zkonedog

Matilda is one of the quirkiest books you'll ever read--half a serious ode to education and childhood, half a terrifying story of domineering teachers and ignoramus adults. This film adaptation is, well, almost exactly the same--problematic for the over-the-top (if played for laughs) violence but endlessly entertaining and endearing because of the actors and story.

For a very basic overview, Matilda is the tale of the titular young girl (Mara Wilson) who is ignored by her idiot father (Danny DeVito) and equally daft mother (Rhea Perlman). Equally as imposing: her schoolmaster The Trunchbull (Pam Ferris). But frequent trips to the public library, a friendship with teacher Ms. Honey (Embeth Davidtz), and a special set of abilities allow her to cope with the confounding world of grown-ups.

The hallmark of the DeVito-directed Matilda is its cast, which is about as perfect as can be had in a flick. DeVito gives an absolutely iconic performance as Mr. Wormwood, while all the other principals are also stellar. The proceedings are equal parts tear-jerking and gut-busting at various times.

The ceiling of Matilda--much like its paper predecessor--however is that it is such a dark and sometimes explicitly violent view of childhood (thank/blame Dahl for that). It is absolutely unthinkable that similar material would be presented that way today, and I think even in the mid-90s it was pretty "bleak humor", so to speak. If always entertaining and clearly trying to be tongue-in-cheek, I'm not sure this is necessarily a great way to portray childhood in any objective sense. I know individuals who are still a bit traumatized from seeing this as a child and having it burrow into their nightmares.

Fortunately, the sweet messages and laugh-out-loud humor of Matilda carry the day in the end. Even with the problematic portrayals, it is a movie that can thoroughly be enjoyed and has remained relatively timeless due to its simplistic-but-evergreen themes.

After a summer (2024) devoted to wide receivers, Netflix returns to quarterbacks in this 2025 second-season installment. The show remains a compelling look-behind-the-curtain at how NFL signal-callers operate on a week-to-week basis. Other than perhaps a slight novelty wear-off, S2 is nearly as good as S1!

The only "returning cast member", so to speak, is Kirk Cousins--now with the Atlanta Falcons after years in Minnesota and trying to recover from an Achilles injury. His unique brand of wholesome determination and dad-aura is perfect for a series like this, and viewers are this time treated to more ups-and-downs from the Cousins clan moving to ATL.

Jared Goff is a new addition, and probably the highlight. Not only did the Detroit Lions have a fun regular season to recall, but seeing Jared prepare for games each week and share the adventure with supermodel wife Christen is interesting. It breaks down some of the easy narrative ruts than can be fallen into with that kind of stuff--much like Patrick Mahomes and family in S1.

Rounding out the triplet focus is Joe Burrow--a fascinating mix of composed and cocky. His sardonic (yet straightforward) wit provides a breath of fresh air at opportune moments amongst privacy concerns (his home intruded by burglars mid-season) and on-field Cincinnati Bengals struggles.

I really like how Netflix has set this series up as the perfect appetite-whetter for NFL activities ramping up. Whether it returns under center or explores a different position group for a fourth installment, I'll be all in!

By all rights I should probably hate Superman '25. It is almost the antithesis of my beloved Richard Donner's Superman '78 verisimilitude concept. But it is different in the positive & humorous direction, so to speak, rather than the Zack Snyder brooding-darkness vision--and I believe that made all the difference for me.

Plot-wise, this film takes a far different approach than any Superman flick before it. Viewers are dropped into the story with very little backstory or context save for a few lines of text as the movie opens. Superman (David Corenswet) is involved in a political conflict in the Middle East region that puts him at odds with governments home and abroad--as well tech mogul Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult). Meanwhile, he's a few months into a relationship with fellow Daily Planet reporter Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan) and seemingly dog-sitting a super-powered pup--Krypto--at the Fortress of Solitude. When Luthor cooks up a plot to take Supes down both physically and in the court of public opinion, the Man of Steel teams with the "Justice Gang" (name pending)--Guy Gardner (Nathan Fillion), Hawkgirl (Isabela Merced), & Mr. Terrific (Edi Gathegi)--to keep Metropolis safe.

When I left the theater after seeing this on opening night, I had it at a very-solid 8/10 stars. Clearly it wasn't an out-and-out masterpiece, but I enjoyed the viewing experience! After further reflection, I do have to knock it down one star as the "theater shine" wore off and the warts became a little more pronounced.

For some, the biggest wart will be that this is a James Gunn film. It undoubtedly features the same humor-laden, manic tone he cultivated in the Marvel cinematic universe. I will fully admit this may have worked on me--having honestly never seen a single one of those Marvel flicks--more than most.

A few other major "areas for improvement"...

-The film didn't need a political conflict AND the plot line regarding Superman's Kryptonian parents. One or the other would have easily sufficed to center the picture's motivations on and would have given one or the other more time to breathe.

-Both Lois & Lex needed more character development. Absolutely nothing wrong with the casting or performances, but they were underutilized for the most part. Taking away some Justice Gang material and adding to Lex/Lois would have done the trick.

-Gunn may have under-powered Supes a bit too much. I really liked the healing-via-magnified-sunlight addition, but here we see a Superman who really gets pushed around quite a bit.

Without a doubt, those are serious flaws that cap this movie's ceiling.

That being said, I cannot--and will not--ignore the fact that Gunn had me laughing at the jokes and feeling the emotion when necessary. The "everything, everywhere, all at once" approach may short-circuit characters and plots more than I would like from an analytical perspective, but it had me in the moment. A few examples...

-I really liked Krypto! Honestly, this may be the biggest success of the entire film for its understanding of how folks view their pups these days.

-Ma (Neva Howell) & Pa (Pruitt Taylor Vince) Kent are done differently than you've ever seen them--but I still got emotional at certain points with that angle.

Most importantly, though, Superman '25 is about positivity and fun. In other words, it brings Superman back to the character roots--albeit more in a way that feels like a live-action comic book. One could make a compelling case it is the best tone of a Superman film since 1981's Superman II. It certainly drags the character out from the Snyder Bat-clone era, which I have no problem admitting I despised (even understanding others may have enjoyed it).

Gunn here has created a goofy, humor-driven Superman that feels like it is set in the times even while being a fantastical story. Admittedly it is far too manic and attention-deficit to build towards true plot/character greatness, but for the most part that did not sink too much of the experience for me. I left with a smile on my face and hope for the character's cinematic future--something that hadn't happened (for me) after a Superman flick in quite some time.