Reviews

Right this is going to be a weird one. So Glass Onion is the sequel to the 2019 movie Knives Out, which was hands down one of the cleverest films of the year, with a terrific ensemble and a grounded plot that just barely strayed into the unbelievable towards the end, but was wildly entertaining nonetheless. Given how enjoyable the first one was and the initially positive reviews that came out about this one, it's fair to say that my expectations were high. I must say though, after leaving the theatre, I'm disappointed. The film is a combination of a fireworks display and a dumpster fire, with a lot of things going for it but with an incredibly ridiculous plot at the center. Honestly, if I'd never seen the first one I would assume this movie was as a parody of detective films because it honestly does a good job of portraying how convoluted they can be. You know what, the more I think about it, the more sure I am that this entire movie was made to make fun of this entire genre: the initial plot is very stereotypical, with a billionaire who owns a private island that's absolutely crazy, a group of friends who are dependent on the guy and all have a motive to kill him, and a world class detective in the mix in case someone dies. From there, the movie flips the script completely and at this point I thought that we were in for another winner. I won't go into the details of the plot given how recently the movie came out, but it became so complicated and ridiculous that by the end, I was left wondering what the hell I just watched. The ending felt so... stupid. It was a lot of noise and a lot of flash but it was just so dumb that I felt unsatisfied. So I'll end the review on this note: treat this movie as a comedy that's making fun of detective stories. Don't take it seriously and you'll have a terrific time. I think that I can't love this movie because the first one was a really good mystery that had a serious plot that delivered and this one was too crazy right from the start. If you look at the movie from this angle, I'm sure you'll enjoy it. The performances become better and the script becomes a little more tolerable. However, if this film was trying to be a serious mystery, it failed in every respect. If it was trying to be a comedy I'd give it a 7 and if it was trying to be serious I'd give it a 2. Since I can't quite decide, I'll give it a 5. As always, I recommend you go and watch it yourself and form your own opinion, because I think that some people may really enjoy this one. Final verdict: 5/10.

High school movies tend to be a mixed bag, especially one that come out recently because of how difficult it is to figure out a unique plot without rehashing classics. It's rare to find a young adult movie that manages to be original and use the numerous tropes and cliche's effectively. Well, I'm happy to say I've found one. What makes The Edge of Seventeen stand out so much is how it manages to take very, VERY common high school movie plot lines (relationships are seemingly impossible, main character is incredibly awkward, the athletic people suck and the main character has to take care of themselves because of course the single parent is out of it) but the acting, writing, and complexity of all the characters make this movie incredible. The main character, Nadine, has issues and isn't exactly a great person but she actually talks and acts like a human being. What I also love is how the film never makes excuses for how she is while also offering an explanation to make her character compelling. The world doesn't revolve around her, and the people around her don't go out of their way to support her or anything, the script is smart and makes her earn it. She makes mistakes, but she learns and forgives and grows in a way that feels completely natural. Every character has layers to them, and it could be satire with the way the script plays with their classic stereotypes. The older brother who seems like nothing short of a self centered jerk is elevated to an extremely complex character with one scene, the mother who seems neglectful for 90% of the movie is humanized beautifully, and the disgruntled teacher who's counting down the days to retirement proves to be more than comic relief and is also humanized in a nuanced and intelligent manner, and I could go on forever. Every character has a story behind them, and the stories are all told in a well paced and (damn I'm going to use this word again, but I have no other way to describe it) nuanced way. The movie makes you laugh, scream, get angry at how flawed everyone and everything is, it makes you feel sheer anxiety, and makes you feel heartache for a character you met 90 minutes ago before finally, FINALLY some good happens and it makes you feel so happy that you want to cry. I don't know, maybe I'm just a stupid kid who doesn't understand the world and thinks this is deep. But I dare you: watch this movie and tell me this thing is a cliche. I double dare you. This movie truly understands what it's like to be a kid and to be scared and to be human, and yeah I freaking love this movie. In case you couldn't tell by now.

I'm going to make this one short, because the movie just came out and i don't want to risk spoilers.

