Erin Underwood Presents

Snow White Review: Breaking Down the Live-Action Adaptation

Posted on March 22, 2025 by Erin Underwood

Snow White is finally out in theaters after what feels like months of drama, hot takes, and online social media contortions that twisted people into knots. Everyone had an opinion on Rachel Zegler, on Disney, on what this movie was going to be … and what it wasn’t. The buildup became so bloated with backlash and assumptions that it’s still hard to separate the film from the frenzy, but at least we have a movie to actually review and talk about. So, I’m going to do my best to review the actual movie that was released, not the one people were speculating about online.

Just a heads-up: there is a lot to talk about with this film, both good and bad, and to do that there will be spoilers in this review, because I want to talk about the story honestly and clearly. This is one of those films that needs to be dissected to really understand what it’s doing to see where it succeeds and where it stumbles. You may not agree with everything I say, or maybe you do, but I hope you’ll hear me out.

You can read the review below or watch the video review on YouTube:

Story Summary

Snow White is Disney’s latest live-action remake, and it’s a remake of the most important film in Disney’s library since the animated classic that essentially launched Walt Disney Studios and revolutionized cinema. This version is directed by Marc Webb, written by Erin Cressida Wilson, and stars Rachel Zegler as Snow White, Andrew Burnap as Jonathan, and Gal Gadot as the Evil Queen. Inspired by fairy tales by the Brothers Grimm, Snow White tells the story of a young princess’s struggle against her evil stepmother whose jealousy and desire for power not only puts her life at risk but the lives of her people as well.

The film opens with a traditional Disney-style song titled “Where the Good Things Grow,” which sets the tone for the kingdom and the royal family’s close connection with their people. It introduces us to young Snow White, her parents, who are the queen and the king if the realm. The royal family has a tradition of sharing apple pies with their people as a sign of love and unity, and there’s a strong sense of community between the royals and the people, right from the beginning.

Then the queen dies, and the king remarries a mysterious, strikingly beautiful woman from a far-off land. The kingdom and Snow White’s life is never the same after that as her father rides off to battle and never returns, and the new queen, wary of the pretty little princess cuts her hair short in an ugly bob and dresses her in scullery rags and hides Snow White away from her people, setting the stage for the Evil Queen to eventually try to destroy the princess and secure her own power.

Throughout most of the film, the live action adaptation does hold fairly close to the animated classic, with some significant story elements that depart from the original while still holding true to the ideals of the original – which I didn’t expect due to Rachel Zegler’s early comments to the press.

First Impressions and Structure

For anyone familiar with the original or who really understands how stories are written and structured, one of the first things you’ll notice is a strange patchwork feeling in the middle of the film. I don’t think everyone will automatically notice this or if they do, they may not be able to put a finger on the oddness that they experience with the story. It’s like you can still see the cutout silhouette of an earlier version of the story that has been stripped away and patched.

Specifically, Jonathan who is the leaders of a group of bandits who live in the woods is caught in the palace stealing food and he challenges Snow White to join them in fighting the Evil Queen, and it feels like there are shadows of a former story in which Snow White escaped the castle and immediately joined up with the bandits, who essentially were meant to replace the dwarfs. Prior to the release, someone at Disney must have realized that Snow White without the Seven Dwarfs just doesn’t work. And they’re right. So, they inserted CGI dwarfs, and honestly, it shows because the dwarfs feel like an afterthought.

The Problem with the Dwarfs

The seven dwarfs are hyper realistic CGI characters who feel jarring in a live-action film. It’s not the same as CGI animals—which, fine, the animated forest creatures work. However, making human characters who are supposed to be integral, emotional parts of the story into fake non-human beings creates a disconnect between the viewer, the actors, and the story itself. Plus, it doesn’t help that their heads are disproportionately large for their bodies, accentuating their photo-realistic eyes within slightly unrealistic faces, which makes these characters feel uncanny. Dopey stands out for a different reason. Every time I saw him, I couldn’t stop thinking about the Mad Magazine kid. I just couldn’t unsee the resemblance.

And yet, the kids in my theater clearly didn’t care. The little girl sitting next to me was absolutely delighted by the dwarfs, giggling as they danced around the cottage with Snow White. In that moment, I realized I realized that maybe it’s us adults who are hung up on the CGI. Maybe the kids don’t have all of our cinematic baggage to react to when watching the film.

That said, I think that they didn’t execute this choice very well. If you’re doing a live-action adaptation, you need actual human beings in these roles. Talented little people actors exist, and their presence would have grounded the story in a more believable world.

Echoes of the Original Grimm’s Fairy Tale

However, I really appreciated how the film enhanced the dwarves’ intrinsic connection to the natural world that allowed them to make special minerals glow in the mines, highlighting their fairytale-esque connection to the earth. It feels like a thoughtful nod to the original Grimm fairy tales, especially Snow White and Rose Red, where the dwarfs weren’t just comic relief or helpers. They were elemental beings, guardians of nature and hidden wealth, deeply connected to the land itself. In this version, their glowing hands, which are connected to their mining magic is not just a CGI gimmick. Instead, it actively restores some of that deeper folkloric essence to the film.

The same goes for the rose metaphor used by the Evil Queen. She crushes a beautiful rose in her hand and calls it weak, something that fades and turns to ash, in comparison to the strength of a diamond. However, in the Grimm tales, the rose isn’t a symbol of fragility, and this reveals the Queen’s lack of understanding when it comes to the power of beauty and goodness. The rose is a counterpart to Snow White herself. So, when the Queen uses it as a metaphor for beauty and how she destroys it, that action has ripples throughout the story that are layered, if not a little too overt. It ties Snow White and Rose Red back together in spirit within this film, even if Rose Red isn’t physically in this version of the fairy tale. It’s a quiet but meaningful connection to the original story from the Brothers Grimm. This is an overly simplistic explanation that I am making for the sake of time in this review, but I really wanted to bring this up since I haven’t heard many people making connections to the original stories that inspired Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.

Artistic Direction and CGI Choices

Visually, there are highs and lows within the film, and Disney is without a doubt a master of animated cinematography. The transformation scene from the beautiful Evil Queen to the ugly Old Crone is gorgeously styled, but it loses its impact due to an over reliance on CGI for Gal Gadot. Her voice remains light and young, and her facial expressions and lip movements don’t quite match the emotions in her voice that could have been captured by using better physical effects. Her transformation also lacks the creepiness associated with the ritualistic magic of the animated original when the Evil Queen was rummaging around her apothecary for things like “mummy dust and a scream of fright” as she recited the spell. That’s gone, and its absence is felt, even if you can’t identify “why” it feels flat in the moment.

Gal Gadot herself (look, she’s not terrible), but she’s miscast. She’s stiff, awkward, and doesn’t bring the presence this role demands as the iconic OG of Evil Queens in the Disney universe. Worse, the way she’s styled with her robes, jewels, headdress, and her crown flatten out her appearance. She looks like a nun, with shiny makeup who is wearing costume jewelry. She’s supposed to be the fairest of them all, but the design choices just don’t work in her favor and are disappointing. Worse, her singing is decent, but she simply can’t match Rachel Zegler’s voice. And in a Disney musical, especially one where the Evil Queen needs to exude power and strength, her voice must be part of that package and Gadot can’t compete.

Rachel Zegler, on the other hand, is spectacular. I never thought I would say that because of how much she has annoyed me lately. Say what you want about the pre-release interviews and her utterly naive and clueless commentary, but she can act. More than that, she can sing, and she understands musical theater in a way that out classes Gal Gadot in every way. The most unfortunate thing about her performance is that Rachel Zegler never fully fades away into her character, not because of her acting but because of her off-screen presence and the months long drama she created. It’s a real case study for future actors to learn how their off-screen actions can impact their on-screen performance in the eyes of the audience.

Characters and Chemistry

When it comes to Jonathan, played by Andrew Burnap, he’s not a prince in this version. Instead, he’s the leader of a group of bandits, and despite what Rachel Zegler led us all to believe about his role, he actually plays an incredibly important part in the story. In fact, the character of Jonathan is so much more important and integral to this version of Snow White than the Prince was to the original version of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. He challenges Snow White who had basically given up and resigned herself to the life of a scullery maid.

This story and her transformation happened because of him. He wakes her up, figuratively, before he ever kisses her. He’s the reason she starts questioning her place and what happened to her father. It’s because of him that she begins to care about her people again and rises to confront the Evil Queen. Plus, there’s real chemistry between them, and their relationship feels earned since there is a constant exchange of values and understanding between them. They literally save each other even as they start to realize that there is something more than friendship between them.

That’s what makes “true love’s kiss” work so well. When Jonathan finds her lifeless body laid out beneath a canopy of flowers, he doesn’t kiss her because he thinks it will save her. He kisses her because he never got a chance to tell her that he loved her while she was alive. In that kiss, he gave a bit of himself to her. That sincere, unselfish love, that is what breaks even the strongest curses in fairy tales, and this story solves that age old problem of the original animated classic of the random prince who fell in love with Snow White’s physical beauty. Instead, Jonathan falls in love with the woman, and that is hella romantic.

It also makes Zegler’s early press comments about not needing a prince totally wrong. Whether she misunderstood the character, or whether Disney rewrote the film afterward to fix the problem, I can’t say. The final version of the film is romantic , featuring a reciprocal relationship between Snow White and Jonathan. He really is the hero of this story in many unexpected ways.

Plot Holes and Pacing

This leads into the biggest flaw of the film. The Evil Queen knows Jonathan loves Snow White, and she even says it to him, but she still chooses a curse that can be broken by true love’s kiss. How does that make sense? There’s no logical reason for her to use that spell if she knows someone loves Snow White and she is stupid enough to leave him alive in the dungeon. She’s ordering deaths right and left. So, why leave him alive to break the curse?

This could have been fixed so easily by having the Evil Queen poison Snow White before realizing Jonathan loves her. This would create more realistic tension and raise our hopes that he will escape and undo the spell before the Queen realizes her error. But no. The film skips right over this, and it’s a frustrating missed opportunity.

