Send us Fan Mail

We review Undertone, a horror movie built around a remote podcast and a daughter caring for her dying mother, and we keep circling the same feeling: huge potential with too little payoff. We score the acting, cinematography, sound, plot, and rewatchability, then land on a unified 2.5 out of 5 after debating what the film sets up and what it refuses to deliver.
• our quick synopsis of Undertone and why the premise hits close to home for podcasters
• acting problems across on-screen and voice performances
• cinematography choices like Dutch angles and why they feel unmotivated
• sound design highlights including silence and headphone transitions
• the “fun and games” the movie teases but never plays
• vibes-based storytelling versus plot-based horror and why the ending frustrates us
• themes we notice around isolation, caregiving, addiction, and consequence
• how we would change our behavior if we were the haunted podcasters
Make sure to check out our podcast, we come out every week wherever podcasts are sold.

Support the show

Send us Fan Mail

Three hosts pick apart The Bride with sharp takes on feminist rage, authorship, and whether lavish style can carry a stitched-together plot. We rate acting, visuals, soundtrack, and rewatchability, and debate who this film truly serves.

• reframing the Bride of Frankenstein through autonomy and identity
• neo-noir cinematography that outshines the script
• performances from Jessie Buckley and Christian Bale under a surreal tone
• soundtrack swings, including Monster Mash, that split the room
• detective subplot versus love story balance breaking the spine
• authorship and white feminism questions around wealth and voice
• audience fit and why some viewers felt seen while others bounced
• final scores averaging to a mid-tier recommendation

“you listen to this, you can’t unlisten to it—fucking follow us places… help us out, send us around, do the things”

Support the show

Send a text

We rate Bologna a bleak four out of five and unpack why stellar performances can coexist with near-zero rewatchability. The film’s black comedy bends into class, power, and the costs of choosing violence when systems refuse to change.

• tight trio of leads driving tension
• swelling score against stark, wide shots
• plot twists that test empathy and logic
• class allegory of isolation and trespass
• physical violence versus systemic harm
• symbolism of bees, fossils, and fallout
• debate on moral ends and ruined means
• final verdict: impressive, heavy, not cozy

If you're liking what we do, please tell your friends, like, subscribe, do all the fucking things

Support the show

Send a text

We rate and debate a new Wuthering Heights adaptation, digging into where it stuns on screen and where the story blinks. We push past the outrage cycle to ask what an adaptation owes the source and what happens when a film hints at heavy themes but refuses to land them.

• why tension reads as “lewd” when it’s repression
• key deviations from Brontë’s plot and tone
• revenge vs romance and what got softened
• depiction of sexual violence and missing context
• desire, kink, and early exposure shaped by the internet
• strong lead chemistry and smart close-ups
• uneven soundtrack with a few standout tracks
• the outrage machine steering first impressions
• communication as the theme the film avoids
• final ratings and a playful “fake movie” reveal

Support the show

Send a text

We rate Sam Raimi’s “Send Help” four stars and dig into how an island strips the gloss off corporate ambition, turning tropes into a sharp critique of power, merit, and survival. McAdams owns the screen, the camera bites, and the final stare puts the audience on trial.

• acting that turns humiliation into resolve
• Raimi signatures in kinetic, queasy camera work
• familiar desert‑island tropes used as satire
• the rock reveal reframing agency and ethics
• competence versus entitlement as core conflict
• the last shot reading as judgment, not wink
• theater crowd energy enhancing tension
• why “women are crazy” is the wrong lens
• our insert‑ourselves what‑ifs for dark humor
• final verdict: a tight, rewatchable four stars

Go see this movie if it's still in theaters near you

Support the show

Send a text

Three hosts get high, sip whiskey, and sort out why a stylish, 60s-set Fantastic Four feels both gorgeous and strangely soft. We rate the acting, roast the CGI baby, praise Galactus and Silver Surfer, and debate whether retrofuturism is a comforting lie or a clever setup for future conflict.

• 60s-set retrofuturism as aesthetic and thesis
• Galactus and Silver Surfer visuals landing with weight
• Performances: Kirby shines, Pascal contained, Reed underused
• Score motif memorable but overplayed
• Desire for inventive “team powers” problem-solving
• Comparison with Superman’s hopeful grit vs naïve optimism
• All art as propaganda; family and compliance messaging
• Hopes for X‑Men to introduce social friction and stakes
• Final ratings and rewatchability judgments
• Teasers for Dolby screenings, Tron and Avatar trailers

“Go see this movie. See it in Dolby. It fucking rocked me in Dolby.”

Support the show

Send a text

We rate Rian Johnson’s Wake Up Dead Man, argue what makes a fair-play whodunit, and wrestle with how religion and charisma shape control, community, and consequence. Between jokes and toasts, we land on 3.5 out of 5 and ask for bolder risks next time.

• scoring the film by cinematography, acting, score, story, rewatchability
• standout shots that map power and space in the church
• ensemble performances and tonal hamminess on purpose
• pacing drag and the line between twisty and fair-play solvable
• faith, cult dynamics, and the soft-pedaled cost of belief
• media risk, IP fatigue, and why new voices matter
• playful “insert ourselves into the plot” alternate scenes

“Always wear your seatbelts”

Support the show

Send a text

We mark our 100th episode by reviewing Wicked 2 with clear eyes and full glasses, weighing standout CGI against flat lighting, soft songs, and a story that stalls whenever the music starts. The Oz lore tie-ins land, but the pacing and depth rarely do.

• definitive category ratings across acting, cinematography, score, story and rewatchability
• why blanket lighting flattens emotion and kills depth
• how song placement undercuts momentum and character beats
• propaganda, perspective and who gets to define “good”
• CGI creature work that actually impresses
• stage vs screen: why act two sag hits harder on film
• audience energy, theater vibes and expectations vs delivery
• our final verdict at 2.5 out of 5

If you enjoyed it, please like and subscribe and do all the things

Support the show