Movie1997

Wow oh wow! What a film! After much anticipation, I finally got to see the follow up to director Damien Chazelle's breakout hit "Whiplash". This movie blew me away. For someone who is not into musical's, this one locked me in from start to finish. Every song in the movie is fantastic and the musical set pieces truly compliment the songs in such stylish fashion. This is very much in the vein of 1940s and 1950s musicals while still being its own thing. The movie is also a love story between Mia and Sebastian played by Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling. This is not only their third collaboration together, but easily their best. Both Stone and Gosling give the performances of their careers. They bring out a lot of great comedy and make you believe that anything is possible. I believe they both should get best acting oscar nominations. The movie showcases the struggles of following your dreams with the complications of being in a relationship. I love how the title has a double meaning. Los Angeles (where the movie takes place) is also known as La La Land. The place where dreams are made. However, the movie shows how difficult and frustrating that idea can be and how the real world is nothing like the movies tend to make it out to be. Which leads to why the movie ended in such a heartbreaking but touching way. It takes hard work to pursue your dreams, but not everything turns out the way you want it in the end. There are some sacrifices to be made in life and the ending really hit me hard with that message. This is by far the best movie of 2016! It is a beautifully directed musical that presents interesting ideas while paying homage to old classics. I give "La La Land" an A+!

Since "La La Land" is out in theaters, I thought I would take a look back at Damien Chazelle's big hit of 2014. And man oh man is this something. "Whiplash" is an intensely electrifying drama that never lets up. Everything about this movie is spectacular thanks to unique editing, a great script, and performances from Miles Teller and J.K. Simmons that really elevate the movie to a whole new level. Without their chemistry, the movie would not be even close to what it became. It is a movie that questions how far you are willing to go to achieve your dreams. The movie presents its ideas in such an unflinching way that it draws you in with its intensity. There were moments in this movie that legitimately made my heart race. Most action thrillers now of days don't come anywhere close to giving me that same effect. Now that is saying something. From beginning to end it continuously builds and builds to a remarkable climax that was so satisfying to witness. It's the kind of underdog ending that was just so well deserved. Overall, Damien Chazelle has a made one of the best movies not only of the decade but of all time. I give "Whiplash" an A+!

As much as I wanted to love this movie, I just couldn't. Don't get me wrong, I don't find "Rouge One" to be a bad movie by any means. It is simply a film that isn't without some flaws. Say what you want about "The Force Awakens", but at least there was structure behind it. It had great dialogue, great editing, clear direction and well-rounded characters. With "Rouge One" the dialogue is not always spot on, the editing is a bit jarring at times, there's not always clear direction and there is not a great sense of care of the characters. Some of the characters from Ben Mendelshon, Mads Mikkelsen, Alan Tudyk, and Donnie Yen were much more memorable than others. Even two particular old school Star Wars characters impressed the hell out of me. At the same time, I found the rest of the characters to be nowhere as interesting. The biggest problem with "Rouge One" is that it doesn't take the time to flesh out our main protagonist's. When we get to bigger moments towards the end, there is no sense of worry or care about the fate of most of these new characters. But what ultimately makes this movie an enjoyable feast for the eyes is the action. The last thrid of this movie in particular is what everyone is going to be talking about. It absolutely looks stunning. Overall, has an interesting story, but it doesn't have as many interesting/memorable characters, or great structure in storytelling. Nevertheless, there is still enjoyment to behold. I'm going to give "Rouge One: A Star Wars Story" a B!

For someone that is really into the Harry Potter universe, I was actually kind of excited for this movie. However, the movie was simply enjoyable, but nothing special. I'll start off with some positives. First off, I was intrigued with the concept of having to recapture the beasts. The beasts were very unique and interesting to watch. As much as I personally do not like Eddie Redmayne as an actor, I thought he was fine as Newt Scamander. Nothing special, but serviceable. I really enjoyed Dan Folger as Kowalski, or the no-maj as he's referred to in the movie. I liked seeing him really get caught up in this world and forming this awkward friendship with Newt Scamander. At the same time, I also found his relationship with the character of Queenie to be even more interesting than I could have possibly imagined. Most importantly, despite the movies numerous "Lord of the Rings" like endings, what happens to Kowalski at the end of the movie honestly left me touched. However, the movie has quite a bit of flaws. The movie suffers from pacing issues. Some scenes played out better than others. The whole Ezra Miller storyline didn't really captivate me and felt as if it was from a completely different movie. But the biggest reveal in the movie, while truly surprising, didn't feel needed in any way, shape or form. If you've seen the movie, you will definitely know what I am talking about. And the ending itself went on way too damn long. Like I mentioned before, I like what happened with the no-maj character, but everything else happening at the end simply did not need to happen. There were definitely two movies going on at the same time, which was very distracting. At the same time, I cared about our main protagonists and wanted to learn more about them, which is why I ended up enjoying the movie in the long run. Overall, for a messy movie, it still provides some interesting new additions to this movie universe that fans will not be disappointed with. I give "Fantastic Beasts" a B-!

