Connect with us

Movie Reviews

MOVIE REVIEWS: “The Smashing Machine,” “Good Boy,” “Bone Lake” – Valdosta Daily Times

Published

on

MOVIE REVIEWS: “The Smashing Machine,” “Good Boy,” “Bone Lake” – Valdosta Daily Times

“The Smashing Machine”

(Sports/Drama: 2 hours, 03 minutes)

Starring: Dwayne Johnson, Emily Blunt and Ryan Bader

Director: Benny Safdie

Rated: R (Strong language, violence and drug use)

Movie Review:

Advertisement

“The Smashing Machine” features Dwayne Johnson and Emily Blunt. The two previously worked together in “Jungle Cruise” (2021). Despite their performances show them giving their best, the narrative in which they exist is too repetitive.

A documentary titled “The Smashing Machine” (John Hyams) debuted in 2002. It detailed mixed-martial arts and UFC champion Mark Kerr and his incredible abundance of wins in the ring. Now, this movie focuses on Kerr’s life from 1997–2000, just after his successive winning streak comes to an end.

Kerr (Johnson) is accustomed to swift victories, but he becomes depressed after losing a match. His life becomes a downward spiral, leading to drug abuse. His only refuge is the love he has for Dawn Staples (Blunt) and his devoted friendship with fellow fighter Mark Coleman (former mixed martial artist, now commentator Ryan Bader).

At its best, “The Smashing Machine” shows that Mark Kerr was fighting in the ring and at home. Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson is playing a fighter, something not dissimilar from his WWE days as a pro wrestler. So the athleticism and nature of this role is something he’s familiar with, yet he still provides a relatively good performance. Emily Blunt plays his lover. She is talented and always on point, but her role appears slim here in many ways.

“The Smashing Machine” appears to be a product of the 1990s from a cinematography perspective. From there, it becomes something more modern for a biographical movie. It hits the highs and lows of person’s life in a tabloid form, meaning moments feel redundant at several points. The characters do the same actions too much. We see Mark Kerr fighting in the ring — quick bouts. Then, moviegoers see his arguments with his lover. The two of them are in a dysfunctional relationship. These two parts of the movie repeat far too often.

Advertisement

“The Smashing Machine” appears to be a product of the 1990s from a cinematography perspective. From there, it becomes something more modern for a biographical movie for nearly three-fourths of the runtime. It becomes a man’s quest to achieve despite obstacles, a triumphant sports underdog overcoming, but the latter 30 minutes becomes something more original.

Director-writer Benny Safdie (Adam Sandler movie “Uncut Gems,” 2019) pivots away from a typical biopic ending. He gives audiences a comeback story before taking it away and providing something more inquisitive to consider, while observing the real-life Mark Kerr living an everyman’s life.

Grade: B- (This smashes expectations.)

“Good Boy”

(Horror/Thriller: 1 hour, 13 minutes)

Starring: Indy, Shane Jensen and Arielle Friedman

Advertisement

Director: Ben Leonberg

Rated: PG-13 (Terror, bloody images and strong language.)

Movie Review:

“Good Boy” is a horror movie, where the leading character is a dog named Indy, a pet of director Ben Leonberg, who co-wrote this intriguing horror with Alex Cannon. This entire movie is told from Indy’s perspective. It is very good filmmaking, a throwback to classic horror with an original touch, its perspective from a canine’s viewpoint.

Indy moves with his owner Todd (Jensen) to the family’s rural home after the patriarch of the family dies. The place is rundown, and Todd in the process of renovating the abode. However, Todd is also sick, and when darkness comes at night, Indy bravely protects his master from a sinister presence.

Advertisement

Yes, a canine is the leading character and is more moving than many human counterparts in other horror-themed flicks. This is not new. “Strays” (2023) and “Dog” (2022) are also recent movies where canines are a central character. However, what is new is the fact that a dog takes the primary lead and all humans are secondary performers. Even more, “Good Boy” is a horror movie that is better than most in the genre.

Indy actually belongs to the director, Ben Leonberg in his directorial debut for a feature film. After “Good Boy” concludes, Leonberg details in a behind-the-scenes segment that he and his team filmed more than 400 days over three years. That time was worth it, and this movie is worth it for audiences. Indy is adorable and is the focus of this narrative. Humans are always obscured behind hunting masks, silhouetted, blurred, hidden in shadows, cropped from neck up or are barely reflected in mirrors or other objects. This creates some vagueness at moments, but audiences should keep in mind that events are from Indy’s perspective.

The result is something that has been missing from movies, especially horror movies for a long time. Leonberg and team share the art of taking one’s time to make a film an enjoyable art.

Grade: B+ (Good Movie.)

“Bone Lake”

(Thriller: 1 hour, 35 minutes)

Advertisement

Starring: Alex Roe, Maddie Hasson, Marco Pigossi and Andra Nechita

Director: Mercedes Bryce Morgan

Rated: R (Strong bloody violence, grisly images, sexual content, graphic nudity, strong language and drug use.)

