Review: Superman (2025)

At one point during James Gunn's Superman, our titular hero is trying to prevent casualties during a kaiju attack and among those he saves is a squirrel.  Test audiences hated it, but as James Gunn himself put it: "I really miss the squirrel. He's gotta save the squirrel."  And nothing better proves how perfect he was to direct this movie than his insistence on keeping that in.

See, I've never really connected with Superman as far as superheroes go.  I never held anything against him, he just always seemed a little too cheesy, a little too corny, a little too earnest for my tastes.  Granted, I grew up in the cynical 90s and as a gay teen in Texas, I was dripping with said cynicism, so it was going to be an uphill battle for me given that I only casually read comics even at that point.

Despite that fact, I knew enough about him to know that the movies that came out in my later years were either misreadings (Superman Returns, 2006) or outright insults (Man of Steel, 2013) to the character.  Even worse, many of the movies themselves were mediocre or bad, so it seemed like he was doomed to forever be sidelined as Marvel became a juggernaut while the DC movies were only occasionally good.

Then along came this movie.  I won't say it completely changed my opinion of the hero - I'll always be a bit too jaded to fully embrace him - but at last it appears we have a director who not only understands but leans into the corniness that is a cornerstone of the character.

And this Superman, as played by David Corenswet, is a cornball.  Trying to avoid killing at all costs - even against enemies - and working to save anything and anyone while saving the day.  He hardly swears - the one notable one is darkly funny when it occurs - and the incident that sets off the main plot of the film isn't because of an attack or because his fortress was broken into, but because someone took his dog.

Speaking of that main plot, the trailers (thankfully) don't reveal much of it.  The basic elements are there - Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult) wants to get Superman out of the way, people mistrust Superman after Lex's shenanigans, and ultimately Superman has to save the day - but so much of the meat and potatoes is left out of the trailers that I hope the film's success convinces other studios to stop showing so much.  It also takes the bold step of beginning at a point where Superman is already established and known - saving us from rehashing his well-tread origin story yet another time.

I also have to hand it to Gunn for his casting choices - not a single actor feels out of place and in many cases it feels like the perfect person was chosen for the role.  Hoult absolutely nails Lex Luthor and I only hesitate in giving him best-in-show because Edi Gathegi (as Mister Terrific) comes close to stealing the movie out-from-under the rest of the cast.  Rachel Brosnahan, as Lois Lane, also nails the character in a way we haven't seen since Margot Kidder and even the smaller roles of Green Lantern (Nathan Fillion), Hawkgirl (Isabela Merced), and Eve Teschmacher (Sara Sampaio) all add flavor that feels just right for what the film is going for.

Gunn has proven with his previous superhero films that he knows how to stage an action scene, and that continues here.  None of the fights feels derivative of his other films however, and it weirdly feels like he matches the action to the 'vibe' of the character (for lack of a better word) in inspired ways.  It's an underrated aspect of his direction.

All this to say: This is a damn good movie.  It might not ever be among my favorites, in general or even within this genre, but this is damn good filmmaking.

8.5 out of 10.  And thank God he saved that squirrel.

Review: I Know What You Did Last Summer (2025)

Man, the feelings I have for this movie are mixed...

I really don't think I can give a better review than that simple sentence, but I will try.  The 2025 version of I Know What You Did Last Summer (which I will refer to as I Know... for the rest of this review) does so many things right that I want to give it a high score simply for avoiding so many of the dangerous mistakes that have plagued legacy sequels in this genre (think the 2022 Texas Chainsaw Massacre or the two worse movies in the recent Halloween trilogy) but manages to make a few new ones of its own that make me want to almost immediately take back all the points it earned.

Set 27 years after the original movie, this sequel follows a new group that makes a similar - though noticeably different - mistake that results in the death of someone they don't know.  They agree to keep it a secret, but one year later Ava (Chase Sui Wonders) receives a note very similar to the one received by Julie in the original.  People start to die, the police are of no help, and the group of now-estranged friends have to figure out who was connected to their victim and how to stop them.

If this sounds the same as the original, that is intentional.  The movie knows the formula and isn't going to mess with it too much - there will be subversions and twists, but nothing that will seriously rock the boat.  It's honestly kind of refreshing that the movie isn't pretending to be more than it is (a problem that has plagued many other legacy sequels) and the subversions it does scatter throughout are enough to keep it fresh.

The performances are mostly good, with returning actors Jennifer Love Hewitt and Freddie Prinze, Jr being best in show.  Which is not to say the newcomers are bad: Chase Sui Wonders does a great job, and Madelyn Cline as lead Danica Richards is a worthy successor to Hewitt's Julie James.  The other members of the friend group - Milo, Teddy, and Stevie (Jonah Hauer-King, Tyriq Withers, and Sarah Pidgeon) have less to do, but all of the actors do a good job of portraying a fractured friend group.

