Den of Geek, 589 8th Avenue, 20th Floor, New York, NY (2026)

01/05/2026

Given that Charlie Cox‘s work as Matt Murdock on Daredevil: Born Again, as well as Robert Pattinson‘s turn as Bruce Wayne in The Batman, it might be easy to understand why Ben Affleck recently announced that he’s done with the superhero genre. Affleck’s two outings in the world of tights and capes, in 2003’s Daredevil and later the Zack Snyder 2010s era of the DC Universe, were largely met with critical and audience division.

Anyone just focusing on Daredevil or Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice might therefore think that Affleck’s retirement from superheroes is no great loss. That’s especially true in light of Affleck’s undeniably great performances outside the genre, such as the insincere, possible wife-killer in Gone Girl or as an alcoholic basketball coach in The Way Back. Affleck excels at playing bone deep exhaustion and is able to retain an innate likability and humor even when he’s trying hard to be indifferent.

Granted, those skills don’t immediately lend themselves to superhero stories, with their emphasis on power and victory. However, there are several roles about a hero in retirement, his best days behind him, that would have benefitted immensely from what Affleck brings to the screen. One might point out that Affleck came near it, too, in the Snyderverse, which drew heavily from The Dark Knight Returns and Kingdom Come. But both of those are, ultimately, about Batman dragging his battered body back into the fight, and always coming out victorious. He is a traditional hero once again.

No, the better Affleck Batman role would ask him to stay out of the fight, to grouch from the sidelines while still charming audiences. The superhero role he might have always been meant to play was as Bruce Wayne in Batman Beyond.

01/05/2026

Miles Teller doesn’t name any names, but it’s not hard to figure out who he’s referring to.

Director Josh Trank famously refused to support the movie back when it released in the summer of 2015, and even took to Twitter to bash the finished product. In a now-deleted tweet, Trank claims that he “had a fantastic version of [the movie]” that “would’ve received great reviews,” hinting that the studio took the project away from him. “You’ll probably never see it. That’s reality though.”

Trank’s problems with the movie don’t just extend to its release. Hired by Fox off his successful found footage superhero film Chronicle, Trank had a darker take on the material than one usually associates with the Fantastic Four. Trank described his version as a David Cronenberg-inspired body horror movie, specifically citing Scanners and The Fly as influences. For his part, screenwriter Jeremy Slater imagined something more faithful to the comics, with the Fantasticar, Galactus, and Dr. Doom becoming the Herald of Galactus.

While Slater, who would go on to work on Moon Knight for the MCU, had a vision closer to what would be in The Fantastic Four: First Steps, Trank’s approach is clearly driving the 2015 movie. Most of the film finds the quartet horrified by what they’ve become, and the stand-out scene—in which Doom (Toby Kebbell) walks down a hallway and explodes heads with his telekinetic powers—is directly taken from Scanners.

Yet, there’s no question that the finished movie is unsatisfactory, in part because it feels like one short first act, a long second act, and no proper finale. And given similar complaints about studio interference launched by Zack Snyder and David Ayer at the time, Trank certainly isn’t alone in claiming his superhero vision was taken from him.

Whatever the reason, Teller isn’t too worried about dwelling on what went wrong, and instead turns his attention toward those who tried to make it work. “The casting, I thought, was spectacular,” he said, referring to co-stars Bell, Michael B. Jordan, and Kate Mara. “I love all those actors.” And given the current MCU’s tendency to bring back stars from even little-loved projects (see: Chris Evans as Johnny Storm in Deadpool & Wolverine), maybe Teller can reunite with those actors again in a future project. Then, maybe the film’s legacy will be more than a silly meme.

01/04/2026

Harrison Ford has only been nominated for an Oscar once in his career. It’s a strange thing to remember when considering one of the most prolific and defining movie stars of his generation.

This is the man who was Indiana Jones, Han Solo, and Rick Deckard, to name but a few. For many he also remains the best Jack Ryan, and emanates a world-weary grumpiness that is like a blast from the Humphrey Bogart past—a comparison that Steven Spielberg and Sydney Po***ck both invited by casting Ford in Bogie-inspired roles.

Yet unlike Bogart, who won an Oscar for The African Queen and was nominated on two other occasions, Ford only garnered the Academy’s attention once, and it was for a superb if regrettably less-than-fully-appreciated thriller, which released 40 years ago this month: Peter Weir’s Witness.

As a sophisticated and surprisingly economical thriller with a hard R-rating and a downbeat ending, Witness is a textbook definition of the type of movie they don’t make anymore. It’s a medium-budgeted studio programmer for adults that somehow cultivated enough class and humanity to be remembered by the Academy almost a full year later after its release. In addition to Ford getting a Best Actor nomination, Witness was also nominated for Best Picture, Director, and Cinematography—albeit the only award it won was for Best Original Screenplay, courtesy of William Kelley, Pamela Wallace, and Earl W. Wallace.

The screenplay in Witness is excellent, yet it is the quiet authenticity cradled by the film’s Australian director, and his ability to recognize that same stoic naturalism in one of the 1980s’ biggest movie stars, which made Witness such a striking film, as well as one of the most important in Ford’s career.

Witness is nominally a thriller, but in practice it’s a doomed romance. And the nature of that ruination is written entirely in Ford’s performance and its equal measures of sensitivity and wrath, intelligence and barbarism. It was a turn worthy of an Oscar nomination. Forty years later, it remains a gem in Ford’s catalog, and perhaps an indictment of the Academy since more of its ilk, including from this star, have gone so unrecognized.

01/04/2026

might center around Will Arnett and Laura Dern’s characters, but there’s two other people who play a vital role in the film: Christine Ebersole and Ciarán Hinds.

Den of Geek sat down with Will and Laura to discuss why working with these two iconic actors was a dream come true.

Tap the link in comments to watch the full interview.

01/04/2026

Vertical lines and black and white stripes. Sullen expressions and pallid skin tones. Disheveled hair and often handcrafted special effects.

There are certain staples and motifs that recur in the works of Tim Burton. So much so that 40 years after his directorial career began, Burton’s films remain instantly recognizable and a good gateway to introducing younger audiences to the concept of auteur theory.

The singularity of Burton’s work has also earned its share of critics and detractors; those who see the repetition of his muses and Gothic fixations as cause for caricature. And to be sure, the one-time Hollywood outsider and Disney outcast spent so much time nestled in the heart of the industry’s commercialized bosom that it seemed to influence a decline in Burton’s later 21st century output. It was a trend so undeniable that even several of the director’s most recent films have seemed to comment on this in the cases of Dumbo and Beetlejuice Beetlejuice.

Nonetheless, Burton remains an original—an unmistakable talent and voice who’s left a major impact on film culture that crosses generations, genres, and even decades of fashion. Burton’s earned his place in cinema history, and we’re taking the time to look at some of his greatest and worst contributions. (*Editor’s Note: This list will only pertain to feature-length movies Burton directed or co-directed. So no A Nightmare Before Christmas or the “Frankenweenie” and “Vincent” shorts.)

01/04/2026

While we’re all wringing our hands about the identity of the next James Bond, a video has resurfaced online showing a potential 007 of the past.

The clip from 2006 shows Henry Cavill running through lines from GoldenEye as part of a screen test for Casino Royale.

Cavill’s lines recreate the first meeting between Bond, then played by Pierce Brosnan, and the villain Xenia Onatopp, originally portrayed by Famke Janssen, with her lines delivered by an unidentified off-screen performer in the clip. Cavill puts a slightly different spin on each of his readings, sometimes hitting a line with more menace, and sometimes playing up the flirtation when Bond says he likes “a woman who pulls rank.”

But the most notable thing about Cavill’s delivery is his quietness, almost softness. The then-22-year-old actor seems to whisper his lines and arch his eyes with interest while listening to Xenia speak. Even when he delivers Bond’s signature veiled threats and double-entendres, there’s a surprising earnestness we’ve never before seen in 007.

01/04/2026

I was a latecomer to zombie films, mostly out of terror, but also because there just weren’t many memorable zombie movies coming out in the late ’90s. Believe it or not, besides George A. Romero’s Dead films, which I would discover a little while after my first viewing of Zack Snyder’s 2004 Dawn of the Dead remake, zombie movies and TV shows (non-existent in the ’90s) weren’t the cash cows they are today.

28 Days Later‘s Rage-infected psychopaths are largely responsible for revitalizing this gruesome subgenre, thanks to director Danny Boyle and writer Alex Garland’s vision. These two filmmakers saw potential in this corner of cinema that had yet to be unlocked. While Romero, the father of the modern zombie film, used the apocalypse to comment on society’s greed and prejudices, Boyle and Garland discovered more personal stories. How do you find the will to survive in a world where you might be forced to watch your loved ones die, try to kill you, or force you to kill them? That, coupled with the manic speed of Boyle and Garland’s Rage zombies, is essentially what Snyder tried to inject into his remake of Romero’s masterpiece.

Snyder’s Dawn of the Dead isn’t as much a remake as it is a re-imagining of the original that doesn’t quite go for the thinly-veiled criticism of American consumerism that is Romero’s thesis. About the only resemblance to the original is the remake’s main setting (a mall), a couple of cameos, and some references to Romero’s film, such as the one you can watch above. Snyder’s Dawn of the Dead is purely an entertainment piece, full of outrageous set pieces, scary moments, and extravagant dialogue.

And it’s all the better for it, sandwiched in between 2001’s 28 Days Later and Romero’s 2005 Land of the Dead, as a fun popcorn flick, a movie that won’t make you think as much as holler at the screen. If nothing else, Snyder deserves credit for directing a critically and financially successful horror movie remake, which is no small feat. (See: 2008’s awful awful awful Day of the Dead remake, starring Nick Cannon, Mena Suvari, and Ving Rhames, to see a remake done wrong.)

All of the hallmarks of Snyder’s later career are front and center in Dawn of the Dead: the brutal storytelling, the desaturated color palette, and big action sequences. Perhaps fans would be more kind to the director if he had stuck to horror movies. His style is certainly best suited for darker ventures. One only has to look as far as the opening of the movie, which is seriously scary stuff.

01/04/2026

Like most other redos, horror movie remakes begin their journey on shaky ground.

The name recognition that often gets them made is the same recognition that leads to them being judged before anyone watches. It’s hard enough to make a good movie and get people to see it; imagine having to do so while battling the perception that your work diminishes the significance of another beloved movie?

Yet the best horror movie remakes remind us that the existence of remakes is about more than lazy studios looking for cheap cash-ins. When done well, a horror movie remake can elevate the legacy of its inspiration while carving its own path. Some do this by being totally different while others emphasize elements of the original that always deserved more love. Each should remind us that the most powerful stories are often retold and reimagined throughout the ages.

01/04/2026

Almost 25 years later, the crass comedy Shrek has scared Disney so bad that it still can't make a straightforward princess movie even in Snow White.

At the start of Snow White‘s second act, the titular princess finds herself in an enchanted wood. The dark, frightening trees around her recede, replaced by animals who approach Snow White, recognizing her as pure of heart. A bluebird floats up to the princess and lands gently upon her extended finger.

This moment, of course, comes from the movie’s primary source, the 1937 Disney animated film Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. But there’s one key difference between the 1937 depiction and the one from 2025. In 1937, Snow White (voiced by Adriana Caselotti) sings to the bird and, magically, wonderfully, the bird whistles back. In 2025, neither person nor bird sings to one another.

The lack of singing is hardly the only change between the two versions, as the 2025 movie adds a few new songs, reimagines the bland prince into a bland rogue, and continues past the true love’s kiss moment to follow Snow White (Rachel Zegler) as she retakes her kingdom from the Evil Queen (Gal Gadot).

However, the bluebird omission is notable not because of its connection to the original Snow White, but to Shrek, the 2001 CGI animated hit. In that movie, Princess Fiona (Cameron Diaz) has an encounter with a bird similar to that of the 1937 movie. But when the bird tries to keep up with the octave increases as Fiona sings, it explodes. A surprised Fiona looks over to the nest to see two eggs, leading to a match cut of those same eggs, now cracked open and sizzling on a frying pan.

It’s been almost a quarter of a century since Shrek made that joke about Snow White. But it hit the House of Mouse so hard that Disney still can’t just do a straightforward princess movie.

01/04/2026

“Armageddon.” That word, spoken by political officer Putin in the 1990 adaptation of Tom Clancy‘s The Hunt for Red October, is weighted with meaning. It’s not just that The Hunt for Red October is a Cold War thriller about the Russian and American Navies racing to find the titular nuclear sub, a conflict that might set off World War III. It’s that the delivery of the word completely changes the movie.

Up until that point, Putin (Peter Firth) and the other Russian characters—most notably, Captain Marko Ramius (Sean Connery) and his second officer Vasily Borodin (Sam Neill)—have been speaking Russian. As Putin reads from a Bible that he finds in Ramius’ quarters, the camera pushes closer and closer onto his face, reaching his mouth just as he pronounces the word “Armageddon.” The camera then reverses the push, pulling out as Arana, Connery, and the others now all speak English from here on out, albeit some with Russian accents.

It’s an incredible moment, one that makes The Hunt for Red October the gold standard for handling foreign languages in Hollywood movies

01/04/2026

Scream 3 isn't anyone's favorite movie, but Parker Posey's Jennifer is one of the franchise's best characters.

Forget “What’s your favorite scary movie?” Forget “I’ll be right back.” The defining line of the Scream franchise in this humble writer’s opinion is the one that Jennifer Jolie delivers as she gets stabbed by Ghostface: “You can’t kill me!” she shouts in disbelief. “I’m the killer in Stab 3! I’m the killer!”

Yes, that line does show up in Scream 3, easily the least loved entry in the series. Which might be why you don’t remember it. Indeed, while Scream 3 brought back director Wes Craven, it replaced screenwriter Kevin Williamson, whose snappy and self-aware dialogue was central to the first two movies’ success, with Arlington Road writer Ehren Kruger. For some, Scream 3 went on to push the metatextual elements too far, as it takes place on the set of the movie-within-a-movie Stab 3, and ups the humor to the point where Jay and Silent Bob make a cameo.

But while Scream 3 struggles to distinguish itself under all of the navel-gazing, arrogant actor Jennifer Jolie works every time thanks to a pitch-perfect performance from Parker Posey.

01/04/2026

Saturday Night Live has produced some of the finest comedic talents of the past half century, its alumni reading like a list of who’s who in contemporary American comedy. With some of its most recognizable past performers including everyone from John Belushi, Bill Murray, Adam Sandler, and Tina Fey to Chris Farley, Will Ferrell, Eddie Murphy, and Jimmy Fallon, SNL’s success is almost entirely predicated upon the talents of its foremost cast members.

With a production history dating back to 1975, SNL has cycled through literally dozens of phenomenal cast members over the last five decades. While most performers’ contributions to the show have been celebrated for one reason or another, however, a handful of former SNL players have yet to see the critical acclaim they rightfully deserve. From underappreciated Weekend Update hosts to wildly versatile impression specialists, here are some of the most ridiculously underrated comedians to ever perform on SNL.

Den of Geek

01/05/2026

01/05/2026

01/04/2026

01/04/2026

01/04/2026

01/04/2026

01/04/2026

01/04/2026

01/04/2026

01/04/2026

01/04/2026

01/04/2026

Address

Website

Alerts

Contact The Business

Shortcuts

Share