The Irishman & The Death Of Cinema

In one of Martin Scorsese’s many masterpieces, The Irishman, the death of cinema is intricately woven into the narrative and style, reflecting both the end of an era in filmmaking and the personal decline of the characters within the story. The Irishman is a meditation on aging and mortality, not just of the characters, but also the genre and style of cinema that Scorsese helped define. The film follows Frank Sheeran (played by Robert De Niro), a loyal Mafia hitman whose life is filled with violence and betrayal, culminating in a solitary old age. The arc mirrors the aging of the traditional gangster genre, suggesting that the type of story Scorsese is known for is reaching its twilight.

Scorsese’s earlier works, such as Goodfellas and Casino, arguably glorified the gangster lifestyle with fast-paced editing, energetic soundtracks, and charismatic anti-heroes. The Irishman, in contrast, takes a more somber and reflective approach. The slow pace and extended runtime allow for a deeper examination of the characters’ actions and their consequences, stripping away the glamor to reveal a bleak reality. This deconstruction can be seen as a commentary on the end of an era for gangster films, moving away from the excitement of earlier works to a more tragic portrayal.

The use of digital de-aging technology on actors like De Niro, Al Pacino, and Joe Pesci serves as a metaphor for the passage of time and the attempt to hold on to the past. While the technology allows these actors to portray their characters across several decades, it also underscores the inevitability of aging and the artificiality of trying to recapture the past. This reflects the broader theme of cinema struggling to retain its old glory in an era of digital transformation and changing tastes.

The film’s narrative structure – which jumps back and forth in time, and its reflective, almost elegiac tone – contribute to the sense of an ending era. The storytelling method emphasizes memory, regret, and the inescapable passage of time – reinforcing the idea that both the characters and the genre they inhabit are in decline. The sense of finality is palpable, suggesting that The Irishman might be one of the last films of its kind, a final statement on a genre that has defined much of Scorsese’s career.

Frank Sheeran’s ultimate isolation and the regrets he harbors regarding his life choices echo the current state of cinema. As Sheeran reflects on his life from the confines of a nursing home, the film reflects the changing landscape of the film industry. The once vibrant and communal experience of cinema is portrayed as something solitary and introspective, paralleling Sheeran’s lonely existence.

Scorsese himself has been vocal about the changes in the film industry, particularly the rise of streaming services and the decline of traditional theatrical experiences. The Irishman, produced by Netflix, exemplifies this shift. While it received a limited theatrical release, its primary audience was on a streaming service. This distribution model signifies a major transformation in how films are consumed, highlighting the tension between old and new forms of cinema.

The Irishman serves as a poignant reflection on the end of an era, both in terms of its characters and the cinematic landscape. Through its narrative, style, and production, the film encapsulates a sense of closure and transition, marking the end of traditional gangster films and commenting on the broader evolution of the film industry. The Irishman is not just about the end of the characters’ lives, but also about the end of a particular kind of cinema that Scorsese has been instrumental in defining.

Leading up to The Irishman, Scorsese was quite vocal about his views on Marvel movies and their impact on cinema. In various interviews and op-eds, he expressed concern that Marvel movies and similar blockbuster franchises prioritize spectacle and commercial success over artistic expression and the exploration of deeper human themes. He famously compared Marvel movies to amusement parks, suggesting they are more about delivering thrills and less about the kinds of storytelling and emotional experiences that he associates with true cinema.

Scorsese’s comments about Marvel movies can be connected to the themes he explores in The Irishman, particularly the death of cinema. Scorsese delves into the passage of time, the inevitability of aging, and the sense of loss and regret that accompany the end of an era. This can be seen as a metaphor for his views on the current state of the film industry.

In The Irishman, Scorsese uses Frank Sheeran’s life to reflect on the end of a certain type of American life and, by extension, a certain type of American filmmaking. The film’s contemplative pace, focus on character development, and complex moral questions stand in stark contrast to the fast-paced and action-driven narratives typical of Marvel movies. This juxtaposition underscores Scorsese’s concern that the cinema he loves, a cinema that engages deeply with the human condition, is being overshadowed by the commercial imperatives of blockbuster franchises.

