Gossip and such

This was originally a school project, but I like posting about movies and T.V. shows I like, so I'm gonna keep this going as a regular blog. I will be discussing different movies, T.V shows, and anything relating to film and maybe celebrities. It all depends on what I'm hyperfixating on at the moment lol. :)

[thatfilmfreak]

School of Rock: A Film That Hits All the Right Notes

I recently watched school of rock and wanted to write a little review about it! I think it holds up extremely well given it in a comedy from 2003. It has heart, conflict, Jack Black, Joan Cusack, and of course, Rock 'N Roll!

If the catchphrase "you're not hardcore unless you live hardcore" doesn't mean anything to you, chances are you missed out on one of the most unexpectedly clean and enduring comic films of the early 2000s. Richard Linklater and Mike White's School of Rock meets all the tried-and-true beats of a feel-good picture but dresses them up with so much extremely infectious charm that it amounts to something else altogether—an honest, moving account of the revolutionary power of tolerance, imagination, and rock 'n roll.

Jack Black, in the movie he was destined to star in, is Dewey Finn—a broke guitarist with no money, no job, and not much of an idea of what he’s going to do with his life. Having impersonated his roommate, Ned Schneeby, played by Mike White himself, to land a substitute teaching position at a high-end prep school, Dewey discovers that his students are musical sensations. Rather than teach the lesson plan, he recruits them into a new band, with the ultimate goal of winning the Battle of the Bands. As expected, the con begins to unravel, but the road to that realization is a swirling mess of disorderly glee, foot-stomping sing-alongs, and refreshingly genuine lessons.

What keeps School of Rock from being like so many other "inspirational teacher" movies is the extent to which it resists manipulating us. There are no slow-motion sermons or captivating speeches of grandeur that have the children crying, “Oh, Captain! My Captain!” Rather, Dewey convinces his students to change not by insisting they change, but by embracing them in all their originality. Dewey never intimidates or demeans his students, not even when they declare insecurities or unconventional passions. When Tomika approaches him and confesses she is afraid people will judge her body, Dewey does not falter—he encourages her. When Billy hopes to be the stylist for the band, Dewey does not ridicule him—he applauds him with a “Of course you can, Fancy Pants!” There is no cynicism involved, simply the effortless optimism that children are capable of doing more than grown-ups believe they can.

This optimism is rooted deeply within the real-life inspiration behind the film. As came to life in Rolling Stone's and Paramount's oral histories, Dewey was loosely based on Hans Fenger. Who was a Canadian music teacher whose 1975 album with his students from the grade school inspired School of Rock's script, as Mike White happened upon it one day. He had discovered the anecdote to include as tribute to unconventional schooling and to the potential that music is universal to bring together disparate eras. Linklater's direction prevents the story from ever dipping into slapstick or cutesy. Instead, it remains grounded so that the performances, particularly from the juvenile cast, can shine.

The kids aren't adorable sidekicks; they're part of the emotional architecture of the film. Miranda Cosgrove's hyper-responsible band manager Summer, adds acid-comic timing. Kevin Clark, Joey Gaydos Jr., and Maryam Hassan, to name but a few, add to natural, lived-in performances. They're not Disney Channel caricatures; they're funny, realistic, and likable.

Even when the film missteps—some of the camera work is stilted, some of the plot turns predictable—it never runs out of steam. That's largely thanks to Jack Black, whose performance is a tutorial in comic innocence. He's loud, certainly, but never overwhelming. He's juvenile, but never mean-spirited. He brings a blend of outrageous abandon and surprising tact to Dewey that makes the film work.

Nearly twenty years on, School of Rock still gets a rise. Perhaps it is that, as Roger Ebert once praised about the finest family films, it gives its audience respect. It knows children are smart and ought to be addressed accordingly. It knows instructors need not don business attire in order to get things done. And it knows some of the finest lessons can be neither arithmetic nor English grammar, but trusting oneself and playing one's heart out.

For anyone who loves music, comedy, or just a good story well told, School of Rock hits all the right notes. It’s not just a kids’ movie or a comedy—it’s a tribute to misfits, mentors, and the magic that happens when someone finally tells you, “You’re not just a kid—you’re a rock star.”

