Reviews

The 2018 reboot of Halloween was absolutely wonderful, and personally, I found its sequel Halloween Kills to be even more fun to watch (despite popular opinion, but that's what I'm known for). I went into Halloween Ends with the same energy, hoping that it would add some spice and lean a bit more into the supernatural, telling us more about Michael / The Shape before concluding with its demise, but oh, the tragedy. The film spins off an adds a new character, Corey, who becomes the focal point of the movie more than the death-defying horror that is Michael Myers. This new storyline doesn't fit with the rest of the series, and only serves as cushioning on a film that doesn't really seem to go anywhere - the kills are sub-par, the threat is nearly nonexistent, and the suspense and angst of waiting for Michael to rip another soul from the world is completely gone. Halloween Ends is a film almost entirely devoid of horror, and plays out more like a cheap action / thriller flick that barely keeps your attention.

It's a shame that the legendary series had to endure a fate like this, taking our beloved Scream Queen with it. Pass on this, and instead pretend that the Halloween reboot was just a duology instead of a trilogy.

I have to admit, I was taken aback a bit when reading the not-so-favourable reviews for Black Adam, as I thought it was actually a fun romp through one of DC's less explored superheroes. I'd never heard of Teth Adam before, and this introduction to both the titular super / anti-hero and the JSA (Justice Society of America) was a great way to get my feet wet. It's not often we get to see anti-heroes appearing in comic book films and shows, and I certainly find myself preferring them over standard heroes, what with their monotonous code of honour preventing them from taking a life. Watching Teth Adam essentially "waste" tons of people standing between himself and his objective is very entertaining, with The Rock delivering on a very interesting character who's origin story is detailed quite well (given that we've seen reboots of popular heroes nearly every week, *cough* Spider-Man and Batman). Sure, there's definitely room for improvement as the film's visual quality is focused on more than the script, and certain supporting characters either do very little to support the film or in some cases, detract from the performances of other, very talented members.

It's a great film to watch for some comic book fun, and it's certainly pleasing to the eye (and ear, thanks to Lorne Balfe), but don't look too far into it - the substance you're searching for won't be there.

I was completely floored by Brendan Fraser's performance as Charlie, a staggeringly obese man on the brink of life. The Whale is mainly about a man going through various stages of acceptance as he realises his life is coming to a close, but we get to see how this man chooses to spend his last days, pushing through some close calls all the while. Fraser's Charlie is both a sad-yet-understandable man who struggles with his mistakes, but also a violently disgusting depiction of the way people can let themselves go. Watching various circumstances giving us glimpses into Charlie's life before his current state gives us an idea of what he was like, what he went through and how he coped with the issues and struggles he was confronted with, but also shows us the fickle sense of mortality that we cling desperately to. It's a fantastic film that's led by Fraser's tear-inducing performance and supported wonderfully by the likes of Hong Chau and Ty Simpkins (as well as Sadie Sink).

We had legends like Rush and Ford v. Ferrari, but this is a genuine letdown of a film. It focuses too much on "the man", and Ferrucio Lamborghini's early life is plagued with such trivial drama and consequences that it makes him seem like someone of minute importance, when really he was one of the most influential engineers of his time. What's worse, half the film's runtime is focused on the invention of Lamborghini's first tractor, which while important and critical by all means to the start and success of his brand, severely undermines his later efforts to quite literally reinvent the wheel and send automobiles into the fast and furious future.

This film is more of a "humble-rags-to-snobby-riches" series of events than the real story of the legendary man himself, so I'd steer clear of this one (even though it does hurt to see the insanely small amount of racing and automotive-related films we fans get to see nowadays).

I absolutely love horror stories that have their grimy, flesh-covered roots in reality and true events, so Lore was an obvious "must-watch" for me. After watching both seasons (the show was not renewed after Season 2), I can honestly say that Season 1 of Lore is fantastic, but Season 2 falls flat quite rapidly and makes you lose faith in the series.

I'd never listened to Aaron Mahnke's podcast before, so I went into the Amazon Original with fresh eyes (and ears) only to be taken aback by the very high quality of the six episodes in Season 1. Each episode covers a unique tale from worldwide folklore that has somehow infiltrated society to instill a tremendous amount of fear into mankind. From bloodthirsty werewolves to murderous dolls, the show does a fantastic job of presenting fictional content in a realistic and engaging way not simply to tell yet another tall tale, but to provide viewers with authentic history regarding events that actually happened, blurring the line between reality and the supernatural. It's quite fascinating and, in my opinion, is able to hit harder than it's horror-movie-counterparts.

However, unfortunately, the Season 1 is the start and the end of the show - Season 2 removes Aaron's helpful narration, leaving the show to become a series of episodes that are short horror films by themselves. The context is lost the real-world tie in disappears, taking the best part of the horror out of the show. But the episodes aren't without benefits; they are beautifully produced and have some strong moments, but can't hold up to the expectations that Season 1 set.

Overall, Lore is a great show that dives into the folklore and myths that mankind has invented, and is definitely worth a watch (at least for the first season).

I remember the first time I heard someone tell me about Aquaman. My initial question was: "is he related to SpongeBob?" I've grown up since then and do not associate Aquaman with the Krabby Patty generator, but also don't associate it with great films.

"Aquaman" is a good film for a lot of reasons, but there are a few that prevent it from being a great film. While the plot is good and allows for Jason Momoa's Arthur Curry to evolve and mature, the film struggles to hold two important villains up throughout its runtime. Bringing Black Manta and Ocean Master was not a great idea as these influential villains don't get time to develop and for us to make bonds with them. Black Manta's origin story takes about six minutes and despite the emotional weight it carries, fails to deliver and leaves you saying "dafuh?". Ocean Master is treated even worse, with his character having no time to develop at all. A split second transition turns Arthur's brother from spraytan-to-mailman and we're once again left saying "dafuh?". It doesn't help that the dialogue tends to be shallow for the most part, cheesy one-liners and cringey jokes being a part of Arthur's arsenal.

"Aquaman" is a decent film (especially great that it finally brings Aquaman to the big screen), but its shortcomings make it hard to like and leave us needing more to fill those gaps. It's definitely a cheesy movie and can give you more than a few laughs, but it takes on more than it can handle and falls apart quick.

This film has cemented Zach Snyder as one of my favourite directors of all time. The rallying of cast and viewers to get his version released and the way he presented the content made this film feel more like an experience than anything else. "Zach Snyder's Justice League" is hands-down one of the best films I've seen, and doubly so for all comic book movies.

ZSJL continues the events that occurred in "Batman v. Superman - Dawn of Justice" and contains the same dark, gritty mood that Snyder brought to the DCEU. The film's enormous four-hour runtime gives all the Justice League characters introduced time to develop and for us viewers to forge that attachment to them, and it benefits the film in so many great ways. The Flash, Cyborg, Aquaman and even the Martian Manhunter get a spotlight on them with enough time to explore who these characters are and why they're here (though it's mostly just pulling clues from "Man of Steel" and "Dawn of Justice" for the Martian Manhunter). The flashbacks of Cyborg, for example, weave a horrific and cruel origin for the superhero, and that puts you through your paces. You feel a genuine attachment for the character and Ray Fisher brings that out every step of the way.

But even though ZSJL is a fantastic film, there are tradeoffs that drew it away from the gold star. The biggest blow (to me) was definitely Hans Zimmer not returning to compose the soundtrack. Junkie XL (co-composer on "Dawn of Justice") takes the reigns for ZSJL and while he does a great job with the score, the beauty of Zimmer's music leaves a hole no one can fill. But, the lowered budget from the sound department went straight to the effects department - and man, did those people raise the bar. The visuals in ZSJL are absolutely stunning; I love explosions as much as any other guy, but taking the superheroes themselves to another level made the film feel ferocious and very fun. Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman is really the focus of that statement - Patty Jenkins' "Wonder Woman" felt like it compensated action with slow-motion, and that made Diana feel clunky and not as agile and powerful as she is. In ZSJL, she looks ultra-smooth and you can feel the wind on your face as she dashes in and out of combat. And honestly, the visuals aren't just for Diana - all the action looks spectacular, as is the usual with Snyder's blockbusters.

I'll never forget the day I watched a 4:3 film about a bunch of guys in spandex fighting a minotaur for four hours, and that's a good thing. ZSJL is worth all four hours and is definitely the kind of superhero movie we need - enough with the feel-good Marvel movies and their kid-friendly undertones. Give us some bloodshed Batman!

Let me make one thing clear: I absolutely LOVE musicals. They bring such a wonderful, family-friendly format to the big screen that allows them to be enjoyed by everyone, and when done right, the musical pieces and the narrative can blend together to make a fantastic film. However, "Pitch Perfect" doesn't get there.

"Pitch Perfect" starts off with a weak narrative that doesn't develop throughout the film and almost disappears entirely towards the end. The story doesn't have any depth and only serves to set the stage for the musical pieces, an aspect of the film I thought were fantastic. Wihle that helps the music, it doesn't help the story and ultimately, you're left wondering what the purpose of the film was.

However, the casting of the diverse characters and the musical numbers manage to make "Pitch Perfect" fun when they take center stage. The songs carve out a spot in the story and are well-justified (unlike something like High School Musical, where everyone just breaks into song and dance), and that keeps the viewer somewhat embedded in the film as there isn't much suspension of belief.

If you like musicals without question, you'll definitely enjoy this film. If you're looking for a story, you won't find one. I certainly hope the sequels are better and develop the story and characters further, but maybe the point is just to watch two hours of college kids singing and dancing and not care about anything else.

Hot off the heels of "Suicide Squad" (which left me unbearably bored), "Wonder Woman" picks up where "Batman v. Superman - Dawn of Justice" ended, the film an origin story of Gal Gadot's Diana of Themyscira. I found the setup to be entertaining as the entire film is just a flashback (with flashbacks in the flashback), but it was decent nonetheless.

"Wonder Woman" is a female-directed and female-led film about a female superhero, so it definitely brings a strong new energy with it and helps fill the superhero film franchise with some much needed diversity. However, the entire film feels slow and sluggish, with the focus on Diana and Steve's relationship taking center stage over the overarching threat of Ares. "Wonder Woman", at most times, feels like a drama rather than a comic book movie, resulting in the action sequences feeling very staged and out of place. However, credit where it's due - Patty Jenkins did a wonderful job of directing the film and it certainly feels like it belongs in the DCEU, but doesn't really match the pace that "Man of Steel" and the awe-inspiring "Batman v. Superman - Dawn of Justice" set.

"Wonder Woman" is a good film, bringing some much needed values to not only the DCEU but comic book movies as a whole, but it doesn't make a lasting impact on the franchise and leaves much more to desired.

I held off watching The Expanse as long as humanly possible due to my fear of it being yet another space soap opera. However, even before Amazon picked up the show, I was taken aback by the premise of the show and how it delivered the story in a meaningful way. I'll break down the show by seasons to provide the best overview possible:

Season 1 The first season presents this intriguing story about civilian life, now present on Earth, the Moon, Mars and The Belt (an asteroid belt close to the Kuiper Belt). At first, I was worried that this show was sci-fi just in the setting alone, but the brilliance of the first season shows the dedication of the cast and crew as they stuck closely to James S. A. Corey's novels and chose to dive deeper into the characters before addressing the main event of future seasons to come. From the pilot onwards, the show brings us a lovable cast that are written as true humans, with their problems and history impacting the decisions they make (and will make), and sets the scene for the real reason we're here.

Season 2 The second season dives straight into the action, bringing a slew of new characters that come from different paths on a collision course with our main characters. Some of those collisions are beneficial, but some are not, and the overarching threat is minimized to the background with balance as moments are taken to continue developing the characters by focusing on the little moments and large scale fights (a favourite of Amos). As we watch our heroes navigate death and destruction on a massive scale to save those they can, our hearts continue to beat for those characters, even harder towards the end of the season.

Season 3 The third season starts and ends with a bang louder than a fragmentation grenade, the hefty middle suffers from a strong push on politics. The larger threat and character development still continue, but not as strong as before - politics enters the fray in full form and take the center seat, putting hours of scheming and bureaucracy above the action and science. While this season helps provide a lot of support for certain characters and helps pad development out for all characters, it can be a tough pill to swallow. But make no mistake - when the politics are pushed aside for action, the ways the show continues to expand on its dangers proves breathtaking and highly immersive (I burned through two seasons in a day).

Season 4 The limits of what the Roci's crew can take is tested, so much more when the little things pose a higher risk than the larger threat. As our crew moves through the hoops, the focus is on them and the other wonderful people involved, continuing to expand on their lives as they explore what it means to be human. With the heavy focus on politics in season three, this season takes it back a notch and provides a great balance of watching planets squabble and ships fire torpedoes on each other. But the larger threat hasn't gone away, and it continues to expand in ways we could never imagine, bringing with it difficult and sensitive choices that can impact more than just the Roci.

Season 5 This season brings back the politics, but shows a side that made me lose hope. The Roci's crew takes time to explore their past and we continue to discover more about who they used to be, not just who they are now. While this is a fantastic and much-needed dive, we also begin to see the desire to keep characters in play, despite them having overstayed their welcome. Sacrifices you expect to see made are never enacted; people you expect to die continue to draw breath; the things you expected people to understand and adapt to vaporize in front of your eyes. It becomes difficult to respect and enjoy the show when characters past their expiration date continue to be present, breaking all attachments and immersion.

Season 6 (In Progress) This season isn't complete yet, so this review isn't either. But as of episode five, the politics continue to take center stage and the faults of season five haven't yet been remedied. Going into this after season five's flat nature makes it difficult to reconnect to the story and the characters, but I certainly hope we begin to see more of the larger threat and what it could now be capable of.

The Expanse is definitely a show that takes science fiction seriously, and its adherance to the source material proves it's a much better experience than a lot of films and programmes out there today. The level of depth to the characters and the dedication to the setting makes this a very enjoyable show that's great for binging.

Even though it was hyped up pretty well, Suicide Squad unfortunately flops around like a fish out of water from start to finish. I came to this film straight from Batman v. Superman - Dawn of Justice, and I loved the dark, gritty energy ever so kindly provided by Zach Snyder, but not even my MCU watching spree could have prepared me for a terrible comic book movie.

The problems (definitely plural) don't make themselves known at the start of Suicide Squad, but as you progress through the film you start to see the wallpaper unravel and give way to the moldy concrete beneath. The actual Suicide Squad (from DC) is made up of incredible villains, and David Ayer's screenplay seems to forget that these characters have been developed for decades, their backstories and actions in life fleshed out to the maximum. A few of the characters (Deadshot, Harley, El Diablo) get a snippet of their former lives shown on screen, but the others are ignored (with just a few lines of dialogue to patch together years of character development). This makes it difficult for viewers not familiar with the comic book source material to actually forge connections with most of the characters on screen. With shoddy dialogue plaguing the entire film, filler action sequences with little to energy and a soundtrack built almost completely of licensed music, enjoying the film becomes a possibility only in your imagination.

The real issue with Suicide Squad is that it doesn't bring any energy to the big screen. Dawn of Justice, Man of Steel, the Nolan Batman Trilogy - hell, even the animated movies like Batman: The Long Halloween - all radiate purpose and a genuine story. But Ayer's film has the squad go from Point A to Point D, attempting to lure the viewer using forced emotional sequences that have the opposite effect and leave a terrible aftertaste. Add characters not actually dying and magically surviving (what should be) mortal wounds to the mix and you get a film that can't find its place.

The feel-good ending, partially complete characters and a narrative that could be easily transformed into one paragraph make Suicide Squad a really difficult film to watch. As a DC fan, I was able to stomach the movie until the post-credits scene - but would never recommend this to anyone.

I've come to realize that I'm a very emphatic Snyder supporter, and Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice has allowed me to understand why. While the Nolan trilogy (and The Dark Knight especially) will always be Batman and his universe to me, Snyder's take on the DCEU proves to be so incredible I can't help but question myself.

It all begins with Kal-El from Man of Steel. When Superman first landed on Earth, he didn't just bring the dawn of a new age with him - he brought something bigger: a universe containing others just like him, varying in style and method. Man of Steel brought the DCEU to fruition, and Dawn of Justice has solidified its place as the best of the two cinematic universes (MCU being the other).

I've been dulled over time to superheroes and their antics because of Marvel cinema - the hero always wins, learns a lesson, and the world is a better place for it. With Man of Steel, I saw something dark, and Snyder brings that same energy to his second film in the DCEU. Dawn of Justice is no family film - it is a violent depiction of superhumans and gods fighting monsters in a world that is not their own. The absolutely mesmerizing visuals and ruthlessly violent action push the envelope for what we've come to know in this genre of cinema and this is the direction I'd always hoped for.

Even though I love this film, it still had issues. The biggest, and absolute worst, has to be the casting of Ben Affleck as Batman. Christian Bale set the bar far too high, and Affleck can't step up to the plate. His performance brings down Cavill and Gadot's characters, and at times you wonder if this is even Batman at all or just a guy in hockey pads. Affleck aside, there are certainly blatantly dumb remarks made by characters and fillers in the plot that can yank you out of the movie and ruin it, serving no other purpose than to make up time.

But I cannot conclude this without speaking of the most incredible aspect of the film - the music. Hans Zimmer and Junkie XL created arguably the best cinematic score in history, the dark and terrifying vocals and undertones adding a level of fear into the film that couldn't be shown with any other form of cinematic expression. Bringing in parts of the score from Man of Steel and (the upcoming) Woman Woman films was a fantastic touch that made certain moments of the film feel like a true sequel, picking up where Man of Steel left off.

I know, at lot of the narrative's problems aren't easy to ignore, but this film brings a very unique energy with it that isn't easy to find in films these days, especially for a comic book movie. The visuals are amazing, the soundtrack is incredible, and over half the time, the performances and story hold up pretty well. I gave it a nine because of my desire to see Batman and Superman fight it out in a gritty universe, but it definitely doesn't deserve lower than a seven.

I love Spiderman along with millions of others, and I was just as thrilled when I first heard there was going to be a movie about my favourite web-crawler. Years later, after having watched it multiple times, I can honestly say this is a fantastic movie worth watching.

Spider-Man is such a well-put-together film, despite the many forks and loops in the comic universe from where the source material comes from. Sam Raimi expertly covers an ample amount of Peter's life, his origin and paints an emotional picture of an average kid who's life begins to change. The computer graphics still hold up very well and the thrill of Peter putting on the suit and swinging from building to building is always as exciting as the first time watching. Additionally, Raimi made a smart choice to use the Green Goblin as the antagonist - using Osborn to weave Peter's personal and superhero lives together was Raimi's trick in proving that a comic book movie can be just as heartbreaking as a drama. And of course, I can't forget Danny Elfman's fantastic score, the theme something we all still hum every now and then to ourselves.

I loved Raimi's take on Spiderman and loved Tobey Maguire's portrayal of the web-slinger, and now that we've gotten to see three versions of Peter's origin and life, I can genuinely say Raimi hit the nail on the head perfectly. Is this the best Spiderman movie? Not quite - but it's a part of the best trilogy for certain.

Every time someone says "western", this one idiotic voice at the back of my head screams "Clint Eastwood!". Unfortunately, this voice also happens to be really loud, so it's hard to find something to maybe shove that voice away in a small box forever. And just as I was thinking that exact series of thoughts, this film showed up and I was persuaded to watch the glorious western shoot-'em-up presented before me.

I watched it, and I'm happy to report the cretin from before has been vanquished.

Incredibly useless prelude aside, The Harder They Fall is a classic vengeance story, but with a focus on black cowboys (and cowgirls) in a seriously gritty manner. It doesn't present some deep backstory with oodles of character development - but it doesn't have to, since that's not the point. Instead, you get some great gunfights, a very remarkable score and some of the best acting and dialogue you can find in an action film. It's the Nat Love Gang against the Rufus Buck Gang and as they butt heads, you can feel the wind-up insults hit as hard as those six-shooter rounds.

Even though it's an average run-of-the-mill story, the film brings with the charm of a top-tier cast, excellent visuals (with equally excellent presentation), a - quite frankly - banging soundtrack and some snappy dialogue to create a really fun western experience. Plus it's claimed to based on real characters (but represented in fictional events), which is even more awesome.

I certainly don't need to convince you to watch Venom: Let There Be Carnage because you're going to - I'm here to tell you why it's good, and attempt to sway you into accepting my opinion as fact.

This film is so much of a rollercoaster (and not in a emotional-drama way) I didn't realize I'd watched the entire movie - the end credits rolled along in an orderly fashion and all I could mutter was "there has to be moar". My only issue with this film is its runtime - I need to see more fights.

Let There Be Carnage continues where Venom left off, and it's a great start to an already notorious anti-hero. The best part, however, is it continues this path while keeping in mind our social values and expectations need to be addressed to truly hit the best note. Venom begins to get a personality (aside from a lousy pun-cracking monster) and explores himself and who he is in the context of Earth and humanity. As Venom acquires these desires, they get in the way of Eddie's goals and this strife allows for both characters to evolve and develop in their own ways. As always, our hero will come out on top and the same goes for Venom and Eddie, though this time around they have a stronger relationship that's built on more than just power and an semi-obligation to protect the world from "eevil".

I take that back - no, not the good stuff about the movie but the thing where I said "something something one thing I didn't like"; I've actually got two. Twined together with the runtime is the actual narrative and character development, which took a slight beating from only getting an hour and thirty-odd minutes to go from zero-to-antihero. We only see a snippet of Venom's development and Eddie's outlook on the world becoming more aligned with his goals, and that's not enough to really flesh these guys out. If only this were at least two hours long and R-rated - that'd be the cherry on top of the cherry, which also happens to be on top of another cherry.

I came across this film when I, suddenly and out of nowhere (I promise), began to stalk Dan Stevens' acting career one fine morning. I was pleasantly surprised to find a German film in the mix and decided to check it out. The premise seemed too similar to countless films for me, so I went in expecting a half-decent drama with a strong lead and iffy supporting cast members; when I came out the other end of the tunnel, the light grew bright and I saw something I'd only ever heard of in dreams - character depth and development.

For its backdrop, the film doesn't touch very keenly on the tech-y aspect of things - it's more about the drama than the science. And in this drama, the focus is on the relationship between Alma and Tom, quivering in the air so delicately. The film explores a much more interesting approach to the human-android social experiment scenario by diving deeper into that relationship and exploring the labyrinth of human social concepts. Alma knows that Tom is designed to fulfill her every need, but she needs more organic behaviour that feels human in the most visceral scense. Aside from exploring the development of a relationship that forces us to debate whether the satisfaction from conquering desires or the desire for authentic human interaction prevail, it explores another interesting theme on a more macro level - what would it be like to have advanced technology, such as Tom, available for consumer/individual use? It's an interesting future concept that roots itself in our current capabilities and extends it by some time into the predicted and makes you ask that question and wonder about future societal norms.

I'm Your Man is a really wonderful film to watch and enjoy on a multi-tiered level that can cater to everyone. It can be both a drama and an intellectual film, and that level of brain stimulation should not be ignored (lest you suffer the consequences of your rampant noodle).

I've always been entertained by Jake Gyllenhall's films as they often sport a unique facet to them that helps drive more impact out of his character. The Guilty is just another film in Gyllenhall's track sheet, and in this one he manages to keep me hooked for the film's runtime.

Even though it seems like a low-budget film, The Guilty manages to make its singular setting work with the only character on screen being Gyllenhall's - that's a tall order for him to meet and yet he handles it so well it's captivating. With Antoine Fuqua at the helm of this project, you can bet there will be strong messages and a deep narrative, and you'd be right - the main stage of the film is underlied by a coating of political awareness, mimicking the current state of our world. But Fuqua's layering does more than embed social context into the film - it embraces it to drive home a much harder point, one that truly strikes the heart. How do you trust someone who took and saved a life?

Even though the pacing can be rough, remember this film's a slow burn, but once the action starts rolling, tensions run very high. It's an interesting film with great subcontext, and delivers its material in an original and effective way.

Now this is a hot take opinion right here, most definitely. 7 stars for this movie? You lose some brain cells? Well when I started watching this movie, I definitely sided with the majority of people. But something magical, and full of wonder happened: 30 minutes into the film, something clicked - something happened in the scene and I began to look at the film in a completely different light.

And it was at this point that he knew - this was a good movie.

I know to a lot of people, this movie seems awfully serious with some comedy thrown in, but it's the opposite for me - all I see is a ragdoll stitched together with duct tape and patches of fabric with pop culture references. From the way the infected look like the Predator to the hilariously terrible CGI, I realized that this is just a meta movie about a boiler-plate infection that weaves so much humour into the way it's designed. On top of that, the cast and dialogue is so terrible it's enjoyable - stereotypical characters with dumb dialogue and predictable emotions lead to stale scenes that harken back to older horror movies and their uncomfortable silences and awkward moments. Granted, there are scenes where the movie does take itself seriously, though not too much to throw off the meta vibes.

This was definitely an odd film for me to watch, but I'll definitely make this a keeper for how it turned out. Bruce Campbell definitely drives the film and manages to bring a new energy to it that helps reinforce this parody concept. Give it a try and look at if from my perspective than what the tags define it as, and you might like it.

My campaign to finish the MCU and get up-to-date has been a long and painful journey, Marvel's Black Widow not making it any easier along the way. We've encountered some pretty bad Marvel movies, but I think Black Widow definitely ranks among the top three for Most Disfigured Donut.

It's not like I can point a finger and say "that's the problem, right there officer" - there are a multitude of issues that plague this film and make it a difficult one to watch (and later to recommend). While the core narrative is decent and invents unique challenges for the cast, the editing and dialogue feels very shallow and low quality. A lot of the CGI for this film looks shockingly poor, and with action at the center of the Tootsie Pop, Black Widow can't move forward with plastic visuals. What only makes this worse is shoddy writing for the characters - a great cast (most notably Florence Pugh with her catchy demeanor and strong emotional presentation) is reduced to ash with a lack of depth and connectivity. I frequently found myself saying "so what?" to almost every narrative element and decision made by the cast simply because there was nothing for me to latch onto and empathize with what I was seeing. And of course, there's a feel good ending (curse the soul who thought making audiences happy at the end of a movie was a good idea).

The primary handicap for Black Widow is its lack of depth. There are Marvel films that pull you in with their cast and relatability, but this film has none of it. Combine it with poor editing and visuals, and you're left with a film with a fizzling existence. The only thing I can say is Florence Pugh's back must hurt from carrying this film, and the post-credits scene does some absolutely fantastic foreshadowing.

There are only a small handful of superheroes I like, and it's not because they have muscles the size of buildings or outlandish superpowers - it's because they are self-made heroes, ones that are just as much human as you and I. And in that pool falls a man with the incredible mental capacity to create a suit of armor that he can use to protect the people of his city (and eventually, the universe).

Iron Man is an extremely interesting hero because of that reason - he isn't limited by his powers and can continue to iterate on his creation and make it better to combat his enemies. He doesn't have a single source of weakness (cough cough Kryptonite), but is human like the rest of us and has people he cares about. But ultimately, Iron Man shines where the rest don't by placing an enigmatic Tony Stark into a situation he can't charm his way out of - the way Stark develops as a character (and all the praises for Downey's incredible depiction of him) forces him to evaluate himself and find a way to adapt and innovate, just like his father. With Jeff Bridges bringing up the evil, the Iron Monger is yet another spectacular addition to the film - Tony found a way to survive earlier, but now he has to find a way to destroy the very thing he created, to exploit his own weakness and find a way to learn from it. These elements come together and paint a beautiful picture of loneliness, self-development and the capacity for any man to be more than what he is.

While I'm not a huge fan of Iron Man (the lacklustre villains really get me here, aside from Iron Monger), I certainly appreciate this film and love what it does with the superhero genre. Similar tones from Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy are present in Iron Man, and they certainly raise the bar for what a superhero film can be.

As I recently binged the hell out of the MCU, I wanted to give the DCEU (DC Extended Universe) the same treatment, starting with Man of Steel. Now in my travels as an avid superhero-movie-watcher, I've come to realize that older superhero films tend to fail at meeting and exceeding expectations due to their focus more on characters and dialogue (though not in a character development way, just to fill screen time) rather than the action and critical stakes at hand. Superhero films need to provide us with a sense of urgency, danger, hope, despair and above all, awe as we watch our protagonist churn through their enemies and come out victorious, even if it is at a cost - this is something Man of Steel does so well, and I think it deserves much more praise than it got.

I desperately clinged on to any hope of the earlier Superman films being interesting and gripping, but was beat to death each step of the way, rendering me unable to continue watching the older films. With Man of Steel, I was gleefully surprised when I watched the trailer a long while ago - it felt gritty and fast, doing justice to our hero himself and his powers. Henry Cavill as Kal-El is the perfect choice, his clean and defined build the ideal platform for Superman (between his chiseled jaw and those bulging muscles, you can't find any reason to disagree here). Though the Christopher Reeves films took a more juvenile, young Kal approach, Man of Steel puts Cavill into a role where Kal-El knows his strength and powers (as much as he is able before discovering his true potential) and is displayed as someone who wants to abide by the words of his adopted father, despite knowing his superhuman nature. This in turn makes for a much more satisfying hero, as the look of just pure disdain and disappointment from Cavill's face as he examines pathetic locks made to chain him provides small moments where you realize Kal-El is truly the future of Kypton, more than simply the Codex being a part of him.

But while we come to Man of Steel for a glimpse at the new take on Superman, we stay for the riveting action. The film doesn't boast strong character development, but provides a solid backstory and wonderfully inspiring action scenes that go to the lengths required to show Superman's true power. Although the film lacks the small, interpersonal moments that would help drive it home further, it manages to provide Kal-El's first crisis, one that puts him as the saviour of humanity, at the forefront and examines our hero as he navigates this newfound responsibility - this isn't just saving a schoolbus of children - this is about saving the human race. And I can't write this review without mentioning Hans Zimmer's incredible score. Zimmer is a legendary composer in his own right, but this soundtrack for this film drives it into a league of its own, supporting the film with a powerful emotional presence that only continues to inspire us all, and for us to place our trust in a man we barely know, a man who will decide the fate of our species.

Ultimately, Man of Steel truly does Superman justice by bringing him back to the big screen under Zack Snyder's umbrella, the action and crisis second only to Kal-El's struggle with both his fathers' teachings and the ideals he knows he must strive to uphold, driving the film home. I've been waiting for Cavill and Snyder to continue the story of Kal-El, but this film breathes new life into an iconic hero that had never seen such an honest realization.

I've been on a horror binge lately and I've opened my eyes to films that don't have hundreds of sequels or have a production date of the Stone Age; that ended up bringing me to His House, a unique film with a low budget that doesn't skimp on any scares and core development.

Exploring new facets of the horror genre is something I wish more filmmakers would embrace, as most films resort to the typical "serial killer gone loose" theme with a slightly different spin that ends up being niche. As Remi Weekes explored Sudanese terrors, I found myself scribbling down yet another mythology that scared me to death (well, at least not yet) - it was something that hadn't been done, and Weekes' risk paid off. A disheartening story with a Sudanese couple seeking refuge in England at the core, the horror develops as the characters do, the scares getting more terrifying as we learn about Bol and Rial, what they've had to endure to get where they are now. But the most interesting aspect of the film is how the horror isn't simply a ghost or a demon - it's something deeper, rooted more in primal human characteristics and development (can't define it without spoiling).

His House doesn't simply through jump scares at you - it's not a cheap thrill. This film is set on a bunsen burner and heats up slowly, the buildup presenting itself as our characters unravel. Most horror films don't have impact, but this one does and it makes you take a closer look and human behaviour and how horror isn't just a tall-tale - it's something we're all capable of.

The first part by Andy Muschietti made me feel emotions I'd never felt before (namely an overwhelming sense of terror), and I'm so thrilled to say It: Chapter Two continues to make me bleed those emotions. Though the general consensus is that the first film did everything better, I couldn't disagree more - both films are equally amazing and part two of the duology brings a satisfying end to the Loser's Club saga.

I loved the teenage Loser's Club, but seeing them as adults brings more depth to the table - everyone has a unique life, most outside Derry (sorry Mike) and have responsibilities other than school. But the casting, oh the casting - James McAvoy and Jessica Chastain sweep the film off its feet and carry it into horror-heaven (obviously God watches movies), complemeting the emboldened presence of Bill Skarsgard, reprising his role as Pennywise the demonic clown. As the (now adult) Loser's Club aims to put It down for good, Chapter Two provides much more depth into the narrative of this demonic alien and what it will take for these lovable rascals to stop the horror from ever returning. Though the members of the club don't have the same bond they did as kids, they reforge something stronger in its place as adults, learning to respect each other and draw out the emotional depth that helps fuel the core narrative further and further. The visual effects come back with a vengeance, providing terrifying new scares and instilling the fear of It within your very soul (if It hasn't eaten it already) and Benjamin Wallfisch's return as the composer provides tear-jerking music to the film, enhancing its depth.

While everyone who feels this film doesn't reach the expectations we had are entitled to their opinions, they're still wrong. It: Chapter Two brings more of what we loved from the first film, all while providing more insight into what the horror that infests Derry is and what lengths the Loser's Club will go to in order to eliminate the chaos. It's a beautiful film that deserves more praise, and I certainly hope Andy delves back into Stephen King's universe to explore the demon's origins in a prequel film.

After watching all the original A Nightmare on Elm Street films (including Wes Craven's New Nightmare), I wanted more of Freddy Krueger traumatizing teenagers (don't judge). Finding out that there had been an (attempted) reboot of the franchise, I jumped on the 2010 remake and came out scratching my head, wondering how I felt.

The only way to truly rate and review this film is to compare it to the original, and in that vein it becomes easy to see where this film succeeds and where it fails (sometimes miserably). As much as I loved Robert Englund as Freddy, Jackie Earl Haley does such a fantastic job filling the Nightmare's boots, embracing the sadistic nature of the child-killing, dream-wandering psychopath. The scares are real, and the visual effects help really add a punch to every scene with Freddy in it. However, it's everything else that ends up in a ditch somewhere, with the main characters taking the biggest blow to the noggin. Character development is non-existant and the cast is very hard to sympathize with, most of them being dull and ineffective at projecting their terror. While Rooney Mara manages to hold her own, it becomes difficult when everyone around her just make the cut. But the one thing I found that made the most notable impact is the writing for Freddy - instead of Craven's altered idea of making Freddy into a serial child murderer, he's re-written as a serial child murderer AND pedophile, making his motives even darker and more disturbing. And providing additional context to Freddy's backstory provides a decent twist that keeps your feelings about Freddy mixed (right until the end), something that helps add depth to the monster.

While people will definitely have their preference (most choosing the original film over the remake), I think the remake shows potential and just needs better casting and dialogue (for all non-Freddy characters). But otherwise, the visual effects, Freddy himself and the pacing of the film definitely make for a solid thriller.