filmtoaster

VIP

3

I don't even want to write anything. This movie makes me angry. Even with the mind-set going in that this is cheesy non-sense meant to please the brain-dead movie-going public, it fails to generate any sense that it understands what it wants to be and it's responsibility to respect it's predecessor. Call me exaggerating, but Pacific Rim: Uprising is a nightmare of a film, it's the last thing any fan should want of a property: Taking everything great a franchise has established, strip it down it's bare assets, then trying to sell it to dumb people. I've already said the first Pacific Rim wasn't a brilliant piece of cinema, but a lot of love went into crafting it's visuals and universe. Del Toro had a great eye for practical effects, lighting, digital composites, etc. I'm sorry Steven S. DeKnight, but he murders the franchise in every possible category: The writing is film school amateurish, the effects are below-average (lower than Transformers quality), the music is forgettable, and the universe has been shrunken down to a couple people, just like what The Last Jedi did for Star Wars. You had this mature and bad-ass world of Jaegar meets Kaiju action and you squandered it into the embarrassing cringe-inducing children's movie domain. I don't know how much hand John Boyega had in the creative process, but you can smell the cheapening all over the product. Everyone's picked apart the Jaegars moving too fast and the outfits not appearing as technically impressive, but down to the core, the writing, it's ruined. You thought Independence Day: Resurgence had lazy writing? Wait until you hear classic lines in Uprising that just reference how much better the writing was in the last movie. Want to write a great speech before the final battle? That takes too much effort. Just mention how great Idris Elba's "cancelling the apocalypse" speech was. They do this constantly in the movie, chucking, not even just random subtle call-backs, but full pieces of dialogue mentioning events in the last one. If you're not even going to bother writing your story better than garbage like Ender's Game and every other "youth training in military to stop evil force" movie, please don't insult the original by persistently referencing how much better it was. The action isn't even exciting. The physics and extremely out-of-place uses of slow-motion hinder any kind of tension or thrills. The finale in Tokyo is among one of the most underwhelming and confusing messes of editing ever. Resurgence was easy to follow at least, because it was set in the barren desert. How is it that a sequence at night in the rain, from the first movie, is easier to follow than one in daylight? And the movie just ends after they defeat the "final boss" Kaiju. No extra words to bring the characters' arcs to a close, you know, like a resolution should. It just goes from the characters getting out of their pod, having an out-of-place snowball fight, and the end credits. I almost couldn't believe it was over then. There was a brief mid-credits scene that poorly set-up future sequels that thankfully won't ever happen. It just dumbfounds me the entire cast went about putting this disaster together without one person going, "You know, shouldn't we at least get something right from the original movie?" Long-gone are the days of cool neon-aesthetic duel-outs with robots smashing ships into on another. We have the most bare-bones bullshit that's parading around as a sequel to a passion project of epic proportions. It's no wonder Del Toro isn't advertising this movie on Twitter. There's a part in the movie where they play the "Trololol" song as the Jaegars are flying away to fight. It was literally trolling it's audience.

Clint Eastwood's
A Series Of Pointless Events

I was going to write more, but my dad summed it up pretty good with that title. One of the worst films I've seen a long time. This is Tommy Wiseau's The Room levels of bad, not exaggerating. Scenes that are so short with no purpose are all over this movie. Some scenes even mirror ones from The Room, like when they go into an ice cream shop and for four minutes, talk about random junk that have no effect on the story. There's an entire section of this movie where these jackasses just tour Rome and take selfies all over the place. Nothing matters, all the dialogue is horrible, the acting is some of the worst I have ever laid eyes on, there's baffling editing choices, inconsistencies in the editing, bland music, and POINTLESS every-day affairs.

This movie has inspired me to take a notebook with me to movies now, so I can write shit down as I watch. I'm just now remembering stuff. There's a little moment with one of the friends as a kid, he's in his room, and on the wall, is a poster for Letters of Iwo Jima, one of Clint Eastwood's movies. Reminded me of that bit in Transformers 2 with Sam in his dorm room, and there's a Bad Boys 2 poster on the wall. But beside the nitpicks, the movie fails at it's emotional structure. The real heroes suck as actors, so it's hard to take their monotone mumbling performances seriously, and a large portion of the movie just focuses on random seemingly unimportant pieces of their life. We get no look at who the terrorist is or where he comes from. I felt no threat or tension in the final scene because the terrorist just came off as an incompetent shooter, just baffling. Even in Pearl Harbor, Michael Bay chose to include scenes with the Japanese army to hype up their power-level and what they could do to an American fleet. Here, there is not a single scene with any explanation or story for the terrorist, reducing my engagement. I'm not intimidated by him, so why should I care?

