Gamereactor UK

Lee Cronin's The Mummy

peter@gamereactor.eu (Peter Westberg) — Mon, 20 Apr 2026 11:00:00 +0200

Let's start by stating the obvious straight away: No, this isn't an action-adventure in the vein of The Mummy from 1999 (which, incidentally, is one of my absolute favourite cinema experiences from when I was a young lad. Blimey, I loved that film). This is, as the title suggests, Lee Cronin's The Mummy. But of course, there are familiar elements from the franchise. Mummies (duh!), scarabs, sarcophagi, black goo spurting from mouths, and various other gross stuff. But that's where the similarities end.

The film in a nutshell: The young daughter of a TV journalist is kidnapped. Eight years later, the torn family is shocked when she is returned to them, as what should be a joyful reunion turns into a living nightmare. There's plenty to like here. It's atmospheric and stylish, the prologue is unsettling and well done, and one detail I really like is that the characters are allowed to speak their own languages rather than being Americanised. We're in Egypt, so the characters speak... you get the point.

One of the film's weaknesses has to be the acting. May Calamawy as the Egyptian cop Dalia is superb and Natalie Grace as Katie is equally so, as she is absolutely outstanding. But the rest leave a bit to be desired. Primarily Jack Reynor, who plays the father in the drama. I won't say it's downright bad, but at times the acting performances tend to feel a bit like something out of Days of our Lives, like Vikings veteran Travis Fimmel (thank goodness he's not in this) who's learnt just one facial expression regardless of whether he's nervous, angry, happy, or horny.

Anyway, we start in Egypt, where the family is living temporarily because of the father's job as a TV reporter. The mother is pregnant, the daughter is groomed and disappears, and eight years later, we find ourselves in New Mexico. The family is trying to cope after the trauma of their daughter not being found with their other daughter, Maud, who is the same age as Katie was when she disappeared, and suddenly the call comes... Katie has been found. She's alive, but she's not herself. To put it mildly.

The Mummy is a stylish film and the make-up work is impeccable. It's called body horror for a good reason. Before things get truly disgusting, however, we're treated to a creeping sense of unease that's cleverly constructed. We know it's going to go to hell, but not when or exactly how. There are many truly effective scenes, but also quite a few logical gaps that are a bit jarring. Everything is kept secret and the family seeks no help from trauma psychologists and doesn't contact anyone outside their ranks when their daughter starts behaving... strangely. I buy into it as a horror film concept - it's effective - but the logic still bothers me.

The Mummy has been claimed to be very scary. And I read a review where someone wrote that it will be a long time before they eat "deviled eggs" again. Yes, The Mummy is, as mentioned earlier, very stylish. It's disgusting, even though I'm so desensitised that I don't react at all or find anything particularly striking, even when skin happens peels away from bone. But Scary? It's unsettling, and sure, it does get under your skin a bit, but no. I don't think the unease becomes overly pronounced. Perhaps that's also a sign that I'm desensitised.

Regardless, it's an exciting, nerve-wracking, and enjoyable film. American critics have called it "mean-spirited", and I understand why and I even agree. At the same time, I absolutely love that Hollywood dares to fully commit to this kind of film. It's hopeful, it's quite long at about 135 minutes, but the running time flies by and I never feel as though it drags or loses momentum. After we've had a few too many "closed house" clichés, we get a lovely little break with the investigation in Egypt, with never a dull moment or any wasted screen time.

It leaves you wanting more all the same. I want more Cronin, and not entirely off-topic, I'm looking forward to seeing Brendan Fraser and Rachel Weisz return to the exciting, silly Mummy franchise. More than I expected. Lee Cronin shows he's a horror film director to be reckoned with as The Mummy is brilliant, despite its flaws.

Beef Season 2

fredrik@gamereactor.eu (Fredrik Malmquist) — Sat, 18 Apr 2026 10:00:00 +0200

It was far from certain that Beef, created by Lee Sung Jin, would get a second season following the conclusion of the first. But the string of awards, at both the Golden Globe Awards and the Primetime Emmy Awards, paved the way for a sequel that ultimately felt inevitable. Much like series such as Fargo and True Detective, Sung Jin and Netflix have chosen to treat the seasons as standalone anthologies on the same theme, conflicts, or indeed 'beefs'. With an electric soundtrack by Finneas O'Connell and exquisite cinematography by James Laxton, we as viewers are once again drawn into an absurd drama, heightened by top-class performances.

In the new season, we meet a brand-new cast in a tense relationship drama. A young Gen Z couple at an absurdly exclusive country club are drawn into their boss's crumbling marriage. What begins as an uncomfortable row quickly escalates into a game characterised by power, manipulation and social climbing, in which everyone is vying for the favour of a ruthless billionaire. Even she, with her own scandal threatening to tear everything apart.

With the success of the first season, Sung Jin has clearly found himself in a completely different position. The director and screenwriter has assembled an impressive cast, giving the impression that Netflix has essentially given him free rein to work with whoever he wants. He admired James Laxton's cinematography in Barry Jenkins' Moonlight, so he hired him. He was taken with Finneas O'Connell and his sister Billie Eilish's Oscar-winning song 'What Was I Made For', so he let Finneas handle the music.

Alongside Korean legends Youn Yuh-jung and Song Kang-ho, the cast features established names such as Oscar Isaac and Carey Mulligan. Playing the younger couple in the series are Charles Melton and Cailee Spaeny, the former known from Glee and American Horror Story, and the latter appearing in Alien: Romulus. All deliver absolutely fantastic performances that move, provoke revulsion and, at times, elicit laughter amidst all the darkness.

I'm completely blown away after binge-watching the entire season over five days. Beyond the season's central conflict between the young couple (Austin and Ashley) and the older one (Josh and Lindsay), we also gain an insight into the couples' internal relationships, marked by relationship troubles and personal shortcomings. Furthermore, both couples are pitted against the ruthless owner of the private members' club, who himself is grappling with his own, increasingly unpleasant problems, which he tackles with unconventional solutions.

Layer upon layer is peeled away, as seemingly trivial details are set against life-altering decisions with potentially disastrous consequences for everyone involved. The TV series builds and builds towards its inevitable climax. Lee Sung Jin, together with his ensemble, manages to make everything feel natural, believable and, at times, painfully cringe-worthy in just the right way. Youthful ambition is pitted against shattered dreams and greed, all packaged into a cohesive whole that could very well pave the way for yet another successful awards season for everyone involved. Beef's second season takes what the first season did well and pushes it all the way to the finish line. This is a full house.

Thrash

peter@gamereactor.eu (Peter Westberg) — Fri, 17 Apr 2026 09:00:00 +0200

Tommy Wirkola. Something of a legend in the horror genre, isn't he? I'm not a huge fan of the Dead Snow films, though I'll admit they're very entertaining. A few years ago, he also brought us the ultra-violent and highly entertaining I Onde Dager (The Trip in English), starring Noomi Rapace, Aksel Hennie and Atle Antonsen.

Now he's swapped the Norwegian countryside for hurricanes and sharks in an American coastal town in South Carolina. I'm going into this without any particular expectations, but at the same time I really do hope it's as entertaining as it sounds. I'm a sucker for shark films, even if there are few memorable ones. Deep Blue Sea is mindless and bloody silly, but it's still fantastically entertaining. We don't even need to mention Jaws. A classic. And I actually thought The Meg was really enjoyable, if you're prepared for what you're getting into: an angry Statham fighting a monster shark. It's fun, folks.

A quick word on the plot then. You've already got the gist. It doesn't take more than a couple of sentences. Abridged and translated: When a Category 5 hurricane devastates a coastal town, the storm surge brings with it destruction, chaos and something far more terrifying: hungry sharks.

You get the picture. It's not kitchen-sink realism. Because the kitchen sinks get swept away in the flood. Thrash doesn't drag its feet. It builds up the plot and the tension just as we'd expect from a disaster film. I think Thrash is relatively stylish. It gets by with simple means. We find ourselves in flooded shacks, out on flooded streets. The sharks are competently animated. It's not eye candy, but it doesn't make you angry either.

The dialogue is what you'd expect from this sort of film. The acting is much the same. There won't be any Oscar nominations, but we're spared the Razzies too. Everyone does a decent job. I actually think that sums up Thrash quite well. We know what we're getting, and if you don't expect anything more, you'll be satisfied. It's a bit like a bag of mixed sweets. You want the raspberries and liquorice, but you end up popping an orange sweet into your mouth every now and then. It's not brilliant, but it works.

There are a few scenes that offer a bit more edge. There are a couple of half-decent shark attacks, but nothing that stands out. Nothing that surprises. It's bloody, but it feels like they're holding back a bit. I can imagine that Wirkola, who's previously been allowed to go wild with the violence, has been tied to the director's and editor's chair. There's a scene where one of the main characters is supposed to throw "things that vibrate" into the water, and I immediately think, "I know Wirkola would have wanted to include a vibrator here, but Netflix said no, it'll be an electric toothbrush."

I've always had a soft spot for Djimon Hounsou. He doesn't get nearly enough screen time, though. Despite my reservations and having to keep my expectations in check so as not to get my hopes up for the next big shark action film (is that a genre? Well, now it is!), I still like Thrash. It doesn't offer anything particularly new. It isn't scary or overly thrilling, but it's still entertaining enough that I sit back and feel grateful that in 2026 I can watch sharks feasting on meat on a Friday night.

If I could make a wish out loud, I'd love to see some sort of crossover between this, Jaws and Deep Blue Sea. But with stylish effects, more tension and non-stop gore. And an LL Cool J who gets to say something cool along the lines of "You ate my bird."

Undertone

magnus@gamereactor.eu (Magnus Groth-Andersen) — Thu, 16 Apr 2026 17:00:00 +0200

When my lovely girlfriend and I watch horror films - and we've watched countless ones together over the past 10 years - she always holds a duvet over her eyes when the tension gets too much, whilst I always cover my ears. There isn't much deep thought behind it, apart from the fact that my instinct recognised long ago that it felt like a smarter way to puncture the balloon of suspense, through which scary scenes are inflated to the point of bursting.

It's therefore only understandable that A24, in collaboration with debut director Ian Tuason, has made a horror film that places the soundscape very much at the forefront. Undertone was made for just $500,000, and this is largely because the film's basic mechanisms all use sound as a central focal point, just like Paranormal Activity.

The premise is tailor-made for this setup too. Evy, played by Nina Kiri, is caring for her dying mother, who apparently doesn't have long left, but in her intensely religious home she doesn't exactly feel at ease, and passes the time recording and researching a podcast called "Undertone", which, in authentic true crime style, deals with eerie audio files and speculates on whether there is something more between heaven and earth. The atmosphere immediately becomes more intense when they receive 10 mysterious audio files, which form the backbone of the film, as the files themselves become increasingly bizarre and Evy begins to experience strange occurrences in her mother's quiet home.

This is how Undertone unfolds, and apart from Evy herself and her mother (played by Michèle Duque), there are no other actors physically appearing in this film. We hear the voice of her podcast co-host Justin (voiced by Adam DiMarco) and the mysterious audio files, but Undertone is, just like Paranormal Activity, deliberately intimate, limited, stripped down to the bare essentials. Unlike Paranormal Activity, however, Tuason does not adhere to the found-footage genre framework, but is instead rather brilliantly shot, with beautiful, simple pans, and a camera that tends to linger just a little longer, a style so prevalent amongst younger horror directors, from Damian McCarthy to Jordan Peele.

Undertone is beautifully put together, no doubt about it, and it's even well-acted, particularly by Kiri, who serves as a strong emotional anchor in a film that truly stands or falls on her credibility. The sound design itself is well produced too, bass-heavy, and punchy, and together forms a solid narrative framework on which the rest of the film can rely.

It must be said, however, that Undertone is not a film that opens up in the conventional sense. It's in the so-called "negative space" - the empty spaces, if you will - that the eeriness and tension arise, and not nearly so much in the form of actual visual set pieces, not even towards the film's conclusion, as it remains faithful to its "audio-first" strategy and deviates from it only rarely.

However, one could also argue that certain, less satisfying horror films overexpose their eerie elements too quickly and too often, and that is certainly not the case with Undertone. The end result shows a director who has a firm grasp of these very basic techniques, and whilst it's a success by those standards, it will be interesting to see Tuason command a few more resources to construct scenarios with a few more "moving parts", so to speak.

Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die

peter@gamereactor.eu (Peter Westberg) — Wed, 15 Apr 2026 16:00:00 +0200

I went into Gore Verbinski's latest film with absolutely no expectations and without having seen a trailer. All I'd seen was the cover image of Sam Rockwell, which immediately brought to mind Terry Gilliam's quirky films.

Gore was very active in the early 2000s. He directed what I consider to be a very successful remake of The Ring, which absolutely scared the life out of me at the cinema. He then moved on to a very, very famous franchise where Johnny Depp staggered about as a perpetually drunk pirate who's always wondering why the rum's run out. I don't need to spell out the title, do I? He's also given us the Nic Cage comedy "The Weather Man", the snooze-fest "A Cure for Wellness", and "The Lone Ranger" (which flopped, but was actually quite entertaining).

Let's run through the plot quickly. A man from the future bursts into a diner in Los Angeles to recruit unsuspecting diners for a desperate mission against an evil AI. Through threats and trickery, he unites a motley crew, who are thrown into a chaotic race, where zombies and robots lurk around every corner in a battle for humanity's survival.

It's hard not to draw parallels with the Oscar-winning Everything Everywhere All At Once. No, we aren't flung between a bunch of different universes in the same way, but it's probably a mix of the pure aesthetic, the fast-pace, and the unpredictability.

And the weaknesses... Because, and this is perhaps like swearing in church, I'm not exactly crazy about Everything Everywhere All At Once. I love the fact that such an underdog film pulled off a massive upset at the Oscars. I love the actors, the daring, the aesthetics, and much of the humour. But it was too chaotic for me and too much was happening, all the time, just as the title suggests. It felt like a film created by a kid with severe concentration difficulties who just wanted to throw new things in your face.

And I experience Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die in much the same way when we're thrown straight into it. I love Rockwell, always have, yet I'm sceptical at first. The opening does nothing for me, but then the film gets going and there are a number of truly delightful scenes. We're treated to plenty of dark humour and this business of almost joking about school shootings feels a bit hit and miss. I get the point - it's surreal - but it rubs me the wrong way.

I particularly appreciate the scenes between Zazie Beetz and Michael Peña, which are very good. There's also a deeper, serious theme in the film that I think is important to address: how we use artificial intelligence and what it does. I'm no doomsday prophet seeing the opening of Terminator 2: Judgment Day playing out before me, but still, we use it for everything, everywhere, despite there being so many uncertainty surrounding AI. So, yes, I like the theme and it works. It doesn't feel forced, even though I do feel that films about rogue AI are starting to feel a bit... overused. That being said, a few uplifting, exciting, and subtle scenes, stylish visuals, and talented actors unfortunately don't make up for it in my view. It's still far too disjointed, which means I don't really care what happens nor do I care much about the characters.

This film would have benefited from being cut down by fifteen minutes and a couple more tweaks to the script. There's something really good here, amidst the chaos of rapid cuts and unexpected events, and you know what? I'd have loved to see a few more mobile-zombies on screen.

Margo's Got Money Troubles: Season 1

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Wed, 15 Apr 2026 09:05:16 +0200

Elle Fanning, Michelle Pfeiffer, Nick Offerman, and Nicole Kidman, all starring in a show written for television by Big Little Lies and Presumed Innocent's David E. Kelley. On paper, Margo's Got Money Troubles seems like a sure-fire success, especially when you add into this equation the pedigree of shows we tend to get from Apple TV. And yet, there's just something about this series that didn't quite connect with me.

The premise of Margo's Got Money Troubles is actually rather straightforward, as we follow a titular young woman, who after giving birth to her first child, realises that life is far from sunshine and rainbows. Employers can't take chances on unavailable staff, upper education won't give the same opportunities to those with infant dependents, and despite all of this, bills must be paid. Thus Margo turns to OnlyFans and explores the world of adult entertainment to make ends meet, a decision that leads to all kinds of additional problems with her own family and that of the child's absent father.

When you lay it out as such, Margo's Got Money Troubles doesn't seem like a very 'funny' series, which is in part my first criticism of the show. This project is defined as a dramedy, but the moments of pure humour are sparse, as rather you find yourself simply trapped in an emotional ring, witnessing as Margo is battered by an onslaught of punches from reality. The more mature and emotionally-complex storyline might seem like a comedy car crash waiting to happen, but if we stick with the Apple TV basis, projects like Shrinking go to show that tough incidents and narrative threads can still serve as a foundation for compelling humour. Margo's Got Money Troubles doesn't really have that.

Granted, it's much better off if you judge it on the parameters of being a drama, as then we find a story about a young woman coping with the challenges of motherhood. From this angle, the premise and structuring works better, especially when Fanning's Margo is supported by the key and core wider cast, be that her mother Shyanne, played by Pfeiffer, or her father, Jinx, portrayed by Offerman. When all these pieces come together and you get to see how the estranged family connect and combine, there's a more substantial and entertaining show to celebrate.

Similarly on this front, the moments that make you, as a viewer, experience the greatest amount of emotion come in the most hard-hitting scenes, be this in courtrooms or at wedding chapels, or perhaps even during betrayals. Margo's family is about as complicated and flawed as a family can get and seeing how she adapts to each problem, and how this affects the livelihood of her baby, Bodhi, is without question the strongest element of this show.

That being said, when you're on the journey with these characters, you can't help but feel disconnected with them due to how simply selfish many of the core individuals come across. Margo snaps at her frustrated university roommates because they're upset she brought an infant child into their shared home and expects them to be entirely fine with it without ever asking for their opinion... Add to this her addict father's issues and her unsupportive mother and her highly-religious new husband's problems with the situation, and ultimately you get a bunch of narrative threads where you can't help but feel as though the core cast are the most selfish individuals in the wider story. It's an unusual setup and one that makes the truly hard-hitting moments less impactful as you're less connected to these protagonists due to their questionable morals.

Sure, there's the signature quality and premium feel that all Apple TV projects tend to boast, and the cast do precisely what you'd expect of them for the character archetypes they have been handed. But overall, Margo's Got Money Troubles came across as a show that I didn't exactly enjoy watching. There's nothing wrong with a tough and complex plot, but it has to be handled in such a way that you get a sense of humanity from somewhere, and in this show, it seems to come from the newborn child and how every decision is supposedly being made for its well-being, even if every decision is rooted in such selfishness that it frankly corrupts the pure intentions.

So long story short, Margo's Got Money Troubles is a conflicting series, with enough potential and talent in place to keep its head above water, even if there are more concerning currents at play beneath the surface.

Outcome

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Thu, 09 Apr 2026 18:00:00 +0200

I was not at all prepared for how much of a meta story Jonah Hill had put together with Apple TV's Outcome. On paper, we find a comedy flick following a Hollywood star, played by Keanu Reeves, who is returning to the limelight after years away, dealing with all of the complications that brings. You take this basic premise, add the star power of Hill and Cameron Diaz, with a few cameos from icons like Martin Scorsese, and tie it all up in a little bow that's around 80-minutes long, and looking at it from a distance, it seems like the rather regular comedy formula. However in practice, Outcome is an at-times funny but flawed riff on the actual life of Keanu Reeves.

You see, Outcome is about more than just following a star returning to the spotlight, as it's actually about said star dealing with the realisation that he's not likeable. Despite being Hollywood's golden boy for three decades, he's alienated more people than he has made friends, and I know what you're thinking, "that doesn't sound like Keanu at all...", and from our perspective as fans of the legendary actor I'd tend to agree. But most of us don't actually know Reeves so making that judgement is impossible. Witnessing his character in this film, a protagonist known as Reef Hawk, desperately searching the web to find any hint that his loyal fans have discovered a crack in his otherwise perfect façade, while simultaneously getting control over a leaker who is blackmailing him about something he has no recollection of, it all shapes up to become a very meta and shockingly familiar take that feels like it could never be a reality without having the seemingly spotless Reeves at the helm. Again, it's not a direct example of Reeves' actual life, but it does come across as shockingly familiar.

So anyway, we find a plot premise that is rather unique and has its moments of brilliance, but it's weighed down by a bunch of other creative decisions that simply don't connect with me. For starters, Hill plays a crisis lawyer called Ira who is just insufferable for most of the movie. There's a brief moment midway through where Ira becomes more authentic and human, but for the rest of the film he stands out as simply dislikeable, loud, and perhaps most importantly, not very funny. Then, as much as I do like Reeves, he's not exactly the most charismatic of actors, seeing his performance as Reef Hawk leave some to be desired. Also, the additional stars and icons used as either key characters (like Diaz) or cameo-like roles (Scorsese) never leave a huge impression, ultimately making for a film that when the credits roll, you find that you haven't experienced much or been affected emotionally at all. It's simply a bit flat from start-to-finish.

One of the few strengths is how it pokes fun at current events and trends, with hilarious nods to the implosion of Kanye West or to the eccentric and bewildering lifestyles of "Real Housewives". There's elements of this film that stand out and Hill even plays with a few interesting transitions and set choices to deliver quite striking scenes from a visual perspective. But at the same time, for a film that is made to be a comedy first-and-foremost, Outcome doesn't feel like it quite understands the assignment.

A natural point of comparison for Outcome would be The Studio, as while one is a movie and another a TV series, both are designed to give an insight into modern Hollywood while also being hilarious. For the latter, Seth Rogen and the gang thrive, serving up witty and memorable comedy matched up with storylines and sequences that feel more real and charismatic. Outcome doesn't have that. It's because of this that I'm once again questioning why Apple TV, despite its pedigree for truly excellent and standout television, can't seem to reach the same standards for feature-length projects... And Outcome is barely feature length as I've seen TV 'episodes' that run longer than this movie.

It may sound like I'm being very critical of this film - and I am disappointed by it because of the potential it has - but this mostly comes from the fact that I've grown to expect great things from Apple TV. This film isn't great. It's perfectly watchable, but it doesn't match up with the other remarkable efforts that this streaming platform has pushed out in the past. For some reason, Apple TV just can't seem to crack movies and Outcome is another example of this.

Mercy

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 13:00:00 +0200

Boy, is this a strange one. There are few films that invoke the same curious slate of emotions and thoughts as what Mercy put me through during its approximately 100-minute runtime. It's a bizarre project because it asks questions about the increasingly overbearing presence of artificial intelligence in society and then puts forth these arguments in a film format that almost feels like a feature-length TikTok. There's a whole lot here that rubs me the wrong way and yet, somehow, Mercy is quite an entertaining movie.

The plot takes us to a semi-futuristic world overrun by crime and unrest, a portrayal of Los Angeles to be exact where law enforcement and the justice system has decided to take action by eliminating the need for a full jury of one's peers and simply give an accused individual 90-minutes to convince an AI of reasonable doubt against their conviction, by acting as a combined detective and defendant. If they get the guilty percentage beneath 92.5% before the 90-minutes concludes, they will be given a second chance at life, but if they fail, they will be executed in the very chair that currently holds them hostage.

As far as a narrative goes, there's substance and potential here that will hold your attention. The story is set up in a real-time 24-like fashion, where the 90-minutes tick away at an equal rate for Chris Pratt's accused detective, Chris Raven, and for the viewer, and this does a great deal for the tense pacing. But a plot like this also opens the door for all manner of other moral ambiguity, one where you start to become distracted by the premise to ask why anyone in their right mind thought this would be a good idea and why the AI judge (Maddox) played by Rebecca Ferguson is given complete power and autocracy to hack into whatever she wants and access whichever data she desires under the influence of the accused in a bid to hunt for the truth. Should we break any law and cross any boundary in the hunt for justice? That's what this film ultimately had me questioning, despite it not actually really being the point of the story.

But anyway, despite a few uneven ideas and hiccups along the way, there's a rather engaging and fresh plot here that is put together in a compelling fashion. It's no Oscar-winner or written masterpiece, but it does have more substance and style than many modern action epics can boast. Rather, the main issues that Mercy faces is in how it's fundamentally put together as a film, as it's filmed in an almost TikTok-like manner that flits between clips, bodycam footage, and video calls, all while Pratt kicks and screams whenever something doesn't go his way and Ferguson shows absolutely no sign of emotion thanks to portraying a lifeless AI. The best possible way I can describe how Mercy plays out is like a feature length Braindance from Cyberpunk 2077, where we get to study and unravel crime scenes, re-evaluate data and information, read through emails and encrypted messages, all in the hunt for the truth. It's a bizarre setup that makes Mercy feel like it was put together by an AI with a penchant for filmmaking.

While I do think that the strongest part of Mercy is its narrative premise, the movie also makes a rather disappointing move by getting right to the point of beginning to ask some of the major questions I levied above and then simply rolling credits, leaving you with an unsatisfied taste in your mouth, especially considering the rather striking plot twists that occur in the final act. It all feels like a movie that was put together incredibly quickly, which is a bit disappointing as there is potential to explore, especially from a world-building and morality perspective.

It's because of all of this that I'm left a tad bewildered by Mercy. It's not a trainwreck of a film in the same vein as the other recent TikTok-like flick of War of the Worlds, but it also isn't great. There are moments of quality, a story with good potential, a tightly wound pacing that keeps you engaged, but there's also so much on the editing, acting, even creative vision fronts for Mercy to leave a fulfilling impression on you. It's another frankly missable movie even if those who do watch will find that they probably won't hate it, somehow...

The Drama

alex@gamereactor.eu (Alex Hopley) — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 09:00:00 +0200

Love is not always easy, but it's extremely rare that it should ever be as difficult as it is in A24's The Drama. Starring Robert Pattinson and Zendaya, the film follows a couple about to be married and a newly uncovered secret that threatens to put their marriage at risk before it has even begun.

We begin with a meet-cute, seeing Charlie (Pattinson) approach Emma (Zendaya) at a coffee shop. Her partial deafness leads to an adorable story you'd expect out of an early 2000s romcom, and the first stage of the film takes us through that lovey-dovey aspect of such a relationship. First dates, moving in together, great sex, it's all going about as well as you could expect. Even if you know something's bound to go wrong, it's nice that there's nothing cynical about the love these two characters share. The film asks us to laugh at Charlie and Emma multiple times, but never at the idea they could be in love. These aren't two young idiots blinded by the attraction they feel to one another physically, who were bound to break up at the first sign of any real trouble.

It's best to go into The Drama blind, and so I won't spoil what the central twist is that leads the lives of this couple to be turned upside-down, but it's something that's bound to have you and your own partner discussing whether the characters should or shouldn't have stayed together on the drive home.

The Drama is teeming with water cooler-worthy moments, themes, and characters. It's a really rich text, with enough additional details to fill a dozen "did you spot this?" YouTube Shorts or Reels. I was a particular fan of how Pattinson's hair became floppier as his mental state spiralled. I don't think I'll want to be rewatching it anytime soon, though. The film is brilliantly cringe-inducing, with moments where you either laugh or recoil into your seat like you're a snail returning to its shell, as The Drama brings the secrets of the couple further into public settings, and more people start to know the terrible moment that caused Pattinson and Zendaya to question their lives together.

I really wasn't expecting The Drama to be as intentionally funny as it is. Considering the title and actors involved, I'd expected a film more steeped in, well, drama. However, The Drama is edited and shot so well you can't help but laugh even when you know you shouldn't. There are some cutaways that feel suited to a Family Guy episode at times, and yet they never detract from the film's emotional weight and core. If anything, the comedy only makes it feel more real, like the characters aren't designed for the conflict, and instead exist as actual people, letting us in for a brief glimpse at their lives.

Me and who?

Zendaya and Robert Pattinson do a fantastic job at portraying Emma and Charlie, although I'd particularly like to highlight Zendaya as a stand-out here. Just as she did in Challengers, Zendaya proves that even though she's one of the biggest stars on the planet today, she can be completely believable as someone else. It's part of her job, as an actress, but at times stars grow so great it's impossible to imagine them playing anyone that isn't larger than life. Yet, Emma is a grounded, realistic person, who the film's central conflict relies upon. You may have heard the controversy around some aspects of the movie, which I won't highlight due to spoilers, but even with subject matter that walks a tightrope above a pit of volatility, Zendaya carries the weight of the film like it's an empty sack. Pattinson is a brilliant scatterbrain as Charlie as well, caught far too often in his own overthinking, leading to him creating the worst scenarios he'd dreamed in his head.

The Drama is a phenomenal character-driven piece of film. It's funny, emotional, and brilliantly edited. Perhaps what I liked most about it was the romantic element, though. As I said at the beginning, there's a belief in this movie that love, true love, exists, and that offers a central theme of hope that helps you answer the questions of if people can be redeemed lying at the film's core. I want to love this film wholeheartedly, yet controversy revolving around the director Kristoffer Borgli's relationship with a teenager when he was in his late 20s hampers that, leaving somewhat of a bitter taste in my mouth when I write praising the film so staunchly.

Star Wars: Maul - Shadow Lord - Episodes 1 & 2

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Tue, 07 Apr 2026 12:00:00 +0200

While I will be one of the first to agree that Star Wars is in a bit of a creative rut, focusing too much time on a very specific and somewhat small time period despite having an entire galaxy and timeline of opportunities at its disposal, this is as much a truth as is the fact that, somewhat contradictory, there is still huge amounts of potential to tap in this otherwise more concise part of the Star Wars mythos. Star Wars: Maul - Shadow Lord certainly seems to be another fine example of this second truth.

The picture is painted on a canvas used plenty of times before. The time period is between Episodes 3 & 4, a moment where the Empire is continuing to grasp the galaxy, displacing and disrupting the political and socio-economic climate. Any Star Wars fan is familiar with this period and premise, and the same can be said about our 'hero' in this latest story too. Maul is back, dropping the Darth and becoming more of a crime boss, as we experienced the character in The Clone Wars and other animated post-Phantom Menace projects. Like how Maul had to piece himself back together after fighting Qui-Gon Jinn and Obi-Wan Kenobi all those years ago, here we see the former Sith Lord rebuilding his criminal network after it all came tumbling down at the end of The Clone Wars, a feat that he is taking on while also working on the next stages of his plans to take revenge against Darth Sidious (The Emperor). And that's basically the premise of what Maul - Shadow Lord seems focussed upon; revenge and rebirth.

In a way it's an admirable narrative structuring because it doesn't fall into the trap of the rather overused Star Wars template we see elsewhere. Again, there's no real hero to this story (unless you count some of the supporting characters) and the plot isn't about good versus evil. This is more Boardwalk Empire or Mob Land than it is traditional Star Wars and that is perhaps it's greatest strength.

It's also clearly a more maturely themed animated Star Wars series. Youngsters will still be fine watching, of course, but there's more here for older and more experienced fans to appreciate and actually enjoy, unlike what frequently was cooked up in The Bad Batch, for example, where it felt like some plot threads were designed to teach a child some kind of lesson instead of simply being entertaining action sci-fi.

Also, by having Maul as a protagonist, we get a good balance of having lightsaber and Force-wielding action without this stretching into the category of the show either being all about the Jedi and the Sith, or not about them at all. It's a middle-ground, and while that may change as more episodes arrive, as it stands, there's an entertaining and refreshing balance.

Star Wars has always served up great artistic direction and set pieces and there's no skipping a beat here. There's also a huge amount of aura and charisma in what is being presented in this show, an artistic and directed vision that has you understanding key attributes of the core characters without needing to know much about them. Don't get me wrong, there's still a ton of the ever-present Star Wars 'pitfalls', or 'traditions' as some may say, including having a quirky (quite sadistic in this case) droid companion, a character that serves as pure comic relief and a Bathos output, and an animation style that is starting to feel a bit too predictable and overused. So it's not at all perfect, but there is a lot that Maul - Shadow Lord has got right so far already.