The other major issue is the bandits. They feel awkward in the story even though we understand they are symbolic of the people of the kingdom. They serve a valid story purpose, but the actors and characters just don’t mesh. Jonathan fits in, but they don’t. I think part of the problem is that they all played their parts like they were caricatures of the dwarves. I think on paper, Disney thought the bandits could stand in for the dwarfs while also representing the people of the kingdom, but they just weren’t strong enough or well defined enough to serve two purposes within the story that are so very different. My guess is that when the film was reviewed, Disney realized that the bandits just didn’t work and that was why they added the CGI dwarves into the film. If this is what happened, I actually think they did an amazing job of repairing the story despite the flaws and problems that it created.

Thematic Direction and Modern Touches

There are some themes and modern touches that work really well in the film. The most important of these is the apple, which becomes a motif throughout the movie. From the opening in which the royal family shares apple pies with the people to the Evil Queen ordering the Huntsman to kill Snow White while apple picking in the forest and her use of the poisoned apple—it becomes symbolic of family, of love, and of Snow White’s ties to her people. This is why, when the Evil Queen offers it to her as “sustenance for the road,” it’s not just a snack. It’s a connection from someone she sees as one of her people who is actively giving her a connection back to who she used to be as a princess, and that narrative thread works really well. In fact, it works better than it did in the original animated film.

After all the drama from Rachel Zegler’s comments, I had assumed that Snow White would lead a violent fight against the Evil Queen, but that’s not at all what happens. She never raises a weapon. She doesn’t fight. And, she’s not a she-ro in this film. In fact, Snow White is very feminine and girly in this movie, and she even refuses to kill the Evil Queen. Instead, she breaks the Queen’s power with kindness and by helping others to remember who they are and to stand with the Princess and Jonathan. The Queen’s downfall comes with the realization that her power is tied to her beauty and her beauty is only skin deep, while Snow White’s beauty is physical as well as emotional. That’s a powerful truth that the Evil Queen can’t counter.

And the theme of beauty and power is threaded throughout the film. The Queen’s magic is literally tied to her physical appearance. It’s her beauty that seduced the King, it’s her beauty that ensorcelled the men around her to do her bidding, it’s her physical beauty that the mirror validates, and it’s her beauty that sustains her magic. Her obsession with surface-level strength is what leads to her undoing. Snow White’s beauty isn’t just in her face. Her power is in her hope, her compassion, and her connection to others. In the end, when the Queen realizes she can’t match that inner strength, she shatters her mirror in anger and her own magic destroys her in the blow back of her rage, which is a far more fitting death than how the Evil Queen (as the Old Crone) fell off a cliff while running away from the dwarfs.

The Music – Old and New

Finally, with any Disney musical, the music has got to be strong. Snow White is a blend of songs from the original animated classic as well as some new ones clearly designed to enhance the story and fill in a few of the emotional gaps. One notable omission is “Someday My Prince Will Come,” which was replaced by a different song that focuses more on the importance of knowing yourself and those around you, rather than sitting around waiting for love to find you.

This is a poignant change in Snow White’s character, and I actually watched the original animated classic right after watching the live action film, and I was struck by how much more interesting Snow White is as a person in the live action film. In the cartoon, her defining values as a human are her looks, her cooking skills, and her ability to clean. I absolutely support women in any role they want to play in society and in family, but even the most wonderful housewives who I know have so much more to offer to their husbands and family’s than domestic service.

This is an intentional shift within the story and the music, and they give Snow White more agency while also giving the other characters like Jonathan more agency. He’s not just a man looking for a pretty wife, he’s a man looking for a partner who is also his friend and who is someone who truly sees his value as well. And isn’t that the whole point of a relationship … to be seen and to be loved by the person you see and love?

I also really enjoyed the update to the dwarves “Hi Ho” song, which was a highlight because their singing voices were lovely. Sadly, it didn’t feel like the dwarves themselves were singing because of the CGI limitations, but the song still managed to bring a moment of nostalgia and fun into the film. It’s one of those rare times when the musical update strikes the right balance between honoring the original and adapting to the tone of the remake.

Final Thoughts and Recommendation

So, should you see Snow White? Is it ticket worthy? Well, it depends. If you’re already anti-Disney, anti-remake, or can’t stand CGI or Rachel Zegler, this film won’t change your mind. However, if you can get past some of that or if you’re curious, open to musicals, and willing to view it as a modern fairy tale …. I think you may actually find parts of it enjoyable despite its flaws because the dreaded “messaging” that we kept hearing about in all of the internet hand-wringing is not nearly as present as we were led to believe.

The songs aren’t showstoppers, but Rachel Zegler’s signing is impressive. It’s a romantic film that was not represented well in the comments made by Zegler, and I think that actually makes it a decent date night or friends film if you are looking for something to do that is decent. If you have kids, I think they will enjoy it. They won’t be coming at this film with all of our preconceived notions and expectations. They are just going to see a Disney Princess, the man she falls in love with, and the Evil Queen who has to be defeated; and if the kids in my theater are any indication for how other kids will respond to Snow White, I think this movie will resonate with them.

In fact, the little girl next to me was in tears when Snow White died. She actually crawled into her mom’s lap and sobbed. Then when Jonathan kissed Snow White, the little girl made this gurgling laughing gasp that made my eyes water because of how she responded to the story. So, after the film ended, I had to ask her what part was her favorite, and without flinching she said: “I liked when the evil queen blew up and died.” And I left the theater laughing. So, yes, Snow White was ticket worthy for me.

Maybe it was because there were some good parts of the film; maybe it was the little girl sitting next to me in the theater who showed me that there was some magic in the film that I would have otherwise missed seeing. Really, I’m glad I saw it even if it was flawed.

Post-Release PR and Rachel Zegler

So, I can’t end this without talking about Disney and the Rachel Zegler PR mess. Look, yes, she said those words that created an internet firestorm, and she must take responsibility for them. However, Disney absolutely failed her. She is young, excited, and inexperienced with the press – even though this isn’t her first merry-go-round. Disney sent her out to promote their MOST IMPORTANT film with no media training on what to expect and how to anticipate reporters who are looking for a soundbite that will go viral. That’s on them, and she got baited. Disney said nothing. Gal Gadot said nothing. And Zegler just kept talking and digging herself deeper. It’s a sad case study of the impact of social media and how everything we say in the past is always current and never forgotten, and that sometimes you just need to stop talking.

It’s a hard lesson, and I hope she’s learned from it. But I also hope Disney has, too, because very little of that drama reflected the movie that I actually saw, and it really exposed just how disposable Disney sees its actors and properties … and maybe even its fans.

So, Snow White, are you going to see it? Or did you see it already? Was it what you expected? Did it surprise you? Let me know in the comments – even if you absolutely disagree with me, and that’s okay too because I know this film will not be something everyone will enjoy.

If you’d like to watch the original animated classic film Snow White, here is my Amazon Associate link:

Original Animated Snow White on Prime Video: https://amzn.to/4kQTl92

Posted in Fantasy, Movies, Reviews, Uncategorized | Tagged Disney, film, Gal Gadot, Movie Review, Movies, Rachel Zeglar, rachel-zegler, Snow White | Leave a comment

The Recruit Review: Legal Drama Meets Espionage

Posted on March 21, 2025 by Erin Underwood

What if your first job out of law school threw you straight into the CIA and the world of international espionage? That’s exactly what happens to Owen Hendricks in The Recruit, but does this mix of legal drama and high-stakes spy action create a thrilling ride, or does it push the limits of believability?

With season two now streaming on Netflix, let’s break down what makes this Netflix series unique, where it delivers, and where it might lose you. If you love spy thrillers with a twist, stick around to find out if this is your next binge-worthy series.

You can read the review below or watch the video review on YouTube:

Owen Hendricks (Noah Centineo), a rookie CIA lawyer, is assigned to sift through gray mail — letters from people claiming to have classified agency secrets. Most are nonsense, but one from Max Meladze, a Russian woman, stands out. Something about her intel feels different, so Owen pushes to investigate.

When they meet, it’s clear Max isn’t bluffing — she knows things she shouldn’t, posing a real threat to national security. From there, Owen is pulled into a world of agency politics, field ops, and dangerous international entanglements — far beyond what a lawyer should handle, yet oddly suited to his skill set.

Season two expands the scope, introducing new characters — none as compelling as Max but still well-developed. While season one is U.S.-based, this time Owen heads to South Korea to assist a local spy in rescuing his kidnapped wife, facing fresh challenges in unfamiliar territory.

However, some of Owen’s scrapes stretch believability. A first-year lawyer surviving situations that could take out a senior agent? The show justifies it well enough with his legal skills, quick thinking, and negotiation tactics, though some moments feel far-fetched.

Similarly, his ability to move across borders and into high-stakes operations with minimal hassle is eyebrow-raising — but that’s standard for spy thrillers. At least the show keeps him human: Owen takes hits, makes mistakes, and faces real consequences, keeping the tension grounded even when reality bends a bit.

First Impressions

So, what makes The Recruit stand out from other shows like The Night Agent, which is a similar but much more predictable spy thriller? Really, it’s Owen Hendricks who sets the show apart because he isn’t a typical super slick spy. He’s just an incredibly likable, average guy who is good at his job, which basically means he doesn’t do stupid things for the sole purpose of moving the plot forward. This shouldn’t be such a big deal, but it is! And it’s so refreshing! Even though he’s pretty much always out of his depth as the “new guy,” he has a knack for talking his way into (and out of) trouble. He feels like an ordinary, smart guy, who you would want to hang out with in real life.

Sure, you get what you’d expect from a spy thriller, but The Recruit avoids falling into predictable patterns. Instead of relying on nonstop shootouts and explosions, the show leans into the legal side of the CIA and the political navigation needed to survive inter office drama on Capitol Hill, which is something you don’t often see in espionage dramas. That legal framework is what makes this show different, offering a fresh perspective on the spy genre while still delivering plenty of action and suspense.

