The film stars Olivier Award winner Patsy Ferran (“Living,” “Darkest Hour“), BAFTA nominee and Golden Globe winner Josh O’Connor (“Challengers,” “Wake Up Dead Man“), BAFTA nominee and Golden Globe winner Damian Lewis (“Once Upon A Time In Hollywood“), and Oscar nominee Lesley Manville (“Phantom Thread“).

Based on Frances Frederica Montrésor’s 1901 novel “The Alien: A Story Of Middle Age,” “Jack Of Spades” is described as a sinister gothic mystery filled with intrigue and betrayal, set against the atmospheric backdrop of the Scottish Highlands.

The screenplay is written by Eleanor Catton, Joel and Ethan Coen, and Conor McPherson. Robert Graf, Frances McDormand, and Joel Coen produce the film, alongside Steven Rales for Indian Paintbrush and Graham Broadbent and Pete Czernin for Blueprint Pictures. Donald MacKinnon serves as executive producer.

“Jack Of Spades” reunites Joel Coen with his wife and longtime collaborator Frances McDormand following their work together as producers on “The Tragedy Of Macbeth.” Both are Oscar-winning producers, with Coen having won Best Picture for “No Country For Old Men” and McDormand for “Nomadland.” Fellow producer Steven Rales won the Academy Award for Best Live Action Short Film for “The Wonderful Story Of Henry Sugar.” The project also marks another collaboration between Netflix and Coen, following the three-time Oscar-nominated anthology film “The Ballad Of Buster Scruggs.” Netflix is also reuniting with Josh O’Connor following his appearance in Rian Johnson’s “Wake Up Dead Man” (2025) and his Emmy-winning portrayal of Prince Charles in “The Crown.”

Ferran, an Olivier Award-winning actress, is particularly recognized for her acclaimed stage performances in “Summer And Smoke,” “A Streetcar Named Desire,” and “Who’s Afraid Of Virginia Woolf?”

Behind the camera, Coen reunites with Oscar-nominated cinematographer Bruno Delbonnel, whose previous collaborations include “Inside Llewyn Davis,” and composer Carter Burwell, whose credits include “Carol” and “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri.”

“Jack Of Spades” is expected to arrive in theaters in Fall 2027 before streaming on Netflix.

What do you think of this news? Are you excited to see “Jack Of Spades?” Please let us know in the comments section below or on our X account.

The post Netflix Acquires Worldwide Rights To Joel Coen’s “Jack Of Spades” For A 2027 Fall Release appeared first on Next Best Picture.

THE CAST – Nicholas Galitzine, Bill Skarsgård, Ray Nicholson, Tom Francis, Brent Comer, Jack Ingram, Dominic Bogart & Pat McAfee

THE TEAM – Peter Berg (Director/Writer) & Mark L. Smith (Writer)

THE RUNNING TIME – 127 Minutes

Peter Berg’s latest film “The Mosquito Bowl” brings together two subjects that he’s been revered for in the past with otherfilms: football (“Friday Night Lights”) and war (“Lone Survivor“). Based on Buzz Bissinger’s book of the same name, Berg’s latest follows four celebrated college players who enlist after the attack on Pearl Harbor and find themselves swept from the world of cheering stadiums, intense competition, and adulation into the Pacific at a crucial point during WWII.Berg frames their story as a clash between youthful confidence and the brutal realities of combat that culminates in a real football game played by Marines in the shadow of the Okinawa campaign. It’s an interesting look back on a time when local town heroes and borderline celebrities would put themselves on the line for something they believed was bigger than them (practically unheard of today), but does it live up to Peter Berg’s best films?

John McLaughry (Nicholas Galitzine), Bob Bauman (Bill Skarsgård), Tony Butkovich (Ray Nicholson), and David Schreiner (Tom Francis) begin the story as standout college athletes with bright futures and reputations built on the gridiron. After the United States enters World War II, each leaves their football dreams and their families behind to serve in the Marines. Their path takes them through boot camp and into a war that bears little resemblance to the contests they once understood and were fairly confident they could conquer. As the men confront the Pacific campaign and its devastating losses, the bonds formed through football and military service become central to their survival and their grip on reality as the brutal effects of war rip through their once hardened psyches. The film also recounts the unusual but necessary game that gives the film its title. It was a moment of play and camaraderie amid a series of excruciating, bloody battles that changed the young men who took the field, giving them hope and strength to press on.

Peter Berg takes two things that he has done really well before, football and war, and brings them together in his latest film, but with mixed results. It’s a very bleak film, and I’m not just saying that because of the monochrome-looking cinematography. It shows the ugly side of war, with that old, often-used saying: “war is hell.” To that end, there is not much new here that you haven’t seen in a dozen other war action dramas, but in some ways it feels like a welcome return to form for Berg, whose previous best works all included some form of spectacle, with characters placed in dangerous situations they had to overcome. And “The Mosquito Bowl” definitely has its fair share of thrilling and pulverizing set pieces. The sound work, especially, is notable as bullets whisk across the screen, tearing through flesh with chaotic randomness. Explosions ring in the background, and screams of horror from the use of flamethrowers can be heard even after the credits stop rolling. Berg also uses slow motion quite frequently to allow his sound designers to play with thevolume levels, accentuating certain sounds while lowering others to create an almost suffocating feeling that effectively places you in the headspace of these four young men.

It’s all very harrowing stuff and impressive on a technical level, but the biggest issue with the film is that, aside from very surface-level introductions to its four main characters, it spends little time developing them. It feels like the movie justwants to move from one set piece to the next once everyone ships off to Japan. In some ways, “The Mosquito Bowl” football match feels more like the movie’s climax, simply because it feels different from everything else in the film and it allows more personality from the main four characters to shine through. It is uplifting and stands in nice contrast to the war and violence we’ve seen in other movies. But here we’re just seeing Peter Berg put his own stamp on it.

In many ways, it’s similar to “Lone Survivor” in that “The Mosquito Bowl” is following a small group of characters facing overwhelming odds they didn’t expect, as the Japanese soldiers prove to be a far different level of soldier than the American Marine. They will not surrender under any circumstances and would rather take their own life than admit defeat. Such horrific acts and displays of carnage shake these once unshakable young men to their core, rendering them almost as little boys again, who shudder in fear at the thought of having to face combat again. As the old saying goes, it’s all fun and games until, in this case, the bullets start flying. Each of the four characters approaches the war either with an innate sense of patriotic duty to defend and fight for their country, to return home to their families, or, in some cases, start new ones (all these young men were 24 at the time of this story), or with the belief that they can take their big-shot college football swagger from the field and onto the battlefield. Obviously, this is not the case. And even with their impressive physical gifts, which perhaps give them a certain level of endurance and strength over some of their fallen brothers, the randomness with which people can get killed in war does not care how strong, fast, or determined to survive you are.

