Film Review: 28 Years Later

The third entry in the series is a breathtaking glimpse at brutality, humanity, and hope

The week prior to seeing 28 Years Later I reactivated my long-dormant account my local video rental store to catch up on the series, since 28 Days Later isn't streaming anywhere. I reacquainted myself with the rage virus (it's important to remember that the infected in these movies are NOT living dead zombies, but deeply ill human beings with a horrible disease) and remembered that the focus in the series (like all good post-apocalyptic media) isn't on the monsters but on the people left behind. I think some folks forget this key part of dystopian storytelling.

If you want just a run-of-the-mill shoot 'em up of infected, play Call of Duty: Zombies with unlimited ammo. The nuance is in the horrible reality and choices that human must live with in a post-apocalyptic society, and the thrill and terror comes in knowing that we're only a failed power grid away from having to make similar choices.

I loved this movie, and was in awe of its intellect, direction, acting, and storytelling. It takes the traditional zombie film and adds so much lore expansion that it ends up surpassing the genre entirely.

28 Years Later opens with a throwback to outbreak day as a young British boy named Jimmy watches The Teletubbies as a horde of infected break into his house. He manages to escape to the local church where his father is welcoming judgment day, allowing himself to be killed while Jimmy escapes yet again. (This is the first part of a bookend that we'll revisit later.)

Flash-forward 28 years and we're in what appears to be a thriving small community that's separated from the mainland by a tidal causeway. Things seem nice, if a bit old-timey. Spike, a 12-year-old boy, is being taken to the shore to go hunting with his father Jamie in a sort of rite of passage, and the two embark on their voyage to raucous celebration and cheer. Spike's father sees the voyage as a sort of respite from his ailing wife, Isla, played by Jodie Comer, who is suffering from a disease that the local population cannot name nor cure.

Hunters and searchers are free to go visit the mainland, but one rule of their society is that you do at your own risk—no rescue parties will ever be launched. When Jamie and Spike make landfall, the countryside, which is England untouched by industry, pollution, or commerce, is a vibrant green. They're out for only a short while before they come across the first new evolved form of infected appear—the slow and lows, which are large, slow-moving, and consuming enough calories from the ground to survive on non-human protein like worms. (This reminded me of the bloaters and shamblers from the Last of Us, and it's fascinating to ponder how these two IPs have influenced each other by leapfrogging around various installments over the years.)

This is such an important point, since in prior films the infected died after around 7 months due to starvation. The existence of the slow and lows means that the virus is evolving and mutating. Once again, you have to keep remembering that the infected are not dead—it's so easy to forget and just think things don't make sense.

Seeing the feral groups of rage-infected human is fascinating because they're living together in what appears to be harmony—a sort of society, almost. Humans, no matter what, are still social creatures. And their depiction in 28 Years Later is far different from the brain-thirsty, mindless hordes of zombies in other movies.

Okay, back to the plot: Spike hesitatingly makes his first kill on one of the slow and lows, and he and his father continue on their journey. They next encounter an Alpha version of an infected—enormous, smarter, and more cunning. Also, he's possessed of a comically large phallus that's impossible to ignore in every single shot it's in.

The existence of an Alpha infected is not only incredibly cool, but also makes total sense given its place in the grand scheme of humanity. Maybe he's just the examplar of an evolutionary new type of human—homo sapiens ira, ira being the Latin word for 'rage.'

The Alpha hunts in such a menacing way that Spike and Jamie are forced to sprint back to the island over a half-flooded causeway, cutting it close to the wire before making it in.

This scene is my absolute favorite in the movie, as it's visually stunning to watch, the panicked running kicking up saltwater as the northern lights and bioluminescence in the waves throw colorful shadows all over the scene—all while the looming Alpha bears down on them with cruel efficiency.

Fun fact: 28 Years Later was filmed with hundreds of iPhones. Contrast this with the fact that the original 28 Days Later was also filmed on a portable camera, and it's fun to see just how much video technology has changed in three decades.

Back on the island, the town celebrates Spike's victory as Jamie lies about how courageous Spike was. The scene is very Wicker Man-esque—in fact, the entire vibe of the isolated and strangely violent island society is very folk horror. The town seems frozen in time because it is, as society is regressing to hunter-gatherer-type activities along with very clear gender roles.

In this isolated island world, Queen Elizabeth II will forever be the monarch hanging in frames upon their walls. Underscoring this thematically is director Boyle's decision to splice in footage from Henry V films, along with the incredibly creepy recitation of the poem "Boots" by Rudyard Kipling.

Later on that evening, Spike sees his father cheat on his mother with a townswoman, which disillusions him as to his father's god-like status. While on their mainland sojourn, Jamie told Spike about a doctor that lives alone and isolated on shore, but mentions that he's crazy and anti-social.

Spike, stewing in his anger and disillusionment, takes Isla the next day and escapes to the mainland in search of this doctor, hoping to help his mother heal from the disease that's affecting her mind and body.

On their search for the doctor, they meet up with a Swedish soldier who was shipwrecked, and he's the sole survivor after members of his team were killed by the infected. There's a fascinating scene where the soldier discusses everyday normal things like online delivery and smartphones, which Spike has absolutely no knowledge of. Another thing it's important to remember about this universe is that only the UK is ravaged and quarantined—everywhere else in the world it's the modern day with all of its conveniences and technology.

The trio comes across an abandoned train that's echoing with shouts of pain and investigate it. An infected woman, feral after years of living with the rage virus, is alone and in the process of giving birth. From start to finish, this scene is absolutely WILD and moving and shocking. Isla, an empathetic mother, approaches gently and actually assists in the birthing process.

