AD
Home Blog Page 21

Review: ‘Idiots’

Macon Blair's Drug-Fueled Road Comedy Is All Over The Map

O'Shea Jackson Jr., Dave Franco, and Mason Thames in THE SHITHEADS

Dave Franco has described Macon Blair’s road “comedy” Idiots (formerly The Shitheads) as “The Last Detail with hard drugs”. Maybe if that were truly the direction Blair had gone, then this would’ve been a much more successful Film. But, similar to the director’s last trip to Sundance with I Don’t Feel At Home In This World Anymore, the tone bounces unsteadily from broad humor to something more considered, with little rhyme or reason, and never pushes the envelope as far as it could go.

It’s entirely possible that Blair imagined one kind of movie, but ended up making something else entirely different. For instance, the film begins with O’Shea Jackson Jr. as Davis, a complete moron who is getting fired from his job driving around Bible school kids. Why? Because he took them to a porno, because he’s an idiot who didn’t realize it was a porno, but when he did he let the kids stay and watch. This presents Davis as the perfect kind of dopey character for a Pineapple Express-style stoner comedy.

Franco is another loser, Mark, who wastes his time at his telemarketing job by getting high, drunk, and watching videos of homeless people fighting in the streets. When he gets fired, he’s indignant about it. “This is my job!!”, he shouts, before angrily knocking everything off his boss’s desk, acting like a baby. Childish antics are Mark’s default way of life.

These clowns come together when they are hired to transport a spoiled, Internet-famous rich kid, Sheridan, played by Mason Thames (who is everywhere lately), to a rehab facility. Little do Mark and Davis know that Sheridan is a total psycho, and he’s going to make this journey a drug-fueled nightmare.

It’s easy to see why so many stars were attracted to Idiots. At times, Blair’s script can be explosive and wildly funny, the kind of unpredictable spree comedy they really don’t make anymore. Ironically, Dave’s brother James Franco was among the last big stars to lead those films when Hollywood made them. But too often, the film doesn’t know where it’s going or how it wants us to feel. For every laugh-out-loud hilarious gross-out gag, like when explosive diarrhea rockets out of Mark’s shorts after being drugged by Sheridan, there are more that ask us to take them seriously, which is very hard to do. It gets tougher the more we learn about the terrible things Sheridan has done, which are pretty unforgivable. Davis isn’t so much an idiot as a big-hearted screw-up, and Mark…well, he’s just kind of pathetic and delusional. These aren’t characters you want to laugh at, but nor does the film do enough to make us sympathize with them, either.

Blair finds moments of inspiration, though, especially in the supporting cast. Kiernan Shipka shines as a down-on-her-luck stripper who gets screwed over by Sheridan, and finds an unlikely kinship with his chauffeurs. There’s the hint of something romantic between her and Davis that is kind of sweet, and that I wish Blair had followed up on more. Also, Peter Dinklage, who has worked with Blair multiple times including on The Toxic Avenger, is a riot as a face-painted kidnapper, with Nicholas Braun as his street thug sidekick. They capture the unhinged energy that should’ve been the standard for Idiots, rather than a pit stop.

Idiots opens in theaters on August 28th from IFC.

*NOTE-This review was originally part of my Sundance Film Festival coverage.*

‘How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days’ Sequel In The Works, Kate Hudson And Matthew McConaughey Could Return

In the early 2000s, Hollywood became obsessed with turning every popular self-help book into a feature film. Released in 2003, How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days was one of the most successful, and now more than two decades later, a sequel is in the works at Paramount. Unsurprisingly, stars Kate Hudson and Matthew McConaughey are being sought to return.

Variety has the news, reporting that a script is in development. Neither Hudson nor McConaughey is officially signed to return, but both have expressed a willingness to do so for the right story.

How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days was loosely based on the dating advice picture book by Michele Alexander and Jeannie Long. The film starred Hudson as Andie, a magazine advice columnist tasked with making a guy dump her in ten days, while McConaughey’s Ben was an ad exec who bets he can make any woman fall in love with him in the same stretch of time. Directed by Donald Petrie, it went on to make $177M and gave your ex-girlfriend stuff she wanted to talk to you about afterward.

