Almost seven years ago on May 23rd, 2010, the series Lost aired it’s two part finale, titled “The End Part 1” and “The End Part 2”. Like most episodes of the hugely successful show, plenty of people watched it (about 13.5 million) and plenty of people enjoyed it (the episode’s Metacritic score is a solid 74 out of 100). But if you think back to the ending of Lost, one of the most popular and influential television shows of its time, that’s not really what comes to mind, is it? Instead, thinking about the end of Lost now is more like remembering the time the golden goose of TV laid one really stinky, rotten egg. That finale sucked, didn’t it?
Otherwise, how did it end up on so many lists of the worst TV series finales of all time, or inspire reviews with titles like, “Lame ending proves Lost was a long con” and “The Lost Finale was Incredibly Dumb” The truth is that, years later, I can’t recall in much detail way all the different ways the Lost finale crushed my spirit (I do know a polar bear was left unaccounted for – not cool! (get it?), but, man, does that disappointment still sting.
Now all that unrest and butthurtness that Lost fans (myself included) felt had to go somewhere (thank god it was before attacking people on Twitter really became a sport), and most of it got directed at Lindelof. In what I chalk up to a testament to his storytelling powers, those fans had become so obsessed the show’s characters and their trajectories, with its mysteries and their answers, that no 104 minute wrap up would have ever made them happy. And Lindelof has been very public about how getting blamed for ruining the show has weighed on him, to the point where he finally decided to just stop talking about it, even though he knows there are corners of the internet where the inconsolable never will.
It might have seemed like Lindelof’s name would forever and foremost be linked to that feeling of great promise and then failure, except that three years ago he did something unexpected (I know I wasn’t sitting around thinking about what he’d do next) – he created one of the most ambitious and important television shows ever made, HBO’s The Leftovers.
If you’re not watching it (standard incredulousness here – go, watch it, what are you doing with your life etc), The Leftovers is a show based on Tom Perrotta’s book of the same name, both about an event called “The Sudden Departure” in which 2% of the world’s population (140 million people) vanish simultaneously for no apparent reason. The show deals with the aftermath for those left behind – the grief, anger, confusion and powerlessness felt by everyone left to deal with the loss of family and friends, spouses and children, with no answers or explanations offered to them by the universe, their leaders or their gods.
We’re already deep in Lost territory here, with huge mysteries and the lives up-ended by them, except in The Leftovers, the stakes are even higher – this isn’t one planeful of people, but the entire planet that was shaken by a horrific, anomalous event, and oh yeah by the way, the world may be coming to an end soon too, so there’s that. With so much riding on the final four episodes, should Leftovers fans be nervous about a repeat blunder from Lindelof? As strange as it sounds, I’m not a bit worried about getting to that finale in a few weeks and feeling that “WTF, but what ABOUT THE POLAR BEARS” feeling again.
With The Leftovers, the ending could answer every question it ever posed or not – maybe just give us the finger with an hour long episode where everyone’s really sane and happy – and it just wouldn’t matter like it did with Lost. Some important features set this show apart from Lindelof’s earlier creation, and as Robert Frost might say, those things make all the difference :
- It’s about so much more
I feel like one of the big mistakes Lindelof and ABC made early on with Lost was to play up how everything hinged on unraveling the mysteries that were planted in the first few episodes. It was all about finding clues and following leads and repeating that string of meaningless numbers till you just couldn’t do it anymore (poor Hurley). And some great storylines and themes that got sacrificed and pushed aside of all for the sake of pursuing the how and whys of the island. Setting up a show like that means the ending is bound to disappoint, unless Damon Lindelof had actually tapped in to some secret meaning of the universe. The Leftovers is a course correct for that overreach – the characters, their turbulent inner lives, take center stage, with the inexplicable event of The Sudden Departure only a backdrop (albeit an extremely important one) that works to magnify what is a ultimately a story of loss universal to every human on the planet.
- It’s been short and sweet
Lost clocked in at 121 episodes, compared to The Leftovers eventual 28. Keeping the seasons short and the series down to three seasons shows an amazing degree of restraint that most American shows just don’t have (learn from the British!) One factor that contributed to the Lost finale being a dud, was that, so were those last few seasons, in comparison to the first few novel ones. Dragging out the secrets and riddles of the plot made it feel like the magician you hired for your kid’s birthday party was stalling cause he couldn’t find the card he knows he put up his sleeve. A big part of ending things is right, is ending them when it’s time, and this way, if anything, The Leftovers will leave us wanting more, not wishing to got to the damn point already.
- It’s taught us to “Let the mystery be”
Nothing says it better than the sweet little song that plays over the gorgeous credits for Season 2. Over the course of it’s run, The Leftovers has asked why we’re here, why some of us stick around when others don’t and why we even try to bear the pain of it all. But it’s never promised us an easy answer, and so I won’t need one when the series finally comes to a close. As Iris Dement puts it (so much more beautifully than I ever could):
“Everybody’s wonderin’ what and where they they all came from
Everybody’s worryin’ ’bout where they’re gonna go
When the whole thing’s done
But no one knows for certain
And so it’s all the same to me
I think I’ll just let the mystery be”
TW: Discussions of Sexual Assault.
I did myself a favour and watched the cult classic Jennifer’s Body (which I highly recommend you do, too). Watching this clever, funny, thought-provoking movie in 2025, it is hard to believe that it was a major flop when it was released in 2009.
‘00s nostalgia spurts throughout the film. From the frosted eyeshadow to the digital cameras, it’s enough to bring a tear to a millennial’s eye. However, not everything about the film is dated. In fact Jennifer’s Body is hailed today as a modern feminist classic.
This is particularly intriguing when remembering how badly the film bombed in 2009. Looking at Rotten Tomatoes scores, Jennifer’s Body has a rather pitiful 46% critic score and an even worse 36% audience score. Was this comedy-horror simply ahead of its time? Many believe so.
In pre-#MeToo 2009, Jennifer’s Body was marketed as a fun, sexy romp aimed at straight men. Sex symbol Megan Fox in the starring role as Jennifer, fresh from her scantily-clad Transformers fame, audience thought they knew what to expect from the actress. And Fox is wrist-achingly beautiful in the film; there is no doubt about that, but many complained she remained disappointingly fully clothed. There was also the promised same-sex kiss between Fox and Amanda Seyfrie,d which was framed more as an uncomfortable, confused, and tragic scene between two childhood friends rather than sexy.
In short, Jennifer’s Body was marketed for the male gaze, even with a female writer (Diablo Cody) and director (Karyn Kusama) instead of what it is, which was a commentary about the treatment of female bodies (the clue was in the title, really).
Many have theorised that the film is essentially a rape-revenge fantasy. The premise is (spoilers!) that Jennifer is kidnapped by an indie boyband after a gig. The group’s plan is to sacrifice young Jennifer to Satan in exchange for fame (obviously). Their plan goes awry when Jennifer lies about being a virgin, when she is not in fact even a “backdoor virgin”. This little lie causes Jennifer to turn into a creature-monster-succubus-type thing. This is a clear commentary on how women are only seen as useful or worthy if their virginity is intact. Also, how the music industry sacrifices young women to the altar of male lust.
Later that night, Jennifer appears at her childhood friend Needy’s (Amanda Seyfried) home drenched in blood and covered in bruises, with a vacant stare. After this, Jennifer begins to indiscriminately kill young men from her school.
I theorise that the film is cleverly inverting the expectation of young women being targeted. Jennifer is indiscriminate in her choosing of victims. A school jock, a sensitive emo guy, and a foreign exchange student walking home alone at night. She lures them to secluded areas with the promise of sex and tears them apart until they look like “lasagne with teeth”.
With Jennifer’s murder spree terrifying the small town, its young men are warned not to go anywhere alone. Johnny Simmon’s character, Chip, is even given mace by his mother to protect him on prom night.
Jennifer’s Body cleverly inverts many of the horror movie tropes. For example, the ‘nerdy girl’, Needy is not a virgin either. Needy and her boyfriend Chip actually have regular, no-consequence sex, which is unusual for a female character in a horror movie.
This cult classic may have died on its initial release but it was resurrected by the dashboards of Tumblr and feminist blogs. Seyfried even teased the possibility of a sequel soon. Suffice to say there is definitely more to Jennifer’s Body than meets the eye!
Indian cinema has long been known for its ability to weave myth, culture, and grandeur into powerful storytelling. The latest addition to this tradition, Hanuman, directed by Prasanth Varma, is an ambitious retelling of one of India’s most beloved mythological characters. A cinematic marvel, Hanuman is a bold attempt to blend ancient epic with modern storytelling techniques, creating an experience that resonates with audiences of all ages.
At its core, Hanuman reimagines the tale of Lord Hanuman, the divine devotee of Lord Rama, known for his strength, loyalty, and courage. The movie isn’t just a retelling of traditional episodes from the Ramayana; it infuses these timeless stories with fresh perspectives, exploring themes of duty, faith, and the triumph of good over evil. While the script takes creative liberties, it stays rooted in the cultural and spiritual essence of Hanuman, making it both an engaging narrative and a respectful homage.
One of the standout features of Hanuman is its visual grandeur. The VFX team has outdone themselves, creating breathtaking battle sequences, celestial landscapes, and larger-than-life depictions of Hanuman’s legendary feats. The use of cutting-edge technology elevates the storytelling, offering audiences a visual feast that rivals global fantasy epics. The cinematography, led by seasoned artist Dasaradhi Sivendra, captures the mythological tone beautifully, blending vibrant palettes with the dark hues of conflict and sacrifice.
Teja Sajja, in the titular role, delivers a performance that is both commanding and heartfelt. His portrayal of Hanuman captures the character’s divine strength and endearing humility, making him an ideal hero. Supporting performances by Amritha Aiyer, Varalaxmi Sarathkumar, and Vinay Rai add depth to the narrative, bringing a spectrum of emotions to the screen.
Director Prasanth Varma deserves applause for his vision and execution. Tackling a subject as revered as Hanuman could have easily resulted in a cautious or overindulgent approach. Instead, Varma strikes a balance, creating a story that is both reverent and relatable. The screenplay moves at a brisk pace, though some moments, particularly the expository sequences, could have benefited from tighter editing.
The film’s music, composed by Gowrahari, Anudeep Dev, and Krishna Saurabh, is an emotional anchor, blending traditional Indian sounds with a modern orchestral touch. The background score heightens the drama and spirituality, particularly during pivotal moments like the crossing of the ocean and the climactic battle sequences.
Hanuman is a cinematic achievement that successfully reimagines a beloved figure for modern audiences. While it occasionally stumbles in pacing and exposition, these are minor flaws in an otherwise spectacular production. For fans of mythology, fantasy, and visually stunning cinema, Hanuman is a must-watch. It is a testament to Indian cinema’s ability to merge tradition and innovation, reminding us why stories of gods and heroes continue to inspire across generations.
Rating: 4.5/5
This film not only celebrates the timeless tale of Hanuman but also sets a new benchmark for mythological storytelling in Indian cinema.
Genre: Action, Adventure, Drama
Duration: 179 minutes
Director: Om Raut
Writer: Om Raut
Stars: Prabhas, Saif Ali Khan, Kriti Sanon, Sunny Singh
Rating: ★★☆☆☆ (2/5)
Netflix’s Adipurush aims to reimagine the Indian epic Ramayana in a modern cinematic style, delivering a tale of righteousness, devotion, and the eternal conflict between good and evil. Helmed by Om Raut, the film follows Raghava (Prabhas) as he embarks on a journey to rescue his wife Janaki (Kriti Sanon) from the clutches of the demon king Lankesh (Saif Ali Khan). With a narrative that spans vast landscapes and incorporates mythological grandeur, the film had immense potential but falters in its execution.
While the premise remains faithful to its legendary source, the execution feels lackluster. The screenplay struggles to balance a modern audience’s expectations with the gravitas of its traditional essence. The dialogues, often stilted, fail to evoke the emotional depth and poetic resonance required for a story of such magnitude.
Prabhas, portraying Raghava, delivers a restrained performance that lacks the heroic intensity one expects from the character. Kriti Sanon as Janaki does her best with limited material, bringing grace to her role, while Saif Ali Khan’s over-the-top portrayal of Lankesh is polarizing, leaning more into theatricality than menace. The supporting cast, including Sunny Singh, adds little to elevate the film.
One of the film’s most significant drawbacks is its visual effects. Despite the high budget, the CGI appears subpar, often detracting from the immersive experience. The underwhelming special effects undermine key battle sequences and fantastical elements, which should have been highlights of the film.
On the brighter side, the musical score by Ajay-Atul manages to shine, offering moments of grandeur and emotional heft. The film’s costume design and some set pieces are visually appealing, hinting at what could have been with more polished execution.
Adipurush is a well-intentioned attempt to bring the epic Ramayana to life for a global audience, but it stumbles in critical areas, including visual effects, pacing, and character depth. While it offers a few moments of spectacle and an engaging musical score, the overall experience feels hollow and unworthy of its mythological roots. Fans of the epic may find some moments of nostalgia, but casual viewers are likely to be left disappointed.
Adipurush is a missed opportunity to create a definitive modern retelling of an Indian classic.
The Resurrection of ‘Jennifer’s Body’
Hanuman – A Visual Spectacle and a Mythological Triumph
Indian movie review at adipush
Businessman (2012) – Movie Review
Solo leveling in India
With the tragic news of Michelle Trachtenberg’s death, we at That’s My Entertainment wanted to pay tribute.
Is ‘Call Me By Your Name’ Really A Romantic Movie?
Ne Zha 2
HAR HAR MAHADEV! Chhaava announces Itself As A Bold And Exhilarating Cinematic Spectacle.
In Memoriam: Gene Hackman (1930–2025) – Celebrating a Legendary Career
Comic-Con 2024: Arthur C Clarke’s Venus Prime TV series
Comic-Con 2024: Max Collins’s TRUE NOIR
Comic-Con 2024: Will Wight’s Cradle
Interview With Heroes & Villains Creative Director Doug Johnson
Thatsmye Interviews: Les Weiler on Henchin’: the Series
