[Get the exclusive video version of these weekly reviews each Friday by becoming a paid subscriber on Patreon!]
Got some new stylish Film Critic's pants on to review four new movies in this week's capsule (short) movie reviews for Friday, February 14, 2025.
Look, I have to be upfront about something: I don't care about the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I don't care about comic book movies. I can never remember which characters belong to which universe, and within 15 minutes of watching any of these films, I'm completely lost.
I don't remember what happened in the previous movies, I don't know why certain characters are there, and I certainly don't have the energy to go back and do any homework just to understand what's going on.
So, if you're a hardcore Marvel fan who lives for these movies, this review probably isn't for you. But if you want to know whether Captain America: Brave New World works as a movie—not a Marvel entry, not a Phase Five puzzle piece, but a film that tells a compelling story with engaging characters and exciting action—then the answer is simple: No. This is a bad movie.
So Anthony Mackie is the new Captain America. I honestly don't remember what happened to Chris Evans, why he's no longer playing Cap, or how Mackie's Sam Wilson took over the role, but that's where we are.
Sam is now carrying the shield, and he gets caught up in an international incident involving President Thaddeus Ross (Harrison Ford, replacing the late William Hurt) and a convoluted conspiracy that ties into The Incredible Hulk (yes, the one from 2008 with Edward Norton).
If that sounds like a mess, it's because it is. This movie is all over the place. It wants to be a political thriller, an action film, a superhero spectacle, and a social commentary all at once, and it fails at all of them.
You can see remnants of what might have been an interesting film. There are hints of political intrigue and moments where the film almost explores the significance of having a Black Captain America under a volatile, authoritarian president. But these moments are fleeting, lost in a sea of reshoots, forced exposition, and Marvel's trademark quippy nonsense.
The behind-the-scenes troubles of Brave New World have been well-documented—rewrites, reshoots, delays, and eight credited writers. That's never a good sign, and it shows. This movie has been hacked apart and stitched back together so many times that it barely functions as a coherent story.
Characters pop in and out with no clear purpose. Scenes feel like they were lifted from entirely different versions of the script. Dialogue is packed with exposition, with characters constantly explaining things instead of letting the story unfold naturally.
And the pacing? Terrible. For an action movie, this thing drags. The action scenes—poorly choreographed and sloppily edited—feel like they were cobbled together in post-production to cover for the lack of a strong narrative. They're repetitive, uninspired, and loaded with unnecessary exposition.
Every action sequence is interrupted by characters pausing mid-fight to explain their motives, backstories, or what's happening in the scene—because, honestly, without those explanations, the audience would be completely lost.
And then there's the much-hyped reveal of Red Hulk. It takes an hour and 35 minutes before Harrison Ford transforms into the Red Hulk, and when he finally does, it's… fine? I don't know why he's red, I don't know why he suddenly transforms, and I don't care. It's explained in some convoluted nonsense about pills, and by that point, I had checked out completely.
Anthony Mackie is a great actor, and he does what he can with this material, but the script gives him nothing to work with. He spends most of the movie reacting to things rather than driving the plot forward. He deserves better.
Harrison Ford is… well, he's Harrison Ford. He's fine but clearly just cashing a paycheck. Giancarlo Esposito, who plays the villainous Seth Voelker (aka Sidewinder), is great—as he always is—but wasted in a nothing role. Tim Blake Nelson returns as The Leader from The Incredible Hulk, but his character feels like an afterthought.
The one standout? Shira Haas as Ruth Bat-Seraph. She's easily the most interesting presence in the movie, bringing some genuine energy to an otherwise lifeless film. You can't take your eyes off her as soon as she's on screen. She has something, a presence that makes you wish the movie had been about her instead.
If I had to pick one moment I actually enjoyed, it would be the deep-cut reference to the USS Milius—a nod to legendary screenwriter and director John Milius (Apocalypse Now, Conan the Barbarian). It's such a niche reference that I might have been the only person in the theater who caught it, but I appreciated it.
That was it. One brief moment in a two-hour mess of a movie.
Yet another Marvel movie I don't care about, and another sign that the franchise is running on fumes. Hard pass. - ⭐️1/2
2) PARTHENOPE
There are movies that are style over substance, and then there are movies that are only style, with barely a trace of substance to be found. Parthenope, the latest from Italian filmmaker Paolo Sorrentino, lands squarely in that latter category—a breathtakingly shot, sumptuously designed, utterly empty film that feels more like a high-fashion perfume ad stretched into a two-hour-and-fifteen-minute endurance test.
