Billie Eilish: Hit Me Hard and Soft – The Tour Live in 3D (2026) ☆☆☆(3/4): It was wonderful to watch anyway – even in 2D

Posted on May 10, 2026 by kaist455

When I watched “Billie Eilish: Hit Me Hard and Soft – The Tour Live in 3D” during this Sunday afternoon, the screening condition was rather disappointing. Although this was intended to be shown in 3D, it was shown in 2D here in South Korean theaters instead despite its higher ticket price, and my only consolation is that I watched it at a big Dolby Atmos screening room at least. Thanks to the first-rate sound system of the screening room, I often felt like being right in the middle of a big concert, though my ears winced a bit whenever the music in the film got quite loud.

Therefore, I cannot tell you about how the film actually looks in 3D, but I can tell you instead that 1) it looks fairly wonderful even in 2D and 2) I appreciate more of Eilish’s considerable talent and presence. Although she is only 24 at present, she does have all the right stuffs for becoming a very talented pop star to dazzle millions of fans out there, and I think she will continue to grow and advance as she has during last several years.

The main subject of the film is her 2025 concert tour “Hit Me Hard and Soft: The Tour”, which was a part of the promotion for her third studio album “Hit Me Hard and Soft”. At the beginning, we see how her concert in Manchester, UK was prepared step by step, and then the film shows us Eilish being prepared to perform in front of thousands of fans already quite eager to see her on the stage.

And she did not disappoint them at all right from when she appeared onto the stage. Amid all those loud sounds and flash lights poured upon the stage (The movie gives a warning in advance for anyone with a serious degree of photosensitive epilepsy, by the way), she confidently dances and performs for more fun and excitement, and it is clear that she really appreciates how many of her fans are connected together via her music.

The film occasionally shows the very emotional reactions of the audiences at the concert. Although this initially feels like an overkill considering all those loud shouts from them, they look genuinely excited and touched by Eilish’s performance as far as I can see, and we later get several interview clips showing some of her audiences gladly talking about how special her music has been to them. Watching Eilish casually and freely expressing herself on the stage, they often feel like being supported and empowered by the sense of empathy generated from that, and we come to have more understanding on their passionate response to her music.

Meanwhile, the film sometimes looks more into how Eilish prepared herself for the concert. While there is a little injury problem in one of her ankles, she remains mostly relaxed, and there is an amusing moment showing her and her several staff members getting some emotional support from a bunch of dogs under their care. Although she is doing the concert without her brother Finneas O’Connell, he sends a sincere and considerate message to his sister before the concert, and Eilish is certainly grateful for that.

And we see how fully she is in the control of her public image. At one point, she is willing to show a bit of herself in front of a group of fans already waiting for the concert outside, and then we see her cheerfully interacting with not only them but also many other fans coming to see her. She also cannot help but become conscious of how important she has been as a trailblazing worldwide pop star during last several years, but music and self-expression always come first for her, and she simply enjoys throwing herself more into her artistic passion while never hiding herself at all.

I must confess that I do not know much about Eilish beyond her two Oscar-winning songs, which were incidentally for “No Time to Die” (2021) and “Barbie” (2023), respectively. I am still not a big fan of her music, but I understand the emotional appeal of her songs to some degree, and I will not deny that I was touched a bit as watching her sincerely performing her Oscar-winning song for “Barbie” and then making a bit of emotional connection with some of her audiences.

Eilish also co-directed and co-produced the film along with James Cameron, who also served as its co-editor. I really have no idea on how much he and Eilish actually contributed to the film respectively, but I can tell you at least that Eilish handled well several moments when she had to not only perform but also wield a little camera on the stage, and it is apparent that she had a lot of fun with this wild filmmaking process.

One particularly weak aspect of the film is that it does not delve much into Eilish as a person. During his several interview scenes with Eilish, Cameron throws fairly soft questions to her as holding the camera right in front of her, and Eilish mildly responds to these questions without revealing much about herself on the whole. As I observed from R.J. Cutler’s documentary film “Billie Eilish: The World’s a Little Blurry” (2021), she may still need to go through a lot more life experience for more wisdom and honesty, and now I am all the more curious about how she will be around 10 or 20 years later.

Overall, “Billie Eilish: Hit Me Hard and Soft – The Tour Live in 3D” is a solid concert film which will definitely entertain and then satisfy numerous fans of Eilish out there. Although it probably looks more effective in 3D, I had a fair share of good time thanks to the commendable direction of Eilish and Cameron, and I certainly prefer this well-made product to that recent bloated blockbuster of his. I felt merely tired in case of the latter, but I felt considerably energized in case of the former, and I guess that will tell you a lot.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Sherlock Jr. (1924) ☆☆☆☆(4/4): A surreal comic masterwork from Buster Keaton

Posted on May 10, 2026 by kaist455

Buster Keaton’s 1924 film “Sherlock Jr.” is an enduring masterwork to be cherished and admired. While it is very hilarious to observe those typically deadpan comic moments expected from Keaton’s phlegmatic screen persona, it also has a series of inspired moments which will still surprise you for sheer technical mastery and all those highly risky physical stunts done by Keaton himself. In the end, you will be all the more impressed by how much the movie dexterously accomplishes in a rather short running time (45 minutes).

Like he did in many of his notable works including “The General” (1926), Keaton plays a plain ordinary guy who simply wants to be recognized and loved. While he just works as a projectionist at a local movie theater, this dude also aspires to be a great detective like, yes, Sherlock Holmes someday, and we get some small laugh as he attentively reads a little elementary guidebook on how to be a good detective.

