For Selma, Santanico Pandemonium in From Dusk Till Dawn. For Keanu it’s Don Jon in Much Ado About Nothing, Neo and John Wick. And for Damson, it’s Joshua Pearce in F1: The Movie.

I've never seen an episode of Anthony Bourdain's series or read his book, but lack of familiarity with the subject proved no detriment to enjoying "Tony," which is another excellent movie in what has turned into a rather remarkable year for cinema. Dominc Sessa, Emilia Jones, Leo Woodall and Antonio Banderas all deliver strong performances in what could have been a very familiar sort of biopic but instead turns into a sort of meditation on how we discover our lives. In a strong year, I think it's among the best of 2026.

My rating: ***** of *****

What about you? Did you find "Tony" a rich and rewarding cinematic meal, or did you want to send it back to the kitchen?

You can read my FULL review after the poster image below or, if you'd like, on my blog at: https://thereinthedark.blogspot.com/2026/09/tony.html

An unusually strong year for movies continues with Tony, a highly fictionalized account of Anthony Bourdain's formative years before he dropped out of Vassar to attend the Culinary Institute of America. Tony could easily have turned into hagiography or, worse, perhaps, into a boring recitation of facts, but instead manages to become one of the most surprising and best movies of 2026.

Tony begins with a telling quote from Bourdain's own Kitchen Confidential: "I was — to be frank — a spoiled, miserable, narcissistic, self-destructive and thoughtless young lout, and badly in need of a good ass-kicking."

The promise of that title card may seem a big promise to fulfill, and a challenging one. The movie, directed by Matt Johnson, rises to that challenge by presenting us with teenaged Tony Bourdain played by Dominic Sessa (The Holdovers) as every bit as narcissistic and thoughtless as the real Bourdain suggested. 

He's remarkably confident, as maybe a lot of intelligent 19-year-olds are, and despite all evidence to the contrary, he is certain he is going to be the recipient of a novel-writing fellowship. When he doesn't, he steals from his parents and runs off to Provincetown, where he plans to find and woo a girl who wants nothing to do with him.

But crude, loud-mouthed Tony doesn't get much of a welcome in Cape Cod, and it's not long before he's sporting a black eye, broke and stuck. It's here that the unexpected theme of Tony kicks in, and it's got nothing to do with believing in yourself, or making your own way, or having courage — there's something deeper and richer at play.

On one level, Tony watches a young man discover who he is going to become, through a series of incidents that seems both natural and implausible — much like life is for many of us. Tony winds up a dishwasher in a local seafood joint that most people write off as a kind of fast food. It's run by a chef (Antonio Banderas), who would not like Tony much if he thought about him at all, which he doesn't. One of Tony's co-workers is Sal (Leo Woodall), who's no good for anyone, but he's magnetic and cheerful and impossible to resist. And slowly, that girl, Nancy (Emilia Jones) takes notice of Tony.

Little by little, life begins to happen to Tony, and the movie embraces — openly and sweetly — its central thesis: that "providence" is real, that if you look closely, what's happening to you isn't just what's happening to you, but is your life taking shape.

As someone who has never seen an episode of Bourdain's shows or read Kitchen Confidential, I walked into Tony with no awareness at all of its subject, intrigued only by a confident trailer. Though it could so easily have been, this isn't a move made only for Bourdain's fans. It is, in the best possible way, the "buildings-roman," as over-confident Tony repeatedly mispronounces bildungsroman. It's a coming-of-age story that happens to be about someone who became famous and wealthy — but the film, to its credit, never once mentions that.

It succeeds on the strength of its four remarkable central performances — Sessa, Woodall, Jones and Banderas, each of whom creates a rich and vibrant character, the kind of people you can imagine having full and interesting lives when they aren't on camera. Director Johnson, working from a screenplay he wrote with Matthew Miller, Todd Bartels and Lou Howe, finds real joy in his storytelling, even in its darker moments.

In Tony, he's taken the ingredients of a movie that could have been obvious, rote and endlessly reverential to its subject and instead created a rich and varied repast that's unexpectedly warm, satisfying and nourishing.

