Billie Eilish: Hit Me Hard and Soft – The Tour Live in 3D

Posted on May 7, 2026 at 5:50 pm

B +

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for strong language and suggestive references
Profanity:	Strong language and sexual references in song lyrics
Alcohol/ Drugs:	None
Violence/ Scariness:	None
Diversity Issues:	A theme of the movie
Date Released to Theaters:	May 8, 2026

If you don’t know better, when you see Billie Eilish come on stage by herself in a huge area, looking like she is wearing the clothes she slept in, bopping a bit as she walks around the perimeter of the stage that juts into the audience, you might think she is winging it. There may not be a sequin in sight, no choreography with spangled dancing girls, very few digital effects and just two back-up singers, simply dressed in polo shirts and pleated skirts. But Eilish is in control of every detail including meticulously staged lighting effects, a floating platform (reassuringly, she is tethered to it), and bursts of flame. As we will see, that also includes a powerful connection with every individual in the two gigantic arenas that are the settings for this 3D IMAX documentary concert film co-directed by Oscar-winners James Cameron and — I did say every detail — Eilish herself. She even used a camera to shoot some of the footage.

For a moment, I was annoyed at what I thought was the hands blocking the screen from the row in front of me. Then I realized they were not blocking the screen; they were on it. Cameron, the man behind the “Avatar” franchise, knows how to create a truly immersive experience. Like most concert films, this one has brief interviews with fans expressing their adoration and images audience members happily sobbing as they sing along as well as some backstage moments, in this case mostly with Cameron interviewing his co-director in an atmosphere of utter comfort and respect. One of the movie’s sweetest moments has Eilish looking through her window to see fans camped out below. She holds up a hand-lettered sign telling them she loves them and they of course go wild.

And one of the documentary’s most touching moments is when Eilish, who is in such confident command on stage, tells Cameron that while she loves performing “more than anything,” she was worried that she would not be able to because she was not comfortable in what she thought of as the expected presentation of young women singers (see the above references to sequins and choreography). Learning that she could be not just accepted but cherished for presenting herself as is (she smiles that she does her own hair and make-up, both minimal) is as important to her as the understanding and appreciation her fans find in her music. Over and over we hear them say that it is the generosity and insight in her music that makes them feel seen in a way that gives them hope and self-acceptance.

Early in the film, Eilish receives flowers and a loving note from her brother, Finneas, wishing her well on her first tour without him. That makes it all the more meaningful when he shows up late in the film to join her on stage. The relationship between them as siblings and musicians is a joy to watch, as is seeing Eilish play the audience as though it is a musical instrument. She is a truly remarkable performer. At one point, she lies down on the stage, cautioning her audience to stay as quiet as possible for just a minute so she can create a series of vocal loops requiring astonishing precision in a studio setting, near-unthinkable in live performance.

Her dedication to the fans is endearing, musing about the cuts and scrapes on her hands from trying to be in literal touch with as many as possible, and explaining that she wants to be the kind of performer her younger self would like to have been a fan of. As we are on stage with her, a part of these concerts, we can assure her that she has.

Parent should know that this film begins with a warning that it includes a lot of bright, flashing, and pulsing lights that may create problems for some viewers. Eilish’s lyrics have some strong language and sexual references.

Family discussion: Why did Billie Eilish think she would not be able to be herself on stage? What performers do you most admire and why?

If you like this, try: other concert films including performances by Taylor Swift, The Band, The Talking Heads, the Rolling Stones, and U2.

Steal This Story, Please!

Posted on April 30, 2026 at 5:37 pm

B +

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Not rated
Profanity:	Mild language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	None
Violence/ Scariness:	Scenes of real-life violence, people injured and killed
Diversity Issues:	A theme of the movie
Date Released to Theaters:	May 1, 2026

Civil rights activist Bayard Rustin popularized the phrase “Speak truth to power” as a foundational tactic of holding authorities accountable and progress toward a more just society. And H.L. Mencken is often credited with the obligation of the journalist: “To comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” No one has exemplified that directive with more passion over more time than Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! She has more than earned the exclamation mark at the end of both the name of her organization and the name of this documentary about her life and work reporting the news from the perspective of ordinary people.