So a strong opening for certain. Here's hoping that the show can keep up this level of quality as the rest of the episodes make their arrival, ultimately delivering a memorable and exciting finale in time for Star Wars Day.

Crime 101

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Tue, 07 Apr 2026 09:00:00 +0200

When you consider the star power involved in Crime 101, it's almost shocking that the movie barely raked in $70 million at the box office. Chris Hemsworth, Halle Berry, Mark Ruffalo, Barry Keoghan, Monica Barbaro, these are some of the biggest stars in Hollywood today or some of the most promising up-and-comers, and yet this film proved to have a rather tragic time with cinemagoers. Granted, I'm part of the problem as I waited to see Crime 101 on Prime Video instead, although perhaps that was a mistake.

I say this because what writer and director Bart Layton has cooked up with this film is a rather sleek and thrilling action film that clearly takes a lot of inspiration from Heat. The plot revolves around a skilled robber, who only targets wealthy and well-insured folks, never resorts to violence, and also leaves no trace of his presence. This is Hemsworth's Davis, also known as the 101 Thief as he tends to commit all of his crimes within reach of this signature road stretching through Los Angeles. Davis is conflicted about the life he lives and when one day a rival robber takes a job he planned and leaves a trail of violence in his wake, the local authorities step up their efforts to neutralise this legendary robber, leading to a cat and mouse chase between an emotionally-challenged criminal and a cop beaten down by the blows of life, played by Ruffalo. Oh and in between, we have a cruel and impulsive rival thief played by Keoghan, while Berry appears as an insurance broker trapped in the centre of this twisted triangle.

Sound familiar? If you've seen Heat recently, or need a refresher by reading that movie's plot synopsis, you'll notice some stark comparisons. You could make the argument that this level of familiarity has its problems, but I'd argue that's only the case if Crime 101 failed to put together an entertaining story built on these Heat-like premises. And it actually does. There's interweaving and merging storylines that isolate and then connect the core cast, there's thrilling and chaotic car chases, intense standoffs where anything could happen, and an emotional chassis holding it all together that humanises each character, rounding them out and making them seem more real.

The point is that Crime 101 is a sleek and stylish crime thriller, which gets more right than it does wrong. The cast are capable and well put together, the action is choreographed effectively, and it all comes together for a film that makes Los Angeles feel like the centre of the world again, in the same way that Heat managed.

Is it perfect? Not at all. Clocking in at around 140 minutes, it's a long film and would have benefited from being trimmed down a tad just to ideally get it within the two-hour marker and make for a more evenly-paced narrative. It's not terribly balanced as it stands, but after 90 minutes, you do start wondering if things could have been cut or moved along faster to maintain that more even structure.

Similarly, despite all the breathing room the film has in place as it stands, some of the more minor narrative arcs feel like simple filler than anything more substantial. Whether this is the romance between Davis and Barbaro's Maya or even how Berry's Sharon adapts to an increasingly unfair career situation. All of this has a level of importance to main story and therefore is vital storytelling, but it's not exactly handled in a way that comes across as particularly entertaining or memorable.

So there are areas to be improved but this shouldn't detract from the fact that Layton has put together a rather good action flick with Crime 101. Again, it's sleek and gripping, and for the most part, you will be entertained by this flashy heist thriller.

Your Friends & Neighbors: Season 2

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Fri, 03 Apr 2026 03:00:00 +0200

I'm a firm believer that if you get the fundamentals right, maintain a clear creative vision, and put enough money behind an entertainment project, it will never really be anything less than 'good'. I bring this up because while Apple TV may have a select few projects that stand out as truly exceptional and must-watch entertainment, the rest of its library typically exists in that good-to-great bracket. Somewhere around the seven and eight out of ten margin. This is largely due to the streaming platform giving its creators time and space to make what they envision and then supporting this with a competent budget, leading to examples such as Bad Sisters, Masters of the Air, Foundation, For All Mankind, Shrinking, and even Your Friends & Neighbors.

When I reviewed the first season of this Jon Hamm-led show, I was entertained and impressed by what the creators had cooked up, setting Your Friends & Neighbors up as another quality Apple TV series. However, it lacked the razor-sharp edge of Slow Horses, didn't develop the same whole-hearted charisma as Ted Lasso, and missed the narrative class of Severance. You get the point. It was another 8/10 series that had more than enough going for it to be regarded as a success and a hit but it didn't manage to make the leap to the next rung on the ranking ladder.

A year later and Your Friends & Neighbors is back for its second season, another round of episodes that revolves around Hamm's Coop and how he continues to find his place in the world after undergoing a serious mid-life crisis. Unlike the first season that spends entire episodes delivering exposition and introducing you to the cast and their wider motivations, this next round of episodes doesn't take any time to ease you into what comes next. Coop is expertly robbing homes again to fund his lifestyle while attempting to be more and more involved with his family, becoming the father and partner he previously wasn't. So, all is well? Pretty much, until a new insanely rich man arrives in the neighborhood and catches Coop in the middle of a job...

That's pretty much the premise of this second season. It follows Coop as he becomes increasingly involved with James Marsden's Owen Ashe, an absurdly rich shipping mogul that seems too good to be true. In a similar vein to Severance and other projects that never explicitly explain what's happening but frequently tease there's more to the eye here, this entire second season is built on the foundation of figuring out who Ashe is and what his motives are, which works in favour of the wider narrative as it keeps you intrigued and entertained.

It should be said that the core and returning cast are still effective in what they do, including Hamm as the archetypical American alpha male (as other characters like to regard Coop as), and even Olivia Munn, Lena Hall, Amanda Peet, and so forth. But the true star of this second season is Marsden who gives one of his best performances to date. Ashe is mysterious but eccentric, lively but false. He's a modern Gatsby with all of the potential and pitfalls that brings, and Marsden plays this persona with class, ease, and absolute confidence. He's a scene-stealer, playing what can only be regarded as his most effective role to date. Again, like Gatsby, you'll become entranced any time Ashe is on screen, even if you know he's hiding something that will ultimately make his prophet-like personality shatter.

So we have a second season that has a better and more focussed hook built around additional characters capable of going toe-to-toe with Hamm, a less exposition-geared opening, and all of this on top of the typical Apple TV structuring that delivers a quality and premium feel at every moment. This is also an impressive feat for a series like Your Friends & Neighbors, which is set in an elitist community where being rich isn't measured in millions but billions. A lot of money was evidently thrown at this series and it shows.

Apple TV clearly has high expectations and hopes for Your Friends & Neighbors and this is no-more evident than in this second season, which is sharper, more entertaining, glossier, flashier, and brilliantly charismatic. Bring on Season 3.

Primate

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 16:00:00 +0200

Horror is an excellent genre because it can thrive off simplicity. There doesn't need to be a grand and spanning universe tied together by a multitude of projects, films in this genre typically don't require immense budgets, and horror flicks more often than not can have more concise run-times asking for less of a viewer's attention and time. In many ways, horror can feel like the last bastion of Hollywood of yore and it's films like Primate that continue to see it maintain this standard.

Primate is not a complex film nor a particularly inventive one but that's more than fine because what it does offer simply works. The premise is incredibly straightforward. A group of friends' holiday is ruined when a typically kind-hearted and charming chimpanzee pet turns feral after contracting rabies, leading to a fight for survival against a former 'member of the family'. That's it. There's no fluff or added caveats, it's a plain and simple fight for survival with slasher-like elements where a foreboding killer stalks and hunts defenceless victims, killing them methodically in the most gruesome and violent ways possible.

It's a conflicting movie because there's no standout villain in Primate. Ben the Chimpanzee is the killer and there's no denying that, but the opening 20 minutes showcases just how loving this animal is and how he has been part of the family for years and years, a creative choice that makes his downward spiral into madness and murder all the more uncomfortable. Similarly, in a vein akin to most slasher movies, Ben isn't a vocal killer, a twisted psychopath that plays with his victim's emotions. The chimp doesn't have any dialogue and simply haunts his home, picking off the survivors when the chance arises and brutally murdering them in creative and stomach-churning ways. In many respects, Primate fits the formula of Halloween or Friday the 13th, where the killer simply kills and the survivors do whatever they can to live to see the sun rise.

Building on this further, there's a bunch of horror genre tropes that are used in Primate, be that a happy and delightful opening act filled with sexy swimsuit pool sessions and emotional family re-connections. Soon the dynamic changes as Ben begins tearing flesh from bone, smashing skulls in with rocks, ripping lower jaws from skulls, the list goes on. We even get moments where survivors hide inches away from the murderous chimp, moments of tension that, as ever, are enhanced when a pile of books falls over or a television flicks on, distracting the beast as though it was a persistent stalker in a horror game. Again, we're not talking about a film that rewrites the horror script but that's fine because Primate knows what it is and simply plays to its strengths.

And these strengths revolve around a tight 80+ minute run-time that doesn't feel as though the film wastes your time, a focus on practical effects, including putting Miguel Torres Umba into a chimp suit to become Ben and ensuring no cheap-looking digital effects are used for the key killer. The entire film is pretty much all set in one house too, meaning the focus never needs to shift away from a few key sets, allowing the horror and fear-factor to steadily simmer and then boil over when a murder takes place or bones are broken.

You won't watch Primate and find yourself staggered by what director and writer Johannes Roberts has put together, but you will enjoy your time with this film, and for me, that's all you can want out of a simple and straightforward horror flick like this. It clearly didn't cost a great deal to make but the money has been well spent, ultimately leading to a film that is fun, easy-to-digest, and tightly packaged. For under 90 minutes of entertainment, you won't go too far wrong with Primate.

The Super Mario Galaxy Movie

david@gamereactor.eu (David Caballero) — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 21:00:00 +0200

When I wrote the review of The Super Mario Bros. Movie exactly three years ago, I praised what I thought was a brilliant big-screen adaptation of that peculiar fantasy that is the Mushroom Kingdom of Shigeru Miyamoto, Takashi Tezuka, and Koji Kondo. But I criticised one thing above all: that it didn't leave much room to relax and felt somewhat hollow. As soon as it left Brooklyn, it bombarded you with one action sequence after another, losing its way and banking entirely on nostalgic references. But, hey, it was so beautiful and some of the characters were so well-rounded that it was worth recommending even to those unfamiliar with the video games, if there's anyone left out there.

The Super Mario Galaxy Movie pays no heed to that oft-repeated criticism and, indeed, repeats the dopamine-bombing formula tailored for the ADD generation with even more frenzy, if that's possible. The problem is that this time it does so with almost no foundation laid.

It would be hypocritical to expect this animated film to have the credibility and character depth of The Godfather, but to identify them or even distinguish them, and for their umpteenth joke to land more effectively, the cast needed a bit more care and on-screen dialogue. Or something like the elegance and restraint of the dog sequence. I say this because Rosalina is completely side-lined after a promising introduction, because Yoshi goes from an exciting discovery to a background extra, because, although the character and his sequences have turned out really cool, it feels odd that Fox McCloud steals the limelight for a stretch. If you strip the sequel of Donkey Kong's personality and his family, if the Lumas turn out to be yet another childish version of the Toads, and if the most unique highlights of the first film disappear, this becomes a succession of gags propped up by visually spectacular scenes.

And then, there's another defining factor I was hoping they'd exploit: the play on gravity from the Super Mario Galaxy titles. There are one or two nods to this, particularly in the Casino section, but where is the sense of weightlessness from the video games? The upside-down world, the three-body problem, or the shifting gravity... On the Wii and even for those who've played recently on the Switch/2, these were and remain fantastic gut-twisting sensations that the film fails to capitalise on. Yes, you see asteroids and larger planets that are inspired by or directly copied from the games, and of course there's plenty of space travel and jumping, but the very essence, the sheer ingenuity of those games, is diluted.

Instead you'll see much more from Super Mario Odyssey, but as quick cuts (Cascade, Sand) and often-times even out of place (a certain song when it didn't fit). The medley also draws on Mario Sunshine and Wonder, but often without properly establishing the reference. For this reason, visually the best elements still come from the older games, and the truth is that in the much better final scenes it makes very good use of the pixel art from Super Mario Bros. and Super Mario World. Finally something surprising, almost at the end.

And that is perhaps what The Super Mario Galaxy Movie lacks most: surprise and mystery, whether on a narrative or artistic level. It's incredibly flat compared to the fabulous source material, and manages to blur the lines for several characters, including Mario himself, the supposed protagonist. Granted, there are a couple of tentative hints of romance, Princess Peach's origins are revealed as expected, and Bowser and his story arc, once again, steal the show: though they don't quite measure up to the first time, they evolve hilariously and in keeping with the games.

Having said all that, it is, of course, an essential film for fans. If you want to see the best renditions of the Mario worlds, it's a feast for the eyes. Although it takes too much for granted, there are always little details to latch onto when boredom sets in (even if the Easter eggs aren't as numerous or as good this time around). And Brian Tyler once again pays the best possible tribute to Koji Kondo and Mahito Yokota, and for the soundtrack alone, it would be worth watching the Mario Galaxy film even with your eyes closed. But I suspect this repetitive formula to make up for the nonsense won't work as well as it did the first time around, and that, sadly, means this film is less suitable for all audiences. They'll need to learn from this for DK's now-predictable return to the big screen.

Send Help

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 16:00:00 +0200

Sam Raimi is a rather fascinating filmmaker as he is responsible for some of the most famous horror projects, including Evil Dead and Army of Darkness, while even being a key contributor in making superhero films as popular as they are today thanks to his timeless Spider-Man trilogy. Even with this epic filmography, which many directors would sell their souls to boast, Raimi hasn't been hugely relevant in the past 15 to 20 years, as since Spider-Man 3, as a director he has delivered Drag Me to Hell, Oz the Great and Powerful, and Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, three flicks that will likely be referred to in history as some of his lesser well-regarded works. So to say that Raimi needs a win is perhaps somewhat accurate.

Cut to this year and we see Raimi back in the director's seat and helming a horror-thriller that is more akin to the kinds of the films he made his name upon. After teaming with Rachel McAdams in the latest Doctor Strange epic, the actor and director have once again come together for Send Help, a survival film that revolves around two people trapped on a desert island, where things aren't quite as they seem...

It's a fascinating film that has been written by Damian Shannon and Mark Swift because it doesn't really conform to the traditional standards of heroes and villains. The start of the story sets up a more typical plot about an underappreciated worker and her vindictive boss, witnessing how McAdams' Linda is tormented and teased by the company's new nepo-baby CEO called Bradley, played by Dylan O'Brien. Immediately, you begin to sense that this is how the wider plot will unravel, exploring how Linda deals with the snide jabs and insults, but a rather quick plane crash, seeing both boss and employee wash up on a distant beach, changes this dynamic almost instantaneously.

Linda, being a huge Survivor fan, has a knack for survival techniques and skills and this flips the dynamic, seeing the employee become boss and the boss becoming a loyal subject. For the next hour, what we see if a friendship blossom, out of convenience, until secrets are slowly revealed and hidden motivations and personality traits bubble to the surface, leading to an explosive turn of events where blood is shed, lives are taken, and horrors are buried in the sand to be lost to the annals of time.

For the first two acts of Send Help, we only get the odd taste of Raimi's signature direction, with hectic and unsettling scenes occasionally popping up. This could be how the two surviving characters bounce off one another in twisted ways, watching Linda fight off a CGI boar in the most violent way possible, seeing how one survivor's isolation-shattering discoveries change the situation unbeknownst to the other survivor. For over an hour, there's not actually much horror in this film at all, with more of a focus on thrill and unevenly effective dark comedy, and while that is fine, it leads to a movie that lacks a bit of punch, as while McAdams is charismatic and lively, O'Brien proves to be less of a standout lead. I'd go as far as saying that the first two acts of this film are simply mediocre.

