Director: Antoine Fuqua
Starring: Jaafar Jackson, Colman Domingo & Nia Long 
Rated: PG-13 (some thematic material, language and smoking)
Runtime: 2 hours & 7 minutes

 
“Michael,” directed by Antoine Fuqua, is supposedly the first installment of the tale of one of music’s most controversial figures. I’m not here to share my opinions on Michael Jackson himself, but I am here to talk about his biopic.
​
We jump right into Michael’s musical career and follow that into the late ‘80s. There’s this idea of streamlining us through his career and how that affected him, rather than showing us deeper into his day-to-day life. This works fine for a biopic, but there were so many interesting parts of his life just cut clean out. I know a lot of things were filmed that ended up on the cutting room floor, so I do hope for a chance to see whether those deleted portions would help support the rest of the film. Also, no Janet…? Really? Okay…

In all honesty, I think this film would be better if it highlighted some of the darker aspects of this period in his life. I think it would actually help to shape Michael’s character. We do see some dark things - don’t get me wrong - but it’s mostly the base level history of Michael Jackson. We get a lot of scenes that are just “this is Michael, and this is why he was great. Remember when he did these things?” And characters observe him and knowingly smile. It just doesn’t really give Michael the depth that his story deserves. We do get a better look at why he was so childlike and how he remained trapped in his childhood whimsy, but I wish we could see more of the grit that led to it.

Michael Jackson is one of the most talented artists to ever do it - there is simply no arguing that. The music in the film helps to prove that. We get a lot of great recreations of past concerts and music videos. Jaafar Jackson, Michael Jackson’s real-life nephew, really carries his own with the vocals. His whole performance as Michael is amazing. You can tell this role meant a lot to him, and you can see the work he poured into the role. From dancing to getting the voice down to singing, you can really believe that he’s Michael. The hair and makeup throughout is crazy good.

I don’t think there was a single bad performance in this film. Everyone hits on all cylinders. Both young and adult Michaels do a fantastic job of portraying the inner frustration and joyfulness that MJ could bring. Colman Domingo nails this kind of sleazily con-artist type as Joe Jackson. He always seems to be at the end of his rope, trying new schemes to extend his success. Nia Long’s role as Michael’s mother (Katherine) is really subtle, but I feel like she plays really well in that space and with her levels. This is obviously a Michael Jackson movie, so many of the characters seem subtle while Michael is the star. The only other person to really shine is Joe, and that’s because he’s the main antagonist of that portion (and really all of) Michael’s life.

The latter installment(s), if they indeed come to fruition, are going to be a doozy. The 2000’s were really a time to bully and point a spotlight at people for being strange. This latter portion of Michael’s life is where you see most of his controversies. It’s going to be a rough watch, but I am interested to see how they handle that. Obviously, I know that his family will be telling their side of his story as they always have, but I am really interested to see how they show how society’s shift against Michael Jackson affected him.

Overall, it’s a biopic about a musician. It has the songs you know. It paints him in a pretty positive light. It has the key points of his early career that most people know about. I guess we’ll have to wait and see what’s next in this franchise.

I guess you can say… I’ll be there.

Directors: Aaron Horvath, Michael Jelenic, Pierre Leduc & Fabien Polack
Starring: Chris Pratt, Anya Taylor-Joy & Charlie Day 
Rated: PG
Runtime: 1 hour & 38 minutes

 
“The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” is a fun video game film with plenty of references for fans and a better story than the first film.
​
The first Illumination Mario film was a very adequate film for what it was. Tons of references, a fine but baseline plot, and a lot of scenes that are interesting to look at. Where it fell flat for me was the soundtrack (I know, “unpopular” opinion), the sense of humor that felt too tongue-in-cheek and what I can only describe as a lack of passion. This film improves upon these issues.

The story starts right off with a little more pizzazz than the last one. We get a quick setup of “this is the villain, this is what they’re doing, aaaaaaaand go!” Although this intro has a very similar setup to the first film, I think they put a little more elbow grease into this opening.

I think with them being able to skip Mario’s whole “I’m a loser” arc that we saw in the first film, we got a lot more room to play with fun stuff. That being said, we did kind of gloss over some things throughout the film. There were a few plot points that were set up and executed, but they kind of just … didn’t have a lot of weight to them. Yeah - this big thing happened, but let’s move right on to the next thing. Pacing is overall the funk of this film - we bebop around reeeeal quick, but that doesn’t mean that I didn’t have a good time.

Life-long dweeb/dork has a smile on his face for most of the video game movie… fork found in the kitchen. I did genuinely enjoy this movie. It was a lot of fun - especially for the fans. Tons of Easter eggs and references for Nintendo fans are littered throughout this film. I do worry for fandom franchises in the future with this - I don’t want things to become reference slop. If you hurl a million “wink winks” at me, I’m going to get bored with them. However, I don’t feel like that’s the case for this film at all. Even some of the references have underlying references that I could point my giant man finger at and say, “I understand this!” It also takes some characters who don’t have much in-game backstory and zhuzhes them up to be a little more interesting. I was very interested, and I had a great time.