Three of the four main characters deliver highly engaging performances you want to see more of, because the actors have fantastic screen presence that digs into the essence of what each man represented. However, the movie is most interested in the least interesting of them all: Nicholas Galitzine. It’s not his fault entirely; the movie just doesn’t give He-Man anything to do other than hope that he will make it back home to his girlfriend, which just doesn’t make for the mostcompelling of characters. Pat McAfee is a highly distracting presence as the unit’s drill instructor, who only shows up for a brief section of the movie to turn these young recruits into killing machines. But despite his flushed face, yelling, and incessant cursing, it feels like stunt casting meant to draw football fans, and perhaps professional wrestling fans, into what is ultimately an extremely macho and patriotic war film.

The film is most effective when the two pieces of its premise, the physical sport of football and the physical terror of battle, converge. Berg gives the action a forceful, immediate quality, emphasizing the scale and confusion of the violence that surrounds the men almost to a dizzying sense of confusion and overwhelming exhaustion. That approach suits the story’s focus on young people thrust into events they could neither control nor fully understand or prepare for. Yet the scale with which Berg stages the action scenes can also crowd out the individual lives that might’ve given those battles more emotional weight. A semblance of that emotion is found towards the end of the film, but that’s mostly thanks to the titular football game that takes place before the film’s true climax. It stands out specifically because it briefly restores a familiar set of rules that these young men are familiar with, where competitors don’t have to be enemies, and strength can be measured without deciding who lives or dies. Its warmth (deliberately shot to be much warmer than the rest of this very dark film) makes the surrounding destruction feel even more punishing as the youth are sent to fight wars started by older generations and throw away the promise their lives once held.

“The Mosquito Bowl” is a muscular war film from a strong director who just needs a good script to bring his tendency for action and spectacle to the screen with heart rather than just technical proficiency. Berg stages the combat with conviction, and the cast brings a believable presence and relatability to a true story of four young athletes forced to confront what their physical abilities cannot protect them from, no matter how hard they try. But the film’s relentless movement from one battle to the next leaves its central characters less fully drawn than their circumstances deserve. When it returns to the football field, the movie briefly finds a more affecting note that reminds us of the lives and shared pleasures that war interrupts. Told with respect for those who gave their lives for this country, it can’t help but feel derivative of greater works that have come before it despite engaging performances from Skarsgård, Nicholson, and Francis.

The post “THE MOSQUITO BOWL” appeared first on Next Best Picture.

THE CAST – Keri Russell, Rufus Sewell, Allison Janney, Bradley Whitford, Ali Ahn, Ato Essandoh, Nana Mensah & Rory Kinnear

THE TEAM – Deborah Cahn (Showrunner/Creator)

Negotiations are about compromise, about finding a middle ground that lets both sides walk away feeling like they won. But when dealing with large foreign powers and even larger egos, diplomacy becomes murkier. How far can you appease the other side before it becomes utter capitulation? How much can you insist on your own perspective before discussions become demands? Following the bombshell revelation that President Grace Penn (Allison Janney) and Vice President Hal Wyler (Rufus Sewell) decided to remove a nuclear weapon from a sunken Russian submarine without the permission of the United Kingdom, Kate Wyler (Keri Russell) finds herself caught between her duties as an ambassador, her fealty to the presidency, her love for her husband, and her fundamental belief system.

“The Diplomat” season 4 is the natural escalation of the show’s narrative so far, balancing sky-high geopolitical stakes with immensely tense interpersonal relationships, with the same flair that made the show so addicting in the first place. The latter is on another level this season, due in no small part to the main quartet of Keri Russell, Rufus Sewell, Allison Janney, and Bradley Whitford. Wisely, the show elevated Janney and Whitford from scene-stealing guest stars to main cast members, creating countless new dynamics that the writers and actors alike feast on. The psychosexual nature of Grace and Hal’s spontaneous subterfuge alone could have a lesser show focused entirely around it! Equally entertaining is Kate and Todd’s (Bradley Whitford) awkward bond as the overlooked spouses of the two ticking time bombs running the United States of America. The show may be best known for its political intrigue and jaw-dropping cliffhangers every episode. Still, by now, the writers clearly understand that the show’s best attribute is its fascinating character dynamics.

The bulk of the show’s drama stems from Kate and Hal’s marriage perpetually being on the rocks. Betrayal is a part of their love language at this point! The best scenes this season are the ones where they can steal a moment of privacy to air out their grievances. Yet this relationship remains the crux of the show because, at its core, we root for them to work things out. Kate’s attempts to subdue herself to make their relationship healthier are sorely misguided, but they prove she still sees something worth fighting for. Watching her quietly simmer and hold in the biting barbs audiences love her for adds tension to the smallest scenes, makes the moments when her frustrations finally spill out all the more exciting, and lets Russell give her best performance to date. If you are going to parallel an international conflict with a marriage, it had better be with one as dynamic as the Wylers.

“The Diplomat’s” greatest strength has always been its pacing. Every episode zips by, and every season is ridiculously easy to binge-watch while still having enough substance to keep you thinking long afterward. So much happens in each season of “The Diplomat”—and season 4 is no different—but it is presented in a reassuringly digestible, constantly compelling way. The series has always been unafraid to change the status quo at the drop of a hat, to the point that several episodes this season could have served as season finales.

Yet this goes hand in hand with “The Diplomat’s” biggest weakness: its formulaic nature. This may seem like an odd critique for a show as iconically unpredictable as this one. Make no mistake, the events that unfold in the narrative are shocking. But the way they unfold episode to episode is a bit standard. The most egregious example is the insistence on ending every single episode with some kind of reveal. This gets to the point where, even if you didn’t guess a twist from the beginning of the episode, it is so telegraphed that something shocking will happen by the end that you can call the surprise more than half the time. Of course, when the show breaks the formula and experiments with how it presents information, it is all the better for it.

Still, “The Diplomat” is such a fun watch that this flaw hardly detracts from the experience. As easy as it is to rave about the intense performances from its main quartet, the whole ensemble dazzles. In fact, certain supporting characters surprisingly walk away with the season after their subtler arcs are brought under a magnifying glass. Ironically, the theme of fraught compromise this season revolves around is an excellent unifying factor for the various storylines it juggles. And in typical “The Diplomat” fashion, the season finale is a stunner, with a final scene that makes you ache for the next season.

THE GOOD – The season doubles down on everything that makes “The Diplomat” so compelling: the tight pacing, the tumultuous relationships, and the terrific acting.

THE BAD – The show has a formula from episode to episode that it sticks by to a fault.

THE EMMY PROSPECTS – Outstanding Drama Series, Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series, Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama Series, Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series, Outstanding Direction for a Drama Series & Outstanding Writing for a Drama Series

THE FINAL SCORE – 8/10

The post Keri Russell Gives A Series-Best Performance In This Gripping Fourth Season Of “The Diplomat” appeared first on Next Best Picture.

THE CAST – Sam Rockwell, Scarlett Johansson, Tom Waits, Matt Berry, Bobby Cannavale, Alan Tudyk & Kathryn Hunter

THE TEAM – Brad Bird (Director/Writer) & Matthew Robbins (Writer)

THE RUNNING TIME – 119 Minutes

Brad Bird, if nothing else, remains persistent in his pursuit of artistic excellence, and his latest film, “Ray Gunn,” is all the evidence you need to support this claim. For the two-time Academy Award-winning filmmaker, this was the project he so desperately wanted to lift off the ground early in his career, even before the 1998 release of “The Iron Giant.” Years later, even with successes like “The Incredibles” and “Ratatouille” under his belt, it still seemed impossible to get the funds to bring his bold retrofuturist noir to life. Yet the powers that be at Netflix were willing to do what no one else would: give one of today’s more acclaimed animated filmmakers free rein. To no one’s surprise, it was the right decision. “Ray Gunn” is another exemplary entry in Bird’s filmography, even as it reuses overly familiar elements from the films that inspired this long-awaited passion project.

In “Ray Gunn,” Bird welcomes the audience to the future, or what also looks like the past, with Metropia, a society modeled on an art-deco-heavy 1930s timeline where aliens live alongside humans and people can rent jetpacks like they’re Citi Bikes here in New York. It’s a city brimming with lights, yet the criminal underground bubbling beneath the surface is the dark center that keeps it afloat. Sam Rockwell’s Ray, a former police officer turned private eye, doing his best to navigate this world, taking on jobs from frustrated spouses and corrupt convicts to keep the lights on in his small office. Despite the muddy waters he wades through, Ray remains an honest man, refusing to sell his morals (or make money), even as his alien partner Eyera, voiced by Tom Waits, urges him to do so. Soon, Ray is pulled into the orbit of the magnetic superstar Venus Nova (Scarlett Johansson), a hotheaded pop star whose career is in jeopardy as she prepares to debut her new album. Like all noirs, a simple job is pulled through a labyrinth of emotions and deviations, this time involving illegal laser guns, alien mobsters, and a string of murders.

Bird’s obvious adoration of film noir is over every frame of “Ray Gunn,” from the narrative patterns that are staples of the subgenre to the intentional character models that are in the vein of some of the biggest studio system stars of classic Hollywood, including Matt Berry’s Slugsy, which is clearly modeled after Sydney Greenstreet in “Casablanca.” His reverence for film noir is so strong, though, that while it gives “Ray Gunn” a unique identity, it also hampers the narrative somewhat. At times, it makes the film feel a bit too elementary for a director of Bird’s caliber, despite how much he leans into the suggestiveness of the almost Hays Code-esque humor and innuendo between characters. A sense of fatalism, so ingrained in film noir, runs through the film. Sometimes Bird’s inventiveness clashes with a story that plays its cards from the jump, yet his exuberant storytelling keeps “Ray Gunn” entertaining throughout.

The animation behind “Ray Gunn” is fascinating to dissect because one compromise in bringing Bird’s vision to life is the film’s original two-dimensional style, which would’ve been a breath of fresh air, especially given the stunning Netflix marketing poster suggesting what could’ve been. Instead, the animation of “Ray Gunn” aligns more with the traditional three-dimensional style that most animated films, especially in Bird’s recent filmography, follow. The work is still attractive, especially with Bird’s kinetic direction, which makes every set piece dazzle, whether it’s the exceptionally choreographed hover-car chase sequences or an extended elevator fight scene. It’s rare to see camera movement as intentional as Bird’s here, even in an animated film, with “Ray Gunn” grounding the action, giving it weight, and maintaining fluidity, making every move from Ray and Eyera through the sci-fi city feel more alive than most live-action films. And, of course, it’s backed by another breezy, enjoyable Michael Giacchino score, which knows exactly how to play into Bird’s sensibilities as a filmmaker to create a vibe and atmosphere that fit the tone perfectly.

The entire voice ensemble is great, especially Rockwell and Johansson, whose sizzling dynamic brings the film together. Rockwell’s personality melds perfectly into a Bogart-like private dick whose charisma masks the inherent exhaustion of soldiering through each day. His performance aligns well with the hallmarks of the prototypical noir lead spewing gumshoe dialogue with a wink and a nod to the audience, and the same could be said for Johansson’s femme fatale, who brings more than meets the eye to her role. Johansson also double-dips, singing wonderful jazzy ballads, mainly the track “Too Much to Ask,” which singer/songwriter Kimbra wrote. Yet Bird’s secret weapon is Waits, whose signature gravelly voice gives Eyera the edge he needs to perfectly complement Rockwell’s Ray, especially as Eyera is constantly ostracized in a xenophobic society, leaving him to carry most of the thematic weight Bird is bringing to “Ray Gunn” along with other themes of technology, corruption, and identity. It’s more than what you’d typically find in a family-friendly animated film made for the little ones, offering a bit more for slightly older audiences while still keeping its broad appeal across generations.

“Ray Gunn,” while dipping into kiddo’s first noir territory, stays true to itself (and its influences), making for another impressive effort from one of Hollywood’s last remaining animation auteurs. It’s a film about what you’re willing to compromise in a cutthroat, cruel world, and Bird translates that feeling effortlessly, with his journey trying to make the film after all these years paying off as much as Ray’s does. Its strong animation, likable characters, and nods to classic genre tropes will hopefully be the building blocks that get the next generation of cinephiles creeping down “Noir Alley” on TCM. For that alone, “Ray Gunn” is an achievement.

