Movie Review: GOAT

Sony Pictures Animation is starting to settle into a pattern as their filmography continues to slowly increase in size of letting their beautiful house style that blends together hand drawn and CG animation do the heavy lifting over the narrative. The Steph Curry-produced GOAT fits into this box as snuggly as anything SPA has ever made. The only thing that distinguishes GOAT from other sports underdog stories is that the hero (Caleb McLaughlin) that's told he's too small, weak, etc. to play professional sports is a talking goat who dreams of being a professional roarball player (it's basically basketball with all animal players, a more liberal foul system and courts that look like Super Smash Brothers stages). Beyond that, the adults in the audience will have no trouble predicting everything that happens to Will as he gets to live out his dream of playing in the pros, clashes with the team's selfish, insecure aging veteran star player (Gabrielle Union) and helps a previous dysfunctional group of players rediscover the power of teamwork and their love of the game through his infectious spirit. This adhering to a predictable genre formula ends up being perfectly excusable as it executes the classic sports movie tropes skillfully enough and delivers consistently impressive visuals (the roarball games look particularly great) throughout. Plus, it pulls off the magic trick of using modern slang in an organic, non-cringey way and has the courtesy of acknowledging who the real villains in sports are: greedy owners who value their bottom lines over the culture of their locker room or the quality of the product their team is putting out there. Any parent that wants to get their kids out of the house for a couple of hours could pick a far more torturous activity than taking them to see GOAT.

Grade: B-

Movie Review: How to Make a Killing

Has anyone noticed that "eat the rich" dark comedies are really en vogue right now? What could've caused this recent surge in anti-billionaire sentiments is anyone's guess, but I'm sure this trend will stop once trickle-down economics finally start paying off for the working class. The sweet trickle tree has yet to produce a single harvest, but boy oh boy when it finally starts to bear enough fruit for the bottom 99% to enjoy the feast they've been promised for 40+ years at this point, they'll never go hungry again and the creative community will surely show their appreciation by making dozens of lovely movies thanking them for them endless benevolence. 

How to Make a Killing, which is loosely based on the 1949 British film Kind Hearts and Coronets, represents John Patton Ford's (Emily the Criminal) entry into one of this decade's most densely packed cinematic corners. While this film about New Jersey-based suit salesman Becket Redfellow (Glen Powell) embarking on a mission to kill off his relatives in order to gain access to the hefty trust he's written into through his late mother (Nell Williams)-whose father (Ed Harris) cut her off after he she became pregnant with him at 19- after losing his job to his boss' son who just dropped out of college isn't overly scathing or clever in its takedown of the ultra-rich, it still manages to be an absorbing watch. Powell does a good job of weaponizing his signature magnetism to play a genuinely nice guy who slowly gets corrupted by his relentless pursuit of obtaining more wealth despite having a perfectly fine life before he started offing his estranged relatives, the terrific supporting cast (Margaret Qualley, Jessica Henwick, Bill Camp, Harris, Zach Woods, Topher Grace) all give spirited performances that help shape Becket's ugly journey up the financial ladder and the ending wraps things up in a nice feel bad bow that communicates its messaging surrounding the moral rot that tends to come with obscene wealth better than anything else that precedes it. While I do think Patton Ford's filmmaking skill set is better suited for scuzzy, tense crime thrillers than the lightly satirical dark comedy that's on display here (case in point: the couple of sequences in the final act where he digs back into the pulse-pounding intensity that drove Emily the Criminal). this is still a very solid sophomore feature that has only further instilled my confidence in his future in the industry. 

Grade: B

Rashida Jones Ranked

Welcome to "Ranked", a weekly series where I rank a franchise or filmography from worst to best and hand out assorted related superlatives. This week, I'm profiling the work of Rashida Jones-whose latest project "In the Blink on Eye" begins streaming on Hulu on Friday.

Rashida Jones' Filmography Ranked:

14.The Big Year (C-)

13.Cuban Fury (C)

12.Celeste and Jesse Forever (C)

11.Cop Out (C)

10.Friends with Benefits (C)

9.Our Idiot Brother (B-)

8.The Grinch (B)

7.The Muppets (B)

6.Between Two Ferns: The Movie (B)

5.Spies in Disguise (B)

4.Tag (B+)

3.Klaus (B+)

2.I Love You, Man (B+)

1.The Social Network (A)

Top Dog: The Social Network (2010)

Remember when David Fincher used to put out movies in theaters? Good times! Anyways, The Social Network was really the first time somebody made a movie about a big tech shithead and it nailed the fragility, insecurity and God complexes that drive these men to such a degree that every other movie that's covered similar territory since has fallen well short of the bar that was set here. Excited to revisit this ahead of the release of Aaron Sorkin's companion film The Social Reckoning in October.