What’s especially fun is how The Recruit blends legal drama, espionage, and comedy. It takes itself seriously enough to deliver high-stakes intrigue but knows when to lighten the mood. The humor comes from awkward situations, office politics, and Owen’s own ability to get into trouble in just about every way possible. That balance of tension and levity makes the show engaging from start to finish.

How The Recruit Stands Out

One of the show’s biggest strengths is how well it captures the absurdity of office politics in a place where everyone is trying to maintain plausible deniability while dealing with national security issues. Unlike the high-adrenaline, globe-trotting action of Jack Ryan or the clandestine Night Agent, The Recruit grounds its story in the legal and bureaucratic side of intelligence work. It’s less about elite field agents with endless resources and more about what it’s like to be the new guy who is trying to survive an agency where knowing the law doesn’t always mean you or your job are safe.

What Works?

The CIA doesn’t operate in a vacuum, and Owen quickly finds himself navigating conflicts between other US agencies, foreign governments, and various political players. That realistic tension keeps things compelling, without over-rotating toward the unrealistic or melodramatic story lines that we often see when a series tries to be taking seriously.

It’s also refreshing that the series leans into the corporate style work ethic in an honest way, showing he good and the bad, which allows the legal office drama to keep the high-stakes world of intelligence feeling grounded. There’s also an intense DC vibe that gives a sense of what it must be like to live and work in the area with everyone knowing “someone” important and how they are constantly having to think about how everything they do will be perceived by others. It really does feel like Office Space and meets Law & Order while doing a quick lunch date with The Bourne Identity. It just feels so different from everything else we see on TV, which is why it works so well.

Recommendation

So, is The Recruit worth watching? Absolutely. It’s fun, smart, and engaging. Whether you like action, legal drama, office politics, or spy thrillers, this show offers a bit of everything. I started watching it just for some “noise” in my house, an within 20 minutes, The Recruit had me focused on the TV rather than the things I was trying to work on in the house. That’s a sign of really good writing and production work. The fact that season two holds up just as well as season one is a testament to the show’s solid storytelling, making it easy to recommend as watch-worthy!

Final Thoughts

However, I just learned that Netflix hasn’t renewed The Recruit for a third season. So, Netflix, you suck. This is a good show and you should have renewed it and not released it opposite of Reacher and The Night Agent. It just got lost in the shuffle. Anyway …

So, what do you think? Do you like spy drama or legal thrillers? Have you seen The Recruit? Did you like it? Let me know in the comments below. I’d love to hear your thoughts!

Posted in Movie Reviews, Movies, Television, Uncategorized, YouTube | Tagged action drama, Book review, books, espionage, Movies, Netflix, Netflix original, Review, series, spy thriller, The Recruit, thriller | 1 Comment

Mickey 17 Review: A Thought-Provoking Sci-Fi Adventure

Posted on March 5, 2025 by Erin Underwood

Mickey 17 is the latest film from director Bong Joon-ho, known for Parasite, and it stars Robert Pattinson in a futuristic, thought-provoking story about cloning, identity, and human survival. This film takes us to a starship where humanity is attempting to establish a colony on a far-off ice planet, and in doing so, it raises some fascinating questions about what it truly means to be human.

You can read the review below or watch the video review on YouTube:

Mickey 17 follows the story of Mickey Barnes, a down on his luck guy who is desperate to escape his life on Earth after racking up an unpayable debt with a loan shark. So, he signs up to become an “expendable” to get a spot on the next ship going off planet. In this future world, expendables are workers who sign up for high-risk space missions, and whenever they die, their consciousness and memories are transferred into a newly printed body. Essentially, they’re clones with a large amount of continuity from life to life, with each iteration preserving most of the thoughts and experiences of the previous one.

As the title suggests, Mickey is now on his 17th iteration. The twist? Well, he doesn’t die as expected during a mission, yet an 18th version of him is printed because the company thinks he is dead. Now there are two Mickeys, which is a serious problem because the rules dictate that only one instance of a person can exist at a time. If duplicates are discovered, they must both be destroyed. As Mickey 17 and Mickey 18 look for ways to survive, they find themselves caught in a web of existential dilemmas, political intrigue, and a clever love triangle – all against the backdrop of harsh realities of life on a frozen, unwelcoming planet.

First Impressions

Right off the bat, Mickey 17 is a mix of comedy, existential drama, and hard science fiction. It explores everything from futuristic 3D printing processes to advanced neural networks capable of preserving consciousness and memories, to space travel, alien species, and even the politics of colonization. There’s so much packed into this film that it easily could have become an incoherent mess, but somehow, Bong Joon-ho pulls it all together into a cohesive and interesting movie.

What makes it work is that it doesn’t focus solely on one element of the story. Instead, it leans into its nature as a science fiction film and juggles multiple “what-if” scenarios: What if we could print living bodies? What if we could transfer the data in our head into a neural net? What if we encountered an alien species? What if society followed a single cult-like leader to another planet? This interconnected web of questions is what makes Mickey 17 such a strong example of thought-provoking science fiction at its best. The thing is, great science fiction isn’t always perfect storytelling. It’s storytelling that makes you think and breaks you out of today so that you can image tomorrow.

Artistic Direction and Technology

I love when films tackled technology in ways that could be realistic in the future. So, I was actually pretty impressed with how Mickey 17 visualizes its futuristic tech. The process of “printing” a new human uses this massive, MRI-like machine that takes waste material and bioprints a fully-formed, living human body – including functional muscles, bones, and skin, along with everything else a living body needs. A lot of this technology actually exists today giving us the ability to bioprint parts of human bodies from functioning muscles to bioceramics for bones and 3D printed skin grafts. The movie is clearly building on these real-world medical advances, but takes a leap in being able to print an entire body and implant the memory data into the body’s brain. What’s different about this film, is that it feels weirdly realistic in how they do it.

They also do a good job of mimicking a neural scanning process that can capture a human’s personality by copying the data in their brains. Mickey’s consciousness is uploaded weekly, so when he dies, the new version of himself can pick up right where he left off. But there’s a catch—each version of Mickey is just slightly different, suggesting that the printing process isn’t perfect. Are these differences caused by flaws in the neural transfer? A slight misalignment in the printing? Or does each iteration naturally diverge over time, introducing tiny mutations of personality and behavior?

The Philosophical Side of the Story

The film raises some really interesting psychological and biological questions. There’s this one moment in the film, during the printing of Mickey 1, when a technician briefly unplugs and then reconnects a cord. Was this small interruption what caused the glitch in Mickey’s printing, leading to slight divergences in personality for each future iteration? Or is the concept of an exact copy inherently flawed? This raises deeper questions about bioprinting human duplicates, or expendables. If a printed Mickey isn’t a perfect replica, is he really the same person? And if two Mickeys exist at the same time and have different experiences, does this make them distinct individuals rather than copies?

This reminds me of the philosophical and ethical dilemmas explored in Star Wars: The Clone Wars, where genetically identical clones develop unique identities based on their personal experiences. The film takes a similar approach, questioning whether nature, memory, and identity are shaped more by lived experience than by genetic or technological replication.

This imperfection is what makes Mickey 17 such a compelling exploration of identity. At what point does Mickey stop being “Mickey”? And if he never truly remembers his death experiences, because that part of his experience never gets saved to his neural net, how does that affect each copy’s identity as a Mickey? Worse, what must it be like to never remember what death feels like, despite having everyone around you watch you die repeatedly, and would the repetitive birthing process create any kind of mental trauma? These are the kinds of philosophical questions that elevate Mickey 17 beyond being just another sci-fi adventure.

Pacing and Structure Issues

While the film delivers a fascinating story, it suffers from pacing issues. At 2 hours and 17 minutes, Mickey 17 could have easily been trimmed down by 30 minutes without losing any of its impact. Certain scenes overstay their welcome, with humor and absurdity stretching beyond what was necessary. The dinner scene with Mickey and Congressman Marshall, for instance, drags on too long, as do some of the relationship scenes with Nasha and other scenes between Mark Ruffalo and Toni Collette. The result is lots of side characters who only serve as tools for exposition, comedic effect, or to amplify the film’s surreal tone. While this isn’t a huge complaint of mine, a tighter script would have allowed the film to maintain its intellectual weight with a punch.

Robert Pattinson’s Performance

What truly makes this film work is the cast. Robert Pattinson carries this film. In Mickey 17, his performance goes beyond playing twins or people who look like each other. He’s not just playing one character, he’s playing multiple versions of himself, who are each subtly different. It’s when he is in a scene with himself that you see how well he holds the same character in his head, presenting different personality traits and ticks that convey the nuanced personality shifts between the different Mickeys. This film pushes his range as an actor, and he may be on his way toward quietly becoming one of the great character actors of our time. If another actor had taken this role, I don’t think the movie would have had the same impact.

Performances: Naomi Ackie & Steven Yeun

Beyond Pattinson, the supporting cast is strong. Naomi Ackie, who plays Nasha, brings warmth and energy to the film. She helps ground Mickey’s character, making him more relatable and sympathetic. Steven Yeun plays Timo (Mickey’s highly questionable friend), and though he’s not in the movie as much as I expected, he still delivers a solid performance. However, guys, please remember that if you ever find yourself in a friendship with a guy like Timo, you might want to find a new friend.

Performances: Toni Collette & Mark Ruffalo

Then we have Toni Collette, who plays Ilfa, the over-the-top wife of former congressman Kenneth Marshal. She’s a calculating leader who controls her husband to a large degree and has a really weird obsession with food that borders on the absurd. She becomes a foil for almost every other character, heightening the film’s comedic level of absurdity. And finally, Mark Ruffalo plays Kenneth Marshal the failed, power-hungry bureaucratic whose fanbase follows him like a cult leader, and honestly, his performance is frustrating. He is so off-the-chart that his character stretches his credibility making him look weak and insane at the same time. I honestly can’t tell if he’s a great actor or a horrible actor in this film because his character is so grating.

Final Thoughts and Recommendation

So, is Mickey 17, is it worth the price of admission? Absolutely. If you love thought-provoking science fiction, this film definitely delivers. It’s a little absurd, a little serious, and a little technologically wacky, but it’s also an intellectual journey that will leave you thinking long after the credits roll.

