action – Rating Frames

One Battle After Another: Paul Thomas Anderson’s Latest is the Year’s Best, an Instant Classic

September 22, 2025September 22, 2025Arnel Duracak

One Battle After Another preview screening provided by Universal Pictures

Even as I found myself slouched into the cinema seat, still having not adjusted to the timezone after a recent overseas vacation, Paul Thomas Anderson’s One Battle After Another (2025) woke me up, slapped me around and reminded me why I spent a year researching his work. There are few working directors who have stayed as true to form as PTA has, and even fewer who have dared to push quirky, unpredictable narratives and irreverent characters at such a scale out to audiences; One Battle After Another might just be the quirkiest, most unpredictable film he’s ever made, and easily one of the rare few that a studio has decided to back, with such a big budget.

While One Battle After Another, at least on paper, has all of the elements of a PTA film —themes of surrogacy, a focus on damaged male characters and dialogue that has you think twice and then twice more— it also feels like his most relevant film to date and not because of smart phones or modern mustangs, but because it isn’t a period piece, it isn’t looking back in ways that There Will be Blood (2007) or Inherent Vice (2014) were. This film plays like it’s very much a forward-looking, foreshadowing of what’s to come if we let forces greater than us hunt us down in the little spaces we’ve carved out for ourselves in a world that feels like it’s already getting smaller around us.

And it’s immediately apparent from the opening sequence that this isn’t going to be your stock standard PTA flick, with a harsher, almost street-like quality to the cinematography. We open with Perfidia (Teyana Taylor), a revolutionary who is scouting an immigration camp before we’re introduced to Bob Ferguson (Leonardo DiCaprio), and other grungy looking revolutionaries who are looking to cause calculated havoc in similar encampments and eventually, across banks and other establishments as well. The political undertones of the film are clear, but the whirlwind that’s to follow is unimaginable.

It doesn’t take long for things to shift to fifth gear as narcissistic leader of said camp/s, Steven J. Lockjaw (a career best Sean Penn and shoo-in for supporting actor), someone who detests African Americans but in being humiliated by Perfidia, falls head over heels for her (hey, everyone’s got a kink), is on a mission to hunt down every revolutionary involved in these acts of defiance. While he does hunt/kill most of them, Bob and his daughter Willa (played in youth age later by Chase Infiniti) are extracted to a safe haven while Perfidia, finding herself in witness protection, escapes to Mexico.

LEONARDO DI CAPRIO as Bob Ferguson in “One Battle After Another.” A Warner Bros. Pictures Release.

A time jump to 16 years later caps off a first act that is as balls-to-the-wall as any PTA has attempted (with 1997’s Boogie Nights coming in at a distant second). It’s telling that like Bob, who goes into hiding with his daughter while others hunt him down in this almost cat and mouse plot at the centre of this film, PTA has (in a way) almost been doing the same, or at the very least, trying to find a version of himself who’d warm up to the idea of being more in touch with the immediate world as it unfolds. While PTA can never be accused of playing things safe —in fact, his framing of thematic interests has only shifted as he’s aged and as he’s had his own children— he’s at his most abrasive, rampant self here.

For starters, PTA doesn’t attempt to play to the good vs evil, right vs wrong binary tendencies that so many weaker political thrillers tend to. Instead, he uses this strange love triangle (if it can be called that), between Bobb, Lockjaw and Perfidia, and a focus on character, to let any surrounding commentary seep in from. Ultimately this is a film about a father/daughter dynamic that’s complicated by an equally complicated lunatic whose motive (without spoiling) in hunting them is far more nuanced than simply getting rid of them.

What ensues is an electrifying, chaotically focused, yet hearty film that never slows down but keeps you on your toes until its classic finale that’s already entered legendary status. To get to that point, Johnny Greenwood’s edgy, almost chimey score keeps the tension flowing and builds on the unnerving aura of not knowing what’s around the corner. This is coupled with the equally unnerving performances of Penn, DiCaprio and Infiniti, with the former having a duality and complex that feels insane to have been pulled off, while Leo has a hipster edginess that’s underpinned by a desire to be didactic yet his paranoia is leaving him out of sorts (this pairing between PTA and Leo is a match made in heaven).

Like the characters in this film, PTA is a revolutionary but of a different cause: the preservation of cinema. In shooting One Battle After Another, he decided to bring back VistaVision (a dying breed of film format). It speaks to his desire to find meaning and breathe life into things often deemed unworthy or better left to fade with time, and this desire is almost felt on the screen with a character like Bob who’s brought back from the brink, from a place where he’s almost lost sight of himself and who he was, and risks fading away into someone that once meant something to so many people but doesn’t anymore. In this way, One Battle After Another inextricably ties PTA so closely to its characters and their plights (both of which always take precedence in his films ahead of commentary) which makes its daring finale and all that Bob finds he really stands for and that his daughter hopes to stand for in her own place in the world, feel so deeply personal.

One Battle After Another opens nationally from September 25

Superman: James Gunn Marvel-ises Superman, for Better and Worse

July 9, 2025July 10, 2025Arnel Duracak

Superman preview screening provided by Universal Pictures

When Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) hit screens some eleven years ago, there was a shift in the superhero movie paradigm that up until then was often focused on darker stories and more mature themes, most of which went hard on action but stepped away from the jovial playfulness that animated shows often captured so well. That shift is owed in large part to James Gunn who managed to find a nice middle ground between getting you your dose of power ups and battle scenes with the humanity and flaws behind these heroes. He also (unintentionally) set off a chain of events for superhero films that would see them sway too much towards silliness and cheesy one-liners that they eventually became devoid of any uniqueness or balance.

In the time since his original Guardians film, Gunn has gone onto deliver two more for Marvel before being headed up as Co-chairman and Co-CEO of DC Studios in a bid to try and turn the tide DC’s way — after all, their catalogue of heroes is much stronger than that of Marvels. While The Suicide Squad (2021) represented his first real foray into the DC universe, it’s his long awaited reinvention of Superman (2025) that has felt like the true starting point that is supposed to set the tone for what is to come.

To do so, Gunn has opted to throw the whole ‘origin story’ approach out the window and instead, throw viewers right into the thick of things. Superman (a perfectly cast David Corenswet) is three years into his Superman reveal, with all of the crash landing and coming-to-terms-with-his-powers backstory, left implied. It’s a bold choice from Gunn but it makes sense as it gives him the room to cram more into the plot rather than tread old ground.

Whether the cramming tickles your fancy or not, is another question. There’s a lot going on in Gunn’s film, much to the detriment of building out a cohesive plot. Gunn is at once interested in diving into the humanity behind the God figure and hitting him with countless obstacles and side quests, with the result being glimmers of deeper interrogation —one occurring early on as Superman in his Clark Kent guise, chats with his fellow reporter girlfriend Lois Lane (an equally fitting Rachel Brosnahanin) in an impromptu interview— but an overall surface level exercise.

(L to r) NICHOLAS HOULT as Lex Luthor and DAVID CORENSWET as Superman in Warner Bros. Pictures’ “SUPERMAN”

And that’s before we start talking about the wider plot which includes Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult) trying to get dirt on Superman so he has justification to kill him, a trio of ‘Justice Gang’ sub-heroes who pop in every now and then to aid Superman and (really) fill-in during his absence, a weird middle-eastern conflict that threatens to boil over but that Superman is embroiled in, and a wonky love-story between Luthor’s side-piece and a a journo helping to get dirt on Luthor. In other words, it’s a stuffy room with little air left to breathe, which at best gets you a little laugh and at worst, an eye roll.

But while Gunn might not be focusing on Superman’s origin story, he’s definitely focusing on his own, taking his learning’s from his time at Marvel and Marvel-ising them here. No one can accuse Gunn of making something that’s boring, after all, the ethos of Superman has always been built around a level of silliness and charm that starts right from his vibrant, cartoonish costume. Gunn understands that in order to make this version of Superman any different from past iterations, he would have to cut the preamble and focus on the wonder that comes from seeing frost breathe, laser eyes and flying while keeping it as lighthearted as possible — keep the message simple and ensure the goofiness is there, even if the stakes never feel like they match up.

I have to admit, while I’m not a Zack Snyder shill, I appreciate the darker tones and comic-book wham’s and pow’s he brought to Man of Steel (2013), Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) and his version of the Justice League (2021). Gunn’s version has gone a completely different direction and I can respect the decision to do so since the other approach wasn’t putting bums in cinema seats. Whether or not this film sets the tone for this new DC universe though, is hard to tell, especially with Matt Reeves’ The Batman (2022) feeling more akin to what would have existed in the old universe (I’m sure we’ll see Cornswet’s Superman and Robert Pattinson’s Batman cross paths in some way — though I smell tonal whiplash from a mile away). Regardless, Superman is imbued with the same level of goofiness as Gunn’s other films, and while it probably would have felt fresher had it been released eleven years ago, it still packs an entertaining punch.

Superman opens nationally from July 10.

F1: Brad Pitt Plays a Past-His-Prime Prodigy in Joseph Kosinski’s Adrenaline Filled Follow-Up to Top Gun: Maverick

June 25, 2025June 25, 2025Arnel Duracak

F1 preview screening provided by Universal Pictures

Swapping the skies for the circuit, Joseph Kosinski’s F1 (2025) is a speedy, four wheeled follow up to his box office smash, Top Gun: Maverick (2022). While I’m not an F1 fanatic, there’s no doubt that the exhilaration of a race with cars that push past 300km/h is an adrenaline rush for those that love that sport, and especially for the drivers behind the wheel. But what happens when you peel back the veneer that is the glitz and glamour of podium finishes, and begin to look at the gruelling process that pit crews and drivers alike go through in the lead up to a race? Well, Kosiniski understood the assignment and has created a punchy drama that both tackles that question, and is rife with everything from technical language about racing, to the fall and rise of a prodigy.

In many ways, F1 feels like a spiritual successor to Maverick in that it traces the life of someone who was young and reckless, but is now more of a “has been” who is giving it one last crack against the new stars. On paper, Kosiniski’s film feels like it was very much geared towards casting Tom Cruise and continuing to put him in the cockpit of these lightning fast death machines, but with the Mission Impossible films taking up the majority of his focus, another aging yet still youthful star had to step in.

Cue Brad Pitt. Once you’ve seen this film, it’s easy to say that it’s hard to imagine anyone else playing this role other than Pitt, but Pitt makes the character of Sonny Hayes wholly his own that it’s really, truly impossible to imagine even Cruise in his position. There’s a boyish cockiness that Pitt translates so well to the screen, and it’s no different here as he carries himself with the same reckless edge he’s delivered time and time again. And it serves the premise perfectly: a former racing prodigy who is living in his van and sporadically competing in races is given the keys to the kingdom that is F1 by his former racing competitor-friend-turned-F1-owner, as a hail mary to pull them out of the rut they’re in.

You might be thinking: this sounds like every movie that has an ageing star who continues to try and compete at the highest level. While you might be right to a degree, on paper F1 isn’t remarkable as a fresh character study, but where it falters in storytelling it makes up for with fast paced action and a desire to authentically capture the F1 scene. Kosinski and frequent cinematographer Claudio Miranda’s work on getting the claustrophobic, tight spacing of fighter jets right in Maverick has helped them capture the same feeling of being in an F1 car; combine that with Hans Zimmer’s pulsating, punchy score, and the film has a video game simulator feel — keeping you at once on the edge of your seat and as though you’re there with Sonny.

Key to trying to give the film a little more egde beyond the generic script by Ehren Kruger is the addition of a young rookie, Josh Pearce (Damson Idris), who naturally takes the lead for the team, with Sonny serving more to amplify his movements on the track. Their dynamic helps shift the gears and keep the film from just being like every other racing film you may have seen. For one, Sonny doesn’t settle for second best and pushes Josh to be his competitor on the track so as to not have him be complacent and expecting everything will be handed to him. This push and pull between the two is like a passing of a baton but only if that baton was on a rope and it had to be caught first.

That’s all to say that F1, while a stellar showcase of zippy cinematography and snappy editing, derives its most heartfelt moments (even if the rest of the story is rather cookie-cutter) through Sonny’s redemption arc as he takes his track knowledge and turns it into a method for madness. What’s even more impressive is just how close to the real thing Kosinski has kept proceedings, with real-life racers like Max Verstappen and Lewis Hamilton cropping up (the latter being a producer as well who was involved with the project before Brad Pitt!). There’s a level of verisimilitude that the film is striving to capture, sometimes to the detriment of the wider drama that’s captured so well by films like Ferrari (2023) and Ford v Ferrari (2019), but often it nails this approach mainly because of how close each aspect of production is to the real thing, and with this approach Kosinski has clearly found himself a formula for success.

F1 opens nationally from the June 26.

How to Train Your Dragon: A New Look but the Same Heart in this Live-Action Remake

June 9, 2025June 25, 2025Arnel Duracak

How to Train Your Dragon preview screening provided by Universal Pictures

Whenever news breaks out that a studio is developing a live-action version of a beloved animated feature, a collective sigh followed by a “but why?” tends to ring out. After all, we’ve seen Disney try and (often) fail to bring their iconic animations back, with bigger budgets and fancier visual effects, only to see them turn out feeling devoid of the heart and soul that made those animations so great (see Aladdin, The Lion King, The Little Mermaid, Snow White, Dumbo etc.) Occasionally though, there is an anomaly, and fortunately it’s How to Train Your Dragon (2025).

That Dean DeBlois has been trusted to continue directing the How to Train Your Dragon series with this live action, is a testament to the success (both critical and commercial) he has found with the series as a whole. After all, how hard is it to make animated dragons look like real dragons while keeping the warmth that an animation lends? Well, it’s definitely no easy feat (I’m looking at you, expressionless lions in 2019’s The Lion King). But that’s ultimately what this film boils down to: can DeBlois and his team retain the charm of the 2010 classic? The short answer is, definitely. Mason Thames, while not sounding like Jay Baruchel, looks like Hiccup, and Night Fury looks like Night Fury. It’s clear that a lot of care was taken to be faithful to the look and feel of the 2010 film while delivering a version that felt larger-than-life and a world that looks lived-in.

(from left) Night Fury dragon, Toothless, and Hiccup (Mason Thames) in Universal Pictures’ live-action How to Train Your Dragon, written and directed by Dean DeBlois.

If you haven’t seen the animated original (I mean, you’ve only had 15 years), then, first and foremost, go and see that film, but also, you may not be too fazed as to whether this version is faithfully done or not. For what it’s worth, it’s about as close to the first as you can come, right down to the dragon designs and casting choices like Gerard Butler reprising his role as Stoick the Vast and delivering just as profound a performance. It also helps that the humour has translated across as well, something that’s probably helped by there being no musical numbers that come across as cheesy and eye rolling.

Beyond simply comparing the animated film to the live action, it’s hard to note anything else given this feels incredibly one-to-one in script, tone and look. If the dragons had looked lifeless or devoid of expression, then it’d be easy to call that out, but I guess my only grievance can be that instead of a fourth animated film, we’re getting live action cash grabs. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that (if it attracts an audience, that’s a win), but there has long been a reluctance to experiment with big budget films and try something different for fear of having it bomb — so much so that a sequel was green-lit before this film was even released, which is both bold, but also speaks to the faith that the studio has in a return on investment for an already successful intellectual property.

Perhaps more than any other animation in recent years, I’ve loved the How to Train Your Dragon series the most so I still had a ball with this live action and there’s no doubt that others will too. In my particular screening in Melbourne, visual effects artists who worked on the dragons were in attendance (with most of the work done here in Melbourne), and it’s great to see local creative studios continue to represent Australia and lead the way in digital effects for some of the biggest blockbusters in the world.

How to Train Your Dragon opens nationally from June 12.

Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning: After 29 Years it’s Mission Complete for Tom Cruise’s Iconic Franchise

May 17, 2025May 18, 2025Arnel Duracak

Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning preview screening provided by Paramount Pictures.

Whether it’s hanging suspended inside a secret vault, rock climbing on cliff faces, climbing the Burj Khalifa, HALO jumping, flying helicopters between cliffs, dangling off the side of airplanes or diving to deep depths, for the past 29 years the Mission: Impossible franchise has pushed the boundaries of what the cinematic experience can offer. The latest and last addition to this exercise, The Final Reckoning (2025), manages to impress one last time, leaving no stone unturned and no jaw undropped.

It feels as though Director Christopher McQuarrie and Tom Cruise’s bond since first collaborating on Jack Reacher (2012) has only strengthened the work they’ve done on this franchise, with The Final Reckoning representing the sixth time they’ve worked together. The duo are clearly in sync with one another, and their relationship has seen McQuarrie produce a number of other titles Cruise has starred in — their collab might just be the Robert de Niro/Martin Scorsese of modern action films.

While all of the Mission films are interlinked, they always tend to have a new threat for Ethan Hunt (Cruise) to take on. Of course, these final two are more connected than the others (title aside). Kicking off almost immediately after Dead Reckoning Part One (2023), The Final Reckoning finds Hunt once again in hiding as his narrow escape from the previous film’s derailed-train-finale has left him with the key to the vault of the lost Sevastopol submarine. The dangerous AI known as the ‘Entity’ continues to pose a risk to the survival of the world, and it’s up to Hunt to track down the sub, contain the entity, and prevent the world from becoming an ash wasteland. Just another day for cinema’s most rouge operative, right?

Tom Cruise plays Ethan Hunt in *Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning* from Paramount Pictures and Skydance.

The Final Reckoning takes Hunt to new heights as well as depths, with Cruise once again putting his body on the line for the sake of realism. It takes some time to get to the almost playful-like vibe that previous installments have been so good at capturing, though. You feel more of the dialogue this time around, with the first act in particular having a greater weightiness to it. When I think about my favourite film in the franchise, Fallout (2018), no line ever feels wasted and always drives the plot forward, but it’s as though the punchy, in-your-face-ness of dialogue this time around is a bit more… measured (I guess being the final film, there’s some understandable caution of trying to make every moment count).

Once the flood gates open, however, it’s a hold-onto-your-horses kind of ride. The elation of watching a Mission film is in the knowing that what you’re seeing isn’t a gimmick, and to add an extra layer to it, that the film’s star is the one doing it. A tank was purpose built (the largest ever for this kind of production) to have Cruise dive into, and the tension of seeing him clamber under water while the sound design holds him (and by extension, the audience) to ransom, is spine tingling, on-the-edge-of-your-seat stuff. At a later point, Cruise is literally dangling from the thin bars of a biplane in what is perhaps the most death defying stunt ever performed by the star of a movie for the big-screen. The high of seeing Cruise scramble as the plane barrel rolls and twists and turns, is just as exhilarating as you’d imagine, and it’s one of the clearest examples of the symbiotic relationship between Hunt and Cruise, a point where these two personas meet as they both battle to get into the cockpit — a feeling best exacerbated by the G-force struggle on Cruise’s face.

Tom Cruise plays Ethan Hunt, Pom Klementieff plays Paris, Greg Tarzan Davis plays Degas, Simon Pegg plays Benji Dunn and Hayley Atwell plays Grace in *Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning* from Paramount Pictures and Skydance.

Ethan’s moral compass has always been the core of what makes this franchise standout. He’s a character of conviction, one who chooses right over right and pays the consequences time and time again. Fallout really brought the fire that burns within him —for those he cares about— out to the max. These final two films have felt more mellow when it comes to character development (we know what makes him tick), but the idea that he’s not facing any one person this time around, but an AI, really brings the focus back on him and his ability to make decisions on the fly, something that really homes in on the idea that his biggest enemy is himself.

At this point, the “Tom Cruise is secretly trying to kill himself” memes are comical, but for every broken bone the actor has endured (and there have been a few), hundreds of thousands of jaws have dropped. If the Mission: Impossible films have taught us anything it’s that Cruise, like Ethan Hunt, has continued to choose the mission and risk his life for the benefit of those he will never truly meet, and cinema is all the better for it.

Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning opens nationally from today.

Mickey 17: Bong Joon-ho’s Long-Awaited Follow-Up to Parasite is Amusing, Insightful and Downright Fun

March 6, 2025March 7, 2025Arnel Duracak

Mickey 17 preview screening provided by Universal Pictures.

It doesn’t take a genius to understand that a film about a guy who wants to leave on an expedition and chooses to willingly die and get reprinted (literally) with his memories in-tact, only to keep dying and being reprinted, is right up Bong Joon-ho’s alley. While that doesn’t capture the multifaceted space adventure that is Mickey 17 (2025) to nearly the full extent of the word, Bong’s interests are very particular in that, human dispensability —especially with regards to people in lower socio-economic situations— is a pertinent concern throughout his oeuvre.

In Snowpiercer (2013), a train is used as a motif to portray the various carriages of the caste system, with the back of the train being the lowest class citizens and the front, the highest class, while in Mickey 17, a large spaceship serves a similar purpose. In other words, it’s no secret that capitalism and the presence of an oligarchy are concerns that he hasn’t been shy about critiquing, and they’re a thematic consistency across his work. Regarding dispensability, Mickey 17 is much more literal than any of his previous films in how it reduces the human body to something that can be done away with, something that goes beyond even that of the lowliest of workers to just a recycled carcass.

That’s at least the seed from which the rest of the film grows and revolves around as Mickey (Robert Pattinson) signs himself up to be an “expendable” or an unfortunate soul who would choose to live a quasi-immortal life by living to die and dying to live. He does this after finding himself in bad company on Earth following a debt he hasn’t paid back, before ending up on a government spaceship headed up by a pompous failed politician, Kenneth Marshall (a goofy Mark Ruffalo whose performance echoes that of his one in 2023’s Poor Things), that’s on an expedition to find a new planet to preserve mankind — if this is sounding like Passengers (2016) mixed with Edge of Tomorrow (2014), then you’d be on the right track.

The spaceship finds itself headed towards Niflheim (not to be confused with that area in 2018’s God of War game), a cold planet inhabited by woolly creatures that look like roly polie, pill bugs (dubbed “Creepers”). It’s here that Mickey’s expendable state is really tested, as he’s exposed to the planet’s toxic air over and over again until a cure can be found and applied; it’s also where we eventually get to the 17th version of Mickey that opens the film in a scene we circle back to later. While comical in its portrayal of the printing process after every Mickey death, Bong’s commentary on how human life can be reduced so willy-nilly by those in power makes for a tasty treat, especially when it comes to just how dispensable the human body is in real life, especially when it comes to matters of war.

Bong never dwells though, he keeps the film moving and he keeps the action and dialogue light-hearted and cosy, but his ability to go a step further in his critique of capitalism and the frivolousness of those in power who look down on others, shows a director who is maturing in his own ideas and isn’t afraid to mine them to the full extent. It helps that Marshall and Gwen (Toni Collette) are so effortlessly unlikable in their bougieness which helps those ideas evolve easier.

But their relationship is hardly the most shocking: after being saved by the aforementioned woolly pill bugs (following a harsh fall in an ice cave), Mickey 17 manages to find his way back to the ship where he comes across a clone of himself or a “multiple” as they’re called. It turns out Mickey 17 was presumed dead so the 18th version of him was printed, but without his pitchy accent and more akin to Pattinson’s Bruce Wayne in cadence.

Mark Ruffalo and Toni Collette in *Mickey 17*

It also turns out “multiples” aren’t permitted, so much so that Mickey 18 tries to kill Mickey 17 from the outset, but they soon find a commonality in the form of taking down their oppressors (very much in the vein of Snowpiercer). Pattinson’s dual performance is really a make-or-break factor in understanding what makes these multiples so unique from one another — that these reprints exhibit more humanity than the majority of the crew really adds weight to just how narcissistic and morally bleak humans can be at their worst.

At the end of the day, this is easily Bong’s most optimistic film, one that doesn’t present a bleak future but offers a chance for its characters to carve a brighter tomorrow on their own terms. Sure, he isn’t subtle about his growing interest in ideas he’s previously explored, but he also doesn’t pander to his audience, choosing to let the film’s amusing story take you on a rollercoaster comprised of the grotesque, heartfelt and humorous. In this way, it feels like his most accessible film as there are no hidden windows that keep you guessing.

Mickey 17 opens nationally from today.

Sonic the Hedgehog 3 Takes the Franchise to New Heights

December 20, 2024Arnel Duracak

Sonic the Hedgehog 3 preview screening provided by Paramount Pictures

If Sonic the Hedgehog (2020) introduced audiences, both new and old, to Sega’s speedy blue gaming icon, and Sonic the Hedgehog 2 (2022) brought with it deeper lore surrounding the Sonic universe (like Chaos Emeralds and wider characters), then Sonic the Hedgehog 3 (2024) is the sum of those parts. At once taking the fun and action to new heights (literally) as well as introducing more new characters and doubling older ones up (even more literally), the third entry in this ever growing series —which has churned out three films in five years— continues the zoomy momentum by pulling out added franchise goodies and showing no signs of slowing down.

Returning to the director’s seat is Jeff Fowler who seems to have found his groove with these films, directing them like pop culture pinball machines, however the spiritual core of them resides with Pat Casey and Josh Miller whose script finds a unique blend between action, comedy and emotional intelligence that breathes life into this revered franchise for the big screen —meaning everyone can get in on the fun.

All that said, Sonic 3 is more interested in going bigger at every turn. Sonic (Ben Schwartz), Knuckles (Idris Elba) and Tails (voice acting veteran, Colleen O’Shaughnessey) are finally the trio the series has been building them out to be and face a new threat in the form of Shadow (an aptly cast Keanu Reeves), a darker hedgehog who harnesses chaos energy that renders him dangerous and unpredictable. He comes into the picture almost instantly after breaking out of prison following 50 years of controlled sedation (with more of his backstory slowly unraveling).

Shadow (Keanu Reeves) in Sonic the Hedgehog 3 from Paramount Pictures and Sega of America, Inc.

From there, the movie fires on all cylinders, with Fowler’s kinetic approach to direction and the haphazardness of the editing really coming together to keep from any real moments of respite. We get chases throughout Tokyo, a Mission Impossible esque climax in London and a battle outside of Earth’s atmosphere — it’s an accelerated experience, but one that never threatens to become anything less than mindless, popcorn fun.

Speaking of fun, Jim Carrey is the standout here, playing two characters this time around: Dr Ivo Robotnik and his grandfather, Gerald Robotnik. Carrey steals every scene he’s in and is at the top of his game as he brings his whole overzealous being into the performances, using every trick in his book of physical humour to give these characters their own special place in the Carrey-verse of whacky weirdos. Whether it’s the whimsical banter and affection Ivo shows Gerald, the grouchy, bad-Santa esque vibe that Gerald exudes, or simply the floor crawls and random dance breakouts — Carrey is clearly having a ball and is reason enough to see the film.

Jim Carrey as Ivo Robotnik and Gerald Robotnik in Sonic the Hedgehog 3 from Paramount Pictures and Sega of America, Inc.

There are other returning faces as well, namely in the form of Tom (James Marsden) and Maddie (Tika Sumpter), but like the humans in the latest spate of MonsterVerse films, they’ve really become more like a distraction rather than an addition to proceedings. Fowler uses Tom as an emotional bridge between Shadow and Sonic, to show they’re both fighting for the same thing (those they love, or the memory of those they love), but the film is at its boisterous best when it focuses on the fun and games.

For a trilogy of films that started off on the wrong foot with that atrocious initial Sonic design, to see just how well it’s recovered and continues to be received is a testament to the heart that Fowler and the rest of the cast and crew have poured into the franchise. Whether you take a liking to the Sonic universe or are just looking for something to see over the holiday season, Sonic 3 is the perfect family film with enough humour to not feel overbearing and enough action to keep you on the edge of your seat.

Sonic the Hedgehog 3 spins into cinemas from Boxing Day.

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga: George Miller’s Return to the Wasteland is just as Chaotic and Fun as Ever

May 22, 2024May 22, 2024Arnel Duracak

Melbourne premiere screening provided by Universal Pictures

How does one follow up one of the greatest action films of all time? In George Miller’s case, he doubles down: double the car chases, double the explosions, double the chaos, double what’s happening in the mise-en-scene, and double the fun. But Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga should not be seen as an attempt to outdo Mad Max: Fury Road (2015), even though it speaks (sometimes explicitly) to the idea of making something epic and memorable, as though that wasn’t already achieved with the sequel.

Tonally, visually and sonically, Furiosa is on par with Fury Road which makes complete sense for the simple reason that it’s a prequel that’s there to compliment, and there’s not someone else in the director’s seat to screw it up. It’s clear that Miller went with a ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’ mentality when approaching this film, and the result is all the better for it. The biggest deviation to be felt in Furiosa is that, while it lives in the universe of Mad Max, it isn’t about him. In fact, Fury Road wasn’t exactly about him either, with these two films carving out their own place as post-apocalyptic, operatic action epics with larger-than-life stakes beyond a bloke called Max. But nonetheless, Furiosa is the character we follow and the focal point that guides our understanding of where Fury Road begins and ends.

Taking place across five chapters, Furiosa opens with the titular character (played in youth by Alyla Browne) in the green haven she attempts to return to throughout Fury Road. After noticing bandits ravaging through the haven, she tries to sabotage their bikes and alert the rest of her people of their presence; unfortunately she’s captured in the process, leading her mother (Charlee Fraser) to give chase. Eventually, Furiosa is brought to the bandits leader, Dementus (Chris Hemsworth), who is looking for his own means of survival along with the rest of his pack of bikers.

Chris Hemsworth in Warner Bros. Pictures’ action adventure “FURIOSA: A MAD MAX SAGA,” a Warner Bros. Pictures release.

It’s from here that Miller reintroduces familiar aspects from Fury Road, namely Immortan Joe (Lachy Hulme) and his goofball sons; Immortan’s white army of War Boys; and the Citadel. The first hour or so of the film focuses on Furiosa’s navigation of this space after she finds herself a captive of sorts (for reasons I won’t spoil). Alyla Browne does a fantastic job at setting the foundations of Furiosa’s arc to the point where, when Anya Taylor-Joy eventually takes the reigns after an hour, it’s not immediately apparent because of how alike the two actresses are with their pronounced blue eyes and Miller’s focus on framing them in tight close-ups.

Once Taylor-Joy is at the helm, Miller throws her into a extended chase sequence with Praetorian Jack (Tom Burke in a minor, but effective role) onboard an oil tanker, the War Rig. It echoes the chase from Fury Road where Furiosa deviates from her oil run to Gastown, but here Miller is much more interested in stretching the tension out as much as possible, almost to breaking point. It really speaks to his penchant for destruction and his eye for detail, where every nook and cranny of the truck, gears and all, is on display and pushed to the limit.

It takes some time to buy into Taylor-Joy’s performance, namely because it feels like she trying too hard to fill Charlize Theron’s boots rather than carve out her own little space for this character. Theron’s commanding screen presence, particularly the way she carries herself, is ultimately too pronounced for Taylor-Joy — she even tries to mimic her cadence of speaking — and subtlety is more effective here (which Browne brings). But Taylor-Joy does offer a level of vulnerability through her enchanting eyes; in this sense it’s easy to see why Miller might have chosen her as the lead.

Tom Burke as Praetorian Jack and Anya Taylor-Joy as Furiosa in Warner Bros. Pictures’ action adventure “FURIOSA: A MAD MAX SAGA,” a Warner Bros. Pictures release.

Hemsworth, by contrast, steals every scene he’s in, even when he goes missing for some stretches of time. Where the Thor films misplaced his larrikin humour (often at the character’s expense), Miller gives him the freedom to lean into it in a way befitting a character with a name like Dementus. His brute physique coupled with his nasally way of speaking gives Dementus a memorable edge, especially with all of the quotable lines he’s given.

Adding to the grandiose and scale of what’s on display is the fact that the Wasteland’s harshness is felt to an equal (if not greater) degree than in the first film. The addition of locations hinted at in Fury Road, like the aforementioned Gastown and Bullettown, adds weight to the stakes at play. There isn’t just more for the sake of having more, but rather Miller deliberately leaves no stone unturned and paces his film like the War Rig barrelling down a stretch of road — there’s no room for respite, you just brace yourself and try to hold on for the ride.

For what it’s worth, it’s a gorgeous ride to be had, with the visuals once again being enveloped in this orange, grainy tinge. Where in Fury Road the colours felt less saturated, there’s a much more surreal, darker quality this time around.

This is ultimately a film about Furiosa though, and her story never feels like it’s compromised or diluted for the sake of brandishing all of the fun and games that audiences will expect. Miller is a master at knowing how to capture human plight and not let it be overshadowed by the scale of his pictures. The human element of his films and this portrayal for struggle is what intensifies every car flip, gun shot and extraordinary set-piece, which is why it’s even more commendable that in a film full of incredible moments, Furiosa never loses sight of Furiosa.

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga opens nationally from the 23rd of May.

Three Mad Max Theories that Change How You See the Franchise

May 22, 2024May 21, 2024Tom Parry

Of all the cultural exports to emerge from Australia, arguably none is more widely recognised or celebrated than the Mad Max film series. These post-apocalyptic, dystopian tales have inspired praise and enthusiastic fan-bases the world over, from Asia to the Americas, all enamoured by the franchise’s idiosyncratic characters, punk-like aesthetics, and high-octane action sequences.

This popularity is quite remarkable when one considers the franchise’s humble origins. The initial Mad Max (1979) was conceived by its director, George Miller — a qualified surgeon — as a means of highlighting the impacts of road trauma, with the hallmarks for which the series is most-widely known not being introduced until its sequel, two years later. And even then, it is never directly stated nor explained why, or how, Max’s world operates the way it does.

This mystique has led to several theories from cinephiles, some of which help explain discrepancies that have emerged in the franchise’s four-picture, five-decade history. With the latest film in the long-running saga, Furiosa set to reach our screens this week, we’re sharing three of our favourites. Spoilers follow!

Max is Dreaming

Max Rockatansky (Mel Gibson) as he appears in the final moments of the first *Mad Max*

This first theory postulates that our main protagonist, Max Rockatansky is imagining the events which occur in the second, third and fourth entries in the series, and stems from what transpires in the first picture. As a reminder: Max (Mel Gibson) loses his best mate, Jim “Goose” Rains (Steve Bisley), wife Jessie (Joanne Samuel) and infant son Sprog (Brendan Heath) to the violent hands of a rogue biker gang, led by The Toecutter (Hugh Keays-Byrne).

The argument here is that Max, having been distressed by the loss of those closest to him, becomes listless and descends into madness — hence the title — by entering a fantasy world of his own creation, one where he gets his revenge on Toecutter and his minions. From there, he visualises himself as a champion of the oppressed, committing vengeance against those who dare to stymie the peaceful will of others.

Applying the Caligari-esque mentality of it all being a dream may appear juvenile, but there are some elements which help provide credence to this belief. Note how, for instance, the respective plots of Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981), Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome (1985) and Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) all have Max entering a cult as an outsider, becoming their leader in all but name, and defeating their oppressors in a climactic chase sequence.

The theory also explains the use of certain actors in more than one film. Bruce Spence is a prime example — he plays the Gyro-Captain in The Road Warrior, and then appears as an amateur pilot in Beyond Thunderdome, both times assisting Max and his allies as they escape tyranny. Then there’s Max Fairchild, who appears in supporting roles in the first and second instalments; and Toecutter himself, Hugh Keays-Byrne, who portrays Fury Road’s antagonistic Immortan Joe over three decades after his first casting as a villain.

Max is a Legend

Max (Mel Gibson, again) with The Ones Left Behind in *Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome*

By that, we mean he’s a mythical figure, akin to the Roman or Greek gods written about centuries ago. A couple of the examples used above could also be utilised as evidence for this second theory — the appearance of thespians as different characters in multiple films; the vaguely similar narratives of the three sequels — and more besides.

The Road Warrior is the entry which most readily identifies with Max Rockatansky being a myth. From the outset, it’s made clear the story is set in the future, with an elderly man (voiced by Harold Baigent) recounting the events of his past, who by story’s end reveals himself to be one of Max’s allies: the Feral Kid (Emil Minty).

More proof comes from the end of Beyond Thunderdome, where an adult Savannah Nix (Helen Buday) is seen recounting the tale of how she and her fellow tribespeople were rescued by Max. And then, there’s this quote which appears at the end of Fury Road:

“Where must we go… we who wander this Wasteland in search of our better selves?”

That line is attributed to “The First History Man”, and unknown and unwitnessed figure who, we can assume, is responsible for telling Max’s story.

Also indicative of this theory is the demise and unexplained return of Max’s iconic car, The Interceptor. This heavily-modified Ford XB Falcon Hardtop was stolen by Rockatansky in the third act of the original film, and destroyed in Mad Max 2, only to miraculously appear in the opening scenes of Fury Road (though in fairness, Miller circumvents this plot-hole by describing the latter picture as a “revisiting” of the franchise).

There’s More than One Max

Max (Tom Hardy) strapped to the front of a War Boy’s car in *Mad Max: Fury Road*

In the days and weeks following the release of Fury Road, there were certain netizens who hypothesised that this particular Max is, in fact, the aforementioned Feral Kid from Mad Max 2, owing to his long hair, the return of The Interceptor, him being played by a different actor, and the character reluctantly sharing his name.

Miller himself entertained this idea when queried by IGN, labelling it “interesting” but ultimately dismissing it, pointing to The Road Warrior’s end narration. Other factors that work against the premise include Tom Hardy being directly credited as “Max Rockatansky” in Fury Road’s opening, and his voice-over where he directly states:

“Once I was a cop, a Road Warrior searching for a righteous cause.”

But, tying into the theory that Max is a fable, it is possible that he is not the only “Max” in this universe. Again, The Interceptor helps provide weight to this theory — if this is the same Max we saw in Road Warrior and Thunderdome, how is it that “the last of the V8s” (as the car is labelled in the first and second chapters) is still in his possession after being lost?

There’s the matter of his name, too. Rockatansky only says his name twice in Fury Road — in the initial voice-over, and in the third act when he saves Furiosa’s life; he shares it about as often in Mad Max 2, and doesn’t utter it even once in Thunderdome, where he’s instead called “the Raggedy Man” or “the Man with No Name”. Perhaps our History Folk are telling of several figures who came to the aid of others, and just so happen to have named their hero “Max” in each tale.

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga is screening in theatres nationwide from this Thursday, May 23rd. The other four Mad Max films are available via home-video, streaming and on-demand services.

The Fall Guy: Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt Amplify David Leitch’s Ode to Stuntwork

April 23, 2024April 25, 2024Arnel Duracak

The Fall Guy Melbourne Premiere provided by Universal Pictures

Car flips, ramp jumps, countless explosions and high tumbles are just some of the obstacles that stunt people face, and David Leitch’s The Fall Guy has them all. Leitch’s film seeks to celebrate the unsung heroes of stunts by putting two of Hollywood’s hottest properties, Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt, in the driver’s seat and letting them run amok.

Stuntman Colt Seavers’ (Ryan Gosling) life takes an expected turn after a stunt-gone-wrong puts him out of the business for over a year. To make matters worse, he’s derailed a relationship with another crew member, cinematographer Jody Moreno (Emily Blunt) after ghosting her in the time since. But it’s not until a phone call from producer Gail (Hannah Waddingham), begging him to return to stunt work on a film that Jody is now directing, that his life really takes a turn. And that’s because amidst his awkward return to facing Jody, he’s also been tasked with locating the film’s missing star that he stunt-doubles for, Tom Ryder (Aaron Taylor-Johnson).

On paper, it’s hardly a unique premise, but it lends itself to a rampant few hours at the cinema, largely because of Gosling and Blunt’s on-screen chemistry. The duo, fresh off of their 2023 blockbuster hits Barbie and Oppenheimer, respectively, seamlessly work off of one another here.

Gosling has a penchant for dry humour, as evidenced by his straight faced delivery of lines, but he’s also an incredibly versatile actor and it shows here as he effortlessly exudes charisma —at once being able to cry in the car to Taylor Swift’s ‘All Too Well’ and then go and burst through a door like a clumsy Jackie Chan. Blunt matches him in her charm, where she finds a balance between being obliviously innocent and a straight-up butt-kicking baddie.

Ryan Gosling is Colt Seavers in THE FALL GUY, directed by David Leitch

The duo are really the heart and soul of the film, which sometimes gets caught up in its own self-reflexivity. Characters will often call out wider pop culture references (Winston Duke’s character slams a bad guy through a table while shouting “Dwayne Johnson!”) and sometimes the writing doesn’t take itself seriously enough, leading to a feeling that the stakes just don’t feel that important —or the wider “why should I care if you don’t” aspect that Leitch’s films are notorious for.

Make no mistake, this is a film that revels in blowing everything out of proportion, so much so that it affords little respite. There are boat chases, three major ramp jumps, a sequence where Gosling is tripping on psychedelics and seeing unicorns, street chases throughout Sydney (which has never looked better), and a closing sequence that is committed to blowing things up.

In other words, Leitch (a former stuntman himself, famously for Brad Pitt) and lead stunt coordinator Keir Beck are all-in on going as big as they can and as fast as they can. For the most part they achieve that as the film rarely gives you a moment to stop and think, at times to its own detriment (the third act resolves in a rather eye-roll moment of spewy exposition), but at the same time that’s the name of the game as stunt people rarely hesitate.

Whether or not the stunts themselves will stand the test of time in the same way Tom Cruise throwing himself off of a mountain face will, isn’t clear. For the most part they’re great in the moment, but I wouldn’t call them memorable, especially when it’s Gosling and Blunt who will steal the accolades for their effortless banter. But Leitch (like Chad Stahelski with his John Wick franchise) knows the stunt game better than anyone, and The Fall Guy delivers the popcorn filmmaking goods while celebrating the bodies behind the actors.

The Fall Guy opens nationally from the 24th of April.