she’s part of, but here, her character feels underwritten and ultimately unnecessary. The film also misses an opportunity to explore the unique challenges she may have faced as a woman in that environment. Chris Messina is given a more intriguing arc, though his performance occasionally feels overly aware of the film’s dramatic weight. If anyone feels truly underutilized, though, it’s Damian Lewis, who brings a compelling gravitas to the role despite being given far too little to work with.

Overall, Pressure will likely appeal to history enthusiasts and fans of the cast involved, even if it falls short in developing the kind of rich characterization needed to create a stronger emotional connection. Still, the film’s immaculate and deeply immersive production design helps elevate it into a compelling new perspective on World War II that remains worth experiencing.

Pressure releases in theaters May 29th!

Review by Chadd Clubine

At this point, Ladies First holds a 13% score on Rotten Tomatoes. That may sound brutal at first glance, but considering it’s based on only 15 reviews, the number feels slightly less damning. Still, the lack of press screenings ahead of release was an early warning sign, as studios often avoid screenings when confidence in the final product is low. That was especially disappointing given the film’s cast and premise, both of which suggested the potential for a sharp, worthwhile comedy. The themes the film attempts to tackle feel timely and relevant, but unfortunately, the message comes across as muddled, and the humor rarely lands.

Sacha Baron Cohen seems to be entering a new phase of his career, one defined by physical transformation and a string of increasingly bland comedies. While his filmography has always varied in quality, he’s consistently been able to make a lead comedic role work through sheer charisma and timing. Rosamund Pike, meanwhile, remains one of the most compelling actresses working today, partly because of how selective she has become with her projects. On paper, pairing the two together felt like a perfect fit. Instead, the film awkwardly tries to convince the audience by the third act that their characters are essentially the same person — a revelation that feels unearned, nonsensical, and ultimately hollow.
​
There are brief moments where the humor works, but whenever the film leans too heavily into absurdity, it falls flat. The comedy isn’t outright cringeworthy; it’s simply ineffective. Much of the film’s humor depends on portraying the female characters as exaggerated versions of stereotypically dominant male personalities. While that idea is clearly central to the film’s premise, relying on it repeatedly for laughs makes the comedy feel shallow and uninspired rather than clever or satirical.

Another issue with the film’s humor is that it constantly reminds the audience of the real-world behavior and societal problems it’s trying to satirize. Rather than turning those observations into sharp comedy, the film repeatedly beats the audience over the head with them. If the takeaway is simply, “This is how men act,” the joke quickly loses its impact and starts to feel repetitive instead of funny. By the time the film reaches its conclusion, it attempts to frame Cohen’s character as changed because he finally sees Pike’s character as someone just like himself. However, that revelation undermines the very message the film seems to be aiming for. Instead of suggesting genuine equality or understanding, it unintentionally implies that men can only view women as equals when they mirror male behavior exactly. As a result, the film’s themes collapse under their own contradictions, leaving the ending hollow and ineffective.

The film is never outright terrible in the way its Rotten Tomatoes score might suggest. It’s simply dull, uninspired, and painfully forgettable. Thankfully, the relatively short runtime prevents it from becoming an exhausting watch. For a Netflix comedy, it also avoids the aggressively cringe-worthy style often associated with a Happy Madison Productions release, which at least keeps it from feeling unbearably long. Still, just as the story begins to gain any momentum, it abruptly ends, leaving behind little more than disappointment.
​
Overall, Ladies First completely wastes its potential. The premise and cast are strong enough to support a genuinely clever and meaningful satire, but the film leans too heavily on cheap jokes, a paper-thin story, and themes that never fully come together. It had the opportunity to say something insightful about gender dynamics in today’s world, yet it ultimately settles for surface-level commentary with little lasting impact.

Ladies First is now streaming on Netflix!

Review by Chadd Clubine

Six and a half years after the last Star Wars film, the franchise finally returns to theaters with The Mandalorian & Grogu, a continuation of the Disney+ series that still manages to feel surprisingly standalone. Even viewers unfamiliar with the show should have little trouble following along, as the film provides plenty of exposition to bring audiences up to speed. It’s easy to see why this became the next theatrical Star Wars project. Not only is The Mandalorian immensely popular, but its cinematic scope — from the story and tone to the sweeping score — naturally lends itself to the big-screen experience. While the film delivers on that theatrical scale, there’s also a lingering sense that it may have arrived a little too late.

It’s clear Disney’s decision to turn this into a film was driven largely by the franchise’s popularity. In many ways, a theatrical release would have made far more sense immediately after the second season, when the series was at its cultural peak. Reuniting Din Djarin and Grogu in The Book of Boba Fett as they originally did, then transitioning directly into a feature film, could have felt like a natural progression. Instead, the current direction of these characters feels uncertain and unfocused. Even the title, The Mandalorian & Grogu, raises questions about the franchise’s future. Does this lead into The Mandalorian Season 4, or set up a sequel like The Mandalorian & Grogu 2? Right now, it feels as though audiences are simply expected to watch these characters bounce from one adventure to the next without any real sense of destination. Because of that, it becomes increasingly difficult to stay emotionally invested when the characters seem protected by endless plot armor. Beyond Din Djarin and Grogu, the only major new addition that truly feels worth investing in is Jeremy Allen White’s Rotta the Hutt, a character who at least hints at having a distinct and potentially meaningful future within the franchise.