As the movie opens, it is 2018 and she is literally chasing after P. Wells Griffith III, then the Trump administration’s climate advisor in his first term, currently Senior Advisor in the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, at the U.S. Department of State, and one-time a managing director at one of Washington DC’s most powerful K Street “communications” firms working on behalf of the oil industry. He insists that he has to rush to a meeting as she peppers him with questions about what he is doing there. “You weren’t running late when you were just standing there.” He accuses her of harassing him and tells her to set up an interview. But when she tries to follow up with his aide, they literally shut the door in her face.

We then see her asking then-President George H.W. Bush, “What do you say to those who say that you’re a war criminal?” And a provocative question for her, “You’re an activist and journalist. Can you do both?” Stephen Colbert, on “The Colbert Report,” jokingly calls her a communist. Rush Limbaugh, not joking, calls her a radical leftist. And we see her reporting, over decades, from every part of the world where people in power are putting people without power at risk, from Haiti to Gaza and all over the United States. Her reporting helped to free a wrongly imprisoned individual in Louisiana after 38 years. She was beaten and held at gunpoint when Indonesian military fired on civilians at an independence rally in East Timor.

Another journalist admits that some journalists do not ask tough questions because they fear losing access. But Goodman never pulls her punches. Every bit of her is fully committed. She even named her dog after an anti-Nazi group in occupied France.

The archival material from her childhood is illuminating and endearing. When she was growing up, her brother David started a family newspaper, reporting on events in their home. When their mother tried to censor a story about Amy getting a spanking, “he really cried censorship, because he was only eight years old.” The newspaper even had letters to the editor “where the whole family fought about issues,” and one from the Goodman children’s grandfather gently disagreed with David’s position on the war in Vietnam, and David responded, “I love you but your views on the war are stupid.”

Goodman is generally considered left-wing, but that is not entirely fair. Unlike some of her competition, who are selective in framing and choosing stories they report, even to the point of having to pay millions of dollars to settle defamation cases, with “local, independent” reporters who are reciting identical scripts from corporate HQ, Goodman has consistently reported the facts from the perspective nearly all other journalists overlook, the impact of the news on ordinary people. When she gets in trouble, it is not about spin, but about the Rustin and Mencken standards for reporters. This movie is a welcome reminder that it is the irritating, provocative, relentless journalists who are an indispensable foundation for democracy.

Parents should know that this film includes depiction of violence and conflict.

Family discussion: If your family had a newspaper, what stories would it include? What news sources do you think are most trustworthy and why?

If you like this, try: listening to Goodman’s reporting and other documentaries about pioneering journalists, like “Writing With Fire,” “Bad Press,” “The Most Dangerous Man in America,” and “Cover-Up”

Lorne

Posted on April 16, 2026 at 5:05 pm

Lowest Recommended Age:	High School
MPAA Rating:	Rated R for language and a sexual reference
Profanity:	Very strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	References to drinking and drug use
Violence/ Scariness:	References to sad deaths
Diversity Issues:	Diversity issues raised
Date Released to Theaters:	April 17, 2026

There are three problems in trying to make a documentary about Lorne Michaels, who created and continues to run “Saturday Night Live” (except for five years) now for more than half a century. The first is the many, many documentaries already made about the show and the people who have appeared on it, including Steve Martin, John Belushi, Chris Farley, so this latest one is a small addition to a big jigsaw puzzle. It goes over events that have been thoroughly covered elsewhere, with some new archival material, like Michaels’ brief appearances as a performer himself in Canada when he was in his 20s and from a brief substitute for “SNL” that lasted less than a dozen years.

Second, Lorne Michaels really did not want to have a documentary made about him. As his close friend Paul Simon says to director Morgan Neville in the film, “You’ll capture a guy who is not happy.” So the movie is not about guy who is not happy, but about a guy who isn’t happy to have a cameras on him. Michaels likes his life, his job, and especially his home and family very much and he is, as anyone in that job would have to be, very even-tempered.

Third, because he is so even-tempered, and often downright dull, he is not a dynamic film presence, and because his job is “SNL” that is a gigantic contrast with EVERYONE ELSE on screen. Neville tries to jazz it up a bit with some animated segments, but we have to keep coming back to Michaels, who is not introspective beyond saying how much he loves nature or analytic about what does and does not work in the show (we see him re-arrange the order of the sketches but we don’t know anything about why).