Scorsese’s critique is not just about the content of Marvel movies, but also about their dominance in the market and how they shape audience expectations. He worries that this dominance limits the opportunities for other kinds of films to be made and seen. In this sense, The Irishman can be seen as a response to and a lamentation for the changing landscape of cinema, where the nuanced, reflective stories that Scorsese values are increasingly at risk of being pushed aside.

Delving deeper into The Irishman and its implications for the death of cinema, Scorsese has consistently emphasized the importance of film language and grammar, and how to interpret it. To do so, consider the works of director Ingmar Bergman, whom Scorsese greatly admired, and how The Irishman‘s structure mirrors Bergman’s Wild Strawberries. Both films feature a protagonist taking a reflective journey, confronting their own mortality and the end of an era. Bergman’s film shifts from linear storytelling to a more subconscious, dreamlike narrative. The Irishman even borrows dialogue and visual elements from Wild Strawberries, creating a direct dialogue between the two.

In The Irishman, Scorsese is engaging in a dialectic with his predecessors, examining themes of death and transformation. Bergman transformed cinema in a surreal and groundbreaking way, which was often seen as heretical. Scorsese is now navigating the shift from traditional cinema to television and streaming, much like Bergman did with Fanny and Alexander and Scenes From a Marriage on Swedish television. In referencing Bergman, Scorsese justifies his own transition into new forms of media, such as Netflix.

Scorsese also explores these themes through his characters, creating a triptych with Frank Sheeran (Robert De Niro), Russel Bufalino (Joe Pesci), and Jimmy Hoffa (Al Pacino), representing different facets of death. This triptych, akin to a painting with three panels, reflects Scorsese’s deep investment in these ideas. He’s not just conversing with film history, but the entire history of performance art.

Consider Pacino and Pesci as embodiments of different acting styles. Pacino, with his theatrical background, brings a larger-than-life presence, while Pesci, rooted in cinema, delivers a more subdued, chilling performance. De Niro’s performance is caught between these two, symbolizing the transition from theater to cinema, and now to streaming.

This dynamic is visually underscored by the use of red drapes when Hoffa is introduced, evoking theater curtains and highlighting the death of earlier art forms. The plot’s focus on killing Pacino’s Hoffa (representing theater) parallels the way cinema supplanted theater in the 1920s, as vaudeville and live performances were overshadowed by films. Similarly, television and streaming now challenge the dominance of cinema.

Scorsese’s craft extends to the minutiae, such as breaking the fourth wall, which he loves to do, as seen in Goodfellas and The Wolf of Wall Street. In The Irishman, Frank Sheeran subtly glances into the camera when he is asked to kill Hoffa, creating an intimate connection with the audience. In this scene, Russell also looks like a doppelganger to Scorsese, confessing his own complicity in the death of cinema by contributing to Netflix’s content machine.

After Hoffa’s hit, Scorsese continues to confess his complicity with the wedding scene – a cold and lifeless affair that starkly contrasts with the vibrant wedding in The Godfather. Both scenes can be seen as a representation of the collective experience of cinema. In the case of The Irishman, Scorsese cuts directly from the wedding to Frank’s daughter watching television, framing the Sheeran family from the television’s perspective, highlighting their atomization as the collective experience of cinema has shifted to the solitary experience of watching television. The Irishman is all about the collectivism and solidarity of the Teamsters Union, a symbol for the solidarity and collective experience that once characterized traditional cinema.

The Irishman is rich with subtext, inviting viewers to engage deeply with its themes, especially the death of cinema. Scorsese’s meticulous approach ensures that his films are layered and enduring, offering insights into the evolution of art forms and the collective experiences they shape. He’s training audiences to view films with a critical, informed eye, and to appreciate the visual storytelling and its broader implications.

Barbenheimer Review: The Biggest Cinematic Event Of The Year Delivers (Though One Overshadows The Other)

Barbenheimer – what started out as an internet joke grew into some else entirely – a massive cultural and marketing sensation. The two films, which will be forever linked by their same-day release dates, are diametrically opposed in genre, style, tone, and aesthetic – resulting in possibly the most disparate double bill in history. However, there are a striking number of similarities between the two tentpoles.

