Reviews

When I heard about people raving about a film, it piques my interest. I have an innate sense in me to see every movie I can. I try not to be that picky. There are plenty of genres that I'm not a huge fan of but I'll see a movie in that genre if I see something about the film that attracts me to it. A lot of times going in cold to a film is the best. I can enjoy the film with no bias and just look at the film for what it is. Sometimes (not all the time) preconceived notions spoil or ruin a film for anyone. But just hearing people rave about a film will definitely help lean me to the side that says "you must see this movie". When I found out Burning from director Chang-dong Lee, I only knew it was a film that takes a turn and it's something you won't see coming. Everyone was right about that, where this film goes is somewhere I can't even fathom.

Ah-in Yoo stars as Lee Jong-su, a writer from a small town who happens to bump into a childhood friend Shin Hae-mi (Jong-seo Jun) on his way home. They reconnect and she asks him to take care of her cat while she takes a trip to Africa. She comes back with a mysterious man Ben (Steven Yeun) who is very friendly, rich and has a very secret hobby. The less anyone knows about this film the better. Because when it turns, it goes full turn there's not slight about it. It goes down some dark paths and some interesting alleyways in life. The film has something to say and it might not all be clear. There is definitely a comment on the classes in society that can't be missed.

Chang-dong Lee along with cinematographer Kyung-pyo Hong paints a beautiful moving painting that is part drama, part mystery and totally engaging. After I would say the first 25 minutes the film takes off and doesn't stop. It is a slow burn but where it gets to where it's going, it's well worth the trip. Ah-in Yoo is good as this writer who doesn't know what to write but he has an idea. He's almost fresh out of school with no job but ideas swirling in his head. I relate so much as I was him when I got out of school. I had dreams of grandeur as a writer. So many ideas in my head that I couldn't get all down. I did struggle with writer's block as well. I needed inspiration and to get that inspiration you sometimes have to face things you aren't ready to face.

Jong-seo Jun plays the feel spirited female character so well. She's got more going on than she admits and she pushes that on-screen without saying it. It's a deep performance that when she's not on screen we miss her. I got all the feels from her performance and was constantly engaged with her character. You can see why she would attract all kinds of suitors. I really hope she uses this role to gain more powerful roles because she has some serious chops. Having only seen Steven Yeun once outside of The Walking Dead (Sorry To Bother You) I didn't know what to expect but he knocks his role out of the park. Genuinely smart, mysterious and a bit creepy I felt uneasy when his character is on screen, especially interacting with Jun and Lee. Near the end of the film when all the pieces are put together you can see how good he was at the character moments. I can only see him getting a lot more work after this because he's doing something here that's so layered it's scary.

The film is beautifully shot. It feels like a set of painting all with this blue tint to them. There are some excellent long takes and scenery. In the middle of the film, there is a scene with the three leads that is used for the poster above, this scene is haunting but engrossing. Jong-seo Jun does this dance to the backdrop of an empty field at sunset. I can't express how cool and chill it is. It also leads us to the viewers to think that all is well. We get a false sense of security and when the rug is pulled from under us the hit is hard.

Burning is a film I was happy to discover. This psychological drama mystery has so much going on. It leaves the audience asking so many questions after the last frame goes to black. And that's not a bad thing at all. I also hate when the term slow burn is used in a negative way. This film is a slow burn to start but once it gets going it flies through it's run time. Ah-in Yoo, Steven Yeun, Jong-seo Jun are all fantastic, with Yeun giving a breakout performance. Chang-dong Lee is a director I will be keeping my eye on because of this excellent example of letting the full story play out with great characters in pretty scenes. I can only say that being a huge fan of David Fincher this felt very much like one of his film and I love that.

I heart Godzilla as the kids say. I've been a fan of the big behemoth for years. One of my favorite sub-genres of films is monsters movies. I lump a lot of films into that category. But out of all the on-screen monsters outside of Frankenstein, Godzilla is my favorite. I was a huge fan of the 2014 remake. It was a film that made me shed tears of joy by the end of it. I know many fans weren't happy with the films. The complaints stemmed from too much human drama and not enough Godzilla on screen. I really liked how the director Gareth Edwards hide Godzilla for most of the film, letting the film play out like an old school monster film in the vein of Jaws. And that final battle was epic and fun. The film as a whole worked so well for me. So, I was thoroughly excited about this epic sequel.

Godzilla: King of the Monster takes place five years later in the present, the global monster surveillance Monarch is not facing scrutiny from the US government. But they are keeping an eye on these titans around the world. But when an unforeseen human factor awakes many of the titans on earth, it's up to the people of Monarch (including Kyle Chandler, Ken Watanabe, Ziyi Zhang, Bradley Whitford, Sally Hawkins, Thomas Middleditch, Aisha Hinds, O'Shea Jackson Jr.) to help aid Godzilla in a fight for the planet. Also in the cast is Charles Dance who plays a former British soldier with ulterior motives for the world, aided by a scientist Vera Farmiga who has her daughter played by Millie Bobby Brown in tow. David Strathairn is the other cast member that reprises his role from the original film.

Now I know issues with this big summer blockbuster that rely upon a lot of fx always have issues with the human story. I won't lie that when the humans are on screen the film is not as much fun. But there are some decent performances from Whitford, Middleditch, and Watanabe. With Watanabe getting one of the best moments in the film and probably the most emotional human moment. I really like what they did with his arc in the film. It definitely seems like everyone is giving their all, well outside of Dance, who does seem like he sleeping walking through an updated version of Tywin Lannister. Whitford and Middleditch get the best lines and most of the comedic moments. Chandler does his thing as the lead and father of the film. Millie goes full emotional daughter which she can do well. It would have been nice to see her get to stretch a bit like she does in Stranger Things.

But what most people will be coming to see in this film is the monster action. Director Michael Dougherty does not disappoint. From the start of the film, it pulls focus from the humans to the titans, who I have forgotten to mention outside of Godzilla in this film are Mothra, Rodan, and nemesis to all the three-headed King Ghidorah. They give Ghidorah an excellent origin that explains most of the story between the rivalry it has with Godzilla. The action is huge. The spectacle is on a massive scale. It's fun, entertaining and at many times will keep the viewer on the edge of their seat. The battles are so beautiful and well shot I wouldn't be surprised if the film is up for not only a special fx oscar but even a cinematography award. Dougherty doesn't skimp on the chaos. It only escalates from the opening to the wild battle of the finale.

This is the type of big monster film that all of us fans have been waiting for. Just to see these film titans on the big screen is one thing. But when they fight it's a thing of beauty. I love that it seems Dougherty is a fanboy for the Godzilla and Kaiju universe. He lays a lot of easter eggs in the film. So many that I'm going to be picking them out in multiple rewatches. This is a film you see on the biggest screen you can find. I can only imagine what the IMAX experience was like. Thankfully, the film plays out on its own as it's own contained story. It's not a major setup for Kong vs. Godzilla but they lay the groundwork for that huge matchup we will see next year.

I am thoroughly happy with Godzilla: King of the Monsters. One of my favorite characters in the series gets an excellent moment, the film is funny when it wants to be, and the monster action is beautiful on an epic scale. I could have done with less of the human factor, more monsters and maybe less plot that retreads ideas we've seen before. But for what was on screen, I'm super happy with the final product that definitely seems like director Michael Dougherty shot with love for Godzilla, it's fans and history. For the fans of the big behemoth, this is run out and see. For action fans, I would see this on the biggest loudest screen that there is. It's a huge fun adventure that really never stops.

This is movie is so...messed up. Messed up is not the word I want to use. But I'm trying to make sure that the words I use are PG even though some things that get posted are R rated. I had no idea what to think about this film when I heard about it. I never watched a trailer. But the internet was flooding with reactions when it dropped. Film Twitter was aflutter with everyone just losing their minds about The Perfection. When I few podcasters mentioned it in their episodes and tweets it piqued my interest. I was going into the film stone cold. The only thing I knew was from the IMDB quick description. The Perfection is a movie that if you have an interest in seeing go in as cold as ice. It going to take you on this trip that you didn't see coming.

I don't want to spoil anything about this film. Because it goes one way and then it goes another way. Then it loses its mind. Allison Williams stars as Charlotte, a musical prodigy that had to give him her aspiration when her mother became ill. After the family event, Charlotte goes to meet star student of her music school, Lizzie (Logan Browning) and reconnect with her music teacher Anton (Steven Weber) and his wife Paloma (Alaina Huffman). What follows is a series of events I can't even comprehend. But all of their lives will be changed for the better and the worse.

I had only seen Allison Williams in Get Out and Girls, both of which I couldn't stand her character. But she played the characters so well, that I credit her performance. I didn't dislike her, I just couldn't stand her characters. In pulling out these emotions in me, I would see she would evoking what she needed for her characters. In this film, I really felt for her, then I hated her and by the end of the film, I love her. She's a force in this film. I really hope this is her star-making turn. Because I don't say this often but I want to see her in everything. She plays her character close to the vest. We can see what she's feeling in a look but never know what she's thinking. It's a layered performance that if done wrong could sink this film. Instead, Williams elevates the film. And when she disappears during the middle you yearn for her back on screen.

Logan Browning is good as Lizzie. She plays coy, fun loving and seductive so well. I wish we could have seen her more in that type of role. But that is for another movie because her character goes through some things that cause her to evolve. Later in the film, she is given scenes with the rest of the cast and they are alright. She shines best when she's playing off Williams. They have excellent chemistry. Steven Weber plays the teacher so well. I believed him as the artist who is best as a teacher. And when things happen he embraces it so well. I would love to see him play this type of character on a bigger scale. He fits the tone of a genre adversary so well. It oozes off him like he knows this character inside and out and this is him, not an actor playing him. Alaina Huffman as Paloma is cold, in a way that when you are spurned by parent cold.

Richard Shepard, director from a story by himself, Eric C. Charmelo and Nicole Snyder have created a genre film that tackles some subjects (like the MeToo movement) in only the way a genre film could. It's so well shot looking very elegant. There some excellent editing on display that is used to give us the full story but in pieces. And when the puzzle comes together color your mind blown. I hope they do get a chance to make more films because they know what they are doing right out of the gate. We as viewers are just along for the ride hoping to hang on. The last 10 minutes of this film is insane. I can only compare this to Get Out in that when twists happen, it's going to shake the viewers. Then the final minutes of the film just go absolutely crazy.

The Perfection is a film I just have no idea how to feel about. I love what they are going for and what they achieved. I wouldn't call it great but it has elements of greatness. Allison Williams is the star and keeps the film going. She has a breakout performance and I hope that this film gets her working on that next level. But I'm totally okay with her working in genre films as well because she has an on-screen presence that you won't be able to take your eyes off of the screen. The film has a twist upon a twist an upon twist until a finale that is just bananas. I can see this earning cult status in the next few years. Netflix seems to be doing well with the high dramas (Roma) and the decently budgeted cult films.

When you think of action stars on the planet one of those first three names should be thought of is Keanu Reeves. The man has made some of the most influential action films of all time. If it was for Point Break we would not have The Fast & Furious franchise. Without The Matrix, who knows what action movies would have looked like for the last 20 years. I know without The Matrix we would have gotten the John Wick series and that would be a crime. Saying that I'm so hyped for the third chapter in this series is an understatement. This film is the second most anticipated film for me of 2019. But could all this hype I was giving it, could this film be exactly what I hoped and more? Yes, it could and it did.

John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum (such a long name) starts off minutes after John Wick Chapter 2 ends. And if you haven't seen John Wick Chapter 2 then stop reading this review, go see that, go see Chapter 3 and then come back. Yes, they are that good, what are you doing here? Get going! John at the end of Chapter 2 had murdered a member of the high table on Continental ground. This is a criminal offense in this world and he had been excommunicated. He was no on the run with a high bounty on his head. Every assassin in the city would be hunting him down. This third chapter follows him as he tries to call in every favor that he has to stay alive. It takes him from NYC all over the world including meeting an "old friend" Sofia (Halle Berry) and getting a bit of his back story from a former mysterious instructor The Director (Anjelica Huston).

But not only does John have to deal with his consequences from his actions, but his friends and acquaintances are also feeling the heat too. An adjudicator (Asia Kate Dillon) has set a time table for Winston (Ian McShane), Bowery King (Laurence Fishburne) for them to either step down or bow allegiance to the high table. It's a complicated mess John has gotten everyone into. Add to that there is an assassin named Zero (Mark Dacascos) working with the Adjudicator. It's a simple story but with a lot of moving parts. Some questions are left open but much of them are answered by the final credits roll.

Chad Stahelski, director of the film, has made himself one of the premiere action directors working now. It's funny that his co-director on the first film David Leitch went on to big action films but Stahelski stayed in this world. And I don't want him leaving anytime soon. The action in this film is top notch. Keanu has once again outdone himself, bringing John to life in stunning fashion. We know the man can fight but the action scenes in this film are wild, to say the least. Without the sure effort of Reeves back by a good director in Stahelski there's no way these films would be half as entertaining as they are. The cast, everyone gets enough screen time to bring excellent characters to flesh out the film. Halle Berry's work is the best I've seen her in an action film. She is in the film less than I would have hoped but she can kick ass with the best of them.

McShane gets some of the best lines in the film. Lance Reddick comes back as Charon but this time gets to get in on the action as well. Huston and Fishburne bring a cool gravitas that makes the film feel classy and sophisticated. Dacascos has most of the best comedic moments especially when he's on screen with Reeves. They play off of each other very well every though they are trying to kill each other. Asia Kate Dillon is fantastic as the Adjudicator. They have this power and fierceness to the character that you are rooting against but respect. One thing I have to totally commend the director and filmmakers for is the Adjudicator character is non-binary human played by a non-binary human. Being a pansexual male, I'm always looking for representation in film. Being a huge blockbuster film, it's wonderful to see good representations of the humans in society and onscreen.

The action is what we all come for in these films and it never lets up. The opening 20 minutes will have any action fan screaming in joy and on the action of their seat. Stahelski went balls to the wall with this film. It gets a bit ridiculous but not enough to turn a filmgoer off. It's grounded enough that you would think most people trained enough could do this in the real world. We get chases, gun fu, hand to hand battles, sword battles, and more. It's so wild but so enthralling. All of the film is shot so everything is seen on screen. The action scenes are shown in wide shots and long takes. There is no quick cut editing here. We feel the brutality of the fights and the stunts. The actors and stunt people go through hell but it comes off so well on screen. I wish more of the big action films would train actors to fight instead of trying to fake with quick edits that make people dizzy. There is a sense of landscape in these action scenes, you know where everything is and how the environment looks. Which you can connect with the scenes no matter how crazy they are.

Hands down John Wick: Chapter 3 Parabellum is the best action movie I've seen this year. Also, it's one of the best action movies I've seen in a while (maybe since Chapter 2). Keanu and the entire cast are excellent in this wild third ride. Chad Stahelski has proved himself once again he can tell a decent story in a great action movie. Everyone gets a good scene or two to show off their stuff but Keanu owns the film and proves this is one of the many reasons why I love this man onscreen. I'll have to see the film again but this might be my favorite film franchise of all time. Just my opinion. And I'd be happy to serve and will be of service if there is a decision to make a John Wick: Chapter 4.

Do you have a pet? Did you ever want to know if they are just like us? If they do things odd when we humans are not around? If any of those questions crossed your mind then The film to see was The Secret Life of Pets. It was a fun, animated adventure about a few pets in the city of New York. With the success of that first film comes the sequel The Secret Life of Pets 2 where those same questions are further explored. And new questions are brought up. For any pet lover, this film is definitely for you. If you are a parent, your kids are going to love this film as well. But also anyone with a sense of humor and a heart will laugh out loud through most of this film. And maybe even get a few feels.

This sequel takes place not too far after the first film ends. Max (now voiced by Patton Oswalt, instead of Louis C.K.) Duke (Eric Stonestreet from Modern Family) and Katie (Ellie Kemper). But when Katie by happenstance meets Chuck (Pete Holmes) they get married, he moves in and eventually they have a son named Liam. At first, Max is apprehensive but he then comes to be Liam's protector. Max's protection and nerves are put to the test when the family heads out to a family farm where Max meets an alpha dog named Rooster (voiced by Harrison Ford). Meanwhile, Snowball (Kevin Hart), Gidget (Jenny Slate) and Chloe (Lake Bell) get into some hijinks of their own when they meet a new dog Daisy (Tiffany Haddish).

The whole original cast comes back for the sequel with a few new voice actors that I have mentioned. Being that this is a sequel, the story does pull focus a bit on certain groups of characters. It's much like an Avengers movie when multiple stories are all happening at once. But it comes together well on screen and all makes seen. Even coming to a head at the end of the film in a very hilarious way. The whole cast is excellent with Harrison Ford being a stand out in a small role. But much like the first film Hart & Slate's characters get the best moments. I find it amusing that an animated feature lets these comedic actors flex their muscles and they shine. Oswalt replacing C.K. works well and fits well with the story. Its almost as if they built the story around him, playing to his acting strengths.

The animation is done in a very interesting way. It's much like the Illumination style that they have gone with the Minions and Despicable Me series. Lots of long characters and the characters that get the focus of the story get fleshed out the best. It doesn't take away from the experience but it is noticeable. Thankfully none of the characters are the same. They each stand out and get their own moments. Co-directors Chris Renaud and Jonathan del Va (who doesn't get credited at the end of the film) know how to place a joke that kids will get and follow that up with a joke that will go over well with the adults in the audience. 90% of the gags land well, some even kill better than can be expected. I found myself hysterically laughing at a few of the gags.

The film does have a nice message of stepping out of your comfort zone and asking for help. There are a few moments when you can see these animals have issues that mirror humans, especially kids growing up. But it's a nice universal message or two that parents should take to heart as well. The film doesn't beat you over the head with it either. It's still pretty damn funny and entertaining all the while having a little something to say. Also, it's nice to see an animated feature where there are no songs or characters singing. The film follows a few interwoven stories and doesn't need a song to push it along. (Although, after the credits, there is a hilarious musical moment with one of the main character, I can take that because I was crying laughing)

The Secret Life of Pets 2 doesn't reinvent the wheel on animated features, but it does what the first film did best. It's an entertaining, funny animated feature with a great cast of actors and actresses who keep the story going. Their characters are great, the setting and animation are interesting. I enjoy the first film but this second film had me rolling in laughter. I can definitely see the film getting a third chapter. Everything that the first film does well, this second feature improves upon. I would call that a success in the sequel film world.

There is usually a movie once a year (sometimes more than one movie) that really gets me. It's a film that pulls me back into being younger when I was falling in love with films. Last year, it was Sorry To Bother You. This film hit me where I live. It had all the elements of such good filmmaking and storytelling. It was my favorite film of 2018 and I hope more people see it. (It's streaming on HULU right this second) I had high hopes for Olivia Wilde's directorial debut Booksmart. It was a teen comedy right up my ally. I'm a sucker for a one-night movie of antics, debauchery and good characterization. Superbad is one of my favorite movies of all time. I still champion that film to this day. Booksmart was more than I could ever hope for. Let me explain why this and Superbad are brother and sister not just "Superbad with females".

Kaitlyn Dever (Justified) and Beanie Feldstein (Lady Bird) start as Amy and Molly, two best friends finishing up their high school careers. They have been the two studying, getting the best scores and the highest grades in order to further their futures in a positive direction. One the last day of school, it is revealed that all the kids that were out partying, having fun and being social, some of them got into the same schools. It dawns on Molly that she and Amy have "wasted" their high school lives being book smart. They set to rectify this is one night by attended the biggest party of the year. Their one night adventure leads some hilariousness, chaos, self-discovery, and self-realization.

Dever and Feldstein are incredible together. Their chemistry pops off the screen. It's so genuine you really would think that these ladies have known each other for years. You can feel every emotion and all they go through in the film. At a certain point in the film, you are 100% on board to ride or "die" with these ladies. And it's a great feeling. But the cast surrounding them is excellent as well. Wilde's fiance Jason Sudeikis shows up in a small role as the school principal. Lisa Kudrow and Will Forte show up in a couple of scenes as Amy's loving and very awkward parents. Also, scene-stealer extraordinaire Billie Lourd shows up as very open-minded high schooler. Every scene she shows up in she takes over. I would say her character needs her own film and there's a great way to make that happen. Every main speaking character gets a moment, with some getting more than one. The performances in the film are excellent across the board.

This script is so smart. It's very 2019 in all the best way. The dialogue bangs coming out of every actor on screen. It feels natural, know that the audience watching it is smart enough they don't have to spell things out. One thing that hit me in all the right ways is that Amy is lesbian but it's not done as that is her only characteristic. The LGBTQIA community is played for a crutch, it's natural and normal. (Like it should be in life, I'll get off my soapbox now) There are gay supporting characters that are not played as side characters, but support the story, the main characters and not played as a joke. I know this is more an indie film but it's an indie film that is opening in quite a lot of theaters and screens this weekend. I'm happy that Wilde got representation so well.

Wilde's direction is what sold me so much on how much I enjoyed this film. She shot the film like a film, not a comedy. Many of these comedies don't shoot their comedies like an actual film, filmmakers stage lighting and shots like a comedy. I would almost call it the Apatow/Rogen effect if you see most of their comedies that have a certain aspect ratio with certain types of shots and lighting. Wilde shot Booksmart like a Scorsese film. There is specific drab light, close up that express emotion and tell the story in a characters looks or reactions. There is a scene near the end of the film that is critical to the characters. I think most directors would have shot this with cuts back and forth, maybe showing some reaction shots. But this scene is shot in one take and she lets the scene evolve and develop. I am very excited to see what she does next because her first effort is a knockout.

I see everywhere that Booksmart is being compared to Superbad and rightfully so. The two films have a lot in common. Their films play off similar story beats with similar tropes and ideas. But they differ as well. I would say that the brother and sister relationship would better fit these two films. They make for a great double feature. You could interchange which one you watch first and you'd still feel the impact of both. One that is glaring about the films is that Superbad is a love letter from Goldberg/Rogen where you can tell they were the "losers" in school. Booksmart plays mostly everyone as equal. Amy and Molly are shunned as outcast which is very nice to see and gets over the troupe that the "loser can be cool too".

Booksmart is a film that if it isn't a financial success, that's okay. Because this film is a success everywhere else. I know the movie business is a business but this is one of those films that is so good it should be seen by as many eyes as possible. Olivia Wilde direction along with the performance from Dever and Feldstein and the rest of the cast make this, (in one person's opinion) one of the best teen comedies of all time. I can't praise the film enough for its excellent direction, characters, inclusivity and I forgot to mention the soundtrack. This soundtrack is banging, hip hop infused with little pop and indie sprinkled here and there. If you aren't dancing in your seat, I'd be shocked. Booksmart is one of the best films of the year. It's taken the award (as of now) as my favorite film of 2019.

In revisiting Ant-Man and The Wasp this week before Avengers: Endgame, I caught something I had missed. There were bits of dialogue that brought questions to my head, also I found a lot of things I really enjoyed about this sequel. This is going to be more of analyzing the film and maybe speaking about things that might come to pass in the future. I'll be spoiling the film a bit and doing less of my normal review. So, if you haven't seen Ant-Man and The Wasp yet, stop reading now, go check it out (because the film is fun) and then come back to read my thoughts. That was your warning, if you read on without seeing the film first that's your own fault.

While I was upset that the first film put Evangeline Lilly on the sidelines for the action, this film rectifies it in spades. Every action is like the title, it's Ant-Man and The Wasp because like Cassie says near the end of the film maybe Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) just needs someone watching his back. Hope aka Wasp is a badass all her own. And I'm sure plenty of people would love to see her get her own film. Or at least Marvel can you give an A-Force all female Avengers film. I really love how Lilly embraces the superhero role and sores. She's more of the lead sometimes than Scott is. Speaking of Scott, Rudd is great as Lang, the hopeless but heart in the right place hero just trying to make sure his daughter is safe and has a father that is three for her. I know in the comics he's not portrayed as well. But MCU Scott Lang is one we can all get behind.

Michael Douglas is great again as Hank Pym even getting to suit up in this. I was very happy about that. I'm an old school cat when it comes to comics and I want to see superhero Hank Pym not just scientist Hank Pym. Laurence Fishburne makes for a great foil Douglas' Pym as Bill Foster (aka Goliath). They feel like old friends who had a falling out working together, each with their side of the story. Every scene that features them two at odds is excellent. My one (of two) complaint about the film is a personal grip because being a huge fan of Michelle Pfeiffer is that she's not in the film enough. But I understand to the story she is the key, the "item" (I really hate to put it that way) that everyone is trying to attain. But when she shows up she damn near steals the show. Here's me crossing my fingers that she can play a much bigger role if there is another Ant-Man and The Wasp film.

My second complaint would be Ava/Ghost (Hannah John-Kamen). She gets the typical villain entry into a superhero film. Her family dies because of an experiment and she is imbued with super powers. The time with her isn't spent well. I don't feel her character earns the ending she gets. I don't even see a redemption arc in her story. She's a selfish character out for only one thing. And she will do almost anything (including harm to a child) to get it. Her character needed to be fleshed out more. It's also a bad analogy for people dealing with a debilitating illness and chronic pain. She's more henchmen than big bad. But it's played like she's always lurking because of her abilities and training.

Walton Goggins is also kind of wasted as Sonny Burch a dealing of weapons and technology. He has one goal, will do what he has to get it. But he doesn't pose a real threat. At the end of the film, he and his men are dispatched fairly easily. I would think if they got such a good character actor as him they would let him really dive into the villain character. Outside of those qualms per the characters and writing, there are many elements of this film I enjoyed more than the first. I like the action sequences because we get more one on one combat. They also many more ingenious ways to use Pym Tech during action sequences. One of being the film chase at the end incorporating a giant Hello Kitty Pez dispenser and Scott Lang actually becoming Giant Man.

I know this is a full-on comedy superhero film and some of the jokes land really well. But there are moments where joke after joke doesn't land as it should. Also, you can get taken out of a scene by a joke that was meant to hit but just falls flat. What is fun about the film is that it's a bit different from the normal MCU film. This is a rescue mission film where the main point is to track down and save Janet Van Dyne. Ghost and Burch happen to be "villains" in the way of that. There's not a huge villain to stop, just a character to hopefully save. I really like that. I'm kind of done with origin films from Marvel. Just intro the characters in on film and then make their solo film a story where they already have their powers. (Spider-Man: Homecoming does this so well) I wouldn't say I liked Ant-Man and The Wasp more than the first Ant-Man film but there are plenty of elements in this film that stand out for me more than the first film.

Stop. Please Hollywood, just stop making Stephen King books into movies. Because seriously, you all just don't get what makes his books so great, so terrifying and so engrossing. It hasn't translated on screen very well. IT is the exception. (I love the film so much) But I'm very worried after seeing this remake/reimaging of Pet Sematary, that the IT Chapter 2 might fall short. (I really hope it doesn't because I'm rooting for it) I had high hopes for Pet Sematary. I liked the cast, the filmmakers seemed to be going more by the book than just the film. The first trailer was pretty good. I had excitement for this film. I didn't even mind when the second trailer dropped and the big mid-story twist had been changed. I was like they are going by the book but in their own way. I can get on board with it. Even the reviews out of SXSW were positive. Don't believe everything you read on the internet. Pet Sematary is bad, really bad.

I'll spill the plot short. The Creeds are a family relocating from Boston to Maine to have more family time. They meet their older neighbor Jud, who becomes a trusted family friend. When the family cat dies, Jud takes Louis Creed to this place beyond the creepy forest behind both of their woods to bury the cat. The next day the cat comes back but it's not the same. Then strange things start occurring, tragedy strikes and before anyone catches on, all hell breaks loose. That is the basic plot of the film without spoiling anything because the second trailer spoils everything. I really don't get why film companies think their audience is that stupid they need to explain the entire film in the trailer. (That's an article for another day)

Pet Sematary the book is one of Stephen Kings most beloved works. It is also considered in some circles as his best work of fiction. The book dives deep into family, loss, dread, family tragedy and how humans deal with the loss of a loved one. It also is a dissection of how people deal with loss in different ways and what they will do to alleviate the pain. Directors Kevin Kölsch and Dennis Widmyer don't get any of that to translate to the screen. This is dread-less, jump scared, not very gory Blumhouse film. And that makes me sad. I don't mind Blumhouse as a company. They surprise me here and there but most of their "scary" movies follow the same tropes with the same execution. There is a lot of scares, as much violence on the screen to squeak by with an R rating and minimal character development.

That's the number one thing missing from this film is the connection to the characters. I know that Jason Clarke & Amy Seimetz as Louis & Rachel Creed are trying. I can see them trying but it doesn't seem like they were into the characters to go in with. I feel like they are going through the motion. I didn't feel the chemistry, I didn't feel the regret when they do something totally stupid plotwise, I didn't feel the loss when something awful happened. It was very flat. And I don't understand how you cast John Lithgow and basically give him no meat to chew on. It's such a waste to have him in such a pivotal role and his performance is bland. Jeté Laurence who portrays Ellie fairs the best out of all the actors. I can see her going on to making some decent movies in the future. Especially if she gets to play the role (roles) she does here. She's got some real chops and out acts most of the cast around her.

The film doesn't even feel creepy. The way it's shot has no style to it. It's very plain. And there are way too many jump scares. It feels like they build the smallest bit of tension and then boom, jump scare or back to back jump scares. Most of the gore comes early on in the film. There is a little bit of blood later but not much. I'm not saying the film had to be balls to the wall gory. (Even that wouldn't have helped it) But this is a King adaptation, give it some horror bite. If people think that Bohemian Rhapsody was over edited, watch this film. The jump cuts alone are numerous from the start and don't really stop until the end. This is not a spoiler, they left the film wide open for a sequel. Which I hope never sees the light of day. It's a very King ending but it's kind of just ends. Something happens that any person paying attention can see coming 20 minutes before it happens, then the film just ends.

I'm extremely disappointed with this film. It one big experiment that needs to stop. I don't think people understand what they read when they are reading King's books. Because as I mentioned before, outside of IT, King books that are in the horror genre I say don't fair well to film adaptation. I can say just stay away from this film. Revisit the original or even better just read his fantastic book. Paramount dropped the ball hard with this one. It gives me pause for IT Chapter 2. Which I didn't want. Also, it's not a good look for R-rated bigger budgeted horror. (I'm stunned many critics of film that I trust enjoyed this film, were we all watching the same movie?)

Interviewer: Our next film I would like to ask you about is Aquaman...

JohnnyPHreak: Dude! Holy wow. I mean no disrespect when I say this but Aquaman is the most fun movie to come out of DC/WB.

Interviewer: Can you elaborate on that?

JohnnyPHreak: Wonder Woman is fantastic. I love that film. Gal Gadot is Diana/Wonder Woman to a T. The film has a decent story, great emotional beats, and some fun action sequences. There are comedic elements and it so cool to watch. It does so much for actress, female-led superhero movies and I don't want to compare them at all. Aquaman is a bananas fun fantasy ride, that us DC Comics fans have been waiting for.

Interviewer: So you take DC over Marvel?

JohnnyPHreak: If you were to put me on the spot I would easily take DC over Marvel only because DC has my favorite comic book character of all time, Superman. Let me explain Aquaman. I'm not a huge of the character. He's not one of my favorites. But when we finally got to see him serious in the comics and animated films, it did the character justice. (No pun intended) Jason Momoa's take is a bit different but equally as cool and confident. He's not just a man who can talk to fish. He's a bridge between worlds. He's this powerful being who's also a total badass. He's having so much fun being this character is drips off-screen. I can't wait to see more of him. And I hope we get to see more of him interacting with other DC superheroes. One day I'll explain my love of the Justice League movie.

Interviewer: Can you give us some of the plot details for those who haven't been following the story?

JohnnyPHreak: It's actually pretty simple. Arthur Curry, Aquaman, is half human half Atlantian. His mother fell in love with a human and they had him. His half brother Orm, hates him and the land dwellers, they declare war on the land from the sea. In order to save his world and all of the world, Aquaman has to team up soon to be queen Mira (Amber Heard) to prove to Atlantis that he is the one true king. One the way he makes enemies of a train pirate who goes by Black Manta. The film jumps all over the world in a fun fantasy adventure with elements of Indiana Jones, The Fifth Element and even some old school monster movies.

Interviewer: Much as been said about the cast, how are they in this film?

JohnnyPHreak: As I said earlier, Momoa is excellent as the Aquaman and easily carries the film whenever he's on screen. Amber Heard is very good as Mira. She's not the helpless damsel in distress. She's a soon to be a queen that cares about her people, her land and is just as capable of kick-ass as Aquaman. The filmmakers did her well. Patrick Wilson as Orm is okay, you get his ideology. He likes to chew scenery and is very over the top in his portrayal but it fits the film he's in. Willem Dafoe is the excellent mentor role, bring his talents to the character. The scene stealer of the film is Yahya Abdul-Mateen II as Manta. He effectively in what screen time he has to give DC film fans the best villain they've had in all of the DC live action films. His character has weight, style and a personal attachment/grudge with Aquaman. It gives him more depth than most superhero villains get to have. I can't wait to see more of him.

Interviewer: This is a big action film, how are the action sequences and direction?

JohnnyPHreak: I'm not saying this as hyperbole, James Wan is the best action director working today. He has a few other directors on his heels but I would place him at the time. The action scenes in this film are wild. They are so well shot, so much fun and pretty crazy. He doesn't put himself in a box. He goes for broke and they all shine when happening. There's an opening sequence with Nicole Kidman's Atlanna (who she is great in this) that looks to be filmed in one take. It's jaw-dropping. The film uses neon colors and sets to express this is a fantasy world and it pops. This is a trippy watch but so enjoyable. Wan even gets to go back to his roots with one sequence that is very horror inspired. It's probably my favorite scene in the movie. It's violent, kind of terrifying and feeds into my need for Wan to make a monster movie. Interviewer: Any final thoughts about Aquaman?

JohnnyPHreak: James Wan has created a wonderfully rich and deep universe here with his first superhero entry Aquaman. The whole cast is great with Momoa, Heard, and Abdul-Mateen II being the standouts. The film looks beautiful, including a bunch of sequences shot in IMAX. The action is wild, easy to watch and just fun. The story is not that deep but it spans all over the world. It has the best elements of Indiana Jones with none of the Crystal Skull. All fans of DC should have seen this on the big screen because it's worth the price of admission. But if they couldn't see it in 4K because the transfer is gorgeous. Aquaman was one of my favorite films of 2018 and is now tied for my second favorite DC Comic live action film.

James Wan has created two decently successful horror series in the last few years. One, The Conjuring series a bit more profitable and well regarded than the Insidious series. I've only seen one Insidious film, I didn't like it but I know the story of the series. The Conjuring on the other hand I love. The first film is Wan on display with his camerawork, character work, and storytelling in one of the best-haunted house horror films in a long time. Like many horror franchises, there are sequels and spin-offs to go along with the original film. I have yet to see Annabelle, the first film. (It's on my list) But after hearing so much praise about the sequel to the prequel (a mouthful) I had to sit down with it just to see what people were talking about.

Years after the tragic death of their daughter a toymaker and his wife (Anthony LaPaglia, Miranda Otto) open their home to a nun (Stephanie Sigman) and several orphans (which include Lulu Wilson and Talitha Eliana Bateman). What they don't know is that the family have unbeknownst to all of them fed the creature that has made a home in the toymaker's doll, Annabelle. Once out, all of the household has been targeted but for what, that is something that needs to be uncovered. It's a pretty simple standard setup. There is a tragedy that befalls a good family. And in their grieving to get closure, the let loose something they can't explain nor control.

Directed by David F. Sandberg (Shazam!) and written by Gary Dauberman (IT, Annabelle) the film plays out like a normal haunted house film but much more entertaining than it should be. It's a slow start to the film but that's because the filmmakers are building us characters to latch onto. The opening tragedy is swift but emotional. We get to see our cast of characters each with a type personality that's at times more than cardboard. There's a good twist on the 'final girl' situation that most horror movies deal with. I didn't see that coming and was pleasantly surprised in the way the film sometimes subverts normal haunted house horror tropes. It does use a few good ones to build tension. I really never knew where the film was going or where it would end up.

I'd not say it was terrifying but it's thrilling. There are great moments of tension and the use of sound is done in a good way. It very much uses all that worked in The Conjuring to its advantage. The difference is when the horror comes it's brutal. I very much am happy to see an R-rated horror film about a demon actually give us some horrific imagery and gore. Being a gorehound, I was excited to see some truly awful after death FX. I was not expecting the film to go all out but it did which was a nice change. The pace is up and down building mostly to an ending that was swift but fun. When chaos reigns, it comes fast and loud. I was expecting more of a body count but it seems the villain of the film acted more personally than anything else.

LaPaglia and Otto play the grieving parents well. There is a relatable quality in their expression of loss and just wanting their child back. But it's their naivety is their undoing. All the child actresses are good but Bateman and Wilson standout. Not only do you feel their chemistry as friends but when things go sideways it cuts deep. Bateman, have to play different types of roles in this film is a credit to her. This is the type of yell at the screen horror movies because a lot of horror cliches to occur but they don't hurt the film that much.

Annabelle: Creation was quite entertaining for a sequel of a prequel or a prequel of a prequel. I think the second one is correct. With good, convincing performances for the child actors, vets like LaPaglia and Otto putting in the work, the film works as a haunted house horror film that has a story to tell. The unexpected gore and well laid tense sequences help push this film above the general cash grab prequel and or sequel horror fare. For fans of the series, this is a must see. Horror fans in general, I would recommend checking this out. I'm hoping that we continue on the upswing of good films in this series. I've not heard good things about The Nun, but maybe every other film in the series can be good. Because there is an Annabelle 3 coming which will feature The Warrens. Hopefully, the filmmakers follow the path of giving us decent characters to follow with some unexpected terror and gore. Give me that and I'm in.

It's been almost three years since it was announced that Brie Larson was announced at Comic-Con to be playing the role of Carol Danvers aka Captain Marvel. I had been waiting for the announcement for a while. I'm pretty close to being a die hard fanboy for Captain Marvel. When I became more of an adult and really got into comics, I don't know what it was but she appealed to me. Her character was the headstrong, powerful, smart military type that always kept things grounded emotionally. She is kind of like the equivalent of Superman for the Marvel Universe. But human and also even if she didn't have powers she would be a badass pilot. When the film and the date were released I was counting down the days. I couldn't wait to see this character I enjoyed so much on the page on the big screen.

Here's the thing, I wasn't a fan of Brie Larson as a choice. I was hoping for Yvonne Strahovski (Chuck, 24) or Natalie Dormer (Game of Thrones). I was a bit confused with the choice of Brie Larson. Outside of the coming off her Academy Award win, I'm not sure what they thought. But that was just my opinion. Time went by and I don't know if I just forgot being upset about the casting or what, but when I saw those first leaked set photos I was very happy. Then I saw all the research and work she was putting into being Captain Marvel and it started putting me at ease. The first trailer was a bit hit or miss for me. With each trailer, my excitement for this film grew to a fever pitch. This film had become one of my most anticipated films of 2019 (top five at least). I am happy to report this is exactly the Captain Marvel film I wanted and have been waiting for.

The quick rundown of the plot of the film is Vers (Larson) is a warrior with the Kree. The Kree who feature Yon-Rogg (Jude Law) and Korath (Djimon Hounsou) have enemies with the Skrulls, shape-shifting alien species whose small faction in the film is lead by Talos (Ben Mendelsohn). When on an exaction mission Vers is caught by Skrulls and probed for information. This leads to memories that she can't put together. She escapes captivity and is hurled to Earth. Teaming up with a young Agent Nicolas J Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) and young Agent Phil Coulson, Vers must figure out what all these memories mean and stop the on-coming Skrull/Kree war that is coming to earth.

Brie Larson embodies Carol Danvers/Captain Marvel. She's so cocky, funny, headstrong at times, but selfless and full of heart. I honestly couldn't have picked a better actress to play her. I don't know how Marvel does it but they really do get the best actors and actress to portray their characters. Samuel L. Jackson seems to be having the most fun playing Fury in any of the MCU films he's been in. This is young Fury, who isn't the hardcore spy with mountains of secrets and a grizzled closed-off demeanor. This happens to be his first encounter with alien beings and he plays with it so well. Also, who knew Fury was a cat person. (More on that amazing cat later) Jude Law is a good leader/foil for Danvers. He's pushing her to be the best she can be but in a poke/prod the bear way. He has things he's hiding from her and when he needs to ruthless he pulls it off very well.

Ben Mendelsohn is probably the human that steals the most scenes. He knows he's in a superhero Marvel movie and proceeds to play the film just right. I'm very happy we get a multilayered villain that could be around for the future. Even the FX and makeup, he's excellent in his character. Lashana Lynch's Maria Rambeau might be the heart of the film. Her chemistry with Larson is so on point, one could think they've been friends for years off-screen. Rambeau keeps Danvers grounded. The love they have for each other is something that never goes away. She is family for Danvers and that pops off the screen. But the one scene stealer of them all is Goose the Cat. (Chewie in the comics, why they changed I'll never understand) Anytime Goose is on screen he commands attention. He has pretty decent chemistry with Fury and a few surprises to boot.

Casting wise, the whole film is full of good performances. I was happy to see Annette Bening in the role(s) she was cast. They are important to the film and history of Captain Marvel. The film is so very sci-fi and I really enjoyed that. I know that Guardians Of The Galaxy is like a character-driven space opera but this film elements of Star Wars and Superman. It's very cool to see the MCU diving into their comic book roots and go all out sci-fi with their last few films. There's a lot of tech talk, aliens, superpowers and cool space travel. The action is good. The train fight/chase being the standout but I did enjoy the end space battle showing off how powerful Captain Marvel really is.

Directors Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck get the small character moments so perfect. Not that I have any issues with the action but I think with a second feature they will get their sea legs and give us something truly eye-popping on the scale that Captain Marvel deserves. That would be my only issues is that there is a really standout action set piece that screams "wow did you see that?!" Everything for me worked so well. And they connect this film to the bigger MCU picture like a piece in a big puzzle. There are more questions that are raised that aren't answered yet. Hopefully in a sequel and Avengers: Endgame we will get some of those answers.

Captain Marvel was a total blast for me. The film does start off a bit slow but once Carol gets to Earth the film takes off in all the best ways. It's much like the opposite of the original Thor. Everything on Asgard was great but him on Earth was a bit underwhelming. All the performances were excellent and it seemed the entire cast was having so much fun playing their roles and being in this film. The story is basically Marvel's Superman story. I also see this as a film that demands multiple viewings. I can't wait to see the film again and see how Captain Marvel fits into Endgame and beyond. For the viewers that don't know there are two after credit scenes that people following this film series need to stay for.

I wasn't sure what to think after Furious 7. I thought that would be the last of these films. It was a nice send-off for Paul Walker, who was a mainstay in the series. It also concluded much of the storylines that had been going on the in the last four films. (Also it's probably my favorite in the series) But why would Universal Pictures want to stop diving into their cash cow? The film keeps getting bigger, wilder and making more money with each entry. I have never seen a film franchise in it's 6th or 7th film be as good and as profitable as this franchise. So, how dod they follow such a success entry as Furious 7? Oh, I don't know, let's make the mainstay hero Dom (Vin Diesel) the villain and have him team up with a beautiful expert hacker and terrorist named Cypher (Charlize Theron).

That's basically the plot of this film. Dom is forced to turn on his family because of reason unknown for about 45 minutes of the runtime until we find out why he would turn on his family. It's a genuine twist that I didn't really see coming but I could have put two and two together. There's not much about the plot that I really need to dive into. If you've been following this series, you know what is going on. The film is really all about the chemistry of the actors, the action set pieces and the performances? Yes the performances, I said it. I think some of the actors on screen here are having the time of their lives. It's just fun to be in a crazy action film series like this one.

I am an unabashed fan of this series (even though I really don't like the original, which is a story for another day). But the films just keep getting wilder and wilder. Also, they always seem to be fun and engaging. This 8th film is no different. Directed by F. Gary Gray, he definitely has honed some of his action film skills. Most of the action set pieces are loud, crazy and easy to watch. I don't feel like all the time I'm gonna have a seizure. There are two standout sequences that propel the film.

One featuring a jailbreak with Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham. The other is a sequence on a plane with Jason Statham. If you haven't seen it, it's one of the most fun, funny and entertaining action moments in the entire series. There is a reason why these two actors are getting their own spinoff, they have a ying/yang quality that oozes on screen. They make for an opposite but fun duo.

Theron seems to be having a great time as the villain as well. She chews scenery with the best of them. But also she has more hidden away than the normal villain in this series. There are ties to the last three films with her character. All are revealed through the course of the film. I think she's one of the best villains in the series and a good one in general for big-budget action films of late. As I mentioned before Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham are a breath of fresh air for this series.

They both are just all in on their character. The chemistry between them comes in spades. When they are on screen the film pops and even if they aren't on screen together, the film seems to be alive. I'm not coming down on the rest of the cast. They are all okay, Russell and Rodriguez fairing the best out of all of them. It must have been tough for the filmmakers with such a diverse cast to get everyone a moment. And they do, but some are far better than others. Watching you can even tell who the director may have learned in to in order to keep the film going.

I'm not the one to say if you have seen one Fast & Furious movie you've seen them all. That's not the case. I think each film have good qualities for everyone to see each of the films. The Fate of the Furious is a fun entry to the series. I do think it's in the middle if I would rate it against other films. There are some fun action set pieces, a great duo turn for Johnson and Statham and a good villain. I'm hoping with the wildness of this film, the future films will get a bit crazier and give us good villains to challenge this family. I'm not sure how they could up the stakes but there may be something out there that gets the family back in the field. See this if you are a fan of action films, see this if love the series and see this if you just have two hours to kill.

The Autopsy of Jane Doe only hit my watchlist because of the director André Øvredal. He is currently working on Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, produced by Guillermo del Toro. The word around the net was it was a good fit with the director because his previous film was pretty good. I grew up with the book Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark. It freaked me out and the cover still gives me the willies when I see it. But this seemed to be another passion project for Del Toro. Even though I'm not a big fan of Del Toro (that's a subject for another time) I am a fan of the book. So hearing that Øvredal was a good fit from the net and that he was working with Del Toro, I thought it was a good idea to check out his last feature, which was getting good word of mouth.

I went into this film stone cold. And I'm glad I did. I picked up on a few clues early on and figured out the main "twist". That didn't deter me from the film, I just pick up on something kind of quickly. The film opens up with a gruesome multiple murder scene. Four people have been brutally murdered. The sheriff (Michael McElhatton) is dumbfounded. These were good people and he has no know idea what happened. To make matters even more confusing, a woman's body is found buried in the cellar. She is pristine but dead. Needing to find answers quickly, he rushes the body to town medical examiner and his assistant son (Brian Cox, Emile Hirsch). As they dig deeper into the body the more this mysterious woman's situation get complex and dangerous secrets are uncovered.

I tried to be vague as possible because this film comes out of left field with some answers. It also raises a few more questions. Øvredal does an excellent job of building tension as most of this film takes place in the medical examiner's autopsy room and surrounding areas. But we are shown just enough of the building to feel stuck down there without characters. He has a decent amount of jump scares but doesn't overuse them. He builds a creepy atmosphere and dread very well. With the help of cinematographer Roman Osin, Øvredal shoots this film beautifully with a drab color palette and old style setting. The film plays out like a dramatic thriller then leading into full-on old school haunted house horror. It nice to see a film use in-camera effects over special FX. It gives the film a realism that we don't always get with horror films nowadays.

Brian Cox and Emile Hirsch are excellent as the father and son examination team. Cox, genre staple, leading into the broken father just trying to teach his ways to his son. Hirsch plays the son who thinks he knows it all but really just needs an out in his life. They are both dealing with something that pushes them away from each other. They play that chemistry well. They do care for each and there is an excellent scene in the middle of the film that dives into both of their characters. Ophelia Lovibond plays Hirsch's girlfriend who knows that his character should be elsewhere. She only gets a few scenes but there's never a doubt this connection is forced. Olwen Catherine Kelly may have the hardest job I've seen an actress play in a while as Jane Doe. All the props to her for being just the body on a slab that tells the story of the film.

I know that I have written this to review the film but the best way to see this film is to know as little as possible. I didn't even watch the trailer. André Øvredal has created a creepy, very atmospheric even claustrophobic horror film here that is a good night watch. With the excellent performance from Cox and Hirsch, the wonderful cinematography and mystery at the core of the story, The Autopsy of Jane Doe is a definite watch for horror fans. Even if the twist is somewhat predictable and the ending of the film goes full-on horror instead of sticking with tension and dread this is film works. I'm pleasantly optimistic that Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark might be a pretty entertaining and even scary.

Alex Garland may not be a household name but film nerds know his name very well. This is the man who has created some excellent genre film in the past few years. He is the writer of such films as 28 Days Later, Dredd and Ex Machina which he also directed. When his name is attached to anything I get excited. When I heard about Annihilation, I did get excited. He was making original sci-fi with an outstanding cast. There's something about original ideas that makes me very stoked. I want more original films, especially sci-fi. It's one of my favorite genres. There are so many places to go with it. Garland is one person who I hope keeps coming up with fully developed original ideas because the film industry needs them. His latest endeavor, Annihilation is a layered movie that hits a lot of high points and a few low points.

The film follows a biologist named Lena, played by Natalie Portman. She is grieving with the loss of her husband, Kane, Oscar Issac who went disappeared on a top secret military mission. When Kane shows up one day he's not the same. Lena can't get any answers from him. He has a medical emergency and on the way to the hosptial, the ambulance is stopped by vans in black. Lena wakes up in a military facility and explained that Kane was on a team that went on a mission to the odd zone and has been the only person to come back. Needing answers Lena joins the next mission into the Shimmer, an all-female team that features Jennifer Jason Leigh, Gina Rodriguez, Tuva Novotny, and Tessa Thompson. What they meet in the shimmer is something so expected and life-changing.

This film is very much about dealing with loss and demons of all time. Each member of the mission has something they are overcoming or struggling with. Whether it be the loss of a family member, drug addiction, self-harm or guilty of past, each of our characters has something troubling them when they go into the shimmer. It makes for the film to have layers not just layers of the zone they have to go through but layers to their personalities and actions. The entire cast is very good. Portman may get the most screen time but Leigh, Rodriguez, and Thompson all shine. Garland seems to be very good at getting good performances out of his cast while telling a deeper story.

This is thought-provoking sci-fi that answers some questions about what's going on in the film. But bigger questions are raised about humanity. That at times can slow the film down. Not in a negative way, but there is a lot to take in about the characters. Not just trying to figure out what the Shimmer is and how it is affecting the environment. Even though we don't spend as much time with each character as Lena, we are told through dialogue backstories and histories. There's a lot going on in this movie and I think it's a film to fully understand requires multiple viewings.

Something it seems like Garland is now perfecting is visual in his film. Annihilation is beautifully shot with some vivid color schemes, excellent cinematography, and pretty wild special FX. The creatures in this film are nothing you've seen before. They very much evolve from the Shimmer and the atmosphere is at times its own character. This is a film definitely made for the big screen. No matter how large your TV screen is, I don't think it will do the film justice. For that, I give Garland all the credit because you can stop watching the film when it starts. As soon as the characters get to the Shimmer, we get to see the full extent of this sci-fi adventure mystery.

I don't know what I expected the film to turn out to be. It definitely didn't see where it was going. I'm getting use to that with Garland films. Ex Machina is a film I could have predicted anything that was going to happen in that film. Annihilation is the same way. And that's a testament to the script. But there was something that just didn't hit me. I'm not sure if it was the small moments that slowed the film down. It could even be the ending that I expected some kind of big twist or a decent explanation. There was a twist but it's something that on re-watches is easily spotted. As I said earlier we are not given much explanation on the sci-fi elements in the film. The final moments of the film leave a lot to self-interpretation.

Annihilation is visually stunning, thought-provoking and well acted. It just for me is missing something I can't explain. And it kind of falls apart for me in the last 10-15 minutes. I really love that Garland is going out and making original sci-fi, we as fans need more of it. I hope that he is given the chance to make more. I know this wasn't a huge hit but it seems like it's already making a cult status run. I suggest anyone who loves smart original sci-fi to check it out. At least that means that maybe the film industry will go out on a limb with original content instead of trying to make money on know IPs.

I have a love-hate relationship with Chucky and Child's Play. I know the original film is a classic in the horror circles. I've never been a fan of the films, but I am a fan of Chucky himself. He's an interesting and icon horror movie killer. I might need to revisit the first films (which I plan to soon) but I have only been a fan of Bride of Chucky. I liked the goofy nature of the film and gory elements. It just seemed to be the first films were played too serious.

Even though most people think when horror characters get too serious they add in humor to change things up. Most of the films that infuse horror after being serious somewhat fail. Look at the Nightmare On Elm Street series. (Even though I'm a fan of quipped tongue in cheek Freddy Kruger) I just feel that Chucky needs to be a little less serious sometimes. A good balance helps his character in these films.

Cult of Chucky takes place right after Curse of Chucky, which I read is a soft reboot of the entire series. This film follows Andy, the protagonist from the first film. He's all grown up and is now hunting Chucky. He actually has found Chucky and keeps his head in a safe where he comes home to torture it. Andy is still suffering after all those years, he can't get dates, he's somewhat antisocial. But he continues to try to keep the world safe from Chucky.

But it seems like Chucky has a new person to torment. Nica Pierce and her niece were terrorized by Chucky in Curse. But it seems no one believes Nica that a doll was doing the killings. After being released from prison in her doctor's care, she's sent to a mental hospital where people start dropping like flies. It is Chucky hunting her again or is Nica the real killer?

For the characters in the film, this is the question. But if us as viewers we know that somehow Chucky is doing this to play with Nica. And it works on so many levels. I gotta say that Cult of Chucky might be my new favorite film in the series. It has a good balance of serious, funny and downright messed up. Don Mancini, the original writer, wrote and directed this film. He knows Chucky and he gets all the beats right. The film is shot pretty well for a VOD horror film. The set design of the hospital is very bleak and when the chaos happens it feels pretty claustrophobic.

Fiona Dourif, who plays Nica is excellent as our lead. We get a gamut of emotions from her. Her range is excellent and she plays the character surprisingly deep for a horror movie. Her father Brad Dourif once again embodies Chucky so well. It feels like he gets to do more here than before. Chucky is manipulative, funny and downright vile at times. I really loved him in this. That's the main reason why the film works. Chucky gets enough really good screen time to shine. And he shines like a bloody bright star.

The film is so gory and violent. There are some top-notch kills to be hand. One specific one actually shocked me with how gory the filmmakers went. I'll just say falling glass is never fun. The film feels fully fleshed out like this is extending narrative that takes one helluva a twist in the end. I really hope that with the rise of all things Chucky (we are getting a reboot film and a TV series) that Mancini can continue the story he is telling. It's nice to see Jennifer Tilly showing up in an extended cameo. She seems to love this series. I believe this might be the third or fourth film she's in.

Cult of Chucky for Chucky fans is a must see. It plays out so well in the universe as a great sequel and just a fun standalone horror movie. It does connect itself to Curse of Chucky but there's enough of the original story in this film to not really having to see the film before it. (I haven't seen Curse yet but now I'm dying to) This film also made me want to revisit the original films. I'm not saying they will win me over like this did. But they deserve a revisit. As excited I am for the reboot/remake, I really would love to see where Mancini can go with this story he created here. He left a lot of things open for more than one film. I'm down for more Chucky anyway I can get it.

Happy Death Day was a film that was up in the air about. You can read all about it in my review of the first film. But it's a film that shocked me the first time I saw it. Then on repeat viewings, I came to love and adore. I didn't think I would come around on a PG-13 slasher film. But it had all the odes to a good slasher, plus it was fun, funny and had a great lead-in, Jessica Rothe, playing Tree Gelbman. It was Groundhog's Day for the horror genre. It worked. And it worked so well that of course in the horror genre there will be a sequel. One of the films I've been most excited for this year is Happy Death Day 2U. Thankfully, it's a fun sequel and hopefully leads to a third because this film needs another sequel.

This time around Tree is stuck reliving the same day over and over again but there's a twist. I don't want to give too much away. Tree has to make a pretty emotional decision with also trying to find out who the killer is and save her friends. Because it seems now the killer is attacking them all. With the only one remembering what happened in the previous days, it's up to Tree to make the hard choices to save the day. I like where the film went with evolving the main character. She has to come to some pretty emotional and gut-punching realizations through the film. It makes Rothe's performance that much better. She's still on top her game as character keeping us so intrigued. Without her in the lead, I don't think either of these films would be as entertaining.

Israel Broussard, who plays Carter has a much bigger role in this film. He's good as the could be boyfriend, trying to help Tree out. Phi Vu who plays Ryan is a key to the first twist in the film. He also leads off the film and has a pretty hilarious day that he has to relive. That's where this film changes. Writer/director Christopher Landon goes for more the comedy/sci-fi aspect with this sequel. I get that the film should evolve. It works for the most part. The comedy elements are at times laugh out loud funny. But the sci-fi can get a bit overboard. There is even a reference to Back To The Future 2, which fits the framework of the film somewhat.

Both films fit like they are throwbacks to 80's film. The first being a slasher version of Groundhog's Day with touches of Friday The 13th, Halloween and Final Exam. Happy Death Day 2U has more in common with 80's sci-fi sequels than horror movies. It is a change that some fans of the first have to get used to. It did take some nice turns and was a bit predictable but still enjoyable. That's the best thing about both of these films, they are so fun and entertaining. They also feel like films that will get multiple viewings on Blu-Ray.

I did enjoy Happy Death Day 2U. It's a sequel that changes some aspects of how the first one plays out. But it doesn't erase it altogether. The first one still is canon but it's hard to explain without spoiling a huge plot point. Jessica Rothe is a fantastic lead and final girl. She is the glue keeping the film together literally and figuratively. The only issues I had is that the film went a bit more sci-fi and less horror. I hope in an eventual third film the filmmakers go back to what made the first one great, a hilariously fun horror film not a sci-fi sequel.

It was here on this blog that I declared how excited I was for Velvet Buzzsaw, the new collaboration from writer/director Dan Gilroy and Jake Gyllenhaal. The trailer look nuts. The poster as you can see above is very interesting. Then there was the rest of the cast that featured Rene Russo, Toni Collette, and John Malkovich. It seemed that Netflix has another winner on their hands. The last time we saw a film with Gyllenhaal director by Gilroy was the biting satire Nightcrawler. That film was so well made and tough to sit through. It also featured one if not the best performance from Gyllenhaal I've seen on screen. That film also featured a good performance (and one of the last) from genre icon Bill Paxton (rest in peace). I hyped myself up for Velvet Buzzsaw. And once again I got too hyped too soon.

Velvet Buzzsaw is somewhat complicated. The film is about an art dealer (Russo), her employee Josephina (Zawe Ashton), an art critic (Gyllenhaal), a rival dealer Jon Dondon (Tom Sturridge), a work appreciator (Collette) and Coco everyone's assistant (Natalia Dyer). When Josephina comes home one night after a bad day at the office she finds a tenant in her building who has died. She happens to find paintings in the abandoned apartment. She decides to take the initiative, sell the painting, move up in her job and become rich in high art society. What everyone doesn't know about these paintings is that there is something more to them. To anyone trying to profit off them, there are dire consequences.

The trailer played this out like a maybe scary, but definitely crazy supernatural horror movie that might be pretty crazy. It is not that...at all. The film is a serious kind of satire of the art world and rich people. There is not one redeeming in character in the bunch. Everyone is out for themselves, especially when they all get a hold of these paintings. The demand for them is high. And with the greedy comes all the other sins that run for humans.

No one is redeemable really. Except for Malkovich character, who is a famous artist is who is not working sober trying to get his groove back. Daveed Diggs (Blindspotting) shows up as that hot artist every company is vying for. They might be the two most redeemable characters in the whole film. It's funny shot at the world around artist stating that the artists are the most redeemable characters in a sea of sharks. But isn't that who it goes, the talent is just the talent.

The film does a take a while to get to the main story. For the most part, we are doing world building, putting us in the vicious world. Once the horror beats hit, they come fast and then slows down until the end where it ramps up. The kills are all very different and unique. One of which is quite bloody. I definitely enjoyed a few of them for their uniqueness. But this film is mostly a slow burn. And if you don't get sucked in, then it's a struggle to end which raising way more questions than it answers. Somethings are explained but most of the info we get is for us the viewers to interpret as this happened and maybe that lead to this. There are some comedic moments but those aren't played for hard laughs just subtle giggles. There is a decent running gag with Dyer's character that I enjoyed.

I was expecting Gilroy to go wild with this film. I thought we'd get this over the top satire that happens to be a goofy supernatural horror film. I thought the film might be played for laughs mostly. That what I wanted from this film. What I got was the opposite. This could have been a great cult film. The story is not very enticing. Most of the characters are extremely deplorable. By a certain point in the movie, I was hoping everyone would bite it in various ways. It was played way too serious. And most of the great talent here seems like they are sleepwalking through their roles.

I'm not saying Gilroy is a one hit wonder. I have not seen his second film Roman J. Israel, Esq. I have read that it's an underrated drama with a great performance from Denzel. But I know that that film and Velvet Buzzsaw are nowhere near on the level that Nightcrawler is. I am severely disappointed with his film. Coulda, woulda, shoulda is what best describes this for me. It wanted a bonkers bloody horror satire with some great actors. It just didn't hit me at all and I felt like I was sleepwalking watching it. Chalk this up to another film we know why Netflix has.

I would say that it's hard to wrap up a movie series well these days. A lot of people over hype the sequels then they seem to be a big let down. Not many trilogies get three good or great movies that wrap up well. Even The Avengers movies, which not a trilogy, but almost don't get everything right. It's very refreshing when a film franchise in the process of making a trilogy gets three separate films that each stand on their own but also connect a very long story it's trying to tell. Guess what ladies, gentlemen, and children of all ages? How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World is that movie that ends the trilogy so perfectly but stands on its own as its own movie. And this film culminates a trilogy that I think more people need to look at as one of the best trilogies of all time.

This third film in the series follows Hiccup (Jay Baruchel) and his Viking clan Eret (Kit Harrington), Snotlout Jorgenson (Jonah Hill), Ruffnut Thorston (Kristen Wiig), Fishlegs (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), & Astrid (America Ferrera) try to fight to free the dragons as they all co-exist in this world. It seems a hired hunter Grimmel (F. Murray Abraham) has other plans and he found the only other "night fury" in existence. This all causes Hiccup to question his leadership. The Viking clan sets out to stop Grimmel before he can wipe out dragons for good, meanwhile, they come upon a dragon utopia called the Hidden World, which also needs protecting.

As I wrote what is above, I really made things a lot more convoluted than the plot actually is. It's very straight forward and flows well despite really not having that three-act structure. Everything moves so fast, that you get sucked into the story and characters that when it ends you want more. Writer/director Dean DeBlois has created a rich world here with excellent characters that are three dimensional. Even the dragons don't feel like cardboard cutouts. They, especially Toothless, have their own journey they are all working too. It's a journey that I wish we had more films to watch in this series.

All the actors bring their game characters it seems they all love to voice. Hiccup gets his evolution as a leader. He has ups and downs. Nothing is forced, each character goes through their own story that just flows throughout this beautiful world. The visuals are at a high level in this film. It's one of the best looking animated features I've ever seen. The Hidden World, when seen on the big screen, is something to behold. It seems the entire cast, crew, and animators wanted to go out on a high note. The film is emotional, heartwarming, occasionally scary, action-packed and extremely funny. The comedic moments are natural. When they come, it's at light speed and you won't realize until later that you are laughing so hard you missed something.

Along with the characters I mentioned Hiccup's mother Valka (Cate Blanchett) comes back in a good leadership/mother role. Even Gerard Butler's Stoick has some poignant tug at the heartstrings flashback moments. The only issue with any of the characters I had was the villain Grimmel. He's a bit underdeveloped. We here pieces of his backstory, he's always one step ahead of Hiccup and his crew. But it just didn't win me over. He's basically a hunter and that's it. He felt very much akin to the hunter in The Lost World: Jurrasic Park, just an actual villain not an antihero.

The Hidden World along with Into The Spider-Verse have shown that there can be lasting animated films that can impact and inspire kids and adults alike. Both films have great character works, wonderful visuals, excellent comedy and strong ideas they aren't pushing on the audience. This film is smart in letting the audience feels something natural. The script works so well on some many levels as an action fantasy, a character piece and most of all a great end to fantastic movie trilogy. If you don't get a bit choked up at the final few minutes and the end credits sequences, I'm sorry you have no soul. How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World is a fun, fitting end feature to a great film trilogy. The film will give you all the feels and then some. I can see this being one of my favorite films of the year. It's also my front runner for the animated feature Oscar in 2020.

I love slasher movies. It's a sick kind of love. My favorite film series of all time, in general, is Friday The 13th. Halloween '78 is one of my favorite films of all time. I wouldn't call myself a horror expert but I'm a nerd for the genre. But there are various levels of the genre. There are so many bad slasher movies that are just plain bad. But there are so bad slasher movies that can be fun. Then you hit the area of so bad it's good. The really good ones we all know are the ones that are iconic. We don't get many straightforward slasher movies. Usually, there is some kind of twist or the film is a satire or even a meta-film trying to playing with the genre. Hell Fest is just a straight-up slasher film.

Directed Gregory Plotkin (he edited most of the Paranormal Activity films) Hell Fest is the story of Natalie (Amy Forsyth) who is coming home from school to hang out with her best friend Brooke (Reign Edwards). Brooke has arranged for the two of them, along with Brooke's wild roommate Taylor (Arrow & Scream The TV Series' Bex Taylor-Klaus) and a few of the boys they know to get VIP at the traveling theme park Hell Fest. But a masked killer starts offing patrons of the park and stalking these group of friends. They have to navigate the park while trying to figure out if these acts are real or fake.

With almost all slasher films, it's all about the killer, the twist and the kills for the most part. Hell Fest is somewhat a throwback to the slasher films of the '80s. It's not meta, it's not trying to parody or satirize the genre. This group of 20-somethings just want to go out and have some fun on Halloween and happen to run the ire of a masked killer. He does have a somewhat unique look and kills with just about anything that is around him. Some of the kills are kind of gruesome. But most of them the killer is using something around him. The film does a nice job with the astetic and set design. This Hell Fest park feels real, alive and something that would be insane to have in real life. If someone could pull it off that would be a great feat.

The cast is okay at those roles. In a film like this, we don't always get a memorable final girl or characters. This film is more about showing off the park and keeping the mystery or growing the legend of their killer. Bex Taylor-Klaus seems like she is having the most fun as the outgoing very sexual loves being scared roommate. I think this film for her was her time to break out of her normal geeky type roles. Horror legend Tony Todd shows up in a cameo role as The Barker, who seems to run this fake Hell Fest show inside the park. His role is only a cameo but there are rumors that if the film gets a sequel his character would be featured more. I don't understand who you have the Candyman himself in the film and not give him a bigger part.

The best aspect of the film is the killer themselves. We are never given much information about why they are killing or who they are. There is an interesting end twist that leads into the credits that plays well but I'm sure would have played much better if the film was more entertaining. In the end, Hell Fest is just another slasher film. The film doesn't really standout expect for its interesting premise and presentation. It gives the audience what it wants but you never really care for the characters. And most of the kills aside for two (one is brutal) are pretty plane. If a sequel is greenlit, I hope they dive a bit deeper into the why of the killer but all go all out with the deaths. Give us horror geeks something to chew on.

The idea of living the same day over and over again has been done a lot. One of my prominent films is the Bill Murray classic Groundhog's Day. That's usually the film everyone first thinks of when diving into that subgenre. More recently the idea has been done very well with Edge of Tomorrow (my favorite Tom Cruise movie of all time). When describing any film that does the same day over and over it's basically Groundhog's Day but in a certain genre. Happy Death Day was described as Groundhog's Day as a slasher film.

I was kind of interested in it but I had a huge problem with one element of the film. I didn't like that it was a PG-13 slasher film. The slasher film genre was born out of R-Rated features. Pyscho, Halloween, Friday The 13th are all R-Rated horror films. (Psycho is more a mystery thriller but it has many elements that would be used in future films) But after seeing the film I'm okay with a PG-13 slasher when it's done well.

Happy Death Day follows a college student Tree (Jessica Rothe) as she wakes up on her birthday. She's mostly the typical pretty girl sorority snob that does she wants. The night of her birthday she's murdered by a killer wearing the babyface mask of the school's mascot. The next day Tree wakes up on her birthday thinking she had deja vu. But really she's reliving her birthday over and over again until she can break the loop by unmasking the person who is trying to kill her.

Much like Groundhog's Day when Bill Murray's character just start killing himself to try to see if he can get out of the day, Tree dies in some slasher ways but also some creative ways. The PG-13 rating doesn't hinder the film. Although I would have loved to see it get a bit more violent. I'm sure the film wouldn't have made as much at the box office if it was R. The film is first and foremost Rothe's film. She handles the lead duties and the "final girl" duties so well. At first, you really can't stand her but through the film, she starts to grow on you. Her character is written well of enough by the end you are rooting for her like you should in a horror movie.

There's also more to her character than meets the eye. That information only comes out when needed and is scattered out well over the course of the film. I think without her charm the film would have fallen flat. The film also builds some good tense moments. We know what the killer wears but he can strike anywhere. We are just not sure where and when. There are a few jumps scares that could have been used more effectively. The mostly gets the tension well.

Not only is the film tense at times, but it's also pretty funny. I wouldn't say it is a horror comedy but it knows what type of film it is and doesn't shy away from being a bit whacky. There are quite a few moments when I was laughing out loud. When Tree gets fed up with the day she just goes all out like someone should when they have to relive the day they died over and over again. It takes a toll on the mind because no one will believe them. Israel Broussard (To All the Boys I've Loved Before) shows up as the love interest who at times does try to give Tree advice about who to figure out who is killing her.

Happy Death Day was much better than I had ever expected. It's at times funny, fun slasher film that takes a subgenre used somewhat often and runs with it. I hope this starts to make the rounds in the cult horror groups because I think it makes a great statement for being a fun cult film. Jessica Rothe is a very good lead and I'd love to see her get more strong leading roles. Director Christopher Landon (Scouts Guide To The Zombie Apocalypse) with writer Scott Lobdell (Uncanny X-Men) have made a really fun easily accessible but also a nerdy horror film that satires but also embraces the cliches. I'm very excited for the sequel Happy Death Day 2U I just don't know how they are going to explain it storywise. But I can't wait to find out.

Joe Cornish is a director I've been waiting to make another movie for quite a while. His debut Attack The Block is an excellent and very underrated sci-fi action horror adventure. The film not only has an interesting premise, brought us future Star Wars star, John Boyega but is a great character piece in the area of genre films. It uses teenagers to attack many social issues along with being a crazy sci-fi adventure set in modern times. That film got me hooked and I have waited with baited breathe for his next feature. He has worked since then writing the Tintin movie (which I love) and has a credit as a writer on the first Ant-Man film. But eight years later we get a nice play on the famous tale of King Arthur and the Knights of the Roundtable.

The Kid Who Would Be King stars Louis Ashbourne Serkis as Alex, a kid who along with his friend Bedders (Dean Chaumoo) get bullied, picked on and beaten up like it goes with outcast in school. Alex decides he's not going to take it anymore and fights back. He gets himself and the two bullies Lance and Kaye (Tom Taylor, Rhianna Dorris) sent to detention. On the way home, he's chased into an abandoned building site where Alex comes upon the sword in the stone. This leads to the awakening of Arthur's half Sister, Morgana (Rebecca Ferguson) who is itching for revenge and to dive the world into darkness. With the help of his roundtable and a younger Merlin (Angus Imrie, older Merlin is Patrick Stewart in a nice extended cameo) they must take down Morgana and her minions before she plunges the world into total darkness. For a storyline that is pretty straight forward, there is a lot of depth to the film. The film is dealing with a lot of current issues. It goes into the state of the world at large, even touching on Brexit but not in a direct way. It very much has a message, but it's not going to push it on you. This is still a family film that happens to be an action adventure. But it has a lot of say and I like that it went deeper with his characters and themes. It very much felt like it was a film from the '80s. It placed children with certain issues in danger but they all turn out that they need to look inside themselves first. Alex the main character has the most baggage to his character. Serkis does a good job of leading the film. The viewers definitely get sucked into his character and his journey.

The cast is good, with Stewart's cameo bringing a nice distinguished touch to the film. It is Angus Imrie who steals the whole film. His young Merlin is full of energy. He lights up the screen. We almost don't feel as enthused to go on this ride when he's not on screen. He has some of the best lines and moments in the film. I could watch a whole film of his character just interacting with things in modern times. I don't want to see him typecast but I'd love to see him lead in another comedic adventure or action comedy.

The film does have quite a bit of action but it does slow down in the middle. There are moments where our character has to get to places. These moments are very low key. Not dragging the film down but just more subdued than the rest of the film. This is all a credit to the script written by Cornish. He knows the intelligence of his audience, he never makes them feel dumb or have to beat them over the head with information. Everything plays out well with how the story is playing out. We as the audience are never too far ahead of our characters as they try to figure things out. When the action beats hit there is something you've never seen before but well shot and plenty entertaining.

The Kid Who Would Be King is smarter, more fun and entertaining than it deserves to be. I actually enjoyed this reimaging of the King Arthur more the most of the straight forward adaptations. Joe Cornish creates a world that is lively with real consequences and dealing with real-life drama. I'm pretty sure if they came out when I was a kid I would absolutely love it. It falls in the category with films like The Goonies, The Monster Squad, and even Super Eight. I do hope this is a hit on blu-ray there is a section of the film world that deserves a film like this. I just hope we don't have to wait another eight years for another film from Cornish. He's too talented to be sitting on the sidelines.

I try not to give into the hype. I hate when I give into the hype of a film and totally let down. It happens way too often than not. Put so much expectation on a film that it can never live up to the hype. Hereditary is one of those films that had so much hype behind it. I never got to see it in theaters. And at some time I was turned off by the hype. I barely even watch the trailer for the film. It just didn't interest me. I had no idea for a while that it was even a horror movie. It just looked like supernatural drama. Thankfully, I wasn't also spoiled for the ending or any of the key story elements. I am kind of disappointed that I couldn't give the film my cash dollars. It would have been a worthwhile investment. Hereditary lives up to the hype and then some.

The film stars Toni Collette as the mother of a family, who just lost their grandmother. Rounding out that family is Gabriel Byrne as the father Steve, Alex Wolff as the oldest Peter and newcomer Milly Shapiro as the youngest, daughter Charlie. After the passing of the family's grandmother, odd occurrences and deep-rooted family secrets start to emerge. That's all you need to know about this film. I would even stay away from any trailers. Because the less you know the better off you are. First time directed Ari Aster crafts a family grieving drama that happens to be one of the most messed up horror films I've ever seen. I will not lie during the last five to ten minutes my jaw had dropped and was open the entire time.

For a first time filmmaker, this man has his technical devices, storytelling and acting down like he's a pro. Toni Collette gives one, if not the best performance of her career as Annie, the mother who is dealing with the loss of her mother and a family that is just clinging together. You feel for her, you cry with her and for her. You just want the rest of family to believe her when things start happening. And we as the viewers are just as clueless as to what is going on as she is. But when it all opens up its eye-opening. It's terrible that she didn't get much award season love. (Especially from the Oscars, as she should have got a nomination for Best Actress)

Byrne is very believable as the father who is lost as what to do about his wife and trying to make sure his children are safe. Alex Wolff is excellent as Peter. He has to deal with the loss of grandmother he never knows but just trying to be a high school kid. As his mother's mental health deteriorates so does his. Milly Shapiro rounds out the cast. Her performance for a newcomer is so deep. We are not sure what is going on with her but her dialogue and everything she does is important to story.

Aster, who also wrote the film, layers the film with a deep history. And once each layer is peeled back we get a deep dive into a family that is more trouble than we see on the surface. And it's maybe coming from one source. There is really no exposition which elevates the film. Dialogue is never used to explain anything. We follow this family as they deal with the aftermath of the grandmother's death. Sounds play a great role in the film and the sound design is superb. There's not much music outside of songs that are built into the story. The sound is used to throw off and mess with the audience. The film is excellently shot. With each scene meant to explain something. No shot goes wasted. And there are things missed on first viewing. This is a film so rich it has to be experienced multiples times. I know there are things I missed or didn't understand well enough on first viewing.

Plus Aster knows his horror and supernatural elements. When the film gets outerworldly the sound plays a very important key. But the director builds tension with some of his sound and cinematography. Blink and you might miss something that was key to explaining the story. But when it turns to horror the film is grotesque. This man loves the horror genre and I commend him for it. Hereditary in the long game will go down as one of the best supernatural horror films of all time sitting next to films like The Exorcist and The Omen. Aster has created a layered, beautiful and haunting horror film that shocks and digs deep. This is no doubt the best horror film of 2018. It's also one of the best horror films of the last decade.

I'm a sucker for a good action film. I don't know what it is. Probably because I grew up on them. My parents the ones who got me into movies started me off with Clint Eastwood westerns, Bruce Lee movies, and James Bond films. So I always love a good action movie. I mean in my film life I've grown to be a bit pickier when it comes to my action films. There are so many out there that are just terrible. When I find a list of films that people say are underrated, I jump at it. Most of the time its action films or horror movies that I haven't seen yet. I saw Final Score on a list. (Don't ask me what site) It was a described as a better Die Hard knockoff than Sudden Death. And the film starred Dave Bautista, Pierce Brosnan, and Ray Stevenson. That was an interesting cast for a Die Hard ripoff. Sadly, Sudden Death is a way better Die Hard knock-off than this.

The film follows Michael Knox (Bautista) as he travels to the UK. He is there to see his niece whose father, his brother, died (sorta) in the line of duty. Knox keeps an eye on here and wants to keep up a family tradition by taking her to a futbol (soccer for us Americans) match. What he doesn't know is there is a terrorist organization that has taken the match hostage. Now he has to protect his niece and the unassuming crowd safe with his special skill set. So this is Die Hard at a sporting event, exactly like Sudden Death. Only Sudden Death is more fun, entertaining and just a better overall. It does bring up that I would love to see Van Damme and Bautista in a (good) action film together.

The only reason to sit through this is Bautista. The man has a natural charisma that shines in every scene he's in. He makes the everyman soldier here proud. He's not a superhero or deadly assassin. He's just a man with military training that gets in way over his head. He does that so well. Because he gets the crap kicked out of him the entire film. I've seen action films where the good guy gets beat up but not like this. He gets put through the wringer and it's kind of refreshing. This film will help realize how awesome he is as Drax in the MCU. He's going to be hard to replace if they have to.

Brosnan's role is more of an extended cameo. He really doesn't show up until near the end of the film. And it's in a plot twist that you can spot coming from the opening moments. He does give a decent speech before the end but that's about it. I've never seen Ray Stevenson in anything I enjoyed. Yes he's Volstagg (was) in the MCU. But I think the best idea for his character happens at the beginning of Thor Ragnarok. No, I'm not a fan of Punisher: War Zone. I really enjoy the extended version of the Thomas Jane Punisher film over War Zone. Stevenson's villain is the typical angry war criminal we've all seen before. He has a reason for what he's doing but it's not enough for us to really care. He's just a cartoon bad guy.

The action scenes are nothing to write home about. They actually don't really show up for a long while. They want to build some tension and give Knox some character. They put things in place before paying this off. But the payoffs are not that great. There's a brutal fight in a kitchen with Knox and one of the main henchmen in the terrorist crew. There is an elevator fight that is bloody and funny to kick off the big action scenes. This is one of the most obvious Die Hard ripoffs made. They don't even try to shy away from the similarities. Some scenes and lines are ripped off verbatim. It's laughable.

As a person who watches Die Hard every Christmas Eve, I know the film by heart. Final Score is not an improvement of that story. It's just one that takes the idea and runs with it at a sporting event. Which as I've said multiple times, Sudden Death just does it better. If you are gonna attack this beast it's for Dave Bautista. He's is excellent as the everyman that has to save the day because there's no one else. This man needs more leading roles in good action films that are outside of the MCU. He's got the action chops and I wanna see him wreck house in a film I can get behind.

Period dramas aren't in my wheelhouse. But I will see anything with (almost) Rachel Weisz. The Favourite when I saw the trailer the first time interested me but not enough to run out to see it. Months passed and it starting getting on tons of top ten lists. Then I was listening to the SlashFilm podcast and there were multiple people just raving about this film. And there was an element about the film that piqued my interest. More about that later. I had not seen a film from Yorgos Lanthimos before viewing this. I've heard mixed things about The Lobster and The Killing of Sacred Deer. They are both on my watchlist now. One thing I had read is that those films were odd and maybe because he was directing from his own script. This time around he was shooting from a script by Deborah Davis and Tony McNamara.

The film takes place in 18th century England, following the relationship between Queen Anne (Olivia Colman) and her faithful aid Sarah Churchill (Rachel Weisz). Lady Sarah governs in the Queen's sted as her health is failing. But Sarah's cousin Abigail (Emma Stone) arrives, her charms win Queen Anne, leading to a bitter rivalry and fight for the attention's of Anne and to be her favorite. At times this movie is utterly hilarious. There were moments I was laughing out loud. But then moments when it was hard to watch these three women just tear each other apart. And they do tear each other part, mentality and psychologically. It's such an entertaining watch because I didn't know where the film was going.

All three leads are excellent here. Colman is the standout because she has a wonderfully honest portrayal of a woman in power who's health is failing. She's gone through so much in her life she's quick to cling to anyone who is kind to her. But from the start we know she's not in the right frame of mind. I see exactly why she's one of the front-runners for all the lead actresses categories this award season. One person I definitely think needs more attention is Rachel Weisz. As Sarah, she's tough, firm but kind and caring. There is a genuine love that Sarah has for Anne. She just knows that Anne isn't always thinking clearly. Sarah makes the tough decision that Anne can't make which puts in not in a good like with parliament, one member which happens to be Nicholas Hoult as a biting member named Harley.

Emma Stone is good here. For the longest time, I was a "hater". But lately with her roles specifically this and Birdman, I'm starting to enjoy her on screen. For me, this is the best I've ever seen her. She takes what she wants as Abigail, having a rough past, does everything she can to get to where she can be content. But is she really content? All of these women want to be happy but do everything in their power to be totally miserable. I did not see elements of the loving relationship between Anne and Sarah. It's not shown off in the trailer but it's a key part of the film. Abigail uses her knowledge during a passionate moment to gain an upper hand. That spins the story upside down.

Lanthimos shoots this so well, with many pants, long takes and interesting use of fisheye lenses. The movie is beautiful to look at. Like a good oil painting, the cinematography will transport the viewer to this version of the 18th century. There are moments when modern-day traits show up. The dance during the middle of the film is hilarious to the point I really thought the actors on screen were going to start a breakdance battle. Even with the setting, the still film to engage on a dark comedic level. But it doesn't get as dark as expected. I thought things might get horrific. But it seems Lanthimos wasn't to show how horrible can be without being physically horrible.

I will say that the end, even though there was no way to for a happy ending, the film's end kind of let me down. I was expecting more. Maybe one last act of villainy or a character trying to get redemption. But no one is redeemed, everyone gets what's coming to them. The Favourite was entertaining with a great job by the lead actresses, all who show be get some recognition during this award season. It's dark, funny, depressing but overall a nice trip to a time that was in a country going through turmoil. I'm happy with my first feature from Yorgos Lanthimos. And very happy to see he didn't play up the LGBTQ factors for but let it play out naturally as a key point to express how much some of these characters love each other. I'm excited to see his previous films and see what he can come up with next.

The name M. Night Shyamalan brings a lot of thoughts to the mind. Most of them nowadays are jokes and few negative connotations. But a while back this was a director who was being called the next Spielberg. He came out of the gate with two hugely successful films The Sixth Sense, and Unbreakable. But then with a bunch of misses to follow (Signs, The Village, Lady In The Water, The Happening) he became a pun of himself. I wasn't a huge fan of him to start. I'm still not a fan of The Sixth Sense. (I can get into that another time) But Unbreakable was a good deconstruction of the superheroes of film. Shyamalan got back up on his successful horse with The Visit. Then we get a secret unofficial sequel *spoilers* to Unbreakable with Split.

Split was his rise back into the mainstream success and spotlight. It's a great character thriller (that I'll be reviewing soon). Now we come upon the end of his Eastrail 177 trilogy with Glass. What I didn't notice is that each film is titled for a specific character. And during much of each film that character is the main focus. Glass does have a lot of juggling to do. But when Mr. Glass is the focus, he takes center stage. Glass takes place a few months after the events of Split. Kevin Wendall Crumb is loose at the powerful Horde, still stalking women who are not pure. We find out David Dunn (Willis) is still walking the streets taking out the evil of society. H's been doing it for a while with his son Joseph as his ear and eyes of the world. (He's Alfred to Dunn's Batman) He also has been dubbed as The Overseer.

It just happens that The Overseer meets the Horde and they both get taken to a mental facility that happens to be housing Mr. Glass. A doctor, Sarah Paulson's character has been assigned to work with all three to prove they aren't superheroes and villains before they all are permanently locked up for good. That's as much as you know going into this film. It's a dramatic thriller, not an action film. This is an M. Night film. Don't expect an all-out action film like the trailers has been promoting. There are really only two action scenes, one on one fights that are interestingly filmed. This film much like Unbreakable is to deconstruct the characters, find out what drives them and figure out are they really superhuman. We know the answer but the characters in this world don't.

M. Night is on his game in this film. It doesn't have the darkness of Unbreakable, but it does have the emotional moments and characterization that some of us love. Willis is the best I've seen him in a long while. Jackson seems to be having the most fun. He's off screen for a majority of the film. It's only when things are revealed that he gets to take the stage. He's really good as the villain with so many layers who is always one step ahead. As much as I love seeing him play a hero, Jackson is just as good a villain with Mr. Glass and Kingsman's Valentine. (Can someone please tell me why this man doesn't have Oscar gold yet?!)

As good as Jackson is McAvoy doesn't just steal but he makes this film what it is. It wouldn't be as entertaining, as talked about, a thrilling, as emotional without his performance. Certain scenes he's changing identities on the fly, it's so impressive. Each character inside Kevin Wendall Crumb is fleshed out, even though some get more screen time than others. I know because of the type of film it is he won't get any award love at the end of the year but I definitely think he should. Anya Taylor-Joy was the breakout star of Split and she continues to shine. She gets some great character moments (some of the best in the film). She's on her way to be a full-fledged leading lady.

Sarah Paulson, who I always love, doesn't get the best character. It's not her performance but more like what the script doesn't give her. On screen she's good but her character isn't that deep. We don't get to know more about her. And the reasons for her being assigned to his case are shrouded in secret until almost the last frames of the film. But she is good just she could have been better if the character was written better. You have Sarah Paulson, let her dive in all the way. I'm not going to spoil anything but I do have to mention that along with every M. Night film there is a twist. It's a huge twist, but it's one if you have a keen eye you might see coming in from left field. I didn't hate it like I've seen many. But it's a plot twist that is very divisive. I can see what critics are not enjoying. I also see audiences rolling with it. This ending was almost inevitable with the way all the films play out.

Glass is a fitting send off to M. Night's "superhero and villain" trilogy. He wants to put extraordinary people in the real world. For the most part, he does that well. This, as a friend told me, is the anti-Marvel series. It really is. M. Night does leave things open where he could (or some other director with dramatic talents I'm looking at you David Fincher) take over to keep this world alive. I enjoyed Glass as much as I thought I would. The performances drive the film with the story going through some very similar superhero movie points. (Some feel lifted from the MCU) I wouldn't call this my favorite film of the series (that goes to Split) but with that film and this I think M. Night is on his way back to be a positive household name for filmmaking.