A partial list of this year’s nominees can be viewed below:

Best Feature

-“Peter Hujar’s Day”
-“The Plague”
-“Sorry, Baby”
-“Train Dreams”
-“Twinless”

Best First Feature

-“Blue Sun Palace”
-“Dust Bunny”
-“East of Wall”
-“Lurker”
-“One Of Them Days”

John Cassavetes Award

-“The Baltimorons”
-“Boys Go to Jupiter”
-“Eephus”
-“Esta Isla”
-“Familiar Touch”

Best Lead Performance

-Everett Blunck “The Plague”
-Rose Byrne “If I Had Legs I’d Kick you”
-Kathleen Chalfant “Familiar Touch”
-Chang Chen “Lucky Lu”
-Joel Edgerton “Train Dreams”
-Dylan O’Brien “Twinless”
-Keke Palmer “One of Them Days”
-Theodore Pellerin “Lurker”
-Tessa Thompson “Hedda”
-Ben Whishaw “Peter Hujar’s Day”

Best Supporting Performance

-Naomi Ackie “Sorry, Baby”
-Zoey Deutch “Novelle Vague”
-Kirsten Dunst “Roofman”
-Rebecca Hall “Peter Hujar’s Day”
-Nina Hoss “Hedda”
-Jane Levy “A Little Prayer”
-Archie Madekwe “Lurker”
-Kali Reis “Rebuilding”
-Jacob Tremblay “Soverign”
-Haipeng Xu “Blue Sun Palace”

Best Breakthrough Performance

-Liz Larsen “The Baltimorons”
-Misha Osherovich “She’s the He”
-Kayo Martin “The Plague”
-SZA “One of Them Days”
-Tabatha Zimiga “East of Wall”

Best Director

-Clint Bently “Train Dreams”
-Mary Bronstein “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You”
-Llyod Lee Choi “Lucky Lu”
-Ira Sachs “Peter Hujar’s Day”
-Eva Victor “Sorry, Baby”

Best Screenplay

-Michael Angelo Covino, Kyle Marvin “Splitsville”
-Angus MacLachlan “A Little Prayer”
-James Sweeney “Twinless”
-Christian Swegal “Soverign”
-Eva Victor “Sorry, Baby”

Best First Screenplay

-Andrew DeYoung “Friendship”
-Elena Oxman “Outerlands”
-Alex Russell “Lurker”
-Syreeta Singleton “One of Them Days”
-Constance Tsang “Blue Sun Palace”

Best Cinematography

-Alex Ashe “Peter Hujar’s Day”
-Norm Li “Blue Sun Palace’
-David J. Thompson “Warfare”
-Adolpho Veloso “Train Dreams”
-Nicole Hirsch Whitaker “Dust Bunny”

Best Editing

-Ben Leonberg “Good Boy”
-Carson Lund “Eephus”
-Fin Oates “Warfare”
-Sara Shaw “Splitsville”
-Sofia Subercaseaux “The Testament of Ann Lee”

Best Documentary

-“Come See Me in the Good Light”
-“Endless Cookie”
-“My Undesirable Friends: Part I – Last Air in Moscow”
-“The Perfect Neighbor”
-“The Tale of Silyan”

The 2026 ceremony will be held at a new location for the first time in 40 years. Instead of inside a tent on the beach in Santa Monica, the ceremony will take place on February 15, 2026 at the Hollywood Palladium.

The post “Peter Hujard’s Day” Leads Independent Spirit Awards Nominations appeared first on Canyon News.

Yes, it is hard to say this in 2025 that CDs are a thing of the past. I’ll be honest the last CD I purchased had to be in 2009. I simply stopped purchasing them because I got tired of wasting my money on music that wasn’t top tier. I don’t want to buy a CD that only has 2 songs worth listening to.

With that said, vinyl has witnessed an amazing explosion in the past 5 years or so. I mean before 2020 there were NOT many people at all who owned record players and utilized them to play music. Maybe the older generation like my parents, but not millennials or Gen Z. Oh, that has changed, but the problem is vinyl records are NOT AFFORDABLE. Go visit Target, Best Buy or any record store and you will see how expensive vinyl albums truly are. There is no way I’m paying $40-$60 for an album; I’m sorry that is absolutely crazy and bonkers, and I don’t care who the hell you are talking to.

A CD was like $10; the music industry wants you to pay like 5x that amount for a single album nowadays if not way more, which means you are in a situation where your money truly has to be stretched to get what it is that you truly want. This is the same sentiment for home entertainment like DVDs, Blu-Ray Discs and 4K Discs. Go to Target, you’re not going to find any of these things anymore. If you want to purchase a movie for home viewing that you can permanently own and insert into a device, good luck.

Streaming has changed that; you’re expected to purchase such items online for delivery to your home. They are no longer in stores, and I find that crazy to say the least. The same applies to Best Buy; they no longer sell any of these items in store, I think within the last month or two they have placed some DVDs, Blu-Ray discs and 4K discs of classic movies on their website via third parties for purchase.

Like I don’t understand some retail establishments. It feels like they want Amazon to be the kind of all things you buy. Yes, you can get stuff quicker and it can be delivered directly to your home. You know what else you can do: go to the actual establishment and buy it yourself. This is why we continue to see so many brick-and-mortar establishments go out of business and close their doors. The things you want to buy you cannot find them in stores at all.

I like buying movies; I like having them as collectibles. I’m a movie collector, but it has literally been a year since the last movie I purchased on Blu-Ray. Why? No retailers advertise them anymore, and you’ll be lucky to find one in stores and the prices are just, “Ridiculous, I’m sorry.” I shouldn’t have to go to like 6 to 7 retailers to try to find something that used to be the norm.

However, you don’t have many electronic retail establishments anymore. I mean I have Best Buy, Target, Walmart (to a degree), FYE (to the stores that are still around) and that’s it. If you know any others, please let me know because I’m listening. Costco and Sam’s Club don’t fall into that group because they don’t really sell those things. You can only purchase so many things on streaming services/devices because you’re going to RUN OUT OF SPACE. I will be damned if I am going to delete or get rid of things I spent my hard money on when it comes to entertainment.

Hello Hollywood and music industry, there is still money to be made from purchasing movies and music beyond on the streaming platforms. If there are any retailers who want to consider a new business establishment that sells such things, hate to say it, but you could have a money maker on your hands.

The post What Is Happening To Music, Blu-Ray With Retail Establishments appeared first on Canyon News.

The trailer was released on Thursday, October 30, and does it ooze and scream back to the 1996 and 1997 days of the franchise where you could feel the tension and terror. The trailer opens to a couple visiting the iconic Stu Macher home which as become an attraction, too bad it is an attraction that actually has Ghostface present and ready to attack.

That transitions to the audience seeing Sidney receive a call from a Ghostface who talks about new town, Pinegrove that Sidney has made home with her daughter Tatum (Isabel May) and her husband Mark (Joel McHale). We get shots of Tatum with her new pals played by McKenna Grace and Celeste O’Connor.

An amazing scene sees Sidney and Tatum navigate through the walls of her home as Ghostface stalks them, not to mention referencing their past to Woodsboro, that is clue number 1 people. He seems to be very familiar with Sidney’s home to say the least, Gale Weathers (Courteney Cox) returns in an iconic scene to help her pal, with Chad (Mason Gooding) and Mindy (Jasmin Savoy-Brown) in tow.

There looks like plenty of fight sequences, not to mention flames galore and Sidney in a protective mode we have yet to see her in as she fights to protect her daughter and her family from whoever is looking to wreck havoc on her life. “Scream 7” arrives in theaters on February 27, 2026. Oh, it looks like the horror fans have been looking for is back and that might be a direct result of the movie’s creator, Kevin Williamson FINALLY stepping behind the camera to helm a franchise that changed the genre as we know it.

The post “Scream 7” Trailer Unleashes Absolute Terror appeared first on Canyon News.

As in most Hollywood iterations, if you make a ton of a money, a sequel is bound to happen. So fast-forward several years later to 1982, and Finney is back, as well as Gwen for this sequel that dives into a realm that seemed all too familiar for me, with “The Black Phone 2.” Why? The Grabber is dead, yet, his presence is very much still all around Finney and Gwen, so it begs the questions: HOW?

Think Freddy Kreuger, but without the razor claws and wise one-liners. The Grabber has found a way to terrify, Finney and those people closest to him by attacking them while sleep, in particular his sister Gwen. Finney is not dealing with his ordeal well, smoking and fighting to deal with being a survivor of such a horrific situation. Gwen does his best to get him to open up to no avail, that is until she begins having dreams about The Grabber and his presence still being in her orbit.

Why is that crucial? Well, it seems that The Grabber has ties to a Christian camp, known as Alpine Lake where Finney and Gwen’s mother, Hope visited in the late 50s. Gwen’s dreams hint to murders that transpired at the camp that may be directly tied to The Grabber. I did love the mood and atmosphere of the film at a snowy, cold camp with religion tied in. Yeah, you can in some odd way predict where the narrative may be headed once a few things are revealed. I would NOT say predictable, but there is not a stunning moment or series or events that totally change the trajectory.

I like some of the scares and the mayhem that the movie brings to the audience without being over the top with the violence. There is tension building and we see that tension stretch, but also culminate at the same time. I love this idea of writer/director Scott Derrickson taking a slice out of Wes Craven’s book with his iconic “A Nightmare on Elm Street.” People getting hurt, and actually dying from their dreams is scary.

The problem with “The Black Phone 2” is we’ve already seen it, so the movie takes a unique approach to try to sever it from that classic, but it works. Thames is solid in his reprisal, but McGraw is the star of this performance delivering some acting that is fascinating to watch. Hawke is still a standout, but he doesn’t get to eat up the role as he did in the first movie because he’s DEAD. The thriller loses points because no one actually dies considering this is a horror movie, but it places the characters we care about Finney and Gwen in serious danger and that keeps you invested in how things may turn out. You’ll have fun in the theater watching “The Black Phone 2.”

The post “The Black Phone 2” Is Terrifying Fun appeared first on Canyon News.

Is “Aliens” a great movie? Absolutely, but it is a completely different movie from its predecessor that had a level of spine-tingling suspense, you cannot put it into words. The chest-bursting scene: unforgettable. That scene with Dallas and his hunt for ‘the alien’ if you could eat that tension it would be amazing. To this day, I think that has one of the most intense sequences I consider in horror.

If you’re talking about any of the flicks in the “Halloween,” “Friday the 13th” and “Nightmare on Elm Street” franchises, none outdo the original. John Carpenter’s 1978 classic, “Halloween” still scares people senseless to this day. It is quintessential horror, and he is the iconic boogeyman as a result. “Friday the 13th” gave us the push for excessive gore/creative kills in the genre and introduced hockey-masked villain, Jason Voorhees. We can’t forget Wes Craven’s birth of the iconic night-stalker with Freddy Krueger. Now, if there is a sequel some argue is quite good it is “A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors.”

That sequel is damn close to being better than the original, it only loses points because it doesn’t have the tension and that level of fear the original helmed. Freddy became a bit of a wisecracker and that takes out the fear element of the villain. None of the other “Halloween” movies come close to the original, I love the 2018 flick, but it doesn’t trounce the original, and “Friday the 13th” doesn’t really have any phenomenal sequels that outwit the original and the twist at the end.

If there is a franchise that has some solid entries it would be the 1996 film “Scream.” What’s the problem though? None of the flicks capture that witty element of balancing pure terror with slight touches of comedy and poking fun at the genre that works so well and easily. “Scream 2” is a worthy sequel, but it misses the mark, by a slight tinge, just slightly.

Please don’t ask me to try to name a sequel that is better than the original in the horror realm. I cannot, I wish I could, but I can name more movies that are worse, terrible, dreadful, which poses the question: why are there so many?! You don’t see many action, comedies or dramas that have more than two maybe three movies. Horror, you get into the realm of seven, eight, nine, 10 hell some movies have reached beyond that number in the franchise. In a way, it has killed the genre.

Here is where Hollywood has made the mistake: not every movie needs a sequel. You know where a sequel should come into place? If there is MORE STORY TO BE TOLD THAT COULD NOT BE TOLD IN THE FIRST MOVIE. Hollywood doesn’t see that, and it becomes more of a chore to create a story to further the original. There’s the mistake. The story already has to be there, when you try to cook it up, you tend to come up with ideas that are just plain stupid and make no sense whatsoever.

There is a reason the genre exploded in the 80s and died in the 80s: SEQUELS. It feels like the genre could be in that same realm with the legacy sequel that has dominated popularity and the big question we all ask is: WHY?

The post The Horror Sequel Debate appeared first on Canyon News.

The 2009 version of “Friday the 13th” had some high points, but terrible character development and no true standout moments besides the opening sequence. We already know the 1998 version of “Psycho” was dreadful, because it was a copy and paste of the original version, just this time in color. Also, it hurts the movie if you already know the big twist of the original.

The 2010 remake of “A Nightmare on Elm Street” was one of the worst flicks I had seen in years. The fact that this is the type of Freddy Krueger and narrative we got almost 30 years after the 1984 original by Wes Craven was just beyond disappointing. Every other 80s slasher flick that had been remade were just as bad if not worse than the original. There was no innovation in those remakes at all.

However, I have 2 flicks that I can put into the rankings of being pretty damn solid if not almost better than the original. First on my list in the 2002 flick “The Ring.” It was the American version of the Japanese horror classic “Ringu.” Why does this flick rank high for me? I saw the remake before I saw the original.

So, I didn’t have any idea of the big twist or the inner workings of the predecessor before seeing this, which makes all the difference when it comes to watching a horror movie for the very first time, a horror remake to say the least. Naomi Watts is fantastic as the reporter trying to get to the bottom of this VHS tape that if you watch it can ultimately led to your demise exactly 7 days later.

Her son was just super creepy, and the film envelops the spectator in a narrative where you are trying to solve the puzzle before the puzzle is solved, but you don’t figure it out and when you do, your jaw is a bit dropped on the floor. This is a good reveal, and all of the clues are there, you just have to look for it. It doesn’t lose its lore on a re-watch, if anything you find more clues that help you piece the mystery of the twist in addition to trying to understand “The Ring” and why this ghostly little girl is so terrifying.

I had to truly think about the only other remake that I found satisfying in the past 20 years, and the one that I keep going back to is the 2003 film “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.” It is vital for you to know, I never saw the 1974 classic helmed by Tobe Hooper. I had just heard horror stories about it from my dad as a kid. Not to mention you have that infamous movie poster and the constant chatter that the movie was based on a true story.

So when I went into this movie, I truly was completely blind. I knew nothing about the hitchhiker, the sheriff and the family of cannibals that preyed on people who got lost. The villain, Leatherface, we don’t know much about him which I think makes the film unnerving. We know he wears skinned masks and he helms a chainsaw like no other, and this isn’t a small guy. This is a pretty big, husky guy, who has run faster than most killers in the horror genre, wielding a very dangerous weapon in the process.

I saw this time and time again, a chainsaw is beyond scary, because what can’t it cut thru? Probably concrete, where it would take a lot of time to put a dent into, but anything else, wood, glass, metal, you in trouble and that’s terrifying to think about.

The cinematography by Marcus Nispel is fantastic, and kudos have to go to Jessica Biel who eats up the role as our heroine Erin. You could feel the terror and fear this character endured and that’s a testament to some fine acting. Why Biel wasn’t featured in more horror films after this one, I will never know, but she damn sure should have.

I know what you all are thinking. Are those the only 2 movies? Unfortunately, yes, I cannot in good faith sit here and recommend movies that don’t deliver and were not in any fashion better than original. Most simply focused on trying to recapture moments from the classic and that’s always the problem.

Horror regurgitates its past and fans don’t want to see that. We want to see a reinterpretation of things with a first lens. There is no need to recycle moments from the past, if anything the goal should be to deliver iconic moments to be debated for the future.

The post Best Horror Remakes Of The Past 25 Years appeared first on Canyon News.

There was a little-known film made by Michael Powell called “Peeping Tom” that was released in 1959 that holds that honor. Very unnerving and a classic flick not many know about especially if you’re not a cinema buff or someone who was a film studies major as an undergraduate. The 70s really upped the ante of the mayhem, so much to the point it was the reason the 80s exploded the genre and killed it at the same time.

You had “The Exorcist,” “Black Christmas,” “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre,” “Phantasm,” “Alien” and John Carpenter’s 1978 classic “Halloween.” All unique movies in their own way that started to shape the genre into the sci-fi, possession, gore and slasher subgenres. Then we have the 80s, which is when I was born and the plethora of horror was unbelievable, you had “Friday the 13th” and “A Nightmare on Elm Street” that introduced us to the realm of franchises, sequel mania and iconic villains Jason Voorhees and Freddy Kreuger.

You also had the birth of what were deemed Scream Queens, but there is only one if you truly think about it, and her name is Jamie Lee Curtis. The number of horror flicks this woman starred in is unbelievable. There are a couple of classics like “Hellraiser,” “Child’s Play,” that top my list, but the rest were subpar if not terrible. Why? They simply copied and pasted what everyone else did before them. There was no originality. Come the 90s the genre was dead. It’s just a fact, movies were still being churned, but it wasn’t until the 1996 classic “Scream” helmed by Wes Craven and written by Kevin Williamson that changed the genre.

It poked fun at horror and the troupes in a way a movie never did before, and it spawned a slew of copycats to a degree with “I Know What You Did Last Summer” and “Urban Legend” among many others. This ultimately ushered us in the 2000s, where remake mania became potent as hell. If the movie was made in the 70s or 80s, you saw a remake of it in the 2000s and 2010s, but none were truly epic, if we’re being honest. It was a copy and paste with new faces and some elevated tech at best. I loved “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” from 2003, “The Ring” in 2002 and “The Grudge” in 2004, there were probably others, but nothing that blew my socks off.

I loved the more psychological horror in the past 10 years or so with flicks like “Hereditary” and a few others, but no actual standouts that blew my mind. I liked “Freaky” and “You’re Next,” not to mention the twist on “Happy Death Day.” As we look at the past five to 10 years, it was the remake/rebirth/requel birth of the genre, as we saw a mesh between the remake of an original and a sequel combined to try to deliver a fresh take on things.

We have the 2018 version of “Halloween” that was amazing, we got a 2022 version of “Scream” (which is simply “Scream 5” that was a fresh take), and we’ve gotten plenty of others that I can name, but it begs the question, is it worth it to do it? No.

Why? The originality element of the genre feels it died like 30 to 40 years ago. No one is coming up with ideas that are game-changing and so fresh that it blows your mind. I’ve never been a fan of horror for the violence, which for reasons I cannot explain has always felt like the focus of so many writers and directors of the genre. Every now and then we get a glimpse of something fresh, but it’s so fleeting.

It could be a direct result of Hollywood not wanting to take a gamble. They want to do what is cheap, affordable and can quickly be churned out to make a quick buck; they don’t care about how stale the story is and how weakly developed the characters in the movie are. I want to change that as a filmmaker. I want to bring something fresh to the genre and flip it on its head. I don’t want you to know who is going to live and die as soon as the movie starts. The opening of the movie doesn’t always have to be a kill, how about we get some character development.

I want a villain that is just as smart if not smarter than our protagonist(s). I want developments in the narrative that stuns the viewer, and I want to build suspense to a height that when it bursts it leaves you so unnerved you never truly put yourself back together until after the movie ends. The goal is to leave you glued to the screen in the best way possible.

Do I think the genre can revitalize? Yes, but it comes with people wanting to take a risk and not be afraid to think outside the box and not just do what is safe. Safe is ok, but does it make you stand out from all the others? Not really and that is the problem with horror, there are so many movies that are forgettable instead of iconic.

The post Is The Horror Genre Dead? appeared first on Canyon News.

Cameron, a Vietnam veteran, is hiding from the police and joins a film crew that urgently needs a new stuntman to replace one who has been killed.

Agreeing out of desperation to fill the vacant position, the protagonist soon realizes that the job is much more dangerous than he thought, and the final stunt involving a car flying off a bridge, which led to the death of his predecessor, could cost him his own life.

The situation is exacerbated by a romance that Cameron manages to start right on set.

Lord of Speed and Time

Special effects master Mike Jittlow made only one feature film, which did not reach wide release and was never released on DVD, but this single film was more than enough to make the director-producer-screenwriter-animator-actor, etc. a cult figure.

After releasing a short film in 1979 about a wizard in a green robe running across America at the speed of wind and winning the admiration of festival audiences (no one could believe that just one person, even a very talented one, could accomplish such a titanic task), Jittlow was inspired to make a feature film about how this “short film” was created.

Here are some interesting games – Reels and Wheels XL

The big picture

A situation familiar to many young directors: you are talented and ambitious, Hollywood bosses want to work with you, you have an idea for a film, and everything seems to be going well…

But any film is a product of collective creativity, and it is extremely difficult to withstand the pressure from the masses of interested parties who want to influence the final result. Film schools don’t teach this, and novice director Nick Chapman has to learn the painful truth for himself: making the film you dream of in Hollywood may only be possible at the cost of personal loss.

Ed Wood

Tim Burton did not always shoot dark fairy tales — in the mid-90s, he briefly returned to the real world and made a black-and-white biopic about the creative path of Ed Wood, whom many still consider the worst director of all time (despite the activities of such nimble competitors as Uwe Boll).

Transgender people, zombies, space aliens in hoodies, rubber octopuses, and flying saucers made from car hubcaps — all mixed together in the boiling cauldron of creativity of this hapless filmmaker, who recruited actors for his films almost off the street, wrote scripts on the fly, and resorted to the most ingenious tricks to find sponsors for his art.

Although the film depicts the 1950s, Hollywood’s inner workings have changed little since then, and the principle of “so bad it’s good” has given more than one generation of creative freaks their 15 minutes of fame.

Cool Guy

If you’re making a movie in Hollywood, be sure to get a star for your film — after all, audiences don’t want to see movies that don’t have big names on the posters. This was the principle followed by the main character of the comedy Cool Guy, director Bobby Bowfinger, when he launched a fantastic project about an alien invasion of Earth, starring the famous Kit Ramsey in the lead role.

However, there is one problem: Ramsey himself has no intention of starring in anything. But that doesn’t stop the cunning Bowfinger: he starts following the star everywhere with a movie camera, arranging situations that he needs for the script, and everything goes smoothly—especially since Ramsey soon discovers a much more accommodating twin brother who is willing to “sell his face” in particularly difficult scenes.

The post Five Hollywood Films About Hollywood appeared first on Canyon News.

The success of that flick spawned a dreadful 2018 sequel, and we’re now in the midst of a new trilogy that feels like a rebirth of the franchise, but to be honest, I’m not fully sure. With that said, “The Strangers: Chapter 1” was not fantastic; it just felt like a long movie where nothing really happened, and when things started to happen the movie was over. Not to mention, some of the antics by our protagonists just makes you scratch your head and yell and scream at the screen.

“The Strangers: Chapter 2” is upon us, but the question is whether it’s better than its predecessor. I have to argue it actually is, but does it narratively give you again fantastic? No, not really, but I found myself a bit more invested in this entry because we get a bit of backstory.

What backstory? The unmasking of one of the ‘The Strangers’ in particular ‘Pin-Up Girl.’ We get a slice of that history, in small flashbacks, but no actual clue, but it’s kind of is if you pay attention. Director Renny Harlin does a solid job focusing the camera on potential suspects.

As the audience you have no idea, who in this small town of Venus, Oregon is culpable or can be trusted. Honestly, everyone is strange, everyone seems to be hiding a secret, and you do suspect everyone. The only person you do immediately connect to is our protagonist Maya (Madelaine Petsch), who survives that brutal stabbing, but her fiancé, not so much as we see in flashbacks as she deals with her trauma.

The sequel wakes up with Maya recovering in a hospital, and people in town speculate about what has unfolded. Looks like someone discovers that Maya is still alive and our vicious trio haunts the hospital hoping to take out Maya. Dare I say, “The Strangers: Chapter 2” is simply put, a long-chase scene. I didn’t have a problem with it because you don’t see chase scenes anymore in horror, and to have an elongated chase sequence was fun to watch. Would Maya crumble or would she triumph and outlast her tormentors? That is the journey the audience takes with the protagonist.

The violence is not over the top, there is a VERY BAD, CGI or AI animal that just looks terrible. AI can be a powerful tool in filmmaking, but when it’s used carelessly, it breaks immersion instead of enhancing it,” said Georgi Dimitrov, CEO at Fantasy AI. Audiences deserve better than shortcuts that sacrifice storytelling, but overall, I found myself entertained with this horror/thriller that clocks in under 90 mins. Better than its predecessor, but not by a ton, but if you can find a way to edge out a predecessor that not many enjoyed you have done something well.

The post “The Strangers: Chapter 2” Offers Some Thrills appeared first on Canyon News.

The film is an adaptation of horror icon Stephen King’s novel, and it is led by terrific performances from all the actors in the film, but in particular by David Jonsson and Cooper Hoofman. Jonsson portrays Peter McVries aka as #23, who is on this arduous journey alongside Raymond ‘Ray’ Garraty aka #47.

The boys are part of a televised entertainment event in a post-apocalyptic America after a war that has left many parts of the country beyond destitute. One boy is chosen by lottery from each state to participate in the event. Most of the boys have signed up in hopes of winning the large cash prize by being the last one standing, in addition to having one wish of theirs being granted at the same time. They need the money for their family to ensure survival.

It sounds easy; sounds great, but there is a problem, the hands of ‘The Long Walk’ is at the behest of ‘The Major’ portrayed by a cold Mark Hamill. The chaos starts earlier and it’s a horror for the viewer to watch; if you stop walking or after that third warning, you’re shot dead right in front of everyone watching and those other boys who are walking with you. It is brutal and visceral and shocked me seeing the first kid lose his life because he caught a charley-horse and couldn’t continue to walk.

Even more horrifying is witnessing one of the boys suffer from diarrhea and not be able to continue to walk and being shot dead as a result. Making matters worse is seeing one of the walkers literally break his foot as a result of the excruciating walk and walking on his ankle that is literally bent and ultimately give up. The result he’s shot in the head and killed.

You may think there is end in sight that the boys only have to walk so many miles, but you would be wrong. You walk until there is only one left standing. So what you think might be 50 miles, 100 miles, 200 miles, ultimately clocks in over 300 miles over a period of five days where, I have to assume the boys are able to sleep at night, but if they are, the viewers don’t get to see it, which makes me wonder if one sleeps, while holding up the other, but that even seems impossible or beyond possible.

That is where we see the bond of friendships evolve between Ray and Peter, both from different worlds with different goals in hand. One plans to get his hands on an M16 (Ray) so he can take out The Major who is responsible for his father’s demise for political disagreement (crazy how potent that is in today’s current climate). The other, Peter hopes to have a wish granted to change the mayhem that has become their present-day society.

They have interactions with other boys during the walk that become intense, psychologically depressing, but gives you hope at the same time. One deals with the fear of being labeled as a killer after pushing another walker too far. Bonds with the boys are severed as they drop one-by-one and find themselves unable to rescue or prevent the pending doom. However, it is the brotherly love between Ray and Peter that shines thru. Jonsson is fantastic in the role, who previously shined in “Alien: Romulus,” which Cooper Hoofman was a name I never heard of before this movie, but with the performance he delivers, Hollywood should watch out.

I love that the narrative doesn’t give us a backstory of WHY this event transpires and how The Major has come to power. I want to know, but the fact that I don’t know, just intrigued me so much more. We don’t see much of the soldiers or any dialogue from them before taking out the boys. There is so much meat to the narrative that is not disclosed you feel the deaths that much more, even though you get small slices of these characters.

Other strong performances are courtesy of Garrett Wareing, Tut Nyuot, Charlie Plummer, Ben Wang, Roman Griffin Davis, Judy Greer and a host of others. “The Long Walk” is a journey people, but it is one that you absolutely must take.

The post “The Long Walk” Is Emotionally Brutal appeared first on Canyon News.

What I can tell you it involves a football legend, Isaiah White (Marlon Wayans) who takes a rookie, Cameron Cade (Tyriq Withers) under his wing hoping to transform him into the titan that he is. Cade has always looked up to White as one of the greats in football, considering he has won eight championships aka Super Bowls during his career. In addition, football was his father’s life and pushed his son to follow in those steps.

That is something to consider, that theme of parents sometimes pushing their children to the brink, as they attempt to live their lives through their children because they couldn’t accomplish it themselves.

Cam has returned to his hometown, but after some afterhours practice he is randomly attacked at night by a masked figure leading to a devastating brain injury that jeopardizes his chance at playing professional football. Despite things not looking great, Cam decides to try out for the combine in hopes of getting his foot into the door in the league.

However, he is given an invitation to meet Mr. White at his exclusive compound and train with him. This is where the movie nabbed my attention. I was intrigued by what was unfolding even though I didn’t understand it from a mile away; I couldn’t stop watching what was happening on the screen. Is it strange? In more ways than I can imagine.

Isaiah comes across as a humble, decent person, but the deeper Cam gets inside the compound he discovers his idol is not who he thinks his idol is. Strange things are happening, blood infusions, masked figures, intense workouts and training sessions and bloody violence. The violence is in your face; intense and somewhat shocking at times, and I’m not sure if this was the goal of director Justin Tipping. However, I was all in on the journey he took me on, even though I couldn’t explain what was happening, but I still enjoyed it.

The performances by Wayans and Withers are top-notch. They absolutely command and control the narrative of the movie, and they keep the viewer invested in the mayhem. Without their performances, the movie would be an absolute mess. The ending left me in awe; I couldn’t explain it to you in words if I tried.

If anything, I might need to see the movie again to try to unearth what was unfolding and exactly what the movie and the director is trying to say. “HIM” is a movie that totally plays with your mind. This is no in-between, you either love the movie, or you hated it. Me, I didn’t hate, I didn’t love, but it forced me to scratch my head.

The post “HIM” Is An Absolute Mind-Bender appeared first on Canyon News.

“The Conjuring” in 2013 was something to be awed at, its 2016 sequel was epic. Still to this day one of the best in the franchise, that third outing was mediocre, but also released at the time of the pandemic, and now we have “The Conjuring: The Last Rites” which is the end of the saga for Ed and Lorraine Warren. This movie tackles the infamous Smurl family in Pennsylvania, who has mysterious hauntings after bringing an antique mirror into their home.

I would love to say this family is the focal point of the movie, and while they are, the characters are not all that fleshed out to me. They actually feel like an afterthought. The primary focus is on the dynamics of Ed (Patrick Wilson) and Lorraine (Vera Farmiga) and their daughter Judy (Mia Tomlinson). Ed and Lorraine have finally decided to call it quits and enjoy retirement, but it appears Judy, like her mother can sense things, and something evil is taunting and after her.

That ultimately brings the family to Pennsylvania, after Judy decides to investigate the hauntings transpiring inside the Smurl family home. As per usual, the opening of the movie is tense and sets the stage for what will unfold. However, unlike previous movies, the pacing on “The Last Rites” is a bit slower. The chaos happens in small spurts and doesn’t really ramp up until about the last 50 minutes of the movie.

There is a buildup of tension for what is inevitably about to erupt thanks to director Michael Chaves. Chaves does a decent job, but one can’t help but wonder if James Wan who directed the first two flicks was helming the camera, what effect the movie would have on moviegoers. Judy’s boyfriend/fiancé, Tony (Ben Hardy) soon joins the mayhem and gets a first-hand account of the scariness the Warrens had hoped to leave behind. Chaves does a solid job with camera work that invites the audience slowly into the terror that unnerves you.

Wilson and Farmiga deliver amazing performances as always, but it’s the suspense buildup that really sells the movie during the climatic third act that will have viewers on the edge of their seat. I was thoroughly entertained to see how things would end, and I was not disappointed. Does “The Conjuring: Last Rites” end with a bang?

That depends on who you ask, while satisfied, I did want just a bit more considering this franchise re-ushered the fear of the haunted house in a way not many horror movies are capable of doing. It was a massive hit at the box-office and touted as the final entry in the franchise, but in Hollywood when tons of money is made there is always an opportunity for more story.

The post “The Conjuring: The Last Rites” Is Terrifying appeared first on Canyon News.

Yes, I will admit that I pay for cable and there is a reason. I like the notion of being able to just turn on the TV and go to the channel to watch the content I want to watch. When you start to implement streaming, you can’t do that. You have to exit out of cable and go into your streaming apps. Select the app you want to watch then go through the menu to find the TV series or movie that you want to watch.

It is more work than just changing the channel with your remote. I’ll be the first to admit, the prices for cable have been on the rise, but I don’t think it has been on the rise as much as your streaming services. It feels like every single week or month, we hear about a streaming service raising their prices for the consumers. Notably, Peacock is in the news because they’re prices are on the rise. Peacock has seriously lost its damn mind if they think consumers are going to spend $16.99 for their premium service.

I have Peacock because it comes with my cable service. It is an extra perk, but no way in hell would I pay more than $5 for this streaming service. Why? There is not as much content in my opinion worth it. Yes, there are TV shows, yes there are some movies, but nothing to the caliber of what you get with Netflix, Paramount+ or HBO Max. Forgive me if the names are not accurate, because they change so much it is frankly frustrating.

I can be ok paying $16.99 for the premium tier of HBO Max. I mean its HBO. They are known for getting blockbuster movies, they have a ton of content (this includes Discovery+) which has loads of content so there is no need to purchase Discovery+ if you have HBO Max. If I am paying close to $20 for a streaming service, it better have a plentiful amount of content and I’m not messing around.

In 2025, I don’t think there is a streaming service today that is less than $10/month. So, start doing the math because there is easily over 20 streaming apps/services if not more. If you have at least 10 or 15 you’re spending $150 or more just for the streaming services without commercials.

If you want the service ad-free, you’re paying more. It is even worse, if you are someone that already has cable and you’re paying close to $175 to $200/month for the cable service. What is the point of cutting the cable cord if you’re paying just as much if not more because of the countless streaming apps that you have? There isn’t one. I hate to say the pandemic has impacted us much more than I ever imagined. Not just socially, but on an entertainment front that seems to not be changing anytime soon.

The post Streaming Prices Just Keep Rising appeared first on Canyon News.

The simple answer is: NO! Film is subjective, it is based on one’s opinions and personal tastes. It is art, and simply put, people are always going to have various opinions about art, especially when you get into the realm of TV and cinema. There are indeed films that are classics, but that is another column and another time and date for us to truly get into that argument.

Unlike many of the actual movie critics out there today, I labored myself as an undergraduate through film school, actually taking classes all about cinema from introduction to film, to film history, film criticism, film theory, studies in film gender, screenwriting and so much more. I was in the trenches and when I say my criticism and theory course challenged me in ways I never expected, jeez it would be an understatement.

You’re talking about a person who analyzed Alfred Hitchcock’s “The Birds” so much it took the actual enjoyment out of the movie, once I was able to decipher what Hitchcock was actually saying about his leading lady in Tippi Hedren, whose character was in essence sexually promiscuous. Most viewers might not see it, but there are a ton of scenes I could show and explore for you where you will understand it much more, explaining why the ‘birds’ flocked to this town and were attacking.

I deciphered “Mildred Pierce” so much for a critical essay, it felt like it was going to destroy my love for film noir because I was constantly rewinding and analyzing scenes in that movie that highlight the film’s title character to her portrayer, Joan Crawford, and the idea of stardom. It seems like a stretch, but my oral argument wowed, not just my classmates, but my professor, and that is not me simply tooting my horn.

A true critic digs deep, they go beyond just that troupe of liking the movie or not, or explaining why it entertains versus why it doesn’t. Your goal is to figure out with precise detail(s) as a movie critic what this movie is trying to say to society or about society, and the general public as a whole. I know that may sound crazy, but even some of the worst of the worst, and movies that should have never been made, have some odd message. It might be a message about depravity, sexuality, violence, narcissism, hatred, racism, environmental destruction or something outlandish you never expected like self-loathing.

I am not the critic that is simply going to agree that a movie is great because all the critics out there loved it. I will call a spade a spade, as much as it may pain me sometimes to actual do it. I’m a fan of horror, but Rob Zombie’s “Halloween II” was easily one of the worst movies I watched in 2009. Was it the worst horror movie ever, no, but it was an absolute failure, and I enjoyed the previously flick, even though it was too focused on nostalgia instead of delivering something fresh and new.

I hated the 2010 flick “A Nightmare on Elm Street” which followed similar troupes of nostalgia instead of bringing something fresh and new to an iconic villain and idea. “Get Out” was NOT my cup of tea, it was an enjoyable movie, but it was not the horror flick everyone touted it to be. IT WAS NOT HORROR PEOPLE, that was a psychological thriller! They are not the same thing, so please stop grouping those categories together like there is no difference.

This year’s Best Picture winner “Anora” was ok, but it didn’t punch me in the gut like “Conclave” did. Also just look at Oscar’s history when it comes to praising work that deals with the sex industry. You get movies like “Klute” and “Cabaret” winning Oscars for Best Actress, as well as “Monster” in 2004 that delivered Charlize Theron her Best Actress victory. There are trends out there that people don’t always pay attention to, but if you look closer you can see them.

I think sometimes critics are afraid to say what they’re really thinking because they get to see all these advance movie screenings without actually having to pay for them. Well, the studios can easily stop that and force them to pay out of pocket, like I do when I see a movie, and I do a critical analysis of the film. If I have to pay $12-$20 to see a movie, those ‘critics’ and I QUOTE that for a reason, they should be doing the same. It sometimes feels like you have those who are just in the room to be in the room with the others, and that elitist crap, who cares.

Being a critic of cinema doesn’t make you any better than the everyday person. Yeah, you might see and decipher some things others don’t, but let’s be honest how many critics actually do the work to make that happen, really?

The post What Good Is A Movie Critic? appeared first on Canyon News.

The 2006 flick, “Superman Returns” starring Brandon Routh was a disaster, and while the 2013 flick, “Man of Steel” starring Henry Cavill was an improvement, it still got mixed reviews with fans of the iconic superhero. However, this 2025 version of “Superman” courtesy of director James Gunn is a fun-ride.

For starters, we don’t have that backstory that almost all previous “Superman” flicks have had to explain to audiences. Yes, the narrative can slightly get bogged down with all those details. You kind of have to hope most people seeing this movie has a little working knowledge about Clark Kent aka Superman, portrayed this time by David Corenswet.

Does Corenswet fit the aesthetic of the superhero in tights: yes, and he plays the part quite well to say the least. He is charming, sweet and has charisma with his love interest Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan). I will admit the romance element of Clark Kent and Lois Lane felt a bit lacking in this go around, but perhaps it will be fleshed out more in the sequel, which I am sure to happen at some point.

Brosnahan does deliver a bit of an edge to the reporter that I’m not used to seeing from the character, and I admit it was quite refreshing to say the least.

You can’t have a hero without a villain, and of course, who has always been, Lex Luthor this time portrayed by actor Nicholas Hoult. Hoult does the job well, but I feel the Lex Luthor needs to be fleshed out more. This jealously this character has had with Superman who is idolized by the public grinds Lex to a core that can’t be placed into words.

This is important because it plays into the narrative of the movie, where Lex changes the story of how people perceive this alien from another planet that has become a savior for Earth who is protecting the world from war. Yes, Superman is focused on preventing a war between Boravia and Jarhanpur.

Gunn does a phenomenal job by jumping right into the movie with Superman battling a metahuman called the “Hammer of Boravia” who gets the upper hand on our hero. The audience gets to see a Superman this time around who is vulnerable to pain and blood, we even get to see Krypto, a dog with some amazing skills and abilities. If you’re going to bring Superman back to the foray, it is always nice to introduce fresh or new to the mix.

The visuals delivered by James Gunn are stunning and fantastic to watch. You do feel immersed in Metropolis and that is a first for me. I’ve always felt the place to feel foreign in previous movies and TV shows, but Gunn captures, the down-to-Earthness of the city, that resonates on the screen and with the viewer.

You also have some fun side characters in this movie that are scene stealers in Mr. Fantastic (Edi Gathegi), as well as Hawk Girl (Isabela Merced) and Green Lantern (Nathan Fillion). Gathegi is a standout, as Mr. Fantastic who shines every time he appears on the screen.

“Superman” might be the first action-flick of 2025, where I felt the pacing was perk. It didn’t move too slow; it didn’t move too fast. Things were carefully plotted out to keep the viewers’ attention from start to finish, which a vast majority of movies in 2025 have been lacking. If this reiteration of “Superman” are signs of things to come, I am very excited to see what Gunn does next with the iconic character.

The post “Superman” Is Action-Packed Fun appeared first on Canyon News.

We all know the 2015 flick starring Miles Teller, Michael B. Jordan and Kata Mara was horrid. Might be one of the worst superhero flicks I’ve watched since “The Green Lantern” starring Ryan Reynolds. It has been more than 10 years since that movie, so expect my giddiness with the thought of a new flick, “Fantastic Four: The First Steps” with the iconic characters back but played by new actors.

Stepping into the iconic shoes of our fearless four are Pedro Pascal as Reed Richards/Mister Fantastic, Vanessa Kirby as Sue Storm/Invisible Woman, Joseph Quinn as Johnny Storm/Human Torch and Ebon Moss-Bachrach as The Thing/Ben Grimm. Are any of the characters actual standouts as a viewer? Not in my opinion, they work well together as a cohesive unit, but not one shines more than others.

At the heart of the narrative is the birth of Reed and Sue’s son, Franklin, who is a major player in our villain, Galactus. Was I happy to see Galactus, with his solider in the Silver Surfer (Julia Garner). We’ve seen the Silver Surfer before, but the character was more of an afterthought. This time around, the Surfer is a villain and does the bidding of Galactus, who devours planets to satiate this hunger he has.

“Fantastic Four: The First Steps” had the potential to be something unique and special, but it felt like a run of the mill superhero flick more focused on a family element that did not resonate with me at all.

The action sequences while awesome, were too far in-between. The villains did not feel treacherous enough for me to be invested. I need a bad guy who is a actual threat to the survival of my heroes or the people they care about most. In addition, the pacing was off. The movie starts way too slow, and by the time things really start to get entertaining, it feels like this rush to the finish.

You can’t give all the good stuff in the final third of the movie. It doesn’t make up for the other two-thirds that lack that special punch that you thirst for as a viewer, especially one who is expecting unbelievable action for a superhero flick.

If there is one thing the movie teases right it’s during the mid-credits where we actually see what could be in store for the sequel, and I was excited by what I saw. Why? That tease should have been the focal point on this go around, because there is so much more meat, story and narrative to be pulled from there.

You will be entertained by watching “Fantastic Four: The First Steps,” especially if you are a fan of the comics but knowing the potential of these characters and the story, there was so much more I expected.

The post “Fantastic Four: The First Steps” Leaves You Wanting More appeared first on Canyon News.

There are major swings taken, some work, some not so much, but my biggest frustration is that the thrills, suspense and terror that the 1997 delivered, this one just didn’t have at all. I recall seeing the original in theaters when I was 13 and it was the time of my life. Truth be told that movie propelled my focus on wanting to be a screenwriter and solidified my love of horror. It was the only time I can recall a movie where I easily jumped 10 plus times in the theater, people were screaming and yelling at the screen, and it was just a ride from start to finish.

This one, follows a new group of pals that echo the past in the present, when they play a role in the death of someone on a dangerous winding road. The new heroine in the group is none other than, Ava (Chase Sui Wonders), who I must say, she annoyed me. I didn’t get Julie James 2.0, no Sidney Prescott, I wanted more if this was to be a character who was going to actually be the heroine to go toe-to-toe with our fisherman.

I will give kudos to Madelyn Cline who portrays Danica. She was a fun character and almost Helen Shivers (Sarah Michelle Gellar) 2.0, but not quite. You root for her, she’s funny and she is hands down a scene stealer. Then you have Milo (Jonah Hauer-King), who is like the new Ray (Freddie Prinze Jr.), and then Teddy (Tyriq Withers), who is the new Barry Cox. There is also Stevie (Sarah Pidgeon), who is the fifth member of the group, who doesn’t necessarily come from the same elitist or wealth bracket as her pals.

They essentially tried to cast the characters from the original with new faces, which rarely works because you’d rather just see those iconic characters back, which we do get two of the four, with the return of legacy players Julie James (Jennifer Love Hewitt) and Ray Bronson (Freddie Prinze Jr.).

There is a new take on Ray, and I like the direction taken with the character, Julie on the other hand, not so much. Why did she NOT have more to do? She felt like a slight afterthought to me, and that really disappointed me. If the story was taking the swing that it did, guess who should have had a bit more to do Julie James and she didn’t in my honest opinion.

Southport, North Carolina has become this coastal masterpiece, compared to the small fishing town that the 1997 film was modeled by. It has had a comeuppance to say the least and the luxury is front and center. You know what would have been great with that newfound luxury an epic chase scene. Hands down the chase sequence between Helen Shivers and the fisherman in the 1997 film is iconic. There is like two chase scenes here, and both are so damn lackluster I can’t even call them chase scenes. There is no tension; no suspense; no fun.

Our core characters have some guilt over what they did, but honestly most of them have moved on with their lives as if nothing ever transpired. There is no stress or angst like the audience got to see from the characters in the original movie. The kills are brutal, but to be honest, I felt the kills in the original were a bit more out there, there just happens to be a bit more blood this time around. Remember how the fisherman stalked and toyed with our foursome last time around, that isn’t the case here, it’s more of go for the kill right away, and that takes away the punch, director Jennifer Kaytin Robinson was going for here.

Not the worst horror movie I’ve ever seen, if anything it’s camp; you kind of expect it, a fun ride, but I wanted a lot more considering how iconic the original is, and let’s face it, it has been almost 20 years since “I Still Know What You Did Last Summer.” I will say this stay after the credits start to roll.

The post “I Know What You Did Last Summer” Falters On Nostalgia appeared first on Canyon News.

Why? Even with new faces in the franchise, after that dreadful, and I mean dreadful previous entry, ‘Dominion,’ this movie just doesn’t deliver the thrills and excitement of the first 2 movies that actually hook you. You would think with star power like Scarlett Johannson, Mahershala Ali and Jonathan Bailey, the franchise could get things rolling, but not so much.

Johannson, stars as Zora Bennett, some sort of weapons expert who is courted by a seedy man with a ton of money hoping to use her to track down dinosaurs that are so dangerous they haven’t made their way to the parts of the world where people would deem beyond dangerous. Why? The blood of these dinosaurs could be utilized for some game-changing research in the field of science, to treat heart issues.

How many times has a movie tackled the issue of people hoping to do something good as a result of science, but it ultimately turns into a fight to survive because of genetic modifications to animals that deliver side effects the researchers didn’t expect? Far too many.

With that said, the ensemble of Johannson, Bailey and Ali works. The three have good chemistry, but the characters don’t feel fleshed out enough. Ali just seems to be moving around as a Duncan Kincaid, who works closely with Zora, but their interactions in the movie feel limited at best. Bailey portrays Dr. Henry Loomis who has a plethora of knowledge about dinosaurs as a paleologist.

The biggest falter for me with “Jurassic World: Rebirth” is that the story seems too focused on a family who gets shipwrecked at sea, and become entangled with Zora, Henry and Duncan on their mission. Those characters become the focal point of the movie, instead of the people most moviegoers think are the focal point. As a viewer, I should have cared about the family, but I didn’t. They came across as a major annoyance more than anything, because who sails in the middle of the ocean as a going away trip as a family?

The logic there just wasn’t working for me. The biggest gripe with “Jurassic World: Rebirth” is the lack of dinosaurs. Their presence comes in small waves and that is where the most excitement comes in the movie. There was never a moment where it felt our characters were in serious danger and that lessens the impact of the movie as a spectator.

This brings me to a pacing issue because the movie feels like it moves too slow in the beginning, and then immediately speeds up near the end, right when things start to become compelling. You snap your finger and guess what: the movie is over.

I wanted more action, more thrills, more suspense, and I got very little if any of that from this seventh outing in the franchise. Was “Jurassic World: Rebirth” better than “Jurassic World: Dominion,” but not by a long shot. The visuals are stunning and amazing, but for a movie about dinosaurs it feels like an appetizer versus a main course.

The post “Jurassic World: Rebirth” Falters On Intrigue appeared first on Canyon News.

He doesn’t always crank out a movie, at least not in today’s current time, but in the mid 70s, 80s, even 90s, the director was churning them out. The icing on the cake is the fact that they were all iconic in one way or another. However, if there is one movie everyone constantly references from his library, it’s “Jaws.” What is it about this movie about a Great White Shark that terrified the American public upon its release and for decades to come? I wish I could tell you.

Well, it is simple, you don’t know what is in the water, and Spielberg explored that in a way that was nerve-wrecking, terrifying and downright genius. I mean the score to “Jaws” has to be one of the best musical scores of all time. You hear that music and you immediately know it’s from that movie. Not to mention it takes a while before the audience actually gets a glimpse of that iconic shark that terrorizes the citizens of Amity.

I know at least from my perspective if someone told me there was a shark attack or someone had been killed as a result of a shark attack, I would not be going into the water. Not to mention, people just didn’t seem too attentive to their kids in the 70s. “Yeah, Bobby, go right ahead into the ocean, despite a potential shark devouring you, oh, there’s nothing to worry about, nothing at all,” yeah, it makes you wonder.

I actually watched the movie this past week, and it felt like I was watching it for the very first time. I still felt the same level of terror, suspense, anxiety as I felt watching the movie the very first time. It is indeed a movie that still ages well with time. The tension is palpable, and I still keep asking myself nearly 50 years later, how did the MPAA rate this movie PG?

I mean we saw a severed head, a severed foot, lots of blood. The level of violence for “Jaws” in 1975 was up there and I don’t think many kids expected that when they saw this flick the first time around. It makes you question the viciousness of a Great White Shark.

Yeah, “Jaws” is a movie, and it was a blockbuster that inevitably coined the term, the summer blockbuster because of how big it was at the box-office at the time starting a tradition that slightly waned as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The thing to understand is there has been aplenty movies that have attempted to recapture the magic of “Jaws,” but the problem is you can’t capture perfection more than once.

I can only imagine in my wildest dreams what a “Jaws” remake would look like today. Would I like to see it? Yes, but you’re totally playing with a classic film there, and nothing could be done to live up to the mayhem that the 1975 classic delivered then and continues to deliver today.

The post “Jaws” Still Delivers 50 Years Later appeared first on Canyon News.

Will admit the trailer that was released in April 2025, was perfect. Just little glimpses of the terror that was to come. This trailer reveals a few things, a death or two, and tries to capture nostalgia from the original having our fearless heroine Julie James (Jennifer Love Hewitt), reciting that iconic line, but a bit subdued this time around.

This was something I never expected, but I’m starting to think the more blind I go into a movie the better. Why? It allows me to go into the movie with no expectations which is what I adore. I watched the trailer once, and that’s all I need.

We have our five players Danica (Madelyn Cline), Teddy (Tyriq Withers), Milo (Jonah Hauer-King), Ava (Chase Sui Wonders) and Stevie (Sarah Pidgeon), who cause a fatal crash. One year later someone reminds them of that horrific accident and begins to stalk and upend their lives.

We see the return of Julie James and Ray (Freddie Prinze Jr.), who become intertwined in the melee, as this requel has a few more twists or secrets at play compared to the original flick.

The film looks bloody, like a terrifying good time, but whether it lives up to the original or outdoes it, we’ll have to wait until July 18 to figure that out when “I Know What You Did Last Summer” hits theaters.

The post New “I Know What You Did Last Summer” Trailer Unleashed appeared first on Canyon News.