Hokum review

 Coming Soon! 

The Devil Wears Prada 2 review

THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA 2: 

A VERY GLAMOROUS FOLLOW-UP! 

By Nico Beland

Movie Review: *** ½ out of 4

20^TH CENTURY STUDIOS

Emily Blunt, Meryl Streep, Stanley Tucci, and Anne Hathaway in The Devil Wears Prada 2

 

            Miranda Priestly (Meryl Streep-Kramer VS Kramer, The Iron Lady, The Post) and Andy Sachs (Anne Hathaway-The Dark Knight Rises, Les Misérables (2012), Interstellar) are back in The Devil Wears Prada 2, the much-anticipated sequel to the 2006 comedy smash-hit, The Devil Wears Prada, released nearly 20 years later. I actually really liked the first Devil Wears Prada, though I do not follow the fashion industry at all. I just thought it was a very funny look at the intense world of fashion with incredibly memorable characters and scene-stealing performances by the cast, with Streep as my second favorite movie “Devil” from that year. 

            Now we have the sequel with Streep, Hathaway, Emily Blunt (Looper, Edge of Tomorrow, A Quiet Place 1 and 2), and Stanley Tucci (Road to Perdition, The Hunger Games franchise, Conclave) reprising their roles and David Frankel (Marley & Me, Hope Springs, Jerry & Marge Go Large) back in the director’s chair. I was curious about this film when it was announced, though I wasn’t really excited for it because while I enjoyed the first Devil Wears Prada, it was a pretty self-contained movie that didn’t warrant a continuation to me. 

            Well, I’m happy to report that The Devil Wears Prada 2 is a worthy follow-up to the first that progresses the story and evolves the fashion world via its 20-year gap. I guess the first one was a little tighter, but this was still a good sit. 

            The film is set 20 years after the first and follows Andrea “Andy” Sachs, who has become a respected reporter in New York. But when she and her entire newsroom are abruptly laid off via text and the former Runway magazine, now online fashion brand facing a PR crisis, Andy finds herself back at Runway as a features editor to do damage control unbeknownst to her intense and tyrannical boss, Miranda Priestly. 

            However, Andy’s not alone as a couple of other familiar faces cross paths with her, including Miranda’s overworking right-hand, Nigel Kipling (Tucci), and her former first assistant, Emily Charlton (Blunt), who is now a senior executive at Dior. 

            The film also stars Justin Theroux (Mulholland Drive, American Psycho, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice) as Emily’s boyfriend Benji Barnes, Kenneth Branagh (Hamlet (1996), Murder on the Orient Express trilogy, Oppenheimer) as Miranda’s new husband Stuart Simmons, Lucy Liu (Charlie’s Angels 1 and 2, Kill Bill, Rosemead) as Sasha Barnes, B.J. Novak (The Office, Inglourious Basterds, Vengeance) as Jay Ravitz, Patrick Brammall (The Alice, A Moody Christmas, Offspring) as Andy’s love interest Peter, Helen J. Shen in her first film role as Andy’s assistant Jin Chao, Simone Ashley (Sex Education, Bridgerton, The Little Mermaid (2023)) as Miranda’s current first assistant Amari Mari, Tracie Thoms (Death Proof, 9-1-1, Looper) reprising her role as Andy’s best friend Lily, and Caleb Hearon (Jurassic World: Dominion, I Used to Be Funny, Pizza Movie) as Miranda’s current second assistant Charlie. 

            Overall, The Devil Wears Prada 2 could have been a phoned-in sequel that lazily recycles the exact same film as the first in hopes of giving people more of what they liked in its predecessor. Thankfully, that is not the case with this film, as it continues the story and shows how things have changed over the 20 years between movies. 

            Just like in real life, a lot has changed since the first film. Runway is now an online fashion company, Miranda can’t be as ruthless as she once was in 2006 at the risk of causing an HR conflict, and Andy’s journalism job is threatened by various takeovers. I can’t believe I’m saying this, but The Devil Wears Prada 2 is a sequel done right because it takes its characters and puts them in new situations and places while still retaining elements that made its predecessor great. 

            The dynamics between the four leads are still fantastic, with Streep slipping back into Miranda as if she never skipped a beat, Emily Blunt is still very funny and sassy as…well, Emily, and is given more depth this time outside of just being the bitchy ex-co-worker. However, what really surprised me was how invested I was in Anne Hathaway and Stanley Tucci’s characters’ relationship, which started off as just a typical workplace relationship and gradually became a genuine friendship. 

            It doesn’t just stop at the cast; the movie itself feels like it was filmed in 2006, even right down to the same cinematographer returning, and even though this is a comedy film and not a big spectacle movie, it feels big. Actual sets, filming on location, various lighting effects, and windows with real streets and backdrops and it really makes me miss this kind of filmmaking on ALL projects, it’s a comedy made for the big screen and not made like a crappy streaming movie that somehow got a theatrical release. 

            The movie is just under 2 hours, and it never felt like things dragged; it’s a highly anticipated sequel to a successful movie made 20 years ago, and the cast and crew wanted to give the characters as much time to shine as possible. For the most part, it works, but I thought some aspects were somewhat underdeveloped. The biggest example being Anne Hathaway’s Andy’s relationship with her new love interest, Patrick Brammall’s Peter, the actors work fine together and have strong chemistry, but it didn’t really impact the plot that much and is nowhere near as interesting as what she’s doing with Streep, Tucci, and/or Blunt. 

            This is a pretty easy recommendation; if you loved the first Devil Wears Prada, then you’re bound to enjoy this one as well, as it gives more of what people want to see without it ever feeling like a lazy rehash. The cast is great, the costume design is divine, the cinematography is magnificent, and the story is funny and engaging; it’s a welcome return to Runway even with someone like Miranda Priestly leading the way. 

Michael review

MICHAEL: 

JAAFAR JACKSON’S PERFORMANCE IS UNCANNY, BUT THE FILM SURROUNDING HIM ISN’T MUCH OF A “SMOOTH CRIMINAL”! 

By Nico Beland

Movie Review: ** ½ out of 4 

LIONSGATE AND UNIVERSAL PICTURES

Jaafar Jackson is Michael

 

            Jaafar Jackson steps into his uncle’s shoes and becomes the King of Pop in Michael, a music biopic produced by Graham King (The Departed, Hugo, Bohemian Rhapsody) and directed by Antoine Fuqua (Training Day, The Equalizer trilogy, Southpaw), chronicling the life of singer-songwriter Michael Jackson. I wouldn’t call myself a Michael Jackson superfan, but I love his music and dance moves; the man was insanely talented in ways that we’ll probably never see again. 

            A biopic on Jackson’s life and career seemed long overdue. The 2009 concert film, Michael Jackson’s This Is It (Which came out a few months after his death), was damn good, and it could be interesting to see an honest look at key events that made him the person he was. However, I did start to step back when I realized it was being produced by Graham King, who produced Bohemian Rhapsody, which, while not a terrible movie, was a very safe and sanitary look at Freddie Mercury and skipped over or downright changed crucial moments in his life. 

            But just like that movie, I was onboard for the actor playing the person in question, in Freddie Mercury’s case, it was Rami Malek, and in this, we have Michael Jackson’s nephew, Jaafar Jackson, bringing the King of Pop back to life on film. Before I really dive into it, yes, Jaafar Jackson as Michael is amazing and the best part of the movie, but the film itself is a very “Bohemian Rhapsodied” look at Michael Jackson, which is its biggest detriment. 

            The film follows the life of Michael Jackson (Jackson), covering his involvement in the Jackson 5 in the 1960s under management by his father Joseph Jackson (Colman Domingo-If Beale Street Could Talk, Rustin, Sing Sing) to his venture as a solo act in the 1970s. Through success and missteps such as a nose job and an accident resulting in third-degree burns on his head, Michael sets his legacy in stone all culminating in his Bad tour in 1988. 

            The film also stars Nia Long (Boyz n the Hood, The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, Soul Food) as Michael’s mother Katherine Scruse-Jackson, Miles Teller (The Spectacular Now, Whiplash, Top Gun: Maverick) as John Branca, KeiLyn Durrel Jones as Michael’s bodyguard and friend Bill Brey, Laura Herrier (Spider-Man: Homecoming, BlacKkKlansman, White Men Can’t Jump (2023)) as Suzanne de Passe, Jessica Sula (Skins, Split, Malum) as Michael’s older sister La Toya Jackson, Joseph David-Jones (Nashville, Arrow, Detroit), Jamal R. Henderson, Tre Horton, and Rhyan Hill as Michael’s brothers Jackie, Jermaine, Marlon, and Tito Jackson, Mike Myers (Wayne’s World 1 and 2, Austin Powerstrilogy, Shrek franchise) who also appeared in Bohemian Rhapsody as CBS Records president Walter Yetnikoff, Kendrick Sampson (The Vampire Diaries, How to Get Away with Murder, The Flash) as Michael’s co-producer Quincy Jones, Larenz Tate (Menace II Society, Dead Presidents, Power) as Motown president Berry Gordy, and Deon Cole (Barbershop trilogy, Black-ish, The Color Purple (2023)) as Don King. 

            Overall, Michael has a lot going for it, and Jaafar’s performance alone makes the film worth seeking out, but this is a very by-the-numbers music biopic that glosses over crucial moments in his life and never really gives anything super insightful about the person. The movie is also produced by The Michael Jackson Company, and there’s even an opening logo for them at the beginning, and I felt that was a huge misstep in the production because if you know ANYTHING about Michael Jackson’s personal life, then you know there are details and events about him that they’d probably not approve of being represented on film. 

            Compared to Baz Luhrmann’s Elvis or Dexter Fletcher’s Elton John biopic, Rocketman, where they did celebrate the person’s life and career, but they also didn’t shy away from addressing their low points, Michael, like Bohemian Rhapsody, feels very safe and generic in its execution, where you don’t get the full story, and is focused more on being a crowd-pleaser. 

            However, I’m convinced that if Lionsgate and Universal hadn’t struck a deal with The Michael Jackson Company to produce this, we wouldn’t have gotten Jaafar Jackson as Michael, who completely steals the show in a similar way to Rami Malek’s Freddie Mercury in Bohemian Rhapsody. He is amazing as Michael Jackson, and the way he captures his appearance, voice, mannerisms, and dances are uncanny; it felt like I was watching the real Michael Jackson onscreen. He easily deserves all the praise. 

            Colman Domingo is also a huge standout as Michael’s father and former Jackson 5 manager, Joseph, whose strict discipline, grueling rehearsals, and corporal punishment essentially made Michael the man he was. Domingo really sells the intensity and charisma of a person like this, though, granted, I know very little about Michael Jackson’s father outside of the fact that he was tough as nails to his children. Colman got that covered. 

            Honestly, none of the acting in this is bad, and any problems I have with the film do not come from the actors because they are giving their all. The problems come from the script, approach to the subject matter, and The Michael Jackson Company co-funding the movie because it’s a very artificial and safe-feeling film in its execution. Had this been like Straight Outta Compton or the already mentioned Rocketman or Elvis, I think we could have gotten something great and a lot more interesting. 

            I will say, despite not getting into the film itself, I was delighted by seeing reenactments of the Thriller music video shoot and various stage performances. The movie was filled to the brim with Michael Jackson’s most iconic songs, and I loved hearing them blasting through the movie theater speakers. 

            I don’t know, Michael is a music biopic that’s just there, and I can’t say there’s anything in it that makes me say don’t see it because there are some amazing aspects about the film, Jaafar Jackson is great, Colman Domingo is great, the reenactments of Michael Jackson's music videos and stage performances are all great. But because the movie skips over a lot of details about his life and even has one of the biggest cop-out endings I’ve ever seen in a film, it’s a middling and safe representation of a truly great talent who deserves far better…even if his family disagrees.  

Exit 8 review

EXIT 8: 

VIDEO GAME ADAPTATION IS QUITE POSSIBLY THE SCARIEST SUBWAY VENTURE YOU WILL EVER SEE! 

By Nico Beland

Movie Review: **** out of 4

NEON

It’s real or anomaly in Exit 8

 

            One of the biggest surprises in video game-inspired cinema has recently arrived in theaters in Exit 8, a Japanese-language mystery psychological horror film based on the 2023 indie video game of the same name from Kotake Create. I have never played or even heard of the game until after hearing about this film coming out, so, because of that, I won’t be able to determine how faithful it is to the source material and will instead be judging it on its own merits. 

            The movie got a lot of buzz at film festivals last year (The film was released in North America in 2026) and was highly praised by critics, not to mention the trailer did catch my interest when I finally watched it even though I know absolutely nothing about the source material. Well, now that I’ve seen the film for myself, I may need to check out the game it was based on because holy shit, this was crazy! 

            Exit 8 is a film that’s difficult to put into words, considering all the chaos that goes down in it, and I’m actively trying to avoid spoilers, but I was captivated and on the edge of my seat throughout. Sonic the Hedgehog 3 is easily my FAVORITE video game movie, but this might very well be the BEST video game movie that I’ve seen. 

            The film follows a man credited as The Lost Man (Kazanuri Ninomiya-Letters from Iwo Jima, Gantz, Nagasaki: Memories of My Son) who finds himself in a deserted, endless-looping corridor inside a train subway. The man soon discovers that the only way to escape the loop is to make it to Exit 8, but how is he supposed to do that? If he sees an anomaly in the corridor (Even just the tiniest difference), he must turn back the other way, and if he doesn’t see any anomalies, then he will continue forward to hopefully end this Flintstones background-inspired nightmare…oh, and there’s a walking man and a young boy in this, too. 

            Overall, Exit 8 fills its 95-minute runtime with non-stop suspense and mindf*ckery and while the plot itself is rather thin, it’s the execution of it all and its compelling characters that bring it all home. The movie is set in one location throughout the runtime, with the characters going through endless loops, and not once does it feel like a gimmick, nor does the novelty wear out its welcome. 

            My eyes were glued to the screen from start to finish, looking at every single thing in the background to see if anything changed as an anomaly, and wondering what crazy thing was going to appear next. It’s a movie where a lot of the fun comes from observing everything in the corridor as if you’re experiencing it with the man. 

            As I was writing this, I did look up some things about the game, and for the most part, this seems to be a pretty faithful adaptation from the corridor’s design itself to the walking man with the briefcase and translating the game’s logic to a feature film. The first sequence of the man in the corridor is even done in first-person, just like how it is in the game, which was a neat little nod. 

            Even though there’s not a whole lot going on, the characters are very likable particularly Ninomiya as the Lost Man (The film’s protagonist) who’s nervous about becoming a father and tends to tune the world out with his iPhone, but through this situation and joining forces with the Boy, he is given a strong arc and character growth as he essentially becomes like a father figure to this lost boy in the corridor, I would talk more about the Walking Man or the Boy as characters, but I would need to go into spoilers and I have no desire of doing that for this kind of film. 

            The movie gets pretty freaky, whether it’s blood oozing from the wall, the Walking Man standing behind the Lost Man and smiling like the Joker, or a sequence involving hairless rats. It is rated PG-13, but unlike a lot of other horror films with that rating, it doesn’t feel like a watered-down movie; it is disturbing and weird and sometimes grotesque (Though not to the point where it would get an R rating) without cheapening the experience. 

            Exit 8 was quite a surprise, which makes me look forward to watching it again to see all the little details and to check out the original game that inspired it. It’s weird, suspenseful, and keeps you on your toes while having a unique premise and captivating characters to anchor it. This is one anomaly hunting movie you shouldn’t miss. 

Lee Cronin's The Mummy review

LEE CRONIN’S THE MUMMY: 

THE MUMMY MEETS THE EXORCIST AND EVIL DEAD! 

By Nico Beland

Movie Review: *** out of 4

WARNER BROS. PICTURES AND NEW LINE CINEMA

Something terrible has happened to Katie in Lee Cronin’s The Mummy

 

            This ain’t no cheesy Brendan Fraser adventure, you’ve been warned! Anyway, director Lee Cronin (The Hole in the Ground, Evil Dead Rise) is back to bring his take on The Mummy, the new horror film produced by Blumhouse and James Wan (Insidious franchise, The Conjuring Universe, M3GAN franchise). 

            Much like the recent Dracula and The Bride! this year, this has absolutely nothing to do with any of the Universal Monster movies, not the Boris Karloff Mummy, not the three Brendan Fraser films, and not even the dreaded Tom Cruise Mummy from 2017. It’s a director bringing their own unique vision to an iconic monster, and in this film’s case, it’s The Mummy, which I was somewhat curious about when it was announced. 

            Whether it turned out good or bad, the advertisements did get my attention and made me want to know what was going to happen. Plus, coming off of the nearly unwatchable, The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008) and The Mummy (2017) from Universal, you can’t go anywhere else but up, so I was interested in seeing what Cronin was going to do with The Mummy and…I don’t know, I kinda liked it. 

            It’s not a great film, and there are certainly some flaws with it, but I thought this was an interesting and genuinely unsettling approach to The Mummy with gnarly deaths and an Exorcist meets Evil Dead storyline. It’s also refreshing to see an actual horror Mummy movie again after the monster often being associated with the 1999 Mummy trilogy’s Indiana Jones-style adventure movie tone. 

            The film follows Katie (Played by newcomer Natalie Grace), a young girl who went missing without a trace until she’s discovered eight years later and is reunited with her family. However, her parents, Charlie (Jack Reynor-Transformers: Age of Extinction, Sing Street, Midsommar) and Larissa (Laia Costa-Black Snow, Only You, The Teacher Who Promised the Sea) notice something very different about Katie, something terrifying that turns this family reunion into a nightmare. 

            The film also stars May Calamawy (Together Together, Moon Knight, The Actor) as Detective Dalla Zaki, Verónica Falcón (Queen of the South, Perry Mason, Ozark) as Carmen Santiago, Mark Mitchinson (The Hobbit 2 and 3, Mortal Engines, Evil Dead Rise) as Professor Bixler, and Lily Sullivan (Mental, Picnic at Hanging Rock, Evil Dead Rise) as Miss Mills. 

            Overall, Lee Cronin’s The Mummy is certainly a unique and ambitious approach to the monster and source material, and while I think it’s nowhere near as effective or clever as Leigh Whannell’s Invisible Man from 2020, I found this movie quite creepy and unnerving at times. I will say it’s to the point where it doesn’t feel like a Mummymovie and instead something along the lines of The Exorcist or the recent Evil Dead movie that came out a few years ago (Coincidentally from the same director as this and also coincidentally the trailer for the sequel was shown before the film) and you could even consider this a better Exorcist: Believer than the actual Exorcist: Believer. 

            No joke, this film actually does have a similar premise to The Exorcist: Believer, where a child goes missing and is eventually found but comes back with something evil and demonic within, and now, the other characters have to exorcise the evil spirit. The big difference is Lee Cronin’s The Mummy handles it way better than The Exorcist: Believer because you give a shit about what’s going on here, and the mystery surrounding it all keeps you invested. 

            The characters aren’t anything groundbreaking, but I found them endearing enough with a strong family dynamic. Jack Reynor, whom I hadn’t seen since Midsommar in 2019, I thought was very good as the dad who acknowledges that there is something clearly wrong with his daughter (Though he does start to ask questions a little too late). Natalie Grace is amazing as Katie/The Mummy, who portrays a very different interpretation of The Mummy that’s more akin to Reagan from The Exorcist or the possessed mother from Evil Dead Rise than any previous Mummy in film, saying stock creepy lines, taunting the people trying to exorcise the demon, and doing gross and gory things…speaking of which. 

            The movie is gory as fuck and flaunts its R rating left and right. People get killed in grotesque, over-the-top ways, and even the possessed Katie ripping her own skin off is unsettling and makes you wince as you’re watching it. There’s also a scene involving toenail clipping that led to probably the best use of gore in the entire film, and it wasn’t even a death scene. 

            The mystery surrounding Katie’s disappearance is fascinating and essentially the hook of the film, to see how and why Katie has changed, and it’s pretty gripping. Like a gritty police thriller snuck its way into this supernatural Mummy horror movie, yet it doesn’t feel out of place. 

            While I did have a good time at this movie, it’s not a perfect film, and I would like to address some criticisms I have. The movie is 2 hours and 14 minutes long, and granted, I didn’t feel the runtime; it could have been trimmed down to like an hour and 40-something minute film, as it does start to get repetitive. I can’t say it got bad, and I was never bored during the movie, but it hits a lot of the same beats as other horror films I’ve seen before, and doesn’t really add much new to them outside of everything revolving around a mummified possessed girl. 

            Lee Cronin’s The Mummy is definitely far from being one of the all-time greatest Mummies and likely won’t be as remembered as the Boris Karloff Universal classic or the 1999 Brendan Fraser version, but it’s a decent and ambitious take on the monster that takes it back to its horror roots with a creepy and bloody Mummy flick with a “Stranger Danger” message woven in. It may not be a glorious “Tomb”, but if you’re the least bit curious about it, I’d say it’s worth a voyage through. 

Sakura Con 2026 Recap