Reviews

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 17 December 2025

If being lazy, I could do a simple “cut and paste” job of my review for the 2022 release, Avatar: The Way of Water.  Yes, the plot is different, but my thoughts and sentiments are very similar.  I’ll be creative through and try to say the same thing by using different terminology.  Let’s start with the broader franchise and toast the achievements of director James Cameron.  Whether you liked the first two movies or not, you can’t ignore their societal impact given they have globally grossed a combined $5.3 billion USD.  That makes them #1 and #3 on a list of the highest grossing movies of all time (Avengers: Endgame sits in between them).

A significant contributor to their success is the quality of animation.  Cameron and his team have the luxury of working with an insanely high budget ($400 million in this case) but the hundreds of visual effect artists still need to step up and deliver.  They’ve done that… and then some.  The state-of-the-art motion capture technology, the use of 48 frames per second (instead of the usual 24), the array of bright colours, and the 3D experience – it adds up to a movie you must see on the big screen.  The fight sequences are clear and easy to follow.  It puts other action movies to shame which are often grimy, chaotic and over-edited.

Narrative remains the weakest element.  I loved the 2009 original but with these movies stretching out beyond the three-hour mark (this one is 197 minutes), the subplots feel increasingly familiar.  You’ve got the same heroes fighting the same villains and making the same choices in putting family above all else.  The five-person writing team have tried to spice things up by introducing a new, not-so-friendly Na’vi clan headed by a cutthroat female leader, Varang (Chaplin).  It changes the previous dynamic which was centred on good aliens vs. bad humans.  This shows the Na’vi can be ruthless, power-hungry jerks too!

Varang is comfortably the best addition to the franchise.  With a distinctive red paint on her forehead, she’s an excellent, scene-stealing villain thanks to her controlling, manipulative personality.  She’s incredibly untrustworthy which makes it hard for anyone to negotiate in her presence.  The “bad guy” from the previous flicks, Colonel Quaritch (Lang), returns but his storylines are becoming repetitive and stale.  He’s the classic example of a protagonist who often gets the upper hand but then, to prolong the runtime, loses it because of a dumb decision.  The same could be said of the human characters who resemble comic book caricatures.

I suspect Avatar: Fire and Ash will be another huge hit and Cameron, now 71 years of age, will get the green light for two more movies to close out the series.  He’s good at what he does!

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 December 2025

The Nuremberg trials, which took place just after World War II, are a fascinating piece of 20^th Century history.  There was a no existing legal standing for surviving war criminals to be put on trial and so four major countries created the International Military Tribunal to ensure those responsible for the Holocaust would face judgement.  Further, it would allow evidence to be made public which highlighted how much was known of the war’s atrocities, including concentration camps, by those atop the Nazi regime.

It’s a worthy subject but sadly, this new film from writer-director James Vanderbilt does little to shed light on events.  He’s drawn from a 2013 novel authored by Jack El-Hai which delves into the trials from the perspective of Douglas Kelley (Malek), a psychiatrist in the U.S. Army who was tasked with assessing the mental state of the incarcerated Nazis to ensure they were fit to stand trial.  The bulk of the interactions we see in the movie are between Kelley and an overweight Hermann Göring (Crowe), the man considered to be second in charge behind Adolf Hitler.

Nuremberg is an unnecessarily long 148 minutes.  As the closing credits started to roll, I’m not sure I’d gleaned much from the two leading characters.  Göring was a heinous person but hey, I knew that anyway.  As for Kelley, the film delves into his professional analysis and asks – were the Nazi leaders pathologically different from the rest of us, or were they just “regular folk” following orders in pursuit of wealth and power?  It’s a meritorious question but the screenplay is scant when it comes to answers.  Does Kelley delivering mail to Göring’s family tell us anything?

Vanderbilt’s approach never gels.  The dialogue is stiff and silly.  Russell Crowe (Gladiator) uses a cliched-German accent, and his over-the-top bravado (“I’m going to escape the hangman’s noose”) makes Göring look like a cheesy action movie villain as opposed to a real-life monster.  Rami Malek (Bohemian Rhapsody) is similarly unimpressive.  There are times when his Kelley is a mystic (“you’re walking into a trap”) and other moments when he’s massively out of his depth.  Odd subplots, such as an interlude involving the Pope, serve as a further distraction.

The only salvageable material are the scenes involving Robert H. Jackson (Shannon), a savvy American lawyer who helped create and lead the trials.  He’s not oozing with personality but he’s still the film’s most interesting, nuanced character.  He speaks highly of the “rule of law”, and yet his tactics (getting Kelley to betray his oaths) and ambition (he wants a U.S. Supreme Court seat) show a more calculating nature.  I wish the film had been told from his perspective.

When it comes to the Nuremberg trials, I’d suggest you tweak your curiosity by Googling or reading books.  You’ll garner more knowledge that what this movie has to offer.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 15 December 2025

I’m someone who enjoys capturing memories – from taking photos with friends and uploading to social media, through to posting golf highlights of talented amateurs on YouTube.  They’re moments in time which can be fondly looked back on, hopefully, for decades to come.  It’s a luxury afforded to recent generations as prior to the 19^th Century, there was no way of capturing images, sound or video.

The History of Sound is a work of fiction, based on a book authored by Ben Shattack who also wrote the film’s screenplay, but it’s centred on a specific time in history.  It begins in 1917 where two young men, Lionel (Mescal) and David (O’Connor), meet at a piano bar in Boston and become romantically entwined.  Not long after, the pair go on a hiking trip across Maine as part of a college research project.  Their task is to meet an assortment of music-loving people and capture them signing folk songs using a revolutionary recording device.  Their beautiful voices would, in a small way, be captured in the annals of history.

Directed by Oliver Hermanus (Living), The History of Sound provides insight into the start of a new technology but it’s also a Brokeback Mountain-style love story.  Lionel and David weren’t largely open about their sexuality and while they shared beautiful, heartfelt moments together, they did so in a way that wasn’t visible to family and friends.  Their research trip across Maine, where they’d sleep each night in a small tent, provided the perfect “cover” given the work and sheltered landscape.

I enjoyed the opening act but felt the film ran out of energy in the later stages.  It ends on a weird, convoluted note involving a character played by Oscar winner Chris Cooper (Adaptation) and, for use a better term, the world’s first recorded voice mail message.  Paul Mescal (Aftersun) and Josh O’Connor (God’s Own Country) portray their introverted roles with the right balance of kindness and apprehension.  They’re nice performances but once their respective characters become separated in the film’s second half, we lose their engagement and the narrative is less interesting.

Chosen to screen in competition at the Cannes Film Festival back in May, The History of Sound is worth a look-see but the emotional resonance could have been stronger.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 26 November 2025

It’s taken longer than I expected for Walt Disney Animation Studios to green-light and produce this much anticipated sequel.  The original was released in 2016, grossed over $1 billion USD at the international box-office, and won the Academy Award for best animated feature (edging out Moana).  I was a fan too and described it as “cute, entertaining and important.”  If new to the material, it was set in a talking animal-filled world and followed a small rabbit trying to break down barriers by becoming a police officer and solving tricky cases.

Zootopia 2 reunites us with the rabbit, Judy Hopps (Goodwin), and her red fox partner, Nick Wilde (Bateman), who now work in the Zootopia Police Department.  We need an excuse to get them in trouble again and so the opening action sequence does just that.  They’re too overeager in taking down bad guys and after a raid almost results in the death of civilian bystanders, the boss (Elba) hauls them in.  They’re instructed to undergo therapy and stay away from field cases.

Judy and Nick are understandably peeved and so to prove themselves, the covertly start an off-the-record investigation after finding a piece of snakeskin.  That may not sound like much of a mystery but since reptiles haven’t been seen in Zootopia for close to a century, it’s tweaked their curiosity.  Their inquiries lead them to Gary De’Snake (Quan), a friendly viper wanting to expose a township secret that will upend societal order.

It takes a few scenes to warm up but, once it does, Zootopia 2 becomes an animated feature which is both fun and meaningful.  Oscar winner Ke Huy Quan (Everything Everywhere All at Once) is a scene-stealer as the one-fanged Gary.  He’s got a great voice and has created a memorable character.  Ginnifer Goodwin (Big Love) and Jason Bateman (Ozark) reprise their leading roles and continue their great comedic chemistry.

Directors Jared Bush and Byron Howard weave it all together in a manner that generates energy and heart.  The fast-paced reptile mystery is genuinely interesting and, whether you’re a child or an adult, you’ll be keen to see how it pans out.  Like the first movie, the screenplay has well-intentioned messages in respect of inclusivity and diversity.  There’s a sufficient dose of emotion too as our heroes find themselves in life-threatening situations in trying to help others.

As the big release over the Thanksgiving long weekend in the United States, Zootopia 2 will ensure this franchise is not a “one hit wonder”.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 02 December 2025

The premise is a good one.  Joan has passed away after a long, rich, fulfilling life and she has been transported to The Junction, a “stopover” hub in the afterlife.  She looks a much younger (played by Elizabeth Olsen) because in heaven, you take on the age at which you were happiest.  Utilising the advice of an experienced afterlife coordinator, she has 7 days to decide where she wants to spend eternity.  There are hundreds of options – Smoker’s World, Man Free World, Studio 54 World, Workout World… to name just a few.  The catch is that one you make your choice, there’s no going back.  You remain there forever.

The added complication in Joan’s case is that she had two husbands.  The first was Luke (Turner), a handsome man who she married as a twenty-something-year-old but tragically, he died not long after fighting in the Korean War.  He’s taken up a job as a bar tender at The Junction and has waited 67 years for Joan to appear.  The second is Larry (Teller), the man she met subsequently and with whom she’s spent the rest of her life with, including raising a family together.  He recently died and has been stalling his eternity decision in anticipation of his wife’s arrival.

It’s a fun riff on the traditional romantic comedy genre.  The traditional formula is for a woman to be presented with two suitors, and the answer becomes obvious when one turns out to be a jerk.  This is more complex because Luke and Larry are men she has loved deeply.  Further, the choice she’s going to make can never be reversed.  It’s a contrived in places – like the way they rule out of the possibility of all three going to the same world together because the two guys don’t get along – but it’s an interesting journey to follow Joan’s thought process and final decision.

Adding to the film’s charm are the two great supporting performances of John Early (Late Night) and Oscar winner Da’Vine Joy Randolph (The Holdovers) as the bickering afterlife coordinators.  They start out as simple, fact-providing administrators but as they become more entangled in their clients’ woes, they evolve into quasi-therapists.  The pair provide laughs and sincere emotion.

There’s not quite enough material to last the full two hours (I grew tired of all the “worlds” and have no idea how some of them would work) but Eternity is a playful, entertaining ride centred on a thought-provoking situation.