CODE 3 Starring: Rainn Wilson, Lil Rel Howery, Aimee Carrero, Rob Riggle, and Yvette Nicole Brown Director: Christopher Leone QUENTIN Here's something I didn’t expect to have on my 2025 movie Bingo card: Code 3 is a gem of a movie and one of the year’s biggest surprises. Despite being marketed as a straight comedy, this is anything but. Yes, there are dark laughs, but only in the way that one must laugh in the face of tragedy just to get through the day. Otherwise, this is an honest and harrowing tribute to paramedics and a scathing indictment of the American healthcare system. It’s heartfelt, heartbreaking, and surprisingly moving, especially surprising if you’re only aware of the movie’s photo-shopped travesty of a poster. ROBERT I saw Code 3 was coming out and thought it would be Ambulance if Michael Bay had a funny bone. Turns out, it’s not only a higher form of comedy, but also a more complete movie. There is an insightful, biting commentary on the state of healthcare and how every cog in that machine tries to survive separately but together, while Rainn Wilson and Lil Rel Howery are not only hilarious together, but also separately. They convey emotional depth about the horrors of paramedic life and how to combat jadedness on soul-crushing shifts. They’re not the TS mother-f’ing A. They’re EMS… the real heroes. This film was reviewed by Quentin as part of Bitesize Breakdown's coverage of Fantasy Filmfest 2025.

MOTHERS' INSTINCT Starring: Jessica Chastain, Anne Hathaway, Anders Danielsen Lie, Josh Charles, Eamon O'Connell, Caroline Lagerfelt, and Baylen D. Bielitz Director: Benoît Delhomme KATIE I love Anne Hathaway nearly as much as I love a good old-fashioned melodrama, so I had a great time with Mothers’ Instinct. This operatic, Hitchcockian psychological thriller plays out against the backdrop of The Feminine Mystique -inspired tension, complete with immaculate set design and costuming of artificially perfect 1960s suburbia and amazing lead performances from Jessica Chastain and Hathaway. Whilst the film is heavy-handed and doesn’t meaningfully explore its themes of grief or the pressures of the housewives’ lives, it is full of tension and is deliciously overbaked. I’d recommend it to anyone looking for a stylish, suspenseful drama. QUENTIN Despite Anne Hathaway and Jessica Chastain doing everything they can to will a great movie out of Mothers’ Instinct , not to mention the wonderful 60s-era production design, this Hitchcockian thriller suffers from an identity crisis. It’s so self-serious that it fails to embrace the campier elements, yet it’s too campy to take any of the darker moments all that seriously. This results in a movie that flails between somewhat cheesy Lifetime-style melodrama and Revolutionary Road -ish weightiness. That said, flawed as it may be, there are worse things to watch than two terrific and impeccably dressed actresses go head-to-head in a battle of paranoia and psychological warfare. PRESTON Mothers’ Instinct takes advantage of the 1960s setting (especially with the fantastic production design) of a stereotypical suburban lifestyle to mask the eventual outcome and advance the building tension. It is a back-and-forth psychological thriller that makes you wonder who the real antagonist is, and it takes its time in developing complexity in the characters. Anne Hathaway (Celine) and Jessica Chastain (Alice) are both captivating talents that are an absolute pleasure to watch, but the primary deficiency is an ending that feels a little rushed compared to the deliberate build-up to an otherwise enjoyable, but dark story.