[thatfilmfreak]

Why Sapphic Love Bites: Untangling Cannibalism's Sex Appeal in Yellowjackets

I've been on a huge Yellowjackets kick recently, and it got me thinking about Cannibalism. Cannibalism is used as a metaphor for all consuming love. You love someone so much that you'd eat them up, lick their bones clean, and drink their blood until the only thing that remained of them was the memory of their skin on your teeth. Why do you think people drink the blood of Christ or eat his "body" during Mass or Communion? They want to be close to him in the nearest way possible. So, given my affinity for sapphic romance and thirst for knowledge about cannibalism in media, I did the most logical thing, and wrote about it. As always, links provided are my research. Happy reading! https://doi.org/10.2307/26167982 http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2025/feb/14/yellowjackets-season-three-review-this-teen-cannibal-drama-just-remembered-how-to-be-funny http://medium.com/@gnawedinlove/feasting-on-love-a-study-of-cannibalism-as-a-metaphor-9f3831f33467 https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2024.2416175 http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/01/17/horror-and-hormones-grief-and-gore-in-yellowjackets

Yellowjackets' pilot is a punch to the gut, an opening into a desolate world of feral, bloodied teenage girls devouring human flesh. It's a shocking hook, certainly, but it's also a good premise for entering into one of the most fascinating and unsettling trends in contemporary storytelling: the conflation of cannibalism and lesbian desire. This is not cheap thrills; this is a phenomenon that deserves closer examination. Why, then, this particular Venn diagram – where the most heinous taboo, cannibalism, overlaps with the narrative of female same-sex desire – so resonating?

Yellowjackets, watched by Doreen St. Félix of The New Yorker, draws on a potent mix of "horror and hormones, grief and gore" (Félix). But beyond the initial gut punch, the show resonates on a deeper cultural level. Cannibalism here is not simply a twist of plot; it's a metaphor. It's about a desire for a complete, almost destructive, erasing of boundaries. This is the intensity and possessiveness that can characterize any romantic relationship, but it's added to when those relationships are off the mainstream. Consumption, in this twisted context, is a gesture of self-expression of a hunger for a union so profound it becomes metaphysical, transgressing the classical boundaries of intimacy.

Subversion of classical femininity is one of the characteristic features of this phenomenon, as identified by research in Feminist Media Studies. (Miller et al, 2024) Alyson Miller and her co-authors observe that the statement, "Those girls are vicious little monsters," encapsulates this subversion. Cannibalism as an act of defiance against passivity, against the stripping away of agency by the outside world. In a cruel, ungoverned world, these women are forced to develop their own social code, their own rules for living. Eating each other is an act of taking power, a means of exercising power on the world that has taken it away from them. It's a transgressive act that rearranges their subjectivities on their own terms. Fei (2024) writes on Medium, "Cannibalism becomes a way of consuming and becoming one with the other, blurring the lines between self and other in a way that is consistent with the extremity of romantic love." This "blurring of boundaries" is the secret to the trope's power. It is a sign of transgression of social norms and of an openness to living a less fixed, less defined sense of self and desire.

It would be easy to dismiss this trend as shock value. And, as Rebecca Nicholson implies in The Guardian, Yellowjackets certainly has a dark sense of humour (Nicholson, 2025). But that is not enough of an explanation. The cannibalism in these tales is more than that. It is a dark reflection of desperation, trauma, and the breakdown of societal norms. The Yellowjackets' characters, driven to desperation by their circumstance, confront their worst selves. The wilderness is a melting pot in which civilization's rules no longer apply, and hunger, lust, and brutality become dangerously intertwined.

  JSTOR's "Lessons Learned from YellowJackets" (2025) identifies the influence of trauma on the behaviour of the characters. Cannibalism as a collective trauma, a means to cope with unspeakable horror. It is a shared experience which unites them in something distinctive and irrecoverable, something born of blood and sorrow. The descent into the abyss provides the environment wherein sexual and moral categories are reversed and allow for the experience of desire and relationship which would otherwise be submerged or repressed.

In addition, the crossing of cannibalism and sapphic desire also offers a compelling metaphor for exploring social anxieties about female sexuality and power. Women who want women exist on the margins of a heteronormative society, and the taboo nature of cannibalism can be seen as an exaggeration of this "otherness." These tales allow us to explore how female sexual desire, particularly when it is nonnormative, can be read as monstrous or deviant.