I’ve watched “SNL” since the very first episode and have stuck with it through all of the ups and downs that are documented or in many cases glossed over quickly or ignored entirely in this film. I’m enough of a fan that I enjoyed it, though it is in no way an indispensable or particularly valuable addition to the record. Any serious fan has seen plenty about the early days, the “is ‘SNL’ past its prime” headlines the rocketing unknown-to-megawatt star trajectories (Eddie Murphy) and the “wait, what’s that one’s name again” cast members, plus the firing of Norm MacDonald (here’s a great take with David Letterman).

One benefit of surrounding himself with some of the most brilliant impressionists and comedians in the world is that most of them have a take on Michaels’ slightly stentorian delivery (and on his disappointed sigh). It is a lot of fun to hear so many of them almost subconsciously slip into his voice. And it’s a lot of fun just to hear them talk about him, his quirks (the entire schedule is built around his preferring to start the day at 4 pm and he is constantly munching on popcorn). The best moments are just listening in on a conversation with comedy legends John Mulaney, Bill Hader, and Fred Armisen, or the comments from Conan O’Brien, writer Jim Downey (see the documentary about him), and Paul Simon. Mulaney, hyper-perceptive as always, tells the film’s most illuminating story.

We know, as we watch the archival footage, how many of those people have died. But there’s hardly any sense of how those losses affected him. We hear about the pressure to revitalize the show, but not what steps he took. Instead we hear him fretting about whether host Ryan Gosling has a doctor for his raspy throat. The other documentaries, the books about “SNL,” or any given episode of the show will tell you as much and be more entertaining.

Parents should know that this film has references to drinking and drug use.

Family discussion: What are some of your favorite “SNL” sketches and stars and why?

If you like this, try: the four documentaries celebrating the show’s 50th anniversary, especially the one from Questlove about the music.

Man on the Run

Posted on February 26, 2026 at 7:08 pm

B +

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated R for language
Profanity:	Strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Social drinking
Violence/ Scariness:	References to the murder of John Lennon, depression
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	February 27, 2026
Date Released to DVD:	February 27, 2026

Imagine that the little band you put together in your teens exceeded every possible dream of success, worldwide fame, rave reviews, unprecedented adoration from fans, buckets of awards, and money money money. Then, it all ends, the band breaks up, the complications from business managers and lawyers and hard feelings create intense misery. And you’re only 27 years old.

That is what happened to Sir Paul McCartney as the 1960s were ending. This film, produced by Sir Paul, tells the story of what he did next.

The first thing he did next was a combination of unwinding and despair. Sir Paul, his wife Linda and her daughter from her first marriage moved to a remote farm that seemed like it was at the end of the world. He tells us he thought he would never write another note.

The peace of the farm is healing. He likes the sheep. He becomes a vegetarian. Linda has a baby. And then he returns to music with the McCartney album, the one with, in my opinion, one of the greatest love songs of all time, “Maybe I’m Amazed,” and then Ram with “Too Many People,” what today we’d call a diss track about John Lennon (not discussed in the film).

He wants to go. back to his roots, start a new group. Linda agrees to join. “Well, that’s two, then,” Paul says. His plan is to play at small venues and have the kind of band the Beatles was in the days of the Cavern Club and Hamburg, where, in his mind, everyone was equal. Much has been written about whether the Beatles was equal with two people writing most of the songs and making most of the decisions, but whether it was or not, four teenagers performing in their home town of Liverpool is not the same thing as an international superstar assembling (hiring) a new band.

It is a lot of fun at first, traveling around and playing for small groups who are more surprised and curious than appreciative. Like a Supreme Court justice arguing your ticket in traffic court or George Takei showing up to act in your fanfic “Star Trek” movie. This is what Sir Paul loves, playing music with his mates for an audience who isn’t drowning out the music with screams.

Documentarian Morgan Neville has assembled archival clips, including some endearing home movies, in an impressionistic, occasionally whimsical, mosaic. Sir Paul, who produced, is famously cheerful (compare his Christmas song to Lennon’s, and recall that he wrote “You have to admit it’s getting better” and Lennon added “Can’t get no worse”). His oddly cool reaction the day Lennon was murdered is included, though sympathetically portrayed as a response to an unforgivably rude question. In this film he allows himself to get more introspective than usual, talking about how he and John were estranged but never stopped loving each other and about how Linda and his children helped bring him back to music. When Wings breaks up, he knows he can start again. And if he never reaches the heights of the Beatles era, that’s fine. As a fan of Sir Paul for decades, who’s seen him in concert twice, I found this a pleasure.

