Connect with us

Movie Reviews

‘Rust’ Review: Defined by Tragedy, Alec Baldwin’s Cursed Western Offers Halyna Hutchins’ Story a Small but Necessary Sense of Closure

Published

on

‘Rust’ Review: Defined by Tragedy, Alec Baldwin’s Cursed Western Offers Halyna Hutchins’ Story a Small but Necessary Sense of Closure

When cinematographer Halyna Hutchins was inadvertently shot and killed by a live round on the set of “Rust” in October of 2021, it seemed unfathomable to me that production would ever be completed — let alone that I would be tasked with reviewing the finished product one day. 

“Twilight Zone: The Movie” and “The Crow” were both released in spite of similar tragedies (in addition to more recent examples like “American Made” and “Deadpool 2,” whose stunt performer deaths sparked considerably less attention), but that was before the internet had so thoroughly flattened every film into the context of its own creation. The horror took on a life of its own when second assistant camerawoman Sarah Jones was fatally struck by a freight train on the first day of filming “Midnight Rider” in February 2014, and the Facebook group that crew members started to oppose resuming the shoot had swelled to more than 10,000 members by April of that year.

'Thunderbolts'

And what happened on the set of “Rust” caused such an instant firestorm that most of the film’s production team — huddled together in a tent as police and medical personnel began to address the situation — first learned that Hutchins was dead by reading about it on their phones. 

By the time the sun went down that day, “Rust” had become inextricable from the calamity that had occurred in a small New Mexico church on the 12th day of the film’s production. And while armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed has since been convicted of involuntary manslaughter for her role in the accident, the enduring mystery as to why a live round was loaded into that weapon — and the persistent question of star/producer Alec Baldwin’s culpability in firing it — has only made it more difficult for the movie to escape the dark shadow cast by its production. 

“Rust” was completed for that very reason.

In a bid to create some closure of their own, much of the original cast and crew reunited in the spring of 2023 to finish what they had started 18 months earlier. Some only agreed to do so at the direct urging of Hutchins’ husband, who received an executive producer credit as part of a settlement, and insisted that finishing the movie was the best way of honoring his late wife’s memory and dedication to her craft. 

Advertisement

In that light, whether or not “Rust” is a good movie would seem to be irrelevant; a masterpiece wouldn’t be “worth” the loss of Hutchins’ life, and a disaster wouldn’t make her death any more senseless than it was to begin with. Still, I can’t help but feel as though reviewing the film — a film that’s about to be dumped into a handful of theaters in tandem with its low-profile release on VOD — is a critical step in the project’s transition from a cursed production to a lasting monument. 

I emphasize the purpose of reviewing “Rust” in part because there’s so little else of consequence to say about the movie, a competent but uncompelling Western whose story is saddled with the unfortunate irony of being about an accidental shooting. The triggerman is a 13-year-old orphan named Lucas Hollister (Patrick Scott McDermott, making the most of this grim opportunity), whose younger brother depends on him to protect their late parents’ Wyoming ranch from wolves and other predators. One fateful morning in 1882, Lucas aims his rifle at a four-legged trespasser, only to hit a human villain hiding just over the ridge. The law holds the boy accountable despite his lack of malice, only for Alec Baldwin — of all people — to save Lucas from a noose by murdering all of his jailers.

The two fugitives make a break for the Mexican border: young Lucas and Harland Rust, a legendary outlaw who also happens to be his maternal grandfather. Harland has never met the kid before, and — underneath his cartoonishly gruff exterior, and layers of lily-gilded dialogue like “You tell any son of a bitch who comes after me that he will shake hands with the devil himself” — it’s clear that the old man is eager to make up for lost time, even if Lucas just wants to get home to his little brother. 