Right off the bat, this new Thor movie is really poor. It's not so much bad as it is just mindless. There's no intention, no direction, the movie feels as lost as it's title character who still has a lot of growth to do after his bro phase in Endgame. The film's plot is so bizarre and shallow that it's immensely talented cast is wasted. The jokes are so inconsistent that I can't believe Taika Watiti, a future comedic legend actually wrote this movie. In my opinion, Christian Bale was spectacularly let down. I was very excited for his character, because I really enjoy his work and in my opinion, he is one of the most talented actors working today. What we got was unbefitting for someone of his range and caliber. Overall, Thor: Love and Thunder is as bad as Captain Marvel for me, but for the exact opposite reasons. The movie has way, WAY too much personality and ambitions, and it falls short of being memorable or coming remotely close to its ambitions. Instead, the movie comes off as more shallow then a baby pool and fails to justify its existence. Anyway, that's my attempt at a spoiler free review, I hope other MCU fans enjoy this one more than me (although that's looking doubtful).

"Papa" sees Stranger Things dialed up to 12, delivering on all emotional points and plot points with gusto. Matthew Modine and Millie Bobby Brown are brilliant onscreen together, particularly Modine with his delivery and use of his eyes. The California group finally shows some life from it's actors, with Noah Schnapp knocking it out of the park, and Finn Wolfhard offering solid support (finally). The writing is outstanding, with a minimal amount plot holes and every move so far is in-character, showing that the Duffers really have learned from season three. A pleasant surprise was the Russia group proving themselves to be at times as riveting as the Hawkins group, although the chemistry of the Hawkins group is so compelling. However, the heart and soul of the story lives in Eleven and her journey, and boy does it deliver on all fronts. So far, phenomenal stuff from chapter two of Stranger Things. We are back, ladies and gentlemen.

In an age of Hollywood defined by big budget franchises, live action remakes and adaptations, it's easy to be critical of much of what has been put out. Originality is often shied away from because of the fact that it doesn't bring in the cash, so all that's left are massive franchises like the MCU and Harry Potter, or nostalgia heavy but ultimately flat reboots and sequels such as Jurassic World and Ghostbusters Afterlife. So where does another seemingly nostalgia baiting sequel such as Top Gun: Maverick fit in all this? For me, Maverick joins Spider-man: No Way Home as an example of how to make the perfect sequel in this day and age: Maverick never once feels like it's overly relying on Top Gun to make it worth the viewers time. This film employs flashbacks and subtle alludes to the first film with nuance and precision, so as to not flood the viewer with memories and distract from it's story. Speaking of which, the story more than stands on its own as a strong, feel-good action packed movie, with strong ensemble acting from all fronts, clever dialogue (mostly), electric flight sequences, and a brilliant performance from Tom Cruise. Maverick is a joyride of a film that manages pushes your sensory limits without completely overloading you, especially if you watch it in the theatre (which I strongly recommend). A pleasant surprise was Miles Teller, who sort of dropped off my radar after his star turn in Whiplash. He's cocky, cool, rash, and emotional, reminding me exactly of Tom Cruise in the first film. The writing is, at some points, formulaic but what's interesting is now matter how cliche it can feel, the viewer is reminded why the cliches became so widely used in the first place. From a technical standpoint, Maverick is an out and out masterpiece. The sound design is flawless, the camerawork is electrifying, and the editing is smoother than Tom Cruise's iconic slide in Risky Business. If any film should sweep the technical Oscars this year, I can confidently say it should be Maverick.

Maverick feels like a glimpse of what a modern classic can be, and it's a shame that a film like this is so rare these days. Maverick is a near-perfect combination of brain and heart, and it's technical wizardry is icing on the cake. Is this suddenly the best movie of all time? No, not by a long shot. Is this even the best movie of the 2020's so far? Even that is debatable. But it's a giant leap in the right direction, and if this is an indication of what Hollywood has to offer, than I'm in for the ride. I strongly recommend seeing Top Gun: Maverick, even if you haven't seen the first movie because it's still as enjoyable and in every respect a better movie. My verdict is a 9 out of 10, and I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

This episode of stranger things immediately tops Dear Billy as the finest episode of the series so far. The gore, the suspense, and humor is measured perfectly, and the result is undoubtedly a future classic in the science fiction/ horror genre. It's incredible how so many familiar stories can be combined to make something so unique. The show has matured wonderfully in its fourth season, and has chosen it's new cast brilliantly. Jimmy Power as the helpful doctor is electrifying onscreen, and uses facial expressions beautifully. The multiple storylines are a lot to keep track of, I won't argue that. But I think the writers managed it. I am very, very excited to see how this ends, and I am scared as hell. This episode single handedly makes the entire series worth a watch. See you in July, y'all.

