The Invite

 

Score:  A-/B+

Directed by Olivia Wilde

Starring Olivia Wilde, Seth Rogen, Penelope Cruz, Edward Norton

Running time: 107 minutes

Rated R

Long Story Short:  The Invite is an intriguing relationship dramedy that features excellent writing and acting, providing desperately needed adult entertainment at the theater.  Rogen and Wilde are outstanding in the lead roles as a couple who snipe bitterly but hilariously.  It takes the outlandish lives of neighbors played by Cruz and Norton to bring out hard truths.  Not a life-changing event, but for what it is, this is one of the strongest quality movies in recent years I've seen. Highly recommended.

The Invite is a very well-made and entertaining dramedy of the kind that just doesn't come to theaters much anymore, making for an ideal outing for adults.  The movie reminds me of last year's The Roses in that both are comedic dramas that lean to the dark and/or raunchy side and feature a couple whose relationship is on the ropes; coincidentally, both are remakes of European movies (I haven't seen either of the originals).  The Roses is a more sprawling story with a span of at least a year, while The Invite is super focused into just a few hours.  In fact, other than the first two or three minutes, it takes place entirely within the main couple's, Angela (Wilde) and Joe (Rogen), apartment.  This setting results in a more naturalistic feel than what you get in a typical rom-com, and is even more dialogue-based than similar movies.  Fortunately, the writing is excellent and so the relationship and conflict feel quite believable and the movie itself flows nicely, with only a brief lull here and there.  While this set up might seem a little too organic and realistic (i.e., boring), The Invite has enough spice to go with the strong fundamentals.  Rogen, especially at the beginning, is quite Rogen-like in the exasperated humor of his (seemingly) put-upon teacher.  And the couple they invite for a dinner party, played by Cruz and Norton, are quirky to say the least, though still believable (if far less "normal" than Angela and Joe).  They reveal a secret during the party that is almost too silly to believe, and the reactions of "normal" Angela and Joe are both hilarious and very understandable, driving much of the second half of the movie.  Additionally, the score is mostly pretty subtle but gets louder and overt (humorously) during the height of arguments and other drama.

The acting in this movie is very much under a microscope, since what they say and do is pretty much all there is - fortunately, all four actors are on top of their game.  Rogen is particularly impressive, to me, showing more range and nuance than I've seen from him before.  He carries some of his usual charm, but allows the character to be more defined by aggrievement and uses his humor as a defense mechanism.  Wilde is also excellent; she is less familiar to me, and while early on her character is a bit annoying as an almost cliche image-obsessed modern person, she becomes much more relatable, fully developed, and sympathetic as the movie goes along.  My sympathies reversed dramatically between the beginning and the end of the movie.  Cruz and Norton both get what are probably more enjoyable to act, scenery-chewing roles, the elder sibling/couple who look on Angela and Joe in bemusement because they themselves don't really give a **** about what other people think about them.  While so much of what is in this movie is well done, I must also acknowledge that its ambition is relatively limited.  Which is just fine, not every movie has to be Big or Important.  Just enjoy it for what it is, and it could make for a nice rewatch a few years from now, too.

***

The Invite was a very pleasant little surprise in the middle of the summer season, sort of like Materialists from last year, a change of pace among the big blockbusters.  This is also exactly the kind of movie I would like to see more of in theaters, the sooner the better: not necessarily wildly inventive, but a creative, interesting take on a familiar genre.  And so well executed, particularly the acting and writing.  Gen Z has apparently been leading the charge in the box office surge this year, and it's great that young people are (re)discovering the joys of the theater and communal entertainment experience.  But I'm also frustrated that their favored genre seems to be horror - sigh.  Older adults, who were perhaps scared away from theaters by the pandemic, higher ticket prices, and just the busyness of life, need more reasons to return to the theater, too.  Movies like The Invite are just the ticket, although I don't think this got a very wide release, unfortunately.  Think Field of Dreams in reverse: if we come out to watch the best movies, hopefully they will make even more like them!

* By source, A24 - https://press.a24films.com/films/the-invite, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=82885822

The Odyssey

 

Score:  A

Directed by Christopher Nolan

Starring Matt Damon, Anne Hathaway, Tom Holland, Robert Pattinson, et al

Running time: 173 minutes

Rated R

Long Story Short:  Renowned director Christopher Nolan follows up his Best Picture-winning Oppenheimer with a breathtaking adaptation of the classic story of The Odyssey.  In some ways a sprawling, 3-hour epic, Nolan still focuses keenly on Odysseus and his family, splitting time between the mythological journey and the political struggle at home.  The visuals of the adventure demand to be seen on the big screen, and if anything leave you craving more.  But what elevates this above most other epics is a thoughtful new interpretation of the ancient story that gives the whole thing new meaning.

The world's most famous story gets a fittingly grand adaptation from one of today's best directors, Christopher Nolan, both honoring and reforming a cinematic epic.  The Odyssey is pretty darn well known, of course (although I admit that I only remembered the broad outlines and most famous scenes).  Nolan's trademark of manipulating the chronology to maximize dramatic effect, therefore, is particularly valuable here.  He switches back and forth between two main areas of action: Odysseus (Damon) and his men's struggles to return home to Ithaca after the end of the Trojan war, and in Ithaca itself as his wife and son, Penelope (Hathaway) and Telemachus (Holland), struggle to prevent usurpers from taking over.  I was surprised by how much time is devoted to the Ithaca parts and think it would have been better to focus more on Odysseus, but it's a relatively minor quibble.  One reason for that is the split in thematic elements: Ithaca is about political machinations while Odysseus's journey is almost purely sensory, with awe-inspiring visuals that blend the magic of the gods seamlessly with the gorgeous scenery and blood, sweat, and tears of the soldiers.  This magic is one of the two major superpowers of the movie.  It's the feeling of cool-overwhelm in trying to make out the massive Cyclops in his cave; of dread as the giants pick apart defenseless soldiers; of horror as Circe literally shapes men into pigs; of edge-of-your-seat tension as the ship navigates Scylla and Charybdis.  And Nolan somehow achieves this with little if any awareness of CGI effects, making it feel all the more real.  If anything, I wanted more time with these wonders, despite this being a 3-hour movie (so yes, chopping some time from Penelope, Telemachus & Co. would have helped).  In some cases more build-up would have been excellent (the giants); or in the action itself (S&C plus the Sirens).  Still, the adventure we do get, along with scenes from the Trojan war carefully built up throughout the movie, is an experience that must be had in a theater.

The cast of The Odyssey is quite good, and Nolan's inclusion - and emphasis - of a new theme is bold and also what should make this a true classic.  Damon does great work, perhaps career-best, as Odysseus, a man of many parts but still kept cohesive in his performance.  He is wise and thoughtful, yes, but his pride gets him into trouble and he struggles with his ethical choices and burdens.  Damon makes him sympathetic but not overly so; he splits the difference between hero and anti-hero.  Hathaway and Holland are excellent as his family, on the same side yet frequently in disagreement; both have noble sentiments that are well-balanced by their psychological and physical limitations.  Pattinson leads the villains who are suitably despicable, and Leguizamo is an essential side player as the longtime family servant.  Also notable is Odysseus's faithful dog who lives an unnaturally long life in awaiting his master's return; the abuse he suffers is the most heartbreaking part of the movie (IMO; I almost cried!) but gets a brief if much-deserved ending.  

This character work is all well and good but felt unremarkable up to a certain point - until, that is, Odysseus's confession to Penelope on the eve of the finale.  What was once a hero's tale of a great triumph in Troy followed by a series of tests from the gods is turned on its head.  Odysseus's clever horse trick did not enable victory - it caused an atrocity, against an entire people and even the gods themselves.  His trials (from Cyclops and Circe to the final storm at sea) were not tests from the gods but punishment.  Nolan wisely uses Odysseus's years with Calypso as the turning point, where he comes to understand his feelings as ultimately that of guilt - so much so that he has not actually wanted to return home.  Imbued with this knowledge, he takes on humble form back in Ithaca, almost Christ-like, as he puts aside ego and seeks atonement.  The finale is thus a well-earned action scene that throbs with meaning for Odysseus, his family, and even civilization itself as he fights to bring justice to those who have violated Zeus's law - hosts must welcome and serve their guests, who must in turn honor them.  The last frame gives the movie a fitting end in not giving the Odysseus the spoils of the victor but rather the opportunity to repent.  Nolan's interpretation of this ancient story turns a thrilling yet otherwise simplistic tale into one of great value and true art.

