Change Your Image
wildcard97
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Sound of Freedom (2023)
God's Children Aren't For Sale
This movie has balls. Big balls.
Not only does it tackle a topic that people aren't typically comfortable talking about, but it effectively pulls on your emotions as a decent human being who wouldn't dare wish such trauma on young children. It's the only time in a theater I heard people gasp and wince at what they were seeing. The movie doesn't show anything explicit, it's either talked about in dialogue (even then the actual language is pretty tame not going into specifics) or it leads up to a scene and cuts to the aftermath allowing you to fill in the blanks yourself.
Due to the explicit nature of the topic and content, not only is it necessary to not show the children directly in these sexual abuse situations but any person with a good moral conscience and common sense will have emotions of anger, sadness, and shock at these scenes.
The only other movie to cover the topic of sex trafficking that comes to mind is Taken with Liam Neeson but that plays as your typical action movie with no substance to hold thereafter.
And the only movie that comes to mind that talks about a sensitive topic while not being gruesome visually rather than in dialogue and implication is Gosnell with Dean Cain, though I didn't see that in theaters so I wonder if the audience reaction would've been, audibly, the same.
This movie should be seen by a vast majority of people, parents especially. I don't have kids but I was pissed at these horrible characters. I can only imagine how an actual parent would feel.
This movie should be the starting point of having an actual conversation and dialog about the current state of child and sex trafficking both in the U. S. and the world.
Timecop: The Berlin Decision (2003)
As Good as the First Film
The 2000's were the heyday of direct-to-video sequels from almost every studio, not mattering how long it's been between films. That being said, this film has the hallmarks of your typical direct-to-video sequel, on the technical level such as basic and simple lighting and cinematography setups and the special effects are a good meh. As well as having little to no continuity with the original movie. However, this film does stand out above others of its kind and it shows within the writing, directing, and the acting.
It's not unusual to have known actors, typically B or C-list, in these types of movies but Jason Scott Lee and Thomas Ian Griffith really make this film engaging and, more importantly, watchable. The martial arts displayed is spread out so it's not relied upon too much, which makes it work and feels effective. Especially when we only get hand-to-hand in the climax between Lee and Griffith.
One thing that really surprised me was that we got to see about six different time periods. Usually with a direct-to-video movie with this concept, or any sci-fi concept, they'd want to keep it as simple as possible for budgetary reasons. Like imagine a space adventure movie on a limited budget, they'd show a very small portion of space travel and have the rest take place on Earth or an Earth-like planet to keep the budget down. But here we manage to see 1895, 1929, 1940, 1988, 2002, and 2025. Although the 1929 and 1988 periods are brief as they are ultimately part of a chase scene but the pacing of the movie made them feel significant and felt like we were there just as much as the other time periods.
Also included is a trope of time travel movies: alternate timelines that the main character goes to when going back to their present time. Neat to see but doesn't really add to the overall story. Its only purpose is getting Lee to the next time jump and giving him a new time watch to help him follow Griffith through time waves. Those scenes could've been re-written to not include alternate versions of characters because it just leaves us with questions of how it got that way and how everything got reverted back to normal in the end. But at least they were quick like time blips, perhaps that was the intention.
It really seems like the filmmakers truly tried their best with what they were given and whatever constraints they had they worked around and were creative about it.
I say this is worthy of standing on it's own. I would definitely even do a double feature with the original Timecop. Both are equal to me.
Jeepers Creepers: Reborn (2022)
The Start of a New Trilogy?
I was expecting this to be bad. I wasn't expecting how bad it actually was.
This movie starts out good with a retelling of the beginning of the first movie, this time being an elderly couple instead of college-aged siblings. I thought this was a good opening to introduce the audience to a new creative team with Victor Salva's absence. But the opening turns out to be an episode of an unsolved mysteries-type show being watched by our one of our main characters, Chase.
From there the movie seems to be basic as it introduces us to a new world of Jeepers Creepers where the events of the previous three movies didn't happen. Instead, the original trilogy exist as films in this universe though their stories are claimed to be untrue accounts of the Creeper's killings, at least until speculation comes in near the end when we see a voodoo doll of Derry from the original film. Or it's just fan-service, who knows.
This movie also introduces the idea of the Creeper being an urban legend in the area. With people having stories and artifacts such as his knives and throwing stars. That was really interesting as well. But it feels like they could've played with that more.
From there it's bare bones. Characters band together to survive in the house as the Creeper sneaks around and kills one-by-one until the final three survivors finish him off in the most unbelievable way possible.
Laine offers herself to the Creeper as he wants her unborn child. The Creeper lifts her in the air by the throat. Laine takes the opportunity to take two of the Creeper's throwing stars she hid behind her (John McClane style) and stabs each side of the Creeper's head. He lets go of her and she gets enough distance to throw each of the stars into both the Creeper's eyes, blinding him. I can't believe that for a second. That's like hitting two bullseyes in a row in darts. Especially under the pressure of trying not to get killed by a supernatural creature.
The Creeper then turns into Michael Myers from the original Halloween II and starts wailing his arms in front of him hoping to get Laine. Meanwhile Chase and Stu are on the roof of the house and detach the weather vane, and on Laine's cue, launch it down and it impales the Creeper through the mouth. From there a swarm of crows come down and they take the Creeper away, but not before knocking Stu off the roof, killing him. The crows seemingly revive the Creeper and gives one last scare to the camera before the credits roll.
The makeup of the Creeper is terrible, though I like the design to differentiate it from the original Creeper. The mouth barely moves except only a couple of times while it's feeding. Also while it's feeding, it always plays this one record, this movie's version of the Jeepers Creepers song. Each time it kills and feeds, it resets the needle on the player. It gets really comical as Stu breaks the record player over the Creeper's head as he escapes, the Creeper looks down at it and is pissed that he can't have his music while he eats.
Essentially everything goes downhill once our two main characters, Laine and Chase, and our other few characters leave the horror festival, Horror Hound, and head to this abandoned house known to be the Creeper's house. From this point to the end, whenever the characters are outside, the background is so noticeably bad.
Like you can tell the background is green screen during the driving scenes, that's pretty standard and looks ok. But when walking around outside in the graveyard and the Creeper house, the background looks like a mixture of PS1 graphics mixed with a Disney Channel Movie sfx. And the characters are overlit that it really doesn't match at all. It makes your jaw drop as to how little they cared. They could've easily went to an open field, place fake tombstones, add fog from a fog machine, and would've looked a million times better. Probably cheap but way better than what we got now.
Acting was decent from no-name actors but nothing special.
The kind of quality you would get from a direct-to-dvd movie. Not from a theatrical release. So wait for streaming or avoid altogether.
This is suppose to be the first installment of a new trilogy. How do they plan to do that with this piece of garbage?
My Son Hunter (2022)
Laptop From Hell Meets The Big Short
Even if you only saw the trailer, you know this movie was influenced by The Big Short, or i guess Adam Mckay in general as it's bascially his style that he used in both The Big Short and Vice. But now the style is in the hands of Robert Davi and the right-wing perspective. I welcome this as I enjoyed Big Short very much, wasn't on-board with Vice, but interested in seeing how the opposite side of the spectrum handles it.
This movie tells the story of the Chinese and Ukrainian business dealings of Hunter Biden and how he peddled his father's influence as VP, leading up to the 2020 presidential election. All with characters breaking the fourth wall and even having the ending being a fake-out like Big Short.
The story uses the general basis of the Hunter Biden laptop story initially published by the New York Post. Just the key points that have been told the most in media.
They even use the real-life gaffes of Joe Biden in the dialogue of not only Joe himself but other characters too. But unless you're completely in-the-know about Joe's gaffes and shortcomings in interviews, press conferences, etc. You'll miss them. Kind of like All the President's Men where you kinda have to do the homework before watching in order to catch everything. But it's not to the level of being mandatory here.
The satirical approach I believe is a smart choice to allow the most average person who isn't a news media junkie to properly digest and understand the material. Though I feel it would've been best to do an official adaptation of the book Laptop From Hell by Miranda Devine to better establish the timeline of events.
But the satire and comedic moments are actually funny and got laughs out of me. One stand out moment is when Hunter is high on drugs immediately after a party in his apartment has died down and everybody is passed out. He wanders to a man who is petting a dog in his lap. He then has a conversation with the dog about kicking all the guests out, all told in speech bubbles. It reminded me of the Japanese version of Godzilla vs. Gigan when Godzilla and Anguirus talk to each other in speech bubbles. It is so funny and believable as I think someone who is completely high on drugs would do such a thing. And maybe even see speech bubbles appear.
Laurence Fox as Hunter Biden and John James as Joe Biden are fantastic, especially James as Joe. He almost steals the show.
Even though they use Joe's gaffes in some of Joe's dialogue, they don't portray him as a dementia-riddled old man with handlers controlling his every move, like what some right-wing outlets would say. I think that move was good to help establish the the business/corruption connection between Joe and Hunter, otherwise it would probably be too goofy. Though I have to admit I wish they played on that a bit more.
Gina Carano was a good addition as her casting was around the same time as her firing from Disney and subsequent partnership with Daily Wire that led to the film Terror on the Prairie. Obviously for PR I bet but she doesn't disappoint. Her being casted as a secret service agent was good as it's a small part to not draw too much attention away from the Bidens. However they set her up as this narrator-type character guiding the audience but she ends up absent from the beginning until about 30 minutes later when she rounds up Hunter to talk to Joe. Unlike the heart transplant guy from Vice, then-again you don't know who that guy is 'til the end of the movie. Just being one more stab into Dick Cheney being a heartless man, metaphorically. Nevertheless, Carano gives a good performance as well.
Whether or not you believe the story the movie claims to be based on, they even make a point in the beginning by saying "This movie isn't a true story...except for the facts", I think this movie is enjoyable if you want to see a right-wing perspective of political satire/true-life.
Robert Davi's direction was quite a shocker for me as I've never seen other projects he's directed, though of course I am familiar with his acting credits of Die Hard, Goonies, Swamp Shark, etc.
I say give it a chance if you're of the opposing party but don't get turned off if something is brought up you believe to be false, exaggerated, or something other. Watch it all the way through, and then analyze.
Shut In (2022)
Small But Intense
I tend to like movies like this that I call "small scale movies". They're typically around 90 minutes, take place in one setting for the majority of the movie, and usually don't go beyond 3 main characters. These types of movies are usually good if you just wanna watch something to kill time because they're short enough and not overly complicated.
The difference in this movie compared to others ones I've seen recently is the intensity of some of the scenes and the characters. For starters, they say the mother is a recovering addict making her flawed and not necessary to hammer it down our throats. And make the possibility of relapse believable.
The premise is simple: a young mother is locked inside a pantry by her drug-addicted boyfriend and tries to find a way out because her children are in danger. The villain being a pedophile, which you don't see a lot in movies, helps motivate the mother to think and plan her escape all while trying not to relapse into her old drug-addicted ways.
All the actors are giving good performances with the material, especially Vincent Gallo as the villain. He can be scary and I'm not familiar with Gallo's other work so this was a really good introduction to the actor for me.
The young 4-year-old girl was a shockingly good performance. For someone this young, it was phenomenal to see this girl act in these intense scenes where you fear for her safety, cry when she wants her mom to come out, and smile when she just does what little kids do. She has the potential to be the next Jacob Tremblay.
Where this movie fails is the typical cliches in the third act. You think the villain's dead when he's not, the mother doesn't break the window into the house as fast as you'd think she would, and you'd think the boyfriend has a slight redemption moment but he doesn't.
This movie is easily something you can put on for a movie night with friends. Especially if you like thrillers.
Zombi VIII: Urban Decay (2021)
Equivalent to a Fan Film
The Zombi series is quite the confusing franchise. But this film claims to be a direct sequel to the two original Lucio Fulci films. Other than original music cues and reference to the original island the zombies are on, there is no connection.
Here we have a zero-budget film shot in the United States made for the Australian market based on two Italian films that were made as unofficial sequels to an American film (Dawn of the Dead) which was also a sequel to Night of the Living Dead. Which they show clips of in this movie because public domain even though they film it off a TV and looks like crap.
You'll be bored watching this even though it's 57 minutes. In order to pad the runtime as best they can, they put in minutes of footage where nothing is happening as characters are walking around a forest. But that's better than when the characters are talking. Not only are the actors bad, you can barely hear them as the audio was recorded straight from the built-in camera mic.
They also stretch the runtime by long opening credits, lasting about 3 minutes, and about 4 minutes of closing credits. Leaving virtually no plot, no character development, or any lack of care for what's happening.
This feels like an insult to the Fulci films. Those weren't great either and were low budget in their own right but at least there was real effort, talent, and charm to them. Especially if you're familiar with the making of Italian horror films of that time.
If you're going to watch anyway, don't pay for it. It is not worth the money. I was fortunate to watch it for free on Tubi.
Steve-O: Gnarly (2020)
DO NOT Watch if You're Queasy
Don't get me wrong, this stand-up special is really funny and entertaining with Steve-O's brand of material. I believe it's ingenious of him to incorporate all of his recorded material pre-and-post YouTube as it makes for good stand-up comedy material.
However, this special is titled Gnarly for good reason. The raunchiness you'd expect from Steve-O and the Jackass crew in general really went up a notch.
Not only does Steve-O redo his bit about swallowing a filled condom and having it exit while on the toilet, but he cranks it up by swallowing it again after it has dried up with whatever fecal matter is on it.
I physically can't watch that part as I nearly vomit myself. If you have a weak stomach, you've been warned.
Straight Outta Nowhere: Scooby-Doo! Meets Courage the Cowardly Dog (2021)
A great send up for Courage.
I'm willing to bet others, like myself, sought out this film for Courage. Well I'm certainly not disappointed as this film acts like a loving tribute and a good series finale for it.
Even though this is also a Scooby-Doo movie, the two groups of characters work well off each other and the voice cast give their performances like they're having fun with it.
In the third act, it's all for the Courage fans. I won't say here as hopefully you'll be shocked as I was to see who shows up.
I'm also willing to bet the writers only made this a crossover with Scooby-Doo so that it could get made as they were probably hesitant about a stand-alone Courage project, after the CGI short in 2014. But I'm glad they did.
Good crossover, great tribute, awesome finale to one of my favorite cartoons growing up.
RIP Thea White, making this her final film.
Infidel (2019)
A Little Preachy, But Worth a Watch.
Being low budget, this movie is good to watch with some friends or family who are in the mood for an action/thriller because you wouldn't notice the difference in quality. The production value and cinematography is top notch for the story and subject matter, which has you in its grip most of the time.
The only real downside to this movie is its dialogue which can seem too preachy, especially in the first-third, to the average viewer. Religion is part of the plot, but it can feel a little heavy-handed.
But other than that, the performances of the three main actors, Jim Caviezel, Claudia Karvan, and Hal Ozsan are outstanding.
At least worth a rental if you're on the fence.
Run Hide Fight (2020)
If you want good action, a good thriller, and good time.
This is the kind of movie you can sit down and watch by yourself or with friends if you're in the mood for an engaging, gripping, and all-round good action/thriller movie.
To be fair, the story, setup, and characters can be somewhat stock but you can put this movie with any other good modern day small scale action movies.
The special effects are great with most of them, if not all, being practical. Has that level of brutality, akin to Brawl in Cell Block 99, in some scenes.
It really brings you into a realistic setting with the villian's motivations and the scale of the whole situation. Especially utilizing social media platforms as plot devices and for the characters.
Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)
There are needles in this haystack, but the hay is too thick to try.
Terminator sequels after T2 have their flaws but I've enjoyed them for one reason or another and have found myself rewatching them sometimes. But I don't get anything at all from this installment.
For starters, they've jumped on the bandwagon of soft reboot/sequel by ignoring past failed installments and picking up after the last good one.
The film begins in 1998, after the events of T2 (which took place in 1997 for those who are confused due to that coming out in 1991), and the CGI de-aging of John Conner, Sarah Conner, and the T-800 look fantastic. We've came a long way from reviving Peter Cushing in Rogue One. But the rest of the effects, especially during the fight scenes, are lackluster at best. I know using CGI to de-age people is really hard and was likely worked on the most out of the rest. But we see de-aged Sarah, John, and T-800 for 5 minutes at most in the very beginning, compared to the remaining 124 minutes mostly filled with special effects in some form.
Before you even hit minute 4 out of this 129-minute movie, they kill John Conner.
And if you're a Terminator fan in any aspect, you've tuned out for the rest of the movie. Even though they made John the villain and killed him in Genisys, he was at least a main part of the story. This was four minutes in and part of a flashback before jumping to 2020, the present time for the rest of the movie.
The rest of the movie is like a mix of Terminator 1 & 3, with just a dash of Salvation.
We learn John and Sarah were successful in destroying Skynet in the end of T2, which makes it confusing how Skynet sent terminators back to try and kill John and became successful, but try not to think about it too much. Sarah has spent the next 22 years after John's death getting drunk and killing new terminators that have traveled back in time.
A mexican girl, Dani, is the new John Conner of this movie as a new A.I., called Legion, sends a terminator back, called Rev-9, to kill her as she leads the resistance against it. The resistance send back their own machine, an augmented human (as the movie puts it) named Grace. Just remember Marcus from Salvation except she needs a recharge every 15 minutes or so.
I'm sure you can figure out the rest if you haven't seen it as all Terminator movies basically go the same way: combination of road movies and sci-fi action.
Like I said, it's Terminator 1 except they want to kill the target, not the mother of the target. The T3 parallels are weird since that's considered as probably the most embarrassing installment. You have the judgment day is inevitable plot, the T-800 that killed John helps the protagonists against the evil terminator, and the evil terminator is killed by shoving a power cell in its face while the T-800 keeps it from escaping while also sacrificing itself. The fact that Linda Hamilton said no to T3 and yes to this, I don't think that's a coincidence.
It's ideas with the new terminators introduced were cool but I don't understand what Rev means when it comes to these new machines and shouldn't need to be looked up in some expanded universe-type medium. At least we knew T in T-800 and other models meant terminator. What does Rev mean?
But the ideas were cool and are believable if it were Skynet just evolving their machines. Which makes sense as Judgment Day has been delayed. I believe the amount of human influence on technology would help Skynet/Legion make more advanced machines. Like in the original timeline where Judgment Day happens in 1997. The tech then doesn't come close today, thus by the 2020s or beyond, Skynet were up to the T-800 models. Salvation did this as it acted as T4 when Judgment Day happened in 2003 and were able to have T-800s made by 2018. So, in this movie, with Judgment Day happening in the 2020s, when they got to 2042 when Grace went back in time, they got terminators which can split apart with their metal skeleton and liquid metal. Having that in a 22-year time frame, compared to 15 from T3 to T4, had to be because of human influence of tech.
But that doesn't excuse Grace from needing a recharge of medications constantly. Again, look at Marcus in Salvation. He's just a T-600 or 800 with a human heart and brain, and his consciousness is still intact. Even though Skynet made Marcus and the resistance augmented Grace, I don't that cuts it. Again because of the human influence of tech making their future technology in 2042 more advanced than Salvation's 2018.
The story is a rehash, the characters are dull and forgettable, Sarah and the T-800 should be the highlights but they're not, and they sprinkle in some woke politics as well. They especially get heavy on the immigration side of it.
Lastly, just because your three main leads are females doesn't mean you're breaking new ground. The first two movies, which are regarded as the best and where this movie takes place after, had a great female lead that everybody rooted for. Another one on the piles of Get Woke, Go Broke and franchises ruined by woke politics with Ghostbusters, Ocean's, and Charlie's Angels.
Taylor Swift: The Man (2020)
Watch it on mute
The extra star I gave this was for the visuals. The video itself, from a filmmaking perspective, looks good. Mainly with the lighting and colors and the opening camera shot was good too. It's just a shame it's for a really bad song because, if given good material, Taylor Swift could be a decent director. The makeup too was amazing but Taylor can't pull off acting like a man with her actions and how she moves in the video. The way the video portrays men is not only insultful and hurtful, but it makes it over the top ridiculous. So over the top it makes it feel stereotypical, the kind of stereotypical you would normally see towards race stereotypes in old movies of the 30s, 40s, and maybe even 50s.
Soul Surfer (2011)
Watch This Now!
I watch a lot of movies but I haven't seen one this good in a long time. I think it helps because it's a true story. But true or not, the filmmakers really make you feel connected to the characters portrayed, so that when the shark attack happens you really feel the intensity because of the bonded created with the characters. Whether you're familiar with the true story or not, you really get worried about the main character, Bethany, when she is attacked.
The editing and pacing of the shark attack is so well done. It keeps it intense while also making it feel realistic on-screen. I haven't felt such intensity in a scene since watching 127 Hours a decade ago.
I highly recommend this to anyone, whether you're looking for a non-fiction movie, feel-good movie, sport-surfing movie, or family movie. I'm really glad this is rated PG and is in the family genre because I think any family and age group would truly enjoy. You'll truly feel really good by the end.
Charlie's Angels (2019)
Forgettable and insulting
It was once deemed that Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle was unwatchable bad. I'd rather watch that 100 times than watch this again. The movie, or Elizabeth Banks for that matter, was more busy trying to push their anti-straight white male political agenda than to make, at the very least, a decent movie. I say decent, because the previous films were never full-on great movies but they were fun to watch.
This movie just makes you cringe for nearly two hours and has the balls to connect itself to the previous films and series rather than keeping to itself.
On top of that, have fun watching the first movie again knowing that Bill Murray's Bosley, played by Patrick Stewart now in this movie, turns bad 19 years down the road. Quite the twist but ruins everything because it's completely unnecessary. If the movie was a stand-alone, okay. But since it's in the same universe as the other movies and the show, makes totally no sense to have Bosley turn.
And on top of this, Elizabeth Banks doesn't care about continuity between films. Obviously Bill Murray didn't come back as Bosley as he refused to come back for the second movie due to his relationship with Lucy Liu on the first film. But they should've chose an actor who matches his nationality. Going from American to British? Why? Makes no sense. Especially when they comment on the fact that he's British later in the movie.
Elizabeth Banks: "Who cares about continuity, we need to make men look totally evil!!!"
Watch the first two films and pretend this one doesn't exist.
Battle Creek Brawl (1980)
Squashed Potential
Of everything you read about this movie it is somewhat better than you think, but it isn't much and definitely isn't what you expect from Jackie Chan in a leading role. The majority of the film is tolerable. I mean the story and acting could've been better but if that was the entirety of the movie it would be a "meh". I'm not blaming Jackie for acting because I know this was his first English movie, but the others weren't so good. But the action scenes is where the movie lacks the most. Jackie himself even said the reason he believed the film failed is because he wasn't allowed to direct the fight scenes himself. To me, the action scenes get to the point of cringe worthy. If Jackie had made them the way he originally wanted, it would've redeemed the film a bit. It wouldn't have been much but would've made it stand out and kinda worth it going through all the slow pacing. The film does have some comedic moments but not many and they're very spread apart from each other. But when they're trying to be funny and it fails, it looks awkward especially if it's Jackie who's doing humor. If you're a really big Jackie Chan fan, I say it's worth a watch for curiosity sake.
The Party at Kitty and Stud's (1970)
Shameful Attempts to Cash in on Stallone's fame.
There's nothing really to say about this film except for what the makers did to it after Stallone became big with Rocky. Just doing a review on the movie itself, there's nothing. It's a cliché under budget early '70s porn flick that does nothing. However, when this movie was re-released after the premiere of Rocky it was altered to somewhat piggyback off of Rocky. They changed the title to "Italian Stallion" to reference Stallone's nickname in Rocky. They dubbed a line in the movie to make the main girl say "Someday they'll call you the Italion Stallion". Lastly, and note that I don't know if it's true so please don't quote me on this but, the song in the beginning when we first see Stallone sounds like a rip-off of "Gonna Fly Now" from Rocky. I mean seriously!? The makers were so desperate to make a profit off of Stallone's fame years after making this movie that they'll do anything to reference Rocky. I can understand re-releasing it 6 years later because they would've never known Stallone would get a big break. But all they could've done was have a few ads promoting the re-release and have a poster with Stallone's face on it and have it say "Starring Sylvester Stallone" or "Stallone's debut" or something along those lines. But by altering it even slightly to somewhat piggyback is just embarrassing. The only thing to gain from this movie is bragging rights to say to your friends "I saw Sylvester Stallone's dick." or "I saw the "legendary" Stallone porn movie." They even try to justify the changes to say it's a "milder" version. If's there's anything below mild, this movie is way down there. For it being just over an hour long, it really drags on and feels like eternity. If you decide to see it, good luck. Now to use my bragging right in saying "I saw Stallone genitals!" and "I saw Stallone's porn movie!"
Wayward Pines (2015)
There Should Be A Season 2
This show was really good, even though it came from M. Night Shyamalan. After how the season/series ended it actually left it open for a good story for season 2 following Ben Burke 3 years later. Let's recap: As the Abbies attacked Wayward Pines, nearly all the children from the academy (except Ben and Amy) got together and sheltered out in a bunker built by David Pilcher for them just in case this situation were to happen. Meanwhile, everyone else is in the complex, where everything keeps the town running, fighting off the Abbies. Ethan Burke sacrifices himself to keep the Abbies going up the elevator shaft, Pam kills her brother because he's gone insane, and everyone knows the truth behind Wayward Pines. We're kinda left at a cliffhanger before Ben wakes up from going unconscious from some elevator debris, where it seems like Pam will take over from her brother and make the town the way any normal town would be: no more surveillance, reckoning, etc. But when Ben finally wakes up, it's three years later (so now it's the year 4031) and the town has been taken over by the students who hid in the bunker. They put everyone in cryo sleep, including Ben because of his father. Because of them being away from the action, they don't know the whole story. Instead of Pam killing David, they think Ethan did. And they see David as Jesus basically. Amy was allowed to stay awake and get on with living but also tried to convince them to wake up Ben, which they eventually did. Now the whole town is how it is back from the beginning of the show. We end with Generation 1 having their own families and living up to what David Pilcher originally wanted Wayward Pines to do: keep the human race alive. We also reckoned corpses hung on lamp posts. Now this is where season 2 can start off: Ben kinda does what Ethan did in the beginning, walks through the town and come to grips with what has happened. The only person he can talk to is Amy to get information, especially on the past three years. As the season goes on, Ben sneaks into the cryogenic chambers and frees everyone who has been frozen by Generation 1. It could be a war between the young and the old. It almost has a religious tone. As Generation 1 sees David Pilcher as God they want his philosophy to stay, while all the adults want to leave no trace of it. Maybe even along the way, Amy could get reckoned for helping Ben. The first half of the season could possibly mirror the first with Ben doing what Ethan did and then the other half going crazy as a huge battle can happen to determine who will control the town and who's hands will the disunity of the human race be in. It could be a epic season/story.
Insidious: Chapter 3 (2015)
Completely Unnecessary
The day before I saw this I read it was a prequel which made me so mad because we're gonna get a fourth one to continue where #2 left off. Anyway, this movie is very unnecessary to the plot of the trilogy, it adds nothing. It seems to answer questions you never would've asked like "How does Elise know that dice guy from Chapter 2?" or "How did Elise meet those two ghost hunting guys?". This movie basically adds more character development to Elise, even though we got plenty to work with from the first movie. To me, Chapter 2 felt like a Psycho ripoff with a kid being forced to be a girl, then grow up to be a serial killer while being dressed as a woman. With this, it feels like a X-Men: Days of Future Past ripoff with Elise not wanting to use her powers when she was younger (i.e. Professor X not wanting to use his powers when he was younger). At least the ripoff part wasn't heavily put in like it was with Chapter 2. One good thing about this movie is that it brought back the creepy factor and improved it from the first movie, while Chapter 2 abandoned it and was a generic horror/thriller movie. One thing that made me mad was the beef with the Bride in Black from the other movies. Since it's a prequel, of course we would probably see the Bride in Black back but the reason why he/she is back is stupid. The reason is because he/she swears Elise will die by his/her hand, which makes sense since she does at the end of the first movie, and we can assume the Bride is mad because in the flashback in Chapter 2 Elise stops the Bride from taking over Josh's body. But before seeing this movie, the Bride killing Elise was justified because Elise found out at the end of the first movie that Josh wasn't really Josh and she would've warned Josh's family, we didn't need this pile up to the Bride's hatred toward Elise. Also, why can't we get a real demon again in these movies. The true definition of a demon is a creature that was never alive. In Chapters 2 and 3, the antagonists aren't demons but are called demons. They are really just evil spirits of past souls. The only real demon in this series is the Darth Maul ripoff character from the first movie. I'm just saying this so people can know the difference. Another good thing about this movie is rare in prequels, you can actually watch in the order of 3, 1, and 2. Usually in prequels, there would be parts in them that would require you watching the previous movie(s) that was released. Example: Paranormal Activity 2 tells you when it takes places before Micah dies in the middle of the movie. This would be a spoiler for you if you didn't see the first movie and decided to watch the movies in chronological order (3,2,1,4,5). But with this movie, the info from the other movies come off like inside jokes rather then spoilers to some viewers who didn't see the other 2 movies. So if you're one of those people who want to watch film series' in chronological order, this one is a safe bet.
Sharknado 2: The Second One (2014)
Why do people like this!?
This movie is, in basic terms, a rehash of the first one. (not surprising since The Asylum produced it) This movie does nothing original whatsoever. Even the damn poster is the same as the first, just with slight touches to it. If you were one of the "lucky" ones to watch it on the day it premiered, you'll find that people tweeted crazily over some of the most stupid things thinking they were awesome. No. This movie causes physical pain to viewers who truly love and respect film. This is one of the worst sequels ever and is personally in my top worst movies, right next to Garbage Pail Kids. Pass on this when given the chance people.