FROM THE DESK OF

CHRISTOPHER CLUCAS

Sinners (2025) Review

April 27, 2025.

What could have easily been another hicksploitation, B-level horror flick in the vein of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre(1974) or, more recently, Ti West’s X (2022), is layered with performances and themes that allow it to stand on its own as a new kind of film. Sinners is all the evidence needed for Ryan Coogler to earn a spot among the current leaders of contemporary cinema—and if he continues to create films from his own mind, that status will be cemented.

Unlike the usual horror movie, Sinners waits until nearly halfway through to reveal its antagonist. This hour of exposition and world-building is incredibly necessary, as it makes the handful of upcoming character deaths impact the story as well as the audience. Delroy Lindo, as drunkard blues singer Delta Slim, delivers a standout performance. What could have been a straightforward role is given complexity and heart by Lindo—especially in the film’s foundational scene, which takes place in a car driving through cotton fields.

Cinematography and sound design are not lost on Coogler, as these are highlights of the two-hour runtime. Recent Oscar-winner Ludwig Göransson sets music to Ernie Barnes’ 1971 painting The Sugar Shack, which can be seen in the opening credits of CBS’s Good Times and on the cover of Marvin Gaye’s 1976 record I Want You. The dynamic cameras used to shoot Sinners creates a variety of aspect ratios, further enhancing the beauty of the colors and action on screen.

Drew Taylor wrote for The Wrap that it was “an Avengers-like experience.” Taylor is correct—although he doesn’t realize that this is not a compliment. It’s no surprise that Ryan Coogler’s first feature film since working in the Marvel universe would have its own “hold for applause” moments. Sinners is his first original concept film while maintaining the themes of Black culture and the Black experience seen throughout his growing body of work. These fan-service moments are the film’s only weakness, pulling you out of the drama with clichés and cheesy lines of dialogue. Coogler is effective at pulling you back in after these moments, but they stain what would otherwise be a flawless script.

Sinners is not only a film deserving of the biggest screen in your town, but one worth driving to a bigger screen to experience. The post-credit scene, albeit unnecessary, leaves a sense of satisfaction and closure. The only question becomes: Will the next project from Ryan Coogler be the hacky, IP-driven blockbuster of his previous pictures, or another risk-taking original film that not only reminds us cinema is alive, but that it is thriving?

man in bryant park

April 6, 2025.

Death of a Unicorn (2025) Review

March 29, 2025.

death of a distributor. 

it seems like just yesterday the film community was raving over the spectacle that was brady corbet’s the brutalist(2024). in fact, it was just a month ago. unfortunately, 2024 has come to an end and we begin the 2025 watchlist which contains a plethora of films from a24. best picture winning, elevated-horror producers, a24. their newest trending topic to start the year is the alex scharfman fantasy, eat-the-rich thriller, death of a unicorn.

the film was presented to me as the new work from the art house giants of modern cinema that are a24. their whole shtick is based around a so-called aesthetic that has garnered praise from fans and critics alike. this appeal has been perfected by such filmmakers as ari aster, the safdie brothers, yorgos lanthimos, and sean baker. the ladder two eventually stopped working with the company and found themselves massive success. funny that. up until i saw the 2021 film ‘lamb’ i was in support of the accolades and fully subscribed to the hype. although lamb(2021) felt like a misguided attempt to fit in with their respective catalog, it was visually appealing enough for its shortcomings to go relatively unnoticed. death of a unicorn(2025) is proof that the folks at a24 are not only capable of missing the mark, but they are growing more accustom to it. the fantasy of an elevated cinema experience provided by the all-powerful gods that are a24 is over. might as well take it out back and shoot it like old yeller because if their upcoming film slate for the rest of 2025 is accurate, it’s only a matter of time before they turn into the rest of the competition.

