Apparently I blinked and the 1998 chick flick “Practical Magic” developed a huge cult following. The film, about witch sisters Sally (Sandra Bullock) and Gillian (Nicole Kidman) Owens, came out 28 years ago, made only $40 million at the domestic box office, scored a mere 31% on Rotten Tomatoes, and I can’t recall ever hearing anyone speak affectionately about it. And yet not only was there a call for a sequel in 2026, the resulting film was the first to win a weekend over “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” (okay, only “after” a six-week run of dominance, but still…). What kind of spell has this franchise cast on the moviegoing public?

            The Owens sisters, along with their kooky aunts Franny (Stockard Channing) and Jet (Dianne Wiest), come from a long line of witches that love extending their bloodline, but hate… love. Or at least romantic love, as a jilted long-ago relative cursed the women of the family to lose their male partners. As a result, Sally’s children, Kylie (Joey King) and Antonia (Maisie Williams), have lost both their father and the stepfather that Sally found for them at the end of the first movie. Sally wiped their memories as children so they would never know the temptations of practicing magic, but the curse still applies. Now Kylie has a boyfriend, Gideon (Xolo Maridueña), and Sally can’t figure out a tactful way to tell her daughter that, for his own good, she can’t love him.

            Sally waits too long and tragedy befalls Gideon, though there’s a sliver of hope that he can be saved. Kylie finally learns of her heritage and the curse, falls out with her mother, and storms off to England, home of her ancestors, to see if she can break the curse with the help of local escort Tom (Solly McLeod). Sally tries to track her down, also travelling to England and taking Gillian along, ostensibly because she needs help but really because the movie needs Bullock and Kidman together so they can squabble for comic effect. They enlist the help of a professor (Lee Pace) who may or may not have ulterior motives and who may or may not be a potential third husband for Sally if that pesky curse can be broken for real.

            The movie is, in its best moments, agreeable and little more. I’m not saying that the appeal of Bullock and Kidman playing witches who share the ins and outs of sisterhood is completely lost on me. The two have good chemistry and some genuinely funny and touching moments. And when they’re sharing the screen with wily veterans Channing and Wiest, those genuine moments are amplified. I get why people like the low-stakes scenes of these four just playing off one another, with magic thrown in for flavor. The problem is that these movies can’t “just” be about these women enjoying happy hour.

            Like its predecessor, “Practical Magic 2” falters when it tries to deliver more than the laughs and tears that people expect. In other words, it doesn’t work as a thriller. The first movie really lost its balance once murder entered the picture, and this one similarly topples with all the mystery surrounding the curse and an evil scheme to burn one of the family at the stake. There’s so much lore and so many secrets that have to be uncovered that the film is over two hours long. I was chanting, “Just end already” like an incantation by the time the credits rolled. By taking up so much time, this movie offers up too much of even the stuff that does work, and goes far overboard with the stuff that doesn’t.

Grade: C

            “By Any Means” is a movie about two disparate FBI employees that can’t decide if it wants to be a “Buddy Cop” movie or not. The pair are mismatched, but are they “comically” mismatched? The pair banter, is there enough banter to qualify for the “Buddy Cop” label? There’s action, but is the action too violent and intense for a term as casual as “Buddy Cop”? The result is an uneven tone that makes the movie too dark for matinee action fans and too ridiculous for true-crime aficionados.

            The movie takes place in 1966, primarily in Mississippi. Local agent Wayne Strider (Yahya Abdul Mateen II) is eager to prove that he, as a Black man, can handle more than a desk job. He also wants to help in the investigation into the murder of civil rights activist and personal friend Vernon Dahmer (Giancarlo Esposito). His boss (David Strathairn) notices that Black neighbors of Dahmer are unwilling to talk to white agents, but maybe they’ll cooperate with Strider. The agent is given a special off-the-books assignment that requires some investigating, though he is mostly in the service of informant Gregory Scarpa (Mark Wahlberg), a New York mobster known for uncondoned methods of getting answers. For different reasons, neither Strider nor Scarpa is particularly welcome in Klan-infested 1960’s Mississippi, though it’s not like they’re conducting the investigation to make friends.

            Scarpa has certainly shown up to be one half of a pair of Buddy Cops. Everything from his hair to his sunglasses to his drinking and womanizing, indicates that he is the “wild” one of the team. And that’s just his first impression. He’s also got a mean mouth, a short fuse, and an itchy trigger finger. The man starts putting up a body count much earlier than Strider expected. He’s not much more merciful in his interrogations, with the investigation rarely moving forward without information soaked in blood. Then again, at least he’s getting the information, which Strider would never be able to get going by the book.

            Strider and Scarpa settle into a rapport, though Scarpa is casually racist and says he doesn’t care about the investigation outside of his specific assignment. Strider eventually learns to give verbal abuse as good as he gets. He even teaches Scarpa an epithet for white people that he doesn’t already know. I found it hard to believe that Scarpa wasn’t familiar with the term, or at least be able to easily guess its meaning from context. His ignorance in this scene is about as embarrassing for the movie as Dr. Don in “Green Book” being befuddled by fried chicken.

            When it comes to the investigation, there’s no learning from each other, Scarpa 100% brings Strider over to his side of using violence to get what he wants. And there is a lot of violence. Interrogation scenes see suspects begging Scarpa to kill them, but he won’t end their suffering that easily. Granted, these men are always perpetrators of horrific violence themselves, which just means that all “action” sequences in this movie are a rough watch.

            I get the point of making the violence in “By Any Means” so ugly, there are no winners in a hate-based war. I also get the point of making the character of Scarpa so unlikeable (provided it does the real-life Scarpa justice), sometimes assets to justice have to come from the dregs of society. But did this movie have to take so many cues from lighter Buddy Cop movies, as if it couldn’t sell itself as something heavier? And did it have to whiff so badly on its few attempts at levity? The film takes itself both too seriously and not seriously enough, working occasionally, but not consistently. It never quite finds the means to elicit laughs “or” screams.

Grade: C

            The big drawback to getting in an advance review of “Coyote vs. Acme” last week is that “Insidious: Out of the Further” is even less relevant this week. The horror film toppled from second place to fourth at the domestic box office, behind even the seventh weekend of “The Odyssey,” while “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” continues to dominate at #1. Fortunately, that drawback is offset by the knowledge that the film was never worth much attention anyway.

            If there’s one horror franchise that loves its jump scares, it’s “Insidious.” The 2010 original sold itself with a trailer that included a jump scare after it had supposedly concluded - not “at” the last moment, like a lot of horror trailers, but “after” the last moment, when the audience thinks they have a beat to rest. The film itself had a gnarly jump scare too, with its infamous red demon appearing in a drably-colored, but well-lighted scene with multiple characters in the daytime, also a setting where viewers think they can lower their guard. But that film also boasted performances by Patrick Wilson and Rose Byrne and an originality to its world. “Insidious: Out of the Further” is the sixth installment in the franchise, it doesn’t boast greats like Wilson and Byrne, and fans very much know what to expect from these films at this point.