Lastly, Yellowjackets and productions like it that employ this trope are not simply wallowing in the grotesque. They are sorting through a thick web of cultural fascinations and fears. They force us to think about uncomfortable truths about female desire, power, survival, and the very definition of what is "normal." This movement is appealing because it is venturing into forbidden space, exploring spaces that repel and fascinate us. It challenges us to think about our own biases and prejudices about women's sexuality and how far human beings will go to connect, even in the most difficult of circumstances.

[thatfilmfreak]

The Rise of Influencer Interview Shows

Hi all! A few weeks ago I was rewatching Sophie Thatcher's interview on Brittany Broski's Royal Court and it got me thinking, what's up with all the influencer Interview shows? Shows like Royal Court, Ziwe, and Chicken Shop Date are becoming incredibly popular and I am all for it. In this post I'm going to discuss what makes them special or different compared to regular daytime or late-night interviews? As always, links provided are my sources. Enjoy! :) www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/exclusive-brittany-broski-royal-court-talk-show-youtube-1234791775/ www.imdb.com/title/tt30526872/ www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2021/may/07/ziwe-review-showtime-tv-series-instagram stanforddaily.com/2024/09/25/chicken-shop-date/

As the internet expands, so to does the culture of consumption. Who really watches a regular ET interview anymore? Sure, Allison Hammond is hilarious on This Morning, somehow managing to make stone-cold Harrison Ford laugh probably for the first time since 1998. But other than that, other than the viral moments that these shows are desperately trying to make happen, who really watches a regular interview? Enter stage right, Influencer interview shows. 

Shows like Brittany Broski’s Royal Court, Ziwe, and Chicken Shop Date have been gaining in popularity in recent years, but why? What do they have that The View, The Social, ET, and LIVE with Kelly and Mark are missing? For starters, a younger audience. Unless I’m being held captive at my Grandparent’s house, the last thing I am watching is Whoopi Goldberg, Joy Behar, and Sunny Hostin, ask the most uninteresting questions to Michael Cera and Michael Angarano about their new road trip movie (no offence ladies of The View, my Nana loves you).

These new interview shows take the standard interview and create a new space that is unique to the interviewer. Ziwe asks uncomfortable questions for comedic purposes in a completely pink room. Brittany Broski and her love for fantasy and Game of Thrones (me too girl), led to the creation of the set for Royal Court, while also playing off of her online “lore” of her being a dictator for “Broski Nation”.  Amelia Dimoldenberg created Chicken Shop Date because she had never actually been on a date and thought this format would be an interesting way to interview celebrities, posing the interview questions as first-date questions. The sets are also small and likely are the only interviews they have that day. The smaller set and small amount of people can lead to a better rapport as it seems less intense than a live studio audience.

The standard daytime show or late-night show appearance is still something that people tune into, late-night moreso than daytime. But with these influencer shows, it also is a chance to show a less polished side of your favourite star. The insightful questions asked by Brittany Broski lead to an introspective look at the people she interviews, how they view their work, their life, how things look for them as opposed to what they used to look like, their hobbies and interests that they maybe don’t get to talk about that often. Ziwe shows how they would be under pressure, similar to Zach Galifianakis during his time with Between Two Ferns. It gives a chance for comedic improvisation during an interview, it catches them off guard, and it makes for viral moments. Chicken Shop Date serves as fan service a lot of the time, seeing our favourite celebrities flirt with Amelia during their “first date”.

As much as it sounds like it, this isn’t me dumping on day time talk shows, or talk shows in general. This is discussing the rise of a new form of journalism that I find very interesting, and so do other my age. In the case of Royal Court, Brittany is a content creator with many fans. She’s known for her ability to go from singing the French national anthem on her podcast, no breaks (queen), to having an in depth discussion with no one but herself about what it means to be a woman in this day and age. It is rare to find someone who can ask in depth and engaging questions about someone’s craft and how they view their life, while still having an air of silliness about them. Where as other shows are more clean cut, they stick to the basics, they keep it lighthearted. Influencer Interview shows are becoming more popular, and I for one, am all in.

[thatfilmfreak]

Will ‘Love Hurts’ Gain Cult Classic Status?