They are both massively ambitious, written and directed by two of the most esteemed filmmakers working in Hollywood who have Oscar nominations not just for their directing, but their screenwriting. Oppenheimer and Barbie are both passion projects led by husband-and-wife-founded production companies with the backing of a major studio. They are led by all-star casts in front of the camera, and accomplished crews behind the scenes, all working together in perfect harmony to deliver a visual feast of exquisite production design, cinematography, costumes, and special effects about two of the most influential figures in history – Oppenheimer and Barbie.

During a year when there was a new Fast & Furious, Little Mermaid, Spider-Man, Transformers, Indiana Jones, and Mission: Impossible movie, along with Michael Keaton coming back to play Batman again in The Flash after 31 years, the biggest cinematic event of the year is Barbenheimer – two original screenplays helmed by critically acclaimed directors. These are the broad strokes that connect Christopher Nolan’s harrowing biopic focused on the father of the atomic bomb, and Greta Gerwig’s romp based on the Mattel fashion dolls, which also happen to tackle similar questions involving existentialism, identity, legacy, and complicity with equal vigor. But the question is, do they deliver?

Oppenheimer is a story told singularly across eleven miles of 65mm film by one of the singular storytellers working today. Nolan has shot specifically for IMAX before, but with Oppenheimer, he revolutionizes the large format once again. In lieu of the traditional action of a Dunkirk, the director uses IMAX’s expanded aspect ratio and crystal clear imaging to allow the audience to access Oppenheimer’s thought process and peer into his soul. Cillian Murphy’s haunted stares, which carry the curse of prophetic power, are shot up close and personal, capturing every detail of his cavernous cheekbones and piercing blue eyes.

In the first five minutes, Ludwig Göransson’s blaring score blows you away and fills you with a sense of creativity, exploration, wonder, passion, and awe – accentuated by frenetic flashes of atomic particles swirling, smashing, and sparking in Oppenheimer’s mind. This immediately conveys how imaginative and intense he is, but also troubled when he attempts to poison his demanding physics tutor with a cyanide-laced apple. Oppenheimer is a brilliant physicist but with the temperament of a temperamental artist and polyglot poet who gets off on reading the Bhagavad Gita in Sanskrit during sex.

Though Oppenheimer is about way more than the bomb, the movie is most captivating during the Manhattan Project portion as some of the world’s top scientists race to build the world’s first weapons of mass destruction before the Nazis do. This staggering suspense intensifies during the Trinity Test and reaches an apex leading up to the moment of detonation, amidst uncertainty it might start an unstoppable chain reaction that could destroy the world. The atomic blast itself, which was created entirely without CGI, is awe-inspiring, mesmerizing, hypnotic, dangerous, and simply extraordinary.

Oppenheimer’s ambitious structure is unrelenting and fittingly, for a film about the man who named the first nuclear-bomb test “Trinity” inspired by the poetry of John Donne, it’s essentially three expertly intertwined segments focusing on Oppenheimer the academic, the scientist, and the politician. The film skips around and splices different moments of time in a purposefully disorienting fashion, which has become one of the director’s defining features, though while Dunkirk was incredibly economical, Oppenheimer runs 3-hours long, and like Memento, it’s told through a combination of color and black-and-white.

The color scenes, which Nolan says represent Oppenheimer’s subjective point of view, are prefaced as “fission,” which is when something is split into two or more parts. In the case of the Manhattan Project, multiple nuclei of uranium are being split simultaneously, resulting in the huge energy output of an atomic bomb. Similar to the chain reactions seen in nuclear fission, which was still a relatively new theory at the time, this is what Oppenheimer himself represents. He chose to come back to America after years of studying abroad because he wanted to be a catalyst in the nascent field of quantum mechanics. Oppenheimer was essentially envisioning another plane of existence, though he largely failed to foresee its full ramifications, like the ripples caused by raindrops in a pond.