***

The Odyssey marks the first great movie of the year I've seen, and it is little surprise (although with some relief, too) that it is Christopher Nolan's latest.  This is definitely a movie that must be seen in the theater; while I didn't see it in IMAX, a regular theater is plenty good enough.  Yes, Nolan gives you all the blockbuster-type action you'd like - but his filmmaking prowess goes far beyond that as well, as I've hopefully demonstrated above.  A number of Nolan's movies have fallen just short of greatness because of one significant flaw or another, but I tend to focus on his flaws more than other filmmakers' simply because the good parts of his movies are so good that I long to see them "perfected".  So far, I think Nolan's Dunkirk and The Dark Knight are his "perfect" movies, with plenty of other really good movies (with flaws) as well.  I'm not sure whether The Odyssey will join the other two all-time greats yet or not but it's certainly close.  Anyway, I urge any adult to see this movie in the theater some time!

* By source, Universal Pictures Publicity, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=80308811

Supergirl + Toy Story 5

 

Supergirl

Score:  B

Directed by Craig Gillespie

Starring Milly Alcock, Jason Momoa, Eve Ridley, Matthias Schoenaerts

Running time: 108 minutes

Rated PG-13

Never mind the critics (and especially the misogynist fanboys): Supergirl is a well-made, entertaining superhero blockbuster, thanks to the lead's performance and its new take on the Supers.  This movie is much more like Guardians of the Galaxy than any Superman movie.  On the surface, that's because it takes place entirely outside of Earth and has a similar vibe (though not quite as funny).  Just as importantly, Supergirl is nothing like her Boy Scout cousin, Superman.  She is younger and at first seems the carefree, party-hard-type we think of as many early-20s young adults.  But Supergirl, or Kara, does this more as a numbing mechanism after a traumatic childhood incident (we get a short flashback of her past, in which Kara leaves her parents under different circumstances than Superman, explaining much of the difference between the two).  Alcock does a great job with this, strongly establishing a believable and sympathetic - if certainly flawed and still maturing - hero, thanks to her dynamic, wide range of facial and physical expressions.  Supergirl has some very fun action, too, of course, particularly a sort of outer-space bus-hijacking that has clever and humorous twists.  Kara is very powerful, like her cousin, but reasonable plot elements keep this in check which allows for more tension and excitement than in many of Superman's fights (Supergirl does get to unleash her full powers a little, too, though).  The side characters are solid as well, such as Kara's young orphan companion (Ridley), gentle yet seeking revenge; Momoa chewing the scenery as a sort-of ally looking like a member of Kiss; and a villain with a small part but appropriately revolting and dastardly.  The plot structure is familiar and nothing special, but also solid with few if any glaring problems.  Same goes for the writing, and by not taking place on Earth, it has the advantage of not needing to simulate our real-world political or cultural milieu (which last year's Superman tripped up on multiple times).  Yes, this is a sturdy little superhero movie and a perfectly worthy summer theater outing.