Hi all! Today I wanted to discuss the underrated action rom-com that was Love Hurts! I went and saw this movie twice and loved it! I was surprised when not everyone felt the same way. One day I hope it gains status as a Cult Classic, but until then here is why I think it deserves that title. As always, the links provided are sources I used to write my post. Enjoy! medium.com/@erin.m.underwood_72534/love-hurts-movie-review-a-valentines-day-movie-worth-watching-70fd5970b778 www.rottentomatoes.com/m/love_hurts_2025 www.hollywoodintoto.com/love-hurts-review/

‘Love Hurts’, written by and starring ex-stuntman Jonathan Eusebio and also starring Ke Huy Quan and Ariana DeBose, is a breakneck action rom-com that's already causing some ripples—just not exactly the kind it hoped. The film is about Marvin Gable, a former assassin turned real estate agent who lives a quiet life in Milwaukee, until an old friend returns to his life on Valentine's Day, reimmersing him in the life he thought he'd left behind.

The film eschews genre tropes and clichés, but that's kind of the point. It knows exactly what it is and doesn't attempt to be anything else. The motion is exciting, the stunt work is excellent, and the actors have the proper amount of charm and chaos. With these positives in mind, ‘Love Hurts’ flopped at the box office and holds a crummy 18% critic score on Rotten Tomatoes. So what gives?

Even though the ad campaign looked strong and the acting was solid all around, the critics weren't buying. But that might not ultimately turn out to matter. A number of the greatest cult favourites of all time—like The Rocky Horror Picture Show, Clue, or even Kill Bill: Vol. 1—weren't initially successful either. They built their base because they had fans who liked the camp, the humor, and the uniqueness that the critics missed. ‘Love Hurts’ accomplishes nothing new, maybe, but my goodness is it fun.

Its 80s-vibrant color grading, off-the-wall plotting (in fact, one woman becomes infatuated with the on-the-run killer after her boss), and exaggeration-given characters drive it squarely towards cult stardom. Ke Huy Quan is a treat to watch as Marvin, playing him with hope and compassion, and showing off some great fight choreography, including a one-inch punch scene that's all Jackie Chan energy. Ariana DeBose navigates the intensity and emotion of Rose. Sean Astin almost made me tear up a little during his monologue about Marvin. Lio Tipton made Ashley, who in my opinion would have been a slightly unbearable character, a joy to watch, even as she fell in love with a man trying to kill her boss. Mustafa Shakir was completely terrifying as the hitman Raven. His terrifying aura, his heart, and his comedic timing made Raven a character to root for. They all had qualities that made them likeable. All except for Kippy maybe, but Rhys Darby is a delight so I will let it slide. 

The cast is bursting at the seams with spectacular actors—, from Andre Ekirsen and Marshawn Lynch who were a hoot as Knuckles’ henchmen, to Renny Merlo, who was Knuckles’ right-hand man, was a fun character. Yes, he was annoying, but Cam Gigandet played similar to a squirrel on amphetamines, with wild mannerisms, crazy plans, and nothing but pure confidence in his ability to succeed, which inevitably led to his downfall.

 Love Hurts won't win anyone over, but for those who enjoy a wacky plot, flashy action, stylized fight choreography, and snappy dialogue, there's plenty of enjoyment to be had here. It's the kind of film that invites repeated viewing and late-night rewinds. Although it's not quite on the same level as Scream when it comes to eventual cult classic status, there's a strong chance that over time it might become something memorable. Cult classics are rarely without their own problems—but they're never forgettable. There is something in ‘Love Hurts’ for everyone.

[thatfilmfreak]

Thoughts on A24’s ‘Materialists’ Trailer

Hi all! Today I wanted to discuss the upcoming movie, Materialists, starring Dakota Johnson as a smart-talking NYC matchmaker who keeps her own love life out of the fray, the film casts her into a whirlwind affair when she meets a smooth billionaire (Pedro Pascal) and a shaggy ex (Chris Evans) on the same evening. The internet is already buzzing with the casting announcements, and the film appears to be set to give the rom-com genre a shot in the arm by juggling the traditional tropes with an edgy A24 sheen. The links provided are what I used to help me write this. Happy reading! www.empireonline.com/movies/news/materialists-trailer-dakota-johnson-matchmaker-torn-between-chris-evans-pedro-pascal/ variety.com/2025/film/news/materialists-trailer-dakota-johnson-pedro-pascal-chris-evans-1236339295/ deadline.com/video/materialists-trailer-dakota-johnson-pedro-pascal-chris-evans/

A24 is shifting gears with its first-ever rom-com, Materialists, and honestly, it's about time. The indie studio has built its reputation on its terrifying horror films, gritty dramas, and brain-twisting thrillers, but now they're diving into love triangles and witty banter headfirst.

