Anaconda

Posted on December 24, 2025 at 6:15 pm

Lowest Recommended Age:	High School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for violence/action, strong language, some drug use and suggestive references
Profanity:	Strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Drinking and drug use (played for comedy)
Violence/ Scariness:	Extended peril and violence, guns, explosions, scary giant snakes
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	December 25, 2025

If you are in the mood for a movie that is self-aware but still cheerfully and unapologetically stupid but in a very funny way, I’ve got good news. “Anaconda” is here.

You may wonder if this is a remake of a legendarily cheesey 1997 creature film called “Anaconda,” and the answer is, sort of, part reboot, part meta-commentary. If you have no idea that there even was a movie starring Jon Voight, Jennifer Lopez, Ice Cube, Owen Wilson, Danny Trejo, and Eric Stoltz, consider yourself lucky and don’t worry about it because everything you need to know to appreciate this film will be recapped for you as the four main characters talk about why they want to do a remake/update. And by the way, if you have never seen the 1997 version, this one might just inspire you to give it a try.

The four main characters, friends since childhood, are Doug, a wedding video photographer who would rather be making something more challenging (Jack Black), Griff, a Hollywood actor better described as unsuccessful rather than struggling, though he was in three episodes of “SWAT” (Paul Rudd), Kenny, once fired by Doug as a videographer because he was high (Steve Zahn), and Claire, a recently divorced lawyer looking for something to feel excited about (Thandiwe Newton, sadly underused as essentially the Wendy to the Lost Boys of the group). Griff tells the group he has obtained the rights to the 1997 “Anaconda” and proposes a 3-week shoot in the Amazon rainforest with him as star and Doug as director.

All four are at that mid-life point where they need to feel that they have not given up their dreams and so, with a screenplay by Doug and some modest financing from Claire, they are off to the rainforest. There they meet up with a snake wrangler named Santiago and his beloved anaconda, Heitor, and set off to film, having no idea that Ana, the person driving the boat (Daniela Melchior), is on the run from some scary-looking guys.

That’s the set up for a lot of meta-jokes about filmmaking, the process and the business, as well as various antics as many things go wrong in making their film, Ana’s pursuers keep pursing, and, perhaps needless to say, there are actual anacondas, well, CGI, but in the world of the movie, these are what Jon Voight called in the first film, “perfect killing machines” that “hold you tighter than your true love. And you get the privilege, of hearing your bones break before the power of embrace causes your veins to explode.”

The action and comedy, much of it extremely silly, are well balanced and keep things moving briskly. I might come down on the side of a little less carnage, but perhaps that is taking this more seriously than it is fair to expect of us. And some surprises near the end and during the credits are genuine delights.

Parents should know that this movie includes extended peril and violence including scary giant snakes, guns, and explosions. Characters are injured and killed. It also includes alcohol, drugs (portrayed for humor), and some strong language.

Family discussion: What project would you like to do with your friends? If you made a movie together, what would it be about?

If you like this, try: the original “Anaconda” film and “Tropic Thunder”

Death of a Unicorn

Posted on March 26, 2025 at 12:30 pm

Lowest Recommended Age:	Mature High Schooler
MPAA Rating:	Rated R for strong violent content, gore, language and some drug use
Profanity:	Very strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Alcohol and drug use
Violence/ Scariness:	Extended and very gory peril and violence, many characters injured and killed, graphic and disturbing images
Diversity Issues:	Class and economic diversity themes
Date Released to Theaters:	March 28, 2025

Elliot (Paul Rudd), a nervous lawyer who is late to a very important meeting with a vastly wealthy client and constantly sneezing from his allergy to pollen. He is driving much too fast on a precarious mountain road and he hits…a unicorn. He and his daughter Ridley (Jenna Ortega) get out of the car. She touches the unicorn’s glowing horn and makes some kind of connection to the animal and its wisdom about the universe. He, seeing that the animal is suffering and again, frantic about getting to the compound on top of the mountain to meet with the client, hits the unicorn with a tire iron to, well, you saw the title.