The film has remained wildly popular over the years, with McConaughey recently saying on the Happy Sad Confused podcast that it still brings him more residual income than any movie he’s ever done. Think about the territory that covers; we’re talking films like Interstellar, Dallas Buyers Club, and The Wolf of Wall Street. But nah, How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days kicks all of their butts.

Hudson recently earned some of the best reviews of her career for Song Sung Blue, and currently stars in the Netflix sports comedy series, Running Point, which was just renewed for a third season.

McConaughey is unlikely to get massive residuals for his latest film, The Rivals of Amziah King, which is in theaters now and receiving strong reviews, as well.

 

‘Ali G: Who Iz I?’ Teaser Trailer Returns Sacha Baron Cohen’s Controversial Rude Boy To The Big Screen

You probably heard over the last few weeks that Sacha Baron Cohen has been doing what he does best, discreetly shooting a new movie, because that’s the best way to get the raw, honest, and hilarious reactions he needs. Today, we’ve got the first teaser for Ali G: Who Iz I?, the return of Cohen’s controversial character after years away.

The film marks Cohen’s return as Ali G, the faux, streetwise rude boy who became famous first on The 11 O’Clock Show and then on Da Ali G Show which ran from 2000 to 2004. Cohen played the character in the 2002 film, Ali G Indahouse.

Cohen will make his directorial debut with Ali G: Who Iz I?, bringing the character out of “retirement” just as he did Borat with 2020’s Oscar-nominated Borat Subsequent Moviefilm.

SYNOPSIS: After twenty years spent “chillin’, tokin’ and bonin’”, Ali G is shocked to discover that his long-term girlfriend, Julie, is 8 months pregnant. Faced with an extra mouth to feed, he gets off his batty and heads to America to reclaim his former glory… but soon encounters adversaries who will ultimately threaten his and his child’s very existence. Sacha Baron Cohen’s new film, ALI G: WHO IZ I? marks his directorial debut and will be released in theaters on October 23 by Amazon MGM Studios.

If I’m being honest, Ali G was always my least favorite of Cohen’s creations, and I question whether he can be relevant today. We’ll find out when Ali G: Who Iz I? hits theaters on October 23rd from Amazon MGM Studios.

Did Gladiator II Kill off the Franchise?

GLADIATOR II opens on November 22nd

24 years after the release of the original, Gladiator II hit cinemas with a star-studded cast that included Paul Mescal, Pedro Pascal and Joseph Quinn. With high expectations, it missed the mark with many critics and audiences. While the cinematography and scope were a sight to behold, lacklustre characterisation and a narrative similar to the original but sorely lacking its key ingredients saw it get a tepid response. So did it kill off the franchise, or is there more in store?

Ridley Scott Discusses Gladiator III

In a 2025 IGN interview, director Ridley Scott did speak of the possibility of working on Gladiator III, and in other outlets branded it a “certainty”. Yet Scott is already 88 years old, and he has films in preparation for both his Alien and Blade Runner franchises that need finishing first.

What makes a third installment tough conceptually is that at the end of the last film, almost everyone died, except the lead character. This would have to involve something of a reset, very similar to the ideas the other two movies have explored in great depth. It would be hard for such a film to diverge from anything but a very well-trodden narrative.

The Franchise Value

The actual franchise does still hold cultural weight. iGaming particularly is an industry which owes much to the imagery of the Gladiator movies, as exemplified in games like Gladiator Mega Cash Collect, which meld modern mechanics with the iconography made popular through the film. Unlike static physical machines, games at an online slots casino can reach a wider audience through mobile devices. This form of casual gaming has grown exponentially, and licensing agreements for film IPs in other media have been a welcome new source of income for many major studios. The Gladiator franchise could still leverage the power of branding and merchandising if the studios want it to stay relevant.