That being said, the film isn’t perfect. It’s a bit too long, with some scenes that could have been trimmed to tighten the pacing. There are moments where it leans too heavily into visual spectacle rather than storytelling, and some characters who could have either been developed more or cut. While these are minor issues compared to what the film achieves overall, if you don’t like smart, absurdist sci-fi, you might not like this film.

So, Mickey 17? Have you seen it? Are you planning to? If you have seen it, what are some of the biggest questions this film left you with? Let me know in the comments!

While you’re here, be sure to like and subscribe for more reviews. Thanks for reading. That’s it for now, see you next time! Bye.

If you’d like to read the MICKEY 17 novel by Edward Ashton, here are my Amazon Associate links:

Paperback Book: https://amzn.to/43phtcK
Audiobook: https://amzn.to/41Iexq7
Kindle: https://amzn.to/4ihL7Vo

Posted in Movie Reviews, Movies, Science and Technology, Science Fiction, YouTube | Tagged Adaptation, Bong Joon Ho, Cloning, Erin Underwood, Erin Underwood Presents, film, Film Analysis, Future Technology, Identity, Mark Ruffalo, Mickey 17, Mickie 17 movie, movie, Movie Review, Movies, Naomi Ackie, New, Review, Robert Pattinson, Sci-Fi Movie, Science fiction, Toni Collette | Leave a comment

Last Breath, Movie Review—A Death Defying Underwater Thriller!

Posted on March 4, 2025 by Erin Underwood

The film Last Breath is based on a real-life underwater catastrophe for deep-sea divers off the shores of Scotland. This is one of those movies that already has a built-in advantage since the story is already there, intact. The challenge for Alex Parkinson, the film’s director, was to figure out how to shape it into something compelling enough for a theatrical audience while staying true to the original events. So, without giving away any spoilers, how does Last Breath handle that challenge?

You can read the review below or watch the video review on YouTube:

This is a heart-pounding film about deep-sea divers battling the elements to rescue their crew mate. It’s in that vein that Last Breath tells a story of teamwork and resilience against the backdrop of a countdown clock for when the rescue would turn into a recovery operation. Based on a true story, it follows a team of saturation divers working on the North Sea pipeline, an essential piece of infrastructure for delivering gas to Scotland.

Duncan Allcock (played by Woody Harrelson), also known as the “SAT Daddy” (short for Saturation Tank Daddy), leads the three-man crew, which includes himself plus Diver 1, Dave Yuasa (played by Simu Liu), and Diver 2, Chris Lemons (played by Finn Cole). When a brutal North Sea storm knocks out their ship’s positioning system, it begins to drift with while the divers are already positioned hundreds of feet below the surface. Their captain, first officer, and the bridge crew work feverishly above water to fix the problem are forced to make some life altering choices. This turns what was a dangerous, but routine dive into a life-or-death crisis as they fight to get their men back to safety.

First Impressions

Immediately, Last Breath gives you a sense of who these men are and why they do this work. They love their jobs, and the film makes sure you feel that connection to their work and to each other before plunging into the conflict. The chemistry among the cast is great. Woody Harrelson and Simu Liu bring a grounded, experienced energy to their roles while Finn Cole, playing Chris (known as Diver 2), feels a bit less experienced as an actor, but in this case, that actually works for his role. His character is newer to the job, and that sense of relative inexperience makes his performance feel more authentic.

One of the strongest aspects of Last Breath is how closely it aligns with the documentary and the real-life events. After I saw the film, I went and watched the documentary because I was curious how dramatized the events actually were in the theatrical release, and I was not only surprised by impressed by how accurate it was to the documentary. Last Breath didn’t need to exaggerate its events or the tension above and below the water because everything happened is already thrilling enough.

A Story for Everyone

One of the things that stood out to me about Last Breath was how well the script was written to engage both audiences who were already familiar with the real-life tragedy and those who had never heard of it before. For those who knew the story, the film builds tension by emphasizing the step-by-step decisions, human factors, and challenges that shaped the outcome. And for newcomers, it carefully lays the groundwork so that each moment of danger lands with full impact. It strikes the right balance, never feeling like it over-explains for those in the know, but also never leaving first-time viewers behind. That’s a tough thing to pull off, and Last Breath does it well.

The Portrayal of Deep-Sea Diving

One of my biggest frustrations with movies set underwater is how often they dumb things down or rely on generic tension. But Last Breath takes the time to explain just enough of what’s happening to make you understand the stakes. The film naturally integrates explanations about saturation diving and why the divers have to spend days acclimating in pressurized tanks before their dives as well as how their umbilical cords work to supply them with life support and why the ship’s thrusters are crucial for maintaining position.

The way they handled the exposition felt like a light touch. They never stopped the story to explain things to the audience, the film lets the characters talk as they normally would which makes the exposition feel seamless. Even if you’ve never heard of a saturation tank before or SAT diving, the film makes sure you understand just enough to grasp why things go so catastrophically wrong when the ship starts to drift during the storm.

The film also does a great job of showing how hard it is to navigate underwater. The disorientation, the darkness, and the struggle to see what’s in front of you all play into the tension. It never feels like the divers have an easy out. Every decision is difficult, and every moment underwater feels like a calculated risk.

Cinematography & Atmosphere

Visually, Last Breath is striking, but not in the usual, overly polished way we often see in underwater films. A lot of underwater movies make everything look too clean, too blue, too perfectly illuminated. But here, the filmmakers understood that real underwater environments are often murky, eerie, and disorienting.

The way light behaves in deep water is captured logically, showing how light bends, gets swallowed by the darkness, or creates a “fog” by reflecting particles stirred by from the seabed. Some moments are almost hypnotic, while others are downright claustrophobic. When things go wrong, you feel how difficult it is to navigate in this space. The disorientation is real, and that adds to the dramatic tension in a way that no made-up sea monster or over-the-top CGI can match.

Truth is Stranger Than Fiction

Now, I’ll admit — there were moments in the film where I thought, “That doesn’t look real. That wouldn’t happen.” But after watching the documentary, I was shocked to see that the things I thought were exaggerated or unrealistic were actually true. That surprised me.

For example, would all of the automatic thrusters really go down at precisely the wrong moment during a horrible storm on the North Sea? Apparently, yes, they can. Murphy’s Law doesn’t care if something like this sounds like a “made for Hollywood” moment.

Also, the international mix of the crew initially felt like a casting checklist with the American guy, the Scottish guy, the Asian guy, etc. But it turns out, that’s actually how it was. These offshore crews are highly diverse because they pull from the best talent worldwide. While the first officer in the film is played by a woman (despite the real first officer being a man), that’s a minor change that still feels true to the spirit of these operations since women do work on these ships, and under these conditions. Plus, she was a fine actor who didn’t overplay her part.

What Doesn’t Work?

If I had to nitpick, maybe the film runs a little long in some spots. There are moments where I wondered if they could have tightened the pacing. But honestly? It didn’t feel too long because it held my attention the entire time. Even if they shaved off 10 minutes, it wouldn’t have changed much. The film stays gripping throughout, and any minor flaws are easily forgiven because of how engaging the overall experience is as a film.

However, I do think it’s worth noting that in the film, Dave gives Chris a command that helped explain to us why Chris made a certain decision. In real life Chris made that decision on his own (and I am trying to avoid spoilers here). I don’t think that substantially changes anything for either of their characters, but it did show to me that the real life Chris was a very smart guy who knew what he was doing down there on the seabed and not just some inexperienced, new diver who gets himself in trouble.

Woody Harrelson’s Performance

I have to give a special mention to Woody Harrelson. When I first saw that he was in the film, I wasn’t sure what to expect since we haven’t seen much from him lately. Was this a late-career comeback? If so, he nails this role as the dive team’s SAT Daddy. He fully embodies the grizzled old diver who has seen it all, training up the younger guys while carrying the weight of responsibility. His performance felt real, like someone who truly understands the stakes of every single dive.

Final Thoughts & Recommendation

If you’re looking for something a little different from the usual big-screen offerings, Last Breath is absolutely worth the ticket price. It’s thrilling, emotional, and genuinely gripping. Whether you know how the real-life story ends or not, the journey to that ending is what makes it compelling. It’s a great film to see with friends, family, or even as a date night pick.

So, Last Breath, have you seen it? Are you familiar with the documentary or the real event? Also, if you have any experience in maritime work or deep-sea diving, I’d love to hear what you think. How realistic did the film feel for you? Were there moments that rang especially true or parts that missed the mark? Let me know in the comments!

Thanks so much! If you enjoyed this review, please give it a clap, subscribe for more, and share with a friend.

Subscribe for more articles above or visit my YouTube channel at @ErinUnderwood for more videos.

If you’d like to watch the documentary, here via my Amazon Associate link: ** Last Breath — Original Documentary: https://amzn.to/41A6OdR

Posted in Movie Reviews, Reviews, Science and Technology, YouTube | Tagged Deep Sea, Divers, documentary, film, Finn Cole, Last Breath, Last Breath Movie, movie, Movies, North Sea, Review, Reviews, Saturation Diver, Science, Scottish, Simu Liu, Tragedy, true story, Woody Harrelson | Leave a comment

Jurassic World: Rebirth – Do We Need Another Jurassic Park Film? Trailer Reactions

Posted on March 2, 2025 by Erin Underwood

Hang onto your hats. This is going to be a long one because we have a lot to talk about. We’re doing a deep dive reaction to the two new trailers for the upcoming Jurassic World: Rebirth film, and I have to ask: Do we really need another Jurassic Park or Jurassic World movie? I think this is the kind of question that every trailer must answer for any film, but it’s an especially important question for a film that is the seventh film in a franchise.

Has this jurassic story line run its course or is there still something worth watching beyond the spectacle of dinosaurs tearing through jungles or cities and eating humans who have no business being there in the first place? What can they give us that we haven’t seen before? That is the question of the day.

