Movie Review: xXx (2002) – Vin Diesel’s Bond Wannabe is All Stunts, No Substance

Movie Review: xXx (2002) – Vin Diesel’s Bond Wannabe is All Stunts, No Substance 

Tags xXx movie review, Vin Diesel, Rob Cohen, early 2000s action, Samuel L. Jackson, Asia Argento, Fast and the Furious, extreme sports movies, spy thrillers, action movie franchises 

 

 Overview

After *The Fast and the Furious* redefined car-chase cinema for the early 2000s, director Rob Cohen and star Vin Diesel reunited for *xXx*, a would-be franchise launcher that replaces underground racing with extreme sports espionage. On paper, it's James Bond for the Mountain Dew generation. In practice, it’s all style, no soul.

Plot Summary

Vin Diesel plays Xander Cage, an extreme sports outlaw and underground celebrity who records himself pulling off illegal stunts and sells the footage online. After one such act catches the eye of the NSA, Cage is recruited by agent Gibbons (Samuel L. Jackson) to infiltrate a terrorist group in Prague called Anarchy 99, led by the over-the-top Yorgi (Martin Csokas). Cage must rely on the help of Yolena (Asia Argento), a Russian double agent in deep cover, to stop a plot involving biochemical warfare. It’s spy thriller meets X-Games—on paper, at least.

What Works

• Vin Diesel’s presence: Diesel has undeniable screen presence and looks the part of a next-gen action star. He’s physically convincing in the role, even if his one-liners fall flat.
• Slick visuals: The film is glossy, fast-paced, and looks like it cost every bit of its high-budget production—an MTV aesthetic turned up to 11.
• Samuel L. Jackson: He elevates nearly anything he’s in and gives the film a bit of gravitas it sorely needs.

What Doesn’t Work

• Poor dialogue: The script is filled with slangy, poser lines that sound awkward coming from actors in their 30s. It feels like a high school teacher trying to talk like their students.
• Clichéd and hollow: *xXx* borrows heavily from better films (*Bond*, *Mission: Impossible*) but lacks their finesse or wit. The movie is all catchphrases and explosions, with little to back them up.
• Sexism and objectification: Despite its PG-13 rating, the film leans hard into misogyny, using women mostly as set dressing. It's embarrassing, not edgy.
• Cheesy effects: The snowboarding sequences, in particular, are painfully fake-looking and unintentionally comical.

Final Thoughts

*xXx* is exactly what happens when a movie is built by a marketing team first and a creative team second. Its attempt to launch a new action franchise is overly eager and undercooked. Rob Cohen’s direction tries to channel Bond’s cool with an “extreme” edge but ends up looking more like a Mountain Dew commercial than a credible spy film. Vin Diesel deserves a better vehicle for his talents. This one’s strictly for action junkies with a high tolerance for cheese.

Rating

⭐ Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars

 Call to Action

---

Did Vin Diesel deserve a better franchise than *xXx*? Drop your thoughts in the comments below.

For more reviews of early 2000s action flicks, check out our action movie archives.

Movie Review: Abandon (2002) – Katie Holmes Steps into the Shadows in Stephen Gaghan’s Stylish Thriller

(2002) – Katie Holmes Steps into the Shadows in Stephen Gaghan’s Stylish Thriller 

Tags Abandon review, Katie Holmes movies, Stephen Gaghan, Benjamin Bratt, college thrillers, psychological mystery, Charlie Hunnam, Zooey Deschanel, 2000s suspense films, Dawson’s Creek stars 

 

 Overview

Abandon is a 2002 psychological thriller written and directed by Oscar-winning screenwriter Stephen Gaghan (*Traffic*). Featuring Katie Holmes in a leading role, the film centers on a high-achieving college senior haunted by the sudden disappearance—and possible return—of her ex-boyfriend. Gaghan delivers a sleek, De Palma-inspired mystery that uses Holmes’ TV persona to surprising effect.

Plot Summary

Katie Holmes plays Catherine “Caty” Burke, a top student at an elite university with a promising job in the financial world waiting for her post-graduation. However, Caty is still emotionally haunted by the vanishing of her ex-boyfriend Embry (Charlie Hunnam), a wealthy and enigmatic art student who disappeared two years earlier. When a dogged, recently sober detective named Wade Handler (Benjamin Bratt) reopens the case—under pressure from Embry’s trustees to declare him legally dead—Caty is forced to relive their toxic relationship and confront growing paranoia. Is Embry really gone, or has he returned to torment her?

What Works

• Katie Holmes: Holmes gives one of her most compelling performances here, navigating Caty’s breakdown with nuance—even if audiences struggle to separate her from her Dawson’s Creek alter ego.
• Charlie Hunnam: As Embry, Hunnam oozes manipulative charm, perfectly capturing the allure of the toxic college artist archetype.
• Direction: Gaghan, in his directorial debut, creates a suspenseful atmosphere reminiscent of Brian De Palma’s thrillers—full of twists, voyeuristic tension, and stylistic flourishes.
• Gender Flip: Refreshingly, Benjamin Bratt’s detective plays the role typically assigned to female characters—serving more as a narrative function than a fully fleshed-out lead.

What Doesn’t Work

• The film leans a bit too heavily on flashbacks, which occasionally slow the pacing and dilute the mystery’s forward momentum.
• Holmes and Bratt lack romantic chemistry, which makes some scenes between them feel forced.
• Some viewers may find the final twist predictable or underwhelming compared to the film’s stronger first half.

Final Thoughts

Abandon is an underrated, stylish college thriller with a strong central performance by Katie Holmes and an atmospheric touch by Stephen Gaghan. While it doesn’t reach the heights of its influences like *Body Heat* or *Dressed to Kill*, it’s a solid entry into early 2000s psychological suspense and a promising directorial debut. If you can separate Holmes from her TV past, you’ll find this to be a fun, twisty ride.

