Reviews

In 1970, Judy Blume published 'Are You There God, It's Me Margret?' a book that, at time was banned from school due to its frank depictions of puberty, but grew to be a classic for that very same reason.

Now, in 2023, a film adaption has released, and while I cannot testify to its faithfulness, haven't not read the original book, I can say that, on its own as a film, it's great.

The film follows 11 year old Margert, as she moves to a new town and has to deal with the trials and tribulations of female adolescence.

Above all, 'Margert' is an extremely important film for all young people, but young girls especially, as it delves particularly into that culture, which is refreshing after the countless male-led coming of age films. The film does a fantastic job destigmatizing the subject matter, but also address the fears and anxieties many young people have during adolescence without shying away from the aspects that may make some people feel uncomfortable. It also deals a lot with the pressures of being young girl, and being stuck between wanting to be mature, but to also still be a kid. I really hope the subject matter doesn't scare off families, because, it is a great film and families shouldn't be afraid to discuss these things with their kids.

To get more critical about the film, the writing is verry good, I was surprised by how funny it was, but the pacing does drag a lot in the third act, and the film's secondary theme of religious and racial prejudice, is a little big sidelined throughout the whole thing and is somewhat hap handedly thrown in at the very end. Some of the chracters don't feel fully developed either.

The direction really surprised, me, Kelly Fermon Craig creates a real nostalgic look to the film's overall composition and I love the colour pallets. The score also surprised, I particularly liked the main theme. The cinematography also really added a lot to the film's mood.

All of the actors were perfect here; Rachel McAdams and Kathy Bates were standouts, but all of the young actors were incredible and should all have bright futures ahead.

Overall, despite its flaws, 'Margert' is a great watch and a must watch for young people or families. A very pleasant surprise.

DreamWorks Animation is a studio with a mixed track record, they will give you something like 'Shrek' or the Kung Fu Panda films, but just as easily, and probably more frequently, you get 'The Boss Baby' and 'Trolls' films.

So, when 'Puss in Boots: The Last Wish' was announced, I wasn't particularly excited for another instalment in the already bloated 'Shrek' franchise, but then, I watched the trailer, and something about this film seemed different, so I kept a sense of cautious optimism.

After watching the film, I can say that it blew me away, as someone how isn't a massive fan of the 'Shrek' films, 'The Last Wish' is stunning, and easily DreamWorks' best film to date.

The film follows Puss in Boots who discovers that he has used eight of nine lives and decides to go into retirement, until his dangerous past catches up with him.

Firstly, this film's animation is breathtaking, by clearly taking ques 'Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse', this film takes a more stylised approach to its animation, as opposed to the clean, washed out CGI style plaguing modern animated films. Despite being inspired by 'Spider-Verse', this film's art style is completely its own, while 'Spider-Verse' took great efforts to look like a comic book in motion, 'The Last Wish' feels more inspired by pulp graphic novels, but the fluidity in the characters' movements are sensational and the backgrounds bleed personality.

The film's story, while simple and initially feeling a bit 'McGuffin-y', deals with several dark, mature themes. The pacing is perfect, and each story feels equally divided and important, the characters are fantastically likeable (or unlikeable, in the case of 'Big' Jack Horner, played by the incredible John Mullaney, who, bizarrely was in 'Spider-Verse' too) and the humour is incredibly funny, there are scenes in this film that feel iconic the moment you see them.

The direction by Joel Crawford is sensational, he provides some of the greatest action scenes ever animated, and the opening sequence is flat-out perfection. The voice acting is incredible, Antonio Bandars is as perfect as always as Puss, Selma Hayek is also great and John Mullaney proves that his 'Spider-Verse' performance wasn't a flook, and maybe gives the film's best performance. Harvey Guillen and Florence Pugh both deserve mentions too.

The editing is fast, but precise, and the score is stunning, with the ballad 'Fearless Hero' bound to get stuck in viewers' heads for days.

Overall, this film is easily DreamWorks' best ever film in my opinion, it has so much charm, humour, heart and artistic value, I would love to see the studio continue in this direction and the animation industry in general and create more age-defying masterpieces that entertain everyone for various reasons.

A Beautiful Testament to the Importance of Imperfection.

People are complex. Grief is complex. This is something 'Somebody Somewhere' has an intrinsic understanding of.

The series follows Sam, who returns to her hometown of Kansas after tragedy, only to discover she doesn't fit in, until she meets Joel, a gay man she went to school with but never noticed until now.

Firstly, this series' writing is phenomenal, it is so quiet, and that's good thing. It remarkably makes the most mundane of situations fascinating; however, in the most mundanity is where the series finds its meaning. While the first season is largely an uplifting story, season two delves more into what Sam and Joel's relationship actually means. The series can easily bounce between relaxed, off the cuff dialogue, to intense, tightly written conversations.

The direction captures this too, with its wide shoots, the openness reflects the series' existentialist nature.

The performances are stunning too, Bridgett Everett and Jeff Hiller brings so much to their characters; their bond is palpable, as for side characters Mary Catherine Garrison and Murray Hill are excellent too. In regards to Murray Hill, I really think this series, easily has one of the best depictions of a transgender character in media. As a cisgendered person I can't comment on accuracy, but it feels earnest, and I hope more series have this kind of important representation.