This episode is undoubtedly the best of the show: perfectly acted, perfectly written, and soul scorchingly terrifying. The underrated hero here is the soundtrack. Equally poignant and menacing, it is perfection. This episode is nothing short of everything I love about Stranger Things in just short of 75 minutes. Goddamn it was beautiful.

This episode is up there with in terms of fear factor and writing consistency. There are some iffy moments with Will and Mike, with Noah Schnapps doing nicely but being let down by Finn Wolfhard's one note delivery. El is being handled very nicely, I love how they addressed that she never had any emotional maturity, that just never was a thing for her. But everything is being handled with nuance and delicious suspense. Every character gets their scene, and they are mostly written nicely. This is going to be an excellent series if they end this properly.

After the less than stellar season three, season 4 picks up with a perfect blend of sheer terror and high school 80's nostalgia. The dialogue is smart and the visuals and suspense is dialed up to 11 (heh) when they need to be. I enjoy the characters again. Like thank god, I'm truly having fun watching this show again. We're back, people. We are back.

The Northman is the third feature film from director Robert Eggers, who rose to prominence due to his distinctive, weird style of filmmaking. His films generally are supernatural and showcase a lot of hallucination sequences and tricks on the mind. The Northman is no exception, going all in on its Scandinavian roots with several scenes that showcase men going absolutely berserk in the heat of battle, pre-war rituals, shield banging, and blood curdling yells of war. The Northman requires some patience from its viewer, as it takes much of its runtime to focus on these scenes, which are made well and acted out perfectly. The fight scenes are wonderfully shot, with very few cuts, which makes the viewer feel like they're right there in the fight themselves. The cinematic shots capture the beauty of the film's set and are laptop wallpaper worthy. Technically, there are zero faults I can find with the film. However, what makes the film so unique is also what makes it a frustrating watch at times, especially for people that are just interested in a good story. At some point, I found myself questioning why the hell I'm sitting down to watch a grown man barking into the camera or how some scenes even fit into the overall narrative. Sometimes, less is more in a movie, and this film could 100% use less attempts at norse authenticity in favor of telling its story at a decent pace. However, I can't argue with how well those scenes are executed or how they are acted. The standout performers for me are Alexander Skarsgard's star turn as Prince Amleth, Anya Taylor Joy's as Olga of the Birch Forest, Claes Bang as Fjolir The Brotherless, and Ethan Hawke with his minimal screen time as King Auravandil War-Raven. All the actors and actresses were casted perfectly, and wasted no time onscreen and all really committed to their roles to fulfill Egger's vision. Overall, The Northman is an excellently made odyssey which adds its own unique twists on a familiar story to make one of the most original films I've ever seen. It's sometimes let down by its pacing and desire to be different because it veers away from telling the story which should be ultimately the main priority. However, the acting and brutality deliver when they should, and makes for a satisfying viewing experience that I would be happy to watch again.

Mad Max: Fury Road is the fourth movie about the iconic 80's road warrior, Max Rockatansky, and serves as a sequel/soft reboot of the franchise. George Miller is once again at the helm of this film, and the man behind the Mad Max franchise (and of all things Happy Feet) proves his sheer genius with this technical tour de force. The film was stranded in development hell for years, but you would never know it from the way it looks and sounds. The non-stop car chase just goes 100 miles an hour but when it does hit the breaks, it's done in an unobtrusive manner that only supports the action sequences. Speaking of which, the action sequences are beautiful. Gorgeous cinematography coupled with raw, uncompromising violence gives the film the special quality of being unable to look away from it. The fights are remarkably intelligent, and they tell you much about the characters without words. This film also uses a lack of dialogue very effectively, with the actors going all in with facial expressions, grunts, and gestures. The always excellent Tom Hardy delivers an impressive nonverbal performance, with his take on Max being one of stone cold efficiency to achieve his goals. Charlize Theron disappears into the role of Imperator Furiosa, with a performance that is raw and emotionally charged and compliments Hardy beautifully despite the differences the two had on set. Nicholas Hoult is phenomenal in the role of Nux, nailing his delivery and mannerisms to a T and it works very nicely. Nux is probably the heart of the movie, and Hoult more the rises to the occasion. When I read some of the reviews on this site, there seems to be a general consensus that the film is beautiful, mindless action with no plot and no character development. I actually find that I can't disagree with that analysis more. The core themes of the movie are redemption and trying to recover lost humanity. Maybe the themes aren't explicitly mentioned or explored, but the actors make sure that they are present at all times. The plot is very simple, but the themes are what provide meaning and dimension to all of the action and in my opinion, if these themes weren't present, the movie would be quite boring. You can have all the visuals and sounds in the world at your disposal, but without heart, they are useless. This movie has the visuals, it has the sounds, but it's strongest component is it's heart. For me, it is the best action movie I have ever watched. An undisputed 10/10.