the film is not without its highlights, albeit far and a few between. it doesn’t take itself as serious as other a24 movies which is refreshing. jenna ortega gives the film its legs to stand on, even when forced to deliver exposition and hold the audiences hand through the story. she gives the character of ridley life and depth while anyone else would leave it as the moody teenage girl trope and nothing more. will poulter as shepard is the saving grace of the film as its comedic relief and is the main aspect audience will walk away having remembered. paul rudd brings nothing more than being paul rudd to the film, but that isnt necessarily a bad thing. the themes of folk mythology are integrated nicely into the stories plot points as well as the costume design and colors. the biggest blunder of the movie, which i would be remiss to not mention, is when ridley is vaping out of her room window and elliot walks in. she panic throws the vape on the bed and sits on the floor as she and her father talk. in every single coverage of her, the juul is in a completely different spot. it’s centered in the frame and is the only thing besides ortega in the bottom left. i had no idea what they were talking about in the scene because i couldn’t ignore it. the whole time i was thinking, “why not just have her throw the juul under the bed or put it in her pocket?” eventually the camera goes to a head-on angle and the juul disappears so they could have edited the scene with that coverage from the beginning. there’s really no reason why the shot changed either since the dynamic between the characters remained the same.

death of a unicorn(2025) is in no way a bad movie and i see it doing well on its theatrical release and even better once it inevitably goes to streaming. the harsh criticism i have is not directed at the cast and crew (minus whoever was in charge of continuity) but rather at the distribution studio for losing what made them special. death of a unicorn is emblematic for the end of the a24 era. their upcoming alex garland film, warfare, will be the nail in the coffin they’ve been constructing since they produced his previous movie, civil war(2024). the pomp and circumstance behind the distributors has led to this point where they prioritize virality and for lack of a better word, aura. the writing has been on the wall with ill-advised decisions like travis scott’s circus maximus(2023), the announcement of a remake of kurosawa’s high and low, and the continuation of television shows from “the sick and twisted mind of sam levinson”. the resulting products from the company continue to stray further from films such as the last black man in san francisco(2019) and their magnum opus that is moonlight(2019). i fear we may never see a true picture from the studio again, or one that can rival their pre-oscar spunk. it is with that i say - help us tim robinson and celine song, you’re our only hope.

note: a24 gave me my ticket for free so it’s not like i wasted any money. thanks guys please don’t stop giving me free tickets after this review.


What’s Up, Doc? (1972) Review

March 7, 2025.

Before he ever picked up a movie camera, Peter Bogdanovich was a film critic and writer in New York City. In the early 60s he worked as a film programmer for the Museum of Modern Art where he played retrospectives from Hitchcock, Ford, Welles, and Hawks. The latter, director Howard Hawks, was known for his screwball comedies such as Bringing Up Baby (1938), His Girl Friday (1940), and Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953). He was referred to as “one of the greatest American Directors of pure movies and a hero of auteur critics” by Roger Ebert and It’s clear that Bogdanovich agreed. 

Hawks’ 1938 classic, Bringing Up Baby, starred Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn in a laugh-out-loud misadventure and entanglement. In a 1972 interview between Hawks and Bogdanovich, Hawks told Bogdanovich that he believed his film to suffer from its insanity. He said there was no sanity to measure how insane the other people were. Bogdanovich must’ve agreed which is why he delivered Ryan O’Neal in the role of Howard (as in Howard Hawks) for his film. O’Neal plays the role of Cary Grant as Howard Bannister and Barbra Streisand as Katherine Hepburn in Judy Maxwell. There’s even a moment where Judy mistakenly called Howard Steve, which is a reference to Lauren Bacall doing the same to Humphrey Bogart in Hawks 1944 film, To Have and Have Not. 

In 1971 Bogdanovich’s debut film, The Last Picture Show, was set to release when he was approached by Warner Bros to direct a film for them, starring Barbra Streisand. He didn’t like the script they gave him and instead, had Oscar nominated David Newman and Robert Newman (writers of Bonnie and Clyde, 1967) and The Graduate (1967) writer Buck Henry compose a different story based on Hawks’ Bringing Up Baby.

A year before O’Neal would star along side his daughter who would become the youngest Oscar winner for her role as Addie Loggins in Paper Moon (1973), a record she still holds, O’Neal joined Peter Bogdanovich to star along side Streisand. It’s difficult to say who steals the show when every member of the cast is worthy of that claim. From Madeline Kahn in her big-screen debut as Eunice Burns, Liam Dunn as Judge Maxwell, or Kenneth Mars as Hugh Simon, the cast brings something to their performances that is as unique as it is ridiculously hysterical.