Besides this earnest personal aspiration of his, the projectionist wants to win the heart of a pretty young girl in his town. It seems that she is also interested in him, and he is surely ready to impress her as much as possible, but, alas, he is too poor to buy any good present for his courtship. At one point early in the film, he actually comes upon a lucky chance for getting a few dollars more for buying an expensive present for her, but then there come several absurd moments upon him, and we surely get amused more as he is quite baffled by how he ends up losing more instead of gaining more.

Anyway, the projectionist manages to impress that girl via a little simple deception, but there soon comes another trouble. She happens to draw the attention of some handsome but mean guy, and, to the projectionist’s frustration, it does not take much time for this rotten dude to get more attention from her. To make matters worse, he later frames an act of theft on the projectionist, who is all the more depressed after being rejected by that girl for the crime he did not commit.

While it is not much of a spoiler to tell you that our hero is eventually vindicated, the real surprise of the movie comes from what occurs to him before that point. He goes back to the movie theater, and then he gets asleep in his projection room while a movie is being projected onto the screen in front of many audiences. Suddenly, he finds himself leaving his body and then entering the screen, and, after clumsily and hilariously trying to adjust himself to this new environment, he becomes “Sherlock Jr.”, who must solve a case involved with an expensive pearl necklace right now.

This surreal moment in the film still looks amazing even at present for its masterfully effortless execution. Needless to say, Keaton and his crew including cinematographers Elgin Lessley and Byron Houck prepared a lot for shooting this memorable moment, but everything flows so well across the screen that you will wonder more about how they could possibly achieve that. Yes, they used a lot of practical visual effects here and there, but the overall result is quite seamless to say the least – especially when the background on the screen is continuously and busily changed in one way or another to our hero’s confusion. In fact, you will be amazed more after learning more about the painstaking efforts behind this humorously chaotic moment (Keaton and his crew used surveyor’s instruments to position him and the camera at exactly the right distances and positions for generating the illusion of continuity on the screen).

Keaton also demonstrates well here in this film that he is an almost peerless master of physical comedy. In case of one comically suspenseful scene where “Sherlock Jr.” plays billiards along with two bad guys ready to get rid of him by any means necessary, its comic momentum is gradually increased as Keaton’s character manages to evade one hidden danger after another while being totally oblivious to his perilous situation, and we later get a nice big laugh from a payoff moment involved with one lethal cue ball, which is incidentally numbered 13.

When the story becomes quite frantic during its climactic part, the movie serves us a lot of physical action scenes packed with a lot of thrill and humor. As many of you know, Keaton did not hesitate to throw himself into all those risky physical stunts at all during the shooting, and it is still marvelous to see how he bounces from one perilous moment to another with his own graceful physical agility. For instance, I still marvel at the scene where his character goes through a small suitcase and then disappears, and you will appreciate more of his and his crew’s efforts after learning more about how they shot this unbelievable comic moment via an old vaudeville trick from his father.

As a matter of fact, Keaton got himself seriously injured when he and his crew was shooting one particular scene where he should be hanging off a ladder connected to a huge water basin for a while. Nonetheless, he kept going as before, and, after suffering from severe migraines during next several years, he belatedly came to learn how serious this injury of his actually was when he came to a doctor in 1935.

On the whole, “Sherlock Jr.”, which is currently being shown at selected local movie theaters in South Korea along with Keaton’s several other works such as “The General” and “Our Hospitality” (1923), is a great film whose comic surreal qualities remain quite fresh and alive even after more than a century. Any film from Keaton during his prime period in the 1920s can be a good start for you, but, “Sherlock Jr.” surely comes first along with “The General” in my humble opinion. Believe me, after watching either of them, you will be surely eager to get to know more about his undeniable contribution to the 20th century cinema.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Day She Returns (2026) ☆☆☆(3/4): Three interviews and one acting class

Posted on May 10, 2026 by kaist455

Hong Sang-soo’s new film “The Day She Returns” is interesting for how it tries some playful variation in its repetitive narrative structure. As phlegmatically observing three interviews and one acting class of its actress heroine, the movie has its several acts overlapped with each other in one way or another, and we get more amusement as the line between reality and fiction gets blurred a bit later in the story.

As its actress heroine, Bae Jeong-su (Song Seon-mi), goes through several individual interviews at a small restaurant one by one along the story, we get to know a bit about her career and personal life. Not long after her divorce, she was approached by some famous independent filmmaker, and she decided to be back in business because 1) the filmmaker’s script is quite good and 2) she wants to make a new start after her divorce.

In case of the first interviewer, who is a young female reporter, the mood is initially cordial between her and Jeong-su, but the mood becomes rather awkward between them as the interviewer asks a few uncomfortable questions to Jeong-su. At least, Jeong-su tries to wrap up the interview with some meaningful last comment for this interview, but then she only finds herself struggling to explain what she said.

In contrast, the second interview is relatively more comfortable for her. Some other young female reporter comes after Jeong-su has a brief break time, and what Jeong-su says to this reporter is not so different from what she said during the previous interview, but she feels more confident and relaxed in this time. As a result, the mood becomes more cheerful between her and the reporter, and they even order two glasses of beer around the end of their interview (This is quite a restraint considering how often many of Hong’s movie characters drink a lot).

In case of the third interview, Jeong-su talks again about her career and personal life in front of some other female reporter. What she says is pretty much same as what she did during the two previous interviews, but we notice some variations as she gives more details on how her personal life has been. As a matter of fact, it turns out that she took an acting class as a part of the preparation for her new movie, and she is soon going to have another session of her acting class.

During its last part, the movie becomes more interesting as observing Jeong-su attending her acting class. Her acting class teacher instructs her to write a short script based on the memories of her three interviews, and she and some other student of the acting class, who is also a young woman, are going to give a performance based on that script.

What follows next is a curious situation going back and forth between reality and fiction. At first, Jeong-su and her fellow student confidently interact with each other during the first several minutes, and everything seems to be going fairly well between them. Soon, they try a bit of improvisation rather than following what Jeong-su wrote, which, as we gradually notice, is basically an amalgamation of all those three interviews of hers.

However, as they try improvisation more and more, Jeong-su and her fellow student come to struggle to maintain their performance, though we are often not so sure about whether the growing awkwardness between them is real or not. For finding any cue for their performance, they come to check Jeong-su’s script more and more, and it sometimes looks like they really have no idea on what to say next to each other.

While it is simply regarded as a storytelling exercise, the movie is still fairly engaging thanks to the competent direction of Hong, who also served as the writer/editor/composer/cinematographer of the film as usual. Every scene in the film is quite plain and simple on the whole, but their rather long dialogues are fluid and natural enough to hold our attention. Hong later adds a bit of notable visual touch during the last act, and that is rather distracting in my humble opinion, but it is at least more tolerable than his disastrous visual experiment in “In Water” (2023), which looks very blurry from the beginning to the end as everything on the screen is deliberately out of focus.

Anyway, the movie mainly works as the showcase of its lead actress’s considerable talent and presence. Song Seon-mi, who has steadily appeared in Hong’s several films including “Woman on the Beach” (2006) and “Walk Up” (2022), splendidly supports the film without any strain, and she also did a commendable job of bringing subtle individual nuances to the three interview scenes and the following acting class scene. In case of several other cast members including Park Mi-so and Kim Seon-jin, they simply step aside as Hong’s camera usually focuses on Song’s face and performance, and you will not probably remember much of them as their faces are not shown that much on the screen.

In conclusion, “The Day She Returns” will amuse and entertain you if you are familiar with many of Hong’s previous works such as “The Day He Arrives” (2011), which is also equally amusing for its deliberately repetitive narrative structure. He disappointed me a bit in several recent films such as “By the Stream” (2024) and “What Does That Nature Say to You” (2025), but Hong entertains me enough in this time, and I think it is one of the more interesting South Korean films of this year.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Pizza Movie (2026) ☆☆☆(3/4): A wacky college stoner movie

Posted on May 8, 2026 by kaist455

“Pizza Movie”, which is currently available on Disney+ in South Korea, tries to be as wacky as possible, and it succeeds fairly well in my trivial opinion. Even when you are baffled by what exactly is happening in its three main characters’ loony adventure, you will be amused by a constant stream of wit, humor, and imagination, and you will probably want to order a pizza when it is over.

At the beginning, we see how things have been very miserable for Jack (Gaten Matarazzo) and his best friend/roommate Montgomery (Sean Giambrone) during another day at their college campus. While Montgomery struggles to express his love toward some popular girl in the campus, Jack is bullied again by a bunch of college football players because of his big mistake involved with a certain football team tradition, and Montgomery has to endure the bullying along with Jack just because he is Jack’s roommate.

As they feel quite daunted in their dormitory room, Jack and Montgomery happen to discover a small tin box containing a mysterious experimental drug called “M.I.N.T.S.”. Although this drug was made 10 years ago by some eccentric college student, it turns out to be still quite effective to say the least, and Jack and Montgomery get very, very, very high with a series of side effects as warned by an old YouTube video clip from that eccentric college student. The only way to counterbalance these side effects is eating some food right now, so they immediately order a pizza.

Of course, there soon come several obstacles for Jack and Montgomery besides those side effects of M.I.N.T.S. First, a pizza delivery AI robot, hilariously voiced by Bobby Moynihan (He also did an equally amusing voice performance in recent Pixar animation film “Hoppers” (2026), by the way). cannot climb the stairs in their dormitory, so they have to go down to the first floor where the robot is waiting, but, alas, they begin to experience the side effects of M.I.N.T.S. one by one once they go outside their dormitory room.

And there is also the trouble with a bunch of resident assistants led by Blake (Jack Martin), who are all quite determined to catch anyone with drug or alcohol. Black has a little diabolical plan for those unfortunate students caught by them, and that somehow reminds me of the last several years of my graduate course, when I was virtually banished to a dormitory far away from the main campus of Korean Advanced Institute of Technology and Science (KAIST) due to my pathetically underachieving status.  

As they struggle to deal with those side effects of M.I.N.T.S., Jack and Montgomery come across Lizzy (Lulu Wilson), a girl who once hung around with them a lot as a fellow nerd but now has been trying to socialize with those popular girls and boys including the bullies of Jack and Montgomery. Because she also happened to ingest M.I.N.T., she also has the same side effect problems just like Jack and Montgomery, and now she and they must stick together for getting that pizza as soon as possible.

As these three main characters bounce from one hallucinogenic moment to another, the screenplay by directors/writers Brian McElhaney and Nick Kocher gives us a wild ride full of odd and absurd moments. At one point early in the film, Montgomery and Jack must not swear at all due to the current side effect stage of theirs, and we get plenty of laughs from the gory consequences of their frequent failures. Later in the story, they and Lizzy come to experience a wacky moment of body swapping among them, and I let you see for yourself whom Montgomery happens to experience a body swapping with (Daniel Radcliffe is effective in his brief but funny voice performance).

Amid all these and other crazy things in the film, the situation becomes a bit more serious as Jack, Montgomery, and Lizzy come to confront their relationship issues. While Jack feels hurt when it later turns out that Montgomery does not want to be his roommate anymore, Lizzy comes to realize that she has not been true to herself as trying to get along with those popular boys and girls in the campus. As these three characters try to deal with these personal issues as well as the continuing side effects on their minds, the movie actually becomes a bit sweet and sincere, and that makes us root for them more than before.

It certainly helps that the three main performers of the film have solid comic chemistry among them. While Gaten Matarazzo, who has been mainly known for Netflix drama series “Stranger Things”, makes a successful entrance into adult acting here in this movie, Sean Giambrone and Lulu Wilson bring a lot of humor and sincerity to their respective roles, and they and Matarazzo always click well together whenever they are on the screen together. As the main villain of the story, Jack Martin gleefully chews every moment of his, and we surely get a big laugh when his character finally gets a comeuppance he richly deserves. 

 In conclusion, “Pizza Movie” is often quite enjoyable for its goofy but undeniably hilarious qualities, and it is certainly a nice start for McElhaney and Kocher’s filmmaking career. As far as I can see from the movie, they are competent filmmakers, and it will be interesting to see what they will do next after this little entertaining movie.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Murder Report (2025) ☆☆☆(3/4): A dangerous exclusive interview

Posted on May 6, 2026 by kaist455

South Korean film “Murder Report” is a taut and efficient thriller about one female journalist having an exclusive interview with a serial killer. Now you will instantly get a pretty good idea about what you will get, and the movie surely has a fair share of expected twists and turns along its increasingly intense and disturbing plot, but its effective handling of story and characters will constantly hold you on the edge at least.  

Cho Yeo-jeong, who has been mainly known for her wonderful performance in Bong Joon-ho’s Oscar winning film “Parasite” (2019), plays that journalist in question, and the opening part of the film quickly and succinctly establishes how she is drawn to an unlikely opportunity for scoop. A man calls her for a private interview, and he promises to her that he is going to tell her a lot about how he killed no less than 11 people. This certainly sounds very preposterous to say the least, but the journalist cannot resist this unbelievable chance mainly because she needs any kind of scoop to save her recently damaged career right now.

We see how she takes some caution in advance before going to a hotel suite where she and that mysterious guy are going to meet during one evening. She is accompanied with a detective who is incidentally her boyfriend, and, once her interviewee arrives, he is going to monitor the suite from a room right below it via hidden cameras and microphones.    

Needless to say, she and the detective are surprised a lot when her interviewee fully reveals himself without any fear or concern at all. As promised to her in advance, the interviewee willingly shows and then proves to her that he is indeed a serial killer, and he seems quite prepared to answer any hard question thrown from his interviewer. For example, he does not hide his real occupation at all, and he also gladly talks about how he was turned into a serial killer some time ago.

And he also reveals that he wants this interview because he thinks he needs to check upon the certain moral aspects of his hideous crimes. Many of his victims were brutally murdered in one way or another, but, while unhesitatingly accepting his responsibility, he does not feel any particular guilt about all these murders committed by him, just because these killings are regarded as sort of “cure” by his intelligent but undeniably twisted mind.

No, his “cure” is not for those victims, but it is actually for a number of certain figures respectively associated with them, and it seems he really believes that he simply did what was the best for these figures in question. Imagine a cross between Dr. Hannibal Lector in Jonathan Demme’s “The Silence of the Lambs” (1991) and the “righteous” serial killer hero of American TV series “Dexter”, and you will get a fairly good idea on what kind of man this dude is. 

While naturally quite horrified by her interviewer’s story, the journalist cannot leave the suite right now. Sure, she wants to record more from their ongoing interview, but there is another big reason besides that. The interviewee told her that he is going to kill another person not long after the sunset, but she can actually stop this only if she continues the interview as long as he wants.

However, that turns out to be much more challenging than expected as her interviewee often toys with her in one way or another. At one point, he coldly demonstrates to her how dangerous and ruthless he can really be, and she feels like getting trapped more and more – especially when it belatedly turns out that her several safety measures were utterly useless from the very start (Is this a spoiler?).  

Deftly accumulating the tension across the screen, the movie delves more into its gray moral area, and our journalist heroine is accordingly pushed toward a certain inevitable point already waiting for her in advance. No matter how much she struggles to stick to her objective journalistic viewpoint, her interviewee always seems to be one or two steps ahead of her, and we come to brace ourselves more as he methodically unfolds a number of hidden cards behind him along the story.

Except a few scenes involved with the detective, the movie is basically a two-hander, and its two lead performers click well with each other from the beginning to the end. While Cho masterfully swings back and forth across the whole gamut of emotions along the narrative, Jung Sung-Il, who previously gave a solid supporting performance in Kim Sang-man’s Netflix movie “Uprising” (2024), is subtly creepy as smoothly complementing Cho’s showier acting with his unflappable appearance, and their solid duo performance ably carries the film to the end even when the story becomes a bit more predictable during its last act.

In conclusion, “Murder Report”, which was shot in 2023 but then was belatedly released in local movie theaters in last year, often feels a bit too generic in several aspects (Its opening title sequence is clearly influenced too much by David Fincher’s “Seven” (1995) and countless other serial killer flicks out there, for example), but director/writer Cho Young-jun did a competent job on the whole. Yes, this is quite uncomfortable to watch to say the least, but I was entertained enough while also musing a bit on a number of tricky moral questions from the film, so I recommend it with some caution.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Is This Thing On? (2025) ☆☆☆(3/4): A comic way to deal with his middle-life crisis

Posted on May 6, 2026 by kaist455

Bradley Cooper’s 2025 film “Is This Thing On?”, which is currently available on Disney+ in South Korea, is an engaging mix of drama and comedy. While it looks relatively modest compared to his two previous directorial works “A Star Is Born” (2018) and “Maestro” (2023), the movie is still worthwhile to watch for its small but intimate moments, and it also shows us a more serious side of its lead actor’s talent.

Will Arnett, who also served as the co-producer and co-writer of the film, plays Alex Novak, a plain ordinary guy who has been going through a period of mid-life crisis due to a domestic issue between him and his wife Tess (Laura Dern). They have been married for 20 years, but they recently agreed to end their marriage, and now he lives alone in an apartment in the nearby city while Tess continues to live with their two young sons in their suburban home.

However, we cannot help but observe how they are still emotionally connected with each other, when they go together to an evening meeting for them and their several friends. While their recent separation is not a secret to their friends at all, Alex and Tess simply enjoy themselves along with their friends, and we come to sense more of their remaining emotional bond as they talk and walk together for a while after the evening meeting.

Anyway, after sending his wife off at a train station, Alex wanders around the city a bit, and then he comes across a little comedy club. He enters the comedy club mainly because he needs to drink a bit, but then he is required to volunteer to do stand-up comedy because he does not have any money for paying the entrance fee right now. 

Needless to say, Alex is quite awkward when he has to go up to the stage later, but, what do you know, he comes to show some potential once he talks about his life and his crumbling marriage in a self-deprecating manner. After receiving a considerable amount of positive reactions from his audience, he is requested to do more standup comedy in the next time, and he finds himself gradually becoming more interested in standup comedy as preparing his comic materials mostly based on his current status of life.

  While this does not suddenly turn himself into a new promising comedian to watch, Alex gets improved bit by bit as doing his shtick during one evening after another. As cinematographer Matthew Libatique’s handheld camera closely hovers around him, we observe how he becomes more confident and relaxed as throwing some effective punchlines for good laughs – and how he feels somehow liberating as opening himself more and more in front of others.

And this little change in his life begins to affect his current relationship with his wife. As becoming more honest and straightforward than usual, Alex comes to admit that he still loves Tess, and it turns out that Tess also has regretted their decision to divorce. While their kids as well as their parents do not have much problem with that, both Tess and Alex begin to have doubts about their initial decision as being reminded more of what still remains between them, and it seems that they can actually restore their relationship via this unexpectedly recharged affection between them.   

Of course, there eventually comes a moment when Tess happens to discover what her husband has been doing behind his back, but the movie handles this supposedly predictable moment with more sensitivity and thoughtfulness than expected. As the camera lingers on her face for a while, the movie deftly conveys her complex feelings to us in addition to vividly capturing the humorous aspects of the situation between her and her husband, and we come to care about her own mid-life crisis as much as Alex’s.

It surely helps that Cooper draws good performances from his two main performers. Arnett, who has been mainly known for his showy comic performances including his Emmy-nominated supporting turn in American TV comedy series “Arrested Development”, surprises us as deftly dialing down his usual comic persona for his unexpectedly nuanced acting here in this film, and he is particularly good when his character struggles to articulate his feelings during several key scenes in the movie. On the opposite, Laura Dern, who has been one of the most dependable actresses in our time during last 40 years, brings enough human warmth and personality to her three-dimensional role, and she is certainly her co-star’s equal acting match as their characters push or pull each other along the story. 

Cooper also assembles a number of various performers to notice. Several performers playing stand-up comedian characters in the film are believable with their authentic details, and Amy Sedaris brings some extra humor as the emcee of the comedy club. Andra Day, Sean Hayes, Christine Ebersole, and Ciarán Hinds are also solid in their respective supporting parts, and Cooper steals the show at times as the goofy actor husband of Day’s character. 

On the whole, “Is This Thing On?” looks like a minor work compared to Cooper’s two previous films, but it still holds our attention via its good storytelling and the enjoyable efforts from its main cast members. It does not surpass my expectation, but it did its job as well as intended with enough humor and sensitivity, and I appreciate that with some applause.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Springsteen: Deliver Me from Nowhere (2025) ☆☆1/2(2.5/4): Springsteen at a turning point

Posted on May 5, 2026 by kaist455

Scott Cooper’s 2025 film “Springsteen: Deliver Me from Nowhere” is a typical biography drama film which merely doles out those familiar conventions and clichés of its genre. While there are some nice moments of somber sensitivity during its first half, the movie eventually becomes another superficial tale of artistic/personal struggle, and that is a big letdown – especially considering the legendary status of its real-life musician hero.

That figure in question is Bruce Springsteen. I must confess that I do not know much about his life and career beyond his several notable songs including “Born in the U.S.A.” and that Oscar-winning song for “Philadelphia” (1993), so I began to watch the film with some expectation, but I only ended up being rather dissatisfied without getting to know more about his life or artistry.

The story begins with the end of Springsteen’s the River Tour in 1981, which was concurrently started along with the release of his album “The River”. While quite exhausted to say the least, Springsteen, played by Jeremy Allen White of American TV drama series “The Bear”, now has to prepare for his next album to be released sooner or later besides recharging himself to some degree, and his loyal manager/record producer Jon Landau (Jeremy Strong) assures that he can take his time as much as he wants.

After going back to his hometown in New Jersey, Springsteen spends some time alone by himself in a big house purchased in advance, and it becomes more apparent to us that something has been troubling him for a while. His mind cannot help but get haunted by the old child memories associated with his abusive father, but he does not know what to do about that, while also having no clear idea on the overall artistic direction on his next album.

Nevertheless, Springsteen’s artistic impulse gradually returns as he casually spends his own time day by day. Accidentally inspired by the works of Flannery O’Connor as well as Terrence Malick’s 1973 film “Badlands”, he begins to compose one particular song for a start, and then there soon come several other songs to be included in the album.

And he also has some ideas on how to prepare for the upcoming recording sessions, and that is the most interesting part of the film. Using a rather cheap recording device, Springsteen makes a demo cassette tape containing his several new songs to be improved in one way or another during the recording session, and he is particularly attentive to how one of these songs should sound in the final recording.

What follows next is a series of amusing struggles for Springsteen and several others including Landau as they try to find any possible way to make the song sound exactly as he wants. His recording engineers go through one trial after another trial without much satisfaction for a while, but then, to our little amusement, they eventually come upon an unlikely method for getting their mission accomplished in the end.

Meanwhile, things become a bit messier for Springsteen’s personal life. His father, who is incidentally still alive just like his mother, goes through another troubling time, and that makes Springsteen more reluctant to face his own personal demons. He has been in a close relationship with a young single mother named Faye Romano (Odessa Young), but he chooses to focus more on his music instead of getting closer to Faye and her young daughter, and that certainly frustrates her a lot.

It goes without saying that Springsteen eventually manages to pull himself together a bit while making and then releasing his next album on his own terms, but the screenplay by Copper, which is based on Warren Zanes’s 2023 book “Deliver Me from Nowhere” and some elements from Springsteen’s 2016 autobiography book “Born to Run”, often spells out its hero’s issues too blatantly. For example, after listening to Springsteen’s demo tape, Landau muses a lot on that in front of his wife later, but this supposedly personal moment between them feels more like an obligatory moment of exposition just for us instead. In addition, the subplot between Springsteen and his girlfriend also feels quite trite and perfunctory at times – especially when they have a little honest conversation on how much he has disappointed her.

In case of White, who has recently been expanding the range of his acting in movies as shown from Sean Durkin’s “The Iron Claw” (2023), he is fairly solid in his diligent embodiment of Springsteen’s spirit and personality despite being often stuck with subpar dialogues just like most of the other cast members including Jeremy Strong, Paul Walter Hauser, Stephen Graham, Odessa Young, Gaby Hoffmann, and Marc Maron. Looking less intense compared to his recent Oscar-nominated supporting turn in Ali Abbasi’s “The Apprentice” (2024), Strong imbues his character with genuine loyalty and dedication, and Graham, who has emerged as one of the most dependable character actors during last several years just like Strong, somehow overcomes his thankless part.

Overall, “Springsteen: Deliver Me from Nowhere” is not a total failure thanks to the admirable efforts from White and several other main cast members, but it still feels deficient and hollow on the whole in addition to being less satisfying compared to Cooper’s several better films such as “Crazy Heart” (2009), which incidentally garnered a belated Oscar for Jeff Bridges. To be frank with you, Thom Zimny’s recent documentary film “Road Diary: Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band” (2024) is relatively more interesting and insightful than this, and maybe you should check that out instead.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Howard (2018) ☆☆☆(3/4): On the life and career of a legendary Disney lyricist

Posted on May 5, 2026 by kaist455

2018 documentary film “Howard”, which is currently available on Disney+, looks into the life and career of Howard Ashman (1950 ~ 1991), a legendary American lyricist who played a crucial part in the success of several Disney animation films such as “The Little Mermaid” (1989). Although it is a shame that he died too early when he was beginning to have his biggest career success, many of his significant achievements have been cherished for many years since his death, and the documentary did a respectful job on presenting the overview on his life and career.

After opening with an archival footage clip Ashman working in the middle of the recording session for the songs for “Beauty and the Beast” (1991) in 1990, the documentary presents his early years in Baltimore, Maryland during the 1950-60s. Even when he was young, Ashman showed considerable artistic interest and talent, and then he actively pursued his growing artistic aspiration during his subsequent college years. Around that time, he was already quite aware of his homosexuality, and we hear about how he and his first partner Stewart White shared a lot of their common hope and dream as frequently participating together in many different artistic activities.

In the end, just like many other young artists in theater field, Ashman and White eventually moved to New York City in the late 1970s, though they had to begin from the very bottom for starting their career there. Mainly because there was no particular connection or figure to help them, they decided to found their own little independent theater company together, and that was how Ashman met his frequent collaborator Alan Menken.

As showing more potential as a lyricist, Ashman eventually tried on his first musical, which is incidentally based on Kurt Vonnegut Jr.s novel “God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater”. After receiving a little indirect blessing from Vonnegut himself, Ashman and his colleagues were all the more motivated, and the result was their first critical success, though it unfortunately became a commercial failure when their production was subsequently moved to Broadway.

Nevertheless, Ashman moved onto his second musical project, which was based on Roger Corman’s low-budget 1960 black comedy film “The Little Shop of Horrors”. Although many people around him were not sure about whether that could be possible, Ashman went all the way along with Menken as his composer, and, what do you know, the result was one of the most enduring works in the Broadway history. In fact, the original production of the musical was so successful that it was later adapted into the equally famous 1986 musical film of the same name, which incidentally garnered the first Best Song Oscar nomination for Ashman and Menken.

After this point, Ashman attempted to work along with Marvin Hamlisch on the next musical project, but the following production process frustrated him a lot from the beginning to the end, and he was all the more daunted by the negative reviews which came right after the opening night on Broadway. Fortunately, he was soon approached by Jeffrey Katzenberg, who was working in Disney at that time and happened to need a good lyricist to give some input to his ambitious Disney animation project. Ashman was quite excited by working for Disney, but Disney was going through the lowest moment in its history around that time, and he was quite surprised by how its animation department had been nearly abandoned for a while.

Nevertheless, he enthusiastically approached to that animation project in question, which turned out to be, yes, “The Little Mermaid”. After bringing in Menken as his composer again, Ashman closely collaborated with Disney animators for more creative feedbacks, and some of these animators gladly tell us how much Ashman influenced their production in one way or another. Besides providing all those lovely songs with Menken, he firmly stuck to his artistic integrity to the end, and that was how one of those key songs in the film, “Part of Your World”, avoided getting deleted despite Katzenberg’s insistence.

However, when “The Little Mermaid” eventually opened a new era for Disney animation and then Ashman received his first Best Song Oscar along with Menken, Ashman was already dying after receiving HIV/AIDS positive diagnosis some time ago. He and his second partner Bill Lauch, who became very close to him not long after Ashman and White got separated in 1983, were naturally quite devastated, but they initially could not tell this sad fact to many of others around them. In fact, Menken came to learn about that only a few days after he and Ashman received that Oscar, and then a small number of figures including Katzenberg also came to learn about that.

Ashman was understandably quite concerned about whether Disney would fire him because of his terminal illness, but Katzenberg and many others in Disney stood by him to the end with a lot of help and support. Besides quickly moving onto “Beauty and the Beast”, he also worked on several songs for “Aladdin” (1992), and he became all the more passionate and diligent than before, though he eventually passed away several months before “Beauty and the Beast” was released. 

In conclusion, “Howard”, directed by Don Hahn (He was the producer of “Beauty and the Beast” and several other subsequent Disney animation films, by the way), is a fairly engaging documentary which also works as a sincere tribute to Ashman’s short but distinguished life and career. While mainly driven by the archival footage clips and photographs and the excerpts from the audio interview recordings, Ashman’s artistry and humanity vividly come to us and then move us a lot on the whole, and the overall result is certainly recommendable especially if you love and admire not only the aforementioned Disney animation films but also their excellent songs from Ashman. Yes, we can only imagine how much he could have achieved more if it had not been for his unfortunate terminal illness, but his legacy will certainly live on just like it did during last 35 years.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Nutcrackers (2024) ☆☆☆(3/4): Stuck with his sister’s orphaned children

Posted on May 5, 2026 by kaist455

David Gordon Green’s 2024 film “Nutcrackers”, which is currently available on Disney+ in South Korea, was an interesting experience for me. At first, I winced more than once along with its hero as observing how he struggles to handle those four children in his custody, but then I found myself gradually caring more about them as well as him, and I certainly cheered for all of them around the end of the story, even though I knew well from the very beginning that I would get that predictable outcome in the end. 

Ben Stiller plays Mike Maxwell, a successful real estate businessman who came from Chicago to some rural town in Ohio for taking care of an important personal business of his. His sister, who was incidentally a promising young ballet dancer a long time ago, and her husband lived there along with their four children, but now they are dead due to an unfortunate accident, and Max must take care of his sister’s four children for a while before any good foster parent candidate comes.

The main source of humor during the early part of the film comes from how these four children look rather unruly to say the least. They freely and happily grew up under their parents in their family farm, and Max is aghast at how messy their family place is in many aspects, while being also quite annoyed by their frequently willful behaviors.

Nevertheless, Max tries to do what should be done for them right now, though his mind is often occupied with some big business deal he must handle as soon as possible. Because there is not any suitable foster parent for them yet, he agrees to be their temporary guardian, and he also manages to have them take care of the currently messy status of their house, though that is just the beginning of many other things he must do for them.

It is not much of a spoiler to tell you that Max eventually comes to like his sister’s children more than expected. As getting to know more about how they lived along with their dear parents, he understands and then cares about them a lot, so he comes to pay more attention to finding a suitable foster parent for them. In fact, there is actually a wealthy couple who may be interested in raising all of them together, though we instantly sense that this couple is not so ideal for them considering the children’s rather wild attitude.   

And there is also a little subplot involved with Gretchen Rice (Linda Cardellini), a local social service worker who genuinely cares about the children of Max’s sister. Although their first meeting is a bit awkward mainly due to his callous attitude, Gretchen subsequently appreciates how much Max comes to care about his sister’s children, and we also gradually sense some romantic vibe developed between them.

Leisurely moving from one narrative point to another, the screenplay by Leland Douglas often shines in a number of small moments to give us some glimpse into its main characters’ humanity. When he visits a certain foster candidate at one point later in the story, Max cannot help but notice how pretentious this candidate is, but he quietly keeps his thoughts to himself as a sensible man – even when what he suspects soon turns out to be true. While they look irrepressible in their spirit, his sister’s children really need someone to lean on, and the movie subtly conveys that to us via their little personal moments instead of spelling that out too loud.

In the end, the story arrives at the finale where its main characters become more honest about their feelings via one small public performance inspired by a certain famous classic work by Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. While the finale feels a bit clichéd at first, the movie eventually surprises us as taking an unexpected turn, and then we are touched by the following moment of healing and reconciliation.

