So, who says that fairy tales and fables are strictly for the toddlers? Certainly not the folks behind this week’s fantasy/satire that’s now at the multiplex. Though it’s not a grand epic like the amazing WILDWOOD, it gets in lots of pointed barbs at societal norms and features a stellar acting ensemble. So what happens when a discarded woman (of a certain age) shakes things up by “hooking up” with a tall, mysterious stranger? Well, a lot, since he’s made entirely of WICKER.
Here’s the standard “setup “. Once upon a time (probably more than 400 years ago) in a tiny village (thinking middle Europe), a woman who sold fish in the market, known only as (‘natch) the Fisherwoman (Olivia Colman), was often ridiculed and dismissed by the village. She was well past the favored marrying age, possessed unconventional features, and smelled of her “trade”. Still, she felt something was missing from her solitary life, and desired a husband, despite the crude wedding traditions (see what they use instead of a ring in the ceremony). Oh, the only merchant in the market who respected her was the eccentric Basket Weaver (Peter Dinklage). One day, he is stunned by her arrival at his home, even more shocked by her request. Handing him several coins, she asks him to “make” her a husband. He agrees and tells her to be ready to be wed at the chapel in a few days. On the morning, the townspeople are stunned by the appearance of a tall, red-bearded, stoic man made entirely of wicker (Alexander Skarsgård). He borrows shoes and a suit, telling them he is to be married. Finally, he walks into the church to meet his surprised and somewhat delighted “blushing bride”. More unconventional than the ceremony is the honeymoon at her home. The passion is so intense and physical that…they break the bed. That is his household “project”, the first of many. As a matter of fact, he dedicates his days to chores (fixing and repairing) and helping her gather fish, and his nights to “making her happy”.When he tells the local men about this, they’re quite angry that he’s not following their ideas of wife/servants. But the women are jealous of the Fisherwoman’s bliss and smiles of “satisfaction”. Will this straight-laced “uptight” village conspire to destroy this very unconventional union? Or can the duo possibly “live happily ever after”?
After her powerful performances in recent dramas, THE FATHER and THE LOST DAUGHTER, some filmgoers might forget that Ms. Coleman is a deft comic actress. Well, let this role be a reminder for us all. She’s the “dark cloud’ in the phony, forced sunshine of this close-minded ‘burg. She pushes back on all the snobbery and disdain thrown her way (and throws ’em right back). Then Coleman hints at the deep longing in the Fishwoman’s regimented life. And when her “order” arrives, Coleman beams with happiness, truly brightening her drab surroundings and neighbors (until they try to squelch it). She has a kindred spirit in the snarky, sneering Basket Weaver, given a dry, sarcastic persona by the terrific Dinklage. Even more than her, he’s looked down upon by nearly everyone, which prompts him to use his caustic wit as a shield and a mace. And then there’s the purity of his creation and the Fishwoman’s always-accommodating lover, the Wicker Husband, given life by the subtle, stoic line readings of Skarsgard. He’s an almost pure, newly hatched soul, taking everything literally, while trying to be pleasant around the very emotional villagers. Their chief agitator is Elizabeth Debicki as the Tailor’s Wife, so compelling as she watches her nemesis living her best life while she is trapped by the local customs and beliefs. She’s a great villainess who still evokes pity. There’s also a delightful supporting performance by the Doctor, who is more interested in his birthday dinner than in tending to a minor wound that becomes needlessly fatal.
Actually, all the actors playing the villagers are great at making the whole “the good ole’ days weren’t that good, really” sensibility soar. Much of the credit for that should go to the gifted directing/screenwriting (from the short story by Ursula Wills) duo of Eleanor Wilson and Alex Huston Fischer (SAVE YOURSELVES!). They establish the sly, satirical mood early on with that bonkers take on weddings and continue skewering the “sweet simple country folk” cliché. They keep the jokes and slapstick zipping along, though not at the expense of the story’s emotional core. It is a love story (unlikely to be sure) so we’re hoping that the lovers are not brought down by outside forces (the results of mistrust nearly doom them). This gives more power to an ending that brings everything “full circle” with a denouncement worthy of the “Twilight Zone” and even the old EC horror comics (and their cousin, Mad magazine). Wilson and Huston make great use of the Budapest locations that riff on the squalor of MONTY PYTHON AND THE HOLY GRAIL (minus the plague). Big kudos to the effects artists, many from Weta, in making this “basket-based” object of desire. And clocking in well under two hours, fans of fables and fabulous actors will enjoy the wickedly romantic comic “strands” woven in WICKER.
A chilling Helen Mirren stars as thriller novelist Patricia Highsmith, author of “Strangers on a Train” and the Tom Ripley novels in A TALENT FOR MURDER, a cat-and-mouse tale of the reclusive, flinty author and a young editor, Edward Ridgeway (Alden Ehrenreich) sent by her New York publisher to the author’s remote home in Switzerland, with the aim to persuade her to write a sixth Ripley novel.
The story, set in 1995, the year that Highsmith died, is invented but is plausible enough to be believable. The invented meeting serves as a frame for battle of wills, wits and nasty tricks, as the pair collaborate on sketching out a novel about the murderous Mr. Ripley and reveal Highsmith’s nasty personality as well as literary brilliance. A TALENT FOR MURDER was adapted from the stage play “Switzerland” by its playwright, Joanna Murray-Smith, and directed by Anton Corbijn, whose previous works include CONTROL, THE AMERICAN with George Clooney, and A MOST WANTED MAN, based on an John LeCarre story and starring the late Philip Seymour Hoffman.
Director Corbijn creates a wonderfully moody and frightening atmosphere for this tense tale, with warm, rich tones and some creative lighting and camera work by director of photography Robbie Ryan. The Switzerland scenes were shot in Italy, and are beautifully claustrophobic, as well as simply beautiful.
The film is more a thriller, like Highsmith’s novels, but it does offer a little exploration of the complex, controversial author. Patricia Highsmith’s novels were influenced by Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, Camus and Freud, and elevated the murder mystery genre to new literary heights, yet the brilliant writer who was also a nasty piece of work, a complex human puzzle known to spout misanthropic, racist and antisemitic views. There is a single line in the film, near the start of the meeting between the author and the young editor, where she voices some of those views but the words linger in the mind after that.
Before he arrives, young Edward Ridgeway has already heard a rumor that Highsmith poisoned a neighbor’s dog for barking too much, and he is uncertain whether to believe that or not. The young editor his boss first sent on this task, Bradley Appleby, has mysteriously vanished. Ridgeway understands that his job is on the line, and if he does not succeed, he need not come back.
On the train to Switzerland, the young Ridgeway meets a young woman, Clementine Balfour (Olivia Cooke), who is also traveling to Switzerland, to visit her wealthy aunt. The two chat and seem to hit it off but part ways when Ridgeway’s train arrives at its station. The meeting as strangers on the train is one of several echoes of Patricia Highsmith’s work scattered throughout the film.
Helen Mirren is brilliant as the difficult, scary aged author, but Alden Ehrenreich holds his own against her, and the scenes between the two of them are delicious fun. Mirren’s Highsmith bluntly tries to turn away Alden Ehrenreich’s Edward Ridgeway at first, but is finally persuaded to let him stay by the gifts he has brought, items she had requested: Brooks Brothers shirts, canned soup, and a large knife for her collection of weapons that she displays on the wall of her study. And by his revelation that he is an orphan, whose parents were killed in a car wreck, a detail that she says makes him interesting. Whether that is true might be something else.
As the two start to plot out the possible story, Ehrenreich’s Ridgeway brings in details of his recent “strangers on a train” meeting with Clementine. As the tale unfolds, Ridgeway reveals that he is an enormous fan of the Tom Ripley stories, and proves it by having the author read a random line from any of the five novels which he can then attribute to the correct one. The stunt softens the prickly author towards him, but only marginally. As the two work together, a Ripley-like side to the mousey Ridgeway emerges, and to underscore that, the director films Ehrenreich so he increasingly resembles Matt Damon in THE TALENTED MR. RIPLEY, even though the actors do not look much alike, a clever bit of camera and makeup sleight-of-hand.
The acting is first-rate, and the film also features Juliet Stevenson as Clementine’s rich Aunt Peggy. The film is at its best early on but in an effort to open up the stage play, director Corbijn has a sequence where Ridgeway leaves Highsmith’s claustrophobic retreat, and ventures into the village where her encounters Clementine and gets invited to a party at her Aunt Peggy’s mansion. The foray lasts a bit too long, and breaks some of the play’s pressure-cooker tensions between the famous author and her young collaborator. While the author spins out the story she is building with the help of the young editor, we see the characters of that new Ripley tale, with more polished Ehrenreich in that role and Olivia Cooke’s Clementine and her aunt in the story Highsmith is narrating, but after awhile, lines blur and it becomes hard to tell what is the new story from what is Ridgeway’s experience.
The film tends to lose steam with the detour into Ridgeway’s own life, and the ending is not as sharp and startling as it should be. Focusing on the cat-and-mouse tale in the fictional encounter also misses an opportunity to explore the complex, confounding, controversial real author at the film’s center, which would have been an interesting side-trip. Still, it is a good film, well-made and lush that evokes Highsmith’s writing well, as well as being a showcase for the always excellent Helen Mirren and the talented cast behind her.
A TALENT FOR MURDER opens in theaters on Friday, Oct. 23, 2026.
Now, even though the Summer cinema season is over and the multiplex content is shifting toward more serious awards contenders, that doesn’t mean that comic book superheroes are going to “sit it out” for a couple of months until AVENGERS: DOOMSDAY. Neither are the supervillains, in case you were wondering. This weekend’s big “popcorn flick” isn’t from the MCU. Rather, it’s from the “guys up the street” (as Deadpool calls them). Here comes the third release from the “re-formatted’ DC Studios, headed by James Gunn and Peter Safran. Their SUPERMAN soared while his cousin SUPERGIRL certainly didn’t (that crash left quite a box office “crater”). Now they’re going to the “dark side”. Sony has done that with their “Spider-verse” spin-offs with the webbed wonder’s foes. There’ve been three VENOM flicks, but don’t hold your breath for the return of MORBIUS or KRAVEN THE HUNTER. Now it’s DC’s turn, so watch out, “Bat-baddies” CATWOMAN and JOKER. Coming to the big screen (finally in “live-action”) is that malleable, morphing menace, CLAYFACE.
This “origin” story begins on a really great day for “up-and-coming” movie star heartthrob Matt Hagen (Tom Rhys Harries). On a bright, sunny morning in Coast City (hey, you “Lanterns” fans), he reports to the set of his new picture just as it’s announced on live TV that he’s nominated for a big acting award. Of course, he’s going “clubbing” that night to celebrate, alongside his childhood pal from the tough “Narrows” section of Gotham City (home base of “you-know-who’), struggling actor Corey Bowery (Joshua James). The lucky streak continues as he connects with a stunner on the dance floor, an actress named Mia (Joana Ribeiro). Corey warns Matt that she’s the “arm candy” of a big-time mobster, but she’s solo tonight. But in the early morning hour, at her plush pad, Matt’s luck “turns bad”. Very bad. The duo awaken and see that the bed is surrounded by crime kingpin Marcos Szabo (David Dencik) and his “goon squad”. As Mia dashes away, the “boys” hold Matt down as Marcos takes a razor to Matt’s “million-dollar mug”. Even after several surgeries, he’s horribly disfigured and must wear a mask in public. While he recovers, Marcos and Mia “blitz” the media with the “spin” story that Matt had an accident after drugging her. Not even Corey will back up his pal (he’s fearful for his family). The trials with a bribed jury and judge cost Matt everything (his manager made bad investments, and his agent “drops him like a rock”. It’s back to a “dump” in the Narrows for Matt. He wallows in self-pity until he runs across an article on scientist Caitlyn Corrr (Naomi Acki), who has developed “nano-cells” that repair disease-damaged skin. Matt tracks her down just as she’s about to lose her lab (others have ripped off her methods), and offers himself up as a test subject. When she finally agrees, the results are staggering. It looks like Matt’s back, until the “cure” doesn’t “hold” (“I’m melting! Melting! What a world!”). But after he gives himself an “overdose” of the serum, Matt gets an unexpected “bonus”. He can meld himself into anyone’s image (like clay). Could this be his “return ticket” to stardom? And will this new “talent” enable him to exact revenge on Marcos and all those who wronged him?
