Connect with us

Movie Reviews

Letterboxd’s most eager reviewers are changing cinema etiquette: ‘I was excited to pull out my phone’

Published

on

Letterboxd’s most eager reviewers are changing cinema etiquette: ‘I was excited to pull out my phone’

I completely turn my phone off when I go to the movies. Not just on silent – all the way off. I say this not because I think that I’m better than you, or that by doing so the ghost of Billy Wilder will come back to shake my hand. I consider it one of life’s little luxuries: for at least an hour and 45 minutes, I am entirely unreachable. I keep my phone off for the duration of the credits, too. It feels decadent to stay put as my fellow moviegoers slowly filter out, illuminated only by rolling text.

And, lately, the glow of the Letterboxd app.

Over 26 million people use Letterboxd, a movie-cataloguing app. Like the Criterion Collection or A24, it has become industry shorthand for a certain type of tastemaker who hypes new releases and delights in rediscovering old classics. Users rate and review movies, and the funniest or most illuminating critiques rise to the top of the page, incentivizing cinephiles to put in some effort.

On a recent trip to the movies, the credits had barely started before the man in front of me began typing his review. A few seats over, a couple sat, heads down, jotting down their respective thoughts.

Advertisement

The late film-maker David Lynch had a piece of advice: write down every great idea the exact moment that it comes. If you don’t, it could slip your mind, and, as he put it: “If you forget a good idea, you want to commit suicide.” Lynch was speaking to aspiring film-makers, but the same ethos applies to Letterboxd.

Josh Stern, a 20-year-old student in New York, always writes his reviews from his movie seat.

“If I don’t get my thoughts out quickly once the movie ends, my reviews are much less coherent and articulate,” he said. “It takes some time. I’m pretty slow, and my girlfriend doesn’t like it.”

Stern goes to the movies a lot – 182 times last year – and is on a first-name basis with the theater employees, who sometimes have to kick him out so they can start cleaning the aisles. He thinks it’s fair game to milk the credits: “When you pay for a movie ticket, credits are a part of the movie.”

Letterboxd’s most enthusiastic supporters credit the app with reviving excitement around a battered film industry, where productions are down and unemployment is up. (Letterboxd also boasts the kind of demographics brands covet – its highest cohort of users is between the ages of 18 and 24, followed by 25 to 35.)

Advertisement

Hype begets hype; eagerly awaited movies see a flurry of activity on Letterboxd immediately after the first screenings. The most-liked review of Emerald Fennell’s divisive Wuthering Heights – “emily brontë died of tuberculosis 177 years ago yet this adaptation is still the worst thing that has ever happened to her” – has more thank 50,000 double taps. The Moment, Charli xcx’s fictionalized retelling of Brat summer, produced this comparison to tabloid enemy Taylor Swift’s concert film: “eras tour documentary found dead.”

“It’s a little bit of an addiction,” said Ben Glidden, a 33-year-old New Yorker who works in marketing for women’s sports. He also likes to write reviews during the credits. “Reflecting on what you just saw, immediately after you saw it, helps with the artistic experience. It helps you grasp the key messages of a film. If it makes you feel like a warm hug, that’s not necessarily something you remember five hours down the line.”

Glidden feels most compelled to review a film if it was very good – or very bad. Case in point: he recently sat through the Chris Pratt sci-fi vehicle Mercy. “I was actually so offended by how egregiously bad it was, that I was excited to pull out my phone and give it a half-star review,” he said. (Glidden’s a tougher critic than the Guardian’s film critic Pete Bradshaw, who gave the film three stars, calling it, “ingenious and watchable stuff”.)

Dakota Chester, a 28-year-old New Yorker who works in social media, saw Arco, the Oscar-nominated animated fantasy film, at an Upper West Side theater and stuck around to write the review (“it got five stars”). He’s clocked worse behavior: people taking out their phones to Letterboxd the movie they are currently watching. “That gets on my nerves,” he said.

One of film’s most enduring urban legends recounts a screening of the Lumiere brothers’ 1896 silent short that showed a train pulling into a station. Cinema was in its infancy and – according to this debunked rumor – the shot of a locomotive heading straight toward the camera shocked the crowd so much that people ran away screaming.

Advertisement

A hundred-and-thirty years later, cinema etiquette remains just as bad. No one knows how to act in public any more, especially when the lights go down: viewers take pictures of the screen, bring in smelly food, and, as was the case during Barbenheimer summer, sometimes engage in all-out brawls.