The post “RAY GUNN” appeared first on Next Best Picture.

THE CAST – Ben Affleck, Kerry Washington, Steven Yeun, Luis Gerardo Méndez, Gillian Anderson, Adriana Paz, Ray Fisher, Jacob Estrada & Christopher Woodley

THE TEAM – Ben Affleck (Director/Writer) & Connor O. McIntyre & Billy Ray (Writers)

THE RUNNING TIME – 105 Minutes

It seems like Hollywood directors can’t stop themselves from putting their own spin on Akira Kurosawa’s highly influential “High and Low.” Just last year we had Spike Lee’s reinterpretation, “Highest 2 Lowest,” which closely followed the kidnapping-gone-wrong storyline with his own musical spin on it, but it largely lacked the finesse that Kurosawa had with his masterpiece. Now, Oscar winner Ben Affleck is stepping up to the plate with “Animals,” which attempts to tie in politics, immigration, and marital drama in under two hours. The result is the messiest version yet as it’s overstuffed with too many storylines, it fails to dig into the societal issues it’s hinting at, and it has a truly wacky ending. But it might just be the best depiction of insane political spin we’ll ever get.

Wealthy attorney Mark Kimball (Affleck) is running for LA mayor, and he promises that he’s the guy that’ll fix all of the city’s issues. Unlike his opponent (a Latina who we never see), he takes the time to talk to real Angelenos, go to devastated parts of the city, and listen to their problems. Residents aren’t really buying it though, as his campaign manager Sam (Steven Yeun) informs him that he’s behind in the polls, and he barely has any additional money to spend. All of this stress is leading to problems at home with his wife Abby (Kerry Washington), who is keeping secrets of her own from him.

If you’ve seen any version of this story before, you know that things only get worse from here on out. After their housekeeper Ceci (Adriana Paz) takes their son Denny (Christopher Woodley) and her son Hector (Jacob Estrada) out trick-or-treating, Mark and Abby get a mysterious phone call from a disenfranchised person saying they have kidnapped their son and are demanding $7 million for their return. Emotions are high, maybe a little too high, as Affleck and Washington’s characters spend way too much time yelling at each other instead of taking a breath to process the moment. Each time the phone rings with the mysterious person on the other line making demands, Mark is coming at them at a level 100, which is understandable to a degree, but it gets annoying quickly. Thankfully Yeun, who is largely underutilized in the film, remains calm and calls in “financial advisor” Dayle (Gillian Anderson). Looking and acting effortlessly cool as Anderson always does, Dayle comes in as a no BS kind of woman who knows exactly what steps the Kimballs need to take to get their son back, all while holding leverage over them so that they repay her all the money she’s owed. Seeing her navigate this situation with ease and no stress on her part is an absolute delight to watch.

Of course, things aren’t what they seem in this tale. In other versions, there’s a huge moral dilemma the wealthy family has to face when they learn more about the kidnapping, and it spotlights a classic story of the haves versus the have-nots. Here, things are handled so sloppily. The other people most affected by this situation are Ceci and her partner Ramon (Luis Gerardo Méndez), an undocumented man who is trying to find work. While Abby says to Ceci that they would do anything for her, the micro aggressions are so obvious whenever Ceci tries to mesh the two families or when she tries to get Ramon work, but Abby says it’s not the right time because of Mark’s mayoral bid. Affleck and co-writers Connor O. McIntyre and Billy Ray barely make any effort into making Ceci and Ramon more than just one-dimensional characters, especially their Latino background and their immigration status, and they’re treated as if their story doesn’t matter. For much of the runtime, Ceci and Ramon are essentially sequestered in a bedroom and talking to each other while all the action is taking place elsewhere (Ramon gets to emerge a little later on). In “High and Low” and “Highest 2 Lowest,” the filmmakers shift focus onto the second family so that the audience feels for them and sees how the wealthy family views them when circumstances change. Here, their story is mostly sidelined for a marital dispute between Mark and Abby (which, if anything, gives Affleck and Washington more interesting dialogue to work with), and him thinking about how all of this will impact his campaign. Sidelining Latino characters and their struggles for a white, wealthy politician who is only concerned about his image is certainly a choice — one that is likely the point of this film in order to show just how savage people can be — but it’ll no doubt sit uncomfortably with some viewers.

Even as a political film, this movie doesn’t do much to discuss the issues that Los Angeles faces, such as wealth disparity and immigration. Mark is constantly trying to appeal to Latino voters, but aside from showing off his Spanish language skills, we don’t know what he would do to address their concerns, nor anyone’s for that matter. Additionally, so little is known about the kidnapper — quick shots show they’re in default on bills and in the middle of a divorce — that it takes away the heart of this story, which is often about down-on-their-luck people who want some type of revenge against those who are better off. Los Angeles serves as a great backdrop for that, where you have some of the wealthiest people in Beverly Hills living just a few miles from the Skid Row neighborhood with high rates of homelessness and poverty. But that doesn’t seem important here for whatever reason. Ultimately, there’s too many storylines at play and not enough depth to any of them.

The climax of the film is fairly lackluster, but if there is one thing this film gives us, it’s spinning the truth in a truly insane way for Mark’s mayoral campaign. It might just be the best example of politicians doing anything they can to get people’s votes, and even though it’s not meant to be funny, it plays hilariously (a montage shows what actually happened juxtaposed with with cheerful music, a press conference, and interview with Gayle King). Even though Mark tells his accomplice that they’re a hero, you can see the gears turning in his head on how to make it so that he tells this story in his favor, especially with Latino voters. We don’t know anything about his politics or what he would do for the city, but he’s already lying to residents, so that clearly makes him a great politician. Once again, Ceci and Ramon’s story is rushed, and what happens with them might raise some eyebrows given today’s political climate. In the end, “Animals” is a whole lot of movie with very little nuance. If you come away from this thinking, “I wish that was better,” Kurosawa’s version is there to show you how it’s truly done.

The post “ANIMALS” appeared first on Next Best Picture.

