2019 Movie Rank
A list of every film I saw released in 2019; ordered from favourite to least favourite.
List activity
11K views
• 0 this weekCreate a new list
List your movie, TV & celebrity picks.
60 titles
- DirectorQuentin TarantinoStarsLeonardo DiCaprioBrad PittMargot RobbieA faded television actor and his stunt double strive to achieve fame and success in the final years of Hollywood's Golden Age in 1969 Los Angeles.9.5/10
Times Seen: 5
Thoughts (Spoilers):
There's a moment in Tarantino's 'Hollywood' that features what is perhaps the best track on Tarantino's best soundtrack yet, in which 'Out of Time' by The Rolling Stones plays over a montage that recounts the goings-on of our three main characters on August 8th 1969. It features voice-over from Kurt Russell, but the information provided is not essential to the progression of the story. Uniquely, it's not included for exposition purposes. It's a rather simple narration of the day-to-day events that might take place on any day of these character's lives. But of course, we understand the significance of this day, and it acts as the final moment before Tarantino decides to derail the balance of fact and fiction that had concurrently ran aside one another for the previous two hours. It's the moment in which protagonist Dalton's struggle with the changing industry meets the moment that Tarantino posits changed Hollywood forever. It's this thematic duality that reveals 'Once Upon a Time in Hollywood' as the filmmaker's most personal work. This film has been viewed by many as simply a celebration of Hollywood, but ultimately the fabricated Dalton film clips, 'The Great Escape', Steve McQueen and Bruce Lee are all icing on the cake of what is a reflective meditation on a time and place lost to history. Nowhere is this better communicated than this montage, through the lighting up of the Hollywood signs as if it were the last time to Rick Dalton sitting in his house reflecting upon the imminent changing times as he and his buddy ("who is more than a brother and a little less than a wife") have come to the end of the line. It's a memory piece, and Tarantino himself has compared it to Alfonso Cuarón's 2018 masterpiece 'Roma'. Both are examples of filmmakers building upon fragments of memory from the time and place in which they spent their childhoods, which is ultimately the most familiar period in anyone's life. However, 'Hollywood' is more explicitly about the melancholy that comes with change, and the feeling of loss that accompanies it; which is a sentiment that really rang true for me in 2019.
The themes of the film relate directly to how the film industry has transformed over the last decade, as well as a more personal story about how to deal with the ever-changing circumstances of life. Rick's instinct is to resist change and it makes it all the more difficult for him to accept. Cliff on the other hand exudes a go-with-the-flow attitude despite his old-fashioned cowboy-like ways, and as a result he seems to adapt much easier. It's also worth mentioning that this idea is communicated brilliantly through the costume design. Dalton dresses in the more formalized fashion style of the 1950s and early 1960s, and in contrast Booth sports a looser-look often associated with the swinging-sixties and hippie-influenced look of the 1970s.
The film moves relatively slowly, it's not in any hurry to get anywhere story-wise. It's a perfect hangout movie, and who wouldn't want to hang out in 1969 Los Angeles? Some of my favourite moments of the film are the ones that aren't traditionally necessary (Cliff driving home and feeding his dog, the discussion between Rick and Trudi, Sharon going to the movies). In fact, this whole film feels entirely comprised of great movie moments that wouldn't typically be narratively necessary; and as a result it has dozens of Tarantino's best scenes.
Every technical element of this movie is stunning. It's so exciting to see what a resourceful filmmaker presents when entrusted with a $100m budget on an original project. The result is the most stunning production design you'll see all year, and it's all beautifully captured by Robert Richardson's gorgeous cinematography. On my first viewing I managed to catch this in 35mm and it was wonderful. It looked and felt like a film straight out of the era in all the best ways. I also haven't been able to stop listening to the soundtrack all year. Pitt and DiCaprio are excellent here, they provide a really engaging chemistry and screen-presence as a duo; the latter giving the best performance I've seen from him. Everyone else is unforgettable here as well. Robbie's Tate is the heart of the film, Margaret Qualley and Julia Butters give star-making performances and 2019 is the year of Pacino.
Every once in a while a movie comes around that feels like it was made to appeal to your exact tastes, and this was the 2019 film that did it for me. It's one of Tarantino's best, it's everything he has done well throughout his filmography. I felt as though he had fallen into the expectation that fans only wanted to see Tarantino-takes on genre-films of the past, but this shows he can continue to try new things and make wholly-original works like 'Pulp Fiction'. It's a film that takes risks, not only in its events and how it chooses to diverge from history, but in its method of storytelling as well. This is exactly the kind of filmmaking I want to see from directors with this kind of draw. This film is going to be tough to beat this year.
P.S. I somehow forgot to discuss the ending, but yeah it's great. It's the most shocking and hilarious movie moment of the year. Also, that very final moment is so perfect. - DirectorMartin ScorseseStarsRobert De NiroAl PacinoJoe PesciAn illustration of Frank Sheeran's life, from W.W.II veteran to hit-man for the Bufalino crime family and his alleged assassination of his close friend Jimmy Hoffa.9.5/10
Times Seen: 2
Thoughts:
I've been excited for this film for years now, but the idea of Scorsese, De Niro, Pacino and Pesci uniting in 2019 for a gangster flick left me tempering my expectations because it's all too easy to build unrealistic anticipation for something this exciting. But having seen the film twice now, I think this very well could be Scorsese's best work in almost 30 years. A masterpiece of auteur filmmaking that feels plucked straight out of the 1970s, featuring the greatest actors of that generation; it's every bit as incredible as it sounds. It's everything cinema has to offer; a fascinating piece of storytelling, wrapped up in remarkable craft and career-highlight performances from everyone involved, and it just so happens to have a lot to say and even more so to feel. This film stands alongside 'Raging Bull' and 'Silence', as one of Scorsese's most emotionally impactful and therefore important works. He's on a hot-streak at the moment and he's delivering films that stand alongside his very best at the age of 77, what an incredible artist. Perfectly-paced and such a glorious achievement by editor Thelma Schoonmaker. Steve Zaillian is truly one of Hollywood's best screenwriters, and this is maybe his best work; it's a stunning piece of writing. These great actors are still working, and they shine here like they've rarely been given the opportunity to in recent years. De Niro and Pesci are so brilliantly understated and subtle here, a wonderful counterbalance for Pacino's emphatic, scene-stealing and truly awesome impact. The phone call scene is some of De Niro’s best work, ever; it’s incredibly powerful. It’s insane but we really were lucky enough to get one of De Niro’s truly great performances in a 2019 Scorsese flick. What a treat, an absolute masterpiece. - DirectorNoah BaumbachStarsAdam DriverScarlett JohanssonJulia GreerNoah Baumbach's incisive and compassionate look at a marriage breaking up and a family staying together.9/10
Times Seen: 2
Thoughts (Spoilers):
The latest installment of the Adam-Driver-is-the-best-actor-working-today saga was incredible! Beyond featuring the two most significant performances of the year, this is also an incredible achievement in screenwriting. This is without a doubt one of the best and most emotionally impactful films of the year. Baumbach's direction is perfectly understated and specific. Many of the year’s best scenes are in here; the long-take of Nicole at the lawyer’s office, the “Being Alive” number, that moment with the knife and THE devastating argument scene. Johansson and Driver deserve all the awards. Their dynamic perfectly captures the very specific, yet universal feeling of regret that comes with conflict between loved ones. Outside of its crushing, specific and thorough depiction of a divorce, on a greater level it serves as a beautiful meditation on the roughest transitions we go through in life. - DirectorBong Joon HoStarsSong Kang-hoLee Sun-kyunCho Yeo-jeongGreed and class discrimination threaten the newly-formed symbiotic relationship between the wealthy Park family and the destitute Kim clan.9/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Likely the best-directed film to release all year. An INCREDIBLE vision that delivers entirely on the promise of its premise + the assured command of Bong Joon-ho’s craft. Wonderful performances and an absolutely stunning film all round. Will almost certainly benefit from many, many rewatches to come. - DirectorRobert EggersStarsRobert PattinsonWillem DafoeValeriia KaramanTwo lighthouse keepers try to maintain their sanity while living on a remote and mysterious New England island in the 1890s.8.5/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
The most sumptuously-designed film of the year. Every element of this film's production shines. A visually-distinct and constantly gorgeous piece. Seriously incredible sound work, editing and the production and costume design are immersive and really help set the serious tone in a film that manages to balance cinematic gravitas in its horror with fart jokes. You won't see two performances this year that match Dafoe and Pattinson for intensity. Still ruminating over its effect outside of how much I adored its presentation, but it's fair to say off-the-bat that this is one of the most exciting filmmaking achievements of 2019. My favourite moment is Pattinson’s seagull sequence, just remarkable! On the other hand, the “lobster” scene is an incredible feat of performance by Dafoe, and one of the funniest movie moments of the year. - DirectorRian JohnsonStarsDaniel CraigChris EvansAna de ArmasA detective investigates the death of the patriarch of an eccentric, combative family.8/10
Times Seen: 2
Thoughts:
Probably Rian Johnson's best movie yet (I do really love TLJ though). Wonderfully-written characters, immensely enjoyable performances all-round and a really fun story that delights at every turn. Was really a fan of the production design, you get such a great feel for the geography of the house and each room is memorable in how it’s staged, lit and utilised within the narrative. Every character is vibrant and the cast inject each of their roles with so much energy and personality that you could easily see any of them becoming the main character. I imagine this will be a film I rewatch a lot, it’s so so fun and I can’t see this film being even a little bit divisive. It’s almost as if Rian Johnson just makes good films! Thrilled that this wonderful, original piece of filmmaking has been such a tremendous hit at the box office, and more importantly with a wide range of audiences. - DirectorBenny SafdieJosh SafdieStarsAdam SandlerJulia FoxIdina MenzelWith his debts mounting and angry collectors closing in, a fast-talking New York City jeweler risks everything in hope of staying afloat and alive.8/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
I was a little unsure of this in its opening scenes, but this film builds and builds as only the Safdie Brothers' work can; and that third act was incredible. Sandler gives one of the best performances of the year and is so, so, SO perfectly cast in this all-time iconic turn. Matches 'Good Time' for filmmaking flair and intensity, and you're unlikely to be more stressed out by cinema in 2019. I am beyond thrilled that this has been such a commercial hit, despite the confusion of general audiences. Really inspired soundtrack choices here too, can’t stop listening to Madonna’s ‘Rain’ now. - DirectorAri AsterStarsFlorence PughJack ReynorVilhelm BlomgrenA couple travels to Northern Europe to visit a rural hometown's fabled Swedish mid-summer festival. What begins as an idyllic retreat quickly devolves into an increasingly violent and bizarre competition at the hands of a pagan cult.7/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
Not as consistently captivating or as creatively specific and refreshing as Aster’s ‘Hereditary’, but nonetheless this is a gripping and unique vision. The first half was really working for me, but the second didn’t have as much to offer and it certainly didn’t up the ante; because I mean how can you top THAT moment that marks the end of the first act? For me, this was a more visually distinct film. Asters style feels more defined now knowing what carries over from ‘Hereditary’, and I love it. Can’t wait to see what he does next. - DirectorGreta GerwigStarsSaoirse RonanEmma WatsonFlorence PughJo March reflects back and forth on her life, telling the beloved story of the March sisters - four young women, each determined to live life on her own terms.7/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
Not as enamoured with this as I was with ‘Lady Bird’, but it shares Gerwig’s strength for writing and directing authentic character interaction. Loved Ronan, Chalamet and Pugh here. This was my first experience with this story, but to my understanding Gerwig took liberties with her script and reworked the narrative into a non-linear structure. Sadly, I think I would’ve appreciated and resonated more with the story and the journey of the characters had it been communicated linearly. I’d certainly like to see it again to see how it works, now being familiar with the full picture. Regardless of my personal gripes with these structural choices, this is a wonderful directorial achievement from Gerwig and I want more movies from her asap. - DirectorVince GilliganStarsAaron PaulJonathan BanksMatt JonesFugitive Jesse Pinkman runs from his captors, the law, and his past.6.5/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Inessential to both the story and legacy of ‘Breaking Bad’ but very well-done nonetheless. Aaron Paul kills it and the intersecting timelines add up to a very engaging epilogue. It works completely on an emotional level and it's full of great moments. It was never going to be a better ending to the show than 'Felina' was, but it works entirely as a separate retrospective. A high recommendation from me for all fans of the series. It doesn't really stand on its own, and it's not meant to. It's far from the level of something like 'Fire Walk with Me', but it does stand-out as one of the best TV-show movies ever made regardless. Features a great soundtrack of course and Skinny Pete is my hero. - DirectorTaika WaititiStarsRoman Griffin DavisThomasin McKenzieScarlett JohanssonA young German boy in the Hitler Youth whose hero and imaginary friend is the country's dictator is shocked to discover that his mother is hiding a Jewish girl in their home.6/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
This is a really great screenplay with fun dialogue, a story full of twists and turns and a brilliant examination of indoctrination and ideology. I'm not entirely sold on its execution however. I don't think it always strikes the tonal balance it's going for, but it's full of great scenes and performances. It sometimes feels too safe, and I imagine some will criticise it for being something of a children's film at points, and very adult at others; but it works for me in that regard because it's emblematic of the transformation the protagonist undergoes. It's not one of my favourites from Waititi, but I enjoyed the ride nonetheless, and it's certainly an effective crowd-pleaser. - DirectorOlivia WildeStarsKaitlyn DeverBeanie FeldsteinJessica WilliamsOn the eve of their high-school graduation, two academic superstars and best friends realize they should have worked less and played more. Determined not to fall short of their peers, the girls try to cram four years of fun into one night.6/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
An amusing and unique film that’s growing on me the more I think about it. Both the script and the performances bringing it to life are impressive and extremely enjoyable. The chemistry between every actor here is insane and Kaitlyn Dever turns in a star-making performance. This is a really charismatic movie with creativity abound in its storytelling, execution and its take on the coming-of-age formula. The comparisons to ‘Superbad’ are apt; they essentially share the same structure, plot and themes, but this film offers a very different experience overall. My only real issue with the film is the use, and in particular, the overuse of music. There’s A LOT of music on this soundtrack and I didn’t always feel that it was to the benefit of the scene. On multiple occasions, music was present when I personally felt the scene could’ve been more effective without it. On other occasions it felt as though I hadn’t not been listening to music for too long. It’s a relatively minor issue and I can only see this movie going up upon a rewatch, which I am really looking forward to. As of the halfway point of 2019, this is easily one of the best films so far this year. - DirectorJon WattsStarsTom HollandSamuel L. JacksonJake GyllenhaalFollowing the events of Avengers: Endgame (2019), Spider-Man must step up to take on new threats in a world that has changed forever.6/10
Times Seen: 2
Thoughts (Spoilers):
This movie is a good bit of fun. Plenty of issues, many of which are shared by its predecessor 'Homecoming'; most notably the Disney TV-movie aesthetic of the cinematography: having said that of course there are a few visually-inventive moments here (you’ll know them if you’ve seen it). There's an exposition monologue about halfway through the film that is really awkwardly-implemented and the twist is nowhere near as strong as the one in 'Homecoming' was. This is mostly due to how much explaining it requires compared to the in-an-instant reveal of that film. There were also a few moments that I felt were rushed and nonsensical. Complaints aside, this is an entertaining movie and the third act is as exciting as Spider-Man action (in live-action at least) has been since Raimi stopped making these. The action here is a big step up from 'Homecoming' despite all being drenched in CGI. Giacchino's score thankfully re-employs many of the leitmotifs established in Holland's previous outing, fusing it with a really great synth-induced theme for Mysterio. Speaking of which, Jake Gyllenhaal as Mysterio is among the most enjoyable antagonists in the MCU. I really could've done with a more original and compelling motivation for him, considering we've seen a few versions of this approach before; but nevertheless Gyllenhaal is an absolute scene-stealer here and he has my favourite visual-design of any villain thus far in a Spider-Man movie. He's so much fun to watch that I would be excited to see him return as the antagonist in the sequel. Tom Holland also gives his best performance as Spider-Man yet. I liked MJ a lot more in this movie than in 'Homecoming', Ned is still awesome and the rest of the supporting cast are all consistently pretty good too. Didn't love the writing for Nick Fury here, but I suppose that can be excused by the time the credits finish anyway.
All that's really holding the film back from being on the level of 'Homecoming' is the awkward writing surrounding the twist and the weaker motivation for the antagonist; Though this film is an effective comedy (much more than most MCU instalments are), I didn't find the high school element as inspired or fresh in this film, and I think that's mostly down to the messier, looser screenplay that has more on its mind story-wise. This is certainly a more ambitious film, both on a directorial and storytelling level, and I think that choice works in the films favour; despite the trade-off of something that's ultimately a little less focused. Not quite A-tier MCU, but it's certainly a great way to close out what was BY FAR the best Phase of movies yet. Absolutely thrilled that Spider-Man is good again (even if the visual presentation is a real issue here). Not sure whether or not I prefer it to 'Endgame', it’s obviously not as culturally impactful but I feel like it'll certainly be more re-watchable and that’s what ultimately matters with these films in the long run. - DirectorAnthony RussoJoe RussoStarsRobert Downey Jr.Chris EvansMark RuffaloAfter the devastating events of Avengers: Infinity War (2018), the universe is in ruins. With the help of remaining allies, the Avengers assemble once more in order to reverse Thanos' actions and restore balance to the universe.6/10
Times Seen: 2
Thoughts (Spoilers):
‘Endgame’ appears perfectly crafted to be the most satisfying movie ever made. That’s not to say that it’s perfect in any sense (in fact, I think it makes it less interesting at times), but it’s nice to see a blockbuster that for all its flaws, manages to combine the storytelling themes of a true directorial vision with the insane spectacle on display here (even if less successful than 'Infinity War'). This is a rare film that often feels very real and personal in its emotional beats, whilst also being all things to all kinds of viewers. This will undoubtedly go down as a classic and upon opening night it truly felt like a film phenomenon was taking place ($357m/$1.2b opening weekend is insane and unlikely to ever be replicated). This film, and the larger MCU experiment has been the defining film-going experience of the decade. Whether you like the movies or not, you can’t deny their impact or (because of their unprecedented widespread appeal) their importance. This larger context positions this film as the defining moment for the mega-franchise.
None of this is to suggest that this film doesn’t have plenty of real issues in its execution. I personally don’t really like the Black Widow death scene, not because I was disappointed by the outcome, but more so because it was directed with an apparent lack of self-awareness. The presentation of this scene is exactly the same as the masterfully-directed Gamora death scene in ‘Infinity War’. It’s disappointing because instead of constantly inventing new iconic and powerful moments like ‘Infinity War’ managed to, this scene in-particular feels lazy and uninspired. Because it’s so similar to the previously-mentioned scene, it’s robbed of its impact and it feels kind of inconsequential and throw-away. A lot of folks have taken issue with Thor’s depiction in the film for various reasons. I actually like the idea and it’s exactly the kind of weird risk that is usually missing in most of these movies. My issue with Thor is that his character arc feels weightless (pun intended). He was positioned in ‘Infinity War’ as the central hero of that film and it didn’t really feel like his role in this film reflected that. His arc here is ultimately unsatisfying; probably because they didn’t want to wrap up his story yet (because Thor is actually good now). Adjacent to this issue, Thanos is also a much less effective character in especially the third act of this film. He doesn’t share the experience that we as viewers, know him from, so he’s essentially back to square-one. In fact, the first act of this film was actually my favourite. The death of Thanos in the first 20 minutes was an excellent and exciting creative choice. The second act is the one where fat could’ve been trimmed off (this pun wasn’t intended) of the three-hour runtime, and the third act, though completely bombastic is honestly earned and immensely entertaining. There’s plenty of absurd fan service here that is either eye-rolling or super satisfying depending on your level of investment in this series. The pacing is much worse than ‘Infinity War’, there’s about 100 potential plot holes and Captain Marvel is once again a very boring and underdeveloped character. This final point isn’t a huge issue because she’s barely in it, but her inclusion alone left me questioning why they would want to involve a character THAT powerful in their cinematic universe. She’s so ridiculously overpowered that she low-key breaks the story and the writers really just ended up having to write around her for the most part. The introduction of time travel also breaks the universe for any and all future films, meaning that if those films wish to have any consequence, they will have to carry that gaping plot hole on their back.
Aside from those issues, I was thoroughly entertained by this movie. It’s a pretty fun story with some memorable character moments, good performances, a great score and impressive special effects. The emotional beats all worked for me (the awkward Black Widow death scene aside), though lacking the visual variety of its predecessor this film had some memorable instances of great cinematography. I loved Captain America’s role in this story considering he’s the best Avenger. Overall, this isn’t as great a film as ‘Infinity War’ but it certainly offers things that that film didn’t. This film works best as a part of the whole package that is the MCU. It’s a great conclusion and at this point in time I don’t really care about the future of this franchise outside of the ‘Spider-Man’ sequels, ‘Guardians 3’ and anything Taika Waititi does if he returns. Despite my long list of complaints about this movie, I like it quite a bit and it certainly stands out as one of the most noteworthy blockbuster films of the 21st Century. It essentially achieves everything it wanted to in terms of the big picture and you can’t fault it for that. - DirectorJames GrayStarsBrad PittTommy Lee JonesRuth NeggaAstronaut Roy McBride undertakes a mission across an unforgiving solar system to uncover the truth about his missing father and his doomed expedition that now, 30 years later, threatens the universe.6/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
A relatively effective soft-adaptation of Heart of Darkness, but in space. It’s a very slow-moving film and it didn’t really have me the entire way, but Pitt and TLJ are great and the effects work (The most seamless of the year IMO) + cinematography are simply stunning. - DirectorDaniel GordonStarsAdam GoodesStan GrantNova Peris"The Australian Dream" is a theatrical feature documentary that uses the remarkable and inspirational story of AFL legend Adam Goodes as the prism through which to tell a deeper, more powerful story about race, identity, and belonging.6/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
A wonderful documentary, important and completely essential in its empathy towards the subject. The condemnation of Adam Goodes is so widespread among hardcore AFL fans because of how the events were framed by individuals in the media, who are interviewed within the film and held accountable for their influence on the matter. There's a complete lack of acknowledgement for Goodes' perspective and experience within AFL culture, that stems from a lack of understanding. This film goes a long way to explaining the reality of the situation, one that was boiled down and simplified as a matter of overreaction. - DirectorJordan PeeleStarsLupita Nyong'oWinston DukeElisabeth MossAdelaide Wilson and her family are attacked by mysterious figures dressed in red. Upon closer inspection, the Wilsons realize that the intruders are exact lookalikes of them.6/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
Really dug this; up until the ending which I found lazy, predictable and detrimentally disappointing. Fantastic performances all round and Peele's direction is impressive throughout. Was really feeling all of its symbolism and thematic/visual parallels, but it all feels undone by how poorly thought-out (and frankly bad) the ending was. - DirectorChad StahelskiStarsKeanu ReevesHalle BerryIan McShaneJohn Wick is on the run after killing a member of the international assassins' guild, and with a $14 million price tag on his head, he is the target of hit men and women everywhere.6/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
This film was the closest I've come to enjoying the 'John Wick' franchise as much as everyone else seems to. The previous two films absolutely had impressive action but I always felt that everything outside of the choreography and cinematography was lacking, most of all the storytelling and character work. I understand that the focused action and lack of extra baggage is what people love about this series, but I felt both films failed to hold my interest past the first twenty minutes due to both a lack of variety IN the action and absolutely nothing of interest OUTSIDE of the action. Going into this film, I wasn't able to recall any story elements from the second installment whatsoever. This film opens very intelligently however.
The first twenty minutes catapults the films pace forward with such electrifying momentum that I figured it couldn't possibly maintain this level of entertainment value for its full 130-minute runtime and it surely didn't, but this was by far the most enjoyment I've gleamed from this now-trilogy so far. I can't really oversell how much fun the first 20-minutes of this film are. The increasing absurdity of the action mixed with the masterful stunt work and clever balance of thoughtful editing and cinematography is indicative of everything this series does well. It's the peak of the entire franchise thus far and though nothing within this film lives up to that same potential, there are highlights within the second and third act that left me feeling that I for once properly enjoyed one of these movies overall. Of the action scenes, I particularly loved the close-quarters knife-throwing fight and the Halle Berry + dog brawl. - DirectorDexter FletcherStarsTaron EgertonJamie BellRichard MaddenA musical fantasy about the fantastical human story of Elton John's breakthrough years.6/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
I'm so tired of generic biopics, especially ones based on musical icons. I despised last years 'Bohemian Rhapsody', and even the best films of the sub-genre (Walk the Line, Love & Mercy etc.) fall prey to all too similar story beats that lend each installment a lack of individuality. 'Rocketman' shares many of the issues I had with films like 'Bohemian Rhapsody' and 'Ray', but like the best musical biopics, it still manages to offer sense of purpose beyond a surface-level celebration of the artists work. The elements that work here outweigh the tiresome tropes that I feared would bog the film down into a boring waste of time. The direction employs the surrealist style of a musical over the usual checklist approach, providing many well-directed musical scenes that offer more than just the music. These scenes integrate John's music into the story this film is trying to tell. The story never stops purely to pad the run-time with obligatory musical numbers. It's all cohesively fused into a not uncommon story of success, excess and mental health issues stemming from a childhood experience. These moments elevate what is still a relatively paint-by-numbers biopic, into an interesting watch. The other key player here is Taron Egerton, who absolutely kills it, offering a more interesting performance than is usually praised in these types of films. His performance offers more than the usual attempt to convince you that he is the real-life person, providing us with a fully-realised character in this story, based upon John's life. There's more to chew on here cinematically than is usually seen in this sub-genre. I won't be rushing out to see it again, but it was a pleasant surprise and a standout when compared to other recent musical biopics. - DirectorDavid F. SandbergStarsZachary LeviMark StrongAsher AngelA newly fostered young boy in search of his mother instead finds unexpected super powers and soon gains a powerful enemy.6/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
A well-made, entertaining and inspired superhero film that might feel less special due to the time of its release (the same month as 'Endgame', but 'Shazam' sits ahead of the pack with regards to the majority of superhero films. It's relatively funny and light-hearted with well-rounded characters and a sharp script. I was honestly expecting this movie to be terrible. I thought I'd hate all of the child actors and I thought Zachary Levi's performance would just be embarrassing and one-note (and I mean they did include him flossing in the marketing). I have to say, walking out of this film, I thought it was decent even if nothing special; but it has grown on me over the subsequent weeks since I saw it. I'm not in love with it, but I'd compare my reaction to it with something like 'Iron Man 3' in that I appreciate a lot of what it has to offer from a writing perspective, I like the performances, I like the message and the fact that it has one. But for me, it lacks that certain directorial flair that would elevate it to say a Sam Raimi's 'Spider-Man', which I know it is receiving a lot of comparison to. Weirdly enough, despite my distaste and exhaustion for the DCEU, that ending was amazing. This film has me very excited for the DC movies to come. Hiring good writers and directors is the simple, tried and true secret to producing a solid superhero film; who knew? - DirectorSam MendesStarsDean-Charles ChapmanGeorge MacKayDaniel MaysApril 6th, 1917. As an infantry battalion assembles to wage war deep in enemy territory, two soldiers are assigned to race against time and deliver a message that will stop 1,600 men from walking straight into a deadly trap.6/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
Undoubtedly one of the true feats of technical craft in 2019 cinema. That final battlefield sequence is a truly remarkable piece of filmmaking. Its unsurprising and totally deserved 10 Oscar nominations are all justified considering the massive undertaking of this production. George MacKay and Dean-Charles Chapman deliver strong, naturalistic work here despite the demands that this shooting style would've placed on them. The lighting throughout is really striking and the blocking goes a long way to selling the value of presenting this story under the impression of one long take. In execution I'm not sure it was entirely necessary outside of the selling point of its gimmick. Certain sequences were absolutely elevated by the approach, but i felt the film on the whole lacked visual variety as a result. The score was all-too-often overbearing and over-present in many sequences and it robbed many moments of the subtlety and realism that the one-take style is intended to facilitate. I found the consistency of style and tone resulted in a film that often dragged in its middle act, but the third act picked up and elevated the piece on the whole with its effective performances and insanely stunning final sequence. I'd compare it to my experience with Cuarón's 'Gravity', where the selling point is the visual craft, and is therefore a film best seen on the big screen; but it's not something that demands to be revisited for me. An effective film on the whole and one I'd recommend. - DirectorJames MangoldStarsMatt DamonChristian BaleJon BernthalAmerican car designer Carroll Shelby and driver Ken Miles battle corporate interference and the laws of physics to build a revolutionary race car for Ford in order to defeat Ferrari at the 24 Hours of Le Mans in 1966.6/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Well-directed, a fun and engaging take on the subject matter, but it was undoubtedly overlong for me. Bale and Damon are fun to watch here and the driving sequences are truly exhilarating filmmaking. It's a very straight-forward movie, what you see is what you get, there's very little that surprises about the film but it achieves what it set out to do. It'll be a good holiday season movie that a lot of people will love. - DirectorDean DeBloisStarsJay BaruchelAmerica FerreraF. Murray AbrahamWhen Hiccup discovers Toothless isn't the only Night Fury, he must seek the Hidden World, a secret Dragon Utopia before a hired tyrant named Grimmel finds it first.5/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
I love Dreamworks, but the 'Dragon' franchise isn't really one of my favourites despite being one of their best. This third installment felt like the most forgettable of the trilogy. Pretty beautiful animation and it has some nice moments but I ultimately didn't get a whole lot out of this film personally despite it being one of the better family-oriented film of the last 12 months. - DirectorChris SmithStarsBilly McFarlandJason BellGabrielle BluestoneAn exclusive behind the scenes look at the infamous unraveling of the Fyre music festival.5/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Well-crafted documentary with an effective use of a Reznor/Ross soundtrack and a pretty interesting story. Has its great, unexpected moments that keep things interesting; however there were times where I didn't feel particularly engaged. - DirectorMarielle HellerStarsMatthew RhysTom HanksChris CooperBased on the true story of a real-life friendship between Fred Rogers and journalist Lloyd Vogel.5/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
An interesting and admittedly more worthwhile approach to biopic filmmaking than many recent efforts that have exhausted my interest in the genre. Biopics rarely hold a candle to a good documentary for me, and unfortunately for this movie, we received one of the best documentaries of last year on the subject of Mr Rogers. Hanks is pretty good here and you can see the work he puts into embodying the beloved real-life figure. Loved the bold choice to present some scenes with miniatures in the style of ‘Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood’. Despite appreciating the approach to the material, the story itself of the protagonist didn’t do much for me. He too often serves as an audience surrogate for the first half of the film, and then once the second half rolls around and the emotional weight of the piece rests solely on our investment in his struggle, which for me was too vague and lacked specificity to really engage me. Plenty to appreciate here about Heller’s direction however, even if I felt the screenplay could’ve been stronger. - DirectorFernando MeirellesStarsJonathan PryceAnthony HopkinsJuan MinujínBehind Vatican walls, the conservative Pope Benedict XVI and the liberal future Pope Francis must find common ground to forge a new path for the Catholic Church.5/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
A sporadically interesting discussion of faith with stellar work from Hopkins, and even more-so Jonathan Pryce, who is just wonderful here. Outside of these achievements, this didn't do much for me and it lost my interest at moments throughout. - DirectorMike MitchellStarsChris PrattElizabeth BanksWill ArnettIt's been five years since everything was awesome and the citizens are facing the huge new threat of Lego Duplo, invaders from outer space, wrecking everything faster than they can rebuild.5/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
An underwhelming but totally serviceable sequel with the same gorgeous but ultimately less inventive animation and a decent enough script. The film functions as both a coming-of-age story and a dissection of sequel tropes. These two concepts are melded together quite effectively to present a different vision to the first film. I also very much enjoyed how this story played around with a few different genres. It’s ultimately a massive step down from the masterpiece that was “The LEGO Movie” (my personal favourite family animated film of the 2010s), but with Lord and Miller being subbed out for the director of ‘Alvin and the Chipmunks 3’ and ‘Trolls’; I really wasn’t expecting much at all. However, Lord and Miller served as writers on this film, so it’s still certainly solid. Not quite as funny as ‘LEGO Batman’ (but definitely stronger story-wise), and definitely lacking the subtlety and nuance in both the humour and themes of its predecessor. Suffered some pacing issues in the second act and there were one or two performances that were noticeably lacking. The musical numbers weren’t really my thing and I felt that they lingered a little too long for what is essentially just one joke. The film also had it’s fair share of pandering nonsense like Batman flossing. In the end though, this movie as-expected just suffers from being less impactful and original than its predecessor; so instead of being an unforgettable gem, it's mostly forgettable but entertaining in the moment (similar to other animation sequels like 'Incredibles 2'). Still a pretty fun film with great animation and a thoughtful screenplay; has its flaws and it's just not nearly on the same level as 'The LEGO Movie', but I did enjoy it overall and felt that it had some worthwhile and well-done elements to offer. - DirectorJ.J. AbramsStarsDaisy RidleyJohn BoyegaOscar IsaacThe surviving Resistance faces the First Order once again in the conclusion of the Skywalker saga.5/10
Times Seen: 3
Thoughts (Spoilers):
I wrote a really long review for this that I was really happy with, and then I accidentally lost it all and I'm too tired to invest the time into attempting to re-write it, so here are my quick overall thoughts on the film.
It's disappointing and messy and not a good movie, but it's so well-crafted from a production standpoint, and I like these characters and I can find a way to enjoy almost all 'Star Wars' (AotC being the only real exception out of the films), so I didn't hate it and though I "fundamentally disagree" (lol) with a lot of the decisions made in this sadly very disappointing script, I can't get too mad about it. Too many people are too mad about 'Star Wars' as it is and the ones I like aren't going anywhere. There's stuff in this movie that worked for me, and plenty that made me roll my eyes but overall I'm totally ambivalent towards it. I seriously don't hate it despite it being way too dumb and way too bad a third act to this trilogy. But I got to go see a new 'Star Wars' movie (and the final film in this new trilogy, which I have mostly loved) with the family (a new tradition that came with the Disney era of 'Star Wars') and I'm happy for that at least.
Favourite moments would be the TIE fighter sequence in the desert, the force connection lightsaber fight between Rey and Kylo (this one mainly just for the construction and visual design of it, the writing is pretty ass in this scene but go figure, the movie is actually pretty neat when it builds off of 'TLJ') and the Death Star duel + the ensuing moment with Harrison Ford; all truly stunning scenes. John Williams delivers a great score as always. Many have voiced their disappointment in the lack of new themes here, but tracks such as ‘The Rise of Skywalker’ and ‘A New Home’ were really beautiful and Williams’ use of Rey and Kylo’s themes was a real highlight of the movie for me. Also thought the absence of music in the Death Star lightsaber duel was an admirable choice, and is emblematic of Abrams’ understanding of the craft, allowing the phenomenal sound design to take over and score the sequence itself. Dan Mindel’s cinematography is everything I could want in a blockbuster, such incredible expertise and artistry; it helps that he has absolutely gorgeous production design to work with also. Neal Scanlan, Matthew Denton and the entire Lucasfilm team behind the puppetry and the other practical effects are doing God's work and deserve ALL the praise. They’ve been the one consistent throughout the Disney-era Star Wars films. When the trailers said “the story lives forever”, they were really talking about Babu Frik.
Such a bizarre film overall. Imagine one of the most beautifully-designed and expertly-directed blockbusters of recent years, but all that hard work is in service of the weakest story in the saga. Also has my least favourite title of the films; even as the film has come and gone, ‘Rise of Skywalker’ still feels like a fake rumored “LEAKED” title on Reddit. Kinda fitting seeing as that’s how the story on the whole felt for me. The final product lacks the heart and pure excitement that I felt with ‘Force Awakens’, and it certainly doesn’t share the thematic intent or creative earnestness that I loved in ‘The Last Jedi’. It ultimately feels less essential in the overall story of the saga, similarly to how I feel about the place of ‘Phantom Menace’ and ‘AotC’; which is disappointing for a film that’s going to serve as the final chapter (for at least the next 10 years lol). - DirectorLouie PsihoyosStarsJames WilksArnold SchwarzeneggerPatrik BaboumianA UFC fighter's world is turned upside down when he discovers an elite group of world-renowned athletes and scientists who prove that everything he had been taught about protein was a lie.5/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
As someone who’s read-up on the subject of veganism and sports performance, I can’t say this documentary had much to teach me that I didn’t already know (aside from the boners lol), but it’s a pretty good summary of the subject that goes a long way to dispelling many of the popular myths surrounding how a vegan diet effects athletes. It’s pretty clear to anyone who’s done the research that a balanced diet is a balanced diet and animal products aren’t necessary or beneficial if you eat well. One of the more interesting segments of the film discusses how marketing reinforces the notion that there’s a correlation between masculinity and a meat-diet. I actually wasn’t aware of Patrik Baboumian’s involvement in the film either, so it was cool to see him featured as I’m a fan of his activism as well as his sports career. An interesting watch if you have any interest on the subject. - DirectorJosh CooleyStarsTom HanksTim AllenAnnie PottsWhen a new toy called "Forky" joins Woody and the gang, a road trip alongside old and new friends reveals how big the world can be for a toy.5/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
A totally fine Pixar effort with gorgeous animation, but a screenplay that's ultimately so-so when compared to 'Toy Story 3', and to an even greater extent; the first two films. This film was certainly better than expected. The marketing was truly obnoxious and presented no real reason for the existence of this movie, and though I feel the same way about the film overall, at least Forky wasn't annoying. Key and Peele's characters didn't win me over in the end, but the trailers threatened a much more insufferable addition to the film than the reality of the final product. They're okay, and though they scream way too often, they do get a memorable scene that most audiences will love. I quite enjoyed Bo Peep's role in the film, even if she and the new characters draw focus away from Buzz, Jessie, the Potato-Heads, Rex, Hamm and, you know, all the best characters. Woody's arc is the big focus here, and the only attempt at justification for this fourth film within the story. This didn't feel like a necessary extension of the trilogy for me, and though that was something I was admittedly critical of going in, I can say that I was expecting to kind of hate this, and I didn't.
I revisited the other films in preparation for this, and they are all much funnier, edgier and layered, both in terms of the dialogue and themes. This storyline didn't really engage me, and I found the "cry-moments" mostly forced and clichéd. The villain arc was certainly a little different from 2 and 3, but it was also predictable and consequently didn't feel earned. What I appreciated most about this film however, (outside of the ridiculous level that animation technology has reached) was the theme of trying to figure out where you fit in and what you want out of life once you reach the end of the road in terms of where you may have previously derived self-worth. It's a universal struggle, and one that fits with the 'Toy Story' franchise neatly; even if it's inconsistent between various character arcs. I just wish that the film surrounding it was better-written overall. As it stands, the cynical nature of this films existence and the forced nostalgia bait "sad Pixar" moments overpower much of the genuine emotion and the fresh ideas that could otherwise be gleaned from this premise to great effect.
This isn't close to being a bad movie and it's certainly an improvement over 'Finding Dory' and 'Cars 3', but it didn't have nearly the same impact as each three previous installments did, and Pixar used to be above making average animated films. It'll likely end up being one of the better family films of the year, but for me it falls short of being a truly good movie overall, and it's certainly a mid-tier Pixar effort for me. - DirectorAndy MuschiettiStarsJessica ChastainJames McAvoyBill HaderTwenty-seven years after their first encounter with the terrifying Pennywise, the Losers Club have grown up and moved away, until a devastating phone call brings them back.5/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
Disclaimer: this review contains 23 uses of the word “it”. So it seems everyone agrees that this isn't as good as the first 'Chapter', and that's absolutely right, but it's been interesting to see the varying opinions as to just how much worse this is compared to its predecessor. I was pretty lukewarm on the original when it first released, mostly because I was burnt out on the over-saturation of 1980s nostalgia at the time. With time however, I've come to really appreciate 'It (2017)', and I pretty much consider it the benchmark for 21st Century mainstream studio horror. This felt very much in-line with that film in terms of style and tone for the most part. And for the first 30-minutes or so, I wasn't really feeling any serious deviation in quality. Once the structure of the second-act revealed itself, it did feel repetitive and almost predictable-by-design, but each segment was enjoyable nonetheless. I felt that this became consistently less effective as a horror film the longer it went on. The run-time wasn't a huge issue for me like it has been for many professional critics, but I imagine that it would be upon re-watch, and the length will almost certainly deter me from revisiting it too soon. Speaking of run-time, I do feel that it was unnecessary, especially considering how drawn-out the third act is. The climax of the film felt like it didn't want to end, maybe in an attempt to be as satisfying as possible, but a tighter edit of this film would've been a perfectly achievable improvement. It didn't help that the climax wasn't particularly suspenseful at best and bombastic and overproduced at worst. This film was always going to lack some of the charm that elevated 'Chapter One', with the younger cast being largely absent and the 80s setting only being gleamed in short moments. Speaking of which, the de-aging effects were sometimes distracting, in particular with Finn Wolfhard and his odd height + baby face + pitch-shift combo.
I was interested to see how they structured this half of the story without the book's flashback/flash-forward style and maintain the theme of confronting and overcoming past trauma. They did this by oftentimes cutting back to the characters as children, and though some of these scenes were engaging, they didn't all feel totally necessary, and were sometimes overlong. That message is also a little too on-the-nose at points. The technical aspects are mostly consistent with the first film, despite a few minor editing choices that stuck out to me as clumsy. This isn't quite as visually interesting of a film, but there were some great, memorable shots and some really fun visual sequences with Pennywise. Speaking of the clown himself, he's shown a little too often for my tastes, but it's hard to complain about it when Bill Skarsgård is again, absolutely killing it in the role. There are a few Pennywise scenes constructed around building tension with a big scare pay-off at the end, and again, though these are fun scenes, the audiences over-exposure to our villain takes away from his screen presence at times. The rest of the cast are also pretty great throughout. Not only is the casting enjoyable, but the performances add a lot to the drama of the film, and making it work. Hadar and McAvoy were the standouts for me.
This film alone, and alongside the full package with the first film, is a huge improvement over the 90s tv-movie, which I consider to be pretty terrible overall, and especially in its adult-Loser's Club segment. I'd recommend catching this in theaters if it interests you. Horror movie audiences are always a little obnoxious and let's say, less-respectful, but seeing such a big, event horror film with a large audience was fun, and it made me wish I caught the first film in theaters back in 2017. Though it's not one of the better horror films of recent years, it's certainly more interesting than most modern studio horror films, plus you'll be supporting a studio that isn't Disney, so there's that. Also I love the poster. - DirectorJim JarmuschStarsBill MurrayAdam DriverTilda SwintonTwo pioneers fight for their lives and their love on the American frontier during the Civil War.5/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
The new film from Jim Jarmusch is a disappointingly flat zom-com that sets its sights on humanity’s tendency to ignore extinction-level issues even when they’re already in motion. It's an interesting concept to explore in this setting, and I'd expect no less from a Jarmusch take on the sub-genre; but unfortunately it's not particularly effective at exploring this idea thoughtfully, and it's not an especially enjoyable or memorable comedy either. The film has a great cast with some fun performances by a handful of the greatest actors working today; Bill Murray, Tilda Swinton and Adam Driver are all really fun to watch here. There were some effective moments of comedy here and the meta-gags were actually some of the funniest ones in the whole movie. Adam Driver is genuinely very funny here and it just goes to show what a masterful actor he is that he can take on pretty much any tone and turn in a great and memorable performance. The first half of the film was overall decent, but the second half felt underwritten, slow, aimless and boring. The actual zombie elements of the film will likely disappoint viewers who are here solely for that aspect, and there isn’t much here that hasn’t been done better elsewhere (and by Jarmusch himself), but it's totally fine for a one-time watch; whether or not I'd recommend it depends entirely on what you’re looking to get out of it. - DirectorTodd PhillipsStarsJoaquin PhoenixRobert De NiroZazie BeetzDuring the 1980s, a failed stand-up comedian is driven insane and turns to a life of crime and chaos in Gotham City while becoming an infamous psychopathic crime figure.4/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
Boy oh boy, if I felt that this movie was even half as interesting as the cultural reaction to it, I could spend an entire day writing extensively about how much I don’t like this very popular movie. Ultimately I think it’s too shallow, too vague, too broad and too non-specific to be interesting. It’s riddled with clichès and everything from its style to its story is entirely indebted to the films of Martin Scorsese. That’s not to say that it doesn’t have qualities to appreciate; much has been said about the cinematography, it’s effectiveness and it’s uniqueness to the genre. The same can be said for the score, and of course Joaquin Phoenix gives a performance that further proves he’s a great actor. It’s not one of my favourites from him, but I’m happy that he’s receiving praise from a wide audience that wouldn’t typically see films like ‘The Master’, because he truly is one of the most accomplished actors of his generation. In fact, he’s even better in this film than most people are giving him credit for. He infuses this interpretation of the character with such an intensity and specificity that he single-handedly elevates this lame story into a character study. On the page, Arthur Fleck is not an especially interesting or complex character. The film relies so heavily on Phoenix’s contribution to communicate its ideas that without him, this movie is a clumsily-written slog that lacks an ounce of subtlety in either its themes or storytelling.
It’s an empty, pretentious mess that garnered all of its interest on the fact that it’s based on one of the most popular comic book characters out there. The film briefly skips over the real character work (Fleck’s childhood), and instead favours a moment of superficial shock value that acts as shorthand. We understand how this person came to be as he is, but the only element of character development within this story is a further descent into madness, and Fleck’s transformation into the Joker. Which is ultimately brought about through lazy, manipulative writing where “society” literally beats him down in a series of comically obvious moments. The Joker persona is portrayed as an acceptance of who “society” pushed Fleck into being, but the film provides no solutions or so much as a sense of hope. It merely mentions a lack of government funding for mental healthcare and lets us know that this is a bad thing. This is what I ultimately mean when I say this movie is completely shallow. It wants to masquerade as a character study and a deconstruction of classism and lack of awareness for mental healthcare, but for me at least, it worked as neither. It’s entirely bleak and absurdly cynical, and as a result it feels like nothing more than a futile expression of despondency.
The intersection of modern hype culture and a relatively standard psychological drama with an attached popular IP means that you have entire theatres cheering for a murderer, in a film that goes a long way to expressing that his violent insanity is a tragedy born from “society”: a blanket term that audiences can attach their own frustrations on to. It could be argued that this is entirely an issue with audiences and fan-mentality, and not an issue with the film itself. But this film is not at all innocent or merely a victim of misinterpretation (e.g Wolf of Wall Street, Fight Club, Scarface etc.). The third act especially encourages audiences to find exhilaration in Fleck’s acts. Admittedly, the talk-show segment is the most gripping, tense moment of the film, and it’s ruined by how absurdly soap-box-y and corny it all is. I’m not saying that this has any wider social implications, as I’m a passionate advocate against the notion that media is responsible for real-world violence. I’m simply saying that this film is a mess because it wants to have its cake and eat it too. It wants to present itself as a call-to-action for these real-world issues, but ultimately it doesn’t ever get around to saying anything productive or nuanced about them. It simply wishes to wallow in self-pity and celebrate juvenile anarchism as shorthand. So if the response to this movie is more interesting than the movie itself, maybe the real character study was “sOcIeTy” the whole time.
Things I liked though:
-Lawrence Sher’s cinematography is pretty stunning. It’s a shame that WB mandated it be shot digitally, especially so considering Phillips and Sher wanted to shoot it on 70mm. It’d be great if more superhero + blockbuster films in general gave this much care to finding a unique visual aesthetic.
-Hildur Guonadottir’s score is striking despite being used to cheesy effect in moments.
-I enjoyed THAT moment on the train. The scene surrounding it was really corny to me, but the decision made by Joaquin’s character was actually a fairly shocking moment in an otherwise predictable story. I wish they did more with it. - DirectorRobert RodriguezStarsRosa SalazarChristoph WaltzJennifer ConnellyA deactivated cyborg's revived, but can't remember anything of her past and goes on a quest to find out who she is.4/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Definitely better than I expected, but that's not really saying much. I was fully expecting this movie to be another 'Valerian' or 'Jupiter Ascending' or 'Fifth Element', and it is very similar to all of those films but at the same time it's much better than all of those. This film is being touted as a massive achievement in visual effects; and I guess I agree solely on the sheer number of visual effects shots. However, I don't think this movie looks particularly good and it's certainly not going to age well. It felt more like I was watching a highly-textured animated movie with jarring occasional live-action actors. To be perfectly honest, I found this movie mostly boring. The story was pretty unfocused and the only sections I gleamed enjoyment out of were the action scenes. It got slightly more engaging in the third act and the Motorball scene was actually impressively staged and quite entertaining. The performances were nothing special, I didn't notice anything interesting about the score and the story was largely scattered set-up. The technical work here is clearly the focus, and to be perfectly honest; for $200m I've seen more impressive effects work for a lot less, but I suppose this film was much more ambitious in that it was trying to create an entire world through CG (although 'Avatar' from 10 years ago already holds up more than this movie). For the first 30-minutes or-so, I found this movie kind of difficult to look at, especially the character design of Alita herself. You do adjust to it after a while, but it was completely unnecessary for something that ended up being very distracting.
I understand why people are really enjoying this movie, but I found myself rather un-engaged throughout and the few things I enjoyed weren't enough to prop this movie up to a full recommendation from me. It felt much closer to 2.5 hours than 2, and even in the end it just felt like it was all there to set up a sequel with a much more interesting story, instead of just telling a good one in this movie. I'm surprised that this wasn't garbage and your enjoyment of the film lies very heavily on what you want out of a movie like this. If you're looking for fun action or you're a tech-head who's interested in computer-animation; you'll probably enjoy this a lot. - DirectorChris BuckJennifer LeeStarsKristen BellIdina MenzelJosh GadAnna, Elsa, Kristoff, Olaf and Sven leave Arendelle to travel to an ancient, autumn-bound forest of an enchanted land. They set out to find the origin of Elsa's powers in order to save their kingdom.4/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Beautifully animated but completely forgettable and already indistinguishable in my memory from its predecessor; although this film doesn’t share the qualities I appreciated in the original film. The first ‘Frozen’ film had memorable music and a really fun and creative twist. Again, this movie looked nice, but there wasn’t anything else that stood out to me as exceptional. After six years I was hoping for something a little more interesting than what this ultimately felt like; a quickly thrown together sequel. The story here felt really, really uninspired, and every character that isn’t Anna or Elsa gets nothing to do. This is a film that falls into pretty much every problem that a sequel must overcome. From recycling the same story from the original but with less effect and without the touches that made the original story compelling, to repeating character arcs, to having no narrative or thematic function for supporting characters and lesser attempts to recapture what audiences liked about the original (i.e. the musical numbers). The first teaser for the film actually made it look kind of interesting, and ultimately the films biggest flaw is that it’s anything but. - DirectorAnna BodenRyan FleckStarsBrie LarsonSamuel L. JacksonBen MendelsohnCarol Danvers becomes one of the universe's most powerful heroes when Earth is caught in the middle of a galactic war between two alien races.4/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
A pretty boring entry into the MCU, with the standout being the charisma of the supporting cast helping to prop up what is essentially a paint-by-numbers amnesia+MacGuffin plot. To me, it felt a lot like a "Phase One" Marvel movie, in that it's deeply rooted in blockbuster cliches including a rather typical and uninteresting protagonist, a wealth of side-characters, completely superfluous action sequences that can be left or cut depending on how the pacing looks in the edit room, but ultimately have no impact on the narrative and exist solely to break up the monotony of a story that we see a handful of times every summer movie season. Marvel movies are at their best when they shake things up, maybe try out a new tone/style/sub-genre, add some directorial flair to the visuals, focus in on clever dialogue and/or unexpected story elements. 'Captain Marvel' unfortunately didn't manage to offer me any of these elements that I appreciate about the very best movies in this MCU experiment; and through experimentation is exactly how the best Marvel movies are made. 'The Avengers' (and also 'Infinity War') was an experiment to test whether or not that kind of movie could work, 'Guardians' was a huge shift in style to see whether or not general audiences would appreciate it if these movies embraced the weirder elements of the comics. This movie doesn't really push the envelope in the MCU outside of being the first female-led installment; and unfortunately it doesn't really feel any different to the other ones.
A lot of folks seem to be complaining about Brie Larson's performance here, with subject of discussion revolving around her being either miscast or underwritten. I totally see what Boden, Fleck, Larson and maybe the three other writers were trying to accomplish with regards to how Carol Danvers was represented here. Instead of taking the Wonder Woman approach of writing a female hero who's a lovable ditz, they wanted to focus in on making Danvers closer in representation to a character like Captain America. Someone who's very stoic and taken seriously as a character but will also occasionally engage in the usual comedic fare of the Marvel formula. What people seem to enjoy most about Marvel movies and the characters within them is the casting. Whether it's Chris Evans as Steve Rogers or RDJ as Tony Stark or Hemsworth as Thor; fans seem to agree that these performances are and will always be the definitive screen interpretations of these characters. The reason that these actors managed to accomplish such praise for these roles is that the creatives played and leaned into their individual strengths as actors. Hemsworth has great comedic timing and there's a reason no one really liked Thor until 'Ragnarok', but now he's one of the most beloved characters in the franchise. I don't feel that Larson is necessarily miscast, I just think that the creatives need to find a way to play to her strengths as an actor. They'll get there eventually I'm sure, but to me that's why this feels so much like a "Phase One" movie; they haven't really locked down exactly what they're doing in terms of this character's characterisation. I have the same essential complaints with this movie as I did with 'Doctor Strange', except this movie doesn't share the creative world design and gorgeous computer animation.
Samuel L. Jackson does a LOT for this movie. He's always been an immensely charismatic screen presence and he elevates every scene he appears in. The de-age effect used in his performance is damn-near flawless; in fact I'd say we're pretty much there with that technology if it wasn't for how bad Clark Gregg's treatment looked in this movie. The first act of this movie is jarring and clumsily established, which I felt was detrimental to my investment in Danvers and her story. The first 'Captain America' wasn't a good movie, but they sure knew what they were doing for that first 45-minutes. The various twists and turns were rather predictable and without knowing a whole lot about this movie going in other than my minimal recollection of the trailers I saw, I already thought Jude Law was a villain; and his criticism of emotions in the opening scenes really didn't throw me off of that notion. The things that this movie actually does well are things that people just expect from a $150m movie. The costume design, make-up and production design are pretty fun and when mixed with the playful but thoughtful use of CGI, this movie looks interesting at times despite the uninteresting camerawork.
A lot of the enjoyment to be found in this movie stems from its existence as a prequel to 'The Avengers', and it's very surreal to see that kind of irreverence for a series that is still yet to conclude. Whilst feeling like a "Phase One" movie, it also comes across as a love-letter to that era of Marvel movies, and I think people will appreciate that about this movie. I didn't hate this movie like 'Ant-Man 2', but overall this feels like the most average Marvel movie yet, with all the major shortcomings of the series on full display and only slight glimpses at what this franchise excels at. - DirectorGene StupnitskyStarsJacob TremblayKeith L. WilliamsBrady NoonThree 6th-grade boys ditch school and embark on an epic journey while carrying accidentally stolen drugs, being hunted by teenage girls, and trying to make their way home in time for a long-awaited party.4/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Better and more bearable than expected. The premise had me rolling my eyes but the film itself is mostly watchable throughout; especially for its target audience. There's a good amount of unconvincing acting from the younger actors, but the biggest issue here is that the dialogue is SO clearly written by adults, and not the authentic words of young kids (because it has to be a watchable movie). Regardless, I remember chuckling at least once, and I have no doubt this will find its audience and receive a lot of love. If it looks enjoyable to you, you'll likely have a good time. - DirectorDavid LeitchStarsDwayne JohnsonJason StathamIdris ElbaLawman Luke Hobbs and outcast Deckard Shaw form an unlikely alliance when a cyber-genetically enhanced villain threatens the future of humanity.4/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
He really was Black Superman.
This movie is kind of incredible, and it would’ve been a flawless masterpiece if:
A) R*an R*ynolds wasn’t in it.
B) K*vin H*rt wasn’t in it.
C) Hobbs and Shaw kissed at the end.
The trailers (the best of the year) didn’t indicate (or warn me) that these issues would be in the movie, so I’m a little mad and I feel betrayed. - DirectorLars KlevbergStarsTim MathesonBen DaonZahra AndersonA mother gives her 13-year-old son a toy doll for his birthday, unaware of its more sinister nature.4/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Surprisingly not terrible, but not at all noteworthy on the spectrum of 2019 horror releases. This is the average horror movie of the year. It's biggest flaws come with comparison to the original, as every aspect is less effective and less memorable. Mark Hamill is a standout here, I just wish he was given more to do as this interpretation of Chucky is unfortunately pretty tame and lifeless. - DirectorJoe BerlingerStarsLily CollinsZac EfronAngela SarafyanA chronicle of the crimes of Ted Bundy from the perspective of Liz, his longtime girlfriend, who refused to believe the truth about him for years.4/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
'Extremely Wicked' is brought to Netflix via the vision of documentarian Joe Berlinger, who released the excellent 4-hour doco series 'Conversations with a Killer: The Ted Bundy Tapes' earlier this year. The announcement of this film along with the particularly awful trailer (and poster) had me questioning why exactly Berlinger was driven to make this film, as his return to feature film directing after a near-20-year hiatus. What could a dramatised account of Bundy's life (starring Zac Efron of all people) possibly offer, that a tightly-constructed and thorough documentary series hadn't. Truth be told, I was surprised to find that this film focuses its sights on telling the story from the perspective of Bundy's wife Elizabeth. This undoubtedly provides the film with the necessary new perspective on the true-crime story that this film absolutely required to justify its existence. The film is actually an adaptation of her book "The Phantom Prince: My Life with Ted Bundy", and though I cannot back this up, as I haven't read it; it does feel as though this aspect of her perspective is present in this film mostly due to the book as source material. This is by no means an outright offensive biopic, and it doesn't feel nearly as exploitative as some might have predicted, but I am somewhat conflicted when it comes to the films priorities. Efron is, in many ways well-cast as the raging-narcissist. He has proven that despite a handful of lacking performances throughout his career, he is in fact a very versatile actor, and one who seems to be searching for his particular brand of star-power. He's been the teen-heartthrob, the comedian, the musical performer and now he's trying his hand at something incredibly complex and serious. While I wasn't all that impressed by his performance on the whole, I was able to observe the work that he poured into bringing this character to the screen in terms of mannerisms and physical behaviour. His performance is very much the focus of this film and that makes it a very awkward depiction of Bundy. On the one hand it wants to be a respected adaptation from the perspective of the person closest to the man that shows how he successfully manipulated everyone around him, and on the other it wants to be an irreverent and farcical dark comedy with an undercurrent of something truly disgusting and serious. This results in a film that is a complete and utter tonal mess.
Whenever a real-life individuals experience is adapted to film, it's worth asking why the filmmaker chose to tell this story, and why through this particular format. The truly great biopics are born out of a vision that grounds the ridiculousness of recreating a life story in raising intelligent thematic discussion. Pablo Larraín's 'Jackie' comes to mind; a film that exists as a meditation on grief and all things surrounding that central theme. It's a story about one woman's experience of loss and Natalie Portman's powerhouse performance serves to externalize how this real-life figure managed to overcome that loss when the whole world was looking at her. The narrative, though based on a real life figure, serves the director's larger vision. With 'Extremely Wicked', it feels as though Berlinger (and Netflix) merely wanted to get as much mileage out of his vast research and create a film that would ultimately be more successful than a documentary ever could. It's the same thinking behind last years 'Bohemian Rhapsody'; where a documentary would've been a vastly more fascinating way of exploring the subject matter, however documentaries don't gross $900m worldwide. With that film however, the argument can be made that it existed as a tribute to Freddie Mercury's legacy, which is ultimately a very positive one (even if that film completely undercut that message by being cliched to the point of fictionalization). I'm not sure that this film had any real purpose outside of purely recounting events. There's no clear theme here, and I imagine that's why audiences aren't really responding to it outside of its novelty as a piece of serial killer media that also happens to star Troy Bolton. Again, the film isn't particularly offensive, because it grounds itself in Elizabeth's perspective but because it doesn't fully commit to that notion and provide anything resembling commentary, the film feels ultimately inessential when the documentary series exists. And this is in essence why it feels like nothing more than a vain star vehicle.
On the other side of things, this film isn't all that confident in its direction. The soundtrack consists of 70s hits, which is actually my personal niche when it comes to music; but this is one of those films where you can take every song on the soundtrack and tie it to about five other films. The choices are often obvious, on-the-nose and awkwardly-implemented. The cinematography, though sure-handed isn't note-worthy but the film does do a good job of capturing the era through production design and costuming. I mentioned earlier that I don't mind the casting of Efron as Bundy, but this film still manages to include plenty of distracting casting choices in pivotal roles; from Haley Joel Osment to Malkovich to Sheldon Cooper the Bazinga man himself. There were plenty of cheesy moments throughout the film, coming from performances, dialogue and editing in particular. Though the film is flawed when considering its technical merits, there is a lot to think and write about this movie and it managed to stick around in my mind for a while after I saw it. Overall, the nicest thing that I can say about is that it was an interesting watch, if not a particularly compelling or memorable one. - DirectorAng LeeStarsWill SmithMary Elizabeth WinsteadClive OwenAn over-the-hill hitman faces off against a younger clone of himself.3/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
Jaden Smith has been fired and Will Smith has replaced him as Will Smith’s son in all future film projects. I love it! When Will Smith makes fun of Will Smith for being a virgin, that was the best part. Also that Will Smith vs Will Smith action scene was actually sick. - DirectorJay RoachStarsCharlize TheronNicole KidmanMargot RobbieA group of women take on Fox News head Roger Ailes and the toxic atmosphere he presided over at the network.3/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
An incredibly superficial and banal dramatisation of events that really didn’t need to be recaptured by film. This is yet another example of a Hollywood retelling of true events that would have worked had it just been a well-crafted documentary; but they don’t make money and they don’t win high profile awards. Some good performances in here, but as a film it’s so tone-deaf, so transparent and so disappointingly surface-level. It’s artless Oscar bait with presumably good intentions but this film isn’t telling anyone anything they don’t already know, and it doesn’t do it well, or with nuance. - DirectorTim MillerStarsLinda HamiltonArnold SchwarzeneggerMackenzie DavisAn augmented human and Sarah Connor must stop an advanced liquid Terminator from hunting down a young girl, whose fate is critical to the human race.3/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Terminator 3: Attempt 4 was bad, go figure. It’s an improvement over ‘Genisys’ but like, so is syphilis. It’s probably the best film in the series since ‘Judgment Day’ but to me ‘Salvation’ was more interesting conceptually. This is just a really ineffective soft reboot of ‘Judgment Day’ that offers no additional insight creatively. It aims very low and I guess it hits the mark, but it’s far from a good movie regardless. The original ‘Terminator’ is one of my favourite movies for a lot of reasons that will never be recaptured, no matter how many times they decide to try. It’s so straight-forward and gloriously 80s; and every sequel grows further and further from that initial tone and style, and closer towards the worst clichés of the action genre in 21st Century film. There’s very little I can say I appreciated about this film; but I do wish to mention that I really liked Mackenzie Davis here. Her performance is easily the most interesting aspect of the film. The third act is horrendous and Arnold’s role in the film is underdeveloped at best and laughable-in-concept at worst. Linda Hamilton does a fine job, but her presence doesn’t elevate the material with any significance. The antagonist is also entirely underwhelming. There’s nothing new here. - DirectorRuben FleischerStarsWoody HarrelsonJesse EisenbergEmma StoneColumbus, Tallahassee, Wichita, and Little Rock move to the American heartland as they face off against evolved zombies, fellow survivors, and the growing pains of the snarky makeshift family.3/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
From the director of Venom and the writers of Deadpool. Yup. - DirectorMichael DoughertyStarsKyle ChandlerVera FarmigaMillie Bobby BrownThe crypto-zoological agency Monarch faces off against a battery of god-sized monsters, including the mighty Godzilla, who collides with Mothra, Rodan, and his ultimate nemesis, the three-headed King Ghidorah.3/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Possibly the bluest movie in existence. I have to admit that I didn’t watch this entire movie. I tried not to fast forward through any of it, but only made it to the 45-minute mark before deciding that my viewing experience would be greatly improved if I watched this over the span of an hour instead of a ridiculous 130-minutes. That’s an absurd amount of time to watch a movie do nothing but move in circles for its first half, and have nothing to offer in its second outside of the most uninteresting monster action in recent memory. This movie bored me to tears, right up until the moment it ended like a trailer. - DirectorTim BurtonStarsColin FarrellMichael KeatonDanny DeVitoA young elephant, whose oversized ears enable him to fly, helps save a struggling circus, but when the circus plans a new venture, Dumbo and his friends discover dark secrets beneath its shiny veneer.3/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Completely dull and forgettable, but having said that; it still looks to be the most inspired and creatively passionate of the handful of dreadful-looking live-action Disney remakes we're being dealt this year. This one is almost as bad as Burton's previous attempt 'Alice in Wonderland', however at least this one features a genuinely hilarious Danny DeVito performance, even if the novelty of his inclusion wears off once the story, formerly 64-minutes in 1941, drags on for a full two hours. - DirectorSimon KinbergStarsJames McAvoyMichael FassbenderJennifer LawrenceJean Grey begins to develop incredible powers that corrupt and turn her into a Dark Phoenix, causing the X-Men to have to decide if her life is worth more than all of humanity.2.5/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
It's not quite the next 'Fant4stic' or as much of a weirdly terrible X-Men movie as 'Origins: Wolverine' was; but I'd certainly sooner revisit those films over this (but also I won't be doing that). 'Phoenix' is one of the most tiresome and embarrassingly unimpressive efforts I've ever seen in this genre, and I've seen almost (without hyperbole) 100 of these goddamn movies. It oddly resembles the structure of a proper movie throughout, but very little of interest happens inside of this near two-hour bore-fest. Whenever something mildly interesting occurs in the story, it's undercut by super weak character writing. This feels heavily re-edited, re-shot and re-arranged, so that it could function as a coherent narrative; and that's kind of the nicest thing I can say about this movie outside of the lack of anything as terrible as the truly most memorable moments of 'Origins: Wolverine'. At times, it feels like an improvement over 'Apocalypse', but I do feel that despite all of its predecessor's issues, it was the more ambitious film in terms of the direction it wanted to take the franchise. This movie knows it's a bomb, and it knows it's the last film in the series; but it also knows it hasn't earned that position, so it does very little to provide a sense of closure to a series that ultimately died both creatively, and in the minds of the movie-going audience, with 'Logan'.
The big death scene was still funny (as was reported from test screenings). - DirectorM. Night ShyamalanStarsJames McAvoyBruce WillisSamuel L. JacksonSecurity guard David Dunn uses his supernatural abilities to track Kevin Wendell Crumb, a disturbed man who has twenty-four personalities.2/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Aggressively disappointing. Started out very iffy and got progressively worse and worse throughout. There's very little about this film that I appreciated when considering just how many elements were severely underwhelming, disappointing and straight-up terrible. I feel like people are going to over-praise the first act of this movie because it's kind of what we wanted after the ending of 'Split', and because it actually starts off with narrative momentum before being completely cut-off after the first 20 minutes. Even when the climax of the film's set-up occurs, it's just a very poorly staged action scene. James McAvoy is a great actor and even though he's required to do some risky stuff performance-wise that doesn't pay off (like comically roaring with a regular human voice), he does give a very impressive performance that ups the ante by introducing previously unseen personalities from his collection of 24. These new personalities aren't as original and fleshed out as the prominent ones that appeared in 'Split' (which are still prominent in this film), but that's more down to the lazy writing. Feels like, in terms of his work here, he brought his a-game and tried to top his performance in ‘Split’, but the filmmaking surrounding his contribution was way too lacklustre to compliment his efforts. Following the first 20 minutes, he's the only entertaining aspect of this film. The handling of both Bruce Willis and Samuel Jackson's characters was beyond disappointing. They're very much side-lined and they each lack anything close to a substantial arc. Without 'Unbreakable', these characters are complete nothings in this film. They feel like they’re cameo-ing in a spin-off film, rather than starring in the sequel to ‘Unbreakable’. The side characters are far too over-present in the story and yet they too lack arcs or engaging motivations.
I'm trying to speak in very broad terms about this film because there's so much wrong with it when you start to approach it with a magnifying glass. This is one of the most nitpick-able movies I've seen in some time. In further, broader issues; this film completely lacks any creativity in its cinematography, the score is super underwhelming considering the great themes they already had at their disposal from 'Unbreakable'. All of the acting is bad with the one obvious exception of McAvoy and woah boy is this movie dull and actually flat-out boring. It's difficult to call whether or not Shyamalan was trying to subvert expectations of the superhero genre as a commentary on its over-saturation; or maybe he just didn't have the budget to realise his vision and that's why the film is so consistently disappointing and anti-climactic. You'd think if this was Shyamalan's 20-years-in-the-making passion project he would care more about the handling of these characters. Anyway, the final 20 minutes are genuinely awful. Even the twist in this movie can't be spoiled because it barely feels like new information is revealed through it. I can't remember the last time I saw a low-budget film that actually FELT like it had an even lower budget. A hugely disappointing film that I don't ever really want to revisit. It's a failure to me because if I decided to watch 'Unbreakable' and 'Split', I probably wouldn't even watch this film for the trilogy novelty; it's just that frustrating. - DirectorRob LettermanStarsRyan ReynoldsJustice SmithKathryn NewtonIn a world where people collect Pokémon to do battle, a boy comes across an intelligent talking Pikachu who seeks to be a detective.2/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
15 years ago, director Rob Letterman released ‘Shark Tale’. To this day it remains the worst film released by Dreamworks Animation. I spent the entire 105-minute runtime of ‘Detective Pikachu’ wishing I was watching ‘Shark Tale’ instead; and I rewatched ‘Shark Tale’ for the first time in 10 years only about a month ago. So yeah, was bored to tears by this movie and it didn’t help that the mystery at the centre of the story was completely uninteresting, or that the acting was generally lacking to put it nicely, or that the majority of character designs looked god-awful, or that without any investment in Pokémon prior, there’s very little to appreciate about this film. - DirectorTate TaylorStarsOctavia SpencerDiana SilversJuliette LewisA lonely woman befriends a group of teenagers and decides to let them party at her house. Just when the kids think their luck couldn't get any better, things start happening that make them question the intention of their host.2/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
A really awkward and off-putting film that swings for the fences with a bizarre horror premise and instantly asserts itself as one of the most uncomfortable movie-going experiences of the year. It's by no means a boring watch, but I disliked pretty much everything about it. A complete tonal mess accompanied by lazy direction and unconvincing performances. Octavia Spencer is at the very least committed and fearless taking on this strange concept of a movie, and she delivers an all-in performance that provides the story with its only watchable element. Comparable to Travolta's work in this year's 'The Fanatic', she's the reason the movie is even worth mentioning. It's a terrible yet demanding role in an atrocious story. This was interesting enough to watch once, but I did hate pretty much everything about it and I would like to forget it now, thank you. - DirectorChris RenaudJonathan del ValStarsPatton OswaltKevin HartHarrison FordContinuing the story of Max and his pet friends, following their secret lives after their owners leave them for work or school each day.2/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
The storytelling here is so incoherent, structureless and completely lacking in narrative momentum that all you’re left with is the same ol’ Illumination shit. Pandering nonsense that represents all of the worst trends in 21st Century animation. - DirectorNeil MarshallStarsDavid HarbourMilla JovovichIan McShaneCaught between the worlds of the supernatural and human, Hellboy battles an ancient sorceress bent on revenge.2/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
That joke about getting a sequel was truly funny. - DirectorF. Gary GrayStarsChris HemsworthTessa ThompsonKumail NanjianiThe MIB tackle a mole in their organization.2/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts (Spoilers):
Love it when studio heads funnel literally $100m+ into a misconceived reboot that nobody would ever want or enjoy, and then it releases and nobody enjoys it or wants to think about it ever again. Yup, it's a summertime Sony release. The most laughable twist villain in recent memory; actually it's the only thing about this movie still in my memory. - DirectorJoachim RønningStarsAngelina JolieElle FanningHarris DickinsonMaleficent and her goddaughter Aurora begin to question the complex family ties that bind them as they are pulled in different directions by impending nuptials, unexpected allies, and dark new forces at play.2/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
I saw a trailer for this months ago and thought whyyyyyy would anyone want to watch this. So, I watched it because I have nothing better to do with my time. I haven't even seen the first. - DirectorGuy RitchieStarsWill SmithMena MassoudNaomi ScottAladdin, a kind thief, woos Jasmine, the princess of Agrabah, with the help of Genie. When Jafar, the grand vizier, tries to usurp the king, Jasmine, Aladdin and Genie must stop him from succeeding.2/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
The extreme lack of content in these live-action Disney remakes makes them difficult and almost redundant to write about. Yes, you can complain about how this trend represents The Mouse at their most cynically manipulative and lazy. You can posit the notion that these movies have a shelf-life only as long as their theatrical run and that they serve absolutely no artistic merit. Or maybe even mention that they exist to sell tickets, like every Disney film; only these ones have no purpose outside of that goal and therefore have no place in film history. I think what rubs most people the wrong way about these adaptations, is that to the wider movie-going public, they primarily serve as an occasion to celebrate beloved stories of the past; without placing any emphasis on celebration of the artists that brought these stories to life and are wholly responsible for their respected position in our collective pop-culture. This is made even more evident by the fact that these creatives are coming forward now and saying that Disney excluded them from any and all credit on this film (yes, including the writers who shaped this story into a Disney classic). This cynical trend that Disney has latched onto in recent years is obviously toxic in terms of creativity within the film industry. There's so much talent hired within the company to create new milestones in animation and storytelling, but that's evidently just not in the interests of Bob Iger and Alan Horn. I personally can't wait for this ridiculous trend to run out its novelty some time in the next few years maybe before or after they run out of stories to butcher.
This one was particularly awful and embarrassing. For a film that reportedly cost $180m, the presentation of this film is nothing more than another one of those atrocious CG-heavy musicals that's all about extravagant costumes and ostentatious visuals, and it all looks so fake. The soundtrack is without a doubt the worst re-imagining for the purposes of a live-action Disney remake yet. If you thought Emma Watson's robot voice in 'Beauty and the Beast' was insufferable, then you may require medical attention after this effort. Whoever told Will Smith that he could or should sing, all those years ago, owes an apology to our collective culture. Nevertheless, the sound team for this film seemed to agree with me, because they auto-tuned his voice to an insane degree and it aggravated me even more. Upon revisiting the original film, the biggest thing that stuck out to me was just how energetic and rhythmically-paced it is. This film moves so slowly and completely lacks any sense of adventure. Abu (a memorable highlight of the original) is unfortunately but unsurprisingly characterless and completely without charisma here (his CG also looked terrible). The cast is mostly dull and fails to leave any real impression on the characters, outside of Naomi Scott; who I honestly believe to be the only real redeemable quality of this film. I can't quite say that she turns in a star-making performance here, because despite the best efforts to make Jasmine more """interesting""", she's a relatively uninteresting character here, mostly due to the leaden story and characters surrounding her. Jasmine's arc is taken very seriously here, and it honestly just makes its inclusion feel less genuine, less from a real place and more of a diversity checklist item. Nevertheless, she shows real movie-star potential here, taking command over the screen as by far the most interesting presence in any scene she appears. So yeah, there's really only the one nice thing to say about this movie, and about a thousand issues, both in the big picture and throughout the moment-to-moment experience of sitting through this abomination. - DirectorJohn SchultzStarsRose McIverBen LambAlice KrigeIt's Christmastime in Aldovia, and a royal baby is on the way. Amber and Richard host royals from a distant kingdom to renew a sacred truce, but when the treaty vanishes, peace is jeopardized and an ancient curse threatens their family.1/10
Times Seen: 1 - DirectorJon FavreauStarsDonald GloverBeyoncéSeth RogenAfter the murder of his father, a young lion prince flees his kingdom only to learn the true meaning of responsibility and bravery.1/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
One of the worst high-profile blockbusters ever made. To me, this is worse than something like 'The Phantom Menace'. At least someone had to write the script for 'TPM' (albeit in a week or so), at least that film had some great effects shots that still hold up 20 years later (despite ones that have aged horribly), and at least that film had some outstanding music. I too like Donald Glover and Beyonce as performers, but the music here was sometimes hard to listen to. Nothing as bad as the 'Aladdin (2019)' soundtrack, but again, it's all a lesser imitation.
There's already hundreds of think-pieces on the internet discussing why this is a terrible thing to have existed, and I don't really have too much else to add to the conversation outside of that I agree with pretty much every complaint leveled against this trash. The only observations I have that could be considered hot takes, are that I thought almost the entire voice cast was extremely disappointing; this could be down to anything from the expressionless animation translating to toned-down performances, to constant comparison to lines that were infinitely more charismatic in the original. This idea reoccurs throughout every element of this film. Everything on show here is simply a worse version of something great. The other thing that was extremely unfortunate about this film, was the animation. Everyone has written extensively about how photo-realistic animation doesn't lend the characters any emotional expression. I hate to say it, knowing that this movie has hugely pioneered computer animation, and thousands of hours of hard work were poured into bringing these animals to life; but these little assholes didn't look real for a second. It's upsetting that a movie that exists solely as a money-printing tech-demo achieves less-convincing effects work than a similar experiment from the same director three years earlier. I hate that I don't really have anything productive to say about this, it's just a shame; and there's no way this movie can age well if it starts off looking 80% of the way convincing. There's something very off about the movement of these animals. The film sometimes decides to inject personality into the musical numbers, and go a little cartoonish with its visuals; resulting in effects work that looks straight-up uncanny, completely breaking any suspension of disbelief in the weak spots of animation.
The comparisons to Gus Van Sant's 'Psycho' remake are absolutely justified, except this is way more cynical and despicable. Jon Favreau has never made a movie close to this bad, and this barely feels like it had a director. It's so passionless and lacking in vision that the result is a machine-made Disney product. There's no personality in this film, and that's its greatest insult to the material. The only thing I appreciate about this as a film, is the creatives it hired (whose talent could undeniably be put to better use) and the hard work they obviously put into animating every frame. If you consider this a live-action Disney remake, it's the worst one yet. If you consider this a Disney animated film, then it's also the worst they've generated in the 80+ years they've been doing this. Congrats, watch it climb the all-time box office charts. - DirectorFred DurstStarsJohn TravoltaDevon SawaAna GoljaA rabid film fan stalks his favorite action hero and destroys the star's life.1/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Decided to give this a watch after seeing Chris Stuckmann's video, and was really hoping for a fun time, but it ended up being a mostly sad experience. I think Travolta is a great actor and it's been upsetting to watch him star in some of the most laughable box office bombs of the last few years. It's clear that Travolta's character is on the spectrum, but also written in such an offensive way that it angered me at times, and made me really uncomfortable during the third act climax. Obviously a terrible movie, this feels akin to 'The Cobbler' and 'Pottersville'. Got a few goods laughs out of me, but this is far too repetitive and off-putting in its cruelty (no matter how laughably stupid it is) to convince me of a second so-bad-it's-good viewing. The Limp Bizkit scene was glorious. - DirectorAmy BarrettStarsSoleil Moon FryeGeorge StultsJaleel WhiteA home stager looking to land a promotion offers to plan the company Christmas party in order to sway the boss' decision her way.1/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
The guy in this looks like a Brad Pitt deepfake. - DirectorDaniel FarrandsStarsHilary DuffJonathan BennettLydia HearstPregnant with director Roman Polanski's child and awaiting his return from Europe, 26-year-old Hollywood actress Sharon Tate becomes plagued by visions of her imminent death.0/10
Times Seen: 1
Thoughts:
Without hyperbole, one of the worst films I've ever watched. It's exactly the kind of low-budget, amateurish, exploitative trash that you'd expect. Very weak performances all around, ridiculously bad casting and what must be one of the worst screenplays ever produced. The directing is an abysmal amalgamation of horror tropes that any respectable filmmaker threw in the trash ten years ago. It name drops real-life individuals as though you're meant to perk up and get a kick out of it. I cannot recommend that you subject yourself to this one, even if you're curious. It's not worth it. This is the sort of film that bases itself in a real-life tragedy but includes what could be construed as ****ing fan service. I'd compare it to 2017's '9/11' starring Charlie Sheen. It's honestly on that level, but that's hardly surprising is it?