Parents should know this film includes some strong language and social drinking.

Family discussion: What would you do if everything you had worked for suddenly stopped? What is your favorite Paul McCartney song?

If you like this, try: “A Hard Days Night” and “Get Back”

EPIC: Elvis Presley in Concert

Posted on February 19, 2026 at 5:39 pm

A-

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for smoking and some language
Profanity:	Mild language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Smoking, some alcohol
Violence/ Scariness:	Sad death of a parent off-screen
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	February 20, 2026

Until someone invents a time machine, this movie is the only way you will get a chance to experience one of the most electrifying performers of the 20th century at the absolute height of his charisma and musicianship. Go see it, and if at all possible, see it in IMAX.

A professional film crew followed Elvis Presley for about a decade, with more than a thousand live concerts plus rehearsals, behind the scenes footage, and a remarkably candid audio-only interview that serves as the narration for this film. All of that footage was lost until director Baz Luhrmann tracked it down when he was working on his film with Austin Butler as Elvis. There were hours of footage, but the film was fragile and required extensive but very delicate restoration. (No AI, not a single frame, Luhrmann assures us.) That footage has now been assembled into an intimate documentary that shows us Elvis at his best, with the most touching and inspiring footage ever of this incessantly-filmed star, showing us, above all, his broad-ranging and deep love of music, of his audience, and of performing. In under two hours, we hear many of his hits, including my two favorites, “Poke Salad Annie” and “Burning Love,” but also his mastery of an astonishing range of genres: country, R&B, gospel, honky tonk, pop, and rock. When he sings Beatles and Simon and Garfunkel songs, it is not because he is trying to compete or keep up; he genuinely loves their music and brings his own understanding of what makes them great.

An introduction gives us an impressionistic mosaic of what has led up to his decision to focus on live performance. We see his early years and his being drafted into the Army and serving in Germany. That would be his only time outside of the United States, and we later hear his wistful longing for a chance to perform in Europe. (His manager, “Colonel” Tom Parker, would not allow him to tour internationally, for a reason we did not learn until both had died: Parker, a Dutch citizen, was in the US illegally and feared that if he left he would not be allowed back into the country.)

We get a sense of his overwhelming life. He is always gracious despite the obnoxious and insulting questions from the press and the constant attention and neediness of those around him. He jokes about Ed Sullivan telling the cameras to show him only above the waist, and about how his sparkly suit is too tight to allow him to kneel.

His interactions with his musicians are mutually respectful, friendly, good-humored, but very professional and specific. He knows what he wants to sing, when it should come in the show, and what it should sound like. He works very hard, telling us he loses 4 or 5 pounds with each performance. At times he looks as skinny as when he first appeared in public.

Elvis is too often reduced to the caricatures of his last years, overweight, ostentatious bling and caped jumpsuits, fried banana sandwiches, giving away cars. It is pure joy to replace that with these vibrant, pulse-pounding, genuinely thrilling performances, very skillfully edited to match the rhythm of the music. We see the wildly appreciative audience (including Cary Grant and Sammy Davis, Jr., who show up after the performance in Presley’s dressing room to say hello, and one-time co-star, dancer Juliet Prowse). Fitting for the gospel and gospel-influenced delivery, at times it feels like a soul-stirring church service. Some of the venues are quite small by today’s arena standards, giving it a palpable air of humility, grace, and connection. We are on stage with him, and one of the purest joys of the film is the private smile when he thinks he has done well. He comes alive in performative mode, drawing energy from the crowd. But that smile of satisfaction invites us into a world that is just Elvis and his music. Thanks to Luhrmann and most of all to Elvis Presley for reminding us — and making available forever — a genuine superstar.

Parents should know that there are some suggestive lyrics and some drinking and smoking.

Family discussion: Which is your favorite Elvis song? Who is most like Elvis today?

If you like this, try: “Elvis: The Searcher,” “Viva Las Vegas,” and “Elvis: That’s the Way It Is”