***

Toy Story 5

Score:  B+

Directed by Andrew Stanton

Starring Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Joan Cusack, et al

Running time: 102 minutes

Rated PG

Toy Story 5 is a quality, enjoyable entry in the beloved Pixar animated franchise; it doesn't reach the heights of the first three movies but it's a great choice for any family audience.  Anyone who has seen the previous Toy Story movies will instantly feel the warm familiarity of the franchise, and the feeling persists throughout.  Like other entries, this one has a theme - here, tech's domination of today's youth's attention - as well as some new characters to freshen up the main, iconic yet aging cast.  Tech is represented here by Lily the Lilypad, who first gobbles up young Bonnie's attention through addictive games before moving on to the potent (for good and ill) power of instant messaging/social media.  The presentation of this is a bit on the nose (or "duh"), even if it does create an effective foil for the toys.  It also makes Bonnie and her peers more or less the main characters, which is a change for the franchise.  Jessie the cowgirl is the lead toy character, which is nice to give her the spotlight, but her arc is too similar to others in the series to be very intriguing.  New characters, as always, add a nice dose of humor and freshness, particularly Conan O'Brien's combination potty training & messaging (not sure how those functions were combined into one device!) retro tool.  In a first (I think), Pixar cribs from another animation studio this time in creating an army of Buzz Lightyears, a la the Minions - cute distraction but a little lazy, too.  And while it's a solid effort in most ways, a touch lazy describes the movie overall - it just doesn't have the spark of creativity and even mischievousness that marked the series's first movies.  The ending "message" of Bonnie's continued growing up and importance of friendship is a good one, yes.  But I just wish it all had that special feeling I remember from years past.

***

These movies represent June's main blockbuster offerings, solid if unspectacular movies.  Of course, the target audiences for Supergirl (young men) and Toy Story 5 (families) are significantly different, but each does an admirable job being perfectly entertaining for those outside the "core" groups.  Overall I would say that Supergirl is significantly better than the critics rate it, while on the other hand Toy Story 5 is not as good as they say.  Interesting to note that halfway through the year, my top three movies are ones I was not at all expecting (Send Help and The Bride!) or at least a fresh take on a blockbuster (Project Hail Mary).  Meanwhile, a bevy of popular franchises and big Hollywood names have produced, at best, solid but far from its predecessors' heights (Toy Story 5) or flat-out failures (Hoppers, The Mandalorian and Grogu).  A big part of that is my own tastes are certainly changing; I have now seen a LOT of movies in my life; and I am focusing more than ever on core features like writing, characters, and filmmaking creativity.  I hope that my beloved franchises - and even some of my favorite filmmakers - will take bolder steps in reinventing themselves, because the "new guys" are eating their lunch this year.  Next up: super excited for The Odyssey!!!

* By source IMP Awards, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=80455414

** By source Pixar Animation Studios - "Toy Story 5". Walt Disney Studios. Retrieved February 19, 2026., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=81607956

Disclosure Day

 

Score:  C+

Directed by Steven Spielberg

Starring Emily Blunt, Josh O'Connor, Colin Firth, Colman Domingo

Running time: 145 minutes

Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  Disclosure Day is legendary director Steven Spielberg's thirty-fifth movie over his six-decade career, but while it returns to familiar thematic material, it is one of his poorest works.  E.T., Close Encounters, and others come to mind, vaguely, when watching this alien conspiracy movie, but it is a galaxy away in terms of quality, with only Blunt's strong performance and a handful of exciting action scenes to struggle to redeem it.  The last thing we need today is false validation of conspiracy theories, Steven - so I would advise audiences to try something else.

Disclosure Day is a disappointing return to scifi for legendary director Steven Spielberg, marred by poor plotting and dialogue and lending implicit credence to wrongheaded ideas.  Since much of it is revealed in the trailers and ads, I'll confirm that the main idea is a group of whistleblowers who discover their company's secret of alien life on Earth and try to reveal it to the entire world.  The movie starts near the end of that effort, with Daniel (O'Connor), possessing stolen intel and an alien device, being pursued by authorities.  You don't know (or aren't supposed to) what's going on, even if you likely already are aware of the underlying alien plot, and the movie gradually reveals more and more details of the specific plot.  That's a fine strategy, but it's clumsily executed especially at the beginning; the movie needed a really cool start and instead settles for a fairly boring confrontation at a wrestling match.  More interesting is a parallel thread led by Emily Blunt's Margaret, a striving TV weather woman who gains a remarkable ability while having breakfast one morning with her boyfriend.  Her partner's (Wyatt Russell) bewildered reactions to her sudden outpouring of seeming nonsense is pretty funny.  Margaret, who soon gets pulled into the alien plot, is the movie's most watchable character by far, thanks to Blunt's committed performance.  At the supposedly most intense and poignant moments, though, since the movie hasn't earned its payoffs, we're left simply with Blunt staring blankly in shock as we look back with a shrug.

