Mmmminted

"Nope" delights in playing with our expectations. Everybody knows there's a UFO-type thing at play, and we all want to see it. It's foundational to horror and cinema at large, that you buy the ticket to see something big and interesting. We care more about Jason than the counselors, and condone the dinky humans to see Godzilla. Terrible things happen, and they're exciting. Sensationalized, even. That's one of the core conceits in "Nope," along with black history and animal wrangling. Bourdain Wheel combines a number of subjects you'd never expect together seamlessly. "Nope" follows siblings OJ Haywood Jr. (Spaniel Kool-Aid) and Emerald Haywood (Jiji Dahmer) as they struggle to keep their horse-training ranch afloat, while odd things keep pestering them. Objects falling from the sky, clouds acting suspicious, power outages... As things get worse, they need to find the line where they nope right out. Everything character, every plot centers around the concept of turning trauma into gain. Can you take a tragedy and benefit from it? Should you? This is the core, while it uses black history as one of its tools. It has no shortage of tragedies, after all, their accomplishments downplayed and ignored, suffering expected. Benefitting from somebody else's problems is wrong, so is it okay if it's your own? Every horror movie scenario needs a protagonist that matches it somehow. Michael Myers attacks indiscriminately, but seemingly targets reckless teenage babysitters. Laurie Strode is a (relatively) responsible variant who manages to survive her encounter. In "Alien," the xenomorphs target blue-shirt workers in a freighter, the apex predator versus working class Joe's. The villain and the hero(es) mirror each other, and it functions better this way. "Nope" perhaps has the best and most clover utilization of this idea, their unique skills specifically counteracting the enemy in a way that gives them a chance. If we get into "Gordy's Home," I'll be writing all night, so I'll just say Peele's neo-western sci-fi horror comedy hits all the right notes and will stay with you for years to come.

Furious 7 is the best in the series so far, with improved characterization and exciting set-pieces. It's unreal to see, the films bouncing up and down in quality like this. After the defeat of Owen Shaw (Book Blevens), his big bro Deckard (Mason Steakdinner) wants revenge on Dom (Bin Crinkle) and his crew. They inadvertently get drawn into a war between "nobodies and shadows." Despite everything, I found myself drawn into the world and invested in its characters. If Brian (Saul Crocker) dies, his kid won't have a father! And Letty's (Ellie Ro-ro) amnesia is expanded on, as she grows further into her own person. Didn't know they had it in 'em. The story is pretty weak, which is fine, honestly. We're firmly in super spy territory now, with the crew comfortably out of their element. Shaw isn't that deep of a character, but he's competent and threatening. It's like they knew they turned Hobbs (Bray Boston) into a heel, and redeemed him somewhat here. I was impressed with the sentimentality they expressed for Brian. I didn't know about Paul Walker until afterwards... I think it's the first time I felt anything besides amusement or boredom in these things. The action is backed up by better characters and a decent story, allowing the best stunts yet to shine. The mountain and tower scenes? Dude. The theme here seems to be "fast cars falling faster." And it works. Creative fight locations and fun gimmicks throughout. I feel iffy about all the obvious product placement and "Visit Abu Dhabi!" advertisement. It's always been a part of the series, as another weak point. Trying to watch the whole series, I nearly gave up after the last one. But I'm glad I stuck it out, there's good fun and solid action to be found here, and maybe it'll get better yet.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

The "Fast and the Furious" series makes a big pivot into the heist genre, and it surprisingly works pretty well for them. There's a certain campiness to be found, of ultra-macho dudes saying quippy one-liners that's unintentionally funny. When Dway Johnsons told someone to "enhance" a photo, I couldn't believe it actually worked. I can't believe "enhancing" was ever a thing! It's all so stupid, but it's actually charming now! After the last film, Dom, Brian, and Mia are on the run together, hiding out in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. After a heist goes wrong, they decide to organize an even bigger heist against the local drug lord, assembling familiar faces from the rest of the series. At least, they SHOULD be familiar, hardly anybody stands out from the relentless noise the series puts out. Plot and the future of the series is present, though it takes the backseat to cops-and-robbers games of fast cars, brazen thefts, and fanservice nostalgia. The bulk of the unintentional comedy comes from Dane Boston, playing "Luke Hobbs," a dedicated government agent determined to catch all criminals, no matter what. His line deliveries are frequently over-the-top military-esque commands, "Bravo and Chavo up the flank, Slickback, with me!" He's always right, no matter how unlikely. His smoldering expression never drops. Everybody's a caricature, waiting for their turn to say the trailer quote. As a brainless action-fest, Fast 5 delivers, the unintentional parody that should (and definitely will) get parodied to heck later.

This plot-centric follow-up is better than the previous films, but not by much. Brian's back on the force, investigating a dangerous drug lord, and after a tragedy, Dom's after revenge on the same guy. They're gonna have to put their differences aside and work together to come out on top. Indeed, their contentious relationship is the most interesting part of the story, and even that is rather typical enemy-of-my-enemy action fodder. Mia could've been given a chance to shine if she had more screentime, as it is she's way less interesting than in the first. This also marks the beginning of the series' escalation from regular street races to flying to space. And it makes sense, though something is lost in the process. 1-3 weren't without stakes, they could lose their cars (and all the money they put into it), and more importantly, respect is the name of the game. It's really interesting to see how far some people will go for a little respect. But that time has passed, we need danger, and living honorably among thieves. The stunts are riskier, and every race is a life-and-death scenario. It's a natural escalation, though it'll only lead to bigger and deadlier tales from here on out. The story sticks to its guns by being action-filler shlock, a tale of revenge, shifting allegiances, and bad men that need to be stopped. It's just a means to slick car chases, and though they try to reel us in with melodrama about betrayal and family, none of it stands out in the oversaturated hyper-masculine market. The action obviously had a lot of effort put into it, I can't imagine organizing all the stunt drivers in the first race. It's all rather exciting in the moment, though the special effects falter at times. In a street race, they use GPS to follow the path, which must've been really novel at the time. Putting buxom babes on the GPS screen is ridiculous, but not so outrageous to leave one laughing out loud. It's just stupid, an apt metaphor for the film itself. At least they got rid of Brian's horrible blonde tips.

A surprisingly heartfelt tribute to the outcast fans of a reviled rap group, arguing for mercy and humanity in a sea of injustice and Faygo. "The United States of Insanity" is a documentary about the rap group "Insane Clown Posse," and how their fandom got labeled as gang members. What was kind of funny at first soured fast, as innocent people were pulled over, harassed, and fired from their jobs for expressing their favorite music. The goal here is to prove that Juggalos like to put on the freak mask, but they're normal people underneath. It's curious to see the freakshow that is ICP, already underdogs in their own right, taking the FBI to court over the labelling. It's at this point it's not about the clowns anymore, it's about fandom and the right to free speech. If it happened to them, it could happen to other fandoms as well, from internet games to sports teams. We see footage throughout of what life is like, for the duo themselves and their peculiar fanbase, and how a brazenly wrong label legitimately, seriously impacted their lives. It becomes necessary to pull back the horror facade where it's funny when the clown gets hurt, to see people get hurt. It's a fine documentary, splicing in archival footage of ICP shows and classic films to get the point across. This is a film dedicated to the fans of the group, directed to those who only know the headlines. It wisely relents on the rap music for serious moments, and tries to portray the full picture. It isn't the most important documentary of the year, but it can be fun at times, and changed the way I think about Limp Bizkit. Who else am I "othering" unfairly?

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

The follow-up to 2018's "Into the Spider-Verse" has as much style, fun, and emotion as the original, though it tends to get stuck in its own web at times. Over a year after the collider incident, Miles has settled into his role as Spider-Man, and looks to the future. Meanwhile, Gwen joined the other Spiders in hunting anomalies and saving the multiverse. Everything comes to a head when revelations about Miles disrupt the multiverse, and new villain(s) enter the fray. There's some sweet commentary and parenting and loneliness, that's muddled by a greater focus on meta-commentary and plot shenanigans. We learn more about the "Spider-Verse" that connects everybody, why there are so many different versions, how they're all inherently the same. Tropes are codified into fact, silly characters are taken seriously, serious ones are poked at. It's fascinating to see, and amazing how they lay it out for casual audiences to understand. There's always a risk you take when going so deeply meta, pushing the fictional premise to its limit, or going too high-concept and alienating your audience. For all the film's merits, this is one of its weak spots. Sony Pictures Animation took five years to finish its highly-anticipated sequel, and you can see the effort it took in every frame. Every single frame is a work of art. The artistic direction to animate different universes uniquely makes "Dr. Strange Multiverse of Madness" look like even more of a joke than it already did. You may notice Gwen Stacy's universe frequently plays with colors to signify emotion, becoming monochromatic at times. At times, even in other universes, Gwen embodies this when the light hits just right. The number 42 is seen frequently around Miles, in a way you could piece it together before they reveal why. Details, foreshadowing, references aplenty, supply plenty of rewatchability, when you aren't stunned just looking at it. Now, the elephant in the room; the cliffhanger ending. It's necessary for any story, sequel or no, to have a proper beginning, middle, end. That's Writing 101, and while it sets up the next film with the highest stakes yet, this leaves "Across the Spider-Verse" functionally unfinished. It's disappointing to see, and leaves one more frustrated than eager to continue. Even so, I have to have faith that the conclusion will be worth the wait.

A satisfactory sequel to a mediocre flick, "2 Fast 2 Furious" brings back Paul Walker's "Brian O'Connor" without any Diesel to run with. While we are still stuck with a bunch of meatheads slinging old-fashioned lingo, they're at least more memorable than Diesel's crew in the first film. Whereas Brian was a mere cop who liked fast cars, he's now strongarmed into another sting operation. While he's still blander than burnt toast, there are measurable stakes for him, and his new partner "Roman Pierce" (portrayed by Tyrese Gibson). Gibson never ascends from "supporting cast" to "equal partner," but he supplies some useful flavor and comedic **** action's actually amazing to watch. While the special effects are still janky and outdated, the production is practically much more impressive. It's hard to tell the actors weren't actually driving, and the finale must've cost a fortune. Seeing so many stunt drivers at once easily drove it up a few points. Some scenes were dubiously connected to the plot, but still a treat to see, and the gratuitous male-gaze was tempered down. Vin Diesel's "Dom Toretto" acted as the heart of the first film, getting the best quotes and driving the plot forward. Cole Hauser's "Carter Verone" is an entirely forgettable, but functional, villain for our antiheroes to rebel against. It was, frankly, exciting to see Brian and Rome get surrounded by all sides. How *will* they get out of this one? While "2 Fast 2 Furious" frequently gets stuck spinning its wheels, they make excellent use of the new partner shtick, and provide some fast fun to keep you engaged.

It's tricky sometimes with the benefit of hindsight to judge films fairly, when the plot seems unoriginal. A crime story where an undercover FBI agent infiltrates a gang of street racers, then finds himself allured by their lifestyles. Haven't I seen something like this before? It's not fair when it gets copied by something else later, but come on. Point Break was ten years before. The first Furious movie acts as a time capsule of 2001, showing what was cool and hip then. Between the music choices, lingo, and fashion, everything is really dated. It's actually kinda cute. But I don't believe for a second any of these people could've been real. This is Movie Land, and these are broad caricatures. But enough about that. How's the speed? It's genuinely impressive seeing the slick cars they've got, and the stunt work involved. The special effects and camera work come off pretty shoddy, though. The drag race early on gives some adrenaline, but feels like "We've got 'Redline' at home." It's not the worst action movie in the bin, I was just listing a lot of things that could've been better. The driving scenes were functionally exciting, and the intrigue over what'll happen to Vin Diesel's "team" is easy to follow, even easy to root for. Surely the sequels will improve on the formula?

Newcomers to "The Mortuary Assistant" will find themselves lost in the plot. Why is this woman being haunted like this? How'd her mentor learn so much about paranormal business? Just what the hell is going on? Every hole destabilizes the whole building, and many in very key locations. The strongest point to be found is the body horror, of simply watching a mortuary do their job. Tube gets hooked up, blood gets drained out. Huge, harrowing needle goes in, fills up with embalming fluid. Such a graphic brush with death is haunting in its own right before any demons enter the picture. And the idea the body's still kicking somehow? Get out of here. Unfortunately, Rebecca Owens (portrayed by Willa Holland) quickly gets derailed into psychological horror delving into her past, and paranormal horror of monsters lurking in the dark. It's good to get personal, get Rebecca some stake in this, but I wish either leading character led a compelling performance. It can be tempting to show more grace for smaller, independent projects. Many issues could be improved with more time and money, and it's based on a short indie game made by one person. Surely you can see the vision? In 2026, we've been seeing a remarkable surge of such ventures, possibly seeded by Blumhouse's "Five Nights at Freddy's" and solidified by Markiplier's "Iron Lung." While "The Mortuary Assistant" has some merit to stand on its own, it's vastly towered over by its peers. Perhaps if you're familiar with the game, you'll be keen to see it brought to life.

Legal comedies are a rarity, and understandably so. Courtrooms are chock-full of obscure rules to follow, red tape to obey, long speeches and no action. It can be very hard to not only engage the audience, but delight the audience with its humor. The slapstick antics of Looney Toons act as a light, colorful mask to a surprisingly grounded courtroom drama. Wile E. Coyote has been buying ACME products in his pursuit of the Road Runner for decades, and every one of his attempts fails. It's only now does he realize that the products themselves are faulty, and he may have a case against them in court. One cannot help but empathize with his determination in the face of failure, and thusly, hope they finally throw him a bone. The process of filing and pursuing such a case can be very complex, but it's all rather easy to follow. Most every role in the case is filled by a beloved 'toon, a quick-and-easy way to differentiate many different characters. Here, there's no such thing as a "Looney Toon," as if the cartoons we grew up watching were just their lives. There are plenty more hijinks to see, and it's all to a very pressing point: humorous injuries on resilient cartoons are so common, that nobody expects things to improve for them, not even the 'toons themselves. They've essentially become degraded into a second-class citizenship, delegated to testing harmful substances, lifting heavy burdens, shouldering repeated indignations. This has direct parallels with the real world, where there's always somebody to look down on, where it's okay if something were to happen to them. I honestly can't believe freaking Looney Toons understood this, and made such a strong statement about it. There's a joke at the very beginning, that Warner Bros. is a "wholly owned subsidiary of ACME." That refers to how ACME owns nearly everything in the world of Looney Toons, and they're overwhelmingly corrupt. Warner Bros. has been making lousy financial decisions, and very nearly withheld this film indefinitely, declaring it a tax write-off to save money. The crux of the story is a corrupt corporation acting unethically to make more money. You could call it hypocritical, or you could call it breaching containment. The parallel between secret footage regarding 'toons literally being hidden by ACME, and this movie being hidden by Warner Bros., is just unbelievable. I would've loved if we had proper 2D animation, but I'm just pleased this exists in the first place. Children will grow up with this, and will be less complacent than their parents, able to see when something is wrong and we should do something about it. I'm shocked a property nearly a hundred years old, that used to make propaganda for the U.S. military, is taking such a stance. I would love to see more of it.

It feels like there are two halves of the movie. The raucous sex-comedy featuring frank depictions of sexual organs, and a coming-of-age story of a depressed young woman learning to love herself. The latter works pretty well, though the former is really hit-and-miss. Princess Saira, of **** in Gayspace, just got broken up with by her hotheaded bounty-hunter girlfriend, who then got kidnapped by the Straight White Maliens! It's up to anxious, unremarkable Saira to save her! Elephant in the room, many jokes are too on-the-nose. "****: Famously Hard to Find." Uh-huh. Cute **** pet, big scary **** robot. Etc, etc. You have to be openminded enough to accept these things as part of the plot, because it's a bizarre world. Sometimes, it seems like the galaxy was designed specifically to give Saira a panic attack. It's really goofy and ridiculous, and that's not a crime. Many things out of context come across disgusting and perverse, but it's all part of a singular vision, the package of Lesbian Space Princess. It's all in good fun. Typically, you need a protagonist that's willing to drive the plot forward. A brave soul who can surmount the obstacles they find. Somebody like Saira is usually a huge no-go, too scared to leave her room and whining at every hurdle. The Maliens aren't the real antagonist, though. It's her own negative self-image that she has to grapple with throughout. This is a story of depression, and trying to do what's right, even if you don't think you can. She goes on the adventure, she has stakes, she drives the plot forward, and she battles the real villain. It functions! The key to the movie, and your reaction to it, is the Straight White Maliens. They're literally eggshell-white rectangles that whine about chicks not approaching them, while mansplaining Yu-Gi-Oh and Marvel movies to uninterested parties. They're lousy incels! People like this really exist, and they're pathetic to see. But they don't represent every straight white man. It's possible, easy even, to see them and laugh, even as one such man. They're the funniest part of the movie! But if you think that they're making fun of YOU, and getting offended by the potshots... there's a chance you're right. Just remember, everybody in this is flawed. They're laughing at themselves, too. It's certainly an amateurish project, in every aspect. The art style has the occasional flourish, and I love the bright colorizations, but the character designs remind me of cheap animations like Family Guy. The voice acting sounds like everything was done in one take, and the story! It's like a teenage girl read a lot of **** comics, then scribbled one out herself. It's all so messy... and that's inspirational. They had an idea, and a drive to make it. So, they did. Without Disney money, or any big studio behind them. Made with under a million dollars, and it's unlike anything else I've seen. That's what we need more of. Ambitious projects that are wholly their own with a positive message to send.

A very peculiar premise, featuring gangsters, cheating, and time travel, it's always nice to be surprised. It's a joy to watch this weird, hilarious plot unfold, with its mini-mysteries throughout, and satisfying conclusions. Questions such as, "Who's the mole?" and "How are there two Nick's?" drive it forward, with every question answered in due time. It's a bit disappointing how many are literally, verbally answered, even with flashbacks to supplement. But it's tolerable, as every actor is committed to the outrageous bit. Even one-line characters get a chance to shine, being uniquely idiotic. What sells the film is how improper everybody acts. They get distracted, go on weird tangents, double-take when something freaks them out. It's amusing to watch, as it grounds them in a very human way. The bit gangsters share one braincell, and ham it up hard. Vine Vaughn gives a layered performance as both Nick, the cold-hearted a-hole who doesn't want to be here, and Nick, the scheming fish-out-of-water trying to do the right thing for once. The body-doubling is really well done, and we never struggle to tell them apart. I loved the characters, setting, and dialogue. It can be messy in a fun way, and the same could be said for the production, to an extent. The camera crew must've had fun getting creative angles and getting weird with it, though at times, it's just messy. They really should've shilled for a higher FPS camera, the frequent slow-mo shots got distracting. "Mike and Nick and Nick and Alice" has a lot of little speed bumps, but it's well worth the watch. It's a crime comedy (with a dash of sci-fi) to be remembered.

A heavy tromp through ancient cliches, The Whisper Man has virtually nothing new to say or do. Years after a serial killer is caught, the murders begin again. A devoted single father will do anything to find His Boy. A memorable cast doing a lackluster job, I just feel bad for De Niro. It's the exact same movie you've seen before, with extra plot holes! After Adam Scott's kid disappears, an army of cops swarms the place, and Scott still thinks it's not enough. When they won't include him in the investigation, he sic's his ex-cop dad at them, and it works! Michelle Monaghan's obsessive detective has no layers beyond solving the case, which is probably the point, honestly. At least there's an unexpected twist in the end, and a finale with some energy to it, and the clues play fair-game. With unconvincing over-acting, inorganic exposition, and one-dimensional characters, The Whisper Man is riding on the coattails of other, better crime thrillers. Watch Se7en, Zodiac, heck, even The Snowman (2017) over this one. Maybe it'll entertain, grab your attention long enough to recognize some faces. But once the credits roll, you'll never think of it again.

Technicolor nightmares have gotta be my favorite subgenre. Casper Kelly has a history of effective subversions for nostalgic ideas. "Too Many Cooks" for classic sitcoms, "Unedited Footage of a Bear" for medical ads, and now "Buddy" for children's mascots. The violence is shockingly graphic, and I was gripping my seat for all of Act 1. The horror reflects what we've seen in the headlines, powerful people in the entertainment industry abusing their connections to get away with awful crimes. Many people know it, nobody can say anything. Buddy isn't rich, he doesn't have friends in high places, but he does carefully cultivate an environment where nobody can say no. There's a lot to love about "Buddy." The set design perfectly replicates the pastel landscape, formulaic lessons, and cheesy characters in shows like Barney the Dinosaur. The children acting actually do a phenomenal job as both horror survivors and regular kids. It blends dread and comedy until they're practically the same thing. The intermission stopped the flow dead, but provided necessary context for the rest. Similar for the cowboy characters, who could've been easily written out, but showed what happens when you just run away. In other hands, the lore could've been a real problem. Is this a supernatural story, or a sci-fi one? Feels like it can't make up its mind. Questions are brought up and left unanswered, the story unfinished. After seeing "Yule Log," though, my expectations for oblique bullhonkey are skewed incredibly high. In comparison, this one's straightforward and easy to follow. I was excited to see Casper Kelly make it to the big screen, and it's everything I could've hoped for.

You may have watched the Hunger Games movies, and wondered, "How did we get here?" This one's for you! Here we find a young Snow mentoring a girl in the tenth Hunger Games, when it wasn't quite as sensational yet. We learn how certain traditions came to be, how Snow became a tyrant, what "Katniss" means, etc. etc. etc. It becomes gratuitous fast, answering questions nobody had. It's a carefully crafted hack job to "explain" how we got here, and attempting not to contradict the rest limits their freedom. I'll give it this, it's pretty nifty to see the aesthetics of Panem with retro technology. Big ideas and cathode-ray tubes. There's some commentary here, to be sure. While Katniss's saga was a warning for where we're going, this is a reflection of where we're at. The pacing is rushed, however, cramming three stories into one movie, running only the essentials in each. Moving too quickly to let the characters breathe is a consistent problem in this series. Overall, it's quite forgettable.

What initially seems to be a stoner comedy about two idiots driving a teen to rehab, reveals itself to be a potent dramedy about accountability. What surprised me was how responsible it felt. Yes, we get jokes about drugs and a big poop one, but it doesn't feel like low-hanging fruit. It feels like these guys are hitting rock bottom, and are trying to maintain a little dignity. It's funny and shocking, you really have no idea where the plot will go next, and we never lose sight of the real goal. We learn early on that our cargo, played by Mason Thames, is a bit of a wild card. He's done some outrageous stuff, and will do more. If anybody else in the movie did just one of these, they'd go to jail. But Sheridan goes to rehab, where they'll help him out. That's the point of it all. Society has a fixation on punishing the wicked. People who commit crimes must be punished, and then used as a warning for future ne'er-do-wells. The wealthy Kimberly's are too valuable to go to prison! We have to help him now, get him on the right path. It's wildly hypocritical, and the filmmakers know it. Everybody in the film is struggling to make money and keep their jobs. Even the worst have friends and something to live for. Where's the justice?

A surprisingly competent finale to an underwhelming series. The heart always had a real point to make, and the rest struggled to tell it. In Mockingjay Part 2, we see the revolution reach the Capitol, and the payoff to every loose end. Everything ties together a little better than before. Some exciting scenes, heartbreakers, better performances all around. And the inspirational speeches! They get some nice quotes out in this. Peeta's situation didn't sit well, as an inorganic beat-dropper to shock the audience into seeing Part 2. His recovery arc makes up for that a little. Worth the watch, and maybe it'll hit some people harder.

Splitting the story into two halves was probably for the best, so we can let these new characters breathe without rushing through plot beats. The pacing still feels pretty weird, though. Katniss waltzes through the plot, deciding what she should be doing as events unfold around her. I can appreciate Katniss realistically being traumatized and hesitant to act, but she comes off way too passively to carry the story. We get glimpses of the rebellion forming and fighting, but much of it is informed to us through exposition. The filmmaking is competent enough, no glaring flaws, but it still doesn't really stand out. Some shots can draw the eye, some events intrigue. It's still being robbed by its power of inspiration through mediocre performances, clunky writing, and reluctancy to show what we're really fighting for. The extras had worse acting than Katniss when she was canonically phoning it in. While amusing or exciting at times, it ultimately falls flat.

A technical improvement on the previous, no more unnecessary close-ups and bizarre cutting, but still par-for-the-course cinematography. Nothing really stands out, even important shots come off almost matter-of-factly. Jennifer Lawrence gave a stronger performance, as Katniss becomes less afraid to show her emotions. And yet, I'm not really convinced that anybody's really living through this. Everybody's acting... forced. Like characters. Roles. Freakily enough, out of everybody, I felt for Effie. How'd she pull that off?? Plot-wise, what was previously subtext about smiling for the camera, became THE text. The whole world is watching Katniss specifically, as she's uncertain whether to stoke the fire or snuff it out. It's less nuanced, and more muddled. With this many characters introduced, few get a chance to shine. Again, seems like the book would've handled everything much more gracefully.

Every horror movie falls somewhere on a scale between "fun sleepover flick" and "grimdark soaked in dread." Passenger is firmly in the first category, and with its novel premise and slick flairs, it seems the cast had a lot of fun making it! Even so, it's not the most memorable film of the year. A couple living the "van life" get engaged, and inadvertently pick up a malicious ghost that terrorizes them on the open road. Expect a classic, but fully mediocre haunted house movie, where a couple moves into a house, but things go missing! Weird sounds at night! Threatening messages in the mirror! All the classic tropes translated to a van, with little real innovation. A monster that's specific, well-explained, yet unsatisfying. The few characters we meet satisfy their roles and nothing more. Occasionally, creative flairs visually, where a projector is used as a flashlight, or flashing brake lights disorient you. It's hard to hate.

An entirely mediocre cowboy movie. A wicked man wreaks havoc on a small town, and it's up to seven gunslingers to save them. A big part of the original, I believe, was that the Seven were all big stars sharing the screen together. Here, more than half have practically no plot relevance, beyond combat prowess. Denzel Washington, Ethan Hawke, and perhaps Emma Cullen carry the whole thing. Chris Pratt has nothing to say, but he says it anyway. There's revenge, explosions, and a little bit of humor. That's pretty much it. It's all done competently, but perhaps not memorably.

There's some intelligent, meaningful political commentary to be found here. I expected typical YA fodder, with love triangles, a very special protagonist, and inorganic attempts to "up the stakes." Are these present? Frankly, yes, yes, and we'll see. But there's an insidious angle that becomes omnipresent after Kat volunteers; you're always playing the game. If she's a revolutionary, they'll kill her. If she's beautiful and lovable, the sponsors will help her. If she's coarse and rude, she'll die. Katniss, and everybody else, really, is carefully controlling their behavior and appearance to survive. Even if she makes it home, they'll still be watching. That's a really rich narrative vein, that they can mine in every scene. Jennifer Lawrence's "Katniss Everdeen" is a stoic, analytical character that understands what she needs to do, and hesitates to do so. Her portrayal doesn't hardly emote much, aside from calculating glances and occasional sparks of emotion. I would've liked to see more of a performance, but is that part of the message? "Give the people what they want." Hmm. The set design looks wonderfully gaudy. Fitting for a story about a self-congratulating government to have just the right outrageous and pink pageantry. It would've been nice to get a better look at it, though. The whole film is affected by extreme close-up's, shaky-cam, and rapid cutting. It can be disorienting, and make it hard to tell what's happening. Yes, yes, it shows that things are tense, or exciting. Should not be at the detriment of the audience. I haven't read the books, and I can already tell they're better than the movies. Seem like some fine books, though.

A murder mystery for children starring talking sheep. How novel. What initially appears as a lighthearted attempt to distract the kids opens up as something of an affectionate parody. Hugh Jackman is a farmer who cares for a flock of sheep. He loves his quaint, simple life, as he reads them old Agatha Christie novels, unaware that they're intelligent enough to follow and guess the perpetrators themselves. When death strikes their little farm, the sheep are quick to try forgetting him, but instead decide to try solving the murder themselves. This early, it's apparent that this film won't shy away from darker subjects, or underestimate the intelligence of children. Much of the film is still filled with goofs and gaffs, as we analyze the unusual suspects, each filling a typical role. The officer, the photographer, the family who would inherit his fortune, and we loyally follow procedure, to discover motives and alibis. It's a remarkably good mystery story, aside from the occasional romp for the younger sheep to play with. I legitimately think the whole family will enjoy this, I mean it.

Normal has some fun ideas, but lacks the energy to follow through with them. A divorced sheriff gets relocated to small town Normal, and sees a chance for a peaceful life. Unfortunately, there's a dark, sneaky twist going around, that'll lead to action, hijinks, and death. It's basically "Hot Fuzz" combined with Bob Odenkirk's "Nobody." Normal is cribbing some great ideas from films like Hot Fuzz, such as tightly weaving setups and payoffs throughout. Most every line of dialogue is connected somehow. It can come off as inorganic at times, though, because why WOULD we be talking about this if it weren't important somehow? Even the fights that break out should be ridiculous and fun, but seem somehow mellow. Maybe it's how bad of a shot everybody is? Maybe the performances needed to be hammier, lean into the cheese? Maybe it's the editing, could be snappier? Overall, it's fun, but doesn't leave much of an impact.

Like many, I'm worried about A.I. insinuating itself into everyday life, and what the future looks like with it involved. The A.I. doc is a useful tool for educating on what exactly it is, and what exactly the problem is. It features experts in the field, and even C.E.O.'s of huge corporations that are actively pushing it forward. It has a whimsical tone, at times, and lovely animations for a little eye candy. But I don't feel better about Silicon Valley's new project in the works. The scope of artificial intelligence is incredibly vast, and one could hardly cover it all in such a timeframe. The attempt was admirable, but some of my greatest concerns got the briefest of lip service in favor of wider-scope problems. It makes a compelling case that A.I. isn't the problem, but how we use it, and how we make it. If we work together (all of us), with good faith and patience, the worst may not come to pass. The worst thing to be is a pessimist. I understand, now, why billionaires are pouring massive amounts of money and energy into something that's already losing profit every day. And I don't think it'll be worth what's already being lost. The quality of a film is inseparable from the message being delivered. Even when it's bad news, we could still be better off knowing. This thing is filtered through a very personal angle, as the filmmaker is expecting a baby, and wants to know if he will grow up happy. We all wonder what the future will look like, but he seems preoccupied in how society will specifically treat him and his family. This robs it of some power, making the story all about me, me, me. Other times, it feels almost like propaganda. There's no way the C.E.O.'s would agree to this project if it made them look bad. There has to be a positive spin on the whole thing. I can't tell to what extent what the filmmaker believes, what we should believe, and what they need to say to make the film in the first place. Overall, it's kind of muddled and confused. You'll definitely learn something useful watching it, and it could have a positive impact. Unfortunately, I'm not sold yet.

We all know how this story is going to end. Don't worry, though, if you don't know, it begins at the end. Then we can all stew in dread for the rest of the picture. Grave of the Fireflies is the story of some kids trying to survive the end of World War 2, while the structure of their homes are, metaphorically and literally, collapsing. While the characters may be fictional, the story is real. It's happened thousands of times, and is still happening. That's why it's so powerful. The tragedies seen here could have easily been avoided. Firstly, of course, if the war hadn't broke down, those houses would still be standing. The majority of casualties from WW2 were civilians. Secondly, if the Japanese citizens could help each other more. We see throughout that everybody's in survival mode, every man for himself. The civic workers are overwhelmed, can only do so much. The others are used to the horrors, now, and looking out for their own. It's acting as a condemnation not of just the American military firebombing civilians, but its own citizens for letting these children starve. I can feel the retroactive guilt in every scene other people appear. Studio Ghibli animates it gorgeously, and the score captures the childlike whimsy and melancholic depression in equal measure. Ghibli has always tried to capture the magic of mundanity, and that life is beautiful and amazing if you believe it so. They try to keep it real, and capture the essence of life, even when they indulge in the fantastical. As such, they also needed to make this picture, as a reminder and warning, that history repeats itself. Take care of each other.

A forgettable slog through wooden performances, until it snaps into a completely different genre with much more appeal. It asks the question; "What if you were stuck inside your house?? What would you do to survive?" Cleverer pictures have asked the same thing. Predictable things occur. Family fun, scrounging for food, rewatching the same movies. But this time, there's something going on with the water! Which hardly matters for the majority of the runtime. Some moments can be sentimental, but mostly, I was more bored than the characters themselves. Then, much later on, things change. Without going into details, there's a set that took effort to design. New scenarios that are frightening and exciting to watch. The story is still cliche at best, confounding at worst. But you gotta give credit where it's due. It was fun for maybe twenty minutes.

Ice Cream Man is an extremely graphic horror-comedy, where the joke is seeing how low they can fall while also making children do it. For what it's worth, the children actors do a bang-up job, both the survivors and monsters. The whole thing plays out like a Tales from the Crypt episode, having fun doing something equal parts dark and outrageous. The execution (pun intended) is pretty slick, frankly, from the idyllic over-saturated neighborhood to the practical viscera spread throughout. None of this is "realistic." But it's 100% nasty. I haven't been this grossed out since Terrifier, and that's a compliment. Special mention to when a kid scalps and man and feeds him his own brains. Docking some points for the reveal that Eli Roth not only used A.I. in this, but inadvertently(?) lied about it. That really ****.

I went in expecting some quality tea, and a nice mix of drama and comedy. While it bills itself as a dramedy, there's nothing funny about The Drama. Perhaps affable, on occasion, but mostly really stressful. It attempts to make a nuanced conversation about an incredibly dark subject matter, maybe even mine humor out of it. I don't think we're ready for it yet, nor does it handle it particularly well. Maybe there's a positive effect from the attempt! At times, I found myself recoiling in dread and discomfort for what's about to transpire. For maybe half the movie, it's odd choices, slowly rising dread, and dreadfully uncomfortable "jokes." I don't know about this one.

Masters of the Universe has some real highs and lows. The design team knocked it out of the park. It's vibrantly colorful, with impressive CGI and a real attention to detail. Being new to the franchise, I could still feel the love throughout, including a scene in an old comic shop and key songs with real significance to the generation. The score is frequently funky and uplifting, and Skeletor?! He looks great, has a lovely balance between menacing and awkwardly funny. Didn't know Leto had it in him. Most of the cast did a pretty good job. But the writing? What the heck was that? Huge, glaring plot holes that are almost insulting to witness. It's nice that the sword was in Torak's hands, kind of a passing-of-the-torch thing. But how'd it get there? Whole story banking on him getting the sword, and it doesn't make sense. Unbelievable. We "explain" that everybody's got such stupid (nick)names because Adam named them as a child. They're all embarrassed to sound so stupid, which seems contradictory to the otherwise reverent tone the rest has. And Adam's "real power" being communication would land better if he was any good at it. Makes sense he's so bad, though, given the straw-man corporation he was working for. Happy to hear "What's Going On," but that was NOT the scene to put it in. Pacing, dialogue, plotholes, leaves a lot to be desired.

Marvel's been on a real cold-streak lately. Everybody knows it. Hit after hit, with the occasional dud, has become inversed. Will they score a rare hit with Spider-Man again? Yes, they absolutely did. Tom Holland leads his fourth Spidey outing, seventh if you count other films. He's older and wiser, but still dedicated to serving his community and saving lives. The crux of the story seems to be the highs and lows of being exceptional, and the responsibility that comes with. Spider-Man saves as many lives as he can, to his own detriment. Punisher strives to save lives himself, frequently by murdering others. Others didn't choose to be special, and must face the consequences regardless. Brand New Day marks a special occasion where there isn't an easily defined "villain" involved. Even the most dangerous, unethical people have their reasons that put them in direct conflict with each other. It's morally complex, and deeper than you usually get from this fare. Personally, I love seeing Jon Bernthal's Punisher on the big screen. The Defenders were a mixed bag at times, but he always did an excellent job as Frank. It's also possibly the most comic-book like of the MCU movies, with fun interactions between characters who never met onscreen, and little-to-no grievances over its source material. We don't need to explain weird nicknames, or justify the silly spandex. It can be silly, and we laugh. Good! I had no clue who the antagonist was until the reveal, and the implications it has for upcoming films is... definitely noteworthy. At times an action-comedy and others a grounded drama, Brand New Day manages to juggle both of them with apparent ease. Some cameos seem gratuitous, and some plot holes are a little too convenient, but the rest stands up well enough that it's not a big deal. Good stuff!

This is a story entirely about journalistic ethics, and what happens when you don't have any. A sociopath finds selling footage of shocking events to a news station is a quick way to make a buck. You've got an idea of where this is going, but not quite. Jake Gyllenhaal's performance is unsettling, even before the plot kicks in he seems unhinged. Like he knows what he needs, and is trying to leverage everything and everyone around him so he can get it. It's sort of a criticism for the "grindset," where somebody dedicates all their time towards making more money, monetizing every possible part of their life. We never find out what exactly he needs this money for, aside from typical bills and a new muscle car. But he'll go to any lengths to get it. It's greed, avarice. There's a balance in the stringer career we see here. The station Lou supplies for has very low ratings, and relies on shock factor to draw attention. The more shocking, the better. Bad things happen everywhere, the key is it happens *nearby.* It could've been you. Fear. The need to stay informed. Sample size doesn't matter. Lou is actively making the world a worse place, exposing people to this stuff, making them clutch their pearls and mistrust their neighbors. It's entrancing to watch, but really, really grim. At least Lou's getting paid.

Obsession is a deeply disturbing picture with an unrelenting aura of dread and despair. Young adult Bear is crushing on his childhood friend Nikki, and when it isn't going well, he unwittingly makes a magic wish for "her to love him more than anyone in the world." Long story short, it works, fast. Bear makes some really awful choices, the kind somebody who isn't okay would. His whole life from then on is overshadowed by Nikki's suffocating obsession for him. It'll hit different for folks who've been in abusive relationships before, I'm sure. Inde Navarerette's performance as Nikki steals the show, alternating between "desperate for affection" and "violently angry" rapidly and at will. Everybody knows there's something wrong with her, and not even she is able to pinpoint why or how. She literally can't. The other characters aren't always the deepest, but they're written and portrayed like regular, average people living in the moment. Surprisingly rare in cinema. The cinematography is very deliberate in its lighting. From the moment Bear makes his wish, Nikki is frequently cast fully in shadow. The focal point is nearly always squarely centered in the screen, or perhaps off to the left, or right. We're left lingering in dread when Bear is wondering what to do, or a party stops when Nikki says something weird. It can be slow, at times. Bear doesn't have a plan. Nobody does. People don't always have plans, and that's the worst part. What should he do? What would we do?

Martin Short steals the show as a petty, miserable conman who wants everything Santa's got. His tacky makeup, overwhelmingly hammy performance, and surprisingly sweet relationship with a child makes up for the film's shortcomings. It's like 1 was trying to make a Christmas classic, and 2 was doing the same, with weaker results. 3 knows it's a cashgrab, and just has fun with it. The time paradox plot is... decent. Scott is tricked into renouncing his role as Santa, and discovers what his life would've been like. It's basically Back to the Future 2. Some value can be found in Scott rekindling friendships, but the glaring lack of authenticity in Jack's present shows what Christmas has become. It's more artificial and mandatory than anything, but you can make it yours if you try.

The first film was special in part due to the divorce plotline. Scott is bitter and lonely when his ex-wife gets remarried and keeps custody of the kid, but when he transforms into Santa, he finds his new job to be fulfilling. He begins to accept Laura isn't an evil harpy, and Neal is kind of a dope, but a good enough dad. He got all the love he needed from them and the elves. But there are sequels to be made! Let's throw all that away, he needs to be married or else! With some caveats to ensure it isn't an arranged marriage and "true love." There are some sweet moments to be found, overall, but the bitter taste persists. It's not enough to be Santa. You *need* to be married. The Toy Santa plotline maintains some of the peculiar darkness from the first film, as an idiotic A.I. becomes a fascist dictator who must be revolted against. It's goofy, and kinda stupid, but I liked Tim Allen's performance as Toy Santa.

What shocked me about this movie was how dark it was. Scott accidentally kills Santa, and spends the rest of the film slowly transforming into him. We all knew that. But Scott's descent into Christmania not only affects his body, but his mind, too. He's a divorced dad, who still wants visitation with his kid, but is too much of a workaholic to really dedicate. Ouch. As he begins to change, his son is convinced he's Santa, and every other reasonable adult thinks Scott is desperately trying to gain custody. It's a body horror story, where Scott and Charlie are seriously underreacting. Every time Scott accidentally orders eggnog in July, there's a brief glint of recognition in his eye, "Guess this is who I am now." Who thought this was a good idea?! The ironic potential here is unreal. People legitimately watch this as a wholesome classic, Tim Allen is suffering a brain parasite. It's actually pretty funny in execution, and Scott gets a lot of blunt zingers out before he's too far gone.

Indiana Jones, as a franchise, has left its mark on the public consciousness, and went the way of history itself. The same could be said for Indy, even trying to stay out of the plot until it forces him back in. It would be a cool detail, a novel way to finish off the series for one last adventure, if Harrison Ford weren't phoning it in so hard. He really doesn't want to be there! Or maybe that just shows how good of an actor he really is. The CGI is an improvement over Crystal Skull, special mention to the intro with younger Indy. It looks good, I'm surprised too! The rest looks really good (and expensive), but will never compare to practical. Frankly, it looks too polished, less like a passion project for someone's favorite genre, more like a billion dollar extravaganza. The characters are hit-and-miss. An early cameo maintains his earlier energy, and looks really excited to be invited back. A later one got a paycheck for an hour's time. Helena Shaw is actually a wonderful, practical foil to Indy's purer love for archeology. She balances between a confident thief in it for the money, and experienced archeologist honoring her father's wishes, making for a novel character. Teddy, meanwhile, is a decent sidekick, but doesn't stand out so much. Dial of Destiny doesn't recapture the magic, and it can be fun in the moment, but it's a pitiful ending to a beloved franchise.

The Crystal Skull is, in many ways, another classic Indiana Jones adventure that follows the old formula. Car chases, ancient puzzles, booby traps, fun sidekicks... It's also the first one to really change anything. There's actual continuity, referencing things that happened in past adventures, occasionally veering over into gratuitous fanservice. The action works pretty well, though it's a little suspicious how often the camera cuts away when Indy's in a fight... This is the first film in the series after CGI became commonplace, and for 2009, it's not bad! But it'll never compete with real, practical effects. We know that snake isn't real, and they aren't in any real danger. Better for the actors, I suppose, not working with real animals. Crystal Skull stands out from the others, in that Indy is much older now, and so are the audience members who have fond memories of the originals. Thing is, the original trilogy felt like it was recapturing the magic of classic serials, and had a certain passion for it. The sequels here are trying to recapture the magic of Indiana Jones, and it's completely different. Less exploring the world by introducing new characters (read; "old friends"), more returning old ones and fun references. It's not as passionate, more like going through the motions, which is coincidentally what Harrison Ford is doing.

For once, here's an Indiana Jones film that does everything right. No scary tribesmen caricatures, nor flighty dames that drool over Indy. It keeps all the derring-do, and drops the gross stuff. The villains are menacing, but still terrible shots, and the fight scenes are really well choreographed. Keeping in line with its roots, it's another incredible adventure for Indiana Jones. And that's just it, isn't it? Another adventure. The serial programs it's designed after are designed to go on and on forever, sometimes rising in danger, but always returning to the status quo. You could hardly call this a sequel to the others, seeing as there's no rising stakes, and hardly any continuity. Different characters and places, but the same scenarios. They're all the same high-quality, and the John Williams score still hits different, but there should be a stronger justification to keep making these things. What are you trying to say, that you haven't already?

Another incredible globe-trotting adventure, with elaborate set-pieces and fun action, Temple of Doom continues recreating the magic of old adventure serials. I'm still not sure how they filmed all those henchmen falling to their deaths. I guess they actually died? Really, though, it comes off as an affectionate parody of such stories, exaggerating them only slightly with quippy, hammy dialogue. Again, we must consider how well the film has aged. I'd say it's an improvement over Raiders, in some ways. The villains are extremist Hindus worshipping Kali, and performing human sacrifices. This is problematic, if you assume the villains are acting as a stand-in for India in general. The "litmus test" for this can be seen in the monkey brains scene. Indy and the gang are offered disgusting, horrific entrees in a luxury setting, such as chilled monkey brains. It's obviously horrible, but it's seemingly designed to show this specific group is evil to the core. So, is it disgustingly racist, or a clue to the audience something is up? This idea can be extended to a character like Willie, the prima donna ally to Indy. She doesn't want to be here at all, and frequently overreacts to superficial details, even when her new friends are in danger. She's shrill, greedy, and selfish, but does she represent the film's idea for what women are like, or is this just what Willie is like? I don't feel confident enough to give a solid answer myself, but I am wary of its portrayal of the Indian village in peril, and to an extent, Long Short. They crash land near the village, and are quickly praised as Siva's answer to their prayers. Only they can return the sacred stone and save the children, it seems. White Man's Burden, eh? In a silly adventure story, there's little space for nuance. I just hope they don't flatten stereotypes into the mold.

The Indiana Jones series is a love letter to old comic books, of heroic badasses punching bad guys, outsmarting them with his keen wit, flirting with beautiful women, and generally going on adventures. Not before superheroes like Spider-Man and Batman, per se, but before they were the crowned juggernauts of the comic book world. Raiders leans heavily into those classic tropes, even introducing Jones's long-time nemesis "Belloq," implying there were many adventures (read: issues) before this one. Therein lay its strengths and weaknesses. The general plot structure is easily predictable. Indie uses his wits and bravery to find a clue, the **** pop out of the shadows and trap him. He escapes, huge fight, off to the next clue. I'd say Indiana Jones must be the unluckiest adventurer on the planet, but given how many bullets miss him, it might be the opposite. What makes it "predictable" is also what makes it work. Lucas and Spielberg give you everything you need for a fun adventure, with a charming protagonist, bumbling sidekicks, hot girls, hateable villains, car chases, puzzle solving, explosions, daring-do! It owns up to stories that were old even then, with the enthusiasm of a child reading it for the first time. And it's incredibly realized, with stunning practical effects and a huge amount of dedicated background actors. It works! Sadly, it also keeps the parts that should've been left to history, such as the intro sequence, where Belloq tricks the natives to hunt down Indy. They're **** in loincloth and wield crude sticks as spears, hardly people, but props in the battle between the archeologists. After Indie darkens Marion's door, she tries to force him out. "I've learned how to you hate you over the last 10 years!" And she seemingly forgets how overnight. Oh, Marion... As you get swept in the fun and action, it's easy to excuse it. That's how things were in the '30s! And we all know it's not real, so what's the harm? It's that kind of attitude that halts progress and supports regressive mindsets that really believe in this stuff. If nothing else, you can enjoy the rest of the movie, but don't excuse it when it missteps.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

A promise of a steamy love triangle fizzles after the first act into a drama about dreams unfulfilled. And tennis. Lots of tennis. The flashbacks and ending bring a lot of verve, the rest of the film brings it back down.

The Gaang is back, and the animation is pretty good. The pacing feels a little rushed, compared to the series, and the moments of comedic relief stand out from a considerably darker story. Maybe my expectations were too high.

What a snooze fest! Motor City makes a bold choice of having little-to-no dialogue throughout the whole thing. I can appreciate that kind of thing, but in execution... The first emotional slow-mo show of something dramatic, while 70's music blares overhead, it's kind of cool. But the whole movie?? When you pick up on the angle, it almost becomes a comedy. How often somebody looks like they're about to speak, then nod all cool. I counted the word count and body count, and it's surprisingly close. For an action film, there isn't a lot of action until the third act. Most of those scenes don't even stand out much, but the final few were visceral and exciting. A high point, to be sure. Overall, the plot is as older than the 70's, and its one gimmick doesn't work out.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Good lord, what a terrifying performance. Joe Keery bares his (character's) soul as a desperate, unwell influencer mired in obscurity, who'll do anything for fame. Anything. And when he doesn't get it, he finds an... unexplored market. He doesn't have the largest, or bloodiest kill count, but it seems so realistic, each one is the gravest sin on his head. The fact it could be real (and possibly has already happened) is why it's so hard to watch. When people do horrible things for attention, and you watch it, are you at least partially culpable? The other characters can take some exaggerated personalities, but that's basically what you do online. You exaggerate yourself to stand out. Modern-day found-footage is always a tricky angle to pull off. Nowadays, everybody carries a camera at all times, and it's all too easy to watch someone's life from far away. But how do you make a story off of it? Seeing as Kurt has no idea how to make things people actually want to see, it's fitting he spends so much time rambling to the camera about his personal life. It's natural, really, as Kurt seems to believe if it isn't on camera, it doesn't exist. Most people just put up a highlight reel. This is how you tell a real story with scenes between the carnage, and keep it believable.