Some have taken to social media to debate the appropriateness of Letterboxding during credits. When one TikTok user posted about her “quiet little moment” writing a review in an AMC theater after the credits ended, movie theater employees chimed in. “Pls do this in your car, as soon as the credits stop rolling we have to clean in there or we get way behind in our scheduled cleans,” one wrote. “Take this to the lobby,” another added.

Courtney Mayhew, a representative for Letterboxd, wrote in a statement: “Anecdotally, we’ve heard from members who’ve struck up conversations after noticing someone nearby on the app, sometimes leading to ongoing friendships or just a great chat about what they’ve just watched. That impulse to get your thoughts down while they’re fresh is something we understand – it’s part of the ritual for many people … And obviously, phones out during the actual film is still a cardinal sin – we’re not monsters.”

Other Letterboxd users like to let a film marinate before posting. Irene Vasquez is a 22-year-old film student who joined Letterboxd in 2018 and credits the app for helping her take movies more seriously.

Advertisement

“As I’ve seen it get more popular, it’s gamified movies for people, and it feels like everyone’s in competition to watch as many movies as possible,” she said. “I get frustrated with all the people who pull out their phones immediately to rate films, because I really value sitting with a movie and letting it sink in. I treasure that experience.”

Professional critics used to be arbiters of taste, but in a fractured, post-Gene Siskel or Pauline Kael media ecosystem, Letterboxd reviews probably do more to get young people talking to each other about films than any New York Times writeup could. Raphael Martinez, 43, who manages and programs for a movie theater in Chicago that caters to a “pretty hardcore” art-house crowd, is heartened by the app’s most immediate reviewers. “Within 20 minutes of the movie ending, we have a handful of advertisements on Letterboxd for the movie,” he said. “It helps get people to the theater and gauges community reaction to what we show.”

In the 2010s, Marvel movies conditioned millennials to stay for post-credit scenes offering breadcrumbs or plot reveals for future films in the universe. Martinez found that much more annoying than the cinephiles who stay to get their thoughts down. “People weren’t doing anything, they would just wait around,” he said. “Now, people are hanging out, engaging, and it’s more of a vibe, as opposed to simply consuming.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movie Reviews

Masters of the Universe (2026) | Movie Review | Deep Focus Review

Published

on

Masters of the Universe (2026) | Movie Review | Deep Focus Review

There’s a photo of me (below) from the mid-1980s, when I was around age 5, standing on the hood of an old Plymouth in the overgrown field behind my childhood home. I’m holding He-Man’s shield in one hand and his sword, made of yellow plastic, in the other. (Unrelatedly, I’m also wearing an Incredible Hulk shirt in the picture.) And I’m grinning with pride because I have thoroughly conquered the jalopy. The vehicle never ran again, probably because I fucking destroyed it with my sword and shield. Around that time, I also had a He-Man birthday cake and a sizable collection of Mattel’s Masters of the Universe action figures. They were my first foray into toys of this kind, later replaced by G.I. Joe, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and X-Men. However, my nostalgia for He-Man remains almost nonexistent today, perhaps because, looking back at the material, the mythology remains at once weird and unmemorable, and neither the popular animated series nor the 1987 film, Masters of the Universe, starring Dolph Lundgren and Frank Langella, holds up well. 

Over the years, Mattel has tried to revive the toy line and cartoon, but the company’s biggest effort thus far is the new feature from Amazon MGM Studios, which reportedly spent upwards of $200 million on a blockbuster-sized Masters of the Universe. If the 1980s versions of this franchise unabashedly targeted the preadolescent boy demographic, the new iteration has been reconfigured (by a sausage fest of credited screenwriters: Chris Butler, Aaron Nee, Adam Nee, and David Callaham) to adopt a more conventional mold. The movie also incorporates the last three decades of ironic reassessment: the series’ very 1980s obsession with bulging muscles; the loincloth-centric costumes, all of which look like rejected designs from Zardoz (1974); the vague eroticism between He-Man and several characters, including his nemesis, Skeletor; and the eccentricities of the cartoon, from the many heads thrown back in laughter to the bizarre characters—all of which started first as action figures (Stinkor, Mantenna, etc.), around which the writers built a lame storyline.