Overall, 'Somebody Somewhere' is excellent, despite season one feeling a little bit plain at points, season two is the show fully blossoming into what it truly can be, it's a must see, a future HBO classic.

I love 'The Muppets'. The Henson era (both Jim and some of Brian), contain some of my favourite films ever, and 'The Muppet Show' is so ahead of its time with its satire, but since Disney purchased these iconic characters, they have been on a bit of a downward spiral, while I love the 2011 and 'Most Wanted' most of Disney's 'Muppet' production have felt empty, most of them aren't outright bad, but they feel somewhat passionless. Then, 'The Muppets Mayhem' arrived and it's the closes thing to classic 'Muppets' in years.

From Adam F. Goldberg, Bill Barretta and Jeff Yorkes, 'The Muppets Mayhem' follows the Muppets' band, The Electric Mayhem as a record assistant forces them to record an album they promised years ago.

Firstly, this series is by no means perfect; the human characters are underdeveloped and have too much screen time, some episodes' pop culture references feel forced and some episodes can be way too schmalzy. However, those issues don't bother me that much.

Writing wise it's the best since 'Most Wanted', there are some genuinely hysterical moments in this series and the emotional beats hit extremely hard. While, the human characters aren't great, pretty much everything with the Muppet characters is perfect, Dr. Teeth and Janice's arches felt particularly well done to me.

The direction, while nothing mind-blowing, and lacking in the same artistry as '79 original or 'Christmas Carol' feels a lot more passionate, which is something I can say about everything in this series and something it has above more recent 'Muppet' productions.

The puppetry is as great as always, as where the songs, 'Rock On' and 'Believe in Us' being my personal favourites.

So, while overall it is imperfect, 'Muppets Mayhem' is one of the best 'Muppet' productions in a while and definitely deserves a season two to (hopefully) work on some of these issues. If you are, or ever were a 'Muppets' fan this is more than worth your time.

I have been a Spider-Man fan pretty much my entire life, and I never felt like an adaption of the character met its full potential: I loved the Rami films, but even those are imperfect, the 'Amazing' series has a great lead in Garfield, but ultimately feel soulless and the MCU ones feel a little too bogged down into fitting into that series' cannon and feels even more soulless than the 'Amazing' films. So, I thought, that this character's future would lay solely in mediocrity with MCU, until Sony Pictures Animation, who, bar a few examples, are masters in mediocrity, released 'Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse' in 2018, and changed everything: this film was not only a landmark for comic book filmmaking, but also the entire medium of animation as a whole. I feel in love this film the moment I saw it, I was aware of the Spider-Verse storyline from the comics, but this film elevates it and its lead, Miles Morales, into legacy status. This film wasn't only a perfect Spider-Man film, but a perfect film period. This acclaim lead to two sequels announced, the first of which, 'Across the Spider-Verse' has finally released.

I was anxious about this film, as the first film is one of my favourites of all time and I had made my prince that, as along as it is just 'good', it didn't have to as good as the first, but, fortunately, the team behind this film shocked me as once again, and delivered something as good as it's predecessor, but also, exists as its own masterpiece as well.

A year and a half after Miles saved the multiverse, he is still struggling balancing his two lives and finding piece in his Spider-Man identity, while, Gwen Stacey returns and takes Miles to a mysterious group of other Spider-People, ran by the brooding, Miguel O'Hara, aka, Spider-Man 2099.

One of the most groundbreaking things about the first film was its breathtaking animation, which pushed the medium to its bounds and crafted a style entirely of its own, and while I thought this film would look great, I did not think it would advance itself, yet again form its predecessor. Yet, this film's animation outdoes the first, each dimension, and in most cases, Spider-Person, has their unique look, which somehow, blends together perfectly.

The characters from the first film are just as perfect here, and the new ones fit in perfectly, Spider-Man 2099, Spider-Punk and Spider-Man India stood out in particular. Every main character is written with intricacy and never feel like an archetype, each character is loaded with depth and a compelling personality.

One of the things that made 'Into the Spider-Verse' so special when compared to other comic book film was its story, instead of a clichéd, bland action movie story, we got a plot that gave us those superhero clichés, but also gave us deeper themes going on underneath the story. 'Across' accomplishes this too, but, as well as exploring deeper (and some more meta-textual) themes than the first, the main story is darker as well, more complex morals, and a generally more mature atmosphere bleed into the film.

This film's soundtrack and score are also an improvement over the first, the score in particular, every Spider-Person is given their own unique theme which are all excellent.

The direction excels here too, just as much as the first, with snappy action and breathtaking quieter moments too. The editing is as perfect as the first, but even more impressive, as the film's larger scope and more chaotic plot, makes a harder editing challenge, but, everything flows together perfectly and never feels overwhelming.

So, overall, 'Across the Spider-Verse', is somehow, another masterpiece from this incredible team, and even though it is only part one of a two part story, with 'Beyond the Spider-Verse' next year, is another filmmaking masterpiece, which I am sure will leave just as much of an impact as the first, it easily matches its quality and maybe excels it. It defines Miles Morales as Spider-Man, and cements that he is the best one put to screen.

Here's hoping for a Best Picture nomination.

My 'Dungeons and Dragons' knowledge isn't very vast, but I have always really liked the idea of it, despite never playing the game, so, I decided to see 'Honour Among Thieves' on a somewhat of a whim, I felt like going to the cinema, this was playing, I heard good things, so, I thought why not.

This film was an utter surprise, my expectations were rock bottom, I thought it would be passable at best, but, instead I got one of the best blockbusters I have seen in years.

The film follows a thief called Edgin, played by Chris Pine, as he gather a crew to rescue an old artefact.

In a landscape dominated by some of the most abysmal of blockbusters, 'Honour Among Thieves', stands out as, while nothing exceptional, it showcases a level of filmmaking quality usually absent in these types of blockbusters, especially in DC and Marvel's recent efforts. There feels like there is genuine passion here, an effort to make something visually distinctive, it actually feels like a filmmaker's vision.

The script, while riddled with clichés and some pacing issues, is surprisingly tight, and most importantly: funny and engaging. This film has several great laughs, but more surprisingly some genuinely impactful emotional beats, which the comedy never intrudes upon. Its characters are all distinct and memorable, they don't feel like cardboard cutouts of film protagonists.

The cast are also great, and have great chemistry, Chris Pine in particular surprised me with his fun and charismatic performance.

In short, 'Honour Among Thieves' is by no means perfect but it is a throughly refreshing and fun blockbuster that felt lost to time, I would recommend to D&D fans and non-fans alike, it's a real winner that I would love to watch a sequel to.

'King of the Hill' was created by Mike Judge ('Beavis and Butt-Head') and Greg Daniels ('The Simpsons'), this became FOX's first real attempt (aside from 'The Critic') to replicate its success with 'The Simpsons' to develop another adult animated series.

The series follows straight-laced, traditional, Texan family man, Hank Hill (Mike Judge) as he tries to deal with the new modern ways, often brought on by his quirky son Bobby (Pamela Aldon) or his niece Luanne (Brittany Murphy) alongside his wife Peggy (Kathy Numjy).

The series, in my opinion, delves into satirical ground more than 'The Simpsons' with the exception of certain episodes (I.e, 'Homer's Phobia', 'Homer Badman' etc.), each episode, typically, in the early seasons, anyway, would all be focussed on a topical social issue and explore it, making the series rather more 'South Park' like your other animated sitcoms.

Though one of the things that made 'King of the Hill' special, and still does, is that, despite its satirical edge, it never made its core cast characters ever unlikeable to further its point or comedy, which I feel, makes its messages stronger.

The characters are another one of the series' biggest strengths, and something I feel it has over 'The Simpsons', Hank, Bobby, Luanne and Peggy are all amazing characters who are significantly more layered than a lot of other sitcom characters, the side characters offer this too, Dale and Boomhouer are probably my favourite, but Kahn and Connie are close up there too.

The series' humour is always intelligent, subtle and clever, alongside 'The Simpsons' and 'Bob's Burgers' there are the only FOX animated sitcoms that are routinely and consistently thoughtful and clever, in my opinion.

The only downside to this series is that the brilliance doesn't last during the entire course of its run, at around season 8, the series takes a huge dip and the last 4 seasons are pretty painful to get through, the thoughtful satire, humour, great character development are all kind of thrown out the window to point where the series doesn't feel like itself.

However, the series' high points cannot be overstated, so, the short bout of low quality can be forgiven, so please check out 'King of the Hill' it and 'Bob's Burgers' are the only other FOX animated series that live up to 'The Simpsons'' legacy, if you're looking for intelligent satire and wholesome moments with well thought-out characters, you can't really do better, I'll tell you h'wat.

(Seasons 1-8: 10/10, Seasons 9-13: 5.5/10).

MTV isn't exactly know for its quality programming, especially nowadays, where they are mostly know for reality shows, but in the '90s they had Mike Judge's 'Beavis and Butt-Head', a cultural staple of the time, but is more widely accepted as a biting satire of the youth culture that adored it, while it doesn't personally appeal to me, I certainly see its appeal, but it's the 1997 spin-off series focusing on a cantankerous teenage girl who went to Beavis and Butt-Head's school that I love.

Premiering in 1997, from Glenn Eicheler and Susie Lewis, 'Daria' followed the titular teenage misanthrope moving from Beavis and Butt-Head's school to a new one, where she deals with the daily incompetence of her parents, school staff and peers, alongside her best friend Jane.

In the '90s 'Daria' challenged the perception of women in media, and was pretty trailblazing, while also challenging the portrayal of teenagers on television from being stupid, brain-dead morons. Channeling MTV's rebellious spirit into thoughtful satire, 'Daria' is easily one of the more progressive shows of its time, prior to 'South Park's' ascent into a social commentary behemoth, 'Daria' was there first tackling race, sexism, class and more with intelligent humour and heart.

'Daria's' characters are another huge strength: Daria herself, her best friend, Jane and her brother Trent, Jodi (an intellectual equal to Daria) as well all of Daria's family are great characters, and are all well developed throughout the series' run.

This series is dripping with snarky, smart dialogue, it totally revels in '90s 'counter culture', it deeply reminds me of 'South Park' with its irreverence and general distain for authority, I also enjoy its animation, despite that fact that it has aged, much like 'Beavis and Butt-Head', it fits the show's motif well.

Overall, 'Daria' is one the '90s most underrated shows, it's a subtle satire, with great characters and brimming heart, and I can't recommend it enough, while some later seasons (4 and 5) take some character choices I dislike and have some really bad episodes, the good still outweighs the bad.

Following, 'Thanks to Them' would undoubtedly be a hard task for 'The Owl House' team, and while, I don't think this episode quite matches that one, it is still a great episode.

The story, humour and animation are all still top-notch here, my only real complaint is the pacing, which, unlike 'Thanks to Them' sags a bit, and I feel like it could have benefited slightly from being two separate episode, but really, it didn't impact my enjoyment of the episode and I am still excited for the finale.

There were some excellent character moments in this episode, which easily made up for the weaker elements.

Overall, a solid episode that builds up well to the finale.

'Bob's Burgers' is my favourites show of all time, it also remains funny and clever, despite how long the series has been going on for, but even I am surprised that the series has remained not only consistent across its 13 seasons, but still manages to bring out series defining episodes.

This episode, 'The Plight Before Christmas', is one of those, it's an episode that captures everything that is amazing about 'Bob's', it's funny and smart, with fast, snappy dialogue, but it never loses sight of its heart, and this episode has one of the series' most heartfelt moments, which, just so happens to involve my favourite character in the series, Louise Belcher.

It actually made me tear up, something, clearly, I should expect from a show that's feature debut did the same, as well as a couple of other episodes from the series' run.

As always, the voice acting and animation are just incredible, the collection of voice actors for the series are top-notch.

So, thanks to the entire 'Bob's' team, for everything they do make this show happen.

Premiering on the BBC in 2014 , 'Detectorists' arrived as an unassuming piece of televisual genius, written, directed and starring Mackenzie Crook, from The UK Office fame, the show follows a pair of middle-aged metal detectorsits (yes, detectorists, not detectors), named Andy and Lance, while, not initially sounding like a comedic gold mine, Crook exposes himself as an outstanding writer, in both comedy and drama, as the series manages to find an unexpected level of substance in the lives of these two outcasts.

The first seasons, as with most sitcoms, isn't quite as amazing as the other two, it slightly struggles to find the right dynamics for its characters, while wanting to find the type of show it wants to be: did it want to yet another smarmy, cynical series, or did it want to go for something sweeter, which, is harder to write. The series finds its direction around the middle of the first season, and uses the remaining episodes to properly define its characters and their dynamics; before long, the entire of the duo's club, DMDC (Danbury Metal Detecting Club) are all unique, fleshed our characters. Outside of the club, in the first series we also have Andy's longtime girlfriend, Becky, the DMDC's rival club and the DMDC's new member Sophie.

The second and third season, expand on things further, introducing new characters, but more importantly, on the air of poignancy that was draped across the first season, which also helps the comedy, it focuses on the mundanity of life, like a scientist with microscope, and drums out these witty observations, but is never scared of the sadder qualities to these observations, and allows the characters the breath in these quiet moments.

Not every series could pull off these quiet moments, but this proves how great Crook's writing and characters are, it takes the good qualities of series like 'The Office', elevates them, and removes the lesser qualities to make it stronger.

The performances are incredibly intricate too, Mackenzie Crook and Toby Jones are incredible, so too, are the side characters that fill the series.

Crook's direction here is phenomenal, he captures such delicate, powerful emotions, so expertly and precisely, it is easily one of TV best directed comedies, the same goes for the cinematography as well, while the landscapes are inherently beautiful, it requires skill to make them pop the way they do.

'Detectorists' is such a surprise, it was a series I thought would make me laugh, but not one that I thought would deeply impact me emotionally, it's a show that I yearn for in life's sadder moments, and the happier, it drifts through my mind constantly, bringing a tear and a smile, much like the landscapes of Danbury, the series' is a hidden gem, that holds a great number of treasures you might not expect. Please, please watch it.

As a huge fan of 'Gravity Falls', I have been excited to check out 'The Owl House' from its announced, considering, it was created by 'Gravity Falls' alumni, Dana Terrace, I believe that I have been watching live since around the beginning of season two, I liked season one, but it felt lacking, to a degree, but it definitely improved during its run, season two was better once again, but I felt like it lacked "Gravity Falls'" genius, which is fine, it's its own show, just because some of the same creative team worked on the two doesn't mean that it has to be as good. However, the second half of season two then premiered, and while it still contained some of my prior problems, it was creeping up to 'Gravity Falls' levels of quality, particularly in episodes like 'Hollow Mind' and 'King's Tide', then, the third and sadly final season's premiere episode arrived, 'Thanks to Them' picking up from season two's cliffhanger, and it was incredible.

This episode managed to have everything I wanted the series to be, the story, characters, humour and animation felt like they were functioning on their highest level.

A truly spectacular episode that has me excited for what's to come, but sad as there isn't much left.

Premiering in 1997, 'South Park' arrived and shocked everyone, and, ultimately, changed the animated landscape the most since 'The Simpsons'. The series was a hit for Comedy Central and its owner Paramount, and so, only a few years after it began a feature film was commissioned in a bid to capitalise off of the series' popularity. So, in 1999, 'South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut' released.

The plot follows the characters from the series, as 8 year olds Stan, Kyle, Cartman and the immortal Kenny (whom, in the series, constantly dies in, at that point, every episode), as they deiced to go an see the R rated feature debut of their favourite TV show from Canada, Terrance and Phillip, however, the film's use of strong language 'corrupts' the kids who begin to swear all the time, so, this forces the overprotective parents of the town of South Park to take action.....and put the blame purely on somewhere else and choose.... Canada.

I think anyone who knows even the slightest thing about 'South Park' can see the parallels between the show and the fictional show Terrance and Phillip, as, when 'South Park' premiered it was meet with shock, disgust and outrage from parents. The film's plot is severely meta, using Terrance and Phillip as a placeholder for the series, these elements of hyper-focussed satire, which make up around the first 40 minutes, are easily the film's strongest plot, it also ties nicely into the film other major focus: the importance of free speech, which, is also dealt with well.

The writing is top-notch, filled to the brim with satirical jibs and just plain silly jokes ('son, we've accidentally replaced your heart with a baked potato'), the story works very well in providing stakes and social commentary which is 'South Park's' best trait, though the series' brand of taking an issue and taking it to a comedic extreme does slightly mess with the pacing, though it doesn't undercut the experience greatly.

Another thing I wanted to mention was the film's use of profanity, which is so fantastically creative, every utterance feels useful to elevate the film's themes.

I feel like the film's biggest issue is that, just like the show, to deplore its issue of free speech, sets out to be offensive, which, in some cases in the show can work either extraordinarily well or poorly, sometimes its use of offence can be skilfully placed within its story to further its satirical point, or it can just feel lazy, this film to me feels like a bit both: there are several crudely clever gags and quite few just plain crude ones, which don't appeal as much to me as the smarter ones. Thankfully though, the film does manage to avoid this, mostly, despite a few instances.

Another one of the film's biggest strength is its music, the film is a full blown musical, and they are pretty fantastic, 'It's Easy, M'kay' and 'Blame Canada' are my personal favourites, the songs are so good that 'Blame Canada' managed to snag an original song Oscar nomination. The characters are all pretty great too, the managed to translate their small screen personality to the big screen, while staying true to who the characters are established to be while adding a bit more cinematic depth to them. I also personally really like the animation, it looks intentionally cheap, but I feel like it has a deceptive level of polish and talent to it, plus, I feel like having it look like an old cardboard stop motion TV special, contrasts the crudeness of the film and series.

Ultimately, for me, 'South Park: Bigger Longer and Uncut', is a really great watch for me, as it is filled with great songs and sparkles with intelligent irreverence, but at points it can feel bogged down with its desire to offend, but, I think if you're a 'South Park' or not, it's definitely worth a watch, and is definitely one of the greatest comedies to grace the big screen: It's pretty much perfect, m'kay.

I have been a huge 'Mario' fan pretty much all my life, from a little kid until now, I still eagerly anticipate the release of the new games, I think 'Super Mario Odyssey' is a gaming masterpiece, so needless to say, I was immensely curious about this movie considering the original 'Mario' film still lives in infamy for being so terrible, and the fact this film was being made by one of my least favourite animation studios, Illumination, the people responsible for unleashing the Minions onto the world. My expectations were rock-bottom, but then the trailers started releasing and......it looked good, nothing groundbreaking, but I thought it would be along the lines of last year's second 'Sonic' film. I suddenly became really excited for a passable family film with great references and pretty solid humour.....which is still significantly better than Illumination's current output.

Unfortunately, I found the 'Mario' movie to be a gargantuan disappointment, both critically and as a fan.

The film's premise is very simple, when Mario and his brother Luigi get sucked into the Mushroom Kingdom and get separated, Mario works with the land's Princess, Princess Peach and a mushroom guy called Toad, to rescue his brother and save the land from the evil Bowser who seeks to rule it.

This premise, is very similar to the video games it's based on, but unlike last year's 'Sonic' which uses the games' bare-bones story and expands upon it with classic story beats, while infusing pre-established series lore (I.e., Chaos Emeralds, Knuckles), the 'Mario' movie instead chooses to keep the plot as bare-bones as the games, now, this isn't inherently bad, though a bland story can be draining to watch for an hour and a half, but if the film's humour and characters are good enough it can be entertaining, however, this is another instance in which the film fails.

The film's humour is disappointing....despite a few instances of genuinely funny interactions, mostly coming from Jack Black's lovelorn Bowser, a vast majority of the gags are very Illumination, they're the kind of jokes that a long-distant uncle might make, or a teacher, just the blandest, most generic instances of comedy....like a Sunday comic strip from the 1940s that send kids and parents looking for an easy laugh off, but lack any real thought or craft, at least, though, there are not fart jokes, a mainstay in Illumination's filmography.

The characters are very bland too, every character is slotted neatly into an archetype and is not allowed to leave that for second to show even the slightest degree of depth, the characters are, in fact, giving more depth in certain video games, such as the 'Luigi's Mansion' or the 'Paper Mario' series, this results in barely any eternal conflict for the characters, which, on top of a bland story makes the film drag on even more. All of this topped off with pacing that moves faster than a bullet bill, which makes everything feel like a sugar-induced fever dream and, some characters who are shockingly missing, even from brief cameos.

The writing is truly abysmal: the film's narrative isn't compelling in the slightest, the emotional stakes fall flat on their face, it doesn't feel at all like the characters go on a journey, everything feels empty and generic. There isn't a soul here, everything feels mass-produced.

There are some positives though, the animation is really good, particularly the background animation and character design, the characters animation could have been a bit more expressive at points in my option. The score, too, was really great, the orchestral remixes of the games' iconic music is heavenly, the voice acting is surprisingly solid, Jack Black, Charlie Day, Chris Pratt and Keegan Micheal-Key are top-notch with their delivery, though, as much as I enjoy Anya Taylor-Joy as an actor, she currently anyway, isn't the best voice actor, her delivery never felt authentic to me, and, of course there are some great references, even some non-Mario ones which greatly pleased a Nintendo nerd like me.

Overall, the 'Mario' movie was a disappointing experience for me, I went in expecting nothing more than a fun time with a few good jokes akin to 'Sonic 2', but instead I got a sugary pile of slop, that I can't see anyone under the age of 10 enjoying.

Independent cinema is one of the most important facets of cinema, this is where auteurs are born and creativity reigns, in a branch of cinema filled with greats, 'Aftersun' is a rarity....a true classic for the ages.

Written and directed by Scottish filmmaker Charlotte Wells as her debut feature, it follows 11 year-old Sophie on holiday in Turkey with her idealistic father Calum.

Described as 'semi-autobiographical', 'Aftersun' is one of the most emotive and personal films I have ever seen, as well one of the most creative visually, the story is framed through flashbacks, while occasionally flickering through a stylised 'home movie' style visual. One of the most strikingly earnest aspects of the film is it dialogue, it feels precise, managed and scrutinised for optimal emotion, but, also effortless, as good dialogue should, it's never strained, even at the most apparently banal points of conversation, feel real, yet stimulating, in a way that real conversation sometimes does not. It's a film that balances its delicate array of emotions tightly, also certain when to add comedy or emotion to a scene, like a five star chef making a soup, perfectly balanced throughout.

The performances, too, of course, also convey this, Calum (Paul Mescal) and Sophie (Frankie Corio), feel like a father daughter with the levels of comfort, yet occasional discomfort, Mescal and Corio mange to make you feel like you have know them for years in a few hours.

I am stunned that this is Wells' debut feature, there is a level of talent and craft that feels like a veteran of the industry made it, she knows when to push the creative boundaries with her direction and when to simply let a scene breath on its on. Her framing is top-notch, she frames her characters in such a honest, vulnerable, that you feel connected to them in a way very few films can. It feels like a combination of the Coens, Kubrick and Wes Anderson.

The film's cinematography is stunning too, when it comes to capturing the beautiful and ugly moments, the score is perfect and the soundtrack is wonderfully '90s.

There's so much more to say about this film, I could drone on for hours, but I feel like this film is best experienced for yourself. So, please go and see 'Aftersun', easily, the best film of the year and one of my favourite of all time, a true study of mental health and human connection.

In 1940, Walt Disney released an animated film based on the Italian fable of a wooden boy who came to life, called Pinocchio this version, by many, was considered the definitive version of the. Henceforth, whenever people think of Pinocchio, you then inevitably think of Disney.

I, myself, have never been a fan of Disney's interpretation of the film, it always felt too childish and messy to me, as well as all the racial stereotypes, however, I found the basic story fascinating, with its moral dilemmas and vague veil of horror encompassing the narrative. So, imagine my anticipation when Netflix announce a new adaption of the Pinocchio story, done in possibly my favourite animation style (stop-motion) and by a masterful filmmaker, Guillermo del Toro, whose gothic sensibilities shone in 'Pan's Labyrinth'.

So, it's 2022, the film has released, and, it somehow managed to better than my expectations.

The story, largely follows what you'd expect, but with a couple notable changes: it is set in fascist Italy, it is more spiritual and it is more philosophical. There are a couple more changes, but I don't won't to spoil them here.

The film from the offset is darker and more mature than the Disney original, encompassing themes of war and death within the first ten minuets. It also uses its titular character as a 'puppet' to convey humanity's worst and best impulses, which albeit, the Disney original did too, but in a more 'after-school' way, chiselling down its moral core to a nub of simply 'don't lie' or 'don't get addicted to vices', whereas GDT's version poses more questions than moral lessons.

GDT's version also feels equally more realistic and more fantastical, blending the two seamlessly, and, despite, his change in medium, it still feels and particularly bleeds GDT's style, feeling pulpy and gothic, while retaining its PG family rating.

Del Toro and McHale's writing elevates the story to new heights, the character writing feels very reminiscent of McHale's previous, the masterpiece that is the TV mini-series 'Over the Garden Wall', as each character feels loving crafted to be fully three dimensional, Pinocchio himself feeling incredibly reminiscent of Greg from that very series. However, the scene stealing character is Sebastian J. Cricket, voiced by Ewan McGregor, who, is this version's Jimminy Cricket, fittingly, unlike his predecessor, Sebastian is, at the beginning at least, a somewhat misanthropic writer, focused on writing his memoirs, as opposed to the generally high-sported Jimminy. McGregor's performance here is great, giving a wry delivery to the jokes with an unexpired sense of vigour, delivering some of the film's funniest and saddest lines. David Bradley is another stand-out, bringing life to a sadder Gepetto.

The animation here is simply breathtaking, with puppets from The Jim Henson Company, Del Toro and Gustafson bring the world to life with their intricate and delicate stop-motion and well-placed CG, everything here is tightly framed with a blazing level of artistry and elegance, brought together by stunning cinematography, it feels like two auteurs at their peak. Crisp and efficient editing ties the whole thing up brilliantly too.

The score is provided by the legendary Alexandre Desplat, with a couple of songs too, the score is exquisite, but the songs are the only element that feel like they should have had more time in the oven, other than two, 'Ciao, Papa' and Sebastian's Ending Melody, the rest feel a tad pointless, not bad, but slightly unnecessary.

Overall, Del Toro's Pinocchio is a staggering cinematic achievement pushing boundaries in craftsmanship for both live action and animation, with an intelligent script that honours and diverts form its origins that explores every theme it sets out superbly, making it the definitive version of the fable for me, firmly pushing Disney's vision out of mind. Easily, one of the year's very best, animated or otherwise.

It took me a long time to get round to 'Amphiba', despite being a huge 'Gravity Falls' fan, and even then a quit the show for a bit after find season one a bit dull, but, man I am so glad that I came back because from season two, 'Amphiba' becomes great.

While I still think 'The Owl House' is Disney's TVA best current show, but 'Amphiba' is also great, especially its finale: a managed to be warm, but not sappy, epic but not overwhelming and left its characters perfectly.

As always, the animation and voice acting are stellar, with the writing, as most of season three being top notch.

So please watch 'Amphiba', especially if you love 'Gravity Falls' watch 'Amphiba' , because you are a about to witness a fantastic story, just don't let the season one kinks put you off let them work through them. It has its fault, but 'Amphiba' is more than worth your time.

Baz Luhrmann's 'Elvis' is a recent in a chain of biopic films cantering around iconic musicians, however, in my opinion, unlike 'Bohemian Rhapsody', I think 'Elvis' does a pretty good job of showcasing the musician, but is also a decent film overall on top of that.

'Elvis' is a real oddity of a film, as, there's a lot of it that's great, and a fair bit that is dreadful, it really is a mixed bag of quality, as one minuet it can great, and the next it feels like a different film. Firstly, Austin Butler's performance as Elvis Presley is amazing, it's definitely on of my favourites of the year; Butler manages to avoid a lot of the pitfalls that many leading actors in biopics face, which is playing the person as a characiture of themselves, rather than an actual person, but Butler, thankfully manages to avoid this and delivers an electrifying and nuanced performance as Elvis Presley, that really shines in the little details, likes his mannerisms. The cinematography is great here too, as well as the editing, which, for the most part, manages to channel and manage Luhrmann's manic style very well. The script, despite a few irritating conventions, is pretty sound too, and the pacing, especially considering its length, is great too.

This is when we reach the mixed to the bad aspects of the film, Baz Luhrmann's direction is mostly pretty good, but his camerawork does get a little overly manic at points, but he does manage to reel it back in. The ending is also a bit drawn out, as is really the entire third act, which is a shame, considering the second is probably the film's strongest. The narration and centring the story around Tom Parker, I don't think fully worked, and at point distracted from the good aspects of the story, I think modelling the film around a specific narrative idea is a good, but I feel like it could have been handled a lot better here. Finally, Tom Hanks' performance as Tom Parker was utterly dreadful, he overacted to the highest degree, and played him like a Tex Avery character, his performance, at certain points detracted from the film a lot.

'Elvis' is a mixed bag, but, ultimately, I think it is worth seeing especially if you are an Elvis fan, the fact it managed to invest me for as long as it did, considering that I'm not an Elvis fan is enough to praise it.

I can't say that I am a huge MCU fan, I find a lot of Marvel's characters pretty interesting, but most of the MCU films, to me, just seem like bland, action flicks, rather than a Sci-fi film, which just aren't for me, although in saying that, I really loved 'Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness' earlier on this year, so I had hoped that I would also love 'Love and Thunder', unfortunately, that was not the case for me.

'Thor: Love and Thunder' is helmed by Takia Watiti, whose comedy stylings I quite enjoy outside of the MCU, but Takia Watiti's other MCU film, 'Thor: Ragnerock' also failed to capture me and 'Love and Thunder' could not be e of a follow up to 'Ragnerock', so, regardless of what else I say here , if you liked 'Ragnerock' at all, I think you will like 'Love and Thunder'.

You see, there is nothing inherently bad or wrong with 'Love and Thunder' outside of a few issues, but its main problem is that, to me, it feels soulless, void of any real personality, and any attempt at humour or quirk just feels extremely forced to me, though, once again I can see many people loving this, but it just didn't work for me. However, an aspect of the film I really loved was the storyline involving Jane Foster, and I wish that had been pursued further, but isn't explored to its fullest possibilities. Christian Bale's performances also felt slightly over exaggerated to me also, and the action scenes seemed quite poorly directed to me also.

Ultimately, 'Thor: Love and Thunder' is a stone-cold crowd pleaser, which, if that's what you're looking for, you will love this, but, if you're looking for something more, I'd recommend 'Doctor Strange' 2 instead.

I have loved Pixar since I was a very young child, and honestly, my love for most of their films have only grown with age, though, their more recent films haven't really connected with me. Regardless, I was looking forward to 'Lightyear' despite the basic premise not really interesting me much, and, for the most part, 'Lightyear' was.....good enough.

'Lightyear' takes a lot of influences from a lot of '70s and '80s Sci-fi, which definitely helps to create a pretty decent Sci-fi setting, 'Lightyear's' story, despite being quite basic, manages to include some interesting Sci-fi ideas which definitely elevates the story quite a bit, despite this though it always feels like 'Lightyear' never fully commits to its Sci-fi concepts. 'Lightyear' definitely peaks early on, and it reaches its most emotionally impactful elements of its story within the first forty minutes, which definitely does make the rest of the film feel relatively flat in comparison.

One of 'Lightyear's' biggest weakness is its characters, or lack there of, as, despite having a pretty large ensemble of characters, none of them are really interesting, including Buzz himself, the only exception to this is Sox, who is by far the best part of this film.

The direction in 'Lightyear' is also pretty good, it really captures the ascetic of '70s and '80s Sci-fi, the more realistic animation also contributes to that, but, personally, the more realistic style of animation doesn't fully work for me, I feel slightly like what's the point of making an animated film just to make it look live action, when animation as a medium can be used to express things you can't in live action.

'Lightyear' is a perfectly average Sci-fi film, which, ultimately, does what it sets out to do, but, you can't help but feel like it could have been slightly better.

I have been a fan of the character of Sonic the Hedgehog for years, and as I grew older, I have become a huge fan of the games (but the 2D ones, in particular), and after the surprise that was the first Sonic film from 2020 (I. E, it wasn't completely horrible), I was looking forward to the sequel quite a bit, especially after watching the trailers, as it seemed that this film would lean into the video games source material more.

So, it makes me pleased to say that 'Sonic 2' is a whole lot of fun, and everything I could have possibly wanted from a film like this, though I should mention that, my rating for the film is a little bit inflated by personal enjoyment, if it were judging it purely on a critical basis I'd probably give it a six or seven.

'Sonic 2' is a huge improvement to the first, and that's mostly for two reasons: one, the greater amount of video game inspiration and references and two, it's significantly funnier, the first film's humour mostly relied on cringy and childish humour, and while some of that is present in the sequel, there is also more thoughtfully goofy humour, mostly, once again, from Jim Carey's Dr. Robotnik, and the brilliant addition of Idris Elba as Knuckles (who also just so happens to be on of my favourite characters from the game). The story is by no means anything special, though it does do a good job of transferring the plot from the video game, and is paced pretty well too, despite an overly long scene involving one of the human characters' wedding, which does disrupt the pace. The direction and cinematography were also just fine, though, I did particularly like the CG on Sonic, Tails and Knuckles. Ultimately, though, for me, none o this really mattered, as, for a Sonic film, all I am really looking for is cool references and some humour that makes me smile, and 'Sonic 2' delivers just that.

Marvel and Disney have creating loads of series recently, though, out of all of the ones announced, 'Moon Knight' was my most anticipated out of them all, now I haven't read any of the comics and I know very little about the character, but it seemed like it could bring something different to the MCU, and after watching the first trailer, 'Moon Knight' seemed like it could be that, but, unfortunately, from when I started the first episode, it didn't seem to meet those expectations for me.

Despite its unique premise, 'Moon Knight' quickly becomes very generic, and just like every other MCU project, despite, a brief sparkle of originality in episodes 4 and 5, before quickly getting swallowed back into the hole of mediocrity. However, I'm spite of all of this Oscar Issac gives a really great performance.

'Moon Knight' is mediocrity at its most mediocre.

I like 'Star Wars', a lot, but, the recent films and series that have been released, I have really disliked, all except 'The Mandalorian' , but despite this, and my general lack of affection for the prequels, I was still pretty excited for 'Obi-Wan Kenobi', but unfortunately I found myself disappointed once again.

'Obi-Wan Kenobi' is set after episode III but before episode IV, and focuses on Obi-Wan leaving his post on Tatooine, looking after a young Luke, to rescue a young Princess Leia, while his former apprentice, Anakin Skywalker, now Darth Vader, hunts for him.

Throughout its six episodes, 'Obi-Wan' can narrows its issues to two main points, in my opinion: writing and direction. Firstly, the series' direction is awful, a lot of the camerawork, especially in the fight scenes are terrible, the series employs the 'shaky cam' technique, which, can be used very effectively in specific films and shows, here, it, just doesn't work, the fight scenes just don't feel as effective without the precise framing, in my opinion. Deborah Chow is a good director, her work on 'Mando' was pretty good, so, I think 'Obi-Wan's' direction could have been so much better with just some fine tuning.

Secondly, the writing here is really poor, especially in the dialogue, now, in 'Star Wars' I expect a certain amount of corny dialogue, but here it transcended corny and just became plain bad, a lot of the episodes' pacing felt very jagged to me as well, and the plot just didn't engage me at all.

However, in spite of all of this, there is some good stuff in here, particularly the performances, Ewan McGregor is great as always as Obi-Wan and Kumalii Nunjalli was pretty good in his role too. The cinematography, as always in 'Star Wars', is great too.

So, I found, 'Obi-Wan' yet another 'Star Wars' disappointment, but that does not mean that I have lost hope, and, I think, with a little fine tuning a potential second season of 'Obi-Wan' could fix this one's mistake.