Film 2511 - Sin City

Intro: I wanted to rewatch this movie for a while but never really found the right opportunity. For a moment, I was saving it to watch with Simon, but it didn't happen... so one evening, I just went for it. Finally.

Film 2511: "Sin City" (2005), directed by Robert Rodriguez, Frank Miller, Quentin Tarantino
Watched: From the computer
Language: English
Watched with: No one
Thoughts: I'd forgotten how much I like this film. 21 years later, it's still one of the coolest pieces of cinema I've ever seen.
I'll admit straight away that I've never read the comic book, but I'm pretty sure the film's visuals are quite similar to what you'd see printed on the page. Stylistically, I think this was such a bold choice... And it paid off big time.
Visual achievements aside, I like "Sin City" for two main reasons: its story is bold and unapologetic -- the baddies are real baddies, and they get no redemption or excuses; they're just big pieces of shit -- and the sheer star power this film packs. To this day, it boasts one of the most impressive casts, including the likes of Bruce Willis, Benicio del Toro, Mickey Rourke, Clive Owen, Rosario Dawson, Elijah Wood, Jessica Alba, and so many more. It blows my mind every time.
I also love that Alexis Bledel has a small but very interesting role here. Before this movie, I'd say she was mainly famous for "Gilmore Girls", and I think we were all pretty much in shock when we saw Rory Gilmore playing a backstabbing prostitute in a film where one of the main characters castrates another. I mean, the shift in tone was quite remarkable.
All in all, I really enjoyed rewatching "Sin City". It has some problems -- the love story between Bruce Willis and Jessica Alba's characters hasn't aged well -- and it's definitely a film full of violence that glorifies criminals and gangsters. But for a movie with a very specific target audience that came out more than 20 years ago, the fire and grit are still there.
Film 754 - Sin City
Film 2511 - Sin City
Film 914 - Sin City: A Dame to Kill For
Cast: Jessica Alba, Benicio del Toro, Rosario Dawson, Brittany Murphy, Josh Hartnett, Devon Aoki, Alexis Bledel, Nick Stahl, Jaime King, Michael Clarke Duncan, Michael Madsen, Carla Gugino, Tommy Flanagan, Clive Owen, Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, Elijah Wood.
Box Office: $158.7 million
Worth a watch?: "Sin City" isn't for everybody, but if you enjoy bold movies that take a swing and actually stick the landing, this is the film for you. The cast is amazing, the visuals are mind-blowing, and the whole aesthetic is so refined and well thought out -- iconic! And Quentin Tarantino directed one of the scenes for just $1.
Awards: The movie competed at the 2005 Cannes Film Festival for the Palme d'Or. It won Sexiest Performance (Jessica Alba) at the MTV Movie + TV Awards over 3 nominations (Best Movie and Best Kiss for Rosario Dawson and Clive Owen).
Key word: Nancy.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2510 - Practical Magic

Intro: Kate and I watch a lot of stuff together in the living room, lately especially "The Traitors", as we're both obsessed. After finishing the second season of the Irish one and before UK Celebrity season 2 started, we decided to take a break from it all and watch a movie for a change. And because the sequel to this one was about to come out -- and, crazy enough, Kate had never seen the original film -- we opted for this cult classic.

Film 2510: "Practical Magic" (1998), directed by Griffin Dunne
Watched: From the projector
Language: English
Watched with: Kate
Thoughts: I've seen "Practical Magic" many times in the past and, somehow, it's always a comfy, cosy watch.
On paper, it shouldn't even work -- the pace and tone of the story are all over the place -- but the overall charm of this film and the incredible chemistry between its two protagonists, Sandra Bullock and Nicole Kidman, more than make up for it.
And sure, look, it's not groundbreaking or a landmark in cinematic achievement, but it is a magical fairytale in its own right and, overall, a lovely movie to (re)watch.
Film 1425 - Practical Magic
Film 2510 - Practical Magic
Cast: Sandra Bullock, Nicole Kidman, Dianne Wiest, Stockard Channing, Goran Visnjic, Evan Rachel Wood, Margo Martindale, Aidan Quinn.
Box Office: $94.4 million
Worth a watch?: This movie encapsulates the charm of the late '90s, perfectly capturing the vibe of a small American town. Add to the equation two movie stars in their prime, two iconic veterans (Dianne Wiest & Stockard Channing), and a darker-than-expected witch story, and you get "Practical Magic" -- the perfect movie to watch right now, as the leaves start to fall and Halloween is right around the corner.
Awards: /
Key word: Belladonna.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2509 - Reading Lolita in Tehran

Intro: Years ago, I started reading the book this movie is adapted from because "Lolita" is my favourite novel of all time. I'll be honest, I couldn't finish it -- my English wasn't as good as it is now, and I was struggling big time to follow it -- so when I learned about the movie adaptation, I immediately gave it a go.