Gladiator merging into other media could also be a way to create a sequel without having to dedicate same the Hollywood budget. Blade Runner 2099 is in the works for a Netflix TV show. A Gladiator one could do the same.

Rectifying the Mistakes of the Past

One hallmark of the franchise that could define it going forward will be its ability to tread a fine line with historical accuracy. While the original did have a Hollywood shine, it flirted with a line that allowed the suspension of disbelief. The second opted for naval battles, sharks and mutant simians in the Coliseum. It was not something fans warmed to.

One problem it had was in leaving a sequel so long between its first and second movie. The original was released in 2000, with the second releasing in 2024. In this situation, a movie needs to be tip-top, carrying the themes of the original but also being unique. Take Aliens, which turned what was essentially Jaws in space into an all-out action blockbuster for its second outing.

If Ridley Scott has said Gladiator III is coming, then it most likely is. With directors of this calibre, what they say often goes. We have seen this with James Cameron’s Avatar and its sequels. Yet only a quality movie will give the franchise its edge back, creating longevity and forging loyalty with fans.

James Gunn Responds To ‘Brave And The Bold’ Hiatus Rumors

One of the reasons James Gunn is so popular is that he’s a fan himself, and makes himself available to other fans. Whenever a rumor about one of his projects gets out of hand, he’s always there to either confirm or deny. Recently, rumors began swirling around the DCU Batman film, The Brave and the Bold, stating that it had been put on hold until the WB/Paramount situation is resolved. Well, Gunn has given his official response on Threads after a fan questioned him about it…

“No. Nothing is on hold.”

Pretty simple, quick and easy.

This whole thing started with journalist Dan Marcus, who was reporting what he heard from apparent Brave and the Bold director Andy Muschietti. That said, Muschietti seems to be out of the loop, and it’s not even a certainty that he’ll be behind the camera at all, especially given the embarrassing failure of The Flash, which he directed.

On the one hand, this makes sense. The Paramount/WB merger might not even happen (let’s hope not), and other DCU projects are moving forward anyway, such as Clayface, Man of Tomorrow, and a Wonder Woman film. Why not The Brave and the Bold?

On the other hand, there’s already a successful Batman out there, played by Robert Pattinson in the standalone universe created by Matt Reeves. Does it make sense to have two separate Batman franchises at the same time?

DCU Batman Film ‘The Brave And The Bold’ Put “On Hold” Due to WB/Paramount Merger

THE BRAVE AND THE BOLD still has Andy Muschietti as director

James Gunn’s DCU Batman movie, The Brave and the Bold, has been the subject of a lot of speculation. Who will play the Dark Knight? His sidekick and psychotic son, Damian? Is Andy Muschietti even still attached to direct? Well, apparently so, because it’s Muschietti who has provided the latest update, and it’s a disappointing one.

According to journalist Dan Marcus, Muschietti told him that The Brave and the Bold has been “put on hold” while the Warner Bros./Paramount merger is being figured out. Hopefully, that shit gets tossed in the garbage. Anyway, the film won’t move forward until that’s settled.

If I’m being honest, it seems ridiculous for there to be two Batman franchises at the same time, anyway. I wouldn’t be surprised if WB, whoever the owners are, hold off until Matt Reeves is done with his movies.

So at least for now, Muschietti is still on board as director, with the latest script by Birds of Prey writer Christina Hodson.

The fate of Batman could depend on the next couple of DCU movies: Clayface in October, and Man of Tomorrow in July 2027.

Kit Harington In, Nicholas Hoult Out As Gilderoy Lockhart In HBO’s ‘Harry Potter’ Series

Well, that didn’t take long. Nicholas Hoult, who just joined the Harry Potter series cast as Gilderoy Lockhart days ago, has already dropped out and been replaced. Deadline reports Game of Thrones star Kit Harington has taken over the role…one he’s played before.

Hoult had to drop out due to scheduling conflicts, likely with his return as Lex Luthor in Superman: Man of Tomorrow and the Hulu/Disney+ comedy series Mosquito with Daisy Edgar-Jones.

