Horror, Comedy, and the Cosmos (with Guest Paul Boyd) | Black & A Half Full Episode #250

Episode 250 of Black & A Half features a conversation with filmmaker Paul Boyd, director of the horror-comedy Scared to Death. The discussion explores the creative journey behind independent filmmaking—from idea to execution—and the importance of collaboration, experimentation, and persistence.

The episode also dives into broader topics like storytelling philosophy, creative partnerships, and the unexpected influences that shape a filmmaker’s work. As always, the conversation expands into humor, personal reflections, and the unique chemistry that defines the podcast.

Video

Audio Only

Review – Dreamers

Dreams, starring Jessica Chastain and Isaac Hernández, explores a passionate but complicated relationship between a wealthy socialite and a ballet dancer who secretly crosses the U.S.–Mexico border.

In this review, Silas Lindenstein examines the film’s strong performances, indie storytelling style, and underlying themes about immigration, power, and desire. While the film offers compelling moments and thought-provoking choices from its characters, its unconventional ending may leave some viewers feeling unsatisfied.

Is Dreams a daring indie drama—or a film that forgets to resolve its own story

Video and podcast links below:

Video Review

Audio Only

Everyone Needs Their Own Hype Music | Episode 244

Episode 244 of Black & A Half explores creativity, identity, and momentum through a meandering, Seinfeld-esque conversation. Topics include debuting new theme music, using AI as a creative collaborator, musical instruments as self-expression, fox symbolism, aging, confidence, and why clarity comes from action—not endless planning. Equal parts comedy and reflection.

Video


Audio Only

Episode #225: We Are Back

Samantha Rund returns to co-host Black & A Half. In this episode, Silas & Samantha talk about fact-checking on Facebook, grief, and rededication. 

Videocast

Podcast

Review: Moana 2

Moana 2 (2024)
PG ‧ Family/Adventure ‧ 1 Hour 40 Minutes
Story by: Jared Bush; Dana Ledoux Miller; Bek Smith Screenplay by  Jared Bush & Dana Ledoux MillerDirected by  Dana Ledoux Miller, Jason Hand, David Derrick Jr.

THE CAST

Auliʻi Cravalho, Dwayne Johnson, Temuera Morrison, Nicole Scherzinger, Rachel House, and Alan Tudyk, Khaleesi Lambert-Tsuda, Rose Matafeo, David Fane, Hualālai Chung, Awhimai Fraser, and Gerald Ramsey.

THE STORY

(In their own words).  Three years after the first film’s events, Moana receives an unexpected call from her wayfinding ancestors and forms her own crew, reuniting with her friend, the demigod Maui. As they journey to the far seas of Oceania to break the god Nalo’s curse on the hidden island of Motufetu, which once connected the people of the ocean, they confront old and new foes, including the Kakamora and underworld goddess Matangi.

THE BEST

The BEST things about the film

1. It’s a funny and fun film.

2.Animation is absolutely incredible.

3. Quick runtime. 

THE WORST

The WORST things about the film

  1. Uninspiring, Unnecessary, and adds nothing. 
  2. Songs are not memorable. One is downright bad. 
  3. Dwayne Johnson seemed to be phoning in the movie.
  4. Big bad doesn’t work. 

THE COMMENTS

It’s been a while since I felt so disappointed by Disney. This film was a sequel I have been looking forward to, and while I can’t say I had a bad time, this has to be the most memorable and uninspiring Disney animated film I’ve seen. 

In one song by Dwayne Johnson, he just spoke the whole song. It seemed to me like he was talking during the parts that were supposed to be sung and then just “talked fast” when he was supposed to be rapping. It felt like Mr Johnson just didn’t care. And maybe he didn’t when presented with such poor music to perform. Lin Manuel Miranda’s absence in the film is very noticeable. I could tell from the first song that it wouldn’t be as good as the first one. 

Sequels are hard; I get that. Origin stories are just naturally more interesting, but it felt like they did have good things to mine here, but the execution was just not great. I think it’s also a sign of potential trouble whenever you see more than one director for a film.