TOP GUN: MAVERICK Starring: Tom Cruise, Miles Teller, Jennifer Connelly, Jon Hamm, Glen Powell, Lewis Pullman, Monica Barbaro, Bashir Salahuddin, Charles Parnell, Ed Harris, and Val Kilmer Director: Joseph Kosinski NICK As someone with no particular connection to the original Top Gun , I was curious if Maverick would be for me. Boy, was it! This film is solid from top to bottom. The aerial scenes are exceptional, the new crop of pilots blend together well, and the emotional beats are such that they don’t require an attachment to the original film. This is both a tribute to its predecessor and a film that improves on it in every way. Also, props to Tom Cruise for still finding a way to have multiple running scenes in a film about flying. Never change. QUENTIN After seeing a few early reactions call it “the perfect blockbuster,” I was growing concerned that Top Gun: Maverick was getting overhyped, and while I wouldn’t go as far as to call it “perfect,” there isn’t much to hate about it either. It boasts phenomenal aerial sequences, a story that is surprisingly organic, a decent amount of humor, and even a few strong emotional beats. One could definitely nitpick a few things (like why do we need Jennifer Connelly’s character?), but it’s best if you just find the biggest screen possible, sit back, and let your need for speed be satisfied in thrilling fashion. PAIGE Grab your popcorn and hold on tight because Top Gun: Maverick soars! It’s not just the best legacy sequel ever, it's even better than the original with no one flying on autopilot. It’s a fantastic follow-up, and one that delivers the most extraordinary aerial sequences I’ve ever seen. It’s also filled with tons of nostalgic moments harking back to the 1986 classic, and let's be real, I’d be Tom Cruise’s wingman anytime because I’ve got the need… the need for speed after watching this film! JACOB Top Gun: Maverick is the kind of movie that movie theaters were made for. A perfect summer sequel, the likes of which just don’t get made anymore, that is not simply an appropriate tribute to its late-80s source material, but an elevation of it in almost every form. While it may be one set-piece short of calling itself action-packed , there’s no shortage of thrills delivered by the action we’re given. The aerial sequences are perhaps the best ever put to film, and within all of it, the heart is never once lost. The original’s director, Tony Scott, would be exceedingly proud. ADRIANO Top Gun: Maverick is incredible. As someone who doesn’t like the original film, this sequel greatly improves on it in just about every possible way. For one, this movie actually has a plot that is engaging and easy to follow. While the film does have moments of nostalgia, it isn’t reliant on them to tell its story. It’s also more character focused and has more emotional depth than I would’ve guessed, while the flight sequences are jaw-dropping. I couldn’t tell what was CGI and what was practical, but either way, I was impressed. An excellent summer blockbuster that requires the biggest screen imaginable.

I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER Starring: Madelyn Cline, Chase Sui Wonders, Jonah Hauer-King, Tyriq Withers, Sarah Pidgeon, Billy Campbell, Gabbriette Bechtel, Austin Nichols, Freddie Prinze Jr., and Jennifer Love Hewitt Director: Jennifer Kaytin Robinson BODE It’s well known that the original I Know What You Did Last Summer was rushed into production in an attempt to capitalize on the success of Scream . So, it’s fitting that after the latter franchise got a 2020s revival, Sony would try and see if the same could happen for the former. After seeing the new “requel,” I’d say it wasn’t worth the effort. There isn’t much in the way of tension or memorable kills, and because it’s so workmanlike in execution, its attempts at metatextual commentary (not present back in 1997) fall flat. All in all, this is a pretty unsuccessful legacy sequel. AMARÚ As much as I like Chase Sui Wonders (who deserved a Studio Emmy nomination as much as anyone), the exposition-heavy script for this “requel” did no favors for her, the new crew, or the returning legacy characters. This is a shame because there was fun to be had throughout but every time a nuanced story element gave balance to the nostalgia, horrible editing and dumb character decisions would kill any momentum that the fresh takes would build. There was potential in the self-aware nature that director Jennifer Kaytin Robinson tried to portray, but she wasn’t aware enough to leave the 90s slasher stupidity in the past. ROBERT No matter how you showcased the “requel” template, the expectations were low for I Know What You Did Last Summer . Even so, the only kernels of joy gleaned from my viewing were nods to the 1997 original and its direct sequel. Unlike something like Scream (2022), I didn’t care about the new group of teenagers despite my preconceived opinions on the actors. There were some messages in the violence about the role of trauma in changing who a person becomes and the negative effects of gentrification on a community, but they didn’t prove meaningful. Like the movie in general, it all ended up feeling half-baked. KATIE I enjoyed I Know What You Did Last Summer far more than I expected. It’s slick, stylish, and campy whilst taking itself just seriously enough, and although it's heavy on the nostalgia, I think that’s fitting for a film that only exists because of another’s success. I actually liked this a lot more than the latest installments in the Scream franchise and thought the cast was much better. The script isn't always great, but Chase Sui Wonders and Madelyn Cline in particular elevate everything through their performances and they are what make it so enjoyable.