            We open with a sequence where nine-year-old Gemma (Charli Penton) comes home to a mother (Laura Gordon) who manages a few loving platitudes, but is clearly out of sorts. The mother attacks the child before locking herself in a bathroom, which doesn’t end well. In the present day, adult Gemma (Amelia Eve) is a single mother determined to be better to her own daughter, Maya (Island Austin). She’s present for her at the beginning and end of every school day and talks to her as much as possible about every subject except her late, presumedly-mentally-ill grandmother. This being an “Insidious” film, it’s not long before strange things start happening: old toys reappear after being missing for decades, suspicious people are seen around the neighborhood, and Gemma starts having scary dreams that may or may not be dreams.

            Things ramp up. Dentist Gemma has an unsettling appointment with one of the new neighbors (disappointing scares in the rest of the movie aside, people uncomfortable with dentistry “will” be freaked out by this sequence). She gets unreasonably lost in a coffee-table-sized blanket fort and barely escapes with her life. Her cop boyfriend Nick (Brendon Parea) doesn’t believe her when she says she’s in danger. Franchise mainstay Dr. Elise Rainier (Lin Shaye) does, but she can only be so much help considering she’s been dead for over ten years. Eventually Gemma learns that all the scares are because her bloodline has ties to the purgatory-like realm known as The Further and that she and Maya are being targeted by cult leader Cyrus Lam (Sam Spruell), who is supposed to give off main-villain energy, but is somehow less scary-looking than any of his followers.

            Like many horror movies, “Insidious: Out of the Further” is at its scariest in its early stages when we don’t know what’s going to pop out. We know that “something” is going to pop out, which itself depletes the scare, but we don’t know what and how. Once the veil has been pulled back on the villains and their motives, the film can’t be scary or exciting to save its life. Even a returning familiar face (other than Lin Shaye’s) couldn’t get a reaction out of my theater. And the non-horror action wasn’t pulling me in. I’m sure the actors are doing their best, but there’s not much interesting about the umpteenth horror setup with a parent, a kid, and generational trauma. After this film, I ask that the “Insidious” franchise go away and stay even Further away than before.

Grade: C-

            The dialogue-free Road Runner/Wile E. Coyote cartoons are my favorite of the Looney Tunes. No jokes centered around annoying accents or speech impediments, just pure physical comedy about a hapless carnivore and his Ahab-like obsession with catching and eating a skinny flightless bird. Although the cartoons are ridiculous, they follow strict rules, outlined by creator Chuck Jones. Rules include the action always having to take place in the American Southwest and the Road Runner always having to stay on the road. Oh, and the coyote can only use devices provided by the unseen Acme Corporation. These devices’ failure, along with the coyote’s own ineptitude, must always be the cause of the villain’s downfall, which usually takes the form of an actual fall from a great height.

            New live-action/animation hybrid “Coyote vs. Acme” sees the coyote finally have enough of the technology giant’s faulty products. He enlists Albuquerque attorney Kevin Avery (Will Forte), a lawyer so unambitious that he rarely settles for more than three figures, to sue the corporate behemoth for decades of defectiveness. I would have suggested a different small-time lawyer from Albuquerque, but I guess this isn’t a universe where they can just Call Saul. 

Even with his loyal niece Paige (Lana Condor) supporting him as an intern, the deck is stacked against Avery. Acme has a powerful legal team led by undefeated hotshot Buddy Crane (John Cena). His accident-prone client is unsympathetic, especially since as a cartoon, he can’t sustain lasting injuries, putting in doubt how much damage the backfiring products have really done. Also, the key witness is going to have to be the only other being in the vicinity when the products failed: The Road Runner himself. How will Avery ever get the bird to testify on behalf of an enemy that has always tried – and is, in fact, still trying – to eat him?

Avery and Wile E. do have one thing on their side: the truth. Acme CEO Foghorn Leghorn has indeed been exploiting cartoon characters via defective products for years. There’s a complex conspiracy in play, and other Looney Tunes characters are part of it. Daffy Duck was a product tester driven insane by unsafe working conditions. Tweety Bird is being forced to work as an Acme spy against his will. An animated version of Peter Lorre was a scientist silenced for knowing too much. As for the mysterious whistleblower secretly leaking information to Avery… let’s just say the movie’s setting of Albuquerque is where he should take a left turn.

It’s hard to talk about “Coyote vs. Acme” without mentioning the rough road the movie had to its release. To make a long story short, Warner Bros. Discovery kept the completed film from release for three years so it could take a tax write-off. The film might never have been released at all had distributor Ketchup Entertainment not bought the rights for $50 million. That Warner Bros. Discovery tried to deny the public any completed film with years of effort behind it is disgraceful, but that it was this gem of a movie is downright dethpicable.

“Coyote vs. Acme” is the best Looney Tunes-related output in decades. The classic physical comedy is so sharp, it’s like the characters spent every day since the last Chuck Jones-directed short in 1963 training for this movie. It also hits some surprisingly strong emotional beats about Coyote and Road Runner needing each other as nemeses. I can’t say it always works as a legal thriller, and some of the logic gets murky as mediums are blurred, but overall this movie is a lot of fun. I hope it makes a lot of money for Ketchup Entertainment and shames Warner Bros. Discovery for treating it – and Looney Tunes fans in general – so poorly.

            “The End of Oak Street” is a creature feature about a seemingly-idyllic suburban family that is secretly going through some hard times. Those times become more hard and less secret when their neighborhood is attacked by dinosaurs. It’s like a “Jurassic Park” movie, except it doesn’t have to come up with a way for its characters to go to an island filled with dinosaurs – the dinosaurs conveniently come to them.

            Greg (Ewan McGregor) and Denise (Anne Hathaway) Platt raise their teenage children Audrey (Maisy Stella) and Brian (Christian Convery) on Oak Street in the sickeningly sweet suburb of Flowervale, MI in 1982. Beneath all the sunshine and roses, the family is hanging on by a thread. Greg has lost his full-time job and is delivering pizzas to make what little cash he can. Aspiring author Denise is working on a novel about an unfulfilled housewife with a loser husband, and Greg isn’t happy about it. Audrey is about to lose all of her friends to college while she stays in the same town. Brian is having trouble with a bully and struggling to talk to his crush Jeannette (Jordan Alexa Davis). But the big problem is that the parents are on the edge of divorce and the kids hate being caught in the middle.

            Unrelated to the various personal dramas, strange things start happening in the vicinity. Bright lights flash. Pets go missing. Giant piles of dung appear in neighbors’ backyards. Could it be some sort of elaborate prank? Or is the neighborhood, thanks to a series of unexplained wormholes, gradually switching places with a patch of land from 200 million years ago? There wouldn’t be a movie here if it was the former, so of course it’s the latter.

