Spider-Man: Brand New Day (Movie Review)

With Avengers: Doomsday looming on the horizon, the Marvel Cinematic Universe hype train has one last stop to farm as much audience goodwill as it can get. So it is a good thing then that the stop in question just so happens to be the latest Spider-Man movie. After all, Spider-Man is arguably the most popular superhero within its vast pantheon of superheroes. But with three movies already in the can, it is only fair to wonder if the webslinger still has enough tricks up his sleeve to farm said goodwill. Or is Spider-Man: Brand New Day merely another random stop in a long, aimless journey?

The movie takes place four years after the events of No Way Home. In that time, Peter Parker has continued to serve New York City as the friendly neighborhood Spider-Man, even though its inhabitants have no memory of the man behind the mask, specifically his best friends, Ned and MJ. But his world gets upended once again when an unknown mutant with the ability to manipulate others threatens to harm the people dearest to him. Now he must work with the Department of Damage Control, all while struggling with mutations of his own, to neutralize the threat before it is too late.

If you are someone who frequents the nerdier corners of this bustling digital metropolis we call the internet, or a member of comic book movie fandom specifically, then chances are you already know the mutant alluded to in that synopsis. But in the off-chance that you don't, rest assured that I won't be spoiling who it is, even though I found the secrecy behind the character leading up to the film's release a bit ridiculous and ultimately pointless. It was like the Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield fiasco from No Way Home all over again, except this specific character's reveal within the movie was nowhere near as impactful.

As for the movie itself, Spider-Man: Brand New Day has a lot working in its favor. Right off the jump, we are treated to some of the sweeping, kinetic swinging sequences that have come to define the larger Spider-Man film franchise. And those sequences have never looked as good as they do here, with near-seamless transitions between VFX body doubles and the live-action actors. There were one or two shots with obvious green screen effects, but by and large, the film looks great, and I implore you to try to see it on the best screen available.

The same praise extends to the action scenes in general. Each one was solidly crafted and appropriately cinematic. I especially loved the fights with The Hand, as they showcased some of the best martial arts seen in the MCU since Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, which makes sense considering both movies were directed by Destin Daniel Cretton. Another clear highlight was the fight with the Hulk, even though it was relatively brief and it left me wanting more.

Still on the topic of visuals, I really enjoyed the body-hopping effect used to depict the powers of the mutant whose name I will not mention. There was this sense of momentum behind it, and I know a lot of that was performance-driven, but the cinematography and editing also go the extra mile to really help sell the effect. Speaking of performance, we already know what to expect from our main trio of Peter, Ned and MJ. They were all fine. The real question is how did the new additions fare, particularly Jon Bernthal as Frank Castle and Sadie Sink as She Who Must Not Be Named.

The latter was basically Max 2.0, and I was admittedly disappointed by her portrayal of this particular iteration of the character. But it was the former that irked me the most, as they effectively turned The Punisher into a watered-down version of what we got in the Netflix and Disney+ shows. Think Nick Fury in The Marvels, though nowhere near as egregious. I guess I should have known that from the trailers, but I honestly didn't anticipate how much of a joke the character would become, complete with signature MCU quips and all.

And while we are still on the subject of things I didn't like, I also found issue with the pacing. The movie dragged in places,  nearly slowing down to a crawl during what were supposed to be emotional beats that didn't quite land with me. Maybe I am just becoming old and grouchy, but I found myself checking the time on my phone more than once, which is a pretty good indication that I was losing interest. Thankfully, there was more than enough of the good stuff to help offset the doldrums and make the movie ultimately worthwhile.

Spider-Man: Brand New Day is the closest thing to a Shang-Chi sequel we've gotten thus far. It shares much of that movie's DNA, particularly the kickass martial arts and next-level choreography. Destin Daniel Cretton clearly has a flair for directing highly stylized action scenes, and a talented production and effects team to help bring those sequences to life. So even though his movie might not quite reach the heights of prior entries, or do much to build hype for Avengers: Doomsday, it is still another solid overall outing for the webhead and fans of his nimble acrobatic antics.

The Odyssey (Movie Review)

Like most high-profile movies nowadays, Christopher Nolan's The Odyssey has been bogged down in controversy. Most of that centers upon its interpretation of the source material, as well as some casting choices that I can only describe as questionable. But regardless of what side of those never-ending culture war debates you happen to land, there is no denying the fact that anticipation for the movie itself is at an all-time high. So does the film successfully sail past the siren song of all that noise, or does it get shipwrecked by the godlike fury of angry film fans?

In typical Christopher Nolan fashion, the story of The Odyssey is told in a nonlinear manner, primarily through flashbacks. But the general gist is as follows. It has been many years since Odysseus, the king of the Greek island of Ithaca, was last seen, ever since going to fight in the Trojan War, even though there have been tales of his exploits. In his prolonged absence, tensions rise as suitors gather in his hall, seeking to inherit his kingdom by marrying his wife, Penelope. Except Odysseus is not dead but merely caught by the many trials that have plagued his journey home, as he struggles to return in time to save what's left of his kingdom.