THE RULE OF JENNY PEN Starring: John Lithgow, Geoffrey Rush, Nathaniel Lees, and George Henare Director: James Ashcroft NICK During festival season last year, I'd heard really positive things about The Rule of Jenny Pen , especially regarding the performances of Geoffrey Rush and John Lithgow, so I was eager to check it out. The word on the performances was justified as Lithgow, in particular, gives an unhinged and menacing performance. The rest of the film, however, is rather messy. While the performances caught me at first, it soon became glaring how hollow the story they're in is, which made the runtime feel far longer than it actually is. There’s certainly moments that stick out, but not the film as a whole. PAIGE While it's easy to obsess over John Lithgow's masterfully sinister character that terrorizes his fellow residents, director James Ashcroft offers a societal critique on nursing homes that is unexpectedly nuanced and impactful. Not only does Lithgow’s character in The Rule of Jenny Pen evoke a great deal of fear and anxiety, but so does the ease with which the care staff overlook the issues going on throughout the film. There may be a lot of unanswered questions and some pacing issues towards the end, but one thing is for sure: this movie will have you terrified of ever getting admitted into a nursing home. QUENTIN Despite terrific performances from screen legends Geoffrey Rush and John Lithgow, The Rule of Jenny Pen isn't a movie worth going out of your way to find. Themes of elder abuse and the inevitability of getting old are notionally explored, but not with enough weight to make them meaningful. On top of that, the pacing is extremely repetitive and sluggish, resulting in a movie that feels much longer than it actually is, which is especially exacerbated by the thin and messy story. Still, Lithgow clearly relished the opportunity to act completely deranged because he goes for broke, so it’s not a total loss.

CHIP 'N DALE: RESCUE RANGERS Starring: Andy Samberg, John Mulaney, KiKi Layne, Will Arnett, Eric Bana, Seth Rogen, Tim Robinson, and J.K. Simmons Director: Akiva Schaffer QUENTIN I can’t believe I’m going to say this, but Chip ‘n Dale: Rescue Rangers is kind of great. Sure, it’s essentially Who Framed Roger Rabbit for a new generation, but it’s also a 97-minute meta Easter Egg wrapped in a love letter to people who grew up in the 90s. There are just so many references, many of which are super deep cuts, that I was basically the real-life embodiment of the “Leonardo DiCaprio points at the screen” meme the entire time. Does the movie work if you don’t get the references? Yeah, probably, but it’s a whole lot better if you do. JOSEPH Chip ’n Dale: Rescue Rangers may be filled with Easter Eggs and random IPs, but it’s far from the soulless outing that was the Space Jam sequel. Instead, we’re treated to a unique satirical take on reboots that addresses Hollywood’s lack of originality these days. The visual humor and plentiful cameos help serve up a lot of laughs, but it’s the clever script and great character work that keep you invested. There’s virtually nothing I would change. Ultimately, it’s a worthy successor to Who Framed Roger Rabbit and it bodes well for the future of comedy films. NICK Chip ‘n Dale: Rescue Rangers is the right way to use existing IP in a film (unlike the gratuitous nature of Space Jam: A New Legacy ). Andy Samberg and John Mulaney step into the roles of the iconic chipmunks, and while Mulaney is especially great as the disgruntled Chip, it’s Seth Rogen who plays the role of scene-stealer. However, the real highlights of the film are the Easter Eggs, and there are tons hidden throughout (Lego Miserables and Fast & Furious Babies being among my favourites). I don’t think anyone was clamoring for a new Chip ‘n Dale movie, but I’m glad we got one. ADRIANO Chip ‘n Dale: Rescue Rangers is a total blast. The Who Framed Roger Rabbit -esque reboot is one of the funniest movies I’ve seen in a while. I was dying of laughter at not just the Lonely Island humor, but all the meta references and cameos that were somehow allowed in this movie. The characters that pop up throughout are hilarious, but also do a great job at world building, while Andy Samberg and John Mulaney were perfectly cast as the titular chipmunks. Nothing revolutionary about the story, but I wanted to watch this again as soon as it ended.

THE CARD COUNTER Starring: Oscar Isaac, Tiffany Haddish, Tye Sheridan, and Willem Dafoe Director: Paul Schrader NICK The Card Counter is a vehicle for another fantastic Oscar Isaac performance. He keeps you engaged with his mysterious character every minute he is on screen while fitting perfectly into the film's dark and brooding tones (which Tiffany Haddish brings a welcome contrast to). Unfortunately, the film stumbles in the editing. While it has solid direction and writing, the score (or lack thereof) really messes with the flow of the film. Sometimes, it's used where it doesn't fit; other times, it's completely non-existent, leaving the film feeling unfinished. A blemish on an otherwise solid film. JAMES The Card Counter is hypnotic. Director Paul Schrader’s slow camera and prolonged takes are reminiscent of Blade Runner , and the vibrance of the casinos and cityscapes give the movie a dreamlike feel. This feeling is enhanced by the shifting soundscapes and vocals that echo throughout the film. Oscar Isaac brings his characteristic depth and stillness to the main character and forces every actor he shares the screen with to slow to his pace - something very few performers are capable of doing. The result is an intimate confessional of a film that's going to stick with me for a long time. JACOB A far cry from the quality of First Reformed , Paul Schrader’s The Card Counter isn't bad as much as it's difficult to get a read on. From the beginning, the film distinguishes itself as poorly shot and badly produced, with its garish lighting betraying its limited budget to ill effect. Yet, as it continues, one can sense seeds of greatness below its technical shortcomings. The writing is ambitious and Oscar Isaac is excellent (even Tiffany Haddish impresses), but Tye Sheridan feels woefully miscast. It's okay enough to pass the time, but as an awards contender? I wouldn't bet on it. QUENTIN Between The Card Counter and First Reformed (among other movies he has made), I’m starting to think I’m just not a fan of writer/director Paul Schrader anymore. Like most of his recent work, The Card Counter is annoyingly slow despite featuring a compellingly brooding Oscar Isaac. There are long, quiet stretches without music or dialogue, and Tiffany Haddish is woefully miscast, failing to have a shred of chemistry with Isaac. If you want a poker movie (to be clear, this is not a poker movie despite what the marketing might lead you to believe), just watch Rounders again.

THREE THOUSAND YEARS OF LONGING Starring: Idris Elba and Tilda Swinton Director: George Miller JACOB I’m not sure if I liked Three Thousand Years of Longing , but I’d certainly recommend it to anyone who asked. George Miller’s fantasy odyssey is constantly grappling with interesting ideas surrounding story, life, desire, and purpose; however, its presentation isn’t as fulfilling as it hopes to be. Idris Elba and Tilda Swinton have great chemistry, and the film is always engaging, but its adherence to lengthy flashbacks removes the audience from the things that work best. There is much to admire…the costuming, the design, the look of it all…but not much to fall in love with. ADRIANO Three Thousand Years Of Longing definitely looks great, and it also has some original concepts that are buried underneath a whole bunch of nonsense. However, writer/director George Miller’s latest sees him having full creative freedom, and, unfortunately, that freedom is wasted on a script full of underdeveloped characters and plot points. I genuinely couldn’t tell who I was supposed to root for or what the objective was, which are two pretty important aspects of a movie. And the third act? My God. I’m not exaggerating when I say it gave me whiplash like nine times. It’s very disappointing, to say the least.

WITH LOVE AND A MAJOR ORGAN Starring: Anna Maguire, Hamza Haq, Veena Sood, Donna Benedicto, and Arghavan Jenati Director: Kim Albright PRESTON With Love and a Major Organ is a mostly original, dark comedy sci-fi film whose social commentary is something we can all relate to in some way. I will admit, while liking the story overall and agreeing on the dangerous direction our society is heading, I felt a depressive annoyance with the subtle finger-wagging message of embracing artsy carpe diem mindsets and villainizing practicality (but that may just speak to my own traumas). Despite my overly personal digression, this film smartly demonstrates a quirky romanticism that doesn’t stray too far from an ideal whose espousal is one that I really appreciate. NICK There are some parallels between this film and last year's Fingernails , as both are tales of a futuristic way to live, with an eye on finding love and happiness. The main difference is this Anna Maguire-led feature does a much better job telling that story. Although the film doesn’t shy away from difficult questions, it poses them while maintaining a pure sense of optimism that brings a welcome sense of hope with it. This is a well-acted film that should make you chuckle, smile, and restore faith in your ability to overcome obstacles. Depending on your mood, this may be just what the doctor ordered. PAIGE With Love and a Major Organ is a visually striking and distinctive film, but ultimately, it's a boring and uninteresting watch. I had to fight to finish the entire movie because I was losing interest in it so quickly. The characters are clearly unlikable, and the script lacks any sense of urgency or motive to make the audience care about them. Plus, it’s all too obvious and without any depth. All in all, it's a tale that might work fine on paper, but struggles to translate to the big screen. This film was reviewed by Nick, Paige, and Preston as part of Bitesize Breakdown's coverage of the 2024 Canadian Film Fest.

WHAT JOSIAH SAW Starring: Robert Patrick, Nick Stahl, Scott Haze, Kelli Garner, Jake Weber, and Tony Hale Director: Vincent Grashaw QUENTIN Based on the performances and atmosphere alone, What Josiah Saw is decent southern gothic horror. It’s probably even better if you know what to expect going in (which I did not). Namely, that the story structure is practically an anthology. If you don’t know that from the start, everything feels random and unconnected. The first act, which plays like Frailty , gives way to a second act that is reminiscent of Pulp Fiction , which gives way to a third act that’s kinda sorta like American Beauty . It’s very jarring. That said, everything eventually ties together in a mostly satisfying way that is brutal, tense, and deviant. JOSEPH What Josiah Saw has all the moodiness and talent to deliver an engrossing story about familial secrets and horrors of the past, but this southern gothic tale failed to deliver on nearly every aspect, especially with regards to the story. Every time I thought the film was going somewhere, I was mistaken, and whatever point the film was trying to make did not register with me at all. Despite a promising premise, a halfway decent finale, and some beautiful cinematography, the final scene only cemented my distaste for this film that barely managed to keep me interested.

WARFARE Starring: D’Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai, Will Poulter, Cosmo Jarvis, Kit Connor, Finn Bennett, Taylor John Smith, Michael Gandolfini, Adain Bradley, Noah Centineo, Evan Holtzman, Henrique Zaga, Joseph Quinn, and Charles Melton Directors: Alex Garland and Ray Mendoza NICK If we’re just grading on accuracy and realism, then Warfare would be an easy five out of five. This is an immersive, unforgettable sensory experience. That’s the thing, though. It’s more of an experience than a film. There’s no real character development or backstory; no beginning, middle, or end. It’s like an elevated, true-to-life Call of Duty mission, and I mean that with no offense because it is remarkable. Every cast member brings authenticity and poise to their roles (Joseph Quinn's screams will stay with me for some time), but it's the direction from Alex Garland and Ray Mendoza that really makes this thing stand out. ADRIANO At what point do we watch something like Warfare and ask, "is this even a movie?" It admittedly does an excellent job of immersing audiences in the gruelling reality of combat, but still… Truthfully, the sound work, makeup, Alex Garland and Ray Mendoza's direction, and the performances are all effective in really making this an experience. However, that is all this is. An experience. Warfare is nothing more than immersion without real substance, point, or, character development. Very late in the movie, I couldn't help but think, “is this it?" And low and behold, it was. PAIGE Directors Ray Mendoza and Alex Garland may deliver an immersive and polarizing film with stellar sound design that will leave your ears ringing, but overall, Warfare just ends up feeling like a 90-minute Call of Duty mission. With no real plot or arc, its story becomes soulless. The ensemble’s performances are extremely authentic, but there isn’t any characterization with these characters. Frankly, there isn't much at all to take away from this suffocating and harrowing film, so even though it kept me on the edge of my seat throughout the platoon's mission, I couldn't help but feel empty by the time it was over. BODE The best way to describe Warfare is if directors Ray Mendoza and Alex Garland took the D-Day sequence that opens Saving Private Ryan and stretched it out to 95 minutes. It’s as immersive as a film conveying “war is hell” can be, as its visceral brutality is accentuated by its refusal to rely on much in the way of typical cinematic devices like traditional storytelling rules, intimate character details, or a digestible narrative (an almost-deafening sound design, notwithstanding). It’s an unsatisfying experience by design, but I have much respect for it. QUENTIN Warfare is the type of movie that treats the scenario at hand, as opposed to the people on screen, as the main character, providing a wholly immersive battlefield experience through gritty realism and tremendous sound design. As a veteran, I’ve been close enough to similar real-life situations to know Warfare is as close as one can get to confronting the fog of war without actually enlisting. The palpable tension, distressing uncertainty, and jarring what-the-fuck-do-we-do?! chaos — it’s all there for 95 edge-of-your-seat minutes. Fair warning, though… Warfare will be much better on the big screen than at home, and it could be triggering for some combat veterans.

ETERNALS Starring: Gemma Chan, Richard Madden, Kumail Nanjiani, Lia McHugh, Brian Tyree Henry, Barry Keoghan, Kit Harington, Salma Hayek, Angelina Jolie, Lauren Ridloff, Don Lee, and Harish Patel Director: Chloé Zhao ADRIANO Eternals isn't a bad movie, but it is a messy one. The script is extremely exposition heavy, and the way it jumps between different time periods can be jarring. There also are numerous moments that could've been cut to make the movie shorter, and director Chloé Zhao's style doesn't really mesh with the MCU. On the plus side, the diverse cast is incredibly strong, especially Gemma Chan and Kumail Nanjiani. Overall, the film makes a clear attempt to escape typical MCU trappings, which is a fantastic step forward, but it's still flawed. It's worth watching to see for yourself. NICK The MCU has become a cinematic juggernaut partly due to the overarching story and distinctive style threading its 25 films (and several shows). The latest entry, Eternals , breaks that mold to the point it barely resembles an MCU entry. This is 100% a Chloé Zhao film, which doesn't work for the most part. The sceneries are vast and the action sequences are fantastic, but they're few and far between. As for the characters, they lack intrigue, while the dialogue contains enough exposition to make Dune blush. Phase 4 has some work to do to reach the heights of its predecessors. AMARÚ Eternals looks beautiful and dreams big. Hopeful themes about humanity run rampant throughout director Chloé Zhao's grand aesthetics and the characters' open-hearted view of Earth (Brian Tyree Henry, Don Lee, and a subtle Angelina Jolie are standouts). Big philosophical swings about life's grand schemes work well, especially when they pit the heroes' beliefs against one another. However, that leads to some cliché one-liners and all-too-convenient plot points, which are saved only by the charming innocence displayed by such powerful beings. Great chemistry helps to elevate the telegraphed exposition, making Eternals a slightly better than average, yet highly rewatchable, MCU addition. JACOB Many things will be said of Marvel's Eternals , but expect none of them to be overtly positive out of the gate. The film is decent... and it looks great in certain scenes... but its emotional tones are often uneven and its pacing is far too outstretched. That said, I did appreciate how different the film felt from typical MCU fare, as it rarely references the other films and stays most concerned with the story it's telling rather than the ones around it. Chloé Zhao’s directorial style fades in and out, but there is enough to enjoy, even on a surface level. QUENTIN Eternals isn't outright terrible, but it's certainly terrible by MCU standards. Aside from a few camera shots that are pure art and two anticipation-generating post-credit scenes, there is very little to rave about. The cast seems mostly uninterested in being involved (Angelina Jolie and Salma Hayek genuinely feel like stunt casting), and there is almost zero on-screen chemistry amongst the ensemble. On top of that, the CGI is periodically shoddy, the characters are dull, and it's generally boring - just... So. Much. Exposition. I appreciate Marvel's effort to expand outside their proven formula, but Eternals is a huge swing and miss.