The End of Oak Street was pure 1982 Spielberg. Disclosure Day was pure 2026 dreck.

The Iron Giant, enough said.

I implore anyone who hasn’t experienced this cinematic masterpiece to do so, it is timeless media.

Just a little random movie trivia, it was kind of tough to think of one off the top of my head tbh. Almost every big movie has some kind of romantic interest or relationship

Looking at this video, I realized Ryan Gosling is the only movie star that is the mascot of an entire sub culture.

He's been in so many similar roles that he carries this essence of relatability and loneliness.

Rather it be the sigma male, literally me, manosphear or all of them. He is the mascot of all these male dominated groups.

His name has weight and these big film studios know this, which is why he's now in star wars and marvel. The studios are desperate and know people will follow him.

You can say "this isn't real" "Only incels like him" "He's just an actor" but the views don't lie, this video has 9 million views for a reason. What other actor has this much of a following and seems to be the face of a sub culture?

This has been getting quite the buzz around it! Here is my review consider subscribing to my channel if ya enjoy! And please smash the like button.

I completely forgot Pratt was in the movie Wanted until I rewatched recently. I remember him from Parks & Rec but even from there, surprised he became into a big action star. McAvoy was a surprise as well but he had been acting for a bit longer by that time.

I SAID, I'M GONNA BE SOMEBODY! I'M GONNA MAKE MY STAND!

You know the song, the iconic end credits song of Police Academy.

Police Academy did exactly what my thread title said despite being among the lowest rated movies in history (by critics) and it went on to spawn over half a dozen sequels, becoming one of the longest movie franchises ever, spanning multiple decades. The sequels were hit or miss but they also have many fans that have given them a bit of a cult following. Mahoney, Hightower, and Michael Winslow created iconic beloved characters, making the most of a thin script and likely improvising the best parts. The whole cast of especially the first one was great, I even liked the police chief because he would always call everyone dirtbags and his delivery was great. The hot blonde police lady was also a badass who put all the weak dudes in their place. This movie legitimately was epic, I don't want to spoil what happens in the end for those who haven't seen it, but it goes in a direction I didn't expect, expanding its scope and scale for one of the most unforgettable and satisfying finales I've ever seen to a comedy, with a bit of social commentary thrown in for good measure, as well as plenty of action. This movie shows that critics aren't the final or leading voice on what movies become classics. Look at The Shining and 2001: A Space Odyssey, two of the greatest movies of all time, panned by critics on release. A Clockwork Orange, cmon, the list just goes on. I watched them all because I love these actors and the characters they portray, the feel like family even if you only see the first one. This is movie magic, baby, no critic can tell me what I can and cannot like. Police Academy 4 life!

Iconic theme song too, absolute classic.

I’ve seen plenty of 60,70s,90s movies but not 80s movies for whatever reason. I saw the Thing a few months ago and it was really cool and disgusting lol. What else should I check out?

Tommy in Goodfellas or Nicky in Casino, some may say it’s a similar role, you can only choose one, go!

I organized an AMA/Q&A with director and screenwriter Michael Sarnoski. He wrote and directed Pig (starring Nicolas Cage), A Quiet Place: Day One, and most recently The Death of Robin Hood (starring Hugh Jackman and Jodie Comer, out in UK theaters this week).

It's live here now in r/movies for anyone interested in asking a question:

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/1w4bbu1/hi_rmovies_jodie_comer_here_with_michael_sarnoski/

He will be back at 12 PM ET tomorrow (Wednesday 9/2) to answer questions. He is joined by the The Death of Robin Hood co-star Jodie Comer. I recommend asking in advance. Please ask there, not here. All questions are much appreciated!

Synopsis: Grappling with his violent past, Robin Hood finds himself gravely injured after a battle that he thought would be his last. He soon gets a chance at salvation when he meets a mysterious woman and a young girl.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlSDDuWxO_0&themeRefresh=1

Thank you :)

This film follows a left-leaning family that slowly comes apart as an authoritarian movement takes hold across the US. The catalyst is Liz, the son's girlfriend, a radical who's anti-democracy and becomes one of the architects of the new regime.

What makes it work is how intelligently it shows true colours of people and relationships. Some quietly shift their beliefs because it's convenient for their career, others martyr themselves for what they believe, and most just try to keep the peace at family gatherings until keeping the peace is the thing that lets everything fall apart.

Given what's happening across the world right now, this doesn't feel like speculative fiction. It feels like a mirror. Everyone should watch this not just for the politics, but as a warning about how much damage "let's not talk about it at dinner" can quietly do.

You’re invited to be among the first to see 30 minutes of exclusive footage from Zach Cregger’s Resident Evil - followed by a LIVESTREAMED AMA/Q&A with Zach himself. 

📍 Los Angeles, Dallas (AMC NORTH PARK), & New York

📆 Tuesday, September 1st - 6pm PT | 8pm CT | 9pm ET

RSVP with your city’s code at the link below, space is limited and screenings are first come first serve!

http://bit.ly/ResidentEvilAMALive

Los Angeles: FULL
Dallas: RMOVIESLDAL
NYC: FULL

You know I was watching the Whisper Man recently and just wasn't impacted by Micheal Keaton's performance. Not because I thought he was just hamming his way through. But because its because I have seen so many of his movies, so it just felt like an extension of himself.

In contrast, 2 projects, both hilariously involving David Fincher: Zodiac and Mindhunter. Just the sheer contrast between the quality of conversations is staggering. Those are the scenes that stay with you!

I feel the need of mystery with such characters is at an all time high. And if we know the person it just doesn't work. The did it a bit smartly with Nic Cage in Longlegs, but still.... I feel like having unknown actors is key. I dont think the scene in Whisper Man were written poorly. Sure they dont match the quality of Fincher projects, but still a character actor would have been a much better choice than a widely known actor.

Of course, there are exceptions like Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter. But for me, personally, I think it worked also because of me not being highly familiar with Hopkin's work when I watch Silence of the Lambs beyond his amazing acting.

I organized an AMA/Q&A with actress Jodie Comer. You may know her from fantastic roles in things like Killing Eve, The Last Duel, 28 Years Later, The Bikeriders, Free Guy.

It's live here now in r/movies for anyone interested in asking a question:

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/1w4bbu1/hi_rmovies_jodie_comer_here_with_michael_sarnoski/

She will be back at 12 PM ET tomorrow (Wednesday 9/2) to answer questions. I recommend asking in advance. Please ask there, not here. All questions are much appreciated!

Thank you :)

Her newest film, The Death of Robin Hood, is out in UK theaters on September 2. It co-stars Hugh Jackman and is directed by Michael Sarnoski (Pig).

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlSDDuWxO_0&themeRefresh=1

Genuinely confused at all the hate I’m seeing for this movie. I read non spoiler style reviews before going in opening day and had really low expectations, by the time I left the theater I was extremely thrown off.

The movie was genuinely fun, there was 2-3 plot points you could pick on for not making sense or being too extreme but I had enough fun that I was willing to look past those points. The film definitely was a slow burn for the first 20-30 minutes but I was also ok with that. Every movie cannot have the same tone and vibe. The set design was great, the acting was solid enough, the music fit the film perfectly and the story itself was a nice little fun ride. Maybe the book was incredible and that made it hard for the film to succeed how it should have.

Bottom line. Very shocked at how badly this movie has been received, I think if people give it a fair chance it’s enjoyable. FWIW I’m not a big zombie/end of the world type of movie fan so maybe this film is derivative for fans of those kinds of genres. For me it did its job and did it well.

Watched it randomly and didn’t know much about the actors, but they all did a great job. I really loved the motorbike journey.

To say I was obsessed with Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers as a kid would be a gross understatement. That show was everything to me as a child. I was the red ranger for a couple Halloweens, had as many action figures as I could talk my mom into getting, and even had Power Rangers underwear (sorry for that mental image).

