
'Heads of State' movie review: John Cena, Idris Elba fuel fizzy action flick
As mismatched frenemy world leaders, Elba and Cena actually work well together in that 1980s buddy sense in the action comedy 'Heads of State' (★★½ out of four; rated PG-13; streaming now on Prime Video). Everything around them is far-fetched nonsense, but they're at least fun together, bantering and trying to out-macho each other through a series of explosive misadventures.
President Will Derringer (Cena), the former star of the 'Water Cobra' movie franchise, is enjoying the honeymoon phase a few months into his first term. British Prime Minister Sam Clarke (Elba), an ex-soldier, is suffering from slumping approval ratings and bad PR after a botched spy mission.
Join our Watch Party! Sign up to receive USA TODAY's movie and TV recommendations right in your inbox
But the 'special relationship' is kind of a hot mess as the two dudes do not like each other. Sam thinks POTUS is a 'gym strong' idiot. Will is still spicy that Sam endorsed his opponent (apparently there was fish and chips involved). Yet they kind of need each other, which is why Sam hitches a ride to an important NATO meeting in Italy on Air Force One.
But there's also a global conspiracy to take down NATO, and Air Force One is hijacked. Will and Sam parachute to safety yet the plane crashes. With the world thinking they're dead, the two guys get all their macho bickering out and work together to make the big meeting and keep the bad guys from killing them before they get there.
The reluctant pals get some help from a couple of strong supporting characters. Priyanka Chopra Jonas is a joy here as Sam's ex, top MI6 agent Noel Bisset, who finds them and is way better than either of the two at action-hero stuff. And Jack Quaid has a small role as an excitable weapons specialist they run into at a CIA safe house.
Cena and Elba showed strong chemistry in 'The Suicide Squad' and that carries over, though 'Heads of State' ends up being a better showcase for Elba, since he's grumpily hilarious even as the straight man to a likably goofy Cena. And the two don't go overtly political either, which they easily could have, given Will's celebrity background and America's current standing in the world. The movie is mostly quippy in that sense, like when Sam pushes pretending they're Canadian in the European wilderness.
But the comedy overall isn't as strong as the action sequences: Director Ilya Naishuller ('Nobody') crafts some intricate and slightly amazing stuff – including one well-choreographed fiery bit involving the president's 'Beast' limo. While humorous enough, the movie begs to be in the same silly vein as 'Tropic Thunder' and just can't make the most of its funny bone.
'Heads of State' is a bomb pop of a summer movie. It works as a fizzy, somewhat kid-friendly throwback to action-packed '80s partnerships – think 'Tango & Cash' or 'Lethal Weapon' – that doesn't take itself too seriously and, for a starry streaming action flick, thankfully isn't a lame duck.
Where can I watch 'Heads of State'?
The John Cena/Idris Elba action comedy "Heads of State" is streaming now on Amazon's Prime Video and is rated PG-13 by the Motion Picture Association "for sequences of strong violence/action, language and some smoking."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
We Were Liars Season 2 When? Candice King and Caitlin Fitzgerald Pitch the Ultimate '90s Throwback
We Were Liars may have wrapped its first season, but the Sinclairs' story is far from over. In addition to its central tragedy (R.I.P., half the cast!), the Prime Video series also drops several major hints about another skeleton in the wealthy Sinclair family's closet: the tragic death of Penny, Carrie and Bess' younger sister Rosemary at just 10 years old. Details about her drowning are revealed gradually, but one moment in the finale confirms that we still only know a fraction of the story. More from TVLine Get Apple TV+ for 50% Off on Prime Video - Catch Up on Severance, The Buccaneers and More The Boys Wraps Production on 'Grand Finale' - When Will Season 5 Be Released? Select Prime Video Channels Are on Sale for $1/Month - Watch Starz, BET+, Paramount+, Hallmark+ and Others While discussing the deaths of their own children, Bess tells Carrie, 'Sometimes I think losing them was our punishment, like that one tiny ember was sent from God or the universe or Beechwood Island.' When Carrie asks Bess what they'd be punished for, she chillingly replies, 'For what we did in Summer 16, the summer I was 16. But then I think, if it was our punishment, Penny wouldn't have been spared, right?' With that simple exchange, a seed has been planted for a potential second season, and there's plenty of source material for it. Just as Season 1 was a largely faithful adaptation of E. Lockhart's 2014 novel We Were Liars, Season 2 would pull from Lockhart's 2022 follow-up Family of Liars, which turns back the clock to explore the aforementioned Rosemary tragedy. Needless to say (but we'll let them say it anyway), the cast is game for a return to Beechwood Island. 'Because we know the prequel and the origin story of these three complicated women, it would be really fun to go back and do that,' Caitlin Fitzgerald tells TVLine of adapting Family of Liars for the screen. And if you're at all on the fence about wanting another season, allow Candice King to pitch the heck out of it: 'Who doesn't love a throwback to the '90s?' she asks TVLine. In fact, that's only the start of her and Fitzgerald's A+ pitches for the show's future. Hit PLAY on the video above to watch our full interview with King and Fitzgerald, then drop a comment with your own thoughts below. Did you enjoy Season 1 of , and what are your questions leading into a possible Season 2? Best of TVLine Yellowjackets' Tawny Cypress Talks Episode 4's Tai/Van Reunion: 'We're All Worried About Taissa' Vampire Diaries Turns 10: How Real-Life Plot Twists Shaped Everything From the Love Triangle to the Final Death Vampire Diaries' Biggest Twists Revisited (and Explained)


The Hill
37 minutes ago
- The Hill
Tears of the UK's treasury chief spooked financial markets
LONDON (AP) — The weekly session in which the British prime minister is questioned by lawmakers in Parliament can be an ordeal for the government leader. For Cabinet members, it's usually simply a matter of backing their boss. But on Wednesday the spotlight ended up on Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves during the Prime Minister's Questions session because it became evident that she was crying as she sat beside Prime Minister Keir Starmer. It's not known what triggered the tears, later said to have been personal. They came as Starmer sought to fend off attacks that his year-old government was losing its authority and that he was about to fire Reeves to regain the initiative. Traders got spooked, with the interest rate charged on the U.K.'s 10-year benchmark bond in the markets up sharply, and the pound down. The moves were a sign investors had lost confidence in U.K. financial assets. Reeves had become associated with fiscal discipline, in particular a rule of covering day-to-day government spending with tax revenue, said Andrew Wishart, an economist at Berenberg Bank. 'The markets are concerned that if the Chancellor goes, such fiscal discipline would follow her out of the door,' he added. With Starmer insisting Thursday that Reeves would remain in post, the markets calmed down. Prime Minister's Questions, or PMQs, can come as close to a gladiatorial contest as is possible in a modern legislative chamber. Very little deference is given to the man or woman holding the highest office in the land. The prime minister is considered the first among equals. Like all other members of Parliament, the prime minister represents one of 650 constituencies. And nowhere is that shared connection more noticeable than at noon every Wednesday in the House of Commons. Starmer stands for half an hour every week to be quizzed by friends and foes. He may get soft balls, but there's always a potential zinger around the corner. The leader of the biggest opposition party, currently the Conservative Party's Kemi Badenoch, has the best chance to knock the prime minister off course. With six questions, she can lay traps and go for the jugular. Typically it's more theater than substance, and the weekly shouting match is consistently the most-watched parliamentary event, viewed around the world, including on C-Span in the United States. This week's session appeared to have more at stake than usual following a chaotic run-up to a welfare reform bill. With scores of Labour lawmakers opposed, Starmer was forced to scrap key planks of the bill — at a cost, politically and economically. For a prime minister, with one of the biggest majorities in history, it was a sign of weakness. Many Labour MPs blame Reeves, for her rigid adherence to her budget rules. As usual, Starmer was flanked to his left by Reeves, who didn't look her usual self, clearly bloated around the eyes. Badenoch showed little mercy, describing Reeves as 'absolutely miserable' and a 'human shield' for Starmer. She asked Starmer whether he could repeat a pledge that Reeves would stay in her post until the general election, which has to take place by the middle of 2029. While praising Reeves' handling of the economy, Starmer didn't give that assurance, and it was around this point that Reeves wiped away a tear. 'How awful for the Chancellor that he couldn't confirm that she would stay in place,' Badenoch responded. Starmer's Downing Street operation faced questions over Reeves' teary appearance. Could it have been hay fever? Had Starmer told Reeves she would be fired for the government's recent woes, which has seen Labour's approval ratings slide? Starmer's press spokesman said it was a 'personal matter,' insisted Reeves was 'going nowhere' and had the prime minister's 'full backing.' Later, Starmer told the BBC that Reeves would be Chancellor for a 'very long time' and that it was 'absolutely wrong' to suggest her distress was related to the welfare U-turn. Images of Reeves' agitated state were emblazoned across newspapers and remained a key item on the news agenda. Starmer repeated on Thursday that Reeves would remain Chancellor 'for years to come' and sought to explain why he hadn't comforted Reeves during PMQs. 'In PMQs, it is bang, bang, bang,' he said at an event where he and Reeves hugged. 'That's what it was yesterday and therefore I was probably the last to appreciate anything going on in the chamber.' Reeves appeared more like her usual self. 'People saw I was upset, but that was yesterday,' she told Sky News. 'I guess the thing that is different from my job and many of your viewers is that when I'm having a tough day, it's on the telly.'
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lawmakers Investigate Whether Pfizer Delayed COVID-19 Vaccine Results For Political Reasons
The House Judiciary Committee has subpoenaed Dr. Philip Dormitzer, a former Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE) executive, in connection with an investigation into claims that the company intentionally delayed the release of clinical testing results for its COVID-19 vaccine until after the 2020 presidential election. The move signals an escalation in the panel's probe into whether political considerations influenced Pfizer's vaccine announcement timeline. Dormitzer, who later joined British drugmaker GSK Plc (NYSE:GSK), is considered a key witness in the inquiry. Trending: GoSun's Breakthrough Rooftop EV Charger Already Has 2,000+ Units Reserved — Benzinga reached out to Pfizer for comment. According to the committee, he has not voluntarily complied with previous requests to appear or provide documents. The subpoena, first reported by CNN, reflects lawmakers' belief that Dormitzer's testimony is central to understanding internal decision-making at Pfizer during the development of the vaccine. The committee points to allegations that Dormitzer, after joining GSK, told colleagues that Pfizer had deliberately delayed disclosing the vaccine's effectiveness until after Election Day. The CNN report added that the Wall Street Journal previously reported that GSK had flagged those statements to federal prosecutors in New to House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan, GSK provided information from a human resources meeting in November 2024 in which Dormitzer allegedly expressed concern about being investigated by a future Trump administration, suggesting the vaccine announcement timing was "not a coincidence." Further, Jordan's letter cites claims that Dormitzer informed colleagues that Pfizer's top R&D leadership intentionally slowed clinical testing so that it would not conclude before the election results were known. The Judiciary Committee has received some records from GSK but has not made them public. Pfizer announced the COVID-19 vaccine's effectiveness on Nov. 9, 2020, six days after Election Day. CEO Albert Bourla has previously denied political motives, telling CNN that the timing was based solely on data readiness and regulatory review, not election considerations. While the committee has not issued a subpoena to Pfizer, it seeks information directly from the company as the investigation progresses. Read Next: Maximize saving for your retirement and cut down on taxes: Schedule your free call with a financial advisor to start your financial journey – no cost, no obligation. If there was a new fund backed by Jeff Bezos offering a 7-9% target yield with monthly dividends would you invest in it? Photo: Shutterstock Up Next: Transform your trading with Benzinga Edge's one-of-a-kind market trade ideas and tools. Click now to access unique insights that can set you ahead in today's competitive market. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? This article Lawmakers Investigate Whether Pfizer Delayed COVID-19 Vaccine Results For Political Reasons originally appeared on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data