Merry Christmas to Everyone!!!

    Hello everyone!  I know it’s been a little while since I have posted on here but I have more content coming soon!  Unfortunately, November and December are two of the busiest months for me due to my job and from selling on eBay.  I will soon have reviews posted from movies in theaters including “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse” and classics including “The Karate Kid Part III” and “The Next Karate Kid” (review copies were provided by the very kind Mill Creek Entertainment company).  Anyway, I just wanted to take this time to wish all my readers a very merry Christmas.  Also, for those amazing readers who celebrate holidays other than Christmas, I hope you have a happy holiday season!  Lastly, if you don’t celebrate a holiday, I still wish you the best and hope you have a great week!  Thank you!

“Ralph Breaks the Internet” Movie Review

    “Wreck-It Ralph” was one of the more enjoyable non Pixar Disney releases over the last decade.  The film introduced the lovable protagonist Ralph who happened to be the antagonist in his own game.  The film dealt with self worth and the importance of non glamorous jobs.  It was a film both adults and children could connect with.  Unfortunately, the same can’t be completely said about it’s sequel, “Ralph Breaks the Internet”.
    Now, “Ralph Breaks the Internet” isn’t a bad film.  The story of the film is actually pretty original and enjoyable.  I liked that they went a different direction with the story.  A lot of sequels try to make a carbon copy of the first film and this film did not.  It tried to tell a different story of morality but that was also part of the problem I had with the film.  The film, at it’s core, deals with having to let go of someone you love if it’s better for them.  While this is something we all have to deal with, it makes the film feel somewhat depressing.  So the film’s theme ultimately feels too adult for most children yet the animation might be too childish for some adults.  I did like that the film was ambitious enough to try a different tone.
    Unlike the first film, the jokes in this film didn’t always land.  Maybe it was because most of the jokes tied into product placements which this movie was filled with.  I am talking obvious product placement as well which is something that shouldn’t be so in your face in a kid’s movie.  I was well aware of eBay before this movie but if I wasn’t, I would sure be now.  “Ralph Breaks the Internet” feels more like a commercial half the time over a real film.
    Luckily for this film, the characters were extremely lovable and this film, despite it’s faults, didn’t hurt that.  Just catching up with the characters was refreshing and worth the price of admission.  The voice cast once again helps add to the character’s charm.  John C Reilly and Sarah Silverman have great chemistry and sound as if they were friends for years.
   “Ralph Breaks the Internet” doesn’t live up to the first movie but is worth a watch.  Just be aware that this movie deals with serious themes that children might not have much interest in.  The film also has kind of a bummer ending for an animated film.  Ultimately, I feel like this movie was worth the admission but perhaps not all the praise it received.

Grade: C+

”Creed II” Movie Review

    The “Rocky” franchise was long lampooned as never ending.  Many parody films would feature background posters of an elderly man in boxing gear and would have a title such as “Rocky 64” blaster across it.  It has been the butt of many jokes since “Rocky IV”.  The ironic thing is after all these years, the franchise is still going strong.  The newest film, “Creed II”, is the eighth film in the much beloved “Rocky” universe.

    “Creed II” acts as a direct sequel to both “Creed” and “Rocky IV”.  The movie begins with the introduction of Viktor Drago, son of Ivan Drago.  Ivan Drago had killed Apollo Creed in the ring during the events of “Rocky IV” but lost to Rocky Balboa in a bout held in Russia.  As it turns out, this event brought shame to the Drago name.  Ivan hopes to restore his family name through his son, Viktor.  This brings the Drago, Balboa, and Creed families on a collision course once again as Adonis Creed has just now become the boxing Heavyweight Champion.

    “Rocky IV” is one of my least favorite “Rocky” films (“Rocky V” holds the title as worst) so knowing this film would be a direct sequel to that film made me a bit nervous.  “Creed II” manages to act as a superior sequel to “Rocky IV” by making the stakes more realistic and grounded.  The boxing match isn’t about a country’s glory, it is about a form of redemption for both families.

    Michael B. Jordan returns as Adonis Creed and delivers another stellar performance.  Sylvester Stallone was fantastic once again as the iconic Rocky Balboa.  Supposedly, this may very well be Stallone’s swan song as Balboa (though it’s hard to believe he will completely exit the franchise).  I wish Stallone was given a little more to do in this film should this be his last movie.  Dolph Lundgren returns as Ivan Drago and despite the fact that he isn’t give many lines, he manages to convey a lot of emotion through his eyes.
    The film is rousing and filled with many epic boxing scenes.  The fight sequences are expertly shot and make you feel as though you are in each fighter’s corner.  One of the few criticisms I have about the film is that it’s a safe and predictable sequel.  “Rocky II” was a very good film and also suffered from a predictable story.  On the plus side, “Creed II” contains a few cameos that feel rewarding to long time Rocky fans without being distracting or feeling out of place.
    I can’t help but feel like this film is a bit of a setup to a larger story to play out in a possible sequel.  The film ends without a sense of who the clear cut best fighter is and I have to wonder how that might play out.  Also, if a sequel is made, Stallone needs to return in my opinion to officially retire the character.  While “Creed II” is a very good movie, Stallone deserves a bigger role with more to do in his final appearance in the franchise.
    At it’s heart, “Creed II” is a story about fathers and sons.  It’s about not making the same mistake over and over again.  Lastly, the movie is about placing family above pride.  What makes this film so unique is that both the protagonist and antagonist learn the same lesson.


