Jay Kelly

Given the low Internet scores and mid critical reception, I came in with low expectations, and was pleasantly surprised by how moved I was by this movie.

I'm a sucker anyway for movies about making movies, but this one hit me hard, I think because I'm at the right time of my life for this kind of story. There's a moment when a fan of George Clooney's movie star character tells him that looking at him makes him feel like he's seeing his life in front of his eyes, and I know exactly what he means. I'm watching a generation of actors who I've grown up with and who I revere aging out of their stardom, and in some cases starting to die. It used to be that watching tribute montages of a favorite actor's film roles was simply thrilling, but now it's tinged with sadness and melancholy. Now it's like watching the passage of time not just in the actor's life, but in my own as well.

"Jay Kelly" digs into that feeling and articulates it better than I can articulate it myself. And it also happens to be well acted and filmed, and it looks terrific.

Grade: A.

I happen to catch this at the NYFF. This is the type of film we need now. It focuses on our humanity, our relationships, our joys and regrets. The movie captures accurately the working relationships of a movie star and his supporting entourage. And demonstrates the sacrifices that are sometimes necessary to achieve such success. The performances were wonderful. Adam Sandler has really come along way. He just gets better and better as a dramatic actor. His performance was heartbreaking and hopefully he'll receive many deserving accolades for it. Clooney, well, he never disappoints but this is the most vulnerable role I've ever seen him tackle and he did it superbly. I was very moved and hope everyone sees this film.

This film stretches a premise that could barely sustain a short into a full-length feature, and the padding shows. The characters exist in isolation from one another, creating zero chemistry or meaningful interaction that might draw viewers in.

The casting defaults to the tired formula of white male protagonists, while Europe is rendered through embarrassingly outdated stereotypes that feel decades out of touch. The performances across the board are wooden and unconvincing, suggesting either poor direction or miscast roles-likely both.

In two decades of watching films, this stands out as the most unnecessary addition to cinema I've encountered. Skip it.

I've loved Noah Baumbach from the jump, however here we are in 2025 with a retrospective character study that grabs, dips, and meanders from a semi-relatable introspection to how-did-we-get-here slog. I liked it? Yes, mostly. I was never bored, and I did laugh out loud at quite a few parts, it's just - - - editing, I guess? Some things definitely could have taken up residence on the cutting room floor. Sandler does a fine job, as does the entirety of the cast. I cue Sandler though because Sandler. He isn't exactly known for his subtlety. The music is a nice stand out. Mortimer being co-writer, her character could've gotten more play. And Laura Dern? Love her. But if the film lost her character entirely, that might give the pace a little more? As it stands, it's the cacophonous surroundings of Jay Kelly's world that elevate the film as much as it bogs itself down. Less is more.

There was a time when a pairing like George Clooney and Adam Sandler would have felt like an automatic win. Jay Kelly arrives carrying that expectation, along with the promise of a reflective, midlife character study built on wit, melancholy, and lived-in performances. Unfortunately, the film never quite finds its footing, resulting in a viewing experience that is more puzzling than provocative.

The biggest issue is apparent early on. The first half of Jay Kelly feels strangely undercooked, not in terms of effort but in execution. Scenes drift without momentum, tonal choices feel uncertain, and the film appears unsure of what kind of story it wants to tell. Is this a gentle comedy, a character-driven drama, or an offbeat meditation on aging and regret? Rather than allowing those elements to organically coexist, the film toggles between them in a way that feels hesitant and uneven. The result is a movie that feels "off," a hard sensation to pin down but impossible to ignore.

Clooney and Sandler are both serviceable, but that word is hardly a compliment given what they are capable of. Clooney leans on his familiar, weathered charm, while Sandler delivers a muted, introspective turn that recalls some of his better dramatic work - yet neither performance feels fully shaped. There's a sense that both actors are waiting for the material to deepen, to demand more from them, and that moment rarely comes. The supporting cast does little to elevate the film, existing more as functional pieces than fully realized characters. To its credit, the film improves as it goes. The latter half contains several genuinely effective moments, hints of emotional clarity and thematic purpose that suggest the film finally understands what it wants to be. These scenes are quietly affecting and make the disappointment sharper, as they reveal the stronger movie buried beneath the surface.

It's easy to see why Jay Kelly has found its defenders. The intentions are thoughtful, the atmosphere is mild and reflective, and the story gestures toward meaningful ideas about connection and identity. But intention alone isn't enough. What's missing is conviction - in pacing, in tone, and in storytelling. Jay Kelly isn't a failure so much as a missed opportunity, a film that had the tools to resonate deeply but never fully figured out how to use them.