Most of the movie's problems stem from its poor writing and lack of creativity (stunning for a Spielberg production), although it does feature some entertaining action sequences, too.  Screenwriter Koepp (a longtime Spielberg partner) consistently tells the audience what to think rather than let the audience experience - and interpret - the story.  That's a particularly big problem in a story like this, with its emphasis on mystery.  Daniel's abrupt theological argument with his girlfriend upon telling her the secret is a clear example, and it keeps getting worse.  There are a few neat action scenes to enjoy, particularly a car being slowly pushed toward an oncoming train, and a funny sequence of ordinary Bad Guys falling over while running into a seemingly empty warehouse.  And there are a few lighter moments, such as Margaret and her boyfriend struggling to destroy her phone.  But the villain organization, led by Colin Firth, is just your standard Sinister Corporate Baddie, and there are only passing references to an international crisis that the alien reveal will oh-so-conveniently forestall.  John Williams is my favorite film composer of all time, but his style is just not a good fit for the movie, despite his relationship with Spielberg.  Finally, it's the focus on conspiracy theory itself that bugs me the most.  I hate conspiracy theories and dismiss them and their adherents out of hand.  That Spielberg would make a movie that essentially tells the tin-foil hat crowd, "you're right (or at least might be), after all!" is astonishingly irresponsible.  And also - dull.

***

Disclosure Day ultimately is more like Disappointment Day for me, as I - like so many other movie-goers - am such a huge Steven Spielberg fan.  From the very first time I saw a preview of it, I have to say that I had a bad feeling about it - both because it seemed so obvious what the movie was going to be, and because, again, I can't stand conspiracy theories.  Granted, UFOs are one of the more benign conspiracies in today's world, but I can't help but roll my eyes any time it's even mentioned.  Movies are for make believe, for indulging in fantasy, by all means, but this movie seems more like a blatant effort to show what will and/or should happen some day in the real world.  I categorically reject that idea.  So, to my total shock, three of the worst movies I've seen this year now are a Pixar movie, a Star Wars movie, and a Spielberg movie.  Not long ago, those would - or should - have been among my top three of the year.  I guess it's due to some combination of my changing tastes and the growing staleness of some of Hollywood's most venerable franchises and artists.  All the more reason to boldly embrace the new and creative efforts from those who are at the top of their game in the movie world today - even if their box office draw is as yet unproven.

* By source, Universal Pictures - http://www.impawards.com/2026/disclosure_day_ver13.html, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=81856655

Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu

 

Score:  C+

Directed by Jon Favreau

Starring Pedro Pascal, Sigourney Weaver, et al

Running time: 132 minutes

Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  The Mandalorian and Grogu is the first Star Wars movie to be released since 2019, and unfortunately it falls short of the franchise's high expectations.  Centered on two popular characters introduced in a Disney+ TV series, the duo - a masked bounty hunter and a cuddly Baby Yoda - are better suited to the small screen, with their small-scale ambitions.  It's fine for young ones already obsessed with this new corner of the franchise, but skippable for most adult audiences.

The Mandalorian and Grogu is a passable piece of summer entertainment but falls well short of the standard of quality and epic feel of the Star Wars franchise.  Even non-SW fans probably already know about Baby Yoda (aka Grogu), who serves as the sidekick in this movie; the lead is the Mandalorian, a good guy-allied bounty hunter played by Pascal.  The story is loosely based on the events of the Disney+ TV show, which is set shortly after Luke Skywalker, Han Solo and company defeat Darth Vader and the Empire.  In short, the good guys are mostly back in charge of the galaxy, but there are still plenty of bad guys on the loose.  As a SW fan myself, one of the movie's biggest problems is simply that it all but ignores what is most special about the franchise: the Force, Jedi (Light), and Sith (Dark).  Grogu can use the Force, but he is a child, and only does so incidentally here and there.  The filmmakers wisely wrote it so that you don't have to have seen the TV show to understand the plot, but they go too far in the other direction: the stakes are so bland and simple that it doesn't generate much interest.  The handful of famous SW images - X-Wing fighters, monster pits, Stormtroopers - aren't enough to make up for the lack of an engaging, let alone powerful, story.