​

i saw the telepath asking questions to a guy who isn't established to be immune to her powers and my brain just did a pop shove it, hurts like a migraine. it seems like she can only inhabit one person at a time so inhabiting the director to read his mind would mean frank is free to subdue her, but that just makes me ask, why did she even bring her own body there?

i wanted to stop watching at that point, but i had to power through cause i wanted to make this post and i know that not watching the whole thing is enough for people to dismiss any criticism.

so to start from the beginning, and i mean chronologically, sarah inhabiting jean to make her walk/run away from the abduction only works if jean was not a target in the first place. but in their conversation, they said their mom cared for them before they changed. both of them had powers already. even if sarah was the only one using those powers in a bad way back then, there's no reason to not take jean as well regardless of where damage control lies in the good to evil spectrum. the inciting incident relying on the incompetence of the entire department of damage control, that's just terrible writing.

moving on though, jean's established powers makes the first act a nothing burger. she can impersonate the people she inhabits pretty well because she has access to their memories, like she did with mj. that's way more than enough to infiltrate any damage control department with zero physical violence. yes, she definitely wanted to be violent, but delaying the search for her sister for that? it just gets peter on her tail in a contrived manner and it makes the talk no jutsu at the end weaker than it already is

at least jean is smart, not actually going in the vicinity of the troubles she's causing, just using her powers from far away. oh wait, there she goes, into the department of damage control where she can easily get shot. did she need to be there? absolutely not, and lo and behold, she got taken down because of it. crucial plot point handled like a slimy fish. and banner gets talk no jutsu'd like ross.

next up, another contrivance, the way peter realized that the director lied to him. peter says that the director "remembered thinking about someone named sarah", so he must be lying since no one remembers anything while jean is inhabiting them, but that's not what the director said. the director just said that he was close with someone named sarah who recently passed, and that, "somehow the memory of sarah must have affected her", peter knows that jean can access the memories of the people she inhabits, as she did with mj. but no, he just slanders the director to further the plot. another crucial plot point written terribly.

then, spidey goes to yelena and she says damage control scrubbed records and data about jean but she still provides the data they need to progress the plot. overall, yelena is just there to further the plot. sometimes, stories need a character like that, but it shouldn't be this blatant. this is still the part of the crucial plot point above so yeah, it just gets worse.

then spidey gets to jean, she freezes everyone besides spidey in the area, which was never explained btw, why is spidey somewhat immune to this? some cringe dialogue happens, jean says "my sister died in this room and her only crime is she was special". no, she possessed people without their consent, that's literally the highest form of invasion of privacy. peter, the surveillance freak who also doesn't care about privacy besides his own, says "you're not a killer jean". bro i can't even put into words how that line makes me feel, she kills so many people throughout this movie omg

then jean comes inside peter. lots of generic dialogue is thrown around so viewers can interpret it however they want, like a banana duct taped to an empty canvas, and frank comes in to end my suffering. thank you frank.

thanks also to every action scene, those were all great. i liked that the peter and mj situation isn't something that's solved in the b plot of just one movie. i enjoyed frank and peter's relationship, as well as peter and ned's.

overall, enjoyable turn your brain off movie. i guess a couple of recreated comic panels/cover arts and a few couple of guest characters are enough for the movie to nostalgia bait its way into a billion dollars in the box office. how it gets so much hype online after the fact, i have no idea. pretty soon they'll be releasing ai movies and everyone will eat it up as the bar will be in the ninth circle of hell.

I've realized that I don't necessarily have a problem with long movie. Some can hold my attention for hours, while others feel too long even when their runtime is much shorter. For me, the difference seems to be whether every scene adds something meaningful to the story, characters, or atmosphere. What makes a movie feel unnecessarily long to you? Is it pacing, editing, unnecessary scenes, or something else?

I love all four of the movies above, but my pick would be The Silence of the Lambs.

Many of Shane Black’s scripts have become cult classics, including The Monster Squad (1987), The Last Boy Scout (1991), Last Action Hero (1993), his 2005 neo-noir classic Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (also his directorial debut), and my favorite Shane Black film to date, The Nice Guys (2016). It’s largely because his films have a distinctive personality, combining dysfunctional characters, sharp dialogue, irreverent humor, genre-blending plots, memorable buddy dynamics, and tremendous rewatchability—qualities that have helped many of them develop devoted cult followings over time.