What ultimately unfolds is a story that feels fairly safe and formulaic. Even the marketing keeps the plot intentionally vague, and once the true antagonists and larger narrative are revealed, it becomes hard not to question why this needed to be a theatrical event in the first place. Still, the film’s sweeping action and visual spectacle ultimately provide the answer for why it belongs on the big screen. From its breathtaking opening sequence, The Mandalorian & Grogu immediately pulls audiences in and rarely loosens its grip. In many ways, that alone captures the essence of what a summer blockbuster should be. While some of the action-heavy plot beats can become overwhelming at times, director Jon Favreau clearly understands how to keep viewers engaged and consistently deliver crowd-pleasing spectacle.

​Following its incredible opening action set piece, The Mandalorian & Grogu makes a surprisingly bold creative choice that none of the previous Star Wars films have attempted. It fundamentally alters the traditional structure of a Star Wars movie, and while the decision helps establish a distinct tone — especially for viewers unfamiliar with the series — it also sacrifices some of the uniqueness that made the original show so compelling in the first place. Unlike the earlier seasons, which felt more deliberate and purpose-driven, this film often comes across as a project born primarily from the franchise’s overwhelming popularity. Still, credit is due to Jon Favreau and Dave Filoni for convincing Disney to fully embrace theatrical Star Wars storytelling again. When the action erupts and the practical effects take center stage, the film serves as a powerful reminder of why audiences fell in love with this franchise to begin with.

Out of everything the film has to offer, its greatest strength may ultimately be Ludwig Göransson’s phenomenal score. Considering the consistently exceptional work he has delivered in recent years, it’s remarkable how he continues to produce music of this caliber. There’s little doubt that this will stand as one of the year’s best film scores. Göransson has developed a distinctive musical style, yet he always understands how to use specific sounds and textures to make his compositions feel deeply immersive. Even listening to the score on its own after seeing The Mandalorian & Grogu feels like reliving the film all over again.

Overall, Star Wars: The Mandalorian & Grogu succeeds in delivering a strong theatrical experience, anchored by its spectacle and standout score, but it ultimately falls short in terms of story and characterization. In trying to serve both longtime fans and newcomers, the film leans heavily on exposition at times, which can feel tonally uneven and occasionally disrupt the pacing. The narrative itself doesn’t break new thematic ground, instead revisiting ideas the franchise has explored many times before. It may not be exactly what Star Wars needs at this moment in its evolution, but for anyone who grew up with the franchise and still values seeing it on the big screen, it still carries a sense of return and familiarity that’s hard to dismiss.

Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu premieres in theaters May 22nd!

Review by Chadd Clubine

2026 is already shaping up to be a strong year for horror, but May in particular is looking like a standout month for the genre. Kicking things off with Hokum, nearly every week in May brings another major horror release, all leading up to Backrooms at the end of the month. Right in the middle of that lineup is Obsession, a new horror film that absolutely shouldn’t go unnoticed. With both critics and audiences praising it, this is quickly becoming one of the must-watch horror movies of the year. After seeing it, Obsession is destined to become a modern horror classic.

Writer and director Curry Barker first built a following through YouTube, where his work has steadily gained attention over the years. If you aren’t familiar with his name yet, this film is going to change that. Even if Obsession wasn’t initially on your radar, the growing word of mouth surrounding it will be impossible to ignore for long. What Barker accomplishes here is genuinely extraordinary. The film is just as uncomfortable as it is terrifying, constantly keeping viewers on edge. Barker repeatedly subverts expectations in ways that not only enhance the horror, but also deepen the film’s thematic storytelling in a meaningful way.

What makes the film even more impressive is Barker’s ability to craft a story that resonates from multiple perspectives. While the narrative does explore the male point of view, it never blindly validates it. Instead, Barker highlights the flaws and insecurities within that perspective, allowing audiences — especially female viewers — to connect with the story in their own ways. The online discourse surrounding the film already reflects just how many interpretations viewers are taking away from it. None of these characters are particularly likable, yet they all feel deeply human. Just when you find yourself relating to someone, the film forces you to reevaluate that connection through the disturbing choices these characters ultimately make.

Michael Johnston may be the film’s lead, but Inde Navarrette is undoubtedly its breakout star. Johnston delivers a layered performance as a deeply flawed character, grounding the film in a way that makes its story and themes truly work. Without his performance, the emotional core of the film would fall apart. However, Navarrette is the one who elevates the movie into something unforgettable. She taps into something completely unhinged and emotionally raw, reminiscent of the intensity Naomi Scott brought to Smile 2. Navarrette fully commits to the role, delivering a performance that deserves to be remembered as one of the year’s very best. She completely disappears into the character, and it’s hard to imagine this film not becoming a major turning point in her career. Unfortunately, like many standout horror performances, it’s unlikely to receive the serious awards recognition it deserves — a frustrating reality for the genre that still hasn’t fully changed. 

The film is just as darkly funny as it is horrifying. Much of the humor comes from sheer disbelief that the movie is willing to go as far as it does in certain scenes. The shocks are outrageous at times, yet they never feel cheap because the film fully earns them through its storytelling and character work. It can be frustrating watching Michael Johnston’s character make certain choices, but the way he continually forgives Inde Navarrette’s character adds another layer to the film’s themes and emotional complexity. Just when it feels like the story has reached a natural stopping point for these characters, the film pushes even further into darkness, culminating in a finale that lands on a haunting note and lingers long after the credits roll.

Overall, Obsession fully lives up to the hype, delivering not only one of the strongest films of the year so far, but potentially a future horror classic. The performances are consistently strong across the board, with the entire cast bringing weight and authenticity to the material. Still, it’s Inde Navarrette who delivers the standout performance, anchoring the film in a way that will likely define her as one of the year’s best. Thematically, writer-director Curry Barker crafts a story that lingers well beyond its runtime. It’s the kind of film that doesn’t just end—it settles in, slowly revealing new layers the more you sit with it, leaving you reflecting on its ideas the more you think about it.

Obsession releases in theaters May 15th!