Heading into 2026, I knew there was one movie I absolutely had to see. And that film was The Odyssey, Christopher Nolan's first foray into the realm of epic fantasy. And he couldn't have possibly chosen something meatier because Homer's Odyssey remains till today one of the quintessential works of Greek mythology. Even though I must confess that most of my initial exposure to the material came through other adaptations like Ulysses and the Percy Jackson book, Sea of Monsters. But from what I know, there's plenty there for a director like Nolan to sink his teeth into.

And sink his teeth into it he does with an adaptation that feels faithful yet modernized. It touches upon a lot of the familiar beats from the source material but is told through a contemporary lens, a fact that is reflected in the use of modern language for dialogue as well as the diverse casting. These are the two main areas of contention for the purists out there, and a lot of that backlash is valid. But I'd be lying if I said I was bothered by any of it beyond the first five minutes of the film. Because once I got over that initial hurdle of seeing Travis Scott belting out stories as the resident bard, I was fully locked in and immersed in the narrative.

It did take a fair bit of time for that story to kick into gear. But even though the film is just shy of 3 hours long, a hard limit imposed by its use of IMAX cameras, it never felt overlong or like it overstayed its welcome. Speaking of IMAX cameras, I didn't see the movie in IMAX, but was still able to appreciate its grand scale and scope. Everything about the film felt larger than life, from its sprawling locations and sets to the cinematography that captures all of it in jaw-dropping detail. Put plainly, this is one you'd definitely want to see in a cinema.

A lot of that praise must also extend to the mostly practical effects that help bring the movie to life. I hear that a large 60-foot-tall puppet was built for the cyclops, along with clever use of forced perspective for the armored giants. And it all blends together seamlessly to sell the illusion, keeping the movie grounded while still exploring the fantastical elements of its story. Nolan is known for his aversion to CGI, and the fact that they were able to accomplish so much with very little of it is a testament to the wizardry of his production team.

But the real standout in my opinion was the incredible score by Ludwig Goranson and the movie's overall sound design. His music was able to elevate the visuals in the best way possible, adding layers of tension when needed. I'd be surprised if he doesn't pick up yet another Oscar next year, along with the entire sound team. The screams of that cyclops, echoing inside its cave, will haunt my nightmares for weeks to come, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

In terms of performances, Matt Damon was a more than capable lead. The same goes for Anne Hathaway as Penelope. Even Elliot Page and Lupita Nyong'o gave half-decent portrayals of their characters. The only truly weak link among the bunch was Travis Scott, a casting that Nolan himself confesses was born out of their trying to draw a link between the storytelling of bards of old and that of rappers today. And considering how little he was in the actual film, I imagine it would have been possible to cut out his scenes entirely and the movie wouldn't be worse for it.

The Odyssey is a sprawling epic fantasy adventure worthy of the Christopher Nolan name. It is the work of a director who is clearly in full control of his craft and all the resources at his disposal. And for a movie that seemed engineered to leave moviegoers divided, I was surprised by how much it plays like a crowdpleaser. I, of course, recognize that not everyone would be able to overlook some of its more "creative" choices. But if you are willing to accept the movie for what it is, then you just might be in for a journey like none other.

Supergirl (Movie Review)

Not to be upstaged by the Man of Steel himself, the Girl of Steel flies into action in her own dedicated movie, the second overall film of the Gods and Monsters phase in the James Gunn-led DC Universe. And while we've gotten quite a few iterations of the character over the years, in movies like The Flash and shows like Supergirl and Smallville, this one marks her first standalone movie since the ill-fated 1984 Helen Slater film of the same name. So does this one manage to soar where that one stumbled, or does it mark a costly misstep for the DCU?

The film opens with Kara, aka. Supergirl, in the midst of her week-long 23rd birthday celebration, just as she'd hinted at during her Superman cameo. We are soon introduced to the villain, Krem, a fine specimen from a clan of so-called Brigands with an affinity for young girls. Do with that information what you will. Kara is soon swept up in a race-against-time mission to save Krypto when the superdog gets shot by one of Krem's poisonous darts. And she is joined by a young girl with a thirst for vengeance. Oh, yeah, and they run into Lobo at some point, too.

From the moment she'd made her debut in last year's Superman, something about this particular iteration of Supergirl rubbed me the wrong way. Perhaps it was her carefree, party girl disposition. Something about the writing for the character seemed, for lack of a better word, forced, like they really wanted to communicate how different from prior iterations this one was. But it just ended up making her come across as insufferable, which was a shame because I really love the actress, Milly Alcock, especially after her star-making turn as young Rhaenyra Targaryen in House of the Dragon. 

So the decision to have the very next movie in the newly minted DCU center upon her was certainly an interesting one. I say all that to establish the fact that I had minimal hype heading into Supergirl. The trailers certainly didn't do much to move the needle either, from their generic, cookie-cutter space adventure look, by way of Guardians of the Galaxy, to the questionable song choices. But I knew I still had to give the movie a fair shot. After all, there've been many movies in the past that I had little hope for that ended up blowing me away. Sadly, this one won't be joining their ranks.