Film 2509: "Reading Lolita in Tehran" (2026), directed by Eran Riklis
Watched: From the computer
Language: Italian
Watched with: No one
Thoughts: I tried to watch this film in its original language, but I found the English subtitles too distracting. So I decided to go with the Italian-dubbed version, as it was much easier to follow. I don't regret this decision, although I would usually prefer to watch a movie in its original language.
I have to admit I didn't remember much about the story, so watching "Reading Lolita in Tehran" felt like discovering it for the first time. To be honest, "Lolita" isn't at the centre of the story, as it's just one of the many banned books that this group of women read. It's interesting to see how something I found so accessible when I first decided to read "Lolita" has a completely different meaning and set of implications here: reading this book is dangerous, and these women know it all too well, as the regime has forbidden them, along with the rest of Iran's population, from reading it or even talking about it. Instead, I read "Lolita" while on holiday in Greece.
I enjoyed "Reading Lolita in Tehran". It explores the history and culture of a country I know very little about, and it felt refreshing to consume content that wasn't produced or conceived for a Western audience (or specifically an American one).
It's a very quiet movie in the sense that, although deeply unsettling things happen, tragedy isn't sensationalised. I'd say this is mainly thanks to Golshifteh Farahani's portrayal of the protagonist, Azar Nafisi, the author of the book the film is based on. She's assertive but never loud, and practises a form of quiet, almost understated rebellion, with real-life consequences: she refuses to wear the veil, creates a book club for her students, and discusses forbidden Western literature with them.
Her marriage dynamic also feels quite modern, especially considering this story is set in the 70s: she's on equal footing with her husband, has her own job and career, and fights for what she believes in, risking everything in the process. Compared to the other women's romantic relationships, the contrast couldn't be greater. All in all, "Reading Lolita in Tehran" succeeds in showcasing the struggle, uncertainty, and fear that define this period in Iran's history. I'm no expert on the subject, so I'm judging it solely on what I saw in the film. I wish the story had focused more on the actual discussions of the books the women read. I think the film would have benefited from including more of those conversations, but I understand that, with so many characters, historical events to portray, and the challenge of doing the novel justice, there was a lot to cover. All these elements inevitably compete for screen time. I wouldn't say the movie completely succeeds in delivering a balanced story, but its achievements outweigh its limitations.
Cast: Golshifteh Farahani, Zar Amir Ebrahimi, Mina Kavani, Bahar Beihaghi, Isabella Nefar, Raha Rahbari, Lara Wolf, Arash Marandi, Catayoune Ahmadi, Reza Diako, Shahbaz Noshir.
Box Office: $1,580,815
Worth a watch?: It's not a loud film, and its subject matter might limit its appeal to a wider audience. Still, I'd recommend it. It's well made and focuses on topics we rarely get to see in modern mainstream cinema.
Awards: At the 2024 Rome Film Fest the film was nominated for Best Film in the Progressive Cinema section.
Key word: Iranian Revolution.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2508 - Evil Dead Burn

Intro: The days of the couch are over and I'm back to the movies.
I really wanted to catch this one before it left cinemas, so I finally went back to Cineworld on the last day it was showing.

Film 2508: "Evil Dead Burn" (2026), directed by Sébastien Vaniček
Watched: At the movies
Language: English
Watched with: No one
Thoughts: Can a movie do too much? It definitely felt that way while I was watching this one.
I can't say I'm a huge fan of the "Evil Dead" saga, but I remember enjoying the previous movie, so I was quite excited about this one, especially considering how much "Evil Dead Rise" had scared me.
This sequel is scary too, but in a way I don't particularly appreciate. There's a lot of gore and splatter -- very graphic stuff -- and I have to admit I was a bit fed up with all the dismemberment and bloodshed, especially in the mid-section of the story as there's literally no time to catch a break. To me, it felt like the story took a back seat to the horror scenes and spectacle, so I guess you could say the violence started to feel a bit gratuitous after a while.
One element of the story I found interesting was the starting point for our protagonist: she's a widow who's just lost her husband, yet there's something off about her from the get-go. Without giving too much away, I appreciated how the screenplay starts with something that feels extremely real and grounded, only to then go balls to the walls and venture into the supernatural. I mean, it definitely wasn't subtle, but the parallel between the horror Alice (Souheila Yacoub) experiences in the movie and the abuse she suffers in her marriage was an interesting way to anchor the story -- and I liked that more than all the crazy, bloody scenes.
All in all, although it definitely delivers on the horror front, "Evil Dead Burn" wasn't for me.
Cast: Souheila Yacoub, Tandi Wright, Hunter Doohan, Luciane Buchanan, Erroll Shand, Maude Davey, Alyssa Sutherland.
Box Office: $72.4 million
Worth a watch?: I'm sure hardcore horror fans can handle this without a problem, but I was actually quite surprised by the amount of graphic, explicit violence on display here. To each their own, but don't say I didn't warn you: "Evil Dead Burn" is not for the faint of heart.
Awards: /
Key word: Dagger.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2507 - Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl

Intro: I'm not on the couch anymore, but it's still Summer and I keep feeling my movie fantasy.