Movie Review:

“Bone Lake” has an enticing start at least after the first five minutes. This is when William (Roe) and Cinnamon (Nechita), ‘Cin’ for short, arrive. They are a young, beautiful couple with model waistlines in abdominal muscles. They arrive at this very nice mansion, only to find Sage (Hasson) and Diego (Pigossi) already there, preparing for a few very romantic days.

Advertisement

The two couples decide to remain in the very spacious mansion at the same time. The mishap is an apparent mix-up by the owners who rent out the place for vacationers. Soon, lies, sex and videotape emerge and Sage and Diego find their relationship is tethering. Even more, the couples began to have their own little riffs with each other.

“Bone Lake” is a horror movie on the surface. It is advertised that way in all its trailers. This is a thriller with surprises.

That fact does not take away the entertainment value of “Bone Lake.” It is a seductive mix between a sensational soap opera episode and what seems like a romantic reality show for a moment. The problem is the writers were boneheads. They do not make the apex’s twist a more superior moment. Instead, the moment feels shallow, so audiences are left with a very violent slasher horror — albeit gratifying ­— for the last few scenes.

Grade: B- (Lake is nice for sailing, but it has some calcium buildup.)

 

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

‘Balaramana Dinagalu’ review: A restrained look at the gangster mind

Published

on

‘Balaramana Dinagalu’ review: A restrained look at the gangster mind

In K M Chaitanya’s Aa Dinagalu (2007), actor Atul Kulkarni, playing gangster Agni Sreedhar, says man is the biggest weapon in the underworld. “The rest are just properties,” he adds. The yesteryear Kannada crime drama, based on the real incidents from a big chapter of the Bengaluru underworld, stood out for its understated storytelling.

In Balaramana Dinagalu, which has the skeleton of a sequel to Aa Dinagalu, weapons are seen in the first scene. As the film progresses, we encounter an arsenal of knives, razors, machetes, and guns — each an extension of the gangsters’ identities and an indispensable tool in their quest to remain feared and lethal. Chaitanya attempts to make the movie a mix of reality and entertaining tropes.

Balaramana Dinagalu (Kannada)

Director: K M Chaitanya

Cast: Vinod Prabhakar, Priya Anand, Atul Kulkarni, Ashish Vidyarthi, Ramesh Indira

Runtime: 151 minutes

Advertisement

Storyline: Balarama, an ordinary young man from a remote village in Karnataka, becomes a dreaded gangster who rules Bengaluru

The director has roped in the same cast, who played the dreaded gangster trio of Kotwal Ramachandra (essayed by Sharath Lohitashwa), Jayaraj (Ashish Vidyarthi), and Agni Sreedhar (Atul) in Aa Dinagalu. That’s what makes one instantly curious about Balaramana Dinagalu. The only difference in the latest movie from the previous one is the fictionalised names of the real dons. Jayaraj becomes Jayaram, Sreedhar is Shashidhar, and Muthappa Rai is called Monnappa Rai (played by Ramesh Indira).

Even if these characters are the big draw in the movie, the plot revolves around the journey of Balarama, a character with a small yet significant presence in Aa Dinagalu. Vinod Prabhakar’s portrayal of the titular role is the film’s biggest takeaway. He makes us feel for the character, and is quite impressive in the final portions of the movie, where Balarama struggles to break free from the underworld’s trap.

Balaramana Dinagalu is impressive when it reflects the psychology of a gangster. Jayaram is shown helping the needy while Balarama urges young boys to focus on education. It’s as if these men who commit heinous acts, have a heart as well. Shashidhar is often called “intellectual gangster”, as the film reflects how the underworld fears well-read men in the field. Politicians and policemen, the supposedly the protectors of people being part of the crime nexus, strengthen the movie’s world-building.

The film falters in its inability to rise above the plot’s predictability. Balarama’s journey is no different from the often-seen life of an innocent man from a small town who becomes a gangster owing to uncontrollable circumstances. I wish the film had delved a bit more into Balaram’s personality. Why does he not resist becoming a gangster? What dreams did he have when he moved to Bengaluru from a small town?

Advertisement

“My hands speak louder than my words,” says Balarama. This signals that he is someone who settles conflicts with fists rather than conversations. Despite this detail, Balaram’s entry into the underworld feels too sudden. The predictability strips the sheen away from the well-shot action sequences, as the result of every fight is known beforehand.

Chaitanya is careful not to glorify the act of violence. He wants to portray the negative effects of violence on the children in a family, as the movie ends with a hard-hitting frame. It’s impressive that the actor-director duo has delivered a non-hero-worshipping gangster saga.

That said, the movie could have benefited from a couple of gripping episodes. While it’s important not to romanticise the life of a gangster, there is no harm in delivering moments of peak tension, the biggest plus of the genre. 

The assassination of Jayaram, the impact of Kotwal’s elimination on the underworld, or the Sakleshpura incident involving Monnappa Rai, had the potential to offer edge-of-the-seat, high-stakes portions, but they are rushed. The love story is simple, but it lacks emotional intensity between the lead couple. Santhosh Narayanan’s dance numbers are forgettable (despite it being his forte) while his montage melodies are beautiful.

Balaramana Dinagalu adopts a restrained, almost clinical approach to the gangster genre. While that keeps it from glorifying violence, it also leaves the narrative feeling a touch too neat and emotionally muted.

Advertisement

Balaramana Dinagalu is currently running in theatres

Published – June 28, 2026 07:58 pm IST

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

A New Dawn Anime Film Review

Published

on

A New Dawn Anime Film Review

Perhaps there’s a certain irony in a story about a fireworks factory mostly keeping away from explosive drama. Yoshitoshi Shinomiya‘s lowkey feature directorial debut A New Dawn is at the very least visually captivating, comprised of lush and rather hypnotic production design. The story is small scale focusing on a trio of friends who try to save a fireworks factory in their hometown, but the imagery feels expansive and lush. A New Dawn begins with a beautiful and vaguely familiar display of this beauty: the flowing, painterly imagery of its opening sequence recalls Shinomiya’s work on the flashback sequence in Makoto Shinkai‘s your name., immediately showing that the film’s visuals might transcend its small town drama.

A background artist himself on films by Makoto Shinkai as well as the similarly resplendent Pompo: The Cinéphile, it makes sense that this history would be felt in the background works of A New Dawn. They’re dense with detail, rich with almost luminous color and illustrative texture. Shinomiya, who also wrote and storyboarded the film, veers away from the photorealism associated with someone like Shinkai through some impressionist touches – like the splotches of green paint which represent treelines – which sometimes turns into outright abstraction like when a character begins to run through the space. Sometimes there are swaying, morphing textures in the background as splotches of paint subtly shift around. On a more intimate level, the cluttered and characterful interior spaces tell a story too. This is a long-winded way of saying A New Dawn looks really, really good.

It’s not just in the tableaux of its countryside habitats and ramshackle living spaces carved out of abandoned warehouses, but there’s a sense of invention permeating through A New Dawn‘s various experiments with visual languages of animation. The most prominent is an incredibly charming stop motion animated sequence using a cardboard diorama and real human hands invading the shot in a creative reflection of a drunken character’s perspective. Even though it broadly still looks “anime” through its character design, there are also smaller details which work to set A New Dawn apart from its contemporaries, touches like its occasional lineless artwork or the way rain is defined through smudged black brushstrokes.

It’s in the screenwriting where A New Dawn begins to feel more run of the mill. Its story about the constant chasing of the majesty of a fabled firework “Shuhari” feels both familiar in its premise but also a little bit alienating in its structure. The importance of the firework itself never feels clear – the moment its mystery is unravelled hardly feels like a revelation as a result, something amplified by how the writing often obfuscates what anyone is talking about. The whole story feels a little distancing, and despite the allure of the background art and design of the spaces the characters inhabit, the people themselves feel constantly at arms length.

It almost pulls things back with its climax – the detonation of the “Shuhari” goes a long way in justifying the circular conversations about its nature and origins – a painted streak of light launches into the sky before turning into something otherworldly, suddenly tripling down on the film’s captivating exaggerations.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Hollywood Pariah Kevin Spacey Opens in a Straight to Video Movie with 25 Producers, 1 Review, No Theaters, No Press – Showbiz411

Published

on

Hollywood Pariah Kevin Spacey Opens in a Straight to Video Movie with 25 Producers, 1 Review, No Theaters, No Press – Showbiz411
★ Make Showbiz411 your Preferred Source on Google

As we know, Kevin Spacey is a pariah in Hollywood.

He’s in a rare club with Mel Gibson, Armie Hammer, Nate Parker, Jonathan Majors, and James Franco.

Spacey has managed to avoid jail time by reaching settlements with various accusers of sexual malfeasance, all men.

His film career — which included two Oscars and a Tony Award — has been destroyed.

Advertisement

Spacey has been reduced to appearing in straight to video films, made for whatever reason the various producers involved know only to themselves.

On Friday, a new Spacey movie surfaced against its will, but not in theaters. It also went straight to video. “1780” is a period piece set during the Revolutionary War. Spacey plays a toothless Pennsylvania country trapper.

There is no rating on Rotten Tomatoes, largely because there is only one review. The review by Alan Ng of Film Threat is positive. Ng recently reviewed “World War Bigfoot,” which he also liked. He seems to specialize in reviewing films no one has heard of.

“1780” does boast 25 producers who will probably not see a return on their investment. But they can say they made a movie with Kevin Spacey.

Advertisement

Donate to Showbiz411.com

Showbiz411 is now in its 13th year of providing breaking and exclusive entertainment news. This is an independent site, unlike the many Hollywood trades that are owned by one company. To continue providing news that takes a fresh look at what’s going on in movies, music, theater, etc, advertising is our basis. Reader donations would be greatly appreciated, too. They are just another facet of keeping fact based journalism alive.
Thank you

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending