[Get the exclusive video version of these weekly reviews each Friday by becoming a paid subscriber on Patreon!]
We had a very rainy week in Chicago, so I'm wearing my Film Critic pants and my Film Critic galoshes to review five new movies in this week's capsule (short) movie reviews for Friday, March 7th, 2025.
1) MICKEY 17
Simply put, Mickey 17 is one of the year's best movies. I know it's only March, but I doubt I'll see many movies this year as good as this one. It will almost certainly be on my top 10 list at the end of the year—it's that good.
Director Bong Joon-ho is in peak form with this film, which blends science fiction, black comedy, biting social commentary, and genuinely thrilling spectacle into one of the year's most original and wildly entertaining movies.
Bong Joon-ho, the Oscar-winning director of Parasite, has always made films that seamlessly mix genres while exploring themes of class struggle, societal inequality, and human nature. From The Host to Snowpiercer to Okja, his work consistently surprises, challenges, and entertains, often unexpectedly.
Mickey 17 is no exception—it might be his best work yet. The film is constantly shifting, always one step ahead of the audience, full of shocking twists, laugh-out-loud humor, and genuinely moving moments. Scene by scene, something fresh, thrilling, or completely bizarre happens, making it impossible to look away.
The film is adapted from Edward Ashton's novel Mickey7, but Bong takes it in his own direction. It follows Mickey Barnes (Robert Pattinson), a man who signs up to be an "expendable" on a human colony on the ice planet Nilfheim.
His job? To undertake deadly assignments, knowing that he'll die and be regenerated as a clone over and over again. When Mickey 17 is mistakenly thought dead and replaced by Mickey 18, he finds himself in a dangerous situation—by colony rules, only one version of an expendable can exist at a time.
If the authorities find out about both of them, they'll both be terminated. What follows is a satirical, darkly funny, and unexpectedly emotional journey about identity, capitalism, and the value of human life.
Robert Pattinson is extraordinary in this film. He delivers two wildly different performances as, Mickey 17 and Mickey 18, playing off himself in hilarious and deeply compelling ways.
This is a guy who has completely shed the Twilight baggage and become one of the most interesting and daring actors of his generation. He's fantastic in everything from The Lighthouse to Good Time to The Batman, and this might be his best performance yet.
His dual roles here allow him to showcase his full range, from slapstick comedy to existential dread. His inspirations for the two Mickeys—including Jim Carrey in Dumb and Dumber and the characters from Ren & Stimpy—somehow work perfectly.
Mark Ruffalo and Toni Collette are both incredible as the colony's power-hungry leaders. Ruffalo plays an insecure, egotistical politician who loves the spotlight but is completely incompetent, while Collette plays his devious and scheming wife. Their dynamic is hilarious and all too familiar in today's political climate.
Naomi Ackie (who was so amazing in Blink Twice last year) is terrific as Mickey's love interest, bringing genuine heart to the film, while Steven Yeun steals scenes as Mickey's sleazy, opportunistic best friend. Every performance in this movie is pitch-perfect.
Visually, Mickey 17 is stunning. Darius Khondji's cinematography is breathtaking, full of striking, meticulously composed shots that make the icy world of Nilfheim feel both beautiful and oppressive.
The production design is incredible, and the special effects are top-notch. Bong Joon-ho doesn't just make sci-fi—he makes it immersive, tactile, and lived-in. The film's big action set pieces in the final act are jaw-dropping, but what really sticks with you is the humanity underneath all of it.
Like Snowpiercer, Mickey 17 is a scathing satire of capitalism and authoritarianism. It's about how the rich and powerful exploit workers, how people are seen as expendable, and how systems are designed to benefit the few at the expense of the many.
But it's also a deeply personal and life-affirming film about the importance of identity, love, and human connection. Beneath all the wild sci-fi concepts and the pitch-black humor, it has a real beating heart.
The film's tonal shifts might be jarring for some—one moment, it's a broad comedy; the next, a harrowing thriller; the next, an emotional drama—but that's exactly what makes it great. Bong Joon-ho has always had a knack for balancing humor and tragedy, and he does it masterfully here.
The first third of the movie is outright hilarious, the middle section is packed with tension and intrigue, and the final act is exhilarating and moving in equal measure.
Snowpiercer meets Starship Troopers meets Dumb and Dumber meets Dune—that's Mickey 17. It's weird, brilliant, thought-provoking, and flat-out entertaining. It's a big-budget sci-fi epic with something to say and demands to be seen on the biggest screen possible.
This is easily one of the best films of 2025. Bong Joon-ho has once again delivered the goods. Robert Pattinson proves why he's among the most exciting actors working today.
