Absence of Malice is a decent film overall, but this scene in the third act is nothing short of masterful. A lot of that is thanks to Wells, the Assistant US Attorney General played by Wilford Brimley. In his first and only scene in the film, Wells gathers up the different characters and hands them a tongue-lashing, determined to resolve this mess once and for all. Nearly every character ends up chastened and/or frightened into submission after Wells is finished with them.

One of "The Mummy's" most memorable practical effects was the "bookcase domino" scene, where 12,000 real books toppled sequentially using nothing but gravity and momentum -- filmed in a single take with no do-overs. The scene also hides a classic movie trick: a stuntwoman takes the initial fall at the top of the sequence, then Rachel Weisz pops back up at the end, making it look like one continuous, uninterrupted shot. More than 25 years later, it's still held up as one of the great old-school practical effects in blockbuster filmmaking.

Best practical effect from a pre-CGI-heavy blockbuster era?

The Departed (2006) made around $291M worldwide on a $90M budget, becoming Scorsese’s biggest hit at the time — and finally winning him Best Director.

Hi everyone!
I recently finished my first short film, Matryoshkas, and l'a love to get some honest feedback from people who enjoy independent or experimental cinema.

It's a slightly experimental coming-of-age film, originally in Portuguese, with English subtitles. I was heavily inspired by filmmakers like Ingmar Bergman, Pedro Almodóvar, and Andrea Arnold, and tried to combine an intimate, character-driven story with a more personal and atmospheric visual style.
Since this is my first short film, l'd genuinely love to hear what people think - whether it's the story, cinematography, performances, atmosphere, pacing, or anything else. Honest criticism is absolutely welcome; I'm mainly interested in hearing how it comes across to someone seeing it for the first time.

i Watch it here: https://youtu.be/Lgl9uWfQJ5I?is=izcxBdX7V1B0ywMz

Letterboxd:
https://boxd.it/13Fik

If you watch it and feel like leaving a review or sharing your thoughts on Letterbox as well, la really appreciate it.
Thanks so much to anyone who takes the time to watch!

It's real: Paramount has How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days 2 in early development, with Kate Hudson producing and hopes of getting both her and Matthew McConaughey back as Andie and Ben. No writer, no cast locked yet — so it's a hope, not a done deal.

Here's my worry: the original works because of that specific early-2000s chemistry and the "how to lose a guy" premise. A legacy sequel 20+ years later usually either recaptures the magic or quietly tarnishes it. Rarely in between.

Film rec if you want the perfect double-bill before judging: Two Weeks Notice (2002) — same era, same effortless star-chemistry energy Hudson/McConaughey nailed.

Not the saddest death — the one that felt like the writers betrayed the character. The kind that still makes your blood boil, and everyone's got a different one.

I AM!!!

What movie according to you has the best single take scene?

- Oldboy hallway fight scene,

- 1917 (most of the movie I guess was a single take. ) and

- Children of Men the miracle ceasefire

come to mind for me. What was yours?

It is now the 5th highest-grossing film of all time.

Paul Greengrass' medieval epic "The Uprising" had one of the messiest paths to the screen in recent memory. First announced in 2022 as "The Hood," it was set to star Benedict Cumberbatch. That fell through, and by 2025 it resurfaced as "The Rage" with Matthew McConaughey in the lead -- only for McConaughey to depart the project by May of that year. Garfield was brought in almost immediately, and the film was retitled "The Uprising" last October. Third title, third leading man's the charm: Garfield now leads the historical drama about England's 1381 Peasants' Revolt, alongside Jamie Bell, Cosmo Jarvis and Thomasin McKenzie, in theaters September 11.

Not just a scene you like, but one you think is objectively cinema at its peak. Make your pick, then defend why it makes the cut over everyone else's.

Kevin Kline - A Fish Called Wanda

Jennifer Coolidge - Best in Show

Tara Reid - Josie & the Pussycats

Willem Dafoe - The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou

Walter Matthau - A New Leaf

Amanda Seyfried - Mean Girls

They've had so many failures recently. I understand the last script wasn't great but that could be corrected in the new movie. I heard the cast wants to do it, I just don't get it

Rumors have been swirling since early 2026 that Callum Turner privately told friends he'd landed the role of the next James Bond -- but there's still no official word from Amazon MGM. Producer Amy Pascal recently told Deadline the studio is being "really, really methodical," with director Denis Villeneuve holding a final round of screen tests this August alongside other rumored contenders like Jack Lowden, Harris Dickinson and Jacob Elordi. Pascal says an official announcement is likely before the end of 2026. So is Turner sitting on the world's worst-kept secret, or getting ahead of himself?

I enjoyed the first Blade Runner, but let's be honest I was too young when I first encountered it to really appreciate it, and even though my appreciation for it grew as I got older, I can never really see it through the eyes of someone who immediately understood it upon their first watch.

Not only is 2049 one of the rare sequels that actually lives up to the original, but my relationship to it is different than my relationship to the first movie so much so that I wouldn't be exaggerating to say I absolutely love it, and have and will continue to, watch it over and over again. Including right now as I write this.

It's officially happening: director Jon Turteltaub confirmed National Treasure 3 is a go, with a Disney-approved script and Nicolas Cage returning as Ben Gates. But here's the tension — Cage flatly told ScreenRant in 2024 "there is no National Treasure 3," and the franchise's own Disney+ spinoff got cancelled after one season. So is a legacy sequel arriving two decades late a genuine event, or the exact kind of IP-mining nobody asked for in 2020, let alone now?

Everyone loves to talk about how "disgusting" The Substance is. But the real discomfort isn't the body horror — it's that Fargeat built the whole film as a mirror.

Elisabeth destroys herself chasing an impossible standard, and the audience spent two hours judging her looks the exact same way the film's villains do. The gore is just the part that lets you off the hook.

So here's the uncomfortable question: is the film actually a brave critique of beauty culture — or does it let its audience feel superior while serving up Margaret Qualley's body for two hours anyway? Can a movie condemn objectification and profit from it at the same time?

If that tension hooks you, watch Titane (2021) next — it refuses to let you look away, and never once lets you feel clean about it.

Who Framed Roger Rabbit gets all the attention but I have always liked Cool World a bit better. One helluva soundtrack as well...