RUTHLESS (2023)

 

Directed By: Art Camacho

Written By: Art Camacho, James Dean Simington, Javier Reyna and Koji Steven Sakai 

Cinematography: Brandon Ruiz 

Editor: Rylan Rafferty 

Cast: Dermot Mulroney, Jeff Fahey, Mauricio Mendoza, Melissa Diaz, Keisa Elwin, Tonantzin Esparza, Texas Battle, Manu Intiraymi 

A high school coach, whose teenage daughter was murdered, takes matters into his own hands by going after the men who kidnapped his student for their human trafficking operation.

---

it’s rare to see Dermot Mulroney play a leading role and it’s definitely a rarity for him to play in action hero leading role. At first being a vigilante and then it seems like seeking revenge and to tell you the truth this film feels like it was more written for Steven Seagal, only because Dermot Mulroney‘s character seems to have no sense of humor is always straight to the point and has a hankering for loving to break arms, wrists, rather than just go for the kill which becomes a kind of dark humor flight in this world

The rest of the story is paint by numbers and mostly predictable. It does offer a few little twist towards the end, but for the most part, you know what’s going to happen. This film also has to have a record for most people injured, but not killed in an action film b on-screen. 

This is the type of film that would’ve played on a Friday or Saturday night on HBO as an original action film for them, though it might’ve had a few more stars in the film other than Moroney and Jeff Fahey. Which might be why I have a particular weakness for the film as it’s kind of nostalgic for me at least. 

There are many scenes and this film that are over the top and a bit ridiculous that only add to making this a guilty pleasure. I didn’t say a guilty pleasure but definitely a guilty pleasure as it gets more silly as it seems to go along now Moroney is perfectly cast in the lead role and you just wish the script was there for him a bit more and support in store.

As one wouldn’t mind seeing a sequel to this chest, hopefully a little bit stronger in the writing as this film would’ve been more of a showcase if we had more regular or had as many action heroes from the past nowadays it’s more about actors so they are the new action heroes but they wanna show range and not in that position. They didn’t mind trying to stretch, but they knew what their job was and the roles they were most likely always going to get.

Can’t really say that any action sequences are that memorable they’re believable enough, even though in some you can see the Korea geography, and the waiting for the hit to be thrown and for some that will make it more realistic, and for others, they’ll seem too slow and unstylish as they don’t like to see the seems 

If you’re just looking for something that’s entertaining, it isn’t really gonna make you think and you’re just a really bad Dermot Mulroney fan. This is the movie for you.

Grade: C

LOU (2022)

 

Directed By: Anna Foerster

Written By: Maggie Cohn And Jack Stanley 

Story By: Maggie Cohn 

Cinematography: Michael McDonough 

Editor: Matt Evans and Paul Tothill

Cast: Allison Janney, Jurnee Smollett, Ridley Asha Bateman, Logan Marshall-Green, Matt Craven, Daniel Bernhardt, Greyston Holt, RJ Metherstonhaugh 

As a massive storm rages, a young girl is kidnapped. With no other option, her mother teams up with the mysterious older woman next door to pursue the kidnapper. The journey through the wilderness will test the women’s limits and expose dark and shocking secrets from their pasts.

---

There’s a very specific subgenre of action movie that has become increasingly common over the last decade: the “serious, award-winning older actor decides to punch people for two hours” movie. Usually it’s Liam Neeson, sometimes it’s other veteran male stars looking for a late-career reinvention or at least a reliable paycheck. Lou is essentially the female version of that formula, with the always-great Allison Janney stepping into the role of grizzled action hero.

And honestly? On paper, that sounds great.

Watching Janney play against type. armed, dangerous, and trudging through a stormy wilderness to rescue a kidnapped child is the film’s biggest hook. There’s something genuinely fun about seeing an Oscar-winning dramatic actress suddenly become an unlikely action star. It’s refreshing. It’s different. It should work.

Unfortunately, LOU wastes most of that goodwill by being painfully generic.

The film tries to downplay the novelty of having an older female action lead, which is admirable in theory. it doesn’t want applause just for existing. But in doing so, it forgets to be memorable in any other way. The plot is so basic and familiar that you can predict nearly every beat before it happens. It feels assembled from leftover parts of better thrillers.

Worse, the movie seems to realize how routine it is and starts throwing in twist after twist to compensate. But instead of making things more exciting, those twists become increasingly absurd less “shocking revelation” and more “wait… what?” By the end, the film becomes almost laughably convoluted, trying so hard to surprise you that it stops making sense.

Which is frustrating, because the action itself is actually pretty solid. Director Anna Foerster stages several tense, rough-and-tumble sequences that work well. The stormy Pacific Northwest setting gives the movie an atmospheric edge, and when fists start flying or arrows start landing, the film briefly wakes up.

But those moments are too few.

Even the cast seems only partially invested. Jurnee Smollett does what she can, and Janney remains watchable because she’s Allison Janney and seemingly incapable of being bad, but much of the supporting cast looks like they’re simply fulfilling a contract. Everyone involved deserves better material.

That’s what makes Lou such a disappointment. It had a clever premise: an older woman as the hardened action lead, rewriting a familiar male fantasy. That alone should have made it stand out. Instead, it settles for being a serviceable streaming thriller competent enough to fill 100 minutes, forgettable enough to disappear from memory by the next day.

A missed opportunity. Not terrible. Just aggressively average.

Grade: D+

PRIMATE (2026)

 

Directed By: Johannes Roberts 

Written By: Johannes Roberts and Ernest Riera 

Cinematography: Stephen Murphy 

Editor: Peter Gvozdas

Cast: Tony Kotsur, Johnny Sequoyah, Jessica Alexander, Victoria Wyant, Gia Hunter, Benjamin Cheng, Charlie Mann, Tienne Simon 

Looking forward to a relaxing vacation with friends, Lucy returns to her cliffside home in Hawaii after her first year of college. After all, with her father away on business, they have the house all to themselves. However, their reunion takes a dark turn when Ben, the family’s beloved chimpanzee, begins to show strange aggression. As Ben becomes an unpredictable threat to humans, Lucy must find a way to escape the raging primate and survive the night. But what good is fighting back when pinned down by a brutal force of nature?

---

Out of all the monkey movies that I have seen, this might be a favor only because it is truly a guilty pleasure.

The film tries to put everything together like it makes sense but when you try to describe the plot to someone and what happens in the story, it just sounds so ridiculous even if it is rather simple.

This film is basically if they made a sequel to Stephen King’s CUJO only with a monkey, because it’s pretty much kind of the same story only more victims and ways in which to bring more victims, a kind of standoff of trying to survive, and then a final confrontation where winner takes all.

This is good if you really just wanna watch a horror movie that’s just brutal. As that is one of the most impressive aspects of the film are the special effects. Especially the Gore effects and it’s graphic violence. This is also a film that has plenty of jump scares, which actually helps this is one of those more classic horror film formulas. Which is meant to scare an unnerve, and it works for the most part.

It’s just not that smart, but luckily it gets to the point rather fast. This isn’t a film where we spend the first half getting to know the character is getting to know the monkey and then realize something must be wrong and then the second half is more of a thriller. Which realizes what it is and tries to get to the point. It’s pretty much a B-movie in glossy clothing. In other words, a low browse satisfactory popcorn movie thank you. Will most likely forget soon after.

The film doesn’t have any real stars, but it does put Academy Award-winning Tony Kotsur in a pivotal role for the film as he is probably the biggest name in the cast. Next to a rather odd uncredited actor here for a cameo mysteriously.

This is The first johannes Roberts film I have enjoyed since THE STRANGERS: PREY AT NIGHT and he has made a bunch of film since then.

Though with most of the victims at first seeming to be female, but then they try to even it up by adding males, which they set up early in the script. It does end up becoming equal as at first it would seem rather sexist that all the females would be in peril and be getting killed off and increasingly brutal ways.

The film even has its first scene which is a death scene that takes place actually later in time in the film, but yet is the opening scene meant to grab your attention. Why not just have him murder another random person for that opening scene and then keep the other attendants peril for when it naturally happens in the story it’s just a weird edit

If you are a horror fan, One would say check this film out, but definitely don’t pay for it. Watch it for free streaming. Where you can and you can pretty much put it on for the background. Though it wouldn’t hurt to pay attention. Even if you know where it is going. As it doesn’t break any new ground you’re just surprised at how violent it actually gets as it seemed more shocked, like a PG-13 extravaganza and ends up a hard one, but for violence mostly.

It stays entertaining throughout and is never boring 

Grade: C 

JEFF OF THE CINEFILES & UNFINISHED BUSINESS: HALL OF FAME - FILE #0078: BAXTER (1989)

 

Directed By: Jerome Boivin

Written By: Jerome Boivin and Jacques Audiard 

Based On The Book “HELL HOUND” By: Ken Greenhall

Cinematography: Yves Angelo

Editor: Marie-Jose Chauvel

Cast: Lisa Delaware, Jean Mercure, Jacques Spiesser, Catherine Ferran, Jean-Paul Roussillon, Sabrina Leurgoin, Daniel Rialet, Evelyn Dipi

Told from a dogs perspective – the titular Baxter is moved from one owner to another, seemingly never being a good fit for anyone.

---

Have you ever watched a movie that is so good you have no desire to really ever watch it again yet you would still recommend it. Well, this is one of those movies for me. Kept me watching with fear and anticipation until the end. Leave it to the French.

I was hoping that the recently released film GOOD BOY, would be on the level of this film while I found that film disappointing this was better than I could’ve ever expected as it kind of feels like it’s own version of the film MAN BITES DOG, though not as disturbing, but disturbing in its own way. Though this film could be watched with films such as WHITE DOG and WHITE GOD. Why all these films have White in the title? You’ll have to watch them and see.

This movie is a very depressing indefinitely disturbing though it never shows any violence throughout more leaving it suggested until the third act. 

Throughout the film, you know where it is going but not how it will get there or what it will do when it does and you kind of hope that it might steer itself somewhere else as we get to know the next inheritors of the dog and can instantly spot their weaknesses and vulnerability. especially as he seems to more go after the innocent, lonely, weak and trusting. All those that used to be sacred in films of the past or even of the films time period in which it was made.

Fell through throughout was thankful it didn’t go some places that were expected. As one feels sorry for most of the characters 

they keep in mind as one get older films like this bother me. They aren’t exactly for me anymore, but they’re watching it. It definitely inspired a reaction and kept me watching which can be rare when it comes to certain films

The film disturbed me yet want to read. It’s original source material. A 1970s American horror. Novel. Not shocked that one of the Screenwriter was future award-winning filmmaker Jacques Audiard (DHEEPAN)

I thought the film would be more an ensemble episodic anthology movie, Sort of like the movie WEINER DOG with less quirky comedy. Which then again makes me wonder if Todd Solondz  was inspired by this movie even as this stays more in a certain community in the neighborhood.

The ending is disturbing and sad as it shows a kind of legacy that will continue in its own one. 

Writer-Director John Waters put this on his list of favorite films that will corrupt you when he had an all two brief movie review show of his own

Which ends up being true as by the end, you are scared and feel a bit guilty as a film is going to make you feel something with barely having a Music score to guide you. It’s not flashy stylistically it’s definitely challenging and seek to instigate as you are a fly on the wall throughout and is going to take you with it willingly or even if it has to drag you unwillingly 

Grade: A

THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA 2 (2026)

 

Directed By:  David Frankel 

Written By: Aline Brosh McKenna

Based on characters created by: Lauren Weisberger

Cinematography: Florian Ballhaus 

Editor: Andrew Marcus 

Cast: Anne Hathaway, Meryl Streep, Stanley Gucci, Emily Blunt, Lucy Liu, Tracie Thoms, Justin Theroux, B.J. Novak, Simone Ashley, Kenneth Branagh, Tibor Feldman, Helen J. Chan, Caleb Hearon, Patrick Brammell, Rachel Bloom, 

Andy Sachs reunites with Miranda Priestly as they navigate their careers amid the decline of traditional magazine publishing.

---

This film from the get-go was a mix bag as I loved the book and I loved the first film and was partially looking forward to a sequel even though I partially believed it’s probably not going to be as good and then once I saw the trailer is that feeling became more and more apparent.

The film is not based on the book sequel REVENGE WEARS PRADA: THE DEVIL RETUENS 

So now that I have finally seen this film, I can honestly say it doesn’t hold a candle to the first film. It’s more like a nice try, but it’s not entirely all of the films fault as it’s nice to catch up with the characters and see what they’re doing the problem with this film is really how times have changed.

How when the first film came out, there were still magazines. It was still an industry, and the fashion industry still felt creative and of quality when it came to art photography, even though it’s all about sales in the end and showcasing they just seems to be a grand or presentation when it came to magazines and print, and at least there were articles and interviews that seem to make it more worthwhile whereas now everything is on the Internet, so kind of has a gloss to it, but it feels uninspired more shiny sort of like the materials at some clothes are made up how some of these days are more disposable then build to last and that is the fate of this magazine within a film and it feels like that is the state of this film. As well as where it almost feels like culture is going.

It’s very glossy, but it feels impersonal and very disposal. It’s not as much fun and ultimately becomes disappointing now maybe because the first film dealt with growth and learning from a young female character learning her way around the ropes and now we have this character more at middle age coming to terms with her life so that’s not as endearing to the audience, even if it is partially identified and though there are stakes, they don’t seem to be very high or dramatic. Again it’s almost like the Judd apatow movie. THIS IS 40 where we’re watching the trials and tribulations of the characters, but they are in such a verified error of the 1% and that it’s really hard to really feel anything or truly worry because you know they’ll land on their feet quite easily they just might not have the same high positions they wanted

While the film obviously has its moments it also never quite feels fun like the first filmed, especially as everybody just seems to be going through the motions. they might seem to be having fun to revisit these characters and come together, but they also still feel a bit on autopilot making them mainly bland, even though why they stood out in the first place was that they were colorful one can understand that for Anne Hathaway‘s character as she was growing up and morphing in the first film here she just feels very bland, but wisened.

Miranda Priestley as played by Meryl Streep is still an iconic character, but while she still continues to have her high maintenance, the film softens her and gives examples of how she has to handle herself in this more delicate culture. 

Luckily, the film isn’t all bad and it does try but again it just never feels quite inspired or creative as it could be just like how the offices in the first film felt a little more grand and permanent but by the time we get to the sequel, the offices feel small filled more with people that you’re not quite sure what they do in while being more modern it doesn’t quite feel built to last. It’s good enough for now, but no one will claim to miss it within a few years.

Happily, they never really lean into a romantic angle, even though they hint at it as it seems that all films with women over a certain age being single we must throw one a love interest, even if it kind of feels like it’s padding the movie down with filler and to give her some kind of life outside of the office

It never feels as grand as it should privileged sure but never as much as a spectacle. It has the same effect as when Glenn Close went from 101 DALMATIONS to 102 DALMATIONS  movies where it doesn’t have quite that same magic when it goes off the reservation and away from where it was based so much.

This is a sequel that never really needed to be made but for fans of the original, you’re going to want to see this film probably as completed, but don’t say you weren’t warned

Grade: C