If you love smart, funny, ambitious sci-fi with a sharp satirical edge, you need to see Mickey 17. Absolutely phenomenal. - ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
NOTE: (The Rule of Jenny Pen played at the Chicago International Film Festival this past fall; this is my review from October of 2024):
I didn't read enough on this one or thought it would be something else entirely because this was NOT what I expected. I don't even know WHAT I was expecting, but it wasn't this.
Geoffrey Rush plays a tough and arrogant New Zealand judge who suffers a near-fatal stroke that partially paralyzes him and lands him in an assisted living retirement home. He is angry and miserable about his situation, lashing out at the staff and other residents, causing conflict with everyone, and waiting for the day he thinks he will be released.
Enter John Lithgow as a sadistic, psychotic resident who terrorizes the home with physical and verbal abuse while wielding a dementia doll named Jenny Pen.
It has a simple premise but is told in the darkest, bleakest tone imaginable, with little humor or relief from the constant sense of sadness and dread. This is a very heavy movie.
It's usually a lot of fun to watch Lithgow chew up the scenery as an over-the-top villain because he's just so great at being bad. His villainous turns in Blow Out, Raising Cain, Buckaroo Banzai, and especially Ricochet are an absolute blast to watch.
But in this film, there's nothing funny about what he's doing. Although he gives a reliably terrific performance (he is, after all, one of the finest actors on the planet), it's deeply disturbing and hard to watch.
The film is very well directed by James Ashcroft, who also co-adapted the screenplay. For a good portion of its running time, it's pretty creepy and effective. Ashcroft overtly pays homage to films like Don't Look Now, Rosemary's Baby, and especially The Shining, where he takes specific sound and music cues. In fact, the whole thing has a very, very heavy Stephen King vibe; it could have been written by him.
For a stretch, I was really captivated by the movie. I felt deep sadness and overwhelming empathy for the characters as the movie navigated the horrors of getting old and losing control of your body and mind.
It really played like a parable about old age, with Lithgow's character being an imaginary symbol of elderly terrors and death. But, about halfway through, the symbolism goes out the window; everything becomes very grounded in reality, and it just doesn't work.
Once everything, including Lithgow and his doll, becomes literal, the movie loses its power and becomes a standard gross-out revenge thriller. Which is too bad because it was devastating until it became predictable.
Still, Lithgow and Rush are terrific, the supporting cast is strong, and even though it ends about three separate times, it's a reasonably satisfying horror ride that gives one much to think about. - ⭐️⭐️1/2
Paul W.S. Anderson is back, folks, and once again, he's here to remind us that he is not, nor will he ever be, Paul Thomas Anderson. If there's one thing you can say about Paul W.S. Anderson, it's that he's consistent—consistently bad.
His latest film, In the Lost Lands, is another brain-numbing, video-game-looking, CGI sludge-fest that continues his streak of making action-fantasy films that look and feel like cheap knockoffs of better movies.
Based on a short story by Game of Thrones creator George R.R. Martin, In the Lost Lands follows the feared and powerful witch Gray Alys (Milla Jovovich) and the mysterious hunter Boyce (Dave Bautista) as they venture into a dangerous and mystical realm to retrieve a powerful artifact for a queen.
That's the premise, but in Anderson's hands, any interesting themes or rich world-building from the source material have been stripped away and replaced with hollow spectacle and mindless action sequences.
Now, let's be honest. If you've ever seen a Paul W.S. Anderson film, you already know what this movie looks like. The man has made a career out of turning decent-to-great source material (Resident Evil, Monster Hunter) into vapid, poorly paced, CGI-ridden messes. Instead of compelling storytelling, he relies on video game aesthetics, rapid-fire editing, and generic, poorly choreographed fight sequences. This movie is no different.
Milla Jovovich is once again in the lead because, well, she's married to the director, and that's been the formula for every movie he's made since Resident Evil. Look, Jovovich can be a solid presence in the right project (Dazed and Confused, Stone), but when she's working with her husband, she's reduced to just striking poses and doing slow-motion flips while killing CGI monsters.
There's no depth to her character, no intrigue—just the same kind of one-note, emotionless badassery she's been doing for two decades.
Then there's Dave Bautista, an actor who has proven over the last few years that he actually has range (Blade Runner 2049, Dune, The Last Showgirl). Unfortunately, In the Lost Lands does him no favors. Here, he's just another grunting, sword-swinging brute with barely any character development.
After seeing what he's capable of in more nuanced, well-written roles, it's frustrating to watch him wasted in a movie that just wants him to look menacing and swing an axe.
Visually, the film is a disaster. The CGI is distractingly bad, the sets look cheap, and the color grading is so dark and muddy that half the time, you can barely tell what's going on.