            Yes, the area is soon infested with dinosaurs, and the new residents are less pleased to “meet” their new neighbors as they are to “eat” them. And there’s no driving away, as all roads have been broken by… let’s say plate tectonics. The family, along with a sadly-orphaned Jeannette, are going to have to work together to survive. Can they get through this crisis when they were already having trouble getting through their daily lives?

            I wasn’t digging the “nearly-broken family” dynamic. Action and disaster movies have been milking this trope for decades, and this one doesn’t really bring anything new to the table. If anything, it’s a particularly tame version of what can go on behind closed doors. But I was digging the dinosaurs. We get nice, long, well-lit shots of the creatures, with very little cheating by way of darkness, rain, or other obstructions. Action sequences are harrowing, a few laughs are eye-popping, and there’s more violence here than in a typical PG-13 movie in this era (though it probably would have gotten a mere PG in 1982, the year that brought us “Raiders of the Lost Ark”).

            It took me a long time – too long, in fact – to get invested in “The End of Oak Street.” The Platt family drama was just too uninteresting for too much of the movie, and it loses my recommendation because of it. But that doesn’t mean that the dinosaur action isn’t some of the best action, dinosaur-related or otherwise, that I’ve seen in a long time. I can completely understand someone else thinking that it saves the movie for them, it just doesn’t for me. This movie came very close to winning me over, but by the time the credits rolled, I was happy to have reached the end of “Oak Street.”

Grade: C

            It takes a very generous suspension of disbelief to enjoy “One Night Only.” The film is set in a not-too-distant future where premarital sex is outlawed, save for one night a year. Comparisons to “The Purge” are inevitable, which to me raises an interesting question: Which would lead to more violent crime in this country – one night of legalized violent crime, or gradually-building sexual frustration on all but one night?

Never mind that such laws would never in a million years be passed, enforced, or obeyed. The characters in this film – which takes place in a fully-recognizable New York City and not some bleak dystopian fantasy world – accept that the law is set in stone, and occasionally complain about it, but we never see any serious resistance. That’s a big strike against the film right off the bat – it’s hard to identify with anyone in this world because everybody is inherently ridiculous enough to go along with this law.

            To be fair, this film is not about the 364 days a year where this law wouldn’t work, it’s about the one upside, the lone night where all the single people are allowed to go crazy. And go crazy they do, with almost every shot in the movie showing people hooking up, in at least the background. Of course, it’s all in a tame R-rated way with the naughtiest bits out of view of the camera. I shudder to think what this movie would have looked like if it took the X-rated approach, though that movie would have at least been memorable. As it is, I probably won’t forget the weird premise anytime soon, but I’ll probably have forgotten the title of this movie by year’s end.

            The movie follows traditional rom-com characters Owen (Callum Turner) and Allie (Monica Barbaro). He’s a pizza cook who works too hard. She’s a singer who has stage fright. He has a girlfriend (Maya Hawke) who treats him badly and tells him he’s on his own for finding a partner for tonight. She’s not that serious about finding someone. Both have friends and family who tell them that they need to lighten up and have some fun. They bump into each other a few times while on separate adventures, initially having animosity that turns into a rivalry before considering that maybe they should be together. Will they become a couple, physically or otherwise?

            The good news is that Turner and Barbaro are sweet enough leads. I was digging their chemistry and interactions with one another. They’re basically having a PG-13 relationship while the world around them is super R-rated (though not as “hard-R” as it probably wants to be). It’s all corny, in traditional rom-com fashion, but mildly engaging, especially when compared to what else the movie has to offer.

            The bad news about “One Night Only” is pretty much everything else about the movie. I can poke holes in the premise all day, but the real problem is that the film wants to be both raunchy and edgy, but it can only manage the former. Sex gags permeate the movie (let’s just say it’s really hard to procure protection at the last minute in this world), but they’re oddly toothless. Director Will Gluck previously made “Anyone But You,” an R-rated romantic comedy that I thought would have worked better without its cruder elements. This movie doesn’t work because it doesn’t have much cruder elements. Even though I champion the film’s cleaner moments, they would mean more if they were contrasted with dirty moments that were actually good at being dirty.

Grade: C-

            When we last left Peter Parker aka Spider-Man (Tom Holland) back in 2021, he had to submit to a spell from Doctor Strange that would make the world forget he ever existed. His Aunt May (Marissa Tomei) had died, so he had no family left, but he had to watch his friends Ned (Jacob Batalon) and MJ (Zendaya), go off to college without him, blissfully unaware of what they meant to him.

            As we rejoin Peter in “Spider-Man: Brand New Day,” he’s mostly turned himself over to superhero work full-time. There are plenty of dangers around New York City, from minor thugs to supervillains like Scorpion (Michael Mando) to people that just need rescuing. Peter is always happy to swing in and save the day as Spider-Man, but the years of anonymity are taking their toll on the human side of him.

            Peter has some help. He coordinates with Detective Jean DeWolff (Liza Colón-Zayas), as a liaison to the NYPD. A supposedly-benevolent organization called Damage Control, led by Bill Metzger (Tramell Tillman) deals in superhero affairs. Fellow vigilante Frank “The Punisher” Castle (Jon Bernthal) keeps an eye on things, though Peter disagrees with his violent tactics. If he gets really desperate, he can call upon Yelena “Black Widow” Belova, the leader of the New Avengers. Even Bruce “The Incredible Hulk” Banner (Mark Ruffalo) is still in play, wearing a device that prevents him Hulk-ing up, though it can be disabled. But these people are “allies” at best, Peter misses having friends.

            Eventually a threat presents itself that stumps Peter, his allies, and even his enemies. Somebody is possessing the bodies of whoever they please – often average citizens, though it can be a familiar face if specific deception is required - and wreaking havoc throughout the city. Their ultimate target seems to be Damage Control, which itself may not be on the up-and-up, as if Spider-Man battling the company’s ninja security team in all the film’s advertising wasn’t enough of a giveaway. The person behind the possessions is a shadowy figure, and it’s little secret that Sadie Sink of “Stranger Things” has been cast in a shadowy role, so the real question is, who is this character beyond someone played by Sadie Sink?

            Peter tries to keep from becoming possessed himself, but his biology betrays him and soon the villain learns that he’s still pining after MJ. He tries saving her impersonally as Spider-Man, but it soon becomes apparent that Peter Parker can’t stay out of her life forever. And this leads to some good conversations about what these characters are, what they’ve been, and what they can and can’t be going forward. It’s some of the best acting I’ve seen from the MCU in a long time. Also, Bernthal with his jaded attitude is everything you could want in a perfectly-cast Punisher.

            And yet, I’m not recommending “Spider-Man: Brand New Day.” It’s an apologetic sort of non-recommendation, as the movie does a lot right, especially with its three(!) carryovers from “The Odyssey.” But for every scene where the movie admirably lets the actors and dialogue breathe, there are too many more that are just dull MCU retreads. Like how Damage Control is just the latest corrupt human organization to think that they can get away with crimes against superpowered individuals. Or how the villain is temporarily stopped the way most MCU villains are stopped in this era. Or how characters like (the new) Black Widow and The Hulk are wedged into the film to remind fans that they’re still a part of this franchise despite the story not needing them. Or, perhaps worst of all, how the film seems preoccupied with setting up more MCU installments down the road than making this installment particularly memorable. Compared to the satisfaction I got from 2021’s “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” this movie… I won’t say “doesn’t have legs,” but is maybe a few legs short of an arachnid.