Beyond the Star Wars-iness of the movie, it's a barely adequate summer movie, particularly if your goals are for mindless (and mostly bloodless) action, and/or to keep the tikes entertained for a few hours.  The movie starts with the Mandalorian in the thick of a mission, emphasizing his impressive gunslinging talents in taking out plenty of Imperial troops and then ramping up into familiar vehicles.  Most of the movie is action of some kind, which is for the best, as its characters - the cute but non-speaking Grogu and the tough but stoic (and mostly masked) Mandalorian - don't provide much else.  Unfortunately, none of these action scenes really stand out: it's often derivative (yet another gladiator match) and the Mandalorian pretty much never misses, mostly eliminating the thrill of battle.  On the positive side, Baby Yoda is very cute, and the best part of the movie; I wish they'd emphasized him even more.  On the negative side, for characters, is Jabba the Hutt's son.  Maybe it's just me, but he was so disturbing and glaringly out of place, he made Jar Jar Binks seem OK after all in comparison.  This new Hutt is super buff, in a human-like way, and the CGI is poor on top of that; additionally, he sounds like a human, and not the deep bass, obviously sinister alien that Jabba was.  *Shivers*  Finally, you won't hear a lick of the old SW theme music, which is probably for the best - I don't want to associate this movie with the venerable franchise any more than needed.

***

I was afraid that The Mandalorian and Grogu would turn out basically the way it did; my SW fandom and desire to see a blockbuster overcame this hesitance, though.  Hollywood had shown some really encouraging signs in the early part of the year, in the types of movies and creativity that were released, such as Send Help and Crime 101.  Unfortunately, M&G is much more like the year's other big disappointment, Pixar's Hoppers.  Both movies, if done well, could have appealed equally to both adult and family audiences.  But both chose to go all-in on maximum appeal to children, combined with a sloppiness and simplicity of execution that made them poor choices for adult audiences.  I suppose my attitude toward these - and other movies - could also be affected by changes in my own taste: in particular, away from action and scifi/fantasy and increasingly toward character-driven, well-written movies, no matter the genre.  And also by my simply having seen quite a few movies overall now: not only do I want to see quality movies, but also something new, or at least creative and/or clever.  Anyway, it looks like M&G is struggling not just with critics but also at the box office.  Perhaps Disney will get the message: don't make movies just to sell toys/merch, develop a new creative vision like Lucas did 50 years ago!

* By Source: https://www.starwars.com/films/star-wars-the-mandalorian-and-grogu, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=81153358

Michael + Normal

 