Passion is a word that is thrown around a lot with media. Do I think the creators of this film were passionate about the source material - almost. Do I feel like the weight of Illumination’s thumb was still present from the first film - not as much. I don’t think you can have a movie like this with this many nods to past media and say that there wasn’t any passion behind it… However, there is still that feeling of something missing. You can eat a cake and think it’s delicious while also saying, “I think this was missing something.” I mean - look at the ‘Sonic’ films (woah Mario v Sonic discourse in the big ‘26). You can look at those films and those actors and the team and say, “Whoa - these people really like Sonic.” There’s just energy around it. From hiring fan-favorite artists to redesign your characters to hiring writers from the comics and games to assist you in making the story - the ‘Sonic’ films have done a lot of things right. For Mario, we don’t have any modern comics to pull lore or references from, but we also didn’t have to worry about the design or plot too much because Nintendo would never let Illumination mess with their mascot too much. We also had Shigeru Miyamoto on as a producer - Mario’s figurative father figure in the eyes of many. I do think a lot of passion went into this film. I really do, but there was still that mark that wasn’t hit directly. We’re inching closer and closer, but we haven’t hit it head-on … yet! I have high hopes for the next Nintendo Animated Film. I think we’re heading in a more correct direction after this film.

Director: BenDavid Grabinski 
Starring: Vince Vaughn, James Marsden & Eiza Gonzalez 
Rated: R (strong/bloody violence, language, sexual material & drug use)
Runtime: 1 hour & 47 minutes 

Director/writer BenDavid Grabinski’s “Mike & Nick & Nick & Alice” is a whole lotta fun. It’s the kind of action-comedy you may have seen in theaters two to three decades ago that has been jettisoned to streaming-only (this film’s case on Hulu) because comedy doesn’t play in theaters anymore.

Mike, played by James Marsden, is a hitman who doesn’t really have the heart for cold-blooded killing anymore – probably because he’s fallen in love with Alice, played by Eiza Gonzalez. The only problem is that Alice is married to Nick, played by Vince Vaughn, a gangster who is Mike’s colleague. Nick doesn’t love Alice anymore, but still, she’s his. And this is why Mike is in some danger at the beginning of the film.

But Mike has an unlikely savior … Nick, but a Nick from, like, a month in the future. Yes, there’s time travel involved, but you don’t really have to worry too much about that because the movie knows it's just a fun comedy-crime caper and doesn’t bother too much with the science behind it. If you can’t get past that, this one won’t be for you.

You see, Nick knew that Mike was sleeping with his wife and, in a jealous rage, told the crime boss Sosa, played by Keith David, that Mike was the rat who got Sosa’s son, Jimmy Boy (Jimmy Tatro), sent to prison for years.  

There’s not a single character in this film that isn’t a bundle of laughs, and you definitely want to spend nearly an hour and 45 minutes with them, especially the titular foursome. Yeah, there’s twice as much Vaughn, who I know can be a “take him or leave him” personality (even for me), but he’s firing on all cylinders here.

The film is a smorgasbord of pop culture references (I particularly like the “Doctor Who” one early on). Potentially, the film’s highlight is a conversation between Mike, Nick, and Alice while waiting for a scary hitman who takes his victims alive and then eats them, in which the foursome discusses which of Rory Gilmore’s boyfriends from “Gilmore Girls” is the best. It’s a delight and goes on for a ridiculous amount of time, just eating up the scenery.

Tatro and David are a blast as the father-son crime duo, with Tatro doing what he does best in playing a character who is delightfully dumb in the funniest of ways, and David playing the loving, but confused by his son, father, who just wants to give Jimmy Boy the gift of killing the man who sent him to prison.
Stephen Root has an incredibly quick, but incredibly hilarious scene-stealing scene, and Ben Schwartz opening the film as a scientist jamming to Billy Joel’s “Why Should I Worry?” from the animated film “Oliver & Company” is quite fun, as well.

While frequently laugh-out-loud funny, “Mike & Nick & Nick & Alice” can get quite bloody too, especially during a scene with “The Barron,” the cannibalistic hitman, and a balls-to-the-wall shootout near the film’s completion – set to masterful soundtrack moments like Thin Lizzy’s “The Boys Are Back in Town” and Andrew W.K.’s “She Is Beautiful.”

“Mike & Nick & Nick & Alice” is the kind of film that’s probably not going to stick with you for long, but it’s certainly one you won’t regret watching and will have a lot of fun doing so. It’s perfect for a late-night wind-down viewing.   

Let’s send Rob Schneider to Iran
He can make his copies in the sand
There ain’t no use for him in Disneyland
Let’s send Rob Schneider to Iran
 
Douche Bigelow wants to reinstate the draft
But we should send his 62 year old ass
He’s claims that he can do it all night long
He knows all you need about making bombs
 
Let’s send Rob Schneider to Iran
Only has a job because of Sand-man
He has 8 Razzie nominations
Because he’s an abomination
Let’s send Rob Schneider to Iran

Directors: Phil Lord & Chris Miller
Starring: Ryan Gosling, Sandra Hüller & James Ortiz
Rated: PG-13 (some thematic material & suggestive references)
Runtime: 2 hours & 36 minutes 

​There’s something uniquely “amaze, amaze, amaze” when watching a human travel 11.9 light-years away to experience an unbreakable friendship with a rock-shaped alien with no face but so much heart. “Project Hail Mary,” directed by Phil Lord and Chris Miller, is the ultimate tragedy turned hopeful story — exactly what movie-goers need right now.

Based on the remarkable 2021 novel of the same name by Andy Weir, Hollywood has again adapted a Weir novel, with the brilliant work of screenwriter Drew Goddard, into an instant classic. Weir’s first novel, The Martian (published in print in 2014), was also a hit, thanks to Goddard, starring Matt Damon in 2015. But neither the book nor the movie can compare to the masterpieces of “Project Hail Mary.”

The novel has incredible stakes, heart and humor, and I was so nervous about how the movie was going to balance all three. There were key things left out of the movie version of “The Martian,” as is typically the case with most adaptations. Still, Weir’s book was so perfect, I couldn’t fathom them leaving any part of the story out.

While parts of the novel were certainly streamlined for the movie, the novel was mostly preserved and played out on screen. Making it film-adaptable was something Weir must have had in mind while writing it because it transitioned to the big screen flawlessly.   

Ryan Gosling at the helm as science teacher turned world-saving astronaut Ryland Grace, ‘Mary’ was perfection. At first, I was a little surprised by Gosling’s casting because I honestly didn’t think he was nerdy enough to pull off the character of Ryland. I just thought he was too pretty. But he tapped into every emotion that character needed — goofiness, fear, confusion, sadness, humor and the depth of emotion a character like that needs to decide to sacrifice his future for his newfound intergalactic friend, Rocky. I couldn’t imagine another actor portraying him.

The movie opens, as does the novel, with Ryland waking up from a years-long coma aboard the Project Hail Mary spaceship. His two crewmates are dead, and he’s alone, 11.9 light-years away from Earth near the star system Tau Ceti, with no way to contact Earth. Because of the coma, it takes him a while to understand where he is and why. In flashbacks, the audience learns that he’s plucked from his middle school science classroom because of a paper he wrote on how organisms can survive without water, a concept that got him laughed out of the science world. It’s exactly this kind of out-of-the-box thinking that is needed to solve the unprecedented threat of the sun dying. International leader of the Petrova Taskforce, Eva Stratt (played perfectly by Sandra Hüller), gives him three of the invasive alien organisms, astrophage, that are eating the sun, to see what he can learn about them. While his theory about no water is busted, he quickly learns how astrophages breed, with help from his government security detail, Carl (the delightful Lionel Boyce). Carl wasn’t featured in the novel, and I love the choice to add him — it shows off Ryland’s playful side early on.

We see through flashbacks that Ryland had no intention of being one of the astronauts who would go on the suicide mission, Project Hail Mary, to discover why Tau Ceti seems to be the only star system immune to astrophage. They can breed just enough astrophage to fuel the spaceship to make it that far into space, but there’s no time to make enough for a return trip before Earth is destroyed. The ship can, however, send back four unmanned beetle probes — named after the Beatles — with scientific data and samples of whatever is stopping the astrophage on Tau Ceti.

After a key crew member is killed in an accident, Ryland is asked to fill the role of the scientist-astronaut, as the only other person available with expertise in astrophage. He’s adamant he can’t do it. He won’t do it. But the world has no choice — all of humanity ends without him.

Amid all of these flashbacks, we’re back with Ryland on the ship near Tau Ceti when he first sees an alien ship, Blip-A. While the two ships first try to communicate via throwing essentially a message in a bottle — made of solid Xenonite — soon, Blip-A attaches to Project Hail Mary, and we see the beloved Rocky for the first time. Rather than using CGI, Rocky is a rock-spider puppet with no face, operated by six puppeteers, led by James Ortiz. I honestly think this decision was big enough to impact the movie’s heart. A CGI image just wouldn’t have been the same, and it’s a vital reality any filmmaker should pay attention to.

Rocky, as Ryland names him, is his ship’s mechanic and also the only Eridian left on his ship, as his crewmates have also passed away. Rocky, also voiced by Ortiz, communicates in musical notes, but the two quickly decipher how to communicate by comparing mathematical patterns and assigning words to the notes on a laptop. The astrophage is also eating Rocky’s planet, making him their only hope, too.

From the moment Rocky arrives, the film shifts from a space-mission-to-save-Earth plot to a buddy film of sorts. Rocky tries to pick up on the human language, but his slight mishaps of repeating words like “amaze, amaze, amaze” or “Fist my bump” instead of fist bump or giving the thumbs down when something is good make for so many laugh-out-loud moments. Then there are the two just trying to coexist, kind of like college roommates who are trying to save their species.

I was nervous while watching the film that they might change the ending. I thought for a moment that the most crucial part of the film, demonstrating Ryland’s growth as a person, would be whitewashed. I’m thrilled they preserved it.

“Project Hail Mary” is one of the few movies I wanted to watch immediately again after seeing it in theaters. It’s a story of sacrifice, friendship and hope. I’m so grateful that the film did all the characters justice. The world could certainly use more beings like Ryland and Rocky. 

 
I have a request for writer/director Quentin Tarantino …

​Will you shut the fuck up?

Everything that comes out of your mouth these days seems to be dumber than the thing you said before. I know you like being a provocateur, but I don’t think you need the limelight this much, do you? Shouldn’t you be more concerned with that 10th film you’ve always said you're retiring on?

In an interview with the Sunday Times, Rosanna Arquette, who had a role in Tarantino’s 1994 smash “Pulp Fiction,” spoke out against the director’s frequent use of the “N-word” in his films – a criticism often levied against the popular director.

She said: “[Pulp Fiction is] iconic, a great film on a lot of levels. But personally, I am over the use of the [slur] – I hate it. I cannot stand that [Tarantino] has been given a hall pass.”

Arquette also called the use of the slur “creepy,” and admitted to harboring some resentment toward the movie, because she stated she was the only actor on the project that didn’t see some back end money following the film’s release, which she blames on the film’s producer, the controversial Harvey Weinstein, who’s currently serving time for a series of sexual assaults.

Tarantino couldn’t let the swipe pass without commenting, and his response is incredibly hypocritical and narcissistic – though who can really be surprised by that second part.

Tarantino released the following statement to media outlets on Tuesday, March 10:

“Dear Rosanna,

I hope the publicity you’re getting from 132 different media outlets writing your name and printing your picture was worth disrespecting me and a film I remember quite clearly you were thrilled to be a part of?

Do you feel this way now?

Very possibly.

But after I gave you a job, and you took the money, to trash it for what I suspect is very cynical reasons, shows a decided lack of class, no less honor.
There is supposed to be an esprit de corps between artistic colleagues.
But it would appear the objective was accomplished.

Congratulations
Q“

Are you fucking kidding me, Tarantino?

If you’re not familiar with why I ask this, let me remind you of the controversy Tarantino stirred merely months ago when he went on The Bret Easton Ellis Podcast and claimed Paul Dano was “the weakest fucking actor in SAG,” during a conversation about director Paul Thomas Anderson’s “There Will Be Blood.” For some reason, he also felt the need to add that he didn’t care for Owen Wilson or Matthew Lillard as actors, either.

So, for Tarantino to talk about “class,” “honor” and especially “an esprit de corps between artistic colleagues” is laughable, hypocritical and confirms that he’s a raging asshole.

Thankfully, Tarantino got hammered by many, including high-profile actors like Toni Collette, who responded to a reporter’s question to Dano during a 20th anniversary screening of “Little Miss Sunshine” in January with: “Are we really going there? Fuck that guy! He must’ve been high … it was just confusing. Who does that?”

Maybe the backlash to Tarantino’s unnecessary jab at Dano and his hypocritical response to Arquette will teach the writer/director that we don’t care to know every opinion he has, but if there’s one thing we’ve learned about Tarantino over the years, it’s that he fucking loves the sound of his own, whiny voice.

Director: Daniel Chong
Starring: Piper Curda, Bobby Moynihan & Jon Hamm 
Rated: PG (action/peril and mild language)
Runtime: 1 hour & 44 minutes 

 
Director Daniel Chong does an incredible job translating his “We Bare Bears” humor to film in “Hoppers.”
​
“Hoppers” is the lighthearted, comedic romp that I needed. It finds its times to be serious, and it’s not afraid to shift its weight on some heavier topics, but it’s also incredibly charming and funny without going too overboard. Although Chong’s signature off-the-wall humor does shine in this film. The absurdity of this film was a very nice cherry on top for many scenes and major plot points throughout. It wasn’t afraid to go weird places, and I appreciate that.

They play a lot with the point of view for both the humans and animals -  it reminds you that nature is something that humans can go into and explore, but it also reminds you that nature is all that these animals know. When we neglect nature, it often only affects nature, but this film reminds you that our planet can turn around and bite us back if we’re too careless. It’s refreshing to see after “The Wild Robot” last year. These back-to-back environmentalist films really make me feel like I’m back in the late ‘80s and ‘90s boom of films like “Ferngully” and “Princess Mononoke.” It’s a great reminder in times where mega corporations and morons on the internet are using up all of our natural resources to line their pockets and make the masses dumber and dumber.

The characters are all very fun, and most of them have pretty clear arcs. There are a lot of side characters that play the support role to the protagonist’s and antagonist’s motives, but they tend to all be delightful in their own way. It’s like a play with a small main cast and a ton of ensemble. 

Visually, this is such a cute and beautiful film. It feels like most of these animals were designed with a big warm hug in mind. They feel so round and jolly - I think it lends itself nicely to you rooting for them. The shots of nature are also so picturesque. A lot of them have key focal points we see throughout the film that help show you the growth and change in the world surrounding the characters. 

Overall, this film has that classic Pixar heart. It has a few bumps in pacing and story, BUT it also has a major misdirection in its plot that I didn’t see coming at all. It’s a very strong film, and I don’t see it having any trouble becoming a classic.

10. Power Ballad 
“Sing Street” was one of my favorite films, not just of 2016 but easily of the last decade, so any time John Carney has a new project in the works, I'm eager to see what he's been up to. Premiering at SXSW this March and starring Paul Rudd and Nick Jonas, “Power Ballad” is billed as an uplifting, music-driven story (duh) about a wedding singer, a rock star and the song that comes between them. Rudd plays Rick, who is a washed-up wedding singer, while Jonas plays Danny, a fading boy band star who bond with one another over music and a late-night jam session. When Danny turns Rick's song into a hit, Rick sets out to reclaim the recognition he believes he deserves. While 2023's “Flora and Son” didn't necessarily set the world ablaze, there is something about the mix at play here that seems like it could make the film a surprise, feel-good flick of the spring/summer - especially if the titular song in question is a hit outside the film itself. It will be interesting to see how many hallmarks of Carney's work this carries - Irish setting, romantic angle, complicated family dynamics - while seeming as if it could play a little more to the mainstream crowds. Whatever the case may be, Jack Reynor is back, so we'll at least get a few gems from their second collaboration. The film is currently set for a June 5 release via Lionsgate.

