It was a year of personal and professional change, but that didn't keep me away from the movies.

As 2024 ends, I'd like to share with you my Top Films of the Year. Gone are the days when I would see between 200-300 films per year...I've admittedly seen way fewer films overall this past year than in recent years, but I still see WAY more than most. If a favorite movie of yours does NOT appear on this list, I will leave it to your imagination as to whether or not I didn't see it, or if I just didn't like it. I will give you a few reveals: First, I did see "The Brutalist" - a film appearing on almost every single critic's Year-End Lists - but I just didn't like it. At all. Sorry not sorry! I also regrettably missed "Megalopolis," a movie I was dying to see (not that it's appearing on ANY Year-End Lists). And finally, I saw and enjoyed "Wicked," but not enough for it to make my list.

And with those controversial statements behind us, I bring you my favorite films of 2024:

I have to admit: When I walked out of the theater after screening "Mufasa: The Lion King," the new prequel and sequel to the CG-realistic 2019 version of "The Lion King," I had a smile on my face. Indeed, there are some good messages and the movie got better, faster, stronger, as it went along, culminating in what felt like a satisfying conclusion. 

But the more and more that I thought about what I had just seen, the more I felt...underwhelmed. The animated original, from 1994, was and is of course a modern classic. And I was one of the lonely critics that actually embraced the 2019 version (that last movie only ended up with a 51% on RottenTomatoes.com).

Especially when I started comparing it to what had came before, I began to feel like the franchise deserved better. "Mufasa: The Lion King" doesn't feel like a pure cash grab in the way that, say, the straight-to-DVD "The Lion King 2" did. And yet, there is no real reason for its existence other than to ravage the dead carcass - like a hyena might - of yet another Disney classic, squeezing what little life might be left so that the masses can feed.

When the tribute to James Earl Jones at the start of the film carries more weight than the film itself, there's a problem.

Fifteen years in the making, and every bit of blood, sweat and tears poured into "Aladdin 3477: The Jinn of Wisdom" is apparent.

Matt Busch’s "Aladdin 3477: The Jinn of Wisdom" is an impressive feat of independent filmmaking that feels like cinematic comfort food—familiar, adventurous, and deeply satisfying. Known for his work as a professional illustrator on various Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, and Indiana Jones projects (and much, much more over his 30+ years in the industry), Busch proves he’s more than just a renowned artist; he’s a capable, bold and passionate storyteller. And what he was able to pull off from a technical standpoint - on a budget of around a paltry $200,000 - simply defies all logic or explanation.

As a film critic for 15+ years, having seen thousands of films over that span, I can say with full confidence that I've never quite seen anything like this. Independent filmmaking and blockbuster popcorn movies have never been mashed together in this way, nor did I think such an amalgam was even possible. Busch has some brass balls for even attempting such a massive undertaking, and what he's been able to accomplish is nothing short of a mind-boggling achievement. And it's singular: It might take until the actual year 3477 for another creative talent such as Matt Busch to come along, because there is NOBODY else who could have even come close to making this project work in the way that he does.

This self-made film, crafted by a self-made man is available for pre-order on Apple TV+ as of December 20th, 2024, and it hits various VOD platforms on January 3rd, 2025.

​I simply cannot recommend this film enough. Read on for my full review.

"Gladiator II," standing on its own, is a serviceable sword-and-sandal action movie. It's when compared to its 2000 predecessor, "Gladiator" - a film that was nominated for five Oscars, winning for Best Picture and Best Actor - where it seems falls short, unable to capture the depth or gravitas that made the original a modern epic.

A divisive movie if there ever was one, 2019's "Joker" was a movie that I was absolutely enthralled by. Not even considering Joaquin Phoenix's Oscar-winning (and well-deserved) performance, it was a movie that took an inspired, serious deep-dive into the causes-and-effects of mental illness, using a well-established and iconic comic book villain as its lens. It was nuanced, gripping and did not offer any easy answers. Was Phoenix's Arthur Fleck born mad? Or was he the predictable end-product of a broken and corrupt societal system? By the film's end, he had inspired the poor and down-trodden citizens of Gotham City...but was Arthur truly the actual Joker that we all would come to know as the arch-nemesis to Gotham's eventual hero, Batman?

(Read my review of the original "Joker" here).

With it's incredible, record-breaking box office success - grossing over 1 Billion dollars and breaking the record for highest-grossing R-Rated film of all-time, until this year's "Deadpool & Wolverine" surpassed it - it was perhaps inevitable that a sequel was demanded, if not required.  Lady Gaga signed on to play Joker's comic book love interest, Harley Quinn, and it was announced that both Phoenix and director Todd Phillips would return. It made fan-boys salivate at the curious announcement that "Joker 2" would actually be...a musical? I guess it could make sense...we are dealing with a master anarchist, a man so crazy and unpredictable that in his world, anything can make sense.

Everything was teed up for "Joker: Folie a Deux" (translated from French as "madness shared by two") to be a massive success. It ends up being one of the most egregious misfires in recent movie memory.

***Spoilers are to follow, be warned.***

Two of the most popular Marvel characters on the planet see their worlds collide, in a wild, ridiculous mash-up appropriately titled, "Deadpool & Wolverine." 

I wouldn't refer to it as "hard-hitting," but a new documentary on Disney+ (streaming as of May 31st) called "Jim Henson: Idea Man" is a loving, and long-overdue tribute to a man who was way ahead of his time, absolutely right for his time, and simultaneously, gone way too soon.

It's cute, innocent and means well, but "IF" - an acronym for "Imaginary Friends" - leaves a lot to the imagination.

Viewed through the right lens, Jerry Seinfeld's directorial debut, "Unfrosted" (now streaming on Netflix) is a harmless diversion. Much like its subject, the Pop Tart, if you're looking for nuance, exquisite flavor or any level of complexity, you are probably sniffing in the wrong toaster. But if you want something fast and edible, this may be the comedy for you.

While Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt are undeniable super-stars and the sort of actors you'll always find yourself rooting for, "The Fall Guy" fails at becoming the romp-action-comedy it's aiming to be.

It's not all bad and as a comedy, it contains plenty of laughs, albeit there are more misses than hits. But as an on-the-nose love-letter to the long-ignored stunt community, it is less effective despite its efforts. It gives the under-appreciated stunt men and women their due, but hold this up to other stunt-heavy films that REALLY should be applauded - think "John Wick" or the "Mission: Impossible" movies - and it's no question that "The Fall Guy" falls way short.