THE CAST – Florence Pugh, Christopher Abbott, Mike Faist, Joseph Zada, Joe Anders, Hoon Lee, Ciarán Hinds, Martha Plimpton & Tracy Letts

THE TEAM – Zoe Kazan (Showrunner/Writer) & Jeb Stuart (Showrunner)

Amid Hollywood’s never-ending tradition of reinventing adaptations of celebrated classic literature for television, Zoe Kazan’s “East of Eden” has done what many of her contemporaries have failed to do: make an exceptional work that improves upon its predecessor. Kazan is already fighting an uphill battle translating John Steinbeck’s magnum opus into a visual medium, given its arduous length as the author wades through generations of the Trasks and Hamiltons, two American families sifting through the complexities of navigating life, emotions, and familial preservation. At least a television adaptation would give a momentous work like this time to breathe, fleshing out the experience in the most novelistic manner possible.

This seminal work of American fiction has certainly impacted the Kazan family. The original film adaptation back in 1955, directed by Zoe’s grandfather Elia Kazan, an acclaimed filmmaker of Golden Age Hollywood, is forever cemented in cinematic history as the lead acting debut of the one and only James Dean. The film, however, stands the test of time more as a monument to Hollywood iconography than as an effective adaptation, especially since it focuses primarily on the novel’s final third. Within the first few minutes of the first episode of Zoe Kazan’s iteration, it’s clear she isn’t willing to repeat her grandfather’s mistakes. In fact, she brings something necessary to ensure a project like this would thrive: perspective.

Audiences see in the series’ opening moments a bloodied and battered Cathy Ames, played by Florence Pugh, crawling through the mud desperately clinging to life. She stumbles upon the steps of a household owned by two Trask brothers, Charles, played by Mike Faist, and Adam, played by Christopher Abbott, who reluctantly come to her aid. The narration shifts from a Steinbeck-esque stand-in to Cathy, and Pugh’s signature raspy voice immediately adds dimension to “East of Eden” from the start. Kazan, along with series showrunner Jeb Stuart, also uses a non-linear structure, replacing Steinbeck’s patient storytelling with something more cinematic. Each episode dives into portions of the novel, exploring the Trask family’s history from their upbringing under Tracy Letts’ Cyrus, a swindling veteran whose harsh treatment of the violently brooding Charles and soft-natured Adam damns them to a lifelong cycle of pain.

The two brothers, modeled after the biblical figures Cain and Abel, weave in and out of each other’s lives as the mysterious Cathy enters, threatening to tear apart everything they have reconciled over. It’s a story spanning five decades, showing how the simplest of seeds these characters plant, whether in how they treat one another, the relationships they form, or the decisions they regret, only permeate over time. Kazan takes Steinbeck’s words to heart, pouring them onto the screen in every moment these characters stare searingly at one another. Kazan’s perspective as a woman makes Cathy an even more compelling character than in previous depictions. Steinbeck paints Cathy as one of the most callous creatures ever to walk the planet, a character utterly transfixing from the moment he introduces her.

Kazan’s teleplay, while bringing perspective, never degrades the audience’s intellect in favor of apologia. “East of Eden” doesn’t shy away from the cruelty that festers in Cathy’s heart, showing that she’s a woman in a world where she has traded empathy for freedom. Yet this behavior has deeper roots, as Cathy remains in a world she can hardly control, a point Pugh’s powerful performance underscores. Many series today steer away from challenging audiences’ perceptions of the characters and even the stories they consume because of unlikability. Kazan weaponizes this weakness in how modern writers translate lauded works, seeing it as a chance to confront audiences’ emotions and help them understand who these people are. It’s a pretty fair preservation of Steinbeck’s novel, which, at the time of its release, was far ahead of its time in the subject matter he broaches.

Garth Davis, of “Lion” fame, steps in as director for the series’ first four episodes and perfectly captures how readers would imagine this story on screen. It may not have the visual splendor of seeing the Salinas Valley in CinemaScope, but it’s a handsomely shot series that Davis and Laure de Clermont-Tonnerre direct with precision. Luckily, the series avoids the pitfalls of the Netflix aesthetic most commonly associated with many of their programs. The technical work, from the stunning production design to the costuming, is all exceptional.

Of course, the stacked ensemble that populates each frame and delivers Kazan’s words with such potency is marvelous. Pugh, who will garner most of the attention because of Cathy’s character, delivers her best work since “Little Women,” pulling audiences’ eyes with every mediated reaction as her unsettling energy stays present throughout. Abbott is also on an exceptional run, from off his Tony nomination for “Death of a Salesman” to his newly announced foray into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. In “East of Eden,” he strips it all back, laying bare the broken soul of the once-kind Adam, slowly worn down by the world around him. Abbott is heartbreaking, especially whenever he’s opposite Faist or in the final few episodes of the series. Faist is great, delving into a darker performance he never has had the chance to display before, yet Charles presence is quite limited in the narrative. Kazan smartly weaves Faist throughout the series, but he is so great that every second he isn’t on screen is harder to accept.

Despite all of these star-heavy performances, it’s Hoon Lee’s performance as Lee that brings “East of Eden” to another level. Lee, the Chinese-American servant to the Trask family who becomes not only a loyal confidant but essentially the patriarchal figure that keeps the family together, is one of the more radical inclusions in Steinbeck’s novel. Lee feels like one of the more Mulligan-coded aspects of “East of Eden” that Kazan truly wanted to improve on from the 1955 feature. Not going into much detail, but while Dean is doing his thing on screen, Lee’s absence is enough to make the film a cinematic mistrial as an adaptation, given how integral he is to the story. Lee brings such warmth with his presence that it perfectly contrasts with the stern persona the character has to maintain to protect himself. Lee’s reliably comedic performance in “Your Friends and Neighbors,” while massively entertaining, only makes what is a career-defining performance here in “East of Eden” all the more impressive. He’s the best part of the series, and it isn’t even close.

My one gripe, which comes from my own experience with the novel, is that this occasionally abridged adaptation, while translating Steinbeck’s words faithfully, relegates the story wholly to the Trask family, leaving the Hamiltons as figures who appear to support Adam and company. While it shapes the narrative effectively for a cinematic translation, it also waters down a character like Samuel Hamilton, brought to life by a brief but lovely turn from Ciarán Hinds. The dichotomy of the two families makes for a fascinating examination of the perceived American household, especially in a period of change towards the dawn of a new century. Kazan makes this difficult decision for the most part, at least maintaining a narrative focus that many claimed Steinbeck lacked when “East of Eden” was first released. As far as adaptations go, “East of Eden” really set a bar that many that come after it won’t achieve. It’s for sure one of the best shows airing on television this year. To me, it may be the definitive cinematic iteration of one of the greatest American stories ever told.

