The summer movie season has come to an end and different movie options aside from blockbusters are now opening up. The two movie releases Morgan and The Light Between Oceans couldn't be more different One is a sci-fi, horror-thriller with the son of Ridley Scott making his directorial debut, while the other is an adaptation of a popular romantic drama. I was able to see both during the last two weeks, so let's start with my thoughts on Morgan. Morgan is all about the titular character (played with finesse by The Witch's Anya Taylor-Joy,) a "woman" who was created by scientists. She is the first successful version of artificial life....until she becomes not so successful after attacking of one of the members of the research team. Enter a risk management member of the corporate team (Kate Mara) to decide whether or not project Morgan should be terminated. We'll leave the plot at that because it's best if there's a way the movie can surprise you with the few tricks up its sleeve that it has. Paul Giamatti arrives midway through the film and his scene with Taylor-Joy is absolutely the highlight of the film. So much tension is built that I was so excited to see what came after this point...but unfortunately, this was where the film kinda fell back on the thriller genre formula instead of kicking the horror up a notch. Really that's the problem with the film is that it's caught between too many genres. As a fan of horror, I kind of wanted this to be more on the side of Alien... where Morgan is a silent, relentless stalker...but the way it plays out, they don't really give you much time to revel in her destruction. Still though, even though the beats became a little familiar in the second half, they were still executed with a lot of fun. Plus, I'm excited to see were Luke Scott goes from here. His freshman effort was decent enough and certainly entertaining. RATING: 7/10 The first 15 or 20 minutes of The Light Between Oceans might as well have been called "Beautiful People in Love." Not that there's anything wrong with that...but there didn't seem to be a lot of depth to this film and it made me wonder why two Oscar-caliber actors signed on for this. And then the drama hit. BIG TIME. And that's where things got interesting. The Light Between Oceans is all about a married couple (Michael Fassbender and Alicia Vikander) who find a baby and a dead man in a boat. Having had two miscarriages, Isabel begs her husband not to report what they found and just to raise the child as their own. Her husband Tom reluctantly agrees but soon finds he can't live with the guilt when he discovers the baby's mother is still alive (Rachel Weisz.) Once The Light Between Oceans got rolling, I really really liked it. All the drama in the second half made me appreciate the lighthearted opener that I didn't care for at the beginning. The performances here are fantastic, and the message at its core is pretty heartwarming. The ending could have perhaps been more solid and memorable (it's a little understated and cheesy at the same time), but it's a minor complaint. I mentioned earlier as more of a cheeky comment that the movie is basically two pretty people falling love...well I can't deny that makes the movie all the more beautiful to look at combined with the gorgeous cinematography and lovely score....so it definitely ain't a bad thing when all is said and done. RATING: 8/10

What a year for the horror genre it has been. The year started off great with the Sundance 2015 selection The Witch finally being released, and only got better when out of nowhere the world learned it was getting a horror-centric Cloverfield sequel. The summer gave us the solid, though inferior sequel to The Conjuring, the ridiculously fun, shark-filled The Shallows and the surprisingly modest hit Lights Out. During my viewing of The Shallows, I caught the trailer for Don't Breathe and was instantly wowed. I'd never heard of this horror flick that re-teams the Evil Dead remake director Fede Alvarez with his star Jane Levy. Like the first Conjuring film, the trailer for Don't Breathe highlighted a specific scene and absolutely terrified me. As soon as I saw that trailer, Don't Breathe instantly jumped to my most anticipated films list. So with all those expectations, did the film disappoint? I'm happy to report that Don't Breathe absolutely did not disappoint. This non-stop horrific ride instantly became one of my favorite movies of the year. It thrilled me and awed me all at the same time. Don't Breathe is all about three kids who like to commit burglaries in their spare time. The leader is kind of a cookie cutter thug named Money (easily the weakest point of the movie) who has influenced his troubled, wrong side of the tracks girlfriend Rocky (Jane Levy) to take part in stealing from rich people. Rocky steals in hopes that she can somehow obtain a better life for her and her sister. They wouldn't get too far though without her friend zoned buddy, Alex, whose father's job puts them into easy access to spare house keys and remote controls to silence home alarms. As a final heist, they decide to rob an old blind man, who recently won a huge settlement and supposedly keeps all his money in a vault inside his house. If they can just do this job, they'll never have to steal again. As expected in a horror film, things don't go quite as planned and the audience is taken on this ride that