What the film does well is bring laughter. I brought my 8-year-old daughter to the film, and she laughed throughout the film, or at least when it wasn’t too scary. Yes, the film was fun to watch and funny, and it was nice to revisit the characters from the past. It’s a quick film, and it’s pretty to watch. Aside from Dwayne Johnson’s song, they all have lovely voices to listen to. 

THE LESSON

People need to stay connected. 

IS IT REWATCHABLE

Yes. You probably have to rewatch it to remember the film. 

THE FINAL WORD

Moana 2 reunites familiar characters in a visually stunning, funny, and fast-paced adventure, but it falls flat in originality and impact. The songs are unmemorable, with one awkward performance by Dwayne Johnson standing out for the wrong reasons. While the film delivers laughs and moments of fun, it feels uninspired and lacks the original’s magic, especially without Lin-Manuel Miranda’s musical touch. It’s worth a watch for kids and fans of the first film, but don’t expect it to leave a lasting impression.

THE VERDICT

My 3L system gives me the choice to Love It, Like It, or Lose It. 

I’ll give it a soft “like it.”

THE TRAILER

Interview: Xenia LeBlanc

lcome to another episode of “You’re Watching A Movie With Silas Lindenstein”! This week, I had the pleasure of interviewing Xenia LeBlanc, the talented writer and director of the short film “The Exposed.” Xenia takes us through her fascinating journey from studying acting around the world to creating her gripping horror short film.

In this interview, we delve into the unique dynamics of her filmmaking partnership with her husband, Nicholas Acosta, and how they navigate their creative projects together. Xenia reveals the challenges and creative process behind “The Exposed,” a film crafted without CGI or visual effects, and the inspiration she drew from her Russian childhood, including a chilling episode of “Rescue 911.”

Watch and Listen Below:

VIDEO INTERVIEW

AUDIO-ONLY PODCAST

Highlights of the Interview:

  • Filmmaking Couple Dynamics: Insights into working and creating films with her husband, Nicholas Acosta.
  • Creating “The Exposed”: Behind-the-scenes look at the making of the film and overcoming challenges without CGI.
  • Inspirations and Horror Genre Insights: How Xenia’s childhood experiences and love for horror influenced her storytelling.
  • Cultural Influences: Discussions about the impact of her Russian background on her creative process.

Links:

Join us for an engaging and insightful conversation with Xenia LeBlanc, filled with personal anecdotes, filmmaking tips, and a closer look at her latest project. Don’t forget to leave your comments and share your thoughts on the film!

Enjoy the episode and make sure to subscribe for more exciting interviews and movie reviews!

Reviews: Challengers

Review: Challengers

Challengers (2024)
R  ‧ Sports/Romance ‧ 2 Hours 11 Minutes
Written by Justin Kuritzkes
Directed by Luca Guadagnino

THE CAST

Zendaya, Josh O’Connor, and Mike Faist.

THE STORY

(In their own words). Tashi, a tennis player turned coach, has transformed her husband from a mediocre player into a world-famous grand slam champion. To jolt him out of his recent losing streak, she makes him play a challenger event — close to the lowest level of tournament on the pro tour. Tensions soon run high when he finds himself standing across the net from the once-promising, now burnt-out Patrick, his former best friend, and Tashi’s former boyfriend.

THE BEST

The BEST things about the film

1. Narrative Structure: The non-linear storytelling approach is one of the film’s strongest aspects. This method isn’t just for show—it crafts a more intricate and engaging viewer experience, allowing the audience to piece together the characters’ pasts and present, thereby deepening the emotional and psychological complexity of the narrative. It helps frame the personal histories and motivations in a way that a linear narrative might not manage as effectively.

2. Cinematography and Visual Style: The film employs bold and experimental cinematography that sets it apart. Particularly notable is the use of the tennis ball POV shots during match scenes, which not only intensify the gameplay but also metaphorically represent the back-and-forth dynamics of the characters’ relationships. This creative decision enhances the immersive quality of the film, making the tennis matches not just a sport to be watched but a lens through which interpersonal conflicts are explored.

3. Acting: Zendaya, Josh O’Connor, and Mike Faist deliver phenomenal performances. Zendaya, in particular, should be praised for her nuanced portrayal of Tashi, who transitions from a tennis prodigy to a coach, grappling with her own past glories and current challenges. Her ability to convey deep emotional undercurrents—her passion for tennis, her complex relationships, and her own regrets and aspirations—anchors the film. O’Connor and Faist also deliver compelling performances, adding to the film’s emotional depth.

4. Engagement and Pacing: Despite its runtime of over two hours, the film does not feel its length, indicating effective pacing and engagement. This aspect is crucial in maintaining audience interest and speaks to the director’s skill in crafting a narrative that is both absorbing and brisk, keeping viewers hooked from start to finish.

THE WORST

The WORST things about the Film

1. Frustrating Character Choices: Some characters in the film make decisions that could potentially frustrate or perplex viewers. While integral to the plot and character development, these choices might not align with what the audience feels would be the ‘right’ or expected decisions. This can lead to dissatisfaction or disconnect with the characters, potentially impacting the viewer’s overall engagement with the story. However, it’s important to note that these choices also add to the realism and complexity of the narrative, as real-life decisions and relationships are often messy and challenging.

2. Polarizing Cinematography: The film employs innovative cinematography techniques, including very close-up shots and slow-motion sequences that might not appeal to everyone. Specifically, using the camera point of view from a tennis ball, could be distracting or disorienting for some audience members. While these techniques are designed to enhance the immersive experience and reflect the characters’ psychological and emotional states, they risk being perceived as overly stylized or gimmicky, potentially pulling some viewers out of the narrative rather than drawing them deeper in.

3. Specific Taste Required: The narrative and visual style of “Challengers” demands a certain appreciation for artistic filmmaking and a tolerance for non-traditional storytelling methods. Audiences looking for a straightforward sports drama might find the film’s approach too unconventional or challenging, which could limit its appeal to a broader audience.

THE COMMENTS

The film employs a daring approach to its cinematography and narrative structure that sets it apart from typical sports dramas. It challenges traditional storytelling norms in the sports genre, making it a topic of interest for discussions on film technique and character development.

THE LESSON

  1. The Importance of Passion for Success: The film illustrates how essential genuine passion and love for what you do are for achieving success. This theme is evident in the portrayal of Tashi’s character, whose deep love for tennis drives her and highlights the contrast with characters who may lack the same level of dedication. This passion is shown to be a crucial factor in overcoming obstacles and achieving personal and professional goals.
  2. The Complexity of Relationships and Growth: “Challengers” delves into how personal relationships can profoundly impact an individual’s growth and success. The characters’ interactions and history demonstrate that our connections with others can both challenge and propel us forward. The film suggests that navigating these relationships with honesty and resilience is key to personal development and fulfillment.

IS IT REWATCHABLE

Yes, “Challengers” is rewatchable. The layered narrative and intricate character dynamics make it a film that could offer new insights on subsequent viewings. The technical aspects of the film, like its cinematography, also make it worth revisiting to appreciate the artistic choices more fully.

THE FINAL WORD

“Challengers” delivers a potent mix of intense sports action and deep personal drama, elevated by standout performances from Zendaya, Josh O’Connor, and Mike Faist. Luca Guadagnino’s daring narrative techniques and bold cinematography turn this tennis story into a compelling exploration of ambition, love, and the personal costs of greatness. Engaging, emotionally charged, and visually inventive, it’s a film that redefines the boundaries of sports cinema.

THE VERDICT 

My 3L system gives me the choice to Love It, Like It, or Lose It. 

For “Challengers,” I definitely “Love It.” It’s a film that entertains and engages on an intellectual and emotional level, prompting reflection and discussion.

THE TRAILER

THE MEME REVIEW

VIDEO REVIEW

AUDIO-ONLY REVIEW

Interview: 7 Questions with David Lewis

Interview with David Lewis, director of the Seattle film Fantasy A Gets A Mattress. Available as a video from our YouTube channel and audio-only podcast.

Video

Audio-Only Podcast

Review: Oppenheimer

Oppenheimer (2023)
R  ‧ Biographical Drama ‧ 3 Hours 0 Minutes

Written by Christopher Nolan

Directed by Christopher Nolan

THE CAST

 Cillian Murphy, Emily Blunt, Matt Damon, Robert Downey Jr., Florence Pugh, Josh Hartnett, Casey Affleck, Rami Malek, and Kenneth Branagh.

THE STORY

(In their own words). The story of American scientist J. Robert Oppenheimer and his role in the development of the atomic bomb.

THE BEST

The BEST things about the film

  1. The Score – I truly believe this film lives and dies by the score. Nolan uses the film’s musical score with extreme precision, constantly ramping up the tension in the scenes to their extreme and making the silence in some scenes exceptionally dramatic. He uses the music extremely well. I will go even further; many of these scenes would be boring without the score. This was sorcerer-level magic, tricking the audience into believing they were actually watching an interesting dialogue scene when it was just a lot of high-level science talks along with the mediocre dialogue that doesn’t move the story along very well. 
  2. The Pacing – The film has a rapid-fire pace, which is necessary to get through this three-hour-long film. It needs to be fast because otherwise there aren’t enough interesting things happening to stay with the film. 
  3. The Acting – This is a truly exceptional cast of actors doing some of the best work of their careers. 
  4. Directing – Christopher Nolan is obviously a master filmmaker. This film is extremely well made and will probably win many awards for people involved.

THE WORST

The WORST things about the film

  1. It’s almost there – This film always felt like it was “almost there.” Whether that was in “making a point,” “making sense,” “making it exciting,” or “making me care.” Three hours filled with the Oppenheimer character, and I didn’t care much about him. Basically, because I never really understood his motivations or his cares. I didn’t know why he was motivated to do things he did, to risk the things he risked, to lie about the things he lied about, or to love the way he loved. They would circle the rim discussing his motivations but wouldn’t dive into it.
  2. It’s long. It’s really much longer than it needs to be.
  3. Too many stories. It lacks focus; it goes all over the place in the name of art, not in the name of better storytelling. 

THE COMMENTS

I have no doubt that most critics will love the film. Its good technical filmmaking. I feel like I’ve seen all these tricks from Nolan before, and it has gotten a little old. Hard, fast music, some good actors, lots of non-linear edits, special effects, slow down of camera speed … .just lots of tricks. Tricks that hide a fundamentally mediocre story. Sure, there are lots of interesting things about Oppenheimer, but I never discovered the core of him in this film. I don’t know why he ticks; I don’t understand his motivations. He’s not particularly likable, not that he has to be, but I at least want to know why he is doing things that I have problems with.  

As an actor, of course, I’d love to be in one of Nolan’s films, but I think that comes from a self-indulgent space in my heart. He has some meaty roles; he makes people look good on camera. 

THE LESSON

Extraordinary minds don’t mean they are extraordinary people. 

IS IT REWATCHABLE

Yes, maybe. I think more in an academic/study of film kind of way than in a “what a great, fun film to watch” kind of way. 

THE FINAL WORD

Loud and long. Sometimes those are good things, and sometimes it’s a Christopher Nolan film that is trying very hard to prove itself to be a good, meaningful film. Nolan is an exceptional filmmaker, and I probably would have liked this film a lot more if it was the first film of his that I’ve seen. But it’s kind of…same tricks, different movie. It’s not a bad film. With fast pacing and a score that pushes you along like an ocean wave, it flies by for a three-hour movie. The acting is fantastic, an outstanding ensemble. Story….I don’t think there’s a lot there. There’s a lot of cinematic trickery to get you to believe you just watched more than you did. I didn’t feel like I got to really understand Oppenheimer, which I think is the point of a biopic. All that being said, I can’t deny it is a well-made film and that many people will enjoy it. But I’m sure they’ll also enjoy anything else that he makes. They like the style, not the substance. 

THE VERDICT 

My 3L system gives me the choice to Love It, Like It, or Lose It. 

Oppenheimer gets a Like It. 

THE TRAILER

THE MEME REVIEW

Review: Elemental

Elemental (2023)
PG  ‧ Animation/Comedy  ‧ 1 Hour 42 Minutes

Written by Peter Sohn; John Hoberg; Kat Likkel; Brenda Hsueh

Directed by Petry Sohn

THE CAST

  • Leah Lewis as Ember Lumen, a tough, quick-witted fire element who loves working at her family’s convenience store in Fire Town.
    • Clara Lin Ding voices little kid Ember, while Reagan To voices big kid Ember.[
  • Mamoudou Athie as Wade Ripple, a fun, sappy water element who is making his own choices and works as an inspector living in Element City.
  • Ronnie del Carmen as Bernie Lumen, Ember’s father, Cinder’s husband, and owner of their family’s convenience store in Fire Town.
  • Shila Ommi as Cinder Lumen, Ember’s mother and Bernie’s wife who is prejudiced against non-fire elements, like her husband.
  • Mason Wertheimer as Clod, a young, street-smart earth element and the Lumens’ neighbor who has a crush on Ember.
  • Wendi McLendon-Covey as Gale Cumulus, an air element with a big personality and Wade’s employer.
  • Catherine O’Hara as Brook Ripple, Wade and Alan’s mother and Harold’s sister who is very welcoming to Ember in a luxury apartment building.

THE STORY

(In their own words).n a city where fire, water, land, and air residents live together, a fiery young woman and a go-with-the-flow guy discover something elemental: how much they actually have in common.

LOVE IT

The BEST things about the film:

First Rom-Com – I’m pretty sure this would be considered Pixar’s first rom-com film. Sure, there have been love interests in other films, but I think this is the first time such a vast section of the film occupies that idea. 

LIKE IT

What worked about the film:

Story – The tale is basically an analogy for the Asian immigrant experience in America. The “fire” element in the city feels othered and faces hostility around the city, where even parts of the city aren’t built with characteristics hospitable to life. 

The animation – Lovely animation. I liked how they brought everything together into this world while still keeping a harmonious production design. 

LOSE IT 

The WORST things about the film:

Lack of good antagonist – The central conflict seems to be with Ember’s father, but even then, there isn’t lost love between them; they clearly have familial love for each other. It’s more about hiding from a father’s potential disappointment. He’s not really a bad guy, though. I think the film would have been much stronger if they had a bit stronger of an antagonist to fight against. 

Lack of oomph – As fun as it was, I don’t know if this is going to be a memorable tale. Maybe it will grow more on me. I just didn’t walk away super excited by the movie. 

THE COMMENTS

The idea for the film is more significant than the actual film. I could see a whole animated series taking place in Element City. The film doesn’t really take an opportunity to explore very much with the city and instead focuses on the relationship between Ember and Wade. Which is fine. Maybe if they spent more time world-building, I’d be mad they didn’t focus on the relationship. I’m a critic; perhaps I can’t be happy. It feels like a little bit of a waste of this setting. The potential for world-building in this universe is enormous.

THE LESSON

No matter how opposite two people are, they still could be a good match.

Don’t force your dreams onto other people.

IS IT REWATCHABLE?

Yes. 

THE FINAL WORD

Elemental is a pleasant enough film. The film is an analogy for the immigrant experience in America wrapped together with a traditional rom-com. Overall it is a funny and enjoyable Pixar film, just not one that will leave a lasting impression. I’m willing to concede that this might be a movie that will grow on me over time. I’ll show it to my kids so I can buy the merch. Its lack of a significant protagonist is probably good for younger kids where bad guys scare them, but I want my plots like I want my carbs…complex. 

THE TRAILER

THE MEME REVIEW

  • Rated: PG