Minier‘s Hometown News Site

How do you revisit a work that already reshaped how history is told without diminishing its impact on the world? THE HELL OF AUSCHWITZ: MAUS BY ART SPIEGELMAN approaches this challenge carefully, refusing to position itself as a definitive statement on Maus and instead framing the graphic novel as a living object that continues to provoke, educate, and agitate select people decades after its publication.

What happens when a system designed to shape young minds becomes a hunting ground instead? TEACHER’S PET takes a premise that feels uncomfortably plausible and refuses to treat it as a metaphor or exaggeration. Writer/director Noam Kroll’s psychological thriller frames the academic environment not as a refuge, but as a system built on trust, authority, and access. These very conditions make it vulnerable to exploitation.

What happens to a sense of self when every hour of the day becomes organized around keeping another human alive? REMOVAL OF THE EYE begins from that muted panic, not as a conceptual exercise, but as lived reality, captured in real time by filmmakers Artemis Shaw and Prashanth Kamalakanthan as they document the first year of parenthood without the comfort of distance or hindsight. This isn’t a film about learning lessons or arriving with an understanding of clarity. It’s about survival, and the fragile hope that meaning will emerge once the exhaustion lifts.

What happens when permission becomes emotional leverage? BIGHT, with that question hanging in the air, spells out its consequences, positioning itself not as provocation but as an uncomfortable examination of how easily desire can be weaponized when boundaries are treated as suggestions rather than safeguards.

What happens when doing the right thing for your child means reopening wounds you never fully processed yourself? JIMPA places the core of its story around that uneasy question, placing a mother, her nonbinary teenager, and her aging gay father in the same emotional sphere and refusing to let any of them escape without consequence. Rather than building toward a single answer, director/co-writer Sophie Hyde’s deeply personal film settles into the discomfort of competing truths, asking how love, autonomy, and responsibility coexist when family history refuses to stay quiet.

What happens when an explicit phenomenon is filtered through the mechanism of a major Hollywood studio, flattened into a palatable fantasy, and then asked to carry the weight of an entire culture’s unresolved hang-ups about sex, power, and desire? That question defines FIFTY SHADES: 3-MOVIE COLLECTION.

What does immortality look like when it no longer feels like power? NADJA opens inside that question and never allows the audience to escape it. Michael Almereyda’s 1994 vampire film doesn’t treat eternal life as myth, but as a condition shaped by boredom, longing, and misdirected need. Seen now in its newly restored Director’s Cut, the film feels less like an artifact and more like a transmission from a moment when American independent cinema briefly allowed genre to fracture into something personal.

What does it say about modern ‘courtship’ when intimacy becomes a test of endurance rather than connection? LURE doesn’t flirt with that question; it drags it into the open and spills blood around it. Oliver Cox’s feature debut is a deliberately confrontational horror film, one that takes the structure of reality dating television ala THE BACHELORETTE and strips it of any pretense of romance, revealing the transactional cruelty lurking just beneath the surface.

What happens when a character built for laughter is asked to carry the weight of years that passed without an audience? AÍDA Y VUELTA answers that question without flinching. Rather than presenting itself as a victory lap or a nostalgia grab, Paco León’s film approaches its legacy head-on, acknowledging both the affection people still feel for these characters and the realities that time, grief, and economic pressure impose, whether anyone is watching or not.

What do we owe the people we used to be, and how much of that debt is still unpaid decades later? EVERYTHING FUN YOU COULD POSSIBLY DO IN ALEDO, ILLINOIS builds its entire identity around that question, then refuses to answer it with cynicism, irony, or exaggerated quirk. Instead, it opts for something rarer and riskier in contemporary indie comedy: sincerity without apology. There’s heart, a lot of heart here in this film, and it's clear from start to finish!

What happens when a film can’t decide what kind of movie it wants to be, and how much does that indecision matter when the heart and costumes absolutely nail it? DOCTOR PLAGUE raises that question almost immediately, then proceeds to circle it for the remainder of its runtime without ever landing on an answer.

How do you dramatize the birth of a police force while confronting the corruption it was created to challenge? SPECIAL UNIT – THE FIRST MURDER tackles that question head-on, positioning itself not simply as a period crime thriller but as a foundational myth shaped by compromise, ambition, and institutional rot. Christoffer Boe’s reimagining of Rejseholdet’s (an actual elite police unit in Denmark tasked with assisting local police in solving serious, complex crimes across the country) origins isn’t concerned with nostalgia or comfort; it’s about the uneasy reality of power forming under pressure.

Why do dinosaurs endure when so many other childhood fascinations fade with age? WHY DINOSAURS? doesn’t treat that question as a rhetorical hook; it treats it as a genuine mystery worth unpacking from every angle. From the outset, the film makes it clear that this isn’t a traditional nature documentary concerned with extinction events or anatomical breakdowns. Instead, it positions dinosaurs as a shared cultural language, one that bridges science, imagination, nostalgia, and identity across generations.

How much tension does a murder mystery really need if the cast is good enough? DEATH ON THE NILE answers that question with a kind of confidence that feels almost rebellious by modern standards. Rather than leaning hard on suspense or dread, the film treats murder as an excuse for character, atmosphere, and theatrical indulgence. It isn’t in a hurry to disturb you, and it isn’t particularly interested in urgency. What it offers instead is a carefully staged social exercise where everyone looks guilty and extraordinary, and the pleasure comes from watching the pieces move rather than from fearing where they’ll land.

What does it mean to confront your own mortality when you can’t even come to terms with your day-to-day life? ANDRÉ IS AN IDIOT opens with that question hanging in the air, not as a philosophical exercise, but as a practical problem its subject insists on solving out loud. From the first moments, a scene that you’ll never forget, the film lets you see who André is. The film establishes its core narrative early on. This is a documentary about dying, but it is not interested in reverence, restraint, or distance. Instead, it’s about agency; specifically, what agency looks like when it’s slipping away and the only thing left to control is how you show up.

What do you do when adulthood shows up before you’re ready and doesn’t bother knocking? MUSTARD MAN opens on that question and never even wants to pretend to give you all the answers, which turns out to be one of its strengths without question. This is a film less interested in milestones than in drift, less focused on triumph than on the space between adolescence and something permanent. The film is a coming-of-age story that offers the audience a chance to feel the experience rather than just watch it on camera.

What does it mean to capture a moment that history itself later refuses to honor? THE LONG WAY HOME: REMASTERED AND EXPANDED arrives less as a rediscovered relic than as a time capsule reopened. Originally released in 1989 and long unavailable, Michael Apted’s documentary about Russian rock icon Boris Grebenshchikov returns with a new restoration and an added epilogue that reframes everything that came before. What once played as an optimistic portrait of cultural exchange now carries the weight of lost possibility.

What does it mean to hold a family together when history has already pulled it apart? Set in 1970s Virginia, BIRDIE places its emotion squarely on the shoulders of a sixteen-year-old Nigerian refugee navigating the aftermath of the Biafran War (Nigerian Civil War). Writer/director Praise Odigie Paige approaches this moment not as a history lesson or a chronicle on trauma, but as a deep coming-of-age story shaped by absence, restraint, and longing. The result is a short film that feels both carefully composed and emotionally intimate, less interested in dramatic escalation than in the slow accumulation of unspoken tension.

How long can grief survive before it turns into resolve? PIKE RIVER doesn’t rush toward that question; it sits with it, returning again and again to the space where mourning and anger overlap. Rather than framing the 2010 mining disaster as a singular tragedy with a singular emotional arc, director Robert Sarkies and writer Fiona Samuel treat it as an ongoing open wound, one that reshapes lives not through shock, but through attrition. The film’s power comes from its refusal to simplify that process.

What happens when a film has all the pieces of a compelling sci-fi genre story but never quite figures out how to assemble them? WORLDBREAKER opens with a premise that feels deliberately pared down: a father and daughter living in isolation after a global catastrophe, training for a “threat”. Directed by Brad Anderson, whose past work has shown an aptitude for psychological tension and claustrophobic dread, the film aims to blend post-apocalyptic survival with an intimate coming-of-age arc. The ambition is clear; the follow-through is less consistent.

What happens when curiosity isn’t driven by wonder or fear, but by boredom and ego instead? TIM TRAVERS AND THE TIME TRAVELER’S PARADOX opens with that question baked directly into the core idea of its story, and it wastes no time making clear that this isn’t a tale about saving the world, fixing the past, or learning some noble lesson about responsibility. This is a film about a deeply unpleasant man who decides the laws of time exist solely to amuse him, and then doubles down on that belief until the universe quite literally fractures under the weight of his self-importance.

What does intimacy look like when romance and sex stop meaning the same thing? PAYING FOR IT doesn’t pose that question as a provocation; it treats it as an inevitability. Set in the late 1990s, the film approaches non-monogamy, sex work, and emotional distance with a level of candor that feels rare, especially in a culture still trained to frame love as something that must follow a prescribed path to be considered valid.

What happens when a horror film wants to question religious trauma but refuses to weaponize fear in service of that goal? INHABITANTS opens with a promising premise, pairing domestic unease with spiritual guilt, and initially suggests a slow-burning examination of belief systems colliding under supernatural pressure. On paper, that approach makes sense; religious horror has always thrived on conflict. In practice, though, the film rarely pushes beyond suggestion, settling into a muted exploration that drains tension rather than cultivating it.

What happens when the institutions meant to protect truth decide that truth itself has become inconvenient? (sound familiar?) ILLUSTROUS CORPSES opens with that question hanging heavy in the air, and it never lets the audience forget it. From its earliest moments, Francesco Rosi’s film makes clear that this isn’t a mystery interested in easy answers or comforting resolutions. It’s a procedural that treats procedure as theater, and a thriller that understands the most frightening forces are rarely the ones you expect or the most visible villains.

What line do you cross when survival stops feeling optional? KAISHAKU plants that question at its core and refuses to let it go, using supernatural horror not as an escape from reality, but as a pressure chamber that magnifies every ethical crack already present in its characters. The film makes clear it’s not interested in shock-driven horror or easy moral binaries. Instead, it studies the quiet devastation of compromise and asks what kind of damage lingers when a choice is technically consensual but spiritually corrosive.