does not let up. For the type of movie it's trying to be, Don't Breathe is almost absolutely perfect. Dare I say the "masterpiece" word?? The only flaws that really stood out were that the characters could have been fleshed out a little more. Usually, that's a bigger gripe for me, but the amount of time that this movie holds your attention non-stop, it's an easy thing to forgive here. Money was awful, as was his dialogue. His lines can be cringeworthy, but you don't really have to deal with too many of them once everything is all said and done. Jane Levy, once again excels in the horror movie "final girl-type" role, though Goosebump's Dylan Minnette certainly tries to steal the title with his performance on more than one occasion. I would have loved a couple more moments between them before all the action started, but once it does it's really hard to complain about anything because everything is so well done. The camera work in discovering this house was so wonderful, I'd always be a second away from commenting on how masterful the film was and then gripping my chair a moment later because something horrible was happening. Honestly, this is the horror genre at its absolute best. The way it should be. RATING: 9.5

Here I am again. Typing out another review to a long-awaited comedy sequel to a cult classic I love. Everything seems to be a cash grab these days, and the idea of lightning striking twice seems pretty much impossible. So did Zoolander 2 ever really have a chance? Certainly of all the potential comedy sequels out there, a sequel to Zoolander had the most potential. With characters so silly and plots so outrageous, the possibilities are endless. So does Zoolander 2 manage to soar above the other wasted opportunity comedy sequels of the last few years? I'll just tell you the answer straight up. No. No, it does not. It takes a leap and falls on its stupid face. I take no delight in being the bearer of bad news to declare that Zoolander 2 is absolutely terrible. Zoolander 2 is set in the present day but fills us in on the events that took place after the first film. Derek and Hansel are now estranged and pop stars are being killed all around the globe. It's up to Fashion Interpol Agent Valentina (Penelope Cruz) to find the now hermit Derek Zoolander to help solve the mystery and save the world or something (at least the world of fashion anyway.) So what exactly are Zoolander 2's offenses you ask? Well firstly, it fits that phrase that EVERY critic loves to throw around: "painfully unfunny." It was at least 20 minutes before I let out a single laugh... or smirk. In fact, all in all, I think I can count on one hand how many times I laughed throughout the film. Secondly, I'm getting really sick of sequels that undo all the hard-fought victories of the first film within a couple of minutes. What they decided to do with these characters is just atrocious, whether it's in the exposition or the convoluted mess that follows. It's incredibly stupid from the get-go, but you'd be amazed at how much worse it gets. For a free screening, I definitely contemplated leaving quite a few times. Most puzzling of all though that the film gets wrong is the character of Mugatu. Easily one of my favorite parts of the first film, Will Ferrell almost seems to have forgotten the character completely. He's got some of the facial ticks down, but his voice is all wrong (though to his credit, the real Mugatu occasionally seeps through his performance, but far too seldom.) The LEAST you could have done to prepare for your role is re-watching the performance you gave in the first film. Zoolander 2's problem is that it's living in the shadow of a far greater predecessor. Every gag or sequence that was great in the original tries to be duplicated here and only ever pales in comparison. Often because there's no straight man the audience can identify with to laugh at the shenanigans of our two foolish leads. In absence of these grounded characters? They threw in shameless celebrity cameos (illustrating just one more thing that the original was able to do naturally, that felt forced in the sequel.) If I HAD to say something positive? Uh, I enjoyed the kid who plays Derek Junior? Also, half of the audience will enjoy the eye candy of Penelope Cruz, but I am not among that audience. Zoolander 2 makes me want to watch its FAR superior predecessor and forget this mess ever happened. RATING: 2/10

Out today is the Coen Brothers' tribute to old Hollywood in Hail, Caesar! How do I even begin to describe this hot mess of a movie? There are moments of sheer brilliance and hilarity that I love with all my heart. The film is all about a day in the life of Josh Brolin's character Eddie, a studio exec trying to keep everyone's pictures afloat and scandal-free. He has to deal with finishing a giant biblical epic (that is essentially Ben-Hur, just with a different name...) whose star has gone missing, a pregnancy from an unwed studio starlet, and a cowboy star who can't make the leap to dramatic actor. Unfortunately, not all storylines are created equal in this picture. Alden Ehrenreich, who was the only reason to see Beautiful Creatures, similarly is fantastic here. His character and his scenes with Ralph Fiennes are hilarious as the miscast actor and frustrated director respectively. Conversely, Scarlett Johansson's storyline feels like an afterthought, while