For a brief moment, it's just one woman helping another, as has been happening throughout all of human history. The infected woman delivers a regular infant (though most definitely a carrier like the mother in 28 Weeks Later). As the mother begins raging again, the soldier shoots her, and Isla grabs the baby and keeps moving as an Alpha then in turn kills the soldier. Isla and Spike, a new baby in tow, continue on their journey to find the doctor.

This point is where people begin to either start loving or hating 28 Years Later. Up until now, it's been a straightforward look into a new civilization and a raucous infected bow-and-arrow turkey shoot. Pretty standard.

But once Isla and Spike encounter Dr. Kelson, the film turns into an incredibly moving treatise on family, loss, and grief. Meeting Dr. Kelson is a delight, as it's a bald Ralph Fiennes-covered-in-iodine jump scare (a very welcome one, of course!).

Kelson has been living alone and coexisting amongst the infected, in a sort of Jane Goodall-type way. When he saves Isla and Spike in their first meeting, he blows a morphine dart at the Alpha rather than shooting an arrow at his heart. This is the first time I can recall in a "zombie" type movie that someone is approaching them with a nonlethal motive. Again, this could be because they're not zombies, and as a doctor, Kelson appreciates a person's humanity, however little of it there may seem to be.

Kelson is not crazy, despite Jamie's insistence, and over the past 30 years has been building an elaborate Bone Temple as a monument to the countless dead in the UK. He bleaches and sterilizes bones for this process, and the result is towering pillars of femurs, arm bones, and skulls, and it's very reminiscent of catacombs in Europe.

Kelson evaluates Isla and realizes it's metastatic cancer. With her wishes, he euthanizes her while Spike is slightly sedated, returning with her cleaned skull so that he can place it atop the piles of skulls.

This scene is wild, to be fair, but it works for a number of reasons. Isla is finally no longer suffering. Spike is learning first-hand how cruel and horrible and indiscriminate death is. He also is realizing that in this world, no matter grief-struck you are, you cannot stop—you have to keep moving, keep evading, and keep trying to live.

He returns to the island and drops off the infected child, whom he's named Isla, and leaves a note saying that he's going to off on his own for a while. The island that had raised him, he has realized, is not the only way forward.

The movie could have ended here, and it would be completely fine. But we get a few minutes of Spike wandering through the green countryside before being overrun by infected. Then, a posse of jumpsuit-clad long-haired blonde men jump to his rescue—it's Jimmy from the beginning of the movie all grown up! And he and his gang kick butt Power Rangers-style and save Spike.

Now, as a non-British person, I neither knew this was a strange allusion to British entertainer Jimmy Savile nor do I feel qualified to really speak as to how jarring this was for British people to watch. Savile worked with children and was a known predator and abuser, but I didn't know any of this until watching TikToks later about it. For a more in-depth discussion of it, check out this article.

I thought this bizarre ending was truly surreal and definitely very different tone-wise, but it didn't hamper my enjoyment of the movie. I've not been able to stop thinking so many different parts, and I can't wait to watch it again.

And good news for fans—28 Years Later: The Bone Temple is set to release January 16, 2026 as the first installment in a new trilogy. And yes: that is roughly 28 weeks later from now. We see what you did there, Danny Boyle.

Nerd Coefficient: 8/10.

POSTED BY: Haley Zapal, NoaF contributor and lawyer-turned-copywriter living in Atlanta, Georgia. A co-host of Hugo Award-winning podcast Hugo, Girl!, she posts on Instagram as @cestlahaley. She loves nautical fiction, growing corn and giving them pun names like Timothee Chalamaize, and thinking about fried chicken.

Rebellions Are Built on Hope: Andor S2E9

In episode nine, “Welcome to the Rebellion,” Mon Mothma begins to understand the cost of what she has been supporting financially for years

The episode opens with the Ghorman ambassador being arrested in the wake of the Ghorman massacre. Bail Organa (Benjamin Bratt) and Mon Mothma know now is the time for action, especially since the Imperial news is continuing the propaganda machine. As Organa says, “The winner writes the story.” To which Mothma responds, “Well, they haven’t won yet.”

It’s Mon Mothma’s moment to use her power in the Senate to attempt to make a difference. Organa decides to stay to buy more time for Yavin to develop, but after her speech, Mothma will flee to Yavin and join their leadership.

While prepping for her speech, her assistant, Erskin (Pierro Niel-Mee), finds a listening device, which Mothma destroys, alerting the ISB that something may be happening in her office. She goes to the plaza to practice her speech, where Luthen finds her. Perhaps unsurprisingly to viewers, her assistant works for Luthen and was recruited at the wedding of Mothma’s daughter. Mothma sees it as a betrayal that neither Luthen nor Erskin told her about the connection, but Luthen sees it as her assistant protecting her. Even so, feeling betrayed by Luthen, she struggles to trust his next piece of intel—that the extraction team Bail Organa has prepped to take her to Yavin has been infiltrated.

Meanwhile, Cassian is exhausted and shaken after escaping the Ghorman massacre. He meets with Kleya to receive what he claims will be his last mission with Luthen. She confronts him: “You’re tired. It’s too much, it’s too hard. You were a witness to the Ghorman massacre; one would think there’d be no stopping you.” He emphasizes he needs to “start making my own decisions,” but Kleya has a response for that, too: “I thought that’s what we were fighting for.”

Even so, he agrees to help rescue Mothma and enters the Senate as a reporter, at the same time as Organa’s compromised team also enters with an ISB agent in their group. Cassian connects with Erskin, using the now iconic line, “I have friends everywhere.” Even though Mothma immediately dismissed Erskin, he continues to help make sure she escapes.

In the senate, Mothma waits for Organa to create an opening for her. Earlier in the episode, an ISB agent had made clear that no pro-Ghorman senators would be allowed to speak, and the glimpses of the Senate narrative throughout the episode continue the Imperial line that the Imperial soldiers are “martyrs,” and that the Ghormans were not massacred but causing an insurrection. With some political maneuvering, Organa is able to break through the blockade of voices and yield the floor to Mothma. When his ploy works by invoking a specific Senate rule about emergencies, the ISB immediately orders the shutdown of the feed.

I often comment on the brilliant monologues and speeches throughout the show, but Mothma’s speech is perhaps the most important and moving in our current moment. Since I heard her speech, I have not been able to stop thinking about the line, “The death of truth is the ultimate victory of evil.” Immediately after the episode ended, I had to look up when the episode had been filmed, because it felt impossible that Gilroy and his team had written this speech with such prescience, but in interviews, Gilroy has discussed they had wanted the speech to feel as timeless as possible, which they achieved. With rising fascism and the violence of empire globally, there are certain patterns, and the pertinence of Mothma’s speech comes from recognizing those patterns and exploring them in Andor.

Rewatching this episode, the “death of truth” shook me even more as the U.S. enters yet another war on the lie of weapons of mass destruction, as more of my neighbors are disappeared off the streets of my rural hometown under the lie of being “illegal” or a “criminal,” of watching the lie that Palestinians are receiving “aid” when they are instead being murdered while world governments do nothing. Mothma counters the death of truth by speaking the truth aloud, which is when the Senate reacts to her speech: she calls the Ghorman massacre “unprovoked genocide.” Saying the word at that moment is what causes the Senate to react, and is part of claiming that truth. Words like “genocide” and “fascism” are brushed aside as extreme, as incendiary, but Mothma’s speech shows the power of using the word in the right moment, of calling something what it is.

Interestingly, Andor sets up this as being one of the most important moments in Mothma’s career. In the Senate, we see moments of her advocating for different ideas—especially for the Ghormans throughout  both seasons—but we don’t necessarily see her as being impactful in the Senate. Rather, in season 1, she is useful to Luthen because she funds his actions. In season 2, her attempt to help the Ghormans with a petition is ineffective, and even she knows that. Instead, her disruption of the Senate and her speech being aired is demonstrated as being impactful as opposed to her political power. I’ve been curious about what tactics of resistance Andor shows as working versus failing. For example, Ghorman’s plaza protest fails, but Mothma’s speech scares the Empire into frantically cutting it off.

Importantly, the only reason the Empire doesn’t succeed in immediately silencing Mothma is because of two unnamed technicians. These two technicians have maliciously followed the rules in order to slow down operations by locking out their supervisor. The exchange is worth repeating:

Supervisor: “It’s locked. Why is it locked?”

Technician: “It’s supposed to be.”

Supervisor: “It hasn’t been all year.”

Technician: “We know. We fixed it.”

Supervisor: “What?”

Technician: “We checked the protocol.”

Supervisor: “Open it.”

Technician: “You need the sequence key.”

Supervisor: “So let’s have it.”

Technician: “We took it up to the security office yesterday…”

The technician even speaks slowly compared to the frantic supervisor, who runs off to find the key, while the technicians smile to each other. Much like the hotel clerk Thela, this example of how to commit malicious compliance—a way to gum up the Empire without breaking any rules—is yet another example of praxis in this show that anyone can do off the screen.

At the very end, Mothma’s speech is cut off, but she’s successfully delivered her message to the galaxy, and finds Cassian standing outside. With the help of Erskine, Cassian kills the ISB agent on Organa’s team, then they escape to her ship. The titular moment of this episode comes as they are hurrying away from the dead body of the ISB agent and Mothma is struggling with the moment of violence, getting her hands dirty in a different way than she’s used to: “I’m not sure I can do this.” Cassian responds: “Welcome to the rebellion.” 

Cassian brings Mothma to the safehouse where he and Bix used to live, and he’s informed by Kleya and Erskine that Yavin will take over Mothma’s travel, and Cassian will essentially be written out of the story in order to make a grander narrative for Yavin. Cassian takes this in stride, but it mirrors how Mothma’s very public moments, like her speech, can only happen because of the work of Luthen, Cassian, and Kleya, which they receive little to no credit for.

These types of moments undermine the larger hero’s journey that Star Wars is so known for. The only reason these heroic moments happen—like Mothma’s speech or blowing up the Death Star—is because of the unsung work of people like Cassian, Bix, Wilmon, the hotel clerk, and the technicians, and all the other large and small acts of defiance.

POSTED BY: Phoebe Wagner (she/they) is an author, editor, and academic writing and living at the intersection of speculative fiction and environmentalism.

Book Review: Wearing the Lion by John Wiswell

Bringing a new found family perspective to the story of the greatest Greco-Roman mythology superhero.

When I wrote my review of Stephen Fry’s Troy in 2022, I had imagined it to be an endpoint to a boomlet of books interpreting and reinterpreting Greek mythology from a variety of perspectives. Little did I know that Fry himself has a new book in his series, but more importantly, and germane to this review, John Wiswell (Someone You Can Build a Nest In) would step up to the plate of tackling and interpreting Greek mythology. And, what's more, take the biggest of swings to the most famous hero of Greek mythology in the process.

And so we come to his second novel, Wearing the Lion.

If you are at all familiar with anyone in Greek mythology, you probably know something about Heracles (or, if you want to go Roman, Hercules). Having a TV series devoted to him in the 1990’s certainly helped. His labors come up (even if why he had to do the labors sometimes is fuzzy in the minds of many people). His prodigious strength, certainly is the stuff of legend. He is really is the OG superhero of Classical western literature.

 
And then there is of course the monsters in Heracles' story, where Wiswell comes in.

In many stories of his even before his breakout novel, John Wiswell has been writing and thinking about monsters¹. Monsters are one of his core themes and ideas and exploring monsters, from the inside as well as out, is one of his strongest power chords. And Heracles’ story, let’s face it, is positively littered with monsters. Nearly all of his labors are capturing or killing something monstrous. Probably, the most famous of these is the Nemean Lion, the one whose hide is impenetrable to weapons. How do you defeat a monstrous carnivore you can’t hurt with a spear or a sword? In the main line of the myth, Heracles wrestles it to defeat, uses its own claws and teeth to cut the hide, and then wears it for the rest of his life as some rather good light armor.

 
Wiswell comes up with a rather different idea, and hence the book’s title and the throughline for the book. Why would Heracles, himself a monster in some ways, not seek to befriend monsters rather than to slay them? And what does that do to his myth and story? The Nemean Lion is the first, but far from the only monster that Heracles meets and befriends in the course of the narrative. Heracles is not afraid of a fight, or of war, but this is a Heracles that would rather make a friend. Again, and again. Wearing the Lion is not an act of violence... it is an act of love.

The book alternates point of view between Heracles and Hera. You might be familiar that in most myths, Hera hates Heracles and from birth tries to kill or weaken him². Wiswell plays on the fact that while Hera hates Heracles (for being a bastard son of her philandering husband Zeus), Heracles himself is for most of the book absolutely and positively devoted to “Auntie Hera”. He takes the “Hera’s Glory” of his name (that is what his name means) and hits that theme again and again. This imbalance between a Heracles who is always trying to live up to his divine stepmother and be worthy of her, not knowing she is seeking his downfall, drives a lot of the plot, and some of the more mordant humor of the book. There is the damoclean sword hanging over the narrative--what happens when Heracles finds out what Hera really thinks of him?

 
But the book begins lightly and sprightly enough, in a style that I’ve come to associate with Wiswell’s writing. It almost, I think, strays over to being twee. The conversational tone of the chapters contributes to this, as we often have Heracles, or Hera, talking to (or even more often addressing ) another character in the chapter. The second person point of view gets a workout in this novel and uses it frequently

For all of that rather light tone at the beginning, though, Wiswell is willing to go dark, and in fact to tell his story has to go dark.. I should not have been entirely surprised given his short fiction but there is definitely a gear shift in this book, before and after the death of his children. I had wondered, being relatively familiar with the Heracles story, how Wiswell was going to go there, since he changes a lot of the rest of his labors and background. But indeed, Heracles does in fact kill his three children thanks to a bout of divine madness. What had started as a relatively light Heracles and the monsters story shifts into a more serious and somber tone with less humor and more drama. Heracles of course wants to know why this happened, convinced some god must have done this, and so the rest of his narrative shifts to the quest to find that out.

There is also good work on the theme of identity and who you are. The fact that one of Heracles’ early names Alcides is used again and again, and Heracles reverts to that name when he feels no longer worthy of the name Heracles. This reminds me of Doctor Who’s The War Doctor, stripping himself of the title Doctor, and having in his own mind to re-earn and regain the right to use that name. Lots of Wiswell’s characters at some point have crises or have to come to terms with who they are and their nature. His take on Heracles is another in that spirit and mode.

Meantime, on the other side, Hera has reconsiderations of the fallout of what she has done. A strong beat Wiswell hits again and again is that Hera is Goddess of the Family. Families, especially pregnant mothers but all families in general, are her divine mandate. And instead of killing Heracles with the madness, she wound up killing his family instead³. Coming to terms with all that and what happens next, along with Heracles’ own quests, makes up the back portion of the book. And as Heracles befriends more monsters and completes more quests, the eventual conflict of Hera’s plans and Heracles’ own quest head toward inexorable conflict.

 
So the novel is really in the end about Heracles and his found family of monsters and how they intersect with Hera and her family of gods and goddesses. There is a lot of lovely bits set on Olympus with Hera and the parts of the Olympian pantheon we see--in particular Ares and Athena, although a couple of others come in as well. A criticism I might have for the book is that a few opportunities were definitely missed on this side of the equation, especially with Hera given the divine mandate of motherhood and family being an important theme of the novel. Demeter and Persephone for instance, aren’t even named. The wrangling between the deities we do get and see, however is gold, and their squabbling never gets old⁴. The novel really is, from Hera’s perspective, the slow realization that Heracles’ group of monsters with him are, in fact, a family. Heracles’ story is the slow realization of his own nature, what he did, and coming to terms with himself. And, not to bury the lede, learning to actually accept his family for and what they are.

 
Wearing the Lion shows off John Wiswell’s talents for humanizing and making monsters into people and again, like his first novel, showing that people can often be the real monsters of society. This book doesn’t quite hit that theme as hard as Someone You Can Build a Nest In, this novel though is much more about building and creating a found family...and accepting them and accepting them and their love into you, as much as you loving them. Heracles gets the latter part right off... but he (and Hera) need to learn the first half of that equation matters, too.

--

Highlights:

• Interesting take on the Heracles myth exploring his relationship with Hera in a new way
• Strong theme of found family of monsters
• At turns funny, mordant, and without warning, will tear your heart out (a John Wiswell book in other words)

Reference: Wiswell, John, Wearing the Lion, [DAW 2025]

¹Dream conversation at a con or literary event ? Get John Wiswell to talk to Surekha Davies (author of Humans A Monstrous History) about monsters. That’s box office gold. 

²As Fry notes in his books, though, there are a multiplicity of varieties and variants to Greek mythology. Heracles' story is no exception and in fact, he was enormously popular across the Mediterranean. Heracles is actually Hera’s chosen champion in Etruscan mythology and we get none of the “try and kill him” business.

³In this version of the myth, Hercules kills his children but not his wife, who remains loyal to him and important to his redemption. Is that “correct” to the myth? See footnote 2.

⁴Allow me once again to lament the cancellation of KAOS, with Greek Gods set in the Modern Day. 

POSTED BY: Paul Weimer. Ubiquitous in Shadow, but I’m just this guy, you know? @princejvstin

Film Review: Ballerina

Change the accoutrements and this movie would be low fantasy - prove me wrong

Ballerina is, on some level, a blatant cash grab, more so than the other John Wick movies, by virtue of being an interquel. It is an interquel because it needs to be set at a time when John Wick, the man you hire to kill the boogeyman, is alive, and by the end of the fourth movie John Wick is dead (spoilers for a movie from 2023, sorry). Trying to slot in a film between two other films in a sequence is ungainly at the best of times (the good people over at TVTropes have discerned a rather thorny continuity issue with this movie vis-a-vis the other movies in the series). But, for this movie, I choose to look at its continuity in the way I look at James Bond movie continuity, where the whole thing is malleable and something of a mess, and as such I will care about continuity about as much as the films will.

Ballerina contains within itself another iteration of the John Wick series’ spectacular worldbuilding. This series has the best worldbuilding I have ever seen that has not a single obvious supernatural element to it. By virtue of being set in a criminal underworld, there is room for all sorts of weird micro-societies and cultures, some of them bordering on a religion. The one that takes pride of place in this film is the one in which our protagonist is immersed. It is an all-female organization of assassins and bodyguards who, in addition to all their combat training, also have to learn to be first-class ballerinas. You see your main character, played by Ana de Armas, be grilled in her ballet technique intercut with her more obviously violent education, and by the end of it the stage on which she practices is covered in blood. Ballet as an art form is brutal on the body, as shown in previous John Wick movies as well as 2018’s Red Sparrow, and for that reason is so often juxtaposed with more violent endeavors. On an aesthetic level, it works as a juxtaposition between beauty and death, and the whole thing feels like something out of a fantasy novel, or even a Greek myth about the Amazons.

The Ruska Roma, the ballet/homicide organization that our protagonist, Eve Macarro, joins in the beginning of the film is confronted with an enemy that likewise feels like something out of a fantasy novel. This organization is a religious/homicidal cult whose raison d'être is shrouded in mystery (which is a polite way of saying somewhat vague, but it works) that has existed for centuries, and based in a town in the Austrian alps. In some ways, they are the perfect mirror of the Ruska Roma, also being fanatical and cold-blooded. Every little bit of world-building you get here is through character actions, rather than ham-handed exposition or hackneyed dialogue. You are finding out who these people are right alongside Eve, and the strangely impassioned but always scary behavior makes for a compelling villain.

An aside - there is a bit where the head of this cult in the Alps mentions that a leader of said cult has not had to flee in two hundred years - I would read the shit out of fan-fiction about this cult’s involvement in the Tyrolean Rebellion against Napoleon’s forces, because I am a fucking nerd.

The action here, as in all the other John Wick films, is spellbinding. There is the obligatory shoot-out in a nightclub, this time in New York. As familiar as such scenes are in this series, the film still justifies its presence by virtue of the use of the bright, contrasting colors used decoratively. You also get a good deal of mileage out of that town in Austria run by the cult; there is a well-done fight in a kitchen with use of kitchen utensils (in a manner far more creative than this year’s Novocaine). You will also get the most off-the-wall usage of flamethrowers I have ever seen in any film ever, as well as the most creative use of a hose I have ever seen in any film ever. The series has, fortunately, not devolved into cliché.

Ana de Armas brings a strong presence to her leading role as Eve Macarro. Eve is what I would imagine John Wick himself was like as a young assassin learning the ropes (and how to hang people with them) of the homicide business, but of course gender-swapped. Eve has to build up a tolerance of killing, something John Wick has had the entire run of his namesake series, so there is a trepidation here that has to be overcome. Her gender, of course, changes a lot. The most spectacular, and most poignant, of these is during her training in the Ruska Roma, where her superior tells her that she will be weaker and smaller than any man she fights, and she must always remember that. This immediately cuts to Eve fighting a man in a spar; to make up for the difference in size, she attacks his groin repeatedly, and he is clearly in incredible pain. Throughout the movie, you see a woman turning from someone relatively normal, albeit having gone through a tremendous loss, into an amazon who can dance.

Only a few days after I saw this movie, I read David Foster Wallace’s (no known relation to the author of this piece) essay collection A Supposedly Fun Thing I’ll Never Do Again, whose namesake essay is about his time on a cruise ship in the Caribbean. He finds a brochure aboard the ship with an essay-cum-advertisement by the acclaimed writer Frank Conroy. Wallace is quite perturbed by this essay, not because it isn’t good (on a craft level, he says, it is superb), but that nowhere it is disclosed that Conroy was paid for it. This essay, argues Wallace, is an advertisement pretending to be art:

“In the case of Frank Conroy's ‘essay,’ Celebrity Cruises is trying to position an ad in such a way that we come to it with the lowered guard and leading chin we reserve for coming to an essay, for something that is art (or that is at least trying to be art). An ad that pretends to be art is at absolute best like somebody who smiles at you only because he wants something from you. This is dishonest, but what's insidious is the cumulative effect that such dishonesty has on us: since it offers a perfect simulacrum of goodwill without goodwill's real substance, it messes with our heads and eventually starts upping our defenses even in cases of genuine smiles and real art and true goodwill. It makes us feel confused and lonely and impotent and angry and scared. It causes despair.”

This is an argument that I think is worth thinking about in relation to big media franchises, of which John Wick has most certainly become in recent years. The purpose of a media franchise is to be enjoyed first, and then to advertise future works in the franchise for the ultimate financial gain of the franchise owner. John Wick, the man, the character portrayed by Keanu Reeves, is something of a modern folk hero, in what Henry Jenkins described as “a system where contemporary myths are owned by corporations instead of owned by the folk.” The question, then, are franchise films art? Is Ballerina art?

I would argue yes. So many great works of painting and sculpture are here in this world for us to appreciate because of the patronage of the wealthy; hell, the art on the Sistine Chapel is a prominent example. It bears mentioning here that Ballerina started out as an original project before being retrofitted into the John Wick universe. Like the great works of the Renaissance, Ballerina owes its existence to men of great wealth, but ultimately it has enough substance, enough meat on the bone, to be enjoyable.

(also the song at the credits is extremely catchy)

--

POSTED BY: Alex Wallace, alternate history buff who reads more than is healthy.

Film Review: Elio

Disney loves to write orphans, but doesn't seem to understand them

Recently orphaned Elio Solís has been adopted by his aunt Olga, who has a busy military job and had to give up a chance for career advancement in order to take care of him. She's struggling to adjust, but hasn't said one word that would imply she resents him. Still, he feels unwanted and unwelcome. This misunderstanding on his part sparks an entire allegorical journey in which he meets a distorted mirror version of himself (no, I don't mean the clone) and learns that he isn't as alone as he thought. The message is sweet and valuable, but the way it's expressed through the narrative is sometimes muddled, which is unfortunate in a movie that focuses so much on efforts to communicate.

What sets things in motion is Elio's visit to a space museum where he learns about the search for alien life. After reasoning that there's no one on Earth who loves him, he becomes obsessed with contacting aliens, hoping to be taken by them. Any viewer who grew up with terrible parents will recognize this fantasy of adoption, but it's hard to understand in Elio's case, because his aunt is in no way whatsoever mistreating him. It's Elio who convinced himself that his presence is bad for her life. He takes too long to figure out that her choice to pause her career plans is not something he inflicted on her but something she willingly did for his benefit.

All right, she does make one mistake: she signs him up for a summer camp that teaches military discipline, which ranks very, very low on the list of things you should do to a kid who already feels lonely and expects to be abandoned. He soon gets dragged into a fistfight with other kids, which the movie treats as a pivotal moment in the course of his life.

From this point on, the emotional trajectory of Elio is best understood by placing in parallel the plotlines of the human kid Elio and the alien kid Glordon. They don't even meet until well into the runtime, but Glordon's story is basically the heightened, hyper-dramatized version of Elio's. From Elio's perspective, Olga has dumped him in that military summer camp because she's had enough of him, and also because military life is all she knows. In Glordon's case, his father, Grigon, is an interstellar tyrant who expects him to one day wear the battle armor that is traditional in their species. The armor is full of a ridiculous variety of deadly devices, and it hides, constricts and pierces the creature's soft skin. It's meant to be worn permanently. What this prospect means, when translated back into Elio's life, is that he has before him the option to deal with his complicated feelings by squeezing them under a mask of toughness. But the kind of person who would make that choice, as the movie illustrates rather literally, is not Elio's/Glordon's authentic self. It would be a disturbingly people-pleasing version of him. Olga wants a polite, obedient child, as the warlord Grigon wants a ruthless conqueror, but that's not who Elio/Glordon is.

Where this beautiful allegory falls apart is in the manner of its resolution. Elio's injury from the fistfight at the summer camp shows Olga that she was wrong in trying to steer him into her steps; Glordon's almost-death shows Grigon that galactic conquest isn't worth losing his child. The problem here is that Elio is the one who needs to change his incorrect beliefs (the movie even literalizes this point by giving him an eyepatch during the entire second act to represent his limited perspective), but the allegorized version of his struggle has the parental figure be the one who learns a life lesson (notice how it's the battle armor which has eyes, in the manner of a reverse blindfold, while the actual alien body has none). The emotional resonance is pointed in the wrong direction. Grigon's neglectful, harsh style of parenting is not the proper translation of how Olga behaves toward Elio. A charitable reading would say that Grigon stands for Elio's distorted idea of Olga, but even in that case it would still be Elio who needs to learn and grow. This thematic misfire brings to mind the better execution of the same dynamic in The Lego Movie, where the villain and the father follow neatly parallel arcs.

Despite this confusion in the handling of its ideas, Elio is not without highlights. A thrilling scene in which Olga and Elio have to pilot a spaceship through floating debris reaches a triumphant peak when they get unexpected help from random strangers, which is a better thematic conclusion to Elio's yearning for a community where he fits. Maybe he won't join the diplomatic elite of the universe, but there's plenty of excitement to be found on Earth.

Nerd Coefficient: 6/10.

POSTED BY: Arturo Serrano, multiclass Trekkie/Whovian/Moonie/Miraculer, accumulating experience points for still more obsessions.

Film Review: The Life of Chuck

Dancing and Dreaming as the world comes to an end

As a writer and as a critic, there are times I wonder what the point of writing and critiquing is when [gestures vaguely at the world] is on the march, with no sign of abating. Writing stories and reviews in the hopes that someone will enjoy them, or take something away from them that is beneficial, can feel like you’re a member of the dance band on the Titanic, plucking and thrumming away while everything around you is sinking ever more quickly, right before you drown and your corpse is crushed by the water pressure. To quote an old meme, we had the misfortune of living in the one apocalypse where we still have to go to work. The fact that I drove to the theater to see The Life of Chuck in a massive rainstorm that seemed to appear out of nowhere only heightened the mood. This film is based on the namesake novella by Stephen King, and directed by Mike Flanagan.

There are three interrelated portions of this film. The first is about the slow end of the world, an exaggerated version of the existential dread felt by those of us who follow the news (and also a solid piece of evidence in favor of the idea that ignorance is in fact bliss). The second is about an accountant who, while in another town on a business trip, decides spontaneously to dance to the music produced by a busking drummer in a public square. The last is the coming-of-age of a boy who loses his parents in a freak car crash, grows up with his paternal grandparents in a home where he is absolutely forbidden from entering the uppermost room, all the while learning how to dance. Running through all these is the story of Charles ‘Chuck’ Krantz, the axle around which the wheel of this film spins.

The first section, the one involving the end of the world, is one that is equal parts completely unnerving and deeply relatable (and a good chunk very, very funny) by how familiar it is. It is, to quote a Bluesky post from around the time of the Los Angeles fires, selfies taken in disaster areas closer and closer to you until you are the one taking the selfie. The characters in this segment are on some level resigned to the whole thing, the casting away of the accoutrements of quotidian society feeling almost inevitable, for we have all planned for it, fantasized about it, dreamed of it even, as we try to numb ourselves from reality. The first thing that heralds apocalypse is the loss of the internet. There’s one particular scene, where two men commiserate about how they no longer have access to PornHub, that filled me with an emotion that I have a hard time describing (but I’m certain there’s a seventeen-syllable German word for it). It’s the humor that arises when you see that people will always be like this, but also despair at how we will never change.

The second part is a celebration of human joy and spontaneity. The businessman, for no reason that even he can ascertain (and he himself admits this), starts dancing to drums in public. He puts down his briefcase, but doesn’t change his shoes (I can attest to you that dancing in business shoes is a massive mistake - he would be sore for a week afterward, if his experience is anything like mine), and he just starts going at it. He is joined by a young woman whose boyfriend has just dumped her via text, and had the brazenness to ask if they could still be friends afterwards. They both are jolted out of day-to-day numbness, or worse, and in their wild, raucous, jubilant dance, they bring a similar jolt to the drummer, and to the crowd that is watching them. It likewise brought a jolt to me, for reasons I will explain soon.

The third part is the most meaty. This boy, who grows to be a young man over the course of years, spends his time asking ‘why?’ He asks it of his grandmother, his grandfather, his teachers, his crush, and of the world. Some of it is asking questions about injustice, some of interpretation, others arbitrariness. This kid has seen a lot, starting with losing his parents and his sister-to-be in his mother’s womb. He is also struggling with questions that his grandparents refuse to answer. Who is Henry Peterson? Who is the Jeffries boy? And why is he not allowed in the cupola of his own home? In the light of all of these, he pushes on, trying to make something of himself, trying to find joy. He finds joy in a dance program after school, and it gives him the strength to carry on in spite of loss and mystery.

I’d like to take a bit of a detour and talk about how the film portrays the act of dancing. Since college, I have been an avid ballroom and swing dancer. I credit learning to dance these dances as being the thing that dragged me out of the purposelessness and depression of my high school and early college years. Without dance, the world was cold and gray and joyless to me. With dance, life was warm and full of color. As such, my heart surged when I saw the two characters in the second part dance with such aplomb, such buoyancy, to those drums that filled a town square. My heart soared when I recognized their steps as coming from cha-cha and from lindy hop.

My heart absolutely leapt out of my body in the final section when this boy was being taught in his class by a teacher who proudly calls herself the ‘dance monster.’ She taught them cha-cha with steps that I recognized, and then she said words that are inscribed on my heart, a simple “rock step, triple step, triple step.” That is the way of counting the basic steps of six-count lindy hop. Those are the first steps any swing dancer learns, and they unlock a world of excitement, a world of joy, for those who persist in following that route. Those words are not simply steps to me; they are my second heartbeat. I swear to you, I cried when I heard them, and saw this kid inelegantly repeat them, his teacher drilling them, but doing so very accurately.

I have been deliberately coy about the actual supernatural element of this film, but I assure you it is there. The first part is the most obviously supernatural; it uses that supernatural conceit to make you very nervous, absolutely on edge, by virtue of not giving you a single explanation for it (one can detect a tonal similarity to the more cosmic, existential SCP articles). The world is ending! There is a mysterious man on a billboard! His image keeps appearing on a variety of surfaces! All of this culminates in an otherworldly scene that I am almost absolutely certain Stephen King cribbed from Arthur C. Clarke’s story The Nine Billion Names of God. This whole film absolutely feels like a Stephen King story, where the bizarre, the strange, and the otherworldly are found hiding in plain sight, poking around among the everyday as if it were always there, waiting to be found by someone in thrall to the mundane.

The end result is a film that is unabashedly humanist and unashamedly existentialist. It reminded me of Kevin Brockmeier’s novel The Illumination, which likewise has a deeply strange alteration to the world, and asks us to find meaning in it. The man who dances to the drums in the second part of the movie says that that particular incident is why God put him on this Earth. In light of the cruelty, the arbitrariness, and the despair that have ensnared us, the movie tells us to make our own beauty, our own meaning, our own light, because those are what make life worth living. It tells us to push on, to keep fighting and to keep dreaming and to keep dancing and to keep creating, as that is the beauty of the whole thing to begin with. As odd as it is to say about a film based on a Stephen King story, it’s beautiful.

--

POSTED BY: Alex Wallace, alternate history buff who reads more than is healthy.

6 Books with Helen Marshall

Helen Marshall is the World Fantasy Award-winning author of two short story collections, two poetry chapbooks and her first novel, The Migration. Her stories and poetry have appeared in magazines and anthologies including Abyss & Apex, Lady Churchill’s Rosebud Wristlet and Tor.com. She is the author of the forthcoming The Lady, The Tiger and the Girl Who Loved Death.

Today she tells us about her Six Books.

1. What book are you currently reading?

Cahokia Jazz by Francis Spufford. I'm on a big speculative detective kick after working my way through Nick Harkaway’s Titanium Noir series. I love how science fiction melds with detective stories—they’re both fundamentally about investigating the way the world works, peeling back layers to reveal hidden truths. There’s something so satisfying about that combination of mystery and speculation, where the detective isn’t just solving a crime but uncovering how reality itself functions. Detective stories often end with “and this is how the world is—we’ve just uncovered the truth of it,” while SF stories end with “and here are the possibilities.” I find it fascinating to see which way an author is going to leap when they're combining both genres.

2. What upcoming book are you really excited about?

Kathleen Jennings’ Honeyeater. Kathleen is one of the most interesting, curious, and creative people I’ve ever met. She has a poet’s attention to language, an artist’s attention to detail, and a novelist’s attention to world-building. Everything she touches becomes something extraordinary—her illustrations, her short fiction, her academic work. We’re actually working on a non-fiction book about writing speculative short stories together, and I snuck a peek at the first page of Honeyeater and immediately wanted to slip the book into my bag and abscond with it. I have a feeling this book is going to be something genuinely special and surprising.

3. Is there a book you’re currently itching to read again?

Mad Sisters of Esi by Tashan Mehta. I read it during the pandemic and it was absolutely perfect—that rare kind of fantasy that completely transports you to another world that’s strange, wonderful, and utterly immersive. It’s about two girls living in a whale made of dreams, which sounds impossible to pull off, but Tashan makes it feel inevitable. The book has this incredible sense of wonder mixed with deep emotional truth. I genuinely think this represents the future of fantasy writing—bold, inventive, unafraid to take risks that pay off beautifully.

4. How about a book you’ve changed your mind about—either positively or negatively?
The Last Unicorn by Peter S. Beagle. It’s a book I reread every couple of years, but each time I discover more to appreciate—more depth arising from apparent simplicity, more emotional resonance hidden in what seems like a straightforward fairy tale. It reminds me again and again of the beauty of the form of the fairy tale, how it speaks to our longing and honours the craving we have for mystery and meaning—something fantasy is deeply interested in. Increasingly I have been thinking about how becoming a mother has changed me as a writer. Like, it rewrote the emotional landscape of my world and charged it in new ways, some of which have been quite confronting and difficult to manage. For example, I am so sensitized, so raw, that I find horror writing much more difficult than I have in the past. But this book brings me a sense of comfort and joy. My husband read it to me while I was pregnant to help me sleep, so it holds a very special place in my heart now.

5. What’s one book you read as a child or young adult that has had a lasting influence on your writing?

Impro by Keith Johnstone. As a university student, I was terrified of public speaking, so I took an improv course out of what I can only describe as a mixture of self-hatred and self-improvement. But this book taught me so much about creating narrative on the fly—how to understand the shifting balance between characters, how to build toward satisfying endings, how to say “yes, and...” to unexpected possibilities. The principles of improvisation—accepting offers, building on what others give you, finding the story in the moment—have become central to how I approach both writing and life. It’s not technically a writing book, but it’s one of the most useful books about storytelling I’ve ever read.

6. And speaking of that, what’s your latest book, and why is it awesome?

The Lady, The Tiger and the Girl Who Loved Death follows two women across generations: Sara, a circus master’s daughter seeking revenge, and her granddaughter Irenda, who becomes entangled in a web of state-sponsored illusions decades later. It’s a story about how grief and love echo across time, set in a world where the line between political spectacle and magical performance has completely dissolved. At its heart, it asks whether stories liberate us or trap us—and whether we can tell the difference. But what makes it truly awesome is that it’s also narrated by a godlike talking tiger who may or may not be trustworthy. The tiger represents something wild that we think we might tame—which becomes this perfect unreliable guide through a world where nothing is quite what it seems. It felt like the ideal narrator for a story about the power and danger of storytelling itself.

Thank you, Helen!

POSTED BY: Paul Weimer. Ubiquitous in Shadow, but I'm just this guy, you know? @princejvstin