And so the long-estranged relatives trek across a rugged sweep of the American Southwest, the hostility between them (very) slowly thawing into something that resembles love as they elude bounty hunters and have campfire heart-to-hearts. Those conversations largely boil down to Harland saying things like “This ain’t no game, boy,” and “There’s alive and there’s ain’t — try to focus on the former,” but even the most derivative aspects of Souza’s script resonate with an inescapable awareness of life’s cruelties. While Hutchins’ memory is obviously most palpable in the movie’s sweeping vistas, backlit interiors, and dusky skies, it’s hard not to feel her presence when sheriff Wood Helm (an effective Josh Hopkins), hot on Harland’s trail, laments the random illness that has befallen his own son. 

Advertisement

Much of Hopkins’ performance is wasted on the lopsided “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” triangle — completed by a devil-eyed Travis Fimmel as ruthless bounty hunter Fenton “Preacher” Lang — that needlessly warps “Rust” well beyond the two-hour mark, but every second of bloat is an extra opportunity to savor the beauty of a film that only exists to be looked at. Hutchins lensed a relatively small fraction of the footage that appears in the finished edition of “Rust,” as several actors had to be recast and their scenes reshot (the church scene was scrapped altogether), but co-credited cinematographer Bianca Cline has honored her late colleague by adhering to the details and lighting choices left behind in Hutchins’ notes. 

As a result, the footage is not just impressively seamless, but also beautiful throughout. The film’s digital gloss dovetails with the rustic elementalism of its genre, whereas so many other recent Westerns have forced those two aesthetics into direct confrontation with each other. Clunky as “Rust” can be when its script tries to navigate how the regrets of one generation might seed the hopes of another, the film’s photography creates a nuanced conversation between the heartbreak of the past and the promise of the future. In this case, that promise will remain eternally unfulfilled.

“Some things in this life you can’t get back, I reckon,” Harland laments. It’s the one truth that “Rust” conveys all too well. 

“Rust” is now playing in theaters and on VOD.

Advertisement

Movie Reviews

‘Jab Khuli Kitaab’ movie review: A heartfelt exploration of love’s endurance

Published

on

‘Jab Khuli Kitaab’ movie review: A heartfelt exploration of love’s endurance

Pankaj Kapur in ‘Jab Khuli Kitaab’
| Photo Credit: ZEE5

Cracks in conjugality constitute a common conflict device in Hindi cinema. Usually, the male commits the bhool and expects forgiveness. Most fissures appear early, but what if a grandmother reveals a long-buried truth? Can the man accept it as easily as he expects forgiveness? Seasoned actor and theatre practitioner Saurabh Shukla gives new meaning to a prescribed book, making us both chuckle and reflect.

Being a cinematic adaptation of his play, the constraints of the medium are not completely erased, but it shines as a heartfelt exploration of love’s endurance.

The film’s core premise revolves around a decades-old secret — Anusuya’s (Dimple Kapadia) confession of an indiscretion early in their marriage — that surfaces after she awakens from a coma. This revelation forces Gopal (Pankaj Kapur) to re-examine 50 years of trust through the lens of this buried truth as a forgotten ad hoc presence in his life threatens to become a permanent peeve. Enter Negi (Aparshakti Khurana), a young client-chasing lawyer who becomes an unlikely facilitator of tough conversations, legal proceedings, and emotional confrontations.

A still from the film

A still from the film
| Photo Credit:
ZEE5

Jab Khuli Kitaab (Hindi)

Director: Saurabh Shukla

Advertisement

Duration: 115 minutes

Cast: Pankaj Kapur, Dimple Kapadia, Aparshakti Khurana, Sameer Soni, Nauheed Cyrusi, Manasi Parekh

Synopsis: Gopal and Anusuya’s decades-long marriage is shaken by a revelation.

Though the transgression is a distant memory, its emergence shatters Gopal’s sense of shared space with Anusuya. He questions whether the life he built was an illusion. The woman he cared for seems suddenly unfamiliar. The film asks questions that may seem flimsy but persist in memory. For instance, Anusuya’s love for poetry that Gopal never really discovers, or the concept of marzi (inclination) in relationships.