They shove the unicorn’s body into the rental car and proceed up the mountain to the compound of the client, Odell (Richard E. Grant), critically ill and on oxygen, his wife Belinda (Tea Leoni) and their son, Shepard (Will Poulter). This visit will determine whether Odell will bring Elliot on as a partner of the pharmaceutical company, and Elliot has brought Ridley along to demonstrate his value as a family man. He does not pay attention to Ridley’s unhappiness with him and with the client as a representative of the oppressive oligarchy. She has grudgingly agreed to pretend to close to him. And he keeps assuring her that all of the compromises he is making are because he wants to take care of her.

This conflict is acutely shown in the first scene, when they are stuck on a plane that has been delayed. Ridley has fallen asleep on her father’s shoulder. He looks at her tenderly. But then the papers he was working on fall into the aisle, and, after some brief efforts to reach them without disturbing her, he stretches out and lets her head fall to the armrest with a thunk.

Odell, Belinda, and Shepard do not exemplify Ridley’s view of the oligarchy; they are even more selfish, fatuous, and predatory than she imagined. Grant and Leoni are right on point in conveying the superficial congeniality and underlying combination of carelessness and ruthlessness that comes from a complete disconnection to any adverse consequences. Why shouldn’t the entire world exist for no purpose other than their comfort and, perhaps, immortality?

Their reaction to the unicorn is to follow the Native American “every part of the buffalo” theory, not out of economy or respect but out of greed. This is amplified when an infusion of unicorn blood brings Odell back from the brink of death to vibrant health. It might even cure cancer. Poulter is also terrific as the spoiled bro heir.” That’s the biggest one!” Shepard shouts joyfully. There’s a recurring joke about the way the family yells “Griff” for the servant (Anthony Carrigan) any time one of them needs something, thinks they need something, or just has a whim.

The dead unicorn is a baby and the other unicorns want it back. Ridley does some research into the legend behind the famous unicorn tapestries now in New York’s Cloisters Museum. The connection she made when she touched the horn helps her understand that it will not go well for anyone who hurts or captures. The movie gets very grisly.

We are in the midst of a prevalent “eat the rich” theme in television series from “Squid Games” to “White Lotus” and “Severance” and movies like “The Menu,” “Triangle of Sadness,” and “Mickey 17.” Some of them are more effective than others. I’d put this somewhere in the middle. The extended bloodbath at the end and the slight nod at one character’s redemption are not as well-executed as the satiric first half. But its audacity and imagination are impressive and the skill and commitment of the cast makes it very watchable.

Parents should know that this movie has extended and very graphic violence with most characters injured or killed and very disturbing images. Characters use strong language.

Family discussion: Why was it hard for Elliot to see that he was not helping Ridley? What do you think will happen after the ending of the movie?

If you like this, try: “Glass Onion,” “Dumb Money,” and “Mickey 17”

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire

Posted on March 21, 2024 at 12:07 pm

B +

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for supernatural action/violence, language and suggestive references
Profanity:	Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	None
Violence/ Scariness:	Extended supernatural peril and violence, some disturbing images
Diversity Issues:	None

The latest installment of the now four-decades-long saga of the intrepid, firehouse-based, three-generation funny, scary, and then funny again and then scary/funny crew who capture ghosts is much better than the wobbly reboot, with plenty to delight both long-time fans and newcomers. Those who love the original 1984 will be happy to see the more-than-cameos returns of original stars Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Ernie Hudson, and Annie Potts. Walter Peck, the mean-spirited non-believer from the EPA in the first film, is now the mayor, played once again by William Atherton. And some of the ghosts from the original are back, too, including tiny little Stay-Puff guys. And yes, there will be slime.

And, yay, they’re back in New York City! The contrast between the gritty, cynical, material reality of the city and the supernatural images is an essential element of this franchise.