George Clooney's scenes usually tend to be the best time to make your trip to the lobby or bathroom (or if you need a little shut-eye.) Unfortunately, Clooney's storyline is the most central to the plot, and it is by far the worst. I should also mention Tilda Swinton, Channing Tatum, and Jonah Hill all make appearances as well (of varying importance, all are great...especially Tatum.) As a tribute to films of this era, Caesar features two amazing musical numbers, and they are undoubtedly the highlight of the film. I only wish there were more of them because it was fun to hearken back to a time when instead of explosions, it was this type of artistry that got people in their seats. It's hard not to wish that the film could have been more focused as to what it wanted to be. It can't decide whether to be an homage or a satire; whether to focus on fame or politics. Instead, it tries to do everything and it only succeeds at half of what it attempts. There are moments that truly are great, only to be dragged down by the most random dialogue-driven scenes that go on and on. For every great moment, there was one that left me scratching my head. It's definitely an unsatisfying film experience to watch a movie that is half great, and half completely out there. RATING: 5.5/10

Happy Friday good readers! Today I shall give you two reviews for the price of one. Two movies of note came out today: (three if you want to include the latest Nicholas Sparks movie which I have not yet subjected myself to,) the long-time in the works adaptation of Pride & Prejudice & Zombies, as well as the Coen Brother's latest film Hail, Caesar! February isn't usually the kindest month to the world of cinema, but do either of these two films manage to be a light in the darkness? Or are they the usual doomed fare? We'll start with the zombies ladies first. When I first heard this movie was in the works I was really excited. I hoped that the filmmakers would have fun with the material and not try to take it too seriously. And then I saw the trailers and I was worried. Really worried. As such, I didn't have too high of expectations as to the quality of the film...the only thing was I expected it to be much more zombies, and much less Pride & Prejudice. I was very surprised to discover it was the other way around! This film is almost a direct copy of the Keira Knightley Pride & Prejudice, just with zombies thrown in (so there's really no use in describing the plot...just think of it as an alternate universe of Austen's world, this time that took place in a zombie-infested England.) Is that a bad thing? For this girl, the answer is absolutely not. I had so much fun with this movie, I just wish there could have been some more action! Sometimes the filmmakers were too faithful in adapting the Pride & Prejudice part of the story, and you just wish that the characters' lives were a little more endangered. The action mixed with the period piece romance is the best part and when it gets it right, it really gets it right. It's a hard balance to strike throughout, but often I felt the filmmakers erred a little on being too safe. Lily James makes a fantastic zombie-hunting Elizabeth Bennet. She's gorgeous and feisty. Sadly her Darcy is not quite her equal, and is a little more emo in this version...but I suppose he's perfectly tolerable, just not handsome enough to tempt me... (sorry for the P&P joke it was just too appropriate.) Luckily they work well together, and everyone is cast well enough. Matt Smith and Lena Headey in particular, are scene stealers. For a movie such as this, the pacing is everything. In the beginning, it was absolutely perfect the way they intertwined the zombie attacks with the well-known romance. The middle portion of the movie doesn't have the same tact in getting things right. It drags as it focuses more on the story we know when it should take more liberties. Still, I can't deny I had a lot of fun seeing one of my favorite stories zombified. I just hope an extended/directors/unrated cut makes its way to Blu-ray sometime. Pride & Prejudice & Zombies is flawed but incredibly enjoyable for Austen lovers that don't take themselves too seriously, as well as action fans alike. It just might be the perfect date movie. RATING: 7/10

Not every Sundance movie gets a ton of attention. Some debut at the festival with little to no fanfare, even when they're directed by accomplished directors and feature strong actors. Sometimes they'll even get great reviews, and yet they still don't seem to draw much attention to themselves. Such is the case with Ira Sachs's latest feature Little Men, a film so simple and unassuming that it's easily being overlooked and lost in the shuffle of other great films. Little Men is not a movie designed to blow you away, but rather to simply make you ponder life's little intricacies. The movie focuses on the friendship of two preteen boys: an easy friendship formed by proximity. These two live in their own world, enjoying their time together, and are oblivious to the problems of their parents. As such, they are not aware of their parents' feud over a lease that threatens to destroy their respective realities. There's something wonderful about the juxtaposition of the world of the adults with the world of these two preteen boys. The problems and disagreements we face as adults are messy and driven by many different factors (though usually with money being involved, as in the case of his parents.) Meanwhile, the existence we live as kids seems so much purer. Differences still exist, especially when bullying occurs (as it does in a scene here)...but there's a far more trusting innocence that draws us to certain people that disappears when we're adults. Little Men is a great portrayal of a friendship that only exists because of proximity. This to me reflects the type of friendships you had as a kid that at the time you valued with all your heart, but when you grew up and became different people, (as well as physically and figuratively going separate ways...) the friendship dissipated. You discovered you really had nothing in common and the friendship was only really there to be a part of your life for a short time. I kept waiting for a scene where the two boys' bond was solidified but realized that when there was none...it was actually far closer to real life. When you're a kid, you don't need a reason to be friends with someone. You just spend time with them and that time is all the bonding you need. Whether it's playing video games or rollerblading in the park...just having someone to share your company is enough. It's not until we get older and more insecure with the hurts we've had to experience that we allow those friendships to fade in favor of ones with people who understand the version of ourselves that we've become. Or as Greg Kinnear puts it, when you've reached the point that you can understand that your parents are just people too, trying to make the best decisions they can. There are varying levels of meaning you can derive from Little Men (some heavy-handed, others very simple), but for me, I took it at its core: a story about the relationships we have when we're young, and how life will turn us into the adults we become....the adults who build walls and look out for themselves above others. It's a simple film, but one I enjoyed. RATING: 7.5/10

The first movie I got to see at this year's festival couldn't be more Sundancey if it tried. Wiener-Dog is the perfect movie for indie movie-loving hipsters, and apparently, I'm one of them. The film follows the titular wiener dog through four vignettes: a father buying the dog to be a companion to his young cancer surviving son, a vet rescuing the dog and taking him on an unexpected road trip, the dog's life as a pet to a washed-up film professor, and finally living with a crotchety old woman near the end of her life whose granddaughter pays a selfish visit. Not every storyline is created equal in this dark-humored comedy, and seeing how well the first two stories lead into each other makes the final two transitions a bit jarring (even if we do get a wacky intermission thrown in for the heck of it...which I will admit, did make me chuckle.) The first two vignettes, one featuring Julie Delpy as the cynical mother of the aforementioned boy smitten with his new wiener dog, and the other with an awkward but sweet Greta Gerwig meeting a zoned out Keiran Culkin are strong and have some real tender moments, as well as genuine humor. When we get to Danny DeVito's film professor story though you can't help but feel that it was thrown in just for the Sundance crowd. It's like you can hear the director say "now let's do a segment all about the art of film and dissect filmmaking, as well as the people who claim to love films." I, of course, find it interesting as someone who loves film, but I can't help but feel that it doesn't really go with the rest of the movie. There's not a ton of humor in this vignette until the punchline of why the dog was important to this storyline, which humor happens to be so dark, that it will be up to filmgoers whether they'll find it funny, or a little too bizarre. I appreciated the joke but didn't feel like there was a proper enough setup for it. The last vignette featuring Ellen Burstyn returns to the feel of the first half, with more humor throughout, but again feels somewhat isolated. Like the last storyline, we don't know how the dog came into the old woman's possession, but rather he just shows up to be a silent observer. There's some self-referential humor again about art this go-round, but it's less on the nose than in the previous segment. A rather bizarre sequence occurs near the end of the film, that depending on the viewer might take them out of the movie because it threatens to cross the line of being a little "too weird." I still went along with it, but more mainstream audiences probably will not (if they make it that far!) The ending itself was particularly dark and strange, so not getting too attached to the dog would be my advice for anyone going in. In the end, I found wiener-dog to be strange, precocious, funny, quirky, but ultimately uneven. In summation: it is a typical indie film with the desire to show several slice-of-life scenes, rather than going into anything too profound. RATING: 6/10

So now that I'm done talking about what 2016 has in store for us, it's time to return to summing up 2015. Earlier I presented my list of the ten unwatchable films of 2015, but now it's time for the worst films I DID actually watch last year. 10. TIE: THE LONGEST RIDE It's almost a tradition at this point to include a Nicholas Sparks film on my worst list, but in this one's defense, it probably was the least worst of his offerings of late. Most of that was probably the eye candy offered by Scott Eastwood. Otherwise, this one is a pretty forgettable mishmash of all the usual Nicholas Sparks tropes. Original review HERE. 10. TIE: ALOHA I wanted to like Aloha. I wanted to like it really badly. The cast is fantastic and the trailer showed so much promise. But what did I actually get? A giant steaming hot mess. The story is all over the place and all kinds of stupid. But the most surprising thing to me of all is how little chemistry the usually charismatic Emma Stone and Bradley Cooper had together. The age difference (that usually isn't a problem with the pairing of Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence) was glaringly more obvious while Emma Stone tried to make her character so childlike. A movie is doing something wrong when you're hoping the character gets back with their ex. Also one of my cardinal movie sins is wasting John Krasinski, and while he was absolutely the best part of this movie, he deserved better (as he always does.) 9. SELF/LESS Self/Less almost was just a bland sci-fi action thriller...until a point in the movie where it crossed over into absurdity. At this point, the film becomes an unintentional comedy and a parody of the genre. It's kind of preposterous. 8. THE LAZARUS EFFECT With a genre capable of such craziness, how is it possible that so many boring horror movies exist? With a premise about learning to bring the dead back to life, you'd think they could generate some suspense. Unfortunately, though, The Lazarus effect bored me to tears and is quite frankly an insult to the genre. Even with a great cast, they couldn't bring this dud to life. 7. PAN I was so disheartened by how awful Pan was. This film has a serious identity complex. One minute it's trying to be Moulin Rouge, the next it's taking plotlines directly from the first Star Wars. There was so much potential to this film, but somehow every single thing rang hollow. Original review HERE. 6. THE GALLOWS So there are boring horror movies, and then there are idiotic ones. This one happens to be both. It also happens to contain some of the most annoying characters to appear in a movie this year. The Gallows is horrendous. It's only 81 minutes, but the fact that there is zero suspense and that the film basically consists of annoying teenagers walking around in the dark acting scared--it feels like an eternity. You don't think the film could possibly get any more stupid, and then it reveals its twist. 5. THE BOY NEXT DOOR As an unintentional comedy or parody, The Boy Next Door is kind of fantastic. It is absolutely one of the more entertaining films on this list, but certainly not in the way it was intended to be. This movie is hilariously awful, in the so bad it's good kind of way. But that doesn't mean I'm not about to acknowledge that it *is* awful. 4. ACCIDENTAL LOVE Accidental Love is almost indescribably bad. The film was made in 2008 by David O'Russell but was never finished due to a number of financial issues. It rested on a shelf for years and years and REALLY should have stayed there. What is supposed to be an upbeat comedy making statements about the government (the film centers around a waitress who gets hit in the head with a nail gun, and convinces a senator to plead her cause...) just ends up being a listless, mind-numbing experience I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. 3. JUPITER ASCENDING Like The Boy Next Door, the utter absurdity of Jupiter Ascending is kind of fun. There's a certain respect for this film since it tried to be original and took a risk and all...but it pretty much failed spectacularly. Oh and I'm STILL shocked this film didn't help Michael Keaten edge out Eddie Redmayne in the Academy's eyes with his scenery-chewing performance he gives as one of the villainous siblings out to kill their reincarnated mother. 2. THE COBBLER The Cobbler is an awful film starring Adam Sandler, which isn't in and of itself an unusual thing. But the WAY in which it is awful differs so much from the usual Sandler offering that it's quite simply astounding. What's crazy is that Sandler isn't actually so bad in this role, and the premise itself is pretty interesting....but somehow the director takes the idea of a cobbler being able to turn himself into the person whose shoes he's wearing, and makes it infuriatingly stupid. 1. HOT PURSUIT No film I saw last year outmatched the sheer laziness and stupidity of Hot Pursuit. This film legitimately does not have a single thing going for it. It's as if in the pitch room someone said "You know what would be a good idea for a movie? Someone scratching their nails on a blackboard for a whole movie!" Then they cast Sofia Vergara and Reese Witherspoon who had absolutely zero chemistry and expected somehow it would be funny. The plot here is completely inconsequential to talk about here, pretty much like it was in the movie. Honestly, this movie was the worst. So any that I missed from this list AND my unwatchables? Let me know! To read my WORST of lists for previous years see below. 2014 WORST 2013 WORST 2012 WORST 2011 WORST