Film 2507: "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl" (2003), directed by Gore Verbinski
Watched: From the computer
Language: English
Watched with: No one
Thoughts: I always liked the first one, but I've never been a massive fan of this franchise, to be honest. Let's say I like it enough.
I still think this one is the best of them all, and what Johnny Depp does with the Jack Sparrow character is, I think, amazing. He literally created one of the most iconic and recognizable characters in modern cinema, and he did it... for a movie inspired by a theme park ride! I'll never get over this.
Anyway, Depp aside, "The Curse of the Black Pearl" is entertaining and a good ride -- wink wink -- but I have to admit I forgot how long this film is and, to be honest, 143 minutes was a bit too much for me. Don't get me wrong, I still enjoyed it, but I think knowing more or less all the bits of the story made me anxious to get to the good parts and/or the end. I really enjoy the beginning of the film, but I couldn't stand the sword fight between Sparrow and Will (Orlando Bloom)... too choreographed, and the scene overstays its welcome. Same with the curse: it's amazing when you see the pirates go from normal human beings to just skeletons under the full moon for the first time, but the quest to get the last coin and the (double) voyage(s) to the island broke my spirit.
Again, I think this has more to do with me and possibly the fact that I decided to rewatch this movie but only remembered the parts that I liked. "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl" is extremely entertaining and good fun. Keira Knightley is perfect for these types of period movies, Klaus Badelt's soundtrack is iconic, and overall, this film still holds up more than 20 years after it came out in cinemas.
Film 240 - La maledizione della prima luna
Film 1560 - Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl
Film 2507 - Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl
Film 1570 - Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest
Film 1579 - Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End
Film 1242 - Pirati dei Caraibi - Oltre i confini del mare
Film 1415 - Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales
Cast: Johnny Depp, Geoffrey Rush, Orlando Bloom, Keira Knightley, Jonathan Pryce, Jack Davenport, Kevin R. McNally, Zoe Saldaña, Mackenzie Crook.
Box Office: $654.3 million
Worth a watch?: In general, this saga is good fun, especially the first three films. My favourite is still this one, and every now and again I like to rewatch it. But beware of the running time, because it goes over the two-hour mark. Other than that, go ahead and have fun.
Awards: Nominated for 5 Oscars: Best Actor (Johnny Depp), Best Makeup, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Visual Effects. 1 win at the BAFTAs for Best Makeup and Hair over 5 nominations (Best Actor in a Leading Role for Depp, Best Special Visual Effects, Best Costume Design, Best Sound. 1 Golden Globe nomination for Best Actor – Motion Picture Musical or Comedy (Depp) and 1 win at the MTV Movie Awards for Best Male Performance (Depp) over 6 nominations for Best Movie, Best Comedic Performance (Depp), Best On-Screen Duo (Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom), Best Villain (Geoffrey Rush), Best Breakthrough Performance (Keira Knightley).
Key word: Curse.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2506 - Sherlock Holmes

Intro: I wanted to rewatch this movie for a while and never got the right chance. So, thanks to my Summer couch session, I finally got down to it.

Film 2506: "Sherlock Holmes" (2009), directed by Guy Ritchie
Watched: From the projector
Language: English
Watched with: No one
Thoughts: I'm a big fan of this franchise and have always loved this first one. I think it's great fun, and Guy Ritchie's take on the character of Sherlock Holmes is so dynamic and entertaining that it's still so refreshing to watch today. Also, I love how Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law play off each other. There's obvious chemistry between them, which makes this film stand out even more.
So, quickly, what I love about "Sherlock Holmes": the slow-mo montages, the humour, Rachel McAdams as Irene Adler, the magic/occult vibe of the story and, above all, Hans Zimmer's soundtrack. It's a classic, go listen to it!
Film 47 - Sherlock Holmes
Film 115 - Sherlock Holmes
Film 311 - Sherlock Holmes
Film 615 - Sherlock Holmes
Film 2506 - Sherlock Holmes
Film 367 - Sherlock Holmes - Gioco di ombre
Film 769 - Sherlock Holmes - Gioco di ombre
Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law, Rachel McAdams, Mark Strong, Eddie Marsan, Kelly Reilly, Hans Matheson, Geraldine James.
Box Office: $524 million
Worth a watch?: If you're looking for a fun ride, a good adventure and a visually interesting take on Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's characters, this film is perfect for you. It's entertaining, funny, the action sequences are extremely well crafted, and the story (aka the mystery) is a good one. And this version of Holmes was made for Downey Jr. to play.
Awards: 2 Oscar nominations for Best Achievement in Music Written for Motion Pictures, Original Score and Best Achievement in Art Direction. 1 Golden Globe win for Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture - Comedy or Musical (Robert Downey Jr.). 1 Grammy nomination for Best Score Soundtrack Album for a Motion Picture, Television or Other Visual Media. Nominated for 1 MTV Movie Award for Best Fight (Robert Downey Jr. and Mark Strong).
Key word: Magic.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2505 - Jumanji: The Next Level

Intro: Another Summer evening, another movie on the couch.

Film 2505: "Jumanji: The Next Level" (2019), directed by Jake Kasdan
Watched: From the projector
Language: English
Watched with: No one
Thoughts: I watched this movie back when I was living in Ushuaia, Argentina, but I never got around to reviewing it because... Well, I was so far behind with the list of movies I had to write about on the blog that I skipped some of them to jump ahead in the queue and review newer entries. Then I never got back to the older ones. I'm talking about a backlog of possibly more than 50 movies -- including this one -- and I'm not sure I'll ever go back and finish what I left behind.
So, in a way, watching "Jumanji: The Next Level" for the second time a) helped me remember what actually happens in the story and b) finally allowed me to review it. Here we go.
Did I watch "The Next Level" a second time to actually realise it's a bad movie? Yes, because it felt like I was watching it for the first time, if I'm being honest. And... it'st nothat good.
Firstly, there are way too many characters. The story is complex enough with the human characters and their respective avatars; I really didn't need to add the grandpa and his frenemy to the mix, especially when they also get transported into the game and one of them gets transformed into a horse... Like, on paper it sounds fun, but the reality is that the joke gets old quite quickly.
Additionally, I didn't like the character swaps. I understand why it was necessary to switch things up compared to "Welcome to the Jungle", and I believe some degree of change actually benefited the story here. What didn't work for me, though, is how the avatar swap becomes some sort of character study for Dwayne Johnson and co. It's funny and entertaining at first -- I mean, Johnson playing Danny DeVito and Hart playing Danny Glover is unexpectedly funny -- but after a while of old-man jokes and complaints about back pain, it all becomes stale and quite uninspired.
On top of all of this, I don't think this adventure is as fun as the previous one. Again, too many characters to follow, too many story arcs to complete, and it all becomes messy and convoluted for no reason. I believe if DeVito's and Glover's characters were cut out, the whole story would have benefited from it.
So yeah, I was disappointed by "The Next Level" because, to be honest, there's nothing really next level about it.
Film 784 - Jumanji
Film 1472 - Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle
Film 1785 - Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle
Film 2504 - Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle
Film 2505 - Jumanji: The Next Level
Cast: Dwayne Johnson, Jack Black, Kevin Hart, Karen Gillan, Nick Jonas, Awkwafina, Alex Wolff, Morgan Turner, Ser'Darius Blain, Madison Iseman, Danny Glover, Danny DeVito, Rhys Darby, Colin Hanks, Bebe Neuwirth.
Box Office: $801 million
Worth a watch?: If you liked the first one, you may give this one a go. I think it's the weakest one of the whole franchise (yes, I'm including "Zathura: A Space Adventure"), so I would personally advise you to skip it. But considering the third one is coming out in December, you decide if you want to go through with "The Next Level". I mean, it's not the worst thing I've ever seen, but I was quite disappointed.
Awards: /
Key word: Dr. Bravestone.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2504 - Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle

Intro: A few weeks ago, during the Summer heatwave, I started watching older movies on the projector by myself in the living room. What a treat!

Film 2504: "Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle" (2017), directed by Jake Kasdan
Watched: From the projector
Language: English
Watched with: No one
Thoughts: I always loved the original "Jumanji" movie and I've seen it so many times. For a second there I was tempted to watch it again, but seeing as the new "Jumanji: Open World" is coming out on Christmas Day this year, I decided to revisit the two newer movies, especially because I couldn't name one thing that happened in the second one.
I have to admit I quite enjoy "Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle". I think it's a smart reboot of this franchise, in a way that pays homage to the original film while including brand new elements that launch the saga in a whole new direction. In this sense, I think moving the game setting to a video game was the correct idea.
Additionally, I like the four main characters. They're easily identifiable as they come with specific, inescapable traits, which makes it easy to identify them and simultaneously sets them apart. Pair that with their human counterparts and how different they are from their game avatars and... you get the perfect mix.
I mean, don't get me wrong, it's all quite simple and on the nose, yet I think the simplicity of these opposite archetypes is key to the success of the story here: no subtlety that needs to be interpreted by the audience, no complex plot points, no overly complicated story arcs. You watch the movie and you get it straight away, and if you happen to know the original one, watching "Welcome to the Jungle" is even more rewarding.
And look, I've never been a big Dwayne Johnson fan, but here he makes fun of himself enough to be passable. Not to mention that, by making fun of his "Smoldering Intensity", the story utilises his acting shortcomings to its advantage.
So all in all, I had a good old time.
Film 784 - Jumanji
Film 1472 - Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle
Film 1785 - Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle
Film 2504 - Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle
Film 2505 - Jumanji: The Next Level
Cast: Dwayne Johnson, Jack Black, Kevin Hart, Karen Gillan, Nick Jonas, Bobby Cannavale, Rhys Darby, Alex Wolff, Ser'Darius Blain, Madison Iseman, Morgan Turner, Colin Hanks, Marc Evan Jackson, Missi Pyle.
Box Office: $963 million
Worth a watch?: The original "Jumanji" is an undeniable cult classic that holds a special place in my heart. I was a bit scared when they announced the sequel back in the day, especially because Dwayne Johnson isn't necessarily known for being a good actor with extensive range. Here, though, I think he finds a middle ground that works for him: macho action movie star combined with some quirky, funny comedic moments that uplift his performance.
So, if you're in the mood for a little adventure and you like the OG "Jumanji", I'd say you should like this one enough. Of all the reboots and sequels we've seen recently, this is definitely one of the better ones.
Awards: /
Key word: Console.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2503 - Spider-Man: Brand New Day

Intro: I mean, I was quite excited about this one, although I wasn't quite sure what to expect, to be honest. The only way to find out was to go to the movies and check it out for myself.