This fantastic beasts movie? It's not good.

The fantastic beasts series is an extremely rocky franchise, with a decent starting point and a sequel that didn't quite meet expectations. The biggest fault of the series is that it's plot is extraordinarily weak due to its immense scope and scale that it tries to do justice to but hasn't been fully fleshed out. However, both always managed to remain watchable because of it's solid acting performances and it's dazzling visuals that at least kept you entertained for a couple hours. Unfortunately, this film is a disaster from start to finish and is completely devoid of good characters, fun dialogue, a cohesive plot, or any creativity in its story and the telling of said story. Let's start with some positives, though: the technical team SNAPPED on this one. The magic is mind blowing, and some of the shots in this film are simply beautiful. It all goes downhill from there, however. The acting is mediocre to downright bad. The best performances came from Mads Mikkelsen as Gellert Grindlewald and Eddie Redmayne in the lead role as Newt Scamander, but both are let down by an awful script which can't find anything clever or meaningful to say. The plot is muddled and confused, packed with so much noise and subplots that the viewer can't follow at all, as the film tries to get so much done while half baking everything. It shunts its most interesting characters to the side in favor of pointless scenes that distract from the main plot for seemingly no reason, and for scenes that could've been fleshed out so much more, the writing skips over that in favor of so called "wise words" that are utterly meaningless. There are some moments in the film the feel so out of left field that they beg for further explanation but are simply brushed over, leaving the viewer wondering exactly what just happened. Hell, now my review is also all over the place, because this movie is so bad that I just don't know where to go from here!

In short, nothing from this film is memorable in any positive way. The entire thing seems like a poor fanfiction that wasn't well researched. The film is so disappointing because it is so forgettable, and is a perfect example of why movies today are infinitely inferior to those of the past: instead of telling good stories, studios are flooding money into a milked out franchise and forcing it to produce something, and that something is always disappointing. The Secrets of Dumbledore is the latest in the Hollywood conveyor belt of sequels and reboots, and it lacks any creativity or cleverness to justify its existence. If a fourth Fantastic Beasts film is made, I will not be watching it. That's all I've got, if you are interested in the film, go ahead and watch it. I hope you find it more enjoyable than I did.

The Batman was easily my most anticipated movie of the year, with its promises of a grounded, unique take on a Bruce Wayne that became the incarnation of fear for criminals and one who cares very little for the everyday work of being a billionaire philanthropist. As a matter of fact, this Bruce Wayne straight up isn't anything by day, just a rich man who was the son of the city's god, Thomas Wayne. Well, this movie most certainly delivered on its promise, but they also in the process showed me why it wasn't a great idea in the first place. Don't get me wrong, the film executed its concept perfectly on a technical level, no faults there. The film is beautiful, the actors do a wonderful job, and the practical effects are jaw dropping. But the problem is that its story is highly convoluted, with some connections that feel forced and would've been best left to be two separate Batman plots. Now on to the big question, what about Robert Pattinson's Dark Knight? Well, Pattinson does a very good job with his material and shines as Batman, not so much as Bruce Wayne. Bruce Wayne is very poorly written, making him a complete annoyance on screen. He spends a majority of his time out of the cowl with a bad haircut looking moody and depressed, which gets tiring at some point. He also frequently disrespects Alfred in a very immature, "it's not a phase, mom" type attitude that's bratty and frustrating to watch. However, he's barely on screen as the man whereas he spends a long time in costume as the bat. Oh my god, his Batman is terrific. Smart, scary, and brutal, Pattinson walked right off the pages of many celebrated Batman comic stories, reminding me of the Caped Crusader seen in Batman: The Long Halloween and Batman: A Serious House on a Serious Earth. As a detective, he is brilliant. As a fighter, he is terrifying, and in his softer moments with a pitch perfect Zoe Kravitz's Selina Kyle or during the end of the film, a deeply human person who is capable of being more than a symbol of fear; he can become a symbol of hope. Now for Paul Dano's Riddler: he is scary and unrecognizable in the role, a powerful enemy who is mentally ill but still genius. His scenes are bone chilling, and he prover, in my opinion, to be the perfect match for this incarnation of Batman. So I have a lot that I love about this movie, and I enjoyed this movie tremendously. The issues I have with it are only very apparent if you take the time to think very deeply about the movie , which several people may not want to do. Not trying to seem arrogant here, just saying that it's some very nitty gritty details I'm highlighting here, that aren't apparent upon first viewing. I think that it succeeded on delivering its promise of being a dark detective story, but is a little bit let down by its explosive and loud Third Act, which falls prey to the usual flaws of a big budget action movie, which this film is most certainly not up till that point. But anyway, that's my take. I hope you enjoy the movie yourself.

Arcane starts off very nicely with this gorgeous episode. The animation is simply breathtaking, and it almost distracts you from the story. Almost. The story is enrapturing, with the scenes with our four main characters being done very well, particularly the scenes between the two sisters, Powder and Vi. Also, special mention for the soundtrack of the undercity, it's a damn good song.

It's difficult to write a review about Arcane when so much good has been said about it already, and what makes this show so impressive is that all the praise heaped on the show is earned and then some. Arcane is just a very compelling TV show, let alone an animated TV show. It's sprawling narrative and it's excellent animation brings this magical world to life as the show goes on, and it is a very rewarding experience to watch. Arcane's plot strength lies in its refusal to tell a single story: There are constantly shifting perspectives, across the moral spectrum: the naive but resilient cop Caitlyn, the visionary turned politician Jayce, and the power hungry but complex crime lord Silco are some examples of the very different characters in the show that are all equally explored, but the glue that holds the story together is the relationship between sisters Vi and Powder/Jinx. Their bond is an example of writing at its finest, as the other stories would make for a very messy show without the sisters who are the two most featured characters. The soundtrack is also very nice (except for episode 5's rather forced integration of Imagine Dragons), with the original songs expanding on Riot Games' active music label. The animation is simply superb, on a level that I would argue is higher than Spider-Man: Into The Spider-verse, or at least an equal to that movie. The constant movement onscreen makes the show impossible to look away from, and every frame could be used as laptop wallpaper. I strongly recommend this show to everybody above the age of 12, whereas anyone younger might miss some of the finer details. Arcane is a show that I will show to my children, and one that will no doubt serve as a benchmark for storytelling in general. I cannot wait for season two, and I truly hope that the quality can stay at this incredible level. Until then, ladies, gentlemen, and none/all the above, enjoy.

Dune is a very well directed and made sci fi epic, that was a enjoyable experience and it delivered exactly what it promises. It should be renamed in IMDB as Dune- Part One, because that is exactly what it is, and it definitely feels like that. I have read the book, and I believe it is more enjoyable this way because it felt geared towards those like myself. It was a very faithful adaptation, that didn't add anything unnecessary and only took Frank Herbert's (author) own plot points and didn't mess with it too much. It is definitely no Lord of the Rings and weirdly, it doesn't feel like it wants to be despite the obvious comparisons one can make. The actors were solid, but I still have a bit of skepticism about Timothee Chalamet's Paul Atreides. He feels too delicate, too much of a boy, but I believe the second part can redeem his performance by making him stronger and more fremen-like, just like the book. The standout, or at least the performance that is burned in my head is Baron Harkonnen. Nah man, that performance was creepy as HELL, and full credit to the makeup team, they better get something for that incredible effort. Overall, Dune Part One is what it wants to be, and I have no problem with that. I can't wait for Part Two, and you can't ask for anything more.

I'll see you all in the theaters. That's all I have to say.