As the main center of the story, Ben Stiller, who has recently demonstrated more of the serious side of his talent as shown from his Emmy-nominated directorial works in acclaimed Apple+ TV series “Severance”, dials down his usual comic persona a bit, and it is engaging to observe how his low-key performance fills out his character with human details to observe. At first, Max is not a particularly likable dude, but then we come to understand and accept him more as observing more of his inner decency, and Stiller also clicks well with Linda Cardellini during their several key scenes in the film.

Around Stiller, the four main young performers of the film, Homer Janson, Ulysses Janson, Arlo Janson, and Atlas Janson, hold each own place well as ably imbuing their respective roles with enough spirit and personality. It certainly helps that they are actually real-life siblings and the movie was shot in their real family farm thanks to their mother (She was a film school classmate of Green, by the way), and I was not so surprised to learn later that they have a certain particular set of skills necessary for the finale.

In conclusion, “Nutcrackers” is a little but enjoyable mix of drama and comedy, and it is certainly better than Gordon’s recent commercial horror films such as “Halloween” (2018) and “The Exorcist: Believer” (2023). Whenever we think he is no longer a wonderful filmmaker who gave us “George Washington” (2000) and “Undertow” (2004), Gordon always surprises us with his little project, and “Nutcrackers” is certainly one of such cases.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Nightbitch (2024) ☆☆(2/4): She’d rather become a dog

Posted on May 5, 2026 by kaist455

Marielle Heller’s 2024 film “Nightbitch”, which is currently available on Disney+ in South Korea, is an uneven genre mix which seems to be often confused about how it is about. While it is clearly intended to be a suburban mix between satire and fantasy, the result feels jumbled and disjointed in terms of mood and narrative, and it is a shame that its lead actress tries really hard for making it work as much as possible.

At first, the movie shows us how things have been quite frustrating for its heroine, who is simply named “Mother” in the end credits. Before her two-year-old son was born, she was a very promising artist, but she chose to focus on raising her son instead once she became pregnant, and now she wonders whether she made a big mistake from the very beginning. Every day is a constant struggle for her as she tries to take care of her son, but her husband is virtually absent due to his frequently busy job, and he does not seem to appreciate much of her efforts whenever he is at their home. 

The satiric aspects of the story work best as observing how much its heroine feels still frustrated even when she is with several other mothers in her suburban neighborhood. Many of these mothers look mostly fine and well while also being happy and content with their children, and this makes her feel all the more inferior about herself. She really wants to let out her feelings and thoughts churning inside her mind, but she only comes to deliver occasional internal monologues to herself and us instead.

In the meantime, something weird begins to happen on her body. At first, her body shows a rather abnormal growth of hair, and that is just the beginning of several other odd changes on not only her body but also her mind. While being often driven by a sudden bout of primal urge, she comes to have a much more sensitive sense of smell, and she becomes more aware of those barking dogs outside the house whenever she tries to sleep at night.

Eventually, she comes to sense that she is being transformed into something like… a dog. Quite flabbergasted about this truly preposterous case of body horror, she naturally tries to understand and process it, and that is how she becomes interested in checking out all those myths about women turned into animals. Is this simply a delusion propelled by all the accumulating anxiety and stress inside her? Or…

There are several disturbing moments including when its heroine is shocked to find a lot of dead animals in front of her house, but the movie somehow remains to be merely ridiculous instead of becoming unnerving or amusing instead. When its heroine finally reaches the logical outcome of her transformation process, this moment is supposed to be dramatically liberating, but it simply feels silly and outrageous without adding that much to the story and characters.

Heller’s screenplay is based on the novel of the same name by Rachel Yoder, and I was a bit alarmed when I came across a certain literature term while getting some information on Yoder’s novel. It seems that the novel depends a lot on magic realism, and, as some of you know well, magic realism is something quite tricky to be translated onto the screen. Many preposterous moments in the movie may be fairly believable in the novel, but these moments are just plainly weird instead of drawing us more into the story and characters.

Above all, we never get to know that much about its heroine, who remains more or less than a symbolic figure representing all the struggling mothers out there. While the movie provides a bit of her personal and professional background, the flashback scenes involved with her and her mother are mostly superficial, and the same thing can be said about a scene involved with her former professional colleagues, whose sole function is reminding more of how much she gave up just for becoming a mother.

The overall result becomes all the more frustrating because there are actually a few effective moments around its last act. When its heroine eventually opens herself more to those fellow mothers of hers, she and they come to share each own anxiety and frustration from motherhood, and this actually helps her reflect more on what she really wants to do about her life.

However, Heller’s screenplay frequently swings from one extreme end to another without any moderation, and so does its lead actress’ performance. Since her Oscar-nominated breakthrough turn in “Junebug” (2005), Amy Adams has been steadily engaging throughout her career, but the movie is unfortunately one of her few missteps. She surely shows some professional commitment as her character is driven to several extreme moments, but her admirable efforts are limited by her thin character more than once, and she is also not supported well by several notable supporting performers including Scoot McNairy, who are sadly wasted in their under-developed roles.

On the whole, “Nightbitch” is a big disappointment in addition to being two or three steps down from the considerable achievement of Heller’s several previous films such as “Can You Every Forgive Me?” (2018). I appreciate it to some degree as an exploration on motherhood via female perspective, but there are several other films which did the job much better in comparison, and I would rather recommend them instead.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | Leave a comment