Thankfully, the third act is where we see Raimi really flex his skills. This last act moves along like a bullet train, seeing how secrets are spilled and witnessing how the two survivors deal with the consequences. Again, it never really reaches full horror status, but it's far more unsettling than what was served up before, with plenty of gore baked in where we get to see eyes gouged, heads scalped, people killed, and even brief zombie jump-scares. In this final act, you won't want to look away aside from when cringing as the characters try to kill each other in the most violent ways possible. It's a brilliant conclusion that you can't help but wish was reflected all the way throughout the film, making for more of a survivor-horror flick than a desert island-thriller as it is for over 60 minutes.

So an unevenly-paced plot even if it does finish strong. At least the wider whole is put together well, right? For the most part, yes. There are times where CG is used to really ugly and poor effect, including on the overlook and during the boar fight, where some of the fear-factor and thrill is lost as it's so clear which parts of the movie have been filmed on a real set and which have been put together in a warehouse in front of a blue screen. It's a bit off-putting and makes you wish that these scenes either weren't used or did so with better and more effective digital effects.

Bringing it back full circle, if Raimi is needing a win to see him return to being one of the movie world's top and current best filmmakers, Send Help is not exactly it. It's a fine and perfectly entertaining movie, but it's also a bit forgettable and lacks character. With a runtime of less than two hours, you won't become bored of watching this flick, but by the time the credits roll, you also won't leave stunned or blown away. It's an okay film, and there's nothing wrong with that, but it won't be going down in the list of Raimi's best.

They Will Kill You

javier@gamereactor.eu (Javier Escribano) — Fri, 27 Mar 2026 13:00:00 +0100

A lot of action movies work better the simpler the script gets. {They Will Kill You} is a great example of "less is more": the script is extremely simple, and wastes very little time in getting the plot moving; there's little to no filler in the tight 94 minutes it lasts, with most of the scenes being fights. And it's a blast from start-to-finish, one of the freshest and violently fun action and horror movies I have seen in recent years.

I have to admit I was a little sceptical. The premise of a young woman fighting for survival in an enclosed space against a group of rich people murdering poor people for fun or satanic rituals is a bit tired. It also gets, at least for my taste, a little frivolous seeing so many movies toying with that concept when we know that the real wealthy people from our very real world were doing other kinds of atrocities on a certain island for decades, and nobody seemed to care then, nor seem to care now. Of course, that's not a fault of the movie...

Coincidentally, {They Will Kill You} releases at the same time as another strangely similar movie, the sequel {Ready or Not: Here I Come}, but this one, from Russian director Kirill Sokolov, stands out on its own as arguably more original and stylistic. The Muschietti brothers did well in noticing Sokolov's talent, and {They Will Kill You} has everything it needs to become a cult classic in the future.

Perhaps one of the reasons I liked this movie so much is how well it blends into the video game language. I had so much fun thinking on how closely it resembles a Metroidvania: the main character Asia Reeves, played by an excellent Zazie Beetz, enters a high-rise building in New York trying to rescue her sister. There, literally everyone tries to murder her, but Asia has impressive fighting skills and a few weapons she gains along her adventure, going up and down the different floors of the building and fighting hordes of enemies.

There's literally a part where she cannot fight with the enemies in one room until she "finds" a new weapon, returns, and then kills them all: I won't spoil which weapon or why she needed that weapon, but I admit that, and other moments, made me giggle in my seat in a way few recent movies have managed to do. And the action is fabulous, too, with incredible but not unrealistic choreography and tons of creativity in how people are brutally dismembered, crushed, or burnt.

The pacing of the movie is relentless and cuts down the time for exposition, flashbacks, and overall explanation of the plot so that the movie doesn't lose rhythm. One of the few flaws of this decision is that the side characters (all the "mini-bosses" of the building) don't have too much to do and the finale feels a bit too rushed. The reality is that you're likely to be left wanting more, as it happens with short video games that end when you're having so much fun.

I watched {They Will Kill You} and {Ready or Not: Here I Come} back-to-back, and it's shocking how similar both movies are: their plots are almost identical, two sisters trying to reconnect while being chased by rich people wanting to sacrifice them. It's a bit unfair to compare them directly, but while the sequel to Ready or Not felt largely uninspired, unfunny, repetitive, too long, and almost boring at times in my eyes, {They Will Kill You} was a tour de force from start-to-finish.

Some of the most brutal and violent fights I've seen recently, a pair of likeable protagonists, some very stylistic but not too obtrusive visual choices, a hefty dose of black humour, making for a great, short but intense, ride that leaves you wanting more. And one of the purest "Metroidvania-like" movies since Die Hard. It's such a good time.

Shelter

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Fri, 27 Mar 2026 09:00:00 +0100

Let's not beat around the bush, you know what this film is really about. Jason Statham, for all of the things he does right, tends to headline movies that play out and are framed in the exact same way. Whether we're talking about The Expendables, Mechanic, The Beekeeper, A Working Man, even The Meg and Fast and Furious, Statham's roles and performances are always usually the gruff and tough guy that overcomes the odds to save the day, often by taking the most violent route possible. Again, you can say what you will about that and how predictable it has become, but you also can't deny that Statham's movies tend to be rather entertaining to watch.

So let me save you some time and state that Shelter fits wholly into this formula once more. It's an action flick that is easy enough to consume, doesn't leave much of an impression, but has some moments that serve as evidence as to why Statham is continuously asked to make these kinds of films. The perfect 5/10 movie, you could say.

I won't waste much time on the plot because there's not actually a whole lot to spotlight. Long story short, Statham is an ex-British special forces operative who after years of exile and hiding, has been found and is being hunted by the very government that he used to serve. MI6 is throwing all sorts of assets and threats in his direction and it's his duty to overcome them while protecting a young girl that just so happens to be a relative of one of his former team members. If you asked ChatGPT for a generic Statham film synopsis, it would probably cook up a plot premise that's very similar, something I actually tested to rather hilarious results, as you can see below.

"A former black-ops operative turned lone-wolf mercenary is dragged back into a world he tried to leave behind when a mysterious figure from his past resurfaces. Now living a quiet, off-the-grid life, he's forced into action when a young woman—connected to a job gone wrong years earlier—becomes the target of a powerful international crime syndicate.

"Reluctantly taking her under his wing, he uncovers a conspiracy that stretches from the streets of London to high-level corporate elites, involving stolen tech, dirty money, and a betrayal that hits closer to home than he expected. As the body count rises and time runs out, he must rely on his brutal efficiency, street smarts, and unbreakable code to dismantle the operation piece by piece.

"Outnumbered and hunted at every turn, he wages a relentless, high-octane war against an enemy that knows his every move. But they've made one critical mistake—they've given him something to fight for."

Now, this might seem like Shelter is another egregious example of a pointless action film, similar to A Working Man, but this is where the Statham factor creeps back in. For all of its narrative vices, there are scenes and excellently choreographed combat that continue to prove that Statham is one of the finest pure action stars out there. It's John Wick-esque, with snappy and fast violence that never feels like the actors are holding back or that they're moving sluggishly. It's a ballet of brutality and Statham is a master of this dance.

Similarly, as the budget for Shelter clearly doesn't rival many other modern action options, it leans more on real sets and environment usage, fluidly choreographed battles, and moments of class from its more veteran actors, like the ever-excellent Bill Nighy. This isn't a movie that intends to or actually does waste your time, it's a fast-paced roller coaster of violence that you will be entertained by, despite its more glaring problems and typical design elements. Speaking about the latter, there are obligatory plot 'twists', like protagonist Michael Mason's dog being killed and becoming further motivation for him, and typical location selections for these one-man-army flicks, including a club sequence where you just know that it's used to give the sound mixing department a day off, as the thumping ambient EDM soundtrack completely drowns out any other audio...

So yes, you've been here, you've seen this, but that doesn't change the fact that Shelter is simply fun entertainment to consume. It doesn't ask much of you and there's always an argument as to whether we should continue supporting movies with such basic creative direction, but unlike War Machine on Netflix, as an example, Shelter's major saving grace is Statham, who as usual, thrives and delivers a performance that makes the two-hour runtime zoom by. It's Statham as you know and love him. Make of that what you will.

Something Very Bad is Going to Happen

magnus@gamereactor.eu (Magnus Groth-Andersen) — Thu, 26 Mar 2026 09:00:00 +0100

Do you remember the first half hour of Jordan Peele's Us? I mean, before he rather desperately tried to force a rather half-baked, unrealistic, and utterly ridiculous explanation of the film's internal logic down your throat. No, the first half-hour actually passes without any creepy clones, but just a growing knot in the stomach that tells the protagonist, Lupita Nyong'o, that something is... wrong. That "something very bad is going to happen".

Yes, I'm bringing up this example because it's exactly the kind of suspense that Haley Z. Boston creates. Boston has constructed her entire eight-part horror series around - this is the basic, central foundation upon which the whole experience is built - your inherent knowledge that something terrible is going to happen, but you don't know when it will happen, or what it will look like when it does. You know it, the characters don't, that is the anatomy of the premise, and this premise lasts a good seven hours.

Something Very Bad is Going to Happen is an eight-episode Netflix series created by Boston, and produced by, amongst others, Stranger Things creators Matt and Ross Duffer. We follow Rachel Harkin (played by Camila Morrone), who is due to marry Nicky Cunningham (played by Adam DiMarco) a week into the series, as they drive together to his wealthy family's fortified summer mansion to meet his eccentric relatives ahead of the impending wedding. To reveal more would truly spoil both the thrill of watching these events slowly unfold, and the inherent mystery of knowing that "something very bad is going to happen", without really being able to contextualise that knowledge or place it within a comprehensible framework.

Believe me, though, when I say that Boston directs her cast (which includes, among others, the ever-talented Danish actor Zlatko Burić) to absolute perfection here. Jennifer Jason Leigh once again delivers a masterclass, as does Morrone, who, as Rachel, provides precisely the combination of emotional anchor and mystery needed to hold the viewer's interest throughout.

Boston generally draws inspiration from Ari Aster, Jordan Peele, and perhaps even Mike Flanagan, as suspense is prioritised far more highly than actual adrenaline-pumping horror, and so she lets the camera linger a little longer than you might find comfortable and also tends to have characters speak directly to the camera lens, almost in FPV style, to heighten the tension and that aforementioned knot in the stomach, which just grows and grows as the episodes unfold.

The series is backed by absolutely brilliant production design from start-to-finish, where there's a real focus on contrasts in lighting and sharp colour chemistry, which also makes the series look infinitely more expensive than it surely was. Combined with composer Colin Stetson's smouldering soundscapes, you've got a razor-sharp dose of horror here.

The only real complaint here is that eight episodes of around 50 minutes each stretch the story, the effective suspense, and the entire structure to breaking point. It's impressive in itself that they take it as far as they do, but it's hard to ignore that the series would probably have benefited from a miniseries format of, say, four or five episodes.

That said, Something Very Bad is Going to Happen is one of Netflix's most effective horror projects in a long time, and heralds a sparkling career for Boston as creator and showrunner.

Daredevil: Born Again - Season 2

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Wed, 25 Mar 2026 02:00:00 +0100

It's rather unusual how viewer tendencies are shifting towards the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Sure, there's the ongoing debate about superhero fatigue and how it's impacting the box office performance of films, but to add to that is a change where many of the best-received recent memory MCU projects have in fact been TV shows, an unimaginable feat for anyone staring into the future from back in the 2010s. The return of Daredevil has helped garner this change of fate as the man without fear was brought into the MCU in full in the form of a dedicated show that premiered in 2025 to great effect and already it's time for the second batch of episodes.

Anchor beings. That was something that Marvel introduced in Deadpool & Wolverine and for the wider MCU, you could argue that Daredevil is the anchor being for its television efforts. No live-action show has received the same number of episodes and rapid production as Daredevil: Born Again, and rightly so in many respects, as this series is perhaps the consistently strongest MCU series to date. Not that the competition is steep when looking at shows with second seasons...

If you haven't seen the first season, look away now as we're going to briefly touch on where this next round of episodes takes us. Following Wilson "Kingpin" Fisk being voted into power as New York's Mayor, the formidable villain has activated his anti-vigilante efforts in a bid to put a stop to meddling heroes. While many have been outed and persecuted by these unjust laws, Matt "Daredevil" Murdock and Karen Page have gone underground, teaming up with a few evasive vigilantes to chop away at the Kingpin's empire from its foundation. Essentially, nowhere is safe for Daredevil and it's with this state in mind that we find our fearless hero facing overwhelming odds that would make weaker men crumble.

It's actually a story premise that somewhat reflects modern society. There's a villain that uses propaganda and twisted and controlled social messaging to make the public believe something that is otherwise false. There's unofficial and violent enforcers on the street, enabled to use force whenever they personally deem it necessary to stop any so-called 'vigilantes'. There's corrupt officials, loyal to the overarching villain, who will contort laws and rules to make it fit their narrative. In many ways, the second season of Daredevil: Born Again hits home a little too close for comfort, even if the evidently-inspired narrative is softened by thrilling fight scenes and costumed heroes.

The point is, like the first season of Born Again, this Daredevil story isn't burdened by the same, almost toned down narratives that can otherwise be found in the wider MCU. There's no hiding that this show is meant for more mature audiences, fans who are tired of seeing infallible heroes and social paladins that never quake for a single second or even really bleed. This series is more raw and honest, violent and dark, and that's noticeable both in the brutality of its excellently choreographed fight sequences but also how murder, trafficking, mental anguish, and a collection of other greyer narrative threads are routinely weaved into the tapestry.

It's the decision to be more mature and less reliant on fan-service that makes Daredevil: Born Again (and particularly this second season) such a delight. Like Wonder Man earlier this year, there's no betraying who this series is about. Sure, you might notice nods to the wider MCU or personally ask questions, including "what's Spider-Man doing while New York falls apart?" But it's also not a series where you feel the need to constantly inquire about the bigger picture. This is a story about Daredevil and the vigilante 'defenders' of NYC, it comes across as more of a closed off tale in the wider MCU, a story that you don't feel the narrative weight of 40+ films and TV series on its shoulders. It's allowed to be what it is, so credit to Marvel for not tying it up in the wider web too much.

That's not to say there isn't fan-service. There are still noticeable and obvious decisions that have been taken to appease MCU and comic fans, be that the redesigned "DD" suit, the return of Jessica Jones, and brief nods to the wider MCU landscape. It's still Marvel at the end of the day, but again, like Wonder Man, you become immersed in just this story for the most part, and that's actually a hugely admirable quality.

Let's not also forget that Daredevil: Born Again, like many MCU projects, clearly has a rather large budget behind it, which ultimately means the show oozes high-quality production. The sets, the costumes, the choreography and fight scene structure, the camera work, the editing, it's all top-of-the-line and a reflection of what one would expect from a Marvel Studios production.

Long story short, if you enjoyed the first season of Daredevil: Born Again, you should find yourself pleasantly surprised by this next chapter too. It's simply enjoyable and high-quality entertainment, a series that shows when the right creative individuals are in place and involved in projects they are passionate about, the whole nature of superhero fatigue becomes moot. This is a series made by folks and stars who adore Daredevil and you can see that in every scene. It's a pleasure to have you back, Mr. Murdock.

Ready or Not 2: Here I Come

jonas@gamereactor.eu (Jonas Mäki) — Mon, 23 Mar 2026 16:00:00 +0100

There are few things better than a truly entertaining horror film where the pieces of the puzzle come together to form a mosaic that is far more beautiful than its individual parts might suggest. A clear premise, a good scream queen, genuine surprises, and a touch of self-awareness often go a long way, just like in Ready or Not. For reasons that remain unclear, we've had to wait an unreasonably long time for the sequel, but after seven years, the horror duo, Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett, have now invited us to the premiere.

Kathryn Newton plays Grace's sister and has a much more optimistic personality.

Their new story picks up exactly where the predecessor left off, and lets us meet a shattered Grace Le Domas (or should we call her MacCaullay again?) who stumbles out of the burning building where hide-and-seek was played in the predecessor. How does one explain everything that has happened to the police and wider family? We find out early on, when Grace's sister Faith MacCaullay turns up. Their history is clearly fraught with betrayal and conflict, but they don't have time to sort out their problems before they quickly find themselves caught up in another round of games.