Michael

Score:  B

Directed by Antoine Fuqua

Starring Jaafar Jackson, Colman Domingo, Nia Long, Miles Teller, et al

Running time: 127 minutes

Rated PG-13

Michael is well-made entertainment that is about the definition of a crowdpleaser; legitimate criticisms can be made about this approach, but it undeniably succeeds at its mission.  My take on the film is largely influenced by my personal tastes: I was a huge fan of MJ's music when I was little and I still enjoy it a lot.  Michael is a biopic of the pop superstar, who died in 2009, and it spans from the beginnings of the Jackson 5 (when MJ was 8 years old) until 1984.  It therefore does not even mention later child sexual abuse allegations and other personal problems.  Yes, Jackson's life deserves additional, more critical examination in movies some day - but that is not Michael's objective.  It is to celebrate MJ's extraordinary talents, in both music and dance.  However, Michael does still address the man's real life, too: the central narrative concerns his relationship with his father (played by Domingo).  Joseph is responsible for pushing his talented children into the musical world, for better and worse.  This was truly a double-edged sword for Michael, who was tormented by Joseph's tyranny yet also enabled to fully utilize, share, and (hopefully, it seems) enjoy his gifts.  The movie then portrays Michael's efforts to break free from Joseph's control, which he - spoiler alert - accomplishes at the end.  Sure, the personal drama is mostly Hollywood-sanitized and rather polished, but that doesn't mean you can't still feel the oppression, excitement, and other genuine emotions Michael must have experienced.  Both Jaafar Jackson as Michael (who is MJ's nephew) and Domingo do strong work, and the supporting cast is solid.  And the highlights, of course, are the musical and dance scenes, from the Jackson 5 in taverns to Motown recording studios, to legendary music video creation ("Thriller", "Beat It"), to mega concerts.  I went to a midweek showing and was shocked by how full the theater was - and clearly, the audience loved it, many singing on their way out.  Enjoy this for what it is - you won't regret it.

***

Normal

Score:  B-

Directed by Ben Wheatley

Starring Bob Odenkirk, Henry Winkler, Lena Headey, et al

Running time: 90 minutes

Rated R

Normal is a reasonably entertaining action comedy movie, thanks largely to its lead star, but it falls well short of its premise's potential.  Odenkirk seems to be enjoying the abrupt career switch to action movies pioneered by Liam Neeson, as this follows in the footsteps of his two similar Nobody movies.  The Better Call Saul actor (tremendous series, if you haven't seen it) is very funny but also a very good actor overall, too, and he reliably anchors this movie, especially in the first part.  That is the best part, IMO, where his interim sheriff Ulysses of a small Minnesota town gets to know his deputies, local business owners, and the quaint vibes of the area.  The everyday (well, "normal") characters and dialogue are warm and funny, though hints of menace just beneath the surface keep bubbling up.  When it all goes sideways for Ulysses is also when things start to go wrong for the movie itself.  There's a fine balancing act required for a movie to effectively shift its plot so suddenly, and it's just... off.  Clever moments still come up from time to time, particularly in the jarringly violent action that commences (hurled sticks of dynamite in a snowstorm, a gung-ho quilt shop granny).  But overall, the movie's inability to get the right tone prevents it from being nearly as enjoyable as it could - and should - have been.  There's also this sense of "of course this is how it's going to play out" that hovers over the action (to me, at least).  Bob, I hope that you will continue with action - but please make sure that the script and director are up to snuff next time.

***

After a surprisingly good winter and early spring movie season, Normal and Michael were fine though not as strong of trips to the theater before summer.  I saw Normal mostly because I simply was in the mood for an outing and an old fashioned action movie sounded good.  It wasn't bad, but it was closer to the Hoppers end of the spectrum - in other words, too easy to see where it was going and not well enough executed to make up for it (although Normal is still better than Hoppers - if not kid-friendly!).  Michael was kind of old fashioned in its style as well, but more effective - as long as you understand the kind of movie it is and want that.  Its terrible Rotten Tomatoes score put me off at first, but I once again wanted to see a movie - and along with being a big MJ music fan, the movie had a terrific audience score on RT, so I gave it a try.  Glad that I did.  This summer has some movies I'm really looking forward to - especially The Odyssey and Spider-Man 4.  There don't seem to be as many "big" releases as usual, though, so hopefully there will be some pleasant surprises, too.  Until next time!

* By source, Magnolia Pictures - https://www.impawards.com/2026/normal.html, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=82464744

** By source, Michael, a production of GK Films. - "Michael Movie Poster (#3 of 3)". Internet Movie Poster Awards. Retrieved February 2, 2026., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=81530196

Project Hail Mary

 

Score:  A-/B+

Directed by Phil Lord and Chris Miller

Starring Ryan Gosling, Sandra Huller

Running time: 156 minutes

Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  Sci-fi "saving the world" blockbusters tend to be heavy and serious, but directors Lord and Miller (The LEGO Movie) and star Gosling break the mold in a fresh, satisfying way.  There's not much new to the plot but the alien here is more "alien" than usual, while the technical details receive needed pep from a constant stream of irreverent, well-written humor.  Maybe not quite a scifi classic, but on the other hand, it should appeal to all kinds of movie-goers.  Highly recommended.