While Harington is joining Harry Potter for season two, playing the arrogant celebrity wizard Gilderoy Lockhart, it’s technically a reprisal for him. Harington, a huge Potter fan, voiced Lockhart in the Harry Potter: The Full-Cast Audio Editions released last year. Obviously, Harington already has a close connection with HBO due to Game of Thrones and Industry.

Harington joins a cast that includes Dominic McLaughlin as Harry Potter, Arabella Stanton as Hermione Granger, and Alastair Stout as Ron Weasley, Rory Wilmot as Neville Longbottom, Amos Kitson as Dudley Dursley, Louise Brealey as Madam Rolanda Hooch, Anton Lesser as Garrick Ollivander, John Lithgow as Albus Dumbledore, Janet McTeer as Minerva McGonagall, Paapa Essiedu as Severus Snape, Nick Frost as Rubeus Hagrid, Bel Powley as Petunia Dursley, Daniel Rigby as Vernon Dursley, Lox Pratt as Draco Malfoy, Johnny Flynn as Lucius Malfoy, Katherine Parkinson as Molly Weasley, Leo Earley as Seamus Finnigan, Alessia Leoni as Parvati Patil, Sienna Moosah as Lavender Brown, and Bertie Carvel as Cornelius Fudge.

Harry Potter season one hits HBO this Christmas with Francesca Gardiner as showrunner.

How Filmmakers Make Games of Chance Feel Like Psychological Showdowns

You know the scene. Two people sit across a table, barely moving, while the movie somehow makes a turned card feel more dangerous than a car chase. Nothing is exploding. Nobody is running. Yet the tension is brutal.

That is the trick. In strong films, games of chance are rarely about the game itself. They are pressure chambers. Directors use them to expose ego, fear, bluffing, confidence, and the tiny decisions people make when they think they are still in control.

The Game Is Only the Surface

A poker hand, roulette spin, or wager gives a scene an instant structure: somebody wants something, the outcome is uncertain, and everyone has to wait. Filmmakers then build the real drama around that uncertainty.

A Face Becomes an Action Scene

Casino Royale understands this perfectly. The poker table works because James Bond and Le Chiffre are not simply playing cards; they are studying each other. Every pause becomes a challenge. Every look can be a lie. The chips provide the mechanics, but the actors provide the danger.

Rounders takes a similar route, making observation feel almost physical. The audience starts watching posture, speech, confidence, and hesitation because the film teaches us that behavior matters as much as the cards.

That fascination with uncertain outcomes now stretches across many forms of entertainment, including online terms such as slotgacor. Cinema, however, has a special advantage: it can make chance reveal character. The interesting question is not merely who wins. It is what someone is willing to show, hide, or risk before the result arrives.

Filmmakers Control What We Know

Suspense gets stronger when the audience has enough information to worry, but not enough to relax. A director can show us one player’s hand, hide another, cut to a nervous observer, or hold on a face just long enough to make us suspicious.

Editing Turns Uncertainty Into Suspense

The cut is often the secret weapon. Fast editing can create panic, while a long take can make a few seconds feel unbearable. Uncut Gems pushes this idea almost to breaking point. Its wagers are tangled into a larger storm of deadlines, arguments, money, and impulsive choices, so each uncertain outcome lands inside an already overloaded situation.

Contemporary entertainment culture also has its own language for immediacy around games of chance, including phrases such as slot gacor malam ini. A film does not need that real-time framework. It manufactures urgency through information: what the character knows, what we know, and what neither side can control.

Sound, Silence, and Stakes Do the Heavy Lifting

A great showdown does not need constant dialogue. Sometimes the most effective choice is to remove noise. The clack of chips, a card sliding across felt, a breath, or a sudden stretch of silence can make the room feel smaller.

What to Watch for in the Next High-Stakes Scene

The next time a movie pauses at a card table or another game of chance, watch three things:

  • Who has the most information, and who only thinks they do?
  • Does the editing speed up the decision or force you to sit with it?
  • What does the character risk beyond money: pride, trust, status, or control?

Those questions usually reveal why the scene works. The game supplies rules, but the filmmakers create the psychological battlefield.

Final Thoughts

The strongest games-of-chance scenes are miniature character studies disguised as competition. A director can take cards, chips, probability, and silence and turn them into a confrontation where every glance matters. That is why these scenes can feel bigger than their setting. The table may be still, but the characters are fighting for control, and the audience is trapped there with them.

‘Cliffhanger’ Reboot With Lily Collins Moves To February 2027

Lily James scaling the rockface in CLIFFHANGER

If you, like me, looked at this week’s releases and wondered why you hadn’t seen more of the Cliffhanger remake with Lily James and Pierce Brosnan, wonder no more. Recently, distributor Row K ran into some financial difficulties and had to unload some of its titles. One of those was Cliffhanger, which was picked up by NEON. They are planning a much larger rollout for the film, and as such, it’s been moved to a promising new date, February 24th, 2027. My birthday! Whoop!

According to our friends at Joblo, NEON is taking a “go big or go home” approach with Cliffhanger in hopes that it will be its biggest blockbuster hit. They have good reason for optimism. It has reportedly tested very well as a crowd-pleasing thriller and could justify the whopping $100M budget. NEON acquired the film for about $12M plus $20M P&A commitment, a hefty investment.

You may recall that Cliffhanger began as a kind of sequel to Sylvester Stallone’s 1993 action flick, with Stallone expected to return. However, weeks before production, Stallone left the film due to “creative differences.” The entire script was rewritten for a female lead and entirely new cast including James, Brosnan, Nell Tiger Free, and Franz Rogowski.

Jaume Collet-Serra directs, following the streaming success of Carry-On. He has two more films coming up, Play Dead and An Innocent Girl.

Here’s the Cliffhanger synopsis: “Ray Cooper (Brosnan) is a seasoned mountaineer who runs a luxury chalet in the Dolomites with his daughter. When a weekend excursion with a billionaire’s son turns violent, they are targeted by a group of kidnappers. As the attack unfolds, Ray’s daughter, Naomi (James), still haunted by a tragic climbing accident, escapes into the mountains and must fight for survival against both nature and her pursuers.”

 

Josh Brolin Says ‘Sicario 3 Is Happening, Production To Begin “Soon”

Josh Brolin’s CIA spook Matt Graver isn’t done taking on the Mexican drug cartels. Brolin spoke with ScreenRant about his upcoming film, Ridley Scott’s The Dog Stars, and revealed something unexpected about a different project. “‘Sicario 3’ is “happening,” Brolin said, adding that production will begin “soon.”

It’s been a while since we heard anything about Sicario 3. Back in 2023, Christopher McQuarrie joined Taylor Sheridan in shaping the sequel’s story. He exited the film a year later to work on King Conan, and that’s the last update we’ve had until now.

The first film was directed by Denis Villeneuve in 2015 and made $84M. It starred Brolin, Emily Blunt, Daniel Kaluuya, and Benicio Del Toro as the series’ breakout character, assassin Alejandro Gillick. Brolin and Del Toro returned for the Stefano Sollima-directed 2018 sequel, Day of the Soldado, which wasn’t reviewed nearly as well, but still managed $75M at the box office.

Sicario producers have been gung-ho for a third film, as well, but one of them, Thad Luckinbill, tempered expectations just a little bit with EW, stating “We’re hoping to do it, so fingers crossed. It would be great to get to do another one for the fans. And, honestly, for me, too. Like, I’m a fan of it. Even though I produced it, I wanna see it.”

It’s unclear who would be behind the camera for Sicario 3. It won’t be Sheridan, who wrote the first two movies but has been busy with his TV empire on Paramount+, plus a Call of Duty movie. Villeneuve seems to moved way beyond movies of this small-ish scale. It’s possible Sollima returns, having directed the Tom Clancy thriller Without Remorse and critically-acclaimed crime drama Adagio in the years since.