by Sophia Caneira ’29 on October 2, 2025

---

Arts & Entertainment

---

The Dark Knight Trilogy Review

Boy, do I wish I had been born in 2005 when Christopher Nolan gave us the gift of Batman Begins. Nolan’s next stab at the Batman franchise came in 2008 with The Dark Knight, but I think most people would agree that a one-year-old is a little too young to watch Heath Ledger’s stunning performance as the Joker. The first time I watched these films—as well as the third installment, The Dark Knight Rises (2012)—was during the COVID-19 pandemic, when family movie nights became a daily ritual instead of a Fridays-only event. It’s easy, I think, to fall in love with Nolan’s films, especially when the Caped Crusader himself is involved. Nolan’s take on DC Comic’s Batman still holds up in the modern day and his trio of films are widely considered to be the best superhero movies of all time. 

The Dark Knight trilogy is one of my favorite movie series of all time for many reasons, from the story and acting to the cinematography, but one of the most crucial elements of this series is its score. Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard created an unforgettable theme that surrounds and defines the character that is, and the movies that are, Batman. These films would not be the same without the music that creates such emotional and gritty moments in an already beautiful story. 

Another strength of these movies is their casts. Christian Bale stars as the main character, who he remarkably portrays as three different personas: the charismatic, lazy, womanizing Bruce Wayne that Gotham is familiar with; the introverted, principled Wayne that serves as a foil and that we only see behind closed doors; and the persona of Batman, who is neither hero nor villain. Michael Caine plays Alfred, Wayne’s father figure and his voice of reason. Morgan Freeman plays Lucius Fox, who, in a way, makes Batman who he is. Without Fox’s loyalty and wealth of resources, Wayne would not be able to maintain secrecy, nor would he be able to jump off of rooftops and arrive in style with the tumbler that, thankfully, does come in black. 

In the second installment, The Dark Knight, the most notable performance is Ledger’s portrayal of the Joker. His use of method acting creates a character who is very real onscreen. His mannerisms—the way he licks his lips when he talks, his hand gestures, his iconic voice and laugh—make his character frightening and very convincing. I also thought Harvey Dent’s (quite literally) two-faced character was a great inclusion of a well-known comic book icon. 

Batman has duality because he swings between hero and villain. He is not concretely one or the other, which makes him a compelling character. In The Dark Knight, we find him somewhere in between. Especially in the second installment of the trilogy, morality is a major concept and is debated between Batman and the Joker. The film, at times, is more like a psychological thriller than a superhero movie, exploring the ages-old ideas of good and evil through unconventional means. Gotham is used as a character in and of itself and serves as a microcosm for humanity. 

One minor criticism I have for the second film is the actor change for the character Rachel Dawes. Originally, in Batman Begins, Dawes’ character is played by Katie Holmes, whose performance I really enjoyed. Maggie Gyllenhaal’s portrayal of the same character in The Dark Knight is still notable, but I felt she didn’t have as much chemistry with Bale’s Wayne than Holmes did. However, this is a relatively minor detail, and with actor consistency aside, there’s not much to complain about. The entire cast, every character, brings value to the film and how the story unfolds. 

The Dark Knight is directed by Nolan, who created all three installments of the Bale trilogy in addition to other critically acclaimed films such as Inception (2010), Interstellar (2014), and, most recently, Oppenheimer (2023). Personally, I love Nolan’s direction. The style he uses in all of his films, with unexpected twists and turns, is evident here. He creates a film that is not only enjoyable for Batman fans and superhero-genre enthusiasts, but also for a majority of diverse audience members. Although my personal favorite of the Bale trilogy is probably the third installment, The Dark Knight Rises, the entire trilogy is certainly a work of cinematic art, sculpted by only the best talents in acting, directing, writing, and editing.

by Luca DeLucia ’28 on October 2, 2025

---

Arts & Entertainment

---

The Halloween season brings a multitude of different films that appeal to different audiences as the world once again gets into the spirit of the season. There are so many different ways to get into the spirit of Halloween. There’s always the classic thriller like Halloween (1978) to get the adrenaline running. Some might even prefer a horror that plays with the mind, such as Jordan Peele’s Get Out (2017). And for others who don’t want the scares, a simple night on the sofa with a hot chocolate and a screening of It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown (1966) after their trick-or-treating will do just the trick. But what about those who want to seek something unique this Halloween season? How about a movie that aims to be as bizarre as possible, and to push what is possible even in the realm of the horror genre? The film they might be looking for has become a cult classic in the many decades since its release, and is a part of a franchise that has now grossed over $300 million worldwide.