Again, this movie gets so much right that it is frustrating to see it fail in several substantial ways.  The biggest is the reveal of the killer.  I don't think anyone was really surprised at the reveal, which really kills the tension as the climax approaches, and it also doesn't feel very earned.  It's a weird thing to feel about a teen-oriented slasher, but for the character selected to be the murderer to work, there needs to be better build-up - especially if they are going to have to sell a 'killer monologue' at the same time.

The movie also struggles a bit with the side characters.  While some are very obviously meant to be cannon fodder, some still feel like substantial portions of their character were cut.  In particular, Tyler (Gabbriette Bechtel) feels like she should have been a much larger character that what was in the final cut of the film.

I can't say that casual fans of the genre won't enjoy the movie - I Know... moves at a good pace and is judicious in how it spreads out the kills - but there isn't much in the way of gore or even inventive kills so it the movie so the more hardcore horror fans might only see it if they have nostalgia for the original.  However, it is nice to see the familiar faces in this movie, and it is smart enough to hint at two possible hooks for sequels (no pun intended).

I'll tentatively give it a 6 out of 10 - but I could see it moving in either direction after more time sitting on it.

Review: Jurassic World Rebirth

I was lucky enough for Jurassic World Rebirth to be the selection of a Mystery Movie showing at my theatre of choice, and ever since, I've gone back and forth on this movie.  Not in its general ranking (I'd put it on par with Jurassic World - a ranking of all movies will be at the end of this review), but as to whether or not I think this movie is a needed step in the correct direction of the franchise.  To wit...

 

On the plus side:

This movie did a good job of bringing a sense of wonder to seeing the dinosaurs.  In particular, a scene with Titanosauruses works incredibly well due to Jonathan Bailey's Dr. Henry Loomis experiencing genuine joy at seeing and interacting with the creatures.  While other movies in the franchise have tried to mimic that first scene of Dr. Grant seeing the Brachiosaurus from the original Jurassic Park, this is the first time since then that the actor's performance really hit that same level.

 

On the down side:
This movie continues the franchise trope of forcing a child into the story to give an artificial stakes. If there are enough likeable characters, we don't need a child to worry about! The stakes are still there!  In the case of this movie, we end up having very strong emotional reactions to the deaths of the various crew members of Zora and Duncan (Scarlett Johansson and Mahershala Ali) without any of the development associated with such a reaction.  I don't know if the filmmakers were afraid of killing anyone the audience would like, but as it stands, the movie makes it clear that most of these people are red shirts.

 

On the plus side:

Director Gareth Edwards does a great job with the action scenes.  The mosasaurus sequence does a great job of capturing what would likely be a chaotic interaction with such an animal on a smaller boat.  Even better, Edwards gives the audience a good layout of the ship so that when the Spinosauruses get involved, the audience can keep track of where the various characters are as they try to survive the suddenly-more-dangerous encounter.

On the down side:

The script-writing needed some more work.  First off, the film posits that the world at large is 'over' dinosaurs - so much so that museums about them are shutting down because no one goes.  And I'm sorry, but sharks have been around even longer than dinosaurs and people are still fascinated by them to the point there is an entire industry around interacting with them.  You expect me to believe that 25ish years after they were revealed to the world at large, people are done with them?

The script suffers from the noted lack of character-building for the emotional reactions of the main characters, as noted, but also inconsistency from the characters that do get developed; most notably some quips that don't really fit the character that delivers them.

 

On the plus side:

Scarlett Johansson continues to prove that she is a great action heroine.  She gives the movie just the right amount of seriousness and goofiness that it needs to work, while believably coming across as a mercenary for hire.  None of the cast are terrible (though some are unnecessary), but Johansson is the standout performance of a fairly talented group.

 

On the down side:
The editing of this movie - outside of the action sequences - makes me think that quite a bit of the movie was cut for time.  Weird payoffs and character interactions occur throughout and it feels like something is missing that would bring it together better.  The movie as it is takes over 2 hours to finish, and perhaps some better editing might've helped it feel more cohesive.

 

On the plus side:
Manuel Garcia-Rulfo's character might be completely unnecessary to the film, but at least they had the good sense to put him in some short-shorts for the majority of it.

 

Overall, I'd give the movie a 7 out of 10, though it could swing to a 7.5 or 6.5 depending on the day.

 

Jurassic Franchise Rankings:
Jurassic Park
The Lost World: Jurassic Park
(big drop)
Jurassic World Rebirth
Jurassic World
(big drop)
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom
(even bigger drop)
Jurassic Park 3
Jurassic World Dominion

2025 Movie List

The Movies:

28 Years Later
Clown in a Cornfield
Death of a Unicorn

The Fantastic Four: First Steps

I Know What You Did Last Summer

Jurassic World Rebirth

Sinners

Superman

Review: The Haunting (1999)

Sometimes, when you are not sure about a movie, it helps to break it down into Pros and Cons.  Maybe throw in a few either way/maybes for parts of the movie you are unsure about.  Let's try that exercise with this movie.

PROS:

1. Lili Taylor is working overtime in this movie to make it watchable.  Not sure how many mainstream movies she had been a lead in before this, but she tears into this one with gusto - like she might not get another chance.
2. It emulates better movies in such a way that it doesn't feel too derivative: there are allusions to the breathing doors of the original (and superior) 1963 film, amongst others.
3. Catherine Zeta-Jones is a perfect choice for Theo - almost moreso than Lili Taylor as Eleanor
4. Changing it from a study of the paranormal to a study of fear is an interesting concept, even if I don't think they bettered the original premise.

CONS:

1. Owen Wilson is not quite sure what type of movie he is in.
2. The CGI is bad even by the standards of 1999, which is saying something
3. More of an addition to the above, but they use way too much CGI
4. Plotwise, they have Theo experience some of the paranormal activity, but still have her act like Eleanor is crazy for talking about her own (admittedly more intense) experiences.  Could've been a much more interesting dynamic than everyone thinking Eleanor is having a breakdown

MAYBES?:

1. Liam Neeson very obviously does not give a fuck - he doesn't even pretend to see anything when the CGI is 'present'.  However, watching him completely and totally not care onscreen does give me some personal amusement
2. I like the shifting-when-not-looking-at-them faces of the children, up until the movie decides to show them shifting with bad CGI
3. Like the book and the previous movie, I am enraged by Eleanor's sister and husband in an early scene, so well played there.  Also, hello Virginia Madsen!  Not sure why you did that small part, but you did it well!
4. Changing it so that Eleanor is related to Hugh Crain is... a choice.

Hmm, that doesn't really help since all of them have the same number.  I find it watchable at least, so I guess it gets a passing score.

6.5 out of 10

Review: The Babysitter (2017)

I'm not sure why I never got around to watching this film when I have Netflix and love horror movies.  Laziness maybe?  It's right up my alley - comedic and violent and it has a killer performance from Samara Weaving as the titular babysitter.

Not that it isn't without faults.  While he does a good job as Cole, Judah Lewis is saddled with some stupid characterization as a kid who is scared of everything.  I'm sure there are people like that in real life, but in this film it very much reads as a Movie Character With an Arc type of screenplay writing - and not a particularly engaging version of it.  It's really annoying, because otherwise this is a breezy and witty screenplay.

To give a brief summary, Cole (Lewis) is 12 years old and scared of everything.  His parents go out of town and leave him in the care of his babysitter, Bee (Weaving).  He stays up to see what she does after he goes to bed, and it just happens to be the night that Bee and her friends - who are in a cult - decide to sacrifice someone and steal Cole's blood in an evil ritual meant to give them their wildest dreams and wishes.

Fairly boilerplate as far as horror goes, though the movie does have a few twists and turns to keep the formula fresh.  Cole is forced to defend himself, and the various cult members die as he tries to get to safety.  Their deaths are fairly inventive, and a few - while not anything new to the genre - still manage to surprise in the way that they happen.

But really, this movie is all about Samara Weaving's performance.  She oozes charisma on the screen - necessary to justify her as both the crush object for Cole and the leader of a cult - and she effortlessly switches from cool to sexy to scary with ease throughout the film.  I don't know that she is a villain you root for, but she is definitely a villain that is fun to watch.

If I were to compare this film to anything, it would be All Cheerleaders Die, another horror film with a twisted sense of humor.  Definitely worth a watch - it's a shame it took me this long to get to it.

8 out of 10

Review: The Conjuring (2013)

It's kind of crazy that this movie spawned a legitimate horror universe.  It's also easy, 7 films after the original, to forget just how solid and scary this movie is.  Famously, it was given an R rating despite no real violence, nudity, or swearing - the sheer scariness of the film earned it that rating.

How does it hold up, all these years later?  Pretty well!  Wan has proven himself to be an excellent director when it comes to tense sequences, and it is on full display here.  Whether cutting back and forth between a music box mirror and the person looking into it, or just having terrified characters stare into an impossibly dark corner, Wan is an expert at making the viewer hold their breath throughout the movie.

It is also boosted by strong performances from all of the actors.  Vera Farmiga is best in show, and Patrick Wilson has since deservedly become a Scream King.  Lili Taylor is also strong, and this is a much better haunted house movie than her previous try, 1999's The Haunting.  Really, I cannot single out any performance is lacking: the entire cast is natural and believable in an unbelievable situation.

There's something to be said for a simple, scary film.  It doesn't overcomplicate the plot, it properly and effective escalates the situation, the tone is consistent - I really can't find fault for the film anywhere.  Granted, the real-life Warrens were likely frauds and the movie plays fast and loose with certain historical events, but it's far from the most egregious 'based on a true story' film to use that tagline.

Would I recommend this?  Yes, easily.  I haven't seen most of the sequels, so cannot comment on the franchise as a whole, but this is a great start to it.  Even if it doesn't, in my opinion, make any of the All Time Greatest lists, it is strong enough to merit consideration for a couple.

8.5 out of 10