Sorrentino has long been one of cinema's great visual stylists, crafting lush, operatic imagery in films like The Great Beauty, Youth, and The Hand of God. His best films balance that beauty with genuine emotion, insight, or biting satire.
But with Parthenope, all that's left is the aesthetics—an endless, repetitive cycle of fawning admiration for its lead character, played by the stunning Celeste Dalla Porta, whose beauty is the film's entire thesis. Unfortunately, that thesis wears thin about 30 minutes in.
Set in Naples, the film follows Parthenope, a woman so beautiful that every character exists solely to admire her, desire her, or be in complete awe of her. Her brother is creepily obsessed with her, and her anthropology professor finds her brilliant.
A drunken John Cheever (Gary Oldman, in a glorified cameo) tells her that if he weren't gay, he'd be in love with her. A bishop considers having a fling with her. Everyone in her orbit, regardless of gender, age, or profession, seems to exist only to be captivated by Parthenope's perfection.
At first, it's an interesting premise. Then, it becomes repetitive. Then, it becomes exhausting.
The film teases some kind of existential coming-of-age journey—will Parthenope become an actress? An aesthete? A scholar? Who knows, and frankly, who cares? The movie plays with these ideas but never fully explores them because the film's only real goal is to keep reminding us how beautiful Parthenope is.
It feels like Sorrentino saw Dalla Porta and said, Let's shoot an entire film about how stunning this woman is. And that's it. There's no real character development, no emotional investment, no stakes. Parthenope is not an interesting protagonist—she's a figure to be worshipped, not understood.
While I get that Sorrentino is probably intentionally making a film about desire and idealization, the problem is that the execution is just tiresome. Watching Parthenope is like watching a fragrance commercial for two hours—beautiful, yes, but without a real story or meaning behind it.
Celeste Dalla Porta, as Parthenope, is undeniably gorgeous, and the film worships her accordingly. But as an actress, she brings very little to the role. Whether that's due to the material or her performance is debatable, but either way, Parthenope is a one-note character in a one-note film.
Parthenope is exactly what happens when a director falls in love with his own aesthetic to the point that he forgets to make an actual movie. It's not deep, thought-provoking, or particularly engaging after the first half-hour. It's just an extended exercise in cinematic vanity.
If you want to watch a two-hour perfume ad with beautiful locations and a lot of slow-motion shots of a woman being admired by everyone around her, then go for it. But for everyone else, this is an empty, pretentious slog—proof that even the most visually stunning films can be completely lifeless. Skip it. - ⭐️1/2
3) THE GORGE
Some movies feel like they were made for the big screen—massive, cinematic spectacles that demand to be seen in a theater. The Gorge is not one of those movies. This kind of film plays like a glorified video game cutscene; luckily, that's exactly where it belongs—on streaming.
Apple TV+ has a pretty solid track record with its original films. The Gorge certainly has all the right ingredients for something great: a talented director in Scott Derrickson (Sinister, The Black Phone), a stacked cast led by Miles Teller and Anya Taylor-Joy, and a premise that blends sci-fi, horror, action, and espionage.
But despite all that promise, The Gorge ultimately feels like an empty exercise in style—a film that's watchable and entertaining in moments but never really adds up to much.
The premise is intriguing enough. Two elite snipers stationed on opposite sides of a mysterious gorge are assigned to guard it from an unseen, unspeakable evil. They don't know where they are; their only connection is through radio.
As the film progresses, they begin to bond while questioning the true nature of their mission. When a catastrophic event threatens humanity, they must team up to face the horror lurking in the Gorge.
Sounds cool, right? It's the kind of setup that could have made for a tense, psychological thriller or a brutal, action-packed survival horror movie. Instead, The Gorge takes a more generic route, borrowing heavily from military shooter video games, sci-fi thrillers, and late-2000s action movies. It has a Halo meets Edge of Tomorrow vibe but lacks the depth or intelligence to make an impact.
One of the best things about The Gorge is its cast, and thankfully, they keep the movie watchable even when the script lets them down.
Miles Teller is solid as always, playing the rugged but vulnerable Levi. His natural charisma and intensity make him a believable action lead.
Meanwhile, Anya Taylor-Joy continues to prove why she's one of the most fascinating actresses working today. She has a way of elevating even the most generic material, and here, she gives Drasa more presence and mystery than the script really provides.
