2024 Reviews | Eagan At The Movies

Sing Sing by James Eagan ★★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Seriously? Why did it take so long for this guy to get the recognition he deserves?

It's one thing for a movie to move you. It's another thing for it to bring out some tears. It possibly doing so at the end can also tend to happen too. However, for a movie to bring out some genuine, full blown, watery tears of inspired joy when you leave the auditorium to make a quick stop at the restroom before leaving? That's a new one. Talk about the real power of the performative arts. God, I hope the guy in the stall next to me didn't hear me.

Inspired by somewhat true events based around a real program and even a real stage show that was performed, "Sing Sing" fittingly takes place in the Sing Sing Maximum Security Prison, where writer "John "Divine G" Whitfield" (Colman Domingo), serves as a prominent part of the "Rehabilitation Through the Arts" program (Or "RTA"), a group of inmates who create and perform various stage shows. Divine G, who was incarcerated for a crime he didn't commit, is in a way, the face of the program along with his friend/cell block neighbor "Mike Mike" (Sean San José), which is organized by volunteer/director, "Brent Buell" (Paul Raci). The program, having also brought in a new, more intense inmate, "Clarence "Divine Eye" Maclin" (Who plays himself in the film), comes up with a completely new production called "Breakin' The Mummy's Code" (Which is a comedic blend of time travel, along with various characters all compiled together in one bizarre show).

Drected by Greg Kwedar ("Transpecos"), who co-wrote the screenplay with his collaborator Clint Bentley, and having based the film off the book, "The Sing Sing Follies" by John R. Richardson, "Sing Sing" is a quiet, funny, and proudly vulnerable, setting itself apart from lesser films that desperately would want to attempt to capture those emotions, though in a more cloying fashion. This on the other hand, is anything but cloying. If anything, it's quite painfully honest in execution. The film is by no means a downer because of it, because the heart of the story, as well as wonderful ensemble of endearing characters and a smart screenplay to balance out the drama with some relatable warmth. It's a sincerely funny film at times, with the show being performed sounding completely outrageous and nonsensical, though still quite original to say the least and one that I would personally would have loved to see fully. (Where an Egyptian prince travels through time, coming across certain recognizable figures, from Hamlet to Freddy Krueger for some reason. Who wouldn't wanna see that?) Stuff like this makes the film feel more real and believable. Kwedar's direction is also remarkably simple, though maybe that's why the film catches you off guard. It's got such a crisp, fairly timeless feel to it, which can be oddly relaxing too at times. I suppose that's possibly the point, trying to make prison life seem more mundane and somewhat average in the sense of feeling normalized, despite being almost entirely cut off from the outside world. Just people going about their days as if it were normal, while slowly a part of you could be dying inside.

Colman Domingo, who has made quite the impression in this latest stage in his career by continuously giving it everything he has, no matter what it is, and being outstanding either way. This might classify as one of his best performances yet, and normally, that would be enough to recommend an immediate end to the Oscar race for Best Actor (It's only August after all). With that said, it's not just his movie. Clarence "Divine Eye" Maclin is a total revelation in his first major film role, and appropriately steals the show. There is some terrific chemistry between these two, with the characters being portrayed as completely different on the surface, but both equally seeking redemption through the performative arts. Others such as Paul Raci and Sean San José are excellent as well. In a film where acting plays a major role, it's no shock that the performances are all across the board worthy of the subject. However, they're also much more raw and authentic than one might at first realize. I had no clue that so much of the cast was made up of real life, formerly incarcerated RTA members mostly playing themselves or at least variations of themselves. It's one of those films where everybody, even in the tiniest of roles, gets a moment or two to shine. The film really doesn't hold back in portraying male vulnerability in such a resonant light, and in a time where that kind of emotion coming from masculine characters tends to be seen as weak or lesser thanks to the rise of a much more toxic base, we all need this more than we realize. At least have it more normalized.

"Sing Sing" is a one of a kind, wonderful piece of just plain sincere filmmaking. Poignant, yet never hollow. Sentimental, yet never sappy. Touches on heavy material, yet finds the lighter side of the darkness. It all comes together in a heartwarming package, that will find your eyes tearing up not because you're sad, but instead because you're inspired to be better than you already are. Not because you need to be. Because you know you can be. One of the best films of the year, and one of the most impactful film experiences I've had in a while. 5 Stars. Rated R For Some Language And Mature Content, Though It's Nothing That's Gonna Scar Anyone For Life. One Of Those Grown Up Films That Might Have Something To Teach You Really.

Borderlands by James Eagan ★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Pretty sure nobody involved is commemorating this crap.

I know little to nothing about the "Borderlands" video games. I know there's a robot named "Claptrap" (Mostly because of the "Poker Night" game), there's a guy named "Handsome Jack" in one of the titles, and they're known to be crude and violent games that generally receive "M" for mature ratings. However, in spite of that minuscule knowledge of the source material, even I know this doesn't work! For anyone!

Set in a futuristic, Mad Max-esque galaxy, "Borderlands" follows a cynical bounty hunter, "Lilith" (Cate Blanchett), who is hired by corporate bad guy, "Atlas" (Edgar Ramírez), to retrieve his daughter, "Tina" (Ariana Greenblatt), who has supposedly kidnapped by "Roland" (Kevin Hart), a soldier of Atlas' personal army that went rogue. Lilith heads over to the planet of "Pandora" (No, not the blue one from "Avatar"), where everyone is currently fighting over a hidden vault, filled with untold riches, technology, and power. Along the way, Lillith encounters an annoying robot, "Claptrap" (Voiced by Jack Black), who tags along because he apparently was programmed by an unknown party to do so. When Lillith finds Tina, it turns out she is actually quite safe with Roland and her hulking, masked bodyguard "Krieg" (Florian Munteanu), who are actually protecting her from falling back into Atlas' clutches. It turns out that Atlas wants to use Tina (Who may have some secret abilities or whatever) to unlock the vault, and Roland, Krieg, and Tina have no intention of letting someone like Atlas get what's inside. Our group of unconventional heroes are forced to team up to evade Atlas' enforcers and get to the mysterious vault first, while searching for a key and all that video game stuff. This ends up being a little more convoluted than it seemed at first.

Directed by somewhat by Eli Roth ("Thanksgiving", "Cabin Fever", "Hostel"), who co-wrote the screenplay with somebody named Joe Crombie (Who apparently replaced "The Last of Us" screenwriter, Craig Mazin at some point during production left the project. I guess. It's hard to tell at the moment according to various sources), "Borderlands" is, if you haven't guessed by now, a complete and utter mess of a movie. Whatever idea they were originally going with was thoroughly lost at some point during this apparent disaster of a production, with Eli Roth himself departing at one point to direct last year's "Thanksgiving", leaving Tim Miller ("Deadpool") to do some quick reshoots in the meantime. Either way though, regardless of how you feel about Eli Roth's filmography, it's still a genuine shock that he even would have been a good fit for a goofy, Sci-Fi comedy, with much of the film looking like it's been edited into oblivion in hopes of salvaging whatever they could to serve as a passable final product. The humor revolves around some lame poop and pee jokes, along with the lightest of vulgarity, making for a laugh free hour and forty five minutes. Not to mention the abysmal CGI, green screen, and just plain ugly visuals that only further hinder some unremarkable action sequences (Seriously, this feels edited by someone's cat stepping all over their keyboard). Thanks to a ruthlessly watered down PG-13 rating, the film has absolutely no edge to it, making for something that's oddly too juvenile for adults and yet, has nothing to it to warrant the interest of kids.

This is a cast made up of people mostly just collecting paychecks. Thankfully, Cate Blanchett does look to be having a fun time, cracking bad quips, twirling a pistol, and rocking the colorful leather (She's definitely mothering the Hell out of this). Ariana Greenblatt, who proved to be a capable young actress last year with "Barbie" and "Ahsoka", also looks gleefully committed as a wacky, semi-homicidal teenager. However, Kevin Hart feels fairly miscast (I know you wanna branch out your range from the usual "Loud Funny Guy" roles, but this ain't working), and Jamie Lee Curtis (as "Dr. Patrcia Tannis", an eccentric scientist who joins the group to find the vault), mostly looks perplexed and lost the entire time (Plus, the film weirdly doesn't seem to comprehend how ages work, with Cate Blanchett apparently having been a little girl knowing an already adult Jamie Lee Curtis, despite the two actresses only being born a decade apart). Florian Munteanu should make for one of the more fun characters, yet doesn't do much of anything except shout out weird phrases via poorly timed ADR, and while Claptrap is meant to be useless and annoying, Jack Black tragically gets the prestigious honor of having absolutely nothing funny to say (Meaning he's just useless and annoying). Edgar Ramírez is an almost entirely inconsequential villain (And good lord, does he not seem to care about giving a decent performance in this at all), while one of the more enjoyable moments in the film comes from a fairly delightful Gina Gershon (as "Mad Maxxi", the totally still very hot bartender in a shady town on Pandora), who is, like how I just described the character, totally still very hot.

"Borderlands" is like "Guardians of the Galaxy" or "Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves" without the charm, humor, or distinguishable personality of its own. By the last act, it appears to sort of give up all together (Likely where most of the reshoots happened) and finds a way to make the most absurdly out of left field climaxes so blasphemously dull. It's bland, boring, occasionally really difficult to follow, and looks like piss covered sludge (Fitting, considering there's literally a place called "Piss Wash" in the movie). Being someone who doesn't follow the games, it's just a dreadfully misguided and disastrously chopped up piece of work. I can only imagine how actual fans of the games must feel right now. And here we all thought that we were starting to finally move away from terrible video game adaptations. Welcome back early 2000s! I'm going to assume you're also responsible for giving us "Madame Web", "Megamind vs. the Doom Syndicate", and "Not Another Church Movie" too, huh? 1 Star. Rated PG-13 For Gross Out Gags, Robotic Jack Black Sh*tting Out Bullets, And That One Shot Where I Swear Cate Blanchett's Mouth Was Not Moving While She Was Talking. Yeah, Yeah. I Know All Movies Do This, But It Generally Shouldn't Be This Noticeable!

It Ends with Us by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: I mean, it looks like a lovely romance from a distance...

The target audience for this? I'm not one of them. Obviously. Everybody knows this. However, as far as ladies night movies go, filled with some wine moms or teen romance novel enthusiasts, I gotta give credit where it's due. You guys genuinely tried with this one, and while I can't say you were completely able to reach the heights of the high ambitions you set, the fact that the film even has a mature understanding of its subject matter is something to admire.

Based on the successful book by Colleen Hoover, "It Ends with Us" follows spectacularly named "Lily Bloom" (Blake Lively), who despite the urging of her mother (Amy Morton), can't think of anything positive to say at the funeral for her father (Kevin McKidd), due to how much of an abusive monster he was to her mother. Lily meets a handsome, very charismatic neurosurgeon, the equally spectacularly named "Ryle Kincaid" (Justin Baldoni), and the two hit it off. At first hesitant, Lily falls hard to Ryle in what appears to be an almost fairy tale romance, even though she does briefly run into her childhood flame, the also spectacularly named "Atlas Corrigan" (Brandon Skenar), with much between the two being left unsaid. However, as Lily and Ryle's love blossoms, certain red flags start to spring up, along with Ryle's more unstable rage fueled outbursts, leading to Lily to contemplate their romance before coming to the conclusion that she might very well be in the exact same boat as her mother once was.

Directed by the film's co-star, Justin Baldoni ("Five Feet Apart", "Clouds"), with a screenplay by Christy Hall ("I Am Not Okay with This"), "It Ends with Us" takes a glossy look at some really heavy material, which in the wrong hands can lead to some truly disastrous results (Examples like your average Nicholas Sparks movie, or 95% of Tyler Perry's filmography). I can't say that the film is perfect and that it gets everything completely right, but there is a rather smart, almost beautiful sense of intentional manipulation, providing the audience with a clever, yet subdued and complex look at the premise itself. This is a very complicated task that the film, as well as the source material, has decided to tackle and for what we get, there is something genuinely moving about it. To get some of the weaker aspects out of the way, the screenplay isn't without some cheese (With one of the most obvious title drops in recent memory) and you can tell something may have been lost in adapting the book, especially with the film's choppy flashbacks that only show up during the first two acts. It's quite condensed, which is kind of funny considering the film is over two hours long. Thankfully, Baldoni's direction is one of the highlights, playing things out like a run of the mill rom-com, though with something darker beneath the surface of the story. There are some intelligent, if not almost twisted, tricks that he pulls, where certain scenes are shown one early on before giving us the whole picture much later. It's like we're being shown the mindset of the main character, along with how she's rationalized the situation.

Blake Lively is also just plain wonderful in the film. Beautiful beyond reason, appealing all over, and nonetheless gripping when she needs to be, Lively makes this work on levels that I'm not sure the movie could have been able to exist without. I also gotta hand it to Justin Baldoni again because he's also excellent, playing this character as an antagonistic force that you actually forget at times is meant to be one. He is charismatic as Hell, and not in a fake way either, which makes the character's intense shifts more painful. The chemistry between the two of them is the selling point, because unlike so many other films that try to take a shot at this kind of subject, they don't play this broadly. This feels like a real love between two people, and you see from the perspective of the one being abused how easily one can allow themselves to be hurt by someone they trust simply because, well, they love them. I can see how some might take the film's more three dimensional look as the film trying to sympathize the abuser, but I don't remotely think that's the point. While there are some truly vile, unrepentant guys out there, not all abusers are just some mindless monster to be destroyed. If anything, that would make it almost easier for the one being hurt to get away from them. This is one of those situations where you almost find yourself understanding why she would even consider taking back someone who affects her on an emotional and physical level, because you kind of like him too. If anything, it digs the knife deeper, and makes the heartbreak that comes from the realization of how wrong this is sting much more. I'm neither a woman or someone who has been in an abusive relationship, so I can't say everything is right about how it's portrayed. I just feel that this kind of maturity is lacking far too much in many other, much worse films.This film does a better than solid job with it. There are still a handful of moments that are pretty brutal and might hit close to home for some.

The flashbacks don't always work, though Isaela Ferrer (Who portrays the young Lily) looks and feels like she straight up cloned from Blake Lively herself, right down to perfectly inhabiting her noticeable mannerisms and husky voice. It's actually kind of freaky at times. The whole love triangle aspect is wisely secondary, though Brandon Skenar has to elevate a fairly underwritten part (And thankfully does by just being a likable guy). You do get the idea though that there was likely supposed to be more meat there than what we get. Jenny Slate (as "Allysa", Ryle's sister and Lily's eventual best friend) makes for some good comic relief and also gets her fair share of dramatic moments too, including a scene towards the end that I'll admit kind of got to me emotionally.

"It Ends with Us" is a flawed film, that tries to tackle such a harsh concept. I'm still a little conflicted trying to figure out if the film actually succeeds enough. Still, it's well made, with Lively and Baldoni's terrific performances keeping you engaged, and even with the YA novel-esque dialogue, still finds a way to conclude on a fairly powerful, meaningful note that feels earned. Empowering even. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Strong Adult, Sometimes Probably Even Triggering Content. It's Fairly Tame, But It Still Might Have An Effect On Some Who Have Experienced Similar Situations.

Hundreds of Beavers by James Eagan ★★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: Who here hasn't had "The Beaver Dream"?

I have been hearing from various Indie snobs about this movie. It always seems to be their most recent go to when using it as a sort of alternative choice to the more mainstream blockbusters. "Hundreds of Beavers" this! And "Hundreds of Beavers" that! Always about the damn beavers! So I finally was able to watch it, after it got a very limited, self-distributed release, followed by a video on demand release right after. At long last, I got to see what the so called big deal was. And as much as I really hate to admit it......Yeah, that was pretty awesome actually. I mean, you're still snobs, but damn it, this really did feel made for the early slapstick cinema lover that's been buried within me for the past few years.

"Hundreds of Beavers" opens in the early 19th century, with an always drunken Applejack salesman, "Jean Kayak" (Ryland Brickson Cole Tews) getting his farm blown up by actions of the growing beaver population. Jean survives, waking up in the middle of winter and now must find a way to adjust to the cold climate, though mostly struggles simply to find food (Resulting in various "Looney Tunes"-like gags with the smarter than expected wildlife). Jean eventually finds a local merchant (Doug Mancheski), who offers a surplus of supplies, weapons, and other essentials in exchange for the hides of the many rabbits, wolves, and yes, beavers. The merchant also has a smoking hot daughter (Olivia Graves), that Jean desperately wants to impress and ask for her hand in marriage. Jean finds work with a master fur trapper (Wes Tank), while arranging many traps of his own to catch some of the beavers. When the merchant agrees to allow Jean to marry his daughter in exchange for hundreds of beavers, Jean becomes more determined than ever to achieve his goal. However, with a Sherlock Holmes and Watson-like pair of beavers investigating Jean's actions, absolutely cartoonish insanity is about to ensue. Also, I should probably mention that all of the animals in the film are just people in mascot costumes, making gibberish noises the entire time.

Directed by Wes Cheslik (In his first feature length film), who co-wrote the screenplay with Ryland Brickson Cole Tews, "Hundreds of Beavers" is mostly silent, absolutely nonsensical, and gut bustingly hilarious. Filmed in a crisp, almost glowing black and white filter, mixed with some "Monty Python" inspired use of cardboard cutout visuals, different forms of stylistic animation, and logistics that you would find in an early "Super Mario" game, the film always has something of beauty to display. The film definitely seems to play out like a video game, complete with some amusing running gags involving reactionary punctuation marks popping up over characters' heads and much trial and error with the lead character, which generally leads to some good old fashioned harm humorously befalling him. Cheslik composes so many wondrous shots, with some Oscar worthy cinematography from Quinn Hester, that revolves around loads of sight gags, which to the shock of the audience may or may not serve an important purpose to the story. The randomness, which isn't always random, makes the film unpredictable. Granted, all of which would be funny enough on its own, but it's elevated by how creative the filmmakers were in crafting so many elaborate, vibrant, and at times, shockingly thrilling sequences. The film actually culminates in a wild finale that actually puts action scenes in your average blockbuster to shame. I genuinely have no clue how they were able to accomplish most of this (Especially at only a $150,000). I also can only imagine how much hard work also went into crafting the tiniest, most goofy of details, right down to a rather inspired gag involving the lead character following a trail of rabbit footprints in the snow, which proceed to detail their entire lives, from marriage, sexual activities, and eventually death (Complete with the trail stopping at a tombstone). These are the kinds of jokes that take commitment and nobody would have ever thought of.

Ryland Brickson Cole Tews basically has to carry much of the film, and with incredibly little dialogue (Most of the time just screaming and making silly sounds). It's a brazenly physical performance that reminds one of some classic performers such as Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin, Abbot & Costello, among others that I always loved growing up. The rest of the cast is a ton of fun, with the hypnotically lovely Olivia Graves (Who veers between seeming cutesy and innocent to much more naughty on a whim), Doug Mancheski (With a bizarre recurring joke involving him creatively spitting into a can, only to always miss), Wes Tank (And his sled dogs, who like to spend their breaks playing poker), and Luis Rico (as a Native American trader, who occasionally allies with Jean and has a pet horse, who is again, just a guy in a poorly made costume). The beavers themselves are the real scene-stealers, and it's quite hilarious how much personality these characters are given, despite being nothing but over the top mascot costumes that you can surely find at any children's' party. (Another hysterical recurring gag involves how whenever a beaver is killed, their blood and guts are shown to be made up of packing peanuts, stuffing, and plush toy organs. Seriously, how did they even come up with this?)

Having taken nearly over four years to finish production (And only getting a full release after being completed two years prior), "Hundreds of Beavers" is an immense amount of silly, over the top, and delightfully strange fun. For what looks like purely animated nonsense in a live-action package, comes across as peak surreal filmmaking. One minute you're nearly rolling on the floor with laughter over either a genuinely intelligent joke or the most lowbrow of punchlines (The film does feature the greatest nut shot ever put to screen), and then the next, you're in awe of the film's hypnotically weird visuals. It feels like the kind of dream you have while you're drugged up due to an extra bad case of the flu, and yet, you really don't want to wake up from it. 4 1/2 Stars. Not Rated, Though Feels More Or Less Like A Strong PG Or Light PG-13 For Slight Adult Content, Rabbit Multiplication, Loads Of Horrifically Hilarious Animal Abuse (PETA Probably Hates This Movie So Much. Just Don't Take It Too Seriously), And, Well, As The Title States "Hundreds Of Beavers".

The Mouse Trap by James Eagan No Stars out of ★★★★★

Image: Images like this make my own failures in life sting more than they already do.

Perhaps properties being available to the public domain were a bad idea. Like, it was a fine idea and all. Would have been cool to see what other content creators could have done with it. However, we CLEARLY can't be trusted with such power. After "Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey" and "The Mean One", if all we're going to do is make some worse than bottom of the barrel horror films, where the appeal is that they are intentionally terrible, nobody is gaining anything from this. Hell, these aren't even really making that much of a profit either. It's literally the bare minimum.

Serving as a sort of horror parody of beloved 1928 Mickey Mouse cartoon, "Steamboat Willie" (Which found itself in the public domain literally at the start of the year), "The Mouse Trap" follows "Alex" (Sophie McIntosh), who gets a surprise party at the local arcade from her friends, which includes the guy who likes her "Marcus" (Callum Sywyk), the jerk jock "Ryan" (Ben Harris), the goth girl "Rebecca" (Mackenzie Mills), and a small collection of disposable a-holes. The group is stalked by a teleporting, homicidal maniac (Simon Phillips) wearing an old, vintage Mickey Mouse mask, who I assume wants to pick them off one by one, but really just seems to take his sweet ass time doing so in an attempt to pad out the hour and twenty minute runtime (What is it with killers and not, well, killing?).

Directed by Jamie Bailey, with a screenplay from Simon Phillips, "The Mouse Trap" is yet another one of these cheap, half-assed slasher films that I'm honestly giving way too much time of day to. Logically, what more can I actually say about this? It was released quietly via video on demand, Amazon Prime, or can just be watched by "Sailing on the High Seas" (The only way to watch stuff like this. Wink Wink!). It had no budget. No thought process behind it. Just a bunch of honest and knowingly trashy filmmakers setting out to make a piece of sh*t. I can't get mad at this. The only reason I'm even talking about it is because, as far as these movies have been so far, this is easily the worst of the bunch (And even then, maybe that's what they were going for). It's just a lifeless, scare-free rip off of "Scream", barely held together by the cheapest kind of disposable tape in hopes of banking on Disney's nearly hundred year old short film becoming part of the public domain. Now one can hope that something clever, insightful, or at least, fun could come out of it. Sadly, that appears to be too much to ask. The film even opens with a "Star Wars"-esque opening crawl admitting to the parody, though it just comes across more like what non-"Deadpool" fans seem to think his self-deprecating humor is actually like (And also, "The People's Joker" did it much better in mocking its parodic existence).

No real laughs here, and not even really any unintentional ones either. There's nothing of value to the concept itself, with the sight of some dude going around, killing dumb people while wearing a cheap Mickey Mouse mask getting old real fast. Especially since it takes like 90% of the runtime for any killings to commence, and even then, they're all just tame stabbing and throat slittings. There's barely a connection to the old cartoon, which appears in the background a couple times (And I suppose is implied to have been possessed. Maybe? It's hard to tell). And yeah, while the performances are quite abysmal all around, it's not like they're given anything to work with. It's a screenplay that never establishes its killer or his motivation. There's no real characterization at all and I can't see anyone, regardless of talent, making it work. I just feel bad for Sophie McIntosh because she's at least trying. Hell, the most committed performance comes from Simon Phillips (Which makes sense since he's basically the co-creator of this thing), and he's just hidden under a mask most of the time. I'll admit to actually kind of enjoying Ben Harris' performance, because while it's still quite terrible, his needless antagonism and drunken douchebaggery got a few chuckles out of me. The film only gets irritating when it repeatedly stops dead to waste some time with a god awful framing device, involving Mackenzie Mills' character being questioned by a pair of cops (Played by Damir Kovic and Nick Biskupek, who I swear looks like what you would get if you reheated Sharlto Copley in the microwave), resulting in the story being detailed via their forced, derivative, and often just plain annoying dialogue. The acting in these scenes are also the kind of bad that one would think impossible to achieve. A holy grail of bad acting in a way. And that's saying something for a film that, again, doesn't seem to have any intention of being classified as "Good Quality".

"The Mouse Trap" lacks ingenuity for its premise, suffers from an onslaught of plot holes, and overall, a sense of acceptance of its future as nothing more than background noise for whoever stumbles upon it by accident while going down the internet's rabbit hole. The ending, or lack thereof, is what really shows how little work seems to go into these films. While "Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey" or "The Mean One" had some kind of commitment to what they were parodying, this doesn't even feel like a parody of anything. Obviously it's one of the worst made movies I've seen this year. It's supposed to be that. I don't know though. There's just nothing to say about it. We got a Mickey Mouse mask wearing slasher with a weakness for strobe lights, who sometimes teleports around (Through the use of hilariously lazy editing, where he will jump cut in and out of shots), and takes too long to actually kill anybody in a movie that eventually stops being a movie at some point before we cut to credits. It's still not remotely worth getting upset over. I've already seen more anger inducing films this year as it is. It simply exists. Congrats. I guess. Nobody asked for it, but it's here. Literally anything can be a movie these days. No Stars (What? What was I supposed to give it?). Not Rated, Though It Basically Is An R Rated Film For Language, Blood, And The Draining Feeling That You Get While Watching It, Before Eventually Realizing That No Matter How Hard You May Try, You May Never Achieve Your Filmmaking Dreams And Yet, THIS Exists.

Trap by James Eagan ★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: My facial expressions while watching this movie.

Shyamalan is back and he's just as frustrating as ever!

"Trap" follows a seemingly inconspicuous dad, "Cooper Adams" (Josh Hartnett), taking his teenage daughter, "Riley" (Ariel Donohue), to a massive, sold out concert for Riley's favorite pop star, "Lady Raven" (Saleka Shyamalan). While at the concert, Cooper starts to notice the extra security and the large ensemble of police surrounding the area, learning from an especially excitable vendor, "Jamie" (Jonathan Langdon), that the whole concert is an elaborate trap that's been set up to capture the infamously brutal and violent serial killer known as "The Butcher". Of course, it turns out that Cooper himself is the Butcher and has no intention of getting caught. While trying to make sure Riley doesn't suspect anything, Cooper searches for any means of escape, though with the FBI bringing along a very skilled, almost telepathic profiler, "Dr. Grant" (Hayley Mills), to predict his movements, Cooper soon realizes that his days of terror just might be nearing its end.

Written and directed by M. Night Shyamalan ("Knock at the Cabin", "Old", "The Sixth Sense"), "Trap" is certainly a return to form for him in so many ways. The film opens so strong right out fo the gate. Shyamalan, while retaining a pretty twisted sense of humor, keeps things confined to such a tightly wound (And anxiety fueled) setting. He also brings out his usual bag of tricks, along with an eye for unnerving cinematography, which are heightened by several POV shots, forcing us to look at characters directly as if we're the one being questioned. It also shows some progress in terms of Shyamalan's usual style in which the twist is revealed in the first ten minutes, leaving the rest of the time for the audience to be kept guessing at how in the world our villainous protagonist could possibly get away with any of this. It leads to a lot of clever writing, pop culture satire, and moments of pitch black levity, further encompassing the very idea that a truly monstrous, unrepentant psychopath just might be some every day guy, who you could bump into at any moment. From the staging, score, and setup, this is Shyamalan in top form and you never know what kind of craziness is going to happen next. For almost the first hour of the film, we get an intense, claustrophobic, compelling, and even at times, quite funny, thriller that I could have seen possibly earning a place on my best movies of the year list. And then.....the rest of the movie happened.

I don't think I've ever seen a ball dropped this hard in a while. Hell, it's almost like they spiked the ball, flattened it, and then stepped on it for good measure. Shyamalan eventually succumbs to some of his absolute worst urges, taking what was a small scale, yet effective tale of psychological villainy and instead turning it into a meandering disaster in the last half. The film straight up abandons its premise once we reach finish what seems like the third act, before the film shifts gears and drives right into a fourth, fifth, and sixth act in the last forty minutes. At first, you think maybe the film is going to toss in some last second twist, which M. Night Shyamalan has admitted to getting too enamored with in the past, but aside from one small reveal (Which you can kind of see coming anyways), there isn't much more to it. Well, aside from an inability to end. The film just decides that it has to keep going, despite already being given the opportunity to end on a high note some time earlier. It becomes the definition of overindulgent and loses track of what made it so captivating in the first place.

So many excellent qualities to the film, and most amazing of all is how pitch perfect Josh Hartnett is. It's a revelation of a performance, shifting between the goofy, cringey, but well-meaning dad to a menacing, calculating, and deliciously vile maniac within the same shot. He makes this character so interesting to watch, with how he plots things out on a whim, and smoothly charms his way into seeming so unsuspecting. It's to the point where you almost WANT him to win, despite being shown clearly how much of a monster in human form he is. (The film actually does good with its PG-13 rating, where we never actually see what he's done to earn the name "The Butcher", but it's hinted at just enough to make you repulsed) Ariel Donoghue is also very likable, and works well off of Hartnett in scenes that wisely feel like they could be from a completely different, more family friendly movie. Jonathan Langdon is a great, quick scene-stealer, while Kid Cudi (as "The Thinker", one of the fellow acts performing with Lady Raven) pops up for a pretty hilarious cameo. Saleka Shyamalan's entire role in the film feels like pure nepotism at work for sure, though despite clearly not having done much acting before this, she's actually pretty solid and undeniably full of screen presence. (Hey, she's putting on a damn good show regardless. Even if she's no Mid-Sized Sedan!).

What makes the turn in "Trap" so aggravating is that it's so unnecessary. It's as if other ideas and story were left floating around during production, and M. Night Shyamalan just couldn't bear to part with it. This results in some threads that aren't near as tight as the movie thinks they are, and despite having me so hooked at the start, it eventually lets me go without realizing. (Imagine a guy fishing for a good half hour before realizing that his line has already snapped off) I loved it, until I didn't. Maybe it truly is a return to form for Shyamalan. I just can't tell if I mean that positively or not. 3 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Intense Content, Hartnett's Evil Abs, And The Usual Shyamalan Jumpscare.

Harold and the Purple Crayon by James Eagan ★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: How it feels looking through Zachary Levi's Twitter history.

Taking beloved children's stories and icons, then churning out a live-action centered film about them in the hopes that blind nostalgia and child-like innocence will result in boat loads of cold card cash is nothing new. And there are plenty of times where it can really work. You either got a clever subversion of the source material, a genuinely heartfelt take on it, or at least some passion to embrace the sort of oddness that can come from taking a more mature, logical lens to something you grew up with. Or you can just poop something out, then hope for the best before moving on like nothing happened.

Based on the book by the late Crockett Johnson, "Harold and the Purple Crayon" opens in a 2D animated world, where the titular, "Harold" (Zachary Levi), who has used his magical purple crayon to create whatever he imagines, lives a peaceful life of childish joy with his animal friends, "Moose" (Lil Rel Howery) and "Porcupine" (Tanya Reynolds), along with an unseen narrator they refer to as "The Old Man" (Voiced by Alfred Molina). When the old man suddenly stops speaking to them one day, Harold decides that they need to go into the real world to find him and you pretty much know where all this is going. Harold and Moose pop into reality (With Moose taking a human form, likely to save on the budget), where they embark on a quest to find the old man, with Porcupine showing up later (Also taking a human form), to engage in her own shenanigans. Harold and Moose meet up with widowed mom, "Terri" (Zooey Deschanel) and her imaginative son, "Mel" (Benjamin Bottani), who take them in temporarily, despite Terri being rightfully weirded out by the two of them. It also turns out that Harold's purple crayon's magical power also can be used in the real world, which attracts the attention of disgruntled librarian, "Gary" (Jemaine Clement), who wants to use the crayon for his own selfish, villainous purposes (Which also include having the hots for Terri because, well, it's Zooey Deschanel, so what do you expect?).

Directed by Carlos Saldanha ("Ice Age", "Robots", "Rio"), with a screenplay from the duo of David Guion and Michael Handelman ("Dinner for Schmucks", "Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb"), "Harold and the Purple Crayon" genuinely opens with a likable little sequence of beautiful animation that just bounces off the screen in such a way that should serve as a reminder of how we moved on from traditional animation on the big screen. However, that only lasts a good five minutes before we find ourselves once again in the blandest of bland stories, set in the blandest of bland settings and features the blandest of bland scripts. I can say that this isn't a remotely annoying or painful film by any means, but then again, maybe that actually would have been welcomed considering how uninspired the final product is. It's one of those movies that feels like it could have been done by anyone, going through the motions in many ways, right down to some out of nowhere music cues, generic plot beats, and less than stellar CGI (Granted, one shouldn't expect such a thing from "Harold and the Purple Crayon"). It's a movie where you don't go in expecting it to be good (Though would very much love to be pleasantly surprised), but still find yourself disappointed in how lacking in actual fun there is to be had. It's not like earlier this year's "IF", which took a more mature look at such goofy whimsy (Whether or not it fully worked for you, you gotta admit that the film at least tried). This is just a checklist of kids movie tropes and while you might get a moment or two where you can see the hint of something magical, it's too dull to even get worked up over.

Zachary Levi essentially just plays the same type of man baby character he's become known for, though this one weirdly doesn't have any kind of arc or sense of urgency despite being the lead. Lil Rel Howery, who has shown to be a very funny guy, is quite underutilized in a bafflingly uncreative way (So he's a Moose in the cartoon world, but is just a dude wearing brown clothes in the real world? How does that even work? And how is that remotely fun? Should have had him dressed like a moose the entire time. Just saying!). Zooey Deschanel is her usual lovely, charming self, having to make up for the lack of a purpose in the film's disjointed story, while Jemaine Clement thankfully gets to go full ham during the film's last act. The biggest source of decent humor comes from an especially lovable Tanya Reynolds, who fully commits to the concept of a twitchy porcupine trapped in a human body and gets a few good laughs because of it (Plus, I'm pretty sure a girl that cute crawling around like a chittering animal probably does it for more than a few people. Not saying I'm one of them, but not saying I'm NOT one of them).

"Harold and the Purple Crayon" isn't necessarily the bottom of the barrel in terms of poor kids movies. It just comes across as so much lesser than the good ones. "Paddington" without the wondrous appeal to all audiences. "Peter Rabbit" without the snarky, self-aware humor. "Lyle, Lyle Crocodile" or "Clifford the Big Red Dog" without the unapologetic, memorable weirdness. It's more like "The Smurfs", except worse. The film struggles to find a reason for being during its second act (Which involves the characters being chased around by the police and eventually arrested, before the film abandons that plot entirely), and doesn't compensate its already undemanding audience with any actual imagination of its own. I'd say it would probably work better as something you turn on in the background to keep your kids busy, though even then, I can only see them being more bored by it than anything else. Not so much lazy as it is just plain lame. 1 1/2 Stars. Rated PG For Slight-Ish Adult Content (And I Mean Very Slight), Zooey Deschanel Lusting, And The Fact That Some Innocent Man May Have Been Mauled To Death By A Puma (Did They Ever Address That? I Legit Don't Remember!).

Deadpool & Wolverine by James Eagan ★★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: Film Twitter, when they see people actually enjoying something.

Despite years of goodwill, box office glory, and millions of adoring, newly converted fans, the "Marvel Cinematic Universe" has been repeatedly going back and forth between "Being SO Back!" to "Being SO Over!" for the past four years. It's to the point where that pessimism has started to worm its way into its own fans, and sadly the worst part is that they have a point. We are at the point where it seems to be about trying to see what sticks, and yeah, while I personally think none of the recent projects have been outright bad (I'll give you "Secret Invasion"), the cracks in this long running cinematic franchise, along with the superhero/comic book genre in general have been starting to wear out its welcome. So in a desperate plea for relevance, the biggest, most corporate and downright evil at times company we know, "Disney" (aka "The Mouse"), has pulled out all the stops in toss in as much gratuitous fanservice, heavy CGI-fest, and slapping that cocky, self-aware walking red sticker in front of it in hopes of achieving the same level of heights it once used to bask in. And yeah.....It's F*CKING awesome! What did you expect me to say? Want me to sit on my comfy chair, cross my legs, next to my bookshelf full of Kubrick screenplays and my half-assed Criterion Collection, while I tweet about how it's the "Worst Thing Since Cancer"? I know what pure, unfiltered nerdy happiness looks like when I see it!

Following the events of the first two films, the "Loki" series, and basically the whole Fox/Disney merger (Resulting in their "Marvel" property rights being in the hands of "Marvel Studios"), "Deadpool & Wolverine" reunites us with that unkillable, disfigured Merc with the Mouth, "Wade Wilson/Deadpool" (Ryan Reynolds), who has fallen on hard times due to his obsessive need to matter in some way, which results in him become separated from the love of his life, "Vanessa" (Morena Baccarin), quitting the superhero business, and deciding to sell used cars with his mustached buddy, "Peter" (Rob Delaney) aka "Sugar Bear". Peter arranges for a surprise birthday party for Deadpool, inviting Vanessa, along with Deadpool's cocaine loving, blind elderly roommate "Blind Al" (Leslie Uggams) and a bunch of cameos from his supporting cast from the last film (Excluding the ones they couldn't afford to get back, were busy, or were a total piece of sh*t like T. J. Miller). Just then, out of the blue, Deadpool is abducted by the "Time Variance Authority" (The in-between time and space organization that watches over the multiverse from "Loki", or the "TVA"), bringing him literally into the Marvel Cinematic Universe (Or the "Sacred Timeline" as it's called). A TVA agent, "Mr. Paradox" (Matthew Macfayden), offers Deadpool a chance to become a part of the Sacred Timeline, which Deadpool is more than ecstatic about until he discovers that this will mean that he will have to leave his own timeline behind, including all of his loved ones. To make matters worse, due to the unexpected, but very epic and dramatic death of his timeline's anchor (Major, very important figure), the famed, clawed mutant hero, "James "Logan" Howlett/Wolverine" (Hugh Jackman) in 2017's "Logan" (Should have won a bunch of Oscars!), this means Deadpool's timeline will cease to exist.

Declaring himself to be the Messiah, or "Marvel Jesus" (MJ, if you're nasty), Deadpool gets the bright idea that any Wolverine will do and proceeds to go rogue, then go around the multiverse to find a new, totally not dead Wolverine. Eventually, Deadpool is stuck with the apparent worst Wolverine (Also played by Hugh Jackman. Duh!), who failed to protect his own world. Paradox gets fed up with Deadpool's nonsense (And also because his operation to speed up the demise of Deadpool's timeline in a so called "Mercy Killing" is totally not authorized by the rest of the TVA), resulting in him sending Deadpool and Wolverine into "The Void" (The place where all the hated, forgotten, and unworthy Marvel movie characters have been sent). To find their way out, Deadpool and Wolverine must put aside their differences to find a way to escape, while having to deal with a gang of abandoned Marvel villains, led by the sadistic, "Cassandra Nova" (Emma Corrin).

Directed by Shawn Levy (The "Night at the Museum" films, "Free Guy", "The Adam Project"), who co-wrote the screenplay with the returning duo of Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick, along with comic book writer Zeb Wells ("The Marvels" and, well, the worst current run of "Spider-Man" comics. He's been having an off few years in terms of comic book writing) and Ryan Reynolds (Because, of course!), "Deadpool & Wolverine" might not win over any new converts, especially those who told themselves that they were going to absolutely hate it months in advance. It let's you know right away in the first five minutes what this is going to be, with Deadpool promising the audience that he is definitely going to desecrate the legacy of "Logan" by literally digging him up from his grave, finding nothing but a decomposed corpse, and using the corpse's body parts to violently rip apart some attackers in bloody, vulgar fashion during the opening credits, set to "Bye Bye Bye" by *NSYNC. Now if that doesn't sound like the greatest thing you've ever read, then steer clear for your own safety. For me though? Yeah, I knew one of my favorite comic characters was in the right hands, even with the studio change.

Much like everything involving the character, the film is self-aware in its own purpose to keep the IP alive, while indulging in over the top violence and shameless fan service. However (And again, like everything involving the character), the film is fast, funny, and deep down, underneath all the crudeness lies a much more sentimental heart. Clearly this is a very cynically funded project. It's also one filled with so much passion and undeniable love. Shawn Levy especially seems to be reveling in what Marvel and Disney is allowing them to get away with, from how brutally absurd the action can get (Especially when it involves our two leads who have a tendency to not stay dead regardless of how painful an injury likely is), making for some fiendishly cruel comedy. And boy, does the film love its pot shots, which are taken at everyone imaginable. At times, it's borderline mean to see some rather unrelenting jabs at the current state of the MCU, comic book movies and blockbusters as a whole, Disney, other studios, random people that I'm sure were just on the writers' minds at the moment, and most of all, itself. What makes it work is how absolutely hilarious it is. Like the snap of a finger, you're gonna get a smartly written line, mixed with something incredibly childish, and just plain odd for the sake of oddness (Best evident with the film's all over the place soundtrack, which has been carried over through all of these movies). The action itself is creatively soaked in blood and is a lot of fun, particularly in just how jovial the film seems to be in how it's basically been let loose onto the world, regardless of how ready the world is itself (No kind of limb isn't left ripped off in some way). Sure, there's loads of CGI and green screen at work here, but for the most part, it looks quite good (Or at least appealing in its own fairly sick way). Honestly, it's less noticeable here than in "Furiosa" (Hey! I love that movie too! So don't come after me!), especially since we've kind of just gotten used to it by now.

The stars, which includes the expected and even unexpected appearances from some names that you never knew you wanted to see so badly, seem to be treating this as the greatest achievement of their lives, which yes, does include Deadpool getting some dead Wolverine claws stuck in someone's ass and in their crotch, repeatedly yanking back and forth. Ryan Reynolds, who has blurred the line between knowing if he's just playing himself in every movie or if he's just always playing Deadpool, is a bloody riot. He's full of snark, the inability to shut the Hell up, and in places, someone who uses his insistence to annoy as a way of masking their own insecurities. Hugh Jackman meanwhile, who already had his perfect sendoff seven years ago, appears to have jumped right back in as if he never left. He just could have just phoned it in for a big ass paycheck with anyone understanding if he did (He's been playing this character for over two decades now after all). However, similar to the likes of Andrew Garfield and Tobey Maguire in "Spider-Man: No Way Home", Jackman is here to give it everything he has, putting his entire soul into this. Together, Reynolds and Jackman make a dream team of instability, spending just as much time ripping into each other rather than the villains (Sometimes in a literal sense). It's great seeing the returning faces of Morena Baccarin, Leslie Uggams (Always weirdly wholesome how terrible she and Deadpool are to each other), Rob Delaney (Peter is a treasure), Brianna Hildebrand (as "Negasonic Teenage Warhead", the edgy teen X-Men, who engages in snark offs with Deadpool), Karan Soni (as "Dopinder", Deadpool's lovable taxi driver buddy), among others, even if their appearances are quite brief. Emma Corrin makes for a delightfully sinister villain, along with a returning Aaron Stanford (as "Pyro", a fire based mutant, who made appearances in the second and third "X-Men" films) and a hilariously hammy and hateable Matthew Macfayden. The cameos though? I'd barely consider them cameos because most of them serve much grander purposes than your usual cameo appearances. I don't dare get into them, but I can say that [REDACTED] gets to finally [REDACTED], while [REDACTED] also comes back as [REDACTED]. I've already said too much though. Most of all though, how could anyone forget the glory that is "Dogpool" (An adorable, bug eyed Pugese, with a dangling tongue always flopping around everywhere), who steals every scene she's in.

Serving as the real "Multiverse of Madness", "Deadpool & Wolverine" is full of laughs, yet has such a sweet, joyful nature. We get as "Member Berry" a movie as you can get, but it's quite sincere about it. It's about finding the beauty of failure, serving as a perfect sendoff for the Fox made "X-Men" movies, as well a few other things that, again, I just can't get into without spoiling things. The film doesn't hold back in any capacity, which clearly won't work for everybody (And I can't stress this more, if you've been telling yourself that you're going to hate this, you're just making yourself and everybody around you suffer). With that said, once you get past the bawdy R Rating, this feels perfectly at home with the rest of the MCU, forcefully giving it the pulse of life that it sorely needs, and makes its fans more than happy to stick around a little longer. Maybe the best is yet to come. Maybe the worst is instead. Marvel Jesus is here to lead the way into the future. Hallelujah! 4 1/2 Stars. Rated R For Real Gory, Bloody Violence, The Strongest Kind Of Language Imaginable (If There's A Swear, They Say It), The Nerd Boner You're Going To Have For The Next Week After Seeing This, And Soooooo Much Ryan Reynolds Ass. Soooooo Much!

Twisters by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: "Aurora Borealis? At this time of year? At this time of day? In this part of the country? Localized entirely within your kitchen?"

I suppose while the original box office hit, the 1996 movie "Twister", gathered quite the fanbase, I never understood it. Even when I was younger. Still, I gave the original a new shot since I had to prepare for this one, and....I think it's kind of bad. Yeah yeah yeah. We got plenty of bad disaster movies, though even the worst ones have either memorable characters or so much insanity that you can't help but find yourself oddly charmed by them. The Jan de Bont "Twister" feels like a fairly watered down version of better disaster films, which doesn't do much to counteract the silliness, except maybe make a tornado growl as if it were a Kaiju. There's hints of charm, but aside from what I can only assume is some 90s nostalgia, I don't see the appeal. So that only made it more out of the blue that we were getting a more high budget sequel nearly three decades after the original.

Serving as a 99.9% standalone sequel to the 1996 film (With the only apparent connection being that the same storm scanning device "Dorothy" makes a fairly brief appearance), "Twisters" opens with young storm chaser, "Kate Cooper" (Daisy Edgar-Jones), who dreams of being able to disrupt a tornado to save lives, witnessing the death of nearly her entire crew of disposable cameos (Poor Kiernan Shipka. That's twice in the past two weeks!). Years later, Kate is brought back into the game by her only surviving crew member/longtime friend, "Javi" (Anthony Ramos) to be a part of his new top of the line storm chasing team, which will monitor the data of tornadoes and track them. Returning to Oklahoma with Javi, Kate comes across a group of seemingly obnoxious, thrill seeking "Tornado Wranglers", led by the well chiseled "Tyler Owens" (Glen Powell), who serve as competition during the more violent than normal storm season. However, when Kate realizes that the company Javi works for might not be entirely noble and that there's more to Tyler than a big cowboy hat and his love for merchandising, she gets her groove back as they say, to fight the storms like she once did before. Sounds like a song lyric really.

Directed by Lee Isaac Chung ("Minari"), with a screenplay by Mark L. Smith ("The Revenant", "Overlord", "The Boys in the Boat") and a story credit from Joseph Kosinski ("Top Gun: Maverick", so there's a connection), "Twisters" is what likely comes to mind when people think of the original. Aside from, well, actually being good this time, it's also got those undemanding, yet refreshingly old fashioned thrills that we used to have every Summer in the 90s. The film also just serves as probably the best straight up disaster movie we've had in some time. Much of why the film works is because Lee Isaac Chung seems to know what kind of film he's been told to make (Campy popcorn fun), and at least try to have more depth or personality to go with all the spectacle. In fact, the spectacle in terms of its budget (Which I guess ranged somewhere to $150 Million to maybe even $200 million), is fairly tame with solid enough special effects. However, they're brought to exhilarating life by the impeccable sound design (Talk about making your seats shake!), a grand scope for destruction, and characters that you genuinely give a crap about.

The original film may have had a likable cast, but it seemed like they were doing all of the heavy lifting. Here, something feels more natural. There is just enough dimension to the characters to make them stand out, with the charismatic cast only enhancing it. A wonderfully appealing Daisy Edgar-Jones and the reliable onscreen presence of Glen Powell (Really on a roll, that guy) make for an excellent pair. They have great chemistry for sure and there's no doubt there's supposed to be some romantic tensions there, though the film never forces it. Anthony Ramos gets probably the best character arc, serving as someone with the best of intentions, though might be a little lost in the corporate game at the moment and just needs a little nudge back on track. I do find it pretty amusing that the fairly small appearance from Maura Tierney (as "Cathy", Kate's mother), considering how its portrayed (And how she comes out almost like an "Avengers"-like reveal), feels like the role was probably originally intended for Helen Hunt's character from the original film (I honestly would have deducted half a star if they had pulled that crap, so this is for the best). There are some fun supporting roles from the likes of Sasha Lane, Brandon Perea, Katy O'Brian, and Tunde Adebimpe (as Tyler's crew, who all turn out to be much more than a bunch of reckless storm chasers), along with probably my favorite character being the always amusingly befuddled Harry Hadden-Paton (as "Ben", a London Reporter who goes with Tyler's crew as part of a story he's writing, and obviously has no idea what he's gotten himself into). It's nice to see that almost everybody is given little moments to show different shades to their characters. The only exception being David Corenswet (as "Scott", Javi's much, much less caring business partner), who is literally just a piece of sh*t just because we need at least one person to hate (In all fairness, he actually does a great job with it).

Surpassing the original with ease, "Twisters" is a solidly made Summer blockbuster, with the kind of heart and personality that these genre films are known for. It brings a sense of old fashioned sensibilities, with grand spectacle and people to root for. Plausibility might be secondary (Real nice of the tornadoes to lift everything off the ground, except for the main characters when its convenient), but really, that's just movie stuff that you should like you're just being a dick for even trying to critique. You come for the thrills and especially once we reach the film's semi-forced climax (Where the tornado destruction is taken up to an eleven), you get just that and it's still packed with edge of your seat excitement. It's the kind of film like "Fly Me to the Moon" and "The Fall Guy" that while can be a bit on the safer side and doesn't really provide its audience with an incredible amount of memorability, it fits the bill when it comes to the classic charms of a fairly quick, middle of the day trip to the movies. Plus, people love their tornadoes. And you get plenty of those. The title is plural for a reason after all. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Scary, Weather-Based Imagery, The Obligatory Shot Of Glen Powell Walking In The Rain In A Tight White Shirt, And Dorothy's Big, Shiny, Tornado Seeking Balls.

Tyler Perry's Divorce in the Black by James Eagan ★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Everybody needs a little emotional support after watching any Tyler Perry movie.

Tyler. Tyler. Tyler. Oh Tyler. We've been through so much together. How many Madea movies has it been? How many of my "Worst of the Year" lists have you found yourself at the top of? And then, you went away. Sort of. Found your place with Netflix, releasing some still pretty terrible films, but hey, at least they actually looked like movies. Hell, I've even seen a god awful parody of your films with "Not Another Church Movie", and while I can't say that vindicate your usual plethora of crap, it pretty guaranteed you're not going to end up at the number one spot on this year's "Worst of the Year" list. I mean, it's looking like you're still going to be somewhere on that list. Just not entirely for the usual reasons.

Released via Amazon Prime (Apparently the first of a four film deal), "Tyler Perry's Divorce in the Black" opens with "Ava" (Meagan Good) and her abusive husband, "Dallas" (Cory Hardrict), attending the funeral for his brother, where Ava's preacher father, "Clarence" (Richard Lawson), goes on a tirade about how he's burning in Hell, due to the known evils that Dallas' family have committed. This leads to Dallas' wildly over the top mother, "Linda" (Ursula O. Robinson), kind of rightfully calling Clarence out on doing such a thing during a freakin funeral (She's a piece of work too, but you know, that does seem inappropriate). Linda proceeds to get Dallas and her other sons to yank the corpse out of the casket, in front of everyone, causing a whole scene, and driving off, leaving Ava completely distraught. Ava has been struggling with Dallas for a while now, and their marriage has finally hit a wall, with Dallas demanding a divorce. Ava, despite some hardship, does start to realize how messed up their relationship was and is on the path to moving on, such as slowly starting to see an old friend/love interest, "Benji" (Joseph Lee Anderson). However, at a little around the halfway point, Dallas gets the idea that Ava had been cheating on him the entire time and proceeds to escalate things to the usual Tyler Perry world of implausibility.

Written and directed by Tyler Perry (The "Madea" films, "Acrimony", "Temptation: Confessions of a Marriage Counselor", and many, many other films that range from horrifically offensive or just offensively bad), "Tyler Perry's Divorce in the Black" is already being called by some to be his absolute worst film yet, which is quite the accusation considering his filmography. And yeah, it's not the worst. In a way though, it makes an even more egregious error, and that's being so goddamn boring. Once we get past the thoroughly bonkers first five to ten minutes, this ends up being a fairly by the numbers drama of our lead characters trying to recover from getting out of a dangerous relationship. Sounds fine, right? The problem that it's still hindered by Tyler Perry's inability to write decent characters, original dialogue, or understand the basics of filmmaking itself. It's amazing how despite being in the business for so long, garnering quite the fortune, and giving off the facade that he's improving, Perry has only shown that he's basically learned nothing over the years. The film's frustratingly thought-free script plays out like a sort of "Greatest Hits" when it comes to lame "Lifetime"-esque dramas or cheap romance novels, and while Tyler Perry continues to semi-embrace his newfound sort of edge (More language, sexual context, and an R rating), it still feels fake and devoid of merit.

The always lovely Meagan Good is trying to sell this, and at times, she kind of does, though one can only do so much when they're given literal garbage to work it. The film just never remotely justifies why this is an ordeal in the first place (Right down to showing that Ava was already being at least emotionally abused by Dallas and his family, during their wedding day, leaving one to wonder how this ever became a relationship to begin with. Hell, it never even looked like either of them once liked each other!). It just goes by the whole "We Need a Movie" style of outline, to justify its conflict, regardless of how much sense it makes. The film also continues that Tyler Perry trend of not realizing how either detestable or at least problematic some of its supposed "likable" characters are supposed to be. We have Taylor Polidore (as "Rona", Ava's best friend, who only exists to worry about Ava's problems) trying to inject some out of place humor/state the obvious ,and the romance with Joseph Lee Anderson lacks chemistry, while Richard Lawson and Debbi Morgan (as "Gene", Ava's equally religious mother, who is always spouting out God's word like she's a Christ-Fueled zombie), come across as religiously cult-like zealots, who also just repeatedly just make things worse throughout the film (You know, you can make decent religious characters without making them batsh*t crazy, right?). There is some unintentional hilarity to come from the villains, though the film rarely shows us why they're evil (It's one of those "Because the Script Says So" sort of things). Cory Hardrict is terrible, yet amusingly terrible, going from just a sexist dick to deranged, homicidal maniac in a matter of seconds, while Ursula O. Robinson is always off the charts with unflinching anger.

"Tyler Perry's Divorce in the Black" doesn't quite go off the rails with the usual silliness until the second half, and yet, even that is kind of half-assed. There's no big cartoonish twist or an outlandish finale (If anything, it's just mildly uncomfortable considering the subject matter and the, er, controversy with Meagan Good's current boyfriend. We'll just leave it at that). This is some safe stuff by comparison, and only leads to an aggressive amount of dullness. Clocking in at two hours, Tyler Perry movies at least tend to leave a guy broken mentally, though with plenty to talk about (While also leaving his target audience of good, God fearing, older Christian women going "Ooooooooh!"). However, I see this boring his fans just as much as it did me. In terms of actual positives, I can say it looks a little nicer than some of his other movies. Still, despite that glossy outside, you can't hide the ugliness on the inside. 1 Star. Rated For For Strong Language, Fully Clothed Sexual Content, And Meagan Good's Inhuman Strength To Break A Car Window By Lightly Slamming A Door Shut.

Longlegs by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Just your average reaction to seeing a feral Nic Cage in the wild.

It's been a while since I've been stuffed into a crowded movie theater. And of all the films, it happens to be "Longlegs"? An odd choice, though one that did get a pretty damn good reaction Perhaps the brilliant marketing campaign behind this film could pay off in the long run, and for good reason too. Every ad, trailer, or teaser released had only given little hints as to what the Hell this was, along with baffling, unsettling images that you just have to find out more about. Not to mention an excuse to see Nic Cage actually going out of his way to be terrifying? Who could resist that? It's a film that's already being lauded as the best horror film of the decade, leaving audiences in states of panic and urine soaked clothing.

Set in the 1990s, "Longlegs" follows the newest (And hilariously anti-social) recruit to the FBI, "Lee Harker" (Maika Monroe), who quickly proves to be not just a capable agent, but an especially perceptive one. (Maybe it's just really good intuition. Maybe she's psychic. Or just a really good guesser?) Harker is put on a rather twisted case, which is to track down a now notorious, Satanic serial killer, known as "Longlegs" (Nicolas Cage). It's a task that proves very difficult because of how baffling the murders are, with families being brutally murdered by the father of the house, followed the the father presumably killing himself, though there appears a connection to Longlegs at every scene of the crime despite him never seemingly being there in the first place. As Harker digs deeper, she discovers that Longlegs himself has taken special interest in her. With the odds becoming more and more likely that Longlegs is only going to kill again, Harker must face her own past if she's going to catch him before it's too late.

Written and directed by Osgood Perkins ("Gretal & Hansel", "The Blackcoat's Daughter"), "Longlegs" has already garnered quite the reputation and I think it's my civic duty to admit that this really isn't the scariest movie of the decade. Probably not even the scariest this year either. However, don't let that turn you off from an effectively chilling, always unsettling and demonically crafted thriller that's bound to give you the kind of shock that can only come from the most nefarious of minds. It's much more of a slow burn, taking an approach that's similar to Michael Mann's "Manhunter" before drifting into "Silence of the Lambs" territory. The film acts like a police procedural first, with hints at something more sinister beneath the surface that's always egging you on, even when you don't even know it. Osgood Perkins' direction is brilliant that way. Simple moments of a character just standing in a dark room, hearing things around them, and with the tiniest of sounds setting them off. It's also a credit to the haunting sound design, where I swear to God, you can constantly hear this spine tingling little whimper throughout. It's like you're being watched while you watch the movie. Of course, this leads to some nightmarish, yet strangely beautiful imagery that you swear could have come out of the very bowels of Hell itself. You kind of don't want to look away from it, even when the film's shocking violence (Which sometimes just pops out at you like a jump scare) shows you something that you really wish you hadn't seen. Yeah, this isn't for the faint of heart.

Maika Monroe gives a career best performance, conveying her character's hidden turmoil through slight glances, intentionally distant line delivery, and of course, the eventual unfiltered terror when she gets closer to the dark heart of the situation. You just like her, even though the character clearly isn't a "People Person" (But you do start to see why as the film progresses). There are some great supporting performances from Blair Underwood (as "Agent Carter", Harker's superior), who brings some levity, along with a mesmerizingly odd Alicia Witt (as "Ruth", Harker's very religious and clearly psychologically damaged mother) and a brief, but memorable appearance from Kiernan Shipka (as "Carrie Anne Camera", the only survivor of one of Longlegs' family killings, who lives in a mental institution because of it). Then we get to the film's biggest selling point, which is to see Nicolas Cage being absolutely unhinged and terrifying. Granted, we see that with him a lot, but this is another level of "What the F*ck?". Mixed with some indescribable (And probably intentionally fake looking) pale makeup, that makes him look like a cross between the Joker, Robbie Rotten from "Lazy Town", and a demented grandma, along with a voice that sounds like Willy Wonka after getting his balls cut off, Nic Cage is literally uncaged. It's a suitably bizarre performance that's nonetheless frightening, despite the fact that he actually doesn't have much real screentime. It's a credit to his performance that even when he's not on screen, you can feel his presence all the way through. The film also has little moments of humor sprinkled around, whether it be because of some minor character quirks or just because of the film's surprisingly rocking soundtrack. The dread is constant and that sticks around even when you find yourself having the slightest amount of fun with it.

"Longlegs" is actually not an entirely unpredictable film (There's a few little twists and turns that you've seen before), but Osgood Perkins wisely seems to make up for such a thing by having his own macabre spin on the matter. It's the commitment to the terror that makes it work. It almost gives a hypnotic vibe, as if you're under whatever strange spell the film is casting on you. To call it the scariest thing you've ever seen can feel like an overstatement, and yet, the blood curdling visuals you're subjected to will stick with you, then might even keep you awake at night. 4 Stars. Rated R For Grotesque, Disturbing, And Upsetting Images, Along With The Truly Horrifying Sight Of Albino Nicolas Cage Making Kissy Faces At You Through The Screen.

Fly Me to the Moon by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: Any excuse to use a pretty picture of Scarlett Johansson is a good excuse.

What we have right here is more or less the definition of a "Boomer" movie. No ground is being broken. It barely qualifies as a PG-13. Safe. Secure. Harmless. Simple. It's what the older crowd wants and, well, I may have only just turned thirty years old, but I get it. In fact, I kind of feel that more movies like it, at least so long as we get plenty of bigger, deeper, more cinema worthy films to balance the scales.

Inspired by true-ish events (I appreciate that more films now are starting to acknowledge that they really are just making crap up half the time for dramatization purposes), "Fly Me to the Moon" is set during the tail end of the 60s, with the Space Race between the United States and the Soviet Union becoming more desperate than ever. A spunky, former conwoman turned marketing genius, "Kelly Jones" (Scarlett Johansson), is brought on board by shady government type, "Moe Berkus" (Woody Harrelson), to help "Sell" the idea of landing on the moon to the American public. This is a stark contrast with super serious NASA director, "Cole Davis" (Channing Tatum), who has an underfunded team working day and night on the future Apollo 11 launch. Despite their differences (And most because the both of them are, you know, conventionally attractive by all sexuality standards), sparks fly between Kelly and Cole while they utilize both their talents to make the seemingly impossible task of getting to the Moon possible. However, Moe returns to get Kelly to secretly orchestrate a backup plan of sorts, just in case things don't quite work out. That backup plan is to use government funding to stage and fake the moon landing.

Directed by longtime television producer and writer, Greg Berlanti ("Love, Simon"), with a screenplay by Rose Gilroy (Daughter of Rene Russo and writer/director, Dan Gilroy), "Fly Me to the Moon" is a little like the earlier this year's "The Fall Guy". It's light, fluffy, would normally have been a bigger hit if it had come out like a decade earlier, and is as predictable as they come. However, sometimes a good throwback to the kind of film you would watch with your parents on a rainy Sunday can be made just a bit more lively, thanks to the capable hands behind the camera and the undeniable star power in front of it. Berlanti's direction can be seen as quite tame by certain standards, especially when you compare it to the likes of say a "Dune: Part Two" or a "Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes". Then again though, this ain't some Science Fiction epic. It's nothing epic at all. Hell, I'd say despite the historical context, it's not even Non-Fiction. Berlanti comes in to direct a slick, steady, still lovely looking period piece, that also incorporates a delightful cast of characters, some nice humor, and even some safe, but still effective drama. In a way, it's still not hard to find some inspiration in the film, especially when the lead characters see more of the big picture that came from the very idea of the moon landing and what it could mean to the United States along with the rest of the world, rather than the temporary political benefits of the time.

Of course, most of why this works is because we got some damn good leads to keep the film anchored. Scarlett Johansson in particular is at her most charming, lovely, and all around just plain appealing here (Which for her, well, being Scarlett Freakin Johansson, that's saying something). She and Channing Tatum, who definitely inhabits the required likability for a role like this, go through some typical Rom-Com tropes (Some more annoying than others), yet make them work better than they would normally have any right to. Other cast members include a hilariously Jim Rashy Jim Rash (as "Lance Vespertine", the total diva of a director that Kelly hires to direct the fake moon landing), a suitably straight faced Ray Romano (as "Henry Smalls", Cole's close friend and co-worker, who is constantly befuddled by Kelly's marketing campaign), and Woody Harrelson, who goes back and forth between charismatically scheming to at times, a little lightly menacing. It's around the last act where things get a little extra screwball, and a bit difficult to buy, basically revealing that this is certainly "Movie World" rather than reality. Still though, that's why we go to the movies in the first place and while I can't say the film is a magical experience, it's still a good one.

"Fly Me to the Moon" ain't gonna change your life. It's not meant to. What we do get is a rather fun, occasionally humorous, and still very appealing film, that benefits from sleak direction, saccharine sweetness, and the astonishing aura that comes from Scarlett Johansson's jaw dropping sexiness. It's got a little something for everyone there. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 (And Like I Said, Barely) For That One F Bomb, Black Cat-Astrophes, And, Er, Well, Scarlett Johansson Rocking Every 60's Era Outfit And Hairstyle She's Given, Which I Think Might Be Too Hot For Any Screen To Handle. Maybe I Am Just A Boomer Born In A Millennial's Body.

MaXXXine by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: She's a STAAAAAAARRRRR!!!!!!

Nothing fits the slasher genre more than a hodgepodge of sequels,prequels, and reboots, with Ti West's surprisingly successful "X" series finding a way to elevate its material past its more admittedly trashy roots. "X" on paper was more or less your usual "Kill em all" type of slasher, except with dark humor, a respectable amount of artistry, and some creative terror, while its prequel, "Pearl" (Which focused on the main villain from "X") was like an "Golden Age of Hollywood" film gone horribly wrong in the best way possible. Now it all seemingly culminates in one final chapter (Or at least for now) that has some more hefty ambitions than what things of this caliber usually seem to have.

Set six years after the violent events of "X" in the mid-80s, "MaXXXine" follows the titular "Maxine Minx" (Mia Goth), as she makes the jump from porn star to big time movie star, landing a major role in the upcoming horror film, "The Puritan II", directed by the stern "Elizabeth Bender" (Elizabeth Debicki). However, all of Hollywood is a bit on edge at the moment, with fear of satanic worship and the serial killer known as "The Night Stalker" roaming the streets. Maxine's past also comes back to haunt her in the form of a slimy private detective, "John Labat" (Kevin Bacon), who has been hired by a mysterious individual to track her down, reveling in the fact that they have knowledge of what really went down during the events of "X" (Big massacre of Maxine's friends by a deranged old couple, who Maxine ended up murdering herself in the end). After people close to Maxine end up murdered one by one, with their bodies branded with satanic symbols, Maxine becomes the prime source of interest for LAPD detectives, "Williams" (Michelle Monaghan) and "Torres" (Bobby Cannavale). With Elizabeth Bender becoming frustrated with Maxine's personal issues affecting film production, Maxine decides its time she took matters into her own hands to make sure nothing interferes with her dream of finally becoming the star that she's always known she was born to be.

Written and directed by the returning Ti West (Responsible for the series as a whole), "MaXXXine" has boosted itself more into the mainstream (Much like its distributor "A24" has as well lately). There are a lot of moving parts, intricate details, and so much greatness here that it only makes its mostly minuscule, yet frustrating and even perplexing flaws a bit more noticeable. The film has also garnered some unexpected hate from its fans, either because it just isn't quite as good as what came before it or possibly because like I said, it's much more mainstream now that it no longer quite resembles the small scope indie project it once was (That's speculation on my part, but these A24 fans do tend to be harsher on these kinds of things). What the film gets right is what the others also have gotten so very right, which is encompassing the time period. West's direction in all three films have varied so much, yet still feel connected in their own ways. This has the makings of a grainy, dirty, stylishly 80s Hollywood based horror flick, with old fashioned blood splatters, vibrant colors, and unbelievable practical effects. It also pays so much homage to the horror films of the time, along with the recognizable static that you normally would have found when films made their way to home video. It's well crafted, and still often quite funny in a pitch black, twisted sort of way, due in part to how over the top the violence can be. The film does struggle though when it comes down to just how many things seem to be going on at once, with the main plot of Maxine's role in her film, mixed with the unknown slasher on the prowl, the cops investigating her, the man straight up stalking her, and her own connection to her more religious based roots. The payoff isn't always quite enough, and it doesn't help that it's all pretty damn predictable. I mean, I'll be genuinely shocked if you don't figure out who the main driving antagonist is before we reach the film's last act.

Mia Goth has repeatedly been a revelation over the course of these three films, especially with her performance in "Pearl" (Total Oscar snub!). She returns to the Maxine character, but this time has to play her in a more subdued environment, even when the character's more outrageously dark history starts to rear its ugly head. It's the nuance to the character, which we all know that slasher films rarely take time to center on, and Goth rather beautifully brings them to light. I adored Elizabeth Debicki and her no nonsense performance, who plays so well against Goth (And well, is like so really hot, honestly. What? I like domineering women who you just know could put me in my place. Nothing weird about that!). We get a delightful Giancarlo Esposito (as "Teddy Knight, Esq.", Maxine's agent, who really does go above and beyond for his clients) playing a more exaggerated rendition of his usual persona, along with an outstandingly hammy Kevin Bacon (With his absurd wardrobe and odd Cajun accent), chewing the living Hell out of the scenery and leaving no crumbs for anyone else (Dear Ti West, if you're planning any more films in this series, how about a prequel with him? Ya know we want it!). Michaelle Monaghan and Bobby Cannavale are both way too good for parts that almost don't amount to anything by the end, while we get some small roles from the likes of Halsey (as "Tabby Martin", a fellow porn star friend of Maxine, who becomes a target of the supposed Night Stalker), Lilly Collins (as "Molly Bennett", the star of the first "Puritan" film), and Sophie Thatcher (as the VFX artist on the film).

"MaXXXine" shoots its load a bit too far across the landing strip, with the film basically becoming "Scream" in its final twenty minutes and aside from being so obvious from the start, the twists are still a lot sillier than I expected. It's still a fun, smart, humorously dark, and gorgeously demented ode to old horror and old 80s Hollywood, even if it can't quite recapture the maniacal magic that either of its predecessors had. Mia Goth's admitted star power and Ti West's passion for the project is still prevalent, and while I wouldn't say its the ending we deserve, it's still one that feels earned despite its flaws. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated R For Gruesome Gore, Pompous Porn Stars, Elizabeth Debicki's Hypnotically Towering Height, And Literal Ball Busting.

Despicable Me 4 by James Eagan ★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Gru enacting his American right to stand his ground.

Wanna feel old? The "Despicable Me" franchise, responsible for putting "Illumination Animation" up there with the household names like "Pixar", "Disney", and "DreamWorks Animation", along with creating this lovably hilarious to most (And obnoxiously annoying to some) little yellow corn puffs "The Minions", is fourteen years old. These movies are nostalgic now for some kids, with some being adults by this point, and since I was already a teenager when the original came out (It was one of my earliest movies that I reviewed), I can already feel myself morphing into Gru myself. Before you know it, I'm gonna be bald, with a long nose, gain a big squishy body with oddly long legs, and will be sporting an impossible to describe sort of Romanian accent.

Following the events of the first three movies (Along with the two "Minion" focused prequels), "Despicable Me 4" opens with "Gru" (Steve Carell), the former moon stealing supervillain turned loving dad/husband/agent for the "AVL" (Anti-Villain League), showing up at his old villains school reunion with his Minions to arrest his old rival, the eccentrically French and cockroach-loving "Maxime Le Mal" (Will Ferrell). Gru returns home to his wife, "Lucy" (Kristen Wiig), their adopted daughter "Margo" (Miranda Cosgrove), "Edith" (Dana Gaier), and "Agnes" (Madison Polan), and the newest addition to the family, a baby boy "Gru Jr.", who seems to want nothing to do with Gru. The family is approached by AVL former director, "Silas Ramsbottom" (Steve Coogan), who informs them that Maxime Le Mal has already escaped prison with the help of his equally devious girlfriend, "Valentina" (Sofía Vergara), and is coming for revenge.

Gru and his family are then placed in witness protection, sent to live in a new neighborhood and with new names, being now referred to as "The Cunninghams". Gru and his family now have to adjust to their more mundane lifestyle, though it becomes very difficult for them, especially when the next door neighbor, a supervillain loving teen with braces, "Poppy Prescott" (Joey King), discovers Gru's identity and wants to force him to assist her with a heist at Gru's old school (Said heist being of the school's mascot, a honey badger). Meanwhile, Silas has brought most of the Minions to work for the AVL, with a select few being put into a top secret program that will turn them into superpowered agents, aka "The Mega-Minions", which as you would expect, has disastrous results.

Directed by the returning Chris Renaud (Who did the first "Despicable Me", along with "The Lorax" and the "Secret Life of Pets" films), with a screenplay by Mike White ("Pitch Perfect 3", "School of Rock", "Migration") and Ken Daurio (Who co-wrote most of the "Despicable Me" films), "Despicable Me 4" is, well, "Despicable Me 4". A lot of what I have to say isn't going to shock anyone and even the franchise's biggest fans have to admit that we're at the point where this all should probably stop. Plenty of animated film franchises (And many of the more comedic ones in general really) generally start to show signs of wear and tear, with the plots being more overcrowded due to how many characters there are or the reliance on simplistic gags involving the more merchandise heavy aspects start to overwhelm. The plot this time has a lot of filler, where the movie just stops to follow a character in a sort of mini-arc that gets resolved quickly, sometimes even in the same scene. It's also one of those cases where if you're not already willing to go with it by now, there's no winning you over. I mean, who's gonna talk about how much they have these movies or are just tired of those Minions popping up everywhere, but then go on to say "Now that "Despicable Me 4" though. Maaaaan, that's the one that got me!". Nobody is going to say that. In fact, I'll just tell you that this is probably the weakest film in the series thus far. I can also tell you that, despite all these glaring issues and a lack of any real substance, this is still some pretty funny stuff.

I don't know what it is, but every once in a while, these movies just come out of nowhere with not just a little chuckle, but a huge laughs that makes all the lesser moments feel worth it to sit through. The story is basic and uninspired stuff, and yet, they get a lot of good mileage out of what sort of humor you can find there. Gru and the family trying to fit into a more normalized society is simple, but humorous. The whole Mega-Minion subplot just exists to give the Minions something to do and to probably even sell some toys. However, that's also the funniest sequence in the movie, with these super-powered Minions basically making everything so much worse around them (And even throwing in a hilarious "Spider-Man 2" reference while they're at it). Heck, just the running gag of that one Minion being trapped in a vending machine for the film's entire length just somehow kept getting funny due to how the film almost creatively got so absurd with it. The animation is also better now than it has been before. It's funny to watch the original movie and the more humble beginnings of Illumination, then go to this very point where the budget has skyrocketed and the money is all there on screen. I saw the film in IMAX and it's always popping off screen (Even without the added 3D glasses for some showings), feeling like a grand scale Looney Tunes cartoon, where you'll get a silly, over the top bit of slapstick, following by some genuinely jaw dropping visuals (Like Maxime Le Mal's giant cockroach mech). It really is one of those things where you have to see it in theaters to appreciate how much work the animators have put in. Sure, Illumination isn't as sophisticated with their work like other animation studios, but you can never accuse them of being lazy. In terms of their animation and visual style, they're only getting better.

The cast is still very likable, even though most of them don't always get a whole lot to do. Steve Carell is just as wonderful as ever, and clearly puts everything he has into this character every time, regardless of the necessity of the film itself. Kristen Wiig is also really endearing (With a unneeded, though still very funny subplot involving her character botching her job as a hair stylist, leading to a Terminator-style chase down by a violent customer). Miranda Cosgrove and the other girls too, are mostly pushed to the side sadly, though there is a cute storyline involving Gru trying to bond with his baby (It does bring up the idea of a character like Gru being able to, er, um, you know, "Get Bizzaaaay!" as they say....So do with that knowledge what you will). Steve Coogan is a lot of fun, and there are some small parts for Stephen Colbert and Chloe Fineman (as Poppy's rich parents), though the series co-creator Pierre Coffin (Who voices each and every Minion) often steals the limelight, which shouldn't be unexpected because the Minions themselves are one of the franchise's biggest draws for the young audience. On the bright side, there is some excellent voice work from some of the newest additions, such as director Chris Renaud (as "Übelschlecht", the wheelchair riding, incredibly old principal of the villains school) doing his best old woman voice, along with Sofía Vergara, who sounds like she's having a lot of fun. Joey King, who is always lisping, is fantastic, serving as an unexpected foil to Gru, who also even gets a little character development, and it's no surprise that considering how these films have always created some scene-stealing villains, making Will Ferrell's Maxime Le Mal no exception. Ferrell, and an insanely out there French accent, is giving it 110%, blurring that line between who's animated, the character himself or the actor playing him. He's an absolute riot, and oddly, he and Carrell have a lot of great frenemy chemistry together, despite only sharing a couple scenes. The best showcase for why the film works at all in spite of its very existence comes right down to what it all culminates in. That being the usual, big dance party style ending. And yet, this one just so happens to be a pretty funny rendition of "Everybody Wants to Rule the World", which in a way could symbolize the end of the franchise as a whole. I just can't dislike this movie.

"Despicable Me 4" is more of the same and while it can be a bit more tiring now that we're fourteen years into the series, there's enough here to keep it from falling apart. The characters are still charming, thanks in part for Steve Carell's commitment, along with the new cast members, such as the delightful Joey King and a hilarious Will Ferrell, and the animation is certainly impressive. It's very much a see it with a crowd of families sort of film, where you have some fun and then mostly forget about it later that day. Yeah, I wish it took more of an "Inside Out 2" route by actually setting out to be something more than goofy, family friendly entertainment, but no reasonable person can fault them for being exactly that. In the end, you still laugh, even when you really don't want to. That's the real despicable aspect of these films. They always get ya at some point. 3 Stars. Rated PG For Crude Humor, Cockroach Chaos, Horrendous Honey Badgers, And Minion Induced Casualties. Pretty Sure Those Little Monsters Have Killed Before, And Will Gladly Kill Again!

A Quiet Place: Day One by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: The cat's gonna sell em' out. I know it.

The "Quiet Place" films deserve way more credit than we've given them for being a horror franchise that's been consistent, has expanded on its world-building, and most important, hasn't lost sight of what worked so well in the first place.

Set before the first two films, "A Quiet Place: Day One" opens during a seemingly normal day in New York City, following a terminally ill cancer patient, "Sam" (Lupita Nyong'o). Sam seems to have accepted her fate cynically, though finds comfort with her service kitty, "Frodo", and happens to be in the middle of the big city just when the sound sensitive, aggressively violent aliens (Or "Death Angels", as they're referred to) attack, thus bringing an end to civilization as we know it. While many survivors, forced to remain completely silent to avoid the aliens' wrath, decide to evacuate to possible safety, Sam seems more interested in getting one last slice of pizza from her favorite pizza place in Harlem since she's pretty sure she's dead anyways. Along the way, Sam comes across a lost law student, "Eric" (Joseph Quinn), who joins her on her little journey because he really has nowhere else to go, traversing the once great city, now left to ruin by the alien menace.

Written and directed by Michael Sarnoski ("Pig"), taking over for the busy John Krasinski (Director of the other films), "A Quiet Place: Day One" seems to at first set out to be bigger and better than its predecessors. A bigger budget, large set pieces, and a grander scale compared to the first two films, which were generally more secluded in scope for the most part. Bigger doesn't always result in better and this film, despite more than a few memorable, grander sequences, can't quite reach the level of genuine scariness that came from the other films. However, it's still a solid and emotionally resonant addition to the franchise, that continues to hint at the possibilities of where it could go from here. Sarnoski, in his first more mainstream film, crafts some exciting action scenes early on, getting it from the view of a singular character as they witness the world around them erupt into flames and bloodcurdling screams. It's also cool to see these creatures, with the CGI on them being pretty damn close to flawless, inhabiting a big city area this time around, watching how much damage they can really do on a more massive scope. It's easy to see how quickly humanity can be taken out by such a mindlessly violent threat. Granted, the film still doesn't quite get into what their true goals and motivations are (Maybe a possible hint or two), and like the other films, in a way, the creatures are more of an obstacle or stepping stone to get to the real dramatic center. The film moves past its more actionized setup after the first act, before settling down a bit to focus on our very endearing lead characters.

Lupita Nyong'o is once again just phenomenal in everything she touches. She makes for a wonderful protagonist, who makes some decisions that could seem questionable on paper, yet oddly makes sense once you truly understand where she's coming from. Joseph Quinn (Who was a real scene-stealer in the previous season of "Stranger Things") is also terrific, playing a completely different part than what we were used to seeing him as. They have some heartwarming chemistry together, with Quinn's lost puppy face adding for a little humor to Nyong'o's more exasperated demeanor. There are also good supporting parts, such as a brief appearance from Alex Wolff (as "Reuben", a care worker, trying his best to get Sam to come out of her shell) and a returning Djimon Hounsou (as "Henri", who you might remember in a small, but vital part in "A Quiet Place Part II"). We also can't forget to give a special shout-out to the film's real star, Frodo the kitty! That cat is just so lovable and cute, serving as a reminder of the possible warmth of life when surrounded by so much death.

The "Quiet Place" films have always been more about the perseverance and better nature of people, rather than the usual more cynical tropes that you see from post apocalyptic media. "A Quiet Place: Day One" is no different in that regard. In fact, the creatures themselves take a bit of a backseat for long periods of time so that the film can instead focus on its characters, who sometimes even have to convey a lot of story and emotions with zero dialogue (You know, due to them having to be silent to avoid detection). The film's last act, while not exactly surprising, is still very strong and might even hit you on an emotional level. Sure, we're used to end of the world films showcasing the evils of humanity and the selfishness, but it's also nice to see some that remind us of the sacrifices and the sense of hope that somehow come out of the most dire of situations. End it with an unforgettable final shot, and you got yourself a very welcome addition to one of the most respectable horror franchises we have today. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Scary Images, Wanton Destruction, And Some Cool Ass Cats.

Horizon: An American Saga - Chapter 1 by James Eagan ★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: "Direct a big movie, cast yourself as the badass, get the hot girl, and sport an awesome mustache. Everything is coming up Costner!"

God, I really wanted to like this movie. Who grew up watching old westerns and wondering why we don't get anything like them anymore? So when I heard Kevin Costner was bringing to life his longtime passion project, which was a massive, star studded, multi-film western epic, I was pretty interested. Sadly, I should have known this could have gone so wrong, so easily.

Serving as the first in a possibly four film saga (With the sequel already due to be released in less than two months), "Horizon: An American Saga - Chapter 1" opens during the midst of the Civil War, following several different storylines over the course of a few years. The film shows the expansion of the old west, for better or for worse, with many, many characters embarking on their own separate journeys, which are either sometimes connected or most of the time, have nothing too much to do with each other. Thanks to many flyers being spread around, promising a land of untapped potential, this results in some understandably agitated Native Americans, some innocents caught in the crossfire of conflict, people out for revenge, and those just trying to make a decent living with nowhere else to go.

There's the likes of the mysterious stranger, "Hayes Ellison" (Kevin Costner), who only comes in about an hour of the way through to get roped into a situation protecting a distressed young woman, "Marigold" (Abbey Lee) and the child that she just so happens to have been stuck with, due to a conflict between "Ellen" (Jena Malone), a woman she was staying with and the violent "Sykes" brothers (Jon Beavers and Jamie Campbell Bower). We have a mother, "Frances Kittredge" (Sienna Miller) and her daughter losing their family to an Apache attack, forced to find a new home with the Union army. Then we also follow a group of settlers, led by the endearing, and understandably frustrated "Matthew Van Weyden" (Luke Wilson), who struggles to keep control of his group, while a particularly vengeful Apache warrior, "Pionsenay" (Owen Crow Shoe) ignores the warnings of his father (Who would rather avoid any confrontation) and sees only a violent solution to the white settlers swarming their land. There's also a subplot following a group of hunters, who start out as simply trying to find the ones responsible for killing a group of settlers, though obviously this is going to go down a darker, more racially motivated path. I'm probably forgetting someone or something because there is a lot in this movie. Too much, yet not much really.

Directed by Kevin Costner ("The Postman", "Open Range"), who co-wrote the screenplay with Jon Baird, "Horizon: An American Saga - Chapter 1" has some hefty, very hefty ambitions. Too hefty. This three hour mess is less of a well told tale of human struggles, turmoil, and perseverance, but rather an intentionally incomplete, occasionally incoherent collection of scenes that just sort of happen. Perhaps all of this is by design in a way, feeling like the first part of a really long miniseries that just so happens to be on the big screen. Sadly though, while the film has its moments, it's too all over the place and inconsistent for a film that reaches the three hour mark for no real reason. Costner's heart is in the right place, setting out to tell an engrossing story that's more inclusive and aware than the old westerns that came before it. The film is certainly not glamorous, with abundant violence and hardship. Costner's direction is certainly beautiful, which seems to have been done so to be undercut by how brutal the film can be at times. The film struggles though when it comes to its screenplay, pacing, editing, and the very way the story itself is told. The film just starts, following characters almost randomly, with their subplots either being cut short abruptly or just opening up out of nowhere (Some by the two hour mark). The film seems to be all about setup, but that doesn't mean much when you're not given much reason to care. The film either takes too long to get going, or will rush through certain details to the point that it's hard to truly understand the passage of time. Most of the storylines are also pretty on the predictable side, so you're left waiting for the movie to just get to the point already.

There's nothing really wrong with the performances, with some of them feeling underdeveloped simply because you just know they'll likely get a larger part in the next film. Kevin Costner (Who is actually not in the movie very much now that I think about it), Sienna Miller, Jena Malone (Who deserved way more to do considering how strong her arc starts), Abbey Lee, Will Patton (as "Owen Kittredge", an aged settler with many capable daughters, who I guess has a relation to Francses Kittredge. Guess that's being saved for Chapter 2?), Tom Payne (as "Hugh Proctor", who attempts to keep his group of hunters in line as they search for the Apaches who attacked their settlement), among others, are all good. The real standouts come from the likes of a rather excellent Sam Worthington (as "Trent Gephardt", a union soldier, who questions the logistics of the current situation and even acknowledges the unfairness towards the Native Americans), a charming Danny Huston (as "Colonel Houghton", Trent's superior, who has come to terms with the expansion), Michael Rooker (as "Major Riordan", a kind-hearted soldier), and a perfectly despicable Jamie Campbell Bower. Giovanni Ribisi, sporting some mean mutton chops, literally pops up dramatically for one second during the film's little montage of things to come at the very end.

"Horizon: An American Saga - Chapter 1" has some tense, fascinating, and even at times, very powerful scenes (Generally breaking the illusion that we associate with the old west). However, those scenes are packed under a pile of overblown, under developed, and jumbled collection of old western tropes that really could border on parody. It lacks the personality and depth needed, despite Kevin Costner's best efforts to craft something truly beautiful. While I can say that I'm a bit interested in where the Hell all of this is supposed to be going, it's starting to feel more like an obligation in the sense of "Well, I gotta review it anyways since I saw the last one". Truly great cinema should never feel like that. 2 Stars. Rated R For Strong Violence, Adult Content, And An Excessive Amount of Silly Facial Hair.

The Bikeriders by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: So, Venom and Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen walk into a bar.

This is an entirely new experience for me. Reviewing a film that I not only have already seen, but saw almost a year ago before the general public did. I was lucky enough to see it during last year's Austin Film Festival, despite the film being delayed due to the SAG-AFTRA strike and being dropped by its distributor, 20th Century Studios. Luckily, the film found a new distributor with Focus Features and is finally getting the big screen release it deserves.

Loosely based on the photo-book of the same name by Danny Lyon (With the filmmakers admittedly taking liberties), "The Bikeriders" is recounted by "Kathy" (Jodie Comer) to a fictionalized version of Danny Lyon (Mike Faist). Kathy details the rise and eventually fall of a Chicago motorcycle club known as the "Vandals", founded by the charismatic, but intimidating "Johnny" (Tom Hardy). Kathy falls in love with one of the bikers "Benny" (Austin Butler), explaining how what once started as a simple, small scale club that even served as a strange little family of sorts, would eventually grow too fast and too big into yet another violent, criminal gang.

Written and directed by Jeff Nichols ("Mud", "Midnight Special", "Loving"), "The Bikeriders" more or less follows a bit of the old gangster-esque formula, except this time it's from the perspective of motorcycle gangs. Because of that, it's a fairly by the book sort of story that isn't without its moments of predictability. Regardless, what we still get is a very strong, beautifully crafted interpretation, that's so jammed pack with character that you don't particularly care if it's something you've seen a million times before (Or in my case, having already seen this movie last year). Nichols' direction is top notch as usual, conveying the dangers and questionable behavior of many of its characters, which are evident early on. However, Nichols also finds humanity to these characters, where you find yourself drawn into how their world works and even a bit inspired by the overall idea of it. I mean, who doesn't gravitate to the sort of outlaw type? We've kind of always done that. A lot of this is because of how well written the film is, surpassing the tropes of the genre simply due to how genuine the dialogue is delivered. It does feel like I'm watching real people, which is fitting because regardless of what's real and what's admitted fiction, it comes from a place of reality.

The cast is made up of an excellent ensemble. Jodie Comer is outstanding, particularly with her expressive features and commitment to the semi-Chicago/Southern accent (Which reminds me of when I saw this at the Austin Film Festival, the filmmakers played a recording of the real life inspiration behind Comer's character and it was surreal to hear how you literally wouldn't be able to tell either voice apart).Austin Butler, who also has to emote, rarely speaks, yet tells you everything you need to know about what he's thinking with a simple glance. It's also just cool to see how much range Butler has if you compare this with his performances in "Elvis" and "Dune: Part Two" (Basically, he's the kind of actor that Jared Leto thinks he is). Tom Hardy meanwhile comes in with his own indecipherable accent, and yet, it somehow all works. You oddly see how people gravitate towards him, whether it be his charisma, his sincerity, or even at times, his menace. This film is a bit of an odd love triangle in a way, because of how well these three play off each other. We also get some terrific standout performances from the likes of Mike Faist, Damon Herriman (as "Brucie", a close member of Johnny's gang), Toby Wallace (as a troubled, violent young man, eager to join the Vandals, simply referred to as "The Kid", Boyd Holbrook and a delightful Michael Shannon (as "Cal" and "Zipco", prominent members of the gang), along with a memorable appearance from Norman Reedus (as "Funny Sonny", a biker from California, who literally shows up out of nowhere).

"The Bikeriders" overcomes what may seem like genre trappings with style, providing an interesting perspective on the biker lifestyle and makes it something that anyone can completely understand or even see themselves admiring in a way (Personally, I was not made to ride a motorcycle, touch one, or even go near one, but that's just me). Never overly sentimental, with a certain grittiness and admission of human faults, that elevate the more conventional into something special. 4 Stars. Rated R For Strong Language, Brutish Bikery, And The Likely Intense Smells That Come From Every Single Character's Dirty Ass Looking Beards.

Thelma by James Eagan ★★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: June Squibb on her way to play some Scribbage and kick some ass! And guess what? She's all outta dice!

Yeah, I'm not sure what it is with me lately. Maybe I've started to come to terms with that I'm getting older or I'm just starting to see the simple joys of so-called "Boomer" movies. Granted, most of what I'm used to when it comes to the old people dicking around genre consist of the lowest common denominator of blandness, boredom, and taking great veteran actors, then having them partake in out of touch comedy. It generally seems like the basic goal is to just have a lot of meandering around in a way that's not too exciting, stick to a safe formula, and most importantly, do NOT challenge in any way. What's funny is that this film could so easily veer into that in the wrong hands, yet actually takes its own message to heart. That being "You're only as old as you feel".

"Thelma" follows the titular "Thelma Post" (June Squibb), a ninety-three year old woman, who after the death of her husband has found more of a sense of independence, though still requires some assistance from her loving, though maybe too protective grandson, "Danny" (Fred Hechinger). One day, Thelma gets a random phone call from someone pretending to be Danny, as part of an elaborate phone scam to get her to send them $10,000. Despite Thelma's family, which includes Danny's parents, "Alan" (Clark Gregg) and "Gail" (Parker Posey), thinking it would be best to just wait and see, Thelma is determined to handle the situation herself. Thelma, who coerces an old, retired friend, "Ben" (Richard Roundtree) into allowing her to borrow his top of the line scooter (So long as Ben gets to join her on her adventure), sets out to reclaim what's her's, along with accepting both the good and the bad that come with old age.

Written and directed by improvisational comedian, Josh Margolin (With the film being a tribute to his own grandmother), "Thelma" is the kind of film that on paper, should be nothing more than an amusing time waster, let alone a great film. However, what we get is something much more nuanced, smart, hilarious, and even quite exhilarating, with something to offer demographics that range from the elderly, to middle aged, or even those who are only now coming into adulthood. The film is a comedy for sure, that often hilariously plays out like it's an adrenaline fueled action film, like "Mission: Impossible", except with the situations being more or less mundane looking from a distance. However, that doesn't stop the film from being exciting and even at times, quite suspenseful. From a chase scene in a retirement home on motorized scooters to Thelma climbing up the stairs, these sequences get some big laughs because of how they're shot and portrayed as intense moments. Still, there is a sense of adventure here, where the film always stops to address that our lead characters are older and regardless of how they may feel, they're still fragile at times. It's balance between coming to terms with how you can only do so much in spite of your age, though you may have more control over what you can do than you (And especially others) might realize. In a way, this ends up being a fast paced thriller, packed with some huge laughs that all come from a genuine place of humanity and some very heartfelt, if not bittersweet drama. The subject matter is actually pretty heavy stuff that you just know every day has affected some unsuspecting person in the real world, and the film tries to find the crowd pleasing lighter side of the situation.

The star of the show is the totally awesome June Squibb. Taking inspiration from the work of Tom Cruise (His face literally is what prompts her into taking matters into her own hands), Squibb is thoroughly lovable, the right amount of strong yet vulnerable, and even makes for a damn good action hero to rival some of the greats. Whether it be her moments of senile seniority (Such as repeatedly stopping everything she's doing to talk to a random person who she thinks she might recognize, though half the time she's actually meeting this person for the very first time) to when she showcases the still spry, sharp, and inspirational woman that immediately has you falling in love with her, Squibb is outstanding from start to finish. She also has wonderful chemistry with the late, great Richard Roundtree, who gives such an endearing, warm performance that it just might hit you on an unexpected emotional level. Fred Hechinger, Clark Gregg, and Parker Posey, who are all just perfectly cast as a family, are the right amount of goofily nervous, yet the film does take time to stop and show even their struggles with how to handle the complexities of age. Malcolm McDowell is also great in a small, yet vital part, that also puts a bit of a different perspective on the circumstances.

Impossible to dislike, "Thelma" is like the "Paddington" of old people movies. It's set in its own sort of reality, with a sense of silliness throughout, but still retains its heart and finds a way to bring various, relevant themes together in such a relatable fashion. Whether it's the humor or the heart, you can't help but feel like your hand is being lovingly cradled while you're watching it, resulting in tears of joy and comfort. Surprisingly thrilling, chaotic, hilarious, and nonetheless poignant, this is one of those out of nowhere best movies of the year. 4 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Some Language, Geriatric Gun Use, And Starey Gary.

Ultraman: Rising by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: What I assume my cat imagines when she decides to lay down on my back.

Netflix is becoming known for giving us the most basic, uninspired, faux-budgeted kind of generic films that only look like something you would have seen in theaters, but quickly falls apart if you look close enough. And by look close enough, I mean just watch it for more than ten minutes. Background noise at best most of the time. However, almost out of nowhere and with little promotion or fanfare, comes some of the most inspired looking animated films you've ever seen (With the likes of "Klaus" and "Nimona" giving Disney and Pixar competition with surprise Oscar nominations for Best Animated Feature).

Based on the long running, much beloved and revered Japanese franchise, "Ultraman: Rising" follows "Kenji Sato" (Christopher Sean), who after the presumed death of his mother, struggles to balance out life as a baseball player and filling in the role of his elderly father (Gedde Watanabe). That role being able to transform into the giant superhero, "Ultraman", who protects Japan from various Kaiju attacks (Although usually refraining from actually killing any of the Kaiju, since they're just giant animals that just don't know any better). However, Kenji's ego and estrangement from his father have only made things more difficult, with Kenji turning out to be a terrible superhero, which leaves most of the Kaiju attacks in the hands of the "Kaiju Defense Force", led by the vengeful "Dr. Onda" (Keone Young), who prefers more lethal and permanent means of ending the Kaiju threat. After a battle with an especially feared Kaiju, "Gigatron", Kenji comes across an egg, which hatches to reveal the most adorable big baby Kaiju you've ever seen in your life. Now forced to take on daddy duty himself, Kenji must finally find true balance if he's going to be the hero that Japan needs, while also protecting the baby from harm.

Directed by Shannon Tindle (In his first feature film, after working on many animated shows from "Samurai Jack" and "Static Shock", along with plenty of movies), having co-wrote the screenplay with Marc Haimes ("Nimona", "Kubo and the Two Strings"), "Ultraman: Rising" takes much inspiration from its anime/manga roots, while retaining a sort of modernized, more Western appeal that never feels insulting to anyone. The film serves as something that many without much prior knowledge to the franchise can enjoy, but also should likely appeal to much of the original fanbase. Much of this is because of the sincere direction, smart and emotional screenplay, and the absolutely spellbinding animation, that I feel is completely being wasted on something like Netflix. The animation is provided by "Industrial Light & Magic", who are known for the visual effects work on pretty much most, if not all major live-action film, particularly if it's one that requires heavy duty CGI. They've also given it a go at a small handful of fully animated films, such as the Oscar winning "Rango" and the upcoming "Transformers One". That alone gives off a different sort of feel to what appears to just be another Netflix movie that you turn on to keep your kids busy.

It's stylish as Hell, with many frames looking like something you could see in a comic panel, mixed with occasional 2D rendering to emphasize certain emotions that come from the 3D models. It's clearly taking some inspiration from recent films like the "Spider-Verse" series or "Puss in Boots: The Last Wish". You could literally pause the film at any moment and just stare at what could pass as a gorgeously rendered painting. The characters also have some unique design work, which feel like they could have jumped from a traditionally done anime into a big screen looking event. This most applies to the film's mesmerizing, and even at times quite intense, action sequences. Particularly during the climax, the scale is massive and the painstaking love the animators have for all the crafted details that go into each moment, it looks like something you could see in a "Marvel" movie or something like "Pacific Rim". In fact, the action might even give some blockbusters a run for their money.

Movies like this could easily veer too much into the style and forget about providing anything of substance. Thankfully, the screenplay knows that it's still a family film, even though it's not afraid to get a little on the heavy side. There's also a good amount of depth to the characters, with some excellent voice work to go with them. Christopher Sean is quite terrific as the somewhat self-absorbed and cocky, but damaged and still good-hearted hero, who matures over the course of the film in a natural way. Gedde Watanabe is warm and wonderful, while Keone Young plays what is more or less a fairly basic villain for the most part, yet still displays a certain understandable humanity despite some inhuman actions. Tamlyn Tomita (as "Mina", an AI assistant to Kenji, designed after his mother's voice and basically acts like she really is his mother) provides a great source of lovable humor and even some heart. In a way, she kind of is the true heart of the film. Of course, there's also the baby Kaiju, who is just adorable, hilarious, and most importantly of all, sooooo marketable. I mean, look at that thing in the picture! I want a plush of that! Who wouldn't?

Packed with humor, action, and heart to spare, "Ultraman: Rising" may not quite match something like "Inside Out 2", but still serves as an animated film that surpasses what's still seen as a genre, rather than a medium. The film isn't always zippy and fast paced. Something it stops to let the characters just be characters, and it does so in a mature way that doesn't talk down to the kids. However, it also doesn't talk above them either. It's still something that the young ones can adore, almost as much as the parents. The film's themes of parenthood ring true, almost as if releasing this on Father's Day weekend was something intentional (I mean, I'd certainly recommend it to my dad. Or any dad actually!). It's a wonderful work of family friendly entertainment, with something for everyone. 4 Stars. Rated PG For Monster Sized Action, Mild Language (Bringing Back Swearing In PG Rated Films!), And Titanic Temper Tantrums.

Tuesday by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: This live-action "Rio" remake took a dark turn.

You gotta appreciate things like this. Despite hitting it bigger in the mainstream as of late for what was once the little Indie studio that could, "A24" (Which means that a good chunk of the studio's hipster fans will have no real choice but to hate everything they do from now on), hasn't forgotten its weird, original, and, well, really f*cking weird roots.

"Tuesday" opens with the emotionally unstable, "Zora" (Julia Louis-Dreyfus), struggling to come to terms with the inevitability that her terminally ill daughter, "Tuesday" (Lola Petticrew), is at death's door. Zora spends her time, pretending to go to work while she sells everything she owns, sleeps on park benches, ignores calls from her daughter, and eating cheese. Tuesday is visited by a strange, filthy, scarred macaw, with size-altering abilities, revealed to be the physical embodiment of "Death" (Voiced by Arinzé Kene). Death has come to peacefully end Tuesday's life, though instead the two form a brief friendship, made up of listening to music, getting high, and finding ways to calm themselves during stressful times. Death promises to let Tuesday say goodbye to her mother when she gets home. However, when Zora does arrive, things take a rather interesting turn. A turn that could change the very concept of death itself.

Written and directed by first timer, Daina O. Pusić, "Tuesday" is one of those films that it's best going in as cold as possible. The less you really know about where the Hell this insane plot goes, the better. The film feels like a surreal mixture of tones, concepts, and genres. It's almost structured like a live-action Studio Ghibli films, with imagery that drifts between darkly comedic and straight up horrifying, along with a little dash of M. Night Shyamalan tossed in there for good measure. What we get is a fascinatingly off-kilter, fantasy drama that retains its quirky sense of humor, even when the film goes down some deep, dark, depressing places. The philosophical concepts alone are unlike anything I've ever seen before, and the way the film decides to tell its narrative, through simple moments of just characters interacting or through imaginative, haunting visuals, is quite different in of itself. It feels right at home with what you expect to see from an older A24 film. Now if that's exactly your cup of tea is a different story entirely. Sometimes the film is so out there, whether it be with seemingly misplaced moments of humor, heavy subject matter, or just some, lets just say, eccentric sequences (Such as Death's surprising fondness of rap music). I can see plenty checking out rather quickly, though the film does let you know pretty early on that it isn't going to be remotely normal.

Julia Louis-Dreyfus gives what may be a career best performance, that goes down unusual routes of unpredictability, and yet, she remains so committed. This is a very complex character, that gives you many reasons to dislike her, though you may at least understand why she is the way she is. It's a very grey look at how the loss of someone you love can affect you, with your own good intentions looking selfish and inconsiderate. She also has wonderful chemistry with Lola Petticrew, who embodies the sort of more emotionally mature for their age look, without ever feeling cloying or annoying. There's an excellent supporting part for Leah Harvey (as "Nurse Billie", who takes care of Tuesday and Zora refers to just as "Nurse 8" on her contacts list, likely not even knowing her actual name), while Arinzé Kene (Who sounds like a mix between "Dr. Claw" from "Inspector Gadget" and "Black Doom" from "Shadow the Hedgehog") brings so much oddly endearing personality to a creature that's frightening and majestic in equal measure. Overall, for a likely small budget, the effects are pretty solid for the most part, with even the occasional fakeness adding to the surrealism.

Possibly intentionally uneven and even a little charming in its own complicated way, "Tuesday" is an affectionate story, that at times drifts into the macabre (Ever wondered what would happen if death had no consequences, regardless of what happened to you? It makes for some scary and even sort of funny imagery). Thanks to Julia Louis-Dreyfus' captivating performance, some stellar direction, and Pusić's lofty, admirable ambitions, the film's true heart and purpose shine through. It leaves you with some bittersweet food for thought, with some welcome peculiarity mixed in to keep you on your toes. I see some leaving the film confused, while others are desperately trying to wipe away tears. 4 Stars. Rated R For Strong Language, Disturbing Images, Macaw Mangling, And Zombie Cows.

Inside Out 2 by James Eagan ★★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: When you tell your co-workers that after months of trying, you finally killed that boss you were having trouble with.

Disney has been struggling a bit as of late, or at least theatrically they have (There's also that whole thing with the "Star Wars" hotel that we won't get into right now), and by extension, Pixar too is facing their own issues. After the huge success of "Toy Story 4" back in 2019, Covid hit hard the following year, resulting in the still well liked "Onward" suffering at the box office. This resulted in some of their next films, the beloved "Soul", "Luca", and "Turning Red" all getting the "Disney+" treatment, while what seemed like a surefire financially success with "Lightyear" became a surprise bomb. Then last year had "Elemental", which opened poorly, but persisted to become a modest success thanks to positive word of mouth from audiences despite a more mixed critical reception (And if you ask me, it's a fine enough film, but easily was their weakest film in years. Probably since the second "Cars" movie). It's not the biggest slump in the world, yet it's enough to get a more pessimistic general consensus from the public, especially when other animation studios have been stealing their limelight for the past couple years (We did have like four or five animated films last year that all could have easily won Best Animated Picture, let alone serve as some of the best films of the year). Luckily for us, it seems Pixar decided to take a step back and give us the kind of sequel that I'm actually kind of shocked wasn't in demand the moment people fell in love with the original.

"Inside Out 2" once again has us follow the now thirteen-year old "Riley Andersen" (Kensington Tallman, replacing Kaitlyn Dias), along with the colorful characters inside her head that make up her emotions, such as the always optimistic leader, "Joy" (Amy Poehler), "Sadness" (Phyllis Smith), the easily agitated "Anger" (Lewis Black), "Fear" (Tony Hale, replacing Bill Hader), and "Disgust" (Liza Lapira, replacing Mindy Kaling). Having graduated middle school and avid hockey player, Riley and her friends are suggested by "Coach Roberts" (Yvette Nicole Brown) to join a weekend long summer trip to hockey camp. Along the way though, Riley learns the troubling news that her friends won't be attending high school with her (Due to both having to move). At the same time, the dreaded puberty hits, resulting in the emotions' headquarters to be completely renovated to make room for new emotions, such as the intensely fidgety "Anxiety" (Maya Hawke), the diminutive and always fascinated "Envy" (Ayo Edebiri), the French and unamused "Ennui" (Adèle Exarchopoulos) aka "The Boredom", and the large, constantly quivering "Embarrassment" (Paul Walter Hauser, who speaks almost entirely in muffled whines and whimpers).

Seeing that Riley had begun to idolize the popular high school hockey player, "Val" (Lilimar), Anxiety gets the idea that it's time for a little out with the old, and in with the new (Which includes abandoning her friends in favor of the more popular ones). After tossing away Riley's "Sense of Self" (A MacGuffin that houses of various memories and feelings that the emotions believe create Riley's very being) to make way for one Anxiety can craft herself, she also has Joy, Sadness, Anger, Fear, and Disgust literally bottled up and kicked out of their headquarters. Now it's up to the emotions to find their way back, get Riley's Sense of Self back where it belongs, and stop Anxiety from completely overriding Riley's personality. Meanwhile, Riley herself is put through the ringer as she inches closer and closer to a total breakdown caused by Anxiety running amok in her head.

Directed by Kelsey Mann (Longtime Pixar team member, taking over for Pete Doctor, who still serves as an Executive Producer), with a screenplay by the returning Meg LeFauve (The first "Inside Out", along with "The Good Dinosaur" and "Onward") and Dave Holstein (Mostly known for TV work like "Weeds" and "Kidding"), "Inside Out 2" is yet another continuation to a film that's already so great as it is. This means that it has a lot to live up to. 2015's "Inside Out" has gone on to become a Pixar favorite, winning the Oscar for "Best Animated Feature" and at least getting nominated for "Best Original Screenplay" (Which is essentially like getting nominated for "Best Picture", but not because the Academy still refuses to respect animation). Not to mention, it hit people right in their hearts and minds, with how smart, funny, and, most fitting of all, emotional it was. So yeah, following up on a Pixar classic is quite the challenge, though they have done it before (We somehow got four great "Toy Story" movies out of them after all). Despite the difficulty of the task, it brings me so much joy to tell you that the film serves as a perfect follow-up to the masterwork of the original, with laughs all over, incredible visuals and animations, and yeah, maybe a few things that might even bring a tear or two to your eyes (Although nothing as heartbreaking as what happened to "Bing Bong". We all remember where we were the day we witnessed the tragic fate of that cotton candy, imaginary elephant!).

It's still a shock to me though that it took almost ten years to get us a sequel, because the ideas pretty much write themselves. The film takes full advantage of the many, many troubling insecurities that can hit someone the moment they reach the teen years (And hilariously, it all happens in the film pretty much immediately over night). It feels like a natural progression, and the filmmakers find some clever, very creative ways to portray how the actions of these various emotions affect the inner workings of the world inside Riley's head. From a river full of whatever crosses Riley's mind and a literal chasm with an echo making everyone who speaks over it immediately sound sarcastic (aka the "Sar-Chasm"!), to a literal brain storm (With idea lightbulbs falling from the sky like hail) and the inner workings of Anxiety's various worse case scenarios represented through an animation studio, where animation cells (Heh) sketch out the scenarios (Which Joy later uses to incite a workplace revolution). These are all very original and unpredictable in where they go, getting huge laughs that also just plain make you feel smart for understanding in the first place. Not to mention the stunning, colorful amounts of detailed animation, where almost every frame has something to catch your attention (Like a jar next to Anger, that's filled to the top with money). You always, no matter what, gotta appreciate how much Pixar continues to improve and improve their visuals, even when it's not entirely noticeable at first.

All these big ideas wouldn't work near as well if it wasn't for the lovable cast of characters, made up of both old and new. Amy Poehler, who many suggested should have gotten an Oscar nomination for her work in the original, once again just brings so much energy to this character. The overexcited, but undeniably caring semi-control freak, who now is starting to question her own place as Riley starts to grow up, yet remains loyal to her regardless. (You know, Pixar really does well with those kinds of characters.) Phyllis Smith is still lovable as ever, and while it's a bit jarring at first, the replacement voices of Tony Hale and Liza Lapira are equally delightful (And get much more than supporting roles this time). Lewis Black is still an absolute riot and even gets a few extra moments of depth to his character that we never got to see before. Maya Hawke is brilliantly cast, matching Poehler's optimistic energy for neurotic madness, making her into an antagonist that isn't remotely villainous, but rather tragically misguided. The other new additions of Paul Walter Hauser (Always amusing to me when actors are hired to do voice work that consists of mostly certain, specific sounds), Adèle Exarchopoulos, and especially Ayo Edebiri (Who takes the idea of the emotion of "Envy", and turns it into a teeny, tiny sort of minion for Anxiety, who is always in awe of everything around her), all get their moments to shine. We get some returning voices such as Diane Lane and Kyle MacLachlan (as Riley's parents), along with some memorable, hilarious small parts for the likes of Ron Funches (as "Bloofy", a 2D animated "Dora the Explorer" rip-off, who is convinced he's breaking the fourth wall by addressing the audience, yet is actually talking to thin air), Yong Yea (as "Lance Slashblade", a poorly animated Playstation 2-esque video game character, that both Riley and Disgust may have had a crush on), and June Squibb (as "Nostalgia", an old woman emotion, who is repeatedly shooed out when she comes into headquarters too early to reminisce about things that only just happened). It's a lot of brilliant little puzzle pieces that all come together in a cohesive, really funny way that can appeal to the parents, as well as the kids. If anything, it's a reminder of Pixar's real superpower of just plain making great films that can be loved by anyone.

It's funny how the filmmakers stated that they got some inspiration from "Uncut Gems" of all places, but after seeing "Inside Out 2", I totally get where they're coming from. The emotions once again hit you in a place that you recognize and relate to, resulting in a shockingly intense final act that leads to a finale that had the entire audience of parents, little kids, or dudes my age by themselves, in total silence. It's the moment where everyone matures just a little, whether it be because they've found themselves in such a situation, have seen someone else experience it, or just come to the understanding of the complications that make one human. It's a true return to form for Pixar, and one that I can see being the mega-hit that we all needed right now. 4 1/2 Stars. Rated PG For......Triple Dent Gum Will Make You Smile Triple Dent Gum It Lasts A While....

Bad Boys: Ride or Die by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: "It's okay Will. He had that slap coming anyways."

So you're telling me that director, Adil & Bilall can come in, save the "Bad Boys" franchise, make one of the better (And more endearing) more recent entries in the Marvel Cinematic Universe with "Ms. Marvel", and pour their hearts and souls into the creative ways that they shoot action, but apparently according to Warner Bros. (And that Zaslav guy) their completed "Batgirl" film was just, unreleasable? I find that difficult to believe.

Serving as the fourth (And maybe final?) entry in the series, "Bad Boys: Ride or Die" returns us to Miami with the titular Bad Boys themselves, the police detectives "Mike Lowrey" (Will Smith) and "Marcus Burnett" (Martin Lawrence). Mike has finally found love with his new wife, "Christine" (Melanie Liburd), and despite suffering a near fatal heart attack, Marcus gets the crazy idea that since his time hasn't come that he must be immortal. The two get the distressing news that their late, beloved captain "Conrad Howard" (Joe Pantoliano, whose character was killed off in the last film), had apparently been in league with drug cartels for years. The situation feels way too forced and coincidental, with Mike and Marcus both refusing to believe it. After getting confirmation from Mike's illegitimate son/Captain Howard's remorseful killer, the former cartel member "Armando Aretas" (Jacob Scipio) that Howard never was dirty, Mike and Marcus get a message from their dead captain (Recorded before his death) that alerts them about a vast conspiracy that he'd been investigating and how it deals with internal corruption that just might go much higher up than they realize.

Fearing that the two are getting a little too close to the truth, the unknown sociopathic ringleader of the conspiracy (Eric Dane), sets a plot in motion to have Mike and Marcus set up and framed, along with Armando (Who also just so happens to know who the true villain looks like). Soon, Mike, Marcus, and Armando are on the run from the bad guys, as well as Captain Howard's determined U.S. Marshal daughter, "Judy" (Rhea Seehorn), and anyone else who might have it out for them. Not knowing who to trust, the Bad Boys must become fugitives to clear both Captain Howard's name, as well as their own.

Directed by the returning Adil & Bilall ("Ms. Marvel", "Rebel", and as of now, the still unreleased "Batgirl") with a screenplay by also returning Chris Bremner and Will Beall ("Aquaman", "Gangster Squad"), "Bad Boys: Ride or Die" continues the franchise's hot streak with style, bombastic action, and the ever wonderful chemistry between their two lead actors. However, I do like how the film has realized, even more than the last one, that it can't just get by on that alone. The first two Michael Bay films have their fans (And I do to a degree get why, particularly with the first film. The second one can go to Hell personally), but now that he's nowhere near the director's seat, the films feel more focused and less in your face with its blind nihilism. With that said, that doesn't mean that the movies can't still be action packed, bullet riddled, and crassly funny popcorn entertainment. Once again, Adil & Bilall show off how well they can shoot a fast paced and often quite violent, yet inspired action setpiece, where the camera is always moving, the humor stays integrated without detracting any of the grittiness, and every single character in the sequence is given some kind of essential role to play in it. The film also gets surprisingly psychologically artistic in places (Such as Marcus' near death experience, which is kind of lovingly done in a bizarre way). As far as story goes, it's nothing all that original and it's not without its very predictable beats, though granted, these aren't known for having incredibly deep plots. It works enough for what it is, and is likely elevated by how good much of the cast is.

Will Smith and Martin Lawrence are still a duo to be reckoned with. They feel just as natural now as they did almost thirty years ago with the first film. Will Smith is the straight man/action star, who still has some hilarious reactions to his co-star's absurdity, while Martin Lawrence is an absolute riot, who still finds his place in all the action. I love how each of these movies has a subplot revolve around how Marcus decides to try something new (Whether it be refusing to kill or getting the wacky idea that he can't die) and Mike is stuck having to put up with it the entire time while he refused to acknowledge his own personal sh*t, and yet, it never gets annoying. You like them on their own, and love them together. Still though, other actors in the film aren't neglected to the background. In a way, it's starting to feel like more of an ensemble now. We get welcome returns from the likes of the thoroughly adorable/badass Vanessa Hudgens and the amusingly dorky/incredibly swole Alexander Ludwig (as "Kelly" and "Dorn", weapons and tech experts allied with Mike and Marcus), along with Paola Núñez (as"Rita", Mike's ex, who has become their stern, but very understanding and strong captain) and Jacob Scipio (Who repeatedly makes short work out of large groups of enemies in spectacular fashion). The very brief appearance from Joe Pantoliano (Showing up in recorded messages and a few visions) sincerely tugs on the heartstrings and serves as a source of warmth for the film. Eric Dane is a menacing villain, and does stand out much more than the baddies in these films usually do, while there are some roles that are either somewhat disposable, such as Melanie Liburd (Who spends most of the film offscreen), are really easy to predict, like with Ioan Gruffudd (as "Lockwood", Rita's senator boyfriend) or very underutilized, like with Rhea Seehorn (Who was brilliant in "Better Call Saul", and doesn't get much to do here). Also, a quick shout-out to Dennis Greene (as "Reggie", Marcus' U.S. Marine son in law), who gets the film's biggest standout sequence and the biggest laughs simply through his never changing, overly stoic expressions and deadpan line delivery.

Undemanding, but in no way half-assed or lazy, "Bad Boys: Ride or Die" is a damn good action-comedy that benefits from the talents in front of the camera, as well as the talents behind it. I'm not quite sure if the franchise really has enough juice to keep going past here, though the film at least gives off the confidence to make it look like it does. Flashy, crazy, stylish, funny, and an all around good time. Not bad at all. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated R For Strong Violence, Stronger Language, Gator Gruesomeness, And So Much Glistening Sweat.

The Watchers by James Eagan ★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: When Dakota can't tell if that's just her reflection, or if that's Elle Fanning.

Like father. Like daughter. In some of the good ways, and in a lot in the bad ways.

Based on the book of the same name by A. M. Shine, "The Watchers" follows pet shop worker "Mina" (Dakota Fanning) who is still tormented by the death of her mother, as she's tasked with delivering a parakeet, that she's named "Darwin", to a Western Ireland zoo. Along the way, Mina takes a turn into a forest, where her car suddenly shuts down. Mina can't seem to find her way out of the seemingly endless woods, only to find shelter in a heavily armored cabin with a window that can only be viewed to the outside at night. Mina meets "Madeline" (Olwen Fouéré), "Ciara" (Georgina Campbell), and "Daniel" (Oliver Finnegan), who reveal that they've been trapped in this forest for months. They can only go out during the day (Yet the forest apparently messing with their minds to prevent their escape), and must return to the shelter before it gets dark, because of the so called "Watchers", mysterious, frightening creatures who stop by every night to do just that. Watch. Mina is determined to find a way out, despite the strict rules enforced by Madeline. The more Mina digs into what's going on, the more unsettling (And perplexing) the truth becomes.

Written and directed by the daughter of M. Night Shyamalan, Ishana Night Shyamalan (In her first feature length film), "The Watchers" starts with much, much promise. I mean, it really comes out of the gate strong, setting the stage for what at first appears to be a suspenseful thriller, with an intriguing mystery that looks like it will have you guessing the whole way through. Much of why it works is because Ishana Night Shyamalan appears to have inherited her father's talents. It's a gorgeously dreary looking film, with a moody atmosphere and a subtle intensity that allows you to breathe in the quiet sense of dread that inhabits every shot. From the very beginning, you're uneasy and you're very intrigued by the many questions that the film just plops onto your lap. There's also a little levity with some hushed moments of humor, such as with Mina's only source of entertainment in the shelter being some kind of Big Brother-esque reality show (Making for some good, campy satire considering how the main characters themselves are in a much deadlier version of the situation). Sadly, the film takes a hard dive off a cliff once we reach the halfway point, and the film's mysteries are revealed, with results both disappointing and just plain silly in equal measure. The screenplay falls into the worst qualities that we've seen in many Shyamalan films, with heavy, nonsensical exposition and tediously drawn out story-telling decisions that I can see only generating unintentional laughter, rather than shock and awe.

It's so upsetting because the film is genuinely well made, even from a director's standpoint for a good chunk of the runtime. Not to mention, we get a terrific, captivating performance from Dakota Fanning. Even when the film slowly starts to fall apart, Fanning is generally damn good in spite of it and is forced to overcome the script's trope failings. I was also thoroughly shocked to discover that Georgina Campbell (From 2022's "Barbarian") was British. Oliver Finnegan does good, though his character's motivations are a little all over the place and Olwen Fouéré ends up getting saddled with the back breaking task of describing all of the plot points and backstory to the audience, even when there's no way she could possibly know any of these things with the information provided. On the bright side, Darwin the parakeet is a delight the entire time. The titular Watchers aren't without their creep factor, even when we see their intentionally off-putting creature designs (Possibly serving as a metaphor for AI in the sense of how they look lifelike though just a little "Off" in noticeable ways), but they lose much of that when we find out what they're supposed to be (And boy, it's a hard one to take as seriously as the film needs you to take it). The film gets increasingly convoluted as it progresses and in the end, really predictable because of how many times we've seen these kinds of horror/fantasy tropes in movies both better and worse than this.

"The Watchers" nearly loses an entire star in its final twenty minutes, with some stupid decision making, a meandering epilogue, and a climax that's painfully easy to decipher despite how long the film tries to build it up. Perhaps this could have worked with a few rewrites or less sentimental direction, but it results in some cringe filled dialogue and leaves the actors struggling to get through it. It truly does feel like a film from the second act of M. Night Shyamalan's career. So much potential was there, and despite a lot of solid tension, it frustratingly doesn't stick the landing. In fact, it kind of lands flat on its face. It's always sad to see such good looking, decently put together films falling apart because of its own adherence to silliness. 2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Scary Images, Wily Woodland Critters, Predatory Peeping Toms, And Freaky Fairies.

In a Violent Nature by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: "Oh boy, Here I go killing again!"

We finally have it! The greatest "Friday the 13th" movie ever made. Okay, it's not an official one, but considering all of the tropes, homages, and right down to the very structure, I'd say it sort of qualifies. And, unlike most of those kinds of slashers, we got one right here and realizes just how boring our future corpses are. The real focus deserves to be on the killer himself, who has more personality, dimension, and intrigue just simply walking around than most of these so called characters would throughout.

"In a Violent Nature" opens with a group of dumb young people as they wander around a the ruins of an old fire tower and take with them some seemingly inconspicuous locket, before returning to camp out in the woods. However, removing this locket awakens the violent, rotting corpse of "Johnny" (Ry Barrett), who was a mentally disabled kid who was killed on the camp grounds years prior. Johnny sets out on a journey to reclaim his locket, which also revolves around him brutally, though casually, murdering every single living thing in sight.

Written and directed by Chris Nash ("ABCs of Death 2"), "In a Violent Nature" is not, and I really have to stress the word NOT, for everyone. This experimental slasher flick doesn't change the game when it comes to character or story, but rather turns the very premise into a slow moving art house film. Almost 90% of the film is showing us the back of the killer as he stomps around the forest, occasionally stopping to pick up a new weapon or accessory, before eviscerating an unsuspecting victim and then carrying on like nothing happened. The film basically focuses on the aspects of an average slasher that we generally see offscreen and while it retains some of the usual annoyances (All of the soon to be victims act exactly the ways you expect them to), those moments are retained to the background more often than not. Considering fans of the genre rarely go for the deep, complex characterizations anyways, this should give them what they want. And for what it is, it's quite an intense, moody, and even at times, disturbingly beautiful experiment.

Nash, who has even started that Terrance Malick was on influence, crafts some simple, yet effective sequences of quiet terror (Without a single jump scare too!). It's all about the buildup, which can even take a while in places (Again, LOTS of walking), though it always leads to something of value. Whether it be a horrifically gory death scene (Which are done with entirely practical effects, with the obvious fakeness adding to the fun), a few bits of twisted dark humor, or even at times, absolutely nothing at all, it's hard not to be fascinated by it. It also helps that the film lacks an actual musical score (Meaning everything happens with almost complete silence) and Ry Barrett's intimidating, mesmerizing presence (With the film stopping at times to allow him to give the character small character moments, such as the implication that he seems to still maintain the mind of a child, which actually makes him kind of endearing in a sick sort of way.)

While I feel that the film could have used more of the dark comedy (Like Ti West's "X" wisely embraced, making that a much more memorable old-fashioned slasher flick) and the budget constraints can be fairly noticeable (Such as the obvious voiceover dubbing in places), "In a Violent Nature" is a capable, late night thriller, that more than makes up for its flaws with such heavy atmosphere. The always building intensity never lets up, even when the film changes the game in the final fifteen minutes (In a subversion that I genuinely thought worked really well, but I can see others being annoyed by). Whether it's the over the top violence or the odd anticipation that comes from watching the back of some zombie dude's head as he takes a relaxing stroll through the woods, you gotta appreciate the attempt to add a little more artistic integrity to the kind of genre that proudly declares itself the definition of trashy cinema. 3 1/2 Stars. Not Rated, Though It's Really Just A Hard R, Filled With Gut Churning, Head Chopping, Plastic Head Tossing, And a #1 Motherf*cker.

Hit Man by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

AAAAQdk-OrHpj9DHd2xHfY6VPmo92UF56ItfINvFvCyc9VswYmQFRcuSYjpLTbzQOr5M2mnQOtyS0ZduTue5XDMaMp

Image: We all definitely would have done all of this for Adria Arjona. Wouldn't even have had to think twice.

You know me by now. I'm not a romantic comedy guy. Sure, some can stand out or win me over with a natural charm, but when they don't work, they are infuriating to sit through. The whole time, the cynical part of your brain is wondering why certain characters are acting a certain way, faking manipulative emotions, or just, you know, not actually being remotely comedic at all. What we have right here is what I would call "The Anti-Romantic Comedy", where it's as if a demented God just decided that it's time we took a much, muuuuch more twisted approach to this. And yeah, this is right up my alley.

Loosely based on the story of a real undercover hit man named "Gary Johnson" (With the film openly admitting most of this has been fabricated), "Hit Man" follows a fictional version of the before mentioned "Gary Johnson" (Glen Powell), a nerdy, unsuspecting college professor, who also works with the New Orleans Police Department part time to assist in the arrests of people attempting to hiring hitmen. After Gary has to fill in for the usual guy, a much hated undercover cop "Jasper" (Austin Amelio), it turns out that Gary is really good at posing as a hitman. Gary seems to embrace inhabiting new characters, studying those who seek to hire him out, and doing good work for his community, while possibly learning a bit more about himself along the way. However, Gary, posing as a hitman named "Ron", ends up falling in love with the jaw-droppingly beautiful, "Maddy Masters" (Adria Arjona), who attempts to hire him to murder her controlling, abusive husband, "Ray" (Evan Holtzman). Gary is able to convince Maddy to reconsider and simply leave her husband to seek out a new, better life. Gary secretly also starts to date Maddy, while retaining the hitman persona, although with the lies starting to pile up and much darker consequences start to rear their ugly heads, Gary starts to wonder which of his personas are real and which ones are simply part of the lie.

Directed by Richard Linklater ("Dazed and Confused", "School of Rock", "Bernie", "Boyhood"), who co-wrote the screenplay with Glen Powell, "Hit Man" is a thrilling, meditative, often hilarious and thoroughly charming genre mixer. It really doesn't simply settle on one idea, but instead tosses them all into a pot and mushes them together. Thankfully though, the bizarre progression the film takes never feels jumbled or sloppy. If anything by the end, you realize that there's really no other way this film could have gone in the first place. Much of it is thanks to Linklater's laid back, generally quirky approach to the story, despite how much more philosophical and downright morbid much of what's going on ends up being. Sure, I can see some of the themes might be a little on the nose at points, though it still makes for an undeniably fascinating character study that just so happens to find itself wrapped up in a still admittedly adorable romance.

Glen Powell gets his biggest shot yet to show off his range, especially with how quickly (And even in a subtle manner) can change his mannerisms, voice, and look in such an organic way. Yeah, it's hard to imagine a guy with such an impressive chin like him being a total geek, but he finds a way to make it work, while also being able to revert into this charming hitman persona, who is seemingly capable of taking a life (Despite the fact that the character never having even thought of remotely hurting anyone in his life). It also makes for a few good laughs with the many wigs, costume changes, and accents that Powell also will take when going after some would-be killers (Who are all mostly shown to be total morons in their own unique, very Southern ways). The chemistry between Powell and Adria Arjona is also where the film shines, making this couple feel believable despite the out there circumstances. Aside from Arjona being just all kinds of hot (And I mean, on ridiculous levels that need to be studied!), she's also allowed to let loose and show off some of her own acting range. It's actually a bit of a breakout performance for her. Austin Amelio, who might be my favorite performance in the film, is hilariously scummy in every conceivable way, while we get some funny supporting comedy from Retta and Sanjay Rao (as the pair of officers that Gary often works with).

Playing in select theaters before getting released on Netflix next month, "Hit Man" is a lovably deranged semi-noir, that only seems purely innocent and lightly fluffy on the outside. A very inspired, smart piece of work that you would never have expected to be as deceptively capable as it is. Fitting in a way. 4 Stars. Rated R For Strong Language, Sexual Content, And An Onslaught Of Wigs So Fake That It Would Make Tyler Perry Blush.

The Garfield Movie by James Eagan ★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: "Gasp! You sound nothing like Bill Murray!"

Okay, who in the world dislikes "Garfield"? Whether it's one of the cartoons, the original comics by Jim Davis, or even the Live-Action films (I mean, those weren't very good, but they got some fans. I suppose), everybody at least likes "Garfield". A big fat, orange cat, who loves Lasagna, hates Mondays, is literally the laziest creature on the planet, and just oozes with unfiltered sarcasm? What's not to love? And in the eyes of film executives, what's not to capitalize on?

Based on the beloved character, "The Garfield Movie" tells the previously untold origin story of the titular chubby tabby cat, "Garfield" (Chris Pratt), who was seemingly abandoned by his father, "Vic" (Samuel L. Jackson) as a kitten. Garfield is soon adopted by "Jon Arbuckle" (Nicholas Hoult), gets a beagle best bud/sidekick "Odie" (Harvey Guillén, doing only dog noises), and lives a pampered existence of eating large quantities of Italian food and just loafing around on the couch. One night, Garfield and Odie are abducted by hulking Shar Pei "Roland" (Brett Goldstein) and a scrawny whippet "Nolan" (Bowen Yang), two hench-dogs working for a maniacal Persian cat named "Jinx" (Hannah Waddingham). This is all to draw out Vic, who is reunited with Garfield, despite him never acknowledging up until this point. Jinx, wanting revenge for Vic abandoning her during a milk heist at state of the art dairy farm, demands that Vic, Garfield, and Odie break into the farm to steal a truck full of milk as payment for her time in the pound, or else. The trio meet a retired, old spokes-bull for the farm, "Otto" (Ving Rhames), whose lost love is still inside, agreeing to help them with the heist so long as he's reunited with her. Garfield, who never does anything, must get out of his comfort zone if he's going to accomplish this mission and return home to his life of luxury.

Directed by Mark Dindal ("Cats Don't Dance", "The Emperor's New Groove", "Chicken Little"), with a screenplay by Paul A. Kaplan, Mark Torgove, and David Reynolds ("Finding Nemo"), "The Garfield Movie" has the potential to be the perfect family film, with lovably sarcastic lead character, a high profile voice cast, great animation, and humor that should appeal to both kids and adults. Well, at least it gets some of those aspects right and even has the right mindset on paper, though it becomes very clear, very quickly that this is a much more watered down version of the character, meant to appeal to the youngest demographic. It's another one of those PG rated films that is only PG rated in name only. If anything should have been a solid G rated film, this would have been it. It's incredibly safe and inoffensive, and sure, for the kids, that's what you ask for. However, the certain edge that we usually associate with the titular character is nowhere to be found. In fact, the final product doesn't even feel like "Garfield" hardly at all. That makes it just pretty generic by comparison. I will say that Dindal, who has apparently disowned "Chicken Little", seems to put more of the energy that you see in his other animated films into this, with fun, zany animation that gives off a 2D appeal, despite being 3D animated. It's not on the level of the "Spider-Verse" films, but it's certainly pleasant to look at and will keep the kids interested. The story is just nothing special. It's nothing bad really, but rather stock-ish. As if it were one of those go-to sort of plots that an animated film will go for because it's just bland enough to have any kind of character occupy. If you're looking for depth and surprises, you ain't gonna find them here.

The weakest link, in more ways than one, is Chris Pratt. He's fine in the film. However, he's also just, well, Chris Pratt. Where at least he felt like he was actually playing a character in last year's "The Super Mario Bros. Movie" (And even tried to do a silly voice for it), this performance could have been done by anybody. Overall though, Garfield ends up being the least interesting part of the film in general because how much the film seems to want to tone down his character's occasionally jerkish attitude. Something important just feels missing. We do get some good voice work from the likes of Samuel L. Jackson and Ving Rhames, who already have great enough voices for this kind of movie, while we also get more inspired performances from the likes of a suitably dorky Nicholas Hoult and Harvey Guillén, with Odie just plain being the best part of the movie. (It is nice to see that no matter what version we get, Odie remains lovable either way). Hannah Waddingham is having the time of life as our over the top villain (With her cute voice coming across as legit menacing in places), while Bowen Yang and Brett Goldstein are plenty fun, if not a little underused. There's also a quick appearance from Snoop Dog (as a random cat). Not sure what the joke is, but I did chuckle. So, mission accomplished? I guess?

The ideal version of "The Garfiend Movie" should have played out like "The Peanuts Movie" or 2011's "Winnie the Pooh", where the simplicity of the source material is used to the film's advantage. Instead, this ends up being a little too long at an hour and forty minutes, too sloppily paced, and just too mild to appeal to the adults. However, it's not without an occasional laugh and brief moments of creativity (Such as a sequence within the overly elaborate and shockingly dangerous cheese factory, which amusingly involves a giant cheese grater and large pools of molten Cheddar), serving as sweet little diversion that the youngest kids will endear to. Still, there's nothing wrong with asking for a little bit more protein to go with these empty calories. 2 1/2 Stars. Rated PG For Cartoony Humor And Egregious Olive Garden Product Placement, Though Again, How Things Like This Don't Get G Ratings Will Forever Be Baffling To Me.

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Buuurn Baby Buuurn! Wasteland Inferno!

You gotta appreciate the kind of director that George Miller seems to be. You got a man who will take what's just a silly, run of the mill biker movie, that just goes off the rails into a greasy, almost Shakespearean apocalyptic world of leather, guns, and puss. Then he'll just make weird family films like "Happy Feet" or "Babe: Pig in the City". He's pushing eighty years old now, seems pretty chill (And unapologetically feminist too apparently), but will then give us adrenaline fueled, cracked out insanity on a operatic level that no normal human being would even dream of attempting to bring to a big screen. The man is literally mad! The king of "F*ck Yeah!" cinema!

Set years before "Mad Max: Fury Road", "Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga" tells the backstory of that film's standout heroine, "Furiosa" (Previously played by Charlize Theron, now played as a child by Alyla Browne, then as an adult by Anya Taylor-Joy). The film opens with Furiosa being taken from her lush, beautiful home, "The Green Place of Many Mothers", by a biker gang working for the appropriately named wannabe warlord, "Dementus" (Chris Hemsworth). Furiosa's mother (Charlee Fraser), attempts to rescue her, only to end up murdered in front of Furiosa by Dementus, who decides to keep Furiosa as a daughter/pet. Sometime later, Dementus takes interest in "The Citadel", the outpost of the "War Boys", commanded by the evil "Immortan Joe" (Previously played by the late Hugh Keays-Byrne, now played by Lachy Hulme). Dementus seeks power, though doesn't have the intelligence to weild it properly, eventually trading Furiosa to Joe in exchange for a fuel refinery station known as "Gastown". Furiosa escapes and plots to return home, avenge her mother, and kill Dementus for what he took from her. Thus, her epic saga begins, leading right up to the events of the last film.

Directed by George Miller (All the "Mad Max" films, along with others such as "Three Thousand Years of Longing" and "Lorenzo's Oil". Again, interesting filmography here), who co-wrote the screenplay with the returning Nico Lathouris, "Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga" has a lot of big expectations to live up to, considering the previous film went on to earn high critical praise, an Oscar nomination for Best Picture", and the adoration of film buffs everywhere. This film isn't quite the shock to the system that "Fury Road" was, but that's by no means a criticism towards the film. It's still an excellent, exciting, and wildly entertaining ride that shows what kind of madness George Miller is still capable of, even if he's clearly got to adapt to the more modernized era of big blockbuster filmmaking.

Right off the bat, you can tell there is more of an abundance of green screen and CGI work than the last film. While there's still plenty of practical effects and amazing stuntwork, it's obvious when computer imagery is being used, mostly because I'm pretty sure Miller didn't want to, well, kill anyone while making this. To George Miller's credit, he seems to know and even embrace what he has to work with, and even when you know it's not logically real, it's beyond epic to watch. There is so much style to the way the film's shot, constructed, and how each rage-filled action flows, that you still can't look away. The film's biggest showcase comes from a long, nearly twenty minutes sequence involving a chase between a heavily armed oil tanker and some raiders, who utilize parachutes to attract the vehicle, as if it's a battle on the high seas. The moment when you think it's over, it just keeps going and keeps topping itself, with every movement of every single contributing player in the sequence serving as something pivotal. This also means that we get more world-building, allowing for some more background material for locations and characters that may have only been briefly touched upon in the last film. It's never done in a way that feels too fanservicy and actually contributes to the overall story, bridging both films in a way where one can't possibly exist without the other.

Charlize Theron's Oscar snubbed performance is tough to top, though Anya Taylor-Joy (And her frighteningly expressive eyes of doom) does bring a sense of vulnerability that we didn't see much of in the last film. We see how she learns, becoming more hardened by her experiences, even with very little dialogue being necessary to convey it to the audience. Also, gotta give a lot of credit to Alyla Browne, who has to carry a good hour of the film during the character's child years. Chris Hemsworth is an absolute blast to watch, with his bizarre makeup, hammy voice, and cartoonish personality, coming across as equally easy to hate, yet often so funny that you kind of like him in spite of it. (It's always fun to have a villain who the film acknowledges is such a complete boob, yet still serves as a dangerous one nonetheless) Tom Burke (as "Praetorian Jack", a more honorable commander in Joe's, who becomes a close ally to Furiosa) is another one who has to demonstrate a certain amount of depth through actions and expressions, rather than through dialogue (And does so very well), along with Lachy Hulme serving as a great way of bringing such an iconic villain like Immortan Joe back to the big screen. The film also gives some extra screentime to a few supporting roles from the previous film, such as John Howard (as "The People Eater", an overweight oil Baron, who is always rubbing his exposed nipple), Nathan Jones (as "Rictus Erectus", Joe's moronic, but freakishly strong son), Angus Sampson (as "The Organic Mechanic", a rather creepy doctor), and quite a few others. One has to appreciate how every single character, whether their role is major or not, has so much personality. It can be because of the wild ways they look, talk, or just plain whatever the actors seem to want to do in the moment (Each with their own bizarre little quirks), which make them instantly memorable.

Both shiny and chrome, "Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga" is an epic worthy of the gods. It's the right amount of gasoline drenched excess, with hefty ambitions, a grand scope that demands the IMAX treatment, and visuals that will live on in your mind forever. Much like the titular Furiosa herself, you will remember this! Witness it on the biggest and best screen possible! 4 Stars. Rated R For Nipple Ripping Violence, Gross Infected Imagery, And Anarchy Loving Aussies.

The Strangers: Chapter 1 by James Eagan ★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: It's Strangerin Time!

Hey! Leave Madelaine Petsch alone! She's too pretty for this!

Serving as the start of a new trilogy that may or may not serve as a prequel to the previous two films, "The Strangers: Chapter 1" follows loving young couple, "Maya" (Madelaine Petsch) and "Ryan" (Froy Gutierrez), as they end up stuck in a small town in Oregon due to car trouble. Despite Ryan being a little suspicious of their situation (And because of just how weird everybody in the town is), Maya is convinced that it should be a safe enough to stay at a small Airbnb in the woods until their car is fixed the following morning. However, after a, ahem, strange knock at the door from some unseen person asking if a "Tamara" was home, Maya and Ryan find themselves trapped and at the mercy of a trio of masked killers, who proceed to terrorize the couple up until the point they decide to simply finish them off. Brutally and in bloody fashion. Maya and Ryan must fight to evade these maniacs, who just might not actually have any real motivations for why they are doing this in the first place.

Directed by Renny Harlin ("Die Hard 2", "A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master", "Cliffhanger", "Deep Blue Sea"), with a screenplay by television writers Alan R. Cohen and Alan Freedland, "The Strangers: Chapter 1" has a rather interesting concept in terms of crafting a multi-part story with the slasher genre. In fact, this has had some solid results before recently, with Ti West's "X" and "Pearl", along with Netflix's "Fear Street" trilogy. However, while those films either brought something more inspired to the genre or at least had a unique set of ingredients to differentiate itself from others like it, this is just the exact same movie all over again. Scratch that. It's only part of the exact same movie again. The original "The Strangers" developed a cult following, though I found it to be an overly stretched out short film that mostly got by a couple tense moments, the idea of decent people facing an undeserved situation, murderous set pieces accompanied by recognizable music, and the big twist being that there literally was no twist (That the killers were just there to kill simply because they could). The second film, "The Strangers: Prey at Night" actionized it a little bit, with a higher body count, but just felt a lesser version of a movie that I already didn't think was that great anyways. This film is almost intentionally set up to simply be the first act, with our characters being stalked by three masked serial killers, attempting to hide or escape from them, and well, you know the rest. It's literally just more of the same, but instead of trying to add anything new to the series, Harlin pulls out the usual bad of slasher tricks, which have long gotten stale. It's not remotely scary, with a reliance on our villains popping up out of nowhere to go boo, then somehow mysteriously teleport away at super speed or our heroes thinking they hear a noise, but only discover that it was nothing (Or was it?). You know all this. You've seen all this. You've seen this done better too. Hell, the best "Strangers" movie is probably that music video, "Withorwithout" by Parcels (Which starred Milla Jovovich).

The stunning Madelaine Petsch and Froy Gutierrez are both a pair of likable leads, with good chemistry, banter, and give the film more than it deserves. These films always have a nihilistic approach to the violence, especially when it comes to how genuinely innocent the protagonists are, and regardless of quality, it's hard not to be endeared to these two. Our mostly silent, masked villains aren't without menace, with their performances being completely physical. Still, the film seems to want it both ways. The tagline in the trailer was "Witness How the Strangers Became the Strangers", which alone contradicts the very idea of these characters, where the point is that we have no idea who they are and they don't have a reason to be what they are. It doesn't matter because the film never follows through with that concept anyways, though maybe it's being saved for one of the upcoming sequels. We get some brief appearances from the likes of Ema Horvath (as "Shelly", a local diner waitress) and a thirty second cameo from character actor, Richard Brake (as the local sheriff), who you might recognize as always playing either a villain or a creep (Like he did memorably in 2022's "Barbarian"). Much is left unsaid and hinted at for the next film, but there already isn't near enough to justify this film alone. (Also, I already think I might know where these films might be leading, which might only further prove my point that maybe it's best that we just leave things that were originally meant to be completely ambiguous alone in the first place)

While it has its tense moments (Such as a well down sequence where the protagonists have to keep quiet and hide from the villains, despite one of them dealing with a painful wound), "The Stranger: Chapter 1" promises more later on, when offering so little right now. It's essentially a plodding, padded out hour and a half trailer for another movie. Even judging it on its own merits as an effective horror movie, the scares are basic and all the tricks to heighten the atmosphere fairly uninspired (Oooooh, look. Someone's standing right behind you. Oh! Now he isn't. Rinse and repeat) I suppose the least demanding of gore loving, slasher fans might have a good time, although the film doesn't even get too violent until the final couple minutes, so maybe this will also disappoint them as well. These guys no longer feel like strangers, but rather annoying neighbors that won't stop coming by when you don't want them to. Don't need two more chapters to figure that out. 1 1/2 Stars. Rated R For Jump Scares, Bloody Violence (However, It's Quite Tame Compared To Most), And Madelaine Petsch's Fondness For Casual, Figure Hugging Clothing.

IF by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: "If I had a nickel for every time there was something involving Imaginary Friends looking for new kids that had a character named after the color blue, I'd have two nickels. Which isn't a lot, but it's weird that it happened twice."

After absolutely scaring the pants off of us with the "A Quiet Place" films, it only makes sense that John "Jim Halpert" Krasinski would take a complete U-turn towards something much softer.

"IF" follows "Bea" (Cailey Fleming), who after the loss of her mother, now is struggling to deal with her father (John Krasinski) being hospitalized, deciding that it's time to put childhood behind her. While temporarily living with her grandmother (Fiona Shaw), Bea discovers that she can see Imaginary Friends (or "IFs" as they like to be called). Bea learns from her new neighbor, "Cal" (Ryan Reynolds), that the IFs are working with him in a sort of match-making agency to help them find new kids to replace their old ones (Who have long since forgotten about them once we reached adulthood). Bea and Cal set out to provide the IFs a new lease on life, with the collection of colorful characters including a proper, humanoid butterfly "Blossom" (Voiced by Phoebe Waller-Bridge), a wise elderly teddy bear "Lewis" (Voiced by Louis Gossett Jr.), and a big, purple puffball named "Blue" (Voiced by Steve Carell), simply because the kid who made him was color blind.

Written and directed by John Krasinski ("A Quiet Place", both Parts 1 and 2), "IF" is a different kind of family film that I can see finding an audience that it will enchant and delight, or will find one that it will instead bore and confuse. It's not exactly the entirely whimsical, fast paced, wacky adventure that you may have expected from the trailer. It's a bit heavier, slower paced, and dare I say, more mature than that. It's more akin to Spize Jonze's "Where the Wild Things Are", than say, well, Cartoon Network's "Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends". In a way, this feels more like a kids film aimed at the adult crowd, and though it can't exactly keep that tone the entire time (Couple little kiddie jokes here and there), I applaud the film for taking such a chance. I also feel that despite its flaws, it succeeds more than it doesn't. Much of it is because of how sincere and earnest Krasinki's direction and screenplay are. Nothing about the movie looks cheap or manipulative. The heart and intentions are pure. It's also both simple, yet visually remarkable. The animated characters are never meant to look real, and yet, even with how exaggerated or cartoonish they look, they oddly never feel out of place. They feel alive and as if they were right there interacting with the real world.

The film never expands past the big city setting, but isn't without a few elaborate sequences of wonder. Perhaps that's one of the points the film is trying to make, finding beauty in the most mundane of settings. With such a likable cast and a sweet center, it's not a shock that the story and world-building might seems secondary. The plot is quite basic, without much of an urgent conflict. Granted, there's no villain or antagonist. There's no danger. There's barely even a goal (With the characters only coming to the conclusion of how to solve the IFs' issue in the second half). The film's rules aren't explained. Could be intentional, if not a bit sloppy. The focus is more on the emotions, which carry the film more often than not, though the lack of a perfectly flowing story prevent it from ranking among the best family films today.

Cailey Fleming, who gets top billing for a good reason, is pretty terrific. It takes a lot to be able to both act against nothing most of the time, and to keep up with actors that you know have personality to spare. This is a perfect showcase for her talents, playing a character that could so easily have been annoyingly down, yet is rightfully cynical in places though still retains an appealing childlike wonder. Ryan Reynolds, doing his best Ryan Reynolds, is a perfect match, delivering some of his signature snark to balance out the sentimentality. It's a credit to the actors, which also include Fiona Shaw and John Krasinski, on how they remain committed to playing straight such a fairy-tale-esque premise without being cloying. There's an amusing hodgepodge of voice talent, who appear in a variety of roles from major to drawn out cameos. An endearingly neurotic and awkward Steve Carell is perfectly cast (In more ways than one, as the film later reveals exactly who his previous kid has become as an adult), Phoebe Waller-Bridge, and a wonderfully warm performance from the late Louis Gossett Jr., all standout. The same goes for the rest of the bizarrely inspired selection of voices, such as Richard Jenkins (as the voice of "Art Teacher", an animation figure IF), Sam Rockwell (as the voice of "Guardian Dog", a superhero dog IF), Bradley Cooper (as the voice of "Ice", an IF who is literally just a glass of water with an ice cube), Awkwafina (as the voice of "Bubble", a literal bubble IF), a hilarious Christopher Meloni (as the voice of "Cosmo", a detective IF, who is just a pair of eyes in a hat and trench coat), and so many humorous surprises. There is a twist that I saw coming part way through (However, it isn't the fault of the filmmakers that I see so many movies to the point it's hard to catch me off guard with these kinds of things), but it is something that I can see really shocking kids. If anything, it's pretty bold what this film sets out to do, and it's hard not to respect that.

While its ambitions might be a bit too much for the film to grasp, "IF" makes up for some convoluted shortcomings with eye-popping visuals, genuine heart, and a shocking amount of maturity. Krasinski doesn't want to talk down to kids, and for better or worse, he gives them a daring, challenging experience that they may not have known they needed. And once we reach the film's final moments, I'd be lying if I didn't admit that it kind of got to me. It recognizes the adult you've become, but also knows that your inner child will never go away. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated PG For Silly Humor, Slight Mature Themes, And The Imaginary Girlfriends/Boyfriends You Know Some Kids Likely Imagined Up. Something I, Uh, Don't Know From Experience. Heh.

Back to Black by James Eagan ★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Sometimes I feel like a biopic is made just because of how much one might look like the real life person. And then it's all just marketed around only that.

Can we make it a law that film studios have to wait at least ten to twenty years before even considering making a biopic about a popular, deceased, musical icon? Apparently there were attempts to move forward with a biopic based on Amy Winehouse almost immediately after her death, and it only further proves that much like the Paparazzi, film executives can be just vultures in human form.

Based on a watered down version of true events, "Back to Black" follows the life of British singer, "Amy Winehouse" (Marisa Abela), throughout the ups and downs in her career, including her relationship to the toxic "love of her life", "Blake Fielder-Civil" (Jack O'Connell). The film slowly explores her rising stardom, as well as her struggles with drugs and alcohol, leading to her tragic, too soon death.

Directed by that woman who adopted Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Sam Taylor-Johnson ("Fifty Shades of Grey"), with a screenplay by Matt Greenhalgh ("Film Stars Don't Die in Liverpool"), "Back to Black" is, ugh, it's remarkably unremarkable. I suppose it's a good thing that I can say that it's not exactly offensively bad. The only real offensive part is that it's, well, bad. Despite the many controversies surrounding the film, it really tries to play things incredibly safe, without offending some of the still living subjects (Such as Winehouse's father, "Mitch", who some say may have had more involvement in her personal demons than the film takes time to address). Sam Taylor-Johnson's direction is bland, uninspired, and lacks any kind of real identity, especially for someone who has been working for quite some time. Maybe it was chopped up in the editing process or production was a rush job, but this looks like it could have been done by anyone.

The actors are left to work with what they have, and to their credit, they work. They work well even. Marisa Abela is much better than the material she's given, inhabiting the subject's natural charisma, toughness, and even apparently did much of her own signing. The music sequences, while nothing special in terms of composition, are sold completely by Abela's talent. Jack O'Connell does a good job at playing an arrogant piece of sh*t, while the likes of Eddie Marsan (as Amy's father) and Lesley Manville (as "Cynthia", Amy's loving grandmother) remain thoroughly professional and give it their all regardless of what the screenplay allows for. It's also a little funny how little the film does with Juliet Cowan (Amy's mother), who I swear only says like two sentences in the entire film (And that's at the very end).

"Back to Black" doesn't want to dwell too much on the tragedy, along with the substance abuse (Which is more often used to quickly establish the passage of time), and instead seems to want to appeal to fans of Amy Winehouse, who just wanna see her story and hear her songs on the big screen. It's ironic because the film doesn't quite justify being in an actual theater. Just a background movie, which in a way is faint praise for something that we expected to just be the absolute worst, yet, still doesn't do its subject the justice she deserves. 2 Stars. Rated R For Strong Adult Content And Slight Exploitation, Though The Film Is Still Quite Tame, Feeling Like A Harsher PG-13 (If Not For More Than Two F-Bombs And Brief Boobery).

Not Another Church Movie by James Eagan No Stars out of ★★★★★

Image: Welp, I guess I should provide Madea for a formal apology.

I gave "The People's Joker" a rather high recommendation a few weeks ago. It showed that despite its incredibly low budget, use of intentionally bad effects (Including green screen, ADR, and some bizarre ways of trying to insert poorly cropped footage of people into scenes where they obviously weren't there), there was still a funny, heartfelt, and surprisingly smart story that worked as just pretty solid parody. Parody itself has seemed kind of dead in terms of film today, thanks to such so-called filmmakers like Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer (Responsible for films like "Date Movie", "Disaster Movie", "Epic Movie", "Meet the Spartans", "The Starving Games", etc.), who seemingly helped usher in the fall of the genre. You don't get films like "Airplane!" anymore basically. Something like "The People's Joker" is the closest we've gotten to that kind of nonsensical parody, with most films more or less focusing on lightly poking fun at a certain genre sometimes, rather than straight up basing their entire film over turning them into full blown comedies. Ever since "Fifty Shades of Black" (The "Fifty Shades of Grey" parody, that was somehow worse than those films), I can't recall the last time we got THIS kind of parody. The kind that just makes you hate everything and everyone around you.

"Not Another Church" movie opens with billionaire, talk show host "Hoprah Windfall" (Luc Ashley), announcing her intention to seek out a successor. This leads to a motorcycle riding "God" (Jamie Foxx, with long hair), to choose "Taylor Pherry" (Kevin Daniels), to write a movie that will tell the various stories of his family, thus inspiring the community. However, the cowboy hat wearing "Devil" (Mickey Rourke. No, I'm not joking!), has devilish plans of his own. The movie follows a series of somewhat vignettes (Though none of them are ever completely told, serving as just a joke or two), involving Pherry's family, which includes the wisecracking "Madude" (Kevin Daniels in drag). There's an hour and twenty minutes of this.

Written and directed by first timer (And hopefully, last timer), Johnny Mack (Known for writing a couple episodes of "Real Husbands of Hollywood"), "Not Another Church Movie" feels like it should have come out like ten or fifteen years ago, though would have still felt outdated even then. This was kind of a shock to the system for me. Yeah, I saw the trailer once a while back, but I didn't think much of it mostly because I simply forgot all about the trailer right after watching it. Plus, I thought to myself "Movies like that don't get released in theaters" anymore". I see so many trailers before so many movies, that I just know half of them aren't going to see the light of day or will at least find themselves released straight to home media. Hell, with streaming services, there's even less reason for a movie like this to end up on the big screen. I have a few questions to ask. How did this happen? Why did this happen? And who can I make suffer for it? Because I'm not sure I can recover from this anytime soon!

Forget the war flashbacks for "Epic Movie" and "Meet the Spartans" that I got from this. I just don't understand the thought process that went into any of this. Yeah, Tyler Perry and Madea are ripe for mockery, but even that feels a little stale to do now. He doesn't do much with the Madea character lately, and most of his films have seemingly moved away from the religious aspects. There's no joke to make. And you don't have the budget to make it! And apparently, you don't have the self-awareness to realize how wrong you are for trying to do so! Like I mentioned before with "The People's Joker", there was a charm to how the film looked and it at least remained cheap and somewhat shoddy. This is generally shoddy in terms of direction, scene composition, editing, ADR, continuity, and consisting of effects work that wouldn't fly even on the cheapest YouTube video today. However, there are occasional moments where it actually looks like, well, an actual movie. Just a couple shots mind you, but they're there. If this is supposed to be just one big joke, nobody is laughing. And that's before we even get to the screenplay, which is filled with jokes aimed entirely at many of Tyler Perry's filmography ("Meet the Browns", "Diary of a Mad Black Woman", "Boo! A Madea Halloween", "Madea Goes to Jail", ect.). They all fall flat. Not just flat. They trip, then get up and smack you upside the head before collapsing to the ground and dying from all around laziness, yet just wants to make entirely sure that you're in just as much pain as they are. Obviously, it's not funny. The jabs the film takes are either obvious, out of touch (Who still makes R. Kelly jokes anymore?), or most perplexing of all, are just lamer rehashes of jokes you would see in a Madea film. You heard that right. They actually do things that a Madea movie somehow did better. Almost play by play, then word for word.

Kevin Daniels is just doing a more half-assed version of Madea. Love or hate Tyler Perry's work (And yeah, I'm not the fan, as you already know), he's always invested in whatever kind of bullsh*t he's churning out. This performance doesn't have that. Jamie Foxx doesn't really do much of anything, while others from Vivica A. Fox, Kyla Pratt, Lamorne Morris, Tisha Campbell, Jamsine Guy, and plenty more, are given the absolute worst to work with. Maybe favors were owed. I'm not sure, but nobody seemed to care in the slightest about being professional with this. I'm also 90% Mickey Rourke had no idea what was going on or what he was doing throughout this entire runtime. The other 10% of me thinks he was just on drugs the entire time. Can't blame him.

"Not Another Church Movie" made me question everything, and for a bit after watching it, I didn't even know how to write a review for it. They put little to no thought process into this, and because of how God awful it looks, it's almost as if they're proud of that. It has no place in a theater. It has no place anywhere really, except maybe the very bowels of Hell. Lacking in creativity, intelligence, or anything resembling the concept of basic comedy. Clearly a contender for the worst film of 2024. Or maybe worst film since 2016. I don't freakin know. There are no positives here. Only pain. God truly has forsaken us. No Stars. Rated R For Strong Adult (A Term I Put Lightly) Content, Lowbrow Humor, And Possible Transphobia? Not Sure About That One. Could Be Too Stupid To Be Offensive.

Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes by James Eagan ★★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: The humans are bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume are good people. Oooh Oooh Aah!

Back in 2011 when everyone got their first look at the newly rebooted "Planet of the Apes" film, called "Rise of the Planet of the Apes", being set in a modernized time period and replacing the original cutting edge practical make-up and effects work with CGI, everyone was rightfully skeptical. It had disaster written all over it, and yet, to everyone's shock, it won over critics and audiences, with special praise being towards the use of motion capture work from the likes of the great Andy Serkis, bringing these apes to life like never before. It was then follows by two sequels, "Dawn of the Planet of the Apes" and "War for the Planet of the Apes" (With both being directed by Matt Reeves), which proceeded to surpass the first film, making for one of the better recent trilogies. They're beloved now and if you ask me, they're even better than all of the other older films that preceded them. These films are the definition of taking a big gamble on a major blockbuster franchise, not knowing if it will appeal to the masses, and hoping that you can achieve that level of respectable Science-Fiction storytelling than came before. And they're still somehow doing it.

Following the events of the last film and the death of the first hyper-intelligent ape, "Caesar" (Previously played by Andy Serkis), "Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes" opens centuries later, with humanity mostly having been either wiped out by a man-made virus or have devolved into feral beings. A young Chimpanzee, "Noa" (Owen Teague), is collecting eagle eggs with his friends, "Anaya" (Travis Jeffery) and "Soona" (Lydia Peckham), as part of a rite of passage in a tribe of eagle raising apes, like his father, "Koro" (Neil Sandilands). Noa discovers a seemingly feral young human woman (Freya Allan), which also brings trouble to his village. Noa is unable to prevent his home from being destroyed by violent, mask-wearing apes, who also murder his father and take prisoner of everyone else. Noa is determined to bring his family and friends back home, journeying into the unknown to rescue them.

Along the way, Noa meets a wise, kind-natured Orangutan, "Raka" (Peter Macon), who introduces him to the teaching of Caesar (Who has become a religious, messiah-like figure), which include some recognizable mottos such as "Apes Together Strong" and "Ape Not Kill Ape". Noa and Raka also bring along the young woman, who they name "Nova" on their journey, with it becoming quickly apparent that there is much more to her than it first seems. Their journey leads them to a kingdom of apes, ruled with a mighty, tyrannical fist by the evil Bonobo ape, "Proxiumus Caesar" (Kevin Durand), who has warped the legacy of the original Caesar into one of violence and slavery. Proximus plots to gain access to hidden human secrets in hopes of furthering his own sense of evolution (And likely conquering the rest of the world, much like humans did once before), and it's up to Noa to save his people from Proximus' madness.

Directed by Wes Ball (The "Maze Runner" films, and has recently been tasked with directing an adaptation of the "Legend of Zelda" video game series), with a screenplay from Josh Friedman (Working with a story from reboot creators/"Avatar: The Way of Water" collaborators Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver), "Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes" continues to evolve a franchise that logically, should have gone extinct years ago. However, life has repeatedly found a way to shine through all the spectacle. Despite moving things much closer to where the franchise began (With the titular "Planet of the Apes" finally being realized), the film remembers what made people fall in love with this new saga. That being, the Apes themselves. We're shown this new world through their eyes, with Wes Ball's intimate and clearly loving direction crafting an apocalyptic world that's both jarring to see, yet still quite beautiful. It's different the sense that it takes a moment for one to realize that characters aren't climbing giant trees or mountains, but rather buildings that have become overgrown with plant life. It really looks like our world, except centuries into the future (And one where, well, we likely no longer had any effect on the environment. Kind of feels like how it was during the Covid lockdowns taken to an extreme degree). Ball goes for a slower pace, taking time to immerse the audience in its world, similar to James Cameron's "Avatar" films, to the point where reality just doesn't quite look as good once you leave the theater. And, because I just love pissing off Film Twitter, I'd take ten of these over a single "Avatar" film any day. Not just because of the sharper screenplay, more memorable characters, and the adherence to utilizing traditional storytelling, instead of just using clichés as a crutch. I just think there's something more impressive about having technology used to make things that you know aren't real and instead finding a way to bring things that are actually real to life. (Space whales are cool and all, but being able to take the plight of a living, breathing, talking ape THIS seriously? Now that's a real accomplishment).

The visual wonder often blends so seamlessly that it's hard to tell what's real and what isn't. What parts of the scenery is just green screen or completely created through CGI? Much of that is thanks to the use of motion capture, which even when you can tell it's not exactly real, the facial expressions and attention to the tiniest details (Skin, fur, sweat, ect.) are mind boggling. It also gives way for the performances to shine through, once again proving that this is real acting and it's time it got more appreciation. Owen Teague is a wonderful lead, expressing so many emotions simply through his eyes (Ape eyes?), and is a worthy successor to lead this franchise. Considering how iconic Andy Serkis' Caesar has become, that's quite the accomplishment. Freya Allan ends up being one of the most complex aspects of the film, where you're never quite sure what her end goals actually are or what methods she'll use to achieve them. Peter Macon serves as an instantly lovable source of both warmth and much needed humor, while an excellent Kevin Durand embodies his overconfident and somewhat dim-witted, yet undeniably dangerous and sadistic villain. There is much commitment by the actors to their motion capture performances that it's actually quite shocking when William H. Macy (as "Trevathan", a cowardly human, who has resigned to teaching Proximus about human history) pops up. Although that does feel like kind of the point. You become so struck by how lively these creatures are that you forget they're not human. In fact, you too start to believe that they might actually be something more.

"Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes" brings this long running franchise into a new, glorious era, that feels traditional, yet still fresh at the same time. It's a visual masterpiece, with defined characters, a beautiful score from John Paesano (Though it is tough to match the already stunning score in the previous films by Michael Giacchino), and even a few unconventional surprises that one might not be used to seeing in their average summer blockbusters, but still feel right in line with the themes of extremism this franchise has been known for. It's a darker, though still hopeful cinematic experience that feels like a mandatory watch in IMAX, so you too can find yourself lost in this world that feels real and unlike anything you've ever seen before at the same time. It's great to see that even after all this time, the Apes are still very strong. 4 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Frightening Situations, Photo-Realistic Simians, And Good Old Fashioned Monkey Business.

Tarot by James Eagan ★ out of ★★★★★

Image: I'm not sure the "Heart of the Cards" will help me out of this one.

The movie about killer Tarot cards? How do YOU think it was?

Apparently based on a book called "Horrorscope" by Nicholas Adams, "Tarot" open with a group of friends, "Haley" (Harriet Slater), "Grant" (Adain Bradley), "Paxton" (Jacob Batalon), "Paige" (Avantika Vandanapu), "Madelyn" (Humberly González), "Lucas" (Wolfgang Novogratz), and "Elise" (Larsen Thompson), gathered at a rented mansion in the woods. They uncover an old box of Tarot cards in the mansion basement, then have Haley read out their horoscopes. The cards are obviously creepy as Hell from the start (And even the horoscope readings themselves are quite menacing), but the friends don't think much of it. The next day though, when one of the group ends up horrifically offed, they find themselves in a race against their very fates as the images in the Tarot cards take physical form as monstrous creatures to kill them all one by one. (The creatures on the cards taking forms such as "the Fool", "The Hangman", "The Magician", "The Devil", and many more of your favorites!)

Written and directed by Spenser Cohen and Anna Halerg (A pair of first time directors), "Tarot" is a pretty dumb idea for a horror movie that at least could have had more of a hook to its silly premise. Or maybe even more of a sense of humor. Or, most obvious of all, had actually been scary. The movie looks like it's constantly spinning, trying to get a movie out of a story that really doesn't have anything to it. It starts off its first ten minutes or so with a hint of promise, trying to introduce its doomed characters, and attempting to generate some atmosphere, only to tragically fall to pieces the longer it goes on. Even at a short hour and a half, there's just nothing there. It also feels cobbled together of the usual horror tropes that have long outstayed their welcome. Jump scares all over, forced dire situations, characters making dumb decisions, and some of the most telegraphed sequences that I've seen a movie hit you over the head with. Sure, the film is clearly telling you what's going to go after each of the characters early on, complete with hints as to how they might die or what they might be able to do to stop it, but the dialogue is so dumbed down to the point that there's no sense of tension. It's so easy to read through such thinly crafted lines that give little room for interpretation. (Such as when the Tarot readings include lines such as "Being sent down the wrong track", having to "Watch Your Surroundings" or literally anything involving a creature called "The Hangman". You know where this is all going)

The characters are paper thin, with the actors saddled with the heavy lifting. Harriet Slater is a fairly dull lead character, while Adain Bradley is by far the most annoying, being the whiny skeptic of the group. Avantika Vananapu, who completely stole in the show in earlier this year's "Mean Girls", is shockingly personality free, while Humberly González is absolutely lovely, despite getting the most moronic moment in the entire movie (One of the movie's many contrivances is getting the characters in the exact situations needed for them to die). Jacob Batalon at least gets a few chuckles in an attempt to balance out the tone, which can't seem to figure out if the film should be tongue in cheek or something you're meant to take absolutely seriously. When the film stops to force in some backstory (Via nonsensical exposition), it makes less sense the more you know, especially considering how the creatures spend most of the movie just dicking around when they apparently can simply kill their victim whenever they want. Speaking of which, most of the creature designs look too similar or are too hidden by darkness, though one sequence involving the one referred to as "The Magician", is the only moment where the film utilizes any sort of cleverness (Involving a character being forced into a box in front of a creepy audience, while the Magician proceeds to jab swords and saws into the box). I'll even give some credit for the film pushing its PG-13 rating, which never goes too far, yet does have a decent sized body count and quite a few gruesome off screen deaths (Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it wasn't brutal).

"Tarot" would have been dated if it had come back sometime during the mid 2010s, in January, when trash like this would have found itself at home. Now that it's coming out in May of 2024, it's just kind of sad. It's one of those movies where you know it's bad and maybe you would have seen yourself going with your friends to mock it during a late night showing. However, when you can find perfectly suitable, garbage horror films in the depths of Tubi, Netflix, or Shudder, this ain't even worth that. It's too lame to even want to make fun of. I don't see this being something you're gonna be thinking much about in your future. 1 Star. Rated PG-13 For Scary Faces Jumping Out At Ya, Cursed Cards, And The Fact That I Couldn't Tell What Ages Anyone Was Supposed To Be. Longtime College Friends Who Range From 19 To Early 20s Then Early 30s? These Numbers Aren't Adding Up!

The Fall Guy by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: Would romancing Emily Blunt count as doing your own stunts? Because you wouldn't need to pay a guy for that.

Is the Academy really going to have a "Best Stuntwork" category? I have been hearing talk about it for a while, and it's really about damn time. The past few years have given us some truly amazing stuntwork (Logically, "John Wick: Chapter 4" should have been the first to win such an award, but whatever), and it's fitting because back during the dawn of filmmaking, the first actors were basically stuntmen. Those guys all nearly killed themselves to get the kind of iconic shots and sequences that are still being imitated today. It's one of the most important parts of filmmaking and it's shocking to me how it's only now going to be recognized.

Loosely inspired by the 1981 television series of the same name, "The Fall Guy" follows longtime stuntman, "Colt Seavers" (Ryan Gosling), the stunt-double for douchey movie star "Tom Ryder" (Aaron Taylor-Johnson). Despite getting his ass handed to himself for a living, Colt loves his work and even has met the girl of his dream, camera operator "Jody Moreno" (Emily Blunt). However, when a stunt goes wrong and Colt is seriously injured, he disappears off the face of the Earth, ghosting Jody, and becoming a washed up loser in the process. Over a year later, Colt is tracked down by Tom's persnickety producer, "Gail Meyer" (Hannah Waddingham), who convinces Colt to come to Australia where Jody (Now turned director) is shooting her big, Dune-esque Schi-Fi, Epic Romance "Metalstorm" to be Tom's stunt-double once again (Under the idea that Jody asked for him personally). It turns out though, Jody had no idea Colt would be showing up and the real reason Gail brought him over is so that he can track down Tom (Who has seemingly gone missing). Using this as a chance to reconnect with Jody, Colt decides to go along with it, only to find out that Tom has been dealing with some questionable people, which quickly turns the situation deadly. Now Colt has to find out where Tom is, avoid getting killed, and most importantly of all, help Jody finish her movie, thus possibly winning back her heart.

Directed by stuntman/co-creator of the "John Wick" series turned director, David Leitch ("Atomic Blonde", "Deadpool 2", "Bullet Train", "Hobbs & Shaw"), with a screenplay by Drew Pearce ("Hotel Artemis"), "The Fall Guy" is possibly a bit more fluffy than you might expect, though there's nothing remotely wrong with that. It becomes quickly apparent what kind of early summer blockbuster this wants to be, and it's surely one that I can only winning over audiences simply because it's just so damn charming and oh so lovable. In reality, the film is less an action-comedy (Though there's plenty of that), but rather a romantic-comedy, with an exceptionally likable cast and the right amount of safe, yet highly endearing laughs. The film is still a salute to stunt performers, and despite some occasional CGI effects work for what I can only assume were the most dangerous of sequences (Don't wanna kill anyone making a movie, especially for an effect that could so easily be rendered without any trouble), there are a lot of real, death defying practical effects. You can really see the passion behind them, and just how much hard work was put into the project, along with clearly how much fun everyone looked to be having the entire time. It also adheres to certain screwball comedy tropes, where it's all about escalation and how crazy things can get when everything is literally crashing down on top of each other. Such as a major highlight involving Colt, teamed up with a trained acting dog, ending up in an over the top car chase across the city (A sequence so good, you'll forgive the film for kind of glossing over how much damage is caused and how nobody seems to react to it).

The action aspect though might be the weaker part, though not because it's bad by any means. It's just that the film's focus on the romance is shockingly the true highlight of the film. If anything, it might be the real reason I can see moviegoers gravitating towards the film. Ryan Gosling, who continues to flex his comedic chops after his Oscar nomination for last year's "Barbie", is a delightfully dorky, yet still plenty competent action hero. He spends a good chunk of the film getting his ass beat badly, though he repeatedly gets back up, making for an action hero that just feels like an average, nice Guy (Who you know, happens to look like Ryan Gosling). Emily Blunt (Who is just, oh so beautiful. Like hypnotically so) also gets to remind everyone that she also has some great comedic acting chops to match Gosling. Together though? They're absolutely wonderful. Perfect chemistry, playing characters that you instantly love, and just bounce off each other so well. It's actually refreshing to see this kind of relationship in a romantic comedy, where it's less about opposites attracting and more about how obviously perfect these two are for each other, even when they don't always realize it.

Aaron Taylor-Johnson perfectly encompasses the worst kind of leading man actor, who is in reality a self-centered, dangerously moronic pile of crap, while the always welcome Winston Duke (as "Dan", the stunt coordinator for Jody's film and Colt's friend) is a riot, making the most of the usual "Supporting Friend" role. Hannah Waddingham is having an absolute blast, while Teresa Palmer (as "Iggy", Tom's psychotic girlfriend) gets some brief moments of amusing absurdity. However, on the downside, Stephanie Hsu (as "Alma", Tom's worn out assistant) is criminally underused in what feels more like a stretched out cameo than an actual part. (There are a few pretty great cameos that do get a big laugh on the upside)

It's predictable and pretty silly, but I feel that in a way, that's part of the fun. "The Fall Guy" works as a solidly funny romantic comedy, that also serves as both a tribute to the often forgotten stunt performers who put their bodies and hearts into making a film great, and the absolute, crowd pleasing joy that comes from good old fashioned happy endings. It's genuinely nice to have a blockbuster like this that feels light in a way that anyone can really jump into and leave with a reactionary smile. It's low stakes, yet still a very smart and sweet experience that's bound to get the Summer movie season rolling on a good note. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Adult Content, Casual Destruction Of Property, And Lots Of Testicle Chewing Action.

The People's Joker by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Show this image to a "Joker" fanboy, and watch them scream.

I loved 2019's "Joker", and even ranked it as one of my top ten movies of that year. However, back when I saw it, I just knew it was going to appeal to one of the worst demographics in the geek community. Even when they're just really annoying, like those guys who constantly complain about "Superhero Fatigue" even when you didn't ask them crap (As if complaining about something is the only thing that gives their lives meaning), they too seemed to gravitate towards "Joker". It's funny to me that the movie has been seen as the Anti-Comic Book movie, because it seemingly goes against the norms, smashes down the barriers, and boldly declared a war of anarchy upon both the "Marvel" and "DC" superhero machine. Guys, it's just a really good comic book movie that tried something very different. Now if you wanna talk about smashing down barriers and going against the norms, I got something for you.

In a parody fueled, dystopian "Gotham City", "The People's Joker" follows "BLEEP" (Vera Drew), whose dead name is repeatedly bleeped out, a trans woman who tries to make it big in the city as a comedian in a sketch comedy show, "UCB Live", run by a poorly CGI'ed doll version of "Lorne Michaels" (Voiced by Maria Bamford). Having been subjected to a smile inducing antidepressant, "Smylex", by "Dr. Jonathan Crane" (Christian Calloway) at a young age, due to a lack of understanding from her mother (Lynn Downey), BLEEP (Later going by "Joker the Harlequin") has always experienced some off-putting, psychedelic side-effects. After failing to impress renowned comedian, "Ra's al Ghul" (David Liebe Hart), Joker partners up with another aspiring comedian, "The Penguin" (Nathan Faustyn), to open an underground comedy troupe that specializes in "Anti-Comedy" (Because all non-approved humor is outlawed). Joker falls in love with a trans man, "Jason Todd/Mr. J" (Kane Distler), who bears a striking resemblance to Jared Leto's "Joker", and soon finds herself in an emotionally abusive relationship. With the shadow of a far-right, fascist "Batman" (Voiced by Phil Braun, who generally only appears in various animated segments) looming over everyone, Joker must come to terms with who she is and what she will stand for. To be the Joker that Gotham City needs, if you will.

Directed by Vera Drew (Known for some editing work, such as some of those late night "Adult Swim" programs), who also co-wrote the screenplay with Bri LeRose, "The People's Joker" is the definition of true parody, and it's still a shock that it's somehow allowed to exist. In fact, it barely did. Having originally premiered at the 2022 Toronto International Film Festival, the film was pulled due to accusations of copyright infringement despite clearly being a low, low budget parody (And really, it was never meant to be anything bigger than a future cult film anyways, so pulling it seems a bit extreme). After some searching for a distributor (And some apparent changes to the film, that likely happened while it was being shopped around), the film found itself released in the most select in theaters just a few weeks ago. What we end up getting is a strange, cheap as Hell, clever, and often very funny twist on some well known comic book characters and movies, which eventually finds its very own deranged identity once we reach the end.

The film, which I'm pretty sure was shot on some of the least expensive green screen one can find (With some actors being, er, poorly, added back into the film during post production), though in its own baffling way, makes this world feel so alive. The film will randomly shift styles, with surreal animated sequences (And sometimes major characters who are fully animated throughout), fever dream looking flashbacks, a few unexpected cameos (Yet still sometimes get a laugh), and a random scene where everyone is portrayed by Batman-inspired Barbie dolls. This definitely won't work for everyone. The lack of any kind of budget will either charm you, or make you cringe in confusion, though I do firmly believe it works in context of the film more often than it doesn't. Some of it is because the gonzo interpretations of popular characters, or it's the numerous references, ranging from widely known to totally obscure, proving that Vera Drew is basically a total nerd like the rest of us. The way the film satirizes many of these elements at times are pretty obvious (Yeah, is nobody going to question Batman's thing for basically grooming teenagers?) to rather odd (It literally took me half the film to realize what the Hell the film was doing with Ra's al Ghul, before it finally made some kind of sense).

All the performances are also very committed, with Vera Drew being a likable quirky lead, along with Kan Distler bringing some humanity to such a manipulative character. Nathan Faustyn (And his obviously fake Penguin nose) is quite the scene-stealer, with Christian Calloway making for a surprisingly legitimately creepy interpretation of the Scarecrow (Which is especially commendable considering this is anything but legit). There's also a hilarious Tim Heidecker (as the voice of "Perry White", an Alex Jones-type commentator, who only appears in animated form), treading the line between parody and what you're pretty sure guys this really portray themselves (Complaining about reptilian transexuals and whatnot). There are some jokes or bits of satire that don't quite land with me, and I'm not sure if it's because I just didn't get it or if the movie is just being weird for the Hell of it. Considering the "Adult Swim" inspirations, it could likely be both. At it's best though, the film's satire is quite insightful, and I'd go as far as to say, necessary.

"The People's Joker" is the true anti-comic book movie, yet not in a way that's particularly against films like that. If anything, with how much affection there is to the parody (And how deep it actually gets), it just wants to be seen and heard. It's not a movie for everyone, but I could argue it's a movie for anyone. Look, I'm a bland cisgender, straight guy, who like this movie humorously points out likely saw Nicole Kidman (In a "Batman Forever") at a young age and jumped to completely sexualized thoughts, but even I can see how others saw the same thing and took a completely different approach (Wanting to become that personification of beauty, which they've only kept hidden within themselves up until that point). I can see people in the queer, trans, and LGBTQ+ community gravitating towards it to see themselves represented in pop culture in a way that speaks to them. I can see comic book nerds just eager to see someone new doing a more unique take on the genre. You could also be looking for something just plain weird and funny, with a little heart added to it. It kind of just successfully encompasses all those fronts in such an awkward, though confident manner. It's eccentric, funny, and once we reach the end, thoroughly touching. Anarchy in its purest sense. 4 Stars. Not Rated, Though Likely An R Rating For Loads Of Adult Content, Large Amounts Of Questionably Copyrighted Material, And For The Love Of God, Do NOT Watch This On Any Kind Of Drugs. You Don't Need Them! Trust Me! It's Safer That You Don't!

Challengers by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Way too much skinny energy going on here.

Word of warning. If you're going into this thinking that this is going to be that trashy, sexy threesome movie that the trailers and marketing has been building up, you're gonna be sorely disappointed. I'd even go as far to say that if you find watching three absolute pieces of sh*t, screwing over each other in a literal game simply for their own egos, almost as if they really get off on it, remotely sexy, there might be something wrong with you. Now, good, juicy, dramatically over the top entertainment? That's exactly what this is!

"Challengers" opens in 2019, with tennis champion "Art Donaldson" (Mike Faist), is having a bit of a losing streak, but will be going toe to toe with his former best friend/washed up player, "Patrick Zweig" (Josh O'Connor), in an upcoming match. Art is married to a former tennis prodigy (Having been forced to quit due to an injury), "Tashi Duncan" (Zendaya), who is also Patrick's ex. In fact, both Art and Patrick years prior became rivals for her affections, with the film flashing backwards to showcase just how messed up this little "Throuple" situation really is.

Directed by Luca Guadagino ("Call Me by Your Name", "Bones and All", "Suspiria"), with a screenplay by Justin Kuritzkes, "Challengers" is a stylish blend of sports drama and some wackjob's interpretation of a romantic comedy. Something that Guadagino masterfully does is make it feel like a cinematic soap opera, with intense, thoroughly exciting sports-centered action and even more thrilling emotional battles between our characters. And yeah, it's all petty, mean spirited, and unlikable as can be. Luckily, aside from the film's fast pace keeping the flow going without stop, it's also got a smart script, that knows when to just be a campy sort of funny. It's also a film that actually does find a way to make the film's jumping back and forth, then all around again, in time work (For the most part). It's a hard style of story structure to get down, and I've seen so many movies turn into a total mess because of it. Like a pile of spaghetti being plopped on the floor, with the director trying their best to salvage something that went bad hours ago. It does add something to the story, such as the big, dramatic reveals, or simply helping one get a grasp of the intricate complexities of our main characters. Not to mention when it's accompanied by a kickass, techno score from Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, which plays during all of the moments of the most overtly over dramatic.

Speaking of characters, following around a trio such as this (And for as many years as the film's timeline goes) can be a chore because, well, you hate them all. Patrick is a smug, egotistical a-hole, who hasn't quite realized how much of a loser he is. Meanwhile, Art seems like the most sympathetic, he's also such a doormat in a way and even plays up the whole "Nice Guy, who isn't looking for a reward" routine, even though he damn well knows his reasons for certain actions are nothing short of selfish or at least, self-serving. Then we have Tashi, who you might respect for her intelligence (And yes, Zendaya's natural hotness), but is the worst of them all, being a master manipulator to the point you wonder what emotions are real to begin with (Hell, maybe even she's tricked herself into buying some of her own bull crap). What makes these characters a guilty joy to watch, aside from good writing, is how tremendous the performers are. In a way, this is just a showcase for the three of them to let everyone know their potential. Zendaya's stare alone bursts with intimidation and demands respect, while Mike Faist plays a quiet, seemingly more restrained role and Josh O'Connor retains such a smug, punchable smirk throughout. The three of them have killer chemistry and even during the film's predictable beats, there is some fun to be had in how they're eventually forced to show different sides to these characters than what we're first introduced to. I will say though, one problem with the film's jumping around with time is that you never quite buy how the actors have apparently aged. The film's earliest flashback is supposed to be when they're all 18, while they're in their 30s in the present. I feel like the filmmakers are just expecting you to simply go with it, because it would be wise not to remotely think about how sometimes certain characters look older when they're supposed to look younger (And vice versa).

"Challengers" might end on a note that could leave some wanting, though most of that is because of how spectacular the final match is. I feel it's one of those films that has the makings of something you're only meant to go "Oooooh!" or "Nuh Uh She Didn't!" to, yet has much more class than that. I mean, you still get plenty of those moments too. It's just really smart about it, and just really well done. It hooks you in and never lets you go till the end. Game. Set. Match. 4 Stars. Rated R For Strong Sexual Content, Manipulative Ménage à Trois', And So Much Tennis Screaming. Pretty Sure The Words "UGH!" And "URGHHH!" Were Written Into The Screenplay Without Thinking.

Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver by James Eagan ½ out of ★★★★★

mx0830-2000002-comp4k-v06-0001-r3-min-65832a99e46ec.jpg

Image: After watching this, if I see another smidge of grain ever again, it will be too soon!

Okay, I know how this looks. Especially when you see that rating. This looks like bullying by this point, but come on! If we don't say anything, Zack Snyder will just keep doing this! And he won't learn nothing! He NEEDS to understand ENOUGH is ENOUGH! This isn't a review. It's an intervention!

Picking up right after the events of the first film, "Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver" reunites us with our bland, derivative collection of heroes, such as the remorseful former soldier, "Kora" (Sofia Boutella), her farmer love interest "Gunnar" (Michiel Huisman), the former general "Titus" (Djimon Hounsou), the cyborg JedI, er, I mean space Samurai "Nemesis" (Doona Bae), the long haired, musclebound "Tarak" (Staz Nair), and that one extra who I guess counts as a main character "Milius" (Elise Duffy), as they unite to protect the farming moon of "Vedt" against the forces of the Galactic Empire, er, I mean, the "Motherworld" and its military force, the "Imperium". Kora seems to think they might have a chance against the invaders after she previously killed "Admiral Atticus Noble" (Ed Skrein), the right hand man to the leader of the Motherworld/Kora's adoptive father, "Regent Balisarius" (Fra Fee). However, Admiral Noble has just been resurrected, alive and crazy, planning to lay waste to the people of Vedt. Kora and her allies must help the farmers defend themselves against Noble, while coming to terms with their many unremarkable backstories and most importantly of all, farm that all too important grain! ........The next "Star Wars" right here! Grain!

Directed by Zack Snyder ("Sucker Punch", "Zack Snyder's Justice League", "Man of Steel") for Netflix, having co-written the screenplay with Kurt Johnstad ("300") and Shay Hatten ("Army of the Dead"), "Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver" is the kind of disaster that should normally land a director, no matter how talented, directly in "Director's Jail" (Where we just don't see them for a while because of how much of a certified failure their "Magnum Opus" ends up becoming). It's a movie, if you would even call it that, where everything just feels wrong. Despite being the second half of an already pretty terrible first half, it still feels incomplete, which is because it's intentionally incomplete. With talk of an extended, R rated cut on its way, we're literally being given some half-assed assembly cut of something that we're being told will be better when the one, true version comes out. Love or hate Disney's current ideas with "Star Wars", but at least it all still makes some kind of sense what they're trying to do with it. This is all just made up, forced attempts at drumming up excitement for something that they almost seem to know is terrible, yet somehow believes that people will just fall in love with it so quickly that they'll just eat it up like the next "Dune", "Lord of the Rings", or next big "Marvel" movie. That is the definition of pure corporate soullessness. It's also a shocking amount of uncreativity from a director that we all know is capable of crafting real art if he really wanted to.

Say what you will about some of his work, but Snyder has always been an original, and these movies have been anything but that. Everything just feels like a lesser version of something we've seen somewhere else, only mildly more edgy, entirely overdramatic, and so overwritten in its stretched out dialogue, where it feels like less being said would have generated much more emotion than some long winded proclamation of what the character is feeling. The fact that this second part can't even seem to improve on these problems from the first is one thing. It's another to make it so much worse by relentlessly padding things out with such "exciting" sequences of characters sitting around and talking about their tragic, uninspired backstories, which I assume are meant to be substitutions for actual character or depth, or grain farming. Grain farming! That's literally half the movie! We are forced to watch them farm for grain! In slo-motion! While some terrible "Lord of the Rings"-esque song won't shut the Hell up! I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP! Nothing happens for most of the movie, until the hour long final battle, which just consists of random blaster noises, lots of dirt, screaming and yelling, and lackluster CGI, making for a surprisingly ugly looking experience. Again, Zack Snyder movies are a lot of things. But I've never known them to be ugly.

Maybe some humor or heart could have livened things up. However, every character is so thinly presented, feeling the need to just tell you what their implied personality is, rather than you know, actually have one. (Yeah, you can piss and moan about the "Star Wars" sequel trilogy all you want, but you still remember those characters regardless. They left an impact) God bless Sofia Boutella for her admirable attempt to play this as Shakespeare, even though she just can't overcome such a wooden screenplay. She has no chemistry with Michiel Huisman, who gets the unfortunate honor of having his character being named Gunnar, with it being pronounced "Gooner" (Leading to my immature ass snickering the entire time). Djimon Hounsou looks oddly as uninvested as I am, while the likes of Doona Bae, Staz Nair, and Elise Duffy all just randomly fade into the background despite being considered main characters (The only main trait they all have is "Badass", which was likely all that would have been written on the back of their actions figure profile). Ed Skrein, much like in the last movie, is at least bringing some kind of smarmy menace to his basic villain, making for someone entertaining to watch, while Anthony Hopkins (as the voice of "Jimmy", an ancient robot warrior, who now stands watch over the farmers) doesn't get much of anything to do, yet is still easily the most interesting part of the film to the point you're just wondering the entire time why he wasn't the focus. Fra Fee (In some god awful looking old man makeup) still doesn't make for much of a greater big bad (And remains completely unfought still by the end), yet does get one of the film's biggest, most unintentional laughs. (The movie shows how Kora was betrayed and framed by Balisarius, but the in-universe is so lazily done that I almost kind of appreciated it)

Feeling like something you would see on "MST3K", except with a larger budget, "Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver" is this weird mix of insufferably boring (Why are you focusing so much on the grain?), rather unappealing to look at even with the onslaught of sludge-like CGI action towards the end, and so painfully predictable that it doesn't even feel like a spoiler to let anything slip out. It all leads to such an underwhelming climax and a lame sequel hook that promises, or more like threatens, that there will be even more to come in the future. Last year we had "Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves" and it was delightful, despite as of now not quite making enough to get a deserved franchise. The fact that we might instead get several more of these, due to how often Netflix seems to reward mediocrity with their bags of thrown away money, this doesn't seem remotely fair. Zack, you're better than this! I know it! You know it! Even those cult-like fans of yours seem to know it! Easily his worst film (Especially if you combine it with the first part). With a combined total of over four hours and absolutely nothing to show for it, this is clearly an experiment that failed and would be better off being abandoned. Maybe left in the nearest Death Star trash compactor. 1/2 Star. Rated PG-13 For Sci-Fi Violence, Hardcore Gooning, Excessive Slo-Mo, And....SO MUCH F*CKING GRAIN FARMING! GAAAAAAHHHH!!!!!!!!

The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare by James Eagan ★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: I'm all for having some self-confidence, but if you tell me you could take most of these guys in a fight, you're not just lying to me. You're lying to yourself.

Guy Ritchie has really brought us back to the good old days of action movies. The days where they were so in your face machismo, sweaty, and overtly manly with its manliness and at the same time, the most homoerotic thing that you've ever seen in your life, then will result in much of the audience watching coming out as at least Bisexual. Talk about bringing about peace to the nations.

Inspired by true events (As usual, give or take some details) and based on the book, "Churchill's Secret Warriors: The Explosive True Story of the Special Forces Desperadoes of WWII" by Damien Lewis, "The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare" follows the formation of "Operation Postmaster" by British Prime Minister, "Winston Churchill" (Rory Kinnear) and "Brigadier Colin Gubbins" (Cary Elwes), or "M". The off the books mission is to go behind enemy lines and destroy important Nazi U-Boat operations, while allowing for a team that's, er, less than respectable by government standards. The team is made up of "Gus March-Phillips" (Henry Cavill), "Anders Lassen" (Alan Ritchson), "Freddy Alvarez" (Henry Golding), "Henry Hayes" (Hero Fiennes Tiffin), and the recently captured/soon to be liberated, "Geoffrey Appleyard" (Alex Pettyfer), while Special Operations agents, "Frederich Heron" (Babs Olusanmokun) and "Marjorie Stewart" (Eiza González), work on keeping the Nazis busy on the island of Fernando Po (Where their biggest and best supply ship is waiting, just begging to be destroyed by our bloodthirsty heroes). Clearly there's gotta be a lot of intrigue, thinking on the spot, and so much physical (And mental) flexing to be had.

Directed by Guy Ritchie (The "Sherlock Holmes" films, "The Gentlemen", "The Covenant"), who co-wrote the screenplay with Paul Tamasy and Eric Johnson ("The Fighter", "Patriots Day"), along with Arash Amel ("Erased", "Outside the Wire"), "The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare" is a return to what Guy Ritchie seems to love best. Dumb, musclebound action, with a cheeky British sense of humor, which can either win you over to its side on style alone, or can feel like lesser, but more accessible Quentin Tarantino. However, I can't say the film is anything too special, considering it lacks the immense entertainment value of "The Gentlemen", the sense of character that came from "Sherlock Holmes", and definitely doesn't have the depth of last year's "The Covenant" (Which I'd say might be Ritchie's best film). With that said, I'd also be lying if I didn't admit that there is very much plenty of fun to be had with this. Hell, even a little brilliance at times. Guy Ritchie's eye for quick action, mixed with snappy humor (Almost annoyingly so), is firing at full force, without any kind of restraint. It's something that you gotta appreciate about the man. He just seems to want to make the movies he wants to make now, without a care in the world for how they're perceived. A man that truly loves what we does, even if it's to a rather demented degree (Matches the main characters perfectly if you ask me).

Henry Cavill looks like he's having an absolute blast with an action hero, who is admittedly kind of a sociopath. Just maniacal, oddly charming, and badass to boot, Cavill seems to want to show the world that he has personality to spare, despite what the DCEU's Superman allowed him to have. Henry Golding is his usual charismatic self, while there is a certain joy to come from watching a glasses-sporting, incredibly tight shirt wearing Alan Ritchson shooting a bunch of Nazis with arrows with perfect precision. The characters for Hero Fiennes Tiffin and Alex Pettyfer are pretty dull though, and it doesn't help when both actors don't have the same amount of screen presence that the others do. Rory Kinnear makes for a bafflingly goofy looking Winston Churchill (Then again, the legend of that man has become such a stereotype of itself that I'm sure the real Winston Churchill would have approved), the amusing Cary Elwes (Sporting a stone-faced smirk throughout the entire runtime, which he tends to do a lot in movies now), and a quietly compelling Babs Olusanmokun sport some good supporting roles. Meanwhile, Til Schweiger (as "Heinrich Luhr", the head Nazi, who Marjorie has to get close to) is suitably slimy and detestable, even if he's not too different from just some random bad guy that you'd see nonchalantly axed off. The real star here though is Eiza González, who is yes, as absolutely beautiful as can be, yet gets possibly the most complicated role of the entire film. It's cool to see that she is capable of inhabiting some more complex character parts, especially in a movie that has so many in your face personalities, and coming out as the secret true protagonist of it all.

In simple terms, "The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare" is too long, too bombastic, and too Guy Ritchie, yet those could also be exactly what a certain audience is asking for. It's hard not to look at it like a less good "Inglorious Basterds", which found a way to make sure you remember almost every character from that film. With that said, it serves up enough brutish, bulging, British justice to make for an enjoyable spectacle, while knowing it's nothing more than that. 3 Stars. Rated R For Strong, Bloody Violence, And So Many Veiny, Muscular, Hairy Men Doing Badass Men Things, Then Having Sweaty Bromances With Their Fellow Veiny, Muscular, Hairy Men. And Some Eiza González Lovliness Too. Everyone Wins!

Abigail by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: I assumed all daughters were like this at a certain age.

I've said it before. Genre-Bending is the future of horror. Look at films like "Night Swim", "Imaginary", or "The Exorcist: Believer", which were so basic and lacking in creativity that they just feel like something left over from another era. An era that accepted such uninspired horror drivel, that really only succeeded in tricking the masses into thinking that all horror was just like that (I too was one of those people who assumed the very same thing). You gotta take what's been done and try making it at least feel new again. In other words, take a good stake to its very heart and see what comes out.

"Abigail" opens with the titular, young ballerina, "Abigail" (Alisha Weir), being taken by a group of hired kidnappers, working for the secretive "Lambert" (Giancarlo Esposito), who refuses to elaborate further as to who the girl is or who her father is, simply stating that they will be collecting $50 million in ransom. The group, all told not to use their real names, consist of "Joey" (Melissa Barrera), "Frank" (Dan Stevens), "Sammy" (Kathryn Newton), "Peter" (Kevin Durand), "Dean" (Angus Cloud), and "Rickles" (Will Catlett), who take Abigail to a large mansion out in the middle of nowhere to stay for the night before an exchange can be made. However, the group starts to notice a few holes in this plot, and eventually learn that Abigail is the daughter of a ruthless crimelord. Then things get worse when they realize that Abigail is actually, wait for it, a vampire! Now with the mansion locked down, preventing their escape, and the team losing members one by one to Abigail lust for blood and guts, they come to the conclusion that the real trap was set for all of them. And Abigail herself is planning to enjoy toying with her food before giving them each a grisly demise.

Directed by Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett ("Ready or Not" and the last two "Scream" movies), with a screenplay by Stephen Shields ("The Hole in the Ground") and their frequent collaborator Guy Busick, "Abigail" is a tribute to some classic Universal horror, with a pitch black sense of humor and modernized touch. Universal has benefited from abandoning their whole "Dark Universe" idea (Where all the old Universal Monsters were meant to be tied together in one big cinematic horror universe), and has instead opted for standalone stories centered around classic creatures (Like 2020's excellent "The Invisible Man"). This in a way feels like another damn good, and hilariously bloody addition to the nightmarish collection. Bettinelli-Olpin and Gillett come together to once again take what's old and spice it up in a smart, funny, and still suitably frightening way. They have such a snark-filled sense of style, that seems to emphasize well-defined characters and Hammer-inspired horror, where some of the fun can simply come from how outrageously over the top the violence can be, without it feeling just like another gore-fest. It's literally like having your cake and eating it too. Except that cake is essentially human flesh.

It's a credit to the screenplay and especially the actors in how despite all of the characters being of either questionable morality at best to simply terrible people, they're oddly likable in a way. You at least enjoy watching them bounce off each other in amusing fashion due to how much personality they have, despite being likely to be served up on a silver platter to our titular blood-sucking monstrosity. Melissa Barrera (Of "Scream"), really has the right kind of chops to carry such a ridiculous premise, take it seriously, yet still find a way to logically coexist among the insanity without feeling out of place. The fact that Paramount thought it was a good idea to boot her from future "Scream" films feels like something that's only going to bite them in the ass far down the line. Dan Stevens, who is having a pretty solid year so far, is proving to be one of those character actors that you just enjoy seeing, even when he's playing such a scumbag like in this (And it looks like he's savoring every minute of it). Will Catlett is suitably stoic and appears to be the most level-headed, while Kevin Durand, as the meathead who constantly states the obvious, along with an especially charming Kathryn Newton showcase some impeccable comedic timing. The late Angus Cloud, who tragically passed last year at such a young age, gets probably some of the biggest laughs as the most inept of the group that you just know is doomed from the start. The always reliable Giancarlo Esposito does his best Giancarlo Esposito impression, while there is a surprise cameo towards the end that lends itself to an amusing sort of twist (And really just seems like perfect casting the more I think about it). The big draw is Alisha Weir, who gets the role of a lifetime for such a new young star. She balances out seemingly scared and innocent, then shockingly scary, and meticulously brilliant, while still providing her own sort of quirky take on what we're used to seeing with movie vampires (All while dancing like a little ballerina, covered in someone else's blood).

"Abigail" kind of twists and turns itself into a red soaked knot towards the end, which I can see some audience members losing a bit of interest by that point, though thankfully the film is such a fast sit that these moments come down to "Eh, I'll go with it since it's almost over". However, before all that, it's a funny, ferocious, dastardly dark tale, that never lets up in both the humor and horror. It also makes for a Hell of a showcase (And breakout performance) for Alisha Weir, who I can't praise enough for a performance both so charming and diabolical at the same time. 4 Stars. Rated R For Gruesome Goriness, Barbaric Ballerinas, And More Red Blood Than I Think The Human Body Likely Has.

Civil War by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Trying to get Trump's good side is a job better said than done.

Love or hate what this movie may or may not be doing, how it's saying it, or if it's even trying to say anything politically, but you gotta admit its very idea is nothing short of brilliant. How many war films have we seen, where we follow a bunch of Americans (Soldier, journalists, etc.) in some falling apart country that's been ravaged by war and chaos? And how many of those films usually focus on either real life countries or fictional ones, where they're generally (And intentionally) made to exclusively foreign? Most of the time it's probably a bunch of darker skinned people, speaking another language, and in less recognizable locations, so that the audience watching doesn't get too scared, feeling that "Well, that's only over there. Not here. Where it's safe and civilized.". That kind of desensitized nature is exactly why this film is important (Again, whether you actually like the film or not), and how regardless of where you fall politically, none of that would remotely matter if one day, we were the ones in that exact situation that we've only seen happening elsewhere. Showcasing this kind of anarchy, but from an outside view, where we don't have all the answers, is such an ambitious task alone that I consider it worthy of praise.

Set in the near future (Future-Ish?), "Civil War" shows the United States falling apart thanks to a multiparty conflict, with many states seceding and forming their own alliances (Such as things being so bad that Texas and California have apparently put aside their differences to join forces!), with the dictatorial President (Nick Offerman), serving his third term (And has only made things much, much worse). Renowned war photojournalist, "Lee Smith" (Kirsten Dunst), along with her colleagues "Joel" (Wagner Moura) and "Sammy" (Stephen McKinley Henderson), get word that the rebel forces are planning to take the capital on the Fourth of July, thus bringing an end to the President's reign (And maybe end the war? Honestly, nobody seems to have thought that far ahead). Lee and her team decide to make their way to Washington D.C. to interview the President before his fall from power (Or execution, most likely), letting a naive young photographer, "Jessie" (Cailee Spaeny), who idolizes Lee, tag along. The group witnesses the hellhole that the once great USA has become, facing deadly threats from all over, along with their growing detachment from the horrors that they continue to photograph.

Written and directed by Alex Garland ("Ex Machina", "Annihilation", "Men"), "Civil War" is certainly made to be a divisive, harsh, and unbearably unforgiving film, that's less an action film as it is a horror movie. I have already seen the film gain from dislike from the left because they see it as Garland pulling his punches, avoiding political talk, and leaving so much open to interpretation (Which yeah, the film is clearly doing), while most on the right are upset because, well, an evil, self-absorbed President allowing for chaos in the streets, with various gun-toting militias shooting at anyone they deem "Non-American", hits too close to home for them (If you are a Trump supporter, seeing a Trump analogy without the filmmakers even saying that there is one, I think you pretty much know what's up!). It's specifically designed to NOT make everyone happy, or in some ways, make everyone so unhappy and depressed that they can only find solace in the possibility in our next election being our last at least putting them out of their misery. The film's focus isn't on world-building or the details, but instead drops you right in the middle of the madness, without any real clue as to what even caused it in the first place. Honestly, I kind of love that. It makes you even more uneasy since you're not entirely sure who is the good guy here and how anything good will even come from this. The film's real attention is squarely on the journalist aspect and their story, taking the usual road trip movie tropes and turning them into a series of nightmarish experiences that look like they could be happening right down the road from your home.

The performances are all spectacular, portraying characters that you are left questioning how much you're really meant to like them. Kirsten Dunst is understated, giving a performance that feels emotionally detached, mostly due to seeing so much unimaginable, unrepentant death and torture elsewhere that you has seemingly become numb to it. However, you also can tell that those personality traits that she showcases may not be entirely true as the film progresses. Wagner Moura plays it differently, with a more humorous side that almost feels as if he's enjoying the life or death situations he's in and may not be entirely taking it all particularly seriously (Though when that charismatic charm fades, showing the more broken person beneath it, that's when the emotions hit hard). Cailee Spaeny on the other hand is the more innocent surrogate for the audience, learning more and more about the harshness of this new world, only to e further hardened because of it, while Stephen McKinley Henderson is where the film finds some kind of light within so much darkness. Jessie Plemons (as an unnamed, very trigger happy soldier, who the team come across), only appears for one scene, but makes the most of it in such a frighteningly real way, while Nick Offerman says a lot with his mannerisms and expressions in just a couple minutes of screentime (Showcasing the difference between a dictator's public image against who they really are when facing death's door). It's not much for action, yet you can feel the suspense and unnerving sense of dread throughout, from a scene where the team comes across a pair of soldiers in a shootout with some unknown resident (Where we never find out what got them into that situation in the first place, other than "He's trying to kill us and we're trying to kill him") to a brief moment of apparent peace in a seemingly lovely town that just wants to "stay out of things", to the point that everyone is going about their lives as if people aren't dying all around them.

"Civil War" isn't without a few predictable beats (Though there are some parts where no amount of foreshadowing can prepare you for), some logically questionable moments, and so much bleakness that it could be seen as too nihilistic for some. However, it's still an exceptionally well constructed, intelligent, and, regardless of how hard you want it to hit (Or how hard you might think you're being hit), very relevant look into what war-driven mayhem could look like if it were happening right here, where many of us think we're stable to ever experience in our lifetimes. With a final twenty minutes of edge of your seat spectacle (This cost $50 million? Now that's the real shock!), and a final image that will certainly stick with you for a while, it works on levels that aren't just at face level. That alone makes it necessary. 4 Stars. Rated R For Strong, Bloody War Violence And Murican Mayhem.

The First Omen by James Eagan ★★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: "Check this out sisters. I'm totally gonna freak this girl out. It's gonna be hilarious."

We all gave credit to "Immaculate" for its intense shock value and unsettling imagery, based around the possible birth of the Antichrist, which is to be forced upon a young woman of faith by those who claim to be people of God. You wanna know the real shocker? That was the watered down version!

Serving as a direct prequel to the 1976 horror classic "The Omen", "The First Omen" takes place in 1971 Rome, where a young American "Margaret Daino" (Nell Tiger Free), arrives at an orphanage to take her vows and becoming part of the nun convent, reuniting with an old, loving fatherly figure, "Cardinal Lawrence" (Bill Nighy). Despite the ongoing left-leaning, civil protests of the younger generation of the time going on right outside, Margaret is determined to commit herself to God. The convent, headed by "Sister Silvia" (Sônia Braga), is at first quite welcoming, with Margaret befriending her more outgoing roommate, "Luz" (Maria Caballero), though faces some uncertainty, such as how the rest of the convent treats the clearly disturbed "Carlita Skianna" (Nicole Sorace), such as locking her away in separate quarters whenever she acts out. Margaret sees a connection with Carlita, who claims to be plagued by strange, frightening visions (Which she creates morbid drawings of), because Margaret also experienced such a thing during her own childhood. Margaret is approached by a crazy sounding priest, "Father Brennan" (Ralph Ineson), who claims that there is a great evil conspiracy going on within the church. A conspiracy that will intentionally bring about the birth of the Antichrist in hopes that fear of such a thing will only drive people back to the church. At first, Margaret thinks this is insanity, but after starting to witness several sinister events and images one after the other, she comes to realize that there truly is something vile going on within the convent. Margaret now must find a way to save Carlita and discover how far up this conspiracy goes, before the Antichrist is finally born. (And if you have seen the original.....well, cue the Latin chorus!)

Directed by Arkasha Stevenson (Mostly known for television work, with this being her first feature film), who co-wrote the screenplay with Tim Smith and Keith Thomas ("The Vigil", "Firestarter"), "The First Omen" on paper sounds like the most unnecessary addition to a franchise that already has too many unnecessary additions. The first film is good, with a few legit shocking moments of horror, but was plagued by the desire to exploitable a horror film's legacy (With a weak sequel, followed by a weaker one, followed by an abysmal television film, and a pointless 2006 remake). It gives off the vibe that the first film should have just been left to stand on its own, with its themes unable to find a place after the fact, and worst of all, the attempts at franchising on the verge of reaching "Halloween" or "Exorcist" levels of betraying what the original stood for. That alone makes this film such a demented miracle of terror. The filmmakers took something that normally would have served as a lame cash grab, trying to capitalize on an old franchise, and turned it into something that genuinely feels like it could tie into the original film, yet also, is actually much better than it. Much of it is because of the amazing work from Arkasha Stevenson, who shows much promise when it comes to its use of visual storytelling (Which is full of disturbing, religious subtext), a strong cast, social relevancy, and as any good horror movie does, finds a way to leave the audience's jaws on the floor in both shock and dread.

Taking cues from the original, Stevenson plays things soft and quiet, forgoing traditional jump scares in favor of forcing the audience to get a nice, long, agonizing look at what kind of horrific image is being presented right in front of them. Most of the time, you're left questioning what's real or what's just a figment of the lead character's imagination, which repeatedly calls into question her very sanity (Not to mention, it's easy to understand why she might be losing her mind because of how feverish things will sometimes appear to be). It's as if you think you're waking up from a nightmare, but then realize that it's only just begun. And when I say it's a nightmare, that's putting things lightly. The film apparently got an NC-17 rating several times for some of the controversial images that it shows, and while I feel such a thing would have been too extreme a call, I can't say that the film is for the faint of heart. It's also only made more upsetting by how dark the subject matter gets. There are themes of rape, female degradation, and taking control over what say women have over their bodies, with all of it being in the supposed name of God, turns the very concept of religious horror into something all too real. Sure, it's taking it to a more exaggerated, supernatural-esque degree, but the point is clear and you're left pondering how often such evils have been committed by people of faith claiming that it's for the greater good or the betterment of the church. Turning people to God, Christianity or any religion really, not by love and acceptance, but by fear and exploitation? Those are ideas that will never not be relevant.

Much of what really sells the film is the very bold, uncompromising performance of Nell Free Tiger. She comes across as the ideal "normal", everyday character that just so happens to find herself walking into something much larger than herself, wanting nothing to do with it, yet is left little choice but to play her part. Not to mention, she plays realization induced fear and panic better than anyone I can think of at the moment (Where it takes one a second to fully grasp what kind of shock they're experiencing before letting it all out in an uncontrollable fit of irrational fear). It's very much Nell Free Tiger's film and this should serve as a catalyst for a promising career (There's a one shot sequence where she has to showcase what possession would likely look and feel like in the moment, making for a moment that you just can't look away from). Ralph Ineson (And his epic voice) play crazy really well, while the likes of a menacingly stoic Sônia Braga, Nicole Sorace, a creepy Ishtar Currie Wilson (as "Angelica", one of the more unsettling nuns at the convent), and a memorably morbid cameo from Charles Dance (as "Father Harris", a priest, whose discovery of the conspiracy makes him for a grisly fate in the film's prologue), all leave heavy impressions. Plus, it's always a delight to see Bill Nighy in anything, even when you know exactly how big or small a role he's going to be playing. The film makes surprisingly good use of callbacks to the original (Or should we say, call forwards?), and even when there are a fair share of more predictable moments, there's always something more to them that only make those reveals feel fresher.

A hauntingly gorgeous trip into satanic insanity, "The First Omen" is the kind of scary where it's not meant to make you jump, but rather cause you to experience so much anxiety induced states of frozen fear, that you're too afraid to look away because you're not sure what will happen if you do. I can't even get into the f*cked up visuals that we're subjected to, which never feel exploitative but instead further drive home the film's heart wrenching themes of religion's casual abuse of women (Both mentally and physically). I have no idea how they pulled this one off. Turning something that could have so easily been something to throw away more horror schlock for a late night dumpster fire, then instead turning it into a future horror classic in its own right that only surpasses what came before it. Hell, I'd go as far as to say, if they do it right, this could even serve as a possible reboot for the franchise as a whole. 4 1/2 Stars. Rated R (A Hard R, Considering It Was Almost NC-17) For Gruesome, Disturbing, And Just Plain Upsetting Images Of Religious Induced Sexual Horror. Pretty Sure Something Like THAT Is Not Meant To Come Out Of That Hole.....

Monkey Man by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Monkey! Monkey Man! I gotta be! A Monkey Man!

The story behind this movie's very existence is one of hope, human perseverance, and the desire to make a genre, action film with a sense of soul. A story brought about by its star, director, producer, and co-writer Dev Patel, who previously wanted Neil Blomkamp (Who he worked with on 2015's "Chappie"), to direct, who wisely declined, most likely because a South African white guy making such a film would have been thoroughly missing the very point of the film. Eventually things seemed to be coming together in 2020, only for Covid to rear its ugly head and change the plans, resulting in a new shooting location and an immediate on-set injury for Patel (Which I'm going assume happened a lot throughout this movie's production). After finally getting completed, the film was originally going to be released via Netflix, who later decided to abandon the film due to thinking its harsh themes wouldn't sell. Luckily, a hero in the form of Jordan Peele (Who has proven to have a damn good track record with his smart filmography, despite coming from a more comedic background), served as a last second producer, then made sure the film got the theatrical release that it truly deserved. I'm not going to get into the pain, blood, sweat, and tears that likely went into the actual shooting of the film, because you can definitely see all of it on screen for yourself.

Set in an overpopulated city in India, ruled by overtly corrupt officials, "Monkey Man" follows an unnamed young man (Dev Patel), credited as "Kid", goes by the name "Bobby" to keep his identity hidden, and takes part in illegal, underground fights run by the devilishly charismatic "Tiger" (Sharlto Copley), where he dresses up in a Monkey mask, going by the moniker "Monkey Man" (Let's just refer to him as that because it just sounds cool). Monkey Man is secretly on a mission to get revenge on the people who, as a child, witnessed the murder of his mother, "Neela" (Adithi Kalkunte), the destruction of his village, and continued persecution of any individual seemed lesser in a brutal Caste system. Posing as a kitchen worker at a socially exclusive club (Full of drugs and prostitutes to be given out to powerful people, including politicians and other important officials), run by the domineering "Queenie" (Ashwini Kalsekar), Monkey Man has to find a way to work up to the top to get his hands on the vile chief of police, "Rana Singh" (Sikander Kher) and his boss, the controversial spiritual guru "Baba Shakti" (Makarand Deshpande). However, Monkey Man is just, well, one man, and with his uncontrollable rage always on the verge of being unleashed, he's really got his work cut out for him.

Directed by Dev Patel (His directorial debut), who co-wrote the screenplay with Paul Angunawela and John Collee ("Hotel Mumbai" and for some reason, "Happy Feet"?), "Monkey Man" is a brutal, unrelenting, and ambitious action thriller, that might seem to bite off more than it can chew, yet finds a cohesive way to mix adrenaline fueled violence, social awareness, and even some memorable character in equal measure. Most of it is because of Dev Patel's chaotic, yet loving direction, which has taken clear inspiration from more recent action films (The film straight up references "John Wick", because if they didn't do it, we would have ourselves) by integrating well choreographed stunwork that feels like a barbaric dance of sorts, yet never appears overly planned out (Meaning that people will use anything and everything in a life or death situation, right down to many casual mistakes and nobody coming out unscathed). The film also makes great use of the crowded, claustrophobic-like setting, particularly in a sequence where Monkey Man attempts to flee into the city, only to run into a brothel and is out of nowhere attacked by the axe-weilding owner, resulting in yet another violent action scene. The film's disorienting camera work might not work for all (Apparently the filmmakers had to rely on whatever they could to shoot many of these sequences, right down to camera phones), but I feel it cleverly showcases how chaotic this world is, where a fight could just break out randomly at any moment and you're left unsure what to do next.

Dev Patel really commits to the feature in many ways, especially with his he transforms himself into a certifiable, genuinely intense badass, who still for a good chunk of the runtime, gets his ass thoroughly kicked all over. The character is making up his plan as he goes along, proving to be smart enough to act quick on his feet, yet repeatedly has to compensate for mistakes. This makes for more suspense, extra depth to the performance, and even a little humor (Such as a hilarious bit where he attempts to leap out a window, only for himself to bounce right off it because realistically, windows don't break that easily). There are some supporting roles, where the performances of the actors (Along with brief moments where the screenplay allows them to show that there's more to them than what first appears) turn them into something that you take home with you after the film ends. This includes Pitobash (as "Alphonso", a lower rank member of the club, who is literally looked down on by the others and becomes a strange ally to Monkey Man), the beautiful Sobhita Dhulipala (as "Sita", one of the prostitutes, who has come to terms with her current situation), Vipin Sharma (as "Alpha", a member of a Transgender community that's been ostracized by the elites), Zakir Hussain (an unnamed drum player in the Transgender community that initiates the obligatory cool training montage), and a suitably sleazy Sharlo Copley. Our villains are all equally detestable and you just can't wait to see their eventual comeuppances, such as Ashwini Kalsekar (Representing corporate, sexually exploitative villainy), Sikander Kher (Representing police corruption), and a frighteningly calm Makarand Despande (Representing the mix of both political and religious corruption taken to the most dangerous degree imaginable). It's also cool to see some Trans representation, which in a lesser film (With a white lead), would have had them simply serve as a group to be saved, rather than actually contributing during the climax (In some ways even more than the lead does).

"Monkey Man" is immensely entertaining, creatively violent, and even surprisingly socially important, and you can truly see how Dev Patel poured his heart into making it into a reality. From the stylishly messy fight scenes to the strong sense of character, it has much more to say than "Guy in Monkey mask punches real hard". I mean, it does that too (And it's awesome!), but it's a lot more intelligent than just that. It feels like a culturally ignited, future cult classic that I'm sure will resonate with a wider audience in years to come. And it keeps me in anticipation as to what Dev Patel might do next. Sequel? Or maybe something even better? The fact that I'm genuinely curious is proof that he gave us something special here. 4 Stars. Rated R For Gruesomely Bloody Violence, Strong Adult Content, And Some Manic Monkey Business.

Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: Godzilla is about to introduce the Scar King to the pile driver! OH! And here comes Kong with the chair!

See? Now this is one of those "It is what it is" sort of movies that makes sense. We've all already heard it and knew you were going to say it. It's no "Godzilla Minus One". Blah Blah Blah. Look, I saw a statement from a random YouTube comment that said it best. If "Godzilla Minus One" is the "Dark Knight" of giant monster movies, then "Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire" is the "Batman Forever" of them. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. In fact, some might prefer it that way.

The fifth entry in the growing "MonsterVerse" and following the events of "Godzilla vs. Kong", "Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire" opens with the current world order, with the anti-heroic, giant atomic-breathing lizard "Godzilla", serving as a protector of the planet, keeping the other "Titans" like him in line and keeping humanity always on their toes (Since he's basically God now, so all they have to do is make sure they stay out his way and don't piss him off). On the other side of things, giant ape/protector of the people "Kong", remains in the "Hollow Earth" (The world beneath our own, where all kinds of strange, giant man-eating creatures reside), where he of course has begun to get lonely since he is seemingly the last of his kind. Meanwhile, "Dr. Ilene Andrews" (Rebecca Hall), a scientist of "Monarch" (The organization that keeps track of all the Titans), learns that her adopted daughter, "Jia" (Kaylee Hottle), has been having strange visions, which coincide with Godzilla deciding it's time to power up for some kind of cataclysmic threat that might be looming over the horizon.

Learning that what Jia is sensing might be a distress call of sorts, Ilene and Jia, along with Kong's weird doctor "Trapper" (Dan Stevens), kooky conspiracy theorist "Bernie Hayes" (Brian Tyree Henry), and their antagonistic pilot, "Mikael" (Alex Ferns), chart a course into the Hollow Earth to search for it. The team discovers more of the tribal people that Jia came from and learns of the mysterious origins of the war between the various Titans. Kong continues his own adventures, where he comes across more apes like him, such as the slightly smaller chimp "Suko", who leads him to an even larger group of giant apes. However, these apes are under the command of the evil "Scar King", who has his own icy Godzilla, "Shimo", under his control and is planning to return to the surface world once again to conquer everything. When it becomes apparent that all of what's about to happen has been prophesied and it's obvious that Kong can't handle Scar King and his forces all on his own, it seems that the big hairy ape and Godzilla will have no choice but to put aside their differences for the greater good to save the world.

Directed by the returning Adam Wingard ("Godzilla vs. Kong", "You're Next", "The Guest"), with a screenplay by the also returning Terry Rossio (The "Pirates of the Caribbean" films), along with Wingard's occasional collaborators Simon Barrett and Jeremy Slater, "Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire" lets you know right off the bat what you're getting into and lets you decide if you're willing to go along with its Saturday morning cartoon plot. If you're about to let a movie where a big ass monkey with a robot hand partners up with a dinosaur to fight another, eviler ape (Who straight up acts like a serial killer) and his own ice covered dinosaur ruin your day, then you must not be particularly fun to be around. These MonsterVerse films have become the closest thing we can imagine to live-action Anime in the sense that you get lots of heavy exposition, plenty of "Just go with it" moments, incomprehensible visuals that lack real logic and simply go by their own, and making sure whatever you're about to see on the screen is as freaking awesome as possible. This movie delivers on all that, and to the point where it almost would be too much if not for the fact that you're basically asking them to keep upping the ante (Don't wanna peak early, am I right?). The excessive CGI is full of life, and unlike say the "Jurassic World" films, which eventually dropped the ball on making the stupid actually fun, this lives and breathes the cheesy fantasies we all had as kids, where we just smacked our action figures together. It's more or less what we wished those old Kaiju films (Where it always had a guy in a rubbery costume) looked like. I can't say it looks real, but it's not really supposed to. It's meant to be engaging and this movie is certainly that. (It's almost two hours and it just breezes by)

As usual, the human stuff is the weakest link and you can generally take it or leave it (Something "Godzilla Minus One" surprisingly did well was making the human story compelling). With that said, you at least get capable performers to make it digestible, even when the dialogue is, well, like something you'd see in a cheesy anime or a cartoon. Rebecca Hall and the deaf Kaylee Hottle are still wonderful together, playing the film legit straight and have a heartwarming bond that works, mostly because they make it work. Brian Tyree Henry and a delightful Dan Stevens (Wearing a baffling Hawaiian shirt throughout the entire runtime) make for some good comic relief, Alex Ferns, in a precipitately short role, does make good use of the smarmy, jerkass part, while the whole thing with the ancient tribe (While it was set up in previous movies) is just a plot device for some backstory. To the film's credit, it remembers that the monsters are the stars and there are lots of long sequences where there's no dialogue, leaving us to watch these larger than life characters in their own environment. It leaves it up to the audience to understand what's going on and it's not just fun to watch, they're actually all pretty memorable characters on their own. Kong is an easy to root for hero, while Godzilla continues to be such an endearing dick, who is still plenty badass and clearly loves his title as the King of the Monsters. Suko ends up being more than just a cute mini-Kong, who proves to be kind of sneaky and scrappy, while Scar King makes for a perfectly ruthless, almost cartoonishly evil piece of work.

"Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire" isn't the best from the MonsterVerse, and these films don't seem to have any intention of getting less silly anytime soon. However, as far as what you want from your city destroying popcorn blockbusters, where big monsters are just beating the crap out of each other, this has it all. Wingard feels like a kid just playing with his toys and I mean that in the best way possible. Good natured, wildly bonkers entertainment that the whole family can enjoy. Nothing deep or meaningful, yet you don't always need that. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Monstrous Mayhem, Gargantuan Godzillas, Killer Kongs, And Soooooo Much Collateral Damage. I Mean, The Casualties For These Movies Have Gotta Be Through The Roof.

Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey by James Eagan ★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: Bear suits are funny.....and Bears as well.

I get it. This truly is one of those "It is what it is" kind of movies, but come on! We shouldn't be giving this a free pass. Crap is still crap, even if it's intentionally designed to be. It's just slightly more polished this time. An improvement for sure, but that ain't saying much. Be realistic!

Set some time after the first film, "Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey" follows "Chris Robin" (Scott Chambers, replacing Nikolai Leon), after escaping the clutches of his former silly old bear friend turned bloodthirsty serial killer, "Winnie-the-Pooh" (Ryan Olivia) and "Piglet" (Eddy MacKenzie). Now Chris has become a controversial figure in his hometown, with some thinking the murders from the last film were his doing, some believing his story and declaring war on the "Hundred Acre Wood" to find Pooh for themselves, and now there was an apparent movie (Implied to be the first film) that only cemented the entire situation into becoming a total joke. While Chris wants to move on and find happiness, Pooh and Piglet reunite with the maliciously Machiavelian "Owl" (Marcus Massey) and the especially violent (And misogynistic) "Tigger" (Lewis Santer), with a scheme to lay siege to the human society, while also getting their revenge on Chris for abandoning them. When the body count starts to rise, Chris must face his former friends, while also trying to figure out the larger mystery as to why they came into existence in the first place.

Directed by the returning Rhys Frake-Waterfield (Known for all kinds of cheaply made horror garbage, like something called "Firenado"), with a screenplay from Matt Leslie, "Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey 2" is vastly superior to the original, simply because it genuinely for the most part looks like an actual movie, with better practical effects, a bigger budget, and some more attempts at making something clever with its admittedly distasteful premise. If anything, this is closer to what I'm sure many of us imagined the first film should have been. That doesn't stop it from being the bottom of the barrel horror slop that the best in the genre has moved away from (The whole AI debacle aside, "Late Night with the Devil" made good use with less and created something far stronger because of it). At its core, this is just another slasher, which just ups the kills, the gore, and the offensiveness, but really, I can't be the only one who never saw the appeal of overlooking basic quality issues simply because some random person gets gutted in a certain way, especially when it really isn't all that creative (The "Evil Dead" franchise showed you can do both). Plus, the luxurious sight a grotesque looking Winnie-the-Pooh ripping a girl's head off and hitting it like a baseball so hard that it splatters all over the place loses its impact when the film is so slowly paced and too damn long for its thinly written story to compensate. No movie with this title should be an hour and forty minutes. Barely an hour maybe, or at least an hour and ten. While the film sprinkles in some random kills, it gets repetitive and seems like padding in a movie that seems to want to attempt to have a story. Again though, none of that is what its target audience wants to see, so who is this even for?

Scott Chambers, who also serves as a producer, is a fairly unremarkable lead, even if he at least seems to be trying (I actually kind of remember the guy from the last film leaving more of an impact), while Tallulah Evans (as "Lexy", Chris' longtime friend/love interest) is only here to serve the role of her character description (Being the "longtime friend/love interest"). The film's most (And really, only) recognizable face is character actor, Simon Callow (as "Cavendish", a mysterious man with a possible connection to how Pooh and his friends came to be), who gets stuck with a massive exposition dump, but does sell a preposterous backstory simply because the guy is clearly a professional and obviously serves as the best actor in the movie. Pooh, Piglet, Tigger, and Owl look much better than our childhood icons turned villains did in the last film, with much more money being put into the makeup effects, though you can still see a little bit of the fakeness when they have to move a lot. They're not bad though, even if the film still doesn't do much with the idea of turning these beloved characters into slashers. Pooh is just a lumbering lug, while Piglet does nothing, and Tigger serves as little more than a "Freddy Krueger" ripoff with a tail. Owl (Looking like a live action version of the original Vulture design from the Spider-Man comics) on the other hand serves as easily the best of the group, being the only one with a sense of menace and intrigue, thanks to Marcus Massey clearly having a lot of fun and the film seemingly trying to do something unique with the character (He appears to be the mastermind, coming across as a threat that's more than simply jumpscares or bloodsplatters).

While I do appreciate how Rhys Frake-Waterfield has embraced his new Ed Wood-esque status as a giddy connoisseur of bad filmmaking, "Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey 2" just feels like a cruddy, trashy, cheap horror flick, which I suppose could be taken as a compliment compared to the first. The filmmakers use the budget well for what it is, avoiding some of the blatant sexism of the first film (I mean, at least every victim isn't just a hot girl this time. So there's that) and has some, shall we say unique, ideas for what's to come. Whether we want it or not. As it is, I still wouldn't call it a successful blood soaked slasher, as it's too dull, takes much time to get going, and doesn't many characters to attach yourself too due to the film's lacks of humor or personality. However, I can still give credit where it's due and the fact that this might not make my top ten worst of the year list by this year's end, I'd say that's an accomplishment right there. Can't say it's good though, and not sure I can take anyone seriously who does. 1 1/2 Stars. Not Rated, Though Clearly It's Rated R For Goriness All Around, Tigger's Love Of Assaulting Women Both Physically And Verbally, And That One Morbius Joke, Which To My Shame, I Chuckled At.

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire by James Eagan ★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Garraka prepares for his heavy metal cover of "Let It Go".

"Ghostbusters" is a fascinating franchise. Simply because it was never meant to be a franchise. It was just a silly little comedy from Dan Aykroyd and the late Harold Ramis, about a bunch of doofuses busting ghosts, while Bill Murray delivers some iconic, incredibly quotable one-liners. Now we're onto the fourth film (Chronologically at least), and they've basically just become accustomed to as much nerdy fanservice as possible. 2021's "Ghostbusters: Afterlife" was a success, especially with said fans, who as we all remember didn't respond well to Paul Feig's woman-led 2016 attempt at a reboot (And that's putting it lightly). By this point, I feel like you have to know what you're getting into and decide if you're going to accept that or not.

A couple years after the first movie, "Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire" follows the descendants of "Egon Spengler" (Previously played by Harold Ramis), as they've returned to the family business of catching ghosts in New York. The precocious, and probably too smart for her own good, "Phoebe" (Mckenna Grace), her brother "Trevor" (Finn Wolfhard), along with their mother "Callie" (Carrie Coon), and her boyfriend "Gary Grooberson" (Paul Rudd), try to live up to the family name, though catch the ire of "Mayor Walter Peck" (William Atherton), who is still dickless and wants to see the Ghostbusters shut down for good. After Peck admittedly makes the solid point that maybe it's not exactly ethical for a fifteen year old girl to be handling a Proton Pack, Phoebe gets benched from the team. Luckily for Phoebe, she forms a surprise friendship with a ghost girl, "Melody" (Emily Alyn Lind), to take her mind off things.

Meanwhile, while former Ghostbuster, turned businessman, "Winston Zeddemore" (Ernie Hudson), arranges for a new containment facility to trap the ghosts (Since the old firehouse is kind of falling apart), the retired "Ray Stanz" (Dan Aykroyd) is sold a strange looking orb from "Nadeem Razmaadi" (Kumail Nanjiani), who is just trying to make a quick buck on some old ancient family artifacts. It turns out that the orb contains a violent, purely evil entity known as "Garraka", who has the power to unleash a deadly force that turns fear itself into a weapon, causing anyone unlucky enough to cross his bath to literally freeze to death (While also basically having the potential to cause a second Ice Age). Despite being pushed to the side, Phoebe is determined to prove herself and get to the bottom of the mystery surrounding Garraka, who is already putting a plan in motion to bring about the apocalypse.

Directed by Gil Kenan ("Monster House", "City of Ember", and co-writer of the last film), who co-wrote the film with the last film's director Jason Reitman ("Juno", "Tully"), "Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire" is dedicated in memory of the original film's director/Jason's father, Ivan Reitman, and the movie is certainly a labor of reverence. It's just, can't you guys try to do anything different? What we get is something that's admittedly entertaining, especially for the kids, but feels like junk food in the end, without much real substance. Even more than the last film, this one really adheres to nostalgia, with tons of callbacks, references, and the need to bring back any familiar face it can simply to get a rise out of its audience. It actually does start off strong, introducing some fresh ideas, along with obvious inspiration from the old animated series "The Real Ghostbusters" (Which was known for how much more creative it was than it needed to be). However, the messy plotline diverges too often and tries to incorporate way too much for its own good. The film literally just bites off more than it can chew, getting by on a few good laughs, some damn impressive effects, and the undeniable charm of its actors.

Mckenna Grace is as usual, a wonderfully lovable young actress, while Finn Wolfhard, who gets less to do sadly, still has enough perfect delivery to compensate. I also wanna know if I'm the only one who got the idea that the subplot involving Grace and Emily Alyn Lind's characters was basically supposed to be a "coming out" situation. At least from my perspective, that looked like a little more than just "Good Friends". Carrie Coon and an especially great Paul Rudd have delightful chemistry together, while we also get some returning faces, with Logan Kim (as "Podcast", who is still obsessed with ghosts, yet hit puberty hard between films) and Celeste O'Connor (as "Lucky", the fourth member of the younger Ghostbusters, who I swear this movies have no idea what to do with). There's also another new addition with James Acaster (as "Lars", who works on the Ghostbusters technical team), and really adds nothing to the group except another body to fill in space, along with an amusing brief appearance from Patton Oswalt (as "Hubert Wartzki", a friend of Ray, who provides some comedic exposition). There's some good work with the legacy characters, which include Ernie Hudson (Who I do love getting more important roles in these movies now considering how the second movie seemed to treat him as the odd man out), a genuinely heartfelt Dan Aykroyd (There are a couple sweet moments between him and Hudson) and William Atherton (Who is a lot of fun, despite a limited appearance), while the film never does anything with Annie Potts (as "Janine Melnitz", the former secretary to the Ghostbusters), who gets much less to work with compared to the last movie and Bill Murray (as "Peter Venkman", the old team's wisecracker), whose addition is so late to the party that it almost feels like a cameo. The funniest scene-stealer ends up being Kumail Nanjiani, who makes his entirely silly plotline work simply by being an endearing goofball, with some great one-liners. The ghosts themselves are pretty cool, though Garraka makes for a menacing enough though forgettable villain. I do appreciate how the film doesn't always rely on CGI for certain effects, such as the appearance of "Slimer" (Who remains practical).

With too many characters and storylines competing for time, "Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire" is a sloppy entry in the franchise, and only shows that the filmmakers have little intention from moving on from what came before it. As it is, the heart is still there, with some humor and even some chills to delight fans of all ages. It's a perfectly suitable diversion, even if it is just a colder shell of what the original film was. The best thing I can say about it is that busting this time feels pleasant, yet just doesn't quite give you that sense of joy that you once experienced before. 3 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Scary Moments, Marshmallow Massacres, Insidious Icing, And Slimer Splooge.

Immaculate by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Immaculate-Syndey-Sweeney-012524-ec425c41fe8d424d8d2bd527100b60fc.jpg

Image: Sydney Sweeney, repenting for "Madame Web."

It's time the internet realized that Sydney Sweeney is more than just an overwhelmingly hot actress that has us all thirsting for on Twitter. She's a damn good actress, with loads of potential. It's something that makes this movie such a good showcase for that talent, which almost entirely rests on her shoulders. And yeah, she's overwhelmingly hot too. I say that respectfully. Again!

"Immaculate" follows a young nun, "Cecilia" (Sydney Sweeney), who is invited to become part of an exclusive convent in Italy, which tends to sickly nuns before their deaths. Cecilia is very much welcomed by "Father Sal Tedeschi" (Álvaro Morte) and even makes friends with a more cynical nun, "Gwen" (Benedetta Porcaroli), but starts to notice that there just might be something off about this convent. Suddenly, Cecilia discovers that she's pregnant, despite being a virgin. This prompts the convent superiors to believe that this is a miracle and that Cecilia is a new Virgin Mary. As Cecilia's pregnancy progresses, things get weirder and she soon learns that the convent has no plans of her ever leaving, especially now that they believe that she's about to give birth to their lord and savior, regardless of what deranged methods they use to make sure that happens.

Directed by first-timer Michael Mohan, with a screenplay by Andrew Lobel (His first feature length screenplay), "Immaculate" doesn't remotely change the game on horror and can't seem to avoid a few typical pratfalls, yet it does well with the still usable ingredients and makes for a solidly creepy (And even somewhat unhinged) bit of terror. The filmmakers are certainly having a lot of fun with the setting, making the convent go from a place of comfort and solace to a nightmarish prison, full of absolute madness. There's a damn good amount of uneasiness, so that makes it more unfortunate how often the film stops for a cheap, quick jumpscare, which all end not being remotely scary (Oh no somebody randomly popped up from behind with loud music! Scary!). The film gets better use out of some shocking good use of gore and violence, which is never pretty to look at (A character throws themselves off a roof and lands with a horrifying splat, complete with a pile of red mush for a face. Pretty impressive practical effects really).

The film's whole reason for existing is because of Sydney Sweeney, who serves as one of the film's producers. Having previously auditioned for the film about a decade earlier before the film's screenplay was temporarily shelved up until a couple years ago, Sweeney is very committed to the part and how crazy it gets. It especially shows when the character experiences a brutal, mindbreaking pregnancy, which is anything but beautiful. Her already expressive eyes are particularly something to see when she's both confused and terrified at the same time, which comes to a head with an epic scream that straight up obliterates the theater sound systems. Álvaro Morte is having a lot of fun blurring the line between charming and menacing (Serving as Cecilia's main obstacle), while Benedetta Porcaroli gets the film's few moments of levity with a few good lines. The film's last act is where things take a turn that while not exactly impossible to see coming (At some point you should be able to get an idea of what's going on), yet still doesn't prepare you for how balls to the wall the film just revels in this insanity. It's the definition of something being completely based around something working entirely because of how it's executed. Seeing a nun convent become Arkham Asylum is both hilarious and so bonkers that it actually comes across as a bit scary.

"Immaculate" gets good mileage out of some old tricks, even if it can't seem to help using some dated ones. However, thanks to some elevation from Sydney Sweeney's determined performance, disturbing moments that genuinely leave you unnerved, and the kind of wild derangement that horror movies today rarely even bother trying to go for, it makes for an effective ordeal of pure, sadistic torment. After crap like "Night Swim" and "Imaginary", we really needed this right now. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated R For Gruesomely Violent Images, Perilous Pregnancies, And A Final Scene That I'm Sure Many Will Either Being Laughing Hysterically At Or Will Be Morally Disgusted With. What's Funny Is That In The End, They're Both Kind Of Right.

Late Night with the Devil by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: "I see you....dressed in polka-dot pajamas....throwing explosive polka-dots are people..." "This girl is obviously insane. Commit her!"

Boy this movie's praise took a sudden turn, didn't it? A high Rotten Toamtoes score (100% just a day ago), rave reviews from people who saw it last year at SXSW, and just the novelty of seeing a beloved character actor finally getting his time to shine, only for all the goodwill to immediately get shot down by an admittedly small, yet glaring issue. The use of AI. Three images to be exact, which clock in at a collected total of about fourteen seconds or so over the course of the film. It is quite disappointing that a film with so much attention to the details and aesthetics of the era it's meant to be inhabiting found the need to rely on such an artist alienating process, for likely cheap reasons. People also have good reason to fear how much more normalized (And likely, eventually unnoticeable) it will at some point become in movies, television, and any kind of media. Still, it's not even a minute long, and review bombing, along with boycotting the film (Which is an independently funded project that needed like six or seven production companies to get it released. The opening logos have more screentime than these quick images!), seems harsh and comes across as making it more about how much you're taking a stand for something, rather than actually supporting the efforts of actual hardworking artists. If these brief, though still noticeable few seconds bother you that much, I understand not feeling comfortable watching it, though don't try to make it out like you're performing some sort of noble crusade and anyone who isn't as bothered by it must be shamed for not being as pissed off as you are. It deserves addressing, but doesn't affect anything in the actual film too much. (I mean, I'm pretty sure "Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey" was AI-free, being 100% human made garbage and that deserves no praise) I'd probably go as far as to say we've let worse things slide, like one of last year's best films/the Oscar nominated "The Holdovers", with Alexander Payne facing statutory rape allegations (Along with possible plagiarism too apparently) and yet, it's kind of been brushed off simply because the movie is great (AI bad, but rape is worse). As for this movie itself, it's pretty damn awesome and it's upsetting that the filmmakers allowed such a thing to serve as a controversial distraction from that.

Presented as a found footage recording of a broadcast from a 1970s late-talk show titled, "Night Owls with Jack Delroy", "Late Night with the Devil" follows the titular host, "Jack Delroy" (David Dastmalchian), whose rise to being number one in the ratings has repeatedly been hindered. Declining ratings, controversy surrounding some of Jack's background, and the sudden death of Jack's beloved "Madeleine" (Georgina Haig) have caused Jack to become desperate to save his show. So he arranges for a special live broadcast, which will introduce interesting guests from a questionable psychic, "Christou" (Fayssal Bazzi), a smarmy former magician skeptic and refuter of anything supernatural, "Carmichael" (Ian Bliss), and a parapsychologist, "Dr. June Ross-Mitchell" (Laura Gordon), bringing in a young, disturbed girl, "Lilly" (Ingrid Torelli), who was the sole survivor of a Satanic Cult's mass suicide and claims to be possessed by a demonic force. Everything at first seems normal during the show for Jack, until things slowly start to take an unsettling turn, resulting in a terrifying broadcast that Jack's late-night audience won't soon forget. If they survive it, that is.

Written and directed by Colin and Cameron Cairnes (Known for very small, independently funded films), "Late Night with the Devil" is a very clever, brilliantly constructed, and delightfully twisted piece of work. The brief AI aside, the film is clearly painstakingly crafted, with so much attention to the littlest of details that one normally wouldn't see as a necessity to do. The set and production designs, imitating old 70s variety programs, right down to the colorful costumes, fuzzy audio, and the incredibly saturated yellows that damn near blind you with how much it pops off the screen. It even utilizes the found footage look in a way that one should, with the footage actually looking like someone stumbled upon it, with how often the film will glitch or fizzle out (Leaving it open to interpretation if it's just really old footage, or possibly some other dark force causing it). It genuinely feels like you're watching an old recording, complete with cut out commercial breaks, along with some fictional behind the scenes footage to show what was going on once the lights go down and the real feelings of our characters come out. It's a unique, brilliantly crafted way of showing showing some age old concepts about how the celebrities (Particularly talk show hosts) really are, along with what kinds of lines one will cross for the one thing everyone in the business wants. Success. It's a lot of style, though with plenty of substance at the center.

The film's major selling point is David Dastmalchian, who has been working for years in small parts (Particularly his especially memorable part in "The Dark Knight") that gradually grew over time. In more ways than one, this is his show and his moment in the spotlight. Dastmalchian revels in it, with a strong, charismatic screen presence, going back and forth between being naively misguided to even a little manipulative and morally questionable. You just love seeing him work, and prove he's got the acting chops to play more than just a bit part. Despite this being Dastmalchian's vehicle, others in the cast do genuinely stand out, from Laura Gordon, a suitably smarmy Ian Bliss, Rhys Auteri (as "Gus", Jack's on-show sidekick, who is wary of the possible devilry on display), and an absolutely outstandingly complex Ingrid Torelli (Who plays up this sweet, innocent young girl act and still consistently finds a way to make her full blown "Exorcist"-like transformation believable). The film is funny as Hell in a macabre sort of way, and features some glorious uses of practical effects (And even some puppetry), which feel only natural within the aesthetic that the filmmakers are going for. Some of the more modern effects (Like some brief CGI) show the budget constraints, but are too quick to distract too much, though the brief AI artwork does standout for the couple of seconds they're onscreen. Again, for a film that does such a spectacular job with real, handmade effort, using such a cheap, morally (And maybe even legally) debatable method for the smallest of things kind of goes against the very idea.

"Late Night with the Devil" is smart, hilarious, visually brilliant, and surprisingly effective as a different kind of horror flick. It's all about the constant sense of dread that you feel as you wait for the sh*t to go down, and what's gonna be the thing to cause it. That's where the real fun comes from. It's immersive in execution and it's impossible to look away from, especially once we reach the shocking finale (Which is especially something because you know it's coming and yet, you're still not prepared for it). It's actually one of the best movies so far this year, even if the more recent controversy serves as a blemish that's difficult for some to ignore. Maybe the filmmakers will wise up and remove it by the time we get a digital/home release, but we'll have to wait and see. 4 Stars. Rated R For Scary And Disturbing Images, Along With Some Demented Devilry.

Love Lies Bleeding by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: "Mama warned me about women like you! I was hoping she was right!"

You know a movie is good when the most batsh*t thing will happen out of nowhere and the audience together at once lets out the loudest "YEEEEEEESSSSSS!" you've ever heard.

Taking place in 1989, "Love Lies Bleeding" follows a reclusive, cynical small town gym owner, "Lou" (Kristen Stewart), who has become estranged from her psychopathic, gangster father, "Lou Sr." (Ed Harris), and only sticks around for the sake of her sister, "Beth" (Jena Malone), the constant subject of abuse for her sleazy husband, "J.J." (Dave Franco). A rising bodybuilder, "Jackie" (Katy O'Brian), comes into town, looking for a job and a place to stay while she trains for an upcoming competition in Las Vegas, with Lou immediately taking a shine to her. Lou and Jackie become a couple, though after J.J. beats Beth to the point she's left in a coma, the couple find themselves stuck in a violent situation that can only escalate. Also not helping matters is Jackie's addiction to steroids, which continues to cause her body to grow, and Lou's messed up family drama on the verge of sending everything spiraling off a cliff.

Directed by Rose Glass ("Saint Maud"), who co-wrote the screenplay with Weronika Tofilska, "Love Lies Bleeding" starts off as the kind of 80s or 90s erotic thriller that you always saw the box cover for at the local Blockbuster, yet never saw until that one really attractive hippie girl in your college film class told you how it's her favorite movie ever (And then you of course lied about loving it too). The film is a special, rather sadistic kind of insane, though slowly eases you into it until by the end, you'll fully accepting of whatever baffling images you're about to see. And damn! It's pretty awesome. Glass finds that right balance between the dark and suspenseful, but also the more sensationalist and campy, finding ways to shock the audience with its out of nowhere violence, along with a pitch black sense of humor. The movie is actually really funny in a macabre sort of way, and this is even before the film just progressively starts to mess with your mind to the point you don't know what the Hell you're seeing. The intentional trashiness behind the film doesn't take away from how crisp and engrossing the cinematography is, with imagery that always has a different meaning the second time the film showcases it to you.

Kristen Stewart, who by this point doesn't remotely need to prove herself to those online dude-bros who for some reason haven't let her time in the "Twilight" series go (She should have won that Oscar for "Spencer"!), is outstanding. Stewart's occasional deadpan delivery really adds something to this character, both humorously and dramatically with how held back she's supposed to be. Katy O'Brian (Who you might remember from things like "The Mandalorian", "Black Lightning", and "Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania") is a revelation, proving to have such amazing screen presence and bold acting chops in a part that's every bit vulnerable and strong. Their chemistry together is the film's biggest highlight and how well these two apparent opposites connect. (It's also quite nice to have a movie embrace the sexiness of feminine muscles. What? Who doesn't want to be broken in half by a hot buff woman? You know you're into that!) Jena Malone plays a much more frail part than I usually expect from her (Which is interesting because I'm used to seeing her as the "badass"), while Anna Baryshnikov (as "Daisy", a lesbian stalker, who just won't leave Lou alone) is hilariously creepy. Dave Franco (Sporting a Billy Ray Cyrus mustache/mullet combo) is a perfectly despicable scumbag, while Ed Harris (Sporting a long, balding hairline that I swear is going to become legendary) is a twisted, crazy piece of villainous work (And he eats a bug at some point. No clue why he did that, but it was great!)

I can definitely see "Love Lies Bleeding" being too crazy for some, while others will find it to be the right amount of bonkers. It's a damn good, edge of your seat thriller that finds creatively outrageous ways to catch its audience off guard and is sure to become a cult classic, but for good reason. It's kooky, erotic, shady, trippy, funny, and so much fun. It's like a fake movie that somehow became real. 4 Stars. Rated R For Some Quite A Bit Of Nudity, Jaw Dropping Violence, Pulsating Veins And Biceps, And Epic Roid Rage.

The American Society of Magical Negroes by James Eagan ★ out of ★★★★★

Image: When you award yourself for making a political point that everyone else already made after the fact.

Guys, we didn't need this right now. From the usual, mostly white and all male annoyances online complaining about "Wokeness" in media, along with such things finding their way into modern politics and being used as talking points for presidential wannabes, a movie like this being bad is not in any way helping. And then it being THIS bad just goes and pisses everybody off. In a way, I guess it kind of succeeded in bringing everyone together. Just looking for positives here.

"The American Society of Magical Negroes" (Based on the concept of the "Magical Negro", in which a black person exists as a pilot device to further along a white person's journey), follows a young African American artist, "Aren" (Justice Smith), who meets "Roger" (David Alan Grier), who introduces him to a world behind our own. There turns out to be a secret society of magical black people, who use their abilities to inject themselves into the lives of white people to make them comfortable with their own lives. When they do so, their magic grows and the pacification of white people means that black people don't have to be afraid of well, the usual stuff, like being accused for crimes, getting killed by police, and the many challenges that African Americans have had to face. Aren's first client is a self-absorbed tech-bro, "Jason" (Drew Tarver), who works at some kind of modern tech company, with Aren's mission being to find out what will make Jason happy with his already pretty privileged life. Aren also happens to hit it off with Jason's co-worker, "Lizzie" (An-Li Bogan), who really seems to like him back. However, when Jason gets the idea that Aren is trying to set him up with Lizzie, that proceeds to complicate Aren's already rather convoluted mission. If Aren fails, it could result in the entire society losing their magic, and they will have to erase his memory to preserve their power, along with protecting the non-magical black people. Ya get all that?

Written and directed by first timer, Kobi Libii, "The American Society of Magical Negroes" feels like the kind of movie that Jeffrey Wright's character in "American Fiction" would have hated. This movie already ruffled some feathers, with the trailer on YouTube getting a massive amount of dislikes and downvotes from easily offended white people, throwing out the usual buzzwords that gets those real snowflakes flaking. Granted, the film is terrible, but just for entirely different reasons. The film's premise is great, and is based around a trope that still to this very day finds its way into movies and television. Black guy who is best friends with a white guy, but has no real life outside of participating in the white guy's dilemmas and making sure he achieves what he wants. I honestly think some of us are just so used to this that filmmakers just don't think about it anymore. (To them, black people just do that, I guess) The first twenty minutes or so has some fun with the concept, detailing how this magical world works, complete with a few amusing gags (Such as a invisible meter that measures white people tears, or rehearsed life-affirming metaphors that obviously revolve around penis sizes), along with satire, while obviously on the nose, that is certainly relevant.

The problems arise when you realize there is both too much detail to the concept, yet not enough at the same time, especially when the film's novelty wears off after those first twenty minutes and just becomes a generic romantic comedy. Even then though, that could be fine, if not a little disappointing, but the film keeps trying to do too much and loses sight of its own message. It's to the point where the quirky, whimsy doesn't gel with the real life consequences, and boy does it not do any favors for racial politics. The world doesn't make enough sense to fill in many, many plot holes, which normally could be overlooked in a satire if it was consistent. The magical society itself are actually kind of the main antagonists of the movie, yet I don't know if the movie itself realizes it. They're portrayed as goofy and witty, despite the fact that they're more focused on appeasement, rather than actually confronting the racial divide (In a way, they're actually prolonging it). Meanwhile, all of the white characters are generally antagonistic, oblivious, or are just plain stupid, which I'm all for because, well, you can't exactly offend the offenser. However, the film doesn't resolve anything, nor does it have anything to say about it. It's all too safe and watered down, and most baffling of all, it seems that the Libii thinks he's been hard-hitting. Literally every punch is pulled.

Justice Smith and An-Li Bogan both deserve so much better because while the romance serves as one of the catalysts for why the film is such a mess, they're genuinely likable and cute together. Their charm alone is trying its best to salvage this predictable tale, even when the screenplay constantly fails them. David Alan Grier is fine, but again, much like the titular society, I don't think the film exactly knows what it's trying to do with him. He comes across as warm and fuzzy, but there are some messed up implications here that the film doesn't seem to want to address despite the fact that they were the ones that unintentionally brought them up in the first place. The same goes for Nicole Byer (as the head of the Magical Society, who chooses to float above her subjects at all times). A lot of the white characters are pretty well cast, finding the most cartoonishly Caucasians out there, with Rupert Friend (as the Mark Zuckerberg/Elon Musk-like head of the tech company) being especially amusing. There are some very light chuckles here and there, though it's not exactly as insightful as the film seems to think it is. That's actually where the film's greatest, most aggravating problem comes from. It seems to think it's breaking down walls, when in reality, it's just repeatedly bashing its own inflated ego against it, only injuring itself and forcing us to watch.

Towards the end, "The American Society of Magical Negroes" just goes downhill in brutal fashion. The film leads to a big, showstopping speech that doesn't hit the way the film intends it to. It basically revolves around the idea of African Americans feeling they need to play things safe around white people in hopes of not offending them or "making them feeling bad", even if it's at the expense of themselves as people, which is also complete with the usual white dude defenses ("I'm the most not racist person out there!") and even addresses how in some cases, this has led to the deaths of many African Americans (And yes, even in today's America). However, the way the film goes about it is so moronic, tone deaf, and clumsily cobbled together, that it ruins any good will the film may have had at first. You see, I agree (As should everyone) with everything that's being said, but when it's delivered in such a stupid way, that's just borderline offensive, especially when the film decides NOT to resolve anything once it's all said and done. Toss in one last second little sight gag that will leave you in a more sour mood (You're not cute, movie!), and you get one of the most depressingly bad movies of the year. We got some pretty serious stuff going on lately and something that only the white liberals will love isn't something we need right now! 1 Star. Rated PG-13 For Adult-Ish Content, Black Magic (Sorry, I Had To), And Way More Dick Fondling Than I Expected.

Arthur the King by James Eagan ★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: "Alright! I guess I have to be the one to ask it..." "No Mark, we're not eating the dog!"

The moment I walked into the theater, seeing that perfectly average Rotten Tomatoes score, and having sat through the already perfectly mediocre trailer dozens of times already, I just knew this was going to be a 2 1/2 Star rated movie. "Mid", as the kids say. At least the dog didn't have a voice-over narration. You just know if it had come out like five or six years ago, it would have.

Inspired by true events and based on the book, "Arthur - The Dog Who Crossed the Jungle to Find a Home" by Mikael Lindnord (The real inspiration for the story), "Arthur the King" opens with "Michael Light" (Mark Wahlberg), captain of an "Adventure Racing" team, losing his mojo after taking some time off after a humiliating defeat. Now married to one of his old team members, "Helena" (Juliet Rylance), but still wants one final shot to prove himself. After gathering a new team, consisting of the social media obsessed "Leo" (Simu Liu), the rock climbing "Olivia" (Nathalie Emmanuel), and their navigator, "Chik" (Ali Suliman), Michael readies to take part in a huge race, across mountains and forests under extreme conditions. Early on, Michael meets an abused, but strong stray dog, who to everyone's shock, manages to follow the team despite the hardships. Naming the dog, "Arthur the King", he joins them on their journey, bringing the team to the realization that there are things much more important than victory.

Directed by Simon Cellan Jones ("The Family Plan", along with TV work), with a screenplay by Michael Brandt ("Wanted", "Chicago Fire", along with its spin-offs), "Arthur the King" is one of those nice enough, but not too compelling rainy day movies. It looks fine, has some okay enough performances, with safe dialogue, and plays things as safe as possible, while wasting little time tugging at the heart strings when it comes to the film's titular little pooch. Really, the only major frustration to the film is that there's too much focus on the human story in the first act, which is as bland and by the book as any sports drama can be. Once all the clichéd setup is out of the way (And the dog himself gets the spotlight he deserves), then the film is elevated just enough to make for something that I can see appealing to a certain audience (An older, less risk-taking one), though never once goes above that.

Mark Wahlberg is solid enough, even if he's playing the same character he's already played a dozen times before (Which is just Mark Wahlberg by this point). Simu Liu gets to inject some humor, while Nathalie Emmanuel is charming (And quite cute, even when her natural accent slips out). I feel that Ali Suliman's arc just sort of comes and goes, while Juliet Rylance serves as the supportive wife and nothing else. Arthur is the film's real hero, and is all kinds of adorable. Not mention though, genuinely heroic and instantly lovable. It's the easiest job in the world for a filmmaker to get an emotional rise out of its audience when you toss in a doggy like this, and yet, we all still fall for it every time.

"Arthur the King" is exactly what it needs to be. A 2 1/2 Star movie, with generic direction and an even more generic script, but with just enough heart to satisfy. It's at least in the right place and doesn't offend. Some white bread if you will. Like I said, 2 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Dramatic Dramaticness And Doggo Endangerment.

Kung Fu Panda 4 by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: One child and one adult for "Kung Fu Panda 4". Left to Right: Child, Adult.

I don't think enough of us appreciate the fact that something called "Kung Fu Panda", has somehow become a genuinely beloved, acclaimed, immensely successful property. The franchise first began in 2008, opening to a big box office, critical love, and even went on to get an Oscar nomination for Best Animated Feature. Not to mention, it was genuinely respectful of Chinese culture, martial arts, and artistry. Then somehow "Kung Fu Panda 2" came around, was even better, and to everyone's shock, got some emotions out of people. While the third film was slightly less successful, I do mean that only slightly. It's a franchise that has gained a following of all ages, rivaling some of DreamWorks Animation's biggest IPs, such as "Shrek" and the "How to Train Your Dragon" series. Seriously! How can anything with the title "Kung Fu Panda" do that?

Set after the events of the previous film (From 2016), "Kung Fu Panda 4", the pudgy, plushy Panda/Dragon Warrior, "Po" (Jack Black), has enjoyed being the protector of the "Valley of Peace", but his wise, yet always curmudgeonly mentor, "Master Shifu" (Dustin Hoffman), tells him that his role as the Dragon Warrior is coming soon to an end and that Po will have to take yet another step in his neverending journey. Po must become the Valley's Spiritual Leader, meaning he will also have to select someone who he will mentor to be the next Dragon Warrior. However, Po never even considered that he would have to make such a drastic change, and can't make a decision. It also doesn't help that he has to contend with a snarky, thieving fox, "Zhen" (Awkwafina), who breaks into the palace. At the same time, Po learns that the first villain he ever faced, the snow leopard "Tai Lung" (Ian McShane), has seemingly returned, though Zhen suggests otherwise. It turns out that it's merely one of the many forms of the power hungry sorceress, "The Chameleon" (Viola Davis), who is plotting to conquer all of China and beyond. As luck would have it, Zhen knows a lot about the Chameleon, offering to help Po take her down in exchange for avoiding prison time. The duo travel to "Juniper City", where they must face all kinds of challenges and criminals to get to the Chameleon's villainous fortress, while Po's two dads, his paternal Panda one "Li" (Bryan Cranston), and his adoptive goose one, "Mr. Ping" (James Hong), follow them, worrying for Po's safety like the cute (gay?) couple they are.

Directed by Mike Mitchell ("Shrek Forever After", "Trolls", "The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part"), with a screenplay by longtime franchise writers Jonathan Aibel and Glenn Berger, along with Darren Lemke ("Goosebumps"), "Kung Fu Panda 4" really doesn't try to hide that it came into existence due to DreamWorks Animation wanting to get a quick, guranteed success from a property with good clout and a dedicated fandom. That pretty much explains why the usual supporting characters, like the "Furious Five", aren't included this time around. With that said, we still get a perfectly good, laugh out loud funny, and gorgeously animated family feature, that joyfully accomplishes its goal with flying colors. That goal being, well, to be something for the whole family (Kids, parents, grandparents, angst-filled teens, that uncle you only see around the holidays, etc.). Sure, this isn't the best of the four (I'd maybe consider it a bit better than the third one), but these films always have a little extra something. Extra spice, if you will. Something that sets it apart from other films like it, which makes it just a bit more than it needs to be. Of course the lovingly crafted (And more beautiful than ever) visuals draw you in, with more detailed colors, a grand scale, and even a stylized mixing of various forms of other animation (Like a ancient Chinese mural come to life before your very eyes). The eye popping visuals also, just like the other films before it, result in some clever, even occasionally epic, action sequences. These movies have really embraced the art of animation and how you can do things that live-action could never even dream of, and this one is no different. In fact, it contains some of the most unique fights to come out of the entire franchise (Particularly due to the Chameleon's shape-shifting abilities). The score from Hans Zimmer (Who has been with this series from the very beginning) and Steve Mazzaro is the right amount of playful, energized, and oddly soothing.

Jack Black is the face, voice, and heart of this franchise, and he always gives it everything he has. I also appreciate how Po's character has never faltered like other main characters in ongoing franchises have. He's still lovably goofy and even a bit too nice for his own good, yet has remained a capable warrior, who continues to grow with each new step he takes. Awkwafina (Who does seem to be a go-to when it comes to voice work and not always to good effect), does feel like a perfect match with her husky voice, getting to play well with the comedy, along with even some more dramatic parts. (She also really works well with Black, and you can tell they got a good rapport together) Dustin Hoffman (Whose voice is as gravely as ever), gets a much smaller part than before, though is continuously wonderful. The same goes for the returning Bryan Cranston and James Hong, who are hilarious together (Especially when they have to use their comedy relief status to their advantage in a deadly situation). Viola Davis continues the franchise's trend for memorable villains, with a surprisingly frightening one that might be the most evil of them all, yet still gets a funny moment or two to balance the sinisterness (And honestly, she just sounds like she's having the absolute time of her life with this role). Also returning is Ian McShane, who doesn't have a huge role, though it ends up being one that will leave fans pretty satisfied with what little they end up doing with him (There's actually quite a bit of fan service that even I shocked I got as much of a kick out of as I did). There are also some fun supporting parts for Ronny Chieng (as "Captain Fish", a fish captain who literally lives inside of the mouth of a pelican. Who came up with that?), Lori Tan Chinn (as "Granny Boar", a greedy boar who runs a diner where the rabbit staff is constantly abused), a trio of violence obsessed bunny children, and an especially delightful Ke Huy Quan (as "Han", a Sunda pangolin, who runs a den of thieves), who just has a voice made for animation.

"Kung Fu Panda 4" isn't without its predictability, with telegraphed moments that should be easy for the adults to decipher without any issues. However, this franchise has always treated those type of plotlines more as a sense of traditional storytelling, rather than tropes to fall back on. The characters are still strong, with lovely visuals, big laughs (As well as some perfectly timed slapstick), and as always, some very heartfelt messages for the kids to grow up with (Such as the accepting, even embracing of change, especially within oneself). Even after sixteen years, that cuddly Panda continues to go against the odds and delivers exceptionally well, with a heartwarming smile. Again, not bad for, you know, "Kung Fu Panda". 4 Stars. Rated PG For Some Cartoonish Humor, Kung Fu Action, And Panda Portliness.

Imaginary by James Eagan ★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: I'm less of a "Care Bear", and more of a "Don't Give a Crap Bear".

I've started to notice that after a couple years of changing the game, delivering hit after hit, and subverting expectations, the horror genre is starting to go through an unexpected rut this year so far. Even though we had some solid horror flicks like "Out of Darkness" and "Stopmotion" (I'm sure none of you guys saw either of those), there's been little creativity from others, like "Night Swim", coming across as forgettable spooky fare for the least demanding and easily scared. "Imaginary" isn't really anything different.

"Imaginary" follows an artist/creator of a children's book series, "Jessica" (DeWanda Wise), who moves back into her childhood home with her new husband, "Max" (Tom Payne), along with his two daughters, the teenage "Taylor" (Taegen Burns) and the little "Alice" (Pyper Braun). Despite having some trouble adjusting to being a stepmom, Jessica tries to bond with the girls, though Alice discovers a little teddy bear in the house, naming it "Chauncey". Jessica sees how happy Alice is with her imaginary friend, though something seems a little off about the bear. Experiencing flashbacks to her own childhood trauma, Jessica starts to uncover once buried secrets as Chauncey apparently starts to get Alice to perform some questionable tasks (Such as harming herself). Once it becomes apparent that Chauncey is very much alive and very much evil, with his main target being Jessica herself, Jessica is going to have to confront her past if she's going to protect her new family from a rage filled evil.

Directed by Jeff Wadlow ("Truth or Dare", "Fantasy Island", "Kick-Ass 2"), who co-wrote the screenplay with Greg Erb and Jason Oremland ("Playmobil: The Movie"), "Imaginary" seems to have taken the "Five Nights at Freddy's" approach to horror, by playing things as safe as humanly possible to the point that it would almost classify as a kids movie. It's not that the premise couldn't be fun and there are moments of inspiration in there, yet, it's such the dull, uninspired execution that prevents it from feeling like a less creative "Goosebumps". However, it's like how with a comedy, you can forgive a lot of flaws so long as it accomplishes its goal to be funny. The same goes for a horror movie, which is to be scary. This isn't that. Much of it is because of bland direction, a derivative screenplay, and a tone that can't quite figure out what it wants to be until we reach the incredibly campy, but thoroughly absurd last act. The scares, if you would call them that, are incredibly tame. It doesn't even provide many jump scares. It's all very watered down and always feels like something you've already seen done better elsewhere.

DeWanda Wise is committed to the part and carries what she can, while Pyper Braun isn't the best child actor in the world, she's got some good delivery in the cute and creepy factors. Taegen Burns' whole "I'm an angry teenager" routine is very annoying while Tom Payne is completely useless (Vanishing from the film almost entirely fairly early on). Betty Buckley (as "Gloria", the new neighbor, who takes an immense and fairly odd interest in everything that's going on) spends most of the film as an awkwardly placed place for exposition, until she eventually goes down a rather predictable route that makes absolutely no sense. There's also a mini-subplot involving the girls' mentally unwell birth mother, that goes nowhere. Every now and then you get a funny moment, with some being intentional, some being clearly unintentional, and others just being so freaking bonkers that your only reaction would be to burst out laughing. The film also doesn't have to budget for any big time special effects, with some poor CGI and green screen, though the practical effects are fairly cool (Such as an animatronic demon bear form that Chauncey takes). The film just becomes "Coraline" in the last half hour and while it goes on for a little too long, it's a cool idea.

That's the thing about "Imaginary". It's got potential, but isn't executed in a way that comes together. The all over the place tonal shifts (Which even gets fairly serious in places, before getting too goofy for its own good), unsurprising story, and worst of all, no scares, make for a barely teen-centric dark, horror-fantasy that might just bore them more than anything. When the film eventually kind of jumps the shark, the camp nature might be able to satisfy the less demanding, but for others, it comes too late. Not near as imaginative as it should be. 1 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Creepy Images, Childish Chaos, And Bloodthirsty Bears.

Megamind vs. the Doom Syndicate by James Eagan ★ out of ★★★★★

Megamind-vs-Doom-Syndicate-Peacock-1536x864.jpg.webp

Image: The sight of pure disappointment, mixed in with a little terror and your belief in humanity slowly fading.

"Imagine the most horrible, terrifying, evil thing you can possibly think of.....and multiply it....BY SIX!"

Taking place just a couple days after the first film (Despite the original being almost fourteen years old), "Megamind vs. the Doom Syndicate" returns us to "Metro City", which has now embraced the former big blue-headed supervillain turned superhero, "Megamind" (Keith Ferguson, replacing Will Ferrell), along with his fish in a bowl, robotic henchmen, "Ol' Chun" (Josh Brener, replacing David Cross), formerly known as "Minion", but had to change his name due to copyright infringement (Okay, that's actually a pretty funny meta gag, considering the um, other "Minions"). Megamind loves his new popularity, though Chum feels underappreciated and goes out on his own, while reporter/former frequent kidnap victim, "Roxanne Ritchi" (Laura Post, replacing Tina Fey), has become less than enthusiastic about her work (Just like the animators!). This new peace if interrupted by some of Megamind's old villain buddies, the "Doom Syndicate", consisting of a colorful group of one-note characters such as the weather based "Lady Doppler" (Emily Tunon), the French mime "Pierre Pressure" (Scott Adsit), the lava monster-man "Behemoth" (Chris Sullivan), and "Lord Nighty-Knight" (Talon Warburton), who desperately wants to be dark and edgy despite his stupid name. The Doom Syndicate thinks that Megamind's new sense of goodness is all just an act, and in hopes of avoiding more chaos, Megamind pretends to go along with it. Believing that the next phase of Megamind's evil plan is coming, the Doom Syndicate is determined to make villainy happen, leaving Megamind to look for other means to stop them, such as help from a young, social media influencer, "Keiko Morita" (Maya Aoki Tuttle). And before you ask, yeah, they're totally doing this right now.

Directed by Eric Fogel ("Glenn Martin, DDS", "Descendants: Wicked World"), with a screenplay from the first film's original writers, Alan Schoolcraft and Brent Simons, "Megamind vs. the Doom Syndicate" brings us back to the good old days of bad, cash-grab sequels to fan favorite animated movies. The days of the straight to video Disney sequel, except now it looks like DreamWorks Animation has decided to jump on the bandwagon. There are two big differences here though. Firstly, now it's all about that streaming service money, and lastly, not even Disney is doing that anymore. Released exclusively on "Peacock" and serving as a pilot movie for the upcoming series, "Megamind Rules!", the film is nothing more than a slapped together, incredibly forced attempt to get in on the original film's resurgence in popularity. The first film was overshadowed by the "Despicable Me" franchise, yet gained quite a following and for good reason, with it being a funny, even thoughtful look at the superhero genre, along with its various clichés. What makes this sequel more frustrating is that it's basically nothing but clichés. Of course the fans were going to despise this and not just because it wasn't a true, theatrically released, big budget sequel (We got three "Trolls" movies instead of that!). It's just so ugly and lame looking, feeling watered down and pandering to the least demanding kind of young audience (Everyone who saw the original are adults now. They're not gonna have any interest in this!). Sure, we've had television continuations of bigger budget animated films, and from DreamWorks too ("Madagascar", "How to Train Your Dragon", "Kung Fu Panda", etc.), yet this feels extra cheap. The animation has no sense of appeal, looking like a bad video game you would have seen in the late 2000s. Considering how quickly this was announced and tossed out (In a matter of months. Barely even that), I wouldn't be shocked if the animators were forced into an excessive amount of crunch time to finish it. We can work with bad animation and the plot could make for something of amusement, so long as it was funny. Sadly, much of the humor is tired and lacks much energy behind it, ruining any sort of timing that could have made a joke work.

Say what you will about the reliance of celebrity voice actors, but in the original movie, they did leave an impression. Keith Ferguson is a longtime, talented voice actor and impressionist, but aside from sounding nothing like the character, there isn't much of an identity to the performance. Laura Post and especially Josh Brener do at least feel like decent enough substitutes. The new villains are so basic that they don't standout, with the exception of Talon Warburton, son of Patrick Warburton, is actually pretty funny. (He is easily the only new character that I genuinely liked seeing) Everything with Keiko is incredibly annoying, throwing in the whole "feisty kid" trope and mixing it with the TikTok generation in a way that's not only forced, it's also clearly something brought into existence by some old, out of touch board members wondering "What the youth today" like. The movie would normally be something so bland and forgettable, that you just shrug it off and move on with your day (Or even just let your kid watch in the background to keep their attention for a an hour and twenty minutes). The movie's laziness, especially in the last twenty minutes, just gets to you after a while. I know that there isn't much money behind this, yet, you could at least look like you care. Just a little?

"Megamind vs. the Doom Syndicate" is too uninspired to keep the attention of the kids, or the adults. Just a waste of time that mostly only offends because of how little thought has been put into it. It's so close to the bottom of the barrel, though lacks so much heart that really gives it too much credit. (And hey, I do stan Lord Nighty-Knight. He deserves better) Definitely not worth streaming, though you could be like me and, hehe, go on the high seas to watch it (Wink Wink). Come on. You know that's what the real Megamind would endorse. This existing is real villainy right here. 1 Star. It Gets A TV-G Rating, But I Definitely Wouldn't Recommend It For Any Age Group.

Dune: Part Two by James Eagan ★★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: Time to kick some Arrak-Ass!

Denis Villeneuve has had to fight to get this thing to happen, and even then, it's still a shock that we're even here right now. Adapting such a grand novel (Which has been adapted before to, er, mixed results? If you would call David Lynch's version that), in one, let alone two films, seemed very unlikely. No matter how good it was. Then Covid happened, delaying the first film and also in turn, preventing both parts from being filmed back to back like originally planned. Luckily, the first "Dune" was still able to make a profit after being released a year later than expected (And in spite of being released by Warner Bros. on HBO Max at the same time), and even got itself some Oscar nominations, such as Best Picture. The much anticipated second part was on its way, only for the writer and actor strikes to happen, delaying it at the last second just only a bit before its release date. Seriously, no wonder the guy is so worn out. (We're not even gonna get started on how much we failed "Blade Runner 2049")

Based on the second half of the novel by the late Frank Herbert, "Dune: Part Two" opens directly after the events of the first film. The jealous ruler of the Galaxy, "Emperor Shadam IV" (Christopher Walken), arranged for an underhanded scheme to do away with the "Atreides" bloodline in hopes of protecting his own power. "Duke Leto Atreides" (Previously played by Oscar Isaac) is dead, and the desert, spice-filled world of "Arrakis" has fallen back into the greedy hands of the repulsively evil "Baron Vladimir Harkonnen" (Stellan Skarsgård). Now the Duke's son, "Paul" (Timothée Chalamet), along with his pregnant mother, "Lady Jessica" (Rebecca Ferguson), have fled into the desert to live with the oppressed natives, the blue-eyed "Fremen" people. Many of the Fremen, such as tribal leader, "Stilgar" (Javier Bardem), see Paul as their Messiah, having come to liberate their planet due to a prophecy (That has been fed to them from the offworld, witch-like religious group, the "Bene Gesserit"), while others, such as the strong-willed, "Chani" (Zendaya), don't believe in such nonsense.

However, thanks in part to Jessica's manipulations (Whose pregnancy takes a unique turn, where she can hear her unborn baby daughter speaking to her before she's even born), Paul starts to become that mythical figure that's been prophesied, though his capability, bravery, and desire to save Arrakis also leads to Chani falling in love with him. Through a series of attacks, Paul (Going by the name "Muad'Dib"), proceeds to disrupt Spice production on the planet, and since the Baron's barbaric nephew, "Rabban" (Dave Bautista) isn't up the the task of dealing with the situation, he seeks out his other nephew, the much more ruthless and maniacal "Feyd-Rautha" (Austin Butler), to do the job instead. Meanwhile, the Emperor converses with his daughter, "Irulan" (Florence Pugh) and the Reverand Mother of the Bene Gesserit/instigator of this entire situation, "Gauis Helen Mohiam" (Charlotte Rampling), of the consequences of Paul's actions and how they will affect the rest of the Galaxy. As Paul's power and influence grows, he soon realizes that there might not be any going back, with war being just over the horizon.

Directed by Denis Villeneuve ("Prisoners", "Sicario", "Arrival", "Blade Runner 2049", along with the first film), who co-wrote the screenplay with the returning Jon Spaihts ("Prometheus", "Doctor Strange"), "Dune: Part Two" ups the ante in every way, making for a cinematic, big screen epic that's better than the original and deserves to be seen on only in IMAX. This is one of those films where you can truly tell how much hard work went into it, with the blood, sweat, tears, and whatever other moisture came out of the filmmakers, has been put into making it happen. The visuals, the sound design, the production design, costuming, and overall artistry is on a scale so massive that a theatrical screen can barely handle it. It's jarring how brought to life this world is, as if it leapt off the pages of the book, with impeccable effects work, blending together so seamlessly that it's impossible to tell what's practically made or what was created with CGI. A standout sequence, which takes up about a good twenty minutes of the film's runtime at the halfway point, revolves around the Harkonnen home world. It's almost pure white, feeling like you've entered some kind of alternate universe where color has completely vanished (With the occasional shades of black). As stunning as the film's presentation is, it would mean nothing if the story, characters, and themes didn't resonate. It's a timeless tale for sure, though serves as a reminder of one ahead of its time back when it was first written. That makes it something entirely new for today's audience and it doesn't hold back in some of the source material's complexities and even its most controversial of ideas. Sure, some things are left out or changed around (Mostly for time, or simply because it just might not translate on film), but their spirit is there. There's nothing but love on display from Villeneuve and all of the performers.

Timothée Chalamet is able to be his most commanding here, going from what was once a naive hero that was easy to root for, to a much more confident, yet tragic figure. You see his steps towards something much darker and how he might not want to go down this path, everything around him seems to be making it impossible for him to turn away from it. Zendaya takes her character to some new places, serving as an audience surrogate instead of just Paul's love interest/sidekick. She questions things from the outside, coming across as more capable in her own right (And in some ways, could even be more of a main character than Paul is). Rebecca Ferguson is as lovely and majestic as ever, but she too gets to take her character into more morally questionable territory. There is a real menace to where they take this relationship between her and this unborn baby (Feeling like she's possessed by her), adding in an extra creep factor, along with another small unanswered question to the legitimacy of this so-called prophecy.(It also serves as a interesting interpretation of the very idea of the chosen one that we're used to seeing in books, shows, and movies).

Some more returning faces include a greatly welcome Josh Brolin (as "Gurney Halleck", Paul's former mentor, who was able to survive the attack by the Harkonnens), Charlotte Rampling, and Javier Bardem, who serves as a source of humor for the film. Some new faces include Florence Pugh (Getting a much larger role than her character did in the book), a brief but memorable appearance from Léa Seydoux (as "Lady Margot Fenring", a Bene Gesserit instructed to seduce Feyd-Rautha for their own purposes), and a very committed, downplayed Christopher Walken, who makes up for limited screentime by conveying a bit of frailty to who is in a way, the bigger bad of the film. Our main villains are all plenty despicable, from Stellan Skarsgård's grotesquely gluttonous presence and an intense, yet pitiful Dave Bautista. The big standout is Austin Butler (Previously having gotten an Oscar nomination as Elvis), who is mesmerizingly frightening. A sadistic, twisted creation of pure bloodlust and villainy, making for a nightmarish character that you're gonna remember once you leave the theater. The characters are memorable, with the top notch screenplay helping set them in what feels like a believable world with stakes and rules that actually aren't as hard to follow as some would be led to believe.

With too many jaw dropping sequences to count (Any time the sandworms come in make for an on the edge of your seat moment), "Dune: Part Two" doesn't have to do any more setup, going for full blown spectacle, though never once feels like style over substance. It genuinely did my heart good to see so many people were able to gravitate towards it, making it feel like that successor to the likes of "Lord of the Rings" and "Star Wars" that we've been waiting for (Which is funny since the original novel basically was ripped off by "Star Wars"). It takes some slight deviations from the book towards the end, serving as a conclusion along with a hint at something more (Denis Villeneuve says he plans to adapt the second book, "Dune Messiah", which I actually haven't even read yet, and conclude the series on a trilogy). Whether or not we get a continuation any time soon, the film (With some help from the last one too) is powerful enough to work on its own as the kind of movie magic that stands the test of time. Let's just hope nothing else happens to get in the way next time. Long Live the Fighters! 4 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Strong Sci-Fi Violence, Spice Snorting, Baron Butt, And Hardcore Sandworm Riding.

Drive-Away Dolls by James Eagan ★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Everyone's reaction to "Madame Web" last week.

Renowned filmmakers Joel and Ethan Coen are probably the most famous directorial duo in cinema history, so it's jarring to see them take time apart to both do some solo work. Joel went on to give us one of 2021's best films, "The Tragedy of Macbeth", while Ethan has, um, given us this apparently. One brother went on to do literal Shakespeare, while the other proceeded to give a weird, totally gay-tastic, and absolutely horny road trip comedy. It's like we're seeing into their very minds themselves. Take that as you wish.

Set in 1999, "Drive-Away Dolls" (Which actually means something else, but the film doesn't explain it until the very end. Kind of disappointed I didn't actually get it until that point) opens with the grisly murder of a man (A quick Pedro Pascal cameo) over a mysterious briefcase that he's holding. Later, two Lesbian best friends, the sexually free "Jamie" (Margaret Qualley) and the more wound-tight "Marian" (Geraldine Viswanathan), come up with the idea to take a trip away from home, after Jamie is kicked out by her girlfriend, "Sukie" (Beanie Feldstein) for cheating on her. Planning to visit Marian's aunt in Tallahassee, Florida, a mishap at a driveaway car service, results in the girls being given a car that just so happens to contain the briefcase from earlier. When "Chief" (Colman Domingo), arrives to collect for his panicking employer (Matt Damon), he sends in his "Goons" (Joey Slotnick and C. J. Wilson), to find the girls and get the briefcase back. While on their little adventure, Jamie and Marian discover the briefcase, becoming involved in a strange, but deadly conspiracy that could interfere with their seemingly innocent, sex-fueled trip.

Directed by Ethan Coen ("Fargo", "The Big Lebowski", "No Country for Old Men", ect.), who co-wrote the film with his wife/editor, Tricia Cooke, "Drive-Away Dolls" is basically a farce of a film, that's surely destined to be divisive. It's a quirky, sometimes overly quirky, feature, from its oddly inconsistent direction, editing, and even down to the film's nonsensical screenplay. The level of silliness that the film displays can be a bit off-putting, and I'd be lying if I didn't admit that it at times left me a little lost. There are times where things fall flat or feel just too over the top for its own good, veering between psychedelic and surreal to pretty broad and crude in its humor. In a way, it's all just buildup to one single joke. However, it's a pretty damn funny one. I'll admit that I didn't quite expect where it was all going, with the film feeling like pure, drug induced nonsense at first, before anything remotely starts to make any sense. When the film does though, and the big reveal happens, it gets a big laugh, especially with how much it completely changes the entire perspective of the film itself.

Margaret Qualley and Geraldine Viswanathan are both delightfully charming, cute as Hell, and have wicked good chemistry together. It's hard not to like them. The film's hodgepodge of supporting characters each get their moment, even when the movie completely stops dead in its tracks to give it to them. Beanie Feldstein is hilarious in her aggressiveness, while Colman Domingo is smooth as can be. There are amusing bit parts for Matt Damon (Probably his most perplexing performance) and Bill Camp (as "Curlie", the unfortunate owner of the driveaway car service), while some of the funniest moments come from Joey Slotnick and C. J. Wilson's unstable, disastrous duo.

"Drive-Away Dolls" is the definition of silly in weaponized form. At barely an hour and twenty minutes, it knows that it's pretty thin and thankfully, cuts off right before it probably could have gotten a little annoying. I like the characters. You get a few laughs. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It might all be a bit too much. It leads to something clever. It's just enough to make for a short, fun, screwy little future cult favorite. 3 Stars. Rated R For Strong Sexual Content, Puzzling Cameos, Head On The Rocks, And Lifelike Dick-Molding.

Madame Web by James Eagan ★ out of ★★★★★

Screen-Shot-2023-11-16-at-2.21.49-pm.png

Image: The lost look you have when you realize what kind of "Marvel" movie you've been cast in.

You know what? It's a good thing this movie exists. It came out at the right time and is just what we need right now. It takes us back to how most superhero and comic book films (Especially ones from "Marvel") were back in the early 2000s before the rise of the "Marvel Cinematic Universe". Oh no, not because it's good. Oh Hell no! Far from it. You see, I grew up during that time. I watched what happened when a studio just made whatever, without any care or thought process, other than it's based on a possibly profitable property. The days of "Daredevil", "Elektra", "Ghost Rider", "Catwoman", both "Fantastic Four" films, etc. These were dark days and despite some of the unevenness of the current MCU (And Disney too, really), we all need a reminder of what real evil looks like. Pick your poison!

The newest entry in "Sony's Spider-Man Universe" (Which continues to be without a Spider-Man), "Madame Web" opens with a pregnant scientist, "Constance Webb" (Kerry Bishé), and explorer, "Ezekiel Sims" (Tahar Rahim), researching a rare, rumored to be magical spider Peruvian jungle. Constance is betrayed and shot by Sims, who steals the spider so he can claim its mystical power for himself. Constance is saved by a tribe of racially insensitive, mud-wearing Spider-People, who are able to rescue the baby before Constance dies. Years later in 2003, the daughter, "Cassandra" (Dakota Johnson) works as a paramedic in Manhattan with her close friend/future Canon Event victim, "Ben Parker" (Adam Scott), where she discovers that she has clairvoyant abilities (Being able to see brief glimpses into the future, seemingly at random). However, when Cassandra witnesses a vision of three teenage girls, "Julia Cornwall" (Sydney Sweeney), "Anya Corazon" (Isabela Merced), and "Mattie Franklin" (Celeste O'Connor), being murdered by a returning Ezekiel Sims, she becomes their only source of protection. It turns out that these three girls are destined to become spider-based superheroines ("Spider-Women") that will eventually kill Sims, and he plans to kill them first. Cassandra must not hone her abilities to keep the girls safe, defeat Sims, and discover her role in growing SpiderVerse. Kind of. Not Really.

Directed by S. J. Clarkson ("Anatomy of a Scandal", along with much work in television), who co-wrote the screenplay with Claire Parker, along with Matt Sazama and Burk Sharpless ("Gods of Egypt", "Dracula Untold", "Morbius"), "Madame Web" has been getting mocked by the public since it was first announced. First of all, it's based on a rather secondary character in the larger Spider-Man mythos. Second, it has absolutely nothing to do with that character and seems to only exist so Sony can continue to own the rights to a large portion of Spider-Man's supporting cast so that Disney can't have them. And thirdly, it's set in the same cinematic universe as the "Venom" films, but also "Morbius" (Which was a movie so hilariously tone deaf and misguided that people were able to successfully gaslight Sony into re-releasing it back into theaters as a joke). I'm one of those guys who wants to give things a chance, especially with all the negativity we already have online, but yyyyyeah, it's as bad as everyone has been saying. Not even in a fun way though. It's bad in the dullest, most generic, and brainless way possible (And yes, I again repeat, nothing in the entire MCU has ever stooped this low before).

It's funny how the filmmakers are now claiming that this is meant to be completely standalone, with no connections to any specific Spider-Man, and even lacks any post-credits scenes, claiming that the original idea was to connect it to the Andrew Garfield films, but decided to abandon those plans when the timelines didn't quite add up. The real question is if they decided that before or after they, you know, already started making the movie? The film is a jumbled concoction of bizarre ideas that the film tries to force into connection with each other, and somehow, no matter how insane it gets, it's not remotely interesting. We got tribal Spider-People, awkward attempts at Prequel-baiting, unexplainable Spider-Powers, and lots of spoiler-ish reveals that I would normally say would be worth the price of admission in a "So Bad, It's Good" way, but it's so uninvesting that it's not worth it. It's not the fun kind of stupid that you can find in the "Venom" movies (At least those HAVE personality), or it doesn't even have the meme-ability of "Morbius".

Dakota Johnson, bless her heart, is a likable, very cute, and capable actress, but is just stuck in something that gives her absolutely nothing, resulting in her not being able to give anything back. The only times that Johnson looks like she's having remotely any kind of fun is when she's being charmed by Adam Scott (Who is trying his best to liven up such a thankless role). Most of the time, she looks bored, and why wouldn't she be? When the script is as bland as can be, with incompetent direction, what is a performer supposed to do in that kind of situation? The three main girls also sadly don't fare much better. Sydney Sweeney (And her little schoolgirl costume) is only here to look cute and confused, which she does well I guess, though you'd never be able to tell how good an actress she can be with this movie. Celeste O'Connor is just annoying, coming across more as a liability to the main group, while Isabela Merced (Who had so much personality in that "Dora" movie) just fades into the background, as if the movie just forgets she was ever there in the first place. There is no chemistry between the girls, with the only scene where they actually get to have any kind of fun is in an amusing sequence where they dance on a table in a diner to Britney Spears' "Toxic" (The only time the film makes use of the time period), which then leads to a fight scene with the song playing over. Also, it's pretty embarrassing how the film tries to portray them as teenagers, despite the fact that they are obviously not (You can only dress down Sydney Sweeney so much before certain, er, "attributes", become noticeable).

There is an absolutely unnecessary bit with a wasted Emma Roberts (as "Mary", Ben's sister, who is pregnant with a certain future web-crawling hero), a weird long cameo from Mike Epps (as "O'Neil", a co-worker of Cassandra's, who she has a vision of dying), and Zosia Mamet (as "Amaria", a tech genius forced to work for Sims), who straight up vanishes from the plot towards the end. Easily the worst part is Tahar Rahim, and everything associated with him. He's so nonthreatening, with absolutely no character motivation (What was he even doing with those Spider-Powers anyway? What was the endgame with that?), and some baffling ADR work (Where his voice is never matching what his lips are saying). The costume looks like easily tearable rubber, and doesn't make sense in context, resulting in possibly one of the worst villains in comic book movie history (Top five at least!).

"Madame Web" looks stitched together, with much left out, and just has this cheap fee to it. Right down to some absolutely abysmal CGI, that has no place in 2024 (Seriously, MODOK was at least supposed to look hideous. What's the excuse here?). The lack of effort, inspiration, or overall vision, makes this pretty much the definition of what's seen as wrong with the superhero genre at the moment, and what's also leading towards its apparent downfall. And worse still, it's just so damn boring. At almost two hours, it feels like three. It just taints the brand, though maybe it can get some to reevaluate some of the MCU's weakest entries (The internet does like to do revisionist history). 1 Star. Rated PG-13 For Spider-Action, Fanservice That Nobody Asked For, And Death By Pepsi.

Bob Marley: One Love by James Eagan ★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Anyone else remember that Cinnamon stick guy from those "Apple Jacks" commercials? Those were pretty racist, weren't they?

It's sad that this wasn't the one to help me get over my biopic fatigue. If anyone's story was gonna do it, it would have to be such a fascinating figure like Bob Marley.

"Bob Marley: One Love" focuses on the life of famous reggae singer and icon, "Bob Marley" (Kingsley Ben-Adir), during the last act of his life. After performing a unity concert to promote peace in Jamaica (During a very turbulent, violent time), Marley is almost assassinated, along with his supportive wife, "Rita" (Lashana Lynch), prompting him, along with his family and band to leave the country to avoid any more attempts on their lives. Marley and his band, "The Wailers", head to London to work on possibly their greatest album. Marley must face several obstacles along the way, such as a desire to spread his message to the people of Africa and his need to return home to finish what he started, along the inevitable and tragically too soon demise.

Directed by Reinaldo Marcus Green ("Joe Bell", "King Richard"), who co-wrote the screenplay from Terrence Winter ("Boardwalk Empire", "The Wolf of Wall Street"), Frank E. Flowers ("Metro Manilla"), and Zach Baylin ("Creed III"), "Bob Marley: One Love" is a pretty safe endeavor, that I suppose will appease Bob Marley's most devoted, though undemanding fans. The movie doesn't do the whole story, going through every moment in his life like a series of cliff notes taken from his Wikipedia page. Instead, it's just one of those cliff notes, stretched out to an hour and forty minutes, which is still obviously taken from a Wikipedia page. The film centers on the last couple years of his life (Though never goes all the way up to his death), with an occasional, very quick flashback to certain moments in his younger days. This decision is different to say the least, though only makes the film feel sloppy and unfocused. Like any weak biopic, it doesn't tell you anything that you don't already know about its subject, while rushing through everything it can with a brisk enough pace.

For such an inconsequential movie, it's still worth it to give credit to an actor trying their very best to elevate it. Kingsley Ben-Adir continues to show what a real versatile actor he is, from his work in things like "One Night in Miami", "Secret Invasion", and "Barbie", there is a remarkable amount of range to this guy (And he's British too!). He brings the film to life, and even when the film frustratingly leaves you wanting, his charismatic performance is what keeps you engaged. This especially shows not during the dramatic moments, but instead during the moments of humor or heart (Ben-Adir's smile alone just kind of makes you smile right back). Lashana Lynch is another one, who always brings what she can to a part, while nobody else in the cast quite stands out. This isn't any of their faults. They just aren't given much time to do so. Thankfully, when the film gives time to the music, it's beautiful to hear and might even get you tapping your feet a little. Still though, this is yet another area where the film just falls short in which it never gets into how the music and the message both coincided together to become a phenomenon.

The music is great and Kingsley Ben-Adir is giving it his all, but "Bob Marley: One Love" almost feels unnecessary. It doesn't feel like it knows what story it wants to tell. It breezes by too many important events in a few quick flashbacks, while clumsily cobbling together a narrative that doesn't warrant an entire film. In any other biopic, for better or for worse, this would have been just a section of the story rather than the whole thing. Maybe we would have learned more if it had been. Or it could have been worse. However, it would have felt more complete. 2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Adult Content And Jaimacan Accents All Over!

Out of Darkness by James Eagan ★★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: This isn't your average, everyday darkness. This is.....Advanced Darkness....

Oh boy, this is definitely going to be "It's not for everyone" kind of movies. All I can say is that if you've only seen the trailer and you're thinking this is one thing, you probably shouldn't be thinking that. You'll understand what I mean if you see it, which I honestly think you should. Smaller movies, especially ones with bolder visions that got left on a shelf collecting dust after a 2022 London premiere, deserve their time in the light. Pun completely intended.

Set 45,000 years ago, a group of travels arrive at a new, undiscovered land in their quest for survival. This group includes the overly proud leader, "Adem" (Chuku Modu), his pregnant partner, "Ave" (Iola Evans), his younger brother "Geirr" (Kit Young), his young son "Heron" (Luna Mwezi), the elderly "Odal" (Arno Luening), and a stray "Beyah" (Safia Oakley-Green), that they've picked up along their journey. However, this group proceeds to find nothing but desolation and starvation, with Adem's decision making being called into question. Unfortunately, they have nowhere else to go but forward, only to discover that something more frightening awaits them within the darkness. Soon, they are hunted by some kind of screeching creature, while also having to contend with the very monster that resides in every single one of them.

Directed by first time feature length director, Andrew Cumming, with a screenplay from the also first timer, Ruth Greenberg, "Out of Darkness" is an atmospheric, semi-horror that's just been hiding in the shadows, waiting to find its audience. Now while I can't say the film will necessarily find it (Granted, nothing is particularly doing that well at the box office right now), I can only commend the brilliance behind the premise and execution, along with the balls to actually commit to it. The film's dialogue is subtitled in a completely made up language that feels just right for the time period the film takes place in, with it convincingly being conveyed by the strong, admirable cast. The film is all about mood and visuals, where things aren't quite supposed to make total sense at first. It's one of those scripts that lets actions speak for the words, and Cumming's intense, ambitious direction does just that. It's incredible how this was pushed into one of the smaller theaters, despite its gorgeous, almost mind-bending cinematography just screams the biggest IMAX screen possible. What the film also just revels in, and quite fittingly so, is the use of darkness itself. There are some suspenseful moments where you can only see the characters illuminated by campfire, while nothing but pure black nothingness surrounding them. It puts you on edge, especially when someone can just as easily vanish into that seemingly endless void without warning. Even when the story shifts to day, there is this gloomy shroud constantly following the characters, as they resort to more barbaric methods of survival.

The performers are all worthy of praise, but it's Safia Oakley-Green that's a real find. She is so compelling to watch, where you're not always sure what exactly what's going on through her head, especially when her character ends up taking command in places, seemingly willing to go that extra mile that any rational person would never even dream of. However, it also serves as a look into that beast within everyone that can easily come out when it comes to survival. That's where the real terror of the film resides. Those cold, calculating actions that we believe separate us from animals, while slowly killing a bit more of ourselves the further we descend into, er, well, darkness. It's in the title!

"Out of Darkness" won't be everyone's cup of tea. It's not too hard to see some later reveals coming and it might alienate those coming in for an old fashioned horror movie, with jumpscares and a scary monster. However, I feel that only further cements the point that the film is making. Those are just the masks that our fears wear. What we should be more afraid of is what lies behind it. 4 Stars. Rated R For Scary Images, Non-Existent Personal Hygiene, And Jaw Dropping Violence.

Lisa Frankenstein by James Eagan ★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: Classic Story. Girl likes boy. Boy is a decomposing corpse. You know the rest.

This movie really has the ingredients to be something for my admittedly questionable mind to gravitate towards. At least younger me more than anything. You got an inspired take on a classic monster story, with Tim Burton-esque set design, a gleefully macabre sense of humor, somebody as cute and charming as Kathryn Newton, and a sense of late 80s/early 90s twistedness that nobody is attempting to make these days. This movie has all those things.......and I really did not like it.

Set in 1989, "Lisa Swallows" (Kathryn Newton) has never fully recovered from her mother literally getting axed off by an axe-weilding maniac, going into a state of depression where she barely even speaks. Since then, her oblivious father, "Dale" (Joe Chrest), has remarried to the overbearing "Janet" (Carla Gugino), and now Lisa is an outcast in her new school, with the only person willing to be around her is her new, more popular stepsister "Taffy" (Liza Soberano). Ignored by everyone else around her and madly in love with the popular guy, "Michael Trent" (Henry Eikenberry), Lisa's only place of solace comes from the local graveyard, where she hangs around a forgotten tombstone belonging to an unnamed, Victorian era corpse (Cole Sprouse). After a thunderstorm, the corpse rises from the grave and befriends Lisa, who keeps the corpse rejuvenated via a tanning bed. One day, after it becomes clear that the only way for the corpse to become fully human again is through reacquiring his missing parts (Hand, ear, among other shall we say useful appendages), Lisa decides that a little old fashioned murder might do the body some good.

Directed by Zelda Williams (Daughter of the late Robin Williams), with a screenplay by Diablo Cody ("Juno", "Jennifer's Body"), "Lisa Frankenstein" has future cult classic status written all over it. Too bad it's just not going to end up as one of the good ones (Remember, movies like "The Room", "Road House", and "Howard the Duck" are considered cult classics now). While I can definitely see how the film could find an audience (And it's not to say that there aren't some things to admire about it), it just frustratingly has no dick. Which is very ironic, don't ya think? It's a PG-13 dark, horror comedy, that doesn't have near enough horror, fairly weak comedy, and should have been a whole lot darker, especially considering how much on the morbid side it is. There is some humor to find in the premise, such as how our lead character is going around and hacking people up for her own Frankenstein's monster, yet also completely friendzones him in favor of her more traditional crush. The film struggles to balance that gruesome tone, thanks to a watered down rating, some sloppy editing, and a screenplay that's not as clever as it seems to think it is. Perhaps the film was trimmed down, which would explain how the film will just jump around between what's meant to be logical and what's meant to be fantasy. The characters just jump right to the decision to go around killing without much buildup, and things only spiral out of control from there.

While character motivations are too thin on paper, some of the performances make up for it. In fact, they salvage it. Kathryn Newton is terrific (And I'm not just saying that in hopes of her possibly seeing this, then agreeing to become the future Mrs. James Eagan), with pitch perfect line delivery between questionably likable and innocently psychotic. It's also a pretty delightful decision to have Cole Sprouse mostly speak in gurgling grunts and groans, while Liza Soberano being a surprise standout with how much more depth she brings to her role (It's fairly predictable where it all goes, but she makes it work and gets a few good one liners). Carla Gugino looks like she's having some hammy fun, while Joe Chrest does what he apparently does best, which is playing a buffoonish, out of the loop dad, who hasn't the slightest idea about the insanity going on around him.

"Lisa Frankenstein" has a beautiful visual aesthetic, even if it's framed like something you'd see on television rather than in theaters. While the film isn't without its chuckles, more of it falls pretty flat, particularly when the film seems to want to have an edge yet is settling for something too tame for its ambitions. Towards the end, it just gets kind of stupid, having worn out its welcome (Also, I think it's time we retire ever using "Can't Fight This Feeling" by REO Speedwagon in anything ever again. It's overused by this point). There is a joyful bit of deviousness to the film that I can see winning some over, while its campy attitude might also leave others irritated. I just see it as lesser than the kinds of films that inspired it, even if I appreciate the effort. 2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Sinister Slaying, So Much Teen Angst, And Improper Dick Handling.

Orion and the Dark by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

AAAAQX8X_sIbJS0K9-LjFZHWP_hsCcPrGNjkEM4iAMDfnqQSPZ4YFG7sujqXVf9rOmesU5bCMu87BJgd25Mrkyd95Z

Image: When that PCP kicks in during the middle of the night.

Ok, I can kind of see why DreamWorks Animation didn't release this in theaters, instead opting out to release it via Netflix, but that still doesn't seem fair to me. If something like "Argylle", which has the broadest kind of appeal, can bomb as hard as it's about to bomb, then why can't a somewhat overly ambitious, yet endearing animated film for the family pushed to the side. "Pixar" is known for stuff like "Inside Out" and "Soul", which incorporate some unique, philosophical themes, but still have much to appeal towards the kids. Last year's "The Boy and the Heron" was a surprise success too, so I think giving kids a little more to think about, along with the usual colorful characters and animation, deserves more respect than a soon to be forgotten Netflix release.

Based on the book by Emma Yarlett, "Orion and the Dark" serves as a story that a father (Colin Hanks) telling his daughter (Mia Akemi Brown) before bed, following a young boy, "Orion" (Jacob Tremblay), who is literally afraid of everything, such existential anxiety, bees, cell phones, rejection from girls (Sorry kid, that one never goes away. Trust me), killer gutter clowns, and most of all, the dark itself. Orion's irrational fears prevent him from living life, and one night, he meets the very embodiment of the dark itself, aptly named "Dark" (Paul Walter Hauser), who promises to help Orion conquer his fears. Dark introduces Orion to the night life that helps the world move, which includes his friends, "Sweet Dreams" (Angela Bassett), "Sleep" (Natasia Demetriou), "Insomnia" (Nat Faxon), "Quiet" (Aparna Nancherla), and "Unexplained Noises" (Golda Rosheuvel), who all have their parts to play throughout the night. While having to always move before the arrival of "Light" (Ike Barinholtz), who Dark despises due to feeling underappreciated, Orion soon learns to face what he doesn't understand, along with how the world needs the dark just as much as the light. This is all before things get a little more complicated as the story takes some unconventional detours before arriving to its established destination.

Directed by longtime animator Sean Charmatz, with a screenplay from Charlie Kaufman ("Being John Malkovich", "Adaptation", "Anomalisa", "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind"), "Orion and the Dark" is a flawed, though inspired premise that boasts almost too many grand ideas, though thankfully does it in such a sweet, earnest, and genuinely funny way that I can see all ages being able to follow it more than even the distribution predicted it would. I actually left a lot out from the plot synopsis because about half an hour in, the film's story takes a pretty unexpected turn, which still leads down a predictable path mind you, but doesn't seem to want to talk down to kids. In fact, Charlie Kaufman's screenplay really gets right just how much more existential kids really are, especially today. These fears about what you don't fully understand and how they clash with a developing mind that seems to overthink things just as often as it underthinks them. Heck, even plenty of adults still go through these kinds of anxieties, and the film is smart about how it brings them to life in a colorful fashion. The animation is not the most detailed of what we've seen from DreamWorks, but it's got these rather children's book-like cuteness to it, which just bursts with pure, unintelligible imagination. What makes this extra bold of the filmmakers is that the film is by no means grand. It's a script that relies more on the characters talking with each other, mixed in with lovely visuals. Most of the charm comes from the film's sense of humor, which also never talks down to kids. It's bound to get the whole family laughing.

The voice cast is top notch, with the typically likable Jacob Tremblay and a scene-stealing Paul Walter Hauser playing perfectly off each other. Ike Barinholtz is a lot of fun as the cocky sounding embodiment of the light, while Agela Bassett's powerful sounding voice always commands your attention, no matter what she's in. Some of the best gags come from how the characters' powers work, such as Nat Faxon being the embodiment of insomnia (Waking people up by whispering anxiety fueled thoughts into people's ears while they sleep), Golda Rosheuvel as the embodiment of those unexplained noises that you always hear in the middle night, and a pretty hilarious Natasia Demetriou as the one who puts everyone to sleep via disturbing means such as forcing a sleep pillow over people's faces or straight up chloroforming them (Plus, her character design looks like a rejected muppet, so it's automatically ten times funny because of that alone). When the two main stories eventually converge, that's when things might become a bit more divisive, giving off the feeling that there are just too many ideas colliding and falling just out of reach, though I respect the maturity behind such designs. (The movie itself even somewhat acknowledges that it's not exactly sure how this story is supposed to end in a moment that's either going to be seen as clever or frustrating)

"Orion and the Dark" is no "Inside Out", but it has much more to offer for a family audience than one could give it credit for. It's a fun, humorous, sweet little film that shoots for the stars simply because it has the faith that the kids will be able to follow. It speaks to them right on their level, with plenty of charm for the parents as well. I got nothing against "Argylle", but even I can admit that this feels more befitting a wide, theatrical experience than something that, regardless if you love it or hate it, you're gonna forget in a week. This film at least asks you some big questions, hoping that just maybe, you'll start looking at the little things that might unnerve you a bit differently from now on. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated TV-Y7, Which Is Basically A PG Rating, For Some Slight Mature Humor And The Sleep Hammer (I Can't Be The Only Person Who Burst Out Laughing At That).

Argylle by James Eagan ★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: How am I supposed to lick my balls in this thing? There's no room!

Guys! The nightmare is finally over! If you're like me, and you see a lot of movies, you've probably been subjected to the trailer for "Argylle" over and over again since like September or October of last year. The trailer itself is fine I guess, and I was okay with having to see it at some point, but holy Hell, watching the same exact trailer at least two or three times a week for months, with it being played before almost every single movie regardless if it fit or not, it starts to get very old, very fast. So you could have called this one of my most anticipated movies of 2024 for no other reason than to make sure that I never, ever see that trailer before a movie ever again. Never! Again!

"Argylle" opens the titular super spy, "Agent Aubrey Argylle" (Henry Cavill) and his baffling haircut, on a mission to capture glamorously sexy terrorist, "LaGrange" (Dua Lipa), with help from his sidekicks "Wyatt" (John Cena) and "Keira" (Ariana DeBose). However, it turns out this is all just the plot for the latest book in the "Argylle" series, by shy, cat lover "Elly Conway" (Bryce Dallas Howard). Elly is having a little bit of writer's block though as she's pressured by her mother, "Ruth" (Catherine O'Hara), to not end the next book on a cliffhanger. While on her way to visit her parents, Elly meets a stranger, "Aidan" (Sam Rockwell), who reveals that he's not only a fan of her books, but is also a skilled spy himself and has been tasked to protect her. It turns out that Elly's books have actually predicted a lot of things that have happened in real life, such as the revelation of a secret organization known as the "Division", run by the evil "Director Ritter" (Bryan Cranston). With the revelation of a "Master Key" in Elly's next book, which will expose the Division to the world, Aidan and Elly, along with her kitty, "Alfie" (Who is carried around in a little backpack), must find it first before the Division can hunt them down. As the mystery and intrigue gets more and more twisty, Elly soon learns that there is an even greater revelation about to be uncovered.

Directed by Matthew Vaughn ("X-Men: First Class", "Kick-Ass", and the "Kingsman" films), with a screenplay by Jason Fuchs ("Pan", "Ice Age: Continental Drift". Um, interesting filmography), "Argylle" is an interesting film, in which there has been some fascinating theories on how with the recent release of the book that the film is supposedly based on, along with who the real Elly Conway is (With some even claiming it to be Taylor Swift) and if the book was really written first or not. The film itself has the same look and style of the "Kingsman" films, and is certainly an enjoyable enough time, especially since there is still nothing new playing in theaters right now that's worth seeing on opening weekend. However, there is also a junk food-like quality to the film, that also lacks the added necessity that you can find in the usual blockbusters. It's not like a big franchise film, or a "Marvel" movie, or even such a good original product that everyone is going to be talking about after you see it. Not that there isn't plenty to like about the film (And I do see enough audiences leaving happy), but it's hardly for everyone and could easily annoy some. One reason is that it's an intentionally convoluted, topsy turvy, twisty and turny story, that might revel too much in its own style. Matthew Vaughn's eye for colorful visuals, even when the CGI is less than stellar, is on full blast, with elaborate fight sequences, an odd sense of humor, and amusing needle drops. The film cost like $200 million, and you can see where the money went, even with the underlying fakeness of it all (Something that's always been part of the "Kingsman" films as well). Still though, the focus does seem to become a bit more reliant on how stylish the film is, over much substance, despite the film trying to have defined characters and an intricate story. This does clash more than it should, particularly with how much actually happens in the film. At almost two and a half hours, it's too much to take in. Too much story, with too many characters, and far too many twists (Which vary between genuinely pretty clever to rather predictable).

The ensemble cast is very much game, and elevates the film with their presence. Bryce Dallas Howard is suitably charming, as cute and lovable as she can be, and does make the character's messy arc more believable mostly because of how genuine she feels. The chemistry between her and Sam Rockwell is one of the film's standout qualities, with Rockwell being a joy to watch as a discounted James Bond. Speaking of James Bond types, Henry Cavill's role is a lot smaller than you would expect, appearing mostly in various fantasy sequences, yet he gets to show off more of the charismatic side that we haven't been able to see enough of (And something about that hair just gets a big laugh out of me). Bryan Cranston lays on the smarm as the villain, while Catherine O'Hara is excellent in a part that takes a few extra turns. There are a couple of faces that we've seen in other of Vaughn's films, such as Samuel L. Jackson (as "Alfred Solomon", an ally to Aidan) and Sofia Boutella (as "The Keeper, a mysterious extra third party in all the intrigue), along with very underutilized roles for John Cena and Ariana DeBose. It also goes without saying that Alfie the cat is pretty damn cute. (Who doesn't like a pudgy kitty?)

"Argylle" feels like it would have been better suited in different hands (Like a Rian Johnson type), though you can only imagine how ungodly horrible it would have been in much worse hands. Matthew Vaughn prioritizes his usual visual flair over the story itself making much sense and it dwells on it more than it should, though it's not without entertainment value and a cast that looks to be having so much fun making the movie. There's also an interesting post credits scene that I think enough people should see coming, and I'm a little interested in where it could go (Personally though, I just want a sequel to "The King's Man", so we can see where that Thanos-style Hitler reveal goes instead, but that's just me). It's an okay way to pass the time till the bigger and maybe better movies come out. 2 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Chaotic Action, Bizarre Hair-Styles, And Pussy In Peril.

Lift by James Eagan ★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: Mission: Impossible, if you ordered it from wish.com.

Is this what desperation looks like? Turning to Netflix in your time of need in order to make up for the lack of any new movies getting released in my nearby theaters? I usually tend to skip full reviews for these movies (Leaving them as quick, admittedly less than well structured mini-reviews on Letterboxd and Facebook), mostly because half the time, they're just so generic and lifeless. The dullest of the dull, which usually somehow find a way to get some recognizable faces and budgets that are quite frankly too high for a Netflix quality production, with the budget likely just going towards whatever locations the film includes. Luckily for us though.......This is exactly one of those kind of films, which I'm only reviewing the pass the time. See how I went nowhere with that setup? That's what it's like watching these things.

"Lift" follows a renowned art thief, "Cyrus" (Kevin Hart), who has been on Interpol's radar for some time. Cyrus, along with his crew of misfits, a pilot "Camila" (Úrsula Corberó), the energetic safecracker "Magnus" (Billy Magnussen), a hacker "Mi-Sun" (Kim Yoon-ji), the engineer "Luke" (Viveik Kalra), and the eccentric master of disguise "Denton" (Vincent D'Onofrio), avoid capture at the hands of Interpol agent/Cyrus' former romantic flame "Abby Gladwell" (Gugu Mbatha-Raw). After lifting a very valuable NFT.....Okay, stop! This is already unrealistic. I just need a moment to comprehend that I just typed that.....So anyways.....the team gets nabbed, though Abby's boss, "Huxley" (Sam Worthington), has other plans in mind for Cyrus and his crew. There's some terrorist baddie, "Lars Jorgenson" (Jean Reno), who is forming an alliance with another criminal organization to make a profit doing bad guy things, which revolves around a payment of gold bars to seal the deal. Huxley, offering legal immunity, wants Cyrus and his team to assist in capturing Jorgenson, so a heist is planned where the team will steal all of the gold while it's transported by commercial airliner, while it's still in the air. After convincing Abby to work closely with him once again, Cyrus and the crew must formulate the best way to complete their mission before Netflix realizes just how basic this all sounds.

Directed by F. Gary Gray ("Straight Outta Compton", "The Italian Job", "The Fate of the Furious"), with a screenplay by Daniel Kunka ("12 Rounds"), along with producing credits from the likes of Simon Kinberg and for some reason, Matt Reeves (NO!!!!), "Lift" is a perplexing bit of boring, banal blandness, that would normally be just forgettable if not for the film's rather confusing casting choices and well, just how almost spectacularly uninteresting it is. The film is certainly slick looking and the locations look nice, but there's this underlying sense of cheapness that's always present, even though the film is trying to hide it behind smoke and mirrors. I'm starting to get the idea that Netflix is putting up the facade of big budget blockbusters (Such as "Rebel Moon", "The Gray Man", and "Red Notice"), which look expensive on the outside, but feel like they could have been made by anyone, as quickly as possible, without trying to secure a full theatrical release. And boy, there are plenty of times where it's obvious the budget wasn't spent on visual effects, CGI, or actual production design, with so much green screen throughout. I know a bunch of our theatrical blockbusters do the same thing too, but the heavy green screen use has been based around creating a world that already isn't real, rather than films like this trying to cover their asses. The action and the plotting are uninspired enough as it is, but it's all brought down by a screenplay that has little to no identity and tries way to hard to compensate with fake charm (Feeling more like smarm if you ask me).

Suave, cool, and badass. These are not the words I would use to describe Kevin Hart. I give him credit for trying to branch out with a performance that's more deadpan and somewhat serious, but it doesn't remotely work. In fact, it painfully falls flat. Hart has none of the qualities that you would see in a James Bond or Ethan Hunt type of character, despite the film really trying to tell you that he does. Hart has zero chemistry with Gugu Mbatha-Raw, in a romance that really just gets in the way more than anything else. It doesn't help that the crew themselves are completely underwritten. Úrsula Corberó, Kim Yoon-ji, and Viveik Kalra, mostly fade into the background to the point one forgets they even exist, though thankfully Billy Magnussen and Vincent D'Onofrio at least go a little out of their way to inject some personality (And God, do you miss them when they're not onscreen). Burn Gorman (as "Cormac", Jorgenson's lead henchmen) always does a solid job playing creepy, while Jean Reno makes for an nonthreatening villainous presence (And he certainly looks more uninvested than anyone watching this thing). Shockingly, the person I wanted to see more of was Sam Worthington, who looks like he's having some fun as a bureaucratic slimeball, and makes the most out of a small-ish part that could have had anyone play it. The film's most memorable aspect is how much NFTs play a part in the film, even towards the climax, and you gotta wonder how long ago this was written because we're basically at a point where everyone already knows what a joke that whole trend was.

You know that "Rick and Morty" episode where Morty writes a heist film to pitch to Netflix, only to abandon it after realizing how stupid and generic it is? I'm assuming that's where "Lift" came from. It follows all of the tropes, without enough humor, developed characters, or intelligence to make it work. Just a snoozefest, but an extra obnoxious one at that. 1 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Slight Violence, Slight Language, And A Slight Screenplay.

I.S.S. by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: The look on your face when you realize your "Portal" space memes died out over a decade ago.

Uhhhhhh, so this wasn't the most eventful of movie weeks and it's not often that I see a movie that I know little to nothing about. Usually that's a bad sign. I've been through it many times before.

"I.S.S." follows American scientist, "Kira Foster" (Ariana DeBose), who joins a crew of American and Russian astronauts aboard the International Space Station (Or I.S.S., in case you didn't know). Her fellow American colleagues include the captain "Gordon Barrett" (Chris Messina) and "Christian" (John Gallagher Jr.), along with the Russian crew members, "Nicholai" (Costa Ronin), "Weronika" (Maria Mashkova), and "Alexey" (Pilou Asbæk). All seems to be going well until suddenly explosions can be seen from the station happening all over Earth, along with Gordon getting a very clear message from his superiors before all communication is shut off, which is to "Take control of the I.S.S. by any means necessary". Fearing that the Russians also may have gotten the same message from their superiors, tensions start to rise as everyone fears who will make the first strike, while the station itself only has a matter of time before it falls from orbit.

Directed by Gabriela Cowperthwaite ("Our Friend", "Megan Leavey", and the acclaimed documentary "Blackfish"), with a screenplay by Nick Shafir, "I.S.S." has the unfortunate luxury of being an early January release, which will be quickly forgotten from memory the moment a bigger film comes out. It sucks because the film, while not exactly special by any means, is actually pretty good. It's using some old fashioned ingredients, but they're still quite effective in creating an intense, very claustrophobic, and occasionally even a bit unpredictable thriller. Cowperthwaite's direction is one of the highlights, which makes use of the obviously small budget by filming everything in close quarters, which can get nerve-wracking and dizzying since the characters are stuck in zero gravity. The effects aren't anything to write home about, yet they work for how little they're used, particularly in a sequence where one of the characters has to go outside the station, with only the endless void of space and the haunting beauty of Earth (Which features endless explosions going off all over) surrounding them.However, I won't say much about what I can assume was meant to be an action scene towards the last act, which felt pretty unnecessary (And features some very fake looking blood). Some of the details don't quite add up, and even the ones that the film takes time to try to explain feel very much like an afterthought. That vagueness does work in terms of the film's suspense, though I do recommend not trying to put all the pieces together when that's clearly not the intent.

The performances are really what bring out the characters, with Ariana DeBose (Who has deserved so much better since winning her Oscar) being a very capable lead. Chris Messina and his excellent mustache are exceptionally downplayed, while Costa Ronin and Maria Mashkova do keep you guessing where their characters' loyalties will go, even if the script is rather telegraphed from the start. John Gallagher Jr. is one of those actors who always brings a lot to a performance, even when it's just a supporting part, and the same goes for Pilou Asbæk, known for being the guy who can elevate a generic villain role, but actually plays against that type with a more conflicted character.

"I.S.S." isn't going to stick around in my head once we reach the end of the year. It's more or less a rainy day film, that just so happens to have better than expected direction, acting, and some clever turns. I always gotta give credit when a movie somehow has a twist or two that I don't see coming, and this genuinely did catch me off guard towards the end. It's a quick sit at barely an hour and a half, serving as a fairly gripping bottle film, that accomplishes its goals efficiently. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated R For A Little Bit Of Violence And Because I Assume A Little Language, But This Felt Like A PG-13. Like I've Seen Much Worse Get More Lenient Ratings.

Mean Girls by James Eagan ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: So that's where all the leftover pink went after "Barbie".

I mentioned this a couple weeks ago with "The Color Purple" in how the marketing for the film seemed to be hiding it was a musical, and this movie seems to be doing the same thing. What makes it more frustrating though is that all I've seen is how it's only further confused the average moviegoers, who just think this is a regular remake. They don't know what this is. They just see the poster or trailer, without having a clue what the film's actual intentions are, and presume it's just a pointless remake of a film that they love. Okay, maybe it might be a little pointless, but there's something more to it than just redoing the same movie again.

Based on the Broadway musical, which was based on the 2004 film, which was based on the 2002 book "Queen Bees and Wannabes" (You get all that?), "Mean Girls" follows the original's story, with the home-schooled, "Cady Heron" (Angourie Rice), getting a transfer into North Shore High School. Cady finds friendship with the school outsiders, "Janis 'Imi'ike" (Auli'i Cravalho) and "Damian Hubbard" (Jaquel Spivey), who tell her all about the ways of the school. Cady learns about the mean girls, or the "Plastics", consisting of their queen bee "Regina George" (Reneé Rapp), her little minion "Gretchen Wieners" (Bebe Wood), and the incredibly dimwitted "Karen Shetty" (Avantika). Cady immediately finds herself entranced by the Plastics and after she's accepted into their clique, Janis and Damian suggest Cady be a spy for them on whatever cruel or stupid crap they get up to. After Cady's crush/Regina's ex, "Aaron Samuels" (Christopher Briney), ends up back in a relationship with Regina, Cady goes along with a plan to completely ruin the Plastics from within. However, Cady soon starts to morph into a mean girl herself, thus everything starts to spiral out of control. Oh, and it's a musical!

Directed by first time collaborators Samantha Jayne and Arturo Perez Jr., with a screenplay from Tina Fey (Who previously wrote the original film), "Mean Girls" has to somewhat struggle to justify its existence, and while it doesn't stand out like say "The Color Purple" did, the film does retain a sort of musically bombastic charm. For what's more or less a rehash of the beloved original, you can feel the love that the filmmakers have for the material, especially for something that was originally meant to exclusively release via Paramount+. The film doesn't exactly look grand in terms of its budget, yet the effort onscreen is clear as day. From the choreography and musical numbers, which almost charmingly reuse the same sets over and over, give off a High School Musical-like feel that's both certainly more on the cheap side, but also endearing in its simplicity. It also helps that the film is still very funny and packed with lots of talented performers, who carry the film with ease.

Angrouie Rice, who always continues to shock me with how well she hides her Australian accent, is perfectly cast as our likable, at first shy lead, even if it is hard to quite detach it from Lindsay Lohan's pretty iconic portrayal. Reneé Rapp (Who previously played this character in the Broadway version) is a star in the making with not just her stunning singing voice, but also in how she commands your attention every single time she's onscreen. She makes this character her own, getting the highlight musical numbers and outshining everyone every chance she gets (So it's no wonder she's another flawless casting choice). Auliʻi Cravalho (Moana herself!) and Jaquel Spivey serve as almost narrators this time, and are both a delight to watch, while Bebe Wood has the perfect panicking face (Always looking on edge, trying to please Regina like a cute little puppy). Christopher Briney is rather bland and Busy Phillips (as Regina's mother, who thinks she's still in her teen years) doesn't quite get the same amount of laughs as Amy Poehler did in the original. There are some fun supporting parts for the likes of Jenna Fischer (as Cady's mother), along with Ashley Park and John Hamm (as teachers at the school), and the returning Tina Fey (as "Ms. Norbury") and Tim Meadows (as "Principal Duvall") are very welcome to see. For me the biggest scene-stealer Avantika, who is a total riot. Whether it be her incredibly moronic comments or just the completely baffling remarks that she makes at the most random moments, she is hilarious, right down to her detached, unwavering, never blinking stare that she does, even in the background (It's laugh out loud, every time).

Does "Mean Girls" completely justify its existence? Not really. It feels like a more watered down version of the original, losing much of its edge in the process, though it is genuinely such a fun time that you find yourself entranced by its fetchness. The musical numbers are a blast, which are all brought to life by the enthusiastic cast, and offers just a good amount of laughs. For the fans, I bet they'll be left quite happy, along with maybe a few newcomers. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Slight Adult Content, Burn Books, And Sexy Cancer.

The Beekeeper by James Eagan ★★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: "I'm the Bee's Knees." "Best Bee care around me." "I'm gonna Bee-eat the Hell outta you." "I got a million of em!"

One thing I've noticed is that we kind of give a free pass to campy trash. Sure, it's not good, but it's not good in a fun way. The kind of way where if you just shut your brain off, you'll have a good time. I actually disagree with that idea. Don't shut your brain off! Oh no, you gotta go in with your intelligence working 100%. All of this so that you can appreciate just how stupid it really is. If anything, you might find something more of value somewhere inside of all the stupidity. Some honey within the beeswax.

"The Beekeeper" opens with an average, everyday, jacked British beekeeper, "Adam Clay" (Jason Statham), who has formed a friendship with the retired, kind-hearted, "Eloise" (Phylicia Rashad). Eloise gets caught in an intricate phishing scam, with completely drains all of her bank accounts, credit cards, and even the charities she's been a part of, leading the emotionally destroyed Eloise to take her own life. Clay discovers the deceased Eloise, whose death is investigated by her own daughter, FBI Agent, "Verona Parker" (Emmy Raver-Lampman). Clay tracks down the company responsible, and completely annihilates its base of operations. It turns out though that this is only a piece of a much larger, country-wide spanning organization of phishing scams, orchestrated by the slimy, "Derek Danforth" (Josh Hutcherson). Derek leaves finding out who Clay is to his family friend/former CIA director, "Wallace Westwyld" (Jeremy Irons), who learns the horrifying truth.....Clay is.....a Beekeeper! No! Not just a literal beekeeper (With honey and bees and all that). A beekeeper as in a secret government program that protects the "hive" (Society as a whole), from anything would do it harm. Clay may be a retired beekeeper, but his mission to root out the corruption, no matter how far up it goes, rages on as he kills his way to the very top.

Directed by David Ayer ("Fury", "Suicide Squad", "Bright"), with a screenplay from Kurt Wimmer ("Equilibrium", "Point Break", "Expen4bles"), "The Beekeeper" is a movie that I feel is kind of trolling its audience. I mean, look at that plot. This is beyond stupid, and it's made weirder by how straight faced the film plays it, though to such a degree that I think that's what's supposed to be funny about it. For all of its buffed out buffoonery, it's also absolutely out of its damn mind too. This is a movie that's all about escalation, in terms of the violence, the stakes, and nonsensical story. Everything just keeps getting bigger and bigger until the film literally just stops existing. In spite of all of this though, I really gotta commend it for what it's going for. It's meant to be a campy, action packed thrill ride, and yeah, it's a good amount of fun. This is probably David Ayer's best looking film by far, where the action is over the top, yet unique in execution (And not near as excessive in the usual mean-spiritedness that I've seen in most of his movies). It's pretty cool to see action that doesn't entirely rely on guns blazing, with the titular character only rarely using a gun to dispatch a villain. Most of the time, he just tosses the gun away and instead goes to town on using everything else from bis bare fists, kicks, and whatever object happens to be within reach to brutally take out a baddie. The setpieces aren't exactly logical (Can one guy get a good hit in? Just a single shot at least?), but they're enjoyable to watch and at least creative in how nuts they are. The real fun comes from the places the film's story later goes and while I sort of predicted the path it appeared to be on, even I didn't expect them to actually do it. In fact, I'm genuinely shocked that I haven't seen an action film go down this route. It's almost jumping the shark, yet it's so original that it sets itself apart from other films like it.

Jason Statham retains his trademark scowl throughout this entire movie, delivering bee puns and kicking ass every chance he gets (And when he runs out of ass, he's still got some puns to throw out there to make up for it). He's certainly committed like he usually is, and that's something I've always appreciated about his work. Not to mention, there are some simple pleasures to come out of watching Jason Statham mop the floor with a bunch of cocky tech bros. Emmy Raver-Lampman and Bobby Naderi (as "Agent Whiley", Verona's partner, following around Clay's trail of bodies) are a likable pair, making for amusing audience surrogates trying to make sense of the carnage, while we get a brief appearance from Minnie Driver (as the new CIA director). Phylicia Rashad is only in the first ten minutes or so, but does retain a sort of warmth to her and it's particularly tragic how badly the villains destroy her life in a matter of minutes (Hell, it's probably the most realistic thing in the movie how questionably legal corporations do target the elderly to steal all of their savings away without apparent consequences). The best part of the film are the villains. Josh Hutcherson is suitably scummy and despicable, being such an immature, coked up douchebag that even when he's being hunted down by an unstoppable killer, he still finds time to flirt with some random girl and try to sell her on Crypto currency. Jeremy Irons is also a blast to see him be the source of sophistication, where he proceeds to become more and more panicky when he learns how he's been backed into an unwinnable situation. There are also some hilarious side villains, with David Witts (as one of the head scammers, who ends up as unfortunate first victim on Clay's warpath), Enzo Cilenti (as one of the most obnoxious head scammers), and a god awful, yet brilliantly so Taylor James (as "Lazarus", the maniacal final boss battle Clay has to face).

"The Beekeeper" is goofy, bloody, and full of holes, but it seems that was just as intended. However, it also feels like a lesser "John Wick", where it has some world building, though lacks the intelligence, sense of humor, and memorable characters that made those films special. This is more run of the mill popcorn fun that found a capable budget to make up for how slight it is and again, some plot points that are so out there and baffling that you are kind of on the edge of your seat the entire time. At least so you can see how far the filmmakers are willing to go with how dumb this is. It's exactly what an action movie about a badass beekeeper should be. Nothing special, but gives you a decent buzz. 3 Stars. Rated R For Strong Violence, Millenial Morons, And More Bee Jokes Than You Can Count. Trust Me, They Do Almost All Of Them.

Night Swim by James Eagan ★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: Just pee in the pool. The demons won't get ya if you do that.

We have entered 2024! It's a brand new era for my reviewing website, and there are going to be some big changes around here. The kind of changes that have been needing to happen for a while now. No, I'm not getting paid to do this. Pfft! Don't be ridiculous! I'm changing my rating system from the usual four star rating to five! Yeah! Finally getting with the times, and my ratings will also match my Letterboxd account. I'm about to turn thirty in a week, so I feel like I had to do something different this year. It's the most eventful thing to happen today. Oh yeah, and I saw "Night Swim" too.

Based on the short film, "Night Swim" follows former Baseball player "Ray Walker" (Wyatt Russell), his wife "Eve" (Kerry Condon), and their kids, "Izzy" (Amélie Hoeferle) and "Elliot" (Gavin Warren), as they move to a new home in hopes of getting a fresh start, mostly due to Ray's physical health (With him suffering from multiple sclerosis). Their new house also comes with a large pool, which comes in handy with Ray being suggested to take up swimming exercises. The pool seemingly at first does wonders for Ray, and even seems to be assisting him in his road to recovery (Though at a shockingly fast rate). However, something more supernatural and vile is at play here, with a dark force beneath the water about to terrorize this family. Slowly, Eve and the kids start to see freaky images and experience unexplainable moments of horror, with the haunted pool's demands on their way to being revealed. (And that usually revolves around demonic, freaky people coming out to drag an unfortunate soul into a watery grave.

Written and directed by first timer, Bryce McGuire (Who made the original short film with Rod Blackhurst) and produced by James Wan ("Insidious", "Malignant") and Jason Blum ("M3GAN", "Five Nights at Freddy's"), "Night Swim" is a really silly premise, though not one without merit. Personally, I never saw the appeal of swimming pools in the first place, and always saw them as giant bathtubs, but I know some people do have a genuine phobia of what could be lurking inside there, especially at night. There is a creep factor there, and to give the movie some credit, there is some originality here. Particularly with where the story goes, with the pool requiring sacrifices for its healing abilities to be fully complete, along with how it finds a way to get into one's mind for its sick, twisted pleasure. However, for something like this to work, it's all about execution. First of all, you gotta have something new to add to the table, but the film eventually comes down to the usual possession tropes in the last act. The variety of ideas have potential, yet the story stumbles around into stupidity. Maybe some more self-awareness would have been more welcome or some more creativity to the silliness. We can go along with a lot of dumb stuff if we're given something to latch onto. And most importantly of all, you gotta be scary. And no! It's not scary at all. Maybe a little creepy in places, but never frightening or nightmare inducing. Something going after you underwater can be scary enough on its own, but all we get are some lame, telegraphed jumpscares and some bargain bin zombie-esque creatures (Which feel like something that wasn't good enough for last year's "Talk to Me" or the "Evil Dead" franchise). I will say this though, it's hard to get mad at anything like this because it's so par for the course with bad horror movies, especially ones that used to litter the month of January every year before.

Wyatt Russell and especially Kerry Condon thankfully came to do their jobs like the professionals they are. Amélie Hoeferle and Gavin Warren are also pretty solid, with their characters not coming across as annoying, overly precocious kids. I actually do like the family in this and don't want to see anything bad happen to them. It's all just kind of stuck in a pile of tired out tropes, which the film seems to only rely on because they don't have nearly enough to compensate for how thin the plot is. Again, cool ideas and all, but it never comes together in a cohesive way.

"Night Swim" is pretty forgettable stuff and what makes such a thing so sad is that it didn't need to be. McGuire's stretching out of his old short film feels just like that. So stretched out. After jumping off the deep end towards the end (That pun was not intended at first), it becomes way too run of the mill in a time where people are asking for much more when it comes to horror. It's goofy, though not exactly the fun kind, and serves as a reminder of what kind of lame ass horror movies that January used to offer us. We truly are back to normal now, aren't we? 1 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Scary Faces, Bloody Tears, Kitty Killing (I Knew That Cat Was Dead The Second He Walked In), Perilous Pool Parties, And Malicious Marco Poloing.