- We Broke the Loop: Ian Tuason and Nina Kiri on “undertone” (March 12, 2026)
Do we want the prayers of a faith we no longer trust in? How do we fight the demons of a faith we’ve left behind? These are the latent questions that soon take center stage for Evy (Nina Kiri), who is caring for her comatose mother (Michèle Duquet) in director Ian Tuason’s audio horror gem, “undertone.”
That Tuason filmed “undertone” in the same house where he cared for his own ailing parents adds more paranormal significance. One of the many bone-chilling terrors of director Ian Tuason’s film is the way it makes miracles perturbing. The hope is that, against the odds, Evy’s comatose mother arises from her slumber, but we’re also terrified at the possibility of her awakening.
Tormented by guilt that she didn’t take her faith as seriously as her mother might have liked, to take her mind off things, Evy records a paranormal podcast with her friend, Justin (Kris Holden-Ried). Fittingly, she acts as the in-house skeptic in contrast to Justin, who pokes fun at her doubt and invites her to consider how the divine might manifest in something as innocuous as an MP3 file. When Justin plays a series of ten recordings for them to listen to, Evy begins to doubt her own doubts, each recording frighteningly echoing something Evy is experiencing in her own life.
That “undertone” manages to feel grand in scope despite featuring only two on-screen actors is a testament to the film’s craftsmanship. Tuason wrote every audio cue in the script, which means that every loud bang, creaky door, or flickering light has been meticulously choreographed. Despite the film’s horrors, there’s a sentiment of reverence and love at its core: in the film’s closing moments, Tuason thanks his parents, writing:
“.. to Mom and Dad from March 2021 to October 2023, when their bodies and minds slowly surrendered to the world, to each other, and to Love itself, and in those thirty months, I learned everything I know now about peace, happiness, wisdom, service, courage and existence – truths I didn’t even know I was oblivious to in all my years before. So I simplify my dedication to Mom and Dad for transforming my faith into the knowledge of God.”
After kindly expressing adulation for RogerEbert.com’s coverage of his film, Tuason and Kiri went on a deep dive into the film’s spiritual wavelength, learning to communicate a depth of relationship through just dialogue, and making peace with the reality that we’ll always care for our loved ones imperfectly, and
This conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.
In the film’s opening moments, the Bible passage Evy’s mother has left open is the verse where Jesus raises a girl from the dead. Before that story, Jesus healed an aging woman and cast out demons into a herd of pigs. All very on point for “undertone,” but I’m curious if opening the film on that verse was intentional?
Ian Tuason: (Laughs) Well, the Holy Spirit chose that because we randomly picked a page, and when we saw the word “child,” we thought, “Okay, let’s put her mother’s glasses on that word.” But then, now that you have mentioned it, I’m going to have to read that passage in its entirety. A demon is mentioned there, Abyzou’s a demon … it’s almost serendipitous.
That’s a common practice for me, though, where I’ll flip to a verse at random and see what it might say.
IA: It speaks directly to you, right? Are you a Christian?
I do come from a faith background, yes.
IA: Have you ever intentionally gone into the Bible to pick a verse as a form of divinity, kind of like tarot card reading?
I personally have not, but I have friends who’ve done something similar. Was that part of your preparation for the role, Nina?
Nina Kiri: (Laughs) No, but he gave me The Prophet, by Kahlil Gibran, which I really enjoyed reading.
IA: Remember, I also gave you that book. Well, I didn’t give it to you, but I showed you that book by Rick Rubin? I made everyone randomly choose a page and a paragraph.
NK: Oh yeah! I don’t remember my paragraph.
IA: Yours was pretty significant. It was one of the ones that surprised all of us the most. Man, I wish I remembered. I do remember, Graham Beasley, our director of Photography, picked a paragraph that–I’m paraphrasing–“If your gut feeling says ‘Don’t execute.’ Then do it over and do everything again.’”
Even in pre-production, it seems that you all were mindful of the spiritual “undertone” that taps into a very particular grief: that of a parent either unsure of their child’s salvation or concerned that their child may not go to Heaven. Evy feels guilty about not taking her faith seriously while her mom was alive. Ian, I’m wondering what draws you to depicting that type of grief on-screen, and what it was like to invite someone like Nina into something so specific.
IA: You’ve made a point that I didn’t realize until now: that Momma wasn’t sure of her child’s salvation. It’s almost as if Momma was trying to save Evy. There’s that voice message that Evy keeps listening to, and I put it in there because I wanted to show why Evy feels guilty, and how Momma is almost guilt-tripping Evy for not going to church. I’m writing the sequels now, and the third film is about Momma and explores her goal of saving Evy’s soul.
NK: When I was a kid, I used to ask all the time, “Am I being good? Is what I’m doing good?” I was so obsessed with being good, and my parents aren’t religious at all, and yet that moral feeling was relatable. If they were religious, I think, similar to Evy, I’d ask myself, “Did I do enough?”
So the way I related to Evy wasn’t necessarily through the spiritual aspect, but through a desire to be good in various situations in life. Did I do this right? Did I treat this person the right way? Am I being a good person at all times? When you’re younger, you need your parents’ guidance, and I would constantly ask myself those questions. Evy is a character who’s rattled with guilt, and she’s asking herself: “Could I have been better towards my faith? Should I have taken better care of Momma?” That guilt is easy for me to access because at so many points in life I felt I wasn’t as good as I should have been, and I could have been better, even when I was just doing what I could.
IA: Did you ever find a way to resolve those feelings? Because I still catch myself wrestling.
NK: I still wrestle a lot, in particular with relationships with my family and my parents. If I don’t call enough, I think “I should have called more,” or “I should call them again or I shouldn’t have been mad at that time.” Sometimes you can go away to repair a relationship, but there’s a struggle with maintaining peace; for me, I’m always like “No, nothing can be bad. I can’t do anything that’s not positive, and that’s a weird feeling, I think to have so often.”
THE UNDERTONE – Feature Film.
February, 2025.
Photo by Dustin Rabin #2935
I’m thinking of when Evy says, “I just want it to be over,” saying the quiet part out loud that she hopes for her mother to pass. Speaking of emotions that may be vocalized or not, I’m struck by the dynamic between Evy and Justin, and we only get a bit of their non-podcast-related banter, but I couldn’t help but speculate if there was a romantic attraction.
IA: I didn’t write that into the script, but then when Nina, Adam, and I were workshopping, we discussed a what-if scenario where there was an unrequited romance back in college. Adam played it that way, and you can hear it in his tenderness. You can also hear in Nina that she’s the one who may have rejected him because she’s the one calling the shots in their relationship. That’s something I’m playing with exploring in sequels. I think their relationship exists on its own to show how much Justin cares about Nina.
NK: There is no explicit conversation about their relationship. It is realistic to me that someone you went to college with who liked you, maybe it’s wrong timing, but you still stay in touch, and you know they care for you, you care for them, and there’s never any pressure or weirdness. It’s just love, because you’ve known a person for so long. I’m happy that Evy and Justin’s relationship is being perceived a certain way because, for both of them, it’s necessary. He’s genuinely trying to help her and isn’t going to let her go.
When he learns that Evy’s boyfriend, Darren, hasn’t been around much to help, I love his instinctive response of “What’s his number? I’m going to call and text him right now.” It’s those little touches that communicate so much depth.
IA: That’s one line I did write in, but when I wrote it, I figured he was just a good friend who’s on his friend’s side. The friend is always on the friend’s side against the friend’s significant other. But it gives him more motivation now that Adam and Nina have agreed on this backstory of unrequited love for their characters.
Ian, I understand you worked with Production Designer Mercedes Coyle to transform your parents’ home into a film set. I’m curious what the process was like to invite outside collaborators into such a personal space, but then also invite your family–your nephew drew the haunting pictures we see at the film’s climax–into the film work you do?
IA: Right now, you’re channeling my favorite interviewer, Nardwuar. He’s known for his research, but it was to a point where it would creep out his interviewees. You’re not as extreme as him because then you would have known my first-grade teacher’s name …
(Laughs) That was my follow-up question, actually. I do know one reason why Nina was due to another serendipitous moment: when you brought your mom to the hospital, she was wearing just one piece of jewelry, a pinky ring. Then, when you first met Nina, she was wearing just a pinky ring.
NK: Well, guess what happened last night? The pinky ring broke.
IA: We broke the loop. Now we’re entering another chapter. To answer your question, someone asked me at a Q&A how I felt about still living in the house. I was the one who answered about how my relationship with my house went through so many different phases. Right now, it’s just a new phase. It doesn’t mean “undertone” house. It means so many other things. Nina’s holding room was my childhood bedroom. Although we don’t see Justin on-screen, Adam was in my high school bedroom. I’ve had different memories for different rooms. I see Justin’s character as the college version of me; I was just in that room all the time. Then, where Nina was in my childhood bedroom, that’s where I was daydreaming, playing, and writing.
Was your nephew informed that his pictures would be used in such a scary film?
IA: I was going to use his actual drawings, but a higher power prevented that. We had a props meeting a day before shooting. I had put all of his drawings in a box. I placed it somewhere in the basement where I knew I could find it. So five minutes before our props meeting, I went down to get it, and I couldn’t find it. So I was searching for about a good ten minutes, and then I went back upstairs, and I said, “I can’t find it. Forget it. Just you guys can do your suggestion of getting another kid to draw it.”
After that meeting, I went downstairs and found it in the same spot where I had originally left it. I took that as a sign that my mom didn’t want to use her gifts from her grandchildren as props in a horror movie.
NK: Zach, it seems that you’ve had your own fights with demons.
(Laughs) My grandma is a prayer warrior, and I know that she prays so much for my younger brother and me. My father has said that when she passes, I’m losing someone who is praying for me. Your film made me wonder what she might be holding back due to her prayers.
IA: I would take that literally because my life went downhill when my mom passed, and she’s the one who prayed for me hard every single day. My life and my brother’s life started spiraling.
NK: A mother’s love … you were once in her body, and the bond between mother and child is flesh and flesh. You were her. It’s such an intense relationship in our lives, whether you look at it through a religious lens or not. Sometimes I feel like moms love us so much we almost can’t handle it. There’s something we feel overwhelmed by, because how could we not?
“undertone” opens in theaters on March 13th from A24.
- 12 Films We Can’t Wait to See at the SXSW Film Festival (March 12, 2026)
Fans of RogerEbert.com know that we’re about to enter a fun phase of the year as the SXSW Film Festival gets underway, starting tonight with the world premiere of Boots Riley’s “I Love Boosters,” the long-awaited second film by the director of “Sorry to Bother You.” It’s only one of a number of fascinating premieres this year that we can’t wait to see and review for you.
What should you expect from SXSW? Programming that’s a bit left of center, including standout genre flicks of recent years like “It Ends” and “Oddity,” alongside major Hollywood premieres. SXSW is where we filed reviews of “A Quiet Place,” “Us,” “John Wick: Chapter Four,” “The Fall Guy,” “Monkey Man,” and so many more future hits. What will break out this year? Here are twelve that we’re most excited to see try:
“Dreamquil”
One of the slogans for SXSW’s chief setting is “Keep Austin Weird.” Based on the description, this should help. It’s got an amazing cast that includes Elizabeth Banks, John C. Reilly, and Juliette Lewis. But it’s this odd synopsis that has us intrigued: “Set in the not so distant future, when poor air quality leads to people living mostly virtual lives. Carol is a dissatisfied career mother, struggling to find connection within her marriage to Gary and her child. With the day to day familiarity of their home and lives feeling increasingly claustrophobic, and worried she could be heading towards divorce, Carol leaps at the chance to get her life back on track by signing up for “DreamQuil”, an avant-garde digital wellness retreat. When Carol returns home however, she discovers her family has been living with “Carol 2″, a robot the corporation sent designed to help in her absence, and things take a mysterious and sinister turn.”
“Hokum”
Damian McCarthy directed one of my favorite horror films of the decade in “Oddity,” and he returns to SXSW this year with a much-anticipated follow-up starring Adam Scott (who appears twice in this preview, actually, hinting at a potentially great 2026 for the “Severance” star). Scott plays Ohm Bauman, a novelist who arrives at an inn that might be haunted by a ghost. McCarthy has proven he’s adept at folkloric hauntings, giving this arguably the highest potential among a number of horror flicks premiering in Austin this year.
“I Love Boosters”
The people at Neon are behind Boots Riley’s return to the big screen, one that boasts a ridiculously talented ensemble. Get a load of this crew of young talent: Keke Palmer, Naomi Ackie, Taylour Paige, Poppy Liu, Eiza González, LaKeith Stanfield, and Will Poulter. And then add Demi Moore’s first major role since her comeback in “The Substance.” What’s it about? The SXSW description is tantalizingly vague: “A crew of professional shoplifters takes aim at a cutthroat fashion maven. It’s like community service.” Sign us up.
“Kill Me”
There are so many weird horror movies in this year’s program that one might mistake it for Fantastic Fest. Which one will break out of the glut? Maybe it’s the unusual plot description or the promising cast (Charlie Day, Allison Williams, Giancarlo Esposito, Aya Cash), but this feels like a solid candidate. Get a load of this enticing pitch: “Jimmy wakes up in a bathtub filled with his own blood, his wrists slit and his life rapidly nearing completion. This would be a textbook failed suicide attempt, only…Jimmy didn’t do it? At least, he’s pretty sure he didn’t. Alongside Margot, the 911 operator who took his call that faithful night, Jimmy begins an amateur-hour murder investigation, desperate to prove that this is a whodunnit and not a hedunnit.”
“Mike & Nick & Nick & Alice”
Man, this looks fun. And it will be on Hulu before the end of the month! We’ll see it first and let you know if it’s worth watching. Vince Vaughn, James Marsden, Eiza Gonzalez, Keith David, and many more star in an R-rated comedy about hitmen and time travel. Yep. Here’s the official synopsis: “’Mike & Nick & Nick & Alice’ is a hilarious, stylized, R-rated action-comedy about two gangsters and the woman they love trying to survive the most dangerous night of their lives. As if that wasn’t enough, there’s one wild ingredient added to the mix: a time machine.”
“Over Your Dead Body”
Lonely Island genius Jorma Taccone switches gears for this enticing war of the roses starring Jason Segel and Samara Weaving (also doing double duty in this preview) as a couple who head to a cabin to reconnect, only to discover that they’re both planning murder as a way out of the relationship. IFC already has this planned for a splashy April premiere, but we’ll let you know this weekend if you should mark your calendar.
“Pizza Movie”
Now that “Stranger Things” has ended, it will be interesting to see which of the young stars breaks out of that defining show. My money might be on Gaten Matarazzo, who stars in this Hulu comedy that will drop on the streaming service in April. It sounds like a fun drug comedy with an SXSW description that reads thusly: “It’s a Friday night and college students Jack and Montgomery have got big plans: They’re going to do drugs and order pizza. But when the home-made drug they ingest turns out to be MUCH wilder than they thought, the simple journey down two flights of stairs to retrieve their pie becomes a mind-bindingly transformative quest. Still, though, how hard can it be? The only thing in their way is a broken elevator, Montgomery’s social anxiety, the fact that everybody in the school hates Jack, a sociopathic RA, a vengeful butterfly, a robot with a dream, and this insane drug that has absolutely no regard for the basic laws of reality.”
“Power Ballad”
John Carney honestly, unequivocally believes in the power of music, as seen in films like “Once” and “Sing Street.” The beloved writer/director brings his Lionsgate film “Power Ballad” to this year’s fest. Paul Rudd stars as Rick, a wedding singer who gave up his dreams of rock and roll to start a family. When he helps a pop star in need of a comeback played by Nick Jonas, he’s startled when the song they wrote together becomes a hit … and he gets no credit. Carney has proven he knows how to do feel-good comedy well, and it’s unlikely that song is going to be out of tune this time.
“Ready or Not 2: Here I Come”
While it seems almost impossible that “Ready or Not” was seven years ago, that just makes anticipation for this long-awaited follow-up even more prominent. Samara Weaving returns (as do the original directors after their double-feature excursion into the “Scream” universe), now hunted by multiple families rather than just her awful in-laws. This one drops in theaters next week, making it the first SXSW 2026 you’ll probably be able to see. Want another reason to play this game? Check out this cool supporting cast: Kathryn Newton, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Shawn Hatosy, Néstor Carbonell, David Cronenberg, and Elijah Wood.
“The Saviors”
Why does a pairing of Adam Scott and Danielle Deadwyler sound so cool? Maybe it’s because they’re always at least good, and often great? They play Sean and Kim Harrison, a divorcing couple who rent their home to a Middle Eastern brother and sister. The Harrisons become convinced that their new tenants are hiding a deadly secret, especially with the President about to come to town. This could go either way, but it’s one of the few plot descriptions this year that sounds truly timely and maybe even a little edgy.
“They Will Kill You”
The last major premiere of this year’s SXSW is this Warner Bros. genre flick starring Zazie Beetz as the latest target for a cult of demon worshippers looking for a sacrifice. It’s got a pretty wicked trailer, one that promises humor and gore, in equal measure.
“Wishful Thinking”
Lewis Pullman and Maya Hawke are two performers who seem right on the cusp of reaching another level in their careers. Maybe that happens here with this opening night SXSW film with a crazy premise. We’ll let the SXSW synopsis explain why this made our curtain raiser: “Julia and Charlie, a volatile couple in Portland, Oregon, are at a loss for how to repair their broken relationship. Julia, an ambitious game designer, and Charlie, a struggling musician working in sound design to pay the bills, are pushed by Julia’s friend into attending a couples-therapy seminar run by twin healers, the Tillies, who claim to fix relationships through energy work. The session triggers a karmic universal system that makes the state of their relationship affect the world around them. With earthquakes, the stock market, and entire nations at risk, Charlie and Julia must confront whether their love can survive amidst so much destruction.”
- If We Picked the Winners: The 98th Academy Awards (March 11, 2026)
What feels like the longest awards season ever will come to an end this Sunday, March 15th, when the 98th Academy Awards are announced. Like we did last year, we asked the editors of RogerEbert.com to pick their choices for what will win, should win, and should have been nominated for one of the most unpredictable Oscars of all time.
Only two of the major eight categories have a consensus prediction to win (Best Actress & Best Adapted Screenplay), and the crew is also divided on what should win across almost every category, indicating the breadth of a fantastic year. As for the overlooked, there’s a lot of love for Jafar Panahi and Josh O’Connor, among many other fascinating choices from Pamela Anderson to Adam Sandler. Enjoy.
Legend: Matt Zoller Seitz (MZS), Robert Daniels (RD), Nell Minow (NM), Clint Worthington (CW), and yours truly (BT).
BEST PICTUREWHO WILL WIN:“One Battle After Another” (NM/CW/MZS)“Sinners” (BT/RD)
WHO SHOULD WIN:“One Battle After Another” (BT/CW)“Sinners” (NM/MZS)“The Secret Agent” (RD)
WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED:“It Was Just an Accident” (BT/CW)“Blue Moon” (RD)“The Life of Chuck” (MZS)“Nuremberg” (NM)
The most competitive Best Picture race in years will end on Sunday when either Paul Thomas Anderson’s “One Battle After Another” or Ryan Coogler’s “Sinners” ends up the final winner announced. The crew here is split on both what will and what should happen. Funny enough, only Clint predicts the winner to be his pick, PTA’s film, although I think “Sinners” would be a historic, equally worthy win, and I’m predicting it after the success at the SAG Actor Awards. Robert agrees, noting, “I can’t ignore the record-breaking nomination haul garnered by “Sinners” or the sheer enthusiasm around it.”
As for overlooked nominees, Clint and I agree that Jafar Panahi’s Palme d’Or winner was robbed, likely due to the abundance of Neon possibilities (two of theirs, “The Secret Agent” and “Sentimental Value” already taking up real estate). Clint says, “I think it’s a shame that Jafar Panahi’s mighty treatise on the lingering effects of wartime trauma isn’t in contention for the top spot.” Nell points out the power of “Nuremberg,” writing, “It is a powerful reminder of how easy it is to slip into brutality if you think it will give you the sense of yourself and your culture you believe you are entitled to.” Finally, Matt Zoller Seitz loves Mike Flanagan’s Stephen King adaptation, “a lovely, funny, sweet, profound, and very accessible movie that also has an unconventional structure.”
BEST DIRECTORWHO WILL WIN:Paul Thomas Anderson, “One Battle After Another” (BT/NM/RD)Ryan Coogler, “Sinners” (MZS)Josh Safdie, “Marty Supreme” (CW)
WHO SHOULD WIN:Ryan Coogler, “Sinners” (BT/CW/RD/MZS)Paul Thomas Anderson, “One Battle After Another” (NM)
WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED:Jafar Panahi, “It Was Just an Accident” (BT/CW)Craig Brewer, “Song Sung Blue” (NM)Mary Bronstein, “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You” (RD)Steven Soderbergh, “Presence” (MZS)
In years that are this competitive, there’s often a Pic/Director split. That’s what I’m predicting: That PTA will finally take home a Best Director Oscar (his second ever after winning Adapted Screenplay earlier in the night), but I’d be over the moon if Coogler won for his incredible ambition, something that 4/5ths of us agree on. (Nell is predicting her pick for should-win, PTA, will take the prize.)
As for why Coogler should win, we’ll let someone who notoriously gave the film a mixed review take the mic: “I’m sure there will be some eyebrows raised by readers, especially those who read my review,” says Robert. “However, like I said in my review, I can’t deny the massive swing Coogler took or the rarity of its occurrence for Black directors. That I think it only works in fits and starts is moot. This is the biggest and most expansive vision of the films nominated. It should win for the sheer level of difficulty required to even attempt it.”
As for the overlooked, Matt picks out one of the best living directors and one who should be in this line-up far more often: Steven Soderbergh. “Soderbergh not only directed but also served as the sole camera operator, simultaneously giving a sensitive and totally in-the-zone “performance” as the first-person protagonist, a ghost, while mentally tracking everything else a director must manage,” he says.
BEST ACTORWHO WILL WIN:Timothee Chalamet, “Marty Supreme” (NM/CW)Wagner Moura, “The Secret Agent” (RD/MZS)Michael B. Jordan, “Sinners” (BT)
WHO SHOULD WIN:Ethan Hawke, “Blue Moon” (BT/CW/RD)Michael B. Jordan, “Sinners” (NM/MZS)
WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED:Josh O’Connor, “The Mastermind” (CW/RD/MZS)Lee Byung-hun, “No Other Choice” (BT)Denzel Washington, “Highest 2 Lowest” (NM)
One of the most unpredictable categories of the night will be Best Actor, which looked at one point like Chalamet’s to lose, but the joy and admiration in the room when Michael B. Jordan won the SAG Actor Award last week felt undeniable to this writer. There’s also a strong possibility that Chalamet and Jordan split the “predictable” vote and allow Moura or Hawke to sneak in and take it.
As for his predicted pick of Moura, Matt writes: “I think Moura is this year’s equivalent of the barely known Adrien Brody winning Best Actor over Russell Crowe and Nicolas Cage for 2002, or a young Irish actor named Daniel Day-Lewis, who wasn’t a star yet, taking the award despite stiff competition from Tom Cruise, Kenneth Branagh, Morgan Freeman and Robin Williams, all of whom did some of their career-best work that same year. It’s a great performance by Moura, mysterious and sad and strangely kind.”
There’s more consensus in the entire field of acting for who should have been nominated than in the five picks and that’s because of the stunning year that Josh O’Connor had with “Rebuilding,” “History of Sound,” “Wake Up Dead Man,” and Kelly Reichardt’s “The Mastermind,” which 60% of the editors of this site would have nominated. As MZS writes, “he’s never been anything less than mesmerizing.” I adore O’Connor, but I was also personally annoyed that Park Chan-wook’s “No Other Choice” was entirely overlooked and would have cited the best work of Lee Byung-hun’s career (among other nominations).
BEST ACTRESSWHO WILL WIN:Jessie Buckley, “Hamnet” (BT/NM/CW/RD/MZS)
WHO SHOULD WIN:Jessie Buckley, “Hamnet” (BT/MZS)Rose Byrne, “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You” (CW/RD)Kate Hudson, “Song Sung Blue” (NM)
WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED:Amanda Seyfried, “The Testament of Ann Lee” (BT/CW)Kathleen Chalfant, “Familiar Touch” (NM)Chase Infiniti, “One Battle After Another” (RD)
Finally, some consensus. The only true award season precursor sweep has come from Jessie Buckley and “Hamnet,” a certain winner on Sunday. While she’s my pick for “should” in this fivesome, if either Amanda Seyfried or Jennifer Lawrence (“Die, My Love”) had been justly nominated, I would have gone with one of those unforgettable turns. They’re both performances that people will presume were nominated years from now and feel startled when they learn they weren’t.
I’m also fully on board with Nell’s pick of Kathleen Chalfant’s nuanced work in “Familiar Touch” and Chase Infiniti’s star-making turn in “One Battle After Another,” Robert’s pick, revealing the remarkable depth of talent in a category that’s being dominated by one person. Nell cites Chalfant’s “exquisite performance as a woman whose vibrance and dignity are undimmed by cognitive decline.”
Robert also wishes that the biggest upset of the night goes to Rose Byrne, writing, “It’s Rose Byrne’s misfortune that she also played an aggrieved mother in a film that I think is emotionally more difficult to wrap your arms around but is ultimately far more trusting of the audience and its actors to provide space to organically feel.”
BEST SUPPORTING ACTORWHO WILL WIN:Delroy Lindo, “Sinners” (BT/RD)Benicio del Toro, “One Battle After Another” (CW/MZS)Sean Penn, “One Battle After Another” (NM)
WHO SHOULD WIN:Delroy Lindo, “Sinners” (CW/RD)Benicio del Toro, “One Battle After Another” (MZS)Jacob Elordi, “Frankenstein” (BT)Sean Penn, “One Battle After Another” (NM)
WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED:Adam Sandler, “Jay Kelly” (BT)Josh O’Connor, anything (NM)Ralph Fiennes, “28 Years Later” (CW)Andrew Scott, “Blue Moon” (RD)Jack O’Connell, “Sinners” (MZS)
There are so many choices here. For weeks, it felt like an open race, but Sean Penn taking both BAFTA and SAG Actor makes him the likely frontrunner, but I’m going with the wave of love for “Sinners” sweeping in the wonderful Delroy Lindo in one of the biggest surprises of the night. Almost no one here would be truly aggravating, although Del Toro’s work feels more subtly perfect than Penn’s to this viewer, even if my pick would be the incredibly physical, nuanced work from the “Euphoria” star. And Clint says he’ll “drink a few small beers” if BdT pulls what now kinda feels like an upset.
Nell drops O’Connor here to award his remarkable 2025 while the rest of the staff picks such a unique range of performances. They’re gonna have to nominate Adam Sandler someday, and this would have been a great one in which to do it, while I agree with all of the other choices, too. It’s a fantastic year for supporting performances, and it will be a bit ironic if the least-campaigning of the bunch, Sean Penn, rises to the top to take home his third trophy.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESSWHO WILL WIN:Amy Madigan, “Weapons” (BT/NM/CW/MZS)Wunmi Mosaku, “Sinners” (RD)
WHO SHOULD WIN:Wunmi Mosaku, “Sinners” (BT/MZS)Amy Madigan, “Weapons” (NM)Elle Fanning, “Sentimental Value” (CW)Teyana Taylor, “One Battle After Another” (RD)
WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED:Jane Levy, “A Little Prayer” (BT)Odessa A’zion, “Marty Supreme” (NM)Pamela Anderson, “The Naked Gun” (CW)Tânia Maria, “The Secret Agent” (RD)Diane Kruger, “The Shrouds” (MZS)
It’s funny that four people are predicting the win for “Weapons,” given I don’t think this category is predictable at all. Yes, the “Sentimental Value” nominees probably cancel each other out, but none of the other three would surprise me in the slightest, and I’d actually prefer either of the non-Madigan picks. As much as Amy Madigan elevates “Weapons” every second she’s on screen, the same can be said for Mosaku and Taylor. What’s interesting is that all three feel like performances that define their films: You can’t imagine the movies without them.
As for who should have been nominated, look at those five. Imagine what an inspired Oscars it would be if those were the five instead! I adored Jane Levy’s moving work in Angus MacLachlan’s delicate drama, while Nell considers Odessa A’zion’s turn “the heart of ‘Marty Supreme,’” tough and tender.” Robert hoped for a second acting nomination for “The Secret Agent,” saying of Maria’s work: “It’s a true supporting performance that provides this rebellious movie with another definition of courage, one found in the undaunted, literal support of others who find themselves rendered powerless against an oppressive system.”
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAYWHO WILL WIN:“One Battle After Another” by Paul Thomas Anderson (BT/NM/CW/RD/MZS)
WHO SHOULD WIN:“One Battle After Another” by Paul Thomas Anderson (BT/NM/CW/RD)“Frankenstein” by Guillermo del Toro (MZS)
WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED:“Wake Up Dead Man” by Rian Johnson (BT)“Peter Hujar’s Day” by Ira Sachs (NM)“Die, My Love” by Lynne Ramsay (CW)“Hedda” by Nia DaCosta (RD)“The Life of Chuck” by Mike Flanagan (MZS)
There was almost five-for-five consensus on the Academy “getting this one right,” but Matt is holding out hope for an upset for Guillermo del Toro, calling his Mary Shelley adaptation “one of his best feature film scripts ever, true to the source (in spirit, anyway) but a GDT joint all the way, in terms of structure, tone, and the choice of when to have characters talk and when to let them be silent.”
As for the overlooked, Nell calls “Peter Hujar’s Day” “a lyrical cinematic poem about the eternal joy of sunlight, friendship, and being present for whatever happens.” Robert holds a little more anger for overlooking Nia DaCosta’s “prickly” Ibsen adaptation, saying those who didn’t vote for it “…will not see heaven. Few scribes took as big an adaptive swing as her and connected on such a high level.”
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAYWHO WILL WIN:“Sinners” by Ryan Coogler (BT/NM/RD/MZS)“Marty Supreme” by Ronald Bronstein & Josh Safdie (CW)
WHO SHOULD WIN:“Sinners” by Ryan Coogler (BT/NM/MZS)“It Was Just an Accident” by Jafar Panahi with script collaborators Nader Saïvar, Shadmehr Rastin, and Mehdi Mahmoudian (CW/RD)
WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED:“Sorry, Baby” by Eva Victor (BT/RD)“Jay Kelly” by Noah Baumbach (NM)“The Mastermind” by Kelly Reichardt (CW)“Black Bag” by David Koepp (MZS)
Once again, there’s a higher-than-average consensus that the Academy will get this one right, awarding Ryan Coogler’s script, one that Seitz calls “vibrantly original and entertaining. “
Robert and I unite in our shock at Eva Victor’s snub, with Robert writing: “Victor’s script is so introspective, thoughtful, and vulnerable—showing a level of processing that I can’t conceive —that I can’t imagine anyone watching or reading it and not thinking it’s among the best of the year.”
Finally, Clint takes a righteous soapbox for one of our best filmmakers and how she’s consistently overlooked, writing, “There are scenes and exchanges in ‘The Mastermind’ that still stick with me, and it would be nice for Reichardt’s probing, contemplative writing to be rewarded. Give her a nomination, for crying out loud; it’s been decades! She’s put in the work!”
- Hulu’s “Sunny Nights” Offers Split Sides, Spray Tans, and Botched Schemes (March 11, 2026)
Over the last few years, the adult sibling dynamic has been explored to great effect in a number of sharply funny and/or dramatically impactful series.
Think Carmy and “Sugar” Berzatto in “The Bear.” The Garvey quintet in “Bad Sisters.” Coop and Ali in “Your Friends & Neighbors.” The Friedkin brothers in “Black Rabbit.” Richard and Jon in the recent “American Classic.” Add to that stellar lineup the inspired pairing of Will Forte as Marty and D’Arcy Carden as his sister Vicki in the dark, brutal, and devilishly funny crime caper “Sunny Nights,” premiering March 11th on Hulu. This is the kind of cheerfully warped series that offers up an exploding crocodile, a nosediving aerial advertising plane, and the murder of a guy who is already dead as plot points—leaving us unsure of whether to cringe in horror or laugh. It’s usually a bit of both.
The Australia-set “Sunny Nights” is an original creation by Nick Keetch & Ty Freer, but it continually reminded me of Carl Hiaasen’s South Florida novels such as “Tourist Season,” “Skin Tight,” “Lucky You,” “Strip Tease” (which was turned into a terrible movie), and “Bad Monkey” (which was adapted into an excellent series on Apple TV). Like those works, the series relies on a cockeyed formula of sun-soaked noir, outlandish, blood-soaked wrongdoings that go spectacularly wrong, and a mixed bag of colorful characters. On “Sunny Nights,” with each new chapter, our anti-heroes get further tangled up in an increasingly complicated and dangerous web of crimes, cover-ups, lies, double-crosses, and double-double-crosses.
Sensible, strait-laced Martin Marvin (Forte) and his impetuous, underachieving sister Vicki Martin (Carden) are American siblings who have relocated to Sydney to launch Tansform, a fast-drying, non-sticky tanning solution. (The “Sunny Nights” title comes from the name of the rundown motel where Martin and Vicki are staying as they try to save their modest nest egg while scouring the cosmetic product convention circuit in search of investors.)
There are two reasons they’ve chosen this particular location:
A. Australia has one of the highest skin cancer rates in the world. That’s no laughing matter, but for Marvin and Vicki, it spells opportunity.
B. Martin is still hopelessly in love with his estranged wife Joyce (Ra Chapman), who is now living in Sydney and working as a journalist for a lightweight news outlet while hoping to score a big scoop.
Sunny Nights (Hulu)
“Sunny Nights” kicks off in breezy fashion, Forte and Carden expertly playing off one another as siblings who have always had each other’s backs but often get on each other’s nerves (as siblings do). Martin and Vicki are inherently likable characters, but you know how many lead characters in series such as this are usually the smartest people in the room? They’re almost never the smartest people in the room. Martin’s attempt to reconcile with Joyce goes up in flames when she says they should just be friends. That leaves Martin in a particularly vulnerable state, leading to him being catfished and having to come up with $10,000, pronto.
Thus begins the plot domino game of one bad decision leading to another, and another, and another. (Sometimes it’s Martin making the gaffe. Sometimes it’s Vicki. Sometimes they pair up to make some spectacularly bad choices.) Over the course of eight episodes that sometimes stretch for a beat too long, Martin and Vicki remain determined to make Tansform a success by any means necessary—even as they find themselves in very real danger of sustaining serious bodily harm or getting killed.
Jessica De Gouw is a standout as Susi, a gorgeous, charming conwoman who is beginning to develop a conscience. Rachel House is a menacing force as the mob boss Mony, a quirky, violent oddball out for revenge who casually tortures anyone who gets in her way. Megan Wilding is a deadpan treasure as Nova, a hapless animal handler who teams up with Joyce to investigate the mystery of the aforementioned exploding crocodile. Former professional rugby league footballer Willie Mason plays, well, a former professional rugby league footballer—but this guy is a brutally efficient standover man who is dealing with the crippling effects of severe head trauma from his playing days.
Some characters are more fully realized and given more to do than others, e.g., Joyce, who remains on the periphery for much of the time and seems a bit wishy-washy. (Martin might have a more interesting and exciting life were he to move on from Joyce and get to know Susi better.)
By the eighth episode, we feel as if we’ve earned some closure—but “Sunny Nights” leaves just about everything unresolved, clearly setting things up for a Season 2. If that happens, I’d be willing to make the time investment, but the payoffs should start coming early and often.
Whole season screened for review. Premieres March 11th on Hulu and Disney+.
- Highlights of the 2026 True/False Film Festival Include “Tropical Park,” “Bucks Harbor,” “Landscapes of Memory” (March 11, 2026)
Every March, the college town of Columbia, Missouri, swells with documentary filmmakers, movie fans, students, and culturally curious locals all lining up in front of churches, a nightclub that doubles as a screening venue, and the stalwart independent two-screen theater, the Ragtag Cinema. The annual True/False Film Festival is a short yet focused event that explores the boundaries of nonfiction filmmaking.
This year, the lineup boasted a number of thought-provoking and mesmerizing works, including standouts from Sundance like “Barbara Forever,” “Aanikoobijigan,” and “Time and Water,” other festival favorites like “Remake” and “True North,” and premieres including “The Great Experiment” and “Phenomena.”
Hansel Porras Garcia’s documentary “Tropical Park” exemplified the festival’s experimental nature. Like the Ross brothers’ excellent film, “Bloody Nose, Empty Pockets,” “Tropical Park” is something of a fiction/nonfiction hybrid, using a situational setup with actors who improvise their dialogue and reactions to explore something true-to-life.
In “Tropical Park,” a brother, Frank (Ariel Texidó), takes his sister Fanny (Lola Bosch) for a driving lesson at a local park. They have been separated for over twenty years and have only been reunited for a month when Fanny immigrated from Cuba to live with her brother and his family in Miami. While in the car, the two tease each other, argue over communism, and reminisce about schoolyard memories, but as the driving lesson gets underway, so do thornier discussions, like Frank needing Fanny to move out and her pain over their father’s rejection of her transition. The emotional talk turns heated, then tearful, as the two navigate issues of immigration, isolation, transphobia, family, and belonging.
According to Porras Garcia, during a post-screening Q&A, the two actors were given only biographies of their characters and rehearsed their feature-length conversation once before shooting the single take (there are no cuts or edits throughout the film) that audiences see on screen. Using only a 12-page script, the pair launched into their improvised argument with breathless ease, adapting to the challenge of acting with their backs towards the camera for most of the movie. With the headrests missing, the camera in the back seat of the car captures each side-eye glance, tear-stained cheek, and empathetic touch between brother and sister.
In what feels like an all-too-rare occasion, the film also paints a nuanced portrait of the Cuban and Cuban-American experience, exploring the tension between generations of arrivals and the ideological differences within a community too easily lumped into a monolith. It can feel claustrophobic to watch such an explosion of pent-up emotions in a small sedan, possibly uncorking some of the audience’s own unspoken feelings. But that’s exactly what makes “Tropical Park” so incredibly compelling.
There were more vulnerable confessions shared in Pete Muller’s “Bucks Harbor,” a surprising trek through northern New England to follow subjects in the lobster-fishing town of Machias, Maine. At first, Muller’s film feels like a descendant of Errol Morris’ quirky classic, “Vernon, Florida,” complete with wild stories and funny moments that earned laughs from the early morning crowd, but as the movie goes on, it extends beyond regional characters and eccentricities to a deeper look at the role of tough guy culture, cyclical trauma, and what healing later in life may look like.
Filled with stunning nature photography of windswept coastlines, deer traipsing through powdery snow, and many close-ups of lobsters, “Bucks Harbor” immerses viewers in small-town life in Maine, showing the muddy drudgery of clam-digging, the perils of lobster fishing, and the hardscrabble life many families have had to make for themselves. Men show off their collection of roadkill pelts, regale the audience with stories of taking down a state trooper by the balls and running from the law, and remember relatives lost at sea.
As they share their stories, we get to know them; they show different sides of themselves: one had artistic aspirations when he was younger, and his creativity still manifests today, another enjoys dressing in feminine clothes for online fans, and another is trying to model better parenting for his two boys as they learn the family business. Some wounds may never heal, but in their own quiet way, these men are redefining what masculinity means to them.
Even lobsters become vulnerable when they shed their skin, and Muller leans into that concept and visual metaphor as the men’s stories grow more introspective, showing a lobster emerging anew from its old husk. He crafts a quilt from the men’s stories, interweaving them with shots of their environment and their hopes for the future. “Bucks Harbor” feels intimate and slightly unfiltered, but it retains a sense of rugged beauty as the men grow from their experiences.
Questioning the norms and expectations of a place and culture is also at the heart of Leah Galant’s thought-provoking film “Landscapes of Memory.” Celebrating its world premiere at this year’s True/False, Galant’s film moves between her home in the States as she reflects on her family’s history and where her father is dying of ALS, and out in Germany, where she questions the way the country remembers the Holocaust.
Galant begins her story in the year following the pandemic, asking her ailing father about his thoughts on her upcoming trek to Germany and his memories of their family, including his grandfather, who survived the Holocaust. Once in Berlin, Galant takes her camera to many of the city’s Holocaust memorials, into conferences, and out to concentration camps, to get a sense of the country’s work on memory culture, but remarks that, as a Jewish American, it felt strange to be surrounded by tributes to Jewish death.
The longer she stays in Germany, she observes Germany’s far-right party weaponizing Holocaust memorials to stoke nationalist furor and how the efforts to criminalize antisemitism have led to the rise of censorship of Palestinian protestors. This makes even the act of waving the Palestinian flag a crime.
“Landscapes of Memory” is a delicate work, balancing several emotional issues at once. It is about grief and action; not forgetting the past, but also a call to not use it to oppress people in the present. Galant shares the camera’s focus with other activists working in this space—including historian Johannes, whose grandfather was involved with the Nazi party; Elias, the descendant of a Holocaust survivor and an artist also questioning the concept of memory culture; and Michael, a Palestinian artist increasingly frustrated by the way his community is under siege in Germany and in Gaza.
In one poignant scene, Michael marvels at a wall at a concentration camp, one that reminds him of the walls back home that keep Israelis and Palestinians separated. “There’s no competition in human suffering,” he says mournfully, wishing for the end of all walls like this one. “If our memories don’t change us, what’s the point of remembering?” Galant asks. In her brief but powerful film, she also leaves us with much to think about and discuss.