After cutting his acting “teeth’ on a few minor movie roles and TV shows, Harries makes the big leap to a title-role leading man. You’d never know, since he lends lots of high-gloss swagger and confidence to the role of (just a bit of a stretch) Hollywood “hottie” (think early Leo and Brad) Matt Hagen.But when things take a turn, Harries also conveys that desperation when everything is taken by cruel fate (wrong lady, wrong night). Then he shows us that yearning turns to obsession, not only for his “healer”, but for vengeance. We see a pretty decent guy turn into a truly horrific monster. Ackie is also very good as the genius trying and failing to “rein” him in, mixing fear and attraction. Plus, she’s dealing with a personal conflict as she’s emotionally torn between Matt and her long-time fiancé, rare honest Gotham City cop John, well played with a gruff, tough-guy bravado by Max Mighella. Two Brits score in supporting roles: Eddie Marsan as Matt’s grifting manager and Rob Brydon as a grinning, slightly sinister late-night TV talk show host.
Director James Watkins (SPEAK NO EVIL) deftly shifts the film’s tone from “Tinseltown” satire (the excesses of super-stardom) to a dark mix of crime thriller and science “gone really wrong”. He meshes the recent body horror of THE SUBSTANCE (with lots of practical make-up effects and a bit of CGI), the 80s classic THE FLY remake, and a whole lot of the 90s “you’d think he came from a comic book” DARKMAN (using tech to take down thugs). Much of this comes from the script penned by Mike Flannigan (inspired by the wonderful “Feat of Clay” episodes of the iconic Batman animated series from 1992) and Hossein Amini. It also evokes the notion of the “creature” that dishes out justice to the evil “normals” that was a 70s horror staple (THEATRE OF BLOOD comes to mind). The biggest problem with the film may be that it’s trying too hard to shock and earn its “R” rating (a hard “R” at that). The mutilation of Matt is presented in long, gory detail, which may evoke lots of wincing (and shifting in the multiplex seats). And later, as Matt tests his powers by slicing his own flesh, it veers into the big problem (especially with teens) of “self-harm”. And we’re to accept the “magic” of the “nano-cells”: They can simulate clothing and aid you in vocal mimicry. Matt becomes almost unstoppable, but not infallible, as he uses his acting “improv” skills when he dons a new persona. The big finale “showdown” is a bit of a “letdown” as it never really concludes a major plot turmoil (I won’t spoil), and sets a follow-up in motion. Still, it’s nice to see a comic-based film go so boldly into horror territory, and it is a solid “B-picture” style entry for the new studio (the changing of the owners). As far as supervillain flicks go, CLAYFACE breaks the mold (and luckily it’s far from “moldy”).
So, this week brings a new animated feature into the multiplex, right after the tepid reception to the superb FORGOTTEN ISLAND and a few weeks before Disney’s HEXED and THE CAT IN THE HAT. Ah, but there’s a big difference here, mainly in the particular animation technique. Sure, they utilize a few computer ‘tweaks”, though the main “method” is one that’s over a hundred years old. It’s stop-motion animation (or “puppetry). Tiny modeled figures (sometimes clay and often wood or plastic) are posed by hand to simulate motion. Hey, we just saw it a few weeks ago with Shaun the Sheep. That’s from Aardman Animations in the UK, but what about the USA? Their contemporary here is that studio in the great Northwest, Laika. Filmgoers have been dazzled by their visually stunning flights of fancy for decades, starting with the beloved CORALINE in 2009. Now, they’re back after a seven-year “hiatus” with their most ambitious work to date. So, let’s dive into the wizardry and wonders of WILDWOOD.
After a brief flashback in a magical realm, the story takes us to the present day, to an “almost as magical realm”: Portland, Oregon. Teenager Prue (voice of Peyton Elizabeth Lee) is again frustrated with her folks, 21st-century “hippies” who don’t want her roaming about while babysitting her toddler brother Mac. After she promises Mom (Maya Erskine) and Dad (Jake Johnson) to stay indoors, Prue puts mac in his wagon attached to her bike and heads to the city park. While stopping for coffee, she runs into (literally) her “dweeby” classmate Cutis (Jacob Tremblay). While they talk at the playground, Prue doesn’t realize that an army (a massive murder) of crows is perching on the “monkey bars” (shades of Hitchcock). The black birds swoop in and lift Mac into the sky before she can reach them. Curtis joins her in the pursuit, and the duo crosses a bridge into the fog-enshrouded “Impassable Wilderness”. While making their way through the thick forest, they encounter a pack of coyotes dressed in military garb. When they begin to chase the pair, Prue and Curtis split up (he insists on being “bait” so that she can go after Mac). Curtis is captured and taken to the “master” of the coyote army, Alexandra, the dowager governess (Carey Mulligan). She takes him under her wing and explains that the crows, under her command, have brought her Mac. She plans to sacrifice him to the “ivy” in order to regenerate her late son Alexi. Meanwhile, Prue is captured in the South Wood by the Mayor. She escapes and gets some valuable “intel’ from the great Owl Rex (Richard E. Grant). Prue’s quest will lead her to the forest bandits and the farmers who follow the “mystics” of North Wood. Can she unite the two factions in order to thwart Alexandra’s magical master plan, rescue her baby brother, and return home?
It’s said that seven is the “lucky number”. In this case, it may be one less, since this sixth film from Laika Studios is their most impressive, grandest cinematic achievement yet. The artistry on display has truly made huge “leaps and bounds” in the past two decades. Every aspect of this pushes and propels the art form into areas mainly reserved for the colossal epics of Hollywood’s Golden Age (yes, even you, Mr. DeMille). The whole design and look of the characters, with humans just as interesting as the animals and the backdrops, from the lush forest to even the decor of Prue’s bedroom. Unfortunately, I didn’t see it on the largest screen format, so I look forward to studying the details (a workout for the “pause button”) upon its streaming run (and hopeful 4K disc). Plus, the textures are so varied, from Prue’s flowing hair to the wings of an eagle, making us almost forget that we’re watching something so “hand-crafted” (the end credits state that”this was handmade in Oregon”). Thanks to the screenplay adaptation by Chris Butler of the book by Colin Meloy and Carson Ellis, we’re treated to this astounding adventure that’s packed with heartfelt emotion and lots of wit (the streets of the city made me wistful for the great TV comedy “Portlandia”). This might have been the lure for such an incredible cast of voice actors. Ms. Lee and Mr. Tremblay have a wonderful rapport as Prue and Curtis, while Mulligan gives Alexandra a silky, sinister, but subdued aura of quiet menace, tinged with tragedy. As for those laughs, they’re provided by Charlie Day as the sympathetic coyote Dmitri and the often-utilized Awkwafina as the helpful rat Septima (maybe a record number of animated feature speaking roles for her). There’s even a double Oscar winner with Mahershala Ali, as the fearsome leader of the “bandits”, the Robin Hood-inspired Brendan. So, who’s the creative force, the mastermind that brought all these gifted artisans together? It’s none other than the company founder, Travis Knight, who somehow made this sprawling saga come together. His “showcase” might be the final “showdown” between the warring factions that’s just as thrilling and immersive as any of the Narnia or Lord of the Rings set pieces, though some action shots may surpass them. This might be the reason for the “PG-13” rating, along with a couple of “naughty” phrases, mixed in with a fairly high “body count” (the deceased stay down here) and more than a dash of blood. So, if the kids can deal with these mature themes of longing and loss accented by swashbuckling swordplay and medieval-style mayhem, then make the magical movie trip to the truly wondrous world of WILWOOD. And be sure to stay for the 2-D animated credits that include a look “behind the curtain”.
Let’s spend some time in Finland during its warmer part of the year when it’s not buried under a thick blanket of snow, for a four-part dramatic miniseries, “The Girl Who Disappeared”. An insurance investigator named Aaro (Johannes Holopainen) meets an attractive woman (Saga Sarkola) who only tells him her first name, as she remains very coy about whether she’s interested in any further acquaintance.
In the first episode, they start spending time together, including some island hopping on his boat. She’s being secretive, but her anxiousness about possibly being followed by someone is more apparent to us than to her smitten suitor. While they’re camping on one of Finland’s zillion, or so, pristine islands, she vanishes without explanation.
Aaro uses his professional resources to find her. He soon learns that the name and employment she mentioned were fictitious. In the second episode we start getting the backstory of how that woman, whose real name is Maura, wound up living under a false identity, constantly looking over her shoulder for something yet to be disclosed to the viewers.
As the story progresses, we find ourselves knee-deep into a psychological thriller along the lines of “just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not really out to get you”. Maura has a sister named Linda (Oona Airola) with a teenaged daughter, Ronja (Senja Poikonen). The siblings have had a complicated off-and-on relationship, as is so often the case among families. Linda starts dating a handsome, charming coworker named Erkka (Pekka Strang). Maura recoils with a mixture of fear and hostility at first sight of him. She urges Linda to dump the guy, without explaining her reasons. Linda, still hurting from the end of her latest bad relationship, dismisses Maura’s warnings as envy.
For the rest of the way, we and Aaro start learning the history between Maura and Erkka, with lingering suspense as to whether she’s nuts or he’s evil. Simo Halinen’s script skillfully dangles bits and pieces of information, keeping either possibility (or perhaps a combination of both) on the table throughout. As director, Halinen is a bit less adroit. The awkward intertwining of flashbacks and cutaways makes timelines and sequence rather hard to follow. But the story and all–around solid performances still make it a worthy option for one’s viewing time.
THE GIRL WHO DISAPPEARED premieres October 20, 2026 in the U.S. and Canada on MHz Choice.
Alex Gibney, Oscar-winning director of insightful, factual, hard-hitting documentaries, turns his camera on Elon Musk, the world’s first trillionaire, and Musk is not happy about that. TikTok, Meta and YouTube all refused to run the trailer for Alex Gibney’s MUSK, claiming it is “too political,” even though they are fine with running actual political ads. It is easy to assume this decision is due to fear of this ultra-rich man. MUSK is a biographical documentary about Elon Musk, mostly focused on his business career with some of his personal life in the first half, and in the second half, his more recent move into the government and campaigns. Anything that is “political” is due to Musk’s own political activities, such as his funding of campaigns and his involvement with the quasi-governmental DOGE and its activities. This is information that all Americans deserve to know, given Musk’s extreme wealth and out-sized influence, things that should be concerning in a democratic republic where free speech and freedom of the press play such an important role. It is information deserve to know, even need to know, about the world’s richest man.
Director Alex Gibney approaches his subject as an investigative journalist, sussing out facts and details to paint a bigger picture of his subject Musk. Insights on this powerful man are plentiful, coming out of the tracing of Musk’s rise in the business world, in a documentary that runs about four hours, although, thankfully, with a short intermission. That running time seems daunting but the documentary is worth the time commitment.
Alex Gibney does not follow the usual biographical route of starting in childhood and tracing the person’s development. Instead, the documentary follows Musk’s business biography, from his first company to SpaceX and Tesla, with the personal information mixed in where it is important to understanding the business side of Musk. However, Gibney also traces Musk’s interests and attitudes, especially as they changed as he grew wealthier.
Several people speak in on-camera interviews, both people from his businesses, his ex-wife and an ex-girlfriend, and notably, Elon Musk’s father. One of the most telling moments are when Musk’s father in South Africa coolly describes shooting three Black men who entered his home, lingering more on the various colors of the blood spilled than the people shot.
One person who did not cooperate for this documentary was Elon Musk himself. But Alex Gibney does something that is both inventive and controversial, creating an AI version of Musk who speaks Musk’s on words, from interviews or writings, using a recreation of Musk’s voice. The effect is weird, yet weirdly appropriate for the documentary’s subject.
We do see the actual Musk in many archival video footage of interviews and in still photos. A pattern emerges of a man who has no trouble with self-promoting and exaggeration, even providing false information, on those businesses. Although Musk has no engineering degree, he likes to call himself an engineer. His real skill is in selling his companies for big payouts.
MUSK presents a wealth of documentary evidence and on-camera interviews of those around him, including the real founder of Tesla. At one time, Elon Musk had a reputation as an innovative, forward-thinking businessman, a kind of engineering entrepreneur in the tradition of Henry Ford, Steve Jobs or even Howard Hughes, who was the inspiration for the “Iron Man” comics that Musk so admires, apparently. He was lionized when he was leading Tesla and talking about a conversion to all electric cars and dealing with climate change. What the public largely didn’t know, and MUSK reveals, is that Musk was not the founder of Tesla, but an investor who bought in and then ousted the real founder.
Far from someone who started with nothing, Elon Musk grew up rich, and his father bankrolled his first business endeavors. As much as he would like to be seen as a Steve Jobs, he was not developing his first projects in his garage. Musk likes to call himself an engineer, although he does not have an engineering degree but two bachelor’s degrees, in physics and economics, although he reportedly was always more interested in practical applications of both than theory. Musk did enroll in a graduate engineering program but only attended briefly.
Something that comes through as the documentary traces Musk’s rise to extreme wealth is a disregard for the truth and increasingly, for other people. Much of the trillionaire’s ideas are grounded in the worlds of comic books and science fiction, with his own version of reality. History is full of cases where extreme wealth or power allowed a person to become increasingly disconnected from the real world the rest of us live in, to the detriment of everyone.
After the brief intermission, the documentary turns towards Musk’s more recent foray into the political realm, with Musk’s financial support of Trump’s presidential campaign and later DOGE involvement. Musk turned from pet interests in promoting electrical cars and green energy, and space exploration and an obsession with Mars, both interests that support his businesses, Tesla and SpaceX, to an new interest, the area of right-leaning politics, and especially Trump. The documentary offers a clever explanation of that new interest, noting that Trump had the power to keep Musk in money, while Musk had the money to keep Trump in power. The documentary follows Musk’s funding of political campaigns with large contributions, and then his delving directly in participation in government with the DOGE cuts, symbolized by his chainsaw wielding stunt.
MUSK offers a wealth of well-researched evidence and compelling information about Musk’s actions and possible motivations, particularly chilling as he has moved into the political sphere. MUSK presents a chilling picture for the country, and even the world. The documentary may be long but this is the most important documentary for every non-billionaire to see at this moment in time.
As the start of the cinema “awards season” officially begins (despite some high temp spikes, this is the Fall), filmgoers will now get to see the film that generated the most “buzz” at last month’s Telluride Film Festival. And the buzz isn’t about the performances of actors or the script, since this is a documentary. Perhaps this will be that ‘doc’ that grabs those who still consider them to be “homework”. There are a couple of big “hooks” to entice. First, it’s co-directed and “presented” by a comedy vet who has headlined several cable and streaming TV shows, though this is his first major feature film. Oh, and the subject was a huge story that became fodder for several podcasts, a best-selling book, and a critically acclaimed streaming limited series (garnering a couple of big awards). After that “media frenzy”, the person at the center of the “scandal” retreated from the public eye…until now. So, what happens after the noise dies down and the trial concludes? Well, now we are given an “invitation” that promises us that YOU CAN SEE EVERYTHING.
The comedian/filmmaker is Nathan Fielder, of “Nathan for You” and “The Rehearsal”. He and co-director Lance Oppenheim (who just helmed the hit “inspired by true events” movie PRIMETIME) are invited into the rented oceanside home of Elizabeth Holmes and her partner (her “baby daddy” and possible hubby), Billy Evans. It’s a hectic time for the duo, who are raising two kids (a toddler around two and an infant only a few months old) while preparing for her “away time”. In 34 days, she must “surrender” herself in order to begin incarceration for fraud. Yes, she is the woman behind Theranos, the company that promoted a “miracle” invention that could test a drop of blood and provide results and a reading within minutes. But the gizmo never worked as she promised. With his camera and sound crew out of sight (most of the time), Fielder becomes our observor/inquisitor who interviews both of them. Elizabeth promises complete “truth” as she stares intently into Fielder’s eyes and proclaims her innocence. Billy is more aggressive as he tells of his initial meeting with her (did her know her “history”) while hustling to start a new “medical marvel” business. And Fielder is always hovering, casting a cynical (some might say a “stink”) eye on the accelerating chaos and bizarre ticks. He even gets to speak with the parents of Elizabeth, though Mom barely says anything. “Prison Day” (in far-away Bryan, TX) finally arrives with teary farewells and a possible ending for the film. But it is not that, as Fielder digs much deeper and raises more questions than he can answer, even with his “dream team”. Could that month”embedded” with them have been an orchestrated piece of “performance art”?
Well, this film is certainly a “test” for any reviewer, or merely a film fan recommending it to a friend. Fielder and Oppenheim have put together a truly offbeat “profile” about the “aftermath” of fame (and infamy), which just might jumpstart another “news cycle” for the Theranos “saga”. As our “eyes”, Fielder heightens his stoic, awkward comic persona as we see him being somehow drawn into this world of investors and “sales-gaming”. At times, he’s almost a tennis ball being bounced between the very different spouses (or partners). Wisely, he steers much of the focus away from himself, avoiding too much influence (certainly nothing close to Michael Moore or the Albert Brooks dimwitted filmmaker character in his classic REAL LIFE). The world was more than a bit unnerved by the wide-eyed gaze of Holmes in the “teasers’ which just hint at her “vibe” as the “decieved dreamer” in many of her exchanges with Fielder. Then, there’s Evans, who takes charge with the zeal of an angry “battering ram” (an early scene at breakfast “foreshadows” his “role”). He’s also a mystery since his motivation careens from family protector to “super-salesman” (and what’s with him viewing online science videos at likely double the speed). He may be the “villain” in this scenario. Or is he? That’s part of the problem in talking to those thinking about seeing this. That and the sublimely surprising final act, which “pulls out all the stops” in recreating what happens behind tightly closed doors. There aren’t many examples of visual flourishes as the shots switch from close-ups to “two shots”, but the general off-kilter sense of unease is driven home by the haunting music score by Art Balouzian. Hopefully you’ll be able to take in this film with friends and family, as the post-movie discussions will be lively. 2026 is shaping up to be a great year for documentary features, and YOU CAN SEE EVERYTHING is one of the very best. And you’ll see that it’s certainly not homework or “eatin’ your veggies.”
3.5 Out of 4
YOU CAN SEE EVERYTHING is now playing in select theatres
For the second weekend in a row, let’s talk about another “based on true events” film. Last week saw the release of THE SOCIAL RECKONING, which could be called a “sequel docudrama”. For this weekend, in between the superb documentary features, MUSK and YOU CAN SEE EVERYTHING, here’s one that’s more of the classic “biopic”, though it’s also a rousing “natural wonder set action-thriller”. We’re still a couple of months away (hopefully) from the frigid snows of Winter, so this film might be somewhat of a “prep”, so that whatever “hits” won’t seem nearly as brutal as the conditions of this true tale. This all took place nearly 75 years ago, thanks to the courage, stamina, and skill of several men. At the forefront was the ‘national hero” named TENZING.
In the film’s opening “prologue,” we meet a pre-teen Tenzing Norgay, a Sherpa shepherd tending to his flock in the shadow of Chomolungma, AKA Mount Everest. Stumbling upon the camp of a baffling group of strangers, he spies a pair of boots. As he slips them on, he is startled by their owner, George Mallory (Johnny Flynn). Returning home, Tenzing dreams of being part of a mountain climbing team. But he’s got to help his poor, struggling family. When they lose their home and livestock, they make the arduous journey through the mountains. When Tenzing is struck by a fever, his parents stop at a monastery in Nepal. As the lad is treated, his folks decide to continue their travels and promise to return for him. They never come back. Instead, this “outcast” deals with the local hostility in the nearby village. Eventually, Tenzing catches the eye of a sweet local woman named Dawa, leading to marriage and children. Seeking to better their life, he relocates to Darjeeling and applies to be part of the Sherpa guide team for the Shipton expedition. Luckily, their supervisor, Henderson (Caitronia Balfe) is touched by his spirit. Years later, in 1952, Tenzing (Genden Phuntsok) is the principal guide for the Swiss expedition, which came the closest to Everest’s summit. Norgay’s personal life has also changed as Dawa has passed away, leaving him to raise their two children. Soon, Tenzing is recruited by Brit John Hunt (Willem Dafoe) for his expedition. But Tenzing will only accept if he is made part of the official climbing team, rather than one of the guide/supply-carriers. It’s “unheard of”, but Hunt finally agrees. Tenzing still must convince and assure his children that he will return safely. The mission soon begins as he meets his fellow climbers and forms a fast bond with a New Zealander, Edmund Hillary (Tom Hiddleston). The two become a team that vies to be chosen as the duo who will be the very first to reach the top of Everest.
Much like the film’s title subject, Phuntsok ably guides this talented cast through this grand adventure story. Despite his almost frozen smile, he shows us the concerns and fears surrounding this hero. He wants to conquer that mountain, but not at the cost of his struggling family. But Phunstok brings that determined “can-do” spirit to compelling life. He makes a terrific dramatic team with Hiddleston, whose Hillary treats him as a “defying danger” brother-in-arms (sharpen that pickaxe), while also tempering his own fears, especially when he nearly ends his quest so close to his goal. Dafoe is excellent as usual as the gruff but often warm father/leader of the team. Speaking of warmth, Balfe brings much of that to her role as the expedition arranger. A bit of dramatic tension comes from Tenzing Jigmey as Pasang, the veteran guide who has been “passed over” by Tenzing.
Helmed by director Jennifer Peedom, the film is more than merely a grand, breathtaking celebration of the peaks that touch the clouds, though it is quite glorious. But while we’re dazzled, Peedom never allows us to forget the deadly dangers in each icy step. At the sign of sudden snow swirls, the climbers drop and lie flat, wondering if this will be their burial site. As the men gasp for breath, using air tanks like scuba divers, we hold our breath as the elements are defied. Cinematographer Stefan Duscio expertly doubles New Zealand locales for Nepal. It’s all enhanced by the stirring score from Rebekka Karijord. And big kudos to editor Simon Njoo, who keeps the narrative clear, despite the inspired flashbacks. For fans of tru-life amazing adventures, TENZING guides us to the peak of an incredible life.