Rating

⭐ Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

 Call to Action

---

Was Katie Holmes convincing in a darker, post-Dawson’s Creek role? Share your take in the comments.

Explore more reviews of psychological thrillers from the early 2000s on our blog.

Movie Review: 8 Mile (2002) – Eminem’s Battle for Respect in a Bleak Detroit

Movie Review: 8 Mile (2002) – Eminem’s Battle for Respect in a Bleak Detroit 

Tags 8 Mile review, Eminem movies, Detroit hip-hop, rap battles in film, Curtis Hanson, Brittany Murphy, Kim Basinger, music biopics, hip-hop dramas, GuessTheGross, underground rap scene

  

 Overview

8 Mile is a gritty 2002 drama directed by Curtis Hanson, starring Eminem in a semi-autobiographical role that explores the struggle to break out of poverty and into the hip-hop spotlight. Set against the stark backdrop of Detroit, the film offers a look at the challenges of race, class, and self-expression through the lens of underground rap battles.

Plot Summary

Jimmy Smith Jr., aka Rabbit (Eminem), is a struggling young rapper living in a trailer park with his alcoholic mother (Kim Basinger) and working a dead-end job at an automotive parts plant. Battling personal demons, broken relationships, and intense economic hardship, Rabbit sets his sights on redemption through Detroit’s underground rap scene. With the help of his best friend Future (Mekhi Phifer), Rabbit prepares to face off in brutal freestyle battles, where his voice and rhymes might finally offer him a way out. Along the way, he becomes entangled with Alex (Brittany Murphy), a woman chasing her own version of escape.

What Works

• Performance: Eminem brings raw intensity and authenticity to a role that mirrors his own rise, particularly during the rap battles where his wordplay is electric.
• Rap Battles: The film’s freestyle scenes are its high points, pulsing with energy and crafted with the stakes of a great sports movie—verbal combat that hits harder than fists.
• Setting: Detroit’s gritty realism adds a stark, immersive texture to the story, emphasizing the odds stacked against Rabbit’s rise.

What Doesn’t Work

• The film often feels too conventional—its underdog structure predictable, and its pacing lacking the edge that its subject matter demands.
• Curtis Hanson’s direction is oddly restrained, missing opportunities to push visual boundaries and more vividly reflect the chaos and energy of the hip-hop world.
• While Eminem is compelling, it’s hard to evaluate his acting fully since he never fully disappears into the character—Rabbit remains indistinguishable from the rapper himself.

Final Thoughts

8 Mile succeeds in delivering powerful moments of tension and catharsis, especially during its rap battles. Eminem’s screen presence is undeniable, and the film captures the spirit of perseverance in the face of cultural and economic adversity. Yet, despite its raw subject and lead actor’s charisma, the film never quite hits the high notes it aims for. It’s good—just not the knockout it could have been.

Rating

⭐ Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

 Call to Action

---

Did 8 Mile live up to the hype? Let us know in the comments, or share your favorite rap battle moment from the film.

If you’re into music dramas, check out more reviews of films about musicians and underground scenes.

Movie Review: 50 First Dates (2004) – A Surprisingly Sweet Sandler Romance with a Twist

Movie Review: 50 First Dates (2004) – A Surprisingly Sweet Sandler Romance with a Twist 

Tags 50 First Dates review, Adam Sandler movies, Drew Barrymore, romantic comedies, memory loss romance, Hawaii films, 2000s rom-coms, Peter Segal, best rom-coms, comedy movie reviews, GuessTheGross, Valentine’s Day movies 

 Overview

50 First Dates is a 2004 romantic comedy directed by Peter Segal. It stars Adam Sandler and Drew Barrymore in a love story set in Hawaii, where a woman’s rare memory condition forces her suitor to win her heart anew each day.

Plot Summary

Henry Roth (Adam Sandler) is a carefree veterinarian living in Hawaii who enjoys casual flings with tourists—until he meets Lucy Whitmore (Drew Barrymore), a charming local woman with a unique condition. After a car accident, Lucy suffers from short-term memory loss and relives the same day every morning. Despite the challenge, Henry falls for her and commits to making her fall in love with him again and again. Along the way, he navigates her protective family, oddball friends, and his own immaturity in a quest for lasting love.

What Works

• Performance: Drew Barrymore brings sweetness and emotional complexity to Lucy, grounding the outlandish premise. Sandler tones down his usual goofiness to deliver a surprisingly likable romantic lead.
• Direction: Peter Segal smartly balances romance and comedy, keeping the tone light while letting the emotional beats shine through.
• Tension or Themes: The film explores themes of memory, commitment, and daily devotion with a surprisingly sincere touch, especially for a Sandler vehicle.

What Doesn’t Work

• The subplots—particularly those involving Sean Astin and Rob Schneider—veer into juvenile territory and feel disconnected from the emotional heart of the story.
• Some humor falls flat, relying on stereotypes and bodily gags that clash with the film’s more heartfelt core.

Final Thoughts

50 First Dates is one of Adam Sandler’s most balanced romantic comedies, blending his trademark silliness with genuine sweetness. While not without its flaws, the chemistry between Sandler and Barrymore elevates the film, making it a memorable Valentine’s Day treat or anytime date-night watch.

Rating

⭐ Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

Call to Action

---

What did you think of 50 First Dates? Leave a comment below or share your favorite moment from the film!

If you enjoyed this review, check out my takes on other romantic comedies here.

