filmtoaster

VIP

3

Deliver Us From Evil, it starts off in a rather unusual location, following scouts in 2010 Iraq, giving us a brief action sequence. Things take a turn for the worse and the 3 person group discovers an underground mine where something goes wrong. Cut ahead 3 years, we follow Ralph Sarchie, played by the talented Eric Bana, he and his partner get involved with a strange case of a wall painter having to do something with the supernatural. Sarchie is put in a desperate situation, as he continues to follow the case, his mental state begins to deteriorate.

What makes the movie intriguing, like Sinister, is the mystery element that's written into here, and the clever cinematic techniques that play into delivering the audience clues. Notice how all the jump-scares in the movie are only done using animals or the wall painter? They're not randomly placed jumps for the sake of having them. All the possessed people clawing on the ground, a trait of that typically of cats? I'm going to waste time going through all the little tie-ins that connect with either character traits or story conclusions, but it's there. It's pretty smartly written actually. But with that said, what drags the movie down at points is the slow pace and uninteresting scenes with the father Sarchie interacts with, played by Édgar Ramírez. I think the man is a great actor, but parts of the story where he was around dragged the story to a halt. I'm not sure if they really could cut out some of his scenes, as this was adapted from a book and supposedly "real-life" events, so whatever. Another unfortunate problem is some scenes are unnecessarily long. A little trimming in the editing room could've helped a bit. But overall, satisfaction wise, there's a lot to like here. It's not the standard horror trope fare some reviewers are pushing it as. Derrickson's brilliance is still all over the picture and I just had fun seeing his direction mixed with the great soundtrack. One thing I would've liked to see more of was the detectives combing through security footage and finding creepy shit. There was some of that, but it was few and far between. Add more of that, and this movie would've bumped up even more.

I actually first got introduced to David F. Sandberg from seeing his mainstream theatrical production, Annabelle: Creation. Once I looked him up online, I had no idea he was the man behind creating those fantastic and viral horror shorts on Youtube. Later on, I sat down and watched the feature-length, Lights Out, which I really loved. But as for his first-time short films, they're all perfection in a hand basket. All of the ones he's done, including the original Lights Out short, are genuinely creepy and tension-filled little moments captured brilliantly on camera. My favorite of his currently is the 2014 Pictured. Right from the get-go, the short starts off creepy with a rather grainy and faded picture of a creepy-looking girl standing on a sidewalk. From there, the short escalates, as the girl in the picture escapes and manipulates the photograph, taunting the owner in the house. The brilliant use of sound and finale set-up make this one of my new favorites. When she's putting her hand up and and down and the girl in the picture moves each time she does this, I got braced for impact and I was almost yelling at the monitor. There was a slight final scare, but it was more of an unsettling startle. I love all of Sandberg's work so far, and I can't wait to see more of his talented productions in the future.

Now THAT is a lot of blood.

Why, oh why, do I love this movie, so? Why do I love you so much, Raimi? However, in this case, I can understand why someone wouldn't enjoy the film. The story can be a little poor at times, the pacing is occasionally slow, and the characters aren't the most developed. I think the movie gets more epic towards the finale, but that's not to say there aren't good points in the beginning and mentioned categories. I love the thematic connections that came back at the end of the movie to wrap a nice little bow to Ash and Ashley's arc. The necklace Ash gives Ashley from the beginning prevents him from chainsaw-ing her neck at the end, and his eye-open eye-close game Ash played on here, demon Ashley plays later on him when he's burying her. But aside from a couple beats like that, the story is very simple. A group of friends go to a cheap cabin in the forest, they find a demonic book, then all hell breaks loose... literally.

What I really love about this movie is it's presentation. The red and blue color palettes and framing of shots are just gorgeously wild, as excepted from Raimi. My absolute favorite parts are the hand-held moments from the POV of the demons. I've never seen a horror movie before tackle a motion like this, and it turned out beautifully. There's something a slight amateur-ish about it, but lovable. Actually, the whole movie is very obviously low-budget independent. The cabin is clearly on a sound stage with propped lighting and fog machines, but something about it's look is just intoxicating. It's the ideal cabin for a horror movie. Everything about it is mesmerizing.

I think what fans like to draw from this movie is the experience it provides. The mythology behind the book of the dead and the ride you take with Ash throughout this movie, and the subsequent sequels, is something I can see people getting rallied behind. It's amazing how Raimi was able to take, what seemed like just a simple horror movie, and provide a whole successful franchise around it. Now that I think about, I actually want my own copy of the book of the dead.

Highly recommend viewing for this October!
Lots of fun horror action and plenty of blood!

Such a simple premise, yet so effective.

I think that's my only complaint about this classic, is how minimal and straight-forward the film's story is. Now -- that's not to say that's a bad thing, 'cause it works enough for this. What many others have already commented is how The Texas Chain Saw Massacre very much goes for a documentary-style of filmmaking. It opens with a stock narrator telling us what's about to happen, as if implying to the viewers, that the events that are shown, really happened. The gritty and dark grainy photography Hooper shoots come off as archival footage, like this is actual footage of a real sequence of events. Also, what I noticed throughout, was the inclusion of rather unnecessary details in quite a few scenes. Why would we need to see someone get out of a car, go back inside the gas station to turn off the light and close the door, and then get back in the car? That's not important to the story. In most films, you'd cut that right out. But these small and left-in touches add to the documentary quality. This is something that newer Texas Chainsaw films are missing, as they go for a much more cinematic look, as opposed to this real-life cinematography. Going slightly off-topic, this is why James Cameron, for the 2012 restoration of Titanic, bumped up the aspect ratio of his film to 16:9 and color corrected the movie differently, to give his film about the Titanic a more television-like documentary facade. I bet most of you didn't even think about that.

But as for this beast of a movie, which spawned many sequels, video games, books, spin-off movies, Halloween Horror Nights mazes, and etc, what makes this gruesome feature so inciting? Why was it such a phenomenon and became possibly the most recognized horror icon in history? Some point at the "Based On A True Story" gimmick that the marketing team strategized, and while the movie is very loosely based on real serial killer, Ed Gein, most of the movie is fiction. I think the gruesome depiction of someone getting sliced up with a chainsaw, which hadn't really been seen on film before, was captivating and exciting for viewers. This is most likely why this extremely low-budgeted 16mm production went on to make over 35 million at the box office over the course of 8 years. Who wouldn't go see the one disgusting horror film you just gotta see? And Leatherface's costume is just so gross, but brilliant. A cannibal who wears his victims' faces as masks? Fucking grotesque, but amazing. Can I also just mention the bleak and fucked-up set design? Notice at the final dinner scene, the chair Sally's sitting in, the arm rests are literally just human arms. Awesome. Nowadays, the feature is a slight dated compared to some horror films, in terms of pacing and editing, but The Texas Chain Saw Massacre is just as engrossing and fast-paced as you can get. I did not feel the run-time at all in this, despite it's sometimes slow-pace and scenes that have no much going on. Just like Jaws, which came out a year later, the movie starts out slow, with an energetic group of friends just taking a ride through Texas, and the movie accelerates to an insane chase sequence, eventually the movie just turning into an absolute nightmare. The claustrophobic and up-close tight photography makes for some deeply disturbing imagery. What also helps this movie over some others is the pitch-black visuals at night. In most other productions, in order for the audience to see what's going on at night, the crew could be using a low-light camera to ever-so slight brighten up the night sequences just so you could see. In this film thought, the night scenes are quite literally pitch-fucking-black. You can't see shit in this, which is probably the most realistic and frightening lighting; not knowing where Leatherface is going to show up makes for an even more tense atmosphere. The final scene at the dinner table and subsequent chase at the end are two of my favorite scenes in horror history. Sickening stuff. If you haven't checked out the original The Texas Chain Saw Massacre yet, please do, for Tobe Hooper and Gunnar Hansen.

Highly recommended viewing for this October!
R.I.P. Tobe Hooper and Gunnar Hansen.

Star Wars jokes, huh, Disney? Not trying to be subtle anymore?

It's a remake of Spider-Man 2. Now I know that's a dumb criticism to be made, because really, how many different stories for a Spider-Man movie can you do at this point? Well, actually a lot! There's how many fucking comic books stories from The Amazing Spider-Man and Spectacular Spider-Man that Marvel Studios and Sony could've pulled from? But NOPE. We get an almost scene-by-scene copy of Spider-Man 2 with Toby Maguire. And my biggest problem with that decision, is they didn't ever top that film once in the entire run-time. There's even a scene that directly mirrors the "Raindrops are falling on my head" scene from 2, where Parker is now an ordinary guy without the suit. What a joke.

Without comparing to the original movies, what are some positives? Tom Holland is a great choice for Peter Parker, and he sticks closer to the age and personality of the original comics. I love him from The Lost City Of Z by James Gray, so it was cool to see him get a big role like this. The spidey-suit upgrades were an inventive fun thing to watch, so that added a little humorous element to the story, even if it was a little too reminiscent of the Ant-Man we just got, but Tom Holland makes it work. A couple of the jokes landed really good, especially the acting from Jon Favreau, but there were multiple desperate attempts at using memes to get younger viewers to laugh, and that got annoying. Diego Tutweiller has an excellent essay about the "Humor of Juxtaposition" in Marvel movies, so go read that too. JMichael Keaton as the villain was a fantastic choice. He doesn't have any super-insane freak-out moments, but his intimidation was what made his character interesting. And also, with the way they wrote him, you can't really love or hate him. I was actually just a sliver sympathetic towards the end when he's explaining his actions to Peter Parker. But I never felt any of the dramatic weight that I did in the originals.

And this is where I get into my major problem with this movie and the other MCU movies. They feel so disconnected from the real world, that what they Avengers do have no effect on civilization and not a single person is affected by their actions. Why don't we get to see the reactions of people getting killed when a plane crashes into a city-scope tower? It's obvious people were harmed and killed, but why don't we see that? Because Marvel wants to keep their movies fun and accessible to wide-spread audiences. All the dramatic tension in every single Marvel movie I've seen so far, is so superficial and without consequence. Call me biased to DC all you want, I'm not, but at least in Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice, you see the effects that Superman's attack on Zod had on Metropolis and the world. You see the people who were affected by those actions, IE, the little girl who lost her mother, the employee at Wayne enterprises who lost his legs, etc. We never see anything like that in the MCU movies, Spider-Man Homecoming included. The only time it gets even close to this aspect is when Peter's Decathlon class is stuck in an elevator about to drop, or the ferry with people on it. But just like the other movies, it plays it up for laughs, so there's no serious weight to the situation, because you know none of them are going to be killed, and you don't see any people really cowering in fear. You know what would've made that ferry scene work even better? Seeing a mother protect maybe a child in her arms, and then seeing Peter Parker's reaction, realizing the gravity of the situation. But NOPE. We have a fat black guy say, "Yeah, go Spider-man!" What the fuck.

I firmly believe at this point no one will ever make a Spider-Man or superhero movie in general that tops Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 2. Do people just not understand what made that movie so incredible? People sure like to praise, but do they really know why?

I'm tired, so I'm not going to write all my thoughts, but I'll share the big ones. It's not scary. There you go. There's a few creepy moments here and there, but surprisingly didn't jump once while watching nor am I scared by Pennywise. Depending on your fear of clowns or amaze of Skasgard's acting job, the results may vary. But that said, the movie is badass. I view this as more like an Evil Dead or Drag Me To Hell type movie. Where, like there are creepy and disturbing shit happening, but you more react like, "Ooo, that's cool. That was awesome." Whenever Pennywise was on-screen, I was just fucking entertained, so that's how I view it. When he started dancing, I was on the verge of laughing. My dad also compared the movie to Beetlejuice, which is a perfect comparison. IT (2017) is basically an R-rated The Goonies with Beetlejuice thrown in, and it is awesome.

What elevates this movie up even further is that it has lovable characters you actually want to see come out on top, something I can't say for other horror installments lately. Bill and Georgie's relationship was actually heartbreaking, when I didn't expect it to be. Overall, just a lovable gang of outsiders who have to take on a killer clown. Great stuff here and so many good quotes from each the kids. But yeah, it's not scary, but it's slick, stylish, fucking hilarious at times, has a couple creepy moments, and Pennywise is the demonic Beetlejuice of modern movies. I'm actually looking forward to Chapter Two.

This treasure of quality atmospheric horror is flat-out one of the best films I've EVER watched. It's now almost been 10 years since it was originally released and I've only grown to appreciate it more as time moves on. No other such movie has peaked my interest in real events such as Centralia and Chernobyl quite like this one. It's not a turn-your-brain-off and enjoy jump-scare popcorn shit-fest like some recent studio releases in the past couple of years. This right here is an extremely rare case. Not many movies come out like this anymore. Think about it: It's a video game adaptation that's good, a horror movie that's more about the tone than the scares, and a think piece that requires some thought while watching. Even today, I'm still learning new things about this movie and it's production. Roger Avary, who most know as the co-writer of Pulp Fiction, was the lead writer alongside director Christophe Gans, both of whom are extreme fans of the video games, which is very important in making a faithful yet standalone adaptation. The two amazingly put together such a great ride. GoodBad Flicks made a fantastic video summarizing everything you should know and why you should watch it. I recommend this movie hardcore. It's an underrated and underappreciated masterpiece.

GoodBadFlicks' video: youtu.be/CfEnsMWYisI

This movie gave me a revelation. About movie-making. Both in a good way and a bad way. On one side of the coin, you now have studios like Blumhouse and Rat-Pac making decent competent horror movies that will satisfy audiences, as opposed to the shit that was being churned out for the last few years. But on the other side of the coin, they're not doing anything super unique or original. You always have to have child actors, you have to have the priest, you have to have a demon, you have to have this old secluded house where people move in, and etc. It's not automatically bad or lazy to use these tropes, but only if they're done with a unique style. And the problem is, I've seen a TON of movies lately use these common ingredients. I liked Ouija: Origin of Evil, but again in that, there was a demon possession, a priest, and house with a dark history to it. I get that doing this is safe and people will go to see it, but I'm hoping directors like David F. Sandberg and other people working with Rat-Pac try to move away from these plot threads. I don't know how much longer I can stand studios think they can get away with using this story over and over. That goes for you too Blumhouse.

Sorry, that was something I had to write down, because I started thinking about it a little more towards the end of this movie. In general, I start to know how I'm going to rate a movie when I reach a certain point. And I knew then how I thought of this Annabelle: Creation. It's safe. It works, but it's safe, and I don't know if I like that or not. I'm a huge fan of older horror pieces and B-movie-esque grindhouse, and it's a little sad directors and executives aren't trying to push the envelope.

But with everything out of the way, this on it's own isn't bad. It's pretty good. The child actresses all do a great job with the script they're given and I believed I was watching actual children interact with one another, which is a problem sometimes with kids. Lulu Wilson, who already starred in Ouija: Origin of Evil, gives another solid performance, and I want to see what else she does with the horror genre, if she decides to keep acting in it. I would love to see a The Exorcist-eque movie with her getting possessed. I believe she could pull off a Linda Blair. But in this, she isn't the one who gets taken over by a demon, but still perseveres and gives us a great scared child acting job. Talitha Bateman, who acts opposite Wilson and the two of them are like bonded sisters, she especially delivers an exceptionally dreary and depressing performance. She's crippled with polio and spends most of the movie in a wheelchair or walking with a support. And what I liked about this facet, is that it wasn't a tacked-on sub-plot or sob story; her condition plays into some of the scares. In one scene, she uses the automatic moving chair thing on the staircase to get away from the demon that's coming closer to her. The chair makes it's way down, but stops and malfunctions half-way down. Then the chair starts to go back up, and the demon is waiting for her right at the top and there's nothing she can do about it. If she didn't have the condition, she could've just ran out of the house. But little touches like that can make for a richer story. It's also why the girls are surprised later when she can walk fine, because she's taken over. Another great scene was in the barn with one of the older girls, played by Grace Fulton, when the demon takes over a scarecrow and slowly unscrews the lightbulbs in fixtures to turn off the lights. I don't know why the demon would care about something trivial like light-fixtures, but I guess you could say because the demon is used to being shut-in the darkness, so whatever. It was a nice set-up.

And this re-telling leads me to one of the bigger pros and cons with the movie. Each of these scary sequences are great, well-done little pieces, but as a whole feature, doesn't really flow well. There isn't a lot of super big tension built up or a looming threat that lurks over the picture. In one scene, Wilson is terrified beyond belief as the doll and the demon have made their way into her room and the bed underneath her bunk-bed. But then, the scene ends, she falls asleep, and it's the next day. Next we see her, she's happily playing with the other girls. Are we not going to talk about what just happened there? And that's my only big problem with this. David F. Sandberg started out doing short horror movies and that seems to be his expertise. These are great little scenes, but don't complement one another always in the larger scope of it all. However, the movie does get really good towards the end, when the demon goes all out on the girls. It was nice to see something quite grand and on an ambitious scale. A lot of times with these movies, the finale is just a small group of people trying to get out of a house and there's a couple jumpscares there and here. But Sandberg decides to throw in everything he can. The demon teleports all over the place and gets at the different separated groups of kids. Scarecrow in the barn? Check. Creepy adventures in the basement? Check. Car won't start? Check. Hiding in the doll room? Check. I know all that sounds very cliche, but it's done rather unique, as it's not the same person who experiences all of it.

But I think I've rambled on long enough. It's a little funny seeing how these origin prequel horror movies end up being better than the originals they're based off of. Now people are going to go watch the first Annabelle and remember just how fucking terrible it is. But I am a little worried about the state of horror movies. I liked this, it was good, I had fun watching it, but I want to see more come out of this genre. I don't really want to see the same plot threads being copied over and over. If you just want to see a fun horror movie to share with friends or family, you'll definitely get a kick out of this, I recommend it. However, as massive fan of this genre, I want more.

Shit, this is better than Blumhouse's Truth Or Dare. At least it shows some blood.

As a sequel to Final Destination 3, and even just a separate horror film, it's a ridiculous cheap disaster... however, if you take it as a comedy, this is a blast. Must watch, for sure, I put this shit on in the background doing work, one of those kind of movies. Every scene in this offers hilarious laughs, start to finish. The priceless NASCAR race sequence, topped with cars and debris just flying straight into the stadium's audience... and no other direction, those people are walking targets.. The punch lines spoken right before an impending death, the musical cues, and the outrageous antics that keep upping the last. Why the hell does a mall explode when there's no explosives anywhere to be found? What's with the EXTREMELY mouse trap death set ups needed in order for our terrible protagonists to be killed in? Why does someone start bleeding at the mouth because their foot is cut off? Why is there a bunch of explosives behind a movie theater screen? Why does a fence have sharp enough blades to cut through a guy's stomach? This movie rocks. It's some good garbage, and I think they knew what they were doing when making this. It's a trashy 'ol good time. The deleted alternate ending is pure fucking gold insanity.

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.

This is one of the greatest films ever created, the one that made me a hardcore Charlton Heston fan. I know, the runtime can be a turn-away for casual viewers, but I don't view this as a movie. I've now seen The Ten Commandments twice in the theater and it's an experience. Through this four hour epic, we're introduced to the location of Egypt and every character imaginable, as they're woven into the story re-telling of the Book of Exodus. It's a tightly constructed, but vast world-building film that makes the audience feel like they're there with the slaves and Moses, as the days and months pass in the film's length. The special effects and green-screen composites are cheese and outdated by modern technology, but hold an old-time charm to them, a quality lost in new remakes, like Exodus: Gods and Kings. Cecil B. DeMille doesn't just slap together a shitty historical movie to make money like with shit such as Gods of Egypt, but pays respect and with great care, creates one of the best epics of all time. It's hard to explain everything in such a short review, so I won't bother but just tell you to watch this if you haven't. It's a must. Make some snacks and some drinks and sit down and watch this. It's well-worth your time and you won't regret experiencing the whole thing. Ideally, I'd say see it in a theater with an actual intermission, but that's hard to do, waiting for a re-release and all.

'Seven Psychopaths' is what I consider the perfect black comedy, or movie that's a drama with sprinkles of humor scattered throughout. I find all the jokes to be timed perfectly and placed just the right moments, but I find myself even more invested and caring for the more serious parts of the writing, which parts surprised me when I saw them come up, as I didn't get that impression I got when viewing the trailer. Martin McDonough perfectly balances poignant commentary about different kinds of psychotic individuals, while delivering crowd pleasing and hilarious set pieces and dialogue. It's truly one of the smarter written movies I've seen in the past few years, more than other acclaimed pieces. I found myself engaged the entire time, not once checking the time on my phone. The story moves along at just a frantic enough paces and showing off twists in the characters to keep the viewer interested, Billy being the absolute craziest and most lovable one of the bunch. I love that the Schi Tzu becomes his dog at the end. Wonderful little closure to the character.

Fantastic movie. I'm surprised it took me this long to see it. Just never came onto my radar, I suppose. Also wow, it's been 10 days since I've seen a movie, that's unusual for me.

DO NOT WATCH THE TRAILER. I REPEAT. DO NOT WATCH THE TRAILER.

The trailer for this tension-filled drama is a complete misrepresentation of what the movie is actually like. It totally betrays the focus of the movie and what it's really about. This is probably why some audience members are turning this movie away, because they either don't understand it or had different expectations going in.

That being said, I don't even really consider this a horror movie. That's to be expected with low-budget Art-house productions, like The Witch, but even The Witch was filled with actual scares and real dread. I still go back to that movie to this day, because it left a very real impression on me, a very creepy one.

It Comes At Night boasts 3 things:

1. Great performances

2. A claustrophobic and sometimes very tension-filled environment

3. Good music

And that's about it. The reason I'm giving this movie 3/5 stars, an above average rating, is those qualities really sell this movie. Those 3 things made me feel I didn't waste my money and got my time worth's spending.

Let me make something clear first before I go any further. I LOVE slow-burn horror movies. I'm an advocate for them. When a movie can perfectly combine jump-scares and atmosphere, it makes for some of my favorite movies of all time.

The problems I have with It Comes At Night though are 2 very simple things, and this could just all be me and only problems for me:

It feels like there's supposed to be this feeling of dread throughout the movie, I felt like I was supposed to be really depressed and battered down at some of the events happening, but a lot of these tension-oriented and scary scenes didn't really go all-out. They didn't go balls-to-the-wall and kept a scene going for more than 5 minutes. What I mean is, whenever a situation came up that was bad, like the dog barking at the woods and then running off, it never went past the initial concept of the scene. The scene lasts for 5 minutes, the family goes back inside the house, maybe a TINY bit paranoid, and then a few scenes later, the dog shows back up sick from the unnamed disease, and has to be put down. It wasn't like in other movies, like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and The Witch, where a pivotal scene like that would just build and build. The only scene that resembles something like that is in the finale, and even then, it's only about 10 minutes tops.

And the other thing was they NEVER explained what actually comes at night. I know, I know, this is a very silly response that sounds like it would come from a mainstream movie-goer who doesn't get these kinds of movies, but this aspect of the movie actually bothers me. They NEVER, EVER, ONCE, in the entire movie ever even hint at what possibly could be causing the disease or where's it coming from. No talking about where it started, how many people have it, just nothing at all. My problem is, I wouldn't mind that they don't fully explain the disease, but the fact the title of the movie and even scenes in the movie itself hint that they would eventually explains "what comes at night." Does the disease only show up at night? Do nightmares only show up at night? I guess these questions don't really matter, but it'd be nice if the movie distracted from those questions long enough to get me really invested in what was going on with the families.

Also, the ending is one of the biggest fuck you downer endings I've seen this year. It's almost as fucked up as the ending to The Wall. And YES, I understand the purpose of these twists. They tie into the central theme of the movie.

I just, I don't know. I want to give this movie a higher rating, but something about it is holding me back. There were tastes of genuine tension and there were great performances, but I don't know. I may have to think about it longer before revisiting this.

Um... what? I don't even know what I just watched, but I really liked it. That's the best way to describe this movie. It's so crazy, so filled to the brim, so over-the-top, and nonsensical, I just had to turn the analysis part of my brain off and accept the movie for what it is: A poorly written, but well-polished, incredibly directed, badass song tuning, and crazy action grindhouse B-movie. That's what it is. This could easily have been released as a 70's grindhouse feature, and everyone would fucking love it. The action scenes in this movie are some of the craziest set pieces I have ever seen. You've got these talented women in skin showing skirt outfits, wielding modern tactical rifles and pistols, going around shooting robots in a World War 1 trench. Yes, you just read that right. Want to go even crazier? Okay, how about flying a modern tactical helicopter over a medieval castle while firing guns at a dragon? Not enough for you? Okay, how about battling in the snow, fighting giant robot samurais wielding miniguns? This movie is so fucking crazy and stupid, that I can't help but like it for some reason. I think that's why most audience members and critics don't like it. This movie is the prime-example of "Hey guys, I decided to make a super fucking crazy ass movie, don't take it seriously, okay?" This movie is what happens when Zack Snyder takes some cocaine and is allowed to do whatever the hell he wants. I don't know why but I like it, a lot.

HAPPY 25th ANNIVERSARY to ALIEN 3

Hell yeah, as of today, Alien 3 was unleashed onto the world exactly 25 years ago. Now unfortunately, audiences were not treated to the amazing assembly cut, which I've already strongly recommended, but nonetheless, David Fincher's first film was released into theaters with a largely mixed reaction. It wouldn't be until 2001 that a proper fully recut version of the movie would be released, which is now available on the Alien Anthology Blu-ray box set.

I'm not going to write a super long review for this one, as I'm burnt out after that Alien: Covenant four page angry rant, but I'll write just a little on why this is one of my favorite movies of all time.

A lot of people are very quick to dismiss this movie, as one the surface, they judge the critical plot point that happens in the first 5 minutes of the movie, in which Hicks and Newt from James Cameron's Aliens are unceremoniously killed off-screen with a word of dialogue or screen-time. I wonder if audience members just tuned out after that scene and refused to accept and enjoy the movie with such a "FUCK YOU!" moment like that so early on. I personally don't mind it, as it perfectly sets the depressing tone the movie goes for. Put those characters to rest, as they're not the focus of the Alien universe. Ripley is the focus of the franchise.

Just a brief synopsis, Ripley is the soul survivor of an escape pod crash as she lands on a distant prison planet, Fiorina "Fury" 161. She's rescued and put with the other prisoners, where they must soon join forces as they face off an alien loose in the lead refinery prison plant, which stoad aboard the crashed escape pod.

I love the thematic elements Fincher tries to go for, mostly stuff that only appears in the assembly cut. A lot of people have pointed out all the religious symbolism that vapors over the entire movie, in it's imagery and storyline. Ripley comes to the planet almost like a Jesus figure. In this bleak and terrible environment, a group of people who are criminals and rapists, the prison inmates have converted to a kind of Christian religion, but are thrown off when a temptation figure, a woman, arrives on the planet. They question their own religion and existence even further with the presence of an evil figure, the xenomorph. By the person Ripley is, she forgives and atones for their sins, and ultimate sacrifices herself at the end for the good of mankind, destroying the last alien and even forming the crucifix at the end as she throws herself in the lava.

But besides it's rather heavy use of themes, it's a perfect sequel to the masterpiece Alien. Because it's not an action movie, it has the chance to recapture the close encounters claustrophobic and chaotic attitude the finale the first movie originally had. It's an incredibly nightmarish experience, in mood and events. Ripley has had to witness everyone she's ever known be killed and hasn't gotten a break since the first film. Even at the end of Alien 3, when human Bishop lies to Ripley that he'll kill the xenomorph chestburster and she can go live a normal, she can tell through his words his dishonesty, and decides she's had enough with the horror and "bullshit" she's had to endure. It's not a pleasant movie by any means, but the dark and terrible nature of the story and atmosphere makes it a true horror movie. The music by Elliot Goldenthal is on the same level as James Horner's score for Aliens. It's hopeless attitude and Alien-like sound makes it a true work of art for a movie soundtrack.

I'll take a religious-heavy, brilliantly written, visually terrifying, and wonderfully executed horror downer any day. I love this kind of shit. The characters are all interesting, especially Morse, who has a wicked dark sense of humor. Ripley's character is brought to a final close, and I consider this movie to be the true finale to the Alien franchise, and it really works. Trying to bring her back in Resurrection just screamed cash-grab. This is a fantastic film. Yes, it's depressing as hell and it's not for everyone, but that's to be expected going into a HORROR movie. PLEASE give it a chance, watch past the opening scene. It's not meant to have a happy ending where it's all smiles. Ridley Scott should've followed this movie for Alien: Covenant.

TL:DR Watch Alien, then Aliens, then play Alien: Isolation, then watch the assembly cut of Alien 3. You're done after that.

I've thought of a lot of different ways I could open this review, but I'm going to do something simple... and start with a checklist; a list of questions for a typical audience member.

1. Do you want a suspenseful slow-burn gripping horror movie? If you answered yes, you're not going to get it at all.

2. Do you want a memorable and unique action thriller with new and exciting ways to show suspenseful gripping warfare? If you answered yes, you're not going to get that either.

3. Do you want memorable and interesting characters that go through arcs, have interesting personalities, and you eventually become really attached to them? If you answered yes, you're looking in the wrong fucking place, boyo.

4. Do you want a philosophical interesting study of human nature that chronicles the creation of a deadly species; one study that makes you question the existence of mankind? If you answered yes, you'll get a very shallow and uninteresting concept like that doesn't go anywhere, but it's kind of there.

5. Do you want a shitty lackluster horror movie that relies on tons of jump-scares, no tension or suspense, absolutely retarded humans that don't act like real people, sprinkles of exposition and pseudo-intellectual dialogue about creation, absolutely atrocious looking CGI, and constant copycat recreations of stuff that happened in the original Alien? If you answered yes, THEN THIS IS THE MOVIE FOR YOU!

Alien: Covenant is really an anomaly of a movie for me. I've never been so confused at the choices made by a director and a screenwriter, while I was watching the movie. I really want to know what was going through their heads. I want to ask them this one question: "What was the goal of this movie?"

As a horror movie, it fails on every front imaginable. You know that movie "The Cabin in the Woods"? The movie where the scientists release toxins into a typical horror movie cabin to cloud the visitors' judgement, and that explains why so many horror movie characters make really stupid decisions? Yeah, imagine that concept, but it was done for serious. The absolute baffling and obviously illogical choices some of these characters make, actually make me roll my head in utter disbelief at how stupid these colonists are. They don't wear helmets when going onto an alien planet, they don't follow any sort of protocol, they don't follow any code, they decide to poke everything they see, and generally act like incompetent children. The fact these people were given the task to colonize another world and be responsible for the lives of over 2,000 colonists is unbelievable. I don't buy it for a fucking second.

Continued from the last paragraph, there's this one scene about 1/3 into the movie, where one the passengers gets infected with this kind of bionic metal floating thing and instantly becomes sick. He's dragged back to the space shuttle that's landed on the planet and is put into the medical room. Girl 1 gets locked into the room with Infected 1. Girl 2, who was already on the space shuttle, locks them both in and refuses to open the door. Infected 1 starts to shake rapidly and something starts to pop out his back, blood flying everywhere. Girl 1, for some fucking reason, decides to hug Infected 1 like the dumb shit she is. The little xenomorph pops out Infected 1's back in a little blood sac, and proceeds to attack Girl 1. Meanwhile, Girl 2 is acting like frantic spaz and goes and grabs a shotgun. She opens back up the room and walks slowly to Girl 1, who's being ripped apart by the alien. She then slips on the pool of blood like a fucking idiot and accidentally fires the gun. She gets up and tries to scramble out of the room, and then gets her foot caught in door, crippling it, again, like a complete idiot. The alien chases her out of the room into the cargo bay of the shuttle, where she proceeds to just shoot wildly until she fires at a gas canister, blowing up the entire space shuttle, stranding all the other passengers on the planet.

Now, when it comes to logic in movies, I'm not harsh on it at all. I'm actually an advocate for suspending disbelief and just accepting that sometimes, people do dumb shit when they're scared. Yes it's true, people when they're clouded by emotions, will act incoherently or stupidly. I firmly believe that in movies and I know people will write characters like that to make them more believable But this... this scene, was so fucking infuriating to watch. Was it supposed to be silly? Was it supposed to be scary? What was the point of this scene? I was watching a really pathetic human acting like a complete moron acting crazy, until she decides to shoot a gas canister. The entire sequence was really just sad to watch, and not in a good scary way.

And even as an action sequence, it's not thrilling or intense either. I wasn't riveted or on the edge of my seat as the events before me unfolded. I knew exactly what was going to happen, with the xenomorph poping out Infected 1's back, but this raises me to a big point that I want to bring up, one of the fundamental biggest problems I had with the movie, besides the fact it's not scary:

The xenomorphs themselves are not scary at all. I'm actually amazed people are giving this movie a pass, rating it with like a 3/5 or higher. I just don't believe that in the slightest. When I think of Alien, I think of claustrophobic terrifying corridor encounters with a deadly and unknown hostile life-form that could kill you in an instant. This nail-biting and tension-filled wait for the thing to go away. Ridley Scott, with this movie, effectively ruins what makes the Alien scary. I have NO problem with Scott trying to explore the mythos of the alien universe, and even explain where the xenomorphs came from. I don't particularly like it, I think it ruins the mystery of the alien, but I can appreciate Scott trying to do something different. But the way the aliens are showcased in this movie, don't make them out to be the terrifying monsters that lurk in the shadow, waiting to strike and then pounce back into the darkness, just ready to sneak up on you. They're now just generic movie monsters now, not exhibiting any of the familiar traits or behaviors of xenomorphs from the original trilogy. Instead of hiding and lurking in the shadows like a deadly creature, these fuckers are running out in the open, just attack humans aimlessly. I felt like I was watching a Friday the 13th movie, but if Jason Vorhees was just skinned over with a alien suit. When I see a xenomorph just come up behind a naked couple in the shower, I don't think of alien, I think of Shylock cliche horror from other movies that are terrible, especially the Friday the 13th sequels. When I see a xenomorph attack a fucking security camera for no reason, other than to give the audience a little laugh, that doesn't feel like Alien. I'm not saying the movie has to be the same as the original, hell, far from it. I want them to do stuff that's different, but you have to understand the rules and behaviors of the world you're exploring first. It's like Ridley Scott forgot the movie he was trying to make.

Another two problems I have with the xenomorphs, are the visual effects and the animation. It's sad to me to think that human suits from over 40 years still look better than CGI from this year. I don't know who was in charge of creating the digital effects for this movie, I don't know if they were rushed or something, but effects for the aliens was fucking terrible. Not once was I convinced in the whole movie, that what I was looking at was a real alien that posed a threat to the humans. The glossy and horribly modeled xenomorph models looked like they were from a low budget experiment project, not a big budgeted blockbuster. But even with the awkward and awful looking models, I felt the animations were all wrong. Thank about what a xenomorph is: It's an alien that infects it's host and then takes the form of the host it infected. 100% verifiably based on what we've seen in the alien universe thus far, when a facehugger infects a human, the resulting xenomorph looks and moves like a human. It stands upright and walks like a human. When a facehugger infects an animal, let's say a dog, the resulting xenomorph movies on all-fours and acts like a dog. We saw this in both Alien and in Alien 3. But for some reason in Alien: Covenant, when the facehugger takes over the human captain, the resulting xenomorph moves more like an animal... running on all-fours. Which, if you think about it doesn't make any sense, based on what we've seen. Yes, Ridley Scott could just be rectonning Alien 3 because "most fans didn't like it," but this animation fundamentally undermines what the term "xenoMORPH" stands for. The embryo morphs into the lifeform it's taken over. It takes the physical traits from it's host. But besides that glaring error in the choice of animation, the actual digital movement of the xenomorph model looked really fake and stupid. The way it ran down corridors and up and down ladders was not convincing in the slightest.

And even when the horror doesn't work, the action doesn't work either. You'd think they'd be able to get one of these elements right, but nope. Because there's no tension in the air and xenomorphs are just running out in the open like deer or whatever, there's no reason for me to get invested in the close-encounters action that's happening. Sure, some people shoot some guns and there's a part at the end where newcomer-captain Daniels is dangling off a space shuttle, but none of the action feels new and fresh. In fact, most of it feels extremely anti-climactic. It feels kind of tact on, like Ridley Scott was making one movie and realized, "Oh yeah, I have to make this a little exciting for audience members. I'll just throw in an action scene here and there. That'll shut them up." None of it feels earned. It just feels like it happens for the sake of happening, and Scott doesn't try to do anything unique with the direction. I was thoroughly bored in every 2 action scenes. The xenomorph just follows the heroes out onto the second space shuttle that comes down, and chases them like a generic bad guy. What happened to the alien sneaking up and avoiding detection, luring the victims into a false sense of security?
The climax of this jumbled mess was literally a carbon copy of the ending from both Alien and Aliens. New-captain Daniels and Danny McBride's character lure the xenomorph into the cargo bay back on the main ship, and then blow the fucker out into space. Same shit again. Nothing original or done differently. I'm really getting sick of it.

Okay, now will all my grievances out of the way, all of my anger hopefully vented, there is one thing critics and audiences are trying to give this movie credit for, or even justifying their reason for the movie earning a fucking 3 stars or higher. Michael Fassbender. He's the center of the movie. He's the core of what this movie's about. The very first scene is his character David, from Prometheus, having a discussion with his creator. This gets them into a talk about what it's like to create, and where humanity will go. Is the role of humans to die off and make way for the next creation from father? Ridley Scott tries to use Fassbender as a tool to try to talk philosophically about life and death, and the horrors of creation. There's a back and forth sequence in the middle of the movie where David and Walter, another synthetic android that looks like David, have a conversation how David has followed in his fathers footsteps, and experimented to create his own life, effectively building the alien xenomorphs. Yes, the synthetic David actually created the xenomorphs, which, I'm okay with the writers doing something interesting like that, but... it doesn't go anywhere or try to answer real serious questions. It just brings up some empty blanket questions about creation and why it's horrific, but never does anything with it. In one scene with the original captain from the colonist crew, he gets taken over by a facehugger, and later, when the xenomorph chestbursts out of his stomach, sad piano and violin music plays, trying to poise some kind of greater question about the xenomorph. To me personally, it doesn't do anything other than just make the aliens not scary anymore. It actually makes me not scared of the xenomorphs anymore. Now they just seem like toys a man came up with, which is fine idea... if the man who created them was actually scary. Michael Fassbender does a decent job with the material he has, and he's a fine actor, but in no way is he intimidating, and I don't believe for a second that he created the xenomorphs. Also, this raises the question, what about the alien queen in the movie 'Aliens'? Where did she come from? The xenomorphs aren't a race like previously thought? Why isn't this explained? Oh, I have to wait until the NEXT sequel to learn that. Goddamn it.

When it tries to be smart, it doesn't work. When it tries to be scary, it doesn't work. When it tries to be action-packed, it doesn't work. When it tries to add depth to the characters, it doesn't work. I didn't like really anything this movie had to offer. I thought some of the music was decent and Michael Fassbender's performance was alright, but that's not enough to save a movie like this. When I think about Covenant, then I think about Alien, it just makes me sad. The original Alien was a groundbreaking masterpiece that worked because it was filled with tension. Ridley Scott is now just using the Alien franchise to try to act pretentious, calling Alien: Covenant a "thinking man's Alien movie." Oh, bite me, Ridley. Your movie isn't smart in any way. It's terribly paced, horribly focused, not scary, not interesting, and not worthy anyone's time.

This is the Attack of the Clones of the Alien franchise. Ridley Scott is now George Lucas, trying to claim ultimate ownership of the franchise. It's quite sad. Very disappointed in this disaster.

Going to see Alien: Covenant right after this, I will have a review up hopefully soon.

I love the atmosphere in this movie. I'm a really huge fan of slow-burn silent kind-of creepy horror films that really souly on building suspense and building the world, rather than resorting to action or jumpscares. I think this is why I prefer Alien to Aliens, and The Terminator to Terminator 2. True horror movies, to me based on what I find scary, is relatable or likable characters being put in genuinely terrifying or claustrophobic situations.

What makes Alien effective is the location. Imagine yourself in Ellen Ripley's situation. Alone on an abandoned ship about to blow up, in very narrow corridors with no one else around, while an unstoppable killing machine is out to get you. That idea alone makes the movie, but the way Ridley Scott executes it, through the sound effects, lack of music, and pacing makes it one of the most tension-filled finales I've seen in a horror movie.

The rest of the movie is great too. There isn't much that happens in terms of story, but you grow attached to these characters as they get picked off one by one. You're constantly on the edge of you're seat anticipating what's going to come next. It's a constant up-hill battle as these group of characters try to figure out how they're going to defeat the alien life-form that's now loose on the ship. Sigourney Weaver, John Hurt, and Tom Skerritt are my favorites out of the cast of exceptional actors. They all do a good job with the material given to them, especially considering how dialogue-heavy the movie ends up being.

There isn't much else I can say, other than it's one of the best horror movies in history, with it's wonderful atmosphere and great setting, which many of follow-up movies tried to copy, but most end up failing to capture.

I'm so glad I heard about it and had the pleasure of watching it. I haven't seen a movie break my heart that good in a long time. It's not usual for me to get actual tears going down my face.

'Train to Busan' is an incredibly rare horror movie that puts actual emotional investment into the characters, what I mean is, you actually care about who's going to live or die. This isn't a world-building movie, but one that devotes it's entire run-time to building an emotional attachment between the audience and the main cast. Not many modern Hollywood blockbusters and horror flicks do this motion, as they figure most people are just simply there for the thrills and the cheap jumpscares. 'Train to Busan' reminds me something. It reminds me how absolutely important it is to have characters you want to root for. The fact I actually cried for the main characters in this movie automatically puts it well above other horror and zombie movies that don't bother with this essential character development.

I loved it. I truly loved it. It's easily one of my new favorite zombie movies of all time, maybe even one of my new favorite dramas of all time. Watch it. It deserves your time and especially money.

This isn't war. It's a game

Absolutely go see it. Aaron Taylor-Johnson is so great in this movie. The entire run-time of this feature could be his Best Actor Winner clip show reel. His dramatic and enticing performance in this just blew me away. You feel the pain he feels as he's pinned down to a small brick wall, being forced to remove a bullet from his leg, watching his partner being pushed to the ground by sniper-point; it's a lot like Dunkirk, but without the music. No music plays the whole movie. Isaac, played by Johnson, and his partner, played by John Cena, are currently out investigating a pipeline in Iraq when things go from suspicious to a nightmare. Cena's character gets pinned down after being shot by an unidentified sniper named Juba. Isaac is forced to stay behind a wall to hide from the shooter that that has both of them pinned down. From there, the movie becomes one big chess game. The sniper wants to get information from Isaac by talking to him over his radio transmission. What he wants to do with that information, we don't know yet. I actually don't want to say that much, in fear of spoiling, but this movie engrossed me from beginning to end. I've never seen an hour and a half fly by that quickly. I wasn't bored at any moment during this. You're constantly on the edge of your seat questioning what's going. The pieces slowly become clearer as time goes on, and the sniper's motivations, I suppose, are what constitutes as the the "twist" ending. The reveal will make you have one of two reactions... or both. Flipping fantastic stuff. You start to like it the more you think about it. I only loved it even more as I thought about while driving home from the theater. The actors did an incredible job with the material they were given, it's not exactly the happiest movie you'll ever see, but it sucked me in so much. One of my favorite movies of 2017 so far.

I can't say much more than what other critics have said a million times before in the past 100 years or so, but damn, I forgot how revolutionary this film was. I saw the post-processed colorized version of the short feature, in my opinion the best version, and it absolutely blew me away how ambitious this was for 1902.

Let's see, we've got a basic structured narrative, which includes a beginning, a middle, and an end. We've got amazing special effects through use of practical sets, matte paintings, and in-camera tricks. We've got great performances that tell the audience the story and what the characters are feeling, without the use of dialogue. There's also some great composition with actors in the framing of what the camera could see.

The only shoddy special effects are some of the quick cuts (Because there wasn't any editing equipment back then), and actually, I find the rocket hitting the moon's eye to be the worst special effect of the film. The rocket appears much bigger in size than what it actually it is and the cut to the rocket hitting in the eye is too jarring. Otherwise, the movie has some great work with blending together smaller sets and in-camera tricks with the real actors.

Georges Méliès possibly revolutionized movies forever and I think everyone owes something to him. By today's standards, it's not the best movie ever created, but goddamn, at the time, it certainly was. A milestone in motion picture history. Everyone interested in movies has to at least watch it once.

There's not too much I can say about this movie.

Chris Pratt has his usual funny moments, Dave Bautista has some very laugh-out-loud bits, and Rocket:tm:, played by Bradley Cooper, is given much more screentime than I thought he would get.

Kurt Russel, however, steals the fucking show. I love his roles in other movies to death, so it was great just to see him at all. He had much more weight to the story than I thought he would, and I didn't expect him to turn out as the villain, so that was a nice surprise.

However, the story itself did get pretty dang predictable at points. Characters go here, seemingly good guy turns out to be the villain, they fight him, the end. It's childish writing, but it works well enough. If Kurt Russel wasn't playing the father of Starlord:tm:, my rating of this movie would go down quite a bit.

What saves the movie though, besides Russel, is the scale of the story and the way the humor is implemented. Rocket:tm: steals battery components from a race of people at the beginning of the movie. This isn't just a one-off joke, this actually affects the course of the story. That little joke actually isn't just a side-gag, but actually pushes the narrative. I like that kind of shit.

The "Awesome Mix Vol. 2" has some great new tracks. It was fun hearing Mr. Blue Sky play as the crew fights the octopus monster in the opening credits. Now all the Youtube videos for that song will be flooded with, "Yo, , anyone?!" However, it is good newer movies are exposing this generation to all kinds of good music. I used to hate how new movies have soundtracks filled with just songs, but now I get it.

Going back to my point a paragraph ago, the scale of the story surprised me. There was no super giant evil bad guy that needed to be stopped (Not really), there was no big army to take down the villain, this wasn't just a retread of :tm:. It was a story of Starlord:tm: finding out who his father was, not liking was he was doing, and taking him down. That's about it. There's like 3 locations the whole movie and it's all centered on just one plot point. I appreciated that. Seeing the crew just stay in one place and talk was a refreshing take on a "superhero" movie.

This one will be a hard movie for me to judge. I'm just going to have to voice whatever comes to my mind as I'm typing, because this was a very interesting and all-over-the-place kind of experience for me.

Alright, so basically, Percy Fawcett is a British officer commissioned to lead an expedition to find a hidden city in the middle of South America. You pretty much know what the movie is going to be like just based on that short description.

Charlie Hunnam does a great job playing a troubled husband who becomes gradually more obsessed with finding this city, but it's not like he goes insane as a result. Throughout the whole movie, he just wants to find it. It's not like he gets PTSD from exploring the jungle and it cripples his interactions with his family.

In fact, the final expedition has him voyaging off with his son, who actually pleaded to join him. There's a great scene in the middle where this oldest son, played by - 's Tom Holland, starts to chastise his father for abandoning his children and his wife, to which Percy slaps his son as he walks towards him. What makes the scene great is how realistic it is. Families have these kind of dramatic quarrels all the time, and it doesn't affect Percy and his son's interactions. This takes place before the son wants to join him on the expedition.

Robert Pattinson excellently plays Henry Costin, who voluntarily joins Percy after finding out about the expedition, revealing he has knowledge of the Amazonia. I didn't even recognize it was Pattinson until about halfway through the movie, but his acquaintanceship with Hunnam was very natural and likable.

Sienna Miller does a good job with the material she's given. I don't recall her having any giant dramatic moments, just her getting annoyed every now and then. They try to throw in some "feminist" message at one point in the movie, but it doesn't go anywhere and doesn't amount to anything. Still, she did a nice job with what she had.

I think the best way I would describe this movie to someone else is, "It's like if they took and and mixed them up as they please." It's a daring exploration movie that feels like it was made in the 90's. It's a period-piece movie that has the camera work and framing of a movie that was made with 1990's equipment. That sounds like a weird way of describing the visuals of the movie, but you'll see what I mean when you watch it.

Another weird point of the visual style that I kind of liked was the odd choice in the color palette. There are no pure whites anywhere in the movie. It was color corrected to have yellows in the white highs of the saturation. It gives the movie this dreamy feel, something I only started to really notice about towards the middle. Like, the clouds in the sky are fucking yellow. It's weird, but I like it.

The ending is very bold and a little sad, but it's based on a true story, so I can't expect them to have done something different. I'm not going to spoil it and I implore you to not look it up before-hand. Go see it without knowing.

I liked the movie a lot, it's always nice to see something fresh come out into theaters, and I definitely look forward to reviewing more of these kind of movies in the future. (Getting really sick of superhero movies, to be honest). I just think it needed to be tightened up a tiny bit in editing and needed a little better of a soundtrack. Otherwise, it was a great experience.

"I know you feel bad about the deer, but it's not your fault. Things die. That's part of life. It's bad to kill, but it's not bad to die."

"Souls don't die."

The smartest animated movie ever crafted and blessed onto movie-goers. Brad Bird delivers the magnum opus of his career and he hasn't topped it since. He blew his creative load out into his first feature and it really shows. The meaning of life, the uselessness of war, death, fear-mongering, and parting of a loved one are all topics tackled wonderfully in this seemingly "made for kids" movie. Who knew a movie like this would be able to talk about 50's war propaganda in such a revealing and hard-hitting way that most movies wish they could dream of doing?

But on top of it's extremely mature themes, it's a fun adventure comedy movie for people of any age. Hogarth Hughes is an instantly lovable boy who just wants a friend, and eventually gets one who happens to be a 50-foot giant robot. Dean McCoppin is a junkyard owner who gave us one of the best memes on the internet, and Kent Mansley manages to deliver some amazing gags in-between his war-mongering freakout moments.

I love the setting the concept artists chose. The 50's look isn't just for aesthetic, as it does serve the time period to hit home the anti-war message, but it's just as fun to look at as ever. The Duck-And-Cover nuclear bomb classroom video, the classic diner with all the waitresses in dresses, the cheesy black-and-white horror movies playing late at night, etc. etc. It's such a fun movie to look at, just for the time period it's set in.

The Giant, I don't even need to elaborate on. Everyone's already written 20 page essays on why he's the greatest silent character ever animated, but I'll just repeat it in a sentence. You cry for a giant metal robot who only says a few words the whole movie.

It's a brilliantly crafted and gorgeous movie that actually manages to make adults cry at 2D drawings. The best written and animated movie ever made.

Eh, I've definitely seen worse films, especially in the horror genre, which is fucking littered with trash. John Carpenter has the bar set for him so high because of what he's done in the past. The Thing, Halloween, and They Live were revolutionary genre masterpieces. So, I can understand how it would be hard to not look at Carpenter with high expectations, especially for a horror film from him, the madman himself.

It's definitely not anything great or anything, and it's not terrible. It's just painfully average, which is it's biggest problem. I like movies that are either entertaining as fuck and very good, cinematic masterpieces, or movies that are so bad, they're funny. There's nothing in the middle for me. If you're movie is average, it's a damn shame. I'd rather laugh at a bad movie than be bored. I want to either be impressed, or entertained, not checking my phone's clock, which happened quite a bit throughout the middle of this.

It feels like a made-for-TV movie made by no-name director, it's that bland. There are some okay performances scattered throughout, and I admit, the twist did get me a little bit, but it's nothing that would shock the hell out of me, like 'Sinister' or 'Drag Me To Hell' did. So, everyone the girl knew was just a made-up personality trait of hers. Big-whoop. I'd rather go watch 'Psycho', at least it offered something to enhance the genre it's in. 'The Ward' is a horror movie that wants to be other, better, and more successful horror movies that came out when John Carpenter wasn't doing horror movies. I could name so many things from this movie that it does, that I've seen other movies do much better.

I didn't realize who directed the movie until after I watched it, and when I found out, I was a little disappointed. I'm not going to say John Carpenter has lost his mind or anything, unlike Ridley Scott, but Carpenter, is old and he made a bland, generic movie. Nothing I'd get too upset over, just disappointed.

I do enjoy this one to a certain extent, especially the design of the wasteland (I even had the art book when it came out) but story-wise, this movie does nothing for me. It's trying too hard to be Mad Max with Terminators, but it doesn't really work. I feel that part of the problem is that the main character Marcus, played by Sam Worthington, is spoiled to us in the trailer that he is actually a terminator when he is found in the 2018 present day war. It would've been a cool twist if the audience found out half-way through the movie that he was one, but NOPE. The same problem happened with Genisys. Give away the big twist right in the fucking trailer.

It needs work with character development. Marcus has the potential to be an interesting anti-hero, one that struggles with living reality as a Terminator, but he doesn't amount to much. We're told his backstory and... he can sometimes but kind to others... and... uh... yeah, I don't even know. I like the scene where Moon Bloodgood is lying her head on Worthington's chest and she says he has a strong heart. It's a clever double entendre. He has a strong heart because he's a Terminator and he has good in him.

Again, the action scenes are great and I love the set design. Probably the best (and only) Terminator war film we're going to get. If the script was reworked and Marcus had better character motives, this would be rated much higher.

Final note, this was the movie that introduced me to Anton Yelchin. May he rest in peace.

Literally the greatest film I have ever seen. Marvel can just go the fuck home. They've got nothing on this academy award winning masterpiece. 'Batman v Superman' is going to end up in a hospital after witnessing this absolute blessing onto the world, not like my ex-wife who I thought was a blessing to me...

I thought 'Jaws' and 'King Kong' were my favorite movies of all time, but pfffff, bruh. This is the real classic. Those other two are fucking trash in comparison.

I can't even tell what I was watching, I remember hearing dialogue and a lot of pop songs, but fuck you. I remember listening to 'Paranoid' as I argued with my ex-wife. This movie is funny because I said so. Jared Leto as the joker was a brilliant choice. Who was that fucker, Heath Ledger? No one cares about him, Jared is the REAL choice pick for the joker. All 5 minutes of his screentime made me orgasm, his Hot Topic portrayal would totally appeal to mainstream critics.

Actually, all the characters would appeal to critics. Will Smith totally sells this movie and Jai Courtney is the greatest actor of all time. I used to love Marlon Brando and Robert Shaw, but those two fuckwads don't stand a chance in an audition against Jai Courtney. I loved it when Courtney terribly read dialogue off a prompter with no emotion. Best Actor Award winner right here, folks! I bet my ex-wife would win Best Actress.

I love how cringeworthy every line of dialogue is. This is supposed to be a group of funny characters in the style of 'Guardians of the Galaxy' but this movie actually works. Not like my ex-wife. Batman makes a small appearance here and there, which makes me can't wait to shill hard for the new Batman solo production. I can't wait to see the high score on Rottentomatoes for it. I heard Ben Affleck had to go to rehabilitation for alcohol addiction. Why go to rehab for alcohol addiction? I love beer and I don't have an addiction...

The rest of the characters I don't even know they're names, but they all said some funny dialogue, so that makes them well-developed and likable characters. Harley Quin was super hot, I loved the way her body looked in that outfit, like how my ex-wife's body looks in the bathtub. Crocodile head made me laugh a lot and Boomerang, AKA Jai Courtney, has the most useful super power on the planet. I never realized all you needed to be a super hero was having a boomerang as a weapon.

A true cinematic masterpiece. 'Casablanca' and 'Star Wars' have nothing on this true work of modern art. I wish I could talk more about, but the cops just showed up to the front door, so I gotta go. See y'all later!

Happy April Fools' Day!