The black-and-white scenes, which Nolan says represent the more objective point of view of Lewis Strauss (Robert Downey Jr.) are labeled fusion – the combining of two or more parts into a larger particle, This is the process used by the hydrogen bomb, as proposed by Benny Safdie’s Edward Teller, and is an exponentially greater energy output compared to fission. These later black-and-white scenes have been criticized for paling in comparison to the greatness of the Manhattan Project portion, though they are necessary to depict the devastating consequences of the atomic bomb, which Oppenheimer thought would end all wars. Instead, the ripple effects caused the Cold War, McCarthyism, and the campaign to discredit Oppenheimer for advocating against the hydrogen bomb.

Nolan’s three-hour historical biopic is dense like a Wikipedia article and moves at a breakneck pace to boot, but for one extremely unsettling scene, Oppenheimer fully transforms into a full-blown horror film. Haunted by immense death and destruction caused by the bomb, Oppenheimer attempts to deliver a rousing speech in a gymnasium to the sound of stomping feet, blood-curdling screams, sudden silence, blinding white light, and incinerating bodies dissipating into dust, all capped off by Oppenheimer stepping on a charcoaled corpse. Oppenheimer’s greatest fear, however, is that he started a chain reaction that will destroy the world, and the movie’s brilliantly haunting ending, which is one of the best in recent memory, suggests that he did.

With Oppenheimer, which feels like a culmination of his filmography, Nolan successfully mines one of the greatest dramatic stories in history for an epic thriller that thrusts audiences into the pulse-pounding paradox of the enigmatic man who risked destroying the world in order to save it. It’s an extraordinary experience that leaves you with resonances that will want you to revisit again, again, and again.

Oppenheimer absolutely delivers, and it could easily be one of the best films of the decade. 10/10

Barbie begins with a direct parody of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey complete with “Also Sprach Zarathustra,” and from the opening scene, Gerwig completely shatters expectations of a Barbie movie starring Margot Robbie. As its lead star says, “People immediately have an idea of, Oh, Margot is playing Barbie, I know what that is, but our goal is to be like, Whatever you’re thinking, we’re going to give you something totally different — the thing you didn’t know you wanted.”

After a long choreographed dance sequence set to Dua Lupa’s diegetic “Dance the Night Away,” Margot Robbie’s flawless heroine blurts out an intrusive thought, “Do you guys ever think about dying?” that brings her blowout party to a screeching halt: It’s a hilarious non-sequitur, especially after three hours of Oppenheimer mulling death and destruction, that sets up Barbie as an existential exegesis made under the aegis of its manufacturer Mattel, which sometimes overshadows its own pointed critique of the patriarchy, perfectionism, and misogyny. Otherwise, Barbie functions just fine as a search for self-discovery.

Gerwig’s fun feminist fable, while cleverly satirical, is largely overshadowed by the sheer scale and importance of Oppenheimer, with Nolan calling its subject “the most important person who ever lived,” or as Matt Damon’s General Leslie Groves puts it more excitedly, the Manhattan Project is “the most important fucking thing to ever happen in the history of the world!”

With Barbie, Gerwig and her creative and romantic partner Noah Baumbach pull off the impossible juggling act of delivering a family-friendly fantasy that soft-peddles satire while simultaneously paying homage to and making a socially aware statement about the Barbie brand. As Gerwig says, “Things can be both/and. I’m doing the thing and subverting the thing.”

Barbie’s existential journey is comparable to Oppenheimer’s, an American Prometheus who stole fire from the gods and gave it to man, and for this, he was chained to a rock and tortured for eternity, though other versions of the Greek myth credit Prometheus with the creation of humanity. Barbie meets her own creator, Barbara Handler, and must choose whether to remain an immortal creation in the idyllic confines of her artificial existence or become human in the real world, despite all its discomforts like aging and death. This emotional moment is set to the melancholic yet mellifluous sound of Billie Eilish’s “What Was I Made For?”

Barbie delivers on being a visually dazzling comedy, but also a deconstruction of the doll itself. 8/10

United in cinematic history due to their same-day release date, Barbie and Oppenheimer also seem like, by sheer coincidence, Nolan and Gerwig’s attempts to grapple with existential dread in their own ways. Barbenheimer, the biggest cinematic event of the year is, surprisingly, two genuine character studies that, while not short on spectacle, are ultimately about the existential horror of being alive.

