Osama Sharshar, the former deputy, said that the assassination of the head of the political office of Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh, in the Iranian capital, Tehran, confirms that the Israeli occupation, led by Benjamin Netanyahu, has failed to suppress the movement in the Gaza Strip.

He pointed out that Netanyahu’s goal is to stop the negotiations with the movement to complete the prisoner exchange deal, as his political survival is dependent on stopping the war on the Gaza Strip, and if the negotiations end, it will mean that Netanyahu will lose to the resistance.

He pointed out that Netanyahu did not lead to that crime in Tehran except with American support, and that came days later from the state of “madness” inside the American Congress.

He explained that Iran will not be silent on the violation of its sovereignty, but will respond at the right time and place, and this is its right, especially because there is a severe fear inside Israel, due to the announcement of Tehran’s response to the assassination.

And he said that Netanyahu is “guilty of war”, and he demanded that his trial be done internationally.

Some movies are so derivative that it seems like their characters must be the only people on Earth who haven’t seen them before. Few of those movies, however, are as muscular and red-blooded as John-Michael Powell’s “Violent Ends,” a chewy — if not downright overcooked — feast of an Ozark anti-Western that claims to be inspired by true events (specifically, the unraveling of Arkansas’ most powerful crime family), but feels significantly more indebted to the stuff of “Unforgiven,” “Blue Ruin,” and Jeff Nichols’ “Shotgun Stories.” While too labored to live up to its self-evident inspirations, this fatalistic revenge saga is so unrepentant towards its own movie-ness that its canned dialogue and clichéd story beats often present an engrossing counterpoint to its vividly authentic sense of time and place.

Powell’s tragic hero is doomed from the moment he dares to do something “original” with his life, an ambition that could never be realized within the world of the film into which he was born, and so he soon finds himself with no choice but to declare an open war against his own bloodline; to so violently confront the Southern-fried tropes that have always defined his family that future generations might have a chance to exist within the pages of a less predictable script. One that isn’t slurred together from such a familiar combination of backwater lawlessness, faux-polite menace, and profoundly sweaty animal metaphors.

But in order to enjoy “Violent Ends” on those terms, you first have to accept the premise that Lucas Frost (the elastic Billy Magnussen, making a solid case for himself as a genuine leading man) doesn’t know he’s been cast as the main character of a contrived thriller about how an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. At least not at first. You have to believe that his incarcerated coke kingpin of a father always talks in quasi-religious parables, and that his bank teller fiancée — Alexandra Shipp as the appropriately named Emma Darling, a beaming angel of a woman who coerces Lucas into a rom-com worthy grand gesture by the end of her first scene — might credibly exist within the desolate Appalachian context of a film whose average character is just a couple of face tattoos away from going full “Winter’s Bone.”

It’s a context that Lucas is keen to escape while he can: It’s the fall of 1992, George Bush the elder is about to lose his bid for another presidency, and the Arkansas police are enjoying a brief detente in the drug war between the two rival sides of the Frost clan. But nobody is enjoying it more than Lucas’ slick-talking but clearly sociopathic cousin Sid (the ever-watchable James Badge Dale, even less restrained than usual in a role so slathered with extra sauce that the actor literally has to lick his fingers clean between some of his lines), who sees this as a golden opportunity to seize the whole cartel operation for himself.

“Violent Ends” does a poor job of laying out the Frost family tree (its wall of opening text fails to establish the who’s who we need to fully understand the dynamics at work), but it’s clear enough that Sid embodies everything that Lucas is desperate to reject within himself. If only it were that easy to cast aside one’s inheritance. As his father told him at the end of a long-winded story about a pentecostal preacher, and as Lucas will soon learn the hard way for himself after a robbery-gone-wrong rocks his world apart: “You’re a rattlesnake, son. Just like me.”

Lucas doesn’t get to witness said robbery first-hand, which is a shame, as the sight of someone getting shot in the chest and just standing perfectly still and wide-eyed as their shirt bleeds red would be his biggest clue so far that he’s in an overbroad — albeit geographically specific — movie about how violence begets nothing but violence. Alas, he sees just enough to abandon his plans for a better life and try to exact revenge on the responsible party, whoever that might be. We see the killer’s face and have no doubt as to what happened, but Powell’s script — so obvious about the rest of its plotting — insists on treating the murder with a veneer of mystery, which contributes to a torpid second that’s too saturated with numbing synths and genre posturing to seize on the film’s most interesting tensions.

Specifically: that between Lucas and his half-brother Tuck (a wounded Nick Stahl, drawing on his own history with addiction to create an achingly lived-in portrait of a decent man who’s struggling to resist the gravity of his own weakness). For all of the sullied virtue that Magnussen commands in the lead role, “Violent Ends” wouldn’t really spark to life or feel like it had any meaningful stakes to it if not for how Tuck’s soul hangs in the balance. As someone with one foot in the Frost mishegoss and one foot in the normal family life that Lucas aspires to, Tuck is the only person in this story whose fate doesn’t feel like a foregone conclusion, and the handful of scenes where Powell centers him are by far the richest things here. The writer/director clearly adore his characters, and is eager to highlight the humanity that arises beneath their circumstances, but Tuck alone allows him to do that to meaningfully stirring effect.

By contrast, Sid spends most of his time preening like a supervillain, while the film never seriously explores what it means for Lucas’ mom (Kate Burton) to work as a cop — her role seems reverse-engineered from the wonderful shot that all of the film’s drama builds towards after Lucas is able to bend the cycle of violence into something of a straight line. It’s a striking image, typical of Powell’s smart and visceral approach to staging rich action on a budget (the movie looks great in all respects, with Elijah Guess’ cinematography finding vivid streaks of natural beauty atop a bedrock of dour Appalachian gray), and palpably freighted with all of the emotion that percolates too far under the surface during much of the story.

Powell is an exceptionally promising filmmaker, but by the time he arranges all of his ducks in a row for the finale, he’s lost track as to whether Lucas is continuing the cycle of vengeance that has poisoned so much of his family, or if he’s breaking it. While “Violent Ends” asks you to reckon with the futility of violence, it (violently) delights in its bloodshed too much to pull that off, as Lucas — a natural rattlesnake — is left with no other choice but to bite his own tail. Alas, this was the movie into which he was born; the great tragedy of Lucas’ life is that he wasn’t born into a better one.

Grade: C+

“Violent Ends” is now playing in theaters.

Want to stay up to date on IndieWire’s film reviews and critical thoughts? Subscribe now to our newly launched newsletter, In Review by David Ehrlich, in which our Chief Film Critic and Head Reviews Editor rounds up the best new reviews and streaming picks along with some exclusive musings — all only available to subscribers.

The easiest way to make sure that you absolutely slay gift-giving this holiday season is by choosing gifts based on someone’s interests. And if the person you’re shopping for happens to be a huge fan of reality television, then you’ve come to the right place.

I found everything you could ever possibly want to gift the reality TV-obsessed person in your life—and they’ll absolutely love receiving any one of these picks.

From Real Housewives–themed tumblers and tees to tote bags and mugs inspired by Peacock’s competition show The Traitors and Vanderpump Rules trucker hats that you can rock on your visit to the Sur back alley, these gifts are sure to be a hit; just like the reality shows they’re based on.

No matter what fandom your friends or family identify with, you’re sure to give them the perfect gift here.

No. 10: He Can Handle the Pressure

Not only has Travis played in four Super Bowls, winning three of them (NBD!), but he’s also hosted Saturday Night Liveso you know he can handle intense spotlight with ease.

That may seem trivial, but Taylor has penned several songs regarding her fear that her level of fame could prove to be too much for her romantic partner to handle. (See: “Peace” and “The Archer.”)

“It all depends who you’re with,” Taylor said in, “If they have a serious issue with it, I guess you’ll hide or whatever, but I don’t really like that, because it makes me feel like I’m running from the law or something. I don’t want to feel like a fugitive, like, ‘Oh my god, we’re having a relationship, better hide!’

“I feel like if you can be in a relationship and have it seem normal, that would be good.”

And in his WSJ interview, Travis proved he’s more than ready for the pressure that comes with being married to someone as powerful as Taylor.

“Obviously I’ve never dated anyone with that kind of aura about them…I’ve never dealt with it,” he said. “But at the same time, I’m not running away from any of it.”

“The scrutiny she gets, how much she has a magnifying glass on her, every single day, paparazzi outside her house, outside every restaurant she goes to, after every flight she gets off, and she’s just living, enjoying life,” he added. “When she acts like that I better not be the one acting all strange.”

Paul Pierce
Takes Safe Way Home From Party
… Days After DUI Charge

Published October 30, 2025 8:52 AM PDT

Thunder’s Nikola Topić
Diagnosed With Testicular Cancer

Published October 30, 2025 10:51 AM PDT

What better day than Halloween to review a sequel to perhaps the greatest horror film of all time. No, I am not talking about Halloween and its myriad endless follow-ups, but rather 1973’s The Exorcistwhich with 10 nominations including Best Picture (and two wins) is still the most nominated horror film of all time at the Oscars (and no, I don’t consider The Silence of the Lambs a horror movie) and style the greatest. In retrospect it probably shouldn’t have been touched by sequel fever, but Hollywood at the time saw how The Godfather Part II did, and then Jaws, and just couldn’t resist.

In 1977, they Exorcist director William Friedkin’s personal horror, Warner Bros convinced filmmaker John Boorman to take on the task of a sequel, Exorcist II: The Heretic, which would continue the tale of the possessed young Regan, now older and fighting new demons. Linda Blair reportedly got a fortune to return, but Ellen Burstyn wisely stayed away. A new documentary, Boorman and the Devil, premiered in a prestige slot at September’s Venice Film Festival and has since been hoping to get a distributor so it can be widely seen.

The fact no one has picked up this exceptional docu from director David Kittredge is baffling, leading me to think somehow it is cursed, much the same way the original Exorcist was thought to be while in production. Not only is this docu entertaining, it is also a great primer on the film business, then and now, and is easily one of the best movies about the making — and unmaking — of a movie I have ever seen. If it can’t land a theatrical deal, certainly a streamer, or better yet Turner Classic Movies, should have a go at it and allow people to see this movie about a movie no one wanted to see (at least at the time). Give Boorman the break he deserves on this.

Kittredge anchors it all with a fascinating and insightful interview with the title star himself, John Boorman who is now 92 but sat down for it seven years ago. Not only will we get the inside story of Exorcist II: The Heretic, but also a view of many other films in his impressive career which started with 1965’s Dave Clark 5 black and white musical, Catch Us If You Can (aka (Having A Wild Weekend) which failed after being poorly compared to the Beatles and A Hard Days Night. He quickly scored with a cult favorite, Point Blank with Lee Marvin, then movies like Hell In The Pacific, with Marvin and Toshiro Mifune, and Zardozanother cult hit with Sean Connery in a loin cloth. He won Oscar recognition in 1972 for Deliverance, a brilliant film that was released a year before The Exorcist, and later in the 80’s would return to the Oscars again with his WWII memoir, Hope And Glory. But nestled inbetween was The Exorcist II in 1977, an ambitious and technically complicated film he says was misbegotten due to its title, that it really was a movie that simply should have been called The Heretic. The problem with that was Warners wanted the connection, was paying Blair a lot of money, and would market it skewer out of their sequel to their original cash cow.

With a script credited to William Goodhart, but rewritten constantly during production by Rospo Pallenberg, it starred Blair, Richard Burton as a priest investigating the death of original exorcist Max Von Sydow, Louise Fletcher, hot off her Oscar win for One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest, and James Earl Jones dressed up as a locust named Kokumo. Blair appears with some smart thoughts about the movie and why she was in it (her Regan tap dancing tale is amusing), and Fletcher (who died last year) is also very amusing in an interview in which she says she didn’t really understand the script but went along with it anyway. This docu represents one of her last appearances in film and it is dedicated to her.

It’s no wonder she had a hard time figuring it out as a major part of her participation is dealing with a silly contraption placed around Blair’s head (and prominently in the ads) called the Synchronizer (don’t ask), and a battle with the Pazuzu (really don’t ask). Filmmakers Mike Flanagan and Karyn Kusama are among other interviewees liberally used, and actually defend the movie which has grown to have its admirers in the past half century since it was unleashed, er, released. I have to confess I never went to see Exorcist II: The Heretic when it came out because the word was soooooo bad I just skipped it – and I was a guy who saw everything.

Boorman is the key to this docu’s success with a terrific recall of all events surrounding the film, his hopes for it, and especially his deep disappointments in the aftermath. It was cursed a bit during production when sand blew into his face and he had to be hospitalized with a major fever. The film shut down for several weeks due to it. The best anecdote is one about the film’s sneak preview in Pasadena where the audience expected another Exorcist started laughing uncontrollably at what was on screen and then got wind that the studio execs were sitting in the back, and as the suits tried to leave unnoticed were then chased down the block by the upset ticket buyers (!)

Boorman attended the first – sold out – show at the Village Westwood theater on opening day and saw for himself this movie was not working with the crowd Warner’s marketing campaign had brought in. People would leave one show and tell people in line for the next one to stay away. Boorman decided to recut the movie while it was in release, taking several minutes out of the running time and tightening it to make more sense. It was not available. Exorcist II: The Heretic was a disaster released in the shadow of the unexpected blockbuster success of Star Wars just a few weeks earlier. Bad timing, but bad movie? Since its release there have been more Exorcist movies, related and not related to the original. Apparently the sad fate of Exorcist II: The Heretic did not deter other filmmakers to venture into the fray. The most recent was the 2023 disappointment, Exorcist: Believer which lured Burstyn back, but don’t look for any sequels for that even though they were apparently planned.

It seems this first 1977 sequel is being reassessed by some admirers of what Boorman set out to do (a Time Magazine critic interviewed is a fan) and is available with both versions, original and director’s recut, on blu ray. David Kittredge’s Boorman And The Devil is the perfect companion if you want to binge them all, so hopefully it will soon find a large audience with the right buyer. It is a gem.

Title: Boorman and the Devil
Festival: Venice (Classics)
Director: David Kittredge
Cast: John Boorman, Linda Blair, Louise Fletcher, Mike Flanagan, Karyn Kusama, Joe Dante
Sales agent: WTFilms
Running time: 1 hour 52 minutes