Gary (Rudd) is no longer an unhappy single science teacher; he is happily in a warm, loving, supportive relationship with Callie Spengler (Coon) the daughter of the character played by the late Harold Ramis in the first film, and they are full-time ghostbusters, back in that firehouse, still very cool with the firehouse pole and the tricked-out hearse vehicle. Rudd and Coon have an easy chemistry that adds a quiet counterbalance to the wilder elements of the story.

The kids are older. Trevor (“Stranger Things'” Finn Wolfhard) keeps reminding Gary and Callie that he is 18, but they are not ready to make him a full part of the group. And brainiac Phoebe (McKenna Grace) is still the one who is on top of all the science and engineering but still only 15. Mean mayor Peck threatens Gary and Callie with prosecution for violation of child labor and neglect laws if they allow her to participate in ghost-busting. Gary cares about Trevor and Phoebe but has not figured out how best to relate to them. He wants them to like him so much that he is not comfortable taking on more of a parental role.

The other two young characters just happen to have found their way from Oklahoma to New York City so they can stay in the story. Lucky (a charming Celeste O’Connor) is working at a ghost-investigating lab funded by now-billionaire Winston Zeddemore (Hudson). And Podcast (Logan Kim) is working for OG ghostbuster Ray (Aykroyd), who now runs a curio shop that’s a kind of “Antiques Roadshow” for artifacts containing spirits and demons.

One of those items is a sphere brought to the shop by a low-level slacker named Nadeem Razmaadi (a very funny Kumail Nanjiani) in a box of items from his late grandmother. Like the fast-deteriorating ghost containment and storage unit in the fire station, the sphere has kept inside a terrifying spirit who kills people with ice. You know where this is going.

There will be consultation with experts, including Murray returning as Peter Venkman and New York Public Library expert in ancient languages Hubert Wartzki (Patton Oswalt). There will be confrontations with ghosts we’ve met before and new ones, including a swamp dragon and a lonely teenage chess champion named Melody (Emily Alyn Lind), who bonds with Phoebe when she is feeling abandoned by being told she has to wait three years before she can go back to work.

As the title suggests, and as the Robert Frost poem at the beginning of the movie underscores, this movie’s villain controls ice, which juts out from the ground like spiky frozen stalagmites. The ghosts and special effect and action are all entertaining, the humor keeps things bouncing along, the fan service is ample but not intrusive, and, well, ghost-bustin’ makes me feel good.

Parents should know that this movie has extended and sometimes disturbing supernatural peril, horror, and violence. There are some graphic images and jump scares. Characters use some strong language and there is some crude humor. A character makes a reference her family dying in a fire.

Family discussion: Why was it hard for Gary to be firm with Trevor and Phoebe? What did Phoebe like about Melody? Do you think there are ghosts like the ones in the film? What do you think is the meaning of the famous Robert Frost poem at the beginning of the movie?

If you like this try: the other “Ghostbuster” films, especially the original and the 2016 version with female ghostbusters played by Kristen Wiig, Melissa McCarthy, and Kate McKinnon, and a very, very funny Chris Hemsworth.

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

Posted on February 14, 2023 at 5:57 pm

Lowest Recommended Age:

Middle School

What I’ve always loved about the “Ant-Man” movies, aside from the ever-lovable Paul Rudd in the title role, is the slightly hand-made quality, in contrast to the high-tech, hight-gloss, high-CGI aesthetic of the rest of the MCU. The opening of the second film in the series sets the tone. Scott Lang (Paul Rudd), under house arrest following the parole violation of saving the world with the Avengers, has created a cardboard thrill ride for his daughter, Cassie. The Ant-Man series had some goofy humor with Scott’s relationship with his ex-wife (Judy Greer) and her new husband (Bobby Cannavale), the cop who can’t decide whether to arrest him or befriend him (Randall Park), and with the discursive stories from his friend and colleague Luis (Michael Peña). The production design truly set the stage with more lived-in spaces than in the other Marvel movies.