            “The Invite” is one of those movies that is basically just a filmed stage play. An unnecessary prologue aside, the whole thing takes place in a single apartment with four actors doing things that don’t require movie magic. For a movie like this to work, it needs to be really funny or powerful. It… comes close.

            Joe (Seth Rogen) and Angela (Olivia Wilde, also the film’s director) are an unhappily-married couple. Their interactions with one another range from “snippy” to “hostile.” They don’t get a divorce ostensibly for the sake of their daughter, but it’s really more about complacency and laziness. And their sex life has been nonexistant for years.

            They invite their upstairs neighbors, Piña (Penelope Cruz) and Hawk (Edward Norton) over for dinner to thank them for putting up with some recent renovations, and to maybe have a word with them about the noise from their very active sex life. The new friends are willing to keep the noise down, but also willing to let Joe and Angela get in on the fun. The titular invite is to swing. Shenanigans, arguments, and all manner of awkwardness ensue.

            Almost all of the pieces are in place for “The Invite” to work as a viewing experience. The cast is certainly funny, talented, and most of all, game. But there’s one hurdle that the movie can never quite overcome, and that’s that it isn’t very cinematic. It’s not that I’m incapable of recommending a movie like this, but I need everything verbal to practically set my soul on fire. Sadly, like Joe and Angela, this movie is missing a certain spark.

Grade: C

            “Evil Dead” is a horror franchise that started out low-budget and shlocky in the 80’s, and has grown to be trusted with more resources as its films take themselves more seriously. It sounds like a welcome form of maturity, but it isn’t. The films aren’t fun anymore, and “Evil Dead Burn,” which insists on wedging a domestic violence storyline into its gross-out horror narrative, is the least fun yet.

            Alice (Souheila Yacoub) was married to the abusive William Price (George Pullar) until he was killed by a Deadite, an evil entity that sometimes kills people, and sometimes turns them into zombies. Now she has to survive William’s funeral and a dinner with the dysfunctional Price family at their dilapidated lake house. The definition of “survive” goes from figurative to literal when the Deadite starts infecting various family members, forcing Alice to turn violent against the people that arguably made William violent long before the Deadite.

            “Evil Dead Burn” is just ugly, with washed-out browns and grays everywhere. The special effects are shoddy, but not in an endearing practical way like the “Evil Dead” of the 80’s. The violence is occasionally inventive, but more often just pointlessly excessive. And the domestic violence angle just comes off as an attempt to give the film substance as a requirement, as opposed to a necessary part of the creative vision. At this point, I’m ready to just let “Evil Dead” as a franchise burn.

            Few film adaptations require more ambition than Homer’s “The Odyssey,” the quintessential epic. And perhaps no filmmaker has been more ambitious this millennium than Christopher Nolan, the man who told an entire story backward with “Memento,” conquered the superhero genre with his “Dark Knight” trilogy, and dominated the Oscars three years ago with “Oppenheimer.” If anyone can handle a challenge as vast as “The Odyssey,” it’s Nolan. I can report that he indeed succeeds in the challenge… to a degree.

            This being a Nolan movie, it should come as no surprise that the movie plays around a lot with chronology and time progression (see also: the competing one-hour/one-day/one-week/one-month storylines in “Dunkirk”). Basically, the movie splits its time between King Odysseus (Matt Damon) of Ithica taking 20 years to fight and then return from the Trojan War, and his family toward the end of that 20 years needing to do something about vacant throne and the glut of scheming suitors squatting in the castle hoping to wed the possibly-widowed Queen Penelope (Anne Hathaway) so they can become king as the expense of rightful heir Prince Telemachus (Tom Holland), Odysseus’s son.

            Odysseus wins the war with the help of some underhanded tactics that displease the gods. His trip home is then cursed with a series of winds and storms that blow his ships off course, plus deadly detours involving a Cyclops, giant Laestrygonian warriors, soul-piercing Siren songs, a witch (Samantha Morton) that turns his crew into pigs, and other nasty surprises. Less nasty is the several amnesia-ridden years he spends marooned on an island with the nymph Calisto (Charlize Theron), but a delay is a delay.

            Back on Ithica, suitors are overrunning the palace, and Penelope and Telemachus are at their wits’ end. They can’t just order them to leave, because their royal duties require them to be accommodating to strangers, but those rules were designed to help humble paupers, not these well-off freeloaders. Telemachus could assume the throne, but he’d become a target for assassination, and Holland doesn’t exactly have spider powers in this movie. Penelope could remarry, and suitor Antinous (Robert Pattinson) is at the front of the line if she makes that choice, but she really wants Odysseus to return and set things right. But how long can she be expected to wait?

            Technically, Nolan is at the top of his game here. The threats are scary, the soundtrack is pulse-pounding (from what I’ve gleamed, this is many viewers’ favorite aspect of the movie), and the scenes on boats do a really good job of putting the viewer right in the middle of the action, which is a nice way of saying they made me seasick. He even provides some insight into Odysseus’s internal struggle that I’ve been told most versions of the story do not. So I’m recommending the movie, there are no worries there.

            But while I am recommending “The Odyssey,” I can’t help but also relay some disappointment. Granted, there was an enormous amount of pressure on this film given the prominence of both the director and the source material, and any product assembled by a mere mortal – even Christopher Nolan – was bound to be disappointing on some level, but it’s not just that. Namely, did the movie have to be so long and meandering? Some will be quick to jump in and say yes, those qualities are synonymous with “The Odyssey” and it would be weird if Nolan’s version wasn’t like that. But I felt there were stretches – mostly toward the end when a plan by Odysseus needs to be put into action – that could have used some tightening. It’s as if Nolan couldn’t stand to have his film labeled as “efficient.” The result is a film that I can’t label as anything but inefficient. I knew going into “The Odyssey” that a certain inefficiency was to be expected, but I thought Nolan would be able to make me feel that the inefficiency was necessary.

            I am well aware of the case against Disney’s live-action remake of its 2016 animated hit “Moana,” namely that the original film is less than ten years old and doesn’t need a remake, and also that  Disney live-action remakes are lazy cash-grabs in general. And I agree with a lot about that argument. I’d rather see Disney put its resources into developing new ideas instead of rehashing old ones, especially when it means trading the magic of Disney animation for the limitations of live-action. At the same time, no amount of discouragement – of which I offer a lot – can stop Disney from making and releasing this movie, and the movie they’ve made and released isn’t terrible.

