Category Archives: Movies

The Devil Still Wears Prada. The Plot, Unfortunately, Shows Its Seams.

Twenty years later, Miranda Priestly is still formidable. I’m less convinced about the story built around her.

I caught The Devil Wears Prada 2 recently on JioHotstar.

Maybe that was the right way to watch it.

No opening-weekend hype. No need to immediately decide whether a sequel arriving two decades later had justified its existence. Just the curiosity of meeting some very familiar characters again.

And, if I am being truthful, one character in particular.

I wanted Miranda Priestly back.

Not a softened Miranda. Not a more understanding Miranda shaped by two decades of changing workplace culture.

I wanted the intimidating, immaculately controlled Miranda who could ruin somebody’s day by barely changing her tone.

On that count, the movie delivers.

Miranda is still Miranda

Meryl Streep slips back into Miranda Priestly almost too easily.

The pauses still work. The looks still work. The voice still works.

Most importantly, Streep remembers what made Miranda such a terrific character in the first place: she never needs to demonstrate power. Everyone around her demonstrates it for her.

And yes, I rather enjoyed seeing badass Miranda again.

One of her sharper lines in the sequel is:

“You’re not a visionary. You’re a vendor.”

That is classic Miranda. No speech. No elaborate insult. Seven words and somebody’s self-esteem has left the building.

And, of course:

“That’s all.”

Some lines simply survive their movies.

The problem is that while Miranda appears completely effortless, the plot around her often feels exactly the opposite.

I could see the writers arranging the pieces

Twenty years have passed.

Andy Sachs is no longer the unsure young assistant entering a world she doesn’t understand. Emily has moved on. Nigel has his own journey. The fashion and publishing industries themselves have changed enormously.

There is actually a very good reason for a sequel to exist here.

Traditional magazines are no longer operating from the position of cultural dominance they enjoyed when the first movie came out. Audiences have fragmented. Advertising has shifted. Influence has moved elsewhere.

That could have been the movie.

Instead, I often felt the writers first decided they wanted Miranda, Andy, Emily and Nigel back in each other’s lives, and then worked backwards to create reasons for it.

Characters need to meet, so circumstances emerge.

Old tensions need to return, so situations are constructed to bring them back.

Andy needs to re-enter Miranda’s universe, so the screenplay finds a route to get her there.

None of it is impossible.

It just feels a bit forced.

And at times, contrived.

That was my biggest issue with the movie.

But nostalgia works

The funny thing is, I didn’t mind all that much while these characters were actually on screen.

There is genuine pleasure in seeing them again.

Anne Hathaway plays Andy as someone who has clearly lived a life since we last saw her. Stanley Tucci remains instantly watchable. And Emily Blunt gets some of the movie’s most enjoyable moments.

Emily probably gets the most quotable line too:

“May the bridges I burn light my way.”

Perfectly Emily.

The sequel also knows exactly how much affection audiences have for these characters.

Perhaps a little too well.

There are callbacks, familiar rhythms and scenes designed to make us think:

Ah, yes. I remember this.

And most of the time, it works.

I smiled.

But occasionally I became aware that I was smiling because the movie was reminding me of something I had already loved, rather than giving me something equally memorable now.

That is the danger with sequels like this.

The first movie had to make us care.

The second one already knows that we do.

The part I wanted more of

The most interesting aspect of The Devil Wears Prada 2 for me was not the relationships or the nostalgia.

It was the changing media business.

The original movie showed Runway as an institution at the height of its power. Miranda was formidable partly because Runway itself mattered enormously.

The sequel is set in a very different world.

And that raises a much more interesting question:

What happens to powerful people when the institutions that created their power start losing relevance?

That is where Miranda becomes fascinating again.

She may still dominate a room, but does the room itself matter as much as it once did?

For someone who has spent years around media and digital businesses, I found myself wanting the film to go much deeper into that tension.

Magazines once decided what mattered.

Now influence flows through creators, platforms, algorithms, communities and fragmented audiences.

So what does somebody like Miranda do when cultural gatekeeping itself is changing?

That, to me, was the sequel hiding inside the sequel.

I would happily have traded some of the manufactured plot complications for more of that.

So, did I like it?

Yes.

But with reservations.

It is stylish, funny and entertaining enough.

The cast still has chemistry. The fashion world remains fun to revisit. And whenever Meryl Streep appears, the movie immediately becomes more interesting.

The problem is that I could sometimes see the machinery underneath the story.

The original Devil Wears Prada felt like a strong story that happened to give us unforgettable characters.

This one occasionally feels like the filmmakers first decided to bring back unforgettable characters and then went looking for a story.

Fortunately, they remain very good company.

And Miranda Priestly?

Still intimidating.

Still funny.

Still able to make everyone around her look slightly nervous without appearing to do anything at all.

I enjoyed seeing her again.

I just wish the plot had relaxed a little and allowed her—and the changing world around her—to do more of the work.

My rating: 3.5/5

Good to see them again.

Very good to see her again.

That’s all.

Territory on Netflix: The Gripping Aussie Neo-Western That Deserved a Second Season

If you’ve been missing the epic ranch drama, family power struggles, and sweeping landscapes of Yellowstone, Netflix delivered a worthy Australian counterpart in late 2024 — only to cancel it after just one season.

Territory is a six-episode neo-Western drama that combines Succession-style family dysfunction with outback grit, Indigenous land perspectives, and high-stakes cattle station politics. It was a critical success and a strong performer in its home market, yet Netflix pulled the plug in February 2025.

Here’s everything you need to know — the full story, cast, reception, why it was canceled, and my honest review.

What Is Territory About?

The series follows the powerful Lawson family, owners of Marianne Station — the largest cattle station in the world, located in Australia’s remote Northern Territory.

When the favored son and heir, Daniel, dies in a suspicious riding accident, the family empire is thrown into chaos. Patriarch Colin Lawson shocks everyone by naming his troubled grandson Marshall as the new heir instead of his alcoholic son Graham.

What follows is a brutal succession battle involving:

  • Rival cattle barons
  • Ruthless gangsters
  • Billionaire mining interests
  • Aboriginal elders and traditional landowners

The show explores themes of legacy, betrayal, masculinity, land rights, and what it truly means to control “territory” in modern Australia.

All six episodes dropped on October 24, 2024, and it quickly became one of Netflix’s most talked-about new releases.

The Cast & Production

Main Cast:

  • Anna Torv as Emily Lawson — the strong, capable wife of Graham
  • Robert Taylor as Colin Lawson — the tough, old-school patriarch
  • Michael Dorman as Graham Lawson — the troubled elder son
  • Sam Corlett as Marshall Lawson — the rebellious grandson and new heir
  • Philippa Northeast as Susie Lawson
  • Clarence Ryan as Nolan Brannock — standout Aboriginal stockman
  • Supporting players include Jay Ryan, Sara Wiseman, and Hamilton Morris

Production highlights:

  • Directed entirely by Greg McLean
  • Created by Ben Davies and Timothy Lee
  • Filmed on location in Kakadu National Park and real cattle stations in the Northern Territory
  • One of the biggest Australian productions Netflix has ever backed locally

The show looks incredible — the vast red dirt landscapes, dramatic skies, and authentic cattle station details are a major highlight.

Reception & Reviews

Critics were mostly impressed:

  • Rotten Tomatoes: 87% (based on 15 reviews)
  • Metacritic: 71/100 (“Generally Favorable”)
  • IMDb: Around 6.8–7.1/10

Standout critic quotes:

“A rollicking Aussie drama… a sensationally heady mix.”
Luke Buckmaster, The Guardian (4/5 stars)

“Does better than Yellowstone in its attempts at weaving the Native perspective into the storytelling.”
Daniel Fienberg, The Hollywood Reporter

The consensus praised the stunning visuals, strong ensemble cast, addictive family drama, and the show’s distinctive Australian voice. Some critics noted it leans into soapy territory and that the first episode can feel a bit cluttered with characters.

Audience reactions were more mixed — many loved the outback spectacle and binge-worthiness, while others found it too slow or overly dramatic.

Why Did Netflix Cancel Territory?

Despite positive reviews and solid initial numbers, Netflix announced in February 2025 that there would be no Season 2.

Key facts:

  • The show reached #2 on Netflix’s Global Top 10 English TV shows and hit the Top 10 in 74 countries.
  • It generated 87.1 million viewing hours (roughly 15 million views) and spent three weeks in the global Top 10.
  • It performed especially well in Australia and New Zealand.
  • It ended on a major cliffhanger.

Why it was canceled: Netflix didn’t give a detailed explanation. Industry reports pointed to production timing and scheduling issues — specifically concerns that a second season couldn’t be delivered quickly enough to maintain audience momentum. It was considered Netflix ANZ’s biggest returnable project, but global viewership apparently didn’t meet the streamer’s high renewal bar.

Netflix’s statement was polite but final, thanking the cast and crew while saying they hoped to work with them again.

My Review: What Worked & What Didn’t

What I loved:

  • The cinematography and locations are genuinely breathtaking. The Australian outback has never looked this cinematic on TV.
  • Strong performances across the board — Anna Torv brings quiet steel, Robert Taylor is perfectly cast as the intimidating patriarch, and Clarence Ryan is a standout.
  • It handles Indigenous perspectives and land rights with more nuance than most Yellowstone-style shows.
  • The family power struggles and betrayals are genuinely addictive once the story kicks into gear.

What didn’t quite work:

  • The first episode throws a lot of characters and subplots at you very quickly.
  • It occasionally leans too hard into soap-opera territory (dramatic confrontations, sudden twists).
  • Some supporting characters and storylines feel underdeveloped.

Overall verdict:
7.5/10 — A very watchable, visually stunning piece of Australian prestige television. It’s not perfect, and it wears its Yellowstone + Succession influences on its sleeve, but it carves out its own identity thanks to the authentic setting and strong cast.

It’s the kind of show that rewards binge-watching and leaves you wanting more — which makes the cancellation especially frustrating.

Should You Watch Territory?

Yes — especially if you enjoy:

  • Yellowstone
  • Succession
  • Australian dramas with strong sense of place
  • Family sagas with political and cultural layers

It’s only six episodes, so it’s an easy, satisfying watch even knowing there won’t be a second season.

Have you watched Territory yet? What did you think of the ending and the cancellation? Let me know in the comments!


Sources: Netflix, Wikipedia, Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, The Guardian, The Hollywood Reporter, C21 Media, What’s on Netflix.

When Old Friends Come to Collect: A Review of The Rip(2026)

Good Will Hunting gave us two young men from South Boston with everything to prove. The Rip gives us the same two men — thirty years later, wiser, more weathered, and considerably more dangerous — with everything to lose.


image by author with Claude.ai

There is a particular kind of on-screen chemistry that cannot be manufactured. You can cast two talented actors, give them a sharp script and a gifted director, and sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn’t, and the difference is almost impossible to explain. What Matt Damon and Ben Affleck have had since that Cambridge apartment where they wrote Good Will Hunting is something rarer — a friendship so lived-in, so thoroughly tested by time and fame and failure and reinvention, that when the camera finds them together, you are not watching two actors play partners. You are watching two men who actually know each other, and that knowledge charges every scene they share.

The Rip — directed by Joe Carnahan and now streaming on Netflix — understands this. It is not a complicated film. It does not need to be. Its primary asset is that chemistry, and it has the intelligence to trust it.


What the Film Is

Damon plays Lieutenant Dane Dumars, and Affleck plays Detective Sergeant J.D. Byrne — partners in a Miami-Dade narcotics unit that works what they call “the dope game,” seizing cash from drug operations. When a tip about a $300,000 stash house turns out to be hiding $24 million — the kind of money that rewrites the arithmetic of a life — the team is required by law to stay and count it. The night that follows is the film.

Carnahan has spoken openly about his inspirations — SerpicoPrince of the City, and Michael Mann’s Heat are his touchstones — and you can feel all three in the film’s DNA. The moral corrosion of good institutions, the loyalty that money systematically dismantles, the way a single extraordinary circumstance reveals who a person actually is beneath the uniform and the procedure. He calls The Rip “a deeply personal” project, inspired by the real story of his friend, Miami-Dade Police Captain Chris Casiano, whose 2016 raid uncovered $20 million in a stash house.

The result is a crime film that earns its tension the old-fashioned way — through character, not spectacle.


What Works, and Why

The first two acts are close to exemplary for this genre. Carnahan establishes the claustrophobic logic of the situation with precision — the stash house becomes a pressure cooker, and as outside forces learn about the money, the trust inside the team begins its slow, almost chemical dissolution. Who made the call? Who benefits? Who is already compromised? These are not complex questions philosophically, but the film makes them feel genuinely urgent, which is a directorial achievement.

Damon, playing the more controlled of the two leads, does what he has always done best — he internalizes. Dumars is a man with a secret, and Damon carries that secret the way a good poker player carries a bad hand: absolutely still, slightly too careful, giving nothing away while giving you just enough to suspect. Affleck, as Byrne, gets to be the more ebullient and readable of the two — open, instinctive, fiercely loyal — and it is the contrast between them that generates most of the film’s dramatic heat. Affleck told interviewers that Damon “is so understated, so real and so honest — it’s the opposite of a showy performance.” He is right, and watching the two of them work in the same frame, you see what thirty years of genuine friendship does to a screen partnership. They don’t perform trust. They don’t perform doubt either. They simply are two men navigating both.

The supporting cast earns its place. Steven Yeun brings quiet menace to a role that could have been a stock antagonist. Kyle Chandler, playing a DEA agent, operates in his natural register — contained authority that might tip either way. Teyana Taylor as Detective Baptiste gets the film’s sharpest subordinate arc.


Where It Stumbles

The third act is where The Rip loosens its grip. The film has spent ninety minutes carefully building psychological pressure, and then it resolves that pressure with action set pieces that feel borrowed from a different, noisier film. The climax is competent but generic — the kind of finale that satisfies the contractual requirements of the thriller genre without satisfying the specific emotional promise this particular story has made to its audience. Several reviewers noted this, and they are not wrong.

There is also a Netflix fingerprint on the whole enterprise that is worth naming. Damon himself, in an interview, described how streaming viewing habits shaped the edit — noting that Netflix wanted the plot reiterated “three or four times in the dialogue because people are on their phone while they’re watching” — a candid window into how the platform quietly influences the craft. You can occasionally feel it in scenes that explain what a sharper edit would have trusted the audience to understand.

But here is the thing about crime films: you forgive a weak third act more readily than in almost any other genre, because the pleasure is so much in the journey. The Rip is a film you lean into from its opening sequence and remain leaned in for most of its runtime, and that is not a small achievement.


The Bigger Picture

What is most interesting about The Rip is what it represents beyond the film itself. Damon and Affleck founded Artists Equity in 2022 precisely to create a different kind of production model — one where the people who make the film share in its success. The deal they negotiated with Netflix for The Rip includes a profit-sharing bonus for all 1,200 crew members if the film hits performance benchmarks in its first 90 days. It debuted at number one on Netflix globally and stayed there. In its first week alone, it suggested it might join the all-time most-watched list.

That is not just a box office story. It is a statement about what the industry might look like if the people who write the scripts, light the sets, and mix the sound were included in the upside. Two men who came from nothing in Cambridge, Massachusetts, won an Oscar together at twenty-something, built parallel careers across three decades, and are now trying to change how the economics of filmmaking actually work — that story is at least as interesting as anything in The Ripitself.


Verdict

The Rip is not trying to be Heat. It knows it isn’t Heat. What it is trying to be is a well-made, grown-up crime thriller that takes its characters seriously and trusts the chemistry of its two leads to carry the weight — and on those terms, it succeeds comfortably. The first two acts are taut, intelligent and genuinely tense. The third act trades depth for noise. The film as a whole is exactly what it promises: a good evening’s watch with two men who know each other the way only time can teach.

There is a line in Good Will Hunting where Will tells Sean, “You’re the only one who knows what I’m going through.” Will Hunting was speaking about isolation. Dane Dumars and J.D. Byrne, standing in a Miami stash house with $24 million between them and every reason in the world to stop trusting each other, are speaking about something harder — the choice to remain loyal when loyalty is expensive.

The Rip is, at its best, a film about that choice. Go watch it.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

Streaming now on Netflix.


Lakshmi Narayana is the founder of Directing Business Consulting and Advisory and author of “Directing Business: Movies and Management Lessons for Dreamers.” He writes at the intersection of cinema, leadership, and the art of human judgment. Find him at lakshonline.com