It's like Anderson took The Lord of the Rings, Conan the Barbarian, and Mad Max and blended them together with a PlayStation 2 cutscene. There's nothing cinematic or visually compelling about this movie. It looks like a direct-to-video Syfy Channel reject.
The worst part? The story could've been interesting. George R.R. Martin is known for creating rich, immersive fantasy worlds, and In the Lost Lands has a great setup: a powerful sorceress, an unforgiving wasteland, and a dark and dangerous journey.
But under Anderson's direction, all of that is turned into mindless action, characters delivering wooden dialogue, and cheap attempts at spectacle that never amount to anything meaningful.
Instead of engaging in any of the philosophical or thematic elements Martin's work is known for, Anderson just crams in as many uninspired fight sequences as he can.
The film also has the pacing of a drunken marathon runner—sometimes it sprints, sometimes it crawls, but it never finds the right rhythm. The first act throws you into the action without any real setup, the middle section drags as characters wander around aimlessly, and the final act is just an incoherent mess of loud, meaningless CGI carnage.
Simply put, In the Lost Lands is a complete waste of time. If you're a die-hard Milla Jovovich fan or enjoy mindless, visually bland fantasy films, maybe you'll get something out of it.
But if you're looking for a good fantasy film with compelling characters, a well-developed world, and a story that matters, look elsewhere. Paul W.S. Anderson has done what he always does—taken a potentially interesting idea and turned it into a soulless, generic, and utterly forgettable slog.
So, if you're looking for a fantasy film to check out this weekend, do yourself a favor and rewatch The Lord of the Rings, The Northman, or Dune. Anything but In the Lost Lands.
Trust me, you'll thank me later. - ⭐️
Professional wrestling movies are having a moment. Hot on the heels of The Iron Claw, which chronicled the tragic tale of the Von Erich wrestling family, we now have Queen of the Ring, a gripping and thoroughly engaging film about a true trailblazer: Mildred Burke.
Burke was a legend and a pioneer who became the first million-dollar female athlete and dominated a sport that, at the time, was considered off-limits to women. This story absolutely needed to be told, and Queen of the Ring does a fantastic job bringing it to life.
Based on Jeff Leen's book The Queen of the Ring: Sex, Muscles, Diamonds, and the Making of an American Legend, the film follows Burke's rise from single motherhood in small-town Kansas to becoming the most dominant woman in professional wrestling. At a time when women's wrestling was illegal in most of the country, Burke defied expectations, shattered stereotypes, and revolutionized the sport.
The film captures her relentless drive, her personal sacrifices, and her struggles to cement her place in history.
For those unfamiliar with wrestling history, Burke's story is essential. She paved the way for the likes of Mae Young, The Fabulous Moolah, and, more recently, the women's wrestling revolution seen in WWE, AEW, and beyond. The film doesn't just tell her story; it gives wrestling the respect it deserves as both a sport and a spectacle.
In the title role, Emily Bett Rickards (Arrow) delivers an absolute breakout performance. She brings intensity and determination to Burke, which makes you root for her every step of the way.
Whether she's taking bumps in the ring, standing up to sexist promoters, or fighting to protect her career, Rickards beautifully embodies Burke's grit and charisma. This is a star-making role, and she nails it.
Josh Lucas plays Billy Wolfe, Burke's husband and manager, with just the right mix of charm and sleaze, while Tyler Posey shines as their son, George William "G. Bill" Wolfe. Walton Goggins, always a standout, brings his usual gravitas to the role of Jack Pfefer, one of wrestling's most notorious promoters.
The supporting cast is a mix of Hollywood talent and actual pro wrestlers, including Toni Storm as Clara Mortensen, Trinity Fatu as Ethel Johnson, and legendary wrestling promoter and writer Jim Cornette as an NWA executive, which adds a layer of authenticity that wrestling fans will appreciate.
What makes Queen of the Ring truly special is how it treats wrestling with reverence. The in-ring sequences are fantastically choreographed, capturing both the athleticism and theatricality of pro wrestling.
Director Ash Avildsen, son of Rocky director John Avildsen, knows his way around a sports drama, and it shows. He brings an understanding of the spectacle and showmanship that makes wrestling unique, ensuring the film never treats it as a joke or a sideshow.
The film also doesn't shy away from the industry's dark side. It highlights the exploitation, the power struggles, and the personal toll that comes with being in the business. Yet, through it all, Burke's resilience shines through. This is a film about fighting—inside and outside the ring—and the determination it takes to change the game.
Queen of the Ring is a must-watch for wrestling fans. It's a love letter to the sport and an important reminder of the sacrifices that paved the way for today's stars.