HEART OF THE BEAST is doing very well it’s 3rd week out! The film has grossed a worldwide total of $131.4 million!
After a harrowing plane crash, Special Forces officer James Belmont (Brad Pitt) and his combat dog, Odin, find themselves stranded deep in the Alaskan wilderness. Together, they are forced into a brutal fight for survival against the elements. From acclaimed filmmaker David Ayer, HEART OF THE BEAST is an intense adventure thriller that explores the unbreakable bond between a man and his best friend as they face their greatest battle yet.
The Paramount Pictures film starring Pitt, J.K. Simmons and Anna Lamb is in theaters now
In his review, Jim Batts says the film is “a journey full of terror and surprising tenderness. It’s this love and devotion that propels and powers the HEART OF THE BEAST.”
Composer Jared Michael Fry’s score for HEART OF THE BEAST, the third for director David Ayer, truly conveys both the danger and vastness of the external forces the protagonist faces while reaching into his most intimate emotional life.
In my recent interview with Fry, we discussed his authentic, culturally specific score. Combined with the vocalizations of the award-winning Alaskan Inuit group Pamyua, the musicians anchor the film with just the tone of their voices and their language, evoking an earthy sound. The composer found himself “reinventing the wheel” for a compelling, emotional score for THE HEART OF THE BEAST.
Michelle WAMG: Hey Jared, how are you?
Composer Jared Michael Fry: I’m good. Thank you very much. Nice to be here to chat about some music
Michelle WAMG: I loved the film. I’m a huge David Ayer fan, so when I saw the two of you were working on a third film together, I was super excited.
Composer Jared Michael Fry: That’s awesome.
Michelle WAMG: I want to ask you first, how were you brought onto the project? Did he say, I got another film. Let’s do it.
Composer Jared Michael Fry: A little bit like that. David is awesome. So, since The Beekeeper, The Working Man, this one’s way different. We’ve just been working together. It’s a good team. It’s a crew. I feel very fortunate.
I mean, the same music editor, the same sound effects team, so really like having worked with David Ayer now a third time, I’m really like, you know, kind of meeting the crew if you will, you know and I know, I know things aren’t always going to be the same like that, but it has been a really cool team and everyone was up for the challenge and we did it. David, I mean, he’s phenomenal. I love what he did on this one. Really opened his heart, I’m so blessed by that. I know a lot of directors have their guy and I’m more than happy to be David Ayer’s guy.
Michelle WAMG: Especially after he and Brad Pitt had already done Fury together. So, when I saw that they were doing another film and especially the subject matter, war veterans, especially combat veterans, Brad Pitt playing James and the service dog Odin, and both of them suffering from PTSD.
Your cues, especially “The Letter” at the very end, and “The Final Mission” were so impactful, so emotional. When you were starting to work on the film, what type of orchestra did you have in your mind that I have got to have these certain pieces of these instruments to really bring across the emotions of the film?
Composer Jared Michael Fry: I think even before that, “The Letter” was one of the first suites or themes that I was writing before I even had a picture. And literally that cue, “The Letter”, I wrote that piece of music, we put it up against that and it was working. Obviously picture changes and we conform and what not.
Early on writing, at the piano, we’re just writing the themes, that chord progression. It’s very simple, but when I read the script and I’m absorbing it and I’m just trying to feel when I read the story, and just to convey that, that’s what came out. I think strings were a shoe in, and there’s a lot of strings in “The Letter”, it’s mostly arranged for strings.
Some woodwinds that were included just based off the early stages, the characters in the wilderness, we’re trying some things out. It’s kind of a spiritual story, the thoughts are brewing about, are we going to bring in the Inuit culture into this story and what not? All those sorts of things were developing, but to get to that stage in the story the journey is at its end.
You’ve got this very American hero, a military veteran, but he’s in Alaska and he’s encountering something and the influences of another culture are kind of coming in. I think in a way that’s sort of like James kind of coming up against his next “battle”. I think it felt good to, to keep it kind of more of that kind of cinematic American sound.
The writing of it was rooted early on the piano, just playing those chords and that theme and that launched quite a bit of the score. “The Letter” certainly was an early piece to hit, to catapult the rest of it.
Michelle WAMG:Can you talk about what you were thinking about when trying to include not only the orchestrations, but those amazing vocals you included?
Composer Jared Michael Fry: We recorded the London voices along with the strings in London at Air Studios and the idea behind that choir was, you look at the landscape, try to match the cinematic depth of what you’re seeing and just getting the voices in a hall like that. We wanted that grandness. The story and the challenge of this score was capturing so huge, but then being extremely intimate at the same time. Hopefully we achieved something, so with the vocals, we had the larger group and then kind of broke them down into kind of a smaller group within that group.
We had some of the vocalists singing more like world vowels, instead of your tame “ahs” and “oohs,” it was “azzz!,” really shouting just to enhance the drama and almost lament some of the drama on screen. I have to talk about Pamyua, the group that I reached out to in Alaska and their group is Inuit soul, but they’re just so connected to the culture that I had from the group, Philip Blanchett. He actually wrote some lyrics too, and their language, their poetry is connected to this story and it was a perfect marriage of the story that we were telling. It was so fitting for this story. And it just works. To bring them in and their culture in so many early discussions, we’re talking about the wilderness as a character, his encounter with death when he goes down in the crash, there was a lot of discussion about is he actually even alive? Is it an underworld journey? That inner kind of story happening inside James that they just have the Inuit culture that Pamyua brought, just studying it and dissecting it and just diving in. There’s just language for the connectedness of you and the awareness of the nature around you. It plays on that big, beautiful, but also threatening and dangerous.
Michelle WAMG: It wasn’t filmed in Alaska, but still these big scenes and then just them playing in the wilderness where he’s letting Odin be a dog and he’s throwing and he’s playing catch with him and the music’s building and it’s just perfect. It’s such a nice blend, the earthy tones and the vocalizations of the Inuit group were just spot on.
Composer Jared Michael Fry: When they’re on many of their journeys, there’s a piece that comes back and I borrowed from a lot of different cultures actually in the instrumentation because I just wanted to add that they’re always connected, like that sound, that music when I wrote their love theme, it has an A section and a B section. It’s in the score, at the beginning when they’re flying, then it’s also on the album, the track “Heart of the Beast” at the end of the album in its full nature that unfortunately is not in the picture, but we recorded it and it was so good.
That B section, I turned that melody into chords and those are the chords that kind of accompany their journey, so it’s always had that connection of their love story, or that bond that they have. Just by bringing all that in and being able to write with them, what a joy. I’m glad it’s got something that has worked and is inspiring.
Michelle WAMG: There were two cues, these soulful piano solos.One of the track listings, “Because You Gave Everything” and then “From Here, Forward” and the film’s credits list Nathan Williamson as piano soloist.There’s all this epic music and what you would expect from this type of adventure of him and the dog and then there’s two beautiful piano solos.When did you decide to go with this?
Composer Jared Michael Fry: I gotta be honest. I actually fought against putting piano in the score. That came down from the producers, from Brad Pitt himself and David Ayer in the end, that intimate piano sound at the very end. As an audience member myself, along with my thoughts and feelings about the score, and my intention for what I think is David’s vision and getting across the story. But it’s interesting, now that the film’s out, I’ve seen it still multiple times, see the response and actually see it for what it is myself, I’m a believer. It was a great decision by the filmmakers to have that intimate piano there.
We actually recorded the score and then we had a pickup session. I didn’t go to London a second time. I’m blown away by Nathan, because in one day he recorded about three pieces and that’s phenomenal. It was such heart with beautiful performances.
Michelle WAMG: The violin (Eloisa-Fleur Thom) and cello (Ian Burdge) soloists were exquisite.
Composer Jared Michael Fry: I think it brought us all to tears when they were recording those solos at the end of the day. I’m just so grateful for the London Contemporary Orchestra and the leader conductor of that, Hugh Tieppo-Brunt, and Ed Farmer who also conducted the last day, but Hugh listened to the music before we got involved and he handpicked these players that were going to perform. They just crushed it.
Every time we get to record live, I’m always blown away by just the human artistry and emotion that comes through because I mock up these demos that over the course of my career have been the final product sometimes, but it is so much better to collaborate with professionals at that level. They’re just so wonderful and when you hear them play and, and then you’re able to convey, “okay, no, but here, just hold back, just to give us a little bit more.” They jump on every bit of that.
Michelle WAMG: Composing for The Working Man and The Beekeeper, very different movies from this. Do you find yourself working on projects like the Jason Statham films, and then you’re presented with a project such as Heart Of The Beast, that’s totally different, where you’ve got to totally shift gears?
Composer Jared Michael Fry: Yes. I had no idea where to go. I had no starting point for this. Out of the many films that I’ve done, I’ve done quite a bit of horror, quite a bit of action. I love it. We all have heart. We all feel things. That’s why we do what we do. Even in the Statham movies, The Beekeeper and Working Man, you’re always looking for the heart. This one just wears its heart on its sleeves a little bit more.
Every project with David is a completely different sound palette, if you will, but when you’re doing action and when it’s Jason Statham, you kind of know this scene needs this, right? To be successful, to be entertaining, to drive it forward. Whereas this one, all those tropes are completely thrown out the window. And we certainly went through a discovery process with this movie quite a bit. At one point, it was a much more adventurous score and much more adventurous story.
It takes hearing, constant collaboration along with revising and talking and dissecting, so it took some time to get to this story when we started stripping back, and the word is restraint, when that became a big theme in the story and letting the picture, the edit, just everything speak for themselves. Our focus was that deeper story underneath it all and playing to that. Things started clicking and I’m glad we found it.
DC Studios’ “Clayface” is a horror thriller from director James Watkins, starring Tom Rhys Harries in the title role of the cult favorite villain from Gotham’s rogues gallery.
Matt Hagen’s meteoric rise from Gotham street kid to Hollywood leading man is tragically cut short when a local crime boss’s actions leave him horribly disfigured. Abandoned by his team and with nothing left, Matt seeks out a cutting edge treatment that miraculously returns him to his former self… but also unexpectedly affects his grip on reality, spiraling him down a destructive path of all-consuming revenge.
The film also stars Naomi Ackie, David Dencik, Max Minghella and Eddie Marsan, as well as Nancy Carroll and Joshua James.
The screening is at 7PM on Tuesday, October 20th (Doors open at 6PM) at Alamo Drafthouse – City Foundry.
James Watkins directs from a screenplay by Mike Flanagan and Hossein Amini, story by Flanagan, based on characters from DC. The film is produced by Matt Reeves, Lynn Harris, James Gunn and Peter Safran, with Michael E. Uslan, Chantal Nong Vo, Lars P. Winther, Rafi Crohn and Paul Ritchie executive producing.
Watkins’ creative team includes director of photography Rob Hardy, production designer James Price, editor Jon Harris and costume designer Keith Madden. Music is by Volker Bertelmann.
DC Studios Presents a 6th & Idaho Production, a James Watkins Film, “Clayface.” The film will be distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures and released only in theaters in North America on October 23, 2026, and internationally beginning 21 October 2026.
