“I don’t know anything about saving worlds, but you do.”
-Deadpool addressing Wolverine
The meta has overtaken the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). After a six-year period marked by a wealth of change–studio ownership, story concepts, characters and directors–the antihero Deadpool has returned, as talkative, subversive and funny as ever. If you like your protagonists to save the metaverse with verbal barbs as well as weaponry, you’ve found the ideal superhero for this summer.
Ryan Reynolds, the creative force behind the Deadpool series, takes no prisoners in this third outing, which follows Deadpool (2016) and Deadpool 2 (2018). The screenplay, for which he and four other writers get credit, skewers the studio (with a clever visual RIP for Twentieth Century Fox), the MCU franchises, the characters and the actors themselves. One’s recent divorce even becomes the subject of a snarky aside. The fourth wall has disintegrated.
Disney, which now includes Deadpool in its portfolio, has carved out a special niche for it–an R-rated niche. It earns it here, with a steady stream of decidedly adult dialogue and violent action. Mind you, the violence often plays out in reduced motion and for humorous effect, but the death toll grows steadily and graphically throughout the movie.
Advertisement
In bringing Deadpool back to the screen, the collaborators have teamed him here with Wolverine (James Howlett, alias Logan), the mutant with the retractable claws often associated with the X-Men. Yes, Hugh Jackman has been “resurrected,” after publicly announcing his retirement from the role. (He memorably impersonated the character for two decades through 2017’s Logan, in which he died.) The pairing in Deadpool & Wolverine generally works well, with Reynolds’ irrepressible, smart-alecky style balanced by Jackman’s often angry, angst-ridden persona.
Visually, the movie pops with color–exactly the vivid palette associated with the original comics. In fact, the producers have gone retro and authentic in dressing Wolverine in his classic canary yellow-and-blue outfit–the L.A. Rams’ look, as Deadpool describes it.
Cinematographer George Richmond (Rocketman) and editors Shane Reid and Dean Zimmerman (Stranger Things) have crafted well-framed and intelligently paced action scenes, and the special effects team have endowed the picture with fresh, eye-catching visuals. The array of pop songs on the soundtrack, while not subtly introduced, enhance the tongue-in-cheek nature of the enterprise. Madonna gives her blessing.
If you’re wondering about the story, there’s a reason it gets demoted here. Call it serviceable, a basic narrative designed to sustain the bells and whistles, the one-liners, the gags and–yes, you’ve heard correctly–a parade of cameos, many of which will resonate with MCU acolytes. Suffice it to say that Wade Wilson (aka Deadpool) has withdrawn from his mercenary days and become a used car salesman, only to have the Time Variance Authority (TVA) inform him that his timeline, with his small circle of loved ones, is deteriorating. To restore it, he seeks out an appropriate variant of Logan, its “anchor being.”
Emma Corrin (Diana, Princess of Wales in The Crown} emerges as the lead villain. She portrays Cassandra Nova, the parasitic twin sister of Professor X, a character making her live-action debut here. Corrin brings a palpable sense of malice to her scenes, appropriately declaring that “boys are so silly.”
Advertisement
You could make a strong case that the MCU itself has deteriorated since the Russo Brothers’ epic Avengers: Endgame (2019). A pre-COVID box office blockbuster, it had the scope and poignancy of a cinematic saga. It also served as a fitting homage to the late, iconic impresario Stan Lee. By comparison, the subsequent entries in the franchise have been mostly uninspired, even unnecessary (unless, like Kevin Feige, the President of Marvel Studios, you have to keep close watch on the bottom line).
With Deadpool & Wolverine, Ryan Reynolds and Hugh Jackman have realized a dream more than a decade in the making. Throughout the previous two Deadpool films, the title character relentlessly cracked jokes at Wolverine’s expense. Here they demonstrate admirable chemistry. This melding of the X-Men and MCU franchises ultimately succeeds by deconstructing the entire superhero genre. At their origins, these are comics, after all, and a heady dose of humor, both verbal and visual, can sometimes triumph over thinness of plot. But, please, don’t view this as the end, either. As the Man in Red tells a group of earthly civilians, shocked at the sight of the prodigal Man in Yellow-and-Blue, “Disney brought him back! They’re gonna make him do this until he’s 90!”
1 of 6 | Harris Dickinson and Nicole Kidman star in “Babygirl,” in theaters Dec. 25. Photo courtesy of A24
LOS ANGELES, Dec. 22 (UPI) —Babygirl, in theaters Wednesday, is the kind of erotic drama they used to make a lot in the ’80s and ’90s. As such, it is refreshing in 2024, though perhaps still derivative of its genre predecessors.
Romy Mathis (Nicole Kidman) is the founder and CEO of Tensile, a robotics company developing automated drones for warehouses. She is married to a theater director, Jacob (Antonio Banderas), and they have two daughters.
When Tensile begins a mentorship program for interns, Samuel (Harris Dickinson) pushes Romy’s buttons to get one-on-one time with her. His power plays unlock Romy’s repressed sexual desires and they begin an affair.
Playing power games may be inherent to many sexual relationships, so it’s not like one movie invented them, but it’s hard not to think about 9½ Weeks. In that notorious 1986 film, Mickey Rourke played a man who seduces a woman (Kim Basinger) with sex games involving food, spanking and blindfolds.
Advertisement
Still, Babygirl doesn’t play Romy as a cliche of a powerful businesswoman who really likes to be submissive in bed and experience the adrenaline of risking exposure.
Not that the affair compromises Romy’s success, either, although it could if Samuel reports her. She also starts to blur the lines of being submissive in private and at the office, but she doesn’t let it interfere with business decisions.
The love scenes between Kidman and Dickinson are revealing, but not gratuitous. They are vulnerable and uncomfortable rather than titillating.
The way writer-director Halina Reijn approaches consent is interesting and seems realistic. Samuel does insist on consent before continuing, which is a fantastic portrayal of obtaining verbal consent, though the conditions of Romy’s consent remain nebulous.
Romy makes it clear that Samuel’s power games make her uncomfortable. Agreeing to continue while feeling uncomfortable seems like it adds a level of duress.
Advertisement
It’s 80 minutes into the movie before Samuel and Romy even discuss using a safe word, which would give either party, but especially Romy, a way to end a session at her discretion. Yet, this is believable because Romy and Samuel are amateurs at this, so they’re figuring it out.
Samuel may play the dominant role, but he is in many respects just a poser. He is a young intern and very emotional when things don’t go his way.
It seems like Samuel is imitating what he thinks a Casanova would act like, but whenever Romy goes off script, Samuel seems to be at a loss for words. It’s not natural to him, either, though he thinks of some clever workplace games that make Romy play along.
He’s probably watched 9½ Weeks, too, or more likely just read the Wikipedia summary.
The Jacob character is the film’s most stereotypical.
Advertisement
Jacob is a loving husband who just can’t excite Romy. Romy tries to teach him to play games in bed, but Jacob doesn’t enjoy experimenting. It’s odd that a person whose job is in the arts would lack any creativity with his partner, but he’s entitled to have traditional desires, too.
The lack of monogamy is an unmitigated betrayal, as even submissive relationships should respect loyalty unless they’ve discussed and agreed to having an open relationship. The film eventually explores how a couple navigates compatibility, but Romy has to own hers first.
Individual choices the characters make in Babygirl will provoke discussions, and won’t be spoiled in this review. The positive is that the film does show Romy’s growth through the experience.
So, even if a viewer disagrees with part of the journey, the film makes its case for the value of those experiences. That makes it an engaging, provocative film.
Advertisement
Fred Topel, who attended film school at Ithaca College, is a UPI entertainment writer based in Los Angeles. He has been a professional film critic since 1999, a Rotten Tomatoes critic since 2001, and a member of the Television Critics Association since 2012 and the Critics Choice Association since 2023. Read more of his work in Entertainment.
Pottel, directed by Sahith Mothkuri and starring Ajay, Yuvachandra, and Ananya Nagalla in pivotal roles, is a rural drama that delves into the socio-cultural issues of the 1970s. The movie, which captivated audiences with its intriguing title, was released in theaters in October and recently debuted on OTT platforms Amazon Prima and Aha. With music by Sekhar Chandra, the film aims to strike an emotional chord with its thought-provoking narrative.
Plot Summary: The story is set in a remote village during the 1970s, where the powerful Patel family dominates the region. Believing that education empowers people to question authority, the Patels discourage the villagers from pursuing it. Mallanna (Chatrapathi Sekhar), who recognizes the importance of education, dreams of educating his son Gangadharam (Yuvachandra). However, his efforts are thwarted when Patel (Ajay) kills him to maintain control over the village.
The villagers revere a local deity, Balamma, and Patel manipulates their beliefs to suppress dissent. Gangadharam grows up in this oppressive environment, determined to bring change. He marries Bujjamma (Ananya Nagalla), defying her brother and societal norms.
Meanwhile, the village observes a ritual every 12 years, offering a Pottel as a sacrifice to their deity. This time, Gangadharam is tasked with overseeing the ritual. The stakes are high, as failure to perform the ritual properly could have dire consequences for him. Caught between his goal of educating his daughter and empowering the villagers, and the ritualistic traditions, Gangadharam faces immense challenges from Patel. How he overcomes these obstacles forms the crux of the story.
Analysis: The film effectively portrays the socio-political dynamics and superstitions prevalent in rural India during the 1970s. The director highlights the dominance of landlords like the Patels and their efforts to maintain control by keeping the marginalized sections uneducated. The screenplay weaves these themes with clarity, emphasizing the need for education as a tool for empowerment.
Advertisement
The movie also sheds light on superstitions and rituals like animal sacrifices, which were exploited by the powerful to manipulate the weak. The village itself feels like a character in the story, with its landscapes and traditions adding depth to the narrative. The realistic portrayal of the struggles and resilience of rural communities enhances the film’s authenticity.
Performances: Yuvachandra delivers a compelling performance as Gangadharam, capturing the character’s struggle and determination effectively. Ajay excels as the antagonist Patel, portraying the role with authority and menace. Ananya Nagalla impresses with her portrayal of Bujjamma, adding emotional depth to the story. The supporting cast, including Chatrapathi Sekhar, performs within the scope of their roles, contributing to the narrative’s strength.
Technical Aspects: Cinematography by Monish Bhupathiraju stands out, beautifully capturing the rural and forest backdrops, adding an immersive visual quality. Music by Sekhar Chandra complements the narrative well, with both songs and background score enhancing the emotional impact. Editing by Karthik Srinivas ensures a cohesive flow, although some scenes feel slightly stretched. The authentic depiction of rural settings and customs adds to the film’s credibility.
Final Verdict: Pottel is a sincere attempt to address important social issues like education, empowerment, and superstition through a rural narrative. While the film’s pacing and predictability in certain areas might deter some viewers, its emotional core and relevant themes make it a worthwhile watch for those interested in rural dramas.