Film 2503: "Spider-Man: Brand New Day" (2026), directed by Destin Daniel Cretton
Watched: At the movies
Language: English
Watched with: Niamh
Thoughts: So, I'll be honest from the get-go: I didn't love it.
Everyone seems to be pretty excited and content with this movie -- it made two billion dollars, after all -- and sure, it's not bad or anything. On the contrary, it's obviously well made, and it doesn't feel like a cash grab, which is nice especially considering how Sony has been developing its own Spider-Man-related cinematic universe. That said, I didn't love the story too much or, to be more precise, I didn't love the ending.
I think, to justify the existence of this fourth outing, the plot twist at the end is quite weak. I love that they're bringing new characters in, I love that we're finally moving towards a new X-Men era, but (**spoiler**) to introduce the Jean Grey character, the story could have come up with something a bit more meaningful than an air vent label. I was so disappointed when that whole bit was revealed that it really ruined the whole vibe of the movie for me.
I'll say it again, "Spider-Man: Brand New Day" is not bad or anything, it's just OK. To be fair, coming up with something as iconic as they did in the previous film would have been impossible, and I appreciate that, in a way, the stakes of this story were scaled down and re-aligned with Peter's life rather than another save-the-world adventure that involves half of the MCU. That said, bringing back the Hulk was a little pointless -- he doesn't do much here and he's soon gone -- and Punisher's character development is a bit odd. MJ's, though, is quite interesting and actually makes sense and feels very mature (she is still the same MJ, but she doesn't remember Peter, so that version of MJ is now gone and can't be brought back just because Peter told her they were in love).
So yeah, a bit of a mixed bag for me: not bad, but I wasn't blown away by this new Spidey adventure.
Film 1394 - Spider-Man: Homecoming
Film 1653 - Spider-Man: Homecoming
Film 1781 - Spider-Man: Far from Home
Film 2077 - Spider-Man: No Way Home
Film 2226 - Spider-Man: No Way Home
Film 2503 - Spider-Man: Brand New Day
Film 467 - The Amazing Spider-Man
Film 718 - The Amazing Spider-Man 2: Il potere di Electro
Cast: Tom Holland, Zendaya, Sadie Sink, Jacob Batalon, Jon Bernthal, Florence Pugh, Tramell Tillman, Michael Mando, Marisa Tomei, Mark Ruffalo.
Box Office: $2.506 billion (to this day)
Worth a watch?: I'll be honest, this isn't my favourite of the franchise, which, I think, peaked with "No Way Home". I love Spider-Man and I appreciate Tom Holland playing the character, so if you feel the same, go for it (you probably did already, but in case you missed it at the movies, I'm pretty sure it's still in cinemas).
All of this said, I think the plot twist gets way too hyped by the story, and by the time it gets revealed, it is a little bit of a let-down. The cast is great, I think Sadie Sink is going to be an interesting Jean Grey, and the scenes that include Florence Pugh are frankly the best part of the movie, which is, quite surprisingly, very comedy-heavy.
So my suggestion would be to go ahead and check "Brand New Day" for yourself and see what all the fuss is about (in a nutshell: the highest-grossing Spider-Man film, the highest-grossing film of 2026, the highest-grossing film in the United States and Canada, and the third-highest-grossing film of all time).
Awards: /
Key word: V-Max.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2502 - Scary Movie

Intro: I watched it at the movies a while ago and forgot to add it to my list of movies to review. I'm not sure how or why, but the other day it came back to me that I never posted anything about this film on the blog and realised I had forgotten to do my review. So here we are.

Film 2502: "Scary Movie" (2026), directed by Michael Tiddes
Watched: At the movies
Language: English
Watched with: Niamh, Debbi
Thoughts: Did we need a new "Scary Movie"? Probably not. Was I excited for the sixth installment of the franchise? Absolutely! Was it as good as I hoped? Not really...
Reality is, "Scary Movie" (or "Scary Movie 6") is a middle-of-the-road sequel that is a welcome departure from the fifth horrendous outing of the franchise, but it also doesn't fully deliver. There is some good in there, yet I'm not sure it was enough. If a seventh film were to come out, tho, I'd say this is the right direction for the franchise to go in.
As usual, the plot is just an excuse to make fun of other movies. Sometimes the comedy works, sometimes it doesn't. I particularly enjoyed the references to "The Substance", "Weapons", "Sinners", "M3GAN" and "White Chicks" -- with honourable mentions to the dildo fight à la "John Wick" and the cartoon "dream" sequence inspired by "KPop Demon Hunters" -- whereas I found the constant references to "Scream" and especially its recent sequels to be a bit tiring after a while. I do understand what the plot was trying to do, in a sort of meta-commentary on the meta-commentary that the "Scream" saga tends to position itself as, but here it only works to a certain point. After that, it's almost a copy-and-paste situation that doesn't add much to the end result.
To be fair, I was unsure of what to expect with this new chapter of this parody horror saga. On one hand, I was happy to see the original team return: the Wayans, Anna Faris, and Regina Hall. On the other hand, the "Scary Movie" franchise has been very inconsistent in terms of quality. Here there's some sort of balance between these two elements: the return of the original cast brings back a certain freshness that was missing for a while, while the movie isn't as hilarious as one would have hoped.
So, all in all, I enjoyed "Scary Movie" enough to be happy this franchise is back, but the end result didn't match my favourites "Scary Movie 3", "Scary Movie" (the OG from 2000) and "Scary Movie 4".
Film 1038 - Scary Movie
Film 383 - Scary Movie 3
Film 1449 - Scary Movie 3
Film 2041 - Scary Movie 3
Film 2396 - Scary Movie 3
Film 1603 - Scary Movie 4
Film 550 - Scary Movie V
Film 2502 - Scary Movie
Cast: Marlon Wayans, Shawn Wayans, Kenan Thompson, Dave Sheridan, Lochlyn Munro, Kim Wayans, Cheri Oteri, Chris Elliott, Damon Wayans Jr., Joe Jackson, Carmen Electra, Teyana Taylor, Anthony Anderson, Shaquille O'Neal, Anna Faris, Regina Hall.
Box Office: $278 million
Worth a watch?: If you're like me and you've watched all the previous movies, then it only makes sense to give this one a go. If you've never watched the other five films or you've never been fond of this kind of comedy, then I'd skip this one and check out something else. Like the original "Scream", for example.
Awards: /
Key word: Rebootquel.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2501 - Exit 8

Intro: The horror saga continues, and Niamh and I watched a second movie on the couch after "Leviticus" didn't leave us fully satisfied.