Upon reading the script, Streisand wasn’t confident in the film and didn’t find it funny. When she saw the audience of Radio City Music Hall screaming with laughter at the film, she told Bagdanovich, “people have strange tastes.” When the film was a box office hit, it continued her sprint as one of the biggest names in Hollywood of the 1970s. 

What’s Up, Doc takes place at a San Francisco hotel where four identical overnight bags owned by four different people get mixed up. Each bag contains something of great value for its owner and the confusion surrounding the missing bags leads to misunderstandings and hijinx for the four owners. The film follows the mild mannered Ingenious rock collector Howard Bannister. He and his overbearing fiancé, Eunice Burns, are in town for a music conference. While at a nearby drug store, Howard meets Judy Maxwell, a witty and charming woman that he'll eventually fall in love with.

The film is a tribute to the screwball comedy era and celebration of the works of Howard Hawks. After the film was released, Streisand agreed that it was in fact funny, although she told the Hollywood Reporter that she “didn’t understand what was going on with the story half the time and just trusted Peter’s vision”. One of the film's writers, Robert Benton, went on to say that Bogdanovich “did the modern version of Bringing Up Baby, and nobody’s tried to do that again. Peter was the only one who could do it.” What’s Up, Doc became the third highest-grossing film of 1972 and went on to win numerous awards and receive countless praise. Streisand stated, “I never knew it would become a big hit because I was always confused about which suitcase was which!”



2024 Movie Picks

  1. Dahomey (Mati Diop)

  2. Rap World (Danny Scharar, Conner O’Malley)

  3. The Room Next Door (Pedro Almodovar)

  4. Queer (Luca Guadagnino)

  5. It’s Not Me (Leos Carax)

  6. Oh, Canada (Paul Schrader)

  7. Anora (Sean Baker)

  8. Challengers (Luca Guadagnino)

  9. Flow (Gints Zilbalodis)

  10. Pepe (Nelson Carlos De los Santos Arias)


The Prisoner (1967) Review

January 28, 2025.

the schizoid man. the chimes of big ben. the girl who was death. 

on the surface the prisoner is the ultimate british spy show. the star and creator, patrick macgoon, even turned down the role of james bond and suggested sean connery instead. macgoon was truly at the helm of the series, writing, producing, and directing. the final two episodes are extremely autobiographical for macgoon, exploring the actors early life and career. while giving him the well-deserved recognition and praise, the smaller voices in the crew deserve credit for the shows glory as well. art direction from jack shampan is a critical reason as to how the show has remained beloved 60 years later. after further viewings and investigations into the show, the layers are peeling back and there proves to be much more than meets the eye. 

george markstein, the script editor, said the show was a sequel to mcgoohans earlier role of john drake in the series danger man. mcgoohan denied this. whether that’s true and they just didn’t want to pay itv or not, it doesn’t change the greatness of number six as a character, or john drake for that matter. it’s possible that disagreement had something to do with markstein quitting the production after the 13th episode but who can know for sure. 

the series asks an array of questions from where is he, what do they want, and whose side are they on. these are just the questions asked in the opening scene. furthermore, why does the village have shops, clubs, and restaurants but no church? why is there no alcohol served in the village? number two answers the questions of number six by saying “questions are a burden to others; answers are a prison for oneself” [dance of the dead]. 

like most great works of art the answers are there, you just have to look closely. macgoon stated, “if whatever we wanted to say is not already contained within the episodes of the series then i failed in the production of them and any amount of chit-chat now will not make good that omission.” this can be seen in the fourth episode, ‘free for all’, where number six is nearly elected into the position of number two, although he never actually declared he would run. the result of the election demonstrates that democracy is a sham and voting ultimately has no relation to political freedom. this is a message that is further stated in the final minutes of the show. 

macgoon once said the ending was intended to be interpreted differently by each viewer. this ambiguous ending, unlike the majority of ambiguity seen in the endings of tv and movies to come after, builds on the themes of the show and works so well that it couldn’t be done any other way. 

