If You Like Documentaries...Here Are Some Interesting Ones You Might Not Know About!

[I review the documentaries "Inside the Mind of a Dog," "The Disappearance of Shere Hite," "An Update on our Family," "Fanatical: The Catfishing of Tegan and Sara," and "Scamanda"]

Inside the Mind of a Dog (2024)

Do you ever wonder what your dog is thinking?  Well, wonder no more!

Directed by Andy Mitchell and narrated by Rob Lowe, this documentary explores the strong bond that exists between people and their dogs as well as sharing new research into the dog mind. 

Did you know that dogs use their barks and tail wags and 16 facial expressions to show us how they feel?  Did you know that dogs can also show signs of ADHD? It's all here and more.

But it's not all science. The film also explores the history of dog and human companionship and how they evolved from wolves to our pampered pets. There is also a strong emphasis on how service dogs are trained as well as practical tips for dog owners.

Though very informative, this is also a heartwarming adventure into the minds of our furry friends.  It might even make you cry a little.

Rosy the Reviewer says...one of the "most liked" films on Netflix, if you are a dog lover, you will also give it a thumbs...er...paws up, too! (Netflix)

 

The Disappearance of Shere Hite (2023)

Shere Hite's bestselling book about female sexuality rocked the American establishment.  It also eventually rocked her world, but not in a good way.

If you were a young person or adult in 1976, you have probably heard of "The Hite Report," a book that revealed the results of a survey of thousands of women about their sexuality. Her book was as talked about as the findings by Kinsey and Masters and Johnson, but today, ask a young woman about this book.  She has probably never heard of it. My local library doesn't even have the book today, and yet, it was (and still is) the 30th best-selling book of all time.  While you are at it, you might also ask that young woman if she is a feminist.  She might wrinkle her nose.

But in the 70's, feminism was in full bloom and this book reflected the frustrations of women and blew the lid off the patriarchy. Likewise, Shere Hite was not afraid to go on talk shows and talk about her books, and it made people, well, men, very uncomfortable. She revealed that few women felt satisfied sexually by their partners, and in a later book, revealed the rampant infidelity that existed amongst married couples.  And it didn't help that Hite didn't take any crap from anyone.  She was a beautiful woman who belied her looks by speaking of sex and the needs of women in a very matter of fact way.  She could also be feisty and even angry.  And you know how men react to angry women. She faced tremendous backlash and misogyny.

Through archival footage and talking head interviews, we learn about Hite's life and work from those who knew her.  There is also narration from those her work helped which makes the backlash she endured and her fall into obscurity all the more troubling. 

This documentary reminded me of my own journey to feminism and how that word has become a dirty word, even to other women.  So the title of this documentary is literal - Hite was basically canceled and run out of the country. Her books were controversial and she herself was so controversial, she eventually couldn't get an American publisher so she moved to Europe and eventually renounced her U.S. citizenship in 1995. But the film's title is also a metaphor for what appears to be the disappearance of feminism as well.

Directed by Nicole Newnham with Dakota Johnson providing the "voice" of Shere Hite (Johnson is also one of the producers), this is a very timely documentary and an indictment of repression as so many are losing their reproductive rights and the LGBTQ+ community is under attack. We have gone back in time...and not in a good way.

Rosy the Reviewer says...a fascinating portrait of a trailblazing woman brought to life for a new generation. (Netflix)

An Update on Our Family (2024)

The dark side of sharing everything about your life on YouTube.

This three-part docuseries tells the story of Myka and James Stauffer, family vloggers who shared everything about their lives on their YouTube channel.  They shared their personal lives, their kids, everything.

The Stauffers were a beautiful family. All went well for them as they gained a significant following, especially during the pandemic.  At one point, they had over a million subscribers. They posted constantly, show their happy day-to-day lives. They were adept at branding and turning their everyday lives into compelling content. Then they adopted a little boy from China and named him Huxley, again documenting every step of the adoption. They became even more popular, attracting a wide range of sponsors (AKA making money).  But when Huxley was diagnosed with autism and ADHD, the "beautiful family" persona fell apart as Myka and James struggled to deal with Huxley's special needs. 

One day Huxley just didn't exist on the vlog anymore. Huxley went missing and online speculation was rampant. And when the Stauffer's fans discovered that Huxley had been "rehoused," their fans turned on them, accusing them of opportunism and neglect. 

This docuseries is more than an expose of this family and their vlog.  It raises some bigger questions: why do people tune in to watch other people's lives and get so caught up in them and then get so upset when they don't live up to their expectations?  What are the ramifications of international adoption?  Are people who document their families online exploiting their children?

Rosy the Reviewer says...directed by Rachel Mason, this is a fascinating look at "mommy vlogging," the risks of "putting it all out there" and the ethical concerns surrounding digital family content (HBO and Max).

 

Fanatical: The Catfishing of Tegan and Sara (2024)

The dark side of fandom.

For you who are part of the "Older Set," you may not know who Tegan and Sara are.   I certainly didn't. They are a Canadian queer indie pop duo formed in 1998, and Tegan and Sara Quin are identical twins born in 1980.  They are both songwriters and musicians.  They have released 10 albums and won a Grammy in 2012 for their video album "Get Along." 

So since I am one of those in the "Older set" and didn't know who Tegan and Sara were, why was I interested in this docuseries?

Well, it had me at "catfishing."  I am totally obsessed with the concept.  It all started with "Catfish," the 2010 documentary where Nev Schulman confessed his experience being "catfished (he actually coined the term)" and he subsequently got an MTV series out of it where he now helps other people figure out whether or not they are being "catfished." The rest is "catfish" history.

So anyway, in the mid-2000s, fans of Tegan and Sara began receiving messages and emails from the Tegan half of the twin duo. Now most people these days would dismiss an email from a celebrity (the whole current Brad Pitt thing notwithstanding), but here we are talking about the 2000's when there were still novice Internet users out there and catfishing was not yet a huge thing.  And Tegan and Sara were very much online, posting often on Facebook, message boards and on their official website. So at that time, maybe it didn't seem beyond the realm of possibility that Tegan would respond to what was said and form friendships with fans. But it turns out, the messages were not from Tegan.  Instead, it was someone pretending to be her who exploited Tegan and Sara's fans for 16 years.  That person became known as Fake Tegan or Fegan.

This documentary follows fans who had been victims and who share their stories. 

Julie was one fan who began listening to the band in college.  She had recently realized she was gay and was struggling with it.  Tegan and Sara's music was a lifeline.  When another fan sent her a link  to a Facebook profile that appeared to be Tegan, Julie sent her a message and was shocked, but happy, that Tegan replied.  Soon they had a friendship.  Three years later, Julie discovered she had been catfished. Another fan actually had a real relationship with the real Tegan but was pulled into the fake Tegan's world, ruining the relationship. 

When the hoax was discovered, the reach of Fake Tegan became clear. He or she had access to much of Tegan and Sara's personal lives. Tegan and Sara started to wonder if the hacker was someone close to them.  They became suspicious of everyone.

Tegan kept Fake Tegan under wraps for 16 years because she was embarrassed and didn't want to come forward but eventually did.  Directed by Erin Lee Carr, this is a compelling examination of fan obsession and celebrities having to deal with Stans - a term coined to describe stalker-fans.  

But this series is not just about celebrity scams. This documentary is a warning to us all. This is a cautionary tale about the scams, frauds and fakes lurking on the Internet, the "keyboard kourage" that allows anonymous people to pretend to be someone they are not while scamming their victims out of money, or at the very least, their dignity. It's a reminder that no one is immune from scammers so be careful out there.

Rosy the Reviewer says...even if you don't know this band, if, like me, you are fascinated by the world of catfishing, you will enjoy this.  (Hulu)

Scamanda (2025)

Catfishing is not the only scam rampant on the Internet.   There is also "Munchausen by Internet."  Don't know about that?  Then, read on.

There was this girl.  She started out as a babysitter for a married couple with a little girl but then the married couple divorced and the babysitter married the husband.  She not only married the husband but got full custody of the little girl. She joined a megachurch and was beloved by all.  And then she got cancer.

Meet Amanda C. Riley.

Amanda C. Riley was a devout Christian, an active church member, and a mother of two healthy children living in San Jose, California.  In 2012 she shared her cancer diagnosis with her church and started a blog depicting her journey called "Lymphoma Can Suck It." Her looks and personality were such that her blog and Internet presence attracted supporters, sponsors and fundraisers from all over the world who wanted to help this pretty young woman who was so positive and inspirational as she fought cancer.

But over time, some things didn't add up.

Friends wondered how she could go swimming right after brain surgery. How was it that her pregnancies seemed to be unaffected by her cancer?

Meet Nancy Moscatiello, an investigative producer.  She received an anonymous tip about Amanda which put Nancy on a five-year-long investigation which led to a podcast by Charlie Webster about what was believed to be Amanda's "Factitious disorder" aka "Munchausen. And when it is played out on the Internet it's called "Munchausen by Internet."

Through reenactments, photos, screenshots and interviews from former friends of Amanda's ("former" because they were also scammed), this four-part ABC series now streaming on Hulu reveals Amanda's scam and offers insight from a neuropsychologist into the mind of a scammer and the psychology behind choosing a cancer diagnosis as a narrative. 

But questions still remain after watching this series.  Why? What was her background and what led Amanda to do this and even when caught, to continue the fraud?  We may never know.

Rosy the Reviewer says...a sad commentary on how easily in our society we can be manipulated and feel immediately sympathetic when the manipulator is an attractive, vivacious and privileged young woman. (Hulu) 

See You Next Time!

If you enjoyed this post, feel free to like it and share it on Facebook, X, or other sites; email it to your friends and/or follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/rosythereviewer where I share short reviews about TV shows I am watching, books I am reading and all sorts of other fun stuff that doesn't appear here!

And next time you are wondering whether or not to watch a particular film, check out my reviews on IMDB (The International Movie Database). Go to IMDB.com, find the movie you are interested in.  Scroll over to the right of the synopsis to where it says "Critics Reviews" - Click on that and if I have reviewed that film, you will find Rosy the Reviewer alphabetically on the list (NOTE:  IMDB keeps moving stuff around so if you don't find "Critics Reviews" where I am sending you, look around.  It's worth it)!

What I Watched in January - Movie Picks and Pans!

[I review the Oscar-nominated movies "Wicked," and "Anora," as well as Clint Eastwood's latest movie "Juror #2," and "The Critic" starring Ian McKellen]

Wicked (2024)

Here is the backstory on why the Wicked Witch of the West from "The Wizard of Oz," became "wicked."

[Note:  If you are a big fan of this movie, then probably best if you cover your eyes now and scroll down to read the rest of my trenchant reviews, because I was not a fan of this film.]

Let me say at the outset that I started watching this film with a rather jaundiced view.  

First of all, this is not one of my favorite musicals.  I am more of a classic musical girl - "West Side Story," "Singin' in the Rain," "My Fair Lady," you know, those oldies but goodies.  Though I have been known to love some newer ones like "The Book of Mormon." 

But secondly, and more importantly, I am not a fan of these Part 1 and Part 2, etc. movies, a pattern which seems to be happening more and more ("Dune" and "Mission Impossible," do you hear me?), and it is especially a problem in this case, when Part I is just the first act of the play and that one act is almost THREE HOURS LONG!  That's longer than sitting in a theatre for the entire play which runs for less than three hours and with a 15 minute intermission!  If the movie industry is worried about getting people into the theatres, then it needs to stop trying to wring as much money out of us by making us not only wait for Part II of movies, but making us pay twice to see the entire story. 

And if you want to see Part II of "Wicked," you will have to wait until November! 

I started this blog over ten years ago and for all of that time I went to the theatre every Friday.  But now I have a 75" TV at home, I can rent movies soon after their release for what it would cost me and my significant other to go to the theatre, and I don't have to put up with people talking behind me and crinkling their candy wrappers in the theatre, so why wouldn't I stay home with a glass of wine to keep me company? Wine doesn't talk or crinkle. The movie industry needs to figure out how to get this movie fan out of the house and back into the theatre, and making overlong movies, where I have to wait a year to see Part II, is not the way to do it.

But that said, I like director, Jon M. Chu, I liked his "Crazy Rich Asians" and his memoir, "Viewfinder," so I decided to give this the benefit of the doubt.

The film (screenplay by Winnie Holzman and Dana Fox) begins with Glinda the Good (Ariana Grande) in Munchkinland celebrating the death of the Wicked Witch of the West.  A child asks Glinda why wickedness happens and she tells the story of Elphaba Thropp (Cynthia Erivo), who sadly, was born with green skin and rejected by her parents.  She was also ostracized because of that, and also, because she just happened to have uncontrollable magical abilities. Turns out Glinda and Elphaba had known each other.

They met when Glinda was actually Galinda and Elphaba had accompanied her younger sister, Nessarose (Marissa Bode), to Shiz University.  Nessarose was wheelchair bound and Elphaba was helping her get situated.  While there, Elphaba had an unintentional release of her powers, and it was witnessed by Madame Morrible (Michelle Yeoh), the Dean of Sorcery Studies.  Intrigued, Madame Morrible offered to enroll Elphaba and tutor her privately.  Elphaba accepted in the hopes that she would meet the Wizard of Oz and he would "de-greenafy" her.  Turns out, Elphaba's roommate was the bubbly Galinda and let's just say they didin't get along.  In fact, Galinda was kind of a mean girl and her friends were not very nice to Elphaba either.

Shiz University was not your everyday college.  It employed talking animals as teachers but when Elphaba arrived, the animal teachers were facing discrimination, especially the popular Dr. Dillamond, a talking Goat (voice of Peter Dinklage).  Elphaba tells him that the Wizard can help. But things get worse for the animals.

But happily, Elphaba receives an invitation to meet the Wizard who has heard of her powers.  By this time, Galinda has changed her name to Glinda and she and Elphaba have become friends. She accompanies Elphaba to meet the Wizard (Jeff Goldblum) where things don't go as planned. Elphaba leaves Shiz University on a broomstick singing the classic "Defying Gravity."  Also, many song and dance numbers took place before that.  Because, hey, it's a musical!  

And that's the end of Part I. Actually, the end of ACT I.  Three hours for just Act I of the play, a play where you can watch it in its entirety in less than three hours! 

Okay, so I gave it the benefit of the doubt and...sorry, for me, the movie was a snooze fest.  When you take a three hour story and turn it into a six hour story, there is bound to be a LOT of down time.  I confess that I had to fast-forward through some of it (yet another reason to watch at home)!

But I want to stay positive, so here is what I liked:

• Though I expected that Cynthia Arivo would be good in this because she is a theatre kid and a great singer, Ariana Grande was a revelation.  Who knew she could sing like an operatic soprano? And she can act too. She was my favorite thing about the film.

• The set design and cinematography were first rate, and the film has an epic feel. It's beautiful to look at.

What I didn't like:

• As I said, this is not one of my favorite musicals.  I can sing at least 3-5 songs from the classic musicals like "South Pacific," "Oklahoma" and "West Side Story."  I challenge you to sing even one other song from this musical besides "Popular" and "Defying Gravity." If you don't leave the theatre humming the tunes, what's the point of seeing a musical?

• I won't rant about the Part I and Part II thing again, because you already know.

• And for some reason, I don't like Michelle Yeoh.

But it looks like I am alone in my disappointment, though I do have friends who are fans of the musical play, who said they didn't recognize much of what was going on in this Part I. Duh...no offense to my friends, but that's what happens when you turn a two-and-a-half hour play into a six hour movie in two parts.  There has to be a LOT of padding.

However, the movie was named one of the best films of 2024 by the American Film Institute and won best film at the National Board of Review. It has ten Academy Award nominations (including Best Picture, Best Actress for Erivo and Best Supporting Actress for Grande) and a record-tying five nominations at the 31st Screen Actors Guild Awards. It also won Cinematic and Box Office Achievement at the 82nd Golden Globe Awards. It has grossed $718 million worldwide on a $150 million budget, becoming the highest-grossing musical film adaptation of all time, and the fifth-highest grossing film of 2024.

So, okay, I am in the minority about this film. 

Will I watch Part II?  I probably will because hardly anything happened in Part I, but I will watch at home where a glass of wine will help numb my jaundiced view and disappointment.

Rosy the Reviewer says...despite the accolades, I can't recommend this. It was not "popular" with me.   (for rent on Amazon Prime).

Anora (2024)

A young sex worker impulsively marries the son of a rich Russian oligarch.  Needless to say, his family is not happy and sends their henchmen to get it annulled. Crazy stuff ensues.

Anora "Ani" Mikheeva (Mikey Madison) is a 23-year-old stripper living in Brighton Beach, a part of Brooklyn with many Russian residents. She is a sweet girl who lives one life at home and one life at the clubs, but she is also a "boss girl."  Don't mess with her.  She speaks Russian, and because of that, her boss introduces her to Ivan "Vanya" Zakharov (Mark Eydelshteyn), the 21-year-old son of a wealthy Russian oligarch, Nikolai Zakharov (Aleksey Serebryakov). Vanya is supposedly in the United States to study, but prefers to party and play video games in his family's mansion.

Vanya hires Ani for $15,000 to stay with him for a week. Vanya asks Ani to marry him so that he can obtain a green card instead of returning to Russia to work for his father. Although Ani is skeptical, Vanya insists his love is genuine, and they elope to Vegas. Ani quits her job and moves in with Vanya, but when Vanya's parents find out about the wedding, Vanya's mother, Galina (Darya Ekamasova), orders Vanya's Armenian godfather, Toros (Karren Karagulian), to find the couple and arrange an annulment while she and her husband fly to the US.

Toros sends his henchmen, Garnik (Vache Tovmasyan) and Igor (Yura Borisov, who has an Oscar nod for this role), to the house. When they inform Vanya that his parents are planning to take him back to Russia, he promptly does a runner, leaving Ani behind. But Ani is no shrinking violet. When they call her a prostitute, she attacks them, throws things and rages around the house until they have to tie her up.  She finally agrees to help them find Vanya when Toros offers her $15,000.  The rest of the film is a crazy night of driving around New York looking for Vanya and a plane ride to Vegas with Vanya's parents to get the marriage annulled. It ends with a poignant moment where we understand that perhaps Anora isn't such a "boss girl" after all.

Written and directed by Sean Baker and billed as a comedy/drama, this film is more drama than comedy but some of the characters and situations are indeed comical such as older Russian hard men trying to navigate the Gen Z world. It's a little bit "Pretty Woman," a little bit comedy of errors with a Woody Allen feel, and, if you remember that movie, a sort of Russian version of "Adventures in Babysitting," but with lots of sex and nudity. The film has six Oscar nominations including Best Picture, Best Director and a well-deserved Best Actress nomination for Madison. This film is a riveting and wild ride with an amazing performance by Madison and it deserves to be seen.

Rosy the Reviewer says...you won't be able to take your eyes off of this film and the amazing Mikey Madison, who deserves her Best Actress Oscar nomination. (In theatres and for rent on Amazon Prime and Apple+)

Juror #2 (2024)

What do you do if you are serving on a jury and realize you have information that could save the defendant but it would implicate you?

Clint Eastwood may be 94 but that is not stopping him from continuing to make really good movies. His latest directorial effort has produced the same level of excellence we have come to expect from the director of "Mystic River," "Unforgiven," "Million Dollar Baby" and so many more. What keeps him going?  He has stated that "I don't let the old man in."

Journalist and recovering alcoholic, Justin Kemp (Nicholas Hoult), is called for jury duty in Savannah, Georgia.  It's a high-profile murder case. A year prior, a young woman named Kendall Carter (Francesca Eastwood who just so happens to be Clint's daughter) was found dead under a bridge.  Because witnesses saw her having a fight with her boyfriend, James Sythe (Gabriel Basso), at a local bar, he was arrested, charged with murder and is the defendant. 

There is evidence against Sythe.  Witnesses say he was drunk and disorderly on the night of Carter's murder and that he followed her when she left the bar.  Additionally, the coroner testified that her injuries were consistent with the blunt force of being thrown off a bridge and an eyewitness claimed to have seen Sythe near the bridge.

So sitting in the courtroom, Justin hears all of this and recalls that night.  He was in the same bar as Carter and Sythe, trying not to relapse.  When he left the bar, he hit something with his car.  Thinking it was a deer and unable to find it, he went home.

OMG...what if he had hit Carter and Sythe is innocent? But if he comes forward, would anyone believe he wasn't drunk when he hit Carter?  He has had prior DUIs.  And the prosecutor, Faith Killebrew (Toni Collette), is hell bent on getting a conviction because she is running for reelection and has said she will try this case as many times as needed to get a conviction, so forcing a mistrial will not save Sythe.

What should he do? What will he do?

Holt is wonderful as he struggles with Justin's dilemma and the supporting players that include J.K. Simmons, Zoey Deutch and Kiefer Sutherland, are also all first-rate.  And this is a first-rate film.

With great acting, a compelling screenplay by Jonathan A. Abrams and the expert direction we have come to expect from Eastwood, this courtroom drama is like a John Grisham novel come to life with many twists and turns as Justin wrestles with his conscience. 

Rosy the Reviewer says...a fast-moving courtroom drama that will have you on the edge of your seat and one of the best films of the year that was, sadly, snubbed by the Oscars. (streaming on Max). 

The Critic (2023) 

A powerful but aging London theatre critic is fired and creates a web of deceit, blackmail and eventually murder to get his job back.

It's 1934 London and Jimmy Erskine (Ian McKellan) is the film critic for the Daily Chronicle.  Jimmy is not a very nice man. He is haughty and arrogant and delights in writing bad reviews when a play or actor doesn't live up to his standards.  No one is safe. But Viscount David Brooke (Mark Strong) has inherited the paper after the death of his father, and he does not delight in Erskine's vitriolic reviews and asks him to tone it down. But when Erskine and his secretary lover, Tom Turner (Alfred Enoch) are arrested for homosexuality (yes, it was against the law in England), Brooke has an excuse to fire him.  But Erskine will not go quietly.

When Erskine discovers that Brooke is a secret admirer of Nina Land (Gemma Arterton), an actress that Erskine has repeatedly dismissed and brutally reviewed, Erskine convinces her to seduce Brooke so that he can blackmail him into giving him his job back.  In return, he promises to give her glowing reviews.

But as these things go, nothing goes to plan and it all goes very dark and then even darker.

Based on the book "Curtain Call" by Anthony Quinn (adapted by Patrick Marber) and directed by Anand Tucker, this is not a very complimentary portrait of a critic (some of us aren't so bad), but it's a compelling drama, though dark, with a wonderful ensemble cast, including Leslie Manville as Nina's mother, who doesn't have much to do here but I always enjoy her work.  

But this is all about McKellan doing his thing and showing why his acting career has lasted for sixty years.  He is wonderful but one expects that.  It's nice that he gained fame for his role in "The Lord of the Rings," but he was an acclaimed actor for forty years before that.  He has been nominated for two Academy Awards; he has won a Tony Award, seven Laurence Olivier Awards, a Golden Globe, four BAFTAs, and five Emmys. 

Rosy the Reviewer says...I would watch McKellan recite the alphabet.  He is one of our greats (for rent on Amazon Prime).

See You Next Time!

If you enjoyed this post, feel free to like it and share it on Facebook, X, or other sites; email it to your friends and/or follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/rosythereviewer where I share short reviews about TV shows I am watching, books I am reading and all sorts of other fun stuff that doesn't appear here!

And next time you are wondering whether or not to watch a particular film, check out my reviews on IMDB (The International Movie Database). Go to IMDB.com, find the movie you are interested in.  Scroll over to the right of the synopsis to where it says "Critics Reviews" - Click on that and if I have reviewed that film, you will find Rosy the Reviewer alphabetically on the list (NOTE:  IMDB keeps moving stuff around so if you don't find "Critics Reviews" where I am sending you, look around.  It's worth it)!

Some Award-Nominated and Award-Winning Movies You Might Not Know About: "Heretic," "A Different Man," "Maria" and "Lee"

[I review the movies "Heretic," "A Different Man," "Maria" and "Lee," all award-nominated and/or award-winning films.  Did they deserve recognition? Are more awards on the way? We shall see. Read on.]

Heretic (2024)

Two young female Mormon missionaries knock on the wrong door!

Sister Barnes (Sophie Thatcher) and Sister Paxton (Chloe East) are on a mission, literally.  They are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints aka Mormons, and they are going door to door as one does when one is a Mormon missionary.  They just happen to knock on the door of Mr. Reed (Hugh Grant). 

Now our first clue that this is a horror film is the fact that Mr. Reed's house is in a very remote, dark area. When the young women arrive, Mr. Reed appears to be alone when he answers the door and invites them in.  But they tell him they are not allowed to be alone with a man, but he assures them that his wife is preparing a blueberry pie in the back of the house. And in fact, Sister Barnes and Sister Paxton smell blueberries, so all must be well.  And m-m-m-m, blueberry pie. They begin to discuss their religion with Mr. Reed, but it isn't long before Mr. Reed makes several uncomfortable comments about their Mormon faith and the nature of belief. And when he steps out of the room, Sister Barnes realizes that the smell of blueberry pie is from a candle, the front door is locked, and they have no phone signal.

Uh-oh.  Let the horror story play out. Girls, LEAVE NOW...er, if you can!

After haranguing the young women with his disappointment with religion, Reed initiates a "The Lady or the Tiger" type game.  He gives them a choice of two doors to go through to get out of the house. Door #1 if they still believe in God; Door #2 if they no longer believe.  They enter the "Belief" door but discover that both doors lead to the same dungeon.

Wait.  It gets worse. It's what's down there.

Written and directed by Scott Beck and Bryan Woods, this is a tense cat and mouse game with great dialogue, atmospheric cinematography and a message: why do we believe what we believe?  But despite a deeper message, this is still a classic horror film that will not only keep you on the edge of your seat but mess with your mind - and it's fun to see Grant chewing the scenery as a bad guy after years as a romantic lead and humorous curmudgeon. He is particularly creepy here, but in a very entertaining way. And the young actresses give him a run for his money.

Awards: 23 nominations, most for Grant's performance, notably a Golden Globe and a Critics' Choice nomination for Best Actor (Critics' Choice Awards to be decided January 12th).  

Will this get an Oscar nod?  I think Grant might, but even though the film is good and entertaining (I liked it), I don't think the movie will. The Academy doesn't usually reward horror films.

Rosy the Reviewer says...if you are a horror fan and especially a Hugh Grant fan, you will enjoy this.  (For rent on Amazon Prime and Apple+)

A Different Man (2024)

An aspiring actor has a medical procedure to alter his disfigured face, but his suddenly handsome face turns his life into an ugly nightmare. 

Edward Lemuel (Sebastian Stan) is a struggling actor with neurofibromatosis that manifests as a disfiguring facial condition. That's not an easy issue to deal with if you are an actor and Edward has been relegated to corporate films highlighting how important it is to be sensitive to those with disabilities. He is a lonely guy who is not very outgoing and tries to hide his face.  However, he is happy when Ingrid (Renate Reinsve), an aspiring playwright, moves in next door. They become friends and Edward has romantic feelings toward her but is too afraid to act on them. 

Then, Edward is given the opportunity for an experimental medical treatment and he takes it, and wouldn't you know? It actually cures him and suddenly he is handsome. And he doesn't want to be Edward anymore - that ugly guy - so he assumes the identity of "Guy Moratz" and wants to leave Edward behind.  He claims that Edward has killed himself and in a way, I guess he has (I have to say that this movie reminded me of a guy version of "The Substance").

Time passes and we learn that Guy/Edward is now a wealthy and successful real estate agent and all is going well until one day, he discovers that Ingrid has written and is producing an off-Broadway play called "Edward," and guess whose life it is based on? Edward auditions for the part and gets it and it doesn't hurt that he has a mask of his old face.  He and Ingrid begin a sexual relationship, though Ingrid remains unaware of the truth of his identity. 

Then enter Oswald (Adam Pearson), stage left. Oswald also suffers from neurofibromatosis, and because of that, has taken an interest in the play.  Unlike Edward, however, who was reclusive and shy when he was suffering neurofibromatosis, Oswald is confident and charismatic and becomes the life of the party, befriending the cast and crew, much to Edward's chagrin.

Suddenly Ingrid and Oswald are close and it's downhill from there for Edward. And it's a nightmare. However, the film ends with a wonderfully funny and ironic line, so watch for it.

So is this a comedy?  

Barely and if so, a very dark one.  Written and directed by Aaron Schimberg, the whole movie plays like a B-movie version of "Frankenstein," except in reverse.  There is an ominous noir soundtrack, a "mad doctor," and then his creation, a new Edward, except this time the creation goes from ugly to handsome. However, we are reminded that changing our appearance does not necessarily change our personalities or make our lives better. We can't change who we are on the inside just by changing ourselves on the outside. 

You might not be familiar with Sebastian Stan and that could be because he is a man of many faces. He has been Tommy Lee in the TV mini-series "Pam and Tommy (2022)," Vlad Tenev, the Bulgarian-American entrepreneur, in "Dumb Money (2023)," and Donald Trump in "The Apprentice (2024)," to name a few of his roles.  And now he literally plays a man with two faces, that lead him down a nightmarish path.

Awards: The movie has 38 nominations and seven wins, most notably a 2025 Golden Globe win for Stan for Best Performance by a Male Actor in a Motion Picture, Musical or Comedy and a Best Leading Performance award at the 2024 Berlin Film Festival. 

It will be interesting to see if Stan gets an Oscar nomination.  I predict he will.  Not sure about the movie, though this is the kind of film the Academy likes but not sure if it had a wide enough release.

Rosy the Reviewer says...though Stan's performance is amazing, this is a very strange film that has some very uncomfortable moments.  It's not for everyone. (For rent on Amazon Prime and Apple+)

Maria (2024)

The last days of opera star Maria Callas.

The movie begins with a nice bit of introduction and exposition about La Callas.  But then it's 1977 and Callas (Angelina Jolie) has died and the film cuts back to her last seven days.  

It's the end of her life, and Maria Callas is living a reclusive life in Paris with her two minders, Ferruccio (Pierfrancesco Favino) and Bruna (Alba Rohrwacher).  Her voice is not what it once was and she reflects on her life. She is also taking Mandrax, a strong sedative that was popular in Europe and Ferruccio is concerned.  She tells Ferruccio she is going on a walk and he says he doesn't like her going out alone.  She says she has her Mandrax.  He replies that is not a good companion.  And then the film takes a very strange turn.  She also tells Ferruccio she is going to be filmed and when the film director arrives he says his name is...wait for it...Mandrax (Kodi Smit-McPhee). They go for walks. Maria and Mandrax. That's when I started going "Huh?"

Written by Stephen Knight and directed by Pablo Larrain (he also did "Jackie," and "Spencer," so he likes to do biopics about iconic women), we follow Callas around for seven days and in a series of flashbacks and actual footage of Callas, we are reminded of her life, career, and her longtime affair with Aristotle Onassis before he married Jackie Kennedy. This is not a straight-forward biopic.  It jumps around and you finally get the idea that much of what we are seeing is all in Callas' imagination. She is wandering around Paris on drugs living in the past.

This film succeeds or not on Jolie's performance because she is in every frame.  She even supposedly did her own singing, spending months learning to sing opera.  Of course, it's not just her singing.  Callas's voice is also there but the thought was that Jolie actually singing would look more realistic than if she did lip syncing. And it looks and sounds fine but here is my problem with Jolie.

For me, Angelina Jolie is a very cold actress.  Some actresses have a warmth that comes out of the screen.  She does not.  However, Callas was not exactly warm and fuzzy, so I guess Jolie's presence works here as Callas, but I had a very hard time feeling much empathy, even though I am an opera fan.

Awards: 22 nominations and four wins: Jolie won the Gotham Award for Best Actress as well as Best Actress awards at the Palm Springs International Film Festival and from the Las Vegas Film Critics Society.  She was nominated for a Golden Globe but did not win and is up for a Best Actress award at the Critics Choice Awards to be broadcast January 12.  The movie itself was nominated for Best Film at the Venice Film Festival, but again did not win.

Should Jolie get a Best Actress Oscar nod?  In my opinion, no.  And it's a huge no for Best Picture.

Rosy the Reviewer says...huge fan of opera, huge fan of Callas, not a fan of this movie.  I don't think you will like it either, even if you love opera and Callas. (Netflix)

Lee (2023)

Biopic about Lee Miller, an ex-fashion model and photographer who became an acclaimed war correspondent for Vogue Magazine during WWII.

No one today probably knows who Lee Miller was but it's clear that Kate Winslet wants you to know, and Miller, indeed, had a compelling story and interesting life.

It's 1977, and Lee Miller (Winslet) tells her story to an anonymous interviewer, and through a series of flashbacks we see her life unfold.

Lee was a model in New York City as well as an aspiring photographer. She also was the muse for artist Man Ray, though the film doesn't go into that relationship much. In flashback, as Miller tells her story to her interviewer, she begins in 1937 when she was living a bohemian lifestyle in Europe (and yes, Kate takes her top off as she seems to do in most movies) as a bon vivant.  She meets and falls in love with Roland Penrose (Alexander Skarsgard). The two move to London where Lee becomes a photographer for Vogue and photographs Londoners as they cope with The Blitz during WWII. She wants to go over to mainland Europe to photograph what is really happening with the war, but the UK restricts women from serving near combat.  However, when the U.S. enters the war, she is able to get overseas where the action is alongside photojournalist David Scherman (Andy Samberg, yes, that Andy Samberg).

During the Liberation of Paris, she was able to photograph the public shaming of Parisian women who were accused of collaborating with the Nazis, but it was her photos of the atrocities committed at Buchenwald and Dachau that put her on the map as a serious war journalist, though many of her photographs were never published because they were considered too "upsetting."

After her stint overseas, Lee suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and alcoholism and it wasn't until after her death that she attained the respect she deserved.

Kate Winslet is always good, and here she puts in a tour de force performance as the young-ish Lee all the way to the old Lee.  Winslet was also one of the producers and it is apparent that this was very much a labor of love for her. But here's the surprise.  Andy Samberg also stars...in a dramatic role!  I didn't recognize him at first but there he was and he was very believable.

Awards: Nine nominations (Winslet nominated for a Golden Globe for Best Actress) and one win (Women in Film Crystal Award).

Though Winslet deserves an Oscar nod, I am thinking this film written by Liz Hannah, Marion Hume, and John Collee and directed by Ellen Kuras was not widely seen so she could be overlooked, likewise the film.

Rosy the Reviewer says...Winslet puts in a wonderful performance highlighting the life of a woman who deserves to be remembered (you should know about this woman). The ending is particularly poignant when it was revealed who her interviewer was.  I cried. (Hulu and for rent on Apple+)

See You Next Time!

If you enjoyed this post, feel free to like it and share it on Facebook, X, or other sites; email it to your friends and/or follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/rosythereviewer where I share short reviews about TV shows I am watching, books I am reading and all sorts of other fun stuff that doesn't appear here!

And next time you are wondering whether or not to watch a particular film, check out my reviews on IMDB (The International Movie Database). Go to IMDB.com, find the movie you are interested in.  Scroll over to the right of the synopsis to where it says "Critics Reviews" - Click on that and if I have reviewed that film, you will find Rosy the Reviewer alphabetically on the list (NOTE:  IMDB keeps moving stuff around so if you don't find "Critics Reviews" where I am sending you, look around.  It's worth it)!