There are few things in the media that can get away with stupidity due to the stupidity being part of its charm. One of the leaders in this has to be, without a doubt, 'SpongeBob Squarepants', which has delivered the goods through silly fun and using its stupidity in a sort of clever way. Speaking for myself, I only watch 'SpongeBob' if I need a good laugh, but don't need to think about what I'm laughing at. It sort of follows the Nickelodeon tradition of things like 'Ren & Stimpy' or 'Rocko's Modern Life', but makes it all innocent enough for kids. However, for as much fun as SpongeBob provides, it's not an example of a cartoon I'd try to convince people to like. There is a somewhat annoying aspect to SpongeBob and Patrick, which is part of the humor, but if someone ever said "I can't stand that sponge", I'd get it. One could say SpongeBob is an acquired taste, and you'll never like it if you have an inability to throw your brain out the window. That said, I tend to lean towards the appreciative side of things. I enjoy 'SpongeBob' for a good laugh, but it's not something I appreciate quite as much as some other animated series out there. My list of viewed material is pretty much a few odd episodes of the series, and the first film from 2004. Alas, I did not catch 2015's 'Sponge Out of Water'. So with that, let's keep in mind I'm not reviewing this as a biased fan boy, but one who can see both sides of the coin. So much of the show revolves around a little villain named Plankton (Mr. Lawrence) who is constantly after the secret recipe of Krusty Krab burgers. The Krusty Krab is run by the greedy, but good-natured Mr. Krabs (Clancy Brown) while SpongeBob (Tom Kenney) whips up food in the kitchen, and the miserable Squidward (Rodger Bumpass) handles the register. To no one's surprise, the film opens with Plankton formulating a new plan to steal the recipe, but his robotic assistant, Karen (Jill Talley) informs him that he's been so focused on getting Mr. Krabs out of the way, he hasn't realized that SpongeBob has been the one constantly thwarting his plans (much of the time by accident). Plankton then devises a plan to get rid of SpongeBob by kidnapping his pet snail, Gary, and giving him to Poseidon (Matt Berry), who uses snail slime as a moisturizer, and is constantly running out because he squeezes them dry. This will send SpongeBob on a mission to find his missing snail, along with his best friend, Patrick (Bill Fagerbakke). That way, he can't possibly interfere with the stealing of the formula. However, without SpongeBob around, everyone involved eventually discovers how much they miss, and somewhat need SpongeBob in the picture. Meanwhile, the laughs are definitely delivered through a series of events involving celebrity cameos, not the least of which is Keanu Reeves as a tumbleweed, calling himself the Sage and guiding SpongeBob and Patrick on their journey. The other cameos popping up, however, I feel like one needs to see for themselves. It's a lot like telling someone Bill Murray was in 'Zombieland' at the time. Although 'SpongeBob' was never something I truly followed, I always did appreciate it for what it was. This movie is no exception. I can't really look at this in any other light that the simple fact that it's 'SpongeBob', and you can't expect to get Oscar-worthy material from something so silly. That's not to put it down or anything, that just isn't what 'SpongeBob' is, and there are many beloved movies that fall under such a category, like 'Dumb and Dumber' or 'Galaxy Quest' - great for what they are, and they don't need awards to prove they're any good. If you like 'SpongeBob' then you'll probably like this movie, if you don't, then you probably won't. It's as simple as that. Personally speaking, I'm not going to pretend I had a blast with it, but it made me laugh, tugged on the heartstrings ever-so slightly, and I got exactly what I expected to get. So although it's pretty average, you'll hear no real complaints from yours truly. On a side note, one might be wondering why this is "late" as a "Now Playing" review. Well, Covid has made things very uncertain with various theatrical releases, and dates are all over the place. Hell, IMDb still has its official release date for this as March 4, 2021, and here we are on February 10. Seeing as I just don't get what's happening with a lot of these titles and how they're dealing with the whole Covid situation anymore, all I'll say is don't be surprised f you see a title like this in "Now Playing" for the next while. Anyway, just to top off the review, despite its supposed March 4th release date, one can currently find it on Prime as a simple $5 rental. If you're a fan, I say go for it. If nothing else, it's a lot of fun. 3/5
0 Comments
Is it just me, or are DC films the undisputed champions of the "mixed review". The first 'Wonder Woman' seemed to be the most positively reviewed while basically everything else ends up being a fun ride with some great visual effects, but with little substance. People love them just as much as people seem to hate them, and some, like myself, aren't exactly fans, but understand some of the appeal. This is one of those truly medium entries into the DC library. A friend of mine gave it a one-word review of "meh", and I have to say, I'm right there with him. The film opens sometime in the past where a young Diana Prince (Lilly Aspell) participates in an athletic competition for the Amazonian women on Themyscira (the hidden world where the Amazonians live). This part of the film is pretty awesome, and could easily be watched a a clip before going through the first (and far superior) film; it sets up Diana's overall character. I won't say much about it, but it's a lot of fun, a good point is made, and it makes you think of Diana's actions as a hero the first time around. It's a very entertaining section of the film, and Lilly Aspell is one of these young actors I would suggest keeping an eye on for years to come - she delivers enough that you can really route for her, and in such a short window of time. After a peek at Diana's youth, we Fast-forward to 1984, where Diana works as a senior anthropologist as the Smithsonian in Washington, DC. In the meantime, she fights crime as Wonder Woman throughout the city. One day, at work, she meets an insecure brainiac named Barbara Ann Minerva (Kristen Wiig), who looks up to Diana, and even envies her. Barbara is asked by the FBI to examine a relic that appears to be simple plastic, but apparently has the ability to grant wishes. Barbara makes a wish to be more like Diana, and Diana unknowingly makes a wish to see her deceased lover, Steve Trevor (Chris Pine) again. Diana gets her wish (kind of) as Steve returns in the body of another man, but more interestingly, Barbara inadvertently becomes more like Diana than she could have imagined. Meanwhile our villain is a wealthy oil tycoon named Max Lorenzano (Pedro Pascal) who is after the stone (dubbed the "Dream Stone") to not only save his failing oil company, but go power hungry and wish to become the embodiment of the Dream Stone itself. This way, he has the power to not only grant wishes, but take whatever he wants. Each wish comes with a cost, however, and there's a bit of a Money's Paw thing going on through the film. While the first film easily remains DC's best modern title (at least in the 'Justice League' Universe), its follow-up isn't terrible, but fairly bland. If 'Wonder Woman' is a fresh, cold, glass bottle of Coca-Cola, '84' is a bit more like an unrefrigerated can of Coke you got from your basement stash - it's tolerable, but it's just nowhere near the same. A lot about this is very reminiscent of older superhero movies, and 'Batman Returns' was a title that kept springing to mind. I find Barbara's journey here very drawn from Michelle Pfeifer's Catwoman. Hell, she even becomes Cheetah Girl, and gets manipulated by a rich tycoon named "Max". This is where my mixed emotions about the film really come into play. The fact of the matter is, this is a movie entitles 'Wonder Woman 1984', so for it to play like an oldschool superhero movie does make a lot of sense. That said, however, it still feels like a somewhat lazy excuse to go back to nostalgic roots instead of giving us a worthy follow-up to such a great predecessor. 'Wonder Woman' is DC's bread and butter, and though the film wasn't necessarily bad, it wasn't quite what it could have been. I can't say I was thoroughly disappointed; this wasn't like watching 'Batman & Robin'. But it might be in the same realm as... well, 'Batman Returns' - it's okay, but it has nothing on the previous film. It's just average at best, and certainly not the heroic film the first one was. 3/5 Funnily enough, I couldn't find much that stuck out to me this week as far as new Christmas movies go. However, since my last review in November was a Christmas movie, and new major releases are becoming easier to access, I really wanted to tackle the sequel to 'The Croods' - a fun, animated family adventure about cavepeople, their reluctancy to venture out into the world, and their eventual discoveries when they are forced to do so. I don't have a full review on the first one, but as luck would have it, this starts out with a brief recap, and it's easy enough to understand what's going on. Following the events of the first film, the Crood family is still looking for a place to settle, following the sun into "tomorrow" (a whole symbolism thing about the future having a light at the end of the tunnel). The Croods are headed by Grug (Nicolas Cage), his partner, Ugga (Catherine Keener), and Gran (Cloris Leachman); Ugga's mother. The partners have three children; the animalistic baby Sandy (Kailey Crawford), the dimwitted son, Thunk (Clark Duke) and the adventurous Eep (Emma Stone) who has developed a relationship with a random caveman she meets from the first film, Guy (Ryan Reynolds). We get a bit more of Guy's backstory in the very beginning of this film as well - it's short, sweet, to the point, and tells us all we need to know about the character. On their travels, the Croods run into a family, familiar to Guy, the Bettermans. Headed by Phil (Peter Dinklage) and Hope (Leslie Mann) One could easily compare the Bettermans to the Flintstones - basically, they've become creative and live in an advanced treehouse. The Bettermans also have a daughter named Dawn (Kelly Marie Tran) who they see as Guy's fit mate. Now, with a scenario like this, it seems very predictable that it would unfold into the general jealousy scenario involving Guy between a battling Eep and Dawn. I am so pleased to announce that the typical does not unfold here in any way. In fact, there's a whole lesson to be learned at the end that isn't the same old with this situation. Eep and Dawn become friends based on the idea neither of them quite knew other teenage girls existed. The real fight lies in the parental units thinking they know what's best for their kids, along with Guy finding new ways to enjoy himself, away from Crood traditions. This obviously effects Eep, as she loves her family and doesn't see anything wrong with the way things are. So I guess one could say there's some subtext in here about how advancing technologies take away from what one might consider "the good old days", but I wouldn't say it gets preachy about it either. Things are a lot of fun the whole way through, and reach an adventurous conclusion once we find out why Phil is so adamant about his bananas. There's a whole thing where his one rule is that no one is allowed to eat the bananas. You find out why, but it's such a farce on people's "forbidden furniture" and the like - you know, when you go to a house with a comfy-looking couch but are told no one's allowed to sit on it. I actually had to watch these back-to-back, because I had pretty much forgotten how the first film went, and didn't want to go in half-blind. Again, it does give us a brief recap, so one can get through this without needing to see the first one. But with that said, I might still recommend giving these a back-to-back watch for a couple of great, fun animated films. The entire cast is great with their voice work, the animation is beautiful, and there's quite a few laugh out loud moments. Perhaps best of all, they keep setting you up for the typical yet delivering the very untypical - especially with the girlfriend situation here. Either of these films are breaths of fresh air, and great for the whole family. I'd highly recommend both for a good family night in! Just bear one important thing in mind - the animals in this don't really make a lot of sense, so you might try watching it as a fantasy movie all the same. 4/5 A couple of Christmases ago, Netflix treated families to the first 'Christmas Chronicles'. I for one enjoyed it pretty thoroughly as a great new Christmas movie for the whole family. It even rekindled some Christmas spirit for me that year with a lot of the imagination that went into it, bringing back that childlike sense of wonder I once had as a kid. Very few Christmas movies have pulled this off in recent years, so there's definitely a special place in my heart for it. But, with a title that contains the word "Chronicles", it's only a matter of time before we see sequels (and I don't believe it means to end here, either) For the story on the original, refer to my review. This one picks up a couple of years later, where the lead kids from the first one, Kate (Darby Camp) and Teddy (Judah Lewis) are on a Cancún Christmas vacation with their Mother, Claire (Kimberly Williams-Paisley) and her new partner, Bob (Tyrese Gibson). While Teddy is enjoying himself, making the most of it, Kate is distraught at the idea that Bob is trying to replace her father, who has passed on. She makes a wish to Santa (Kurt Russell) to basically help out with her situation, because she fears her Dad is just gonna get forgotten before long. It's the typical teenage angst set-up involving "Mom's new guy". Overhearing her solo conversation to Santa, however, is the elf-turned-human Belsnickel (Julian Dennison) Belsnickel is an elf who has broken all of the rules that come with being an elf. If all of those rules are broken, the elf becomes human, and his fate is all because Santa became too busy with the children of the world, and didn't have time for him. While an upset Kate attempts to run away back to Boston, she is picked up by Belsnickel who uses her "true believer" magic to transport through a worm hole to the North Pole. Here, he'd set out for revenge on Santa by trying to ruin Christmas for kids all over the world. So, Kate goes on another Christmas adventure alongside Santa in an effort to stop Christmas from falling apart. This time, however, her tag-along is Bob's young son, Jack (Jahzir Bruno) who, through Mrs. Claus (Goldie Hawn) has to learn to overcome his own anxieties and such. First, I'll just get to the personal criticisms of it all. For starters, Jack doesn't make for an altogether interesting character to me. It's got nothing to do with Bruno's performance; he's a child actor, and he's still very new on the scene. It's just that they don't do a hell of a lot with everything he apparently has. He does have to overcome is fears, and probably manages to cater to the young crowd all right, but there's almost too much of a leap to innocence with his character when Kate's counterbalance in the first one was her brother, who was a freaking car thief. That brings me to my next nitpick, in that while the first film was really good for the whole family, striking every emotion, this one seems clearly more directed at kids. You don't get a whole lot of depth with either Kate or Jack here, and the outcome of everything is super predictable from the get-go. Things are not all lost here though. I have to admit that there was a lot about it I thought was cleverly done. It was interesting to me that Santa's Village (or Mrs. Claus' Village, just to refer to a certain running gag in here) got its power from the Bethlehem Christmas Star, which is an interesting way to combine the Christian aspects of Christmas with the fun, Santa side of things. On top of that, the elves are always a lot of fun to watch, but they are especially fun when a magic dust turns them all basically into vicious little Gremlins. Imagine one of those cute elves from the first one wielding a chainsaw and running amok. Truth be told, thought he overall plot and some character are kind of weak, the Christmas fun is still there. And I really, really enjoy Kurt Russell's Santa Claus - he's got a certain charm to him, he's super friendly, he's convincingly warm, and just fits so well. So, all in all, this one really has nothing on the first one. I remember the first one really relighting that magical Christmas candle in my heart, leaving me with a warm, happy feeling, and empathy for the kids; especially Teddy, who wasn't even really a part of this one. This one didn't quite leave me feeling the same way. I had fun with it, and certain aspects were actually very interesting. But things seem to be aging backwards a little bit, aiming this one more at younger kids and keeping the first one aimed at whole families. It's worth checking out for a giggle or two, but I wouldn't say you're missing out on this particular sequel if you skip it this year either - the original CAN still stand on its own. 3/5 Although I still consider the whole superhero/superpower thing cool, I can't really deny that it has somewhat started its decent after peaking with 'Avengers: Endgame'. Everyone feels a bit differently about the whole situation, and I remain somewhat positive for now. But this was definitely a title that made me question whether or not they've finally run out of ideas enough to simply repeat them. This one comes to us from Norwegian writer/director André Øvredal; the guy who made 'Trollhunter' and 'Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark', both of which I reviewed fairly positively. It's also not full-Norwegian like 'Trollhunter', so subtitles meet a kind of half-way point. This seems to be this director beginning to spill over into American filmmaking, although still staying true to his routes - routes that sadly repeat what American films have already done to death. Quite basically, a guy named Eric (Nat Wolff) wakes up in the woods after a supposed fire. Dazed, he wanders and tries to fix himself up at a medical clinic, but is harassed by a car full of teenagers, one of which he ends up killing through some unknown power. The police eventually pick Eric up, and have a young psychologist named Christine (Iben Arkelie) speak to him about the apparent murder, as well as a fire that killed five people he's suspected of starting. He doesn't quite understand his powers, only that they go off when he's emotional and long story short, he and Christine eventually become fugitives while trying to learn what happened to him, and how he can harness and control his powers. Being that it's all Norwegian and deals with superpowers, namely lightning, I'll give you two guesses as to what the story touches on. Combine that with a touch of just about any 'X-Men' movie and some 'Infamous' and this is what you get. But it's not crossed over in a good, creative way. It's just... repetitive. There's nothing much here you haven't seen before. I think the biggest criticism I can give to the film is that it drags to a point where it makes something about having superpowers actually kind of boring. Nothing much happens here, and it spends most of the time with the same lingering questions over their heads - to put it bluntly, "what's up with these superpowers". Other movies have done this kind of thing creatively and well while being their own thing; 'Chronicle' really springs to mind as a good example. This is a movie that's just kind of going through the motions, and it's truly un-unique. At the end of the day, this is a bit of a throwaway, but I still have my eye on this director for his work on 'Trollhunter' and 'Scary Stories'. He may just be one of those hit-or-miss guys, and in that case, this was one title he "missed". Although it may be decent for Norway, as it touches on some of that folklore, in North America we have superheroes coming out the wazoo and delving into Norwegian folklore covers only a few of them (namely one). It's not exciting or really even fun, and it takes itself too seriously, giving us a brooder who even Batman would look at and tell he needs to calm the hell down. I think the one thing I could possibly give this movie is in how it ends on a complete tone shift that somewhat fits its story. But even still, without getting too far into spoiler territory, it takes from things like 'Infamous' and doesn't feel entirely unique. All in all, one way or another, this is something you've seen before. Guy is confused about new powers, someone helps him understand his powers, and it's up to him to harness and control those powers before he kills everyone. It's a bit of a blend of superhero film tropes, but there really isn't much here to help it stand on its feet. 2/5 The film opens with our favorite Mystery Gang; Fred (Frank Welker), Daphne (Grey Griffin) Velma (Kate Micucci), Shaggy (Matthew Lillard) and Scooby-Doo (Also Frank Welker) in pursuit of their latest specter, "The Haunted Scarecrow". Upon capturing him, his identity is revealed to be none other than Dr. Jonathan Crane (Dwight Shultz) - aka the "regular" Scarecrow from 'Batman' - hooray for crossovers! And speaking of crossovers, this all takes place during Elvira's Halloween of Horrors Parade in a place called Crystal Cove, and the one and only Elvira, Mistress of the Dark also has a guest appearance here. As Dr. Crane is taken away, he says to Velma that they're both caught in the same trap, and it would seem that despite him being caught, bad stuff is still yet to happen. The team sort of brushes it off, and the town thanks them for their efforts in getting rid of Scarecrow. To celebrate, Shaggy and Scooby got trick-or-treating dressed as spilled candy (it's actually pretty gross how they come up with this). However, on their mission for candy, they stumble upon a crashed toxic waste truck that mixes with Crane's fear gas (left over in a nearby crashed drone) and seems to bring pumpkins to life. Soon the Mystery team faces off against a horde of demonic-looking zombie pumpkins that can transform other people into pumpkins. A lot of this one oddly enough centers on Velma, who is very stubborn about the supernatural always having a scientific explanation. She even claims at one point that you "can't be afraid of something that isn't real", which is total BS, because horror movies in general have proven very effective in the past for many people. That brings me to m first real criticism about the film, the dialogue. While a lot of the story is cleverly written, a lot of the lines and jokes are just cringe-worthy here. Daphne is by far the worst of it though, trying really hard to be a comic relief character, and for whatever reason, wanting to be just like Elvira. When I think of Daphne Blake from 'Scooby-Doo', I sure as hell never picture a goth type so much as almost a cheerleader type, so I'm not sure I quite got that whole side story. Anyway, for a bit more fuel to the fire of my desire to actually check this out, they even bring on Bill Nye for a guest appearance. He's essentially the "guy in the chair" to the Mystery Team here, and provides them with the new Mystery Machine X after the original crashes in the opening scenes. This is where Fred's little side story comes into play, being the guy who isn't too fond of the newer, more advanced machine and missing his classic Hippie van. But going back to Bill Nye, he's largely thrown in for a dash of comedy as well. At times it works, but other times, the attempts are so incredibly random it almost hurts - one example being him randomly using a cat filter on his communication hologram and acting like he's cleaning himself. This was a bit of a weird one for me. Some of the gags are very childish, and often the dialogue is a bit juvenile, making it seem like it's very much directed at kids. The fact that it's animated really lends itself to that idea as well, but remember that there's a lot of animation out there meant for more grown up audiences too. Interestingly enough, there are dashes of humor here that fit that, including a line from Elvira about being too much for some men to handle (or something along those lines) and a great, straight up visual gag where Fred does the whole 'Predator' trap montage when Arnold is about to face off against the monster - that, I admit, gave me a good chuckle. This one can be accessed through Amazon for a decently priced rental, and despite quite a bit of stupidity, it's still a fun film for the family. At the end of the day, it's 'Scooby-Doo', so it can't be taken too seriously. Perhaps the most interesting thing about this movie, however, is this is apparently the first actual 'Scooby-Doo' Halloween movie! How that makes any sense in all these decades, I'll never know. There are of films in the collection that fit Halloween very well, but to think that they haven't had a Halloween-themed movie until now is mind-boggling. At the very least, this is a fun little bit of mind junk food for the Halloween season. It's not an annual re-watch, but it could be worth checking out. 3/5 If there's one movie that has people's attention right now, it's probably Disney's 'Mulan'. Once destined for a theatrical release as their next big (and potentially unnecessary) live action remake, it is now found on Disney+ for a subscription cost of $8.99/month, "plus" (get it?) an additional cost of $34.99! This isn't so bad for big families who are trying to see, what I refer to now as a "rapid home release" movie and don't have access to the big screen. For one person trying to see it though, that's ridiculous! I'd spend less seeing whatever is out in IMAX 3D right now on a Saturday night! In the end, I convinced myself to go for it for a variety of reasons. For one, I simply wanted to check it out for myself. But on top of that, I needed a movie to review, and considering the way things have been going with it, this was just a good title to offer my own two cents on. Then on top of that, I convinced myself that had theaters been open and everything was normal, I'd most definitely had spent more that $40 over the past few months. That's only speaking for myself and my situation; I can find a way to justify that cost. Speaking for others, Disney needs to watch themselves, because this is the kind of stuff that makes people download their material instead of giving them money. I wouldn't fight anyone on doing that with this at all. Taking a look at the film itself, it's more or less what you'd expect it to be, but with the significant difference that Mulan (Yifei Liu) doesn't exactly get a whole lot of development here. She's an adventurous young girl who does her own stunts, and pretty bad ass right from the get-go. This disappoints her parents, however, who believe a woman's place is to honor and serve her husband one day. It definitely plays on the old-fashioned ways of thinking some women in some cultures struggle with even today. Soon, an imperial outpost is invaded by a band of Rouran warriors, lead by Böri Khan (Jason Scott Lee), with the help of a shape-shifting witch named Xianniang (Li Gong). This leads the Chinese Emperor (Jet Li) to issue a decree, calling on every family to contribute one man to fight against Khan and his warriors. Mulan's elderly father, Hua Zhou (Tzi Ma) having no sons, is forced to pledge himself. Mulan then second guesses her "place", steels her father's sword and armor, and heads out to be the one to represent her family, disguised as a young man. If she's discovered, it could mean death for dishonor, as a woman's place is definitely not on the battlefield according to their logic. Getting back to the development of Mulan, it's a bit of a problem. The whole thing about the original film was that she was out to prove to herself and others that a woman could do what a man could do, but she still has to struggle through rigorous training, surrounded by testosterone-loaded men. It's a journey we take with her. In this version, Mulan is already about as badass as she can possibly be, and you never really worry about her well-being. This one's more about the equality aspect in that she has the skill, but is not allowed to use it. So I think I get it, but I sincerely find the animated version much better. You could empathize with Mulan as an overall character in the original, where here, you can only really empathize with her as a woman. For some, that's just fine, and I get it. But speaking for myself and as a guy, I can honestly say I got more from the original. So, what about Mushu? Well, he's not in this, if you were hoping at all to see some version of him. Instead, her parents call on the strength of a phoenix to protect her. I think it's supposed to be something mystical when it shows up on screen, but it's hard to determine. There are so many moments you think it's just there, and for as beautiful as it looks, you can't fully tell if its real, some figment of her imagination, or something only she can see. That brings me to some positive points about the film, however, starting with some of the cinematography. The scenery looks amazing, and the action sequences flow pretty nicely. I will say that there are times the camera tries some unnecessary tricks, but I'd say it's at about 90%. More positivity about the film involve things like the idea of it being a little more serious. That was actually one of my main draws to the movie in the first place. Quite honestly when I Wiki'd the real Hua Mulan, all of the pieces essential to her story seem to still be there, so it ends up being a question of what struggle you appreciate more; the struggle of a female character who proves to herself and her family that she can fight like, or better than a man, or the struggle of a female warrior who outdoes men on the battlefield but technically isn't allowed to be there. I suppose to bring it down to a comparison of present day struggles, it's "I can be the awesome female player on the all-boys baseball team if only given the chance" vs "I'm a woman really good at what I do, why don't I get paid the same wages as men?" At least that was my perspective. Both are important enough to be the underlying message, but one will appeal to you more than the other, any way you slice it; one half of the pizza is meat-lovers, one half is Hawaiian. At the end of the day, I personally find the animated version better overall, and that's probably not a surprise to many. I tend to stick to originals over the live-action remakes as it is, with 'Jungle Book' being the only real exception; in that case, I kinda liked the remake a bit more. In any case, this will be streaming on Disney+ soon enough for free, and I highly recommend just waiting. It's nothing particularly special in my eyes, but it might hold its own for others. 3/5 It had been a while since the last time I saw the first two 'Bill & Ted' movies, so I started this week getting into things, and getting ready for this review. I won't get into that much, but if you want some basic plot, here are some Wiki shortcuts for 'Excellent Adventure' and 'Bogus Journey'. I wanted to refresh myself on the events of both films. They are products of their time, not to be taken seriously, and it's mindless fun with a positive message (even if they do both use a derogatory F-word for laughs). So, flawed, but somehow one still finds a genuine charm to these guys, keeping in mind that again, these are products of their time. 'Face the Music' takes place present day (without Coronavirus), several years after Bill (Alex Winter) and Ted (Keanu Reeves) took their Bogus Journey. The Wyld Stallyns (their band) have reached a low-point in their career, having failed to write the song that would unite the world. They both find themselves at odds with their respective significant others, Medieval Princesses Joanna (Jayma Mays) and Elizabeth (Erinn Hayes), and a bad performance at Ted's little brother's wedding leads to Ted confiding in Bill that maybe their futures aren't set in stone, and it's time to hang up their guitars. Soon after, they are visited by Kelly (Kristen Schaal), Rufus' daughter (Rufus played by the late great George Carlin, and yes, there's a nice nod to him here). Kelly takes Bill and Ted to meet her Mother, The Great Leader (Holland Taylor) who gives the duo a limited amount of time to write their world-uniting song, and in true 'Bill & Ted' style, it's just something you roll with despite the gaping plot hole that they gain access to their old phone booth time machine and have all the time in the world. The Great Leader also believes that this whole unity of society prophecy could actually mean the death of Bill and Ted, so she sends a robot (Anthony Carrigan) back in time to kill them, 'Terminator' style. The thing is, the robot keeps messing it up, and it's actually pretty hilarious. Meanwhile, Bill and Ted's respective daughters, Thea (Samara Weaving) and Billie (Brigette Lundy-Paine) end up fulfilling their end of the story by wanting to help their Dads with Kelly's assistance, jumping through time to gather some more musically inclined historical figures, and harkening back to the original film with a couple of fresh, new, female Bill & Teds. They do not take the movie over, help the story along, and are incredibly well cast (especially Billie, who brings a real oldschool Keanu-ism to her role). The film has a good balance of both duos each doing their respective thing. Anyway, if this big mission isn't accomplished, time and space will collapse in on itself. So, weird, right? Well, part of the charm of 'Bill & Ted' is that it IS simply ridiculous fun, not to read too deeply into; stupid, but entertaining all the same. I would daresay that of the three films, and believe me, I KNOW this is gonna sound like blasphemy to many, this one might be my favorite - mere opinion, and it's recognizable that I'll probably be an odd one out on this. But my reasons are a bit deeper than one might imagine. Bill and Ted's original message of "be excellent to each other, and party on" is kinda what this one is all about. This came along at a time where the world needs something to feel good about, and this movie has that in abundance. It plays on our nostalgia, yes, but it's also about the world uniting as a whole and ending what is a potentially world-ending event. Read into it what you may, but I'm not asamed to say that despite how silly and dumb it is, it tugged on my heartstrings. What more can I say? It's a 'Bill & Ted' movie, and it's not nearly as bad and "too little too late" as I imagined. Had Coronavirus never existed, I'm not sure it would feel as strong as it did, but cards on the table, this got to me in a very positive way. If you're a fan of the first two, and don't mind throwing your brain out the window for about an hour and a half, do check it out. I'm hoping not to over-hype it, but what makes the movie is its message, much like the other two. I had a great time with it, and kudos to it for it's straight to VOD option, further proving that their message of "be excellent to each other" is still alive and well in this otherwise particularly dated franchise. It's nostalgic film resurrection done right. 4/5 Much like with 'Onward' and 'Trolls: World Tour', 'Scoob!' was to be released in theaters for the family to enjoy on the big screen. It's another case of coming straight to streaming, and questioning whether the original theatrical price (or more) is worth paying to watch it on our small screens. That decision seems up in the air right now, as people are extremely split on this movie, and that actually includes me. 'Scoob!' starts out with a cute, fun origin story where we see how Shaggy (Iain Armitage/Will Forte) met Scooby (Frank Welker) and the rest of the mystery gang - Fred, the "tank" (Pierce Gagnon/Zac Efron); Velma, the "brains" (Ariana Greenblatt/Gina Rodriguez); and Daphne, the "people person" (Mckenna Grace/Amanda Seyfried). Together, they solve their first mystery, old school Scooby-Doo style, decide to become good friends and keep doing this sort of thing. Fast-forward over the opening credits, and we see the gang 10 years later. They make a business deal with a certain celebrity cameo I don't really wanna spoil, but Shaggy and Scooby are excluded from the plan, as they don't have much to bring to the table. Distraught, Scooby and Shaggy go bowling, only to run into an army of small robots called Rottens who chase them right into an... "abduction beam", if you will. This beam belongs to the Falcon Fury, where we meet the original Blue Falcon's son, Brian Crown (Mark Wahlberg), along with his trusty sidekick, Dynomutt (Ken Jeong) and pilot, Dee Dee Skyes (Kiersey Clemons). They reveal that the sinister Dick Dastardly (Jason Isaacs) is after Scooby for his own selfish purposes. This all leads to an... interesting plan which adds to Scooby's overall lore, but you have to wonder if it's a bit too much. Eventually the rest of the Mystery Team also gets involved, and the film does become a collaboration of lesser-known Barbara characters. So, I'll start with the bad. The biggest problem I had was with some of the voice acting. If you've ever been a deep fan of these Hanna Barbara toons, a couple of major mistakes really stand out. First up, Dynomutt was originally the bumbling fool while Falcon was the straight-edge hero. That said, I can reluctantly let it pass, since in this case it seemed to be going for a sort of role reversal thing, and the Falcon here is the original Falcon's son. I guess I got what they were going for, but it will be irksome to some old school fans. The worst of it is when they come across Captain Caveman, voiced by Tracy Morgan, and everything you loved about Cap Cave is completely thrown out the window. It was just grating to me that Captain Caveman may as well have been renamed Captain Morgan, and not in a good, booze-related way. It was just Tracy Morgan wearing a Captain Caveman costume, and I kinda hated it. This is bothersome to any parents watching this with their kids, trying to find the nostalgia in all of it while it totally misses the mark. Getting to the good, though, perhaps my favorite parts revolved around the Mystery Team. Whenever Fred, Daphne and Velma are on screen, it definitely plays a bit more with the parental humor which makes up for some of the nostalgic disappointment mentioned earlier. There were actually a few jokes and gags here that got a genuine laugh from me, but they are unfortunately met with an equal amount that fall flat. The humour is a combination of clever jokes and annoying slapstick, and it makes you wonder who they were really making this for at times. I will say that I was actually quite impressed here and there at certain moments of prediction. There's a whole lot of "here comes a cliche" only to be surprised that they didn't follow through at the last minute. It's a relief that so much of it wasn't necessarily predictable, but with that said, these surprises are more a matter of "Oh, they didn't do it after all" as opposed to "Woah! I can't believe they did that instead!" But then they make decisions like they did at the very end, where there's a fake-out that genuinely bothered me. It's one of those endings that almost kills a film, because the lead-up is all actually pretty solid and even kinda mature. As far as I think, unless you have some kids who are chomping at the bit, and you're paying for a generously filled house to watch it, it's just not worth it. For adults like myself, there's some good moments here and there, but the screw-ups on familiar characters are kinda glaring, and it doesn't play into your nostalgia quite like you want it to. Again, these characters weren't broken, and they didn't need fixing. At the end of the day, it just made me appreciate the old cartoons much more. If you wanna see it, but you're not in a rush, I'd just as soon wait for it to cost less. 3/5 In a horror-twisted re-imagining of the 1970-80 TV drama, current horror tycoon Blumhouse really drops the ball. I don't think I necessarily minded the idea of the film, but its execution is an absolutely confusing mess. Also, taking a fan favorite that lasted 5 or 6 years and rebooting it as a horror-based prequel probably won't sit well with fans of the show. I'll tell you right now, if you were ever a fan, I wouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole. Mr. Rourke (Michael Peña) runs a mysterious island that a group of maybe twenty-somethings (typical horror fodder) win a trip to. Apparently, upon visiting this island, you can live out a personal fantasy. Various theories are formed as to how it works including holograms, live action role playing, or even the idea of Rourke drugging their drinks with some sort of hallucinogen. One by one, the group is introduced to their "fantasy", but there's always more to the fantasy than meets the eye. Giving way to the old adage "be careful what you wish for", the film attempts to show us that we're more than our fantasies... then it ends in such a hurricane of twists and turns it kinda leaves you wondering what the hell you just watched. Character-wise, Gwen (Maggie Q) wants the chance to say "yes" to a missed opportunity of a marriage proposal; Patrick (Austin Stowell) wants the chance to enlist in the Army, following in his father's footsteps; JD and Brax (Ryan Hansen and Jimmy O. Yang, respectively) are two step brothers who want to experience the ultimate party; and Melanie (Lucy Hale) wants a shot at revenge on her high school bully. It saddens me to say that as the movie tries to make its point, it does a pretty decent job at first. But there's a point in the film where everything starts to blend together, and as soon as paths cross, things get confusing as all hell, and it ruins the whole experience. On top of the confusion, these characters aren't entirely likable except maybe Patrick. Gwen is somewhat likable, but a lot of the confusion of the film starts with her and up to that point, things are pretty boring. Michael Rourke shows up out of nowhere, too. It's kinda funny 'cause he has a reason for being on the island, but his role is mostly unnecessary, and the film could have easily been done without him. Perhaps the biggest middle finger this gives to its audience is the fact that the "be careful what you wish for" lesson already lives in the original series. Many, many episodes would end with some sort of morality lesson. While this does that too, it does it to the extreme of a supernatural horror movie. That's not a terrible idea, but at the same time, if you're gonna do it, do it. There was nothing scary in this whatsoever. It wears the mask of a horror movie, but it ultimately doesn't really know what it wants to be. I keep coming back to this, but all it gave me was confusion, and I don't recommend it. Think of the ultimate lesson this is trying to teach, and you can find it better elsewhere. I didn't think it was bad at first, but that second half or so needs a serious adjustment. 1/5 I need to make a few things perfectly clear before getting into this particular review. For starters, I have never read the book that this is based on, so accuracy for the story's adaptation here isn't something I'd pick up on. On top of that, I haven't seen any of the previous makes of this. Starting with Charlton Heston in '72, it was also done in '76 with John Beck, and another was made for TV with Richard Dreyfuss in '97 ('The Call of the Wild: Dog of the Yukon'). So this is reviewed here as a first-timer to this story, and thankfully, it's a generally positive review. We start out with narration from our lead, John Thornton (Harrison Ford) as he introduces us to Buck- a big, loyal, rough and tumble dog. One day, left outside for punishment, Buck is picked up by someone looking to fetch good money for strong dogs who can be on sled teams, leading them through the Yukon in search for gold, during the Klondike Gold Rush era of the late 1890's. He's picked up by a couple of friendly mail deliverers, Perrault and Françoise (Omar Sy and Cara Dee, respectively), and soon learns the hard way about what it takes to not only pull a sled, but be on a team, especially with a bully for a pack leader named Spitz - a vicious and almost wolfish husky. Through this whole process, Buck's character develops, and he becomes a fiercely loyal and strong character who eventually bonds with John (our narrator) while in the town, between mail deliveries. Without spoiling too much, John and Buck eventually discover that each other is exactly what they need in their lives, and the bond between them grows strong enough that the film's main adventure we see in the trailer finally does take place. It takes a while to get there, but it's not wasted time, either, as we see how both characters get to know and like one another over a steady period of time. That, and while they last, Perrault and Françoise are likable characters we can spend some time with while Buck's character develops. Now, to be perfectly clear, I really liked this movie. It's got a great story, and it's easy to fall in love with the relationship John and Buck develop. I also found myself routing for Buck fairly often, and it took me back to being a kid, reminding me of movies like 'White Fang' (which is not a far cry from this). We see all the turmoil Buck has to go through, and while at times hard to watch, it's super easy to get on this dog's side and cheer him on. It's a good underdog story (pun intended), relating both to Buck and John, who are both very easy to empathize with. My only real criticisms include the utter disappearance of a few characters (I won't say who, but you'll realize who they are very quickly if you watch it), and the fact that for some, the completely CG dogs might seem to lean a bit towards Disney cartoonish. Seeing this so much in the trailer, I didn't let it bug me, but I'm also not blind to the fact that there seems to be an overabundance of films recently, meant to show off what CG can do now (mainly Disney films). This was most abundant with 'The Lion King' from last year. While impressive, it's kinda gotten to the point where I feel this needs to be used to touch up older films (seriously, go revisit 'Rogue One' with this technology) and bring in new, creative material, instead of just taking an old story and remaking it just to show off what CG can do. A lot of these stories aren't broken and don't need any fixing. I still say for as beautiful as 'The Lion King' was, it has nothing on the original '94 animated film. A lot of people seem to be coming out of this one a little underwhelmed, or disappointed in the quality of the adaptation. I haven't found anyone mad about it yet, 'cause it's still a great story with a couple of really likable characters, but people seem to wish the execution was different, and "closer to the book" (as you get with literally any movie based on a book). Personally, I have to give Ford some strong credit for acting alongside a fully CG dog, which I can't imagine he's used to (but someone else might know better). I also give the film full credit for managing to take my breath away with a lot of gorgeous scenery that helps bring you into the cold, harsh, but beautiful climate of the Yukon. You might not have as good a time as I did if you know the story already, but for me, this was a great family adventure (albeit kind of intense at times), the likes of which I have seen before, but haven't seen in so long that I realized how much I missed this kind of adventure story. It's another fine example of bringing a nostalgia to the screen for me in a roundabout way, so while going against the grain here, I simply can't deny the good time it provided me, and how much it made me miss the dogs in my life I previously cared for. I think if you're a dog lover who's a little more unfamiliar with the story, it's a good time. But purists of the book might wanna turn to one of the previous adaptations, or even just back to the book instead. 4/5 AKA 'Birds of Prey and the Fantabulous Immancipation of One Harley Quinn', or, by the time I'm writing this, is now on IMDb as 'Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey', which is probably the most accurate title for the film, since it's far more a Harley Quinn film than a story about the Birds of Prey. But I digress. To be perfectly honest, I didn't have very high hopes for this. But I'm happy to say that I was mostly pleasantly surprised... mostly. This one takes place after Harley (Margot Robbie) and the Joker (Sir not-appearing-in-this-film) break up, no doubt an extra effort on DC's part to ditch the God awful Jared Leto Joker (and to make it clear, Jared Leto is a fine actor, but his Joker is among one of the most screwed up characters in superhero movie history). In a fit of rage, and wanting closure on the subject, Harley does anything from adopt a Hyena from a black market pet shop (and name it Bruce) to blow up the Ace Chemicals factory, where the Joker "made her". So they keep the continuity from 'Suicide Squad'. Word spreads fast that the breakup has happened, and Harley no longer has the Clown Prince of Crime protecting her. A lot of the fun through the movie is being introduced to a variety of characters that she's wronged in the past who are now hunting her down. Meanwhile, Harley is looking for a girl named Cassandra Cane (Ella Jay Basco) who apparently has a diamond that can access the bank accounts of the Bertinelli crime family. After meeting the girl, Harley soon finds herself reluctantly protecting her (more as in protecting the diamond) from the twisted criminal, Roman Sionis (Ewan McGregor - who is having a great time with his role) and his right hand man, Victor Zsaz (Chris Messina), who definitely lends himself to the film's R-rating. These two are also keeping track of a mob killer who is only referred to as "The Crossbow Killer", but we all know her better as Huntress (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), and she's out for revenge after Sionis killed her whole family - The Bertinellis. The other Birds of Prey come into it as Officer Renee Montoya (Rosie Perez) who is investigating the mob killings, and Black Canary (Jurnee Smollett-Bell) who works for Sionis, but betrays him after she sees how far things can go in his club. I could deal with details all day, but yes, they eventually all cross paths and the title of the film does have some meaning - but it's definitely a Harley Quinn movie as opposed to a real team-up movie. The whole thing is told from the perspective of Harley, and as you may have heard by this point, there is a bit of back and forth jumping. But I don't think it's enough to really confuse anyone. Speaking for myself, I was able to follow along pretty well. It's kinda fun having Harley tell the story, because it somewhat reflects her personality in all of its style. If I was to compare it to anything, I'd have to say that this is DC's answer to 'Deadpool'. It's R rated, can be brutally violent, but it's still more of a comedy than a superhero movie. In fact, I'd say this owes a lot to 'Deadpool' for paving the way. With the success of this and 'Joker', I daresay, DC might just be able to get something off the ground with R-rated films. Anyway, for what this is, it's pretty cool. But I'm still not entirely loving it like so many others. I meet it halfway, enjoying the execution of the story and the film's overall style. But at the same time, there are some nitpicks that tend to irk me. The fight coreography was sometimes cool, but often strangely off. Pay attention to the fight scenes and watch how many people either wait their turn (prison scene) or just do nothing at all (car chase scene). It's not a first, but it's just something that makes no sense for what this is. Beyond that, I hate to say it, but Harley's narration can be a little bit grinding at times. But again, these are nitpicks. For the most part, the film is enjoyable. Just remember that it's not totally a Birds of Prey movie when you go check it out. 3/5 Isn't it interesting that Hollywood can take a classic book, and kinda just keep screwing it up? The original 'Doctor Dolittle' wasn't one I particularly liked, myself, but it does have its following. Then we have the Eddie Murphy remakes that might have been fun as a kid, but are hard to go back on. And now, we have this, which may be the worst attempt yet. I mean, to be honest, I've never actually read the book, but it does seem abundantly clear that the original version is a stand-alone classic of sorts, and doesn't really need to be revisited. Dr. John Dolittle (Robert Downey Jr.), after losing his wife, has since kept himself hidden from the world, amongst his beloved animals, Each animal is representative of an otherwise promising voice cast, that includes Emma Thompson, Rami Malek, John Cena, Kumail Nanjiani, Octavia Spencer, Tom Holland, and several more. One day, he is approached by a boy named Tommy Stubbins (Harry Collett), who implores him to help a squirrel (Craig Robinson), eventually forming a friendship with him. When Queen Victoria falls ill, Dolittle is approached by a young girl, representing the Queen. He is asked to set sail to an untouched island, to find a cure that apparently only exists there. Taking his animals, and Tommy along for the ride they encounter old adversaries, finding himself again along the way. Meanwhile, Tommy slowly learns Dolittle's talent for talking to animals, himself. Trust me when I say that this is much worse than I might make it out to be, potentially becoming a front-runner for worst film of 2020, according to yours truly. I know it's early, but there are several reasons to reach such a conclusion. For starters, it ends up being one of those kids movies that tries very hard to be "cool", completely ruining a period piece by saying words like "bro" to try to relate to the kids. To compare it to other movies that have tried this, 'Alvin and the Chipmunks' or 'The Smurfs' come to mind. It seems to be something Hollywood can't quite wrap their heads around - never assume that you know what's cool for kids. The best movies for kids out there never try so hard to be culturally hip, they just tell a really good story. If you want proof, look at the 'Toy Story' trilogy, or even better yet, 'The Iron Giant', which takes place in the 50's. Unfortunately, the biggest problem is, this is about all there is for kids in theaters right now. Beyond that, we get toilet humor out the wazoo (no pun intended), and just terribly written dialogue for these animals. I heard it said best that it's as though they let all these voice actors in, let them all adlib where they could, each with their own completely separate act, and then it all gets thrown together. The film is kinda just loud and obnoxious, and makes absolutely no sense for the fine period piece it ought to be. I'm saying this aware of what I just mentioned about Victorian Era stuff in my 'Little Women' Oscar review, but I can at least respect it for what it is. It also has no idea who its trying to speak to. It's a silly mess that little kids could potentially have fun with, but they try a lot of adult humor here as well. The whole thing feels like too many ideas at once all coming together, and the finished project is an unfortunate mess. It's early, but this one unfortunately stands the chance of being one of the worst films of the year. 1/5 Right off the bat, one might watch the trailer for this and wonder, after seeing how the previous film ended, how in the blue hell the game is back. But can I just say that we can't act like the game didn't already make an inexplicable return in 'Welcome to the Jungle'? Not only that, but it somehow turned itself into a video game. I think it's safe to say that Jumanji, the game, is just kinda unstoppable. If it wants to exist, it just will. It's fiction, but it's still kinda lazy from my perspective. With that little nitpick out of the way, the more important aspect of this are between two things - the characters and how well they do impressions, and what the characters take away from their experience in the game. I'm impressed that in this chapter they didn't just repeat the same characters with the same problems, or even introduce new similar characters, spinning its wheels. This plays with the concept of old, out of their league guys attempting to play a game. Let's face it, my generation, as kids, thought the idea of grandparents picking up a video game was kinda laughable (turns out it's not. My Grandpa LOVED 'Duck Hunt'!) At the same time, the main plot centers on them instead of the previous characters, but still gives the previous characters some good screen time. One year after the events of the previous film, Spencer (Alex Wolff) and Martha (Morgan Turner) are taking a break, with things not feeling quite the same between them. Their other friends Fridge (Ser'Darius Blain) and Bethany (Madison Iseman) have also gone their separate ways, but the group gets together for a reunion, missing Spencer. They soon discover that he doesn't show up, because he had gone back into Jumanji in hopes to feel that unstoppable feeling of being Smolder Bravestone (Dwayne Johnson) again. Reluctantly, the trio heads back into the game to rescue Spencer, but a glitch pulls in Spencer's Grandfather, Eddie (Danny DeVito) and his old business partner, Milo (Danny Glover), who are feuding over their past. Martha and Fridge also get pulled back in, but Bethany is left behind and has to somehow find her own way in. While Martha reprises her role as Ruby Roundhouse (Karen Gillan), Fridge gets (suggestively) stuck as Sheldon Oberon (Jack Black), and to some, that might be a bit uncomfortable. Meanwhile, the role of Bravestone is taken by Eddie, and Milo ends up as Franklin 'Mouse' Finbar (Kevin Hart). The stakes are raised on the mission to find Spencer, as Eddie and Milo are completely inexperienced gamers who can't seem to take the hint that they've somehow been sucked into a game. I'm not gonna lie, it's a running gag that gets kinda old kinda quick, mostly based on Eddie's cluelessness. The game itself has also evolved, giving the characters new strengths and weaknesses, and bringing things to "the next level". Now, let's talk about one thing that make 'Welcome to the Jungle' so surprisingly fun - the impressions. I thought everyone did a respectively good job with their given personalities, but Kevin Hart didn't reach too far for his character. This time around, things felt a bit opposite. I didn't think The Rock did so great as DeVito, but I felt like Kevin Hart did very well as Danny Glover. Karen Gillan reprises the same role, but gave so much more in the first film. And then there's Jack Black impersonating Ser'Darius Blain. As I mentioned before, it's suggestive. I didn't personally feel like he went way over the top with it, but I can't speak for those who it may affect more, either. The best performance in this movie, though, goes to Awkwafina as Ming Fleetfoot, who has to heavily impersonate both Alex Wolf and Danny DeVito, and she does a great job with both of them. This performance alone shows how flexible she can be, and it puts her on a list of up and comers I wanna keep an eye on. Some may remember her from 'Oceans 8' or 'Crazy Rich Asians', but I get the impression this performance is gonna put her name out there a bit more than it already is. Putting it all together, it works pretty well as a fun sequel, where you can see all of your favorite characters again. But the first of them is just far superior. It's in the same realm as 'Ghostbusters 2' or 'Turtles 2: Secret of the Ooze'. There's enough fun to be had here, but it's got nothing on its predecessor. It's really more like an obvious cash-grab, but they do just enough to make it entertaining. 3/5 First, let's just lay down some timeline stuff real quick, because things are starting to get confusing considering all of the time travel and sequels of the 'Terminator' franchise. To put it simply, we're going 'Terminator', 'Judgment Day' and now this. 'Rise of the Machines', 'Salvation' and 'Genisys' now all exist in an alternate timeline, and this is sort of pulling a 'Halloween, 2018' on us. With that said however, I couldn't compare this movie to much more than I could compare it to 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens'. By this, I mean that what we have here is essentially a soft reboot. Plot-wise, it's pretty much a collaboration of the first two films, leaning heavily on 'Judgment Day'. The Sarah Conner of this is now Dani Ramos (Natalia Reyes), the Terminator sent to hunt her is now a "REV-9" (Gabriel Luna), and the protector is now an enhanced human woman named Grace (Mackenzie Davis). And really, no kidding, it is pretty much the same thing all over again. For a bit of fan service, however, we also know that the T-800 (Arnold Schwarzenegger) and classic Sarah Conner (Linda Hamilton) make a return. While Hamilton does a great job as a casual bad ass here, though, Schwarzenegger is officially playing a "retired" Terminator, living life out in the wilderness, and the whole thing honestly never sat well with me right from the trailer. But the good news is, he's not brought into it so much so that we get annoyed with him representing a sort of goofy fan service. I hate to admit it, but some of it is kinda cringe-inducing. I also have to admit that I'm not at all a fan of Dani's character, only because she's so incredibly rushed into things. The film never stops to take a moment to get to know her as a person, she's pretty much simply the next target. Hamilton and Davis both completely overshadow her with their performances, and it's enough to make you wonder why you care about Dani at all. In just about any horror movie, one would expect her not to make it because there's no time invested in her. However, for all the bad, there's still quite a bit of good here. Once again, we have a reverse aging CG process going on here in the beginning of the film (which reaches a decision paralleling 'Alien 3' plot), and it's getting to a point where I might have to say that aging CG is kind of at a plateau now. This year has shown us so much of it, brought up namely in my 'Endgame' and 'Gemini Man' reviews. It's hard to imagine it getting much better. But digressing from that, the overall point here is that the CG is massively impressive, and they aren't stingy on the practical side of things either. For the action buffs who appreciate these movies more for that than anything else, there's plenty here for you, and a lot of it is perfectly edge-of-your-seat. There's plenty here to be entertained by. But speaking for myself, I can't help but recognize that the franchise is kinda just spinning its wheels now, and at the end of the day, it mostly just feels like familiar territory that is meant to get butts in seats, using the title, and two franchise-heavy actors. Aside from a few things here and there, again this is to 'Terminator 2' as 'Force Awakens' was to 'A New Hope'. It's enjoyable, it's fun and "safe" for the hardcore fans, but it's all just too familiar, and even adds a bit of silliness to the whole thing. While it's one of the more solid sequels, 'Terminator' and 'Judgment Day', i'm fairly certain, will just never be dethroned at this point. 3/5 If there's one thing the 'Fast & Furious' movies have taught me, it's that they are the next big name in a long, proud line of action franchises that we watch because we wanna see things break, explode, get beaten up, and have a few laughs along the way. 'Hobbs & Shaw' provides us with a somewhat sci-fi spinoff from the franchise, combining those two characters we love to see fighting, Luke Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson) and Deckard Shaw (Jason Stathom). The pair form an unlikely duo here in order to track down a programmable supervirus called "Snowflake". The stakes are raised when an Eteon (the terrorist organization holding the virus) operative named Brixton (Idris Elba) comes into play, as a protector of the virus. He's cybernetically enhanced to be almost superhuman, thus adding that sci-fi element I was talking about before. However, also caught in the middle of things is Shaw's sister, Hattie (Vanessa Kirby), an MI6 operative whose mission to retrieve the virus only got her framed for the death of her team. It's about as basic a plot as any action movie gets, and to me is somewhat remeniscent of 'Bad Boys II' (when bringing in family members who one of them might have a thing for). As mentioned before, this is kinda the go-to this summer for a mindless, fun action movie to lose yourself in. It's not at all dull, it's funny to watch these two play off of each other, and there's absolutely no lack of action to be had. One thing I particularly enjoyed about this one was bringing in Hobbs whole family, and that whole oldschool fight they have (which is seen in the trailer). It was a neat contrast to the sci-fi elements in this, and at the risk of reading too much into it, it may very well represent a statement that perhaps old fashioned can be better. In other words, maybe technology can just be a bit too much sometimes. Or, if you like, it's just a fun action movie with no real hidden meaning, and some names they knew would put butts in seats. I'd say it's open to interpretation, like with a lot of movies, but I'd like to think that a bit of a message sunk in for myself. That's just me, though. As I said before, I might be reading too much into it. Any theories pushed aside, this is still a lot of fun, and an overall good time at the theater if you get the chance to big-screen it. 4/5 'Men in Black' has been a sort of steadily sequelled franchise over the years, and altogether interesting. Every time there's a sequel, you don't really find anyone pumped to see it, yet it's still a strong enough name to still put butts in seats. The downside is that this particular sequel was obviously made to rake in some easy dough. It's generally more of the same, but with some new big names, two of whom exist in the MCU, and it's a pretty much by-the-numbers execution. It's almost like seeing a reboot of the first film. In 1996 Brooklyn, a young girl named Molly (Mandeiya Flory) witnesses her parents (Inny Clemons and Marcy Harriell) get neuralized by the MIB after the father comes face to face with a strange creature. The MIB decide to not do their job and skip over Molly completely, after told she was "upstairs sleeping", but hey, we wouldn't have a movie otherwise. Molly, Already interested in the unknown, then dedicates her life to locating and joining the MIB. She kinda represents all the sci-fi buff kids from the mid-90s era (or the 'X-Files' age, if you will). She manages pretty much from the beginning of the film through Agent O (Emma Thompson), upon impressing her by locating the NYC branch. Transferred to London, Molly becomes Agent M (Tessa Thompson) and ends up teaming up with the now legendary Agent H (Chris Hemsworth). H was made famous for stopping an alien race called "The Hive", along with Agent High T (Liam Neeson). This world-saving event is commemorated with artwork, along with Agents J and K from the first film, saving it from the bug - admittedly, a nice touch. The case H and M are working, however ends up being much bigger than it initially seems. This time around, the big bad guy looks to be a mole within the MIB, itself, and it looks like the Hive might be coming back for more. But yeah, as a standard 'MIB' movie goes, it's about saving the world again, but with different characters. This time around, however, the new recruit is the straight act, and the veteran is the comedy relief. Joining them is also a little green chess piece alien thing known only as "Pawny" (Kumail Nanjiani). His civilization (on a chess board) is slaughtered, and he ends up dedicating his services to M, who he believes is a queen of some sort. He's generally there to be that extra nudge of comic relief. Sometimes the jokes hit, sometimes they miss, and all in all the comedy is just kinda "meh" with a few decent laughs. I find this one to be some sort of blend of the first and second films. As I mentioned before, it's practically a reboot of the first film. But its overall quality is a bit closer to the second, in that it's just more of the same with nothing much new to offer. The third at least had time travel, and Thanos as young Agent K. I'll give it some of its imaginative creature creations, and a few laughs, and a mindless, fun time. I just feel like after so long, this could have been better. 3/5 I find it kind of remarkable that people are calling this, in so many words, pretty much the worst of the franchise. At the same time, however, I also find it kind of remarkable that given this day and age, 'Deadpool' and the MCU paving a clear path, studio influence is STILL too much, especially when they don't entirely know what the hell they're talking about. Unless you're in the MCU area of things, your stories are generally rushed, have some big names slapped on them, and advertise a title that will put butts in seats. Some of the now most notorious cases of not getting superheroes right go to Fox (so thank you, Disney); 'The Fantastic Four', and about half of the 'X-Men' franchise are prime examples. 'Origins: Wolverine' should have been so much better, since they had the right idea, Gambit has just been completely blown over, and then of course we have 'Dark Phoenix', now failing miserably for a second time. But is it so bad that it's the worst of all X-Men films? One's perfectly entitled to opinion, but personally speaking, I wouldn't say so. In all honesty, I think I disliked both 'Apocalypse' and 'Origins: Wolverine' more - but it does end up just about on par with 'X-3' for me in that it covers the same story, fails again making stupid decisions, and rushes through everything. One might also compare Phoenix to Venom, as a prime story with a massive fan base that they just can't seem to get right. Which is a crying shame because this movie SHOULD have been the make-up for X-3. The film hits the ground running when the lead, adult X-Men, go on a space mission to rescue some astronauts. The team is now comprised of Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence), Cyclops (Tye Sheridan), Beast (Nicholas Hoult), Storm (Alexandra Shipp), Quicksilver (Evan Peters), Nightcrawler (Kodi Smit-McPhee), and of course, Jean Grey (Sophie Turner), all led by Xavier (James McAvoy), back home. During the mission, Jean undergoes this crazy death-to-life instantaneous, unsuspenseful transition, which of course resurrects her as Phoenix, as most of us understand the basic story at this point. Upon their return home, Jean starts to lose control of her powers, explained by an ancient force which destroys everything in it's path until it came into contact with her. She essentially absorbed this power, and now it's growing unstable, and she releases it through fits of rage. Now the rest of the X-Men have to face the hard truth that if Jean gets too out of hand, something crucial may have to be done. While the preference would be to help Jean through her problems, the X-Men also have to face off against an alien race who is looking for Jean and her newfound remarkable powers. I might make it sound interesting, but trust me, it's not what it should be. The trailer managed to do the same thing to me. I thought things were gonna go back to solid storytelling, and the eye candy was gonna take a back seat. But nope. That's where I'd actually compare this to 'Apocalypse' - the best reason for being there are the visual effects. But would you believe that unlike 'Apocalypse', I did find a few moments I enjoyed here - and they pretty much all involved Magneto ( Michael Fassbender). Erik Lehnsherr/Magneto makes a good appearance here, and I find it interesting what they did with his character. He's now trying to live a life of peace out of the way of things, since nowadays the President and the X-Men are living in peace. Erik has been given his own spot of land with which he can come and go as he pleases, as long as he keeps his mutant powers at a bare minimum. I won't spoil his role in this completely, but he's hands down the most interesting character in this one - and actually I'd say all of the new ones, but most easily this one. Some of the mutants were thrown in for easy convenience though. For example, Nightcrawler, as they needed to be able to teleport the astronauts from ship to ship in space. Storm was interesting enough, and I appreciated the casting choice, but she underused her abilities far too much. Most of the time, it's sparks of lightning from her fingers. It's most definitely one of the weakest of the franchise, and it's sure to live in infamy along with the other bad 'X-Men' titles. But I still think I've seen worse. Not MUCH worse, mind you, but still worse. This one at least had some interesting moments here and there; for me, a scene where Beast is talking to Xavier in the kitchen, the whole train scene from the trailer, and anything with Magneto were all perfectly good scenes. But sadly, not enough to save it from still being bad. 2/5 2014's 'Godzilla' had people kinda split right down the middle. Despite it's title, there actually wasn't a hell of a lot of Godzilla in it, save for the end, which featured an epic fight scene between him and some MUTO (Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Organism), playing largely on the Kaiju idea left over from 2013's 'Pacific Rim'. The fight pretty much made the movie, giving us what we wanted to see - monsters fighting. Going on personal opinion, that is what 'Godzilla' films are all about. No one watches these for what the humans are doing, and if you are, you're just plain doing it wrong. These movies represent fantasy titan wrestling matches, and not a whole lot more. Just look at some of the titles. Bearing that in mind, let's move on with my thoughts on 'King of the Monsters' As the film opens up we learn that the Titans are just a thing now, and there are a known seventeen of them scattered across the globe. The main story line follows a family that lost their son, Andrew, after Godzilla's big fight from the previous film. The family splits over this. The father, Mark Russell (Kyle Chandler) sort of never moves on, and develops a hatred fro the Titans, especially Godzilla. Meanwhile, the mother, Emma (Vera Farmiga) works for the MONARCH organization with daughter Madison (Millie Bobby Brown) at her side. MONARCH researches these Titans, and Emma is working hard on developing a sort of communication device for them called ORCA When Emma and Madison are kidnapped by eco-terrorists, Mark is called in to try to rescue them. However, with a certain film twist that's really pretty dumb altogether, we manage to get to four major monsters from the 'Godzilla' collection going, and the fight scenes are absolutely epic. The main movie takes a back seat and you stop caring because of the sheer spectacle of it all. As I said in the beginning, the Titan fights are what we're here for. It doesn't necessarily excuse the bad writing, but it does deliver what I came for when it comes right down to it, putting it somewhere in the middle for yours truly. This one seems to have listened to the audience from the 2014 film, including myself, who said something along the lines of "it was okay, but the monster fight was the only thing that made it good". Well, same idea here. Personally speaking, I still find 'Kong: Skull Island' the front runner of this new Titan universe. We're only three movies in, but it's about to pick up next year with the release of 'Godzilla vs Kong'. It makes me wonder if now that the 'Infinity Saga' is done, this will be the new big thing. Superheroes aren't going away anytime soon, but I get the impression this will at the very least parallel things in popularity as an eventuality. So not necessarily now, but a few years down the line. Time will tell. Anyway, to simplify everything, if you're like me and came to see monsters just beating the hell out of each other with some pretty damn admirably gorgeous CG, you'll get it. But if you came to see a good story, you're not entirely in luck. It's funny, you love the monsters, but you hate how they get to the monsters. Still though, it's well worth the big screen experience to see these four biggies go at it. I'm giving this one a low 4, because it looks just awesome enough to warrant it. 4/5 Let's face it, the DC universe hasn't exactly been my favourite place to be when Marvel is too busy keeping me in their glorious clutches. I've still given every DC film a fair shake, but for my money, 'Wonder Woman' was the only time I was thoroughly impressed. I gave 'Aquaman' a decent review as well, if only because it made me like a character I otherwise had no use for. So when the hell is DC's next big hit? Well, I think we pretty much have it here with 'Shazam!' We meet a foster kid named Billy Batson (Asher Angel), who gets placed in a group home after some trouble with the law while searching for his birth mother. It's here that we meet Freddy Freeman (Jack Dylan Grazer) who eventually becomes Billy's close friend. One day after helping Freddy out with a bully problem, Billy gets chased into a subway where he is randomly summoned by an ancient wizard named Shazam, who has been on the search for someone who is pure of heart for centuries to pass his powers to. Billy is chosen, and in a hurry, as a man named Sivana, who feels that Shazam has wronged him in the past, becomes a bigger problem than Shazam can handle. As we probably know by the trailer, by now, by saying the name "Shazam", Billy turns into a full grown superhero (Zachary Levi) and vice-versa. He and Freddy go around town testing out his superpowers as 14-year-old kids probably would, and soon we learn that with great power comes great responsibility. It's all very well executed. Meanwhile, this Sivana character has joined forces with the 7 deadly sins, and is terrorizing anyone who may have wronged him in his past. Soon enough, Billy and Sivana discover each other, a rivalry is born, and the rest of it plays out as more of a superhero movie than a comedy. I'd equate this one to something more along the lines of 'Kick-Ass', where really, it's more of a comedy than anything, but it's not without moments of good action and drama. I hae to admit that it's pretty awesome to see one of the two big mainstream comic companies give a movie like that a shot. It's a giant step forward for DC, to be sure, and hopefully this helps nudge the gate open for more good DC material. Sure, at times the film gets really silly, but it eventually gets surprisingly dramatic towards the end. It kinda throws you for a loop, and before you know it, you're kinda sitting back, routing for Billy. It's a refreshing blend of totally silly and respectably thoughtful, and I have to agree with most that it's probably one of the better titles DC has cranked out. Here's hoping those guys are on the right track. 4/5 |