the series culminates in the off-the-wall, mind bending finale titled: ‘fall out’. number six is on the verge of meeting number one and having his number removed as we hear the beatles ‘all you need is love’. the sequence plays out as metaphors are hidden behind nonsense. the ending provides more questions than answers with each fan having their own theories that you can sift through in the numerous books, youtube videos, or reddit threads. macgoon describes the ending as a parallel between number six and number one, without pandering to a low mentality that would miss what he had to say. 

throughout the 17 episodes we are put in number sixes place, trying to decipher which side of the iron curtain the village sits on. the series was meant to create a feeling of unrest through an abstract warning of what may happen to our freedoms of choice and thought. the overarching question it provokes is: what responsibilities does a citizen have over the laws of their country? its a question i find myself asking more now than ever.

Selected Sounds That Inspired the Short Film Ave Rat

featuring love comes in spurts (richard hell), pastichio medley (smashing pumpkins), i wanna be your dog (sid vicious), pennyroyal tea (nirvana), subpop rock city (soundgarden), this is love (pj harvey), sister ray (velvet underground), oh shit (the pharcyde), at the movies (bad brains), beginner (cashier), megaton b (handsome boy modeling school), shut ‘em down (public enemy), and much, much more


Ave Rat /averat/ n. 1. The street kids of the U-district were looked down upon. Kicked out or rejected by their families some as young as 10-12 for being homosexual, transgender, the wrong religion, artists, musicians, etc., ran away because of abuse or neglect and barely escaped, or were abandoned. They all ended up on the streets through no fault of their own. Shelters and organizations turned a blind eye because they didn't meet the "criteria '' (blame the Becca bill) and other organizations requiring an address. In the early 90's they sought each other out, banded together for safety and survival and began to clean up their street home. They did what the police couldn't do, lured out the pedophiles and drug dealers, for the police to take away and drove out the scum, not just for themselves, also, for the other inhabitants. Pooling together with house friends they set up communal homes to be used by all for safety, warmth, food and to care for the sick and injured. They formed a community with their own rules and used society's cast offs and abandoned resources for survival. They did not rebel to be different, society had turned its back on them. As the Ave Rats have grown and become productive members of society, cops, lawyers, techs, engineers, etc. They still come together to catch up on each other's lives, help each other, and help the new street kids, (dubbed "Ave Mice'' by many of the original Ave Rats) who are struggling to survive every day, and the Ave Rats are trying to help.


Urban Dictionary

By Pyxey February 27, 2016

self portrait in brooklyn

February 10, 2024.

self portrait in hollywood

Janurary 5, 2024.


2023 Movie Picks

  1. Past Lives (Celine Song)

  2. The Holdovers (Alexander Payne)

  3. The Zone of Interest (Jonathan Glazer)

  4. Oppenheimer (Christopher Nolan)

  5. The Iron Claw (Sean Durkin)

  6. May December (Todd Haynes)

  7. Perfect Days (Wim Wenders)

  8. Evil Does Not Exist (Ryusuke Hamaguchi)

  9. Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese)

  10. Poor Things (Yorgos Lanthimos)

self portrait in calabasas

March 20, 2023.


2022 Movie Picks

  1. The Banshees of Inisherin (Martin McDonagh)

  2. Babylon (Damien Chazelle)

  3. EO (Jerzy Skolimmoswski)

  4. Mad God (Phil Tippett)

  5. All the Beauty and the Bloodshed (Laura Poitras)

  6. RRR (S. S. Rajamouli)

  7. Godland (Hlynur Palmason)

  8. Pinocchio (Mark Gustafson, Guillermo del Toro)

  9. All That Breathes (Shaunak Sen)

  10. The Fire Within: Requiem for Katia and Maurice Kraft (Werner Herzog)

self portrait in bellingham

May 13, 2022.


Daisies (1966) Review

April 19, 2022.