Grade: B+

“The Grinch” Movie Review

    The original Christmas special of “How the Grinch Stole Christmas” is among one of my favorite holiday specials ever.  So when I saw the preview for the new version of the Grinch from Illumination, I was on board to see it in theaters as soon as it came out.  I mean, ‘‘tis the season to watch Christmas movies!
    When it comes to remakes/reboots, I try my best to view it as an original thing without comparing it to the previous films but I also know it’s impossible to separate the remake from the source material so if studios are going to cash in on name value, I feel it’s only fair to put each installment up against the best film baring that franchise’s name.  So when I feel like it calls for it, I will compare it to the original classic.  Luckily, this adaptation of the Dr. Seuss' book isn’t a carbon copy of the original.  Yes, all the story beats play the same but the film adds enough to separate it from the other versions of the story.
    I really enjoyed the animation style of the film.  Between the animation and the humor, it really felt like an Illumination film.  The humor was charming and felt crafted so that both children and adults could enjoy it.  The filmmakers also made sure to include some heart and emotion to the story.
    The voice cast was stellar, Benedict Cumberbatch brings a mischievous charm to the role.  Musician Pharrell Williams however, doesn’t live up to the amazing narration of Boris Karloff in the original animated special.  Pharrell Williams delivers his lines in an overly relaxed and care free fashion.  He doesn’t convey how despicable the Grinch’s actions are.
    To me, the highlight of this adaptation are the animals.  The Grinch’s dog, Max, is given a beefier role in this version and he is as cute and sweet as you might expect.  The addition of Fred the Reindeer was also an adorably genius move.  Both these animals had many moments to shine with adorably sweet parts that made me laugh out loud.
    The film does have a few problems.  It has some pacing issues.  The ending feels a bit rushed compared to the rest of the film.  A quick ending works better in a twenty minute special than in a feature length film.  I also wasn’t a big fan of the new version of the classic theme.  It isn’t a big issue, but in a song that iconic, it’s best not to screw it up.

    The film ultimately turned out better than expected and is destined to be a new Christmas classic among many households.  The hard part will be choosing between which version of the Grinch to watch.

Grade: B+

“Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” Movie Review

    I don’t think I am the only person to have been extremely excited for seeing “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice”.  We were all excited to see a “Man of Steel” sequel, a new Batman film, an adaptation of Frank Miller’s “The Dark Knight Returns”, and a prelude film to “Justice League” all rolled into one film and it actually looked liked it would work.  Then the final trailer was released and it became clear that “The Death of Superman” storyline was also going to be included.  That seemed like it might be too much.  It turns out, it was too much.  Which isn’t to say the movie was terrible.  In fact, it was better than it had any right to be.  It is just sad that after watching the movie, you knew there was a masterpiece in there somewhere with a few tweaks and changes.

    “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” starts off extremely strong, showing the destruction of Metropolis during the events of “Man of Steel” from Bruce Wayne’s point of view.  It is extremely effective showing how helpless a regular person would feel watching two super humans slog it out.  It showed the human cost of the destruction which was a complaint a lot of people had in regards to “Man of Steel”.  Nothing that follows this scene is quite as effective as that opening scene.

    Director Zack Snyder made many interesting casting choices for the film and I believe for the most part, they paid off.  Returning star Henry Cavill fits the Superman suit perfectly although he doesn’t completely fill the boots left by the great Christopher Reeve.  I would actually make the argument that Brandon Routh brought a little more of the spirit of his comic book counterpart in "Superman Returns" than Cavill brings to the role in this film.  That being said, Henry Cavill does seem to be growing into the role and he seems more comfortable and confident than he did in "Man of Steel" (which fits the character development of the films perfectly).  Most importantly, Cavill looks like Superman, which is extremely important to such an iconic character.  Amy Adams also returns but isn't given a lot to do which is a shame because she is a very gifted performer.

    Among the many new additions to the cast is Ben Affleck, who shines as the DCEU's new caped crusader, Batman.  Ben Affleck had some big boots to fill himself.  Christian Bale had just come off the highly popular Dark Knight trilogy and it was hard to picture someone else in the role.  Affleck was the perfect choice and played off of Cavill well.  Part of what makes Affleck's performance so great is the fact that he plays both Bruce Wayne and Batman so well.  It's not easier basically playing two different characters yet he pulled it off.  Also joining the cast to great success was Gal Gadot.  Though she wasn't in the film long, her performance as Diana Prince/Wonder Woman was a highlight and made me excited to see her in "Wonder Woman" and "Justice League".
    Now, I will discuss a casting choice which didn't completely work, Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor.  Let me start by saying I did not hate his portrayal but I also felt like a different interpretation of the character would have fit the film better.  For the tone of that film, I pictured someone more like the "Superman: The Animated Series" Lex Luthor.  I didn't hate the casting choice but I think another actor would have brought something more interesting to the role.
    I can't talk about the film without going into it's script.  The DCEU decided to go in a darker and more adult direction with this film.  I didn't mind this vision but a lot of fans feel like the character of Superman should be in a lighter film because the character is a beacon of hope.   I don't think the character has to be in a lighter film for him to work but a lot of people disagree and it is important to note that for this review.  I am just one person with one opinion.  The main problem with the script is that it was stuffed way too full.  I love the characters of Batman, Wonder Woman, Lex Luthor, and Doomsday; but they are a lot to cram into a film which is basically acting as "Man of Steel 2".  It just made an already full film overly complex and hard to follow the villain's motivations.
    On a final note, I can't talk about the film without ignoring the "Martha" scene which is now a popular meme and was laughed at when the film was released.  I am in the minority here but I actually liked the concept of the scene.  I like the idea of Superman and Batman boding over something as simple as their shared love of their mother.  That being said, the idea should not have been explored as a way to end a fight scene.  I think that was the main problem with the idea.  If someone is ready to kill you and ignores a ton of other good reasons to spare you, a shared mother's name likely isn't going to do the trick.  I did like the idea of the scene though and I wish it was explored differently.
    I guess it depends on how you want to look at films in general.  There is plenty to love with this film and it is easy to gloss over the negative aspects.  It is also easy to nitpick all the things wrong with the movie and let it sour your overall experience.  I am not one of the people and I very much enjoyed the film even being aware of it's failings.  I just hope it is remembered in a more positive light in the future.  Only time, or possibly someone with x-ray vision, will tell.

Grade: B

“Bohemian Rhapsody” Movie Review

    Queen was and remains one of the most iconic rock and roll groups of all time.  So much of their music has influenced popular culture.  Their music has been popular fixtures on the radio and on films.  Queen is a legendary group which explains why it took so look for a film adaptation to become reality, no one wanted to mess it up.  That being said, “Bohemian Rhapsody” was finally released this week to mixed reactions.  It seemed liked critics hated it or loved it.  Well, I don’t know what movie the critics who hated it saw because I loved this film.
    As stated above, “Bohemian Rhapsody” tells the story of the formation of Queen but it’s primary focus is on lead vocalist Freddy Mercury.  The story of Freddy Mercury is both uplifting and tragic.  The story has been criticized for taking historical liberties with dates and events.  I can understand wanting the most historically accutate movie possible, but films also have to be entertaining so creative license must be allowed, even for a subject as well known as the band Queen.  I do understand why some critics would be upset but almost every historic epics take liberties with facts, a great deal of them take far more drastic liberties than this movie did.
    I suspect a great deal of the critism the film is facing is due to Bryan Singer and the controversy he is currently facing.  Bryan Singer has long been accused of sexual harassment involving minions among others.  This does not make the accusations true, but many Hollywood insiders maintain that these accounts are valid.  Bryan Singer is a very gifted director regardless of  the accusations he faces.  If what he did is true, he is a terrible person but that doesn’t change his films from being well made.  Now, Bryan Singer was fired from the movie after completing 75% of the film for being difficult to work with.  Dexter Fletcher (who is set to helm “Rocket Man”) took over the remaining directing duties and polished the rest of the film.
    The cast was one of the best aspects of the film.  Rami Malek was sensational as Freddy Mercury.  He took the role after Sacha Baron Cohen decided to pass on the film.  Malek channels the confidence and inner turmoil Mercury faced throughout his life.  The supporting cast were great and made you feel like you were really watching the band Queen.  Gwilym Lee, Ben Hardy, and Joseph Mazzello portray Brian May, Roger Taylor, and John Deacon.  The chemistry with the cast felt as real as the chemistry of the group.  Mike Myers plays a record executive named Ray Foster.  I thought he might be distracting but I liked his small part in the film.  The film gave a humorous nod to his “Wayne’s World” role as well.
    The love story focused on his relationship with Mary Austin, depicting her as perhaps the true love of his life despite his homosexuality.  This is a very tragic relationship in the movie.  The film doesn’t shy away from his homosexuality despite what some critics are saying.  The film tried to represent love as something deeper and independent of sexuality.  It was really well done and emotional in my opinion and seemed to really want the audience to think about what love truly represents.
    The film was funny and charming.  Seeing the poor reviews showcased for the song “Bohemian Rhapsody” was humorous considering it’s a classic.  The conversations about the song “I’m In Love With My Car” provided a humorous on going joke in the movie.  There were aspects about Freddy Mercury and Queen I wasn’t aware of and found interesting.  I also liked how they focused on each band members contributions to the music and showing how collaborative they all were together.  The concert footage was also beyond fantastic.  The cinematography for those scenes made you feel like you were there.  There were literally people in the theater waving their arms in the air as the music played.

    I wish they covered certain events like scoring “Flash Gordon” and “Highlander” (although “Who Wants to Live Forever” was featured in the movie and used effectively).  My guess is they couldn’t depict that over rights issues.  That was the only thing I can complain about, the movie left me wanting more.  Ultimately “Bohemian Rhapsody” turned out to be one of the best movies and best experiences I have seen in awhile.

Grade: A+

"Superman III" Movie Review

    I think it's safe to assume no one was expecting a property like Superman to become a big budget comedy film after the first two movies proved so successful.  I honestly am not sure what Warner Bros. or the producers of "Superman III" were thinking when they decided to cast Richard Pryor as the film's main lead opposite Christopher Reeve.  Now, I enjoy Richard Pryor and know he was one of the most gifted comedic minds ever while he was alive, but he wasn't a good fit for a Superman movie, at least not in the role he was given.

    It is probably not going to shock you to read that "Superman III" was a disappointment to many fans, including myself.  The film essentially had an A and B story, as if the movie started off as two different projects that were merged into one.  Story A revolved around a bumbling Richard Proyer getting in over his head trying to make a fortune.  Story B revolved around Clark Kent visiting his old stomping grounds in Smallville and going to a  high school reunion.  While the film is set in Smallville, it’s enjoyable and well paced.  The Proyer parts are all over the place however.  Supposedly Richard Proyer had mentioned wanting to be in a Superman film during a late night show interview and the studio caught wind of that and decided to pursue Proyer to star in this film.

    There are good things about the movie.  The Clark Kent vs Evil Superman fight is one of the strongest action pieces in the franchise.  It really makes you wish they went full Bizarro in this movie.  To this day, I still love this scene. The Smallvile scenes are also sweet and sentimental.  There are things that work beautifully in this movie, it’s just a shame that the things that don’t work are so epically bad.

    The film’s attempts at comedy fall flat even with a comedy genius like Proyer spearheading them.  It just doesn’t work in a superhero movie.  I feel this fault largely lands with Richard Lester.  Lester added many comedic elements to “Superman II” and for the most part they worked, but that was also a movie already fleshed out by a previous director.  Richard Lester had limits and a pretty solid blueprint.  Richard Lester, given free range, went nuts.

    Richard Lester was given plenty of chances to tap into the source material for this film and instead delivered a largely original story.  The film was set up perfectly for a classic villain like Brainiac to appear (the final villain is even in the vain of Brainiac).  As stated above, Bizarro was even given a perfect possible introduction but the filmmakers decided to ignore the source material completely.

    Christopher Reeve is still incredible as Clark Kent/Superman but I don’t think he could be bad in that role.  Annette O’Toole is also a more than welcomed edition as Lana Lang, Clark’s high school crush and new romantic interest.  Margot Kidder makes an extended cameo but you can tell she checked out of the franchise after the second part.  Richard Proyer was basically just Richard Proyer, nothing more to say about him.  Proyer was a capable actor and could have fit the role of a villain such as the Toyman and perhaps brought something fresh to the character and role.  It’s just a shame the producers chose to use his talents as a cash grab instead of using him as a creative force.