Not so much this time. Of course, this is a Marvel movie and there are imaginative and exciting action sequences, especially as Scott develops his use of his powers. It has a nice mix of comedy and action, with characters we are invested in, not just as individuals but in the way they are connected to each other.

As the title tells us, this movie takes place in the least hand-made setting imaginable, the quantum realm. As wonderfully imaginative as it is, suggesting a mash-up of Alice in Wonderland, the Pastoral Symphony section of Disney’s “Fantasia,” the wildest anime creatures of Hayao Miyazaki, and video games like Minecraft and No Man’s Sky, plus last year’s “Strange World,” there is a pristine quality that removes much of the distinctive charm we expect from Ant-Man. Plus, talk about the forest and the trees. There is just so much detail here, with the endless settings and characters so overwhelming that they make it hard to keep track of what is going on. It’s not enough that a character’s head looks like a stalk of broccoli. Someone has to say, “His head looks like broccoli.” And then we don’t have much to do with him again. There’s a lot to see and much of it is enticing, but not enough of it relates to anything that relates to the stakes, the abilities or vulnerabilities of the good guys or characteristics that would help us understand who they are and how they behave. The issue of understanding each others’ language is handled briskly but other properties are not developed or explored.

The title says it all because the story is more about the place than about what happens there. After a brief prologue, with John Sebastian’s theme from “Welcome Back, Kotter” on the soundtrack, we hear from Scott about how lucky he feels. He is an Avenger, universally loved for saving the world, even if that means people always ask him for photos (with their dogs!) and they don’t always remember which insect superhero he is. His daughter is doing well, he and Hope van Dyne (Evangeline Lilly) are happily in love and she is out saving the world with wonderful programs to help people who need housing or other kinds of support. Scott has written a new book about his life, and enjoys appearing at book-readings.

But it turns out Cassie (Kathryn Newton of “Freaky,” excellent in the role) has been stirring up trouble by appearing at protests and experimenting with a probe into the quantum realm. Before Janet (Michele Pfeiffer), who spent 30 years there and has refused to give any details, can stop her, Scott, Casssie, Hope, Janet, and Dr. Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) are all sucked into the quantum realm, and that is where they stay for almost all of the rest of the film.

There is a long stretch where we meet an assortment of colorful characters. Some of them are fun, including a goofy return from one of the earlier films. It is always good to see William Jackson Harper (“The Good Place”) as a frustrated telepath who is way over hearing all of the disgusting thoughts of everyone around him and a jell-o-like character very interested in how many “holes” humanoids have in their bodies and what goes into and out of them. A major star appears for a few minutes for no real purpose.

There’s a very “Star Wars”-ish vibe with the diverse good guys wearing rough cloth and carrying spears and the homogenous and faceless bad guys with the high tech weapons that somehow are not very accurate as the armor-less good guys seem to have no problem dodging the bullets.

As I have often said, superhero movies rise and fall on the quality of the bad guy, who has to be evil enough to be a serious threat but not omni-powerful enough to make it impossible to defeat him. With Thanos gone, the Marvel character Kang the Conqueror has been refashioned in his image. Free of the reality-based limits of time and space, Kang’s calculus about wiping out whole universes is for him just straightening the pictures on the wall — except that it turns out there is a strong element of revenge behind his decisions about who and what needs to be wiped out.

Jonathan Majors, who we’ll be seeing as the antagonist in another huge franchise series in a few weeks, “Creed III,” makes Kang intriguing as he shifts from vulnerable and companionable to canny negotiations to imperious orders to white-hot fury. But it also makes him so all over the place that it is hard to invest in the battles. It does not help that the other side is so complicated that we do not attach to most of the new characters, and characters we love, including Woo and Luis and, worst of all, Hope, are pushed to the side.

“There’s always room to grow,” Scott tells his readers, and those reassuring words come back to inspire the good guys later on. But in this case, taking Ant-Man out of the smaller world of the first two films shows that all that room may not be what this story needs.

NOTE: Stay through the end credits for two extra scenes, one tying the next chapter to some favorite Marvel characters.

Parents should know that this movie has extended peril and violence with some disturbing images. Characters use some strong language.

Family discussion: How should Scott have responded to Kang’s threat? Why didn’t Janet tell anyone about her experience?

If you like this, try: the other “Ant-Man” and MCU movies

Ghostbusters: Afterlife

Posted on November 18, 2021 at 5:48 pm

B-

Lowest Recommended Age:	Preschool
Profanity:	Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	None
Violence/ Scariness:	Extended occult-style peril and violence, sad death, discussion of parental abandonment
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	November 19, 2021
Date Released to DVD:	January 24, 2022

They should have called this film “Ghostbusters: Half-life” because we now know that the time it takes to diminish the still-impressive special effects and supernatural action plus a very catchy theme song and off-beat comedy that was cynical but not snarky in the 1984 original to about one-half of the original entertainment value is officially 37 years. Jason Reitman takes over for his father Ivan (who produces) and yet somehow they manage to change what worked in the original, misuse what is new and keep only what shows us how much better the 1984 original was. I mean, how do you put Carrie Coon and Paul Rudd in a movie and not make use of their exceptional talents? How do you make a “Ghostbusters” movie and miss the cynical but not snarky vibe that was the heart of the now-classic? Let me put it this way, but first note: SPOILER ALERT (already spoiled in the trailer, so fair game in my opinion) — when characters from the original show up in this one and say, “Did you miss us?” the answer is “We still do.”

The original film was about three adult scientists played by Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, and Harold Ramis (the last two co-wrote the film with Rick Moranis, who also appeared in the film), who with a colleague played by Ernie Hudson start a firm that will capture and imprison ghosts and other supernatural creatures. And it captured something of the gritty In Ghostbusters: Afterlife, it is tweens and teenagers who happen upon some of the ghost-busting equipment when a struggling single mom (Carrie Coon) inherits a near-collapsing old Oklahoma farmhouse from the estranged father who deserted her when she was a child. She moves in with her two children, !5 year old Trevor (“Stranger Things'” Finn Wolfhard) and 13-year-old STEM genius Phoebe (Makenna Grace in a lovely performance). They make friends with two local kids Lucky (Celeste O’Connor) and Podcast (because he is constantly recording podcasts), played by Logan Kim. When Phoebe takes a summer school science class with a bored seismologist (Paul Rudd as Gary) who is investigating the unusual earthquakes in the area, he recognizes some of the equipment she found in the house as belonging to the original Ghostbusters. They were so successful in eradicating the ghosts and other creatures (including the gigantic Stay-Puff Marshmallow Man) from New York that there was not much more for them to do.

You’d think Gary, knowing all this, would not want to open up the ghost-trap, but this not the kind of movie where characters behave in a logical manner because the plot requires them to do many dumb things, except when it requires Phoebe to be an expert at everything from lock-picking to analog mechanics. (She does get a little help from a friendly spirit.)

This one doesn’t come close to the original’s exceptionally deft balance of comedy, supernatural effects, and thrills, mostly because appealing as they are, the kids at the center of the story don’t have the raffish charm or gritty setting of the original team. It’s more of a Nickelodeon version (not up to the standards of Walden or Disney), and the underuse of Coon and Rudd is unforgivable. Like the Stay-Puff marshmallow creature update, this film is the pocket-size version, small in scares, small in laughs, and likely to be forgotten by the time you get to the parking lot.

Parents should know that this film has some strong language and extended fantasy/occult peril and violence as well as discussion of parental abandonment.

Family discussion: What surprising history can you learn about your grandparents? Would you listen to Podcast’s podcast? If you were going to make a podcast, what would it be about?

If you like this, try: the original “Ghostbusters” film and the under-appreciate 2016 reboot with Kristin Wiig, Melissa McCarthy, Kate McKinnon, and Chris Hemsworth