Author: Josiah Teal

Coming off last year’s blockbuster and Oscar wins with Wicked, Wicked: For Good faces the difficult task of creating an equally compelling part 1. Luckily, the source material already features a moment for intermission. Adapted from Schwartz and Holzman’s stage musical of the same name, Wicked: For Good promises all the splendor of Broadway on the silver screen. But more than splendor, Wicked: For Good promises not only a gripping conclusion to Elphaba and Galinda’s story, but also Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande’s time as the wonderful witches of Oz.

Wicked: For Good picks up shortly after the epic “Defying Gravity” moment at the climax of part 1. Galinda is a willing figurehead for The Wizard (Jeff Goldblum) and Madame Morrible (Michelle Yeoh). Elphaba is on the run and attempting to expose The Wizard for his lies. And all of Oz is in uproar over “the Wicked Witch.” Elphaba’s only solace comes through trying to free the enslaved animals, forced to construct The Wizard’s yellow brick road. Yet separated from each other, Elphaba and Galinda feel the pain of loss and suddenly feel more limited than ever before.

Relationships continue to grow in complexity with Wicked: For Good. As Elphaba and Galinda’s journeys are separate in location, their two paths have never been closer. Each feels the pain of loss, betrayal, and finally friendship, all within the “merry ol’ land of Oz.” Adding to the complexities, Fiyero (Jonathan Bailey) and Galinda are engaged, The Wizard’s deception runs even deeper, and Elphaba embraces her wicked ways. All of this relationship chaos ensues as Dorothy finally begins her trek towards the Emerald City.

Performances in For Good are as stellar as the previous outing. Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande have tremendous chemistry both vocally and creatively. Like Elphiba and Galinda, the two performers work in tandem to create something magical. Erivo and Grande take all of the emotions from the entire odyssey and pour it all into every note, especially on the climactic “For Good.” Jonathan Bailey is charismatic and charming as ever, taking Fiyero from “Dancing Through Life” in part 1 to the man he will become in For Good. Though the rest of the emblem is less present in For Good, Bowen Yang still has a few hilarious lines, and Marissa Bode brings a full range of emotions as Nessa. Goldblum and Yeoh embody their characters with the gravitas of the two legends while maintaining the fun of Wicked.

From a pure songlist comparison, For Good does lack the Spotify takeover factor ever-present in Wicked. The film does not have a clear karaoke favorite like “Dancing Through Life” and “Popular” or a soaring opus like “Defying Gravity.” However, For Good is not without its own musicality and voice. “Wonderful,” let’s Goldblum, Grande, and Erivo channel Old Hollywood in the best way. “As Long As You’re Mine,” let’s Erivo and Bailey further showcase their vocal skills. “No Good Deed” lets Ervio flex her musical prowess. Still, “For Good” remains the emotional core of the film. Eviro and Grande can break even the most hardened heart with “For Good” and deliver the bittersweet anthem theater fans were yearning for.

Wicked had all the vibes of a comfort movie. The college setting, eclectic cast, vibrant characters, and tracks made for a sing-along edition. Just as part 1, For Good keeps the spectacular sets, costuming, and production design, but all built towards creating the comfy, nostalgic, and magical world of Oz.  For Good keeps most of those elements. But For Good loses some of the comfort in the pursuit of a larger epic ending for Elphaba and Galinda. Elphaba and Galinda could not stay at Shiz University forever, and neither could the story. Where audiences may not return to For Good as often as Wicked, it’s because of the foundation built by Wicked that For Good packs the sometimes heartbreaking, sometimes euphoric weight that it does.

Being adapted from such a massive musical as Wicked gives For Good a colossal edge in making a great sequel. Some of the songs move the story less than the previous volume. And some early pacing speed-runs some more prominent emotional beats at the start. Nevertheless, Wicked: For Good, especially in its climax, brings the poignant, uplifting finale befitting characters like Elphaba and Glinda. For Good will do well at the box office and should see a return to the awards stage come Oscar season. Jon M. Chu once again shows his eye for musicality on the big screen. Grande and Erivo will forever have their moment in Oz. But For Good‘s biggest triumph is capturing the wonders of Broadway and combining them with the joys of the silver screen.

Game – The BRWC Review

The debut release from INVADA films, Game is a survival thriller set against the rave scene of the early ’90s. David (Marc Bessant) is an aging drug user who finds himself trapped in the wilderness after a night of wild raving. Suspended upside down in a wrecked car, David must fight for survival against the elements and a raging drug habit. All seems lost until he comes in contact with a poacher (Jason Williams), but just when David thinks he’s found hope, things take a much darker turn.

“Survival Thriller” can often conjure comparisons to short stories like “The Most Dangerous Game” or films like The Grey or The Shallows. While Game pits David against the elements, the survival becomes more about circumstance than braving the wilderness. Flashbacks interweave with David’s plight to showcase the man he was before the accident. The majority of Game is not a constant fight against nature or even a battle against the poacher, but an internal struggle of David’s humanity. Flashing between the blasting beats of the rave scene and the primal struggles of the post-crash, Game builds a character with minimal dialogue and maximum contrasts.

Contrast is key throughout Game. Many of the rave, drug-fueled moments of David’s night before feel akin to the 90s films echoed in the film’s setting. Influences from films like Go and Run Lola Run are as apparent as influences from 127 Hours. Amid the plethora of contrasting influences, Game creates a cohesive narrative that chronicles David’s desperation to live. Using minimal dialogue, the writing team behind Game steers heavily into the “show, don’t tell” mantra of storytelling, and David’s journey is more powerful for it. With a small cast, Bessant and Williams shoulder the weight of the narrative and deliver with nuances befitting the character piece.

David, as a character, is unlikable. Within Game‘s world of 90s club ethos, David comes across someone trying to burn out and fade away in the same breath. Someone who uses others to feed his own demons. The poacher is just as vilified. Yet, unlikable does not mean uninteresting. And Bessant and Williams bring plenty of intrigue to their respective roles. Each brings layers to a performance built on actions, not words. The two performers embody the character with all its flaws and engagement needed to allow Game to dive deep into experimentation, especially in the latter third of the film.

Game, in its essence, is a slow-burn. However, that slow-burn quality allows the performances and character choices to take center stage, all while building to an experimental, avant-garde finale. It’s equal parts strange, psychological, and experimental. Danny Boyle’s influences are vivid, along with some nods to Arrovosky. But the most prominent impact on the film’s experimentation is producer and co-writer Geoff Barrow. Known for his work on films such as Ex Machina and Annihilation, and for co-founding Portishead, Barrow brings a cinema-meets-club energy to the narrative, giving Game a unique space in the Survival genre.

Contrast, commitment, and chaos keep Game engaging even in the slowest moments. Contrasts of influences make Game a tapestry of 90s club fandom and animalistic survival. Bessant’s commitment to hanging upside down for most of the film is impressive, to say the least. But most of all, the chaotic conclusion displays that director John Minton is not just enjoying the indie of Gen X but studying those films as the art they are. Game is an intriguing take on the survival thriller genre and a strong debut for INVADA films. 

A couple comes home from a real estate awards banquet, and a celebration is in the air, but so is murder. Unbeknownst to the couple, a masked killer lurks inside their comfortable home. With little preamble, the killer strikes, slaying them both with a grisly violence. The next day, detectives McCoy (Jonathan Troyer) and Street (Caitlin Drance) hunt for leads as they are left baffled by who would kill such prominent members of the community, let alone stab them 27 times. Exhausting all leads, the detectives must interview the couple’s only son, Eli (Joey Bolt). Son begins immediately as writer, director, and producer, leading audiences into a police procedural with horror-slasher ethos.

Son opens with what feels like the middle of a CSI episode. The film even shares a similar structure to a classic Gil Grissom-era CSI: Vegas episode. However, where Son differs from CSI is not just in characterization but also in how quickly Son hits the ground running. Detectives cycle through a series of interviews, uncovering layers of Eli’s life. Eli’s relationships with friends and family are in turmoil from the recent loss. And Detective Street’s daughter, Sophia (Tamara Villalon), is wrapped up in the homicidal mess because Eli is in her high school friend group. Leads in the case are few and far between, that is, until the killer strikes again.

Transitions throughout Son are jarring to say the least. Just when the story begins to introduce or add layers to a character, the film moves on to the next suspect or moment of dread. The story never lets the character marinate within the narrative, making characters feel unrelatable. Police interviews grow repetitive, as they are the only way Son introduces the core characters. In addition, the police interviews are often brimming with exposition, and more so, exposition stated in the previous scene. Teenage angst and convoluted emotional payoffs plague the non-police storylines of Son.

Low-budget filmmaking can excuse some of Son‘s lowlights. Indie filmmaking is a harsh world, and everything from set design to gore effects can come down to the budget. Yet, with indies, it’s so important to look past the budgetary qualms and focus on the story beneath. It’s what makes films like Velicpastor or ZombieCon so compelling. Son has potential in its story, but so often the commitment to detective storylines detracts from the possibility of campy slasher greatness. Moments with the masked killer could allow Son to be a thrilling low-budget Scream-esque romp. Creating a slasher would encourage audiences to overlook the story’s weaker moments in favor of stylish 1980s-coded kills. The elements are all there to make it a slasher. Some scenes even seem like the film wants to be a slasher. But too often, the dragging police mystery gets in the way.

Championing Son is difficult, even with some solid slasher ideas present. Too often, the lack of character development leads to a lack of tension. The dialogue is on the nose and needs much more nuance. Ideas of libertarianism seem forced, while ideas of bullying are underdeveloped. The work put into making any indie film is something to behold. Reworking Son, within the context of horror —a genre that thrives on campy, low-budget flicks —could merit Tubi Classic. But Son, as it stands, offers potential but needs some restructuring and re-editing to shine.

Adaptation has been a heavy theme within Guillermo del Toro‘s most recent films. Nightmare Alley, based on the novel of the same name; Pinocchio, an Italian classic from the 1880s; and now his boldest adaptation yet, Mary Shelley’s classic “Frankenstein.” Frankenstein is the film del Toro has been building towards throughout his career. From Pan’s Labyrinth to The Shape of Water to Hellboy, del Toro has interwoven bits of Shelley’s masterpiece throughout his work. Taking on a task as daunting as adapting the true literary nature of “Frankenstein” would break many directors. Yet, del Toro has an eye for adaptation and a gothic sensibility that transcends cinema. It’s as if Shelley’s material calls to del Toro, tempting him to explore the idea of Creation and creator through the lens of “The Modern Prometheus.”

The prelude closely follows Shelley’s work. It’s 1857, and a stranded ship finds a half-dead Doctor Victor Frankenstein (Oscar Issac) on the ice near the North Pole. As the crew takes in the dying Victor, a horrible creature (Jacob Elordi) with immense strength attacks the ship, leaving six dead. Recovering from his wounds, Victor laments his tale of sorrow and science to the ship’s Captain (Lar Mikkeleson), but not before begging the Captain to turn him over to the mercy of the monster.

Victor’s story takes him back to childhood, his loving mother, and his cruel father. Training to become a doctor and suffering the death of his mother, Victor becomes obsessed with extending life beyond death—an obsession without limits. After a series of grotesque experiments, the academic world rejects Victor for playing God. However, as Victor’s academic endeavors are at an end, a wealthy benefactor, Henrich Harlander (Christoph Waltz), offers him a proposal and all the funding needed to carry out his unnatural experiments.

What follows in Victor’s tale and the Creature’s tale continues the ethos of the Gothic classic. The film introduces Mia Goth as Elizabeth, Victor’s soon-to-be sister-in-law, expands on Jacob Elordi as the Creature, and gives agency to Harlander’s need for the experiments. The entire cast is committed to the material, especially to del Toro’s literary approach to Frankenstein. Isaac delivers some of the film’s best dramatic monologues, Waltz is charismatic as ever, and Elorid unleashes inner torment yet innocence as The Creature. Goth plays Elizabeth with solemn comfort and subtle grace, making Elizabeth’s care for The Creature feel even more organic to the narrative.

The Creature’s tale makes up most of the last third of the film. Allowing for Jacob Elordi to shine as cinema’s most famous monster. Del Toro alumnus David Bradley brings warmth and wisdom to the Blind Man, as The Creature begins to discover his own humanity. While The Creature’s tale still offers plenty of parallels to Shelley’s text, the first half overshadows the middle with the sheer performances and thrilling scenes of Victor’s quest to conquer death.

But adaptation is the key, and what makes Frankenstein such a unique and successful adaptation is the emphasis on all the literary elements that make Mary Shelley’s classic a classic. Adapted by del Toro himself, the moments where Frankenstein deviates from the novel feel organic to the original text’s core themes, yet at home in del Toro’s version of Victor’s Creation. Del Toro does not shy away from the moral questions of Shelley’s story or the framing of the Creature and Victor’s tale. Performance works in tandem with del Toro’s expertise as the complete cast steers into the bold theatrics of Victor’s persona and the plight of his Creation.  

Guillermo del Toro’s style is perhaps the most prominent selling point of all his films, but even more so with an epic as renowned as Frankenstein. Gray gothic hues permeate each scene. Green gory bodies make up Victor’s lab. The color theory alone is a masterwork of del Toro’s body of work, and it’s on full display throughout every frame of Frankenstein. Expanding on the color, del Toro’s eye for character design and makeup effects continue to thrive from Victor’s experiments to the Creature himself. From the Oscar-worthy makeup to the period-piece set designs, Frankenstein has del Toro’s signature aesthetic in every frame.  

2025’s Frankenstein shares little DNA with the Universal days of Boris Karloff and 1931’s Frankenstein. Many films bearing the name “Frankenstein” use the foundation but shy away from the prestige of the literature. Other adaptations are not inferior by any means, but rather speak to the scope and influence of Shelley’s original horror novel (maybe the original horror novel). However, there is room in the pantheon of cinema for both Boris Karloff and del Toro’s version of finding life after death. For what would del Toro be without the Universal Monsters taking special effects to new heights, and what would those monsters be without del Toro reframing them for a 2025 audience? 2025’s Frankenstein is a celebration of the drama and philosophy of “The Modern Prometheus,” while still retaining the soul of classic Hollywood. Del Toro’s movies have been “event cinema” since his early days, and Frankenstein is no exception, as he blends the classic monster with classic literature in a way no director could.  

The life of a nerd can be difficult. Even in a post-MCU world and the rise of nerd culture, nerdiness still carries its challenges. Yet none of those challenges can compare to the zombie apocalypse breaking out just hours after winning the regional cosplay competition at Anime Con West Coast. With zombies flooding the world, Rocket (Manny Luke) and his best friends must trade their cosplays for katanas as they battle the undead through the streets of LA. ZombieCon Vol. 1 blends horror-comedy and sci-fi action, creating a tapestry of all things nerdy.

Rocket, Javy (Christian Casillas), Clair (Ernie Aine), and Punkie (Punkie Johnson) are the reigning cosplay champs; local heroes of the local comic-con scene. Whether it’s cosplaying as the Guardians of the Galaxy or debating anime, they are here for all things pop culture. After defeating cosplay rival Xander (Carlos Mendez), Rocket and his friends feel unstoppable. Unstoppable, until they find themselves surrounded by hordes of zombies. In the service of truth, justice, and saving Rocket’s mom, the nerds must unite to survive the outbreak.

Rocket and his friends are instantly characters an audience can root for and empathize with. Even though Rocket can be selfish or unlikable, writer and director Kyle Valle does an excellent job conveying empathy for the character. While some characters come across as one-note, the majority of ZombieCon is an ensemble effort. The idea of a group being more powerful than the lone, permeating throughout the film and nerd culture at large. Performances serve the story, allowing nerdom to shine and pop culture references to feel organic rather than name-dropped for nerd cred.

ZombieCon Vol. 1 is an indie film in every way. The love of filmmaking and geek culture radiates through every frame. From One-Piece shirts and Attack on Titan jackets to full-on cosplays from Marvel, Star Wars, and Power Rangers, the film proudly boasts its nerdiness. But more than just a celebration of nerd kind, ZombieCon showcases Rocket’s struggles with being a nerd and the isolation that can sometimes accompany passion. ZombieCon keeps the same vibe as indie gems like Hawk & Rev: Vampire Slayers and Monster Force Zero, combining a love of filmmaking and creativity to showcase style on a small budget. Valle balances camp with sincerity, making ZombieCon an indie worth championing while delivering Ready Player One levels of references.

Friendship is at the heart of ZombieCon Vol. 1, and it reverberates beyond the script into the cast, crew, and the film itself. People cannot make films like ZombieCon without a devoted group of friends who love making movies. But beyond the core themes of friendship and a love of filmmaking, ZombieCon is a fun watch. 80s sensibilities and indie horror comedy tropes energize the story. Rocket’s plight is relatable to nerds everywhere (except maybe the zombie invasion). And the origins of ZombieCon‘s zombie virus could only work in a movie like this. ZombieCon is a love letter to nerd culture and will have fans awaiting the sequel excitement only a true nerd can possess.