The story remains the same. Moana (Catherine Laga’aia), teenage daughter of Chief Tui (John Tui) and his wife Sina (Frankie Adams), is destined to one day take over her island home, but is told she must never go out on open water. Her wise grandmother Tala (Rena Owen) encourages her to take her duties seriously, but also to think for herself if strict adherence to tradition isn’t working. The island comes to be in trouble, and only returning the heart of petrified goddess Te Fiti will save it. Fortunately, Moana has had the heart since childhood (she earned it as a reward for compassion toward the ocean and its creatures), so she sets out on an unprecedented seafaring expedition to return it.

Moana’s mission requires her to team up with exiled demigod Maui (Dwayne Johnson, reprising his role from the original, but now in live-action), who isn’t keen on crossing paths with old enemy Te Fiti. Together they have to keep other parties from stealing the powerful heart for themselves, such as coconut-like pirates the Kakamora and greedy crab Tamatoa (Jemaine Clement, also reprising his role in voice only). Then there’s Te Fiti herself, who is so mistrustful of humans and demigods that she fights our heroes even when they’re trying to do something as helpful as returning her own heart.

It’s when the action kicks into gear that the movie doesn’t fare well. For most movies I’d say the opposite, that I prefer it when the first act stops plodding along and we get to the action. But the second and third acts in this film differ so little from the original that it’s just a matter of waiting for the same beats from 2016. I know “I’ve seen this all before” is a cliché for critics, but in this case it’s especially accurate and appropriate.

While I’m talking about the movie’s lesser points, I need to bring up Dwayne Johnson. In 2016, I was thrilled that the pro wrestler known as The Rock had a juicy part (and even a song!) in the Disney canon. But he’s really lost a step since then. His jokes sound forced (not helped by, again, being carbon copies of jokes from ten years ago) and his body is unnaturally puffy, a result of the effects team going overboard in giving him sentient tattoos. Speaking of unnatural special effects, animal sidekicks Pua the pig and Heihei the chicken also look terrible, and even the water isn’t as… fluid as it should be.

With all of these problems that I can completely understand being deal-breakers for other critics, why am I recommending this version of “Moana”? The answer is simple: Moana. Or, less simply, Moana and her family dynamic back on the island. The first act of the movie gives us four good characters with passion and motivation. The remake really steps up its game in fleshing out these characters now that they have actual flesh. Of course, the standout is Laga’aia, matching the charm of original Moana Auli’i Cravalho every step of the way. Laga’aia and Cravalho combine their spirited voices for a song that plays over the credits, which is just enough to earn this film a recommendation by the hair of a coconut.

Grade: B-

            “Minions & Monsters” is the seventh cinematic outing for the Minions, and the third where they take center stage, as opposed to playing backup for former supervillain Gru. The jellybean-like animated gibberish-spewers all voiced by Pierre Coffin are once again taking the prequel route, as their story is told by a modern-day movie studio tour guide (Allison Janney), though a further framing device modifies even that context.

            At the beginning of the story, the Minions are once again searching the world for a new home in their inexplicable quest to serve the most despicable master possible despite not having an evil bone (or possibly any bones) in their bodies. A hulking cyclops seems like a good candidate (let’s see if this movie and “The Odyssey” in two weeks lead to a rise of cyclopes in pop culture), but a creative, ambitious Minion named James screws everything up for everyone. He also screws things up with a mummy, a pirate, and a wizard with a book of spells. Most of the Minions despise James’s antics, but friends Henry and Ed think he’s funny and stick by him.

            Washing up on American shores sometime in the 1920’s, the Minions see an outlaw train robber and think he’ll make a great master. They destroy half a town just to track him down to offer their services, then they find out that he’s no outlaw at all. He’s an actor, the town is Hollywood, the train robbery was part of a movie from short-tempered director Max (Christoph Waltz), and the Minions ruined the take. Having used the last of his film, Max is forced to present the picture, Minions and all, to a pair of finicky studio executives (both voiced by Jeff Bridges). Surprisingly, the execs love the Minions and order them to be put into more films. The whole tribe becomes movie stars overnight.

            To be clear, I love this portion of the film. The obvious love of – and constant references to – the golden age of Hollywood should earn admiration from any red-blooded cinema lover. I’m just not crazy about the parts that come before the Hollywood invasion and after the Minions fall from grace because they have a hard time transitioning to talkies (an appearance in “Citizen Kane” had me cracking up).

            Eventually, the Minions again need to find a new master. Most of them settle on metallic space alien Dort (Jesse Eisenberg), who is either planning to invade Earth along with his home planet, or is just another actor in a clunky suit. The Minions help Dort in a cute romance with suffragette Debbie (Zoey Deutch), who is willing to spend time with him as long as he doesn’t kick children (it’s sweeter than it sounds)

            Meanwhile, James and his cohorts, trying to stay in the movie business by turning to directing, crack open their old wizard master’s spellbook to summon a monster for their sci-fi movie. They can only manage the puny Goomi (Trey Parker), but he can summon other monsters, including insatiable blob Irene, who tries to consume Hollywood. Can the Minions clean up the mess they created? Can James complete his movie and win an Oscar? Can this franchise finally give us an installment where the Minions and/or Gru’s family go up against Will Arnett’s evil banker from the first “Despicable Me”? It’s been 16 years and it really bugs me that they’ve never seriously revisited that character.

            The movie, as always, depends on your tolerance for the Minions’ lowbrow schtick. Here they’re most effective when the movie is actively celebrating the art of schtick. But that’s just part of the movie, and the rest of the time I feel that they miss more gags than they hit. Plus the last act drags as it tries to work in too many sci-fi elements. “Minions & Monsters” comes close to getting my recommendation, but it falls short by a margin thinner than a 1920’s mustache.

Grade: C

            Krypto the Superdog isn’t very cute in “Supergirl.” I understand that the way the pup was rendered for this film involved taking a real dog (who probably was very cute) and slathering CGI all over his likeness. The result is a dog whose face looks unnatural and with whom I couldn’t connect during emotional scenes. You know your Super-whatever movie is in trouble when you can’t make a character like Krypto loveable.

            Krypto’s owner is more bearable, but just barely. Milly Alcock stars as Kara Zor-El aka Supergirl, a cousin of Superman’s who was raised on a sort of Kryptonian bunker after the planet’s destruction. Eventually the bunker couldn’t sustain life and Kara had to be sent alone to Earth as well, but unlike Superman, she knew a home and a family on Krypton only to have it all taken away. As a result, she doesn’t take to Earth like Superman did and now mostly spends her days moping around with no friends, save for Krypto.

            For this film, Supergirl finds herself teaming up with Ruthye (Eve Ridley), a teenager looking to avenge her family’s death at the hands of space pirate Krem (Matthias Schoenaerts). Krem needs to be defeated (for the murders, for child trafficking, and for poisoning Krypto and tauntingly carrying around an antidote), but Supergirl also wants to teach Ruthye that revenge through murder will not bring her the closure she seeks. On the other hand, Krem and his crew are perfectly willing to kill Supergirl, Ruthye, and anyone else they see fit. Killing him may save the lives of others, does that make it right to kill him? The Supergirl/Ruthye dynamic is based on “True Grit,” and grit-ting is what I had to do with my teeth every time the stiff, overly-formal-yet-too-immature Ruthye had a line in this movie.

            On their quest, Supergirl and Ruthye cross paths with what the film thinks is a colorful gallery of otherworldly background characters. But this isn’t Mos Eisley where the alien designs are so interesting that viewers will instantly wanf to know the backstory of every character in the room. They’re all basically indistinguishable rubbery space-takers. The exception is space biker/bounty hunter Lobo (Jason Momoa), who gets to steal some scenes. One of the few downsides of the DCEU folding a few years ago was losing Momoa’s Aquaman, but now fans can rest easy knowing that he’s landed on his feet in a more fitting role.

            Speaking of the larger DC Universe, it’s worth mentioning that yes, Superman (David Corenswet) is in this movie. He gets one of the few gags that actually works when he tries to welcome Kara to Earth, even though he only speaks English and she only speaks Kryptonian. It’s good to see that Superman is still reliable, because while I don’t dislike this version of Supergirl, this movie is clearly going to bomb and she isn’t going to be allowed another standalone movie anytime soon. If she, Krypto, and Lobo want to have any future in film, it’ll have to be as part of a Superman or Justice League movie.

            Choppy action, a disjointed story, a muddied moral, a bland villain, an annoying second banana in Ruthye, and an overall ugly aesthetic all conspire to make “Supergirl” one of the worst big-budget movies of the summer. Even Superman can’t save it and saving things is his whole reason for being. But what do you expect from a movie that can’t even get the beloved, iconic, usually-adorable Krypto right?

Grade: C-

            Simply put, “Toy Story” is my favorite movie franchise of all time. The 1995 original about cowboy doll Woody (Tom Hanks) fighting for relevance against hi-tech spaceman action figure Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen) was a groundbreaking first for computer animation – not to mention about the most fun a kid could possibly have at a theater… until three worthy sequels came along. I’ve seen the original six times in theaters – my personal record. I was disappointed that “only” the third film in the series was nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars. I didn’t think that 2019’s “Toy Story 4” was in any way a step down from its predecessors. And yet here I am, saying that “Toy Story 5” is the first significant misstep in the franchise (not counting 2022’s sorta-spinoff “Lightyear,” which I’d like to banish to infinity and beyond).

            Despite all the emphasis on the Woody/Buzz reunion in the film’s advertising, the main character of this movie is actually Jessie the Cowgirl (Joan Cusack), a doll companion of Woody’s introduced in the second movie, where she shared a tragic backstory of being abandoned by her human owner. Now owned by 8-year-old Bonnie (Scarlett Spears), along with Buzz and other familiar figures, Jessie spends her days as the youngster’s favorite plaything. But Bonnie has a hard time making human friends, despite the toys’ best efforts to add to the number of children playing in the house. Her parents decide that the best way to connect with other kids in the neighborhood is to get her on social media, which is why they present her with frog-themed tablet LilyPad (Greta Lee). Soon Bonnie is addicted to the screen, “socializing” with so-called friends that aren’t in the room, and the cowgirl has to fight for relevance against the hi-tech newcomer.

The film bafflingly never really comments on the parallels to the first movie. Couldn’t Woody say, “I’ve been through this before…” or Buzz ask, “Is this what is what is was like for you?” as he’s being replaced by something flashier? For all its reliance on nostalgia, the film is missing a lot of potential for callbacks here.

            A sleepover for Bonnie organized by LilyPad turns disastrous for Jessie, and she finds herself rejected, abandoned, and returned to the home to the home of her original owner. There’s a bright girl named Blaze (Mykal-Michelle Harris) living there now, but no time for her, Jessie has to get back to Bonnie. And the only way to do that is with the help of nearly-dead electronic potty-training device Smarty Pants (Conan O’Brien), even though Jessie is averse to all tech. Meanwhile, a reunited Buzz (who wants to marry Jessie) and Woody (taking a break from his life as “lost toy”) organize a rescue effort that will eventually lead them to a whole squadron of lost Buzz figures.

            The emphasis on helping humans make human friends is a nice touch, but too much of the movie is just a series of par-for-the-course toy rescues. Or overly-familiar jokes and bickering. Or throwaway lines given to returning characters just to remind viewers that they’re still alive (as toys go). Even heavy emotional moments are hit-and-miss, with one at a tree being suitably effective, but others (usually involving bullying) feeling like the writers just needed a “down” story beat. It’s also worth mentioning that the usually bright, agreeable, effective animation is often murky and ugly here, and not in a “haunting” way, more in a “shoddy” way.

            Don’t get me wrong, I’m recommending “Toy Story 5.” This franchise on its worst installment is better than a lot of franchises on their best. There’s enough heart and laughter and creativity here to save it… but just barely. And for someone like me who puts “Toy Story” on a pedestal, a movie that I can “just barely” recommend is a big disappointment.

Grade: B-

            All-time-great director Steven Spielberg is back with a film built around one of his most popular subjects: aliens. From the man that brought us “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” and “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial” comes “Disclosure Day,” a film about a small group of people deciding that it is time to let the rest of humanity know that they are not alone in the universe. After deeply personal project “The Fabelmans,” this is Spielberg’s return to blockbuster filmmaking. And I do see this movie as a blockbuster, just not much of one.

            The film essentially follows six characters: hacker Daniel Kellner (Josh O’Connor) and his girlfriend Jane (Eve Hewson), TV newswoman Margaret Fairchild (Emily Blunt) and her boyfriend Jackson (Wyatt Russell), organizer of key players Hugo (Colman Domingo), and shady coverup leader Scanlon (Colin Firth). Kellner has flash drives with evidence of alien activity on Earth dating back decades. Margaret suddenly has powers that are not of this world. Hugo has a full-sized replica of Margaret’s childhood home for some reason. Scanlon has alien tech that he’s ironically using against the aliens and their allies. Let the race to expose or bury the truth begin.

            Following a botched drop to get back a kidnapped Jane from Scanlon, Kellner goes on the run with sketchy help from Hugo in a storyline reminiscent of recent Oscar winner “One Battle After Another.” Jane is shocked to learn that her boyfriend knows the truth about aliens, and he’s shocked to learn that she once aspired to be a nun. At first, she’s a liability to Kellner because she’s blissfully ignorant, then she’s a liability because she doesn’t agree with his cause, then she’s a liability because Scanlon gets to her.

            Kellner knows the score with the aliens, but Margaret doesn’t. She doesn’t know why she suddenly speaks every language or knows the personal life of everyone she sees or can’t help but speak an alien tongue on air. All she knows is that some bad people are after her because of it, and the skeptical Jackson is reluctantly along for the ride. Could it have something to do with repressed childhood memories about unconvincing CGI forest animals? Kellner and Margaret meet up to have an action scene with a speeding train. We know from “The Fabelmans” that Spielberg loves speeding trains almost as much as he loves crashing them.

            For a movie called “Disclosure Day,” there’s a lot of suspense around whether or not the truth will be disclosed. Spoiler Alert: it will be, so don’t worry about it. If you want to worry about something, worry about the individual characters making it to the end alive, which isn’t a lock. Though these characters are so dull that I couldn’t get too invested in their survival.

            Spielberg usually makes good decisions about the way this film looks and sounds (Yes, frequent collaborator John Williams is doing the score), but I don’t agree with how he has the story unfold. Instead of exploring the rich potential for how humanity will respond to this mindblowing news about aliens, he focuses on the buildup to the news, which isn’t that interesting. There’s a brief mention of how people will react if their deeply-held religious beliefs are shaken, but it’s brushed aside in favor of chase antics. I would have put the disclosure at the beginning of this film and given the bulk of the runtime to the fallout.

Grade: C

            From the fifth “Scream” movie proving a shockingly strong January release in 2022 to “Backrooms” opening to over $81 million just last weekend, the past few years have been some of the best ever for the horror genre. So it makes sense that this would be a good time to revive the “Scary Movie” franchise and spoof some contemporary classics. And not only are franchise mainstays Anna Faris and Regina Hall back for this sixth installment after missing the fifth, but originators Marlon and Shawn Wayans are back after absences from the third, fourth, and fifth. Everything is in place for this silly movie to give its audience a seriously good time, but it turns out the movie itself is an unfunny joke.

            Following an actually-promising opening sequence featuring recent Golden Globe winner Teyana Taylor, the loose premise kicks in: a new Ghostface is terrorizing the families of Cindy Campbell (Faris) and Brenda Meeks (Hall). Cindy, now a parody of Jamie Lee Curtis in the recent “Halloween” reboot, has estranged daughters Sara (Olivia Rose Keegan) and Tuesday (Savannah Lee Nassif), based on sisters Sam and Tara from the 2022 “Scream” (with Tuesday also a spoof of Wednesday Addams, because Jenna Ortega has played both Tara and Wednesday). Brenda, a parody of Octavia Spencer in “Ma,” has son Brad (Gregg Wayans) and nonbinary child Dei (Sydney Park), based on twins Chad and Mindy from the 2022 “Scream.” Since the 2022 “Scream” is apparently the only movie being parodied that the filmmakers have watched closely, you can probably guess how Sara’s boyfriend Jack (Cameron Scott Roberts) and Brad’s girlfriend Elle (Ruby Snowber) figure in.

            Of course, Cindy and Brenda aren’t the only familiar faces. Brenda’s stoner brother Shorty (Marlon Wayans) still lives in town, attending the same school as his niece and nephew because he’s too stupid to graduate. Brenda’s ex-gay (though still very gay) ex-boyfriend Ray (Shawn Wayans) is also back in the picture. Other returning characters include bumbling Officer Doofy (Dave Sheridan, also the voice of Ghostface), reporter Gail Hailstorm (Cheri Oteri, here to parody Demi Moore in “The Substance”), weirdo Hanson (Chris Elliot, doing Nicolas Cage in “Longlegs”), and presumed original killer Bobby (Jon Abrahams, offering little more than a “Smile).

            The movie blows one opportunity after another to get in juicy gags about the recent glut of successful horror movies. “Sinners”? The movie can’t do more than set a series of sex jokes at a church and have corny white people show up uninvited at a black party. “Weapons”? This movie knows about “the run,” but can’t have its characters do anything funnier than yell “Six Seven” and get hit by a car, this franchise’s go-to lazy way of ending a scene. The only parody that really worked at my screening (and it did work – the audience was roaring) was of an animated movie that I’m not sure qualifies as “scary,” though I guess demons are in the vicinity of scary.

            There’s minimal heart at work in this new version of “Scary Movie,” and even less brain. I know to expect “dumb” humor from this franchise, but the people who made this movie simply didn’t do their homework. Example: a character goes over the top with emotion in one scene, and another character corrects her, “Stop trying to win an Oscar. It’ll never happen for a horror movie. Just ask Demi Moore.” Yes, Demi Moore did lose in her Oscar bid for “The Substance” (to 2022 “Scream” cast member Mikey Madison), but you know who did win an Oscar for a horror movie? Amy Madigan for “Weapons.” I could overlook that blunder – even in a movie that parodies “Weapons” – if there hadn’t been a reference in the beginning of the movie to Teyana Taylor losing the Oscar that Madigan won. How can I care about this “Scary Movie” when it doesn’t care about its own scary movies?

            Last week, I reviewed “The Mandalorian and Grogu,” which was based on a series that I hadn’t seen, but I was well-aware of its larger world and its place in popular culture. This week is “Backrooms,” which is also based on a series that I haven’t seen, and was in no way known to me until a few weeks ago. Even once I did hear about it, it struck me as an obscure, niche product for horror nerds. Yet both films are estimated to have made over $81 million at the domestic box office in their first three days. How does this movie based on a simple series of web shorts find itself performing just as well as an entry into one of the biggest franchises in history? Like everything about “Backrooms,” I don’t know, it makes no sense, but I like it.

            The film, which I understand to feature characters never before seen in the series, follows Clark (Chiwetel Ejiofor), an unhappy, unsuccessful furniture salesman in early 90’s Santa Clara. He sees psychiatrist Dr. Kline (Renate Reinsve) following an ugly divorce, but she doesn’t seem to be much help, partly because he isn’t receptive to her treatment, and partly because she’s subconsciously distracted by her own emotional baggage.

            Late one night, Clark notices light coming through a crack in the wall in the office of his store. He goes to investigate, and finds himself inexplicably transported through the wall. On the other side is a room not unlike what one would expect to find in the back of a furniture store: dull and dingy with annoying fluorescent lights and a big stack of furniture that doesn’t seem fit for the showroom. Even though it’s his store, Clark has never seen this room before, and he certainly didn’t know about the magic portal. Further investigation reveals that there are more, similar rooms beyond the first, to the point where he can’t tell where they end. Also, “something” is skulking around back there.

            Clark is able to escape the Backrooms through the same portal, and tells Dr. Kline, who doesn’t believe his far-fetched claims about walking right through a wall and a series of rooms with furniture that isn’t quite right. He goes back in with his employee Kat (Lukita Maxwell) and her cameraman boyfriend Bobby (Finn Bennett) to document the labyrinth, but things don’t go so well this time. Eventually Dr. Kline tries the Backrooms herself to find that Clark has gone mad, among other horrors.

            You never know what will be around the next corner in “Backrooms,” except that it will make you feel uneasy. Not “terrified,” necessarily, there’s not much traditionally scary about piles of laundry or an indoor stop sign. But why is there so much laundry nowhere near a laundry machine and why is there a stop sign planted indoors? It’s unsettling in a way that you can’t quite put your finger on, like the hexagonal carpet pattern from “The Shining.” Of course, there are also things in the film that are meant to be scary in the traditional sense, but I found them underwhelming. The film is at its best when it’s subtle and mysterious, like a dream where things are recognizable, and yet not.

            I mentioned “The Shining” as a clear influence on “Backrooms,” I also got hints of “Being John Malkovich,” “Cube,” “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind,” and anything directed by David Lynch. All weird movies, combined, twisted and given elaboration by writer/director Kane Parsons – a name that this movie will instantly shoot to the top of the horror genre. Some critics are saying that it’s the performances that make “Backrooms” stand out, and while the Oscar nominees do put in excellent work, I say the real star is the Backrooms themselves, in all their uncanny-valley glory, as they do not-quite-convincing impressions of actual backrooms.

            “The Mandalorian and Grogu” is coming at an interesting time in the history of “Star Wars.” It is a test to see if the franchise’s recent success on the small screen can translate to blockbuster status on the big screen. I have not seen “The Mandalorian” streaming series on Disney+, though I know of its massive success. I could even imagine a world where a “Mandalorian” movie makes enough money to have a legitimate place alongside classic installments like “A New Hope” and “The Empire Strikes Back.” That world just isn’t this one, not with this movie that nearly put me to sleep.

            The movie follows Din “The Mandalorian” Djarin (voiced and played in “face scenes” by Pedro Pascal), a helmeted human bounty hunter who resembles, but is not related to, beloved franchise character Boba Fett. His young apprentice is Grogu, a non-speaking alien who resembles, but is not related to, beloved franchise character Yoda. I’m sure the origin of the team-up is explained in the series, but for now all I need to know is that that they are a team.

            The opening moments of the movie follow The Mandalorian and Grogu as they take out a leftover Empire loyalist (Hemky Madera) running a protection racket. The sequence is filled with action, comedy, and visual spectacle on a level that the rest of the film lacks. I’ve heard some critics saying that this film could have been a few episodes of television, I’m saying that everything after this sequence could have been cut and the whole thing could have been a short that plays in front of another Disney feature. I know it’s wishful thinking, but it could have added some much-needed incentive to see a fledgling effort like… “Wish,” come to think of it.

            The rest of the story follows the team as they’re sent on a mission by their employer (Sigourney Weaver) to capture another Empire henchman who has thus far escaped justice. This person’s identity is known only to the deplorable Hutt family, and Jabba’s twin siblings won’t give up the information for free. Mando and Grogu first have to rescue Jabba’s son Rotta (Jeremy Allen White) and return him to his aunt and uncle. It turns out that Rotta has carved out a nice little life for himself on another planet as a gladiator of sorts fighting for unscrupulous promoter Janu Coin (Jonny… Coyne is the actor’s name), and he doesn’t want to leave. The “rescue” mission is going to have to be more of a “capture.”

            At first I liked the adorable, Force-enabled Grogu so much that I wondered if the movie even needed The Mandalorian. Around the two-thirds mark, I got my answer when Mando was incapacitated for a stretch. The answer is that yes, the movie very much needs The Mandalorian, because with just Grogu, this movie fell apart. Bless the writers for trying to give him a solo arc and the puppeteers for trying to make him sympathetic, but he just does not have a mode other than “cute.” He works in small, scene-stealing doses, but anything more than that is a mistake.

            “The Mandalorian and Grogu” is every action movie you’ve ever seen about a shady hero dealing with shadier secondary players, including, but not limited to, other “Star Wars” movies. Except it doesn’t quite have the ambition of other “Star Wars” movies. There’s too much blandness to the settings and periphery characters. I can see where Disney thinks this property is “too big” for television, but I can’t say this movie is theater-worthy, at least on the level that a “Star Wars” movie should be. It’s stuck awkwardly between the two tiers of entertainment hierarchy. I’m sure there will be another movie, and I encourage the creative team to step up their efforts (it won’t take much, just a few extra flourishes) so that film can unmistakably belong in theaters.

            In 1992’s “Aladdin,” one of The Genie’s few rules with wishes was that he couldn’t make people fall in love. “Obsession” is a movie about what happens when a wish for love is granted. It’s a horror movie, and a nasty one. The Genie was right to have that rule.

            Awkward dork Bear (Michael Johnston) wishes for the romantic love of his longtime friend Nikki (Inde Navarrette) on a novelty willow stick. The wish comes true, Nikki is immediately smitten with him, and Bear reaps the rewards of her vehement affection. The woman Bear loves may not have any agency in the matter, and that’s problematic if he thinks about it, so he decides not to think about it. But of course, things go south for Bear once Nikki starts inserting herself into every corner of his life and finding creepier and creepier ways to express her devotion. Her love becomes… wait for it… obsession.

            This movie gamely features some of the sickest scenes from a stalker thriller ever put to film, even if they borrow heavily from other stalker thrillers like “Fatal Attraction.” And Navarrette puts in a horror performance for the ages, both when her character is and isn’t under the magic spell. But the movie falters when the story has to give us something other than Nikki spinning further and further out of control. The ending (not Navarette’s contribution to the ending, which is excellent, but the ideas that go into the ending) is a lazy letdown and ends what had previously been an engaging horror film on such a down note that I can’t bring myself to recommend it as a whole. “Obsession” doesn’t lose my recommendation because of anything it “does,” but because of how much potential it leaves on the table.

            The 2021 “Mortal Kombat” movie was a disaster that left fans disappointed for many reasons, not least of which was that it didn’t feature any fights from the much-hyped tournament for universal supremacy. At least in “Mortal Kombat II,” we finally get the tournament. Only the first round is done somewhat properly before the thing breaks down into cheating, sneak-attack shenanigans, but it can’t be said that we are denied the tournament entirely.

            A new character, outstanding-fighter-turned-action-movie-star-turned-washout-at-both Johnny Cage (Karl Urban), is the audience surrogate into the five-on-five fighting series on a distant planet that will determine the fate of our world. Cage fights alongside Sonya Blade (Jessica McNamee), Jax (Mehcad Brooks), Cole Young, (Leweis Tan), and Liu Kang (Ludi Lin) under the mentorship of Lord Raiden (Tadanobu Asano) against the forces of the evil Shao Khan (Martyn Ford), such as his queen Sindel (Ana Thu Nguyen), stepdaughter Kitana (Adeline Rudolph), her bodyguard Jade (Tati Gabrielle), and resurrected minions Kung Lao (Max Huang) and Kano (Josh Lawson). The first movie made another mistake killing off humoristic highlight Kano, fortunately this movie brings him back so he can steal the movie all over again.

            “Mortal Kombat II” is good at things that fans want most from a “Mortal Kombat” movie: it’s creative with its fighting sequences and the jokes usually hit. But it’s bad at things that audiences want from movies of any genre: it’s hard to care about many of these characters and the story is an overcomplicated mess that can’t even stick to its own ridiculous rules. Like “The Devil Wears Prada 2,” I admire the way this sequel steps up its game from an original that I didn’t enjoy, but unlike that film, I can’t say I’m now “won over” by this franchise.

Grade: C