Leading the charge is Dakota Johnson as Lucy, a sharp-tongued New York City matchmaker who's excellent at finding love for others but doesn't seem to have any use for her own. At least, that is, until she encounters a smooth-talking and ridiculously handsome new socialite (Pedro Pascal), only to run into her down-on-his-luck ex (Chris Evans) on the same night. Cue the romantic chaos.

The casting alone has people buzzing. The internet has literally exploded at the prospect of Evans and Pascal vying for Johnson's affections, and honestly, who wouldn't? Pascal is the ultimate go-to for a billionaire with charm—maybe Rege-Jean Page could have pulled it off too, but Pascal is perfect. And Johnson? She's built a career on choosing interesting projects, and seeing her in a rom-com is both unexpected and fitting.

Rom-coms have been struggling in recent years. Either they're so desperate to defy expectations that they neglect to be fun, or they stick so closely to the formula that they're just. boring. But Materialists seems to have cracked the code. It's embracing the tropes we love—hello, love triangle—without feeling like a cookie-cutter throwback. Bridget Jones' Diary levels of romantic tension, but with an A24 twist, is what I'm hoping for.

Rom-coms are meant to be predictable, albeit in a positive way. You anticipate heartbreak, drama, and a happily ever after, and if Materialists delivers that and can make it feel fresh, then it might be the movie to resurrect the genre.

[thatfilmfreak]

‘Yellowjackets’ Has Begun to Forsake It’s Present in Favour of The Past.

This is my first blog entry, and in this one I'm discussing the shift in storylines in Yellowjackets season three. The links provided are where I was able to gather information to form my story, and they provide a more professional look at what I'm talking about. Enjoy! :) www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2025/02/14/yellowjackets-season-3-two-part-premiere-review-i-dont-like-any-of-these-people-anymore/ www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-reviews/yellowjackets-season-3-review-showtime-1236129125/  www.vulture.com/article/yellowjackets-season-3-review.html

The third season of Yellowjackets, long-awaited, was released on February 14, 2025, on Crave, bringing back fans to the eerie lands of previous ravages and present consequences. However, this time, the balance between the two timelines appears to tilt in an increasingly less perfect manner, which might be the end of the show's direction.

It has been since the present timeline witnessed Natalie (Juliette Lewis) die in the season two finale. Ever since, the series has struggled with coherence. The adult survivors are more isolated than ever, their own storylines unfolding independently. Though Misty continues to be tormented by Natalie's demise, the others seem oblivious to it, living their own separate lives that, while autonomous, evidently circle back to the Wilderness. Rather than confronting their shared past collectively, however, they seem content to confront their trials in solitude.

Meanwhile, the 1990s timeline dominates the screen time, with a relentless concentration on the survival of the group. Natalie grapples with the burden of responsibility, Lottie becomes increasingly attuned to the Wilderness, and Shauna grieves in solitude. The increased focus on their time in the woods does serve to render the grim reality of their ordeal more palpable but at the expense of the present-day plotline and its fine cast.

Yellowjackets has always drawn in younger audiences, particularly teen girls, to its gritty, survivalist melodrama of teen heroines. But the adult cast, featuring Melanie Lynskey, Tawny Cypress, Christina Ricci, and Juliette Lewis, brought depth and nuance to the show's exploration of trauma and its long-term effects. With its airtime running out, the series risks shortchanging one of the most fascinating aspects: how these women are getting along decades later.

Season one established a strong foundation for this dual-timeline approach. Shauna’s violent instincts, Tai’s dissociative episodes, Misty’s ruthless pragmatism, and Natalie’s self-destructive tendencies all reinforced the idea that their past defined them—but did not completely consume them. Now, the emphasis has shifted so heavily toward the past that the present-day narrative feels underdeveloped.

While the history of how they survived is a part of Yellowjackets, the consequences must be just as significant. If the writers do not put more focus on the adult survivors and their ongoing struggles, the show risks losing the very thing that made it so compelling in the first place. Until then, the show may continue to drift further from the material that made it so compelling initially.