THE GOOD – A near-perfect adaptation of one of classic literature’s greatest novels with marvelous writing, acting, and direction.

THE BAD – The decision to focus entirely on the Trask family waters down some supporting characters, occasionally making the narrative feel rushed.

THE EMMY PROSPECTS – Outstanding Limited Series, Outstanding Lead Actress in a Limited Series, Outstanding Lead Actor in a Limited Series, Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Limited Series, Outstanding Direction for a Limited Series & Outstanding Writing for a Limited Series

THE FINAL SCORE – 9/10

The post “East Of Eden” Review – Zoe Kazan Delivers The Definitive Adaptation Of John Steinbeck’s American Classic appeared first on Next Best Picture.

THE CAST – Ella Beatty, Vicky Krieps, Charlie Hunnam, Rebecca Hall & Sarah Paulson

THE TEAM – Ryan Murphy & Ian Brennan (Creators)

Lizzie Borden took an ax

And gave her mother 40 whacks

When she saw what she had done

She gave her father 41

Culturally, Lizzie Borden needs no introduction. Immortalized by a haunting nursery rhyme and decades of pop culture, Borden and her infamous crime remain deeply etched in the public consciousness. So one might wonder what new insight Ryan Murphy and Ian Brennan, the creators behind this season of “Monster,” could possibly bring to the story. The answer, unfortunately, is nothing – unless they’re willing to make it up. “Monster: The Lizzie Borden Story” falls victim to Murphy’s penchant for exploitation and sexualization of an infamous story, adding nothing new beyond overly stylized set pieces meant to shock and awe. And it’s shockingly awful.

The beats of the story remain the same: we open with Lizzie Borden (played by a naturally talented Ella Beatty) whacking her father and stepmother with an ax in their home (which, by the way, isn’t even correct – the father, Andrew, was killed on the sofa, not in the entryway while catching his daughter killing his wife). So, after only a few minutes, not off to a great start. We then backtrack a few months to see what led up to these tragic events. Murphy and Brennan take more than a few fictitious liberties with the story, including altering Lizzie’s personality to being a young, naive, isolated woman who’s basically a prisoner in her own home. In reality, Lizzie was 32 at the time of the murders, a Sunday school teacher with plenty of friends, and had traveled Europe. In the show, she befriends Bridget (played by Vicky Krieps), a new housemaid, and their relationship quickly turns romantic before the two engage in a little murder. In reality, there’s no evidence the relationship was ever more than platonic, save for the rumors after the killings.

This version of events places the new housemaid, Bridget, at the center of Lizzie’s story and her parents’ eventual downfall. Bridget entertains her new friend with tales of young women who allegedly murder young girls and bathe in their blood. Creeped out? Not our Lizzie, who apparently finds it inspiring. Bridget also teaches Lizzie about the wonders of an orgasm, making her her own sex toy, and giving her her first kiss. By all accounts, none of this actually happened, but don’t let that stop Ryan Murphy from making a soapy, sexy drama out of it. Vicky Krieps takes real ownership over Bridget, never letting her play the victim but embodying the original cool Brooklyn coffee shop girl a degree too far. This is supposed to be a poor housemaid in Massachusetts in the 1890s, not someone serving you $9 freshly whisked matcha.

As for motive, Murphy and Brennan shape the victims as flat antagonists. Evil stepmother Abby, played by Rebeca Hall (who’s over-the-top in a cartoonish way), has raised Lizzie since she was two and is terrible to her daughter for no apparent reason. A neglectful, cheating father – played by a deliciously yet overly-campy sad sack Charlie Hunnam – is no recourse for Lizzie, more concerned with his business and, inexplicably, axes. The parents are irredeemably one-dimensional, with Brennan and Murphy throwing motive in the audience’s face from the jump. They’re apparently just simply evil with not a nurturing bone in their body. Wouldn’t you be driven to murder as well?

As for Lizzie herself, Hollywood royalty Ella Beatty does a fine job elevating the theater camp dialogue without overdoing it. She balances Lizzie’s self-preservation with inherent guilt in a way that makes you believe she’d feel both – she had to escape, but regrets doing so. It’s too bad Beatty was given such a salacious script, because she could’ve brought a lot more to the role if given the chance. We also don’t get to see much interaction with Lizzie and a major force in her life: her sister, played by Ryan Murphy mainstay Billie Lourd, who’s essentially written off as a side character in this version of events. The writers had a ripe opportunity to explore feminism, revenge, and what drives women to commit unspeakable crimes. Instead, they chose to focus on over-sexualizing and sensationalizing a centuries-old true crime story for the modern crime junkie. What’s left is a hollow, glitteringly fictitious and modernized account of a legend spun out so far it barely resembles the story it sets out to tell.

There’s an interesting choice by the storytellers about halfway through the season to tie Borden’s case to another famous female killer: Aileen Wournos, played by Sarah Paulson. Paulson is by far the best performance of the series, as she completely encapsulates Wournos upon entering the season’s fourth episode. Obviously Charlize Theron is the gold standard here – she did win the Oscar for it, after all – but Paulson does a helluva job throwing caution to the wind and transforming into the blighted and fraught Wournos – both a victim and perpetrator in Murphy’s rendition. I appreciate the attempt to tie the two stories together (I really do), as the message they’re trying to send is one worth exploring. Victimized women are sometimes left with no other choice in life but to commit unspeakable crimes, and the men at fault are rarely held accountable. Unfortunately, these scenes prove more distracting than thematically resonant, making it difficult to justify devoting so much of the season’s back half to them. Wournos’s story is one that would be better served in isolation, and, frankly, one that has already been told before (though this is certainly not an invitation to make another show about it).

The production is what you’d expect: way too much for a show like this. There’s always a certain distinct visual element to a Ryan Murphy production – the overly glamorized, stylized, and cast of actors that look straight out of a popular teen drama.  It’s a little campy and theatrical, with set pieces thrown into each episode, and intended to be binge-watched in a day. There’s terrible CGI with blood splatters that look like they’re shot out of a cannon. There’s way too many center-framed shots that seem lazy rather than deliberate. And the score is, well, a choice. When “Cuntology 101” by Lambrini Girls started to play when the girls concoct their murderous plot, I simply had to laugh. The formula for a Ryan Murphy production is 1) make everyone hot, 2) exploit what you can, and 3) make stuff up if you have to. As for the Emmys, I’d love to write this off as another gluttonous flash-in-the-pan crowdpleaser, but one must never discount Ryan Murphy. There’s a case to be made for Sarah Paulson’s performance, but that’s (hopefully) the ceiling.