Meanwhile, the revelation shakes the family unit. The parents initially try to shield the children from the truth, but the tension inevitably seeps in. Initially, it seems the son and son-in-law are bitten by the Baghban bug, but as the film progresses, the writing provides space for a dialogue on how companionship extends beyond the couple.

The film quietly reflects on the role of memory in a marriage, treating it as a central force that both sustains and disrupts long-term bonds. Gopal’s growing dementia suddenly seems like a cure for his marital problem. Without underlining, Shukla also explores the impact of the revelation on Gopal’s social psyche. Suddenly, a seemingly progressive man starts behaving like a parochial uncle, as we find dozens of them around us these days. Is it always the personal that shapes the political socialisation? Another uncle reminds us that laughing too much leads to days of sorrow, as if the Almighty has assigned us a quota of happiness.

Advertisement
A still from the film

A still from the film
| Photo Credit:
ZEE5

Kapur’s masterful control shines through in Gopal’s progression from bewilderment and stubborn pride to vulnerability and, eventually, the rediscovery of love. Over the years, Kapur has shone in the estuary of comedy that holds a tragedy in its fold. He lives the script’s shifting tones. From the tender caregiving scenes in the beginning to the profound internal shift in demeanour and body language toward the film’s resolution— the transformation feels earned and believable.

It is hard to believe Dimple as a wilting wife, but soon we realise it’s the gravitas in her voice and personality that makes Anusuya a believable picture of regret and resilience.

We know the coma is more like a metaphor, but the medical aspect is treated with a heavy hand. The plot unfolds in a somewhat linear and foreseeable way, with the revelation and its consequences following expected beats. The contrivances, the dot-to-dot mechanics of storytelling, surface in the second half as if the director is keen on arriving at the crux without peeling the layers properly. But it is the chemistry between Shukla and Kapur that prevents this bittersweet dramedy from becoming schmaltzy. 

Jab Khuli Kitaab is streaming currently on ZEE5

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

‘Hoppers’ movie review: Big ideas and smart emotional beats fuel a great adventure

Published

on

‘Hoppers’ movie review: Big ideas and smart emotional beats fuel a great adventure

In cinema logic, sharks, especially great whites, make excellent characters in animation. From Bruce in Finding Nemo to Mr Shark, the master of disguise in The Bad Guys, these apex predators turn their great gummy mouths with many pointy teeth into jolly good fellows.

In Hoppers, the 30th animation film from Pixar, there is a great white called Diane (Vanessa Bayer), who, despite being a scary assassin, has such sweet, shining eyes and a warm smile that one cannot help but grinning back.

Hoppers (English)

Director: Daniel Chong

Voice cast: Piper Curda, Bobby Moynihan, Jon Hamm, Kathy Najimy, Dave Franco

Storyline: A fierce animal lover uses a new technology to converse with animals and save their habitat from greedy, self-serving humans

Advertisement

Runtime: 104 minutes

We first meet Mabel (Piper Curda) as a little girl trying to set all the animals in school free and being sent home for her pains (and also because she bites one of the teachers trying to stop her). Her busy mother drops Mabel with her grandmother (Karen Huie) who shows her the peace and quiet that can be hers if she only stops to listen.

The glade where grandmother Tanaka teaches her this valuable life lesson becomes a special place for Mabel. Years later, after her grandmother has passed, 19-year-old Mabel is a college student and still fighting for animal rights.

Matters come to a head when the mayor of Beaverton, Jerry Generazzo (Jon Hamm) plans to blow up the glade to build a freeway. Mabel tries to get signatures from the citizenry to stop the freeway plans, but that comes to naught as people quickly turn away from the zealous Mabel.

Frustrated, with no recourse in sight, Mabel chances upon a beaver making its way to her university’s biology lab. First worried that her biology professor Sam (Kathy Najimy) is doing some unspeakable animal experiments, Mabel is nonplussed to find that Sam, with her colleague Nisha (Aparna Nancherla) and graduate student Conner (Sam Richardson), have developed a revolutionary technology to transfer human consciousness to robot animal.

Advertisement

Mabel uploads her consciousness into a robot beaver and sets off to thwart the mayor. Seeing the world from the animals’ perspective gives Mabel a unique point of view. Hoppers has jokes, chases, largeness of heart and solid science — not consciousness-switching with robot animals or flying shark assassins but the fact that beavers are the environmental engineers of the natural world.

The voice cast is wonderful, from Bobby Moynihan as the beaver king, George to Dave Franco as Titus, the prickly butterfly who becomes the insect king after Mabel accidentally kills his mum — the Insect Queen, played with terrifying grandeur by Meryl Streep.

The animals are delightfully delineated, from the spaced-out beaver, Loaf (Eduardo Franco) to Ellen (Melissa Villaseñor) the grumpy bear. The animation is lovely, with each of the animal and human characteristics clearly outlined. From the mayor’s grasping to Sam’s brilliance, Mabel’s fervour to Loaf’s stillness, and the different animal monarchs’ regality, it is all given marvellous life.

ALSO READ: ‘The Bride!’ movie review: Maggie Gyllenhaal’s glam-goth Frankenstein can’t hold its stitches

The “pond rules” ensure that the animals are not completely anthropomorphised — a sticky point in animation films where carnivores and herbivores hang together without even a sneaky licking of lips!

Advertisement

Smart, funny, exciting, honest, and touching, Hoppers is the kind of film you can watch with the bachcha party and elders alike, with a happy grin. And then there is Diane of the red, red lips and sparkly white rotating teeth — yes, Hoppers boasts that level of detailing.

Hoppers is currently running in theatres

Published – March 06, 2026 07:08 pm IST

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Is ‘Josie and the Pussycats’ (2001) Really Even A Rock N Roll Movie? (FILM REVIEW) – Glide Magazine

Published

on

Is ‘Josie and the Pussycats’ (2001) Really Even A Rock N Roll Movie? (FILM REVIEW) – Glide Magazine

The satirical romp Josie and the Pussycats (2001) is a fun movie. But is it a great rock ‘n’ roll movie?
Eh, not so fast on that second one. Welcome back to Glide’s quest for what makes a good rock ‘n’ roll movie. Last month, we looked at Almost Famous, a great launching pad because it gets so much right. And every first Friday, we’ll take another look at a rock ‘n’ movie and ask what it means in the larger pantheon. This month, the Glide’s screening room brings you Josie and the Pussycahttps://glidemagazine.com/322100/almost-perfect-why-almost-famous-sets-the-gold-standard-for-rock-movies/ts. The film is a live-action take on the classic comic-and-cartoon property of a sugary, all-girl rock trio that exists in the world of Riverdale, a.k.a. fictional home of the iconic Archie Andrews.

But this Josie has next to nothing to do with Riverdale and is instead a satire of consumerism and ’00s boy bands. A worthy target, and a topic that has stayed worthy in the quarter-century since Josie dropped. The film was not a hit, but it has become something of a cult classic (like many movies featured in this series).

The plot is fairly simple. Wyatt Frame, an evil corporate type, is making piles of money off boy band Du Jour. They start to wise up to his evil scheme and have to be… taken care of. Frame needs a new group to front his plot, which revolves around mind control to push consumer culture. Enter Josie and the Pussycats, who are about to have a whirlwind ride to the top. And along the way, foil a plot with tentacles so far-reaching they have ensnared… Carson Daly?

Josie is a fun, clever movie, but it doesn’t have a whole lot to say about real rock ‘n’ roll, unless you want to simply accept a perspective that it’s just another cynical consumer-driven product. Even that is an argument that can be made, as long as you’re willing to ignore underground and indie scenes and passionate artists making amazing music.

And it is true that this is a theme of Josie. The band triumphs at the end via their authentic music. But it somehow doesn’t feel authentic, which makes it something of a hollow victory. Let’s consider the criteria already established for a good rock ‘n’ roll movie, and how Josie delivers on that front. The first is in the characters department. The film dodges the previously established Buckethead Paradox, which states that “The real-life rock stars are so much larger than life that you can’t make up credible fictional versions. There is no way someone like Buckethead would come out of a writer’s room and make it to a screen.”

Advertisement

For better or worse, Josie dodges the Paradox by essentially embracing it. The characters themselves are cartoons, and there’s no effort at realism. Given that intent is a huge part of art, it seems unfair to call these characters “cartoons” as a criticism, and it should probably be a compliment. At the same time, they aren’t particularly memorable, which is not a great quality.

And—as a bonus—Tara Reid is perfectly cast as drummer Melody Valentine. Josie was a few years after her turn in Around the Fire (1998), an unintentionally hilarious classic that plays like a jam band afterschool special from the producers of Reefer Madness (look for this amazing film in an upcoming piece).
The acting in general is good, with Rachel Leigh Cook as Josie McCoy and Rosario Dawson as bassist Valerie Brown rounding out the band. And Alan Cumming almost steals the show as sleazy corporate weasel Wyatt Frame.

The character of Wyatt is the film’s funniest riff on a rock ‘n’ roll archetype: the sleazy, corporate manager accompanied by assorted crooked accountants. From Colonel Tom Parker to Albert Grossman to The Great Rock ‘n’ Roll Swindle. It’s all about the benjamins. Which is where the music comes in. If the music is good, that’s what makes it worth it. And Josie’s music has aged particularly well. It’s well-recorded, produced and executed. The songs are particularly catchy. The vocals are by Kay Hanley of Letters to Cleo. Much of the soundtrack sounds like a lost album from The Muffs, and one wonders why Kim Shattuck wasn’t involved.

There’s an argument that power pop was never supposed to be dangerous, and that the Muffs aren’t dangerous either. Fair on the surface, but they played real punk clubs and came from a real scene. There’s not even a hint of that in Josie. So an argument that they play pop punk (which they kinda do) is really lacking the punk part.
And it was produced by Babyface, of all people. While that doesn’t seem like it should lead to great rock ‘n’ roll, sometimes preconceptions are wrong.

That said, this is a very commercial product and sound—as catchy as it is—so maybe it’s not a misconception. Maybe the right question to ask is whether it’s all too perfect? And that’s what gives this ostensibly rock ‘n’ film a smoothed-down edge? After all, the basic ingredients are there. But part of what makes good rock good is that it feels actually dangerous. Maybe there are some actual subversive messages, or a genuine counterculture scene. And Josie simply isn’t that film. The soundtrack is fondly remembered enough that Hanley appeared live and performed the songs at a screening in 2017. That appearance also included the film’s stars Cook, Dawson and Reid.

Advertisement

It’s worth noting that while Cook and company obviously lip sync to the songs in the film, their performances are credible. They went through instrument boot camp, so they pull off the parts.

In the end, the film is primarily a satire of consumer culture. And even more strangely, is loaded with actual product placement. Clearly, the joke was intended to “hit harder” with real products, but having Target in the film constantly makes it feel like more of what it is parodying than a parody. Where’s the joke if the viewer actually pushes to shop at Target while watching the film? And if the filmmakers actually took money (which they almost certainly did)?

And perhaps that is the lesson for this month: a great rock ‘n’ roll movie needs to have something to say about the larger meaning or culture of the music. And while Josie may have a lot to say about culture in general, and it may say it in a fun and likeable way, it’s just not very rock ‘n’ roll. There’s no grit. Now, does it have some things to say about being in a band? Yes, though they are arguably true of most collaborations.

If someone in a hundred years wanted to understand early 21st century rock, Josie and the Pussycats is a bad choice. It doesn’t show the sweat of a performance or the smell of beer. But it’s a great choice for anyone looking for a light-hearted, fun watch with a great soundtrack. We could all use some sugar in our lives these days.
Join us again next month, when we’ll look at one of the inspirations for Josie, A Hard Day’s Night, the legendary first film from The Beatles

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending