Welcome to Monday Miniatures, where I tell you about some of the stuff I’ve been watching in the past week that I wouldn’t otherwise get to share.
The week of Oct. 20-26, 2025:
Is This Thing On?, directed by Bradley Cooper
How I watched it: In theaters (TCL Chinese, as part of AFI Fest)
The first of two films I was able to catch at this year’s American Film Institute Festival in Hollywood, Cooper’s latest is his best film yet. I was lukewarm on A Star Is Born and did not care for Maestro, both of which felt a little forced and programmatic. Is This Thing On?, by contrast, feels real and lived in, with a genuinely moving emotional core.
Will Arnett and Laura Dern star as a couple getting divorced who, in their separation, discover or rediscover parts of themselves that seem to make them whole. Arnett and Dern were in attendance for a Q&A after the screening I saw, and Arnett, in particular, seemed moved and a little bashful about the well-deserved praise he received for his work in the film. Both Arnett and Dern are spectacular.
I hope to write more about this film in the future, so I will keep my comments here brief, but suffice it to say that this really feels like a movie by, about, and for adults. It doesn’t condescend. It doesn’t lower itself for a joke. It doesn’t judge its characters. It presents, honestly and truthfully, the difficulties of reaching middle age and wondering what any of it means anymore.
 |
| Will Arnett and Laura Dern at AFI Fest after a screening of Is This Thing On? |
Ghost Elephants, directed by Werner Herzog
How I watched it: In theaters (TCL Chinese, as part of AFI Fest)
Two Herzogs always have existed: Narrative Herzog and Documentary Herzog. I don’t think it’s controversial to suggest that of late, Documentary Herzog is the superior filmmaker. While I liked Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans and My Son, My Son, What Have Ye Done?, movies like Queen of the Desert and Salt and Fire are largely forgotten misfires. Meanwhile, docs like Grizzly Man, Encounters at the End of the World, Cave of Forgotten Dreams, and Into the Abyss are masterpieces of the form.
Ghost Elephants might not quite reach those heights, but for a filmmaker who has scaled Mount Olympus, scaling Everest is still pretty cool. Herzog, editor Marco Capalbo, and executive producer Andrew Trapani were on hand for a post-screening Q&A that was funny, charming, and enlightening in ways only Herzog can accomplish.
The film, a collaboration among Herzog, National Geographic, and scientist Steve Boyes, follows Boyes in his quixotic quest (a hallmark of Herzog’s films, both narrative and documentary) to track down the titular ghost elephants, fabled descendants of the largest elephant ever hunted and killed, making them descendants of the largest land mammal ever. The filmmaking is simultaneously grand and intimate, hauntingly elegiac and rollickingly adventuresome.
Herzog, as ever, is more interested in the nature of the quest rather than the quest itself. This is not about accomplishing the goal of finding these elephants, which Herzog gets Boyes to admit probably won’t result in any profound, mystical understanding of the world. Rather, it is about accepting that the world is profound and mystical and the best we can do is exist in it, be part of it, and occasionally be awed by it.
 |
| Werner Herzog and Co. after a screening of Ghost Elephants at AFI Fest. |
Springsteen: Deliver Me from Nowhere, directed by Scott Cooper
How I watched it: In theaters (AMC Universal)
There are three major types of music biopic. There’s the “Dewey Cox needs to think about his entire life before he plays” type, skewered so well in Walk Hard and exemplified by Walk the Line, Elvis, and a whole host of others. There’s the experimental “artist as an idea” type, such as Todd Haynes’ I’m Not There or Gus Van Sant’s Last Days. And, there’s the snapshot variety, using a single moment or period in a performer’s life as a stand-in for that artist’s particular genius.
Springsteen: Deliver Me from Nowhere is this third type, focusing on the year between “Born to Run” and “Born in the U.S.A.” when The Boss sat down, picked up an acoustic guitar, and got serious about his depression while writing and recording the Nebraska album. This is my favorite type of music biopic, and this film is a good reminder why.
By narrowing the focus, Cooper, who also wrote the film, based on Warren Zanes’ nonfiction book about the same events, is able to dive deeper into the individual moments and to allow the film around those moments time to breathe. It shouldn’t feel like such a luxury to spend 15 quiet seconds on a balcony at sunset, but it does because we’ve grown so accustomed to films setting a breakneck pace while trying to jam entire lives into two-and-a-half hours. By the end of those movies, it’s rare to feel like you’ve spent one authentic second with the subject. Here, it feels like we’re in the room with Bruce Springsteen for two hours.
I was never a big Springsteen fan, though I appreciate his music, so I’m maybe not the one to judge how close star Jeremy Allen White gets to evoking The Boss. I can say, however, that White readily evokes the spirit of a man whose past has finally come to bear on his present. From what I can tell, Cooper hews pretty close to the facts, with the exception of an invented (or composited) love interest. In doing so, the filmmaker offers an emotional insight into the artist that is rare and poignant. And, that’s all anyone can ask from a movie like this.
Weapons, directed by Zach Cregger
How I watched it: Amazon Prime rental
I think it would be fair to call this a Clown Horror (TM), in a manner of speaking, in which case it kicked off an accidental festival of clown movies. I did not intend to watch four in a row, and frankly, I didn’t even realize I had until I was done. Just the way it worked out. I also did not know this would be on HBO Max so soon after I paid $10 to rent it on Amazon. Also, just the way it worked out.
When Weapons came out in theaters, I saw it opening weekend and had a great time. Since then, it became a box-office smash, a critical darling, and a fan favorite. I have seen multiple sites touting this film for the Best Picture race and lauding it as one of the best films of the year. That’s not the movie I saw that first weekend, so I knew I would have to revisit it. Now that I have, I’m here to tell everyone to cool your damn jets.
Cregger is an undeniably talented filmmaker. The way he sets up the camera, the way he uses genre convention as a tool rather than a crutch, the way he toys with audience expectations – it’s all tremendous. I enjoyed Barbarian in much the same way. I look forward to whatever he does next. All that said, folks, this movie is incredibly flawed. The logic of its world is nonsense, its handling of marginalized characters is a problem (much like in Barbarian), and by Cregger’s own admission, the movie isn’t nearly as deep as people want it to be.
It’s particularly frustrating to see the praise heaped on this entertaining but ultimately silly movie after the polite but muted response afforded to the far superior The Long Walk, which is actually the movie people claim this movie is. And in a year with true horror masterpieces like Sinners and 28 Years Later, it’s baffling to hear Weapons brought up in the same breath.
I don’t want to come off as though I didn’t like this movie. I did. In particular, Josh Brolin and Julia Garner deliver tremendous performances, Cregger’s filmmaking is top notch, and the premise is deeply unsettling and intriguing. In my opinion, however, from a story standpoint, Cregger chooses the least interesting of all options to play out that premise. As a result, the third act is a mess, and the ending, while perhaps viscerally satisfying on some level, is tonally disjointed and thematically inert.
Clown in a Cornfield, directed by Eli Craig
How I watched it: Shudder
Yet, for all the words I just spent pouring water on the world’s Weapons enthusiasm, it remains leaps and bounds better than the other three movies I watched in my Clown Horror (TM) marathon. Which is not to say Clown in a Cornfield doesn’t have its charms. It surely does. Namely, while the title promises but one clown in a cornfield, the film in fact delivers many clowns in that cornfield. This was a twist I wasn’t expecting because, as you may have guessed, I was and am completely unfamiliar with the award-winning YA horror novel on which this movie is based.
I am a little embarrassed to admit that I did not realize Craig’s first feature was the classic Tucker and Dale vs. Evil, one of the great horror-comedies of all time and one of my personal favorite movies ever in either genre. Had I been aware of that, I would have striven to see this movie in a theater rather than catching up with it on streaming. I had wanted to see it on the big screen but just didn’t make it.
Clown in a Cornfield is not as accomplished as Tucker and Dale, but it is witty, gory, and tremendously fun. I hope we get more from Craig, who has made just two features in the 14 years since his debut, his last being 2017’s Little Evil.
The Black Phone, directed by Scott Derrickson
How I watched it: Peacock
I watched this as a means of deciding whether I would check out the sequel that is currently in theaters. Now, having seen it, I’ll probably skip the sequel, at least in theaters. Derrickson and co-writer C. Robert Cargill are the filmmakers behind Sinister, Marvel’s Doctor Strange, and the “Dreamkill” segment of V/H/S/85, which takes place in the same universe as The Black Phone. I greatly enjoy their work, and there’s plenty to like here, but it’s a little shaggy.
Ethan Hawke makes a wonderful villain, and the child performances from Mason Thames and Madeleine McGraw are excellent. While light on scares, the movie is high on tension, and the parts grounded in the real world are sufficiently upsetting as to create a sense of dread and unease throughout the proceedings. My issue is that the supernatural elements don’t really jibe with the real-world elements, to the degree that you could largely lift them straight out of the movie and it wouldn’t change much.
Of course, the movie is premised on phone calls from beyond the grave and premonitions in dreams, but I submit that those are actually the weakest elements of an otherwise gripping thriller. Those pieces also contribute mightily to the shagginess I referenced, since it feels like multiple stories are going on at once that never cohere in a satisfying way. I see why Derrickson and Cargill were attracted to this material (the film is based on a short story by Joe Hill), but I hope they get back to the less-is-more thrills of their earlier hit, Sinister.
Terrifier 3, directed Damien Leone
How I watched it: Peacock
Speaking of a filmmaker who could benefit from a less-is-more approach, I give you Leone and the most recent entry in his Terrifier series. But, of course, “less is more” would hardly be the point of these films, so I digress.
These films exist to push the boundaries of gore and audience endurance. The filmmakers hope that people will vomit or pass out or whatever else. That’s the point. And for gorehounds, this series represents a badge of honor that says, “Look what I can handle!” Not one of these movies is a good film, in the traditional sense (you know, well developed characters, coherent storytelling, and competent camerawork and editing), but we can play fair. Let’s judge these on the basis on which they are made.
So, does this movie push the boundaries of extremity and gore? Not really, at least not beyond where the previous two movies took things. The first film is best remembered for its inverted splitting in half of a nude woman. We should pause to note that actress Catherine Corcoran, the inverted woman in question, recently announced a lawsuit against the producers of the franchise, alleging breach of contract, unsafe working conditions, and sexual harassment, specifically pertaining to this scene. I would urge gorehounds to keep this in mind when revisiting that first film.
The second film ups the ante by flaying a high school girl and keeping her alive (in the face of all known science) long enough to be discovered by her horrified mother, who is then killed. People will point to the shower scene in this third film as the pièce de revulsion, but there is nothing in the shower sequence as viscerally upsetting as those first two kills I mentioned. Kudos to Leone, at least, for having one of the victims in this case be a nude man who gets sawed in half starting at the genitals. Of course, there is still a nude woman in the scene to get sliced and diced, but baby steps.
What are its positives? At 125 minutes, it’s almost 15 minutes shorter than the second film. I mean that sincerely. These movies are plotless, formless excuses to eviscerate human bodies. At the two-hour mark, you’re no longer testing audience endurance; you’re testing audience patience and interest. What else? Given the financial success and cultural impact of these movies, Art the Clown has absolutely been elevated into the pantheon of great horror villains, alongside Freddy, Jason, and Michael Myers.
All that said, fuck sexual harassers. Pay Catherine Corcoran what she’s earned.
The Devil’s Bath, directed by Severin Fiala and Verokina Franz
How I watched it: Shudder
Fiala and Franz are an Austrian duo best known for their horror thriller Goodnight Mommy, which I have yet to see, though that may be rectified by the end of this week. I say that because based on The Devil’s Bath, I am incredibly interested in what these filmmakers have done and what they plan to do next. Be forewarned, The Devil’s Bath is not a “good time” in the strictest sense of the meaning, but it is a rewarding time.
Set in Austria in 1750, the film is based on historical records of the time, telling a true story that also stands in for a broader societal phenomenon, which I won’t spoil here. Anja Plaschg stars as Agnes, a woman who marries into a rural fishing village and finds herself crushed by the monotony of her day-to-day existence. Today, we would call that depression, but frankly in our treatment of Agnes’ symptoms, we haven’t come as far as one might hope in 275 years. Which is to say, Agnes’ treatment is mostly her husband and mother-in-law telling her to get over it.
The film also deals with the weight of religious belief and the ways faith becomes both a crutch and a justification for one’s actions. In costume and art design, the film has a tremendous verisimilitude, which reminds one of Robert Eggers’ The Witch, though I greatly prefer this film. This is a bold, challenging movie that won’t be for everyone, but if anything I’ve said sounds at all intriguing, I would encourage you to check it out.
Carrie, directed by Brian De Palma
How I watched it: In theaters (Million Dollar Theater)
A masterpiece that remains a masterpiece and only becomes more of a masterpiece when you see it on the big screen. This was my first time seeing Carrie in a theater and with an audience, and it’s an experience that I cannot recommend enough. Even if you’ve seen it a dozen times or more over the years (I estimate I’ve seen Carrie 25-30 times, largely thanks to how often it played on TNT in the ’90s and 2000s), you owe it to yourself to see it in a theater with a crowd.
I saw this at the Million Dollar Theater in downtown Los Angeles as part of the L.A. Conservancy Last Remaining Seats programming, which strives to highlight the city’s historic theaters. This screening was part of the Conservancy’s inaugural Halloween event, Last Remains. The evening also included a lovely tribute to Diane Keaton, who was among the Conservancy’s longest-serving board members and dedicated much of her life to preserving L.A.’s history and architecture.