Film 2501: "Exit 8" (2025), directed by Genki Kawamura
Watched: From the projector
Language: Japanese
Watched with: Niamh
Thoughts: If I hadn't read the synopsis on Wikipedia, I'm not sure how much of this movie I'd have remembered. This isn't to say that I didn't enjoy "Exit 8", but its repetitive nature and lack of major plot points until the end of the story kind of erased the plot bits that aren't repeated over and over.
That said, I think "Exit 8" is a perfectly fine film, visually interesting and simple enough to follow, although personally I wouldn't call this a horror movie, but rather a psychological mystery film with some thriller elements and a scare or two along the way.
I didn't know anything about the game this is based on -- "The Exit 8", a 2023 indie adventure game developed and published by Kotake Create -- and I went in without knowing what to expect. The only reference I had that I could compare this movie to was "Iron Lung", as these two films share a similar starting point: they're based on video games I've never heard of, they're not major studio productions, they have confined settings and claustrophobic elements, and there's a repetitiveness to the plot.
Based on what I saw and my experience of both films, I have to admit "Exit 8" is more my vibe. I'm not saying it's a movie I would watch again, but at least it feels like a fully fleshed-out and realised film, competently made and with an obviously higher budget (I couldn't find a source for how much this film cost to produce, tho). And I know the comparison isn't necessarily fair, but my brain inevitably went there.
All in all, "Exit 8" was an interesting watch: I liked the visuals, the segment that focused solely on the kid was my favourite -- the child actor is really good -- and the idea behind the story is fascinating enough to carry the whole movie through. But after the first few times you witness the same elements happening, you start to lose focus a bit and, especially towards the middle section of the story, the lack of progression makes the story feel heavier and slower. When it eventually catches up, things get interesting again.
So, yeah, I don't regret watching it, but considering I was looking forward to watching a horror movie, this was definitely not it.
Cast: Kazunari Ninomiya, Yamato Kochi, Naru Asanuma, Kotone Hanase, Nana Komatsu.
Box Office: $44 million
Worth a watch?: I remember watching the trailer for the first time and being quite intrigued. The story of a man who is caught in a looping subway corridor definitely tickles my curiosity + the reviews were really good.
Now, I'm not saying "Exit 8" is bad, but it's definitely not a mind-blowing experience as they try to sell it to you. It's a perfectly fine psychological film with mystery and horror elements that also happens to be based on a popular video game. I never played the game, so I'm of no use there, but as a movie watcher, I can say I enjoyed this film enough, but I wouldn't say it's a must-watch.
Awards: It won Best Poster Design at the 2025 Cannes Film Festival.
Key word: Anomaly.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2500 - Leviticus

Intro: May the horror fest continues!

Film 2500: "Leviticus" (2026), directed by Adrian Chiarella
Watched: From the projector
Language: English
Watched with: Niamh
Thoughts: I think this movie is enjoyable, but not as life-changing as the reviews would like you to think. I still had a good enough time, but yeah, I was expecting something a bit different.
Specifically, "Leviticus" reminded me of other films, particularly "It Follows", but also other recent Australian movies like "Talk to Me" (the young protagonists of both movies) and "Bring Her Back" (the ritual part of both stories). With the latter two, it's more a similarity in tone and general vibe, whereas I think there's a genuine likeness to "It Follows"'s story, as literally the monster/creature follows the protagonists to attack them in both movies. Don't get me wrong, I'm not pointing it out to say it's a bad thing, but simply that this came to mind when I was watching this film.
Other than this, I do believe that the best way to describe "Leviticus" is through the words of a review I read online, which went roughly like this: homophobia is the real monster in this story. And I think it's so true.
I mean, there is an actual monster: an entity that impersonates the person you desire the most to then attack you: in this case, as the two protagonists are gay and in love, they basically get attacked by each other, but the "monster" version of themselves. And because this entity gets summoned through some sort of supernatural conversion therapy ritual, it is indeed a case of homophobia at its core. And when you think that the protagonist's mom is also involved in the ritual... it makes it even more upsetting.
Because of these unusual elements, I enjoyed the movie's take on this issue combined with an unexpected horror setting, which is quite refreshing. Additionally, the actors playing the two teenagers in love (Joe Bird, Stacy Clausen) are quite good, and their performances really carry the film, considering they have to portray both the normal and monstrous versions of their characters. On top of that, I didn't expect to see Mia Wasikowska in a movie again (here also producing), as I thought she had retired from acting -- which she clearly didn't, although she stepped away from the Hollywood spotlight.
All in all, I think "Leviticus" presents an interesting take on queer youth -- in Australia, specifically -- and is able to demonize homophobia in such a tangible way that is rare to see on the big screen, especially in the horror genre. That said, I wouldn't say I was blown away.
Cast: Joe Bird, Stacy Clausen, Jeremy Blewitt, Ewen Leslie, Davida McKenzie, Mia Wasikowska.
Box Office: $8.6 million
Worth a watch?: It's an interesting combination of queer cinema and horror, a genre that rarely engages so openly and honestly with teenage gay characters. If you're looking for a story that is gay and scary at the same time, go for it. Especially because, for once, i'ts not a product from the US or the UK. This film has an interesting point of view and occasionally delivers on the horror as well. If you're looking for a more traditional scary movie, then look elsewhere.
Awards: /
Key word: Desire.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2499 - The Odyssey

Intro: Back in July I was supposed to go and watch this movie at the Irish Film Institute -- my first time there. I booked my ticket for the 70mm IMAX show (because that's how the director intended the audience to watch the movie) but karma had a different plan in mind.
A few days before the show, my sight went double and I got hospitalized for a while to run some tests. I got discharged on the day I was supposed to go and see this movie and, obviously, I couldn't make it. It took another week before my sight went back to normal and only at that stage did I decide to give this movie another try. No more IMAX experience tho, just the regular one.