The Batman Is A Masterpiece & Possibly Better Than The Dark Knight

Robert Pattinson’s casting as the Caped Crusader circa 2019 was met with criticism, likely from those who were unacquainted with his stellar performances in acclaimed indies like Good Time and The Lighthouse. To little surprise, he’s now reinvented one of the most iconic characters of all-time with a subtle yet compelling performance that is simply the best portrayal yet. Instead of a millionaire playboy, this Bruce Wayne is a rockstar recluse. 

The Batman begins with narration not unlike Travis Bickle, allowing Pattinson to showcase his perfect Bat-voice which is not laughably growly like Bale’s or overly erratic like Keaton’s. His opening monologue is accentuated perfectly by Michael Giacchino’s score which is classically grand and blaring, but with a gothic edge. This sets the stage for a dark and brooding film that explores Bruces’s troubled psyche and begins to blur the line between Batman and his rogues’ gallery. Director Matt Reeves presents a fresh but beautifully loving vision of Gotham City and its robust mythos, taking inspiration from the grit and grime of comics like Year One and The Long Halloween.

Despite countless depictions in the past, The Batman also features fresh takes on many recognizable DC characters, each one of them rich and layered, including Zoë Kravitz as a sizzling Selina Kyle, Jeffrey Wright as the reliable Lieutenant Gordon, and John Turturro as a genteel Carmine Falcone. To top it off, Colin Farrell looks completely unrecognizable as Oswald Cobblepot/Penguin.

Reeves and his co-writer Peter Craig wisely opt not to rehash Batman’s well-known origin story. We never see Thomas and Martha’s murder yet the impact of this trauma is apparent in every frame this broken and tormented masked man graces the silver screen. The principal narrative focus of the film’s inventive script is a psychological game of cat and mouse between Pattinson’s exceptionally angsty Dark Knight and Paul Dano’s enigmatic serial killer, the Riddler, who targets Gotham’s elite and taunts law enforcement with ciphers and riddles, giving Batman his time to shine as the obsessive detective he truly is. In doing so, Reeves is able to sneak a hard-boiled serial killer thriller reminiscent of David Fincher’s Seven and Zodiac within the thin veneer of a box-office friendly PG-13 superhero blockbuster (while also delving headfirst into the unfettered corruption that plagues Gotham).

All this is not to say The Batman is hopeless or soulless. It remains empathetic throughout and in the end, is ultimately optimistic. The Batman feels crafted from scratch by artists with a mutual love for the material. Pattinson is the face, Reeves is the architect, and cinematographer Greig Fraser imbues the film with a glowing gorgeousness that is a far cry from the CGI-laden, low contrast, green-screened visuals that audiences have become desensitized to. The Batman differentiates itself from the cacophony of crowd-pleasing superhero comedies that feel voiceless, their directorial vision overtaken by studio notes and focus groups. This is not the case with The Batman. It’s visually and thematically the most beautiful Batman movie ever made.

Before The Batman, I held the firm belief that Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight was not only the greatest comic book movie of all-time, but one of the best examples of strong visionary filmmaking on a blockbuster scale, but it invokes Michael Mann’s Heat more than the best Batman comics. Both adaptations are grounded and realistic, but Nolan’s version noticeably lacks the defining gothic element that Reeves embraces. It’s the Batman film many didn’t know they needed. It’s transcendent cinema. It’s, dare I say, truly a masterpiece.

10/10

July-August Releases: Black Widow, The Suicide Squad, The Green Knight, CODA

Black Widow

Natasha Romanoff’s (Scarlett Johansson) first and last solo adventure is the epitome of passable, neither great nor bad enough to evoke strong feelings either way. Considering Nat’s fate in Endgame and Yelena Belova’s (Florence Pugh) upcoming role in Hawkeye, the film fails to establish any real stakes during their journey. Much of what Black Widow has to offer has been seen before in Bourne, Bond, and otherwise better movies. 

The familial chemistry these characters have, including their parental figures played by Rachel Weisz and David Harbour hamming it up as Red Guardian, is the best thing the film has going for it. The villains, on the other hand, Dreykov (Ray Winstone) and Taskmaster, are lackluster even by Marvel’s standards and can be placed among the MCU’s pantheon of underwhelming antagonists. 

