I think everything is always about context, and honesty. While there is a proliferation of critics out there, and the studios likely would like to reign it in by deciding who gets to make it to the party in the first place, they are missing out on the fact that film has changed. The way we watch and access film has shifted, and the spread of critics doesn’t mean noise is winning all the time, it means that people often are able to find critics that speak to them. There’s something in finding yourself in a piece, or in someone else’s voice, and being able to relate to that. I’m a fan of nerd culture, especially comic books. If I click on a review somewhere from someone who doesn’t like Marvel films, and isn’t making an effort to learn the lore, and it turns out they don’t like the film they were assigned, I’m not sure that’s actually a representation of whether or not a film is good or entertaining. The medium has been around too long for anyone to claim they were around for all of it, and we all now come in from different perspectives, for different reasons. I thought a lot about this as a result of just watching a rant from Adam Conover about how the ease of ratings from average people has ruined the art forms they critique. To some extent, he had points. People do vote down things they haven’t seen simply because of subject matter, or Rachel Ziegler. There are already people ready to fire bomb Ironheart, a series no one has seen.
But, this movie is art. Right? I realize it got buried a bit, and it was the smallest of Jack Quaid’s films to release so far in 2025,and possibly mainstream critics are avoiding it. I found myself drawn to it, because honesty is the best policy, for Jeffrey dean Morgan, who isn’t an A-lister, but does play Negan on my favorite TV series. I’m a big fan of Morgan, and have enjoyed most of his work across his career, from P.S. I love You, Weeds, Grey’s Anatomy, to the Boys, which also has Quaid. And, Quaid drew me in too, as I’m a fan of The Boys. Heck, I like Malin Ackerman and always wanted to see her return to Billions.
The catch in Neighborhood Watch is that Quaid plays a bit of an unreliable narrator type protagonist. he’s suffered trauma, and has a bit of a mental health problem he’s working through. He also truly believes he just saw a girl get taken, but he’s finding it really hard to get anyone to believe him. Thankfully, he lives next door to a gung ho type alpha male who recently was laid off from being a Campus Security guard, and is up for the potential of adventure. he has at least a little knowledge to help these two non-detectives on their journey, which might lead nowhere. Or perhaps, Quaid isn’t as useless as he feels sometimes, and he saw what he saw.
The film is an interesting somewhat serious, somewhat darkly funny trek through faith. Believing in the person, and believing in yourself, at least until the point the evidence arrives to support your claims. Morgan is perfect for his role as a slightly unhinged former security guard, as he does seem to have a soft spot for Quaid’s character. And, he needs that. There are these complicated flashbacks that never fully resolve, but do suggest that Quaid, and to some extent his sister (Ackerman) did not have a fun childhood. there are twists and turns, and especially toward the end, there were moments where i felt the movie took a swing without explaining or following up. I wasn’t quite a fan of the ending, as it almost felt too abrupt. But, overall this had my attention the whole way, and its pair of leads gave some solid performances.
Someone has to be out there talking about these films, and not just the movie of the week. This movie was more worth my time than several major releases from studios this year. then again, I do normally enjoy these actors, and I admittedly might have been predisposed to liking the film. If i was a food critic, I might be willing to eat anywhere, but I might still have preferences in the types of cuisine. The other side is that fans can be disappointed, and feel like the rug was pulled out, or that they were tricked into watching a subpar effort. I don’t feel that here.
it also has audio description, and if memory serves me, this was done by Audio Eyes, narrated by Nicole cyrille. Audio eyes does like this thing where when the tension is mounting, the narrator gets louder, like they are shouting. It doesn’t quite work the way they think, as I heard the same thing last year in films like Oddity. It just feels like shouting. It is the kind of attempt at performative audio description without allowing the narrator the full range of interpreting the piece across the board. Not that I think this needed more interpretation. I wouldn’t say this is a horror film, and while it has some strange elements, and at least one gory moment, it isn’t designed to scare. So, the mounting tension, we can lean back a little on this. I love Nicole, and she’s done some great work.
So if you’ve been feeling like there are too many sequels, or reboots, and you want something that just stands on its own, I do actually think this is worth a watch. I’m actually disappointed it didn’t get a major theatrical push like Quaid’s other films (Novocaine, Companion) did earlier this year. It now can easily get lost in the noise of a streaming service, where its lack of profile may give a hint that this isn’t worth your time. I’m willing to say it is, but also acknowledge that I walked in hoping it would be. Then again, aside from being a lover of the cast, I’m a lover of film, and I really do try to approach each piece with the idea that it will be good, and the year we are in will just be a wealth of excellent cinema. That’s never the case, but one can hope.
Fresh: Final grade: B, Audio Description: B+