Film 2499: "The Odyssey" (2026), directed by Christopher Nolan
Watched: At the movies
Language: English
Watched with: Niamh
Thoughts: I think it was important to explain what happened to me before I went to see this movie because the issue with my eyes had an impact on my perception of this film.
I'll start with the positives: I think "The Odyssey" is masterfully crafted and shot and, overall, it is indeed a cinematic experience. Possibly the true definition of a movie event -- more so than the new Spider-man, which is part of a massive franchise and extremely recognizable IP -- Nolan's new epic adventure dominated the mainstream conversation for weeks (ahead of and after its release) and took the box office by storm. In this regard, this is truly an amazing feat, considering how hard it is to bring people to the theaters nowadays, even more so if it's a film not attached to any previous franchise or saga and, like in this case, it's taken from an epic poem based on ancient Greek literature.
In this scenario, I think Nolan would play the intellectual property: he's one of the most recognizable and successful directors of our time and all his movies have seen an insane amount of success (box office and award-wise). So it comes as no surprise that people would be immediately interested in seeing his new movie, not to mention the follow-up to "Oppenheimer", the film that won Nolan the Academy Award for Best Director. Add in the insane amount of Hollywood A-listers that are playing big and small roles here and... I think it comes as no surprise that people were quite interested in checking "The Odyssey" out. Me included.
All of this taken into account and digested... it's time for me to admit that I didn't particularly like this film. For a variety of reasons. Maybe a list would make it easier, so here we go:

1. The reviews. As we know, good reviews create expectations. This film got crazy good ones, so I was expecting to be blown away, almost like my life was meant to be changed by this masterpiece. Needless to say, this had an impact on me.
2. I struggled to follow. I didn't know the story well enough from the get-go: I knew bits and pieces, but not the whole thing, and I have to admit I struggled to follow the story quite a lot, especially at the beginning. It's like I couldn't get into the story's rhythm. The many characters, the amount of dialogue, the time jumps, the unfamiliarity with the source material... So much to take in so quickly, and I felt like I had no time to process what was shown to me, nor was I given enough tools to follow along. As a non-English native speaker, I am aware that this isn't necessarily the movie's fault but, still, I think the story is a bit confusing. And this gets me to the next point.
3. The time jumps. I have no issues with a story jumping back and forth in time, but I believe it should be signaled somehow. I feel like here it's very much left to the viewer to realise where exactly in the story we are. There's no added text on the screen to signal location or time and -- what I found to be the most shocking part -- there's no real progression (or regression) of time visually. Or at least that was my perception. Anne Hathaway looks always the same throughout the whole 10 years this story covers, Tom Holland never loses his baby face and if it wasn't for Matt Damon's beard, I don't think I would have gotten any indication that some time had passed between the scenes. So confusing.
4. The characters. There are way too many. I realize that the source material has even more, but even as a movie adaptation that runs for 173 minutes there's way too much going on that cannot be addressed properly and in full.
5. The dialogue. This is what bothers me the most about "The Odyssey", especially because it's such a long movie: the dialogue is constantly rushed. Two things in particular stood out to me: a) there's never time to sit with what the characters have just said and b) the back and forth between characters is so fast that sometimes their answers feel unnatural because of how quickly they banter with each other. If something is said to a person that has an impact on them, you would expect them to take a moment to process that information and then react accordingly. Here there's none of that: the first line is said, then immediately we get a reply, then the subsequent reply and so on. And once the conversation is over, off we go to the next scene with no time to process what we just heard and watched.
6. The pace (aka editing). This doesn't refer to the whole movie, but sometimes the film jumps from one scene to the next in such a rush that -- yep, you guessed it -- there's no time to take in what was just shown.
7. Sound and visual effects. This could be just me because of my personal issue, but I thought everything was amped up to the maximum: the volume is crazy loud and some scenes show intense lights or flashing that I found so overwhelming I had to close my eyes and disengage for a moment. The sound especially I thought was too loud and overpowering.

So, because of these reasons, I really struggled with "The Odyssey". Technically, it is quite impressive and I love how much of the marketing campaign revolved around the behind-the-scenes and the technical skills that went into creating this film. I think it's so refreshing to put the artistry that made it all possible front and center, use it to draw people in and make them curious to catch this film at the cinema. That said, I won't lie: I miss sci-fi Nolan. I miss intricate plots and plot twists, I miss space and dream sequences, magicians and superheroes. I loved "Dunkirk" but wasn't super fond of "Oppenheimer" and I feel like this new entry follows a very similar path to these two previous movies, but in a way that has further taken away the fun and excitement that used to come with a new Christopher Nolan film. I mean, don't get me wrong, people are still extremely excited every time this director adds a new creation to his filmography -- me included -- and I'm still gonna go and see whatever he comes out with next, but I am a bit nostalgic for that era when a new Christopher Nolan movie meant new world building, the creation of the impossible and an original story that would take you on a journey.
Ps. It's pretty early to say, but I think it's safe to say that this movie will do great at next year's Oscars. Maybe it won't win it all, but definitely the technical categories are locked, possibly even Best Director for Nolan.
Cast: Matt Damon, Tom Holland, Anne Hathaway, Robert Pattinson, Lupita Nyong'o, Samantha Morton, John Leguizamo, Jon Bernthal, Himesh Patel, Bill Irwin, Elliot Page, Benny Safdie, Corey Hawkins, Mia Goth, James Remar, Travis Scott, Zendaya, Charlize Theron.
Box Office: $1.721 billion (as of today)
Worth a watch?: Definitely not my favourite Nolan movie, it doesn't even make the top 10 to be honest. It's long, loud, overly stuffed and a bit overwhelming at times, but just because it didn't work for me, it doesn't mean it's a bad movie or you shouldn't give it a go (if you didn't already). And especially because this film was so successful and drove much of this Summer's movie conversation, I'd suggest you make your own idea about it.
Awards: /
Key word: Zeus's law.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2498 - Iron Lung

Intro: My long, hot horror Summer continues!

