Thanks to 4chan, this movie is now so bad it's funny.
Even the poster is shit, step up your game, Netflix.
It's like two terrible hack directors, who are actually actors, saw It Comes At Night and The Strangers, then said, "Hey, let's remake The Strangers without understanding anything that made that movie interesting. Then let's throw in the ending from It Comes At Night. People will love this!" Nothing is explored, nothing is explained, all set-up plot threads early-on are completely ignored in favor of an open ending, there are no interesting characters, the drama is extremely forced and immaturely edgy, the cinematography and editing is jarring and even laughable at quite a few points, but overall, it's a fucking bore. It's trying to be like so many other horror movies (other bad horror movies, mind you, I mentioned Paranormal Activity 3 once when watching), and even doesn't understand why those were successful. All I can tell you, is Netflix is not having a good track record with their original movies. Sure, some of you may argue about Gerald's Game, but ultimately, nothing has impressed me enough into thinking paying for a subscription to this service is worth it. The idea I enjoyed Insidious: The Last Key more from earlier this month is downright unacceptable. Avoid this house, trust me, you won't want to buy it.
I loathe this recurring trend I'm seeing with a load of movies being put out, not just in the horror community. Studios take this engaging and expansive concept that could be fleshed out into a thought provoking and timeless archive of our culture, this Winchester story being the perfect capsule of life and death. There's plenty of interesting shit that's lightly tapped into... but like a ton of other projects of recent, we take this potentially enriching thing and throw it into the mainstream bubble. I can see the executives going, "Yes, this tale of a woman building time capsule rooms of dead people, and where they died, is cool and all... but it needs more poltergeists, jumpscares, and marketability." We're taking potential arthouse movies and slapping a studio coat of paint onto it. It's really disgusting.
In this movie, there are so many interesting conversations that are briefly explored. This woman is being told by supernatural beings (who were all killed by weapons from the company she owns), to build rooms in her mansion that capture their spirits and replicate the location where they died. That is so neat, and it amounts to barely anything. No big message at the end, no character study of this woman and the visiting doctor, who's also troubled just as much as her... really nothing. There's a lot of short scenes that go nowhere and inconsistent rules within the house. It's a generic ghost movie with a promising concept being used as the gimmick to draw suckers in like me. The synopsis is far more interesting than how it's executed.
I give credit for teed-bits of the production design, but we just had Crimson Peak and other great period piece movies, so I don't know what's the point of giving this credit for that. And for heaven's lord, I'm an apologist of egregious jump-scares, but this movie is not helping my case. I can't count how many times I wanted to walk about because of the predictable and ineffective jumps. Let's lock this movie up behind thirteen nails and forget it.
Clint Eastwood's
A Series Of Pointless Events
I was going to write more, but my dad summed it up pretty good with that title. One of the worst films I've seen a long time. This is Tommy Wiseau's The Room levels of bad, not exaggerating. Scenes that are so short with no purpose are all over this movie. Some scenes even mirror ones from The Room, like when they go into an ice cream shop and for four minutes, talk about random junk that have no effect on the story. There's an entire section of this movie where these jackasses just tour Rome and take selfies all over the place. Nothing matters, all the dialogue is horrible, the acting is some of the worst I have ever laid eyes on, there's baffling editing choices, inconsistencies in the editing, bland music, and POINTLESS every-day affairs.
This movie has inspired me to take a notebook with me to movies now, so I can write shit down as I watch. I'm just now remembering stuff. There's a little moment with one of the friends as a kid, he's in his room, and on the wall, is a poster for Letters of Iwo Jima, one of Clint Eastwood's movies. Reminded me of that bit in Transformers 2 with Sam in his dorm room, and there's a Bad Boys 2 poster on the wall. But beside the nitpicks, the movie fails at it's emotional structure. The real heroes suck as actors, so it's hard to take their monotone mumbling performances seriously, and a large portion of the movie just focuses on random seemingly unimportant pieces of their life. We get no look at who the terrorist is or where he comes from. I felt no threat or tension in the final scene because the terrorist just came off as an incompetent shooter, just baffling. Even in Pearl Harbor, Michael Bay chose to include scenes with the Japanese army to hype up their power-level and what they could do to an American fleet. Here, there is not a single scene with any explanation or story for the terrorist, reducing my engagement. I'm not intimidated by him, so why should I care?
Typically, I disagree with the complaint that these army movies are nothing more than propaganda commercials for recruitment, but good Christ, this movie is the dictionary definition on throwing subtlety out the window. Spencer, or whatever the hell his name is, wants to join the Air Force. Okay, cool. Does that part of the story have any effect on the train attack at the end? No? What's the point of it? There is none? It's just to promote the Air Forces and the Marines? There's really no point to it? Thanks for wasting my time. Story comes first, plot structure comes first, tension comes first, characters come above-all, and this terrorism-level disaster of a "feature film" did nothing for me at all. It's also just a shame this isn't bad enough in a funny way to be like The Room. It borders into the category so many times, but keeps slipping into the just-bad territory. How did this happen, Eastwood?
This is the first movie I've ever brought a notepad with me to the theater and actively wrote stuff down. That was interesting; I will say, it made the movie go by much faster because I was more involved. I think instead of writing a proper review, I'm just going to hilariously re-write what I crudely wrote on my pad of paper.
"I got more joy out of the Mary (and the witch's flower) preview before the movie. How many seconds have I wasted watching that M&M's fake movie trailer? The wedding in this is much shorter than the one in Twilight, thank God. This is great cinematography. Why is Anna surprised by Christian owning a jet? She flew in a drone and helicopter in the first movie. There's generic action stealth music in this hijacking scene. 'It's Boobs in Boobs-land' is an actual line in this movie. 'Don't pull, they'll bite' is an actual line in this movie. This is The Room levels of bad, getting into the sex scenes quick. Generic plot with generic Danny Elfman music. Christian Grey drove all the way down to Anna's work just because of her fucking e-mail. Why no text messaging? Sitting on a couch for a conversation, such great direction. There's no plot, there's little fantasy sequences with pop music. 'Oh look, a fancy car! Oh look, a fancy house!' Horrible Anna race driving scene, pointless SUV-following sequence, Christian Grey no-have security? Wouldn't the SUV-guy find them later? Grey is a billionaire, his presence is everywhere. Going to New York to escape anonymous driver? Why? Comes back, go to fancy house for little vacation, more pointless sex and bathing scene. Anna restrains the intruder with her play handcuffs, how funny. Christian's trip to New York added nothing to the plot. Sex scenes are not earned or built up, they just happen. Another random vacation montage with soundtrack music. I feel the characters are one-dimensional on purpose so you can insert yourself in them. Embarrassing scene Anna dropping ice cream on Grey's chest with more soundtrack music, totally ignores drama from last scene. The whole movie has fake pseudo-drama, but uses it as a vehicle to sell women's fantasy sequences as a product. Who fucking cares about Anna's friend trying out dresses or getting engaged? 'Uh-oh! Anna rolled her eyes, better punish her in another sex scene with more soundtrack.' Play sad soundtrack song over news of Anna pregnant, it's forced drama. I started ironically getting into it by the end, like, 'Yay, Christian wants to have the baby now!"
There's this really silly flashback montage at the very end of the movie, using clips from the last two movies, as if we went on a journey with them or some shit. I'll admit, I'm going to miss hating on this franchise, it was a fun short-lived ride, unless they dig it back up for a spin-off.
R.I.P. The Fifty Shades Of Grey series
Holy shit, this movie took the biggest quality 180-turn I've ever witnessed. About a half hour into Den of Thieves, I was ready to call it quits. Slap a 'Please stop' and a one star rating on this and walk out, but miraculously, the clusterfuck of a script climbed itself out of it's conventional and edgy teenager levels of writing. It was able to correct it's under-cooked meat and present a thrilling second and third act. I can even pin-point the minute it happened. It's when Gerard Butler is at his daughter's school, he's talking to her through the fence, but when he gets back to his car, he breaks down in tears. Seen the scenario a million times before, but from that scene on, the big heist the movie had been horribly building up to started to happen. Let me just say, the editing, deliberate lack of music, the tension, the quick camera cuts, acute attention to detail, the raw acting, is all, pardon me, really fucking good. Unlike the previous fifty minutes or so, none of the dialogue or acting felt hokey, the performances are intense, and it's mature use of weapon handling just added to the realism. It's just shocking to me, because I've seen movies like Marauders, where the entire film reeks of amateurish direction and horrible trope-y childish ideas, and the whole movie is like that. "Oh man, this thug cop who doesn't play by the rules likes to party, drink beer, smoke, and beat criminals up. He's so cool." Den of Thieves starts off in that territory, horrible, criminal levels of bad, but inverted dramatically and turned great. I want to know what happened behind-the-scenes and who wrote the first hour of the movie. Everything involving the heist and subsequent chase is great. Go see this, just show up a half hour late, you won't miss much.
It's Sharknado without the sharks, directed by the guy who did the original The Fast And The Furious... shame. That's all I've got to say, no one saw this movie any-ways, probably no one cares about this "review." I must say, the amount of continuity errors in the final chase scene, which is proudly displayed on the poster, is off the charts. The whole finale happens in the eye of the hurricane, that means the storm clouds should be encapsulating on all sides. However, because the dozen or so studios who financed this hurricane-scale proportions of a mess must've run out of budget money, the effects are clearly missing for over half the shots. Any shot that shows ahead of the truck, not behind, the cloud wave is missing. I suppose they assumed any braindead audience members just wouldn't care? In any circumstance, it's an unforgivable over-sight. It's unfortunate the entire movie is not stupid enough to be an enjoyable disaster. I'd rather sit through another real hurricane, infinitely more entertaining.
I don't even want to write anything. This movie makes me angry. Even with the mind-set going in that this is cheesy non-sense meant to please the brain-dead movie-going public, it fails to generate any sense that it understands what it wants to be and it's responsibility to respect it's predecessor. Call me exaggerating, but Pacific Rim: Uprising is a nightmare of a film, it's the last thing any fan should want of a property: Taking everything great a franchise has established, strip it down it's bare assets, then trying to sell it to dumb people. I've already said the first Pacific Rim wasn't a brilliant piece of cinema, but a lot of love went into crafting it's visuals and universe. Del Toro had a great eye for practical effects, lighting, digital composites, etc. I'm sorry Steven S. DeKnight, but he murders the franchise in every possible category: The writing is film school amateurish, the effects are below-average (lower than Transformers quality), the music is forgettable, and the universe has been shrunken down to a couple people, just like what The Last Jedi did for Star Wars. You had this mature and bad-ass world of Jaegar meets Kaiju action and you squandered it into the embarrassing cringe-inducing children's movie domain. I don't know how much hand John Boyega had in the creative process, but you can smell the cheapening all over the product. Everyone's picked apart the Jaegars moving too fast and the outfits not appearing as technically impressive, but down to the core, the writing, it's ruined. You thought Independence Day: Resurgence had lazy writing? Wait until you hear classic lines in Uprising that just reference how much better the writing was in the last movie. Want to write a great speech before the final battle? That takes too much effort. Just mention how great Idris Elba's "cancelling the apocalypse" speech was. They do this constantly in the movie, chucking, not even just random subtle call-backs, but full pieces of dialogue mentioning events in the last one. If you're not even going to bother writing your story better than garbage like Ender's Game and every other "youth training in military to stop evil force" movie, please don't insult the original by persistently referencing how much better it was. The action isn't even exciting. The physics and extremely out-of-place uses of slow-motion hinder any kind of tension or thrills. The finale in Tokyo is among one of the most underwhelming and confusing messes of editing ever. Resurgence was easy to follow at least, because it was set in the barren desert. How is it that a sequence at night in the rain, from the first movie, is easier to follow than one in daylight? And the movie just ends after they defeat the "final boss" Kaiju. No extra words to bring the characters' arcs to a close, you know, like a resolution should. It just goes from the characters getting out of their pod, having an out-of-place snowball fight, and the end credits. I almost couldn't believe it was over then. There was a brief mid-credits scene that poorly set-up future sequels that thankfully won't ever happen. It just dumbfounds me the entire cast went about putting this disaster together without one person going, "You know, shouldn't we at least get something right from the original movie?" Long-gone are the days of cool neon-aesthetic duel-outs with robots smashing ships into on another. We have the most bare-bones bullshit that's parading around as a sequel to a passion project of epic proportions. It's no wonder Del Toro isn't advertising this movie on Twitter. There's a part in the movie where they play the "Trololol" song as the Jaegars are flying away to fight. It was literally trolling it's audience.