Before we jump into this reaction to the Jurassic World: Rebirth trailers, remember these discussions are always more fun when you are a part of them, let me know what you are thinking in the comments! Specifically, are you excited for this film or do you think it’s time for Hollywood to move on and dig up a new dinosaur story? That’s the question that these two trailers have to answer. So, let’s break it down.

You can read the discussion below or watch the video on YouTube:

I’ve only seen the trailers, not the full film. So, I’m going to make some educated guesses based purely on what we see in the trailers and what we know about the director Gareth Edwards who is best known for Rogue One and The Creator, as well as the screenwriter David Koepp who wrote the original two Jurassic Park films. If any of my predictions and assumptions are right, this video may have some spoilers, but since no one has seen the movie yet, it’s anyone’s guess. Right now, this is all speculation.

Here’s what we know: The plot revolves around a mission to retrieve dinosaur DNA, which is supposedly necessary for a medical breakthrough that could save countless human lives. Of course, this DNA must come from the largest and most dangerous dinosaurs on a remote island, which turns out to be the secret former Jurassic Park research facility. And naturally, raptors are involved because why wouldn’t they be?

In addition to the writer and director, the cast will include Scarlett Johansson as Zora Bennett (who is the snarky badass mission leader), Jonathan Bailey as Dr. Henry Loomis (the nerdy scientist seeking dinosaur DNA), Mahershala Ali as Duncan Kincaid (the team’s transporter/smuggler who is supposed to get them on and off the island), and Audrina Miranda as a mysterious child character who is with the team on the island (for no other discernible reason than to be able to market this film to children).

First Impressions

My first impressions of the trailers bring up a couple key issues. First, there is one immediate red flag in the story. Why does the mission specifically requires DNA from the biggest and most lethal dinosaurs. Why those dinosaurs? So, the choice of dinosaur DNA suggests there’s more at play than a simple medical breakthrough. Could this be another corporate scheme disguised as science? Is there a darker, hidden agenda behind the mission?

My other first impression is related to Gareth Edwards’ directing style because we can easily make some predictions based upon his past films and preferences. He tends to build stories around a strong ‘what if?’ premise, such as in The Creator where he explored the idea of “What if AI was truly sentient?” and in Rogue One he dug into the question of “What if a rebellion started with ordinary people?” His “what if?” questions tend to be more about perspective shifts that uncover hidden layers beneath what we think we know and what we don’t know to address the larger social ramifications. So, I think what he’ll be going after here is the question of “What if Jurassic Park was never about dinosaurs at all?”

He also trusts his audience, avoiding excessive exposition. Instead, he allows the story to unfold naturally. That means he’s unlikely to spend much time rehashing old Jurassic Park lore despite having the writer from the original film on this project. He’ll pick up where the last film left off and move forward.

Artistic Direction Within the Trailers

Gareth Edwards is also known for prioritizing realism and relationships that focus on strong character dynamics that place story over spectacle, but with dinosaurs, we will likely have a healthy dose of spectacle in this film. So, I’m guessing that we will end up with a fair mixture of both story and spectacle that can lean into the elements that drive the tension, horror, and suspense.

The most critical factor, however, is that Gareth Edwards has a history of preferring real-world locations over CGI-heavy environments, which could give this film a more tactile, immersive feel compared to the previous Jurassic World movies. In the trailers, we can already confirm several things. First, Edwards has embraced the real-world locations, which are featured in the scenes with the characters on the island, walking through overgrown and untamed flora, reinforcing the idea that nature has reclaimed the land.

What We Know About the Dinosaurs

While there are three dinosaurs that they are after, only the Quetzalcoatlus is identified as one of them, which was named after Quetzalcoatl, the feathered serpent god from Aztec mythology. It’s the dinosaur that is describes as being “the size of an F-15” with an estimated wingspan of nearly 40 feet and is as tall as a giraffe when standing. Yes, I had to google that!

There are also indications that the dinosaurs are evolving, possibly forming cooperative hunting strategies with other species, which could imply a learned communication style between these creatures. This makes me think about Jeff Goldbum’s character in the first film, Dr. Ian Malcolm, who warned that nature always finds a way and that humanity never truly has control. So, if these dinosaurs are now hunting in coordinated packs, how might they have evolved in ways that the human expedition haven’t anticipated?

This idea is underscored by another line of dialog that “the data about these creatures has been erased,” suggesting a cover-up about what was really happening on this island. Why was it shut down? What was their real goal? Were they attempting to push the boundaries of evolution with genetic engineering that went beyond a desire to bring back the dinosaurs? If not, why delete the records?

Hubris and Spoilers

This question leads to a potential “red hulk sized” spoiler from the trailer since there is a mention and visual that both indicate the island isn’t just inhabited by dinosaurs, but by monsters. The trailer includes the line of dialog, “Before they wanted to bring dinosaurs back to life … they wanted monsters.”

Monsters? Well, that’s exciting and different! But don’t put it in the trailer! Surprise us with that! Dear studios, please stop spoiling the movies!

It’s frustrating that the trailer reveals the possible presence of a “monster” twist right up front. If they wanted to build suspense, this should have been held back as a shocking revelation in the film itself. Instead, this feels like the studio was afraid that dinosaurs weren’t enough to sell the film. So, they had to throw the surprise twist into the trailer like Marvel did with Captain America: Brave New World when they put the Red Hulk front and center to grab our attention. It makes me feel like either they don’t believe in the draw of the Jurassic Park franchise, or they don’t trust the audience. Either way, that’s annoying because we are so tired of trailers that spoil the film, and I hope this isn’t one of those examples.

However, this reference really does serve as an outright indication that there was a deeper genetic experiment happening on this island that what anyone knew about. Thus, the deleted data. Wouldn’t it have been more effective to let audiences piece it together on their own? Now, rather than speculating about what’s lurking on the island, we’re waiting to see exactly how extreme these experiments got, which takes away some of the tension.

What Did John Hammond Know?

So, I have to ask, what did John Hammond really know about the experiments on this island, if anything? He sold Jurassic Park as a “family friendly” theme park in a way that only a somewhat naïve idealist can manage. However, these trailers for Jurassic World: Rebirth underscore the idea that the science, which made Jurassic Park possible, may have never been about simply bringing dinosaurs back to life. The family friendly face of the park may have just been a front for something much deeper and darker that InGen Technologies was doing either with or without John Hammond’s knowledge, but as the founder, it would be hard to believe that he didn’t know about the experimentation that is alluded to in the trailers for Jurassic World: Rebirth.

So, this film really does need to address the question of how much John Hammond knew about these experiments and if he was involved with shutting down or setting up this island’s research. And if Hammond was aware of early hybrid or monster experimentation happening at the “original” Jurassic Park research facility on this island, then the entire premise of the original film shifts, and that is a big change to the lore for the franchise because it potentially changes his character, making him complicit in a deeper and more insidious scientific endeavor than we thought.

Additionally, it could reveal that the events of the first film weren’t an isolated accident, but rather the inevitable and predictable consequence of decades of unchecked genetic manipulation — just like Ian Malcolm the cautions in the first film. If Hammond or others at InGen were involved in more extreme experiments than the ones we saw in Jurassic Park, then this franchise may be heading toward an entirely new revelation: Jurassic Park was never about dinosaurs. It was always about pushing the boundaries of life itself.

Ethical & Scientific Questions

So, what are those “medical advances” that are so revolutionary that it is worth sending a team to this island to capture the DNA of three special dinosaurs? This opens a whole new set of questions that could breathe life into a set of new films within the franchise. However, it also brings up a bunch of ethical and scientific questions that this or future films will need to address. Jurassic World: Rebirth is likely just the first salvo into this conversation on ethics, but we’ll have to see the film to know how they address these ideas. While the purpose of retrieving these DNA samples is for “lifesaving” medical advancements, the film should explore whether this is just a convenient justification for something more dangerous.

With modern biotech advances like CRISPR and AI-driven genetic engineering already pushing these boundaries in real life, the idea of repurposing prehistoric dinosaur DNA in any way that is related to human DNA raises major ethical questions. Could this research be leading toward weaponized genetics, bioengineered super-creatures, or something far worse? If history has shown us anything, it’s that whenever scientific breakthroughs occur, there are those who want to exploit them for profit or power.

If Jurassic World: Rebirth leans into this question or even just teases them for future films, it could add a deeper layer to the film’s narrative that raise issues related to corporate greed, military applications of genetics, and the unintended consequences of tampering with nature … all of which are socially relevant today and for years to come.

Where’s The Government?

One glaring issue from the trailers is how weak the government response seems to be regarding this island. Duncan Kincaid, the smuggler, makes an offhand comment about how government patrols are weak because “no one is dumb enough to go there.” But that doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.

If history has shown us anything, it’s that humans are absolutely dumb enough to go places they shouldn’t. People climb deadly mountains despite clear warnings, they explore abandoned nuclear zones, and they trespass into off-limits areas for everything from corporate greed to thrill-seeking. The idea that a site containing the most dangerous dinosaurs ever created would be left lightly guarded at best strains credibility. Even if governments weren’t concerned about protecting reckless intruders, they would at least want to ensure that nothing gets off the island. Wouldn’t that at least warrant 24-hour satellite surveillance of the island and waters around it?

This problem is eerily similar to the security failures in Alien: Romulus. In that film, a derelict space station was somehow left unguarded, despite being home to a deadly alien species. There is more to it than that, of course, which I get into in my review of that film. However, the basic narrative failure is the same. If the government (or any authority) knows a location is too dangerous for human presence, why aren’t there better containment measures? The answer is often “incompetence of convenience,” which is a flimsy excuse that makes the narrative possible but weakens the world-building.

Now, there’s another possibility — the security wasn’t just neglected; it was deliberately sabotaged. If someone on the inside wanted this group to get in (and more importantly, get back out unseen), that would be a compelling twist. This would parallel the original Jurassic Park, where Dennis Nedry took down the park’s security systems to smuggle out embryos, only to be eaten by raptors for his trouble. A similar inside job in Jurassic World: Rebirth would not only make more sense but would also reinforce the franchise’s recurring theme that human greed and arrogance always lead to disaster or, again as Dr. Ian Malcolm put it, nature always wins.