    “Superman III” was a movie made on bizzare decisions.  The film isn’t a complete waste but it also doesn’t completely work.  With a little more self restraint, the film could have been something truly special and a worthy follow up to the first two movies.  Instead we got a movie which could be easily skipped.

Grade: C-

"Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut" Movie Review

    Since the inception of DVD, HD-DVD, Blu-rays, and 4K Blu-rays, the general public has gotten pretty used to the idea of film's being released with director's cuts.  Most of the time these editions include a few minutes of added blood, gore, or nudity the director had to cut to secure a lower rating.  Basically, in 90% of the cases, the director's cut doesn't add much to the film.  In fact, there have been director's cuts which have trimmed film off the running time.  Oliver Stone's flop "Alexander" comes to mind as a director's cut shorter than the theatrical release.  "Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut" is basically a different beast all together and in my opinion, serves as a completely different film and as an alternative sequel.  Most of the basic story elements remain the same between both the Donner and Richard Lester cuts of the film.  What is interesting is to see how their approaches would have differed.

    "Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut" opens slightly differently than the theatrical cut of "Superman II".  Instead, it opens with what the original ending of "Superman: The Movie" was supposed to be, a cliffhanger featuring the Kryptonian criminals of General Zod, Ursa, and Non escaping from the Phantom Zone above Earth due to the explosion of a missile Lex Luthor launched in the first movie.  Superman is unaware that his heroic act unleashed the criminals and they head towards Earth as the film begins.  From there until the end, the film plays out basically the same as "Superman II" but with a few changes.  Lois Lane still discovers that Clark Kent is actually Superman but does so in a more confident and clever way.  This version makes Lois Lane seem more intelligent and more of an equal to Superman.  Once Clark Kent admits to Lois Lane that he is Superman, they decide to spend a romantic night together.  Clark Kent decides to show his love for Lois Lane by becoming a mortal human, a condition he is warned can not be undone, but he decides to go ahead and do so in order to marry and have children with Lois one day.  This part is very different than the Lester version as it features Marlon Brando as Jor-El as opposed to the Lester version which featured Superman's Kryptonian mother Lara.  Brando had sued the production at the time so his footage couldn't be used.  Clark wasn't aware that General Zod and his lieutenants were on Earth when he agreed to become mortal and realizes Superman is the only person who could protect the world.  Despite Jor-El's warning that condition was irreversible, Clark sets off to see if he can somehow regain his powers.  This part also fills in a large plot hole from the theatrical release.  In the Lester version, how Clark regains his powers is ambiguous.  In the Richard Donner cut, he learn that Jor-El knew his son might need to regain his powers one day so he created a way to obtain his powers again.  This gift comes with a price, in order to regain his powers, he must absorb the remaining "life force" of his father, meaning he will forever lose the little part of his father and his homeworld he had left.  This sacrifice adds a lot to the story and the character of Superman.  Becoming Superman once more, Clark manages to fight and defeat General Zod.  Seeing all the damage caused from these events causes Superman to turn back time by spinning the world backwards.  This ending ended up being used for "Superman: The Movie" but was intended for this film.

    For every pro I have in regards to this cut over the Lester version, I also have a con.  While I love the scenes between Superman and Jor-El and feel like they add a lot to the movie, I also very much miss some of the humor the Lester version brought.  I also prefer the theatrical endings of both movies over the Donner endings.  I am so conflicted about which version of the film I prefer.  Both versions are fun and allow Superman to showcase his powers over an equal.  Ultimately I feel like the bulk of both films remain Richard Donner films as a whole anyway.

    The cast was great, just like the theatrical release.  Many of the scenes featuring Christopher Reeve and Margot Kidder are the same from alternate takes and angles.  I would argue that the chemistry between Reeve and Kidder is stronger in this version of the film.  Gene Hackman's scenes are exactly the same since he didn't return for reshots but he is still a great slimy jerk in both versions as a result.  Terence Stamp shines as the villainous General Zod.  Lastly, it is a treat to see Marlon Brando once again as Jor-El.  His interaction with Superman is defiantly the highlight of this cut.

    "Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut" gives us a rare glimpse into a lost film which actually managed to get completed in part thanks to fan support and Bryan Singer.  Most film projects like this leave more questions than answers, it's refreshing to see a complete vision for a change.