Black Widow‘s narrative touches on some interesting issues involving the subjugation of women, but it’s merely a footnote amidst all the action and setup for the future of the MCU, although seeing Pugh as Yelena again is a tantalizing prospect.

6/10

The Suicide Squad

James Gunn’s take on DC’s team of incarcerated supervillains turned reluctant antiheroes is bold, brazen, and a bloody blast. Just like he did with Guardians, Gunn plucks some of the most obscure characters from the source material and turns them into lovable novelties: Ratcatcher 2 (Daniela Melchior), Polka-Dot Man (David Dastmalchian), and King Shark (Sylvester Stallone) to name a few of the most pivotal players. Gunn brilliantly juggles all these wacky personalities, with not one of them ever feeling underdeveloped. Elba and Robbie are great as always, and Cena is surprisingly effective as the unredeemable jingoist, Peacemaker, who cherishes peace with all his heart and will kill without discretion in order to achieve it, one of the many examples of the film’s not-so-subtle humor.

The Suicide Squad begins with a beachfront massacre akin to Saving Private Ryan, but with stylized violence reminiscent of Tarantino. Unlike its 2016 predecessor, Gunn’s version never feels scrambled or aimless, as he maintains the relentless forward motion of these characters’ mission, but the film would be nothing without its emotional undertones which come to the forefront during Task Force X’s final battle against Starro (a laughably absurd kaiju that somehow functions as a critique of Reagan-era foreign policy, though it never seems soapboxy on Gunn’s end).

This volatility and irreverence is the perfect antidote to superhero fatigue brought on by Marvel’s family-friendly offerings, but all its outlandish violence and humor aside, the film ends up being a rousing rally cry for the world’s forgotten misfits, its final scene bolstered significantly by John Murphy’s beautiful score. The result is one of the most entertaining comic book movies in recent years that unexpectedly tugs at the heartstrings.

9/10

The Green Knight

By all accounts, writer/director David Lowery’s riff on the ubiquitous Arthurian legend is what they refer to as a slow-burn, but it never feels like it, even for a second. Lowery’s latest work very much follows in the footsteps of his previous esoteric drama, A Ghost Story: introspective, existential, and rueful. Right from the film’s opening long shot, The Green Knight engulfs you with its visual delights. Every frame is a painting and at times, quite literally. Lowery heavily leans on an old-fashioned VFX technique that involves using glass matte paintings to enhance landscapes, just one of the many ways the film is brimming with cinematic artistry.

Since the source material alludes to, but never explicitly describes the adventures and battles that occur during Sir Gawain’s (Dev Patel) journey to the Green Chapel to see the Green Knight (Ralph Ineson), Lowery sees fit to fill in his travels with an encounter with a wonderfully creepy scavenger (Barry Keoghan) and supernatural elements like the ghost of Winifred (Erin Kellyman), pale naked giants, and a talking fox, all of this unfolding at a hypnotic pace. In doing so, Lowery updates the poem by challenging modern-day expectations regarding masculinity and courage, demonstrating how brilliantly this story functions as a character study—a perilous voyage of self-discovery.

For those who know this 14th-century chivalric romance or have seen adaptations before, Lowery’s unique interpretation and puzzling ending provide an entirely new artisanal experience that maintains many of the original work’s core themes and motifs, but with new atmospheric and metaphoric splendor.

9/10

CODA

As its titular acronym indicates, CODA is the story of a child of deaf adults—a 17-year-old high schooler named Ruby (Emilia Jones) who has dreams of pursuing music. A huge hit at Sundance, Apple reportedly paid $25 million to acquire the film, but was the record sum well spent?

Ruby is the only hearing person in a deaf family, including her mother played by Marlee Matlin, who owns a small fishing enterprise in Gloucester, Massachusetts. Though CODA is largely a predictable teen drama, it deftly avoids cliches, and it’s hard not to get swept up in the uniqueness of this family’s conflict. It’s an endearing coming-of-age indie drama that invites viewers to live in this family’s shoes for a little while, which is ultimately what the cinematic experience is all about.