To explain how this can continue after Grace so clearly won in the first film, a smaller universe has been built around the story this time. Now something much bigger is afoot instead, which means a new colourful band of Satanists turns up to kill Grace in the quest for power.

I'm very unsure whether Ready or Not 2: Here I Come really benefits from the fact that the otherwise rather tight and restrained story is suddenly part of something global, but fortunately it doesn't affect the film to any great extent. This is, instead, Samara Weaving's film; she is, if possible, even better as Grace this time around, and is also aided by superb supporting cast members, with Elijah Wood and Sarah Michelle Gellar in particular deserving a mention for roles that feel tailor-made for them.

It doesn't take long before people start dying in truly violent ways and Grace even has her reluctant sister in the fray. The two constantly bicker in an unexpectedly raw and hateful manner, which livens things up, although in some scenes it takes on a bit of a "buddy cop" feel as they've also been given very different personalities.

This time, a much larger universe has been established around Ready or Not, which consequently loses some of its charm.

After that, the action moves at a brisk pace, offering just as much laughter as it does scares and the array of colourful enemies ensures it always feels varied. If I had to point out a weakness, however, it's that Grace and Faith escape a little too often thanks to improbable luck or improbable clumsiness, and the Deus ex machina solution has never been something I'm particularly fond of.

Fortunately, though, the film keeps you entertained right to the finish, and ultimately this is a good horror film, one I would have appreciated even more if I hadn't known there was a predecessor that was just that bit sharper. I suspect this won't be the last film in the series and the fact that I still feel I'd be happy to see a third instalment feels like confirmation that this is a film horror fans should give a chance.

It's non-stop action right from start to finish, and you'll definitely get your money's worth.

Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Fri, 20 Mar 2026 11:30:00 +0100

When news broke that Peaky Blinders would be continuing and looking to finally bring the story of Tommy Shelby to a close with a dedicated movie, I was rather ecstatic. The six seasons of this show, spanning almost a decade's worth of television, became rather dear to me for a variety of reasons beyond simply its excellent quality. However, when it was revealed that Netflix would be involved, my confidence in the project started to waver, even if the core creative team from the series, including creator and writer Steven Knight, would be returning for the project. Anyone who has seen Netflix's original films will be aware that they typically arrive in wildly uneven quality, with some excellent options (Knives Out for one) and some that you can't help but wonder why they were even greenlit in the first place. So would Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man fit into the former category and send off Tommy Shelby in a worthy conclusion, or instead slip into the latter category and serve as an unwanted stain on the series' heritage?

After just rolling credits on Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man, it's clear that this is one of Netflix's better films, even if it is not as strong as the mainline series. We pick up long after the events of Season 6 and find a defeated and reclusive Tommy Shelby, waiting patiently for the day that death will claim him. However, the world is falling apart amidst World War II and Birmingham is once again a powder keg waiting to explode, with a more violent Peaky Blinders gang, led by Tommy's distant son, Duke, proving to be trouble once more. When fascists and Nazi supporters enter the fray, and innocents serving to simply better the world become casualties of this war, it's clear that Birmingham needs its gypsy king back, with Tommy ending his solitude to his own dismay.

There's no denying what this film is and why it has been made. It's not here to set up the next era of Peaky Blinders, it's not here to tell a heroic war story, it's the final act in Tommy's tale, a way to truly bring a firm end to perhaps Cillian Murphy's most famous character. It's grim, dark, and consistently shadowed by the ghosts of his past. There's not much here that will make you smile or grin, it's an exploration into the psyche of a man that wants to be freed from life's vicious grasp, and unfortunately this cannot come without a price.

There are shocking moments in this film, methods used to similarly conclude the narrative arcs of other key characters in the Peaky Blinders story, and some are effective while others come across as a wasted necessity. For example, Paul Anderson isn't in the cast, so you can probably infer what that means for Tommy's brother Arthur, one of the former very key characters to the wider narrative. In fact, by this point, there aren't many remaining Shelby's to focus on, which means we find a cast made up of a lot of new stars and characters. I don't have much wrong with this, but one of the best parts about Peaky Blinders is always how it has steadily introduced characters and made you connect with them or understand them over the course of one or several seasons. This film has a fraction of the time, so Barry Keoghan's Duke, Rebecca Ferguson's Kaulo, and Tim Roth's John Beckett don't quite land in the same way that past characters have. To me, this is a bit of a waste of such excellent talent.

Similarly, the plot is structured in such a way that there's a lot of exposition and traditional Peaky Blinders smoldering within the first hour, which would be fine if there were six-hours worth of television to tell the full story. In this format, we're left with less than an hour to tie this tale up into a lovely little bow and the result is a breakneck turn of events where it doesn't exactly feel like Tommy's send off is as perfect as it should have been. As for what's next, I'm also not sure that Keoghan's Duke, if he is to be the basis for the next era, has what it takes to fill the immense shoes left by Murphy.

Ultimately, as far as a standalone story goes, Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man works as fine entertainment, but it's certainly not the best that the wider series has been. The parts of this film that stand out the most are the elements that Peaky Blinders has always handled well; the set and costume design, the marriage of ambience and music, the remarkable performance of Cillian Murphy. This film continues these parts of Peaky Blinders we all know and love, but then it stumbles a tad in its narrative make-up and how it's trying to do too much, too inefficiently, in too little time.

It's not nearly a stain on the legacy of Peaky Blinders and it is without question one of Netflix's better original films (not that the bar is typically that high), but does it match the truly astounding quality of the main television series? No, no it does not.

Mr. Nobody Against Putin

Óscar@gamereactor.eu (Óscar Ontañón Docal) — Thu, 19 Mar 2026 12:00:00 +0100

Forget the title for a second. Forget Putin. Forget the world news. Imagine instead a small man in a small town, standing in front of small children, holding a small camera. That's what this documentary is about. Or, as David Borenstein said just two days ago when accepting the Oscar: "We all face a moral choice. But luckily, even a nobody is more powerful than you think."

The nobody in question is Pavel Talankin, nicknamed Pasha. He is (or was) the event coordinator and school videographer at Karabash Primary School No 1. Karabash is a small town in the Ural Mountains, known (if known at all) for being one of the most polluted cities in the world. Pasha was not a journalist. He was simply a man who filmed children and referred to his small office as a "pillar of democracy." But then February 2022 came. And everything changed.

After being reluctantly drawn into Putin's propaganda machine, Pasha starts documenting how ordinary Russians are indoctrinated with pro-war messages and recruited for the war. The Russian Education Ministry began issuing directives (songs, poems, patriotic rituals) all of which Pasha was required to film and upload to a state database, so that Moscow could verify that decrees about patriotic lessons were being obeyed throughout the vast expanse of Russia. But somewhere between filming children waving flags and watching members of the Wagner paramilitary group give guest lessons in his school's classroom, something in him shifted. He kept filming. But now he filmed for us.

Pavel Talankin and his camera

What co-director David Borenstein (a Copenhagen-based American filmmaker who found Pasha through a casting call on the Russian internet) has assembled from this raw, secretly gathered footage, is what won him the Oscar this week.

Because the genius of {Mr. Nobody Against Putin} is precisely in what it refuses to be. It is not a war film. There are no frontlines, no bombed cities, no footage of destruction. The horror here is bureaucratic. It is mundane. It is a lesson plan. It is a song. The film illustrates the transformation of Russian society from authoritarian to totalitarian, and it does so through classrooms, not battlefields. Through children's faces. Through the way a teacher smiles when she knows a camera is watching and cannot stop smiling even when she no longer wants to.

Pavel Talankin and the children

The town of Karabash works as a strange, almost poetic backdrop. Pasha admits, almost affectionately, that he loves the place. And you believe him. Because that is exactly the contradiction the film sits inside, loving a country you are simultaneously watching devour itself. Talankin secretly preserved the footage he filmed at school before leaving Russia in 2024. He is now based in the Czech Republic. The most dangerous moment, he said backstage at the Oscars, was crossing the border with the hard drives.

And yet, for all the political weight the film carries, Borenstein is wise enough to never let it become a purely political film. The camera stays close. It stays in the hallway, in the gymnasium, in the little office Pasha called his "pillar of democracy." And in doing so, it achieves something that years of news coverage have largely failed to do: it makes Russia feel like a place where people live. Where a man can love filming and hate what is being done in his name. Where the distance between complicity and resistance is not a border crossing, but a decision made quietly, alone, in a room full of children.

Karabash Primary School No 1

By the time the credits roll over that final, almost unbearably simple image (his room, empty, as he is forced to leave his country) you understand that what you've been watching is not just a story about Putin. Not even, really, a story about Russia. It's a story about what a person does when the institution they serve becomes something they can no longer serve. A story about the strange, stubborn, slightly absurd power of a man with a camera who just kept pointing it at the truth. Ultimately, a story about a Mr. Nobody. A story about (for better or for worse) all of us.

I Swear

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Wed, 18 Mar 2026 09:00:00 +0100

A lot has been said about John Davidson in the weeks since the BAFTA ceremony where the Scottish individual, known for being a campaigner and positive force in bringing transparency and awareness to Tourette's syndrome, made some unfortunate and unintentional remarks that stunned a global audience. Anyone who is familiar with how this syndrome afflicts those who have been diagnosed typically are rather accepting of the situation, but likewise there are others who find the situation to be inexcusable, and it's to those people that the drama flick I Swear, based on Davidson's life, should be at the top of their watchlist.

This movie is an emotional and provocative affair, an intimate and profound exploration into what this man went through at a time where Tourette's was far less well known and often regarded as a falsification, especially so in a region of the UK that would be less inclined to acceptance and change compared to multi-cultural and liberal cities, particularly in the 20th century.

We follow John as he begins to notice ticks and unprovoked outbursts, moments that see him disciplined by unaware teachers and even bullied by his peers at school, all the way through his young adult life where his stigmatised condition made it challenging to land a job or find a partner, and even saw him banged up in jail and attacked by assailants that took his outbursts to be insults. The first hour or so of this film is brutal and rather unforgiving, presenting a story that will have you stunned and make you think even more differently about Tourette's sufferers.

But there is a light in this otherwise dark tunnel and this comes from Dottie, a mental health nurse that luckily falls into John's life and helps him in ways that no one else could possibly offer. It's this relationship that begins to provide the comic relief and even the heart-warming feel-good factor that I Swear possesses, especially during the second half when the darkness fades and light and hope starts to shine through.

The script and the dialogue in I Swear is truly fantastic, making for a tale that you won't want to look away from, even during its darker and more heart-breaking moments. And boy, there are a few. Similarly, a lot of what makes this film stand out comes from the performance of Robert Aramayo as John, where he provides a raw and incredibly effective portrayal of a Tourette's syndrome sufferer. It's by far the best performance of Aramayo's career, far exceeding his efforts in The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power as the younger Elrond. He's scene-stealing, captivating, and flawless, and proves here that he has what it takes to compete with the best actors around the world. Similarly, Maxine Peake stands out for her effort as Dottie, the ever-positive and kind counterpart that helps John through the tough times.

It's certainly not a big budget film nor one that looks to blow you away with flashy set pieces and scenes, but none of that means anything as most everything that I Swear does is incredibly high-quality and makes drama flicks with 10-times its budget look second-rate. It's a firm example that a great script, quality casting, strong direction, and excellent performers are all that is necessary to make a film that stands out and leaves an impression.

And it's on this point that I'll round off by simply saying that I Swear has been one of the most impactful and emotional films I've seen in a long while. This film will leave you speechless during its toughest times, smiling with glee at its most heart-warming moments, and with a lump in your throat the rest of the time. It's immensely effective and engaging entertainment and you absolutely should take the time to watch I Swear as you will not be disappointed.

Project Hail Mary

peter@gamereactor.eu (Peter Westberg) — Tue, 17 Mar 2026 12:00:00 +0100

I experienced Project Hail Mary about five years ago, where I really enjoyed it, though I didn't remember all that much of the plot afterwards. That was actually quite a pleasant surprise when I settled into my cinema seat as Project Hail Mary keeps you on your toes the whole time. I like Ryan Gosling and always have. Not many actors can carry a 2.5-hour film like this especially as we spend seventy-five per cent of the time with him. It's directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller. The duo who, among other things, gave us The Lego Movie, which was surprisingly funny.

For those of you unfamiliar with the story, here's a brief summary: scientist and teacher Ryland Grace wakes up alone on a spaceship several light-years from Earth. His memory slowly begins to return, and it turns out he's on a mission to stop a mysterious substance that's killing the sun, and with it, humanity. During the journey, he makes an unexpected friend. That's the story in a nutshell. It's sci-fi, but it still feels grounded in reality, at least in parts.

I remember that, as a writer myself, I was somewhat captivated by the book precisely because everything felt well-researched and realistic, and I realised that Andy Weir had either spent an enormous amount of time on research or is very good at spinning a good yarn. Weir has, incidentally, co-written the film's screenplay with Drew Goddard, who also wrote, amongst other things, The Martian, which is, in a way, quite similar.

Project Hail Mary feels like a mix of The Martian and Moon (a film I absolutely love). What I was a bit worried about when I saw the trailer was that the end result would feel too contrived, that they'd force in an abundance of subtleties. Don't get me wrong, I love humour when it works and in Hail Mary, it works, fantastically even. I burst out laughing several times. Every single joke hits the mark but I'll take it a step further: The fact is, in my eyes, everything works in Project Hail Mary. The acting, and not just Gosling, as we have a whole host of scenes set on Earth in the form of flashbacks from the time before he's launched into space, and those scenes are absolutely superb, every single one. Visually, it's a feast for the eyes (see it at the cinema, people!), the sound design is superb, the music is brilliant, and the script is top-notch.

As mentioned above, it's funny (surprisingly subtle) and it's nerve-wracking and deeply emotional in many ways. There's a scene set in the mess hall of a military vessel before the mission begins, where a very stiff mission commander sings karaoke. It might sound like a funny highlight, but no, quite the opposite. This was one of the most emotional scenes I've seen in a long time, and I sat in the darkness of the cinema with a lump in my throat, telling myself I'd just got something in my eye. There are a few more truly beautiful scenes, it should be said, and two and a half hours fly by quickly. There are no dull scenes, nothing that feels unnecessary, and everything is exactly where it should be.

Here's the thing: I watch a lot of films and a lot of TV series. It's rare that I'm surprised, enthralled, or anything of the sort. In some ways, it's as if that little boy who devoured every film he could get his hands on and sat on the edge of his seat waiting for new blockbusters has faded away a bit. I rarely get excited. About once every two years, I find a film that basically makes me sit there and smile a little bit right through it (apart from when I'm almost in tears, that is) and the last time I saw a film like that at the cinema was probably Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves, which I thought was absolutely brilliant entertainment.

Project Hail Mary is one of those films, from start to finish. It's the first top-marks film of the year, the best film of the year so far and you need to see it. It should also be added that it's significantly better than Interstellar. I love Christopher Nolan, or I did before the snooze-fests of Tenet and Oppenheimer, which wasn't nearly as fantastic as people claim. Interstellar has a lot that works really well and some absolutely fantastic scenes, but it's also extremely pretentious and who the hell approved that scene in the library at the end? Project Hail Mary is like Interstellar's cooler, slightly funnier cousin. It's completely unmissable.

Invincible: Season 4

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Mon, 16 Mar 2026 15:00:00 +0100

We're certainly not struggling for superhero entertainment these days, which is partly the reason why some of the more exceptional superhero projects don't feel like appointment viewing to the wider masses. As someone who has been following Invincible ever since it arrived in an animated format, I would argue that this series is better than much of what is being put out elsewhere, and yet still, Invincible doesn't seem to be a show that each and every person feels the pull to see for themselves.

To me, this is a shame because it offers everything you could want from an animated superhero series. There's twisting and emotionally complex storylines where heroes are betrayed, icons are killed, relationships blossom, core characters grow and flourish, and all across a variety of locations on Earth, from myth, and beyond the stars.