Despite its origins, Masters of the Universe sets out to become a four-quadrant feature, appealing to everyone, and in that, no one in particular. The story is too bloated for little children, with a 142-minute runtime that challenged the attention spans of the kids in my prescreening, who became restless after an hour. Admittedly, so did I. The material’s self-awareness and humor aren’t memorable enough to distinguish it from other, better examples in this genre, such as Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves (2023)—a movie that I enjoy more with each subsequent viewing. And director Travis Knight can’t decide whether the audience should take these characters seriously or laugh at their inherent silliness. He attempts both and does neither very well. The result did not rekindle my nostalgia for this chapter of my childhood; it didn’t create an exciting new take for audiences of all ages, either.

A protracted opening establishes the distant realm called Eternia, where sword-and-sandal heroes stand alongside robots and flying ships with laser guns. Eternia’s resident baddie, Skeletor (voiced by Jared Leto, doing an R-rolling master-thespian thing), wants the Sword of Power, which imbues its wielder with, as you might guess, power. But it’s kept in Castle Grayskull, home of King Randor (James Purefoy), who’s disappointed by his son, Adam (Artie Wilkinson-Hunt), a young boy more interested in goofing around than learning to fight. When Skeletor attacks the castle and proves victorious, the Enchantress (Morena Baccarin), the magically inclined protector of Grayskull, sends Adam away to Earth along with the coveted sword. What happens then? Did a couple of farmers adopt him à la Superman? Or did he grow up in the foster system? The writers ignore such practical questions, picking up the story years later, when the adult Adam (now a hulking Nicholas Galitzine) works in corporate human resources. After Adam finally locates his sword, which was lost when he was transported from Eternia to Earth, he eventually finds his way home with the help of his childhood friend, Teela (Camila Mendes), to retake Grayskull from Skeletor. 

Advertisement

Knight’s main source of inspiration, besides the cartoon and earlier movie, seems to be the similarly themed cult classic Flash Gordon (1980). Masters of the Universe’s music features identical-sounding Howard Blake-style guitar riffs and, to echo the original songs Queen wrote for Flash Gordon, the production uses Queen’s “Princes of the Universe” on the soundtrack. In other areas, Knight directs a conventional franchise movie with choppily edited and CGI-heavy battle scenes full of anonymous violence, lifeless chase sequences, digital backdrops resembling video-game environments, and shameless product placements for Coca-Cola and Amazon. The VFX sometimes look impressive; at other times, they look cheap and generic. Fortunately, Knight’s production also offers practical effects and prosthetics for some characters, most memorably the cyborg Trap Jaw. Knight’s secret weapon is costume designer Richard Sale, who visualizes the inherently absurd look of these characters, for better or worse, in tangible garb. The actors inhabiting the excellent costumes don’t have much to do, though. Ask yourself why they hired Kristen Wiig to voice Roboto, a bland robot character whose dialogue could have easily been performed by anyone else, or even just replaced with the beeps and boops of a Star Wars droid. When you have Kristen Wiig, use her.

Masters of the Universe movie still 2

Elsewhere, Masters of the Universe attempts to be self-aware in its irony and sexually suggestive underpinnings. There’s a running gag about how practically everyone can’t keep their eyes off Adam after he becomes his heroic alter-ego, He-Man, given his oiled-up muscles and blonde locks. But under Adam’s pink shirt, he still looks buff, making his eventual Hulk-like transformation into a muscle-bound barbarian unremarkable. Elsewhere, I liked the detail of Adam growing up on Earth and forgetting everyone’s names on Eternia, so he makes up their names based on their physical characteristics. A man with a big metal hand becomes Fisto (Jóhannes Haukur Jóhannesson), and another with a metal head-butting helmet becomes Ram-Man (Jon Xue Zhang). The writers take advantage of this with veiled dirty jokes about fisting and Ram-Man “giving head” to Skeletor’s goons. That’s about as clever as the movie gets. As for character development, there’s almost none. Skeletor, for instance, wants to be bad for the sake of being bad. His motivations are nonexistent, resulting in an obvious, uninteresting, and one-dimensional villain.  

A key series in the conservative, Reagan-era 1980s, the Masters of the Universe cartoon and previous movie valued strength and power, muscles and might. Today, that message has negative, regressive associations with the political right, which often looks at this period from a fond standpoint. To avoid alienating any part of their audience, the filmmakers desperately try to please everyone with a mild progressive commentary to counter the franchise’s original themes. Adam’s character must learn to “be a man” to please his father, King Randor, and his makeshift father figure, Man-at-Arms (Idris Elba, in a chummy reformed drunk role). But there’s also a half-hearted message that Adam, having worked in human resources, knows the value of empathy and emotional intelligence. For a while there, the movie even claims you can’t solve every problem with muscles—that is, until He-Man resolves the conflict by pummeling Skeletor with his fists. The movie’s message is ultimately nonexistent. The committee making this movie has carefully avoided any line-in-the-sand worldview, all in an attempt to manufacture a box-office hit that will please everyone and offend no one. 