Eight episodes is simply way too much time and effort to dedicate to this story without telling anything new that isn’t fictionalized. As with most Ryan Murphy productions, the story cares little to examine the “why” behind the supposed “monster,” instead focusing on how far to push the envelope in sensationalizing very real tragedies. It’s a series seemingly tailor-made for the true-crime obsessed who have turned killers into objects of fascination, perhaps in the most grotesque way. The central performances work when they need to, and it’s easy to understand why the series lends itself to an addictive, bingeable watch. But that may be precisely the problem: It’s so consumed with the mechanics of the story that it forgets to ask why this story needs to be told at all. Ultimately, what should feel unsettling instead becomes disturbingly easy to consume.

THE GOOD – Ella Beatty and Sarah Paulson bring rich performances to a bingeable watch of a familiar story.

THE BAD – It’s an overly-sexualized, exploitative, and salacious retelling of a story that seems to take no issue with making up details to fit the writers’ narrative for dramatic effect.

THE EMMY PROSPECTS – Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Limited Anthology Series or Movie

THE FINAL SCORE – 3/10

The post “Monster: The Lizzie Borden Story” Turns Infamy Into Empty Spectacle appeared first on Next Best Picture.

Ahead of “Ray Gunn’s” world premiere at the London Film Festival, Netflix brought Next Best Picture to its Animation Studios for an early, behind-the-scenes look at the film and exclusive conversations with Bird, Giacchino, and more.

In many ways, the development delay makes sense. Film noir isn’t the first genre you think of when it comes to family-friendly entertainment. But with Netflix footing the bill, they’re taking more risks, even butting up against the limits of a PG rating. “Ray Gunn” opens with a fairly brutal (by family-animated standards) fight sequence in an office, as Ray, voiced by Sam Rockwell, investigates a case. Slammed through walls by a giant alien woman concealing extra arms, Ray gets a lot more than he bargained for in this latest job. He’s a private investigator, though not a particularly successful one. But he’s well-known enough around Metropia to keep getting jobs. Like any good movie P.I., he’s a little rough around the edges, typically down on his luck, but he usually knows a guy who knows a guy who can help him break a case. He’s got a gruff alien partner, Eyera (Tom Waits), who helps keep things in line. He’ll need that help on a massive new case when hired by the husband of the biggest movie star around, Venus Nova (Scarlett Johansson), who wants proof that she’s up to no good.

It’s your sort of standard film noir case, but the retro-futuristic lens gives it an entirely new angle. Bird envisioned “Ray Gunn” as the future, but as it might’ve been imagined in 1939. Metropia is a sprawling mega-city, with layer upon layer of buildings, some stretching a mile into the air. The city’s design is a mash-up of Hugh Ferriss’s imposing blockiness and the sleek curves of Streamline Moderne. Metropia is a big, bright utopia, but a seedy underworld lurks behind every alley. So, of course, inspired by the iconic film noirs of the ’30s and ’40s, it’s full of harsh shadows, silhouettes, and fog.

Bird originally conceived “Ray Gunn” as a 2D animated film, a goal he had maintained when Netflix sought to revive the project. Unfortunately, animating such a huge film in a hard-drawn style proved too expensive, even for Netflix’s deep pockets. Faced with the choice of scaling down the film or moving to CG, Bird opted to keep it big. “The scale [of the film] that we made is the scale that I wanted it to be. It’s not a small movie,” he says. “I set out to make the film a certain way, and the best way to get the closest to how I pictured it was through CG.” As Bird describes this shift, you can tell there’s a bit of lingering disappointment there, though he’s clearly proud of the film they’ve made. Still, watching the footage, whenever a character looks a bit rubbery, it’s hard not to have a pang of regret for what could’ve been.

The stylization throughout “Ray Gunn” extends to the music too. Giacchino and Bird bonded over their love of Henry Mancini’s “Peter Gunn” theme music, which had the evocative, gritty, jazzy vibe the filmmakers wanted. Speaking about finding inspiration from “Peter Gunn” and The B-52’s “Planet Claire,” Giacchino says, “What I love about art is, art inspires the next round of art, constantly. Art is kind of an evolutionary process.” More than 20 years after Bird gave Giacchino his first feature film as a composer, the two have clearly maintained a close relationship. “I feel so fortunate to be able to work in a medium where I can actually honor and play with the things that I love in the artistic world, and make something new out of them,” he says. “Brad’s movies always allow me to do that.” 

Throughout our time together, whenever Giacchino said “Brad’s movie,” Bird corrected him. “Our movie,” he would say.

Beyond the noir inspirations, Bird has clearly set his mind on quite modern themes within “Ray Gunn.” Both humans and aliens of all sorts populate Metropia, but the society has clear lines drawn between the two. For the most part, aliens are relegated to janitorial careers and the like, and aren’t given the respect of full personhood. Ray looks past this, wholeheartedly trusting Eyera as his partner, regardless of his alien origins. But the film doesn’t shy away from using language all-too-familiar in today’s climate, like some characters referring to some aliens as “illegals,” and Eyera calling out another character as “xenophobic.” “It’s not meant to be a sociological term paper though,” Bird notes. “It’s meant to be a good time at the movies. And hopefully you’ll have connections with it that have to do with just being alive on the planet Earth, you know?” Netflix only showed us the first act, so we didn’t get to see how deep these themes go, but it’s clear Bird wanted “Ray Gunn” to explore deeper, darker ideas while still preserving the entertainment value.

Will the long wait for “Ray Gunn” be worth it? It’s entering an unusually crowded year for animation. At both the studio level and among the indies, the Best Animated Feature race is full of worthy contenders, from “Toy Story 5,” “Wildwood,” “Tangles,” and Netflix’s other contender, “In Waves.” As the branch has moved steadily away from Disney and Pixar in recent years, the door is still open for a more filmmaker-driven picture, like “Ray Gunn,” to impress the Academy. We’ll see more soon enough as the movie premieres in just a few weeks.

Check out our exclusive podcast interviews with Director Brad Bird, Composer Michael Giacchino, Art Director Wendell Luebe, Animation Director Jason Ryan, and Visual Effects Supervisor Adel Abada below.

Are you looking forward to “Ray Gunn?” Please let us know in the comments section below or on our X account.

The post An Early Behind The Scenes Look At Brad Bird’s “Ray Gunn” appeared first on Next Best Picture.

Based on a true story, “The Mosquito Bowl” follows four college football stars who enlisted in the Marines following the attack on Pearl Harbor and ultimately found themselves fighting in the brutal invasion of Okinawa during World War II.

Berg and Bissinger, cousins, previously collaborated on “Friday Night Lights,” with Berg directing the acclaimed 2004 feature adaptation before the story was later brought to television as the 2008-2011 series.

Berg co-wrote “The Mosquito Bowl” with Mark L. Smith (“The Dog Stars“) and directed and produced the film alongside Brian Grazer and Alex Gayner. Four stars lead the ensemble, with Nicholas Galitzine as John McLaughry, Bill Skarsgård as Bob Bauman, Ray Nicholson as Tony Butkovich, and Tom Francis as David Schreiner.

It’s long been rumored that this will be Netflix’s last Oscar contender of the season, and while many aren’t expecting much from it with such a stacked slate already this year, it could at least contend in the crafts. The crafts team includes nine-time Oscar-nominated sound designer Wylie Stateman, Oscar-nominated visual effects supervisor Ariel Velasco Shaw, BAFTA-winning hair and makeup designer Angela Conte, BAFTA-nominated production designer Phil Ivey, cinematographer Jacques Jouffret, composers Explosions in the Sky, editors Jon Otazua and Garret Donnelly, and casting director Rachel Tenner.

Netflix will release “The Mosquito Bowl” in theaters on October 30th, before it arrives on the streaming service on November 25th.

Are you looking forward to seeing “The Mosquito Bowl”? Are you looking to attend the AFI Film Festival this year? Please let us know your thoughts in the comments section below or on our X account.

The post Peter Berg’s “The Mosquito Bowl” Will Premiere At The 2026 AFI Film Festival appeared first on Next Best Picture.

THE CAST – Theo James, Kaya Scodelario, Daniel Ings, Joely Richardson, Vinnie Jones, Giancarlo Esposito & Ray Winstone

THE TEAM – Guy Ritchie (Showrunner/Writer/Director)

There’s something admirable about the craft of certain filmmakers, especially ones who are constantly churning out projects like their life depends on it. It’s as if an ever-growing dread grows the longer they stay stagnant. It doesn’t always mean everything will turn out in their favor, but for them, the pursuit matters. The work must keep going. This sentiment feels like a fitting throughline between British filmmaker Guy Ritchie and the overall arc of Theo James’ Eddie Horniman, the protagonist in Ritchie’s television adaptation of “The Gentlemen.” Based on Ritchie’s film of the same name, the series continues the misadventures of the newly appointed Duke of Halstead, who reluctantly becomes the face of an underground criminal organization.

Season Two proves itself to be a wild time, continuing to capture all of the staples of a Guy Ritchie project. The gratuitous violence, edgy humor, and stylized storytelling feel most at home in this world, which Ritchie is enamored enough with to be involved in such a capacity. The last few years have yielded mixed results for the popular filmmaker, with no major hit since his live-action adaptation of “Aladdin” in 2019. In a way, “The Gentlemen” is Ritchie in his comfort zone, often coasting on a style that, most of the time, elevates what is otherwise a very straightforward crime drama.

Like its previous season, each episode abides by the same formula where something proves troublesome for Eddie, who, now with some time (and a few bodies) under his belt, endures a string of misfortunes that stand in the way of his goal to preserve his estate and keep his family on top. Alongside Kaya Scodelario’s Susie Glass, the two will have to develop their professional dynamic further if they want to keep their business afloat in the face of Italian mobsters, elusive racing falcons, and even Susie’s father, the superstitious Bobby Glass, played by Ray Winstone. Ritchie and the writing team certainly keep the crude vivacity of Ritchie’s dialogue that makes his work so enjoyable. Audiences watching Eddie tailspin all season, in the face of resistance from Bobby’s methodology and Susie’s ever-ambitious nature, stay entertained.

Despite how fun “The Gentlemen” can be, this season pushes the series into a much darker place. Eddie, now fully accepting the position he holds, must bear the weight that comes with it. Eddie is essentially in the midst of a transformation à la Vito Corleone in “The Godfather.” The brutality of this world that makes someone like Bobby Glass, or even a wildcard like Freddy, played by Daniel Ings, suited for it, slowly stains Eddie. James brings the right amount of charm, class, and viciousness to make him a leading man fitting for a Ritchie-helmed project. He sells this season’s arc for Eddie, pushing the needle on what he can do with the character. The ensemble is a blast to watch, especially veteran actors like Winstone and Vinnie Jones, who get plenty of time to shine this season.

While it’s nice to see an actor like James take center stage with a Geoff-focused episode towards the back half of the series, “The Gentlemen” does take plenty of detours this season with certain side plots that either end in the most inevitably predictable way or do little to push the overall narrative. One of them is Freddy, who spends most of the season on the sidelines in rehab, trying to weasel his way back into the manor after his endless sea of transgressions. Whether it’s because of Ingles being busy in the last of Westeros with the “Knight of the Seven Kingdoms” or because it’s clearly setting the stage for something down the road, it’s underwhelming. Even watching Susie’s storyline of her venturing into her own side business tied to her ex is merely a time-killer till it ties back to the ever-evolving power struggle between Eddie and Bobby.

Ritchie’s direction makes all these sidesteps look as lavish as the lifestyles these characters relish. The ostentatious production design is always marvelous to fawn over and makes for the most immersive stages for Ritchie to capture. While the direction is solid, it’s mainly the writing that pulls audiences in. Even with its few missteps, which are more than typical of many sophomore seasons, the series still has plenty to offer for those willing to stick with it. If nothing else, “The Gentlemen” is the rare case where style over substance actually pays off.

THE GOOD – The series still captures Guy Ritchie’s signature charm, always making it a fun watch.

THE BAD – Certain storylines this season don’t do much but act as a buffer to the central narrative.

THE EMMY PROSPECTS – Outstanding Directing For A Drama Series

THE FINAL SCORE – 6/10

The post “The Gentlemen” Season 2 Review: Style Over Substance Pays Off Again appeared first on Next Best Picture.