Right out of the gate, I could tell I was in for a rough two hours. The visual of Krypto taking a piss on a news clipping of Superman was a strong statement of intent. And it doesn't take long into the movie for the plot holes and various contrivances to rear their heads. A part of me is still unclear what Krem's ultimate goal was. The film tells us it is the propagation of his all-male clan, but yet he still seems to treat his "brides" like disposable objects. The same thing goes for Lobo, who seemed to be just there for a bounty, but perhaps not? The film doesn't seem to be able to make up its mind.

And it is such details that makes me wish that someone had given the script a few more passes during the writing stage. Or at least gotten more competent writers to help bring it closer to the finish line. Because there are certain elements that could have made for a compelling enough narrative. The stuff on Krypton was nice to see, as well as other bits of Kara's backstory doled out through flashbacks. But the film seems content with being a jumbled-up mess of ideas that never fully congeal into something worthwhile. 

At least there's the action, right? Well, it pains me to report that even that is muddled and hard to follow, owing to the one-two punch of choppy editing and too many closeups. The cinematography definitely left a lot to be desired but the film's technical shortcomings extend well beyond just that. Even the sound mixing felt off, with important dialogue often clashing with background music, resulting in an experience I can only describe as headache-inducing. The songs themselves range from borderline jarring to terribly on the nose, right down to the cover version of Jimmy Eat World's "The Middle" that plays during the climax.

I realize that this review has turned out quite negative. I suppose this is merely a reflection of my experience with the movie. But as I always try to do in all my reviews, I'll keep things balanced by also highlighting what I liked about the film. In terms of positives, the Supergirl suit did look good on Milly Alcock, and it was a joy to see her don it for the climactic battle. It was also nice seeing David Corenswet as Superman once again; his scenes were certainly a highlight, as they slowed things down to let the movie breathe. But those moments were few and far between, and not enough to save what is essentially a poorly made film.

Supergirl might not be the worst comic book movie ever released, but it damn well puts in a valiant effort for that dishonor. It is rare for a film to fail on so many fronts, but this one somehow manages to do just that. It tries so hard to be a female-centric superhero film for millennials and Gen Z, from its quirky humor to its song choices, that it forgets what makes these superhero movies worth watching in the first place: their heart, soul, and overall sense of awe and wonder. And while a few missteps should be expected with any franchise or cinematic universe, I worry to think what one this early might mean for the DCU going forward.

Disclosure Day (Movie Review)

The King of the Summer Blockbuster returns to familiar territory with Disclosure Day. I am, of course, referring to Steven Spielberg and his latest science fiction epic, a film that once again explores our continued fascination with the possibility of extraterrestrial life. Except his latest film is based around the conceit that all those UFO sightings and alien abductions are real. But does that angle allow the movie to rise to the genre-defining heights of Close Encounters of the Third Kind, or is it merely a fresh coat of paint on a stale set of ideas?

The movie throws us right into the thick of it, as we are introduced to Daniel Kilmer (Josh O'Connor), a cybersecurity expert on the run after stealing confidential information from a shady organization tasked with keeping the world in the dark. This is a world basically on the brink of World War 3, with widespread panic and unrest as tensions rise between the superpowers. Meanwhile, a news reporter named Margaret Fairchild (Emily Blunt) starts to develop actual superpowers, as a clip of her speaking a strange alien language quickly goes viral. She soon becomes a target as well, and the two fugitives find themselves on a collision course that could end up unraveling one of humanity's worst-kept secrets.

As versatile as Steven Spielberg has proven to be over the years, there's an undeniable joy I experience at the very prospect of a new science fiction movie by him. And that was certainly how I'd felt heading into Disclosure Day, one of my most eagerly-anticipated movies of the year. From the very first trailer, it was clear that his latest flick was going to be a sci-fi film for the ages. And now that I've seen the movie, I am pleased to report that it delivered on the promises of that trailer, even though subsequent trailers had revealed a little more than I felt was necessary.

In any case, I won't be getting into any major spoilers in this review. After all, the movie thrives on the gradual unraveling of its central mystery. As the title suggests, the film grapples with the potential ramifications of full disclosure. In other words, how would people and the world at large receive the news that we are not alone in the universe? And it is that moral quandary that its cast of characters must weigh as they navigate a revelation that would surely challenge established beliefs.

Speaking of characters, Emily Blunt shines as Margaret, with a performance that gives the movie much of its emotional core. Colin Firth also proved to be an adequate foil for both her and Josh O'Connor as the villainous figure trying to stop them. He was almost unrecognizable, putting away his usual British charm and instead channeling the kind of cold determination we only ever get to see in the best villains. They might not win any Oscars for their roles, but the overall ensemble still deserves its flowers.

One aspect of the movie that I feel should absolutely get some Oscar love is the excellent cinematography. There were some breathtaking tracking and wide-angle shots employed throughout the movie, especially one from the action scene featured prominently in the trailers. A lot of that was enhanced by another great John Williams score, his thirtieth overall collaboration with Spielberg, apparently. His music is the through-line that helps give these Spielberg movies their heart and soul, and the same is true in this one, a fact that becomes evident during its emotional third act.

I wish I could say the same thing about the creature effects in the movie, but alas, this is where I think it falls short of its full potential. The visual effects used on the CG animals and extraterrestrials were pretty hit or miss, and I was often surprised by how unfinished and unconvincing some of it looked. I guess that is what happens when everything else is operating at such a high level visually; anything less than stellar tends to stick out like a sore thumb.

The same thing can be said about all the plot contrivances stretching the credibility of the story. The film employs a heavy dose of what I like to call movie logic, things and sequences that only ever make sense in a movie. I understand some of that stuff is essential to keep a movie simple or easy to follow. But a film still runs the risk of feeling inexplicably dumb if it relies on that too heavily. Thankfully, this one never crosses that threshold. None of it ever threatened to completely take me out of the movie or ruin what is essentially another win by one of the greatest directors of all time.

Disclosure Day is a heartfelt examination of what it means to be human in a world on the brink of destruction. It is also a spectacular rollercoaster ride of a movie with a mystery that would have you on the edge of your seat. At the very least, it will make you a believer. The film can be heavy-handed and overly sentimental, for sure, but it still captures the very essence of the summer blockbuster the way that only a director like Steven Spielberg can. And while it never quite rises to the level of an E.T. or Jurassic Park, it soars high enough to earn its spot in his ever-expanding filmography.

Mortal Kombat 2 (Movie Review)

Ever since Johnny Cage was teased at the end of the 2021 reboot of Mortal Kombat, I was instantly sold on its sequel's promise of a bigger roster of fighters with a proper tournament for them to fight in. And my excitement only continued to grow after Karl Urban was cast as the fan-favorite character. But following the announcement that the movie was to be delayed from its October 2025 release date, that excitement took a significant hit. Not enough to keep the film out of my list of most anticipated movies for 2026, though, and now that it is out in cinemas, was it worth the wait, or are you better off waiting for it to drop on HBO Max?

The film opens with the evil Outworld emperor, Shao Kahn, seeking to take over the realm of Edenia, as a young Kitana watches as her father, King Jerrod, is slain by him in a one-on-one battle. Soon after, she is taken under his wing and trained to be one of his assassins along with her adoptive sister, Jade. Meanwhile, the remaining Earthrealm champions are in need of an additional fighter in order to face the Outworld champions in the forthcoming Mortal Kombat tournament. Except their chosen candidate, Johnny Cage, is a washed-up Hollywood star with a flair for high kicks and cheesy one-liners.

Coming out of the previous Mortal Kombat movie, my biggest grievance was its failure to depict the tournament alluded to by its title, like the one we got in the 1995 film. The whole thing basically felt like setup for that tournament, and the decision to center the plot around an original character didn't exactly help matters. So I was glad to see that the filmmakers had been listening to all that feedback because the sequel certainly feels like a direct response to those criticisms. From the very first trailer, it was clear that they had crafted a movie worthy of the Mortal Kombat name.

What was less clear, though, were the dark and murky visuals evident from the Netherrealm scenes shown in those trailers. And as you can imagine, this was compounded by the lack of brightness on the screen in my specific screening of the movie. So much so that I found myself struggling to tell what was going on half the time. From what I did manage to see, it appeared that the fight choreography was still top-notch, much like the first film. The cinematography was likewise great, really capturing the kinetic flow and essence of the fights in the video games.

Speaking of fights, we of course have to talk about the blood and gore. This is Mortal Kombat after all, a series notorious for its pretty outrageous fatalities. Surprisingly, I got the feeling that some of the blood and gore had been pared back for this sequel, despite the film still retaining the same R rating as its predecessor. Maybe it's just me and my gorehound sensibilities but I really felt like I'd gotten more satisfaction from the fatalities in the first film. Either way, this is something worth keeping in mind before going in to see the movie.

Another aspect of the film that left me peeved was how character deaths were handled. I don't want to get into spoilers for this review, but if you've seen the trailers, then you already know that some pretty significant deaths from the first film have been undone for this one. And the same treatment continues throughout, lending what could have been heartfelt character deaths a lack of finality. Yes, I recognize that this is carried over from the games, but it still ended up making the stakes feel lower than they should have.

On the plus side, that lack of finality meant we were able to get Josh Lawson back as Kano. He was the main highlight of the first movie, and he helped bring some much-needed levity here as well, considering how serious and dour the whole thing felt otherwise. I especially loved his interactions with Johnny Cage, even though those were few and far between. Karl Urban was also able to bring some measure of gravitas to Johnny. He didn't have anywhere near the same amount of charisma as he did as Billy Butcher in The Boys, but a part of me suspects his Australian accent does most of the heavy lifting in that role.

Mortal Kombat 2 delivers on its predecessor's promise of a gore-filled tournament but loses some of that film's overall charm. Regardless, fans of the games will be pleased to discover its faithful adaptation of the source material, borne from filmmakers that clearly know what their audience wants. So my hope for the series going forward is that the next installment once again finds that perfect balance between action and comedy without compromising on the blood and gore the franchise is known for.

Michael (Movie Review)

After several internal delays and reshoots stemming from confusion over what can or cannot be included in the movie, the most hotly anticipated musical biopic of 2026 is finally here. Because, beyond a doubt, Michael Jackson is one of the most widely known and beloved pop stars, the King of Pop as he is often referred to, with a storied legacy that lives on till this very day. So does the movie, Michael, manage to do that legacy justice, or is it just an attempt to cash in on the goodwill and enduring adoration of his legion of loyal fans?

The story covers the earlier years of Michael Jackson's musical career, beginning with the formation of the Jackson 5 in 1967. Under the grueling tutelage of their abusive father, Joseph, they perfect their act and soon attract attention from Motown, where their music quickly rises to the top of the charts. But over the years, it becomes clear that Michael is the true star of the show, and he eventually seeks more creative freedom by going solo. Except he struggles to escape his father's shadow even as he tries to recapture the childhood he was never allowed to have.

The main ingredient of any great biopic is an interesting subject matter. And they don't really get much more interesting than Michael Jackson, one of the most well-documented people in the modern age, from his early musical accomplishments to the scandals that plagued the latter half of his illustrious career. And it is for that very reason that it was always going to be tricky tackling a story as nuanced and complex as his, because it was impossible to please everyone whichever way they decided to go.

But it seems the decision to focus the story on his earlier years meant they could leave out basically all the problematic bits. The word on the street is that a lot of that was already filmed and was included in the original 4-hour cut of the movie, and since they were forced to rejig the film in order to avoid potential legal disputes, the current plan is to reintroduce some of that stuff in a sequel if this movie is successful enough to warrant one. So it remains to be seen if and how any of that would get handled.

In terms of what actually did make it into the movie, though, I must say that I was immediately invested in Michael's story, despite my existing familiarity with those events. Young Michael, who was played by Juliano Krue Valdi, was instantly endearing, stealing every scene he was in. His father was also quickly set up as a villainous figure in his life, which only further helped to get us in Michael's corner. Some of it could be considered emotionally manipulative, sure, but so long as it is effective, I don't see that as a problem.

I would have loved to see more about why the family chose to go into music, but the movie starts with the Jackson 5 all but fully formed, with no real background given. And from the very beginning, it was clear to me that the music was going to be a real highlight of the movie. Because every song was recreated in rich, luscious detail, and I was glad I was experiencing them through crisp, surround sound speakers. This is, of course, also a testament to the timelessness of the songs themselves.

The same thing can be said about the performances. This is a musical biopic after all, with lots of singing and dancing. And the glue holding all that together was Jaafar Jackson, who basically embodies his late uncle for the role, right down to his mannerisms and signature dance moves. I had my initial reservations about the decision to cast an untrained actor for such an iconic role, but those doubts were assuaged mere seconds after he popped up on screen. He effectively became Michael, and I'd be remiss if I didn't also give props to the hair, makeup, and costume departments for helping recreate his iconic looks and fashion for the film.

So Michael looks and sounds great, but how well does it function as a biographical drama? Or how does it rank alongside other musical biopics like Elvis, Bohemian Rhapsody, or my personal favorite, Better Man? Sadly, this is where I feel the film falls short of its true potential, in its inability to do anything more with its storytelling than the barest minimum. It felt like several checkboxes were being checked as we went through all the various milestones, without making any effort to dive deeper into the motives and psyche of its subject matter. So I am definitely hoping this is an area that gets addressed should the sequel happen.

If you're a fan of Michael Jackson and his vast catalog of hit songs, then chances are you'd come out of Michael wholly satisfied. But if you are one of those looking to learn anything new about the late singer, or what made him such a unique voice and talent to reckon with, then you might be left wanting. Personally, I am a little too biased to view the movie as anything other than a celebration of one of the greatest musicians of our time. And as such, it gets an easy recommendation from me for the quality of the musical numbers alone.

The Super Mario Galaxy Movie (Movie Review)

The Super Mario Bros. are back for another round of spot the reference. Except this time around, they'll be journeying well beyond the shores of the Mushroom Kingdom, to galaxies far away. Because for some reason, the folks at Illumination have opted to skip right past the prehistoric trappings of Super Mario World and warp-pipe their way right down to the floaty planets of Super Mario Galaxy. So does that leap forward create an opportunity for something fresh, or is this just more of the same? 

The film picks up right after the events of the previous one, with its titular pair of Brooklyn plumbers now regulars in the Mushroom Kingdom. They are quickly introduced to Yoshi, the green dinosaur who was teased at the end of the last film. And it doesn't take long before they are all swept up in a new grand adventure, as the Mushroom Kingdom is invaded by Bowser Jnr., who seeks to set his father free so they can conquer and rule over the galaxy together.

Heading into The Super Mario Galaxy Movie, I knew the film was likely to adhere to the same Easter Egg-laden formula introduced in the first movie. After all, that film had gone on to gross over $1.3 billion in 2023, and it was widely praised among fans for its faithful adaptation of those early Super Mario games. So my only real hope for its sequel was that it would offer some subtle refinements to that formula by delving even deeper into the lore that made those games so special.

But as the saying goes, if it ain't broke, why fix it? Because that seems to be the very mantra with which Nintendo and Illumination have approached The Super Mario Galaxy Movie. Put plainly, if you weren't a fan of the first film's breakneck pacing and paper-thin characterization, then chances are you wouldn't be here either. Except in their bid to go even bigger for the sequel, the issues that plagued the previous movie have become that much more pronounced and magnified. 

There's no easy way to say this, but the movie felt overstuffed and inconsequential at the same time. There was so much crammed within its one hour and thirty-eight minutes runtime, with multiple storylines that didn't get anywhere near enough care or attention. The same thing can be said about the characters, with so many of them being juggled between those competing storylines and barely any character development to speak of. There was also an overreliance on plot contrivances, which completely took me out of the movie on multiple occasions. 

Yes, I understand the argument that these movies are geared towards kids and, therefore, there is a much lower bar of quality that they need to clear in order to be deemed acceptable. But why settle for acceptable when the potential for greatness is right there in front of you? And it is that lack of greatness that left me feeling mixed about the movie and somewhat disappointed. The film felt downright unfinished at times, with a jumbled-up narrative that barely bothers to properly delineate between flashbacks and present-day plot lines. I mean, even the kids deserve better than that. 

On a positive note, the animation powering the film is as vibrant and beautiful as ever, with Illumination sparing no expense in bringing the various worlds and their denizens to life. The same could be said about the score, which once again did a great job of incorporating the familiar tunes and notes from the games. I also found myself chuckling a couple of times at the various jokes and visual gags throughout the movie. But none of those things were enough to elevate the film beyond the realm of just passable. 

The Super Mario Galaxy Movie is an overstuffed excursion that lacks the novelty of seeing the familiar worlds of the Super Mario games brought to life on the big screen for the first time. Even more than the first film, it tries to function as a celebration of the 40 years' worth of video games that have endeared countless gamers to characters like Mario, Luigi, Yoshi, and others. But it ultimately falls short of its true potential due to its adherence to a formula that already feels worn by movie number two, which can only make one wonder what the future holds for the beloved video game franchise.

Project Hail Mary (Movie Review)

From the moment I first caught wind of Project Hail Mary, I could tell it had the potential to be something truly special. Not only was it based on a book by Andy Weir of The Martian fame, but it was also being helmed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, with Ryan Gosling in the lead role, serving as the cherry on top. I mean, all the necessary ingredients for a rollicking space adventure were certainly there. But do those ingredients come together to create a fine dining experience, or is the resultant meal too spicy or even tasteless?

The movie centers upon a scientist named Grace, who awakens from an induced coma to discover he was in the middle of a deep-space mission. With little to no recollection of how he got there, and the rest of his three-man crew already dead, he begins to piece together, with the help of their onboard AI assistant, the nature of their mission, which involved traveling to another solar system with hopes of learning how to stop the Earth's sun from rapidly dimming. But things take an unexpected turn when he runs into another spaceship, and its unusual occupant.

As anyone who knows me could attest, I have a deep-rooted affinity for science fiction movies like Interstellar and Gravity. And coming out of Project Hail Mary, those are the very two that came to mind. This is not to say that I found the movie derivative, but rather, to merely acknowledge that I recognize the strands of inspiration with which it is crafting its own tale. But what really sets this one apart from those other movies is its humor and characterization.

Much like The Martian before it, Project Hail Mary features a lot of Andy Weir's familiar wit, which has been translated onto the big screen by screenwriter Drew Goddard. I broke from tradition and opted not to read the book the film is based upon before going in to see it, mainly because I wanted to be able to judge it as its own thing. And I have to say that I thoroughly enjoyed the movie despite my lack of familiarity with the source material, and I imagine others would too.

Ryan Gosling is no stranger to movies about space travel, after his stoic turn as real-life astronaut, Neil Armstrong, in First Man. Except here, he gets to channel his more comedic side. But the true star of the show, in my opinion, was Rocky, the alien with whom he shares most of his screentime. Some people might consider this a spoiler, but to that I say take it up with the studio, or whoever cuts their trailers, because the entire film was sold on the back of the growing camaraderie between the two. 

Their bromance was the emotional core that kept the film going, and I quickly forgot one of them was not in fact human as I laughed at the various gags poking fun at the alien's larger-than-life personality and how it both complemented and clashed with that of Grace. It helps that Rocky was brought to life with a mixture of practical and digital effects, and that he always felt grounded with the other props on the various sets and shooting spaces.

Speaking of visual effects, the visuals in Project Hail Mary were uniformly stunning from start to finish. I caught myself gaping at several shots throughout the movie, as the cinematography really helped sell the sense of scale and vastness of space. Equally deserving of praise is the excellent sound mixing. This is the kind of thing I don't typically pay attention to during a movie, but when it is this good, then it demands all the attention it deserves. 

Then there's the score by Daniel Pemberton, which builds with the tension and slowly dissipates when needed, creating this ebb and flow that helped guide and propel the narrative, much like the titular spaceship, the Hail Mary, as it navigated the further reaches of space. There were also several needle drop moments during the film, so fans of classic rock and pop shouldn't be surprised to find themselves bopping along with those tunes.

About the only remotely negative thing I can think to say about Project Hail Mary is that the story left me wanting more. Some details felt glossed over, like how the two other crew members of the Hail Mary died. Or perhaps that was addressed, and I was simply too distracted by the gags and gorgeous visuals to notice. Either way, this has only further spiked my interest in reading the source material, where I'll hopefully be able to get some of those answers, and more Rocky hijinks.

Project Hail Mary is like a well-fueled rocket ship, firing on all cylinders. Its narrative can be both heartwarming and gut-wrenching, and the fact that it is able to deftly swing between those two extremes without missing a beat is why it is one of my favorite movies of 2026 thus far. And while the year is still young with many more potentially great movies to come, something tells me this one will stand the test of time and serve as one of the finer cinematic offerings on this year's menu.

The current state of Video Game Adaptations

Video game adaptations have continued to experience a bit of a redemption arc in recent years. Whether we are talking about crowdpleasers like Minecraft and Super Mario Bros., or more divisive fare like The Last of Us Season 2. This is not to say that we are beyond getting the outright stinkers, because it certainly feels like for every Sonic the Hedgehog 3, there is a Return to Silent Hill just lurking around the corner. 

One thing is for sure, though; we are well past the days of those endless Resident Evil sequels and directors like Paul W. S. Anderson and Uwe Boll being the only prominent filmmakers bearing the torch for video game adaptations. Now, there is a healthy variety of talent and voices working to bring video games to the big and small screen, with the video game companies themselves appearing to have a vested interest in seeing those films and TV shows succeed.

Because even the seemingly bad-looking video game movies still manage to find that redemption by leaning into the inherent campiness of their source materials. Case in point, we have new films in the Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat series coming out this year, and they both look gloriously cheesy in the best way possible. I mean, just look at the Street Fighter teaser dropped during The Game Awards and tell me how that doesn't make you cringe and hyped at the same time.

So the question then is, are we currently witnessing a video game movie renaissance, or is this simply the next Hollywood gold rush as superhero movie fatigue sets in and studios scramble to look for the next big thing? 

To even begin answering that question, we must first understand why it has taken this long for video game movies to - quote, unquote - git gud, because it's not as though the potential for greatness hadn't been there ever since Super Mario Bros. opened the floodgates in 1993. But for most of the mid-to-late 90s, it didn't get any better than the schlocky thrills offered by the likes of Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat.

And we could definitely place some of the blame on their source materials, because for the most part, the video games of that era had barebones stories that didn't exactly lend themselves to translation into film.

But as the technology powering those games improved, so also did their abilities to tell more compelling stories that made use of voice acting, CD-quality music, and even pre-rendered Full Motion Videos. Early examples of such games include Tomb Raider, Resident Evil, and Final Fantasy 7, so it shouldn't really come as a surprise that these were some of the first to be adapted into movies at the turn of the century.

And while some of these early adaptations would find some measure of box office success, they would ultimately pale in comparison to the numbers generated by comic book movies like Spider-Man, or the cultural relevance of book-to-film adaptations like the Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter. But most importantly, they just weren't that great, even though I would always have a soft spot for the films of that era.

That lack of perceived quality would spawn what would come to be known as the video game movie curse, the belief that all films adapted from video games could only ever be mediocre at best. This was mainly due to the inherent differences between video games and movies, because the former was primarily an interactive medium that focused on gameplay and player input, while the latter was plot and character-driven. 

And for the longest time, that was the status quo, even as the video games themselves drew more and more inspiration from movies and filmmaking techniques. I am talking about games like Uncharted 2, with elaborate, drawn-out action setpieces designed to be cinematic. Or narrative-driven titles like The Last of Us, which were renowned for the quality of their characterizations and overall storytelling.

Which brings us to where we are today. We recently had our very first video game movie to gross over a billion dollars, with a sequel set to launch in a few weeks, as well as hit TV shows like Fallout and the award-winning adaptation of the aforementioned The Last of Us. Things would appear to be looking bright and robust for the future of video game adaptations, especially judging by the current push by studios like Netflix and Amazon MGM to pump as many of them out as possible.

But therein lies my hesitation to call the current boom a true renaissance, because of that very push and the room for half-baked projects that it creates. And the only way studios can really avoid falling back to the lackluster scripts of old is by pairing each adaptation with the right talent and giving those teams the time, budget, and creative freedom they need to succeed. It remains to be seen if this is the way things would go or if it any of it would be sustainable in the long run.

Either way, 2026 is definitely going to be a make-or-break year for video game adaptations. Or at the very least, it should give us a clearer picture of whether this is indeed the next big thing or just a side attraction for studios to dabble in occasionally, as they attempt to exploit their built-in fanbases and cultural relevance. Because, as the saying goes, recognizable IP is king, and studios would always favor proven franchises over original works.

And who can blame them when we, as an audience, consistently favor those franchises too? Because, despite our claims to the contrary, we hardly ever give original works a chance, and would consistently gravitate towards the comfort and familiarity of established properties and their key-jangling antics. This is why it is always important to vote with your wallets, because studio execs only really care about their bottom line, not what fans are crying about on Facebook or Twitter.

I'll definitely be checking out most, if not all, the video game movies slated for release this year. And the one I am most excited for is Zach Cregger's take on Resident Evil. Yes, even more so than the live-action Legend of Zelda film. The fact that I even get to pick between those two shows why it is a good time to be a gamer and a cinephile. So if you enjoy watching video game movies and you see one that looks like it might be worth your while, then consider giving it a fair shake.

28 Years Later: The Bone Temple (Movie Review)

Like an infected Alpha barreling through the woods, the 28 Days Later franchise is back again with its next installment, 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple. Except Danny Boyle is once again stepping away from director duties, and ceding the chair to Nia DaCosta. And as you can imagine, I was immediately skeptical that the Candyman and The Marvels helmer would be able to maintain the thrills and breathtaking visuals that helped define the previous film. So does the new movie represent a seamless passing of the torch, or is it merely a cheap imitation of what came before?

The film picks up right where the last one left off, with Spike (Alfie Williams) being taken into the fold by Jimmy Crystal (Jack O'Connell) and his gang. But it is actually Ralph Fiennes' Dr. Ian Kelson who gets top billing this time around, and we spend much of the film watching him act as curator and groundskeeper for the titular Bone Temple. After a string of repeated encounters with Samson, the leader of a herd of infected in the nearby woods, the two begin to form an unlikely bond that could very well redefine his understanding of the Rage Virus and those afflicted by it.

In this age of long-gestating sequels, it is not often that we get a turnaround time of less than a year, which is essentially what we've gotten with 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple. The decision to film the first two movies in the planned trilogy back-to-back has certainly paid off, especially considering how the last film ended with a cliffhanger and left some dangling plot threads in the process. So I was glad to see this one hit the ground running as it attempted to tie it all together, even down to providing some much-needed connections to the first film, 28 Days Later. 

To put it in another way, this is the most we have learnt about the nature of the Rage Virus since that film, and why those infected by it turn into raving murder machines. But since this is a spoiler-free review, I won't be saying anything more about what that nature looks like. I'll instead be spending the rest of this review eating crow I guess, for ever doubting that Nia DaCosta could deliver a worthy follow-up to 28 Years Later. Because her movie matches the same kinetic energy as that Danny Boyle-directed entry, though some could argue that has more to do with Alex Garland staying on as screenwriter than anything else.

Whatever the case, this is as valiant an effort as I could have hoped for, with the film even exceeding my expectations in certain areas. For instance, licensed music plays a much bigger role in this movie than in the last, and there were several needle-drop moments that had me grinning like a fiend. One in particular had me outright laughing out loud, and that's another thing I didn't expect from the movie, for it to be so funny and over-the-top in the best way possible. 

This is not to say that it was all smiles and giggles, as it is also worth noting that the film is as gory as it gets. Some of it was borderline hard to stomach and watch, especially one extended torture sequence that just felt too mean-spirited for my tastes. But gorehounds will definitely get their fill and then some, even though the film as a whole didn't have anywhere near as much action or gory kills as its predecessors.

Then I have to give props to both Ralph Fiennes and Chi Lewis-Parry, who plays Samson. Both actors gave outstanding performances that helped sell their implausible friendship, and watching them act stoned out of their minds was yet another highlight of the movie I didn't see coming. I don't know if there's any chance for any kind of award consideration this far removed from the next awards cycle, but at the very least, they are sure to go down as one of the most heartfelt and memorable on-screen pairings of the year.

As far as glaring issues and problems, the biggest gripes I had with the movie have to do with some questionable and contrived sequences, like how the infected would conveniently go MIA for long stretches of the film, or instances when they should've otherwise gathered to investigate a very loud noise. We also don't see or learn more about the other variants of infected introduced in the last film, despite Danny Boyle himself suggesting we would during interviews. But I suppose we'll simply have to wait for the next sequel to see if he eventually makes good on that promise.

2026 is off to a great start because 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple is tense, visceral, and even bloodier than the other films in the series. I guess I can finally say there's a Nia DaCosta film that I actually really enjoyed. I'll definitely be paying closer attention to whatever she does next as I wash the sour aftertaste of The Marvels out of my memory. The biggest accomplishment of her latest film, though, is how it has me excited for the third film in the current trilogy, and the future of the 28 Days Later franchise as a whole.