Author: Dominic La-Viola

Jay Kelly – One of the Best Movies About Movies This Year. 

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

Noah Baumbach’s new film, “Jay Kelly,” is easily in the top three best movies of the year about movies. Which could sound like an insult, considering there have only been three this year in the mainstream. But that would be far from the truth. 

Baumbach’s film offers an insightful look at an aging movie star looking back at his life and career after the death of a friend and director who gave him his big break. 

The film offers this unique perspective on what most people would call a dream come true. Seeing firsthand what I am sure has happened to countless people in the industry, a job in which the work demand is so great, you miss out on being a family man. 

There is this perfect balance between entertainment and story. Never is there a point where the film tilts heavier to one side and becomes more of a popcorn flick or an art house film.

While “Jay Kelly” could easily be seen as an artistic film with a character-driven story, Baumbach’s vision allows for comedic and heartfelt moments that feel real and grounded, yet fluffy enough to pass as popcorn moments. The perfect combination, offering a sleek yet elegant rhythm. 

Adam Sandler gives one of his best performances since “Punch-Drunk Love”, showing once again that he is an underrated actor. A comedian who does comedies, yet has this dramatic performer tucked away ready to spring into action at any moment. 

George Clooney not only plays the role perfectly but is perfect for the role. If the performance alone doesn’t tell you that, the tribute that his character is given does. Using real footage from various films across the span of his career. 

A perfect example of how to create the ultimate montage. Blissfully capturing in frames what can’t be said in words. 

Overall, I think the film works on both an entertaining level as well as a cinematic level. Offering something to both those who desire elevated films, with an intellectual undertone. All while being entertaining and simple enough to enjoy as a movie without the layer of artistic intellect.

Not quite in the same realm as “Nouvelle Vague”, as it is to “Sentimental Value”, the foreign film about a similar situation. An aging filmmaker, trying to reconnect with his daughters. 

While both are great movies, “Jay Kelly” has more of a commercial appeal to the masses, whereas “Sentimental Value” is very much so an art house style film. That has a style and tone that won’t appeal to the average moviegoer.

Overall rating: 4/5 Stars. 

Has YouTube Film Criticism Surpassed Magazine Criticism

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

For decades, film criticism lived in the pages of magazines and newspapers. Siskel and Ebert were household names, publications like Rolling Stone, The New Yorker, and Sight & Sound shaped cinematic taste, and a small number of critics determined which films became “important.” But that era has quietly slipped away, and in its place, a new center of influence has emerged: YouTube.

Today, YouTube film criticism reaches more people, shapes more opinions, and sparks more conversations . And it isn’t because magazines suddenly got worse—it’s because YouTube changed what criticism is.

The first major shift is accessibility. Magazine criticism always relied on gatekeepers: editors, publishers, word counts, and institutional voice. YouTube eliminated all of that. Anyone with a camera—or even just a phone—can deliver a perspective with no filters. The result is a landscape where film analysis comes from all angles: academics, hobbyists, video essayists, comedians, animators, and people who just love talking about movies. Criticism became democratized. Suddenly, everyone had a seat at the table.

But the deeper change is emotional. YouTube critics build parasocial relationships with their audiences. They aren’t distant cultural authorities speaking from a page—they’re faces you see, voices you trust, personalities you understand. A viewer doesn’t just agree with a creator; they follow them, anticipate their takes, and value their taste as part of their routine. That level of personal connection makes their influence far stronger than anything a magazine writer could achieve.

Then there’s sheer reach. A mid-sized YouTube film channel—say 200,000 subscribers—can deliver a video that reaches more eyes in 24 hours than many magazines reach in a month. YouTube videos circulate on TikTok, Instagram, Twitter, movie forums, Discord, and recommendations algorithms. One strong video can ignite a cultural conversation. A magazine article can be brilliant, but its impact is limited by distribution. On YouTube, distribution is not a barrier; attention is the currency.

Another surprising shift is form. YouTube criticism often blends analysis, editing, humor, aesthetics, and storytelling. It’s not just a written argument—it’s audiovisual criticism using the language of the medium itself. When a creator breaks down a shot, they can show the shot. When they analyze pacing, they can recreate the pacing. That makes the critique experiential in a way print never could.

Of course, traditional criticism isn’t dead. It still holds prestige, rigor, and historical context. But influence has moved. Teens discovering film culture today aren’t reading RogerEbert.com. They’re watching videos from creators who upload consistently, speak directly, and understand the rhythms of online culture. The new tastemakers don’t sit in editorial meetings—they sit in their bedrooms, editing timelines into meaning.

This doesn’t diminish magazine criticism; it expands the ecosystem. But it does signal a shift in power. Film culture is no longer shaped from the top down. It’s shaped horizontally—by communities, creators, and viewers in conversation with each other.

And that’s why YouTube film criticism isn’t just “as influential” as magazines ever were.

It’s more intimate, more dynamic, more democratic—

and for the first time, the voice defining cinematic taste might actually sound a lot like your own. 

Although written critique, will always have and hold a higher regard. YouTube and its film reviewers are finally being seen as credible, and taken seriously by not only fans but marketing teams for films. 

Not to mention with the rise of TikTok film influencers. YouTube’s movie reviews are not only, more important than ever. But are becoming the go to for most people looking for honest reviews. 

For a moment, TikTok appeared to be the next YouTube. Creating and giving the opportunity for new comers to compete with the household names of YouTube. Getting seen by hundreds of thousands, without the mass following count. 

Although that died out as quickly as it sparked. For now TikTok “film influencers”. Are just that. “Influencers” people whom once build a following talking about movies. 

Are now just paid spokesman or spokeswoman, for hire. No longer are there honest and insightful reviews, by cinephiles, who didn’t obtain a masters in journalism. But, simply people being paid to promote movies, in which from what I’ve seen don’t know how to market themselves to the masses. 

What’s More Important Characters Or Plot?

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

Film theory and film bros. like to pretend plot is king: the clean three-act structure, the rising action, the ticking clock. But audiences don’t return to movies because the beats were perfectly arranged—they return because they met someone on screen they couldn’t forget. Character is the emotional currency of cinema, and without it, even the most meticulously engineered plot collapses into sterility.

Think of how many films with thin or even chaotic storylines still linger in culture. We don’t watch The Big Lebowski for its kidnapping plot; we watch it because The Dude feels like someone we know. We don’t return to Lost in Translation for narrative complexity; we return because Bob and Charlotte’s quiet, lonely souls invite us in. A great character doesn’t require a flawless storyline—they carry the film on their own gravitational pull. This is the key reason people binge-watch TV shows. They connect to the character, not the storyline. Just like why when series write off key characters, the show declines in viewers and quality. “One Tree Hill” is the perfect example of this. 

Plot is a machine. Character is a heartbeat.

A strong plot can tell us what happens, but compelling characters tell us why it matters. They transform events into meaning. When a character’s desire, flaw, or conflict drives the film, even the simplest storyline becomes powerful. A story about a boxer is familiar—until it’s Rocky, and suddenly it becomes about dignity, failure, and the fear of never being good enough. The plot hasn’t changed. The character has.

And when characters are thin, no twist can save the film. You can feel it immediately: the script keeps throwing bigger events at the screen—explosions, betrayals, reversals—but it all feels weightless because there’s no internal life behind the eyes of the people experiencing it. Plot without character becomes spectacle without consequence. Look at Frankenstein, Mia Goth’s character, as minimal as her screen time as she has. She played a huge part in that film. 

Great characters anchor a film, shape its tone, absorb its themes, and give the audience someone to root for, fear for, or recognize themselves in. They don’t just move through the story; they transform it. “The Perks Of Being A Wallflower” is the perfect example. 

Not everyone went through the events and trauma that Charlie did, but almost everyone can relate to him. Being that kid, that feels isolated and alone, until they find their tribe. So to speak.

In the end, plot is how you guide an audience through a movie.

Character is why they stay, and return time and time again. 

It Appears A24 Has Another Gem In Its Mist.

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

“The Drama” starring Robert Patterson and Zendaya comes out this April, making it the first of three movies Patterson and Zendaya will be starring in together in 2026.

From writer/director Kristoffer Borgli, most famously known for the Nic Cage movie, “Dream Scenario” from A24 comes “The Drama”. What is being classified as a comedy romance. 

A happily engaged couple is put to the test when an unexpected revelation sends their wedding week off the rails.

Now a trailer has yet to drop, and this is all the information we have on the film thus far. Although, with that being said, count me in. Romantic comedies with a twist are a genre that is making waves in film right now, and I’m here for it. 

The fact that this is going to be the first film of three that we are getting with Robert Patterson and Zendaya next year is even more exciting. 

“The Drama” is set to be released in April. Then of course we have the highly anticipated Christopher Nolan film. “The Odyssey” coming out in July, then finally but certainly not least. 

We have the final conclusion to the epic “Dune” trilogy, “Dune Part Three”. Coming into theaters just in time for the holidays, December 17th 2026. 

All this talk about audiences not wanting to go to the theaters, and the numbers are showing it. I’m pretty sure this coming year we will see a record in ticket sales, since Covid. For it’s not about audiences preferring home viewing, but there being a lack of films worth seeing in theaters.

 

Surpassing The Son of Krypton, Superman, Zootopia 2 has now outgrossed Demon Slayer: Infinity Castle and Jurassic World Rebirth with $915.8 million At The Box Office

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By:Dominic La-Viola

This shouldn’t come as a huge surprise, considering the first Zootopia movie grossed over a billion dollars and also took home the Oscar for Best Animated Feature.

Which, if it’s any indication of how the Oscars are going to go this year. It would be safe to say that Zootopia 2 stands a real chance at taking home the golden statue, with  Ne Zha 2 being its only real competitor.

Disney already secured its first billion-dollar hit with “Lilo & Stitch” and now with this, it’s safe to say that even despite “Fantastic Four” and “Brave New World” under performing. It’s still going to be a great year for Disney. 

“Lilo & Stitch”as of now is the only Hollywood movie above “Zootopia 2” on the 2025 box office chart, with Ne Zha 2 sitting comfortably above them both with a massive $1.9 billion. Which is the international hit from China. 

Zootopia 3 hasn’t been confirmed, although there was an Easter egg in the movie. Not to mention, as most films today have. There is a post-credits scene – hints that a third film is indeed on the way, and it will focus on birds, a species which has yet to be introduced to the world of Zootopia.

With the way the box office is looking, there is little to no chance that a third one isn’t coming. I would be completely and utterly shocked if we didn’t see a third coming our way. 

Source- Total Film

Nobody Wants This

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

The title of one of their popular shows is also very much relevant to their current business transaction. 

It appears that no one wants Netflix to buy WB. All three major unions— the Writers Guild, the Directors Guild, and SAG— are concerned with Netflix buying WB. 

All three of them have released statements about the buyout, yet as of now. Only the Directors Guild has made an effort to do something. 

Christopher Nolan, the legendary, modern  director, who is the head of the DGA, has a meeting with Netflix to discuss their future plans after the buyout.

Which, given his history and stance on cinema and the theater experience, makes Nolan without question the right guy for the job. 

Christopher Nolan, a director who worked with WB for over 20 years, famously left to go partner with another studio. All over the window in which movies went from theater to streaming.

Now it’s all speculation on what he can really do. I mean, the DGA is a rather large organization, which most of the working directors belong to. 

Speculation would lead us to believe that he possibly could run a strike, for no director in the guild to work with Netflix if they didn’t play ball. Although, I’m not sure he would. 

During the writing strike, a lot of writers who weren’t in the guild used it as an opportunity to try and break into the industry. Only to be blacklisted by not only the guild but all its members after the strike was over.  

Of course, this is all speculation, although I could see there being a real divide in Hollywood. For there is already immense distress over this buyout. 

Could this be enough to see a huge shift in what production companies and talent work with Netflix in the future? 

Could this be the breaking point, separating movie stars and TV stars once again? Closing that cross-platform stream that has been flowing for the past few years.  

With this news just breaking and no real details yet in writing. It’s too soon to say anything for certain. 

Other than the fact that it was  Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos who made these statements. 

“BARBIE and OPPENHEIMER would have been just as big on Netflix.”

“There’s no reason to believe that the movie itself is better in any size of screen.”

Should without question be removed from his position. For clearly he has no idea what he’s talking about. 

He is the  Barry Lapidus of Netflix. For those who don’t know who Barry Lapidus is. He’s the person who almost cost Paramount Pictures “The Godfather”. 

He was a financial adviser for Charles Bludorn, who was the majority shareholder and owner of the studio at the time.

But thanks to Robert Evans, the head of the studio at the time, he fought back. Convincing Bludorn not to listen to the finance guys. That he knew what the people wanted. That like “Love Story” and “The Godfather” was going to be a monster hit. 

With that being said, if history  has taught us anything. He was right and the suits, as Billy Walsh would call them, don’t know anything about movies, only spreadsheets and numbers. “The Godfather” is a classic and historical film, that almost didn’t happen.  

Netflix Co-CEO Thinks Phone Screens Are Just As Good As Theater Screens

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos says BARBIE and

OPPENHEIMER would have been just as big on Netflix.

“There’s no reason to believe that the movie itself is better in any size of screen for all people. My son’s an editor, he watched ‘Lawrence of Arabia’ on his phone.”

via @nytimes

This is one of the many posts I’ve seen since the news broke that WB accepted the mostly cash offer from Netflix. 

To which, honestly at first I was excited for, before seeing this, that is.

I for sure thought that if Netflix bought out WB, it was going to be to leverage its marketing and distribution departments to help Netflix in the next steps of getting into the theatrical release aspect of the business.

For in the past few years Netflix has been releasing some of its films into theaters, even the ones in which aren’t Oscar contenders. 

“Wake Up Dead: A Knives Out Mystery” isn’t by any means an Oscar contender. Now “Frankenstein”, “Left Handed Girl”, or “House of Dynamite” could very well be Oscar contenders. So them having been released in theaters to meet the quota for competing in the awards made sense. 

Although, after hearing this, that not only doesn’t seem to be their plan. Yet the opposite, doubling down on their streaming-only efforts. 

Of course, personally, I think anyone who believes what Co-CEO Ted Sarandos says or something along those lines doesn’t belong working in the film industry. 

The merger is set for late 2026, of course it still needs to get approval to go through. As many in LA are fighting it and pushing for the merger to be shut down. 

The Disney/ Fox merger went through, so I don’t see this being stopped.  Of course unless after this news and statement from the Co-CEO there was a mass cancellation of Netflix subscriptions, bringing down their stock value and ability to acquire said funds to back its offer.  

Five Night’s At Freddy’s 2 – A Sequel That Debunks The Stereotypes

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

“Five Nights At Freddy’s 2” definitely debunks  the stereotypes that sequels are inferior to their predecessors.

Director Emma Tammi brings her A-game and saves this franchise from a slow, painful, and public demise.  

From the jump, the film feels far more competent and coherent. Giving us a rather well-balanced narrative. One that at first seems scattered and stagnant, but slowly and blissfully weaves itself together, connecting the dots just right. Showing the viewer that the film was never frantic and disarrayed, but running parallel and intertwining story arcs. 

Now, while the first film in the franchise wasn’t particularly well executed. The foundation was strong, leaving plenty of room for growth and improvement. 

To which this one does, picking up where the first one left off and running with it. Carefully laying down building blocks to build upon the foundation, to establish a well-structured origin and base for the lore.

All the while, the film is so well-paced that even in moments before the dots are connected and everything comes full circle . The film does its job and is entertaining and fun.     

Although the film is far from flawless or even greatness. Even though the film is better than the first by a landslide. That doesn’t mean much.

There are still a decent amount of problems with this film. Starting with the most unforgiving problem: Freddy Carter’s performance as Michael. The night security guard at the original Freddy’s. 

Not to be mistaken for Josh Hutcherson’s character Mike. Who was the security guard at Freddy’s franchise location in the first film.

The fact that they’re both named Mike or Michael, which is really the same thing, doesn’t make sense and is less catchy and interesting than clever, which is what they were trying to be. 

While it’s not the only problem with the film, his over-the-top and lack of range with his performance come off as too tongue-in-cheek for the film’s tone.  

There are some issues with the story structure and timing of events. Although all are forgivable given the film’s style and grace. 

Overall, the film works for what it is, the pg-13 rating does negatively affect the film as a whole. I feel the film would have better benefited from being an R-rated horror movie. This is the same problem that I and many had with the first film as well. 

Yet I found this one to be more entertaining, interesting, and coherent than the first, really finding its footing and voice as a franchise. I have no doubt that there will be a third. Just as I have no doubt that it will be a crisper and finer tone film. 

Overall Rating 3.5 Stars. 

It’s Morphing Time! Power Rangers Getting Live-Action Reboot.

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

This is not a drill; we are finally getting a Power Rangers live-action reboot, and it’s happening on Disney+.

The masterminds behind the show are none other than the showrunners behind the “Percy Jackson” series, Jonathan E. Steinberg and Dan Shotz.

Now, at first, they were trying to keep things under wraps and gatekeep this wonderful news for themselves. But Movieweb was able to get them to confirm the show and their involvement in it. 

However, that is all that is confirmed at this point, with them keeping everything else close to the chest.

Which does leave room for speculation, for there could be two different possibilities. First, it could be a reboot, reintroducing the main characters we know and love, or option two. 

Which would be introducing an entire new group of teens that bestow the power of the “Mighty Morphin Power Rangers”.

Keeping the names of the original characters makes more sense than giving them new names. 

Unless, of course, they ditch the TV origins and bring to life the amazingly underrated, BOOM comic series. 


This would allow them to not only have a “Mighty Morphin Power Rangers” multiverse, but would also allow them to be canon to the original show. 

Not to mention, it would give them so much more material to work with and appease the fans, both of the original TV show and the newer fans who were introduced through the comics. 

To be able to see the shattered grid-beyond-the-grid story arc come to life in live-action would be legendary. They could easily make that story arc into a feature film that got a theatrical release. 

Not only paying tribute to the series that inspired “Power Rangers”, “Super Sentai”, but following in their footsteps, completely by having a feature, theatrical film for every conclusion season. 

Source – Movie Web 

Ready or Not 2 : Here I Come Trailer Breakdown

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

The trailer for the highly anticipated Ready or Not 2 dropped yesterday, and this is what we know so far. 

The Le Domas, which, if you don’t remember, is the family dynasty in which Grace was supposed to marry into, although the game of the night was hide and seek. Unluckily for her. 

To which the rules were simple: the only way to survive is to make it until dawn without being found and killed. To which she succeeded, whereas all before her failed. 

Now in the first trailer for the latest in the franchise. We learn that they were not the only family involved in this satanic ritual. 

That since she won, she triggered a new game against the high council families. This time, double or nothing. 

She wins, she wins it all, the entire fortune; she loses, she dies. 

Now at first, she refuses to play, which then triggers them to blackmail her by threatening to kill her sister. Which I’m pretty sure she didn’t have in the first one. 

If I remember correctly, she didn’t have a family; that’s why she was so adamant about getting married, for she grew up as an orphan. One that feared her in-laws saw her as only a gold digger. 

Now with that being said, I’m sure they’ll find a way to make it work in the script. She’s a “sister”, long lost, or someone she grew up in the foster system with. Someone who’s like a sister, but she lost touch with. 

The trailer then goes on to show us them being hunting in the game of hide and seek, which is really more a game of hide and hunt, now that all parties are aware of the situation and conquest. 

Although a potential plot hole aside. My biggest problem with this trailer is the clip where they show the one guy explode on her. 

Like really, in the first one, Alex succumbs to the cure at the end and explodes…. All over her because she was still alive at dawn. It seems that someone wasn’t paying attention or had never seen the first film in which they were hired to cut the trailer for its sequel; literally, they cut the ending scene in the trailer. Or… it was intentional to throw us off. Although I don’t think so. Because why else would he randomly combust like that? 

Even with that being said, I’m still excited to see this movie. We have two next-generation scream queens starting in this film. I mean, what more could you want!  We’re given both Samara Weaving and Kathryn Newton. Two actresses well on their way to the Scream Queen Hall of Fame. I mean, the only thing left I really need to see is Kathryn Newton in a Scream movie. 

Kevin Williamson, it’s not too late. You could easily add another random kill scene in Scream 7 and have Kathryn Newton in it. Or better yet, write her a leading part in Scream 8… we know an eighth is coming. At this point, Scream is going to break double digits. It has to.