That’s exactly the problem with Masters of the Universe. It’s so afraid to have a perspective or be about something that nothing onscreen has an impact. This is not to say every movie must have a substantive message. Sometimes, a mindless adventure is enough. However, even on those terms, there’s no tension or danger here because Skeletor is never all that menacing, and Adam alternates between self-parody and earnest heroism. None of the emotional beats land, not the many father-son dynamics nor the hero’s journey. And the production’s competing tones, from its intentional camp to its sword-swinging adventure, lack the balance of wit and scope that Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves so delightfully captured. For much of the runtime, I felt bored and, aside from a few chuckles at the childish humor, disengaged from everything happening. Perhaps Roboto describes the movie best when referring to life as “a series of absurdities leading to infinite nothingness.”

Photo: Brian the Barbarian

Advertisement

Masters of the Universe movie still 4

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

‘Masters of the Universe’: What Critics Are Saying About the He-Man Movie Starring Nicholas Galitzine and Jared Leto

Published

on

‘Masters of the Universe’: What Critics Are Saying About the He-Man Movie Starring Nicholas Galitzine and Jared Leto

He-Man lands in theaters Friday, and reviews for Masters of the Universe are now in.

The film, a live-action adaptation of the Mattel franchise from director Travis Knight, follows Prince Adam of Eternia, who crash-lands on Earth as a child and is separated from his Sword of Power. Raised as an ordinary man named Adam Glenn, he eventually recovers the sword and returns to save his homeland, where he faces off against Skeletor.

Nicholas Galitzine stars as He-Man/Prince Adam/Adam Glenn, while Jared Leto plays the villain Skeletor. The cast also includes Idris Elba as Man-at-Arms, Camila Mendes as Teela, Alison Brie as Evil-Lyn, Morena Baccarin as Sorceress and Kristen Wiig as Roboto.

Masters of the Universe celebrated its Los Angeles premiere last month, where the original He-Man from the 1987 film, Dolph Lundgren, praised Galitzine’s performance while speaking with The Hollywood Reporter: “You need a guy who is a leading-man type, and the muscles and the strength are secondary. You can always create that, and I think Nicholas did that. He built himself up. When I did it, it was a little more like I had the physique and had to access my boyish side to find the character.”

As of Tuesday, the movie holds a 74 percent score on Rotten Tomatoes. To find out what critics are saying, read on.

Advertisement

THR’s Frank Scheck wrote, “The film winds up feeling so much like one of those fringe festival musical theater parodies that you find yourself waiting for the characters to burst into song … Masters of the Universe touches all the fan-serving bases, with a fun cameo by a certain star of a previous film incarnation and enough post-credit sequences to guarantee several sequels. But it all comes off as terribly forced, as if everyone involved was already trying to figure out exactly how much they’ll earn signing autographs at future Comic-Cons.”

IGN’s Clint Gage wrote, “Masters of the Universe is so much funnier than I expected, and the fight scenes are choreographed and photographed in a way that gives the sequences just enough flair to make them stand out (even if they’re not revolutionizing superhero style fisticuffs on screen). While Nicholas Galitzine and Idris Elba provide the thematic structure to the film, Jared Leto’s Skeletor gives a delightfully weird and cartoonish energy to every scene he’s in.”

YouTube critic Jeremy Jahns also highlighted Leto’s performance in his review, “Standout performance and character in Masters of the Universe: Jared Leto’s Skeletor,” Jahns said. “He was the most fun happening on screen at any given time.” He also added, “It does feel like a few different movies crushed into one. A few different ideas of what a Masters of the Universe movie should or would be. And most importantly, it had these moments of heart and life lessons that I actually liked that didn’t always land because sometimes the comedy is just there to eclipse it.” 

Inverse’s Ryan Britt wrote, “The idea of navigating your childhood hopes and fears, and incorporating those things into your adult life, is — somewhat appropriately for a movie based on an old cartoon — at the heart of the film. Not everyone who goes to see Masters of the Universe will have grown up with He-Man, but this film will make you wish that you did. And, at the same time, it’ll make you feel grateful that he’s back and quite literally, better than ever.”

The Guardian’s Benjamin Lee had a less favorable take on the film, writing in his review, “Amazon’s head-scratching $200m-budgeted misfire fails to explain why so much time, money and effort has been wasted on a movie based on a toy that kids just don’t play with any more … There’s just too much distracting confusion here — from Galitzine’s unsure performance to the script’s swirl of competing tones to the very question of why this needed to exist — for it to transport us as we both hope and expect.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Movie Review – Carolina Caroline (2025)

Published

on

Movie Review – Carolina Caroline (2025)

Carolina Caroline, 2025.

Directed by Adam Rehmeier.
Starring Samara Weaving, Kyle Gallner, Kyra Sedgwick, Jon Gries, Tommy G. Kendrick, P.J. Sosko, Gregg Gilmore, Jamald Gardner, Matthew Smitley, Ed Formica, and Robert Stevens Wayne.

SYNOPSIS:

A young woman joins a charming con man on the run, leaving a trail of crime and passion as they hustle through the Southeast in search of her estranged mother.

Advertisement

The eponymous Caroline of director Adam Rehmeier’s Carolina Caroline has never properly met her mother. That woman abandoned her and her father (Jon Gries) before she was one year old. Moving to South Carolina and growing up there, it’s also safe to say that the unfulfilled Caroline, working at a local convenience store and coming home to a father with no ambitions to leave his comfortable home chair let alone get out and see the world (actively dismissing soccer in the process, suggesting that there also might be some unsurprising internalized racism given his age and having only known the South), hasn’t properly lived. 

A chance encounter with scuzzy but charming con man Oliver (Kyle Gallner, playing in the type of role he regularly excels in), which mostly consists of Caroline observing a mental-manipulation hustle at the cash register, swapping dollar bills with confused clerks to come away with more money than he entered with, lures her to him. Impressed with her ability to pick up on the small-time psychological heist, Oliver decides to take Caroline on as his protege and partner in crime. Naturally, his fascination is also romantic, considering Caroline is an attractive woman played by Samara Weaving.

While going out to dinner together, Oliver also demonstrates a wealth of knowledge about human behavior that helps him predict how people will react in certain situations, opening the door for him to steal something of value or play successful mind games. This also greatly intrigues Caroline, as part of the reason she has never expanded her horizons beyond her small South Carolina town is that, deep down, she fears there are similarities to her mother and that she will end up hurting someone. Meanwhile, as we are watching this, we justifiably wonder if trusting Oliver at all will come back to haunt her.

Nevertheless, as the duo embarks on a string of crimes across the Southeast that gradually escalates in seriousness (at first, it is teaching Caroline how to perfect the cash register con, but not long before moving into identity theft and actual bank robberies resembling Bonnie and Clyde), it is called into question which one here might be more dangerous in the grand scheme of their characterizations. The eventual destination is South Carolina, where Caroline will hopefully meet her mother and get answers to her burning questions, including why she and her father were abandoned in the first place.

And while there is no denying that Carolina Caroline is an effectively performed film with layers and nuances that fortunately saved the film from one-dimensionality, often drawing immersion from lived-in locales (whether it be towns themselves or the bars and banks characters end up in), with the occasional person who comes across more as someone pulled off the street rather than a traditional actor, some of the screenwriting here from Tom Dean borders on hokey and unconvincing.

Advertisement

This also leaves the film feeling as if it is sometimes nervously afraid to commit to the story’s grimy grittiness, more concerned with keeping the characters likable than with pushing them a step too far into moral ambiguity. It’s all a bit too clean and safe for a movie about a woman slowly becoming a career criminal whilst smitten with her mentor/friend, either testing herself to see if she can be destructive like her mother, or as a means to find a semblance of freedom in justified thieving and separate herself from a boring life. Samara Weaving is terrific throughout, but especially in the later stages, determined to push back against a terrible hand of cards dealt to her in life, ready to make her own future at any cost.

To put it bluntly, though, too much is accomplished by depicting robberies and intimacy through montages, typically filled with country songs, that don’t necessarily allow one to invest in the characters and their actions. There is a hollowness underneath the otherwise entertaining surface. Even the title and nickname Carolina Caroline feels like a misguided eccentricity, and something that belongs in that straight-up romance. Thankfully, the direction and performances capture the humanity of the characters and the story, making the inevitable third-act tragedy engaging and heartbreaking.

Flickering Myth Rating – Film: ★ ★ ★ / Movie: ★ ★ ★

Robert Kojder

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=embed/playlist

Advertisement

 

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending