Rippin' the Rip Brand new  Forgotten Cinema: Now Showing for you! And we're gettin' that Rip count accurate for you. We dive into Matt Damon and Ben Affleck’s latest collaboration, the new Netflix thriller  The Rip . And in classic Netflix fashion… it’s fine. Mid. Meh. Another entry in the long-running parade of “sure, I guess I’ll watch this” streaming originals. The Performances Deserve Better We agree on one thing: Damon and Affleck show up. Their performances are easily the strongest parts of the film, injecting more weight and charisma than the script really deserves. In another era, with a tighter screenplay and a director willing to lean into the actors’ strengths,  The Rip  might have been something memorable. But the Netflix-ification of Cinema Strikes Again Instead, the film is dragged down by weak writing, dim and lifeless set design, and a skeleton cast that makes the world feel empty, almost like the movie was assembled inside an algorithm-generated warehouse. Nothing feels lived in. Nothing feels dangerous. And nothing feels like it’s trying all that hard. Then there’s the repetition. We couldn’t help noticing how often characters feel the need to say “the rip,” almost like Netflix is desperately reminding its second-screen audience what movie they’re watching every ten minutes. When the script is repeating key phrases like it’s afraid people have wandered off, it may be a sign the filmmakers know exactly how viewers consume these movies. The New Bargain Bin? For the Mikes,  The Rip  ultimately plays like the digital equivalent of a bargain-bin DVD — the kind of movie you’d see for $3.99 at a superstore (great TV show ) and think, “Huh… Damon and Affleck are in this? Weird.” It’s not the worst Netflix original. It’s not the best. It’s simply another one: a mid-tier thriller with great stars doing everything they can to rise above the material, while the production around them fails to meet their level. Catch the full breakdown in the latest episode of  Forgotten Cinema: Now Showing , available now on YouTube and wherever you listen to podcasts. Spotify  | Apple Podcasts  | Amazon Music  | More Links

This week on Forgotten Cinema , we’re diving into A Man Apart , the early-2000s action thriller(?) starring Vin Diesel that Butler remembered enjoying as a teenager…but that nostalgia didn’t survive the rewatch. To put it bluntly: neither of us are fans. While Vin Diesel gives a solid performance and clearly commits to the emotional weight of the story, the film around him just never comes together. The plot is unfocused, the writing is weak, and the action, despite aiming for gritty intensity, lacks the impact and clarity that make this kind of movie work. A Textbook Example of Early-2000s Misfires What makes A Man Apart  interesting, though, is how perfectly it reflects the era it came from. It checks every box of the early-2000s “hard-edged revenge thriller,” but hits all of them in the wrong way: Gritty aesthetic  without the story to support it Emotional stakes  without the character depth Action scenes  without momentum or punch A revenge arc  that feels more obligatory than earned It’s a reminder that style alone can’t carry a movie, especially when that style feels assembled from leftover pieces of other, better action films. A Man Apart: A Messy Movie…But a Fun Episode Ironically, the film’s shortcomings make for a pretty entertaining discussion. We break down why A Man Apart  collapses under its own intentions, how its editing and tone undercut the drama, and why the movie feels like a rough draft of something that could’ve worked with a sharper script and more focused direction. Sometimes the best episodes come from the worst movies and this one definitely qualifies. A rough watch, but a fun conversation. And if you need to wash out that bad taste in your mouth, check out a good movie with Vin Diesel that we also covered - Pitch Black . Spotify  | Apple Podcasts  | Amazon Music  | More Links

This week on Forgotten Cinema , we’re revisiting Wonder Boys , Curtis Hanson’s funny, warm, and deeply human character drama about writers, academia, and lives that haven’t quite gone according to plan. Both of us really enjoy this film. It’s the kind of movie that feels lived-in from the first frame, full of small character moments and performances that quietly carry the story forward. Michael Douglas delivers one of his most relaxed and likable roles, playing a man who’s clearly stuck, but never uninteresting. It’s a performance built on weariness, charm, and self-awareness, and it anchors the entire movie. An Ensemble That Carries the Day The supporting cast is just as strong. Tobey Maguire brings an unpredictable edge that keeps the film slightly off-balance in the best way, while Robert Downey Jr. injects the movie with sharp wit and effortless charisma. Together, the ensemble gives Wonder Boys  its gentle humor and emotional texture, making it feel less like a plot-driven film and more like a snapshot of people drifting through a very specific moment in their lives. A Little Too Neat… But Still Satisfying Butler’s one real sticking point comes near the end. It’s not that the film opts for a happy ending. It’s that everything falls into place a bit too  neatly for Douglas’ character. The resolution leans toward a classic Hollywood wrap-up, smoothing over some of the messiness the film spent so much time embracing. Even so, it’s a minor critique, and it barely dents the overall experience. Wonder Boys: A Film That Rewards Revisiting At the end of the day, Wonder Boys  is one of those movies that gets better with time. It’s smart without being showy, funny without forcing the jokes, and thoughtful without feeling heavy. It’s also increasingly rare: a studio movie aimed squarely at adults, about adults, dealing with adult problems. If you’re looking for a movie that values character over spectacle and conversation over chaos, Wonder Boys  is always worth another visit. Note: The Scourge of the Power Surge returns this week, so all that blurriness is not our terrible camera skills. It's some kind of demon in the wires! Spotify  | Apple Podcasts  | Amazon Music  | More Links

Charlestown, Loyalty, and a Life You Can’t Escape This week on Forgotten Cinema , we’re not only heading into Charlestown with The Town , Ben Affleck’s tense, character-driven crime drama that has only grown in stature since its release, but we're also battling an onslaught of power surges while recording, so when you see the blurry video, don't be alarmed. It's just Forgotten Cinema facing off against Darren Peter Oswald (D.P.O.) and surviving! (Deep Cut alert!) Both of us are big fans of this The Town . From the opening moments, this film establishes a lived-in world where loyalty, reputation, and geography are inseparable. The performances across the board are excellent, the story is tightly constructed, and Boston itself feels less like a backdrop and more like a living, breathing character woven into every frame. Crime With a Sense of Place What really works here is how confidently the film balances crime mechanics with character drama. The robberies are gripping, but they’re never just about the action. Every heist is tied to the characters’ histories, relationships, and the limited options available to them. Affleck’s direction keeps the tension high while never losing sight of the emotional stakes. Jeremy Renner’s performance, in particular, adds volatility and menace, while Affleck grounds the film with a weary, conflicted lead performance. The result is a crime movie that feels both propulsive and deeply personal. A Few Notes From the Crew That doesn’t mean it’s flawless. Field would have liked the film to lean even harder into its heist elements, pushing those sequences just a bit further. Butler, meanwhile, feels Blake Lively’s character, while crucial to setting up the film’s climax, needed more screen time and development to fully justify her narrative importance. These are small critiques, though, and they never derail the experience. Is The Town a Modern Crime Classic? Even with those minor notes, The Town  remains a standout modern crime film: smart, atmospheric, and emotionally grounded. It’s a movie that understands how environment shapes identity, and how hard it is to escape the life you’re born into. It’s a film we were more than happy to revisit and one that still holds up as one of the strongest crime dramas of its era. Spotify  | Apple Podcasts  | Amazon Music  | More Links

This week on Forgotten Cinema , we’re tackling 12 Monkeys (1995) , our Audience Choice (with 44% of the vote) pick for the season, and a movie that, despite its reputation and passionate fanbase, just doesn’t land for either of us. Going in, there was hope. Butler, in particular, wanted this revisit to change his mind. As a big fan of Terry Gilliam’s Brazil , he’s always appreciated Gilliam’s blend of science fiction, surrealism, and bureaucratic nightmare logic. Unfortunately, his feelings on 12 Monkeys  haven’t shifted since first seeing it decades ago. And Field? He’s right there with him. When Performances Become a Barrier One of our biggest hurdles with the film is the performances. Bruce Willis and especially Brad Pitt push their characters so far into manic territory that it becomes difficult to emotionally invest in the story. Pitt’s performance, often praised for its intensity, feels overwhelming rather than compelling, while Willis never quite grounds the film enough to anchor its increasingly chaotic tone. Logic, Relationships, and Tonal Whiplash We also struggle with the central relationships and internal logic of the movie. The idea that Kathryn Railly (Madeline Stowe) would not only entertain Willis’s story but actively follow him, and eventually fall for him, feels completely unbelievable. The film asks for a level of emotional buy-in that we just couldn’t give. Tonally, 12 Monkeys  feels stuck between two identities: a serious, high-concept science fiction thriller and an absurdist Gilliam nightmare. Instead of balancing those elements, the movie seems unable to decide which one it wants to be, leaving us stranded somewhere in the middle. What Still Works in 12 Monkeys That said, it’s not all negative. We genuinely appreciate the production design, costumes, and props used in the future sequences. Visually, the film has a strong sense of world-building, and those elements reflect Gilliam’s unmistakable creative fingerprint. An “It’s Me, Not You” Movie But, ultimately, 12 Monkeys  is one of those films where we fully recognize that we’re in the minority. It’s well regarded, widely discussed, and deeply loved by many. For us, though, it never comes together in a way that works emotionally or narratively. Sometimes a classic just doesn’t click...and that’s okay. Spotify  | Apple Podcasts  | Amazon Music  | More Links

This week on Forgotten Cinema , we’re ringing in the holidays with Why Him? (2016) , the loud, chaotic, and occasionally sharp Christmas comedy starring Bryan Cranston and James Franco. It’s a film built on big personalities colliding, awkward-family-dinner energy, and jokes that range from genuinely funny to maybe we should’ve tried that one again . Loud, Crass, and…Pretty Fun Both of us enjoy Why Him?  for what it is. It’s not refined, it’s not subtle, and it’s definitely not going for timeless holiday-classic status, but when it hits, it hits. Cranston plays frazzled dad energy to perfection, Franco leans all the way into his eccentric tech-bro persona, and their clashing worlds make for some solid comedic sparks. That said, the movie never quite reaches its full potential. Who’s the Main Character Again in Why Him? One of our biggest sticking points is how unfocused the movie can feel. The perspective keeps shifting, sometimes it’s Cranston’s film, sometimes it’s Franco’s, sometimes it’s the daughter’s, and that split focus keeps the movie from building bigger, stronger comedic set pieces. The film feels like it’s almost  a great studio comedy, but doesn’t fully commit to the kind of memorable sequences that make the genre shine. A Sitcom Waiting to Happen As we talked about on the episode, Why Him?  occasionally feels like a pitch for a sitcom or streaming comedy series. The dynamic works. The characters work. The setup works. It just needs more room, more time to breathe, more buildup to jokes, more space for the comedy to naturally escalate. In another universe, there’s a version of Why Him?  that lasts six seasons on network TV, complete with holiday-themed episodes every December. A Holiday Watch Worth Considering Still, even with the missed opportunities, this is a perfectly enjoyable holiday movie. It's loud, flawed, but fun enough to toss on while you’re wrapping presents or baking cookies. If you like your Christmas comedies messy but spirited, Why Him?  fits the bill. Check out the full episode , available wherever you listen to podcasts and on YouTube. A guilty pleasure? A missed opportunity? Honestly… a little of both. Spotify  | Apple Podcasts  | Amazon Music  | More Links

This week on  Forgotten Cinema: Now Showing , we're closing out our Benoit Blanc journey with  Wake Up Dead Man   and we're not alone! We're joined by a very special guest: Steven Bernstein | Writer, Director, Cinematographer, Author and more! Is Wake Up Dead Man the Strongest Entry in the Trilogy? We all agree that  Wake Up Dead Man  is the strongest film in the  Knives Out  trilogy. While Butler still holds the original  Knives Out  as his personal favorite, he argues that  Wake Up Dead Man  is far more confident in its mystery. The film avoids the distracting mid-film structural twist that plagued  Glass Onion  and finally allows Benoit Blanc to grow as a character, rather than leaning into caricature. Character vs. Mystery Steven praises the film primarily for its character work, even while acknowledging that some performances drift a little too far into farce. The notable exception is Josh O’Connor, whose performance stands out as grounded, compelling, and emotionally honest. Butler, meanwhile, responds more strongly to the film’s narrative discipline, appreciating how the mystery unfolds organically without relying on gimmicks or artificial misdirection. One thing everyone agrees on:  Glass Onion  remains the weakest entry in the trilogy by a wide margin. A Thoughtful End to the Journey With a guest perspective rooted in filmmaking craft and storytelling discipline, Field and Butler dig deeper into what makes a mystery truly work.  Wake Up Dead Man  feels like the series finally firing on all cylinders, confident, character-driven, and focused on the fundamentals of great mystery storytelling. About Our Guest: Steven Bernstein Steven Bernstein is a writer, director, and cinematographer whose career spans film, television, and literature. As a cinematographer, he has worked on acclaimed films such as  Monster ,  Like Water for Chocolate , and  Scary Movie 2 , bringing a distinct visual voice to each project. As a director and writer, his work often explores character, atmosphere, and the intersection of genre and humanity. Beyond film, Bernstein is also an accomplished author, expanding his storytelling into prose and nonfiction. His perspective on  Wake Up Dead Man  adds a thoughtful, craft-focused layer to the discussion, especially when it comes to character, tone, and narrative confidence. Catch the full conversation in the latest episode of  Forgotten Cinema: Now Showing , available now on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts.

Hey, we got around to shooting another short film! Woohoo! Check out our latest attempt at situational comedy. It's Forgotten Cinema: The Sitcom (with new opening) Field has suffered an ACL injury, which gives him the perfect excuse to pretend he's in the move, Rear Window. Except Butler prefers Disturbia...so there's some trouble. Check out Rear Disturbia now! Check out our latest episode: Reindeer Games! Spotify  | Apple Podcasts  | Amazon Music  | More Links

Reindeer Games  (2000) – Snowy Noir, Dumb Decisions This week on Forgotten Cinema , we’re cracking open Reindeer Games (2000) , the late-’90s/early-2000s crime thriller that lives firmly in the “fine… but flawed” zone. Both of us agree this one is watchable, but only just. On paper, Reindeer Games  has the makings of a solid noir-inspired thriller: a snowy setting, a hardened criminal underworld, double-crosses, and a Christmas-time backdrop that gives it a slightly off-kilter vibe. Unfortunately, once the plot gets moving, it starts to unravel almost immediately. When the Logic Melts Faster Than the Snow The biggest issue? The story relies on nearly everyone involved making incredibly frustrating decisions. Ben Affleck’s Rudy/Nick and Gary Sinise’s villain spend most of the movie zigging when any rational person would zag. The central twist, revealing who’s really pulling the strings, only makes things worse, hinging on an absurd level of coincidence, luck, and perfect timing to work at all. It’s the kind of thriller where the more you think about it, the faster it collapses. Style Doing the Heavy Lifting And yet… it’s not unwatchable. The performances help keep things afloat, and the movie’s sheer ridiculousness becomes part of its strange charm. Director John Frankenheimer’s noir sensibilities, the icy visuals, and the hard-boiled attitude give Reindeer Games  a vibe that’s honestly more enjoyable than the script deserves. There’s something about snow-covered crime stories that just works, even when the plotting doesn’t. A Messy Curio From Its Era At the end of the day, Reindeer Games  never quite comes together as a smart thriller. But it's a curious artifact from its time: slick, misguided, overconfident, and oddly compelling if your expectations are properly lowered. Set the bar low, enjoy the vibe, and try not to think too hard about the plan. Spotify  | Apple Podcasts  | Amazon Music  | More Links

As part of our ongoing Knives Out Lead Up Series , we revisit Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery  (2022) , Rian Johnson’s star-studded sequel to his hit whodunit. But unlike our enthusiastic response to Knives Out  (2019) , this episode of Forgotten Cinema: Lead Up  takes a deeper, more critical look at why Glass Onion  doesn’t quite hold together and why the film continues to divide audiences. Butler’s Perspective: Why Glass Onion Misses the Mark For Butler, this rewatch confirmed his biggest takeaways: Glass Onion just doesn’t work. He breaks down why he believes Knives Out  is the only  Rian Johnson film he genuinely enjoys. His issues include: Cartoonish, unlikable characters that feel exaggerated rather than grounded Heavy-handed social commentary that distracts instead of deepening the narrative A surprisingly thin mystery, where tension evaporates instead of building A mid-film twist that falls flat, stopping the story instead of enriching it A pandemic-era setting that already feels dated and gimmicky To Butler, Glass Onion  is a stylish but hollow mystery that sacrifices nuance for noise. Field’s Take: Fun, Flashy… and Still Flawed While Field enjoys Glass Onion  more, possibly even more than Knives Out , he still acknowledges many of Butler’s criticisms. Field highlights: A cast that’s fun to watch, even when the characters feel broad A playful tone that makes the film entertaining but less structurally sound Plot twists that seem clever on paper, but don’t always land A mystery that lacks the tight construction of the first Benoit Blanc case Field sees the movie’s charm but admits it doesn’t craft as strong a whodunit as the original Knives Out . Where Glass Onion  Works and Where It Falls Apart In this Forgotten Cinema  Lead Up episode, we also break down: The strengths of Rian Johnson’s writing The weaknesses of Glass Onion’s mystery structure Daniel Craig’s evolving performance as Benoit Blanc Why the satire feels louder but less meaningful How the sequel sets the stage for Wake Up Dead Man Does the sequel deepen the Benoit Blanc universe… or dilute it?