Grade: B

"Superman II" Movie Review

    There are not many examples of sequels being as good or better than their predecessors, especially when the first movie is widely considered a masterpiece.  I can't imagine how anyone could have pictured a movie surpassing the brilliance that was Richard Donner's "Superman: The Movie" upon it's release.  "Superman II" may not be the game changer that the first movie was but it might just be more fun.  When you are talking about summer popcorn films, fun is a very important factor.
    "Superman II" takes place right after the first film and sees the Kryptonian criminals General Zod, Ursa, and Non released from the Phantom Zone and coming to Earth.  Superman is doing his usual big blue boy scout good deeds when Lois Lane figures out that he and Clark Kent are in fact one in the same.  Clark Kent/Superman admits to Lois the truth and the two spend a romantic afternoon in the Fortress of Solitude.  Clark is unaware that General Zod has arrived on Earth as he sacrifices his powers to be with Lois Lane.  General Zod teams up with Lex Luthor in a plot to take over the world as a now mortal Clark Kent realizes he now has to make a choice.  Clark Kent can stay human and let General Zod take control of the world or risk his newly mortal life in an effort to try and restore his powers in an attempt to stop General Zod and his lieutenants.
    The project was unusual as it was originally partly filmed by Richard Donner.  Donner started filming "Superman II" while he filmed "Superman: The Movie" making it one of the first productions to be ambitious enough to film more than one movie back to back.  Richard Donner had filmed roughly 75% of the film when he got into heated arguments with the producers.  Donner agreed to stop the remaining work on the sequel and instead completely focus on finishing the first film.  After the first film was finished and released, Donner was fired from the sequel by the producers and did not get a chance to finish work on his film until his version of the film was released in conjunction with "Superman Returns".  Richard Lester was hired to finish the film but Donner's firing caused problems with the already troubled production.  To receive sole directing billing, Lester had to refilm a majority of scenes already filmed by Donner and had to reshape the beginning and ending of the movie.  Adding to the problems, actors such as Gene Hackman refused to return for reshots upon hearing of Richard Donner's departure so stand ins had to be used for a few scenes.
    Despite all the problems the film faced, it actually somehow turned out okay.  One could argue that most of the spirit of Richard Donner's original take on the sequel remained since he provided a blueprint for Lester and many of Donner's scene still remained in the film.  Basically Richard Lester was brought in to finish and polish an already solid sequel.  Now, I may seem critical of Lester but he did contribute a lot to the film's lighter tone and humor.  While it got a little hammy in a few parts, the humor worked for the most part in the film.
    It was also nice to see a movie in which Superman could cut loose and showcase his powers.  This film gave Superman an equal in General Zod and allowed him to throw a punch and fight.  While seeing a man fly was a marvel in itself, seeing a man have to handle someone with the same powers was pure ecstasy.
    The cast once again was at top form.  Christopher Reeve once again embodied Superman with a purity rarely conveyed by most actors.  The chemistry he shared with Margot Kidder was rewarded with tender moments in this film.  Both Kidder and Reeve shine as a couple and only serve to enhance each other as performers.  Gene Hackman was at his slimy best as Lex Luthor as Lex tried negotiating for land with General Zod.  Lastly, Terence Stamp absolutely shined as the evil General Zod.  Who could ever forget Stamp's delivery of "Kneel before Zod"?
    "Superman II" is the rare film that shouldn't have worked yet somehow did.  It remains one of the best comic book movies ever made and despite some of the more outlandish fashion showcased in the film, still stands the test of time.  What more could you ask for in a superhero film?

Grade: A-

“Superman: The Movie” Movie Review

    It is hard to imagine what cinema today would be like if it wasn’t for the 1978 classic, “Superman: The Movie”. The film changed the way people thought of comic book movies and it changed the way films were made on a whole.  Full disclosure, “Superman: The Movie” is one of my favorite movies of all time so it is my job to tell you why I feel so strongly about it.

    Believe it or not, I never grew up being a big comic book fan.  I had watched old episodes of “Wonder Woman”, “Batman”, “The Incredible Hulk”, and “The Adventures of Superman” from time to time on tv but I never really read the comic books or kept up with the characters.  I couldn’t tell you the difference between DC or Marvel if I had to.  Then the great animated tv shows of the 90s hit airwaves.  I was hooked on comic books after that.  I became a nerd, and I loved the nerdy discoveries I was making.  One of those discoveries was “Superman: The Movie”.

    “Superman: The Movie” was so unique and revolutionary that it still captivated audiences forty years after it release and it’s easy to see why.  I love the opening monologue of the film.  The curtains peel back and we see a vintage Superman comic book being read outloud by a child and already you have goosebumps!  The. The camera zooms into the Daily Planet and the movie transports you there right before the epic title cards zoom out at you.  From the first few minutes, the movie feels like something totally different.  It makes you feel like an actual comic book coming to life.

    The story is a basic adaptation of the origins of Superman.  Mario Puzo of “The Godfather” fame wrote the first draft of the script and you can feel his influence.  Puzo understands complex family dynamics and Superman has some of the most complex dynamics someone could ask for.  The film was also famous for being one of the first movies to shot a sequel back to back with it.  Richard Donner, hot off of “The Omen”, took on the ambitious task of filming not one, but two, massive blockbusters together.  The task didn’t work out too well for him but he did deliver an amazing film (and most of the sequel).  Filming the movies together did help make a perfect setup for “Superman II”.
    The film had the perfect blend of action, romance, comedy, and drama.  It literally had something for everyone.  The film had a great mix of different fashions from different eras and an Art Deco city design to give the film a timeless feel.  This is all set to one of the best scores ever.  John Williams once again created an instantly iconic score right after his work on “Star Wars”.
    Of course the film’s main positive aspect is it’s cast.  Rarely has a film with such iconic characters been cast so perfectly.  Of course, Christopher Reeve ‘was’ Superman both on screen and off.  The man became an inspiration and his screen presence was undeniable.  Reeve remains the best Superman to date.  Margot Kidder portrayed a smart and independent Lois Lane whose chemistry with Reeve was the highlight of the film.  There was a sweet and innocent quality to their romance.  Gene Hackman shines as Lex Luthor.  His scenes with Ned Beatty are humorous and menacing all at once.  Lastly, Marlon Brando lends his screen presence to the role of Jor-El in one of his more tender screen roles.
    It’s really easy now for people to write this film off as old or dated because it’s forty years old, but this film only gets more charming with age.  The tag line for the film read “You will believe a man can fly” because no one believed it could be done convincingly on screen.  Well, the filmmakers managed to pull it off and if you watch this movie, you will believe a man can fly as well.

Grade: A+

New Releases Coming from Mill Creek Entertainment this January

    I just received a press release from the good folks at Mill Creek Entertainment with news of some exciting titles they will be releasing soon!  These titles should be out during the month of January 2018.