Movie Review: About Schmidt (2002) – Jack Nicholson’s Quiet Triumph in a Life-Unlived Road Trip

Movie Review: About Schmidt (2002) – Jack Nicholson’s Quiet Triumph in a Life-Unlived Road Trip  

Tags: About Schmidt review, Jack Nicholson, Alexander Payne, 2000s movies, road trip films, dramatic comedies, Kathy Bates, Oscar-nominated performances, character studies, movie reviews

 

 Overview

About Schmidt is a 2002 dramatic comedy directed by Alexander Payne. Starring Jack Nicholson, Hope Davis, and Kathy Bates, the film follows a newly retired insurance actuary who embarks on a cross-country journey that becomes both literal and emotional, as he confronts regret, grief, and meaning in his twilight years.

Plot Summary

Warren Schmidt (Jack Nicholson) is a 66-year-old actuarial expert facing a purposeless retirement and a marriage that feels like it’s drifted into inertia. After the sudden death of his wife, Warren takes to the road in a Winnebago, intending to attend his daughter Jeannie’s wedding and, perhaps, talk her out of marrying a man he finds utterly unworthy. Along the way, he writes revealing and often hilarious letters to a six-year-old African boy he sponsors named Ndugu, unburdening his disappointments and fears. His trip leads him to encounter a cast of colorful characters, including the free-spirited mother of the groom (Kathy Bates), culminating in an emotional reckoning with the life he’s lived—or failed to live.

What Works

• Performance: Jack Nicholson delivers one of his most restrained and affecting performances, shedding his iconic charisma to portray a man both pitiful and painfully real. Kathy Bates is a knockout in a fearless supporting role.
• Direction: Alexander Payne expertly balances humor and melancholy, with a tone that walks the line between satire and sincerity. His attention to realism grounds the story.
• Themes: The film meditates on aging, missed opportunities, and the quiet desperation of ordinary lives. The "Dear Ndugu" letters frame these themes with sharp emotional clarity.

What Doesn’t Work

• The deliberate pacing may feel slow to some viewers expecting a more conventionally structured road movie or comedy.
• Some of the satirical moments, particularly early in the film, may come off as overly dry or meandering depending on viewer taste.

Final Thoughts

About Schmidt is a poignant, understated triumph that strips away the myth of Jack Nicholson and reminds us of the actor beneath the persona. It’s a quietly powerful film, carried by brilliant writing, subtle direction, and a career-highlight performance. A must-see for fans of character-driven stories and grounded human drama.

Rating

⭐ Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

What did you think of About Schmidt? Leave a comment below or share your favorite scene or quote from the film!

If you enjoyed this review, check out my takes on other character-driven dramas here.

Movie Review: 40 Days and 40 Nights (2002) – A Celibacy Challenge Rom-Com That Falls Short

Movie Review: 40 Days and 40 Nights (2002) – A Celibacy Challenge Rom-Com That Falls Short 

Tags 40 Days and 40 Nights review, Josh Hartnett, romantic comedy, Shannyn Sossamon, 2000s movies, Michael Lehmann, sex comedies, movie reviews, celibacy in movies, raunchy comedies 

  

 Overview

40 Days and 40 Nights is a 2002 romantic comedy directed by Michael Lehmann. It stars Josh Hartnett, Shannyn Sossamon, and Vinessa Shaw, and centers on a young man who takes a vow of celibacy for Lent — only to meet the perfect girl the moment he swears off sex.

Plot Summary

Matt (Josh Hartnett) is a San Francisco web designer heartbroken from a recent breakup. Tired of meaningless hookups, he decides to give up sex — and all forms of intimacy — for 40 days during Lent. Naturally, right as he embarks on this personal detox, he meets Erica (Shannyn Sossamon), a witty and charming woman who might be exactly what he’s been looking for. Complicating matters, Matt's roommate Ryan discovers the vow and turns it into a public spectacle by launching a betting site on whether Matt can last the full 40 days. As temptations escalate and misunderstandings pile up, Matt’s challenge quickly becomes more about emotional honesty than just abstinence.

What Works

• Performance: Josh Hartnett is affable and occasionally funny in the lead, and Shannyn Sossamon brings a low-key charm to a thinly written love interest.
• Direction: Michael Lehmann (known for Heathers) keeps the film briskly paced and visually polished, even if the story struggles to maintain momentum.
• Concept: The inversion of the usual “guy trying to get laid” trope is refreshing in theory, giving the film a unique starting point in the raunch-com genre.

What Doesn’t Work

• The plot relies heavily on contrivances and avoids real emotional stakes, opting instead for sitcom-level misunderstandings.
• Most supporting characters, especially Matt’s roommate, veer into caricature territory, and the film uses gross-out gags as filler rather than real humor.

Final Thoughts

40 Days and 40 Nights is a watchable but forgettable entry in the early 2000s rom-com scene. While it starts with a clever premise, the execution leans too heavily on clichés and easy laughs. Fans of Josh Hartnett or early-2000s nostalgia may find it mildly entertaining, but for most viewers, it’s a middling experience.

Rating

⭐ Rating: 2 out of 5 stars

What did you think of 40 Days and 40 Nights? Leave a comment below or share your favorite (or most cringeworthy) moment from the film!

If you enjoyed this review, check out my takes on other romantic comedies here.

Movie Review: 13 Going on 30 (2004) – A Charming Body-Swap Rom-Com with Heart

Movie Review: 13 Going on 30 (2004) – A Charming Body-Swap Rom-Com with Heart 

 Tags (Labels in Blogger) 13 Going on 30 review, Jennifer Garner, Mark Ruffalo, romantic comedy, 2000s movies, Gary Winick, body-swap movies, movie reviews, feel-good movies, coming-of-age films, fantasy rom-coms 

 

 Overview

13 Going on 30 is a 2004 romantic comedy directed by Gary Winick. It stars Jennifer Garner, Mark Ruffalo, and Judy Greer, and follows a 13-year-old girl who magically wakes up as her 30-year-old self and must reckon with the adult life she unknowingly created.

Plot Summary

In 1987, Jenna Rink (Shana Dowdeswell) is a shy teenager who wants nothing more than to fit in with the popular crowd. After a humiliating birthday party prank, she makes a desperate wish to be “thirty, flirty, and thriving.” The next morning, Jenna (now played by Jennifer Garner) wakes up in 2004 — in a swanky New York apartment, working at her dream fashion magazine. But she soon discovers that becoming popular came at a cost: she’s estranged from her best friend Matt (Mark Ruffalo), and the adult version of herself is not someone she likes. As Jenna tries to reconcile her childhood ideals with her grown-up mistakes, she learns that growing up isn’t about skipping the hard parts — it’s about choosing who you want to be.

What Works

• Performance: Jennifer Garner is radiant in her breakout comedic role, fully capturing the innocence and energy of a 13-year-old in a grown woman’s body. Mark Ruffalo adds emotional weight and sincerity to the romantic arc.
• Direction: Gary Winick blends fantasy and feel-good romance with a light, stylish touch. The tone is upbeat without becoming cloying, and the pacing keeps things engaging throughout.
• Themes: The film explores the costs of popularity, the value of true friendship, and the importance of authenticity. It balances nostalgia and emotional sincerity with humor and heart.

What Doesn’t Work

• The title can be misleading, evoking the cheesier body-swap films of the '80s like Vice Versa or 18 Again.
• Some overly cutesy moments feel dated or a little forced — especially in the third act — though they don’t derail the film’s momentum.

Final Thoughts

13 Going on 30 is a surprisingly heartfelt romantic comedy that stands out for its strong performances and a story that hits both funny and emotional beats. Perfect for fans of Big or Legally Blonde, this is a movie that will leave you smiling long after the credits roll.

Rating

⭐ Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

JSON-LD Schema Paste in HTML View:

What did you think of 13 Going on 30? Leave a comment below or share your favorite moment from the film!

If you enjoyed this review, check out my takes on other romantic comedies here.

Movie Review Ouija (2014) Dimwitted PG-13 Horror Fails to Start Parker Bros Cinematic Universe

Film Critic Sean Patrick really did not enjoy the attempt to create a board game cinematic universe with Ouja. 

Overview 

Why is no one impressed by the fact that ghosts exist? The stars of the movie Ouija suddenly find themselves in a world where the dead can communicate with the living via a haunted piece of wood and this doesn't fundamentally alter their entire worldview? If I had legitimately witnessed proof of the supernatural my mind would break. I would not be able to function. These nitwits act like this is just another day except a friend of theirs is dead. 

Plot Summary 

Debbie (Shelley Hennig) dies by suicide after a strange Ouija board incident. Her friends Laine (Olivia Cooke), Trevor (Daren Kagasoff), Sarah (Ana Coto), Isabelle (Bianca Santos), and Debbie's boyfriend Pete (Douglas Smith) use the board to contact her but instead reach a spirit called "DZ." They see the image of a girl with a sewn mouth who warns them of her mother. And, they learn Debbie found and used the board alone. Isabelle is possessed and killed. 

Laine and Pete discover the board belonged to the Zander family. They learn Doris Zander, a missing girl whose medium mother sewed her mouth shut, was used to channel spirits. Her sister Paulina (Lin Shaye) tells Laine to find Doris' body in a secret room and unstitch her mouth to banish the mother's spirit. Yawn.

What Works

• Lin Shaye - Horror icon Lin Shaye improves any movie that she appears in, even something as insipid as Ouija. 
• Olivia Cooke - Olivia Cooke has a future as a leading lady, even if Ouija does not speak well of her talent or appeal. 

What Doesn't Work 

• Basic Logic: Why introduce the rules of Ouija and then not make use of them? One of the rules of the Ouija board is never play in a graveyard. Do you know what these characters never do? Play in a fucking graveyard! Now, the only thing I can think of is: what would happen if they played in a graveyard?
• Lore: I am so sick of characters who are entirely unimpressed by the things that torment them. I realize we are no longer easily moved by spectacle in this day and age but the characters in Ouija should be a little more surprised by what they see?
• The Male Cast-members: Daren Kagasoff and Douglas Smith are basically interchangeable. Neither actor makes an impression. Forgettable would a compliment to these performances. 

Final Thoughts

If I saw a ghost I'd probably spend the rest of my life processing this previously unbelievable thing. Sure, I might have a few logical questions about how the ghost possibly exists, not a few of which are inspired  by Scooby Doo episodes, but with such curiosities satisfied I would likely move on to HOLY SHIT GHOSTS EXIST!!! GAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! 

Has no one ever noticed that the only people who believe in Ouija boards are those with a little self interest tied into the board working? It's either people lost in grief, desperate to contact lost loved ones, or people who make money off those grieving folks. How has this logic escaped so many people? 

How is it that the Ouija board and other such nonsense have survived the technological revolution? Anyone ever wonder about that?

It seems that no matter how much evidence exists to debunk the paranormal or supernatural, the mind still craves the belief. It's undoubtedly an expression of the fear of death. We all want so desperately to believe in the afterlife that we can rationalize just about anything, including the fact that none of us have ever seen a ghost or a demon but so many of us choose to believe they exist. 

That's got nothing to with the movie Ouija but it was a more interesting series of thoughts than anything in Ouija. 

Rating

⭐ Rating: [0 out of 5 stars]

---

What did you think of Ouija? Leave a comment below or share your favorite moment from the film!

If you enjoyed this review, check out my takes on other horror movies here.

Men in Black 3 Review: Time-Travel, Alien Hijinks & a Spot-On Josh Brolin Performance

Film critic Sean Patrick reviews Men in Black 3, praising its time-travel twist, Josh Brolin’s uncanny Tommy Lee Jones impression, and the film’s action-packed, alien-filled fun.

Overview 

As a regional media film critic, I’ve seen my fair share of sequels, but Men in Black 3 manages to surprise and entertain in ways few third installments can. Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones return, but this time around, there’s a twist—Agent K is played mostly by Josh Brolin.

Yes, you read that right. Thanks to a clever time-travel plot, Agent J (Will Smith) must travel back to the 1960s to save his partner, Agent K. In the past, K is portrayed by Josh Brolin—and his impression of a young Tommy Lee Jones is nothing short of astonishing.

Plot Summary

Agent J's (Will Smith) newest case forces him to travel back in time to the start of the Men in Black project. This takes J back to 1969 where he will team up with Agent K (played as a young man by Josh Brolin, doing a perfect Tommy Lee Jones impression), and retrieve a piece of information that is needed to save the world.

What Works

• Josh Brolin is Tommy Lee Jones - Brolin’s performance is so pitch-perfect, it’s as if the filmmakers truly traveled back in time to cast a young Tommy Lee Jones. The mimicry is seamless, and what starts as a novelty quickly becomes completely natural. You forget you’re watching Brolin—he is Agent K.
• Will is Still Will - Will Smith's comic timing and charisma remains top notch
• Tommy Lee Jones - Though his role is more limited this time, still brings weight and gravitas when he’s on screen. He’s as good as ever.

What Doesn't Work 

• Not enough Tommy Lee Jones 

Final Thoughts 

The film is fast-paced, funny, and full of heart. It delivers exactly what you’d hope for from the franchise:

• Spectacular special effects

• Clever humor

• Wild alien designs

And, of course, the charismatic Will Smith at the center of it all

In short, Men in Black 3 is phenomenal. Whether you’re in it for the nostalgia, the sci-fi action, or the humor, this movie delivers. It’s perfect for a Memorial Day weekend outing—fun for longtime fans and newcomers alike.

Rating

⭐ Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

---

What did you think of Men in Black III? Leave a comment below or share your favorite moment from the film!

If you enjoyed this review, check out my takes on other Will Smith here.

Movie Review: Don’t Breathe (2016) – A Claustrophobic Home Invasion Thriller

📽️ Official Trailer

Overview 

Don’t Breathe is a 2016 horror-thriller directed by Fede Álvarez. The film stars Jane Levy, Dylan Minnette, and Stephen Lang. Set in the desolate neighborhoods of Detroit, the story follows three young burglars who target the home of a blind Gulf War veteran, believing it to be an easy heist. However, they soon discover that the blind man is far more dangerous than they anticipated. 

Plot Summary Rocky (Jane Levy), her boyfriend Money (Daniel Zovatto), and their friend Alex (Dylan Minnette) are small-time burglars in Detroit. Desperate for a better life, they plan a final heist: robbing a blind man’s house rumored to contain a substantial cash settlement. The blind man (Stephen Lang), a reclusive Gulf War veteran, lives alone in a dilapidated neighborhood. What seems like an easy job turns into a nightmare as the trio finds themselves trapped and hunted in a house full of secrets. 

 What Works Stephen Lang’s Performance: Lang delivers a chilling portrayal of the blind man, exuding menace without uttering many words. Tension and Atmosphere: The film masterfully builds suspense, utilizing silence and darkness to create a claustrophobic experience. Direction: Fede Álvarez’s direction keeps the audience on edge, with tight pacing and inventive camera work. 

 What Doesn’t Work Character Development: The backstories of the protagonists are somewhat underdeveloped, making it harder to empathize with their plight. Third Act Twists: Some plot developments in the final act may feel over-the-top or implausible to certain viewers. 

 Final Thoughts Don’t Breathe stands out as a tense and innovative entry in the home invasion subgenre. While it has its flaws, the film’s ability to keep viewers on the edge of their seats is commendable. Horror enthusiasts looking for a suspenseful ride will find much to appreciate here. 

 ⭐ Rating 4 out of 5 stars

🗣️ Join the Conversation What are your thoughts on Don’t Breathe? Did the film’s twists surprise you? Share your opinions in the comments below! 🔗 Explore More If you enjoyed this review, check out my review of Don't Breathe 2 linked here.🔗 

Snow White and the Huntsman Review: Grim Fairy Tale, Gorgeous Visuals, Disappointing Execution

📽️ Official Trailer  

 Overview Film critic Sean Patrick reviews Snow White and the Huntsman, praising its visuals and Chris Hemsworth’s performance, but finding Kristen Stewart’s lead and the overall film underwhelming. 

 Plot Summary This version of Snow White dives deep into a grimmer tone, clearly aiming for epic fantasy territory. Kristen Stewart (Twilight) stars as Snow White, the daughter of a murdered king, imprisoned and later hunted by the queen’s enforcer: Eric the Huntsman, played by Chris Hemsworth—yes, that Chris Hemsworth, better known as Thor. 

 What Works Chris Hemsworth as The Huntsman: Chris Hemsworth brings gravitas and energy to the role. He even serves as a sort of narrator, helping guide the audience through the sometimes convoluted story. His performance is a standout. High Camp and Glamour: Charlize Theron is deliciously over-the-top as the Evil Queen. She brings flair and menace to every scene she’s in. The Production: The production design is stunning—this film looks amazing, with sweeping landscapes, haunting forests, and lavish costumes. 

 What Doesn’t Work Kristen Stewart: Unfortunately, the same can’t be said for Kristen Stewart. While I generally like her work, she falls flat here. Her portrayal of Snow White lacks the depth and presence needed for such an iconic character, and her performance drags the film down. Style Over Substance: Snow White and the Huntsman is a classic case of style over substance. Beneath its beautiful exterior, it’s hollow. Great visuals can’t save a weak lead performance or a story that struggles to find emotional resonance. 

 Final Thoughts In the end, Snow White and the Huntsman is a big-budget disappointment. Despite its impressive visuals and a solid supporting performance from Hemsworth, I can’t recommend it. Skip this one and save your movie dollars for something more engaging. 

 ⭐ Rating 2 out of 5 stars 

 🗣️ Join the Conversation What are your thoughts on Snow White and the Huntsman? Did you like Kristen Stewart’s performance? Share your opinions in the comments below! 

 🔗 Explore More If you enjoyed this review, check out my take on the 2025 Snow White Remake from Hollywood and the Indie horror version.

Tags:

#SnowWhiteAndTheHuntsman #MovieReview #KristenStewart #ChrisHemsworth #CharlizeTheron #FairyTaleMovies #GrimmFairyTales #FantasyFilms #FilmCritic #BoxOfficeReview

Contraband Movie Review: Mark Wahlberg Powers This Action Thriller

Read our review of Contraband starring Mark Wahlberg and Kate Beckinsale. Find out why Wahlberg’s performance elevates this otherwise average action thriller.Movie Review: Contraband (2012)

Overview

Mark Wahlberg returns to the big screen in Contraband, an action-packed thriller hitting theaters this weekend. Directed by Baltasar Kormákur, the film stars Wahlberg as a reformed smuggler forced back into the criminal underworld when his brother-in-law makes a deadly mistake.

Plot Summary

A former smuggler, Chris Farraday (Mark Wahlberg) ventures to Panama in a desperate attempt to secure millions in fake currency, his mission driven by the need to shield his brother-in-law, Andy (Caleb Landry Jones) from a dangerous drug kingpin, Briggs, played by Giovanni Ribisi. Briggs meanwhile, has Chris''s family, including Chris's wife, Kate (Kate Beckinsale), hostage to assure that Chris accomplishes his mission.

What Works?

• Mark Wahlberg

  . If you’re a fan of his tough-but-sympathetic screen presence, you’ll enjoy this film. Wahlberg brings a compelling intensity to the role, playing a good man who’s forced to do bad things to protect his family. It’s a classic anti-hero narrative, and Wahlberg handles it with his usual gritty charisma.

  
  
• Giovanni Ribisi: Though he's not the most intimidating bad guy you’ll ever see, Ribisi delivers a solid performance, bringing just enough wild unpredictability to his character to make things interesting.
  
  

What Doesn't Work

• Formulaic Storytelling: The plot is formulaic, and without its star power, it might’ve faded into the crowd of generic action flicks.
• 
  
• Kate Beckinsale: Beckinsale is far too good of an actress to play such a merely functional role in Contraband.

Final Thoughts

Contraband is a serviceable action movie made notably better by its leading man. If you enjoy Mark Wahlberg’s work, it’s definitely worth checking out.

Rating

⭐ Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars]

---

What did you think of [Contraband]? Leave a comment below or share your favorite moment from the film!

If you enjoyed this review, check out my takes on other Mark Wahlberg movies here.

Movie Review School of Rock

School of Rock is among the best comedies this century. This century is less than 20 years old but still, that's among hundreds of successful and failed comedies. It's still impressive is my point. With Jack Black back in theaters this weekend I decided to take a look back at my favorite piece of his work as a leading man. That, undoubtedly is School of Rock. While Black is arguably better in his supporting role in High Fidelity or his leading role in the little seen indie movie Bernie, School of Rock is the perfect distillation of Jack Black as a movie star, a comic, and an actor. 

School of Rock stars Jack Black as Dewey Finn, a faltering rock star whose just been kicked out the band he started. With no gigs coming and no job, Dewey is facing eviction from the small corner of his friend Ned's (Mike White) apartment. Dewey is desperately at odds with Ned's bossy new girlfriend, Patti (Sarah Silverman) who is pushing soft touch Ned to throw Dewey out if he can't come up with rent. When Dewey fails in his attempt to hock his guitar, he appears to be completely out of options. Then, luck strikes when Dewey intercepts a call for Ned about a substitute teaching job at a tony, high priced private school. 

Seeing teaching as an easy gig that will pay enough to keep him in his home, Dewey impersonates Ned and takes the job. Once in the job, Dewey figures he can coast just sitting behind the desk and sending the kids on recess. Then he hears the kids playing music in music class and he hatches a crazy plan. Utilizing his seemingly unlimited knowledge of rock n'roll, Dewey will transform these pre-teens into the kind of rock n'roll band that he can use to stick it to his former band and compete at a battle of the bands for a $20,000 grand prize. 

Naturally, through the bond of music Dewey comes to gain a new maturity and sensitivity while the kids discover new talents and confidence within themselves. This is a stock arc that dates back to the silent movie era. It's the kind of stock uplift that you see in television pilots and in Lifetime channel comedies. All of that said, the key is taking these stock elements and building on them and that is exactly what director Richard Linklater and writer Mike White do in School of Rock. The basic structure is strong and yet loose enough to allow Jack Black to shine and improvise and deliver the kind of loose and fun performance that made him a star. 

Jack Black is not a star for everyone. His spastic dancing, his odd affectations and often bizarre manner can grate on some audiences. I happen to be a big fan of Jack Black's tics and tricks. I enjoy his strange energetic performances which recall Jim Carrey in the Ace Ventura movies but with pathos and a more recognizable personality. Black is absolutely hysterical as Dewey. His massive personality pops off the screen from the first moment and Jack Black plus a classroom of cute kids is a recipe for comic gold. Black himself is a big kid and he throws himself into both the role of manchild best friend and budding grown up. 

The kids are something of a faceless mass but a couple stand out. Miranda Cosgrover, the future star of the not bad at all I-Carly, is completely adorable as the business smart grade grubber Summer. I adored the scene where Cosgrove approaches Dewey to confront him about assigning her the role of Groupie for the band project. It's a really funny scene and she nails it. The other stand out for me was Maryam Hassan as Tomika, the shy but super talented singer whom Dewey inspires to come out her shell and come out with her incredibly big and bold voice. It's shocking to find out she never acted again and carries no other IMDB credits after 2003. 

Richard Linklater's best work tends to be small and independent. He doesn't appear comfortable as a mainstream director working for a studio. School of Rock is the rare exception where Linklater lends his considerable talent well to a mainstream feature film. It helps that Mike White gave him a strong and funky script to work with and that he had Jack Black at the height of his powers, but there is still plenty to indicate his strong directorial hand at work. In his other mainstream work such as the remake of Bad News Bears, Linklater doesn't appear nearly as engaged in the process and it shows in the lackadaisical plodding pace of that film. School of Rock is like an unstoppable rocket whole Bad News Bears was a massive dud. 

Recently, Andrew Lloyd Webber of all people turned School of Rock into a Broadway sensation. The original idea for the film was for it to be a musical and now Webber and his creative team are realizing that original vision. It says something however, about the strengths of School of Rock that it could be so radically reimagined and still become one of the iconic comedies of this young century. School of Rock is a buzzy, energetic and wildly funny movie. I stand by the statement that this is one of the best comedies of the last 20 years. Watch it for yourself and you will see a very basic story told with great invention, energy, love and passion. What more can we ask of a great comedy?

X-Men: Apocalypse Review – The Best of the Recent Trilogy?

Sean Patrick reviews X-Men: Apocalypse, calling it the strongest entry in the recent X-Men trilogy, with standout performances from Michael Fassbender and Sophie Turner.

By Sean Patrick, Regional Media Film Critic

X-Men: Apocalypse, directed by Bryan Singer, is the latest chapter in the ever-evolving X-Men cinematic universe. Set ten years after the events of Days of Future Past, the film introduces a new timeline shaped by Wolverine’s time-traveling heroics. And in this revised history, a powerful ancient mutant named Apocalypse (Oscar Isaac) emerges with a grim plan to cleanse the world and build anew—with only mutants he deems worthy left standing.

The Plot

The X-Men must rally to stop him. Professor Xavier (James McAvoy), Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence), and Magneto (Michael Fassbender) return, alongside younger versions of classic characters like Jean Grey (Sophie Turner), Cyclops, and Nightcrawler, as students stepping into hero roles.

Apocalypse recruits his own Four Horsemen—including a lost and vengeful Magneto—and sets the stage for an all-out war between mutants that will define the future of their kind.

Why It Works

Among the recent trilogy (First Class, Days of Future Past, and Apocalypse), this is the most coherent and entertaining installment. The storytelling feels more focused, the tone better balanced, and the humor and pacing are much stronger than its predecessors.

Michael Fassbender gives a powerful, emotionally rich performance as Magneto. He’s given real stakes, and he delivers one of the best performances of the entire X-Men saga. Sophie Turner, as Jean Grey, is also a highlight—she brings subtlety and strength to her role and has several standout scenes that hint at the character’s future importance.

Mixed Performances

Unfortunately, Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique feels like she’s phoning it in. Her performance lacks energy and engagement, and at times it seems like she’d rather be anywhere else. It doesn’t ruin the film, but it does drag down some otherwise strong ensemble moments.

Final Verdict

Sure, there are plot holes you could nitpick, and some moments feel overly familiar for the franchise. But taken as a whole, X-Men: Apocalypse stands out as the most solid and satisfying entry in the recent X-Men reboot series.

Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆ (4/5)

If you’re a fan of the X-Men universe or just looking for a fun, action-packed weekend watch, I do recommend checking it out.

I’m Sean Patrick. Thanks for reading.

A Bigger Splash Review: A Brilliant, Twisting Drama with Career-Best Performances

Sean Patrick reviews A Bigger Splash, a standout film from 2016 starring Tilda Swinton, Ralph Fiennes, and Matthias Schoenaerts. A gripping, intellectual must-see.

By Sean Patrick, Regional Media Film Critic

A Bigger Splash is one of the best films of 2016—an elegant, cerebral, and emotionally intense drama directed by Luca Guadagnino. It stars Tilda Swinton, Matthias Schoenaerts, Ralph Fiennes, and Dakota Johnson in a complex story of passion, power, and disruption on a remote Sicilian island.

The Plot

Swinton plays Marianne Lane, a legendary rock star recovering from throat surgery. She's vacationing in quiet seclusion with her boyfriend, Paul (Matthias Schoenaerts), hoping to heal and avoid the outside world. But their peace is shattered by the unexpected arrival of her exuberant ex-lover and producer, Harry (Ralph Fiennes), who brings with him his enigmatic daughter Penelope (Dakota Johnson).

Harry is a whirlwind—imagine Ralph Fiennes channeling Robin Williams. His energy is explosive, his charm undeniable, and his presence destabilizing. Fiennes gives one of the most unique performances of his career—magnetic, obnoxious, and unforgettable. He’s a character you both cringe at and care about.

Standout Performances

Tilda Swinton is mesmerizing, playing Marianne with extraordinary subtlety, especially since her character is nearly mute due to the surgery. Her silence creates space for Fiennes to dominate scenes, and for tension to build through body language and expression.

Matthias Schoenaerts delivers the best performance of his career as Paul, a man caught between loyalty and discomfort. His internal conflict is palpable, as he tries to hold it all together while unraveling inside.

Dakota Johnson adds intrigue as Penelope—a mysterious and possibly manipulative presence. Her role becomes more layered as the story unfolds, and the film wisely avoids telegraphing her motivations too clearly.

Why It Works

A Bigger Splash is a film that rewards careful viewing. The plot is full of quiet symbolism, moral complexity, and unexpected twists. Rather than spoon-feeding its themes, the movie lets them simmer and unfold organically. There’s no hand-holding—just deeply intelligent filmmaking that respects its audience.

The direction, writing, and cinematography are top-tier. This is not just a film about relationships—it's about performance, control, desire, and the emotional residue of the past. And it builds to a finale that is both shocking and earned.

Final Verdict

A Bigger Splash is one of the most thoughtful, beautifully crafted films of the decade. With career-best performances from Ralph Fiennes and Matthias Schoenaerts, and yet another masterclass from Tilda Swinton, it’s a must-see for anyone who appreciates smart, layered cinema.

Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (5/5)

I’m Sean Patrick. Thanks for reading.

A Bigger Splash, Movie Review, Tilda Swinton, Ralph Fiennes, Matthias Schoenaerts, Dakota Johnson, Luca Guadagnino, Best Films 2016, Psychological Drama, Indie Film, European Cinema

Alice Through the Looking Glass Review: Better Than the Original, But Still a CGI Mess

Film critic Sean Patrick reviews Alice Through the Looking Glass. It’s better than Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland, but still overwhelmed by CGI and odd performances.

By Sean Patrick, Regional Media Film Critic

Released in 2016, Alice Through the Looking Glass arrives as the sequel to Tim Burton’s 2010 Alice in Wonderland—a film I genuinely despised. I still do, six years later. That original outing was an irritating display of cloying whimsy, ugly CGI, and grating performances—particularly from Johnny Depp.

Fortunately, Alice Through the Looking Glass, directed by James Bobin, manages to rise above its predecessor—though only barely.

Plot Summary

This time around, the story hinges on the Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp), who is falling into a deep melancholy. He believes his long-lost family, presumed dead, might still be alive. When no one believes him, he begins to fade away both emotionally and physically. Alice (Mia Wasikowska) must travel back in time to uncover the truth.

To do this, she seeks help from Time himself, played by Sacha Baron Cohen. In one surprisingly moving scene, Cohen and Wasikowska manage a rare emotional connection—one of the only genuinely effective moments in the film.

Performance & Visuals

But one scene isn’t enough to save a movie so weighed down by excessive CGI. Nothing in this film feels tangible. Even basic set pieces—like handrails—are rendered digitally. The result is a visually exhausting film that offers little in the way of immersion or wonder.

Johnny Depp’s portrayal of the Mad Hatter continues to be aggressively grating. His performance, like much of the film, is loud, chaotic, and difficult to endure.

Final Verdict

Alice Through the Looking Glass is not a good movie. It is, however, a less bad movie than its predecessor. That’s the best I can say. While it has a moment or two of clarity, they’re quickly swallowed by the same garish spectacle that plagued the first film.

Rating: ⭐⭐☆☆☆ (2/5)

I’m Sean Patrick. Thanks for reading.

Alice Through the Looking Glass, Movie Review, Johnny Depp, Mia Wasikowska, Sacha Baron Cohen, Disney Movies, Tim Burton, Film Critic, CGI, Fantasy Films, Sequel Review

Movie Review Hell or High Water

Hell or High Water Review (2016): Chris Pine & Jeff Bridges Deliver Oscar-Worthy Performances

In Hell or High Water, Pine and Foster play two brothers pushed to extremes. Facing foreclosure on their family farm, they start robbing the very banks trying to take their land—banks that loaned their mother money she could never repay. Their goal? Use the stolen money to pay back the same banks and reclaim what’s rightfully theirs.

Ben Foster is electric as the unpredictable, recently released ex-con, while Chris Pine portrays the more grounded, morally conflicted brother doing bad things for what he believes are good reasons. Jeff Bridges plays the seasoned Texas Ranger chasing them down—a sharp, instinctual character trying to stop them before things spiral even further.

The film unfolds like a modern western, blending Coen Brothers grit with classical Western atmosphere. Its tight pacing, gorgeous cinematography, and powerful performances make it one of the most compelling films of 2016.

The final confrontation between Chris Pine and Jeff Bridges is unforgettable—arguably the best scene in any film that year. It’s layered, intense, and laced with regret, justice, and understanding.

More than just a crime drama, Hell or High Water tackles the economic desperation of rural America and how far people will go when the system is rigged against them.

Bottom line? Hell or High Water is the best movie I saw in 2016. Don’t miss it—expect Oscar nominations for both Pine and Bridges.

Movie Review Yoga Hosers

Film Review: Yoga Hosers – Dumb on Purpose, and Proud of It

By Sean Patrick

Kevin Smith’s Yoga Hosers is not your average horror-comedy—it’s proudly weird, self-aware, and ridiculously dumb… and that’s kind of the point.

Starring Harley Quinn Smith and Lily-Rose Depp, this quirky flick follows two high school sophomores who work at a Canadian convenience store and suddenly find themselves battling sentient bratwursts—yes, bratwursts—reanimated by a Nazi scientist. These creatures, dubbed “Bratsies,” are hilariously portrayed by Smith himself, bringing a surreal level of absurdity to the screen.

Tied loosely to Smith’s previous film Tusk, Yoga Hosers is the second entry in his self-proclaimed “Canadian Trilogy.” Justin Long also returns, this time as a yoga instructor named Yogi Bear (yes, really), who teaches the girls the ancient art of yoga-based butt-kicking.

Let’s be clear: this is a bad movie—but it knows it’s bad. Unlike films that flop due to lack of effort or vision, Yoga Hosersis intentionally dumb, a loving throwback to campy ‘80s horror where the fun is in how off-the-rails things get. Smith’s joy in making it is palpable, and that infectious energy carries the film further than you’d expect.

While this movie definitely won’t be for everyone—it’s tailor-made for a niche audience with a taste for kitsch and meta-humor—those who catch its wavelength will likely find it charming, hilarious, and even a little bit brilliant in its own warped way.

Verdict: A knowingly stupid, joyfully bad movie that you’ll either love or hate—but it’s never boring.