Typically, I disagree with the complaint that these army movies are nothing more than propaganda commercials for recruitment, but good Christ, this movie is the dictionary definition on throwing subtlety out the window. Spencer, or whatever the hell his name is, wants to join the Air Force. Okay, cool. Does that part of the story have any effect on the train attack at the end? No? What's the point of it? There is none? It's just to promote the Air Forces and the Marines? There's really no point to it? Thanks for wasting my time. Story comes first, plot structure comes first, tension comes first, characters come above-all, and this terrorism-level disaster of a "feature film" did nothing for me at all. It's also just a shame this isn't bad enough in a funny way to be like The Room. It borders into the category so many times, but keeps slipping into the just-bad territory. How did this happen, Eastwood?

I loathe this recurring trend I'm seeing with a load of movies being put out, not just in the horror community. Studios take this engaging and expansive concept that could be fleshed out into a thought provoking and timeless archive of our culture, this Winchester story being the perfect capsule of life and death. There's plenty of interesting shit that's lightly tapped into... but like a ton of other projects of recent, we take this potentially enriching thing and throw it into the mainstream bubble. I can see the executives going, "Yes, this tale of a woman building time capsule rooms of dead people, and where they died, is cool and all... but it needs more poltergeists, jumpscares, and marketability." We're taking potential arthouse movies and slapping a studio coat of paint onto it. It's really disgusting.

In this movie, there are so many interesting conversations that are briefly explored. This woman is being told by supernatural beings (who were all killed by weapons from the company she owns), to build rooms in her mansion that capture their spirits and replicate the location where they died. That is so neat, and it amounts to barely anything. No big message at the end, no character study of this woman and the visiting doctor, who's also troubled just as much as her... really nothing. There's a lot of short scenes that go nowhere and inconsistent rules within the house. It's a generic ghost movie with a promising concept being used as the gimmick to draw suckers in like me. The synopsis is far more interesting than how it's executed.

I give credit for teed-bits of the production design, but we just had Crimson Peak and other great period piece movies, so I don't know what's the point of giving this credit for that. And for heaven's lord, I'm an apologist of egregious jump-scares, but this movie is not helping my case. I can't count how many times I wanted to walk about because of the predictable and ineffective jumps. Let's lock this movie up behind thirteen nails and forget it.

Even the poster is shit, step up your game, Netflix.

It's like two terrible hack directors, who are actually actors, saw It Comes At Night and The Strangers, then said, "Hey, let's remake The Strangers without understanding anything that made that movie interesting. Then let's throw in the ending from It Comes At Night. People will love this!" Nothing is explored, nothing is explained, all set-up plot threads early-on are completely ignored in favor of an open ending, there are no interesting characters, the drama is extremely forced and immaturely edgy, the cinematography and editing is jarring and even laughable at quite a few points, but overall, it's a fucking bore. It's trying to be like so many other horror movies (other bad horror movies, mind you, I mentioned Paranormal Activity 3 once when watching), and even doesn't understand why those were successful. All I can tell you, is Netflix is not having a good track record with their original movies. Sure, some of you may argue about Gerald's Game, but ultimately, nothing has impressed me enough into thinking paying for a subscription to this service is worth it. The idea I enjoyed Insidious: The Last Key more from earlier this month is downright unacceptable. Avoid this house, trust me, you won't want to buy it.

This whole movie, I couldn't stop thinking about Shinji and Kaworu's sub-plot from Evangelion 3.33. There is no point to this movie. It is the most boring film involving an on-screen romance I've ever seen, and I've watched all of Fifty Shades Of Grey. While Shades is bad, it has greater production design, has a form of cohesive story-line, no matter how laughable, has a memorable soundtrack, and is actually enjoyable, in an ironic sense.. Call Me by Your Name wishes it could be this important coming of age bisexual story it props to be up from it's aesthetic and Oscar-bait attire, but all we're left with in the meat are pointless everyday scenes and sub-plots that go nowhere, characters given zero depth or personality, yes, including the two leads, locations so bland and in-effective in expanding the story's world, that scenes could be taking place anywhere, and cinematography that feels very amateurish at times. I started counting the number of times the camera forgot to put the characters in-focus after someone moves to another position on-screen. The blocking and placement of the actors is televisual and bland, there is not a single shot that sticks out to me. Sitting at a table, laying in bed, bicycling, and etc. The only shot that sticks out is the final one as the credits play, but that's only because it's held on for so long.

I'm actually having trouble finding stuff to write. The two stars give it their all, desperately scrounging up an ensemble performance that appears emotionally stirring, and I applaud their efforts. But this just does nothing for me. It's so inconsequential and pointless. There are far better gay movies out there. If that's the reason you guys are all giving this movie high scores, then I'm sorry, you're missing out on movies more worth your time. Go watch Strawberry and Chocolate, a much more entertaining and fulfilling little story. I think I'm done with gay movies. I've seen a lot in the past year and they've mostly just felt the same. This genre is really limited. I'm telling you this because I wanted you to know. Call me by your name and I'll call you by mine. Okay, I'll stop quoting obvious lines. By the way, there's a scene in the movie where he fucks an apricot. Symbolism? Maybe. Hilarious? Yes.

I know I'm going to be in the minority when I say this, but let the Monsterverse end here. I don't mean that in the way that, I hate these movies. Exact opposite, King Of The Monsters is my second favorite film of 2019. But given the history of cinematic universes (MCU), the Toho Godzilla series, and the current situation of the Monsterverse, I would rather see this little series end as a trilogy of sorts, discounting Kong Skull Island, and let it stay a self contained epic that completes all it's arcs over the three Godzilla films it currently has. I wouldn't want them to (((drudge))) this out, change it up to be more mass appealing, and lose the spark the series currently has. Legendary currently has the option to keep making Godzilla films as long as they want so long as they renew the license, Toho would let them. But given the financial returns, I don't think that'll happen. They're going to release this early in China, get some money back on their investment, and release it for the fans that still like this stuff. Neutering it down is the last thing I'd want and I'd rather it end now. I know you all would disagree, but end it on this "high note."

EDIT: Fuck, this didn't age well at all.

Wow, this latest Jennifer Lawrence "movie" is a lifeless slog, complete with horrible, uninteresting leads, unrecognizable bland locations, improper direction, lack of an emotional connection, and feels like only an edgy teenager would consider "artsy" because it's slow and quiet. Who the hell made this?

looks up the director's filmography

Oh, that explains a lot.

I know I keep giving mainstream movies a hard time. We're living in an age where blockbusters, like Black Panther, are superficial and lazy committee projects used to sell products to the general public. But then on the other hand, you got this stuff like Red Sparrow that just turns off said masses from the more original and creative small projects. I know this isn't a small movie, but it's an original movie not tied to some cinematic universe. The issue is, this movie's a piece of shit. It's the dilemma Downsizing and It Comes At Night had with audiences: being lousy "art" movies that are miss-marketed to a mainstream demographic. Doing this shit is only driving people back to the "safe" movies made by Disney. When people are dropping over $10 on a ticket, your film better match up to that selling price. There's a reason Black Panther is winning the box office right now, because people would rather trust a certified movie like that, than take a risk with a shit movie like this. I guess my incoherent rambling just boils down to... stop making bad movies? I don't know, my mind is spinning right now. Black Panther is undeniably a more coherent and gratifying experience, so they got me there, but at the same time, it's barely above this. Quality control has definitely been abolished, I will say that. These studios view something like Red Sparrow as the answer to the pleading call from losers like me, for more original projects. So, they don't care what it is or how good, just that it's the answer. We're already on the road where the only profitable movies will be the spectacle Disney movies, full of action and product placement. They infect all the months around them, so none of the smaller movies stand any chance. Only the few meme movies that Reddit and the Oscars pick up stand a chance at making an impact. Why else does Chris Hemsworth keep choosing to play Thor instead of doing other movies? Because they don't make as much money, and most of them aren't good movies either. Maybe cinema has always been like this, a handful of movies each year are worthwhile and the rest just aren't.

Fresh off of John Wick, David Leitch delivers basically a similar action gun-toting movie, but this time with a female lead, which worked fine. The use of martial arts more this time around added to the uniqueness the film had, enough to separate it from David's previous movies. But sadly, the few and far between action scenes can't make up for this incredibly slow and ultimately pointless movie.

I thought I was crazy when I walked out of this movie a little tired or bored of what I just watched, but it seems I'm not the only one. I originally was going to give this an above-average rating, but the more I thought it over, the more I realized how un-inventive and unoriginal and boring this was. I can't count how many times I was sitting in my chair waiting for this fucking movie to hurry up and just end. I'm never really given a reason to care about anything that's going on, or care about our lead, mostly because the movie makes no try to add charisma or an interesting shaded personality to our spy protagonist, Lorraine. She does have a nice sex scene about half-way into the movie, which attempts to add emotional quality to her character and the french spy, but there's something about Charlize's attitude and reaction to situations that just made her so detached and uninterested in anything going on. I didn't really care at all about what would happen to her, maybe partially to blame being the fact the whole movie is told through flashbacks, but I don't know. James McAvoy adds more charm to the movie and he was much more interesting to watch; the second he came on screen, I already became more interested in him than our lead. There's an attempt to add twists and double-crosses, and the story taking place around the Berlin wall collapse was kind of cool, but I was never full invested in this. I don't know why, maybe I was just tired, but this bored me almost all through. I will say, the long take staircase fight scene is wonderfully done, so props for that.

Also, do we have to rely on 80's nostalgia this heavily now? So many movies coming out now use a 1980's noir type aesthetic and matching soundtrack, filled with stuff like Queen. It's getting just a little old. I appreciate the movie's efforts to be unique, but the action is not anymore impressive than anything that's come out in the last 10 to 20 years. If you're curious to see the lesbian sex scene, check that out I guess, but the rest is rather boring. At least I got a chuckle out of John Goodman saying the word cocksucker.

Do you guys think I enjoy disliking these movies? 'Cause I don't. I swear, I go into every one of these hoping I come out having had a good time, laughing and enjoying watching superheroes do marvelous things. But this is the third time this year I've been disappointed by a Marvel movie. I just don't get it anymore. Is there something wrong with me, or am I missing something in this movie? I really don't know. But as I was watching, I didn't laugh once, but other people around me were laughing, at presumably all the right points. I could tell when a moment was supposed to be funny, I could tell a joke was being attempted, but I just kind of sat there, not at all convinced. A lot of the humor just feels so flat, or simplistic. I didn't think any of the jokes were clever or original. Just like awkward dialogue or callbacks to previous Marvel movies. I think I only half-smiled at two jokes in the entire thing. One was at Steven Strange's place, where Thor puts his hammer (disguised as an umbrella), in an upstairs umbrella rack. At the end of the scene, he's downstairs ready to leave, he puts his hand out for his hammer to come back to him, and you just hear in the background glass shattering and things just getting destroyed. After a couple seconds of it, Thor just half-heartedly says sorry. At least that joke had a little bit of set-up to it. I know there's another one involving a callback to Loki and Hulk's encounter from The Avengers, but I don't consider it clever. Most audiences won't get the joke unless they've seen that scene from that movie. The only other scene I kind of smirked at was the Hulk bouncing a giant ball across the room and back, like that prison scene from The Great Escape, and I thought that was just a nice little touch. But outside that, none of the humor landed with me. I don't know where people are getting at that this movie is like hilarious and easily the best Thor movie. I mean, yeah, it's the best Thor movie, but is that saying much? The first two Thor movies were total garbage, and I actually think I'm not alone in saying that. The story in this movie could not get anymore cliche, with it's hero's journey arc. I think it's definitely the laziest written Marvel movie of this year. I wish we actually learned something about Cate Blanchett's Goddess of Death in this movie. There's like a half-explained backstory that she was banished or something and all traces of her and the real history of Asgard was erased, but that's about the extent of her character. Also, we don't know enough about her powers and her abilities. What weakens her? How powerful is she? We don't know. Check out this little scene from her introduction:

youtu.be/lBBvT6QY2Xk

She's brought up to be like this ultimate powerful being that shocks audiences. I can hear the people watching the trailer now screaming, "Oh my god, she destroyed Thor's hammer! How's that possible?!" Yet, when we see the whole movie, the actual confrontation is very underwhelming. And we never really understand what can she do and can't? I'm still like confused on this. I get that she's more powerful than Thor, but is that it? I don't even know what kills her at the end of the movie. Getting stabbed by that fucking huge flaming monster? There were a few moments of a flashback we see of her fighting the Valkyries, and it's got this renaissance-painting like look to it, similar to the storybook in Wonder Woman, but that's really it. OH, and when she first arrives in Asgard, she murders to people guarding the gate, but randomly decides to spare the janitor that's standing by. Oh, and the guy states he's a janitor in a fashion I assumed was meant humorous, but it wasn't. But she spares him and makes him her executioner... because janitors make really good executioners, I suppose. And he just kind of like awkwardly follows beside her, and I'm still really fucking confused why she kept him. She's the Goddess of Death. Why does she need a fucking executioner? He does nothing the whole movie, and she could just do his job, as she shows off early in the movie. But his whole arc amounts to nothing. I don't even know if we saw him in the final scene. The whole movie just has so much lazy writing. It starts with Thor in a cage talking to a skeleton we see off-screen, but I was just thinking the whole time, "The only reason he's talking to this skeleton is so the audience can get caught up in why he's in the situation. When has Thor ever talked to inanimate objects like that?" It was just something I noticed. And the scene after that has some of the worst CGI I've seen this year. The flaming monster of whatever had terrible animations, it just looked so jarring whenever they'd cut from him back to Chris Hemsworth's live action footage. It even looked like the chains Thor was in was CG, maybe it was the lighting. Now, now, I don't have ill-will towards the director Taika Waititi, I've yet to see his previous movie, so let me list off at least a few positives. And that's the direction the movie sometimes has. At times, there are some really impressive elaborate shots, like the previously mentioned flashback sequence. And there's one scene with Thor and his hammer flying away from a giant serpent monster that was nicely put together with the silhouette lighting and fast movement. But at other times, the movie looks like hot garbage. I don't have all the footage at my disposal, but just for example at some of the bad direction, check out this clip:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lw1T6KYM_4I

I swear, the blocking and camera choices are straight out of Attack Of The Clones, with that scene of Anakin and Obi-Wan talking in the elevator. As much as I like that film, same shit. But you know what's really funny, is I found Waititi actually admits the direction is lazy:

youtu.be/7WahFlp7LKI?t=36s

I love how he finds a hard time saying positives in that sequence. Just pointing out the background is all CGI. Something that's clear as day obvious. There's actually a lot of bad green-screen in this movie. One was so bad, I swear, I almost started laughing in the theater. It's when Thor's running down the bridge towards Asgard and I swear to God, I could see the black lines around Chris Hemsworth.

But, ugh, I don't really know what else to say anymore. Marc Ruffalo has almost nothing to do in this movie except spout jokes at times towards Thor, there's more comic relief characters, just like what you'd see out of Guardians Of The Galaxy 2, and Jeff Goldblum doesn't have as many scenes as I wanted. He was one of the better parts of the movie. I want to see more of him in future movies. I gotta admit, I got a kick out of seeing Doctor Strange again. Benedict Cumberbatch is always a treat to see, even if he didn't do jack shit in this movie and only served as a cameo. Also, they play Led Zepplin's Immigration Song twice in the movie. Why? I don't know, because Guardians of the Galaxy changed movies forever. And before people tell me it's Waititi's style to put jokes in serious moments, fine, but I don't think so. I've seen Marvel do this before, making a potentially dangerous and tense sequence silly. Not once was I on the edge of my seat during this whole thing, and I never feared for the main characters' lives. Even when Thor's home planet, Asgard, is blown up to smithereens, they make a joke about it.

I'm so not looking forward to Infinity War. I just don't get it anymore.

The whole movie, I was just thinking about this video:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=40hFDtQLB8c

I'm going to try to vent my opinions on this movie now.

I think this movie frustrated me more than anything. Barry Jenkins did a really outstanding job with the direction. The scene near the beginning with Chiron in the ocean is great. The way the camera bounces up and down with the water was fabulously disorienting and I loved it. A similar example of noticeable camera work was when Kevin enters Chiron's car. The camera is mounted to the car door and the camera moves accordingly when the door is opened. There's good work all around.

Another major positive of the movie was the acting. Everyone did a phenomenal job with the material they had, especially Naomie Harris. She was absolutely perfect as the drug-addicted mother, who eventually winds up in a Rehabilitation center. She gives an outstanding performance at the table with Chiron, as she breaks down and tries to tell him she loves him, to which he just has to respond that he hates her. Mahershala Ali was quite enjoyable, but unfortunately, he wasn't in the movie very long.

I'm not typically interested in films with topics about gays or victims who are resulted from bullying, but I felt obligated to check it out after all the buzz and critical acclaim it was getting. There was a lot going for it and I was having fun with the characters at different points in the story, especially Chiron's classmate Kevin, played by André Holland. However, even with him at the forefront of the third act, I thought the last hour of the movie dragged on way too long. Far too fucking long. I could see exactly where they were going with setup, but they took too long in the diner to execute anything. There's plenty of scenes like it throughout the whole film. Something will be setup, but then not go much anywhere or do anything particularly interesting.

I understand the movie is trying to get across some important messages about life, love, and the struggle of trying to find yourself as a person. But the problem is, while I applaud and definitely see some great scenes in this movie, like Little Chiron sitting alone in the bathtub, there is far too little happening. You can't have a movie that's only themes. You still need interesting scenes to convey your themes. The only parts I really got invested in was Chiron's life in high school. He finally had enough and threw a chair right into the back of his notorious bully, Terrel. It was a chapter of the film I could identify with, we've all gone through rough patches growing up.

I'd like to give this movie a higher rating because it has good material to boast, but while it has some good subject matter behind it, it's far too slow. Not even the impressive direction and performances can make me want to revisit this movie. I could see why some could get sucked up in the world of Chiron's, but I wasn't digging it. Great visual work from Barry Jenkins, but a script re-write was needed.

Women deserve better films than this, don't give them this. We're not helping women, whatever the hell that means, by giving them the most basic, bare bones, modern, disgusting trite nonsense this is. There's an eyerolling "girl power" montage right before the main titles appear. For no reason. It's not a commercial on television, it's not an advertisement, it's just a random clip show of girls doing stuff. It's just gross. There's no point to it other than flaunt, "Aren't I doing the female sex a positive by saying how good it is to have a vagina?!" All of the male characters are very comically sexist, white, and troublesome, outside of Patrick Stewart of course. The action is tired, a lot of it borrowed from stuff like Now You See Me and Mission Impossible, except much more obnoxious, thanks to Banks needlessly making all of our three new leads as insufferable as possible. Stewart especially I've never hated this much, not even back in the Twilight days. None of her jokes make any sense, she babbles every line, and she does it every time she opens her mouth. I was able to endure fifty minutes or so before realizing I didn't even know any of their names or what was going on because the film's priorities lie in all the wrong places, establishing the organization and the villain rather than our leads. There's even a humorous piece during the first major car chase where one of them asks, "Who is that? Why is he shooting at us?" And I was like, "I'm asking the same thing!" The first line in the film is, "I think women can do anything." Is this really a debate we're still trying to have and the media trying to push on to the general American public? Women in the west are the most freed and supported than at any other point in human history. How fucking ironic that this film that wants to act as a female power move is funded in part by China, a place that has internment camps for Muslims; they show happy Muslims in the film in that opening montage. Hey Banks, why don't you use some of your money you had to make this movie and go help out those people instead of sucking more Hollywood dick to get to make the Invisible Woman film you're now directing? I guess virtue signalling is more important. I only get heated about this because how hypocritical the people who are making this film are being. Glad this shit bombed.

Not even discussing the quality of the film it's about, The Last Jedi, this is actually a poorly structured documentary. From it's first introductions, it's the wrap party followed up with clips of internet buzz about the film's director choice, and from there, starts showing off the cycles of the production. The big issue, in comparison to The Beginning film showing The Phantom Menaces's shoot, is there is hardly a straight timeline of events. You don't know how far away pre-production is from shoot, how far Rian was along writing the script when the sets were being built, when storyboards were being drawn and colored proper for practical and digital techniques, when effects demonstrations started, any conversations really between Rian and the producers, etc. The entire ordeal is glossed over with rapid pace, never stopping it's stock orchestral score to showcase the fancy B-roll they took for this. The style of which this is edited is less of a documentation of what happened, and instead a very fancy marketing show-reel. Pieces of conversations are let to breath, but sometimes the punch line or follow up to conversations are not finished, random choices of what to include and what not is jarring, i.e. the comment about Russian tweets which has nothing to do with the preceding and proceeding sequences, and nothing ever really makes sense. It's like a jumbled compilation of pieces of the production with graceful intent, but no foundation. Everything feels out of order and it doesn't make me feel like I'm actually there experiencing the labor intensive shoot with the crew. I feel like I'm being told what happened, rather than being shown it, which brings me to one of my major gripes, is the over extensive use of narration and interview footage/audio instead of raw B-roll conversation. There is some to be found, sure, but it feels less personal and intimate when a lot of what is being fed to me is not the initial or in the moment feelings of the people involved with the production, but heavily scripted and filtered interviews after the fact. There's a manufactured feeling which I can't shake, and that's my question. Why was this made? Genuinely, I want a real answer, why was this produced and released? Why wasn't one done for The Force Awakens or Rogue One, especially the latter, I would have loved to have heard from Gareth Edwards' mouth his process for making the movie, especially in regards to his documentaries for his film Monsters. What was the goal here? Well, I'm going to put my tinfoil hat on and conclude, the studio probably knew there was going to be backlash, or at the very least, misunderstandings about the creative choices taken with the script and presentation as a whole. It's almost like they anticipated the vitriolic response to the final picture, so my guess is at some point in pre-production they started making this. They probably loved what Rian was doing, "being risky," but that's the point of this, it's a piece to convince the viewer why Rian is a misunderstood, genius director, in a veil attempt to save face, to show the public that they actually "make creative decisions" and this film is some kind of work of art. That's why there's inclusion of a number of interview pieces from actors Mark Hamill and some of the crew facing their concerns about aspects of Rian's planning, but are painted in the light that, oh, he know what he's doing and it should be supported. I want to respect the work by the cast in the background that actually seemed to care, but there's something so disingenuous about everything here. In comparison, Rob Zombie's Halloween documentary that is over four and a half hours long uses almost no interviews, only when it helps the day of shoot, not much narration, just straight B-roll from the start of pre-production, to the very end, and it is one of the best documentaries I've ever watched. The important thing is it's a day by day look in to it, not a shimmering gloss. It's actually a journey, you become attached to the crew through it, nothing is left out. This, it feels like revisionist history.

I'm not even sure why I watched this. I was spending time with my folks and they decided on this, because the trailer admittedly looked inciting. But due to it's very unclear focus, any emotion the film tries to power, falls short because of lack of development between most of the leads. There's an entire subplot somewhere in the second act involving the workforce prison on this planet, you know "world building," but nothing it dredges through helps the characters become more dynamic. It's filler for the sake of entertainment. There's a fight in the mess hall, the captive monsters are let loose in an escape scene, but as I was watching, I was like, "Why am I watching this?" The entire focus of this story is this dad trying to save his daughter as the government is launching a deadly virus to wipe out this planet's population. Why am I watching unrelated characters do stuff that have little impact on the central character? It does this multiple times. Oh, the mains go buy weapons from this arm dealer. Let's give the arms dealer a five minute shoot-out scene that literally does nothing for the story. Some people say movies can be cut down to be shorter, and most I disagree with, but here, you literally could cut out over a half hour of material. The focus is so off, that when the emotional climax (and sacrifice) happens, I'm left more numb than bawling my eyes out, like I'm sure they wanted me to. There's a little something from every science fiction movie ever done here, just not as good. Oh well.

I'M BACK! OH YEAH, FUCK THIS MOVIE.

Venom is unfortunately everything I feared it would be. This year has been especially brutal to blockbusters as studios are rushing to neuter their projects in hopes of recouping losses from spending too much on their budgets, even though Logan, Deadpool, and IT have proven R rated films can be monster hits. We've seen Jason Statham trash talk The Meg just days before release, and while that may have made half a billion dollars, no one is talking about it and is already culturally irrelevant. These are the kinds of movies were are putting on the top box office charts; shit we don't even like. Now we have Tom Hardy depressingly revealing in interviews all his favorite bits to film were cut out the movie, something a good forty minutes. It shows, the editing and pacing of this movie is a haphazard mess. Scenes come and go so quickly, you're never sure what emotion to be feeling. Eddie breaks up with his fiancée and like, it jump cuts six months later so quickly and he's being goofy. Events transpire like fingers snapping, so a lot of it becomes a blur. One of the scientist ladies comes to Brock because she thinks evil baddy, Drake, is doing immoral research using the symbiotes. She seems kind of interesting, but her only purpose is to dispel hideously bland exposition, make a snappy one liner to a security guard, get caught, then given as a test subject to a symbiote. No one in this pile of cinematic universe dreck is given an ounce of character development outside of Eddie. Tom Hardy shines in the few moments he gets to chow down on some frozen tater tots, but they're cluttered in between headache inducing action scenes that can't show any violence. Upgrade just came out a couple months ago and that's a better Venom movie than this, beaming with a better paced story and much more paid off emotion (the first ten minutes had me near crying), plus, hardcore violence. I hate to play the IMDB audience normie reviewer, but I'm just going to say it, imagination is for pussies. If I'm dropping down $12+ on ticket, and it's not explicitly an arthouse film, you're damn right I'm going to be mad when violence is happening as part of the set piece and you don't show it on screen, especially if that's the selling point of a movie. This was so clearly shot to be R, I could just picture the blood splattering and grotesque imagery, but because of the editing, it's not there. The PG-13 curse has robbed us of Venom ripping people's faces to shreds. Oh sure, they imply it, hell, he does it a few times, but the cutting happens so quick, it's like he swallows them whole and quickly disposed of off screen. Venom resorts to just jumping all around the room and throwing people into walls. The disappointment I feel watching a freaking Venom film, a property that's come from a more serious comic book series and has the potential to withhold a three hour R rated epic shows how much the mark has gone left field. Sony would rather make the character as friendly as possible and able to blend right in to the Marvel Cinematic Universe if I buy out would happen. This is the movie industry today. I saw a review for this movie in a magazine that mistakenly categorized this as a film in the Infinity War. I don't blame them. I can't tell the difference. The stink you get from the formulaic quips, forgettable villains, and regurgitated hero origin story could fit right alongside Ant-Man. What a bollocks shame.

Okay, before I type anything, a little update on my writing. I feel like I try to correct myself too often, to make my reviews appear more professional than they really are, which can get in the way of my actual opinions on a movie, and getting reviews out quicker. I'm doing it right now as I type this, it's become a habit. My point is, from now on, I'll try to just spill out my thoughts without worrying too much about format. I'll keep them in mind, but what I want to share comes first. The Happytime Murders is your standard detective murder mystery, only with a gimmick of Muppets being very adult (swearing every other sentence). What makes this so funny is it's directed by Jim Henson's brother, who's responsible for The Muppet Christmas Carol and it's funded by the Jim Henson Company. This is basically a Muppets movie, just for adults. At first, it appeared as just one of those spoof parody movies made by the two hacks who did Disaster Movie, but no, this is the real deal. That said, the script needed work if it wanted to at all resonate with audiences and stand out as a classic you could revisit. This lacks the charm or wit of, say, an Edgar Wright film. It's amusing as hell to see a Muppet in a porn shop, watching a puppet jack off a cow, but it kind of just shows adult behavior without earning any of it or showing it in a clever way. Okay, so puppets are snorting cocaine and jizzing all over the place. It stops being funny after ten minutes. This movie would work better as just a short comedy sketch, like a twenty minute television pilot. Melissa McCarthy is surprisingly passable, I usually find her type of yelling and fish out of water humor annoying, but she restrains herself a little here. All I can say is, if you want to see Muppets be represented as an oppressed group in society (social commentary on minorities), dealing drugs, having sex, saying "fuck" every other sentence, you could find enjoyment in pirating this flick. I would like to see them make a sequel to this, actually. There's potential with this approach, just needs an original, crazy script, that's worthy.

Everyone's seen this movie already, so my thoughts really don't matter. I saw this out of obligation, not 'cause I was on the edge of my seat in roaring anticipation if my flavor of the month favorite character would live. All I can say, this is the best Marvel Studios movie, just on the basis it feels like a... movie. Yeah, with a story, a character to follow, and a real artistic production value behind it. Granted, it still falls short because of the studio mandating and tiresome quips, some of the jokes land, but most don't. The real protagonist of the film is actually Thanos. From the start, you follow him, like he was written with the hero's journey in mind, and he has a clear set up and pay off. He's the best written character in this entire goddamn universe because he is interesting; he has purpose, and I can say that since I've seen over 13 of these released products. As vengeful and heinous as his "overpopulation" removal solution may be, he actually gives solid reason for his actions and you almost end up feeling for him over any of the other disposable and rather annoying superheroes. Who the hell even is Bruce Banner anymore? What does he do? What is his job? Why does he not contribute anything more to this universe other than babble around and turn into the Hulk every once in a while? He's the most useless character in all of this. Thankfully, the Russos' actually attempt to demonstrate the consequences this time around, and use basic human emotions to tell the story. Because of Peter's sudden lack of judgment and losing control of his anger, Thanos gets the gauntlet back and dooms the entire universe. Gamora is given a decent backstory that comes into fruition, she's the adopted daughter (little one) of Thanos, and it works emotionally whenever the two are together. When certain characters are given proper screen time, this works. Other times, some are throw in purely for fan service and have no overall impact on the story. This movie should've just involved Gamora, Quill, Strange, Stark, and Parker, the rest of the cast is there to make this the Infinity War. I really hate Black Panther. This movie isn't bad. I still like Batman v Superman more, yeah, sue me. (I know we shouldn't compare the two, just throwing that out there)

Bill Skarsgård was in this movie and there was not one Pennywise reference. Writers, you have failed me.

Wow, I am really on the fence about this one. I don't have much to say about this, just, if you enjoyed the first, you'll be fawning all over this one. It's better. I'm not a fan of Tim Miller's original, mostly because of the constant meta humor and terrible, inconsequential story. It just didn't click with me. Making a jab at a popular movie that recently came out isn't clever writing. Deadpool 2 is exactly what you would expect of a sequel that thrives off a film built on fourth wall jokes and inappropriate gags. It's the reason you're in your seat. Thankfully, the jokes are actually more respectful this time around and not as often as expected. The Take-On Me piece is the best thing to come out of the movie; I chuckled. And Cable makes for a great character, actually much more so than the Wade Wilson. Josh Brolin nails every role he's in, which is why I wanted more of him. He's a tragic anti-hero, but unfortunately, his struggles aren't given much attention. He brushes all his reason for being there in the last scene (yes, I get what they were doing), but lacked in any satisfying wrap up for his arc. We instead have to focus on the lamest, eye-roll inducing fat kid, Russel, and his quandary at his abusive orphanage. It's so lame and not interesting, but we're forced to endure it, because it ties back to Deadpool's relationship with his wife. It's the center of the movie, and I couldn't give less of a fuck. They could've gotten a better actor, or something. Given more screen time to the horrible crimes the orphanage is committing, but just, I did not care. And at times, it seems the movie didn't either. There's a few subplots that briefly come up, only to be swept under the rug only minutes later. Whatever happened to the kids Negasonic Teenage Warhead were saving in the finale? What happened to the orphanage, or Russel for that matter, after the battle was over? It might be looking for things that aren't there, but the story felt incomplete. It's a cryptic and broken script that's copying Guardians Of The Galaxy and The Terminator, missing any kind of emotion. This should've been all about Cable, not Deadpool making dumb jokes as a guy gets cut up in a shredder. If you just want a silly action movie, with subpar work of John Wick director David Leitch, pounded together with wacky and gross humor, you will like it. It just didn't do much for me. Not going to remember it in a week.

Okay, if you've followed me for a while, you know I would never sell out my voice for money or clicks. I don't construe my feelings to be contrarian, and I've stated a number of times I don't enjoy hating. Oh sure, A Quiet Place looks fantastic in comparison to the relentless gluttony dispenser of superhero blockbusters, but what about it's own? John Krasinski creates a well crafted picture: it looks and sounds great, although it cheats by making everyday sounds artificially quieter. But, I can't help feel the short run time, and plot holes that are coins gushing out of a slot machine, more than you can carry, rot the spine of what otherwise is an intriguing concept. An apocalypse of monsters that seem unstoppable, attracted by simple noises? Having just seen the teaser, I was itching to see what could be done with a story like this. There were, almost literally, a couple seconds of what I could consider worthwhile achievements. The location and cinematography is excellent, using tricky lighting and blocking, but only serves as the means of telling a very cliched story. I don't understand it. How was it that I was bored through this? This has been done better in so many other monster movies, even from Platinum Dunes' own catalogue. What about Signs? None of the characters were interesting, which could be accounted by their lack of speaking, but even performance wise. I didn't create a connection to any of just the cast of six characters. Krasinski is the most intense, but we don't know anything about his past life. What was Emily Blunt's occupation before this? What did they like to do for fun? Have they always lived at this farm? What is the political and social ramifications of the catastrophe on the rest of the world? What did the kids do before the invasion? Where are the creatures even coming from? What sounds can the monsters pick up and why do they not attack at some of them? We don't know. I can appreciate it just focuses on the crucial events, like an old horror movie from the seventies (The Texas Chain Saw Massacre), but it's hard for me to care about a creature coming to attack when I don't care if someone is going to be killed, not even the newborn baby. If you want an example of killing a child done better, just go to the recent IT. It guts you watching Georgie get sucked below the streets, because it took the time and carefully put an emotional tie between the lead, Billy. It's tried here, but to a lesser extent. The writers have already announced a sequel, so maybe the budget will be much larger to expand the world of this universe, but money is no excuse. 10 Cloverfield Lane had nothing, and that boasted an incredible creepy narrative. I nearly laughed when Krasinski screamed and sacrificed himself, while the daughter just stared with her gaping mouth open. And, again, my issue's not the under utilization of it's possibilities, but just that I wasn't able to care about anything going on. Everyone just seemed so flat. And especially more of a problem, when the weakness is so obvious, and shown in a silly way, it makes the monsters all less terrifying. I believe, a spectacularly wasted use of a great idea, most likely just getting praise for not being a Marvel movie.