Whew. Okay, readers. The last one is right here. This year I saw the most movies I've ever seen at the festival (that number being 8,) and I'm happy to say I capped off the experience on a very high note. Like last year, we decided again to get tickets to a randomly selected screening that shows one of the movies the grand jury awarded the top prizes to, and while I was hoping for a repeat viewing of Me and Earl and the Dying Girl, we ended up with tickets to the documentary The Wolfpack. Usually, I'm not huge on documentaries, but the premise of it was so interesting and the fact it won the grand jury prize for US Documentaries made it pretty much a sure thing right? Yes. In fact, this movie ended up being far more fascinating than I thought it could be. The documentary follows a real-life family of two parents, their six sons, and their lone daughter (actually it doesn't really follow her at all because we rarely see her) and how different their lives are from the average American. You see, the patriarch of this family hoped to raise his children as a type of tribe undefiled from the world. As such, he only let them out in public a few times a year, if at all. And when they were out, they were instructed to trust no one and to even look at no one. He told them to never cut their hair...and well clearly they've also never been to see a dentist. The boys' only link to the outside world is the word of cinema. They have a deep love of movies to the extent that one of their favorite hobbies is to dictate the screenplays of their favorite movies, create the props and costumes necessary to recreate them and film their own versions. They actually made quite the impressive version of The Dark Knight, with one of the sons providing a spot-on impression of Heath Ledger's Joker. This lonely, sheltered existence became too much for one of the sons though, and the movie focuses on his attempts to try and become more familiar with the world and to get his brothers to do the same. This documentary made me feel almost every feeling possible. It made me laugh, it made me want to cry, it made me feel tense, it made me feel disturbed, it made me happy for their small triumphs, and made me really depressed that such an existence is a reality for more people than we may even realize. This movie reaffirmed my stance that bubbles of any kind, are dangerous. Parents who try to protect their children by shielding them from "the world" creates a false reality that can be even more dangerous than what they're trying to protect them from. I'm not sure why exactly this family agreed to have their story told, or under what circumstances this movie came to be... but boy was it filled with moments that will stay with you. There is so much more I could say about this doc--suffice it to say, I'm going to be thinking about that one for a while. EMILY RATING: 9/10

Jared Hess is and always has been, an acquired taste. His first film, Napoleon Dynamite was a smashing cult hit featuring randomly humorous characters and various quotable lines...which distracted a lot of people from the fact that the movie didn't actually have a plot. His subsequent films also have become more focused in terms of plot, but still, have a tendency to meander. I enjoyed Nacho Libre...but found Gentlemen Broncos to be horrendous. After that horrible film, Hess needed a while to recuperate.... which I suppose is what he's been doing the last five years (though his wife directed Austenland in the interim.) I was hopeful that the break did him good.. but a little anxious. Our tickets were for the end of the festival and the reviews that came out to help give me a sense of the film were far from glowing. One list said that Don Verdean was the second-worst film of the festival! Ouch. There went any expectations I had. So where did it fall on the scale of Napolean Dynamite to Gentlemen Broncos? After all this film reteams the Broncos cast of Sam Rockwell & Jemaine Clement (both of whom I love and was shocked when I hated Broncos so much) so that wasn't an encouraging sign right? Well here's the thing. Don Verdean is a movie made for Utahns, by Utahns in Utah. And as a Utahn, I could help but find myself chuckling frequently and smiling often. The thing is when you get an inside joke.. you can't help but appreciate it even if you know it won't be everyone's cup of tea. Such is the case with Don Verdean. It's a quirky, silly movie... but after a lot of the more serious content I've been watching over the last week, it was kind of refreshing. Don Verdean probably won't have the lasting power or impact of Napoleon Dynamite, but for a comedy nowadays you could do a lot worse! In fact, I'd argue that Don Verdean is his most accessible film to date. It has a simple premise (religious archaeologist faces a moral dilemma,) but unlike his other works, more exploring of the initial concept happens (and yes even a structured plot occurs!) Don Verdean also has a great cast! Joining Rockwell and Clement are Amy Ryan, Danny McBride, Leslie Bibb, and Will Forte. All turn in good work, but Ryan in particular as the mousy dedicated Christian servant to Rockwell's Verdean is wonderful. Like his other films, this movie is simply not for everyone (I'm not sure what his fascination is with making everyone look like they live in a time capsule).. and in this case, especially the uber-sensitive might take offense at some of the jabs here. No ethnicity, in particular, is portrayed in a glowing light and that does not exclude Americans. These characters may all, in fact, be caricatures, but at least they're amusing caricatures to watch! Just don't take it too seriously and you'll be fine. RATING: 7/10