Honey Non!

This is a movie that very literally has no point. At any given point in time there are 3 plots circulating around it. Plot #1 what honey is doing, which seems to be some kind of version of being a P. I. but not really doing much in the way of investigating besides for getting nowhere fast with it. #2 What the pastor is doing, from what I can see he's got something shady going on which is a mix of some sort with his sex based church. And #3 the actual movie plot which is anyone's guess since there's no real way to make heads or tails of it. And that's about it. I wish I could tell you that they all run together in the end and make some grand reveal, they don't.

5/10 good acting, no idea what these plots are suppose to be, this is something to watch if you're bored and want to waste some time.

A film with a premise steeped in dark comedy and striking situations within a social and reflective critique, but it could have been better.

"Honey Don't!" is an attractive offering thanks to its production design, where you can see creativity from the very start and the way it brings something different to films of this genre. It's a film that employs a dark sense of humor with plenty of satire in a social critique context, offering a window into realism and portraying various scenarios within a setting. It's an experience that encourages analysis from an authentic point of view thanks to its premise and atmosphere, despite having many drawbacks along the way.

The film has a pleasant energy at the outset, hinting at the potential it conveys in just a few scenes and showing that there's much to digest; however, it loses its way as the minutes pass, failing to objectively deliver on each element established in its plotlines. Here, there is a great waste of that momentum that manifests in a structure of great value, weight, or even power; I emphasize the importance of a narrative that can explore different nuances and focus on a satisfying outcome.

At this point, director Ethan Coen conveys his idea-whether visually, objectively, or analytically-but he doesn't seize the opportunity to fully exploit that potential with major impact. However, it does deliver outstanding camera angles and framing that are a marvel, where the level of detail and the use of natural lighting speak for themselves. I think the film's concept is realized, but when it most needs development, it's set aside in favor of subplots that take on more importance than the original idea.

"Honey Don't!" is one of those films that starts off well but suffers from poor execution along the way, despite having appealing ideas and untapped potential. Furthermore, it doesn't delve into character development beyond conveying the idea of social critique that plays out on screen. The main objective of this film is to serve as yet another outlet for expressing controversial issues in various social settings, with the aim of contributing a grain of sand and conveying that message to its audience.

Among its cinematic aspects, I can highlight the editing, cinematography, mise-en-scène, set design, costume design, and the handling of filming in terms of framing, focus, shots, and settings. These are crucial points that are well executed from a visual perspective. The setting is crucial to the film's context, enhancing the experience as long as you connect with it.

In terms of performance, Margaret Qualley stands out the most for the tone she brings to her character thru her seriousness, double-edged intentions, and detective-like focus. In every scene, she conveys a naturalness, and without a doubt, she's a beauty who elevates every shot. As for Aubrey Plaza, there isn't much to say; her performance is straightforward because that's how it's written in the script. However, when she most needs to surprise on screen, she doesn't quite deliver to the fullest. He's not a protagonist, but he should have been given more development for what the film is trying to convey. Chris Evans is merely an exaggerated characterization within the context of the film's critique, and therefore a deliberately forced character thru its script, also recalling the dark comedy that is present throughout.

In another sense, the film covers themes related to revenge, double standards, professional ethics, past traumas, violence, abuse, the relevance of social media, ulterior motives, the intensity of the pursuit of justice, negligence by law enforcement, professionalism, trust, acceptance, and sexuality in an everyday setting as a means of escape from adversity.

It also presents a social critique of religion and the sexual abuse in these so-called "houses of God," where manipulation, egocentrism, smuggling, murder, and the power of carnal desire are rampant in many places, and no one does anything about it. The critique this film fosters is striking because, despite its dark comedy, it doesn't shy away from reality. Furthermore, it employs a metaphor linking religion, culture, power, and sexuality, exploring various settings and the intertwined consequences of their manifestations. It can also be seen as the "why not do it?" from a perspective in which the director emphasizes the exaggeration of gender and those alarming manifestations to try to exemplify it, letting the exploration of sexuality speak for itself.

In summary, it's a film that has a good opening, good shots, and coherent potential, but it squanders the opportunity to explore its established concepts, with the lack of depth and sustainability in each argument going unnoticed. Its main focus is social criticism and conveying a message to its viewers. Despite leaving many loose ends, from my perspective it just barely passes for its messages and the way it tells the story. Without a doubt, it could have been better with better execution along the way, but it serves its purpose.

I was eagerly anticipating this film. Finally saw it yesterday and almost walked out to demand a refund. It was a snooze fest, literally. I dosed off several times. The number of empty seats in the theatre was an indication of what I should have expected. Frankly, they should have just made it a porn flick instead of whatever this is. Don't bother seeing this. It's awful.

First, I'll start with what I liked. The title cards, while lengthy was cleverly filmed and incorporated into the city's skyline.

The acting itself was also good those who are aloof remained aloof. Everyone remained in character throughout.

Now for a bit a negativity. While some nude scenes, I would argue, do push the story forward, the other half are gratuitous and didn't really help with the story line.

The ending however might not be everyone's cup of tea. Without giving away too much of the film I'll say that in retrospect too many movies end the movie with on a closed loop, so in that sense it's refreshing.

"Honey Don't!" exemplifies the frustrating phenomenon of wasted potential. What begins as a promising neo-noir with Margaret Qualley delivering a genuinely engaging performance as hard-boiled private eye Honey O'Donahue quickly dissolves into narrative incoherence that would make even the most patient viewer check their watch.

Ethan Coen's direction starts strong, establishing an intriguing mystery around church-connected deaths in small-town California. The early scenes crackle with the kind of sharp dialogue and atmospheric tension you'd expect from a Coen production. Qualley, Plaza, and Evans all commit fully to their roles, bringing genuine chemistry and wit to their interactions.

But somewhere around the half hour mark, the film completely loses its way. Plot threads multiply without resolution, the comedy becomes increasingly forced, and the central mystery devolves into confusing nonsense. By the third act, you're left wondering if Coen forgot what story he was trying to tell.

The film's "lesbian B-movie" concept had real potential, but execution matters more than concepts. "Honey Don't!" proves that even talented actors can't salvage a script that abandons its own premise.