Evil Dead II (1987) is the very movie, written and directed by Sam Raimi, who is most well known for directing the original 2000s Spider-Man trilogy starring Tobey Maguire. The movie stars Bruce Campbell as Ash Williams, a man looking to spend a weekend alone in a cabin in the woods with his girlfriend until he reads from a strange book found within the cabin, known as the “Necronomicon,” or “Book of the Dead.” Campbell’s role as Williams would be his defining role as an actor. As the house slowly drives Williams insane, more and more people show up to put an end to the madness, but just as quickly as they come into the cabin, they are soon swept up by the evil spirits Williams summoned by reading from the book, until he is the only one that remains.

Evil Dead II, as the name implies, is a part of a trilogy. It is the middle child between The Evil Dead (1981), and Army of Darkness (1992). However, the trilogy does not tell one cohesive story. Rather, Evil Dead II is a sort of remake of its predecessor, following nearly the same plot as the 1981 original. The Evil Dead is also a cinematic reimagining of Raimi’s college short film Within the Woods (1978), also starring Campbell. It is quite interesting to see just how different each movie in the trilogy tries to portray its ideas. Whereas The Evil Dead functions more like the conventional horror film, with moments of dread and silent intensity in between the deaths of characters, Evil Dead II aims to ramp up the comedy to the nth degree. The movie has a very loose plot: the overarching motive is simply for Williams to survive the night as he faces different problems within the house that lead him to the next innovative way someone is meant to perish. Deaths are excessive, with over-the-top acting and an unrestrained amount of blood. Campbell’s acting helps set the tone of the movie as well; his outlandish body movements and facial expressions make him fun to watch for the entire runtime. Williams bounces around the cabin as the monsters, known as the “deadites,” slowly turn him crazy as the cabin becomes more and more alive with each waking minute. In my opinion, there will never be a funnier moment in any horror movie, than the scene where Williams is forced to cut off his hand, for it got possessed by the book, and after he traps it under a trash can, he weighs down the can with the Hemingway novel A Farewell to Arms, as lightning strikes outside the cabin to symbolize a dramatic, and comedic, end to the scene. 

While The Evil Dead leaned mostly into horror and Evil Dead II combined horror with comedy, the third movie in the franchise, Army of Darkness, ends up forgoing the horror-comedy approach altogether. Army of Darkness is mostly a comedy, with horror aspects such as the deadites still lingering from the original two movies, but these serve more as goons from a superhero movie than an evil force that the protagonist has to overcome. Army of Darkness follows a more structured, albeit very whimsical and hysterical, plot that sees Williams going back to medieval times as he tries to get back to the present day (fun fact: the original name of this movie was meant to be “Medieval Dead”). Unlike Evil Dead II, Army of Darkness is a true follow-up, as the end of the latter movie sees Williams going back in time and leaving audiences on a cliffhanger as to how he might get home. The success of these three movies would lead to the series becoming a franchise, which includes two theatrical reboots (with a third one slated for 2026), a TV show that recasts Campbell as an older Williams, as well as many video games, comic books, and even a musical. It was Raimi’s campy and outlandish idea for a comedic horror film that has its roots delving from 1978 that ended up becoming one of the most well-known horror franchises of the modern day, celebrated by many fans for its unique take on the horror genre. And while each movie of the original trilogy aims to do something different in terms of its take, I find that Evil Dead II strikes a balance between horror and comedy, making it my favorite work of the entire franchise. If you were to ask me, I would love nothing more than to spend my Halloween weekend in front of the TV watching a man survive a night in a cabin in the woods against the Evil Dead.

