All posts by Tarek Fayoumi…The Paterson of his Craft!

I am someone who strives to become a professional critic. I watch and review many movies. I view the eyes of movies as something as an art form. I have followed many critics over the years, but once I was thirteen I knew writing film reviews was going to be my passion. I learned from watching multiple episodes of Ebert And Roeper in my teen years, and then in middle school I began writing film reviews for a newspaper club. I am also an avid fan of the arts of Chicago including Theatre, Comedy, and music. Films, however, are my primary focus.

Here Review


Director Robert Zemeckis always shines a light in his projects. He is strong at making connections that focus on what is import ant to the narrative in his projects.  Whether it is highlighting the accomplishments of a man with a low IQ in Forrest Gump or an alcoholic pilot who saves lives while also struggling with his own errors in Flight. Zemeckis has a unique way of finding links to the positive and does it successfully again in Here, a Forrest Gump reunion for the ages featuring Tom Hanks and Robin Wright. The movie shifts and changes scenes from the present to other time periods. Here is wonderfully told in the pattern of a story.

The flow of this film is steady and poetic, and the characterizations have a meaningful presence. Here focuses on the dynamics of families and is all about human values. Richard (Hanks) and Margaret (Wright) play a couple and during their life face various hurdles. The film uses squares as indicators that transitions are coming as the story evolves. Zemeckis has a majestic way of following the storyline. Using visual cues for switching scenes prompts audiences to be curious about what emotions to feel.

In Here, the “whoa” moments build upon each other with the aid of these fascinating visual cues.  When there is a scene with furniture, the square outlines the furniture, and then the film transitions to a different era in the same or similar setting.  This gives audiences the sense that they are in a different time in the same setting.  Relationships shift and encounter human flaws which are a significant element of the film’s true brilliance.

Zemeckis has Paul Bettany play the character named Al, Richard’s father. Bettany is younger than Hanks. Zemeckis uses make-up to create patterns for different roles with unique attitudes in diverse settings. Sometimes these patterns are good and at other times they’re confusing or even frustrating. Zemeckis has a way of directing that resembles reality by linking the bonds which result in the film’s continuity.

Here is about Richard and Margaret going through obstacles.  It makes audiences wonder how generations would behave in previous decades. There is turmoil, sadness, happiness, disbelief, and many emotional entanglements. Zemeckis turns the light on regardless of the scenario in a particular moment of the film. Even when Richard fights with Margaret, there is a transition to feeling optimistic. The optimism in Here provides a source of empowerment that demonstrates how humans can find happiness.

With the generational shifts in this film, audiences may wonder if the previous films of Zemeckis are interconnected especially since both the lead roles are from Forrest Gump. He uses aunique approach and a different mode of storytelling that connects with things that have and are happening in the real world.  The many realistic and known events play an essential role in the continuity of Here. This film will be valued and deeply cherished by fans of Zemeckis. Four out of four stars for Here.

Conclave Review


The term “conclave” refers to an assembly or gathering, especially one with specific power or influence. In Edward Berger’s film Conclave, the dynamics of political theories combined with religion and faith collide poetically. It is a powerful examination of the moving parts in the quest to find a new pope, with an ensemble cast that includes Ralph Fiennes (as Lawrence), Stanley Tucci (as Bellini), John Lithgow (as Tremblay), and Isabelle Rossellini (as Sister Agnes). The interactions of the cast are relentless and invigorating. Conclavecreates a curiosity about where the lines are drawn when selecting one who can lead the Catholic Church. The foundation of consideration reaches a point where established hierarchy and degree of faith challenge this important process.

The plot of the film begins with a deceased pope. The death is quiet and assumed to be unexpected. Over a hundred cardinals from around the world gather for a vote on the new pope. Lawrence is leading the “conclave” process. He keeps Bellini and Tremblay close. Despite their loyalty, they do not always see eye-to-eye. The Vatican halls are where new evidence will evolve, lies will be unfolded, and seniority and beliefs will interfere. Tremblay is subtle, yet frequently questioned by Lawrence. Lawrence privately believes that choices and secrets are in tune with the close relationship Tremblay had with the deceased Pope.

The rumors which are circulating take a major toll on the voting process. Conclave is a fascinating study of the cardinals’ minds as they present their own unique approaches to faith. For Lawrence, however, going by the book and following protocols speaks more to him than the faiths of the other cardinals. Fiennes’ performance as he develops a harsh reputation is where Conclave delivers a massive achievement in terms of characterizations. How far does one go to achieve the ruling of a new pope? What is the logic behind choosing who deserves to hold this position known to the entire world?

Conclave is an audacious thrill ride of the pressure, solidarity, and background of the political theories surrounding the votes throughout the process. The person who truly questions the choice of Lawrence is Sister Agnes and her extreme frustration shows in Rossellini glowing eyes. The real boxing match in this story is in the capable hands of Fiennes, Tucci, and Lithgow. They deliver powerhouse performances which showcase how faith in humanity and deep loyalty discover their shining presence. The movie is captivating in the way it explores the subjects of faith and worship and the role they play for the votes to count. The political issues related to hierarchy of authority, years of practice, and personal backgrounds are also intriguing.  With hundreds of cardinals, there are a lot of analytics to consider during the conclave. It is a riveting and unforgettable portrait of the critical choices involved when the Vatican must select a new pope who will shine a light of authentic power. This is one of the most monumental and visually outstanding films of 2024. Four out of four stars for Conclave.

Okie Review-60th Chicago International Film Festival


The film is a portrait of writer’s block and its struggle. It is a drama that hits close to home (for me) because I grew up in Illinois. Directed by Kate Cobb, she brings her audience to a world of detrimental stress in the life of a writer. Okie is artistic with a vast landscape of a soul-focused direction.

The film’s main character is Louie (played by Scott Michael Foster). Louie feels that reality is hitting him hard. He has a bad past with a deceased parent. Louie is on a journey back to his home around De Kalb, Illinois. The frustrations contain a sense of tension (based on Louie’s reputation as a writer).

What is intriguing about Okie is its continuing purpose of getting through hurdles. Louie is the one dealing with them. Louie has success from dishonesty and lies. The many old folks around him do not forget that. More frustrations unfold, and Okie is a journey that contains harsh pasts, connecting again (with others), and common grounds complex.

Okie is a blur written thoroughly (because its main character is in one throughout the film). Its writing and portrait of aggravation take the cake cinematically. Once one event goes wrong, another one does after. Okie is full of surprises on the realistic levels of life challenges. Three out of four stars for Okie.