Film 2498: "Iron Lung" (2026), directed by Mark Fischbach
Watched: From the projector
Language: English
Watched with: No one
Thoughts: I knew nothing about this film before hearing about it on TikTok. Someone was talking about this renaissance moment for the horror genre, and "Iron Lung" was quoted as one of the entries that contributed to this revival. So, obviously, I was extremely curious.
And look, I didn't hate the movie, but it definitely wasn't made for me. I appreciate the effort that went into creating a product like this on a small budget ($3 million), and all the hard work that went into bringing it to life, considering Mark Fischbach (Markiplier on YouTube) wrote it, directed it, edited it and, yeah, you guessed it, starred in it. So it's clearly a project he really believed in and put a lot of effort into creating. I respect that.
That said, I think the issue of setting your whole story in one confined space becomes more and more evident as the story progresses. Don't get me wrong, it's not that the story gets boring because we're stuck in one place. That's not it. But when a movie with a limited budget is also shot in a tiny submarine where all the props look a bit on the cheaper side... You start to notice. The command control has like 10 buttons overall. The whole room where the main character spends all his time is empty. There's literally so much space you could fit eight other people. And the images that come from the scanner... I understand they're supposed to mimic the original material this film is based on -- the submarine simulation horror game "Iron Lung" created by David Szymanski -- but damn, you really don't understand what you're looking at. Yeah, every now and again the shape of a monster would be easier to spot, but for the rest I was like... What's going on?
Additionally, I found the plot quite confusing. I do believe it was partially my fault because I didn't have subtitles and I would occasionally miss a line or two, but I still thought things could have been explained a bit more clearly. At least this is the point of view of a person who never played the game this is taken from, nor has ever heard about it before watching this movie. I had to go on Wikipedia to read the plot to be able to piece some things together... And that's never a good thing.
Again, I don't necessarily blame the movie. I think after a while I got a bit bored and my brain zoned off and wandered a bit too much. I read that fans of the video game actually appreciated "Iron Lung", so... good for them!
Cast: Mark "Markiplier" Fischbach, Caroline Kaplan, Troy Baker, Elsie Lovelock, Elle LaMont, Mick Lauer, Seán McLoughlin, Isaac McKee.
Box Office: $51.2 million
Worth a watch?: Not for me. I wouldn't even consider this a horror movie, to be honest. If you like the game or know about it and you're curious, I'd say go for it. Otherwise, I'd recommend watching something else. Especially if you're claustrophobic.
Awards: /
Key word: Sample.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi

Film 2497 - They Will Kill You

Intro: I was really curious to see this one, but when it came out in theaters, I didn't make it in time to go and watch it. Being 2026, the year of the horror renaissance, I couldn't possibly leave this one behind. So, a few weeks ago, I decided to give it a go.

Film 2497: "They Will Kill You" (2026), directed by Kirill Sokolov
Watched: From the projector
Language: English
Watched with: No one
Thoughts: I think this movie is full of ideas, and some of them are really good, but towards the end, the story takes such a turn that it ruins the ending a bit for me.
I'll be honest, overall I enjoyed "They Will Kill You": it's bold and very creative, and it has the guts to tell a completely new story in such a unique way, combining elements from horror and thriller, sci-fi and comedy for an overall result that is a crazy ride. And if you like it, what an actual ride it is! It's not perfect, though. I think there is a tonal shift towards the second half of the movie that messes up the vibe a bit, but I appreciate the effort in delivering something new, especially in such a stacked year for horror films.
That said, the ending is where "They Will Kill You" lost me. The cult plot twist is fine -- I mean, not groundbreaking, but it's fun -- and when you mix this element with the fact that its members are immortal and keep on resurrecting... it's actually fun to watch.
My issue is the (real) villain of the story and the fight between him and our main protagonist: it's such a weird scene to watch and, without giving too much away, I think the visual effects are not up to par and, in general, this bit of the story is so over the top that it actually took me out of it. It looks so obviously computer-generated, and what's at stake is so out of the ordinary that I disengaged a bit. Not to mention that the skin part confused me a bit.
All in all, though, this movie surprised me. I went into it without knowing anything about it, with no expectations whatsoever and, yeah, I had fun. It's a combination of so many other movies blended together that it comes out the other side like something new.
Cast: Zazie Beetz, Myha'la, Paterson Joseph, James Remar, Angus Sampson, Tom Felton, Heather Graham, Patricia Arquette.
Box Office: $19.4 million
Worth a watch?: Definitely not a film for everyone, it's extremely violent and filled with dark humor. But if you enjoy films like "Kill Bill", "Ready or Not" and its sequel, or even "Rosemary's Baby", this one could actually work for you. Visually, it's very interesting, Zazie Beetz and Patricia Arquette banter off each other perfectly and, overall, the movie is such a crazy ride that, if you're into it, you end up having fun. For what it is, I enjoyed it.
Awards: /
Key word: Sister.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi