Reviews

If you like good fantasy stories with gore and good voice acting then this is for you! If you are a homophobe or misogynist then this might not be for you.

The 2D animation is fine, nothing special, but it takes what could be generic "He-Man" type stories well beyond the next level. There is gore and people die, so this is not for the little kids.

This show is based on a game, which I have never played. I cannot say how well this represents the game, but that really should't matter to anyone else. The world they live in is interesting and provides a wealth of material.

The voice acting is top notch. Michelle Yeoh, David Tennant, Gerald Butler, and the rest all take this seriously and also elevate this show well above most animated shows.

If you get a chance, look at the ratings for each episodes. You'll see large spikes at 10 and 1, and the rest skew high. All the 1 votes means there are people who just want on hate the show. They are not reviewing the show itself, but they hate what it represents. Whenever this happens you should watch the show and judge for yourself.

As a far of Blue Beetle from Young Justice we were excited to see this movie. For the most part this is a success and the movie has a good heart and cast. If you have "super hero fatigue" this movie won't help but it does change things up a little.

First the weak points: Not the best villain, but at least a believable one. The pacing of the movie could also be a little tighter. There are a few scenes which probably should be been DVD extras.

The strong points: A decent cast who all get meaningful things to do. The core messages are good, but perhaps not original. Still, well-done tropes are still enjoyable. The SPX are very good. Most of the suit is practical effects so they look real and there isn't CGI overload.

This is definitely an "upper tier" DC superhero movie. I hope they make a sequel.

Every now and then shows get brave and do "a musical show" when it doesn't make sense in the normal setting. But when it works it's great. Buffy and Xena famously had musical episodes that are fan favorites to this very day.

Strange New Worlds took that chance and it worked. It might be a bit too soon but still worked. The best musical shows use the songs to both showcase the talent cast (which SNW has, fortunately) but also deal with topics that might otherwise be drawn-out, or just too distracting to deal with traditionally. SNW's topics are perhaps a little weak, but it is able to deal with three different threads in one episode. This will, hopefully, allow the stories to progress to other interesting topics without bogging down on those three relationship issues.

With two "stunt" shows in a row, I hope the show can settle down and do some standard episodes. The two we've had have been great, but it's time to steady the course and get back to basics.

Episode 2.1 was a fine episode, but a poor season opener following a cliffhanger. This episode deals with the Season 1 cliffhanger and should have been episode 2.1, not 2.2. I don't understand the reason they swapped the two episodes. Perhaps production issues?

Maybe when the season is over they can reorder them for future watchers.

As for the episode itself, it's very strong. As always, Star Trek is at its best when it views real issues through a sci-fi lens. Doing so can remove bias an hypocrisy and expose the core of the issue. This episode it up there with the best of them, including TNG's The Drumhead, which is also a trial-based episode form which this episode borrows heavily. This is not a complaint. In fact, I see this an an homage to that great episode.

Guest actor Yetide Badaki is particularly strong as the defense attorney. I think it was a smart decision to use a guest actor rather than the show's captain (like TNG did).

This movie has no idea what it wants to be. Is this a kids move? It's it for older kids? Is it for adults? Rated G? Rated PG-13? Who is this movie for?

The answer is: NO ONE.

This is a bad kids movie.

This is a bad older kids movie.

This is a bad movie for adults.

It's a bad movie is you're a conservative who doesn't like diversity casting just for the sake of diversity casting. Because they do that, very obviously.

It's a also bad movie is you're a liberal who likes diversity casting because they gave all of them just a few token lines and not much more. The only casting I found interesting was the Down's Syndrome actor, but as with the rest, he wasn't given much interesting to do.

Sometimes the movie tries to be silly and goofy. Other times is shows people getting eaten, impaled, or falling to their death. Make up your mind. It also tries to lean into the "growing up" metaphor but it fails at that, too.

This movie also WASTES Alan Tudyk and Jim Gaffigan. Why have two extremely talented and funny actors and do NOTHING with them?

Jude Law is okay as Hook, but doesn't elevate the material or character in any way (perhaps an impossible task).

"Wendy" is also fine. She's not the problem. The real problem is Peter Pan himself. He is written, and acted, as a non-sympathetic character. You just do don't really like him. He is not boyish or charming, or even interesting. The best parts of the movie are the ones without him. I don't blame the young actor, I blame the writer and director.

Take a hard pass on this one. Stick with the original, warts and all.

If you like Phineas and Ferb you'll probably like this show. It's smart and musical at times. It's a great show for the whole family, too. The 12 and 20 year old both loved it in addition to the younger ones.

The show is fast paced, and the easy to consume. Each episode (except the first one) is actually two shows, like the old Looney Toons cartoons. You binge, or not, and it works both ways. Even though the stories are short they still feel completed. Short also means NO FILLER and I can really appreciate that.

The premise of the show leaves a lot of room for all kinds of stories, too. There is a "to do" list of things that have to happen, so anything it possible and the show should be able to stay fresh. I am excited for what they can do.

The best part about NSW is that it felt like "old trek." This episode felt like the bad Trek from Discovery and Picard Season 2. Hopefully this trend doesn't continue.

Had this been episode #2 or later there would be far fewer disappointed people. I don't understand why this episode had to be the very first episode. Maybe the space dock aspect, but really, you could have done something else.

You can't have a cliff hanger at the end of Season 1 and then barely acknowledge it in Season 2. Also, why sideline your main character for the all but the teaser? He doesn't even show up in a bookend scene.

Also, as much as I like Chapel and M'Benga, they are not action characters. We didn't need them on a ninja mission with fight scenes that went a little too long.

I hope we can return to the "old trek" feelings that Season 1 had.

Remember space? Star Trek usually happens in space. Remember smart people? Star Trek usually has smart people. This episode has neither. Instead we get characters we don't care about doing things we don't understand. Remember Seven of Nine? I am not sure she has any lines in this episode. Remember Dr. Jurarti? Apparently the rest of the characters don't. She walks away and no one notices.

This episode exists just to stretch the season to 10 episodes. As much as I enjoy seeing. Few familiar faces I wish the writers have them something interesting to do.

Also, Baltar seems to have gotten lost and wondered into the wrong show.

You can watch this movie as a "serial killer on social media" movie, which it is, and at that level it's a grade B or C slasher movie. But there's a second layer that's more critical of the medium. On that level it's a much better movie. Read all of the comments and text that scroll by very fast. This is where much of the story telling an commentary appear. What might just be satire is sadly a fairly accurate representation of how our society would likely react. The power that these sites have to incubate, sustain, and grow truly vile attitudes is both sad and disheartening. This movie offers no answers but does shine a light on the toxicity that lives just below the surface.

DC movies have the amazing ability to perfectly cast actors into roles and the squander them. The failure of this movie lies squarely on the writing which relies heavily on Superhero tropes. You can feel the bolted-on attempts to add humor and "depth" to characters, but they stand out compared to the typical "DC superhero" movie template we've come to expect.

There are some bright spots. Pierce Brosnan's Doctor Fate character is the main highlight of this movie. Both the actor and the character bring a welcome integrity and charm to the movie.

Dwayne Johnson is also fine as Black Adam, but he doesn't bring much more than he does to any of his other roles. There is a depth and conflict to this character that could have added some humanity and pathos to the movie. No one else in this movie is really worth noting.

The main negative DC/Superhero trope is the meaningless action. This happen but have no consequences. Characters smash and throw and blow things up, but it's all disposable and has no bearing on the story.

I am glad DC is trying to reboot with James Gunn since things need to change.

This movie has has an average review of 7.6, but if you look at the written reviews you will see mostly negative reviews from 1 to 5 stars. What does this mean? Review bombing. I.e. You can't trust them. A small but vocal minority doesn't like (1) Rian Johnson and/or (2) black actresses in lead roles, so they write 1/10 reviews, which is ridiculous.

As for the movie itself, I very much enjoyed it. Is it better than the first? I don't know, and it doesn't matter, because they are different movies. This isn't a sequel, just a different story. Are all Bond movies the same? Are all Poirot stories the same? No, they are different and each has strengths and weaknesses, and they do not always follow the same template.

Glass Onion takes a great cast and gives them all something meaningful to do. As with all the great murder mysteries of old, we spend lots of time with the large cast of characters so learn along with the protagonist.

Also, as the title suggests, there are more layers to this story than may be obvious. Anyone to claims the beginning "was boring" is missing those layers, as there are set ups and payoffs. Lots of literal and figurative "Chekhov's guns" being placed. The story-telling style itself is also foreshadowed cleverly. All the "bored" reviewers missed those details.

Watch this movie actively. Don't be on your phone, don't be doing other things.

I really love this show! It's hard to top Christina Ricci as Wednesday Addams but Jenna Ortega is amazing! She really nails Wednesday and she could carry this show all on her own. Fortunately, she doesn't have to because the rest of the cast is also great. Emma Myers is sure to be a breakout star from this show. Not since Willow in the original Buffy has there been such a wonderful "sidekick." Gwendoline Christie, Riki Lindhome, Joy Sunday, and Christina Ricci herself really make this show work as well.

The writing and pacing of this show are perfect, too. Everything moves along at a brisk pace and you never want to stop watching. I really hope there is a season 2! Make it happen Netflix! You've struck gold with this show!

I am not sure what this is... A short movie? A single episode of an anthology series? Whatever it is, we need more of it. Continue the story or tell more stories in this manner from this universe. If this was an experiment then it worked, so please make more.

As for the show itself, it's for older kids since it can get gory, but since it's in black and white the gore is muted (in a good way). It's made in the style of the old black and white movies, but it has many modern qualities and well, so it doesn't feel old. It's an interesting balance and I think it worked. It's also not 100% black and white, and you'll just have to watch to see what that means.

The Orville continues to out Trek Trek, and now it out Star Wars Star Wars. This episodes was amazing and takes Sci Fi to a new level. These longer episodes bridge the gap between TV episodes and movies. There are no "filler episodes" in this season as well. Do things move quickly? Yes, but for the better. There's no need to waste time going through the motions. We don't need to see the chess pieces being set up. This episode in particular has more plot in it than a half season of TNG (and I love TNG). I really hope there is a fourth season.

Part of the plot is that Monk spoils the secret of Santa Claus. If you have children who believe in Santa then do not watch with them.

Part of the plot is that Monk spoils the secret of Santa Claus. If you have children who believe in Santa then do not watch with them.

Part of the plot is that Monk spoils the secret of Santa Claus. If you have children who believe in Santa then do not watch with them.

Did like like "The Boys" or "Watchmen", but wish they had a really small budget and bad acting? If so then maybe you'll like this show. Otherwise, you'll just be wondering how this show ever got made.

Some claim this show is satire. I don't think so. Making a terrible version of something is not satire.

Jay seems bored. I don't know why Kevin Eubanks is there. The questions are super easy and the contestants are just randos off the street. They don't even try to be funny.

I never saw the original show but it had to be better than this. Supposedly you can win prizes by just watching, but I was only able to earn 10 points from one show. It takes 1000 points to win a hat. At this rate it will take 100 shows to win a hat. Will this show even make 100 episodes?

We all know Amaury Guichon is very talented, as he work speaks for itself. But would he be a good host and judge, and would the show itself be compelling? For me the answer is Yes to both. The show, like the British Bakeoff, stresses friendly competition. The contestants (so far) just want to do their best and there isn't any cutthroat style activity. Likewise, Amaury stresses teaching over cruelty. Mistakes happen and we should learn from them. Amaury's teaching background shows and he wants everyone to learn, grow, and do their best. His critiques are honest and direct, but never cruel or badgering. The honesty may sting, but it's the kind of honesty people need to hear.

There are some dumb but funny moments in this movie. It's satire and you can tell a lot of effort was put into the jokes. Some land and others don't. It's well made decently acted (for a parody). Some of the jokes are crude and juvenile but that's part of the fun. Relax, have fun, and enjoy it does what it is.

All of the Home Alone sequels after 2 have been pointless. This is the first sequel to try to do something interesting. While not a great movie there is an honest attempt here. This movie is aimed at kids who liked the first movie. Adult fans of the first movie will not "rediscover the magic" though, but they may enjoy watching it with their 8-11 year old kids.

Definitely worth watching if you have access to the streaming service already, but not worth going out of your way to see.

This movie suffers from very bad writing. They couldn't make the monster interesting, so they made the characters stupid. One character in particular, really. If the writers needed something bad to happen they just made this character do something really stupid. Honestly, the monster was the least of their problems.

A great cast and fun for the kids 6-10. Surprisingly, the CGI holds up okay in 2021. We watched it on a whim and were pleasantly surprised. My son wants to tell his friends to watch it.

A Mortal Kombat movie can't score higher than a 7, so this was a good as it gets. The fighting is good. The deaths are gory. The Kombat is Mortal. If you're hoping for more than you'll be disappointed, but really, what more do you want? It's gory and cheesy, but it's well-made core and cheese.

Lewis Tan is good as a new character. You may remember him as the ONLY GOOD THING in the Iron Fist show. Josh Lawson is also great as Kano. Jessica McNamee is a little weak compared to the others, but she doesn't ruin the movie or anything. The CGI for Goro was also subpar for 2021. The rest of the characters are all perfectly fine.

If you're looking for a fun and bloody time, this is the movie for you.