And, of course, anytime Sigourney Weaver shows up, it's a win. She doesn't get much to do here, but her gravitas adds a little weight to the film's more ridiculous moments. William Houston and the rest of the supporting cast do fine work, but let's be honest—this is Teller and Taylor-Joy's movie, and they're the reason to watch it.
Scott Derrickson is an interesting filmmaker, but this isn't Derrickson's wheelhouse. The large-scale action sequences feel clunky, the sci-fi elements lack weight, and the tension never really builds the way it should. There are moments of eerie beauty, and some of the horror elements hint at something more interesting, but the movie constantly defaults to generic action beats instead of doing something truly fresh.
At the end of the day, The Gorge is exactly what it looks like—an entertaining but forgettable streaming movie. It has enough cool visuals and solid performances to keep you engaged for a couple of hours, but it never rises above its video game-like structure.
If you're looking for something to throw on and half-watch while scrolling your phone, this is a fine choice. But if you're hoping for a sci-fi action thriller with real depth, suspense, and originality, you won't find it here. - ⭐️⭐️1/2
The Paddington movies are a rare breed—family films that aren't just tolerable for adults but genuinely great movies in their own right. The first two were pure delights, filled with charm, humor, and a surprising amount of heart.
They didn't just play to kids—they were sophisticated, brilliantly crafted, and, at times, even deeply moving. So, naturally, the bar was set very high for Paddington in Peru, the third entry in the series.
And while it may not quite reach the magical heights of Paddington and Paddington 2, this is still a lovely, beautifully crafted, and wonderfully fun film that keeps the spirit of the series alive.
It may take a little while to find its footing, but once it does, it delivers everything you'd want from a Paddington movie—warmth, adventure, humor, and, of course, a polite little bear with an endless supply of marmalade.
This time around, Paddington (voiced once again by the brilliant Ben Whishaw) embarks on his biggest adventure yet. He and the Brown family head to Peru after receiving a letter about Aunt Lucy, who has gone missing in the jungle.
Their journey quickly turns into something straight out of an Indiana Jones movie, complete with treasure hunters, lost cities, secret maps, and ancient Incan mysteries. There are villains with sinister motives, daring rescues, and even a surprise twist involving Aunt Lucy's disappearance.
It's a bigger, more action-packed film than the first two, which were more grounded in the cozy streets of London. The adventure angle is fun, though it does mean the movie loses a bit of the small-scale whimsy that made the first two Paddington films feel so special.
But even in the midst of jungle chases and perilous cliffside encounters, the heart of the series—the kindness, the optimism, the gentle humor—is still there.
One of the greatest strengths of this series has always been its ensemble cast, and Paddington in Peru is no exception. Ben Whishaw is Paddington at this point—his voice work is so full of warmth, innocence, and subtle humor that it feels inseparable from the character.
Hugh Bonneville returns as the ever-reliable Mr. Brown, alongside Emily Mortimer (replacing Sally Hawkins as Mrs. Brown), Julie Walters, Jim Broadbent, and the always-fantastic Olivia Colman, who joins the cast this time around.
And then there's Antonio Banderas, who, as usual, steals every scene he's in. Seriously—put Banderas in anything, and it instantly becomes better. He's that good.
The mix of live-action performances and CGI animation remains seamless. Paddington looks better than ever, and the filmmakers' integration of him into real-world settings is still impressive. The animation gives him so much personality and expression that you forget he isn't actually there.
The biggest change this time around is behind the camera. Paul King, the visionary director behind the first two Paddington films, has moved on, and Dougal Wilson takes over in his feature directorial debut. And while he does a solid job, there's definitely a bit of that Paul King magic missing.
Paddington in Peru isn't quite as magical or effortlessly charming as its predecessors, but it's still miles ahead of most family films today. It's sweet, funny, visually beautiful, and filled with the same infectious optimism that makes Paddington such a wonderful character.
If you're a fan of the series, this is absolutely worth watching. It's another very good movie in a franchise that has set an impossibly high bar. And while it doesn't quite reach the same level as Paddington 2 (which, let's be honest, is one of the best sequels of all time), it's still a worthy continuation of Paddington's story.
And, most importantly, it leaves the door open for more Paddington adventures. Hopefully, we won't have to wait too long for the next one. - ⭐️⭐️⭐️1/2
Thanks for reading, and please SUBSCRIBE to my weekly NEWSLETTER!
Join me on Patreon as a paid subscriber to help keep this thing going.
Thanks again!