Likewise, Invincible started off with an amazing bang, offering an initial season that blew viewers away. The second softened that perception a tad by not quite living up to the same immense standards and also coming after a frankly too lengthy wait. Fortunately, the third season was a return to form and after watching the fourth season, I can happily add that this latest round of episodes is also simply brilliant.

I won't touch too much on the narrative and plot to save you from spoilers, but if you've read the source material comic books, you will know what's coming. Omni-Man returns to Earth, Atom Eve struggles with her powers, Thragg makes his memorable entrance, Conquest causes havoc, Cecil grapples with powers beyond his control, oh and a little something called the war between the Viltrumites and the Coalition of Planets is on the horizon. If you've been following the series, none of this will surprise you, as Season 4 somewhat acts like an "all roads have been leading here" moment, a first curtain call for the overarching story that still has plenty of tricks up its sleeves for the future seasons, one of which has been greenlit and will be debuting in around a year's time.

To this end, you can expect a season where hugely crucial moments are unpacked and series-defining twists occur that will shape this Invincible adaptation beyond anyone's expectations. It's consistently gripping and action-packed, thrilling with dashes of light humour that will make you chuckle, and to balance this otherwise chaotic dish, still features those slower episodes and scenes that hone in on the more human and emotional side of the story, including one such thread that shines a spotlight on Nolan's time as a young Viltrumite adult. It's all fascinating and a great adaptation that feels like it both does the source material justice while having the freedom to explore areas and narrative elements that otherwise weren't covered in the comics. Creator Robert Kirkman knows what this series needs to do to be consistently excellent and Season 4 is just a further emphasis of this.

That being said, there are times where I wish the animation was a tad more lively. I've long been comfortable with this series' animation style, both because it reflects the source material but also since a more reserved animation setup allows for a quicker production turnaround, hence why we've had nearly three seasons of Invincible in the time that we've had one season of X-Men '97. However, there are moments where it feels like this style is abused a bit much for my liking, including what feels like a five-minute scene (that is admittedly quite hilarious) between Invincible and Damien Darkblood where there is basically no movement from the characters at all. There is room for improvement here without question, but if it's to come at the cost of the release cadence we're getting today, with around one new season every 12 months, I can live with this current animation direction.

So yes, there are places where Invincible can be better, but generally speaking, this is an excellent animated series that continues to stand above much of the competition. It's effortlessly entertaining, will have you on the edge of your seat during the intense battles, chuckling with the daft and on-the-nose jokes and puns, and will leave your jaw on the ground when the big surprises come about. Invincible continues to thrive and if you haven't already, you really should check out this show.

Melania

Óscar@gamereactor.eu (Óscar Ontañón Docal) — Thu, 12 Mar 2026 14:00:00 +0100

There's a version of a documentary about Melania Trump that could have been genuinely fascinating. Here is a woman who grew up in communist-era Yugoslavia, modelled her way across Europe, landed in New York, and ultimately became the First Lady of the United States (twice). Melania, the Amazon-funded documentary directed by Brett Ratner, is not that film.

Instead, the film tracks the 20 days leading up to Donald Trump's second inauguration, covering the planning, the fittings, the candlelight dinners. It is, in the truest sense of the word, a coffee table book brought to life, beautiful to glance at, immediately forgettable, and never meant to be read. Melania Trump is never without a full face of makeup or a high heel throughout the entire runtime, always impeccably put together, no hair out of place, which might be admirable discipline, or might be exactly the problem.

The film was made with Melania herself as executive producer, with full editorial control. That fact alone should tell you everything. It is her story, and as its leading lady and executive producer, she tells it the way she wants, peppered with needle drops from her favourite songs, including Michael Jackson's "Billie Jean." There's nothing wrong with controlling your own narrative, but when you control it this tightly, then there's something wrong. Or there's nothing, we could say...

There are brief moments where something real nearly breaks through. The camera catches Melania in moments where she seems happy, singing along to "Billie Jean" with her driver, appearing genuinely comfortable when interacting with designer Hervé Pierre or French first lady Brigitte Macron. Those seconds are oddly compelling precisely because they feel unguarded. But the film doesn't trust them. It cuts away, returns to the slow-motion walk, the lingering shot of stiletto heels on marble floors. If you've seen the trailer for {The Devil Wears Prada 2}, prominently featuring shots of heels walking down corridors, you've got the general gist of what Ratner is going for here.

The movie opens to the strains of the Rolling Stones' "Gimme Shelter," which makes it sound like the film is going to strike an attitude of defiance. But Melania is so studiously celebratory, it never even wades into controversial waters. There is no mention of the immigration policies championed by her husband, despite her own immigrant story. There's a telling moment where she selects glassware to engrave with a presidential seal and alludes to "my home country" (she was born in what is now Slovenia) without ever naming it. The film, much like its subject, hovers just above the details.

At one point, she drops by as Donald Trump rehearses his inaugural speech and suggests he call himself "a peacemaker and a unifier." He incorporates it. In the film, this plays to a burst of applause, with a grateful nod to his wife. That's not quite how it played out in reality as the applause and the nod are editing tricks. It's a small manipulation, but a revealing one. This is a film unbothered by the distinction between truth and optics.

The business context around the film is, frankly, more interesting than the film itself. Amazon paid $40 million for distribution rights (the highest price ever paid for a commissioned documentary) and reportedly spent another $35 million on marketing. That makes Melania arguably the most expensive infomercial in history. Speculation about what Amazon was really purchasing (access, goodwill, political cover) will outlast the film itself by decades.

Critics gave it an 11% on Rotten Tomatoes, while verified ticket buyers gave it 99%, the biggest gap between critics and audiences in the site's history. That split says more about the current state of America than the film does. The people who loved it came to love it, the people who didn't, didn't go. And, as we previously noted, almost all positive reviews come from accounts yet to review any other project.

Ultimately, Melania is not offensive, it's not even particularly infuriating once you've adjusted your expectations. It is simply, stubbornly, magnificently empty. An elegantly wrapped box with nothing inside, asking to be admired for the ribbon.

One Piece: Season 2

conny@gamereactor.eu (Conny Andersson) — Wed, 11 Mar 2026 09:20:00 +0100

When I got a job at a geek shop in Oslo, there was a large section with manga books that I often stood and looked at with interest. Over the years, I bought countless volumes of Attack on Titan, Full Metal Alchemist, Fairy Tale, and One Piece, among others. I have thus followed Monkey D. Luffy in cartoon form for many years, and even though I haven't read all of the more than 100 manga volumes - or seen a fraction of the more than 1,100 anime episodes - I have still followed Luffy, Zoro, Usopp, Sanji, and Nami, who make up the Straw Hat Pirates, on many entertaining adventures. It's been just over two and a half years since we got to know them in live-action format on Netflix, and you can read our review of the first season here.

Now the whole gang is back. The journey from the East Blue Sea to the infamous Grand Line began in the first season, but at the same time there were a lot of introductions and other things to get through. So, as season two gets underway, we can say that the journey is both beginning in earnest and, above all, picking up speed. Conveniently, Luffy and the gang make an early first stop in Loguetown to seriously prepare for the upcoming dangerous journey that will take them up Reverse Mountain and then finally to the Grand Line, where Season 2 takes place. It quickly becomes clear that the second season raises both the tempo and production levels a few notches and it's a really entertaining journey to follow.

The design of the locations is fantastic, and it's clear that Netflix has pumped a lot of money into the production of the series.

My first thought about the whole thing is that it's a bit like experiencing a Japanese role-playing game. A kind of road trip... sorry, boat trip, where we follow this strange gang on their journey from one island to another. Each stop naturally involves adventures and dangers of various kinds, where dangers lurk in the places they visit, and since they are pirates, they are also wanted, much to the delight of the charismatic, eccentric, and naïve captain Luffy. The pace is fast, and even though the formula itself is quite predictable in how the episodes follow each other, after the first two episodes I am completely sold. The first half of this season is incredibly charming and entertaining in every way, and despite some rather repetitive action sequences and similar approaches to how the journey progresses, it never loses its heart or pace.

However, it starts to falter a bit in the second half of the season, as if the famous problem of the episodes being a little too long is brought up too often. At the same time, there are a lot of stories and characters to be presented and given space, and it's not always possible to achieve a perfect balance. Somewhat similar events pile up on top of each other, and as fun as it is to see Luffy swing his rubber arms or Zoro show off his sword skills, it becomes a bit too repetitive.

Thankfully, One Piece has a huge gallery of colourful characters to mix and match, where no hairstyle, outfit or make-up is too crazy to fit in. Sure, it's a bit of a cosplay warning at times, but you buy it when everything else is so crazily designed. Telephones are enormous snails, one of the new main characters constantly walks around with two cigars in the corner of his mouth and the rest in his jacket pockets. We encounter giants and talking animals, and both heroes and villains shout out the names of their special attacks before executing them... Yes, hopefully you get the point. One Piece is fantasy in every magical way imaginable and you have to try to ignore the fact that some things look a little ridiculous, because that's how it is and that's how it should be, and I get caught up in all the madness that happens. One Piece is a happy pill in so many ways, from the beautiful visuals to the characters, the design of the environments, and most importantly, it works very well.

Chopper appears and is adorable!

Already in the first season, most people, including me, were satisfied with how it looked and how entertaining it actually was. I often think it works even better in season two. In many ways, I think this is as good as it gets when translating the whole thing from cartoon to "reality". Sure, changes have to be made and events have to be cut, but it's clear that there's a fantastic source material to draw from and that it's been about making it all work in this format. For the most part, it does, with a few exceptions regarding pacing and certain characters tending to disappear for long periods of time as if they don't really know what to do with them all.

Overall, however, it's very playful, charming, and after watching the eight episodes of the second season (all of which are about an hour long) in a single day, it really feels like I've experienced and been part of an incredibly grand adventure. When the credits rolled on the last episode, there was one thing in particular that made me very happy, and that is that the series has been renewed for a third season. Sure, the wait will be long, but I'm already looking forward to more adventures on the high seas.

War Machine

magnus@gamereactor.eu (Magnus Groth-Andersen) — Tue, 10 Mar 2026 09:00:00 +0100

Although my tolerance for American "oorah" war propaganda may have been declining over the past few years, there are excellent examples of films that use a very militaristic and almost Americana-inspired framework, and hit... well, the mark. Furthermore, I have repeatedly enjoyed "the man in the field against seemingly insurmountable odds", a premise where good actors have been able to stretch their legs, from DiCaprio in The Revenant to Amber Midthunder in Prey.

But War Machine is not a good example of either, neither as a piece of inspiring pro-militaristic hyperrealism, as a "man in the field" film, or just as a relaxed piece of casual entertainment in the company of the broad-shouldered guy from Reacher.

It's actually worth revisiting the aforementioned Prey, as the premise is very much in the slipstream here. New Ranger recruits are about to take their final exam in the field, but what they think is their target is actually a war machine (war machine - get it?) from an alien planet, which recklessly hunts down the soldiers, who comically insist on calling each other by their Ranger recruit numbers, even after the alien superior force begins tearing them to pieces. In the midst of this, we find the traumatised 81, played by Alan Ritchson, who tries desperately to find something human and relatable here, but simply cannot save the embarrassingly poor material.

There are those who have praised War Machine for being "old school", cliché-ridden entertainment from a bygone era, but I say that War Machine is really just stupid. Not "stupid entertainment" in the way you refer to your guilty pleasures at home, but just unintelligently constructed.

Think of Prey - that film wasn't perfect - but it managed to gracefully set up a violent confrontation with an alien superpower with a prey that turns out to be harder to kill than first assumed. The Predator is scary, it's skilled, it has an iconography that immediately sets the scene. Compare that to War Machine's heavy, boring, uninspired enemy - like an AT-ST interpreted through a cheesy JRPG - it's neither scary, expressive, nor exciting to watch.

And then there's Ritchson. I can see that there are many who love his honest, physical presence in Reacher, and that series has apparently also given him scenes and arcs that suit his temperament and strengths. I won't comment on his general ability here, but I will say that War Machine undoubtedly makes everyone involved worse actors than they probably are. The tragic past with his brother, played by Jai Courtney, doesn't really land, especially when it's supposed to serve as a kind of impetus to "step up" as a leader.

There are plenty of "stupid" films out there, simple constructions with just enough honest, lowbrow entertainment value that you can easily switch off your analytical brain. But War Machine simply makes your eyes roll all the way to the back of your skull. It's not as self-aware as others praise it for being, and therefore I feel very confident when I say, "watch something else!"

The Bride

javier@gamereactor.eu (Javier Escribano) — Fri, 06 Mar 2026 18:00:00 +0100

It is hard to review a film like The Bride. It is not the average "bad movie", which is bad because it shows that their creators had no original ideas or did the bare minimum. You can see that it is truly a passion project for director Maggie Gyllenhaal, who managed to collect a budget of $80 million for a very free and feminist reinterpretation of the 1935 film Bride of Frankenstein, in which Jessie Buckley plays a dual role of the Bride and Mary Shelley herself talking from beyond the grave, paying tribute to 1930s gangster movies, horror movies and musicals.

It is the kind of author-blockbuster movie that Warner Bros. takes pride in producing (like Ryan Coogler's Sinners), allowing talented authors to unleash their creativity with (almost) no creative or budgetary boundaries. The Bride is hugely ambitious, and you can sense that the movie is filled with stimulating ideas in both its themes and visual language. Sadly, all those elements don't add up for a an enjoyable movie. Instead, it is a confusing mess that feels much longer than the 126 minutes it lasts, and lacks the depth to make any thoughtful commentary, nor anything too shocking to provoke any visceral emotion, other than bewilderment and tedium.

The biggest problem is that you never establish a real connection with the main character, the Bride. The movie's opening scene, in which Buckley's character Ida, a escort of a mob boss, is "possesed" by Shelley and gives up an incomprehensible and unbearebly long speech, sets the tone for the weird adventure that awaits her: after her death, she is revived by Dr. Euphronious (Annette Bening) when Frankenstein's monster (who is said to have been alive since 1818, the year when Shelley's novel was was publised) begs for a bride to end with his loneliness.

There is occasionally chemistry between "Frank" (Christian Bale) and Buckley's The Bride, but their relationship doesn't develop in coherent ways, so you can't really feel anything for them. I'm sure that Gyllenhaal had clear ideas about what Frank's love for musical movies or the Bride's dual-personality speeches symbolise, but for anyone watching the film they come up as bizarre creative decisions that don't make much sense and get in the way of building believable characters, and that ends up derailing the film because you don't really care.

Not everything can be justified with "you just don't get the film". Without a good story to grip you, all you can do is guess about second meanings and catch classic cinema references, but everything feels shallow, the film trying to outsmart you with elusive eccentricities and drastic tonal and plot changes that probably come from editing the many expensive reshoots. The film starts focusing on the relationship between Frank and the Bride but, as said, neither (especially her) have a defined characterization to build a believable romance.

Then it turns into a musical, but only once and without a clear reason why. It is not a good musical number anyway, and it feels forced and out of nowhere, contributing to the feeling that the movie just wants to be weird and unpredictable for the sake of it without a solid foundation to keep our interest. Then it becomes a Bonnie & Clyde type of thriller film (or at least copies the visual style), while presenting a feminist social revolution in the style of Todd Phillips' Joker which comes out of nowhere, doesn't really make sense narratively, and is almost never referred to it again.

In between Frank and Ida's increasingly boring story, the detectives played of Penélope Cruz and Peter Sarsgaard add some interest and temporarily disguise the movie of a cat-and-mouse gangster film (without really committing to it). Unsurprisingly, they also end up being wasted potential: their reason to be in the film is only explained in the last 15 minutes, filled with rushed exposition, and is not a very convincing reason. They could be removed entirely from the film and it would change nothing.