Director Vera Chytilová didn’t set out to tell a feminist story for western audiences and never agreed that Daisies was a feminist film. Later in her career, however, the film proved to be the ideal candidate for exactly that. A leader of Czechoslovakian new wave movement, Daisies follows two female protagonists. Dubbed ‘the Maries’, these characters don’t promote good behavior. Throughout the film, the Maries are focused on destruction, spoiling everything around them, and creating chaos as a form of enjoyment.

Daisies can be seen as a commentary on selfishness, greed, obsessive consumption, and political apathy. The film operates independently of any commentary on feminism, while being a cornerstone of feminist cinema. The position of women in society is studied throughout Chytilová’s career and Daisies is no exception. The Maries exhibit themes of radical self-expression and refusal to corroborate with what is expected of them. They indulge in luxurious meals, waste food, destroy expensive objects, and treat the world around them as a game. This excessiveness highlights issues with expectations that were present in the 1960s and remain today. Moreover, the film is critical of Czechoslovakian government action. The film's surreal and subversive nature pulls from dadaism and can be seen as a rejection of the strict ideological conformity that was enforced by the government as well as the upper class socialites of the time. In the latter scenes of the film, where the protagonists ineffectively clean up their dinner, their dialogue is openly parodic. They whisper “we’re happy because we’re hard working.”  This, combined with the cleaning — a representation of unhelpful reform — is an apt metaphor for Chytilová's narrative and formal practice, which at once adheres to conventions and grotesquely deforms them.

The eccentric reality of the film adds to a surrealist atmosphere, operating outside of traditional reality. The Marie's life in their own reality embraces the irrational and illogical, breaking free from the constraints of traditional society. The scene depicting the characters cutting each other apart in their room (following a destructive fire) engages with the impossible and the repetitive theme of destruction. Daisies is an incredible commentary on the expectations of a woman, that lends itself to a thematically radical, rebellious perspective on traditional norms, government-induced violence, and subsequent reform.


2021 Movie Picks

  1. Drive My Car (Ryusuke Hamaguchi)

  2. Flee (Jonas Poher Rasmussen)

  3. Marcel the Shell with Shoes On (Dean Fleischer Camp)

  4. The Green Knight (David Lowery)

  5. Spencer (Pablo Larrain)

  6. The Tragedy of Macbeth (Joel Coen)

  7. The Velvet Underground (Todd Haynes)

  8. Licorice Pizza (Paul Thomas Anderson)

  9. Titane (Julia Ducournau)

  10. Val (Leo Scott, Ting Poo)

self portrait in joshua tree

December 16, 2021.


2020 Movie Picks

  1. The History of the Seattle Mariners (Jon Bois)

  2. Lovers Rock (Steve McQueen)

  3. On the Rocks (Sofia Coppola)

  4. Paris Is Burning: The Outtakes (Jennie Livingston)

  5. The Hand (Wong Kar-wai)

  6. Dick Johnson Is Dead (Kirsten Johnson)

  7. David Byrne’s American Utopia (Spike Lee)

  8. Crip Camp: A Disability Revolution (Nicole Newnham, James Lebrecht)

  9. Nomadland (Chloe Zhao)

  10. The Killing of Two Lovers (Robert Machoian)


for my creative writing class, freshman year high school.

may 15, 2018.

it’s like an infusion deep within my bones,
that shapes the way i walk, the way i stand.
it’s in his stride, his style so bold and free,
the sound of strings pushed right up to the edge,
a voice that sang without restraint or fear.

‘sometimes it snows in april’ stays with me
so delicate, so plain, so deeply true.
he wore a quiet strength, not meant to shout,
but built from being wholly, purely him.
he asked no leave, he only chose to be,
and that allowed me room to do the same.

his art was born from instinct, never trend,
he never bowed to safety or to form.
he didn’t dodge the road most others took
he broke it down, and made it disappear.

in times when we forget the worth of soul,
of beauty, freedom, raw self-made expression,
his work reminds us all of what we lose.
by every way i measure craft and flame,
he lived ahead of all that we call “now.”

a true original, who walked alone,
yet lit the path for those who watched him burn.
his art, his life, his way of being free
remain long after memory grows dim.
i’m grateful that i found his voice, his fire.
he leaves behind far more than just his songs.