CW: Christianity, Atheism, white males, a retarded plot
Do I even need to say anything? It's God's Я Us 3: A Light in Bankruptcy. Pure Flix, by some miracle of God, has managed to assemble a cinematic universe out of this fecal matter, just like Universal Studios and Focus was able to splurge out three Fifty Shades movies. I'm committing review sin by comparing two unrelatable franchises, but the parallels apply. I must ask, who is going to these to make them profitable? Suckers like me who want to watch some unintentional trash? Authentic Christian audiences who view these as important films? I would love to have a discourse with someone who honestly enjoys a broken wreck of a movie like this. Everyone can have their own taste, I welcome all perspectives, but it makes you curious. I admit, seeing Shane Harper's silly mug back again made me ironically geek out. It was the equivalent of a seeing a side-character cameo back in a Marvel product. All enjoyment is purely found in the accidental humor and structural problems. When a focal dramatic moment has met me laughing at it's scrambled pacing and distracting inadequate digital effects, you've failed at telling whatever story you were trying to. There's a sampling of laughably edgy conversation too, one where domestic abuse is brought up and another the Mandela effect being used to interpret Jesus may exist. It's too bad, Christianity could be so metal if shown on the big-screen with reverence. Pure Flix, you have money, make a badass action movie (that's not Samson), put some Bruce Campbell, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Dwayne Johnson in there, and you got me there opening day. Throw heavy rock in and hardcore Bible verses for maximum flavor. For now, we still have Ben Hur, The Ten Commandments, and any Mel Gibson movie, so I guess we're good.
:point_right::projector:(:rooster::no_entry_sign:)=:poop:
:eggplant:≠:face_with_hand_over_mouth:
Not the worst offense of the year, but nothing we haven't seen before. Only this time, thrown in some more lecturing and dated humor. The amount of vulgarity expressed in the movie is to be expected, and it will please some crowds just of how up-front it is, but it wears thin. The biggest compliment I can give Blockers is it really trudges ahead to make likable characters. Ike Barinholtz is a funny dude, Leslie Mann really tries her all, but whenever a "dramatic" moment was happening, I couldn't take it seriously. It's a comedy, yes, but the fake tears and arguments about gender politics just came across as hamfisted and :sleepy::zzz:. At least Kay Cannon has done her research about the internet. To all my 4chan anons reading this, there's a character in this movie named Chad, who wears a fedora, owns a samurai, and eats Cheetos.
Heavy spoilers ahead, I'd just like to talk about the movie. Oh yeah, seeing it again in it's original Japanese version helped quite a bit. I caught a lot more stuff this time, including stylistic choices I didn't pick up on previously. All comparisons to Ponyo are only valid on surface level. The movie's tone and messages are unique to it's own. I really appreciated the flashbacks done in a tasteful way, like they're child drawings from the perspective different to each character. The story is excellently told, able to tell the history of the town, and tell the stories of a number of people, some barely getting screen time, but their resolutions being surprisingly emotional. A couple beats I missed: Kai is developing the final song throughout the entire movie, and only sings it at the end, after gaining his confidence from Lu (Somehow I didn't pick up on that from the English dub). One inspiration I just picked up driving home, was Lu could be interpreted as the Mary Poppins archetype. She comes to this broken town, covered in shadows from a curse, wants everyone to become friends, and by the end, once all is fixed, she moves on. Some may not like the romantic involvement between her and the boy, but... love is strange like that. Kai first sees her as reminder of his mother, which inspires him to express himself again, then grows a child like genuine fondness to her. It's actually quite remarkable this pulled off giving backstories a large selection of the cast, and teaching some heavy life realities in the process. Your initial dreams may not work out like you planned, but other opportunities you didn't expect will come. My heart grows heavy just thinking about it. The style is expressionist and lively, almost copying decades old animation, a welcome return. And the four child leads are just so endearing. The scene of Lu and Kai walking around town to the guitar cover of Naoko's theme is especially magical; not in a spectacle way, but something about the playful dichotomy of these two really moves you. The imagery and dialogue makes for a heavy sequence. If there was ever a one-shot anime movie I would love to see a sequel for, it's this. One of my new favorite movies of all time. I'll edit this review if I think up anything else to say.
Updated to read more coherently
Well, that was a whole lot of nothing. If you're new and reading this, I think I should lay down my opinions on the Star Wars franchise. I have a lot of nostalgia for the original trilogy, I unironically enjoy The Phantom Menace, genuinely love Revenge of the Sith, and currently dislike the direction Disney is taking the series with Episode VII and VIII. Rogue One is the only new film put out that I liked, attributed primarily to Gareth Edwards' vision for that particular story. The saga has a special place in the back of my heart, but I'm not a blind fanboy. I recognize when something is poorly done, or in Solo's case, having no reason to exist. It's amazing a pop culture icon as big as this has sunken into bargain bin or Netflix territories of inconsequential narratives. Aside from a couple winks and clever callbacks to aforementioned, and soon to be coming up, events in future and past films, there's no consequences in the story and nothing seems to matter. We have a stagnant and poor actor playing alongside Emilia Clarke in a bad school play of Bonnie & Clyde while doing shit that doesn't make sense, other than that it needs to happen to satisfy callbacks in future installments. And what's a shame, is there was potential here. Maybe Gareth Edwards' hands being dug into this universe indirectly influenced the design in a way, but seeing Han fight as a soldier in the beginning was an interesting route to explore. I liked some of the dialogue, a bit of it feeling much more natural than what's been going on in other quip filled biggies. Ron Howard does a decent job, I'm a fan of his work, and his direction is unique and hands on. Unfortunately, his flavor doesn't seem to appear much. Once more, a committee and a yes man cobbled this up, Howard seemingly compromising his style for simple "wow" moments. But overall, it is competent. I wonder how much of this is Lord and Miller way back from what they shot. I wish there was more of Howard, his look just seemed scattered throughout. There's a moment at the end where Emilia is looking out the window at Han, and, it was a small gesture, but the cinematography combined with Powell's music made for a surprisingly memorable moment. It had a raw quality and felt like... a movie, specifically reminiscent of a 60's drama. But it was just another little nugget in a space of nothing. I liked the idea of showing the storm troopers as actually threatening, pushing civilians around, it felt right. The scene of Han and Kira getting separated between the bars works, there's attempt at character building. But around after the opening on Carillion, the arc kind of stagnates. Everything interesting happens in the first twenty minutes. They may have played all their cards out too early, but just, I don't know. Once they arrived on the ice planet for their first heist, I became so disinterested, and anything kind of established early wasn't considered for bringing back up later in the story (aside from the dice). Arcs weren't considered, things just... happened. Scenes just happened. The most satisfaction I found were just a few shining pieces of competent film making, like the spectacular storm chase with the Falcon, but they're thrown in service of a story with characters as wasted as Rose Tico. Woody Harrelson is wasted in this shit, his only purpose is to teach Han to never trust anyone, which doesn't even really seem to affect Han anyways. He buddies up with Chewbacca at the end regardless, so Harrelson's arc ends with no impact. His girlfriend dies during the first heist, and everyone forgets about it so quick. When droid asked for equal rights, I swear I was ready to walk out. Yes, Star Wars has always been political, but the stories themselves have underlying subtle political echoes. This was just a lazy call out to current year politics, and screamed lazy writing. As for the lack of any tension, it doesn't have anything to do with me knowing none of these characters will die, because this is a prequel, but this doesn't tell me anything I care to know. Oh yeah, I'm so worried the annoying female droid is going to die. It's more useless than the C3P0 and R2-D2 meeting in Episode I. So, Darth Maul is back miraculously. Cool. What does that add to this story? How does it develop the characters anything beyond fan service tripe? Why does it matter? Why does anything that go on in this movie matter? Stuff just happens. Think about it. Take away the brand for a second and think about the events that happen here. I don't know who's saying it, but Donald Glover is passable at best as Lando. So, he smiles a few times and says some snappy things at a card game. That's not a character. Han Solo is not developed anymore than he was in the originals. His character doesn't really evolve or learn any lessons. After the opening, he's reduced to standing around really awkwardly and repeat how much of a great pilot he is. They were just hitting the beats at the right moments and hoping it was entertaining enough so you wouldn't hate sitting through it. The villain is one of the most useless, throw away, gangster cartel dealing baddies you've ever seen. I've seriously already forgotten his name. You know, I go to movies to be enriched. To either be gleefully entertained through worthwhile action that carries meaning, learn valuable life lessons, and to think. I don't go to be numb for two hours as recognizable flashy colors simply blast on a big screen. And like I have to repeat, I don't preach this to be pretentious, these are my feelings. I'm done getting peer pressured into seeing all these big movies I have no interest in, a lot of which leave me feeling empty, rather than quenched. I'm done giving Star Wars a chance. My highest compliment to Howard is, I didn't hate this. It didn't destroy the legacy and reputation like The Last Jedi. I'm just disappointed. Rogue One was the lucky strike in the losing ball game.
I don't ever give out ratings to short films, only features, but I'm making an exception for On Your Mark. How Miyazaki managed to make my heart heavy for three characters I knew for all but six minutes, none of whom speak, is a feat I don't think anyone has done before, for me, in a short. Using the lovely music as a backdrop was incredibly ingenious and added another layer to the emotion. This could easily be a feature, and that's my only issue with it, is there's a lot that happens, just wishing it was a tad longer to extend some of the events. It gets the job done. If you missed this, watch it now here, you won't regret experiencing it. You'll have the song stuck in your head.
Hereditary has a lot going for it. Toni Collette steals the Oscar win halfway into the year, Ari Aster writes a well thought out script at the tender age of 31, and A24 gets to keep repackaging the same movie with the same misleading trailer. Many are going at this movie as a resurgence of the horror genre, everyone complaining about the overuse of "cheap" jumpscares in more mainstream filth, but this being an unprecedented achievement? It is not. That doesn't mean it's bad, or even overpraised. I can see why people will fawn all over this. It's a tightly built, marvelously crafted family drama, filled to the brim with emotionally petrifying moments. It's always the worst kind of feeling you get when you can relate to unpleasant scenario in film (or any medium), but hearing and seeing Collette scream got to my head. Not sure what happened to Aster in his short life where he was able to capture a shouting match so accurately, but I feel you, man. I would rather not say much more, because bringing up any details could delude the twist and mystery. Simply put, if you want a more intense version of The Witch, it parallels a lot, right down to some select story beats. However, unlike the historical and somewhat fable feeling of the latter, Hereditary feels very grounded in the real world of today, sometimes to an unnerving extent. There are grotesque moments, but the bits here that stick with you rely on the characters' actions. When Peter Graham is laying down in bed and he's just waiting for his mom to discover the corpse, then hear her blood curdling screams, that's something that will stick with me. Annie pleading to her husband over and over to burn the book is a performance I won't shake off. I've seen this story done before, and better at that. I think my bigger issue with the movie isn't any of the technical stuff, everything presented is visually stunning, I just don't think I was as impressed as I should've been.
This is 2018's The Snowman. Nothing else to say.
I mean, it's better than whatever the Dark Universe is doing. Shit, I saw this a couple days ago at my awesome local AMC, but I forgot to log it. The film doesn't have as much staying power as I would like, kind of shame, 'cause I really dig cute animated features, and the horror genre. This is a child friendly mix of both, but it's only stand out qualities it has to show for is Genndy's expressive animation, and I mean wacky as fuck stuff, and it's line up of Transylvanian monsters. So call me biased for giving this an above average rating, but it's presentation is what I got a high off. Also, that godforsaken airplane Gremlins bit, oh my god I want more of that. I mean, if you're just looking for a safe time at the theater on a like a discount day, this is the perfect option. Your gelatinous offspring will eat it up, you will like the monsters and action, and the theater gets money. Everyone wins. When I say safe, this is the highest average you can get. Main character wants a girlfriend, crew goes on vacation, lead meets a pretty lady, hijinks ensue, and some "surprise" reveals. You know the entire plot start to finish just by watching the trailer. I wish Tartakovsky was allowed to take risks, or allowed to make his Popeye movie that was shamefully scrapped in service of making The Emoji Movie, because the dude has talent. He created Samurai Jack and Dexter's Labratory. He has a key eye for fluid and unrealistic movement that lends itself to eye candy entertainment. The fact he's stuck at Sony making borderline criminally safe movies like Summer Vacation is sad. I was amused with what I got here, it's fine, but that's it.
It doesn’t take long to recognize that “Mission: Impossible — Fallout” is a good movie. Very good; nonstop exhilaration, incredible stunts, fluid camera movement complimented by the editing, goofy plot twists that work despite their conventionality, and all the character leads. This sounds like a negative, it's not, the best way to describe the experience is like watching a Saturday morning cartoon. Tom Cruise coupled with his lovable team up against the new villain is the groundwork for many children's television episodes. But, Of course, they take it up a bunch of notches, crafting an engaging, and thankfully classy blockbuster that is above many other wretched releases as of late. Never did I feel cheated or talked down to, it hearkens back to the noir films of the 30's (that meet-up at the beginning is a direct take on the gangster genre) while plucking the set pieces right out of classic James Bond. But Christopher McQuarrie shits all over them; he's making a name for delivering breath stopping action sequences, the helicopter finale shot in IMAX left my mouth hanging time to time. The sixth film in a surprise hit franchise is still improving upon itself, and Cruise still willing to do ridiculous stunts at the tender age of 56. I guess Scientology gives you superpowers, sign me up. He makes us all forget he was in The Mummy, and Rebecca Ferguson gets her career back on track after the sleeper "hit" The Snowman. A few last comments, I'm glad they kept the shot in where Cruise limps as he gets up on the building, he actually broke his foot filming that scene, that's why. It's funny, Tom just played Barry Seal in American Made, an expert pilot who transported in a drug cartel. Now in this, he can barely work a helicopter. Henry Cavil put up a damn good fight, that mustache took out an entire film franchise. I say worth it, that's a sick stache. I'm just glad the action was zany enough to marry with it's silly story. This was the right balance of everything. The dialogue is intense, which keeps the audience on their toes, giving the impression of being nonstop. You get your moneys worth.
Everyone needs this film in their life. I cried. No, really, I did. I can't believe it myself. Disney's put out both one of the worst films in their catalogue, and now one of the best in the same year. Three years ago, I was chastising Disney for even conceptualizing a live action Winnie The Pooh, screaming lack of a creative vision and banking off the tired nostalgia of a once great little franchise. I haven't held Disney in the highest regard at all in recent years, criticizing many of their decisions and downright refusing to visit their theme parks or stores. Now, I'm not going to come at you with some bullshit Stuckmann comment, "I grew up with Winnie The Pooh," even though I did, Christopher Robin succeeds entirely on it's own and can be loved by people of all ages. I rack on movies for their structural problems, sometimes ignoring the feeling I'm supposed to be having from the viewing experience, but films like this remind me how emotion can overcome any kind of little technical problem, if it's done well. This is the Disney I miss. I'm so tired of the corporate sell out manipulating monster that is the nu-Disney machine, but it seems every couple of years, Disney puts out a film that reminds me why I loved old Disney, the one Walt Disney created. Meet The Robinsons, Up, Saving Mr. Banks, Tomorrowland, and now Christopher Robin all have something in common. There's messages about growing up, remembering to keep moving forward, not letting such menial things get in the way of what's really important, and so on. What I really love what Marc Foster did was put some class and taste into this. This treats the original Hundred Acre Woods story with real respect, not just the original animated film, but the books and illustrations. This has one of the most perfect openings to any movie, implementing the book drawings into the new live action material. Showing Christopher leave, in a scene replicated from the original movie, and then show his life growing up, and even going off to war and leaving his wife behind, started to get to me. It's very tastefully done and doesn't come across as cheesy or childish. One bit of the montage that stuck out, was I think Pooh blows out a candle on a cake, and it cuts to an explosion in a battle Christopher's in. The whole thing was excellently done. Ewan McGregor makes for a fantastic character, we really don't deserve him. His character means so well for the world, but because of the burdens of reality and his job, unfortunately has to put on hold the things that he holds so dear, even going so far as to snap at Pooh in frustration. The dark and gloomy look of the woods built on the heavy tone of the scene, it was nearly heartbreaking to watch. When the two reconciled, at their thinking place, I had tears on my face. Such an innocent little bear, with no clue of the harshness of the outside world, nearly getting hit in the face with it, while simultaneously reminding Christopher of the carelessness of being a child, was both so endearing and so sad at the same time. The movie gradually turns into a silly adventure movie at the second half, but it doesn't lose it's emotional grip, in fact, it carries it proudly on it's shoulders. I don't want to spoil anything more, but any scene with McGregor talking one on one with either his family or Pooh, will put you on the edge of tears. I love the setting of war-era London, and you very quickly get accustomed to the realistic look of the Hundred Acre Woods. Disney, I know I hate you and I know I rag on you, but let me just say thank you for putting this movie out. It makes me ashamed of my fellow movie fans this movie isn't doing well at the box office or even that fantastic critically, but this is the best movie you have released in a while. It doesn't even feel like a nu-Disney movie, this is a true return to form and boy, man, I really wish they would stick with this. It's so pure and full of genuine heart. I hope people look back on this with a fondness and as a classic. Just great shit, silly old bear...
I watched this again, with my father, in preparation to see The Meg, 'cause I was worried hearing reports the upcoming film was neutered of it's blood soaked glory. I wanted to compensate any blue balls I thought I would have by first drowning myself in wild girls tits and ripped apart penises before inevitable disappointment. I think Piranha loses some of it's enjoyment on repeat viewings, but there's enough over the top fun and classic b-movie antics to keep all horror fans satisfied. It's crazy to see such a crass and low brow endeavor like this film get critical acclaim from critics. The effects aren't the greatest, the story is childish, but the greatest attribute it boasts I proudly agree with is it doesn't hold back. This is a clear cut modern example of not taking yourself seriously, just having fun with your premise. You want to see an entire lake of spring breakers get ripped to fucking shreds with blood and gore everywhere? You will most definitely get it and more. You want to see Christopher Lloyd briefly reprise his role as Doc Brown raving about the piranhas? You got it. Want to see Eli Roth get his head cut off? You bet your ass you'll get it. Want Adam Scott to shoot piranhas with a shotgun while riding a jet ski? It's here, baby. How about tearing the shit out of them with a boat propeller detached like a chainsaw? I'll stop spoiling the fun. It's a crazy match made in heaven, few "don't take yourself seriously" films like Sharknado hit that very specific sweet spot that makes the film fun as hell to watch, but not in a laughing at it bad way. Piranha 3D is the very rare gore fest that knows how to have loads of genuine summer fun; a return to 80's exploitation.
I had to see it twice to confirm if I was crazy that I enjoyed this conventional safe corporate product. and to see Statham naked again, i ain't gay You all know what this is and what to expect from it. Just look at the poster and the title. The bar for quality has been set right there. But does that make experience inherently not worth bothering with? Would you be satisfied putting your money down for it? I can argue I got my money's worth, even if some of the blood and gore was neutered to reach a PG-13 and Chinese market. A shame uncut and more grotesque scenes were filmed, but will never be completed due to money. Despite it's lack of Piranha 3D ludicrous blood shed, there is a lot of action and spectacle to be had with The Meg. The plot is nothing more inventive than what The Asylum and syfy would greenlit, I've never read the novel, so I can't speak for the consistency. What bolsters the script up from it's depths of potential obscurity, is it's high budget crowd pleasing intuition. Lots of emphasis on quips, something I'm usually against, but luckily are implemented smoothly into each character. Not everyone is a damn comedian, it just feels more natural, only once did I feel the placement of a joke was unneeded. This is like what you'd expect from an old 70's exploitation flick, Statham is like the classic adventure hero; even one scene, he lifts his hat up like Indiana Jones. After a traumatizing incident in which he's forced to leave behind a group of people to save another set, he quits diving and retires to Thailand. But when an ocean trench expedition involving his ex-wife goes wrong, he's persuaded to come back in and help. The first half of the film is like Deep Blue Sea, setting up the locations in characters; it's more of a rescue set-up for the megalodon to come in later. It's not like the story of Gareth Edwards' Godzilla, how Godzilla's origins are deeply intertwined into the narrative. This, you could replace the shark with any deep sea creature, it doesn't matter too much, except for the finale. Once the titular monster comes on screen, the movie officially begins. From there, you get the dumb fun you want, and there's a good amount of it. Want to see the shark swallow a diving cage whole? Sure, why not? Anything you want to see the shark do, it's in here somewhere. It's like Rampage in the sense it understands you just want dumb fun. I can respect a blockbuster that doesn't aim for quality, just looking to give you loads of delicious flavorful eye candy. What makes something like this work over another "dumb fun" blockbuster like Pacific Rim: Uprising, comes down to two things: The Meg isn't a sequel with expectations to be lived up to, and there's a competent story, start to finish. While it's not original, could be to blame that the novel is old, it works enough. The characters make up for any tiny lack of shark presence. If we can get more Asian actors in front of the camera like this, by all means, go for it. I'm just a sucker for the Asian aesthetic, see, this whole movie takes place in China and stars one of the country's biggest stars, so you can see why it's doing so great at the box office. This is how you do a silly summer cheese fest, it's not too over the top, it understands you want to see the shark, it has a classic story behind it, and places emphasis on the leads being at least entertaining to latch onto. Did any of you notice the nod to Jaws at the end? When the Meg sinks to the bottom of the ocean, it makes the same growling sound the blown up shark in Jaws did. Trivial knowledge for the hardcore fans out there.
It's odd, I write longer reviews for movies I don't like, but rarely for ones I love. I guess it's hard for me to express the feelings I get from watching a truly great work of art without sounding like I'm full of myself. Night is Short, Walk on Girl came out early last year, but I just caught it for the GKids fathom events in the theatre. Seeing Masaaki Yuasa's mug on screen for the after credits interview is an image I'll never forget. This Science Saru masterpiece deals with a lot of themes; the ever increasing passage of time that seems to go faster as you age, the dangers but also carefree excitement of adult life, love at first sight, etc. It's one of the craziest, but also extremely heartfelt journeys that I think a lot of us have felt in our lives at least once. Going back to American Graffiti or even Ferris Bueller, doing everything you see in sight to take advantage of the moment, because you have to leave and grow up. It's that crazy prom night you look back on with fond memories, remembering all the stuff you did, wanting to recapture that magic. Yuasa's fluid style really lends itself to this fast paced narrative, moreso than Lu Over The Wall, and the use of physical renderings to emulate emotions, like a court room scene symbolizing a conflict of emotions that's happening in a head, and flowers blooming from the stomach to capture that bubbly feeling you can get from drinking. It's hard to pick on scene I love the most, it's all so memorable, like one night, the entire journey is the best moment. The girl with black hair, mirroring her counterpart from The Tatami Galaxy, is just on a quest to become an adult, so she goes across town to different bars just drinking and meeting all these odd assortment of people. Each of them have their own strange romantic stories they're still a part in, and little does the girl know, she's in one too. The first three fourths of the movie is just a wild, crazy, silly extravaganza across the city, but the last half hour takes a more restrained tone as the girl starts to visit people who have gotten colds, laying in their beds, each of who's story has found some kind of end. Seeing the girl mature throughout the story is one of the greatest experiences I've seen on screen, and it's surprisingly funny too. If you're in the mood for just some crazy animation, but a story with all of life in it, you may want to pop it up, by chance.
This is clearly a Steven Spielberg movie (and with the statement from the camera operators confirming it), but I ain't complaining. Tobe Hooper already has my deepest respects for The Texas Chain Saw Massacre 1 & 2, so it doesn't matter how much involved he was for Poltergeist. The result is still a fun film to pop on during the Halloween season and get wrapped up in the sensational characters and set pieces. I wanted to catch up on this for Halloween Horror Nights as I had never seen this before. I have to say, the shot choices are excellent. The contrast with the figures silhouettes against the bright blue light illuminating from the portal, is a beautiful sight. Despite it's 80's effects and compositing, it adds to the cheesy charm of an otherwise dramatic film. This was The Conjuring of it's time; the parents concerned for their child kind of gives off the same vibe. I'm glad I got around to it and it's definitely going into my collection. What else to say? It's a Spielberg classic.
They're playing this timeless music video in front of The House With A Clock In Its Walls right now, in IMAX 3D no less. The remastering done to it is exquisite. For example, you can see the individual particles of dust in the shines of light peering into the house. You can see the dirt and gravel on the street. The detail is out of this world, and it belongs on the giant screen. The 3D effect was an interesting little bonus, but only added depth of field, and not much of a pop. The short film and music video is classic, a staple of pop culture, so there's no sense in me reviewing it specifically. It's the embodiment of classic horror and the overall mood of the 1980's. I can see why Universal sought to put this in front of Eli Roth's film, which heavily relies on a classic aesthetic, using the 70's Universal and Amblin logo to add to the atmosphere. I welcome the addition and I welcome showing an amazing music video like Thriller in the theater. Let's do more of these, please!
This movie suffers from a little problem. It doesn't know if it wants to go balls to the wall horror with the violence and show graphic imagery, or be tame enough so those just getting into horror can be comfortable. I would say it goes for the Carpenter angle and tries to play a mystique towards it's killer. Hell Fest's greatest claim to it's name is it's location. You'd think because it's just a shitty little movie, the sets and costuming would be lame, but it's the opposite. This place almost puts Halloween Horror Nights to shame. It's so elaborate and unrealistically over the top, there are definitely some park regulation violations. The costumes are so grotesque; dripping liquid and touching visitors as they walk down the paths. I find it hard to believe this is a traveling amusement park, some of the rides are built into like the wooden bridges of the park. I don't see how they could pack all this stuff up. But if the nitpick part of your brain can ignore the limitations of reality, it's beautiful to look at. The park is beaming with lights, decorations, stage shows, and set pieces. It's probably the most detailed amusement park I've seen on film. The movie's other greatest claim to fame is it's clever idea, sticking an actual killer into this horror themed park. You'd never know who was the guy because he blends into all the scenery and actors. The mask he wears is even a park issued prop for the actors. He can just walk up and kill someone and no one would know it's for real, or even creepier, the guests would laugh it off. There's some real great shit going on with this premise and they take advantage of it multiple times. On this stage, the main character's ditzy friend is participating in a sacrificing act where she'll be put in a guillotine, but it's revealed the guy performing it is the killer that's been stalking them all night. The way the scene slows down as the lead tries to warn the guards about what's about to happen, it actually puts you on edge. You wonder will the man kill her right on stage in front of the audience, or fool the lead as part of the act. It's a great moment. The biggest issue I have with the movie comes down to parts of it's script. There are too many scenes where the killer stalks them like in the bathroom or the back alleys of the park, away from the crowds of guests. They fell into the trap of doing the "character isolated from the group" dreck. The whole gimmick is the guy can kill anyone in plain sight, and they only do it a few times. Killing the lead's boyfriend in the employee locker room sucks. Why couldn't he do it right in her face and make it seem like part of a performance? And, aside from our head girl and her surprisingly likable boyfriend, the rest of the friends are just eccentric party goers, but luckily, the way scenes are paced still makes you care who's going to die, which I can happily say about this over many other generic slashers. The only other obvious glaring issue is the last half hour, which is an overly long chase through a couple of the haunted houses. It's a fun sequence for like five minutes, but then well overstays it's welcome. If someone could just edit it down, and then put in some alternate scenes with more murders in plain sight of the crowds of visitors, this could easily be one of my favorites of the year. But as now, it's just a fun little time.
This feels like an extended television episode, like if John Hughes started making a series. Not much depth to the script outside some very basic character dynamics. The drama comes out of nowhere. Two guys just come in to rob the Target store, but they have no set up or real connection to the characters. Home Alone handled this much better. There are a number of (rather pointless) montage scenes, and set to hit songs of the time, which can be enjoyable, but add nothing to the story. I'd say only give this a watch for Jennifer Connolly (mostly for her looks), and if you want to get nostalgic over the time period. It definitely is a time capsule type film.
All the people giving this film lower reviews legit don't understand it. This is one of the greatest blockbusters ever crafted, not just in it's visuals, but writing.
initial impressions incoming
Just like the characters in the film repeatedly like to chant in gleeful unison: Everything is not awesome. Coming from someone who had a deep admiration for the first film way back five years ago, because of it's inventive storytelling, quotable dialogue, and surprisingly lovable brick characters, I was given the impression the follow up would match or come close to capturing that lightning in a bottle the first had. However, about fifty minutes in, I realized this film straight up barred in to awful realms. This film is now proof that having an inventive style doesn't mean anything if not for the characters. Oh sure, the presentation here is top notch, as is expected from Phil Lord and Chris Miller's other work, I'm looking at you Spider-Verse, but unless you can enrich my experience with some amazing action to fill that void, or characters that I can at least follow through the dreck, there won't be anything to chew on. The Lego Movie 2 suffers from extreme sequelitis, much in the same vein as Incredibles 2, where in order for a sequel to justify it's existence, characters have to take steps back in their development, arcs have to be completely disregarded that way the sequel can essentially remake it's predecessor to keep that tone and flavor audiences liked about the previous installment. This has only worked a handful of times on some films I find guilty pleasures, but rarely does this tactic pay off. It comes off like you're watching a shittier version of something you liked. Trust me, they try to redo that ingenious human connection that the first's twist gave us, but it's almost overdone to an annoying extent and doesn't have any of the impact the first had, where the LEGO story was revealed as one big parallel to the boy's real life relationship with his father. Doing that again, offers nothing new. Now that little kid has to overcome his sibling rivalry with his sister, as the two bicker over who should have control over the lego's, and at a few moments, you feel like it'll work, but just comes across stale and almost like a television continuation. This doesn't have the grand, epic scope of the first, instead opting for something more personal, that oddly, doesn't explore the characters it's attempting to deconstruct. It acts as a self reflection of Emmett and his relationship with himself, and in turn, affects his interactions with his sister. Something much more ambitious could've been done here, but it feels like half a script is missing and a ton of filler is thrown in instead, like the cringe inducing musical numbers. I wouldn't recommend checking this out, which is a shame, and my expectations weren't high.
All the people talking about race and whatever bullshit with Peele's films kind of sour me on the projects. It's reminding me of Hideaki Anno and the collective analysis that happened with Evangelion. People trying to find this grandeur meaning behind the imagery used in the film, when the mundane reality could just be Peele is making more cliché horror, albeit with a more careful and artistic lens. Everyone labeled Get Out as this masterpiece of screenwriting that's a commentary on whites using blacks for their own gain, and that's not to say those themes aren't present, that doesn't mean it makes the film's formulaic storytelling a step above or revolutionary, or dare I say it, "brave." Peele's previous felt very much like a typical Blumhouse horror movie, but because some notes about his views of race where used as a piece of the storytelling, the critical circles lavished it with, in my opinion, unwarranted praise. It was a standard family horror fair, if you've ever watched horror, you can pick out the set pieces and notes from a mile away, I know I did, but oh, now critics will pay attention to horror because it has some undertone "messages" about race relations. Just because you have those themes does not automatically elevate your film above others, and that's the sad narrative surrounding Peele's otherwise decent movies.
I've enjoyed both of his films so far, and Us I actually enjoyed even more. It's a neat little film that has much more in the way of set ups and pay offs. This is a better constructed screenplay. Every beat and cue comes back to finish off it's arc with amusing grandiose. The hands across America commercial, use of handcuffs, the flare gun line (which comes back in the form of a weapon), and little pieces in the dialogue like, "Doesn't anyone care about the apocalypse?" there's quite a jam packed screenplay in the first and third act. I think it's the second act things get a little too padded out. It's entertaining with some almost hilarious displays, like the neighbor (on her last breath) telling the device to call the police, but it turns on Fuck the police the song instead. There's a surprising amount of humor in here, some working better than others. The family is likable enough, but isn't developed much outside their ambiguous goals, like the daughter conveniently was on the track team, and she's the one who's told to run. The characters serve the plot for the majority of the run time, it's not about them, it's what happens to them and their clones. If you just want action, there's lots of it in the second part, like I was saying, it just gets too long with seemingly not much purpose, upon which is gets exhausting. The third act comes around to finish off the story (and show off the facility underground I called) that was set up and kind of forgotten about, in a nice little bow that's not as clever as any of Shyamalam's twists, but at least brings everything full circle. Maybe everything was a little too predictable. My family guessed the mother was actually switched around in the Merlin's Forest like a half hour before it was revealed. I think this is a case of a script, and I know, who am I to judge Peele, but everything was in place here, I just wanted more a reason to care. I don't really know anything about this family or why I should care about them. The mother is coming to terms with her fear and really, the fact she stole her way in to what she wanted, so there's some nice conflict there. The daughter is mostly a reclusive young girl that sticks to her headphones, the boy likes to wear masks and is also a bit reclusive and weird, and the dad is... well, dad. I enjoyed it enough, but nothing that sets much apart from other things like it. Just some nice camera work (the telephoto shot of the clone boy walking backward in to the fire was a real treat) and editing that kept me engaged. Probably won't rewatch it soon.
Need I remind you only the first part of the story is being shot right now. Be prepared for this to bomb and part two never getting made.
That... that fucking rocked. badum tiss