8/10

Early Summer Releases: Army of the Dead, A Quiet Place Part II, Cruella, In the Heights

Army of the Dead

Seventeen years after his directorial debut Dawn of the Dead, Army of the Dead is Zack Snyder’s highly-anticipated return to the zombie genre, and his first film since the much-ballyhooed Snyder cut. Now, the director is free from restraints imposed by the DCEU and Warner Bros. for the first time since the critically panned commercial flop Sucker Punch from 2011.

Snyder’s latest flick finds Dave Bautista’s Scott Ward and a ragtag group of mercenaries tasked with retrieving $200 million from a locked vault underneath a Las Vegas casino before a nuclear strike wipes the walled off, zombie-infested city off the map. In other words: Ocean’s 11 with zombies. Snyder attempts to set it apart with an emotional father-daughter through line, but many of the characters are glossed over with underdeveloped backstories and incomplete motives, which is common in films overstuffed with as many characters as Army of the Dead.

After a superfluous opening credits sequence, Snyder returns to more old habits: bloated storytelling, excessive use of green screens, and the overuse of slo-mo violence. Army of the Dead isn’t going to win over any Snyder skeptics. While he attempts to sprinkle in some political subtext, it’s not enough to drive the point home amidst the mayhem. With the zombie scene as inundated as it is today, Snyder is not stumbling upon any revelations here, but the mad mélange of genres makes it worth a stream on Netflix, even though much of it falls flat.

6/10

A Quiet Place Part II

As one of the first major films to be delayed due to the pandemic, A Quiet Place Part II roars into theaters with much significance. The first film’s small-scale, B-horror-esque gimmick (which Krasinski used brilliantly) intrinsically rendered a worthy successor unlikely, which is why many approached a sequel, even its own maestro, with apprehension.

Since its thin premise likely wasn’t enough to support a full-feature, A Quiet Place Part II wisely flashes back to a world full of noise, before it was invaded by sound-sensitive monsters. Here, writer-director (and burgeoning auteur) John Krasinski meticulously crafts one of the franchise’s most bracing, most visceral sequences to date, reminiscent of the iconic car attack from Children of Men. It would be difficult to imagine a scene more tailor-made to welcome audiences back to theaters.

After the prologue, the story picks up in the immediate aftermath of the first film, as the Abbot family reels from the death of their patriarch Lee Abbot (Krasinksi). The sequel returns all its heavy hitters: Emily Blunt and Noah Jupe (and introduces a new character played by Cillian Murphy), but it is the still relatively unknown Millicent Simmonds whose character Regan emerges as the true hero of this story. At the center of many of the film’s thrill and chill-inducing moments, Simmonds makes every ounce of this opportunity count. Krasinksi separates this cast of characters into multiple groups and cross-cuts between them, continuing to ratchet up the suspense with little to no dialogue.

A Quiet Place Part II somehow manages to function great as a stand-alone story while also remaining incomplete enough to leave the viewer wanting more. By all accounts, there will be.

9/10

Cruella

Although watching Emma Stone chew her way through Cruella’s scenery is absolutely tantalizing, the film’s larger point remains a mystery. Its dizzying array of outfits and other fashion-based scenes would frazzle even the likes of fastidious cinematic designer Reynolds Woodcock. Its refusal to lean into the well-known darker sides of the character (skinning puppies and smoking cigarettes) is continually frustrating, although not a mystery (Disney has had an anti-smoking policy in place for some time now). Cruella’s performances from its pair of Emma’s is worth the price of admission, but what necessitated this 2 hour-14 minute-long origin story remains a mystery.

6/10

In the Heights

Long before Hamilton became the cultural sensation it is known as today, Lin Manuel Miranda began developing the Tony Award-winning musical In the Heights for Broadway in 1999. Now, it has finally made its way to the silver screen.

A summer slam as refreshing as piragua, In the Heights is overflowing with joy, exuberance, and optimism. Unlike La La Land’s bittersweet ending, its final set piece only reinforces these ideals. The inspiration taken from Spike Lee’s Do the Right Thing drips off the screen as Miranda and Chu examine the immigrant experience of the American Dream through the lens of magical realism. In The Heights demonstrates the distinctive power that musicals have, making ordinary moments extraordinary through the power of song.

8.5/10