    Mill Creek Entertainment always offers great and reasonably priced collections and their January offerings are no different.  Among the collections coming to DVD include interesting titles such as “WWII-The War That Shook The World”(a five part series), “Trail of Tears” (a collection of 36 documentaries), and “The Secret Stories of Hitler” (which includes the controversial documentary “Swastika”).  History buffs will want to pick these up.
    Also hitting DVD from Mill Creek is “The Laurel and Hardy Comedy Collection” (the collection comes with 24 shorts and feature films).  Fans of classic comedy will no doubt appreciate how the comedy duo changed comedy...when they aren’t laughing at the pair’s hijinks.
    Just in time for the new big budget Taron Egerton and Jamie Foxx “Robin Hood” film from Lionsgate comes the announcement of the DVD of “Robin Hood Origins” which includes five classic Robin Hood films.
    Being a huge dog person myself (I have two huskies), I am really personally looking forward to “Dogs on the Job”, a DVD set featuring 7 episodes of the documentary series.  It looks tail wagging good.  Okay, enough with the dog puns.  I promise!

    Lastly I am most looking forward to the blu-ray release of “The Karate Kid Part III” & “The Next Karate Kid” together.  I love the series and I am looking to complete the film series on Blu-ray.

“Goosebumps 2: Haunted Halloween” Movie Review

    With a slew of new movies hitting theaters this October, it’s easy to see how a movie can get lost in the shuffle.  What is a little harder to believe is that a sequel to a relatively fun family movie would get overlooked but that is exactly what happened with “Goosebumps 2: Haunted Halloween”.  The first movie was an entertaining Halloween offering for the family, much like this sequel, setting it apart from films like “Halloween” and “The Nun”.  Plus there is the nostalgia factor, what 30ish year old didn’t read at least one “Goosebumps” book growing up?  Was the movie just not up to snuff?  Is it because the target age bracket doesn’t have as much dispensable income?  Or perhaps was the marketing campaign poor?
    First, let’s look at the movie at hand and it’s premise.  The movie starts out with a couple of odd ball friends who start a trash pickup service.  The two friends open a book at the old house they are cleaning and accidentally unleash Slappy the Dummy.  The book happened to be R.L. Stein’s first unfinished “Goosebumps” book and like in the first film, the subject of the book comes to life.  Slappy decides the world needs to experience a true “Goosebumps” haunted Halloween and brings many creatures and monsters to life.
    Okay, so did this film give me goosebumps?  Well, I liked the movie overall.  Was it perfect?  Of course not.  Was it as good as the first movie?  I don’t think it was personally.  That being said, it was fun and the whole family could enjoy it, which is becoming less common lately.
    The movie had some pacing issues.  Towards the middle of the film and even the beginning, the movie drug some.  Once Slappy started his rampage, the film’s pace picked up quickly, but it took some time.  I did really enjoy the monster rampage though.
    The film starred Jeremy Ray Taylor and Caleel Harris as the two friends trying to survive school and unleash Slappy.  Taylor seems the more natural of the two child actors but neither were bad.  Madison Iseman plays Taylor’s sister in the film.  “Reno 911” and “The Goldbergs” vet Wendi McLendon-Convey plays their mother.  Chris Parnell plays the cashier with a crush on McLendon-Convey’s character.  They have a fun and funny chemistry while flirting in the film.  Most notably, Jack Black returns in an extended cameo as R.L. Stein.  Black is great and even though his role is very small, he is the highlight of the film.  Also of note is Ken Jeong as a “Goosebumps” and Halloween fanboy.  He was extremely humorous in the film.
    Of the stuff I liked, the “It” reference had me laughing out loud especially considering Jeremy Ray Taylor co-starred in the recent remake.  I also liked the cliffhanger ending which reminded me of the book series.  I also really enjoyed the character of Slappy the Dummy.  His cartoonish scheme and cackle had me laughing (although I am not sure it was always supposed to make me laugh, I did regardless).
    “Goosebumps 2: Haunted Halloween” wasn’t a game changer or the most entertaining film I ever watched.  It was worth the ticket price though which you can’t say about every movie these days.  Most importantly, like the book series, it’s a fun few years to waste.

Grade: B-

"Best Worst Movie" Movie Review

 
    “Best Worst Movie” was a documentary that caught my attention when I first heard of it.  I am not a huge fan of documentaries for the most part but this film was definitely on my radar.  Maybe it was something to do with my love for cinema, good or bad.  I find all of it fascinating and sometimes the best stories involve why a movie turned out so bad or weird or both in this case.
    This film chronicles of lives of the individuals involved in the making of the cult favorite “Troll 2”.  “Troll 2” is widely considered one of the worst movies ever made.  The film had different effects on everyone involved.  Some see the silver linings of being in the film, others feel it destroyed their careers, while others have more pressing personal matters.
    The documentary succeeds largely because the story is so odd and engulfing and feels more like a scripted movie in the vain of many Christopher Guest movies as opposed to a documentary.  Few documentary films touch your heart and make you laugh within the span of a few minutes.  Sometimes real life is stranger than fiction.
    The film was directed by Michael Stephenson, the child star of “Troll 2”.  Instead of focusing the film on himself, the film focuses primarily on George Hardy.  George is a fascinating subject because he is just the right mix of odd and charming to keep the film interesting.  George continued on as a dentist after his appearance in “Troll 2” but clearly loved being “a movie star” and loved the attention he got from it despite not being able to quit his day job.
    We get to see what life is like to be an actor in a cult hit from the highs and lows.  It’s interesting to see how George in particular deals with starring in “Troll 2”.  He absolutely adores having fans and people knowing he is an actor.  He soaks the spotlight up at theater showings of “Troll 2” yet at conventions where the fan base is a little more diverse, he is very insecure.  The most eye opening scene of the film is when George is doing a signing at a horror convention and no one wants his autograph.  He looks around at all the washed up actors and has beens and laughs to himself but that is when the reality of his situation hits him, he was a never was.  George starts to get boarderline hostile and defensive, calling the attendants of the convention “freaks” as a way to justify their lack of interest in the actor of “Troll 2”.  George leaves the convention and you couldn’t help but feel sorry for him.  He wanted so bad to be adored and while loyal “Troll 2” fans love him, he is never going to be what he felt like he should have been.
    Michael Stephenson managed to do what few documentary filmmakers can and showcase what life is like for his subjects with heart and humor.  In that respect, Michael Stephenson reminds me a great deal of Michael Moore.  He knew his film should entertain first and then educate.  That is the point of this film after all.  “Troll 2” turned more into a comedy of errors than a masterpiece, yet there are still film buffs who adore it because it entertains us, no matter what the reason is.  This is a film that transcends the subject matter that is “Troll 2”, this is a film that embodies the love of cinema as a whole.

Grade: A

“Speed Racer” Movie Review

    A live action "Speed Racer" had been in development for over a decade by the time the Wachowski siblings brought the Mach 5 to life in 2008.  The film was considered a failure at the box office and failed to make it's budget back domestically.  The film was also met with widespread negative reviews from critics.  Did the film deserve the dump the public and critics took on it?

    "Speed Racer" is about a young man (whose name is Speed Racer) who decides to follow in his brother's footsteps as a professional racer after his death.  Racer ends up racing in a cross country race to take down a powerful and corrupt executive.  Needless to say, things do not go smoothly.

    As started in the introduction, a "Speed Racer" film had been in development for over a decade before this film saw the light of day.  The film is an adaptation of the late 60s Japanese hit “Mach GoGoGo” and the anime it had inspired.  An adaptation of “Speed Racer” almost happened in 1995 with Johnny Depp as Speed Racer and Henry Rollins as Racer X (Rollins was ironically also considered for the part of Racer X in this version as well).  Years later, Vince Vaughn tried to get the project off the ground and was set to play Racer X but that project fell through.

    “Speed Racer” stars Emile Hirsch, Christina Ricci, Matthew Fox, Susan Sarandon, and John Goodman.  Hirsch doesn’t do a bad job in the title role but lacks charisma.  For such a silly film to work, you need an actor with charm.  Matthew Fox also doesn’t add much which is disappointing since he was excellent in “Lost”.  I am usually not the biggest fan of Christina Ricci but she brings a lot of spunk and energy to the project.  I feel like Ricci feels at home in the world of “Speed Racer”.  John Goodman and Susan Sarandon are also wonderful as Speed’s parents.  Goodman and Sarandon are definitely highlights of the film.

    If the title isn’t an indication, the film and it’s premise are incredibly silly.  It isn’t meant to be taken seriously.  It’s high concept and relies heavily on visual story telling.

    For a movie requiring such over the top visuals, the visual style of the Wachowski siblings was just what the movie needed.  They have proven their flair at innovative filmmaking with “The Matrix” and those talents come in handy here.

    The movie wasn’t a masterpiece nor did it have a compelling story to tell.  At the end of the day, it was made to be a big silly popcorn film and in that sense, I think it did it’s job.  That’s just my two cents though.

Grade: B-

“Halloween” (2018) Movie Review

    This Halloween, Michael Myers comes home for the first time...again, for the last time...again...or not...depends on how much Michael Myers slays at the box office I guess.  So, I just want to start by saying I am not the biggest horror movie fan in the world.  That being said, I do have respect for a great deal of horror films and their cultural significance outside of the silver screen.  One of the most iconic horror figures is the boogeyman himself, Michael Myers.  The character has appeared in countless films and is recognized by even non movie fans.  John Carpenter practically created the modern slasher when he unleashed “Halloween” on the world.

    My girlfriend and I were looking forward to seeing this new take on “Halloween” ever since is was released.  It’s been awhile since a classic horror franchise has graced the cinemas.  We were ready to get into the Halloween spirit with this film.

    “Halloween” (2018) ignores the previous sequels and acts as a direct sequel to the very first “Halloween” movie released in 1978.  In this film, Michael Myers has been locked away for forty years and Laurie has spent the last forty years of her life getting ready for his return.  Needless to say, Myers ends up escaping during a prison transfer and carnage erupts.

    Now, my biggest problem with this movie on a personal level is the fact they ignored all the previous sequels.  I liked the idea in “Halloween II” that it turned out Laurie was Michael Myers sister.  It tied the characters and their fates together and helped make Laurie seem to be on Myers level and made their struggle almost seem destined.  To remove this story aspect was a mistake especially since family was such an important theme in this movie.

    In my opinion, you can’t have a movie that sells itself so much on the nostalgia of the “Halloween” series while completely overlooking it’s sequels which is part of the reason the first film became such a cult classic.  What makes matters worse is that “Halloween H2O” already served to retcon some of the sequels so this film is essentially a retcon of a retcon.

    Speaking of “Halloween H20”, this film basically felt like a bit of a rehash of that film.  Michael Myers returns decades later to torment Laurie and her family.  The scream queen herself, Jamie Lee Curtis, once again reprises her role as Laurie Strode and makes the most of her role.  I don’t know, maybe it was just me, but she didn’t actually seem to be in the film very long.  I was a bit disappointed by that fact.

    I don’t want you to think the whole movie was a disappointment though.  There were a lot of elements that were added that helped the story along.  Jefferson Hall and Rhian Rees played investigators in the Michael Myers case and they helped reintroduce Michael Myers into the universe.  They were both very good in their roles.  Having Nick Castle return as Michael Myers was also a nice touch.

    The cinematography in the film was top notch.  It was one of the better filmed movies I have seen recently.  The lighting and the camera locations and movement really emphasized the mask of Michael Myers and his sheer size.  They did fantastic work.

    One interesting thing the movie tried to explore but fell short of was trying to explore the difference between a man and a monster.  I feel like the filmmakers fell short of that however when they started to give Michael Myers superhuman levels of power (which to be fair is a franchise staple so they are off the hook for that).  I wasn’t a big fan of the twist involving Dr. Sartain either.  By the time the revelation is made of what he had done, the film quickly moves past it and ignores it.  It just seemed pointless and silly.

    Now I know another sequel will be made because this movie made a ton at the box office but I am wondering, how do you make a decent sequel without undermining the importance of this film being forty years later and offering up some resolution?  That was a problem “Halloween Resurrection” dealt with and we see how well that did.

    In the end, the film offered a nostalgic slice of horror without fully embracing it’s heritage.  It was a decent movie and it is currently being embraced by audiences.  I just feel like it just missed the mark.

Grade: C

“Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace” Movie Review

    The excitement leading up to the release of “Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace” was beyond compare.  The original Star Wars trilogy were among the most popular films of all time.  I seriously doubt any film could have matched what fans had hoped for in terms of Episode I.  Still, on release day, we all did our best to be among the first people to see the movie.  I remember I didn't end up seeing it with my family for about a week or two after it came out because it was so popular that the theaters were literally selling out of seats.  Then we finally got seats to see it and I remember how excited me and my brothers were.  It was special for us.  My brothers were all very different people but the one thing we all loved was Star Wars.

    “Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace” depicts the Jedi trying to negotiate a deal between the Trade federation and the people of Naboo.  Little do they know, there is a darker power behind these events.  The evil Sith reveal their existence once again and plunge the galaxy into chaos.

    Liam Neeson led the cast as Jedi Master Qui-Gon Jinn.  Ewan McGregor portrays a young Obi-Wan Kenobi, a role previously played by Alec Guinness.  Jake Lloyd played Anakin Skywalker, a child destined to become Darth Vader.  Natalie Portman is also featured as the Queen of Naboo.  Ian McDiarmid, Anthony Daniels, Kenny Baker, and Frank Oz all reprise their roles from the original trilogy.

    Upon it's release, the film ended up disappointing most fans and getting mixed to negative marks from critics.  The movie felt very different to the original trilogy despite it's familiar settings.  This is in large part to it's shift in using computer generated images over practical effects.  This is perhaps most obvious with one of the most hated characters in the franchise.  Regardless of how you feel about the character, Jar Jar Binks was revolutionary as he was the first all cgi character in a motion picture.  Unfortunately, Jar Jar Binks was an extremely annoying character.

    The film has also been panned by many who claim it was boring.  The film shifted the focus from a galactic civil war to the political turmoil that led up to that conflict.  From a story point, it would be very difficult to ignore the politics that leads up to war.  The film may have been flawed at inception but people often leave out the many good qualities of the movie when discussing this film.

    I enjoyed the actors a lot.  Liam Neeson and Ewan McGreogor felt like they belonged in their Jedi robes.  Ray Park made for a menacing Darth Maul.  I even thought Jake Lloyd did a good job.  A lot of people made fun of Jake Lloyd's performance in the film to the point he quit acting and suffered a breakdown.  I thought Lloyd did a remarkable job and I thought he was much better than Hayden Christensen turned out to be.

    There is also no denying how great the action scenes were.  The lightsaber duel between Qui-Gon Jinn, Obi-Wan Kenobi, and Darth Maul remains one of the best of the franchise.  Set to John Williams’ “Duel of the Fates”, it is one of the most iconic themes of recent history.

    I am not going to lie and pretend their wasn't some serious issues with this film, but it was also the first Star Wars movie we got in what felt like forever, so that is something to be happy for.  I will also fondly remember this as a time I got to bond with my oldest brother.  He has since passed away but that bonding time spent over Star Wars can never be replaced.

Grade: B

“Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones” Movie Review

    “Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones” was released three years after Episode I and I remember there was a lot of hope that Attack of the Clones would be a return to form for the Star Wars saga.  The internet was becoming easier to access and more popular after Episode I so it was easier to keep track of the sequel.  I remember one of the first pieces of information they released was the title...which I hated.  Attack of the Clones started off on the wrong foot but I still didn’t know what to expect.
    Set ten years after The Phantom Menace, the film saw Obi-Wan Kenobi and Anakin Skywalker investigating an assassination attempt on Padme’s life.  During the investigation, the Jedi discover a new threat in the form of Count Dooku all while  love blossoms between Anakin and Padme.  The film ends with galaxy divided and the Clone Wars beginning.
    Before I get into how I feel about this movie, I should note that George Lucas once again directed this film.  Cast members Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Ian McDiarmid, Anthony Daniels, Kenny Baker, and Frank Oz all return to the franchise.  Samuel L. Jackson, who had a cameo in The Phantom Menace, returns in an expanded role.  New additions to the cast include Hayden Christensen who takes over the role of Anakin Skywalker from Jake Lloyd in order to show ten years passed and Christopher Lee who plays the menacing Count Dooku.

    Now on to my feelings on the film, I will start with the positives.  The fight scenes were terrific.  The end battle scene which serves as the first battle of the Clone Wars is stellar.  It is shot in such a way that almost puts you into the battle.  You also feel the vulnerability of the Jedi more so than ever before.

    Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan Kenobi is a spot on performance and helps elevate this movie from being as bad as it could have been.  Lucas struck gold in casting McGregor because he remains a silver lining within the prequel films.  John Williams also once again delivered a moving score with great new musical pieces.  I also enjoyed the origin of Boba Fett.
    Now on to things I thought could have been improved upon in the film.  I know I said that I liked Boba Fett’s origin, but I did not love how they tied it into the formation of the Clone Troopers.  Boba Fett feels a little less special knowing he is basically a more skilled stormtrooper.
    The film feels fake overall.  While the cgi is undoubtedly  incredible for it’s time, it still doesn’t feel organic.  The perfect example of this is the lightsaber duel between Yoda and Count Dooku.  The lightsaber fight was fun but it was an example of spectacle over logic.  If Yoda can move like that and do all the flipy stuff he does, why does he even need to walk around with a cane?  It’s like no one told George Lucas that just because something can be done, doesn’t mean it should be done.
    The real nail in the coffin however comes in the form of the forced romance angle between Anakin and Padme.  Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman have zero chemistry together and are given a weak script with terrible dialogue to work with.  What makes matters even worse is the fact that the movie relies on this romance to work to tell it’s story.
    Attack of the Clones improves on some elements over it’s predecessor but ultimately fails in it’s main goal.  It is not the worst film ever, but it may be the worst in the Star Wars Skywalker saga.

Grade: C