But even if you're not into wrestling, the film works as a compelling drama about perseverance, ambition, and breaking barriers. It's about a woman who refused to be told what she could or couldn't do, and in that way, it's an inspiring story for anyone.
While Queen of the Ring doesn't quite reach the emotional heights of The Iron Claw, it's a damn good entry into this new wave of wrestling films. It's well-acted and engaging, and, most importantly, it gives Mildred Burke the respect and recognition she has long deserved. If this trend of great wrestling movies continues, we're in for something special. - ⭐️⭐️⭐️1/2
5) SEVEN VEILS
Atom Egoyan is one of the most consistently brilliant directors of the '90s, delivering some astonishing movies during that time—from The Adjuster to Calendar, Speaking Parts, Exotica, and The Sweet Hereafter. Back then, almost every film Egoyan made was a home run, a knockout.
He was a fascinating filmmaker whose work was dense, layered, and emotionally complex. But since the turn of the century, he's been more hit-or-miss. Sometimes, he still strikes gold with films like Chloe, but other times, he turns out forgettable misfires like Guest of Honour or Adoration. That said, he can still create something compelling when he lands on an interesting topic and truly digs into his material.
Seven Veils is the best movie he's made since Chloe, and interestingly enough, both films star Amanda Seyfried. Seyfried, who has become one of her generation's most reliable and nuanced actresses, brings a deeply layered and gripping performance to this project, elevating the material even when the film itself doesn't always coalesce as smoothly as it should.
The premise is fascinating: Jeanine (Seyfried) is a young theater director taking over a remounting of Richard Strauss's opera Salome, which had initially been staged by her now-deceased mentor.
But as she prepares to restage the production, she finds herself pulling more and more from her own repressed trauma, shaping the show into a reflection of her past struggles—namely, her complex and disturbing relationship with her father and her mentor, as well as the lingering emotional wounds of her failing marriage.
One of the most interesting elements of Seven Veils is Egoyan's use of real footage from a 2023 Salome production that he directed. This gives the film an unusual, almost meta quality, blending reality with fiction to enhance the story and make it feel disjointed.
While the behind-the-scenes footage and the actual opera sequences are visually striking and thematically potent, they sometimes feel like they belong to a different film. It's as if Egoyan decided to build a fictional narrative around his production rather than crafting a story that fully stands on its own. This makes Seven Veils feel, at times, like a fascinating but slightly awkward hybrid of documentary and drama.
That said, there is plenty to admire here. Thematically, the film is very much in Egoyan's wheelhouse, revisiting his signature obsessions with memory, trauma, and the interplay between art and personal history.
Seyfried's Jeanine is a compelling character—headstrong, wounded, and obsessive—and the way she pours her personal baggage into the production feels painfully real. Artists, particularly directors, often bring their own emotional turmoil into their work, whether they mean to or not.
Seven Veils captures that process beautifully, showing how Jeanine's unresolved trauma bleeds into her art, for better or worse.
Seyfried is outstanding here, giving a raw, intense, and deeply felt performance. She is completely convincing as a theater director, embodying both the confidence and anxiety of helming a major production.
The supporting cast is also strong, with standout performances from Rebecca Liddiard as Clea and Mark O'Brien as Jeanine's estranged husband. Liddiard, in particular, has a subplot involving a sexual assault accusation that adds another layer of complexity to the film. It's a powerful storyline, but it also feels somewhat tacked on, like an afterthought rather than an organic part of the narrative.
The film is stunning visually. Egoyan reunites with his longtime cinematographer, Paul Sarossy, and the result is a beautifully composed film that uses light and shadow to reflect Jeanine's fractured psyche.
The music by Mychael Danna, another frequent Egoyan collaborator, adds an operatic quality to the film, further blurring the lines between reality and performance.
The biggest issue with Seven Veils is that it never fully comes together. It feels more like a collection of fascinating ideas and compelling moments rather than a cohesive whole.
The film's structure is a bit patchwork, and some subplots don't fit as seamlessly as they should. It's not a complete return to Egoyan's '90s brilliance, but it's a significant step up from some of his more recent work.
In the end, I recommend Seven Veils despite its flaws. It's an ambitious and thought-provoking film anchored by a phenomenal performance from Seyfried and some genuinely fascinating thematic explorations.
It's not Exotica or The Sweet Hereafter, but it's still one of the most interesting films playing right now. Egoyan swings for the fences here, and while he doesn't quite hit a home run, he at least gets on base—and in today's cinematic landscape, that's more than enough to make Seven Veils worth seeing. - ⭐️⭐️⭐️
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!