9. The Social Reckoning 
A companion piece to “The Social Network,” Aaron Sorkin has penned an original screenplay based around the true story of how Frances Haugen (Academy Award-winner Mikey Madison), a young Facebook engineer, enlisted the help of Wall Street Journal reporter Jeff Horwitz (Jeremy Allen White) to go on a dangerous journey that ends up blowing the whistle on the social network's most guarded secrets. While this is also on my list because “The Social Network” is one of the best films of the century, I am admittedly as anxious about this pick as I am excited. Anxious because while Sorkin has once again written the screenplay, it was his collaboration with director David Fincher that made “The Social Network” something special. Sorkin has directed a few features since the one-two punch of writing ‘Social Network’ and “Moneyball” in 2010 and 2011. For me, Sorkin's directorial efforts have been a journey of diminishing returns: “Molly's Game” is his best, while “Being the Ricardos” is easily his weakest. This doesn't bode well for “The Social Reckoning” necessarily, nor does the fact that Jesse Eisenberg declined to return as Mark Zuckerberg because, since working on the first film, he stated he has developed a more negative opinion of the real Zuckerberg's legacy and has come to dislike being associated with him. What does bode well is that Jeremy Strong was cast instead and will undoubtedly deliver a memorable version of Zuckerberg, no matter the movie around him. To this point, the cast across the board is the highlight, as beyond the three leads, the film also features Wunmi Mosaku, Billy Magnussen, Betty Gilpin and Bill Burr. As for Sorkin's portions, there will almost certainly be a few exceptional exchanges of dialogue between characters, but it is how well the writer/director keeps his tone in check and executes said exchanges that will likely determine the film's success. “The Social Reckoning” is currently set for an October 9, release via Sony Pictures.

8. Remain 
In what is probably the oddest title but maybe the one I'm most fascinated by on this list, “Remain” is a film adaptation of a novel co-authored by M. Night Shyamalan and Nicholas Sparks (yes, that Nicholas Sparks) and directed by Shyamalan for the screen. The idea originated in a 2023 brainstorming session between the two storytellers, with Shyamalan's supernatural concept serving as the basis, though it sounds like Sparks largely authored the novel while Shyamalan penned the screenplay. The story focuses on a New York architect hilariously named Tate Donovan (Jake Gyllenhaal), who is dealing with the loss of his sister ... who could see spirits. The narrative will obviously combine romance and paranormal elements - each of the collaborator's specialties - as it follows Tate to Cape Cod, where he is set to design his best friend's summer home. Naturally, after taking up residence at a historic bed-and-breakfast on the Cape, Tate encounters a beautiful young woman named Wren (Phoebe Dynevor) who challenges every assumption he has about his logical and controlled world, leading him to confront his sister's abilities. Tracy Ifeachor, Maria Dizzia, Jay O. Sanders, Julie Hagerty and Ashley Walters also star. The film is set to be released on October 23, via Warner Bros.

7. Spider-Man: Brand New Day 
Since 2002, the year Sam Raimi's original “Spider-Man” film was released, the longest amount of time between any type of wall-crawler film has been the five-year gap between Raimi's “Spider-Man 3” in 2007 and Marc Webb's ‘Amazing reboot in 2012. While we did get the animated “Across the Spider-Verse” in 2023, this year will also mark five years since the last time we saw Tom Holland's Peter Parker on screen. This is both somewhat of a surprise, given the monster success of ‘No Way Home’ (nearly a billion domestically and over a billion internationally for a total just shy of $2B), while also feeling appropriate given the "finale" type nature of that film. Needless to say, “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” carries this subtitle for multiple reasons. Not only is this the first MCU Spidey movie not directed by Jon Watts as Destin Daniel Cretton (“Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings”) took over directing duties, but also narratively as the end of ‘No Way Home’ saw Holland's Peter make the ultimate sacrifice, asking Doctor Strange to cast a spell making the entire world forget his existence. This included his best friend, Ned (Jacob Batalon), and Zendaya's MJ to keep them safe and protect the multiverse. That said, the logline available for this new film is that Peter is trying to focus on college and leave Spider-Man behind. When a new threat endangers his (new?) friends, he must break his promise and suit up again, teaming with an unexpected ally to protect those he loves. This brings us to the reason something seemingly smaller like ‘Brand New Day’ makes the list over ‘Doomsday’ - there's a kind of uncertainty about where things are headed. This, of course, is true of ‘Doomsday’ as well but the idea of Jon Bernthal's Frank Castle and Mark Ruffalo's Bruce Banner coming into the orbit of Holland's titular character along with Sadie Sink and Tramell Tillman joining the cast in undisclosed roles feels - at least in this moment - more exciting than all of what has been promised with ‘Doomsday’ as the track record for Spidey films is simply more promising than that of traditional MCU flicks at the moment. Or maybe it's just that we're closer to seeing ‘Brand New Day’ than we are ‘Doomsday,’ but whatever the case may be, I hope they both end up exceeding any and all expectations. “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” is expected July 31, from Sony Pictures and Marvel Studios.    

6. Digger 
Tom Cruise and director Alejandro G. Iñárritu team up to tell the story of the most powerful man in the world who embarks on a frantic mission to prove he is actually humanity's savior before the disaster he's unleashed destroys everything. Branded as a "comedy of catastrophic proportions," there is really no way of knowing what else to expect from “Digger” other than what the poster and teaser have given us: a title, a vibe and a Gorillaz track. What makes this latest character study from Iñárritu beyond engaging is the fact it will be Cruise's first non-franchise film since “American Made” in 2017 and I'm assuming his first film not centered around action and/or him doing some type of stunt work since 2012's “Rock of Ages” (though one could argue there was plenty of stunt work going on there). If this is the beginning of Cruise's late career phase, where he does, in fact, focus on more character-centric stories while working with auteur filmmakers, then consider me both psyched and hopeful that this is a great first step in that direction. “Digger” is set to be released on October 2, via Legendary Pictures and Warner Bros.

5. Dune: Part Three 
When it comes to Frank Herbert's series of books surrounding Paul Atreides, I had no point of reference prior to Denis Villeneuve's two-part adaptation of the landmark 1965 science fiction novel. Those adaptations were among the best films released in their respective years and undoubtedly among the best big-budget sci-fi moviemaking we've seen this century. For all of the build-up and hubbub around Atreides AKA "Muad'dib" in the last film, as well as around Timothée Chalamet in everything since, all that I've heard or read about where Herbert took the narrative in his follow-up tells me this isn't going to be a trilogy in the vein of the traditional hero's journey many will expect. The ‘Dune’ series, or at least the films, have thus far managed to maintain a good balance of heady ideas and bizarre details that add unexpected but engaging levels of intrigue and though it may not be the introduction to the genre “Star Wars” was for so many generations, those who are lucky enough to receive said introduction via Villeneuve's series will certainly be more critical in their approach to traditional archetypes. Personally, regardless of expectation, I'm excited to join Paul and the gang as he brings to fruition the ancient scheme to create a superbeing ruler among men. Currently, the film is set to open on December 18, opposite “Avengers: Doomsday,” though I suspect “Dune: Part Three” will be the one to budge and that release date will change - hopefully being moved up rather than being delayed.

4. Disclosure Day
Steven Spielberg returns. That could be the whole of the reasoning for why “Disclosure Day” is high on anyone’s list, but what makes Spielberg's first film since '22 even more notable is that it not only marks the filmmaker's return to moviemaking but moviemaking of a certain type, in a certain area of interest, which is - of course - a science fiction story dealing in life beyond the stars. The film's logline poses a question intended to bring the most basic reasoning to bear on what is, literally, an out-of-this-world scenario. If you found out we weren't alone, if someone showed you, proved it to you, would that frighten you? It's an alluring prompt, phrased to invoke mystery and wonder, which are two things Spielberg has always balanced exceptionally well. The teaser tailer that premiered just over a month ago gave away very little of what might be happening in the film (if anything, it probably muddied the water even more) but what it did do was whet the appetite for those that either grew up on Spielberg's sci-fi epics of the '70's and '80's or came to know them through the generational love for what is widely considered the auteur's golden era. Spielberg will turn 80 before the end of this calendar year, and while “The Fabelmans” would have been a fitting finale for his illustrious career, it makes sense that the man who invented the summer blockbuster would bring things full circle and attempt to revitalize the good ole days when the name Steven Spielberg was synonymous with the cinematic event of the summer. In other words, bring on the popcorn! Universal Pictures is set to release “Disclosure Day” on June 12.

3. The Adventures of Cliff Booth 
When worlds collide. In what is the riskiest pick on this list, the latest from director David Fincher, adapted from a screenplay by Quentin Tarantino, not only sees Brad Pitt reteaming with past collaborators but also revisiting his Oscar-winning character. The titular Cliff Booth, the stuntman turned Hollywood fixer from Tarantino's “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood...”, is back, but when he'll be back on the big screen officially is the question that makes this one of the riskier picks. The surprise trailer drop during the Super Bowl at least confirmed that Netflix will roll the movie out at some point this year, as prior to Sunday, Netflix had not yet included the film in any 2026 film slate announcements. Even the title doesn't seem to be 100% set in stone, as the film was shot under the working title/code name “Disco Kingpin.” I'd expect the film to have a summer 2026 rollout similar to its predecessor but given that production seems to have only officially wrapped at the end of 2025 and started rolling last July, that would mean shooting went on for the better part of a year, and the edit may take longer than usual. I mean, we know Fincher likes to do an insane amount of takes and Tarantino's scripts can typically be pretty wordy ... but damn. 

No real plot details have been released other than it is expected to take place a few years after ‘OUATIH,’ and Fincher’s go-to cinematographer Erik Messerschmidt took over for Robert Richardson, who served as director of photography on Tarantino's film. Outside of Pitt returning, the film also stars Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, Elizabeth Debicki, Carla Gugino, Timothy Olyphant, Holt McCallany, Peter Weller, Scott Caan, and Corey Fogelmanis, though it has also been speculated that Leo DiCaprio's Rick Dalton will appear in some capacity. We're not seeing the forest for the trees here though, which is to say this is a new David Fincher movie and a Fincher movie I wouldn't have necessarily thought he'd pick to add to his filmography that was written by Quentin Tarantino, an auteur who has teased us about his tenth and final film so many different times at this point that it's simply refreshing something of his has actually been made, and will (hopefully) become available to be seen sooner rather than later. While it may still be a mystery when we'll be able to see the film, there is no uncertainty about when I will have tickets to (again, hopefully) see “The Adventures of Cliff Booth” in a movie theater: day one.
 
2. Michael 
Telling the story of Michael Jackson, the “King of Pop,” is not a task I'd necessarily be envious of, but one I am certainly eager to see on IMAX screens on opening day. As a lifelong fan of The Jackson 5's Motown years, The Jacksons’ albums for Epic, and of course Michael's solo career, the music the brothers and their singularly talented lead singer produced has not only been present in my entire life, but a true part of my existence in so many deeply-rooted ways. Growing up, my three younger brothers and I started performing together in school talent shows, receiving enough positive feedback that the only scratch for the itch was to continue down that path. We naturally modeled ourselves after The Jackson 5, studying how they sang, moved, and shaped their careers. Throughout our final performance together, we always closed our sets with a medley of "I Want You Back/ABC/The Love You Save" and other Jackson tracks sprinkled throughout the show. I don't mean to make this about myself, but rather relay this information to explain why this film will absolutely be the event it is being built to be in my eyes, along with the millions of MJ fans around the globe.

Which is also why there has been such fever-like anticipation for how this film would portray everyone involved, how it would look and characterize the events of the different time periods of Jackson's life, and how it would streamline the man's story, given it was always going to be a cradle-to-grave biopic. Both the teaser and full trailers have been reassuring in the way they both remix, utilize and edit Jackson's extensive catalogue of music, and the casting seems to have made all the best choices in an effort to make what could have come off as cartoonish as credible as can be. Beginning with hiring Jackson's own nephew, 29-year-old Jaafar, the son of Jermaine, who seems to have captured not only his late uncle's voice and style but, most critically, his essence. Colman Domingo as the patriarchal Joe and Kendrick Sampson as Quincy Jones also seem to be spot-on. While there has been much discussion around the production and release of the film, as it has been delayed multiple times due to disagreements over both content and length (apparently, there was a first cut in excess of 3½ hours), among countless rumors about this being the first part of a two-part film, the second film's rumored title simply “Jackson.” As cool as that would be and as much as the trailers thus far seem to solely focus on Jackson's life only up to a certain point, all we know for sure is that “Michael,” directed by Antoine Fuqua, will finally get a global theatrical release on April 24, via Lionsgate and Universal Pictures.

1. The Odyssey 
Though I certainly considered switching my number one and two spots several times, if I'm being true to myself, there's no year when a Christopher Nolan film is released where I'm anticipating anything more. Nolan's adaptation of Homer's epic about Odysseus's dangerous voyage back to Ithaca after the Trojan War is easily the most enticing movie of the year. Whether it's wondering which direction Nolan will take when depicting creatures like the Cyclops Polyphemus, the Sirens and Circe, or how such an expansive and well-known cast will pull off an equally expansive and well-known story, nearly every angle offers intrigue. What Nolan would follow up his Best Picture winner and box office behemoth, “Oppenheimer,” with was also always going to be subject to fascination, and in many ways, “The Odyssey” feels like the only natural route to take. What does one do after seemingly reaching the mountain top critically and commercially? Well, adapt one of the oldest surviving works of literature that still resonates with modern audiences as a poem of epic proportions, right? Nolan's film - this time shot exclusively on IMAX cameras - will undoubtedly be the biggest event of the summer, will undoubtedly resonate as an epic across the board, and if everything goes really well, will end up being one of the best films of the year for many moviegoers. Starring a who's who of Hollywood's biggest names featuring Matt Damon in the lead role, Tom Holland as Telemachus, Anne Hathaway as Penelope, Robert Pattinson as Antinous, Zendaya as Athena, Charlize Theron as Circe, Benny Safdie as Agamemnon, Jon Bernthal as Menelaus, Mia Goth as Melantho, John Leguizamo as Eumaeus, and Himesh Patel as Eurylochus, along with Lupita Nyong'o, Elliot Page, James Remar, Logan Marshall-Green, Samantha Morton and Bill Irwin in unnamed roles. The film will be released on July 17, via Universal Pictures and Syncopy.

Director: Mark Fischbach
Starring: Mark Fischbach, Caroline Rose Kaplan & Troy Baker
Rated: R (language, bloody images & some gore)
Runtime: 2 hours & 7 minutes

 
“Iron Lung” is an indie game with a relatively simple premise. You are sealed away in a submarine on a strange moon that is covered in an ocean of blood - navigate and document the ocean floor while surviving whatever threats might be down there with you.
​
When I heard that YouTuber Markiplier (Mark Fischbach) was going to adapt this game into a movie, I was immediately interested and wanted to see what feature-length story could come from such a quick but unique gaming experience.

To set your entire film in one location, with (mostly) one actor on screen for the entire movie, while also trying to hold an audience's attention for two hours, is a major leap to take. I’m glad to say that I think it pays off in “Iron Lung.” You feel as trapped as the protagonist does within this strange metal vessel. There are scenes that made me hold my breath because they felt so cramped and claustrophobic. Although it is small, the space is very well thought out and remains faithful to the design of its reference material. They really played in that cramped space too - opting for a lot of “fly on the wall” shots that trap you in a ship with a man losing his mind. 

Speaking of a man losing his mind, let’s talk about performance. I genuinely think Fischbach is a good actor. I did have Markiplier-Blindness for the first few minutes of the film, being that it felt hard to say, “This isn’t Mark, this is Simon (his character).” It did feel like I was going to wait for him to do something silly to lighten the tense mood, but I’m glad to say that that feeling faded away fairly quickly. Fischbach really got into it for this one - a mirror of how he got into performing a similar role while actually playing the game on his channel. He shifts the weight of his performance very well. Being trapped in a metal tube at the bottom of a blood ocean obviously calls for very heavy and stressful scenes, but Fischbach finds a way to balance those scenes with flecks of humor and sympathy that don’t take you out of the moment. He feels very human in a film where his humanity is being held captive. 

David Szymanski’s games all have such unique designs and vibes. Lots of blood, twisted gods and the unnerving presence of the unknown. As previously mentioned, the submarine is a faithful adaptation of the ship from the original game, but this film really takes flight in how it expands the world of “Iron Lung.” We get a lot of lore thrown out in chunks that are relatively easy to follow, even for those without prior knowledge of the game’s lore; however, I can definitely see how people might get lost in all of it. We get a better idea of the kind of people who would weld someone into a death trap before throwing them into the unknown, and of what you would have to do to meet that fate. But it all really shines with my favorite Szymanski staple: the horror of the unknown. An old god haunting you and hunting you from the depths of a blood ocean is such a sick concept that “Iron Lung” plays with. I enjoy the fact that we got to lean more into that eldritch aspect, both through the insanity and CO2 poisoning of our protagonist, as well as through the presence of such a massive, mind-splitting entity that claims to be a god. And the monster design is top-notch. Moving from PSX graphics to a feature film with such a clear translation of what you intend for the monster to be is one of the home runs of this whole production. Massive kudos to Fischbach and his team for really capturing the essence of this indie horror game in a film.

The soundtrack for this film is astounding. It evokes the ship's heavy, creaking nature while also playing on the fact that our protagonist is alone in an unknown world. The soundtrack really makes you feel like you are traveling into that deep and dark unknown. Kudos to Andrew Hulshult on capturing such an eerie vibe.

I also feel like a lot of this could be an allegory of cancer. I know cancer has affected Fischbach’s life in the past, so I wouldn’t be surprised if this film has nods to that. I have seen so many loved ones go through that fight with cancer that I can’t help but see a lot of that in this film. Being plunged into such an unknown world. Not knowing whether you will make it out. The dread and loneliness of going through this on your own. Accompany all of this with some of the latter body horror of the film - your body shifting against your will and becoming unrecognizable while remaining human - and I can’t help but see that horrible unknown that is cancer. Again, I don’t know if it was intentional. I could be reading way too far into this, but I have major respect for it either way.

This film has done the unthinkable and become a mass-released indie film that is self-produced, published, directed and written by one creative and his team. This could have crazy implications for the future of cinema. As an aspiring filmmaker and actor, I hope this will open the door to more indie films receiving wider releases. Now - yes - this was an indie release by probably one of the most recognizable YouTubers out there, but it’s still a statement. Take more risks. Work with passion. Don’t be afraid of the obscure. I hope this film lights a spark that will continue to grow in a healthy direction.

Markiplier’s big screen debut was a success. I think it took a big swing with a lot of risks and still came out the other side as the victor. I loved the designs, the energy and the presentation.

Director: Johannes Roberts
Starring: Miguel Torres Umba, Johnny Sequoyah & Jess Alexander
Rating: R (strong bloody violent content, gore, language & some drug use)
Runtime: 1 hour & 29 minutes

“Primate” is exactly what it says on the box: watch a family get attacked by their pet chimp. It’s not a novel idea, but that doesn’t make this film a flop. Drawing on those graphic and real stories of tragic ape attacks, “Primate” starts right off the bat with a gory and intense energy that it manages to keep relatively afloat throughout its runtime.

The only real hold-up I had was the dialogue and some performances in the non-ape-related portions of the film. Obviously, we have to get to know the characters and flesh them out before we let a chimp rip them apart, but a few of them feel very flat. I get that this is a horror film and that some of the characters are only here as ape-fodder. It’s what they wrote on the box; however, I do wish the dialogue flow and the motivation of a few side characters were a little stronger. I will say that some of the flatter side characters do a good job of elevating the protagonist and supporting cast, so I think it all served its purpose.

I have to tell you - although I have said this a few times now - this film is intense. If you can’t stomach gore (especially when you’re right up on it), I’m not going to suggest this for you. The first five minutes has an incredibly grisly death that I could see my more squeamish friends having to step out for if they chose to see it. With that being said, the practical effects in this film are insane! All of these gruesome deaths are highlighted by the realistic touch that you can only get from practical effects. Lots of goop in this here film. 

Bouncing off of that, one thing I wish I hadn’t known when going into the film is that the chimp is done with practical effects. No, they didn’t use a real chimp. I had read that they opted for an actor in a chimp costume before I had even considered seeing this film. I wish I had that saved for me until after the film so I could get the big reveal, because, boy howdy, does that chimp look real. Major props to whoever worked on and operated the suit, and huge shout-out to Miguel Torres Umba for his performance as Ben (the chimp). Wow. What a cherry on top for such an interesting film.

This is the chimpanzee horror film. Although this isn’t inherently a new idea, its execution as an ape-gone-bad is really well done. Ben the chimp hasn’t taken his turn for the worse because of some space rock, or demons, or some sort of cruel scientific research. This is a family pet/friend who is attacking the ones he loves due to natural causes I won’t spoil (though it’s explained right at the start of the film). I love that they take a more natural approach with this because apes are fucking scary. To no one’s surprise, I like apes very much, and I think they are so cool. I also know they are crazy strong, very quick learners and sometimes very cruel animals. That’s what makes this film hit so well. It could be real. A chimpanzee could rip you limb from limb. A chimpanzee could just decide to pull your face off. A chimpanzee could be an antagonist in your life if you suddenly found it in your home. It all works so well, and it definitely plays into why this film has stuck with me.