by Flagg Taylor ’27 on October 2, 2025

---

Arts & Entertainment

---

Another Paul Thomas Anderson Masterpiece

Paul Thomas Anderson’s newest film, One Battle After Another, was touted by critics to be one of the defining films of this generation and given top-tier reviews across the media. The trailers released were vague, likely an intentional move by Anderson. Going into the theatre, I knew I would hold this film to an unfairly high standard due to the aura and mystery surrounding its release. Anderson’s film did not disappoint one bit. One Battle After Another is extremely relevant to our current political and cultural climate, exploring themes of revolution, fatherhood, and freedom through the story of a paranoid ex-revolutionary father and his daughter as they escape the evil figures from their past. 

The film has a star-studded cast, and all of them mesh together in comedic but beautiful and impactful ways. In the first act of the movie, we are introduced to the revolutionary couple of Perfidia Beverly Hills (played by Teyana Taylor) and “Ghetto” Pat Calhoun (played by Leonardo DiCaprio). The couple and the rest of the revolutionary group, the French 75, commit various acts of revolution, like freeing immigrants from a detention center or bombing a politician’s office. During these daring battles, Beverly Hills makes an enemy with the film’s main antagonist, Colonel Steven J. Lockjaw (played by Sean Penn), who then develops a strange perversion for Beverly Hills. A series of unfortunate events leads to the disbandment of Beverly Hill’s and Calhoun’s cell of revolutionaries, and Beverly Hill’s arrest and subsequent disappearance. As the first act closes, we are transported 15 years into the future, to the present day. 

In the second act of the film, the audience is introduced to DiCaprio’s new persona, Bob Ferguson, and his daughter, who has grown into a 16-year-old girl, Willa Ferguson (played by Chase Infiniti). Bob is an extremely paranoid, stoner father who constantly worries about the government coming back for him ever since he had to go on the run with his daughter after Beverley Hill’s arrest. However, Colonel Lockjaw decides to hunt down the father-daughter duo for reasons I will not spoil. The plot takes off from here, and the movie truly feels like one battle after another as Bob and Lockjaw both struggle chasing Willa across Texas. Anderson’s different shot variety and the fast pacing of the film give the tone of a long, suspenseful chase, one battle after another for the characters, each with their respective goals. The resolution sequence (a long car chase) at the end of the movie was truly special. I have not experienced such a tense environment in the movie theatre for a long time. 

On top of Anderson’s genius filmmaking, Johnny Greenwood composed one of the best scores I’ve personally ever heard. His score was just as important to the tense and suspenseful feelings felt throughout the play as Anderson’s filmmaking. Greenwood also selected some great songs for the soundtrack, some of my personal favorites being “Dirty Work” by Steely Dan, “Ready or Not Here I Come (Can’t Hide from Love )” by The Jackson 5, and “Soldier Boy” by The Shirelles. 

Finally, the star-studded cast of One Battle After Another delivered a multitude of award-worthy performances. Chase Infiniti made her film debut for Anderson’s work and delivered an inspiring and impactful performance representing Gen Z in a film, making a direct response to current times in the U.S.. DiCaprio was extremely funny and quirky while also having moments of deep passion, perfectly playing his role of a smoked-out, paranoia-stricken ex-revolutionary. Benicio del Toro plays Sensei Sergio, Willa’s karate sensei, who leads an underground railroad for Hispanic immigrants fearing government agents. Toro steps into this role beautifully, portraying a different type of revolutionary as a symbol of strength in the community. Teyana Taylor and Regina Hall play empowering and emotional roles as strong-willed and brave revolutionary women. Last but not least, Sean Penn plays a downright vile, detestable character in Colonel Lockjaw in a jaw-dropping performance. From the facial tics, his walk and posture, the hatred in his voice, Penn brings to life a “soldier boy” that will go down as one of the iconic villains of this generation. 

It is hard to give a deep synopsis of the intricate themes and skillful filmmaking of One Battle After Another without spoiling too much of the film’s plot and ending. I highly recommend making the trip to the theatre and experiencing it for yourself. It was one of the fastest and most tense three hours in recent memory. I’ll have to rewatch it once or twice more before making any crazy statements towards the film’s all-time standing, but with extremely high expectations for this movie, Anderson and his cast and staff somehow managed to meet these high standards and then some. One Battle After Another was a captivating experience and delivered impactful and relevant messages in a funny, action-packed film that could not have been released at a better time than now. 

by Sophia Caneira ’29 on September 25, 2025

---

Arts & Entertainment

---

Disclaimer: Spoilers Ahead

(500) Days of Summer (2009) is one of my favorite films I’ve seen. Even from the first moments, where the director’s disclaimer about Jenny Beckman, presumably a woman who broke his heart, is superimposed over a black screen, I was hooked. The movie follows the lives of Tom Hansen and Summer Finn over the course of their 500 days together, and how they fall in and out of love. For me, Tom is a relatable character. He is someone you might consider a hopeless romantic. He believes in the concept of true love and finding “the one,” while Summer does not. This comes between them and causes tension in their cautious relationship at multiple points. Personally, I think this flips the usual stereotype of the girl being obsessed and head-over-heels in love with the guy, who is usually depicted as more hesitant in the partnership when it comes to making a commitment and putting labels on the relationship. This is one of the many ways that this romantic comedy is unique from most others. 

Most rom-coms are fairly predictable; they follow the same formula that involves a meet-cute, exploration of the relationship, impending problems, and eventually a solution that results in the happy ending audiences crave. (500) Days of Summer is not like this. First of all, the movie jumps back and forth in time, between the high points in Tom and Summer’s relationship and the low points after their breakup. This method is almost reminiscent of the human experience of recalling memories. The way the movie is cut also allows for several powerful parallel scenes that create emotional contrast. For example, the different scenes that take place in IKEA. Despite the time jumps, the story isn’t given away, and the twist about Summer’s engagement is preserved until toward the end. Most of the time in rom-coms, the two main characters experience a challenge that threatens to end their relationship, but they are able to overcome that challenge once they see that they are better off together than they are apart. In (500) Days of Summer, Tom struggles with moving on from Summer because he believes she was the one, but they don’t end up back together. The only other movie I’ve seen where that twist occurs is in the movie La La Land (2016). This kind of unexpected twist rids the film of the predictability we expect from the typical rom-com. The movie explores how relationships are extremely personal and can invade every aspect of a person’s life, which isn’t usually touched on in the common flick. 

From a filmmaking standpoint, (500) Days is also a cinematic masterpiece. The movie employs a number of unique tactics to immerse you in the story. For one, the film jumps from past to present from start to finish. As the audience, we move through the 500 days focusing on Tom’s perspective, making him the main character and allowing us to empathize with his experience. The use of black and white clips, text superimposed on the screen, interviews with the characters, the “expectations vs. reality” scene of Tom arriving at Summer’s party, and even animation at some points, create an unconventional yet beautiful depiction of what a relationship can feel like. The film also includes a memorable soundtrack, which includes songs from a range of genres, from “Us” by Regina Spektor, to the classic “You Make My Dreams” by Hall & Oates, to songs by The Smiths. The Temper Trap’s “Sweet Disposition” became iconic through its use as a theme at several points in the film. 

I think many people, regardless of whether or not they have been in a romantic relationship before, can relate to this film in some way. The characters (especially Tom) are so accessible, and the unique way the movie was filmed and edited is compelling. While perhaps a somewhat simple love story of boy meets girl (although the narrator denies this), the plot and dialogue, such as Tom’s monologue before he quits his job, are quite thought-provoking. The film is so real—between the story and the acting—which I think is partially why it resonated with me so much. This underrated film was a very emotional watch for me, and I would certainly take the time to watch it again. At least for me, it’s the kind of film you’d be able to glean new details from each time.

by Ian Gualtiere ’27 on September 25, 2025

---

Arts & Entertainment

---

To many, there was always a certain glow to movies from the previous century. Maybe it was the way the film met the light while capturing the action, allowing a fabulous fuzz to appear on our screens nearly 50 years later. Audiences could go to theaters to see dreams captured on celluloid and movies where actors truly turned into the characters they sought to convey. The idea of going to see a favorite actor was, is, and will always be a reason to go out and see a new movie; there is a certain allure to a film that promotes itself on raw star power. Many movies attempt to place all the eggs in one basket by hiring numerous A-list actors and celebrities to draw people back into the theater seats. Only a few movies rise to the occasion by complementing the actors with a great plot; examples would include the commercial and critical successes of Oppenheimer (2023), Avatar (2009), and The Dark Knight (2008). These movies allowed their star actors opportunities to shine alongside each other in a thoughtful and meaningful way, but other movies simply attempt to sell their product only by highlighting how many great actors they can afford. Examples include great actors like Russell Crowe, who was accused of phoning it in for his performance in The Mummy (2018), or how Robert De Niro was seen to have tarnished his legacy by starring alongside Zac Efron in Dirty Grandpa (2016). 

One actor had been able to subtly use his charm, skills, and subtle brilliance to shine above the rest, regardless of whether he was alone or starring alongside other talented actors. Robert Redford died last week, on Sept. 16, at the age of 89, and closed a long and celebrated 56 year career in television, film, and theater. Beginning his career on Broadway in the late 1950s, he also appeared on a string of television shows. However, his growing acting chops and unapologetic good looks carried him onto the silver screen, where he made his film debut in 1960. As the romantic comedy Barefoot in the Park (1967) premiered, he was easily typecast into the good-looking, blonde male stereotype, but his integrity as an actor outweighed his image as he searched for more unconventional and grittier roles. That unconventionality would be found when he starred alongside Paul Newman in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969), as the two portrayed stubborn cowboys in a dying western frontier. The image of Redford as a charismatic, intelligent, and reliable actor allowed Redford for a decade of success in the 1970s. A string of hits would see Redford going back into the solitary western genre with Jeremiah Johnson (1972); a 1950s romance with Barbra Streisand in The Way We Were (1973); a reunion with Paul Newman in the world of 1920s crime in The Sting (1973) would give him the only Academy Award Best Actor Nomination of his career; an adaptation of the classic The Great Gatsby (1974); a CIA spy thriller with Three Days of The Condor (1975); and the politically charged All The President’s Men (1976), where he starred alongside Dustin Hoffman as they portrayed real-life investigative journalists trying to uncover the Watergate Scandal of the Nixon Administration. 

By the early 1980s, Redford had become increasingly politically active and was pursuing films with darker subject matter to reflect the materialist American culture he questioned. The result of these motives would culminate in his directorial debut with Ordinary People (1980); it is a film that explores the slow but unstoppable destruction of an upper-middle-class family after one of their sons takes his own life. The movie would be awarded at the Academy Awards with four wins; Redford would take home one Oscar for Best Director. The 1980s and 1990s would show a strong binary effort of Redford the actor and Redford the director. The baseball classic The Natural (1984) and the seven Oscar-winning Out of Africa (1985) would continue to cement Redford as a talented actor, while the Montana-set period drama A River Runs Through It (1992) and the scandalously criminal plot of Quiz Show (1994) would give Redford further respect as a director. 

Redford was also known for his outspoken support for environmentalism, Native American rights and recognition, and LGBTQ+ rights; a career in support of the arts and politics would make Redford a constant trustee and councilman on several progressive and social issues. One of the defining testaments to Redford’s legacy was his commitment to the independent film production industry. With the salary he received from Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969), Redford bought a ski resort near Park City, Utah, that he renamed “Sundance” after his character in the film. Redford cultivated a region solely dedicated to independent films, as the Sundance Film Festival is now the United States’ largest annual independent film festival. Largely thanks to Redford’s direction, the Sundance Institute, Sundance Cinemas, Sundance Catalog, and the Sundance Channel are all located in Park City. 

Redford was an authentic actor and director who defied the conventional role of a typical actor coasting on his good looks; he was instead someone who pushed the boundaries of topics many did not want to talk about and broadcast his opinions through the medium of film. The subtlety of Redford relied heavily on his ability to have one glance at the camera, and the audience would not just see his piercing blue eyes, but they would see the truths, dreams, and frustrations of American society, which did not want to see its reflection on the silver screen.