At the center of Titane’s madness is Alexia/Adrien (Agathe Rousselle), who at a young age caused her father (Bertrand Bonello) to crash the car while vying for his ever distant attention. This results in the installation of a metal plate in her head and the doctors advising her father to watch for any abnormalities. Hint hint. Without giving too much away, Alexia goes on a bit of a killing spree and winds up disguising herself as Adrien, the long missing son of fire chief Vincent Legrand (Vincent London). Agathe Rousselle gives a phenomenal performance throughout her character’s transformation from Alexia to Adrien. Similarly, Vincent London truly captures a broken father’s desperation.

Underneath Titane’s bizarre sensibilities is a strong undercurrent of people looking for family. However, not just a superficial family defined by blood relations, but a family where each member openly loves and supports the others’ honest selves. We watch as Alexia craves paternal love and acts out predictably, then experiences an avalanche of unrequited affection that simultaneously corrupts other “chosen” family members, and then settles with the family that embraces each other for who they actually are. A family where a child has to show her true self and gender to her father despite his expectations, and a father who has to come to terms with his aging masculinity. Simply acknowledging what a family member tells you and truly embracing and supporting the concept are two very different things, and sometimes life has a way of confronting you with realities you have been hopelessly trying to avoid.

While on Titane’s wild ride, a haunting soundtrack, dazzling cinematography, and stylish saturated colors will accompany you. Whether you are watching dancers on the hoods of cars at an auto show, Alexia dramatically marching towards her newfound lover while dripping with water, a man simply playing with a lighter, or an eruption of flames Titane does not disappoint visually.

One area the film does stumble in is how it handles the second half. As Titane (somewhat) pulls away from absurdities and thrills in favor of more tender moments, it also loses some of the edge and shock value that the first half successfully relies upon. In doing so Titane also loses a bit of itself until it comes roaring back in the conclusion. The film puts its more outrageous concepts on the back burner until it’s ready to deal with them again, and in doing so relinquishes some of its much earned momentum.

From the opening scene, Titane continuously doubles down on its own outrageous absurdity until it suddenly pulls back. You go from watching a thriller, to body horror, to something that has a lot to say about what it means to be family. Specifically, what it means to be family in action, not just by blood or oil. Titane somehow addresses gender fluidity, the role of parents to support and accept, the male ego slipping as bodies and testosterone age away, and the opportunity to choose a family not given to you by birth all while bombarding the screen with gore and squirm inducing violence. You find you cannot look away from these disturbing images partly because of how beautifully Titane presents them and partly because they all have something to say. Even though the film may retreat too far from its own deliriousness in the second half, it comes speeding back just in time for a finale that will have you guessing until its last push. Strap in because Titane is one hell of a ride.

The post Titane – Review appeared first on MovieRiffing.

Rear Window​ presents Jefferies (James Stewart) as an experienced photographer, thus legitimizing his gaze and letting the audience come to terms with his actions. He still peeps through the window of his often under-dressed neighbor and peruses the others as if he were flipping through channels on a television, but because of his profession his gaze has an added sense of permissibility. The film insists he is not simply spying, he is learning and appreciating. In the end his gaze gains extra justification, as it helps solve a criminal case, and the numerous invasions of privacy are forgotten. ​Rear Window​ presents the male gaze as justified and correct, with the simple caveat that the peeping tom must own a professional camera.

Post-classical films such as ​Blue Velvet​ begin to challenge this notion of a justified gaze. It initially provides the same setup, with Jeffrey (Kyle MacLachlan) sneaking into Dorothy’s (Isabella Rossellini) apartment to potentially solve a mystery. As he looks through the shutters of the closet, his newfound peepshow devolves into a shocking display of fetish and sexual abuse. Soon Jeffrey finds himself whisked away from his quaint notions of the American suburbs and shoved into the reality of their seedy underbellies. Instead of glorifying the outcome of the male gaze, ​Blue Velvet​ shows the horrifying results it can produce. Jeffrey’s gaze ultimately rips away his sheltered life and stomps on his innocence. The world will never be the same for him. All because he wanted to get a quick peek.

Moonlight​ then shatters the traditional notions of the male gaze. Instead of the gaze being provided by a straight and white lead, the main character, Chiron (Alex R. Hibbert, Ashton Sanders, and Trevante Rhodes), is gay and black. Unlike Jefferies and Jeffrey, Chiron does not gaze out from a position of power or authority. An innumerable amount of pain and trauma mark his younger years. His home life is nearly nonexistent. He has few real friends in the world. Chiron’s gaze is one of hope and searching for belonging. Not only is ​Moonlight​ different for prominently showcasing a homosexual relationship in a feature film, but also because it depicts a male character using his gaze from a position of incredible weakness.

Since the rules of Classical Hollywood started to be attenuated in the late 1960s, the male gaze has shifted, resulting in a change in how male characters drive stories. How a film presents the gaze to the audience controls how much power a character has. Jefferies’ gaze in ​Rear Window​ presents him as an expert, allowing him to act with impunity. However, Jeffrey’s gaze in ​Blue Velvet​ does not result in the same level of sanitized success, instead offering a tale of how the traditional male power and sexual fantasies can go horribly wrong. And then ​Moonlight uses its gaze to give light to a marginalized group and offer a fresh new perspective. As time has passed, the notion of a male gaze (and others) has obviously persisted due to the medium itself, but it has also been subverted to tell stories from new and inventive perspectives.

The post Following the Ever-Shifting Male Gaze appeared first on MovieRiffing.

The following essay contains spoilers for The Wolf of Wall Street (2013), American Psycho (2000), and Fight Club (1999).

Martin Scorsese’s ​The Wolf of Wall Street​ showcases the story of real life stockbroker Jordan Belfort (Leonardo DiCaprio). It illustrates his acquisition of wealth and the subsequent destruction of his empire, quickly followed by him dodging any substantial punishment. Released in 2013, ​The Wolf of Wall Street​ can be read as a direct response to the Great Recession beginning in 2007. With the help of a number of Scorsese’s filmmaking techniques, the film’s visuals directly appeal to the crowd hit hardest by the failing financial systems. Instead of responding to the destruction of Belfort’s life, audiences latch onto Belfort himself due to the spectacle inadvertently replacing the message.

As the film opens and Belfort describes how he,

“…gambles like a degenerate…”, “…drinks like a fish…”, and has “…three different federal agencies looking to indict [him]”,

Scorsese, The Wolf of Wall Street

the audience gets to watch a medium close-up of him doing cocaine off of an attractive woman’s butt. So while the film’s dialogue details a life teetering on the edge, the visual is much more engaging and desirable to a stereotypical male audience. Much like American prescription drug commercials, the potential horrors are audibly listed off while accompanied by eye candy.

Not only are the undesirable portions of Belfort’s life overshadowed, but the desirable pieces are paraded across the screen. When celebrating a week’s earnings, the office transforms into a dazzling house of debauchery. Marching band music plays, the band members march through the halls in their underwear, and then the servers and strippers follow close behind. Quick cuts between medium shots of two groups of strippers charging at each other fill the frame, with a strobe effect turning the whole scene into a dream. A close up of Belfort’s face appears near the end, as he pridefully watches over what he has created. Numerous scenes of this scale appear throughout The Wolf of Wall Street​ and they all end up distracting a sizable segment of viewers from the morally reprehensible nature of Belfort’s business and his looming demise.

The film presents all of this as easily accessible to the audience as well. According to the film Belfort’s only qualification is that he decides to move to Wall Street because of his love for money. He quickly finds himself working up the ladder as a stock broker and when that fails due to circumstances out of his control, he immediately pivots to penny stocks and experiences almost immediate success.

Finally, the film ends with Belfort proclaiming that for a,

“…brief fleeting moment, [he’d] forgotten [he] was rich”.

Scorsese, The Wolf of Wall Street

At this point the film notes that despite all of his crimes, all of those he hurt along the way, and even the destruction of his own personal life, he would not be paying a hefty legal price. It gives audience members the illusion they could experience the three hours worth of hedonistic depravity as well, at little cost. Further driving this point home, the real Jordan Belfort appears in a cameo in the final scene to introduce Leonardo DiCaprio’s character version of himself at a get-rich-quick seminar. Not only did Jordan Belfort dodge consequences for his actions, he now gets to appear in a Hollywood film directed by legendary director Martin Scorsese. In the final seconds of the film, the camera pans over the audience in a medium close-up at eye level, a metaphor for the real audiences’ aspirations to achieve Belfort’s supposed success.

Thomas Salek notes,

“…the film’s cultural reception demonstrates a public ambiguously mesmerized by a wealthy individual and his ‘get rich quick’ philosophy.” Following the Great Recession, “In a 2013 political poll, more than half of U.S. adults said they did not think the government and financial industry had done enough to prevent future financial crises”. Yet, “…they are hesitant to impose any form of regulation on financial markets”. ​

Thomas Salek

The Wolf of Wall Street​ released at a time when many Americans were economically struggling, but also refusing to punish the individuals who put them in that position, possibly out of the hope that one day it may be them on top. ​The Wolf of Wall Street​ showed the disillusioned audiences how that may be possible for them. In the United States where money is so tightly intertwined with power, the men who felt emasculated by the recession now had an outlet of escapism. ​The Wolf of Wall Street ​said by fighting their way out of poverty to reap the rewards of capitalism, men could regain their masculine identity and the rewards that accompany that (mainly women and power). Society will not simply hand out this identity, but instead it will only award it to those willing to struggle against their current socioeconomic condition.

Much like ​The Wolf of Wall Street​, Mary Harron’s ​American Psycho ​found itself released during tumultuous economic times. It reached theaters in the year 2000, with the dot-com bubble having recently burst. ​American Psycho​ follows investment banker Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale) as he strives to maintain an impeccable image for his yuppie colleagues, acquaintances, and fiancee. As the film progresses we watch as Bateman lures in and brutally murders numerous women. It concludes with Bateman being denied the condemnation he seeks by his peers, and the other characters merely continuing to focus on their own lives.

Similar to how ​The Wolf of Wall Street​ parodies the excessive lifestyle of Jordan Belfort yet the pure spectacle of it all still carries the audience away, ​American Psycho​ shows the monstrous side of Patrick Bateman but offers no in-universe condemnation of his character. Bateman’s closing monologue over an extreme close-up of his eyes states,

“My punishment continues to elude me and I gain no deeper knowledge of myself”.

Mary Harron, American Psycho

This lack of a clear condemnation from other characters allows the excesses of his life to outshine the horrors for those already looking to ignore them.

As Peter Deakin points out,

“Bateman becomes so fragmented and de-individualized (in addition to being defined) by his insane consumerism and his hyper-yuppie vision that, composed entirely of ‘inauthentic’ commodity-related desires… he ​cannot​… exist as a person.”

Peter Deakin

This explains how the film itself, but not the characters within the film, does condemn Bateman. However, it also describes how his masculinity and monetary goals are interconnected. He sees every financial conquest as a means of increasing his desirability in a world he perceives to be constantly attempting to rip it away. ​American Psycho ​may mock this notion by showing how all of the yuppies mix up each other’s names due to a loss of individuality, but it is this same rampant materialism that allows Bateman to live in a fantastic apartment, make more money than he knows what to do with, sleep with beautiful women, and ultimately face no consequences for his actions. To the men directly hurt by the economic downturn of 2000, Bateman may come with a lot of baggage (the brutal killing of innocent women is no small thing), but he also represents a lost lifestyle that is waiting for reclamation. A lifestyle only available by fighting against the economic forces of the time.

So once again a film presents a conventionally despicable character and depicts his failings, yet the character’s lifestyle causes audiences to use his material possessions as a goal to guide their lives in troubled times (even though the film itself condemns this). For a country that sees,

“Achieving financial prosperity [as] tied to the American dream”,

Thomas Salek

characters that provide a blueprint for that are highly valuable since,

“…most Americans [now] contend that it is harder to become wealthy and there is little chance they will achieve financial prosperity”.

Thomas Salek

Counter to both ​The Wolf of Wall Street and American Psycho​, David Fincher’s ​Fight Club​ released just prior to the dot-com burst, during an economic peak. It depicts its disillusioned narrator (Edward Norton) and Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt) as they form the titular Fight Club, a place for aimless men to let loose their growing aggression. Increasingly fed up with a materialistic world, the members set out on a number of vandalism related plots, ultimately culminating in the destruction of numerous buildings housing countless debt records.

Fight Club​ parodies brands and corporations, and men’s increasing tendency to use them to define their lives. Mark Ramey states,

“The film is a powerful critique of a superficial consumer culture and the moral vacuum created by consumers who buy into that superficiality.”

Mark Ramey

Fight Club claims a generation without a war or depression to fight has it too easy and becomes effeminate as a result. It goes on to say men on some level crave violence and to fight and feel pain, feel themselves, and feel masculine. These men must fight to form their individuality and in death they will have a name. Their struggle gives them identity.

Of course much like the preceding two films which either depict their characters’ fall from grace and/or condemn them for their actions, ​Fight Club​ denounces the outright anarchy it depicts for much of its runtime when it has the narrator shoot out the part of his brain responsible for projecting the image of Tyler Durden, thus killing his aimless cravings for anarchy. But by depicting a lifestyle free of needless consumerism prior to this point, ​Fight Club​ offers an explanation to the men who feel like their lives lack purpose when their economic conditions are just too good. ​Fight Club​ tells these men to reject their financial bounties and instead embrace the primal nature of their identities. Toss out the comforts of modern life to get in touch with who you really are and what you truly desire. Those who stand in the way of this progress fail as men and (in the film, quite literally) find themselves castrated. Although this time Hollywood is not telling men to fight to climb the socioeconomic ladder, it is still telling them to fight, just this time to tear it all down.

These films expect men to pursue materialistic goods, but once they have acquired them they have either lost their individuality or have been so thoroughly consumed by their drive they have lost true autonomy. Films then encourage these same men to rebel against the broken system to tear it all down. And then films once again encourage them to strive for greatness because, without anything you are nothing, not desirable nor a real man. Throughout the years this cycle of societal and Hollywood based expectations has endured. A man must always be fighting in one direction or another to maintain his virility. To give in to the system, no matter which end of the spectrum the system is currently leaning, is a loss of decision making, agency, and therefore masculinity as often portrayed by American cinema.

Works Cited

• Deakin, Peter. “‘I Simply Am Not There’: American Psycho, the Turn of the Millennium and the Yuppie as a Killer of the Real.” ​Film International,​ vol. 14, no. 3–4 [77–78], 2016, pp. 85–101. ​EBSCOhost​, doi:10.1386/fiin.14.3-4.85_1.
• Harron, Mary, director. ​American Psycho​. Lions Gate Films, 2000.
• Fincher, David, director. ​Fight Club​. 20th Century Fox, 1999.
• Ramey, Mark. ​Studying Fight Club​. Auteur, 2014. ​EBSCOhost​, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=e000tna&AN=828933&site=eds-live&scope=site.
• Salek, Thomas A. “Money Doesn’t Talk, It Swears: The Wolf of Wall Street as a Homology for America’s Ambivalent Attitude on Financial Excess.” ​Communication Quarterly​, vol. 66, no. 1, Jan. 2018, pp. 1–19. ​EBSCOhost​, doi:10.1080/01463373.2017.1323767.
• Scorsese, Martin, director. ​The Wolf of Wall Street.​ Paramount Pictures, 2013.

The post Masculinity’s Origin in Socioeconomic Struggle in American Cinema appeared first on MovieRiffing.

Click here to watch the video version of this review.

Directed by Leigh Whannell, The Invisible Man documents Cecilia Kass’ (Elisabeth Moss) attempted escape and recovery from her abusive and manipulative boyfriend, Adrian Griffin (Oliver Jackson-Cohen). After she flees the mansion, Adrian stages his own suicide before using his advanced technology to turn himself into the titular monster. From there he slowly but surely sabotages Cecilia’s mental recovery and turns her world against her.

One of the best parts of The Invisible Man is analyzing Cecilia’s psychological state throughout the film. Elisabeth Moss flawlessly pulls off a woman attempting to put her life back together after an incredibly abusive relationship. Moss’ performance captures every step forward and back for Cecilia.

Right from the beginning, The Invisible Man has a lot going for it. Of course the title alone produces a great deal of dramatic irony for at least the first act of the film. This results in a built-in well of tension The Invisible Man can draw from right out of the gate. Shots holding on empty space for an uncomfortably long time invite the audience to search the frame for what we know is there. Long shots through hallways create an additional sense of voyeurism. Without explicitly showing anything, The Invisible Man successfully instills fear from the opening scene.

Unfortunately, this driving force of tension falters during the climax of the film. While turning up the action and violence, The Invisible Man tosses aside the paranoia it has so meticulously cultivated. Up until this point there are only a few scenes requiring suspension of disbelief (think security cameras), but here it decides to do away with the whole concept of working in the shadows. Thankfully the film manages to course correct afterwards, but this blip significantly neuters The Invisible Man’s ability to use its bag of psychological tricks.

Another issue attached to later moments is it visually stumbles a bit with the CGI heavy scenes. The budget just is not there to deal with the extended use of the advanced technology they are going for. It is never so bad that it becomes cheesy, but it is noticeable.

Overall, The Invisible Man is a great story of overcoming mental abuse and gaslighting. The ending may not present 100% explicit answers, but it asks us to trust the victim and not fall into the trap of (extremely weak) plausible deniability; ring any bells? Indulge yourself with The Invisible Man this coronavirus quarantine season, for it is a true psychological horror treat.

The post The Invisible Man (2020) – Review appeared first on MovieRiffing.

Click here to watch the video version of this review.

The Hunt essentially opens with 12 strangers awakening in a field, all from different origins. They do not know why they are there or who may have captured them, but they quickly realize their captors do not plan to keep them alive for long.

As the next 1hr 55mins plays out, The Hunt attempts to satirize the growing political divide in America. Emphasis on “attempts.” It takes shots at both sides, but they so routinely come across as ham-fisted and clunky they elicit more moans than laughter. And in making so many surface level jokes about everyone, the film fails to make a statement. It essentially points a finger at the worst qualities of the worst people on either end of the spectrum, screams, “haha isn’t that stupid,” and then cuts to black.

Sure, it depicts far-right conservatives as prone to fantastical conspiracy theories and paints their liberal counterparts as those who are just as likely to ignore truths in order to construct their holier-than-thou positions, but it peters out after that. The Hunt simply does not say enough to justify itself. In fact, The Hunt falls victim to the same trap its characters do, it constantly thinks its smarter than it is.

About halfway through the film, there is a “twist” (I use that word lightly) that reveals The Hunt as a smidge smarter than I originally gave it credit for. However, it uses its twist to launch another surface level critique instead of saying something more profound. Every time it has the opportunity, The Hunt stops just short of producing something meaningful.

The Hunt unfortunately does not live up to the potential of its premise. If a studio decides to delay a film due to controversy, I would prefer the film to at least be controversial. Betty Gilpin’s terrific performance as Crystal fails to be truly memorable due to the films constant stumbling. A chuckle here or there cannot make up for the persistent eye-rolling The Hunt induces. Ultimately, The Hunt closer resembles a middle schooler’s idea of political satire rather than anything of value.

The post The Hunt – Review appeared first on MovieRiffing.

Usually, studios provide theaters with roughly 90 days of exclusivity before releasing films through other means. With Universal Pictures now defying that norm, this could potentially lead to long term issues for theaters. Will moviegoers want to give up the convenience of their own home? After all, home theater set-ups have improved substantially and it seems harder and harder to find a venue with patrons not on their phones or talking to one another.

After a few months of social distancing, new habits will form. Once loyal theatergoers may begin to shun going out for the latest films and embrace a simpler and more personal experience. Home set-ups may never truly match the screen and sound quality of a decent theater, but how good is good enough? Is the pure spectacle of it all still a strong draw? Or are Universal’s actions another nail in the traditional theater system’s coffin?

The post Universal Pictures to Release Films on VOD Amid Coronavirus appeared first on MovieRiffing.

Click here to listen to an audio version of this review.

From the opening scene you sit trapped inside the container alongside Anthony Peterson (Ron Thompson); a setting that becomes quite familiar. The lack of extraneous action or actors in any scene forces a critical eye onto the presentation, and that extra scrutiny works against it. Audio clipping off at the end of lines, uninspired voice-over work, and Ron Thompson hamming it up in an effort to inject life into the dimly lit room all plague the film. Adding to the amateur atmosphere, the threats made by Peterson’s captors come across as comical at best and cringe inducing at worst. In an effort to make the dialogue more authentic, Dylan went too far.

At times you physically feel the script clumsily covering up plot holes. Oddly enough the only scene not combed for consistency could benefit the most from it. After the removal of his teeth, there was no lasting change in speech, and when the camera focuses in on Thompson’s mouth again everything appears fine. For a film that was so quick to explain away why a cellphone could still work after an electrocution, it comes across as a rather large oversight and something I would have liked to see Dylan explore. Moreover, without any other characters to show, the twists and turns coming from Peterson’s personal contacts always seem forced. As soon as the drama appears to settle, rest assured another betrayal awaits.

One of the more interesting aspects of [Cargo] comes with the dynamic camera movement throughout the film. When you hear a car peel out, crash, or swerve on the other end of the phone, the camera inside the container moves to match. While not perfect and at times too exaggerated for my tastes, the movements add an interesting wrinkle to the setting. Unable to follow the traditional “show don’t tell” rule due to the self imposed constraints of the film, Dylan does the next best thing and adds a genuinely nice touch to the film’s admittedly borrowed conceit.

A less original and frankly unearned touch was the cliché lighting imagery at the end of the film. I won’t say much for the sake of spoilers, but the film’s final turn comes out of left field. It needs several more scenes of character development, or at least some time to cool off from the climax. As presented it feels like something ripped straight out of the The Room.

Thorsten Quaeschning from Tangerine Dream (known for Grand Theft Auto V, Legend, Risky Business, Thief, and more) helms the soundtrack with his band Picture Palace Music. I can’t say any of the tracks stand out but, regardless of my nitpicking the original soundtrack is a truly nice touch; adding a well produced epic (sometimes too epic?) undertone to the affair.

I appreciate [Cargo] as a young director’s indie debut. Unfortunately, I cannot recommend it. The film has merit, and director James Dylan appears to have a bright future, but he still needs to find his style and perfect his craft. With a cleaned up script, tighter cinematography, and a few more hours tweaking audio, [Cargo] could stand as a fine film regardless of indie status. However, right now the rough acting and technical aspects hold it back. Film geeks who enjoy seeing budding directors get their starts should give [Cargo] a watch; otherwise, pass.

The post [Cargo] – Review appeared first on MovieRiffing.

Click here to listen to an audio version of this review.

Bill Murray and Adam Driver delightfully play off of each other as the end of the world draws near. The two small town cops face an increasingly dangerous threat, maintaining the same deadpan delivery throughout. Driver declaring ‘zombies’ and ‘ghouls’ at the first sign of trouble is a highlight of 2019.

Much of the movie operates the same way. Taking its dark premise along with the audience’s zombie movie expectations, and reeling the characters’ reactions all the way in. Many times the punchline is that there was not much of a joke to begin with. The end result, while not everyone’s taste, is drop dead hilarious. As the end draws near, the absurdity of the situation ramps up exponentially, making the stark contrast with the level of reaction all the better. The Dead Don’t Die manages this style of comedy perfectly throughout its roughly hour and half (1h 43m) runtime.

Disappointingly, Jarmusch stumbles with the allegory he lays over top the film. What could have been a somewhat subtle nod to American capitalism and excess, gets beaten over your head with a two by four having no fewer than 20 rusty nails sticking out of it. It starts off okay, Steve Buscemi is wearing a MAGA hat, but it helps form a larger point later. Then when the hordes of zombies make their appearance, they make it excruciatingly clear they want their ‘phones’, ‘chardonnay’, ‘cable TV’… get the point? They repeat it so often and forcefully it almost loops all the way back around to funny again. Still, at this point in the film it only comes across as a minor grievance. Helping its cause, there are some legitimately interesting ongoing metaphors. You have the groups who recognize the oncoming danger but take no action, the young who realize straight away how they need to act to survive, the weird foreigner here for observation, and the MAGA hat wearing Steve Buscemi standing his ground to the bloody end.

However, none of this helps the film stick the landing. The final scenes noticeably lack the punch and uptick in tempo they were going for, and oh my goodness the closing monologue. If you happen to fall asleep through the first two thirds of the film don’t worry, The Dead Don’t Die makes sure to give you a full recap of all the points it wants to make. It attempts to play it off as further commentary with who presents it, but none of that changes the heavy handed conclusion. A promising piece of absurdist commentary gets kicked down the stairs at the very last second. Honestly, I don’t know which studio executive was confused and insisted on its inclusion, but it taints an otherwise pretty great film.

Overall, my thoughts can be summed up by the first thing I said walking out of the theater, “I actually unironically enjoyed the movie.”

The post The Dead Don’t Die – Review appeared first on MovieRiffing.