Reviews

And the only entertaining part is two hours in when someone "passes gas."

But seriously, this moving is non-stop science/political jargon without ever pausing to give you a chance to process what you heard. The characters are unrelatable and undeveloped. There is no exposition, no rising action, no climax, and no resolution. It's just monotonous talk-talk *new scene* talk-talk-talk *new scene* talk-talk=talk some more.

Gone is the magic of The Prestige, the depth Inception, and the wonder of Interstellar. In its place is pretentions telling, not showing.

PS: Why does Florence Pugh not wear clothes at any point during this movie?

Some pros include 1) Absolutely gorgeous design and visuals, the planet is jaw-dropping and the technology is just sooo cool 2) Top notch action sequences 3) A great villian

Some cons include 1) Really did not have to be 3+ hours 2) Pretty much the same story as the first one 3) Too many "look how pretty Pandora is" moments 4) Not the most conclusive ending, leaves way for a sequel that will probably come out in 2035 5) Too many kids and teens (most of them starting their sentences with the word "bro"

All in all if you liked watching the first one you'll definitely want to check this one out, but it does come across as a rehash of the first except with water instead of trees.

A brief list of problems with this movie 1. It's a movie by committee, which means it exists for the sole purpose of making money. They have to check certain boxes, make sure everyone is happy, and not offend anyone.

2. It takes itself pretty seriously until they decide to throw in a joke, which is about every 90 seconds 3. Christian Bale is a great actor (from Empire of the Sun to American Psycho), so let's give him almost nothing to work with, aside from (yet another) "I want to destroy everything" bad guy 4. Everyone loves Guns n Roses, so we should play four of their songs! But not any of the deep cuts, just the hits at cliched parts of the movie (and even name a character Axl) 5. Russel Crowe: It doesn't matter that his Greek accent sounds more Italian than anything else, people like him so maybe they'll like this movie.

6. Screaming goats.

What's more impressive? Running a 5k in 20 minutes, or running a 10k in 45 minutes?

Unfortunately, Snyder's League suffers from the same problems as it's hacked up predecessor. What Marvel did so well (individual character movies that eventually assemble) DC only wishes it could do. Yes, it's a better movie than the 2017 version, just not better by enough to make it worth checking out.

Spend your time rewatching Watchmen, or watching Guardians of Gahoole for the first time.

Also, the "Jerry's" sure do look a lot like the Finder logo!

There is just way too much substance and not enough soul in Tenet. Half of the movie is very confusing/difficult to understand dialogue, and the other half is very confusing/difficult to understand action.

Now, keep in mind that the audio is *not* Hans Zimmer, and you can tell. You really have to watch this movie with subtitles. If someone were to pause the movie and have them explain to them what was going on, you wouldn't be able to do it.

The thing with Nolan's other movies are, yes, they can be confusing, but since they are good, you *want* to watch them a second time. With this, you *have* to watch it a second time to get anything out of it. And who wants to do that?

An American Pickle is a decent film. You'll get a couple good laughs, and the run time is short enough to not waste your time. The premise (as you already know) is ridiculous, but the movie doesn't take itself too seriously. That's a good thing. At the same time, you'll probably completely forget all about this movie come next Tuesday.

(PS look for the author of this review around the 59 minute mark)

Fans of the books will be immensely disappointed as this movie changes everything, and not in a good way (think a wrinkle in time, percy jackson, or mortal engines). If you're going to rewrite the plot, it should at least be entertaining and make sense.

However, not only is this a bad adaptation, it is also a bad movie in general. You're not going to attract any new fans by pumping 90% of your budget into CGI, and then glossing over your characters and screenplay. Absolutely no one is going to say "I liked this movie, now let me check out the books."

It used to mean something when you saw the disney castle at the beginning of a movie. Now it just means the movie you are about to see is going to be a disaster.

Its seems in this day and age, the key to making a "good' movie involves having great technical aspects, which allows everyone to overlook any shortcomings (such as the MCU).

The fact that 1917 was filmed in a single scene is analogous to Boyhood being filmed over 12 years. Both technical "marvels", but it doesn't mean that there is actually any substance to either of them.

That doesn't mean that 1917 is bad, it's just another typical movie that happens to have an interesting gimmick.

There's nothing bad about Joker.

But at the same time, there isn't too much to write home about either. Joker is more of a movie that you just watch than a movie you experience. Arthur Fleck's is very distant, and a lot of the movie is watching him do weird things (like dance, or put on make up) to Frank Sinatra type music. This has the effect of telling the audience what to feel instead of making them actually feel it. And it doesn't help that you you pretty much know everything that going to happen.

But is definitely better than Suicide Squad.

If you've been loving the MCU films recently, then this will probably be your favorite one yet. It's absolutely jammed packed with material, and the more MCU films you've seen, the better it'll be.

However, the movie is dragged down by an extensive runtime, and jokes that miss the mark. Endgame takes too long to get going, and then seemingly never ends. And most of the humor is hit or miss; it just feels out of place.

Overall, Endgame wraps up the Avengers ark reasonably well, but it's too arrogant and lacks any real sense of quality.

Whatever you thought of Black Panther is probably what you'll think of this one. This means for most people, Captain Marvel is only okay.

The studios don't break any new ground with this one. It seems they're much more focused on just making more money instead of trying to entertain their audiences with an original concept.

And since they've spent 99% of the budget on visual effects, expect to see another generic plot with a poorly written script (not to help that Brie Larson delivers her lines with more staleness than Cheerios when you forgot to close the bag).

Back in 2008, Marvel found a winning formula with Iron Man. And now more than ten years later, they've done little more than pump out different versions of the same movie. Good thing it's coming to a close with Endgame.

Anita definitely doesn't disappoint as far as the action and visuals go. The sound's pretty good too. The overall presentation of the film is a home run for sure.

But there are a few flaws, including the script. For example, there's too many cliche movie lines such as: "Who am I?" "I have to do this," and the dreaded "Trust me!" Also, many moments are predictable. You can tell when they are going to kiss, when someone is going to escape/get rescued, and when they are about to die. For the characters, they don't have enough meat on them for you to really get into it. And the ending may not leave you satisfied.

All said and done, if you saw the trailer a while back and thought you'd enjoy it, you're probably right. But if it didn't look like your thing, then wait for the Bluray.

There's absolutely nothing special about this film.

The action is what you except. There are some lines that are funny, some lines that aren't. There are two villains that are halfway developed, but two half villains do not add up to one whole villain.

You won't even remember you watched it the next day.

One thing is for sure: Bumblebee is much more down to earth than the other five Transformers movies. Without Michael Bay, the movie feels much more grounded in realism than the previous entries. Gone are the scenes of dozens of mechanical beasts destroying all of Chicago, and it mostly boils down to Bumblebee and the two decepticons chasing him.

One of the highlights is John Cena, who is hopefully going to become the next Rock.The guy killed it out there. And Bumblebee also lasts as long as it needs to. It doesn't have the 150 minute run time that the other iterations have, which is a welcome surprise.

One of the film's largest flaws is the number of overused cliches. The main human character, Charlie, lost her father a few years ago (because why would he still be alive), and is on the verge of 18. She struggles with her mother and step dad, and is is not much more than a stereotypical Hollywood teen. There's also a guy who lives across the street, but he has never talked to her once, and looking back, he doesn't do much for the movie.

Aside from that, there's a mandatory scene of Bumblebee incidentally smashing objects, and Charlie watching an old video of her dad. There's a high school 'party' of sorts, and awkward kiss, and a little more teen angst than is necessary.

Lastly, it's hard to place the movie in a single genre. Sure, a giant robot from outer space sounds to be science fiction, but enough of the movie seems real enough that calling it sci fi doesn't quite cut it. Is it a comedy? While there are funny moments, there aren't enough good jokes (and there are too many cringe moments). Coming of age? Perhaps, but if it is, then it's not a good one. While trying to balance so many genres at the same time, the film ends up not really being any of them.

This movie is definitely not as good as everyone is making it out to be.

The movie starts off simply enough. Miles is your average Hollywood teen, who is the son of the only police officer in New York City. And if you want to see yet another person get bitten by a radioactive spider, then you're in luck.

75% of the film is Miles trying and failing to be Spiderman. He's incapable of controlling any of his powers, and does little more than get in the way and utter cliche lines such as "I have to do this. I promised." It's rather frustrating to watch. But conveniently, he figures everything out in the last half hour and becomes a better hero than all the other Spidermen who've been in the business for years.

Speaking of everyone else, as the story progresses, the audience is introduced to more and more Spiderman variations (and more unusual villains). With so much content, they barely get any more than just a few minutes of screen time. Spiderman Noir was interesting, for the five lines he had. I'm pretty sure there was some kind of Penny Porker character, but I may be mistaken. There's also a Scorpion villain who shows up out of nowhere, then mostly disappears.

As a whole, the movie was filmed assuming that the audience's attention span is a about 1 second. Most jokes are cringe worthy, especially after you've seen them in the trailer. There's also way too much flash going on, and the movie's final scene is about as visually complex as a Jackson Pollock spatter painting.

Spiderverse doesn't do anything that hasn't been done time and again.

Here's an analogy:

A student has to do a presentation on World War II. He gathers a ton a good information on the causes of the war, and the events leading up to it. World War I, mistreatment of Germany, invasion of Poland, he's got it all. Then, he puts even more effort into the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Unfortunately, he realizes that his report is due tomorrow, and he slaps together the Normandy Invasion, Battle of Midway, Island Hopping, and the Atomic Bomb all in a single day. The Battle of the Bulge doesn't even get a mention.

This is precisely the issue with Fantastic Four. It honestly does a solid job of introducing the setting, the characters, and the conflict. But it takes 70 minutes to do this, and then 30 minutes later you're sitting on the couch wondering what exactly just happened.

Surprised?

While there isn't anything particularly great about Fallen Kingdom, it holds up pretty well in most aspects.

One for sure plus is that there isn't as much talking as previous iterations- they screen writers let the action do the talking. This is nice, because some of the characters are rather annoying. They've also created a new sense of sympathy within the movie that goes beyond just the surface. You want the characters to succeed, and you feel bad when things don't go as planned. There is an actual villain this time (and he makes sense too), instead of just the dinosaurs eating people. And finally, the 128 minutes run time is on par. There's enough time allotted to get you involved, but it's not long enough to become a drag.

It won't make as much money as Jurassic World, but it's a full tier better.

It's hard to pin down exactly the ups and downs of "A Quiet Place".

If you've seen Children of Men or The Road, then it's a similar overall vibe. The idea is great, there's no question. The execution is so so.

They do an excellent job creating a tense atmosphere, and the cast does a good enough job. Most things are fine.

But unlike Arrival, you never really see the aliens/monsters show up. They're just there. And there are certainly too many jump scares, and after the first few, they definitely loose their shock value.

Next, dramatic irony is over used. In too many instances does the audience know something that the characters don't, and you become numb after a while. You get tired of yelling at the characters. And finally, the ending leaves audiences somewhat unsatisfied. You want to know more about the creatures, more about the characters, and more about the world (or what's left of it). Instead, you just get the rolling credits.

If you see it, you saw it. If you didn't, you didn't.

Waiting is funny!

It's about the day in the life of several restaurant workers and the misadventures that come along side.

The best thing about this movie is that it does exactly want you want it to do. It doesn't bog itself down with unnecessary flashbacks, or try to paint some kind of broader picture. All it sets out to do is make you laugh for ninety minutes, and for that, it excels.

At the same time, if you find yourself disliking the movie ten minutes in, then turn it off: you're probably a middle aged woman and well outside the target audience. But if you like locker room talk and "Shenanigans", then you'll love Waiting.

Did anyone really see the first Deadpool movie coming? It pumped a good deal of freshness into a long expired genre, to the joy of both critiques and fans.

This iteration has many redeeming qualities, and a plethora of good and vulgar lines. If you came for kicks, you won't be disappointed. Everything good you enjoyed about the first is back. Enough said about the pros.

One of the flaws of the first versions was a complicated mix between joking and serious scenes. This occurs to a bigger extent in the sequel. After an entertaining, violent, and profane action sequence, the film takes a dramatic side for a few moments, only to return to whacking off more heads. Since parts of this movie don't take themselves seriously in the slightest (one of it's redeeming qualities), it's hard to sympathize when it does try to be genuine. How can the audience care about someone genuinely dying when dozens of others did so comedically? One may argue that the solemn moments provide a necessary break from the goofiness, but others will disagree.

In addition, some of the new characters weren't ideal. Fourteen year old Firefist isn't a particularly likable character, which is unfortunate since he plays an important role. Not to mention he sounds more British than Ron Weasley, which proves to be more of an ear sore. They also throw in a relatively pointless lesbian relationship between Negasonic Teenage Warhead and Yu-Gi-Oh (both characters have next to no development, why even put Yukioh in there). And after all that, they even use the same actor for villain as Infintiy War (Josh Brolin) in case you didn't get enough of him for the first 2.5 hours.

All in all, the goods parts of this movie were quite exciting and fresh. But if we've learned anything from Newton, it's that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction, and those opposite reactions will have you wishing you were out buying more popcorn.

The novel Ender's Game, by Orson Scott Card, may just be the best work of fiction ever produced. The motion picture on the other hand, does what it can do to translate a nearly unflimable movie.

A lot of the other reviews do accurately capture the quality of the movie. The adaptation does remain very faithful to the book, unlike examples. (such as World War Z, The Bourne Identity, V for Vendetta). The things that they do change make a good deal of sense. Omitting Locke and Demosthenes, making all the characters older, and combining other characters (Crazy Tom, Fly Molo, and those guys are absorbed by Alai and Bernard) were all good decisions. The visuals do a heck of a job, and most of the performances are up to standard.

However, while greatly capturing the plot, the film falls short in recreating the heart, but this is consequence of the nature of the novel itself. You see, the main character isn't so much Ender Wiggin as it is the mind of Ender Wiggin. The movie just isn't able to make the complete translation, and can be somewhat stale (somewhat analogous to Watchmen). In addition, iconic lines, such as "The enemies gate is down", are delivered with a certain staleness, and only seem to be there just to be there. The movie is indeed too short, and it would have been nice if they showed the passing of time (respects to other reviewers).

If you've read the book, then this movie will be a decent 100 minutes of your time, and will bring back lots of great memories. If you haven't read the book (read it!), you're not missing too much.