Bottom Feeder: The Big Year (2011)

The last thing a comedy led by Steve Martin, Jack Black and Owen Wilson should be is completely forgettable, but that's precisely what The Big Year is. Going through the cast list and discovering that Jones, Rosamund Pike and Anthony Anderson (Jim Parsons was the only other actor I recalled being it outside of the leads) were also in it is the telltale sign of how little of this flat film has endured in my memory. 

Most Underrated: Tag (2018)

Assembling an ensemble cast that features everybody from Jeremy Renner to Jon Hamm to Isla Fisher for a movie about a group of lifelong friends who have been playing a game of tag that last for the entire month of May every year since 1983 is an act of mad genius. Everybody involved in this endeavor takes real pride in making something so silly and it allows this movie to be a total blast to watch. 

(Side note: It sucks that Hannibal Buress' acting career never really panned out because he is obscenely funny in this and Blockers.)

Most Overrated: Friends with Benefits (2011)

Friends with Benefits is a watchable enough R-rated romcom that has managed to hold onto a level of cultural relevancy that its fellow 2011 sex friends-to-lovers release No Strings Attached has failed to. That being said, I don't think it's all that funny or sweet in the grand scheme of things and would prefer to watch any of Will Gluck's other movies (Easy A, Fired Up!, Anyone But You) that occupied a similar genre space 100 times out of 100.

Movie Review: Solo Mio

Are you somebody who wants to see a romantic movie this Valentine's Day season, but aren't interested in laying eyes upon all of the bawdy fully clothed hanky panky of Wuthering Heights? Well, do I have some news for you: Kevin James is starring in a PG-rated romantic dramedy called Solo Mio where he goes on his Rome honeymoon alone after being left at the altar by his fiancé (Julie Ann Emery) and ends up finding love again with an Italian cafe owner (Nicole Grimaudo). It's the perfect movie for anyone who has treated NCIS as appointment television since it first started airing back in 1832 or believes they would enjoy a big belly laugh every time James butchers the pronunciation of an Italian word he's trying to read off his phone. Mama Mia! Mangi! Bonjourno! 

As good as James is and continues to be at playing likeable everyman characters, Solo Mio suffocates his natural charm by being completely devoid of personality or stakes. His character Matt Taylor glides through his evolution from sadsack tourist who just suffered the greatest embarrassment/heartbreak of his life to man who stumbles upon love when he needed the power of true human connection the most like he's a checked bag at the airport that needs to be put on the plane before it takes off. A movie that aspires to tell a nice, warm story about finding love where you least expect it being built around a relationship this emotionally sterile is the kind of puzzling failure that gets you to question if the people that made it were more interested in taking an extended vacation to Italy than the movie that they were there to make. Alas, Solo Mio just never lives up to its mission statement of being a heartfelt romantic movie and in the process, adds yet another stain to James' shaky post-The King of Queens resume. 

Grade: C-
 

Margaret Qualley Ranked

Welcome to "Ranked", a weekly series where I rank a franchise or filmography from worst to best and hand out assorted related superlatives. This week, I'm profiling the work of Margaret Qualley-whose latest project "How to Make a Killing" releases in theaters tomorrow. 

Margaret Qualley's Filmography Ranked:

14.Stars at Noon (C)

13.Native Son (C)

12.Donnybrook (B-)

11.Honey Don't (B-)

10.Seberg (B-)

9.Happy Gilmore 2 (B-)

8.Blue Moon (B)

7.Drive-Away Dolls (B)

6.Sanctuary (B+)

5.Kinds of Kindness (B+)

4.The Substance (A-)

3.Poor Things (A)

2.Once Upon a Time in Hollywood... (A)

1.The Nice Guys (A)

Top Dog: The Nice Guys (2016)

As of this writing, we're about three months away from the tenth anniversary of The Nice Guys releasing in theaters. I'll never forget the ludicrous amount of fun I had watching this noir buddy comedy for the first time with a few of my friends and remarkably, it's a movie that only becomes funnier with each rewatch. Qualley is very lucky that she's able to say that this is the first movie she had a prominent role in. 

Bottom Feeder: Stars at Noon (2022)

There's a sleazy shagginess to the political thriller plot in Stars at Noon that prevents it from being a total drag. It's not however enough to forgive the complete lack of eroticism in the romantic subplot brought on by the nonexistent chemistry between Qualley and Joe Alwyn, especially when it's supposed to serve as the story's emotional crux.

Most Underrated: Sanctuary (2023)

Unlike in Stars of Noon, Qualley has tremendous chemistry with Christopher Abbott in Sanctuary. The pair are incredible together in this darkly comedic psychological thriller about an unexpectedly eventful night between a rich guy and the dominatrix he has a long-standing business relationship with after he attempts to end their arrangement upon getting promoted to CEO of his family's luxury hotel chain following the death of his father. There's a lot of fun to be had in watching them embark in a heated battle in which the upper hand in the power dynamic of their suddenly drastically different relationship is constantly shifting between the two parties and having the film take place over a single night in a hotel suite adds a feeling of claustrophobia that amplifies the tension of their chaotic verbal sparring match. 

Most Overrated: Blue Moon (2025)

A couple of years from now, it will probably be ridiculous to refer to Blue Moon as overrated. But now as it's fresh off of receiving a couple of Oscar noms, I'm willing to make that declaration. As strong as Ethan Hawke's work here in this Richard Linklater-helmed biopic about a bitter, drunk Lorenz Hart trying to accept in real time that the best days of his songwriting career are behind him after leaving the opening night performance of his former creative partner Richard Rodgers' (Andrew Scott) megahit musical Oklahoma! early to go hang out at the Manhattan bar that all of the Broadway talent flocks to after performances, listening to Hart cycle between ripping Oklahoma!, boasting about projects he may or may not be working on, telling stories about his glory days to any pour soul that is willing to listen to him and begging Rodgers to collaborate with him once again without ever coming up for air becomes pretty monotonous after a while.   

Movie Review: Crime 101

Sitting in a theater and watching heist thriller Crime 101 felt like taking a time machine back to the 80's or 90's. American Animals writer/director Bart Layton's second narrative feature is an ensemble-driven movie that is just as interested in exploring the characters that are involved with the different angles of the heist as the robberies themselves

The plot's primary focus is on how the lives of meticulous jewel thief Mike Davis (Chris Hemsworth), veteran detective Lou Lubesnick (Mark Ruffalo) and insurance broker Sharon Combs (Halle Berry) begin to intersect following the robbery of $3 million worth of diamonds from an LA jeweler's (Payman Maadi) delivery. Fate has tethered these folks together as they've each reached a critical impasse in their lives. Mike is looking to get out of the thieving business after experiencing a close call on the aforementioned job that almost got him killed, Lou's obsession with catching Mike-who is pretty much impossible to catch as he's never left DNA or carried out any violence at the crime scene- has caused his wife (Jennifer Jason Leigh) to leave him and made him the laughing stock of his department and Sharon is growingly increasingly discontent with her job as her boss (Paul Adelstein) continues to delay giving her the promotion to partner he's long promised her. A potential solution to all of their problems presents itself when a wealthy client of Sharon's company (Tate Donovan) reveals a plan to give out diamonds as party favors at his wedding. Sweetening the pot is the fact that he's arranged to pay the courier $11 million in cash for the diamonds in order to avoid taxes. Mike reluctantly agrees to do the job, and Sharon requests a $3 million cut for providing him with the info. An already complicated job that requires getting in and out of a crowded luxury hotel in Beverly Hills becomes even more difficult when Mike discovers that his former fence (Nick Nolte) has recruited his hot-headed new protege (Barry Keoghan) to intercept the stones and cash as revenge for Mike severing ties with him after refusing to commit to a brazen jewelry store heist in Santa Barbara. Will Mike and Sharon be able to live long enough to walk away into the sunset? Can Lou finally catch the ghost that has alluded him? Does Keoghan play a character that actually proves to be pretty chill for once? Don't fret everybody, all of the answers to these questions and more are answered before the credits begin to roll! 

There was something nice about a heist movie trusting its audience to have some patience before it delves into the flashier parts of its story. Layton's solid script provides a complete picture as to why these people are doing what they're doing and Hemsworth, Ruffalo and especially Berry give strong, emotionally honest performances that provide the film with a surprising amount of grounded humanity. When the action bits are deployed (roughly about once every half hour during its well-paced 140-minute runtime), Layton matches the command over the material he showed off with his pen by staging some tense, slickly shot vehicle chases/robberies that gradually up the narrative stakes. Eventually, Crime 101 reverts back to the classic heist movie trope of deploying some silly, cute twists to explain away how the big final score was able to be pulled off against all odds, but that's really the only big misstep Layton makes here-which is pretty impressive for a filmmaker working on his first big budget studio feature.

Is Crime 101 going to end up finishing near the top of my 2026 year-end list? Probably not. However, it's a very compelling throwback heist thriller filled with strong performances, visuals and action that never feels derivative of the other movies that have covered similar territory in the city of Los Angeles before it. During this pretty slow part of the calendar, it's well worth making the trek out to theaters to see if you're into the genre or just want to see the type of movie that doesn't end up on the big screen all that much these days.    

Grade: B+

Movie Review: Wuthering Heights (2026)

 

Even during a time where people regularly decry about how homogenized and safe movies have become, some filmmakers have still been able to turn into polarizing figures. Among these lucky few directors whose work inspires passionate takes/arguments galore is Emerald Fennell. The mere mention of the British writer/director behind Promising Young Woman and Saltburn in certain corners of the internet effectively serves as an alarm that activates a sleeper cell of cinephiles so full of venom and disgust towards her work that they make the Snydercut cult that have spent the past few years trying to get James Gunn removed from his post at DC Studios look like pleasant, reasonable people. For her third film, Fennell decided to further expand the already sizable target on her back by moving away from original stories and trying her hand at an adaptation. Much to the disgust of English lit majors and the Fennell haters that felt Saltburn did an awful job tackling its themes of class everywhere, the work she elected to adapt was Emily Bronte's 1847 novel Wuthering Heights. Wuthering Heights is widely considered to be one of the most seminal pieces of literature ever written and the complicated romance between the wealthy Catherine Earnshaw and Heathcliff-a poor boy her father took in off the streets and raised alongside his children- at the center of the story has led to it being adapted on screen dozens of times around the globe since 1920. While I can't comment on how well Fennell's Wuthering Heights adapts Bronte's novel or how it stacks up against any of the previous screen adaptations, I can say with zero hesitation that I enjoyed it quite a bit.

Wuthering Heights is built around a romance that had been simmering under the surface for quite some time that eventually morphs into something ugly due to the shame, pain and jealousy that stemmed from not allowing that love to blossom when it still had the opportunity to grow into something beautiful. The primary contributing factors to this sullying of something pure are Catherine (Margot Robbie) believing that she would be degenerating her family name by marrying a peasant and Heathcliff (Jacob Elordi) being so hurt by this revelation that he transforms into a cold, vengeful prick. When Heathcliff reemerges with some money several years after Catherine has married a wealthy businessman Edgar Linton (Shazad Latif), they finally act upon the feelings they had previously pushed down for so long, and shit gets real messy for both of them real fast. 

Despite the comically misleading marketing referring to it as "the greatest love story ever told", Fennell's film leads with feelings of lust, obsession and jealousy. There's a version of this story where Catherine and Heathcliff build the love they've always dreamed of, but the ones occupying the screen here are too bitter, wounded and selfish to build a relationship that is anything other than purely primal. The animalistic nature of its toxic, doomed romance is perfectly complemented by the stunning Gothic-inspired darkness consuming beauty aesthetic that drives the film. Pairing lavish sets/costumes with the fog-filled landscapes of the British coastline and downtempo music handled by the dynamic duo of Charli xcx and composer Anthony Willis allows the film to cast a hypnotic spell that often looks like a dream but feels like a nightmare. Pulling off a long-unrealized romance that materializes in a much more hideous way than it could or should have requires an incredibly delicate dance from the creatives and thanks to Fennell's rich, visceral atmosphere and the chemistry between Robbie and Elordi that tows the line between sizzling and just plain wrong, Wuthering Heights is able to pull it off. 

I get why people wouldn't be able to get down with a movie that draws its emotion from the gut, heart and eyes over the mind, but I honestly feel like Fennell is able to really explore the evolution of Catherine and Heathcliffe's relationship by committing to conveying the specific impulse-and-pleasure-driven emotions they were experiencing during their ill-fated affair. It wouldn't have felt right to have bigger, headier emotions get in the way of a courtship that is so clearly defined as two rotten souls hoping that the special connection they once had during the days where their hearts were purer will magically return (Spoiler alert: It doesn't!). Now, this approach shortchanges certain characters-particularly Catherine's confidant/servant Nelly (Hong Chau) and makes fully buying the delivery of the inevitable tragic conclusion a difficult ask given all the shitty things these characters do ahead of it, but that was a price I was ultimately willing to pay given how convincing and engrossing every other aspect of the film is. Fennell has a conviction in executing her vision that is special and as long as that remains intact, her movies will keep striking a chord with me. 

 

Grade: B+