It is so sad that The Bride ends up being so weak, because the production design is great: it is not easy to set a movie in the 1930s without making it look cheap or fake. Jessie Buckley and Christian Bale with their monster make up is already iconic, and they display their acting skills, despite frequently being forced to overact.

But that the visual aesthetics are the only positives of a movie with so many bold ideas is extremely disappointing. A lot of ideas, yes, but so poorly executed that it's almost impossible to enjoy, with nothing remarkable behind the surface to at least say 'ok, I get it'. The Bride's only hope is to some day become a cult movie by people willing to fill the huge gaps between its many pieces.

Ted: Season 2

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Thu, 05 Mar 2026 09:00:00 +0100

There's no denying that Seth MacFarlane has a particular way of doing things. Whether its Family Guy, The Orville, The Naked Gun, anything that the comedy star seems to touch turns out in a very specific manner. It's a style that is clearly driven by a love of sitcoms of yore and it's a platform that can deliver quality comedy, even if it is a tad predictable. This is without question the case with the second season of Ted as well.

Following on from the strong first season that matched up savage comedic moments with complex family dynamics, this next round of episodes is back to what Ted, and MacFarlane for that matter, does best. We get to follow the iconic sentient teddy bear and his owner-brother John Bennett, all as the two continue to survive through high school and deal with the challenges of being young adults. Naturally, this involves plenty of sexually-themed narrative threads and other adult themes that every teenager explores or avoids during their maturing at this age. So you could say that it's familiar and a little nostalgic, even if the weight of many of these topics is softened to a pulp by the very comedic tone of the Ted series.

But again, regardless of the topic of each episode - and each episode does tend to have a theme - we find an episode structure that is almost a direct representation of Family Guy. It starts in a completely inconspicuous way, usually at the Bennett household, and then soon spirals off into different directions before the key premise of the episode takes shape. One such example could be how an inquisitive call to a sex operator hotline soon sees Ted and John having to invent a fictional and rebellious student to avoid repercussions for costing their school thousands of dollars. If you've seen your fair share of Family Guy, this leap from one idea to something almost entirely random is not at all uncommon, and it's because of this that if you still enjoy the animated series, you'll find yourself instantly settling back in with Ted and the gang once more.

Building on this, we also find a major use of cutaways and montages, another key element that coins a MacFarlane-creation, with many being nods to pop-culture in the same way that these are used in his animated projects as well. You could go as far as saying that Ted is a live-action version of Family Guy and it truly wouldn't be too wide of the mark.

But otherwise the dialogue and the comedy that is used in this show is often more than enough to carry it through its somewhat predictable nature. Ted knows what it is and doesn't try to trick you once that it's anything more than a simple and fun sitcom-like series, the kind that we don't tend to see all too often these days. There are truly funny jokes and puns in this series, ruthless and almost jaw-dropping insults that'll have you wheezing, and all in a package that doesn't eat up much of your time. We're talking 30-minute episodes that aren't particularly tied together, meaning there's no requirement of following a wider and overarching narrative. This is entertainment at perhaps its rawest and most accessible and it's hard to find that anything but admirable.

So, Ted's return in this second round of episodes won't blow you away or surprise you with how it's re-writing the script for television comedy, but that's fine, as it's fun, easy to watch, and gut-wrenchingly hilarious at times too.

Hoppers

javier@gamereactor.eu (Javier Escribano) — Tue, 03 Mar 2026 16:43:49 +0100

{Hoppers}, the newest original Pixar movie before Toy Story 5 lands in theaters in June, comes from the mind of director Daniel Chong, best known for his work on the Cartoon Network show We Bare Bears and its follow up movie in 2020. While not all of Pixar's latest movies have enjoyed the same level of success and critical appreciation, it is noticeable the effort put in by the studio to diversify the portfolio of authors coming from different backgrounds and bringing new and original ideas, like Domee Shi's Turning Red, Enrico Casarosa's Luca or Adrian Molina's Elio, alternating between safe sequels and risky ideas. Hoppers is a great example that proves that the Pixar project still works, producing quality movies that continue to surprise us.

{Hoppers} tells the story of Mabel, a teenager who fights against the construction of a highway that would destroy a glade filled with all kinds of animals. Her last chance to stop the works is proving that it is still inhabited by beavers, and while investigating, she finds out about a program which allows humans to enter their consciousness into a robotic beaver. Transformed into a beaver, she befriends the animals in the forest and tries to come up with a plan to stop the construction... but a lot of things not deserving to be spoiled happen that alter completely her plans, and our expectations watching a Pixar movie.

The biggest virtue of {Hoppers} is how unpredictable it is and how unapologetically it aims to surprise and amuse the viewer at every turn, even at the cost of sometimes feeling contradictory with itself. Mabel's goal is to stop the construction of the highway, but after a few crazy turns, her motivations shift quite drastically, and the film moves in another direction that is funnier, but makes the moral of the story lose focus. The mandatory quiet and reflective moments between the second and third act don't feel earned and lack the emotional weight intended, especially for what we come to expect from Pixar. The film is, or course, very sweet, putting much of its heart in a relationship between Mabel and a real beaver, but it is not as emotionally manipulative as most of Pixar's films: you'll probably save the tears for Toy Story 5 later this year.

I won't lie, it is a relief to watch a Pixar movie without weird conceptual ideas packed with layers and symbolism that sometimes get in the way of the fun, and with a clearer plot and villain that doesn't come from introspection of the main characters. The environmental lesson is unmistakable and not very deep, and reminiscent of the oddly similar The Wild Robot, which felt more like a Pixar movie than {Hoppers}. Actually, because of the greater focus on action, wacky humour and plenty of absurd situations, {Hoppers} feels closer to movies from competitor studios like {Sony Pictures}, {DreamWorks} or {Illumination} (although certainly better than anything from the Minions studio).

And for the most part it works: {Hoppers} is the funniest Pixar movie in a while, and it even dares to play with the animation a little bit more for comedic and stylistic effects. The cost for that is that it lacks the finesse that other Pixar movies. More specifically, the growth and evolution of Mabel as a character is a bit contradictory and the story sometimes feels like it is improvising as it goes without really knowing where it wants to land. In other words, the thing that makes it so special (how weird and unique it feels) also prevents it from reaching greater heights.

{Hoppers} is not a Pixar masterpiece, but it is one of the freshest movies from the studio, and I dare to say it will end up being one of the most memorable movies from the modern Pixar. It is funny, very entertaining, surprises you at every turn, and even if sometimes feel like a bunch of ideas fighting between them, it is undoubtedly sweet and leaves a really good taste in our mouths.

The Bluff

peter@gamereactor.eu (Peter Westberg) — Tue, 03 Mar 2026 12:00:00 +0100

Sometimes surprises pop up. I hadn't read anything about The Bluff beforehand, but stumbled across it by accident while scrolling through film news online as usual. The day before it was released on Prime. We are truly spoiled in the streaming era. For better or worse. It's stressful trying to keep up with everything that's released, and I can miss the good old days. You know. When one episode was released per week. A season of The X-Files ended with "To be continued..." and an eternity of waiting. Or when films actually ran in cinemas for more than two months and it could sometimes be almost a year between the cinema premiere and the VHS release (VHS! You know. The predecessor to DVD. The predecessor to Blu-ray. The predecessor to digitisation. Jeez.)

Enough about that. Anyway, I was pleasantly surprised by The Bluff. I haven't been on a pirate adventure in a very long time, and it wasn't until the film started that I realised how much I've actually missed hanging out in the Caribbean with muskets, bearded, grunting old men and rolling seas. And the cast. We have Priyanka Chopra Jones (Heads of State) in the lead role as Ercell, the fisherman's wife with a past she hoped to keep buried in the sand. Karl Urban (The Boys, etc., he hardly needs any introduction) as Connor, the bearded, vengeful captain who steps ashore on Cayman Brac in search of gold and violence. Temuera Morrison (Boba Fett himself) as Connor's right-hand man.

This adventure begins very promisingly. It is stylish, edgy and the acting is solid. We are not treated to many quiet moments and the blood starts splattering immediately. The Bluff is a violent film. Very violent. And I find that entertaining. At times, it feels like they are trying a little too hard. Perhaps to mask certain other flaws. But sure. The tension is constant, and Ercell's transformation from an innocent fisherman's wife with a quiet life to the lioness within with a very large capacity for violence is entertaining, but very simplistic. And that's in line with the whole film. The running time is just over 100 minutes, which I think is a shame.

It would have been beneficial to develop a more detailed plot. More character development. More twists and turns. It feels like a rush job and ends before it really gets going. At times, it feels like an extended pilot for a new television series. And that feels like a loss. Because there is so much here that actually works. That is enjoyable. But I wish I had a reason to like it more than I ultimately allow myself to. Because behind the pace, the dialogue shifts, the secrets and all the creative, bloody deaths, the treasure chest echoes rather emptily.

But sure. As entertainment for the moment, in an age when we are spoiled with lavish streaming films, it still works just fine. Pop some popcorn, pour a glass of Caribbean rum (or cola!) and join in. It won't be boring...

Scrubs Reboot (Episodes 1 and 2)

fredrik@gamereactor.eu (Fredrik Malmquist) — Sat, 28 Feb 2026 16:00:00 +0100

It feels almost unreal that Scrubs is making a comeback after 16 years, and it's probably easy for many to dismiss it as cynical nostalgia. Fortunately, this soft reboot is made with warmth, humour and nostalgia in its bloodstream. The first two episodes follow the same charming style that made me love the series from when I was in secondary school until it ended almost two decades ago. J.D., Turk and Elliot are back at Sacred Heart Hospital as if time has stood still. The dynamics of the core group are still at the heart of the series: the jokes are spot on, and the bromance between J.D. and Turk is as strong as ever (or...?). The first two episodes manage to strike a balance between absurd humour and more emotional moments, just as we remember Scrubs.

The series' classic voiceovers, crazy daydreams and sometimes absurd comedy feel familiar and comforting. At the same time, this is precisely what makes it feel a little TOO similar to the original. Scrubs risks fumbling to find its place in 2026 rather than being new and fresh. I haven't quite decided how I feel about this yet. I love that so many of the actors have returned. With Zach Braff, Donald Faison, Sarah Chalke and John C. McGinley back in their roles, the comeback feels genuine and well thought out, and not just a nostalgia trip. The series checks in with the characters in a way that gives them room to have grown and changed over sixteen years, which feels both safe and new. We get to see how life has changed them and how the old gang relates to the Sacred Heart of today.

Perhaps what is most surprising is how well the series dares to let its characters bear the marks of time. There is a weariness in certain glances, a maturity in the conflicts and a different weight in the decisions that reflect that we are no longer at the beginning of our lives - neither as viewers nor as doctors in a fictional hospital. Where the original series was often about finding oneself in the chaos, it now feels more like dealing with the consequences of who our cast has become. It is a thematic shift that, if given room to develop, could give the reboot its own identity. To further confirm that water has flowed under the bridge, it is important to have new faces and medical students for our favourites to contend with. Some of them are funny and promising, while others currently feel more like fillers than independent voices in the ensemble cast. This is where the season gets to run its course; it may be that they are overshadowed by the giants of the series. In a few weeks or months, perhaps we will be invested?

At the same time, it's clear that the series is aware of its own history. There are nods to old gags, small meta-comments and a self-distance that is almost impressive. There's no doubt that the production team is aware that it's "a little crazy" at times, but that's how Scrubs has always been: crazy but with heart. The question is not only whether Scrubs works again, but whether we need it again. In a television world dominated by darkness, prestige, and cynicism, there is something liberating about returning to a series that dares to be silly, sentimental, and honest at the same time. Scrubs justifies its return by being both a tribute to the original and a step into new territory. It will be exciting to see if the series creators manage to make us feel that the format is still relevant today without losing everything that made the TV series beloved in the first place. This is a genuinely entertaining return that both warms my heart and made me smile.

Scream 7

peter@gamereactor.eu (Peter Westberg) — Thu, 26 Feb 2026 15:00:00 +0100

The first Scream film from 1996 quickly achieved cult status and changed something in the slasher genre. Horror film legend Wes Craven directed the first four films in the series, but he passed away in 2015, leaving behind a considerable legacy to take over. The series reboot in the form of the fifth instalment, aptly named Scream instead of Scream 5, was released in 2022. I love horror but have never been a big fan of either the film series or slasher films in general, as I've never found them particularly thrilling. Not enough suspense, not enough discomfort, and too much reliance on cheap jump scares. I saw the reboot, directed by Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett, at the cinema where it didn't impress me overly. There was too much focus on humour, which often fell flat. Then Scream VI, which came out the following year, was directed by the same duo, and I liked it much more. The humour was better balanced, some of the twists were really promising, and it contained more suspense than before.

Now it's time for Ghostface to return in Scream 7, and this time Kevin Williamson is in the director's chair, a good choice, considering that Williamson co-wrote all the previous films. It all starts with a scene in Macher House, the iconic house where the climax of the first film takes place, and now transformed into a museum/experience centre where you can stay overnight for a Stab experience. Everyone knows how this introduction will end. Sidney Prescott has built a new life in a new town, where she is married to the town's sheriff and her relationship with her eldest daughter Tatum is strained.

"Fucking motherhood," as Sidney sums up the situation after a fight. Of course, it doesn't take long before Ghostface makes an entrance and the hunt is on, where we are treated to the same type of character gallery as usual, with talk of the "rules" from the Stab films and theories about who is - or who are - the killers. It's fast-paced, stylish and at times quite entertaining but very watered down, as there are no real surprises. Scream has long felt like the kind of film series that can be summed up as "seen one, seen them all," even though the sixth instalment tried to break new ground, which I found a bit refreshing, although opinions differ on how successful it was.

Tricky, this lad won't budge.

If you're a big fan of the series, there's certainly a lot to enjoy, but it's unlikely to do much to charm people who (like myself) aren't entirely sold on the concept. The murders are similar, with a few exceptions, and there's the same tired use of jump scares to build atmosphere and discomfort. Plus, it's still fascinating how the killers become somewhat invincible (not Michael Myers-invincible, but still) as soon as they put on their masks and cloaks.

In summary, it's once again quite hackneyed, and I find myself sighing a little resignedly in more than one place. There aren't enough surprises, nothing really stands out, too much is reused, and the acting can best be described as stiff. But it's still quite entertaining and there are some scenes that are delightful. So, a film full of tricky situations. Maybe, just maybe, it's time to let that Ghostface mask rest for a while?

Monarch: Legacy of Monsters - Season 2

ben@gamereactor.eu (Ben Lyons) — Tue, 24 Feb 2026 15:00:00 +0100

Considering all of the flashy and grandiose nature of the theatrical MonsterVerse projects, I respect Monarch: Legacy of Monsters for having a premise that is more human and smaller scale, honing in on a collection of core characters and using the Titans as striking set pieces and less as core protagonists in a wider story. There is room for the often mediocre-to-poor box office behemoths where we get to see Godzilla and Kong fight spectacular creatures, and likewise there is also room for the more personal stories that spotlight humanity's place in a world of titanic threats. It's with this in mind that Monarch: Legacy of Monsters has always been closer to 2014's Godzilla than it has to the many MonsterVerse films that follow, and this is perhaps the key reason why I was excited for the Apple TV series to return.

After seeing the entirety of Season 2, there are a few very admirable areas that stand out. For one, unlike some TV series spin-offs, Monarch doesn't try to trick you by offering a cheaper and less premium adventure, the sort of project that feels lesser when compared to the big screen films. This is, as is the case with Apple TV's line-up, as premium in style and appearance as the latest chapter, Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire, with this including the jaw-dropping Titan special effects, the globe-trotting nature of the series, and the strong cast headlined by Kurt and Wyatt Russell.

Plus, unlike the box office flicks that often come across like Michael Bay's latter Transformers films by prioritising style over substance, Monarch: Legacy of Monsters' second season has more than enough time to tell a compelling, somewhat confusing, story over its lengthy ten-episode run. Yep, there's no rushing to the point here, no wasteful use of emotion and setup, but you could argue that such a long runtime allows it to fall into the trap of being convoluted and overtly exposed. For the most part, it doesn't feel this way, as rather we get very meaningful explanations about the lore of the MonsterVerse, but there are moments where you wish things would hurry up a tad or be cut entirely. The dancing around time dilation and time travel is one such area that feels a step too far for this season, and likewise the inherent focus on daddy issues is a problem that leads to some characters being simply exhausting...

Yep, daddy issues seem to define this MonsterVerse project. What I mean by this is that Season 2 further explores the dynamic between Anna Sawai's Cate and Ren Watanabe's Kentaro and how the step-siblings exist in the company of their often absent father Takehiro Hira's Hiroshi. These are probably enough daddy issues for one season of a show, but then we also add father-son challenges between Wyatt Russell's Lee Shaw and his U.S. Army Commander father, and how Hiroshi adapts to a world where his long-lost mother, Mari Yamamoto's Keiko, returns after being trapped in Axis Mundi for around five decades. When all of the core cast are acting like petulant children because of their relationships with their parents over the course of the season, the very emotional basis of their reasoning starts to become frustrating to follow.

It's a shame that this season has moments that make you audibly sigh, moments that make you want to fast-forward 30 seconds to get past the tiring and snide exchanges, as beyond these we find a series that is still entertaining and is perhaps the best and most consistent MonsterVerse project to date. It's not a geeky, almost childish, opportunity for a giant ape and a radioactive lizard to fight a 50-story robot, it doesn't lean into the more outrageous parts of the MonsterVerse setup by showing how Kong has his rotten teeth removed and replaced. Some may come to MonsterVerse projects for such narrative threads, but you cannot support an entire cinematic universe on fan-service alone, and it's because of this that Monarch continues to be successful and perhaps the most important pillar of the wider universe at that.

But again, we are talking about the MonsterVerse here, and while I've come to appreciate its almost dumb action and setup, there's no denying that films in this world often leave much to be desired. So while I will stand firm and say that Monarch is perhaps the best this world has to offer at the moment, in the grand scheme of things, we're talking about a series that is simply fine entertainment. It's not unmissable television, it's not insultingly poor, it's just okay and there's nothing wrong with a show being that way.

Exit 8

magnus@gamereactor.eu (Magnus Groth-Andersen) — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 12:00:00 +0100

If you know me, you know that I love horror films, and to some extent horror games as well. Through this dual love for the genre across the interactive divide, I actually tried The Exit 8 back in its infancy, mostly because this specific setting appealed to the part of my brain that played Kojima's P.T. over and over again and mourned the loss of the game it could have been.

If you are not familiar with The Exit 8, the premise is simple: a person takes the underground, just like any other day, but instead of the traditional route down and up ending in a stairwell, it... loops around. Suddenly, you are trapped, caught in a circular knot, and not only that; you are, in a way, not alone in these otherwise clinical white underground walls.

Here we find our main character, "The Lost Man," frantically trying to keep his nerves calm as this clearly paranormal experience unfolds, but at the same time, just like a player in the interactive version, it's about staying calm, pragmatic, and consistent with the task at hand, which is painted so directly at the entrance to each loop. It's about spotting irregularities, and if you find one, turning back. If not, continue straight ahead.

It's child's play, if you can spot them, and the film presents this duality between performing this task in a relatively clinical manner, in line with our increasingly stressed protagonist, while at the same time wondering and being frightened that this is even... well, happening.

Director and screenwriter Genki Kawamura clearly wanted to let the game's interactive, structural goals be the narrative nerve of the film, and instead of giving this enigmatic but compelling premise a little context, he focuses entirely on the game's single, direct premise of, you guessed it, "spotting irregularities, and if you find"... you know what I mean.

It's a bit of a double-edged sword, because even though The Exit 8 isn't particularly scary (neither is the game), you're left with the feeling that it could have been more effective if it had dared to take a few chances with its source material. Perhaps a little shadow here, a pair of staring eyes there, a little more suspense building between these systematic walkthroughs of the clinically white metro corridor.

But at the same time, you have to give Kawamura credit for being faithful and blindly trusting that the innovative premise and the aesthetic profile and design language of the single location are enough on their own, and that is indeed true. The film is well acted, solidly constructed and choreographed, and, as you can probably sense, there is not a single extra gram to cut away. This is minimalist filmmaking, even if it can be a little boring in places.

However, The Exit 8 follows in the wake of a number of other strong film adaptations of games that not only respect the source material, but directly trust that it alone can win over the viewer. It's pretty cool, even though I would have liked it to have dared to be a little more than that.

The Wrecking Crew

fredrik@gamereactor.eu (Fredrik Malmquist) — Wed, 18 Feb 2026 14:00:00 +0100

Do you remember the 90s when you would go to the video store and find films you had never heard of? Often, the cover was more appealing than the content, and sometimes you would take home something that quickly turned out to be a questionable investment of both time and rental money. For me, a classic example is Dolph Lundgren's The Last Patrol, which unfortunately found its way into our family's VHS player. Today, we get direct to streaming rather than direct to VHS, but the feeling is the same. The Wrecking Crew on Amazon Prime is exactly that kind of film: what you get if you mix L.A. Cop and Lethal Weapon, but with a slightly weaker ensemble and without the same confidence in the execution.

The Hale brothers have drifted apart and have an almost non-existent relationship. When their father dies under mysterious circumstances, they are forced to meet again in Hawaii. It soon becomes clear that they must work together despite old conflicts and irregularities, as it is obvious that their father's death was not an accident. The setup is familiar, and the film makes no major attempts to surprise, leaning safely on well-known buddy-cop tropes.

James Hale, played by Dave Bautista, is a commander in the American elite force Navy Seals and extremely orderly. Jonny Hale, played by Jason Momoa, is the complete opposite: a messed-up suspended police officer who has also been dumped by his great love. The dynamic is supposed to be driven by their total inability to work together, but also by the realisation that they are the only ones who understand that someone wants to harm the family. The problem is that the conflicts feel more schematic than genuine.

The story is straightforward and predictable, often to the extent that you can guess the next line before it is delivered. Bautista and Momoa give competent performances and seem to enjoy their roles at times, but the chemistry between them is not quite there. It is more like two stars sharing the screen than a dynamic duo lifting each other up. In supporting roles, we see Temuera Morrison and Danish actor Claes Bang, among others. Morrison seems mostly interested in getting through his scenes, while Bang at least seems to be having fun with his villain role and brings some energy when he appears.

Director Angel Manuel Soto, who previously made Blue Beetle and La Granja, does what he can with Jonathan Tropper's script. However, it feels like it's more Matt Flannery's cinematography and Bautista and Momoa's pure star power that make the film fly at all. The Wrecking Crew is well packaged, occasionally giggly and never directly painful - but also never particularly memorable. Overall, the impression is mostly meh, and when the credits roll, it feels like yet another streaming title that will be quickly forgotten.

Return to Silent Hill

marcus@gamereactor.eu (Marcus Persson) — Tue, 17 Feb 2026 14:00:00 +0100

Silent Hill 2 is rightly considered one of the absolute masterpieces of the horror genre - a game that not only scared, but also shook, questioned and lingered long after the credits had rolled. It is a narrative tour de force centred on guilt, grief and self-denial, where the game mechanics are subordinate to the story rather than the other way around.

Compared to the games, not least the first three, which are timeless masterpieces, the film adaptations seem like somewhat banal cash grabs that simplify everything Silent Hill stands for. The magic is simply not there, and the horror remains rather superficial, even though the very first film seemed to understand the importance of atmosphere and mood.

It is clearly tempting to dwell on comparisons with the games, and with Return to Silent Hill there was still some hope that Christophe Gans would build on the lessons learned from the first film and give us fans the adaptation we had all dreamed of and hoped for. Nuanced, raw and chilling psychological horror.

The scenes are often reminiscent of poor cosplay.

Unfortunately, that is exactly what Return to Silent Hill is not. A film that is not only a monumental failure on most levels, but also somehow manages to be even worse than the already tragically awful Silent Hill Revelation with its laughable 3D. This is, without exaggeration, the worst film of the year so far - an epithet that I unfortunately believe will stick with it throughout 2026.

Where Silent Hill 2 was groundbreaking, Return is rather laughable. Where the game scared and upset, Return manages at best to give you a chronic headache and severe nausea. It's so deeply frustrating, because the conditions were there - at least on paper. After all, Team Silent's masterpiece was groundbreaking because of its story and how the game approached horror in a way that had not been experienced in the medium before.

But Gahns somehow manages to mess it all up, and after a clumsy introduction where James Sunderland meets Mary Crane on a road outside Silent Hill, the film jumps forward a few years. Mary is suddenly gone, and James is an emotional wreck. One night later, a mysterious letter appears, and no, it's not an invitation to Hogwarts, but an invitation for James to visit the abandoned town, which certainly looks quite okay - complete with all the twisted and tormented monsters - but where everything mostly just feels like a cheap façade.

"Nasty" little creatures that bare their teeth and growl.

James wanders on, meeting Angela, Eddie, Laura and, of course, Pyramid Head - without anything really leaving a lasting impression or raising any questions. Creepy things that go "ooga booga" in the dark - complete with loud sound effects. Because that's how it should be - apparently.

The longer the film goes on, the more it turns into a collection of loosely connected sequences. Events and locations from the game are seemingly slavishly ticked off like a bullet list, completely devoid of emotional weight or narrative logic. Tired postcards that fail to engage in the slightest, and when the credits finally roll, it's hard not to want to collapse in utter disappointment.

The sad thing is that there are occasional glimmers of light here and there. Blue moths fluttering around mannequins, the shadows from James' torch casting ominous shadows along dark corridors, and some creatures that actually manage to be genuinely unpleasant. These are the moments you remember, but very little of the story that Gahns tries to present.

The result is a whole that is not only very plastic and artificial, but also almost completely devoid of everything that belongs to Silent Hill 2. Gahns seems to have completely misunderstood the source material, and the emotional foundation is conspicuous by its absence. Instead, the void is filled with cheap jump scares and questionable CGI. As an adaptation of one of the gaming world's most acclaimed works, Return to Silent Hill is a total and complete disappointment - completely devoid of substance and as loud as it is remarkably lifeless.

Wuthering Heights

emily-maisy@gamereactor.eu (Emily-Maisy Milburn) — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 14:05:00 +0100

As an avid literary enthusiast, I was overjoyed when I heard that a Wuthering Heights adaptation was in the works... until I found out that it was by Emerald Fennel. After Saltburn, I didn't know how many more terrible northern accents, cringeworthy dialogue stints and over the top shock value montages I could take. Sadly, Wuthering Heights delivered on all of the above, albeit, in a more visually pleasing way than its predecessor.

Set in the foggy Yorkshire Moors, the story follows the Earnshaw family and the arrival of Heathcliff, a boy brought from Liverpool to be kept as a family 'pet'. Chaos ensues when Heathcliff (Jacob Elordi) falls in love with the wealthy daughter Catherine Earnshaw (Margot Robbie).

One thing that Fennell always gets right is the aesthetic and overall palette of her films and Wuthering Heights was no different. It was delicious, a feast for the eyes and I was captivated. One scene in particular in which Cathy finds her drunken Father Mr Earnshaw (Martin Clune) deceased from his alcoholism surrounded by multitudes of oversized green bottles piled high was particularly well produced. The stylised opening of the film and gorgeous credits paired with Charlie XCX and John Cale's spoken word segments of House set the tone for the film; erotic, thrilling, and dramatic.

Unfortunately, those were the only positives I took away from Wuthering Heights. The casting was very unfortunate and watching Elordi desperately attempt a Yorkshire accent as he bleated the words "Cath! Cath!" pulled me straight back out of the scenes. The soundtrack itself felt especially incongruous and provoked a feeling that was akin to watching an hour long Charlie XCX music video. The plot deviated greatly from the original story, almost so much I didn't even believe I was watching Wuthering Heights.

The questions of race and violence were omitted and scenes of domestic abuse were replaced with saucy BDSM style puppy play between Heathcliffe and Isabella (Alison Oliver), and class and the cycle of familial violence were replaced with fingers in jellied fish, egg yolks swirled around seductively, and grass being shoved into mouths.

Overall, Fennel really missed the mark with Wuthering Heights and that was made evident within the press junkets and interviews in which she explains that she could not adapt a book as "complex and as dense" as Wuthering Heights. My question is, why do it then? I think we all know why.

Goat

javier@gamereactor.eu (Javier Escribano) — Wed, 11 Feb 2026 14:00:00 +0100

Sony's latest animated movie, using a similar style as seen in the Spider-Man films and KPop Demon Hunters, brings to life the expression '{GOAT}', or {Greatest of All Time}, for a story about a goat who dreams of becoming a basketball player. Not directly affiliated with the NBA, this is nevertheless the equivalent of the F1 movie for basketball fans, but especially aimed at younger audiences also dreaming of becoming great basketball stars in the future (or whatever they dream of)... and are more used to the hyperactive and overstimulating style of storytelling of the TikTok generation, with constant visual gags popping out of the screen, loud noises, and screams.

The script basically writes itself: a kid (pun, intended) dreams of becoming a basketball star after watching a game with his mother, who urges him to dream big. When he grows up, struggling to make a living, he realises that fulfilling one's dreams isn't as easy as it sounds, especially with factors that escape our control... like the fact that he is a goat, and in this universe every basketball star is a bigger animal: rhinos, buffalos, giraffes, bears, pumas...

Eventually, an opportunity arises for the young goat, voiced by Stranger Things' Caleb McLaughlin, to prove himself. The story develops in the most predictable ways, with some forced plot points and not much depth for any of the side characters, but one thing the script really nails is understanding the power that sports have not only on those who practice them (teamwork, fulfilling one's goals and all of that), but also the effects of sports on a collective level. The communities that are built around a local team, the unity and feeling of belonging to a shared identity, the bonds created between fans that stick together regardless of the sporting results, and how sometimes all we need to overcome our obstacles is the support of others.

Visually, the film is stunning, as we have come to expect from Sony Pictures Imageworks. It features the same style of mixing 3D animation with a traditional 2D feel, but the good thing is that it doesn't feel like a copy of Spider-Man, The Bad Guys, or KPop Demon Hunters, but stands on its own: it's a bit less flat and smoother than other similar movies, which sometimes feel too stylish for their own good and are exhausting to watch.

The designs are also excellent. We have had too many modern, futuristic, and pristine cities populated with anthropomorphic animals, and sometimes it's hard to differentiate The Bad Guys from Zootopia. {Goat}'s human-like cities, instead, are completely eaten by nature and vegetation everywhere, almost looking like abandoned, post apocalyptic cities... but it makes sense, because they're animals, after all.

The basketball games are a particular highlight: thankfully, the movie is not directly affiliated with the NBA, so they have more freedom to go nuts with fantasy courts that would fit right at home in a Mario Basketball game (we haven't had any of those in a few years, what's going on Nintendo?), with courts filled with vines, melting ice, and lava rivers.

The only (but noticeable) stain on the fantastic visual design is the egregious product placement of a car brand I'd rather not say, with close ups of photoreal cars looking completely out of place... and of course, being a Sony movie, there are PlayStation 5 (Slim model) consoles everywhere.

Overall, {Goat} is not a revolutionary film by any means, and it's far from Sony Animation's more audacious and ingenious films. But it's a solid and stylistically very original retelling of a classic underdog story, which has been told hundreds of times, exactly the kind of narrative every sport fan loves, and the kind of story that inspires us, with the film also wisely putting the focus on the power that sports have in a local community: more than a team to support, a family to belong.

It would have been brilliant if that aspect was explored with a little more depth, instead of rushing a very undercooked third-act plot twist that also feels incongruous. But {Goat} always remains entertaining, charming, funny (if perhaps a bit tiresome with the accumulation of gags and Gen Alpha references), and visually gorgeous. Younger audiences, especially those fans of basketball, will probably leave the theatre in awe and inspired, and that's the most important thing for a movie like this.