Check out the full review here

the drama is honestly one of the best-edited films i’ve seen this year. the editing feels so provocative and does a great job of selling the discomfort, while Daniel Pemberton’s score keeps the movie engaging throughout and the cinematography is just pure eye candy. but after sitting with the movie for a few days, the big reveal made me realize that this isn’t really a two-hander as much as it is Robert Pattinson’s story, especially after that point. at first, i was hesitant about how Borgli and the screenplay handled the reveal because what it deals with is one of the most disturbing things imaginable, and i wanted more care and nuance around it. but i don’t think Borgli was ever trying to make a straight drama about that issue. this is more of a romantic dark cringe comedy about these two people, their messy relationship, and how they continue living their lives after everything comes out. the movie never treats the reveal itself as a joke, and the comedy feels intentional rather than careless. more than anything, the movie seems interested in the idea of second chances, which comes through Emma giving Charlie another chance after he completely fumbles their first meeting, and then again later at the diner. after thinking about it more, the drama feels less interested in dissecting the larger issue and more interested in asking whether we should judge an entire person only by how they behaved during the worst period of their life.

So I just wanted to pose this question and get it explained to me why people are very much praising this film. I understand the commercial performance, it is a bit ridiculous crossing the 2b dollar mark but it makes sense as a follow up to a great cliffhanger, and spiderman being Marvel's consistent golden goose.

However what I don't understand is the movie itself. I thought it was just a mediocre or mid movie. It was entertaining and I was thoroughly so at the theater, but I'll just point out some of my critiques and hope they either be understood or disproven, I encourage civil discussion in the comments:

- We never get an ending to Jean Grey, she gets defeated by the power of friendship, alright, then she just goes back to being free despite her having committed multiple crimes, and we never get how she escaped the facility, same with Peter himself damage control would've 100% chased after him. We never know any of this because it just cuts to everything back to being normal again and that's that.

- Same with the Hulk, um the last time we see Bruce is him just in the ambulance. Also didn't he fully adopt Professor Hulk, what happened to that (I might be missing some continuity feel free to inform me). And we never get an ending beyond that.

- Everyone has been talking about the universal inhibitor thing, cus that makes total sense like why hasn't it been more emphasized that Peter invented a way to instantly suppress any superpower.

- I think the Punisher wasn't quite necessary, he contributed to the plot somewhat and I thought that he served as sufficient comedic relief at times but I was like... Why is here in this movie? Just felt out of place. I also haven't watched the show yet however it is on my watchlist.

- The story kinda does a lot of things at once. You've got the big bad being Jean, then the mutation storyline which I think could have been drawn out and built up a bit more. I didn't like the conclusion that much, felt mildly rushed. Then obviously Peter's story with trying to reconnect with Ned and MJ, which idk felt like a bit unsatisfying as this film is the big follow up to No Way Home. I don't think I would have preferred an instant reversal like in Endgame after Infinity War but this still felt like nothing much had happened. Like I wouldn't know how to deal with this either I give the writers credit but something feels wrong. Maybe I'm wrong and about to get flamed in the comments.

-I think the tone and style of this film is a hit or miss in some scenes. There is obviously a slightly darker tone, makes sense Peter is in depressed mode and I think the color grade works for some scenes, not all. I still think I prefer the lighter tone of the previous films. That's my preference though I heard some people loved this new take (reminds me of the older raimi and amazing spiderman movies). A personal preference I have is that I don't like the new suit, I liked the CGI polished ones lol but again that's just my opinion and not anything about the movie itself.

Anyways that's all I can think of now. If I'm totally wrong, let me know, I am going to try and be open minded as well as give this a rewatch as soon as it hits streaming just so I am fully clear on this. I also dk if this fully breaks the subreddit rules, I'm not saying this film is bad, I'm saying I think this film is mid slash bad, make me understand why you guys love this so much.