If Jurassic World: Rebirth wants to be taken seriously, it needs to answer this security question in a way that fits the logic of the world rather than just using it as an excuse to move the plot forward.

Final Thoughts on the Trailers

Jurassic World: Rebirth is clearly leaning into nostalgia, but the real question is whether the narrative is just a nostalgia play or something truly fresh. The trailers leave this question up for debate, which is nice because that’s what will get the audience into the theater.

I like that it’s moving away from the global-scale chaos of Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom and Dominion and back to a contained survival horror story. Isolation breeds fear, and this remote island setting looks primed to do just that.

If this film is going to succeed, it’s going to have to address three key questions that the trailers raise to make it a meaningful addition that could extend the life of the franchise:

First: What was the true purpose of this research facility?
Second: Who deleted the data, and why?
Third: Are the dinosaurs on this island the same ones from Jurassic Park, or have they evolved into something more dangerous?

I believe that Gareth Edwards is the right director to bring suspense, realism, and deeper themes to this franchise. If Jurassic World: Rebirth manages to capture the wonder and the terror, as well as the ethical dilemmas, of the original Jurassic Park, I think this could be a win for the franchise and for fans.

But what do you think? Are you in or out? Are you tired of the Jurassic story lines? Let me know what you think of the Jurassic World: Rebirth trailers and your impressions of the film in the comments. Or do you just love seeing dinosaurs on the big screen? Let me know!

Thanks so much! If you enjoyed this review, please give it a clap, subscribe for more, and share with a friend.

Subscribe to receive articles via email or visit my YouTube channel at @ErinUnderwood for more videos.

If you’d like to get a Jurassic World Rebirth T-shirt, here’s my Amazon Associate link:

Jurassic World Rebirth — Tshirt: https://amzn.to/4knKZp5

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged dinosaurs, Gareth Edwards, jurassic park, jurassic world, Jurassic World Rebirth, Movies, news, Science fiction, trailer reaction | Leave a comment

The Last Voyage of the Demeter – SPOILERS, Horror Story Breakdown and Review

Posted on August 20, 2023 by Erin Underwood

Welcome to The Last Voyage of the Demeter Spoiler Discussion. Since the film has been out for a little while, and I didn’t get a chance to see it until now, I decided to make this a spoiler review/discussion because I really want to talk about how the story of Dracula’s passage to England works as a horror film.

You can read the post below or watch it on YouTube here:

I am a horror fan, and I especially love vampire stories. This has been a genre that I have followed for as long as I can remember. One of my first memories as a child was watching Bella Legosi in the 1931 version of Dracula. I was really young, and that night I woke up to noises outside my window. I was sure I saw Dracula there floating in the air watching me. Yeah, I know, it was just an imaginative dream laced with childhood fear, but it stayed with me. After that, I consumed horror films and books because I was convinced that if I learned all I could about monsters, I could kill them whether I was asleep or awake.

So, this is how I think when I watch horror. It’s also why I have a high bar for films that claim to be horror. It’s really hard to scare me, which actually makes the horror genre so much more fun when pulling a story apart, and I think The Last Voyage of the Demeter is a terrific film. It does all of the things that a good horror story should do, and it does them well.

To be clear, this isn’t a slasher, blood and guts film. That is a different kind of horror, which is human based. The Last Voyage of the Demeter is supernatural horror. It has rules with established characters and it takes place in an established world that is familiar territory to a lot of people. This makes it especially challenging to craft a well-told horror story because the audience isn’t learning the rules with the characters. Instead, we are monitoring the characters’ adherence to the rules, and any deviation will pull us out of the film, especially since the film has chosen to firmly embrace an existing and well-established story world.

The film’s success rests on the characters, the imagery, the plotting, and the unraveling of the mystery.

The cast is extremely well chosen, but it’s Corey Hawkins who plays Dr Clemens who leads the cast. He’s grounded, believable, and likeable. He comes to the Demeter with his own set of issues in life being a Cambridge trained doctor whose skin color keeps him from attaining positions for which he is trained. On the Demeter, he uses his training to think through the problem and the solution of the mysterious nighttime deaths. The writers treated him seriously as a character, making his actions and reactions ring true to his situation. Everyone else onboard the ship gravitates around him, keeping the film from devolving into a panic driven, hopeless sea voyage.

Great horror stories come at the problem with thoughtful, characters who don’t give up and who don’t give into the mania around them. This is important because they become the spark of hope within the story, and without a spark of hope, horror just becomes boring, pointless terror-based storytelling.

The other elements of The Last Voyage of the Demeter, namely the plot and the mystery, are also critically important.

When you are working within a well-known story like Dracula, you have to figure out how to tell the story of transporting Dracula from Romania to London in a realistic way. Even in a fictitious story, it must feel real and plausible.

Because of how they chose to tell this story, the writers had to deal with one immutable fact:

Most of the people coming to experience The Last Voyage of the Demeter will be familiar with the basics of Dracula’s story. Therefore, they will be fully aware that Dracula arrives in London. That is a canonical fact that cannot change. Therefore, the ship must arrive on England’s shore carrying the vampire. Everything else is up for debate.

This leaves us with two key story needs:

1. The film needs to acknowledge that the writers know that the audience knows that The Demeter makes it to England.

While the condition of the ship when it arrives is open to creative interpretation, it would be disingenuous if the story waited until the end to acknowledge that we all know Dracula arrives in England. So, they may as well show us the ship landing in England right up front with the opening credits to get it out of the way, and that’s exactly what they do. We see the ghost ship broken upon the stony shore. It is a haunting image that stays with the audience throughout the film as we are left to imagine how The Demeter came to that state.

2. The film needs to be about the crew’s failure to kill Dracula.

It can’t just be about Dracula picking them off one at a time while they sit around scared and hiding because that would be boring…and horror isn’t boring. Horror is like a thread connecting the story to the viewer’s imagination, with every new shadow and every new revelation spinning out new ideas of what the characters should or shouldn’t be doing to survive. While we might not expect any of them to survive, given the circumstances of the story, that doesn’t mean they should be lambs to the slaughter. They must fight and this is the story of how they fought.

Since this story has a high horror bar, the characters have to be willing to put everything on the table with no holds barred. It’s unlikely that anyone will get out of this movie alive, but there is always a chance that someone besides Dracula lives. That’s where the story gold is for this film. They make us care about the characters, and in so doing, they make us root for someone to survive. That someone is Dr Clemens because he has the most potential for getting out alive.

As a result of these two story-needs, the story opens with the battered and bruised image of The Demeter laying wrecked upon the English shore and we are left thinking “Nobody could have survived that!” This, paired with the regular progression of terror during the voyage, keeps us wondering what will happen next. They might not live, but how do they die? How do they fight? And slowly, our belief that everyone will die is subverted by Dr Clemens who is the spark of hope within the story. Maybe, just maybe, someone could actually survive. But who? Clemens? And how?

These questions are the story fuel for The Last Voyage of Demeter as we watch the characters start to think their way out of certain death. One by one, they nail down the facts of what they are facing:

There is something in the darkness that kills by biting and drinking blood.
If you are bitten, you turn into something inhuman that doesn’t breathe or have a pulse but that burns in sunlight.
The monster hunts the living during the night and hides in the darkness below deck during the day.
If the monster’s creations can be killed, the monster itself can be killed. But how?

Since The Demeter is several days from land when they begin to figure things out, they decide they either have to sink the boat or they have to kill the creature because they can’t allow it to land in a populated area. This choice resonates with the best part of human nature. When we realize that there is no hope left for ourselves, we transfer our hope to save others.

Still, this is a tricky moment in the story. It’s where the logic gets a little soft. They know fire kills the people who are changed by this monster, and they know the monster only comes out at night. Therefore, the sun must burn it too. If they are already resigned to sinking the ship as a last resort, why don’t they just sink it during the daylight hours?

The reason is simple: They are only human

They haven’t experienced anything like this before. They still believe they can kill the monster because they don’t fully understand it. Plus, there is a storm coming and the sky is not blazing with sunlight. I am unsure if the characters thought through the darkening storm skies or not, but I would have liked to see them reason this part out a little more. Instead, they spend what daylight they have planning out how they will spend the last night (before landing in England) as they try to kill the monster. If they can’t kill it, they will sink the ship.

It’s a decent plan for people who still don’t understand the type of monster that they are facing, but if the audience is actively thinking “Why don’t they just sink the ship in the middle of the day and use the lifeboat to escape?” then the characters should be addressing that question in some way.

The film’s plot comes together in a slow but steady arc, building tension within the story along with an ever-growing sense of dread because we, the audience, understand that they don’t win. And, so, we sit in our chairs thinking “Just get out. Burn it down. Burn it all down.”

But that’s not an option that the story cannon can allow the characters to take. It’s to the writers’ credit that they make the characters’ actions believable, even as we watch in mute horror and dread, as the characters we have grown to care for die as they try to save the people of England from this monster.

Again, the one thing the film does exceptionally well in the first act is to introduce us to the crew. It gets us to like them or even love them, and then the monster slowly puts them into danger. Dracula is pacing himself, playing hide and seek to some extent, and clearly thrilling in the terror he inspires. After all, he literally could just walk through the ship killing people all at once, but he doesn’t. He’s old, and I think he’s bored. He’s found someone in Dr Clemens who has made the passage interesting to him, and so he begins playing a game of cat and mouse with the crew.

Dr Clemens, the man of science, is the one putting most of the pieces together to figure out what they are facing. He is the one who finds Dracula’s box and his cane. He saves Anna with blood infusions, and he keeps the others from panicking. Dracula clearly doesn’t fear the humans on the ship, and his choice to keep Dr Clemens around to the end is a sign that he views Clemens as entertaining or at least interesting enough to take last. It’s also a great miscalculation on Dracula’s part because Clemens is the sole survivor.

As I wrap up, there is one last clever story element that needs to be mentioned. When Dr Clemens is getting a tour of the boat, he’s instructed that when you are below decks you can knock-knock-knock-knock to sound the alert. This is something that the crew does throughout the voyage. It is a recurring sound that helps to build tension and terror.

In the final scene, when Dr Clemens is in the pub investigating the location listed on the shipping documents for Dracula’s crates, he hears that knock-knock-knock-knock sound. He looks around, startled. He sees a hand on a silver wolf headed cane, the same cane from that he found in the monster’s crate below deck. Then we see the shape of a man walk by the doctor, quickly dragging his finger across the cut that Dracula made on the doctor’s neck during the last battle on the boat. A motion that doesn’t draw blood but is instead meant to inspire fear and acknowledgement.

It is with that scene we know for certain that Dracula is and has always been playing with the doctor and the crew of the Demeter. It’s a fantastic scene and the perfect way to end the film.

I am left wondering if there might be a sequel. This would be a film I would love to see.

That’s it for now. I hope you enjoyed this discussion, and please let me know what you are thinking. Did the film work for you? Did you like it?

Posted in Movie Reviews, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse Movie Review - Art and Technology Reaction

Posted on July 12, 2023 by Erin Underwood

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse isn’t just a good film, it’s a technological achievement in art and sound that will transform how we tell live action animated stories.
This is my deep dive into the technology and art within Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse. I also have a proper movie review on the story, characters, and plot, if you’d like to watch that. Also, be sure to hit subscribe and let me know that you are here.

Okay. So, let’s get into it. The written review is below (originally posted on Medium). However, if you’d rather watch the review, here’s the link to my YouTube video review:

To command the box office returns and critical acclaim that the film is already receiving, there is more to “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse” than a traditionally animated comic with a good story. There is a new level of creative originality in telling cinematic stories that are experiential, all of which is made possible by new technologies and the audience’s ever-growing familiarity with and desire for new forms of visual storytelling.

“Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse” is a dazzling display of story, art, and technology in an all-new form of visual language that is exceptionally well-suited for an onscreen experience that keeps its audience enthralled during its entire two hour and twenty-minute run time. In this sequel to the box office smash hit “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse,” Miles Morales meets a diverse host of other Spider-People who work together to protect the multi-verse and their places within it. The themes of love, friendship, and sacrifice are all present, but it is Miles who brings the element of hope to the Spider-Verse as he confronts the reality his own Spider-Man story. His story breaks the mold in so many ways.

The visual cascade of color and artistic styles paired with new animation technologies blast through the traditional cinematic barriers that have defined animation for years. This film and its current set of peers, from Avatar: Way of Water to Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. III are the end product of an open-source technology ecosystem that has fostered tools that have produced dramatic advances in animation and other filmmaking techniques.[1]

The technology that powers the animation sequences is astonishing bringing to life the colors, shapes, movement, and action as if you are not just seeing a comic book brought to life, but you are seeing inside of a multiverse of artists’ minds as they being Miles Morales’ story to life. And that’s just the visuals. There is a whole new level to experiencing movies with the Dolby Cinema and their Atmos technology that produces object based cinematic audio that uses moving audio with pinpoint accuracy[2] to create the audio feel of the Spider-verse in the theater, no matter how many speakers are in the room or where they are placed.

As mesmerizing as the CGI is on the screen, you still see the artist’s hand and the strong influence of the human artist at work. No matter how powerful the AI or animation technology, you simply cannot reproduce the layers of artistic design that work together to produce the emotional response that a film like Across the Spider-Verse delivers without the eye and hand of a human artist sculpting the digital design that hits the screen. There is a liquid brilliance to the visuals as the light and color are sculpted into shapes, and the layering effect of those shapes creates depth and motion that allow for a mixed 2D and 3D environment.

The core of the story within Spider-Man: Across the Spider-verse relies upon the ability to show how each world in the multiverse represents a different artistic style. Some are reminiscent of traditional comics animation from the 1960s while others embrace everything from photo realism to collage art, pixelation, anime, and more. It’s not just visually stunning, it’s intellectually significant from an artistic perspective - arguing in this ultra-modern visual language that there is a connection between all styles of art.

From the opening scene to the end credits, there is a purposeful artistic design that draws heavily on the new technologies available to studios today. While you are aware of the hand-drawn elements on some level, they technology blends them into the action and scenery, creating a unique cinematic experience that is remarkable on the big screen. While it’s sure to be enjoyable at home and on streamed devices, Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse is a true cinematic experience that is best viewed in a theater with a large screen and Dolby Cinema sound.

Visit my YouTube channel at @ErinUnderwood and subscribe for more videos and reviews.

[1] Academy Software Foundation in partnership with Linux Foundation Research, “Open Source in Entertainment 2022” Link: https://aswf.lfprojects.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/69/2022/03/LFResearch_ASWF_Report.pdf

[2] Dolby Presents: “Universe” | Trailer \ Dolby, Dolby, 9 March 2019. Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hesv-etwK_o

Posted in 2023, Medium, Movie Reviews, Movies, Reviews | Tagged Disney, Marvel, Miles Morales, Sony Studios, Spider-Man, Spiderman | Leave a comment

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse Movie Review – An Incredible Experience

Posted on July 11, 2023 by Erin Underwood

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse continues the story of Miles Morales in a film that is sheer eye candy to watch, but what makes it so good?

All right. Let’s jump into the Spider-verse.

The written review is below (originally published on Medium). If you’d rather watch it, here is my video review posted on YouTube:

I have a lot to say about this film, so I want to start by letting you know that I’ve split this review into two pieces. This is the movie review where I get into the story and the characters, and in my next video, I dive into the art and technology.

Across the Spider-Verse is spectacular. The first film was great, and it is tough to make a sequel that is as good as the original. Across the Spider-Verse is better.

Because the original film had such a strong storyline and well-developed characters, and some cool story telling devices for scene setting information, Across the Spider-Verse was able to simply pick up and run, jumping straight into Miles’ life about a year and a half later without any wasted time. I really love that we get straight into the plot.

We see what Miles’ life is like now and we get a glimpse into his daily struggles. This feeds directly into the coming conflict that Miles faces as he confronts what it means to be A Spider-Man within the spider-verse canon. His fears, his choices, his sacrifices all come to a head as his character grows into the hero that he wants to become rather than the hero everyone else thinks he should be.

Because the film just dives straight into Miles’ life, staying on the original film’s trajectory, Across the Spider-Verse can expand its reach into the various lives of the ancillary characters within the multi-verse, from the captains to the love interests, to the villains, and (most important) to the other Spider-men. This extra time with Miles’ parents, lets us experience and understand their strong family bond, and we also see their corresponding multiverse characters through the eyes of the other spider-men — which creates this layered understanding of the characters and why they are so pivotal to the character of Spider-man. This layering of characters is a fascinating storytelling device that puts every other multiverse story to shame in both the DC and Marvel universes. This is how you tell a multi-verse story.

Across the Spider-verse also doesn’t waste time introducing us to Spot, the “villain of the week.” We don’t see the slow build up that reveals him as the bad guy. We see Spot trying to be a villain and just utterly screwing it up, and we see Miles — who is now very comfortable in his role as Spider-Man — confronting spot.

Do to the nature of Spot’s condition, there are some hilarious fight scenes … the kind of scenes that we have never seen on the big screen. They are as funny as they are fascinating.

As Spot grows into his villainhood, he gets scarier, and the humor dies down to elevate the seriousness of the situation. I wish a little more of the humor was retained, but that choice does make sense.

We get a lot more of Gwen, which is great because we see her as the hero of her own story. When she is on screen in those scenes, she easily transitions to the main character as she confronts her own failures as a Spider-woman, as a daughter, and as a friend.

We also get so much more of Rio Morales, Miles’ mom, as she imparts love, wisdom, parental guidance, and concern for her son. This type of family dynamic is something that is missing from a lot of superhero films. Either the loving parent is already lost, creating this gaping hole in the hero’s heart, or the parent is very shouty and frustrated with the strange actions of their child. Rio blasts past all that relationship red tape and just loves Miles through thick and thin, and that’s different.

The family theme has always been strong in the Spiderman series, but it is on fire in Across the Spider-verse. Even better, the movie doubles down on the multiverse family theme and shows the expansive diversity of the Spider-People as the heroes behind their masks. We see Peter Parker again, this time as a dad. Plus, we meet Jessica Drew, a new pregnant Spider-Woman; Miguel O’Hara who is suffering from the loss of his family; Pavitr Prabhakar, who is madly in love; and my personal favorite new Spider-Man, punk rocker Hobie, who is in it for his friends..

This brings us to the themes that play out in Across the Spider-Verse. After seeing so many superhero films that go desperately dark and gritty, especially in the DC universe, it is so nice to see the themes of love, family, and friendship as canonical fixtures within the Spider-verse.

This film is also funny. The use of humor to counterbalance the fear and pain, is nicely done, keeping the film feeling lighter and full of hope — primarily because of Miles.

This is a film for anyone and everyone. You don’t have to see the first film to get into Across the Spider-Verse, but it would be helpful. It’s so good, that, if you are like me, you’re going to want to see it at least twice in the theater, because the story, the characters, and the art are that good.

Just a reminder that I also have a review where I talk about the art and technology of Across the Spider-verse. So, if you like this review, I think you’ll like that commentary, too.

Visit my YouTube channel at @ErinUnderwood and subscribe for more videos and reviews.

Posted in 2023, Medium, Movie Reviews, Movies, Reviews | Tagged Across the Spider-verse, Animation, Marvel, Miles Morales, Sony Studios, Spider-Man, Spiderman | Leave a comment

The Little Mermaid, Movie Review – An Ariel for a New Generation?

Posted on July 10, 2023 by Erin Underwood

The new live action version of The Little Mermaid is one of the most anticipated movies of the 2023 summer schedule. But was it worth the anticipation?

The written review is below (originally posted on Medium). If you would rather watch the review, here is the link to my YouTube review of The Little Mermaid (2023):

Disney is a powerhouse of technology, story, and imagination. The mouse house has a gift for translating stories between mediums, and what they did was a technological wonder. But, did the adaptation from cartoon to live action film stand up?