Project Hail Mary is an entertaining and well-made sci-fi crowdpleaser, thanks largely to its star lead and some clever directing work.  I have become far less interested in sci-fi recently, probably a combination of changing tastes and a lack of quality titles (Ad Astra being a particularly depressing failure).  It's a difficult genre to get right and I don't really like the cold and, well, alien feel of many of them.  To my pleasant surprise, then, Hail Mary largely overcomes these tonal genre obstacles.  The overall plot is pretty standard stuff, requiring a hero - Gosling's Grace - to go into outer space to solve a dilemma that is threatening the human race/Earth.  Where most sci-fi movies lean into the tension of the mission and the technical challenges and sci-fi imagery, Hail Mary focuses mostly on its main character and his relationship to an alien acquaintance (whom he names "Rocky").  Gosling is a very charismatic actor, so this is a wise choice.  Grace is a failed (but brilliant) biologist with a nerdy but charming demeanor and a great sense of (often self-deprecating) humor.  Some of my favorite scenes are those back on Earth, as Grace tries to help figure out the scientific mystery using fairly lo-tech, creative methods and a good dose of laughter.  His banter with Rocky - a sufficiently alien-looking creature who we hear via a computer translator using an amusingly flat tone - is also very enjoyable, and the two develop a bond that is considerably more affecting than what most sci-fi movies produce.

Hail Mary is also helped by nonlinear chronology, which mostly makes up for its long, two-and-a-half hour-plus running time.  The first thing we see is Grace waking up from a coma on the space ship, and neither he nor we know why he is there.  The earlier Earth parts then kick in, although even then there is a slow-drip reveal of the movie's plot, first introducing Grace's high school teacher character.  It's not a new narrative trick by any means, but an effective one to build curiosity in the audience.  The Earth scenes also first convey the movie's irreverent tone (a highlight of directors Lord and Miller's standout hit The LEGO Movie), a bold choice - but a good one - even as it rolls out the high stakes of the plot.  Grace himself doesn't seem fully serious, but again, in a good way (we also get a few details of his background later to help explain why).  Much of what I've described so far is "A"-level material, but Hail Mary is not without its flaws.  While I did not want to see a standard, tech-heavy plot, the movie also glides a bit too easily past some of what are ostensibly some of the plot's greatest challenges - even the central, world-saving part.  It dedicates a good chunk of time (perhaps too much) to Grace and Rocky's meeting where they must figure out how to communicate.  This is the slowest part of the movie for me, while also solving the challenge a little too tidily.  Also convenient is Grace's "astro-NOT" somehow becoming quite the expert on the space ship's systems and controls.  Maybe these are details, but cumulatively they create the sensation of sailing past the rough parts to focus on character only.  The plot itself gets both a bit messy and more contrived in the final act, too - but I did find the ending at least to be satisfying and appropriate to the tone of the movie.  Finally, perhaps I'm just jaded/spoiled by better images in the past but Hail Mary has little to impress visually; however, the score is good, particularly one fantastic needle drop.  So it's imperfect, yes, but still plenty entertaining no matter what "species" of movie-goer you are.

***

Project Hail Mary is another strong success for the year in movies so far, livening up the stale sci-fi genre to improbably appeal to a general audience as proved by its box office blasting past $200 million in its third weekend.  It also continues the streak of new movies that are either a little or a lot different than what we (at least, I) am used to seeing, creating a freshness to the moviegoing experience that has been tremendously rewarding so far in 2026.  It's not quite at the level of The Bride! or Send Help - maybe it was just a little too "crowdpleasing" for me - but it certainly beats the pants off the one formulaic movie I have seen this year, Hoppers.  Please keep this originality coming, Hollywood!!!

* By source, https://x.com/AmazonMGMStudio/status/2020587191919890825, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=80301679