Yes. Absolutely. I would even say that in many ways the 2023 Little Mermaid is even better than the original, with a few exceptions. What we get with the live action version is a thoughtfully told story that looked at the deficiencies of the original script and addressed those missing or problematic elements so the decisions that Ariel and Eric were making had weight and context.

I think some people who are attached to the animated version might not need or appreciate the story changes and may even find some of them unnecessary. However, I’d argue that the changes enhanced the film overall, creating more texture to the world above the sea and more meaning to the choices that the characters made. The story stayed firmly focused on Ariel and Eric.

To adapt a story is to change it. You can’t just roll out the old script and refilm it in a new medium because the very essence of story adaptation is iterative with each new version building upon previous versions or filling out the story in new ways. As part of that process, storytellers naturally shave away bits of a story here, bend the structure there, and add new story connections that fill in the gaps to meet the needs of the new medium, the new audience, and the new era in which the film is being released. Writer Dave Magee clearly understood this and did a superb job.

So, what made this new adaption of The Little Mermaid work so well?

First, the actors.

Halle Bailey was a lovely Ariel. Her voice was ethereal. She is sweet. And she does a magnificent job of using her face and body to convey her feelings without language, which is so important in the voiceless scenes.
Jonah Hauer-King was great Prince Eric. He carried himself well and made the character so much more rounded, sensitive, and likable than his cartoon predecessor.
King Triton played by Javier Bardem was terrific. He was the Sea King. He also leaned into the loving and protective father role without over playing it, which made Ariel’s choices that much more believable.
Melissa McCarthy as Ursula was a treat. I really think she was a standout. Of all the actors, she felt like a true connection to the cartoon, bringing the big bad evil witch character to the surface while throwing in a little levity to keep the movie from tipping over into taking itself too seriously.

The second thing that made this film work was that they fleshed out the characters a lot more. We got so much more of Ariel, seeing her exploring the island, learning about other lands and islands from Eric, and we hear her interior monologue during her voiceless scenes.

And Eric, we finally learn more about this guy who captured her heart. We learn what drives him. We actually see him having fun with Ariel and learning about her as a person, even without her voice, and we realize how much they have in common. By creating more depth in Eric, the live action film transforms Ariel’s story from a sweet, but flat, Disney princess film into a fully realized love story.

Third, they solved some of the story holes from the original, which I can’t go into without spoilers. Still, some of those solutions do a great job of elevating themes form the original to be more visible and pertinent to a modern audience of young people…and parents.

Fourth, the music was critical. The original music by Alen Mencken is classic, and the new additions and reinterpretation by Lin Manuel Miranda was terrific. They kept many of the old favorites, and they added a few new songs to flesh out the story. I think this is one of the reasons that Eric felt more realized as a character. He has so much more agency because he was part of the music. There were some new songs that were fun and interesting, songs that conveyed new meaning and understanding, but I wish they has a little more of the Caribbean flavor to them to make them feel like part of the fabric of the world…and not all the new songs achieved this. Still, they all served a purpose. One thing that was musically brilliant was the music from the village and the on-land background music, which had this lovely stylistic echo of the music from under the sea, which made the connection between the two worlds that much more sold.

The final thing the I should mention is the technology. Again, Disney is a technological powerhouse. Their creative labs have this innate understanding of how technology can help to convey story and they lean into this strength in impressive ways. People are so tired of CGI, and that was one of my big fears with this film. I was afraid that it would be a CGI screen bomb for 2 hours. Instead, the technology teams made magic, and the film looked like what I would imagine a cartoon would look like if it came to life.

I credit Director Rob Marshall with having the guts to pull off this film. I am sure there are those who won’t like it, or who will constantly compare it to the original. However, the 2023 adaptation of The Little Mermaid deserves to be judged on its own merits, and for that reason alone, I think it’s utterly fantastic and magical.

It’s a great family film. I really enjoyed it, and I think you will too.

Visit my YouTube channel at @ErinUnderwood and subscribe for more videos and reviews.

Posted in 2023, Medium, Movie Reviews, Reviews | Tagged Animation, ariel, critic, Disney, Little Mermaid, live action, movie | Leave a comment

Mission Impossible, Dead Reckoning, Part 1, Movie Review — What makes this film great?

Posted on July 9, 2023 by Erin Underwood

Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning Part 1 clocks in at a fast 2 hours and 43 minutes, the seventh film in the Mission Impossible franchise might just be the smartest film of the series, and it gets four very important things right.

The Impossible Missions Force (IMF) is chasing a world-changing secret weapon, and they are up against a bunch of people who are all angling to find the keys to controlling it, including one very special enemy who knows their every move before they make it. You learn quickly that you can’t trust anything you see and that you have to think outside of the box. It’s a shell game played by experts. The one thing you can trust is that this weapon is a big deal. It simply has to be found, and the stakes have never been higher. So, the team decides to get to it first and to eliminate it from the equation for everyone.

The written review is below (originally published on Medium) or you are welcome to watch the video review for Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning Part 1 on YouTube:

So, what does the film gets right?

First, Ethan Hunt and the IMF are joined by Grace, a talented thief played by Hayley Atwell, who adds an unexpected spark to the film. The dynamic between Grace and Ethan is terrific. Adding a new player to an existing team is a bold choice, but this is Mission Impossible, and they know how to pull off bold choices. The addition of Hayley Atwell to the cast was a smart move since she adds a natural lightness to her scenes that allow for these small moments of effortless humor that really work and she adds a refreshing energy to the film. The fact that she can’t drive well created some hilarious moments, and the shorthand-body language between Hayley and Tom was so easy to pick up. You didn’t need dialog to understand what they were thinking and feeling.

The second thing the film gets right is the technology. Not all of the tech is real or even possible at this point, but it feels believable in the way that it’s portrayed within the story. It’s clear that the director, Christopher McQuarrie, and the writers did their homework on how augmented reality, artificial intelligence, and machine learning work. However, they do bend reality just a bit with this technology, but they do it in a way that is plausible and ordinary feeling. They tap into the social zeitgeist when it comes to this technology, and they make it look like it works in the way the people imagine that it works. This is why it feels real.

Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning Part 1 Movie Poster

Third, the layered storytelling is smartly done. Yes, the jaw dropping action, the amazing settings and locations, and the cast are all great, but without a good story it would fall flat. Again, none of these things would matter without good storytelling and Dead Reckoning has multiple, interconnected story lines that play simultaneously. From the first scene to the last there are clues and plot points sprinkled throughout the film, many of which pay off at different points in the movie and many of which seem to be held in reserve for Dead Reckoning Part 2. This is where the richness of the story lives because you simply can’t stop yourself from trying to puzzle out the story and what is going to happen next. I think we are going to see a lot of predictions for Part 2, and I honestly cannot think of a better way to build buzz for the sequel, which is due out in June 2024.

And, the fourth thing that they get right? The well-timed surprises, most of which make sense within the story world of Mission Impossible where the idea of what is actually possible is a little more subjective than in the real world. Even if you’re thinking “something must happen” and then it does, these surprising slight-of-hand moments and well-timed entries or exits all make sense within the scope of the story. They never quite fall back on deus ex machina to resolve an otherwise unresolvable issue, and sometimes the story plays out differently than you might expect but it still makes. The stakes are so high that everyone has to think differently, and so the film defies expectations but in completely logical and natural ways for these characters.

One thing I want to make sure to mention is the use of music and sound that add to the heart pounding feel of the film. There is something classic and core to those few notes in the Mission Impossible theme, and they are threaded throughout the film in ways that heighten and release tension. The sound design is expertly done. That paired with the cinematography create a stunning combination from the long shots to the closeups, there is a level of attention spent on the camera angles and lighting that showcase this film.

Final thought, whatever you might think about Tom Cruise, he’s a brilliant actor. He has a connection with the camera that pulls the audience into the movie, making that world feel present, real, and immediate. It’s one of the reasons that we feel the tension in his scenes whether or not its jam packed with action.

There is one scene in particular when Ethan Hunt’s trying to convince Grace to jump. The situation is tense (I’m avoiding spoilers here), and it’s the look on his face, the tone of his voice, the tremble in his hand that makes you feel what Ethan Hunt is feeling. It’s as if he’s not sure he can convince her to trust him — or maybe he’s trying to convince himself that she can trust him — and that he will actually be able to catch her. This is just one little moment that highlights that power of his performance. Scenes like these that are threaded throughout the film, turning it into a heart pounding experience because of performance. Tom Cruise is easily one of the best actors of his generation.

In short, Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning Part 1 is possibly the smartest and most exciting film in years. I love action movies and I love intelligent films. With Dead Reckoning, you get both. If you only see one movie in the theater this summer, this is the one to see.

Thanks so much everyone. And, in the words of Rogert Ebert, one of my childhood heroes, I’ll see you at the movies.

Visit my YouTube channel at @ErinUnderwood and subscribe for more videos and reviews.

Posted in 2023, Medium, Movie Reviews, Movies, Reviews | Tagged Action, Films, Movies, Review, Tom Cruise | Leave a comment

Erin Underwood Presents

Snow White Review: Breaking Down the Live-Action Adaptation

The Recruit Review: Legal Drama Meets Espionage

Mickey 17 Review: A Thought-Provoking Sci-Fi Adventure

Last Breath, Movie Review—A Death Defying Underwater Thriller!

Jurassic World: Rebirth – Do We Need Another Jurassic Park Film? Trailer Reactions

The Last Voyage of the Demeter – SPOILERS, Horror Story Breakdown and Review

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse Movie Review - Art and Technology Reaction

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse Movie Review – An Incredible Experience

The Little Mermaid, Movie Review – An Ariel for a New Generation?

Mission Impossible, Dead Reckoning, Part 1, Movie Review — What makes this film great?

Subscribe to Erin Underwood Presents

Recent Posts

The Grimm Future: Reimagined Fairytales

Geek Theater: Science Fiction Stage Plays

Futuredaze: Anthology of YA Science Fiction

Top Posts

Categories

Archives

Underwords Blog