Wow. Talk about a fascinating war movie. This is truly the most visceral and engaging war movie since "Saving Private Ryan" (1998). First off, I have to commend Mel Gibson for his beautiful direction. Say what you want about the man, but he knows how to engage an audience through gripping visuals and interesting characters. Which leads me to the performances. I was surprised to see great performances from the entire cast. Initially, I was anxious to see Teresa Palmer and Vince Vaughn in this movie, but they both surprisingly fit into the movie almost seamlessly. A particular standout is Hugo Weaving. His performance was a bit too real for me and reminded me of a man that I know that was very similar to Weaving's character. Nevertheless, I found him to be one of the best characters in this movie. But the big standout is Andrew Garfield as Desmond Doss. Garfield brings a child-like personality into the role. We see Doss learn how violence can really take a toll on one's inner self which is what makes him the man he becomes as the film plays out. It also tests his own morals and how despite the trials tribulations faced that stand in his way, he still stays true to what he believes. Easily one of the most fascinating characters portrayed this year thanks in large part to Garfield's performance. Finally, let's talk about the war sequences in the film. In a nutshell, they are powerful. Like I mentioned, it the most visceral war film since "Saving Private Ryan" (1998). The war sequences are very hard to watch and can leave you feeling sick. However, it is all portrayed beautifully. Even more fascinating are the moments in which we follow Doss through the war and see how his morals come into play. Both halves of the movie are completely different, but they both help structure our main character and show how he deals with both basic training and the war itself. In regards to flaws, only a couple of moments at the beginning of the film felt very conventionally. However, as the film plays on, it continuously becomes more of an experience as opposed to watching a made for TV movie. Overall, this is a fascinating war drama with a great story and a terrific leading character. I give "Hacksaw Ridge" an A! Definitely check this one out.

Steven Spielberg, you've still got it. "Bridge of Spies" is as close to cinematic art as it could possibly get. Its got great performances from both Tom Hanks and Mark Rylance in particular. It even has top notch directing from Spielberg. It even showcases its great screenplay from the Coen brothers and Matt Charman. Yes, the movie is driven with dialogue to tell its story and it may turn people off, but if you're into engaging dialogue then this is the movie for you. I love how the movie explores the nature of man and how we often judge people as a society. It never flinched away from this subject matter but it also introduced real human connection from two opposite parties. While there are not many scenes like it but when its just a scene Tom Hanks and Mark Rylance, you feel this bond start to form amongst the two. In many ways, they form an unlikely friendship. I love how Spielberg transports us to this Cold War Era. You can feel his stamp through every shot and frame and even through the movie's narrative structure. And Thomas Newman is a great replacement for John Williams as a composer. For the type of music he's known for it really suites the movie well and fits in seamlessly. Overall, it's a movie that has the Spielberg touch which makes for a more heartfelt and compelling story. I give "Bridge of Spies" an A!

This movie really took me by surprise. I had tons of buzz about this movie and wondered what all the excitement was about. Well, now I know. This is an effective work of art that tells a shocking piece of history. I honestly don't know where to begin. I guess I'll start with the performances. Every single performance is phenomenal! I'm surprised no one from this cast got nominated for the golden globes and I seriously hope they don't get overshadowed at the Oscars. This cast is what drives this story along. Aside from the cast, the story itself is incredibly intriguing yet hard to watch. Luckily, it never has a flinching moment. It tells its story with justice. It also shows the importance of journalism and how far they go to uncover every thing behind the scenes. This is an engaging and brilliant story that never loses focus and is always moving further into the thick of things. With fantastic direction, screenplay and arguably the best ensemble of the year, "Spotlight" is a strong contender for awards season and a movie that I believe won't be soon forgotten. I give it an A+!

This was honestly a movie i didn't think would catch my attention at the slightest. However, I found myself emotionally invested in this movie, and its all thanks to the tremendous performances. I bought into the chemistry between Rooney Mara and Cate Blanchett 100%. It never felt forced but rather genuine. Even Sarah Paulson and Kyle Chandler were great and served vital parts in the story. I liked the setting and the fact that it didn't tell a story about homosexuality in a time when it wasn't acceptable, but rather a love story that completely altered the lives of our two leads. This may not be something I found to be groundbreaking, but i'm definitely glad I watched it. Overall, it's a great love story. I give it an A-!

I really wanted to like this movie, but there is no other way of putting it. "Joy" is a joyless mess. To be fair, Jennifer Lawrence gives a great performance as Joy, but honestly, it's hard to acknowledge her great performance when this movies multiple styles and awkward pace overshadow the main character herself. At one point, it feels like a Scorsese movie, at another point, it feels like it's suppose to be lighthearted. And my God, the pacing towards the last half felt like the fantastic four. A very long first act, no second act, and a rushed 3rd act. There's no clear vision of what this movie wanted to be and the movie made me kind of angry. Overall, there's no point in getting into the story when the movie isn't even sure what it wants to be. I give it a C!

To be honest, I didn't know whether or not I was going to like this movie or not. I will say that it's a really good movie, but not a great one. Let me split the movie into roughly three acts. As for the first act, I felt that it went on for too long. Most Tarantinto fans realize that he likes his really drawn out scenes of nothing but pure dialouge. And it's fine when it works, but for the first third of this movie, it takes way to long to set up its characters. And not all of them are even introduced until closer to the second third of the movie. And plus, Walton Goggins got really annoying from the get go. In a nutshell, the first third had me worried. But by the time we jump into the second act, the dialouge starts to get more interesting and the movie starts to take a different turn and reveal itself. The who done it storyline really starts to becoming engaging in great Tarantino fashion. You start putting the pieces of the puzzle together. By the third act, the dialouge still becomes intriguing in the longer and drawn out scenes. However, they never got boring by this point because we're into the thick of the meat (metaphorically speaking). So in a nutshell, "The Hateful Eight" has a slow setup, but once you really get into the main plot, it's a free for all and a rather fun and crazy one to say the least. I wish the movie didn't waste it's time so much with its slow first act. It could have been an all around great Tarantino movie. Nevertheless, it was still a fun movie to watch and I'm glad I did watch it. And I'm glad it got even better as the film went on. I'm going to give "The Hateful Eight" a B+!

Coming off the success of "Birdman", Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu delivers with easily the most gritty film you will see this year. First off, this movie is incredibly gorgeous. From its beyond beautiful cinematography to its gorgeous locations, it's a real cinematic movie that traps you in this environment. The cast (particularly the two leads) is fantastic. Tom Hardy gives arguably the best performance of his career in my opinion. He's an antagonist with layers and even brought unpredictability to his character. But Leonardo DiCaprio, is what you go to see. Saying that he gives a great performance is an understatement. He is Hugh Glass. Not once did I think to myself that I'm watching Leo give a performance. He felt like a real person! Maybe it's not my favorite performance of his but it's beyond damn good to say the least. I loved that it was a revenge story and one that makes you clinch your fists during the big combat sequences. You feel the brutality! And you feel Hugh Glass wanting to seek his revenge. It even has really good pace for a two and a half hour long movie. I never got bored because there was always something at stake. I will say that the very end felt a little too ambiguous for its own good. Other than that, I believe you have a strong contender for best picture at the oscars. Overall, it's a brutally beautiful movie with grit and heart pounding intensity. I'm going to give "The Revenant" an A!

It's been 10 years since we've last experienced a Star Wars movie (not including the Clone Wars cartoon movie). We've had good one and we've had bad ones. So the question is, does "The Force Awakens" hold up? Yes! I believe it does. And here's why. It captured the beauty and essence of what makes Star Wars great. The music, the action sequences, the great characters and the story. People have argued that it's just a rip off of A New Hope. While I agree it replicates A New Hope at parts, that's not what the story is about. I promise I won't spoil the main plot in case you haven't seen it. I love the new characters, particularly Daisy Ridley's Rey. She is a strong female character that is a blast to watch on screen. I also love Oscar Issac as Poe Dameron, John Boyega as Finn and even Adam Driver as Kylo Ren. He's a villain with a real internal conflict which makes his character fascinating to watch. Even the old cast is great once again, particularly Harrison Ford as Han Solo. But have to give credit where credit is due. J.J. Abrams directed a fantastic movie. He captured the heart and spirit of what made Star Wars unforgettable. He brought us new fantastic characters as well as brought back old characters we've come to know and love. There was a lot of passion from his directing and even writing alongside Larry Kasden and Michael Arndt. Now look, the movie does have some issues. The ending comes off as convenient, there is some noticeable CGI and elements of A New Hope are easily noticed, but it's the lure and spectacle that makes this movie so damn fun to watch. Overall, it's a return to form for Star Wars and i can't wait to see what's next in store. I give "The Force Awakens" an A!

After witnessing two great Star Wars movies, I was super stoked to see the conclusion of the original trilogy. 2 hours later, I realized that I didn't love this movie. Granite, it's not bad at all, but it didn't fully deliver as an all around exciting finale. Let me get my negatives out of the way. The style of this movie didn't seem as cool as before. The previous two movies had great affects for there time and still hold up pretty well. The effects in this movie are easily outdated. And because of that it sometimes took me out of the movie. I also didn't find all the characters to be well written and I think the performances kind of show. For me, it's mainly from Han and Leia. I understand that Han is going through a character arc, but he doesn't feel like the Han Solo I knew from the previous too movies. Leia was kind of the same way, but not to the extent I felt with Han's character. And of course, the ewoks. Granite they are not Jar Jar bad by any means, but seem to cute for a movie that should be more of a fulfilling finale. I don't think they truly needed to be written in the movie. Now for the good! While I mentioned some of the writing wasn't as well written with certain characters, Luke Skywalker was great. I love him becoming a Jedi and journey he goes on to confront Darth Vader. In fact, that whole storyline is what I loved the most. The confrontation, the lightsaber fight towards the end, everything going on in those scenes were nothing short of perfection. In many regards, that should be the case since this is the main story we are following. I even loved the emperor. While I got a taste of what he was like in the prequels, it felt like I met this character for the very first time in this movie. And I loved how he wasn't simply over the top, but he was very controlling and threatening. I thought he added a lot to the confrontation between Luke and Vader. And then we get to the cute party scene at the end and the series is over... For now! Overall, even with its flaws, there's still lots of good that comes out of it as well. But it's not always well rounded all the through like I hoped. Nevertheless, I still liked "Return of the Jedi" and I'm going to give it a B!

After getting absorbed into the world of Star Wars thanks to memorable characters and set pieces, "The Empire Strikes Back", delivers in almost every way possible. While the "Star Wars" was honestly nothing much more than pure fun, this one told a dark and intriguing story that really threw its characters for a loop. Since we've pretty much grown to love these characters, the turmoil they face really drives a strong emotional connection that the last one didn't necessarily have. It even digs deeper into the mythos of the force. However, I felt I didn't get enough of it. I wished the second act was much more broad like its first and third acts. It could have added another 30 minutes for all I cared. And really, that's my only biggest gripe. This movie delivers in a way that was never seen before. By putting its characters at stake and giving the story more grit it made for a gripping Star Wars experience. I give "The Empire Strikes Back" an A!

Now this is where we get into the real fun. "Star Wars" is a fun time just watching a movie in general. There are fascinating characters involved with a very interesting premise. It has tremendous pace for a two hour long movie. And the spectacle of it all is still impressive to watch to this very day. It is what a movie should be. It has a little of everything. As far as issues I will say that the whole destroying the Death Star sub-plot felt kind of forced in. It just went from one story to another in my opinion. And it did have a very squeaky clean ending. I understand that it's probably because of the fact that no one expected a sequel after this movie became a humongous hit, but I wish it went for more of that feeling of there will be more. However, there is lots of up to be had with Star Wars. Great characters in a great story with tons of wit and true adventure. I give Star Wars an A-!

After two less than stellar Star Wars prequel movies, "Revenge of the Sith" finally tells the story audiences have Ben wanting for years. The story of Anakin's turn to the dark side. In comparison to the last two, it's a huge improvement. While it's not a great movie by any real stretch. As a whole it tells an engaging and focused story. From the get-go you can easily notice that the visuals look 10 times better than the previous two movies. Even the acting isn't as hoaky as before. Yea, there is still some bad delivery here and there, but it doesn't overshadow the ideas of what's in store. Unlike the others, this is the first time I saw a character (for the most part) rather than just a guy trying to pull off a convincing performance. At times you do feel his expressive emotion. In reality, it only pulls through when he is simply acting with his facial features. Even the musical score felt exciting and heart pounding. So yea, it's an improvement, but shades of the last two can still be seen in certain scenes. The chemistry between Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman is still bland, some delivery of ridiculous lines come off as cheesy as hell. However, I still liked the movie overall. There is still some fun to be had with it and it didn't end with a cringe fully bad taste in my mouth. Honestly, this is the only prequel movie that feels necessary if you truly think about it. There didn't need to be two big movies about Palpatine coming into power and how the clone army came to be (not to mention the romance). You could have still gotten the information needed in this movie quick and easy. So, if you're new to the Star Wars universe, my advice is to start with "Revenge of the Sith". It may not be the best, but it's one I think you'll find very interesting. I give it a B!

"The Phantom Menace" may be a simply a bad movie, this one is unfortunately worse. Instead of loads of tax federation crap, we got loads of Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman having a horrifically forced love story. Instead of mildly fun light saber fights, we get mediocre light saber fights. Instead of bad writing, we get abizmole writing. You see the point I'm trying to make. After "The Phantom Menace" didn't deliver like most people hoped it would, you would at least expect Lucas to actually try with the next one. And to be fair he does try to be different. However, he goes in the opposite direction and writes one of the worst loves in history and a story about clone troopers that doesn't go into effect until the last act. Beyond just the screenplay, the visuals still look hoaky, some even worse than last time. The performances are honestly even worse than from the last movie. If anything, I felt that my time was wasted for the most part. Again, like "The Phantom Menace", there are moments of promise. But there's very little of it. Where as "The Phantom Menace" had its good moments a little too far and in between, "Attack of the Clones" barely has any moments like that throughout the entire movie. With a title like "Attack of the Clones", I was hoping for something fun and exciting even if it was brainless fun. Overall, it disappoints even more so than usual with terrible dialogue, terrible performances, a terrible story, and a terribly God-awful love story. I give it a D+!

Having not experienced Star Wars as a kid, I thought that I should watch all of them starting with "The Phantom Menace". Unfortunately, this did not kick things off to a good start. Right off the bat you get a lame and pathetic story about tax federations, weak characters and even worse performances. The visuals are completely overblown and **** you out of the movie. I don't think I need to say anymore about Jar Jar Binks. While I didn't find him to be the biggest abomination in cinema, he does leave a bad taste in the mouth of viewers. But it's a not a flat out terrible movie. There are some great light saber fights (even if they are too well choreographed), and there are even some (not many) but some moments of promise. However it doesn't fulfill the way that it should be use of George Lucas' direction. The problems this movie has are because George Lucas doesn't know how to write characters let alone get real performances out of his actors. You can tell he's more about style than substance. Overall, while not a terrible movie, it's boring storyline and dull characters make "The Phantom Menace" one to simply skip. I'm going to give it a C-!

If there is anything to be said about M. Night Shyamalan, it should be said that he is not a one trick pony. "Unbreakable", while not as impressive as "The Sixth Sense" is still a rather originally intriguing superhero movie in disguise. First off, Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson give great, subtle performances. I thought Bruce Willis was better in "Unbreakable" as opposed to "The Sixth Sense" in almost every way. I felt him more as a character rather than just trying to deliver a performance. Samuel L. Jackson is probably at his most subtle. Don't get a me wrong, I love the usual performances he gives in Tarantino movies or pretty much anything else he is in. But you could feel he was going for something completely different from his other roles. It felt personal, absorbing and honestly unforgettable. The concept of this movie was genius, but it felt more like setup than an actually story. I guess I just wished this movie had something more than what I got, especially since it truly is a superhero movie in disguise. As for the big twist, I actually bought it. Like the one in "The Sixth Sense", when you go back and watch it, it all works. Overall, even though I wished there was more to this movie, it was still rather intriguing. I give "Unbreakable" a B+! Be sure to check out my YouTube channel "LittleMovieBoy" for more reviews.

Since "The Visit" comes out next Friday, I thought I'd do my best to review every M. Night Shyamalan movie. And I'm starting with the movie that made M. Night a star. "The Sixthe Sense" is a dramatically thrilling horror movie. I was honestly quite surprised how much I loved this movie. Even though I had known the twist for years because everyone spoiled it for me, it still manages to be great one when you think about it. Plus it doesn't feel like a gimmic just to make the movie interesting. When you watch it a second time it all makes since. That's clever directing on Shyamalan's part. But the actually movie delivers just as well. Haley Joel Osmont is fantastic as Cole. Bruce Willis was good, but there were moments that felt like he was just acting. Toni Collete is also fantastic as Cole's mother. The way the story moves is very engaging and compelling all at the same time. It didn't feel like those typical generic horror movies. The characters and situations felt real, and you really care about them throughout. However there were two scenes that while good, I felt didn't really need to be in the movie. But it's still a fantastic movie to watch. Overall, it's a compelling thriller. I give "The Sixth Sense" an A!" Be sure to check out my YouTube channel, "LittleMovieBoy" for more reviews.

Is it any shocker that his latest movie is nothing more than the usual Sandler shtick? Unfortunately no. "Pixels" is just another Sandler fest with a bunch of arcade video games from the 80s. It's incredibly unfunny with some of the stupidest sub-plots in any Sandler movie in general. It's also got forced relationships between Adam Sandler and Michelle Monaghan and even Josh Gad and Ashley Benson. And Kevin James is just awful as the President. THE PRESIDENT! As far as the action sequences with the arcade games, they are fantastic to watch. The whole Pac-Man scene in particular is just outstanding to watch (if you ignore the idiotic comedy in between). But what's sad about "Pixels", a movie about arcade video games, is that they are barely in the movie. They probably only make up about 25% of the entire movie. The other 75% is focused on our terrible main characters, their childishly idiotic humor and their annoying sub-plots that have nothing to do with a movie about video games attacking earth. Overall, the fun action sequences are mostly pushed to the side thanks the movies terrible writing and crappy characters. I give "Pixels" a D-! Be sure to check out my YouTube channel "LittleMovieBoy for more reviews.

Paul Thomas Anderson knows how to write interesting characters. "Magnolia" centers around the different stories of multiple people. We have two characters dying of cancer. One is a cop that falls in love with a drug addict. Tom Cruise is a sex mentor. The list goes on. As a result I love this movie. Grant it, it's not a perfect movie and has its issues. But we'll get to that later. To be fair, there is a lot to love about this movie. Anderson wrote and directed the living crap out of this movie. He has such a beautiful vision not just from a cinematic scope, but from a storytelling point of view. And he has also written tons of interesting characters. John C Reily as the cop. Jason Robards and Phillip Baker Hall as the two men dying of cancer. Phillip Seymour Hoffman as Robards nurse. TOM CRUISE AS A SEX MENTOR! There are tons of more characters than that, but can't talk about them all day. However the performances from the cast is stellar. They hold their own emotional weight to their specific stories and carry the film. Sure some were better than others, but all their stories were nevertheless engaging. And Tom Cruise just kills it in this movie. In a movie filled with literally top notch performances, he stands out as my favorite character. It was just something totally different from what we've seen him do before. I loved how the stories are interconnected but never to the point that they have to try to have everyone come across everyone in some forced way or fashion. It's not like those ensemble movies in which everyone meets up at the end. For a 3 hour long movie, it keeps me engaged the whole way through. If anything only the last 5 maybe 10 minutes dragged. That's it! Plus it also has a rewatchability factor to it. Again, it goes back to having all the interesting characters keep you engaged the entire movie. Ive seen this movie twice and still plan on watching it a third time in the near future. As far as issues, I will say that Julianne Moore's character was the one that I could never care about. It's the fault of Anderson's writing rather Moore's performance is completely over the top. Luckily she doesn't have as big of a story as essentially every other character. But I could never get into to her character like I did with everyone else. And there is a big event near the end of the movie, while a great scene, it just felt completely over the top and absurd. Maybe because that the whole movie felt so grounded in reality up until that point. I guess it's just something I have to look further into. But overall, it's such an entertaining movie with stunning performances by almost everyone, fantastic writing and a great vision (for the most part) by Anderson. I'm going to give "Magnolia" an A-!

The N.W.A. story hit theaters in a big way. "Straight Outta Compton" is an engaging biopic. First off, our three main leads give stellar performances. You don't see the performance rather you see Dr. Dre, Ice Cube and Eazy-E. They all pulled off fantastic performances but Jason Mitchell (Eazy-E) is the real standout. Not only is he the first character introduced into the movie, but he's the one you care about the most. Mitchell brought a lot of emotional depth to the role, and made it a performance for the ages. But that's not the only standout. Director F. Gary Gray really showed his talents for making not just an entertaining movie, but an emotional journey through the eyes of these legendary rappers. Before then Gray really only knew how to make moderately entertaining movies. Here, you could tell that this was a passion project for him. And he pulled it off with spades. It was a great history lesson without feeling like a history lesson. You could tell that in the movie, there were things that they did not hold back; which make for a much more entertaining experience. The last act of the movie may not be as strong as the first two, but there are still terrific scenes in there. There were some cameos. Some good, one in particular (for me) was ridiculous and I personally didn't buy it. Also, there was one character introduced about halfway through the movie who was nothing more than a clear antagonist. His performance was fine but he came off as one-dimensional. But overall, this was a fun, emotional and crazy biopic. If you haven't seen it and want to learn more about N.W.A. Go see it. I give it an A-! Be sure to check out my YouTube channel "LittleMovieBoy" for more reviews.

Now this is one hell of a directorial debut. Joel Edgerton's "The Gift" is one of the most suspenseful thrillers in recent memory. For starters his writing and directing are masterfully crafted. The performances nothing short of amazing. The three main leads are unrecognizable (Paticulary Jason Bateman) and add lots of weight to the film overall. Don't go into this movie thinking that's it's the typical stalker horror flick. What this movie is truly about is how someone's actions can affect another persons' life. From either words, physical actions, etc. And it's a theme that doesn't try to hit you over the head with it, rather it smoothly takes its time to unfold. Sure it's first 15-20 minutes or so tend to play fairly by the numbers at first, but one our characters are introduced, it's literally a free for all. It's unpredictable and keeps you guessing til the very end. It's a thriller that keeps you on the edge of your seat as to where the story will go rather than its minor scares. Sure there are a few well done scares, but that's not what this movie is about. When you peel back the layers there is something truly original and unique that unfolds. Overall, Joel Edgerton knocks it out of the park with his first big theatrical debut. I'm going to give "The Gift" an A!

Wow! I can't believe this movie turned out to be as bad as everyone said it was. This movie went from starting off with a little hope into ending with an unforgettable and disappointing climax. The biggest problem is that it lacks any focus on any sub-plot, development of characters, etc. it's just all over the place. Personally, I blame Fox rather than director Josh Trank. At parts, it felt like it was going somewhere. But it immediately goes nowhere as Fox decided to not develope any characters, sub-plots, etc. And of course, the third act is even worse than I thought. This movie just wanted to get rid of itself so quickly that it lacked any pace. Overall, this is a wasted reboot. I need to sleep this off. This gets an F!

In spite of the controversy that this movie presents, "A Clockwork Orange" is still an energetically electrifying film. What keeps this movie from feeling too focused on the controversy is the character of Alex (Malcom McDowell) and the journey that he goes through. Alex DeLarge is probably my favorite character in a Stanley Kubrick movie. He is synical and monstrous, but at the same time you care about him. It's a back and forth relationship. You hate the character as a person because of the awful crimes that he commits, but when he is getting pushed around from not only the people trying to reabilitate him but by those he harmed earlier, you feel bad for him as a person as well. And of course, Malcom McDowell nails this character to a tithe. Aside from a fascinating lead you have a beautiful stylish setting a gripping moments that really put you to the test. It's also very thought provoking. And not in the way that's too ambiguous for its own good like "2001: A Space Odyessy". It questions views on society. And it shows that everyone and anyone can have a dark side when handling cert a in situations. You feel bad for one character when something bad happens to him/her, but when that same person strikes back you feel ashamed in their actions on dealing with a situation. As far as issues with the movie, there was one droog that gets literally no attention whatsoever. It should have just been three droogs rather than four. And it was a little slow at a couple of parts within the second act. Other than that, this movie is entertaining and engaging as hell, despite its controversy. I give this an A-!

Stanley Kubrick really likes to throw us for a loop. However, it doesn't work like I would have hoped. First off, there is no denying that this movie is straight up beautiful. Absolutely gorgeous to look at. The effects still hold up to this day. The musical score is also beautifully orchestrated and unforgettable. I doubt that anyone will deny that. But the biggest problem with "2001: A Space Odyssey" is that it is excruciatingly slow. It pains me to say it, but this is the first Kubrick movie that got me bored at parts. There are sections in this movie that drag on for so long. And in those moments they really rely on the visual spectacle and beautiful score to cover up the progression of the story (at least I thought). At one point near the end when it was suppose to be super intense, I was trying to keep my eyes open. This movie could have easily been cut 30-40 minutes **** honestly, you don't care about the characters. They seem kind of emotionless. The character you care about is the HAL - 9000. It was such an interesting antagonist and it really is what carries the weight of the movie on its shoulders. This is a hard movie to understand on a first viewing. It's not really a fault of the movie, however with the slow pace, it can distract you from what's going on in the story. Overall, "2001: A Space Odyssey" is a masterpiece on a technical and orchestral level, but sadly nothing more than a painfully slow burn to endure with not so memorable characters. I give this a C!

It was really disappointing to see a movie with so much anticipation split people in half. While I'm not going on record saying that this was flat amazing, I will say it was honestly (in my opinion) that "Tomorrowland" was still really fun and inventive. First off, it's visually stunning. Brad Bird has a very creative look and the concept was interesting for literally the first two acts. I'll get to that later. The characters I found to be quite interesting. George Clooney is great as a gruff older man. Britt Robertson is also equally great as the female lead. But it's Raffey Cassidy as the little girl that steals the movie. Not only was she so unexpected, but she was a straight up bad-ass and served purposefully well in this movie. The big problem with "Tomorrowland" is the last act. The message presented something that I first bought into at first, but it kept beating you over the head. And the big climax was a big let down. And the ending doesn't leave you inspired because of its forced message. Other than that, I think the movie is quite a bit of fun with awesome action/visual sequences and great characters. If you didn't like it the first time, I want to recommend those to at least give it another try. I give this a B!

Marvel has done it again! "Ant-Man" is surprisingly a marvel to watch. First off, Paul Rudd is awesome as The title character. He provides a great mix of comedic flair and meanings of becoming a hero. He's so great because of the fact that he's such an expected figure. It's like when Steve Carrel did "Foxcatcher"; you wouldn't expect actors like them to do something very unique. But Rudd pulls it off with flying colors. I could go on about the performances. Michael Douglas is fantastic as "Hank Pym", going back and forth with the likes of Paul Rudd and Evangeline Lily (she's also great). And Michael Pena was hysterical! But I want to get into the scope of this movie. It's really narrowed down to such a much smaller scale in comparison to every other marvel movie. And I loved that! The cinematic scope and vision was so perfect for this movie. The action was super cool and inventive all at the same time. It shows that you don't need humongous action sequences like in the "Avengers" movies or "Man of Steel". It's still rather impressive to watch the action scope unveil on a smaller that level that can still keep your eyes glued to the screen. As for flaws, I didn't care Bobby Cannavale's character. And I wish they went more in depth with the relationship between Scott Lang and his daughter. I felt something was there, but not entirely for me to care about them. I will say that the villain may not have brought anything new to the table, but he was still intriguing to watch unveil. Overall, this is a wildly hilarious and beautiful action movie shown on a much smaller scale. I give "Ant-Man" an A-! Be sure to check out my YouTube channel "LittleMovieBoy" for more reviews. Hopefully this review will be up by tomorrow.

Taking a look back at some of Kubrick's earlier looks I noticed that I didn't love this movie. I really wanted to love this movie, but it did kind of disappointed me. Here's the thing, the movie looks great on a technical level, Peter Sellars and George C. Scott are great in the movie, some of the war scenes looked really amazing, and it's funny at parts. However, I wasn't interested the rest of the characters aside from Sellars multiple performances and Scott's performance. I wasn't that too invested in the story until about halfway through. And there were parts that I simply did not laugh at. The movie, to me, only felt like it was suppose to be a comedy at parts. The rest felt to me that it was suppose to be drama. I guess the structure didn't feel like a true comedy to me. But like I said, the second half is what ultimately drew me into the story. I know lots of people love this political comedy, but personally it didn't work to its full benefit like I hoped it would. Overall, even with its lack in structure, the movie slowly builds to become more engaging the further you get into it even if it feels too late. I'll give "Dr. Strangelove" a B-!

Finally after 5 years of waiting for the next epic and and grand Pixar movie, we finally got it with "Inside Out." This movie represents what Pixar does best, by being creatively original and tugging on the heart strings all at the same time. All of the emotions are fantastically portrayed. I loved the premise of looking into the mind of an 11 year old girl. And this movie doesn't shy away from dealing themes of happiness, depression, imagination, etc. There are lots of ideas this movie touches on and really brings you back to your own childhood (in a sense). And the score is easily Michael Giacchino's best since "Up". It beautifully sets up the movies' tone. Overall, this is the best movie of the year so far. Of course I'm giving this an A+! Be sure to check out my YouTube channel "LittleMovieBoy"!

Paul Thomas Anderson strikes gold with arguably one of his best works. It's a movie more than the usual life of the party story in which fun and drugs ensue. It tells its story with fascinating characters, including an absolute standout lead by Mark Whalberg. But what makes this movie stand out is Anderson's style and technique on how he tells this story and never loses your attention. The situations feel grounded in reality that we can identify with the characters and the struggles they go through. It does not just show the fun to be had behind the porn industry, but the dark side as well. The transformation in structure is done so beautifully that it stands out from other movies that take on this similar formula. Overall, "Boogie Nights" is a standout thanks to its excellent style, storytelling and performances (even if it hits familiar beats.) I give this an A!

While there was originally some Oscar potential for this court-room drama, it sadly failed to be a contender. To start, the direction of this film felt lost from time to time. Maybe someone else like, preferable anyone else (except for Michael Bay or M. Night Shamaylan). Also, the film stretches certain scenes that come off as unnecessary. But despite its flaws, Robert Duvall is the saving grace of this film. His character holds the movie together and is the true character that we come to truly know and love. Robert Downey Jr. is good in the role, but I wish this movie could have been something more, but overall, it's just an enjoyable for the main purpose of Robert Duvall and the court case scenes primarily. I give this a B-!

Despite all the controversy behind this project, it was all worth! It may not be Rogen's funniest project, but it's filled with hilarious raunchiness that he's usually known for. James Franco steals the show, the premise is mind-boggling insane and the climax is unbelievable! It may not have been fully fleshed out in structure all the way through, but there's still a lot to enjoy in this controversial comedy! I give it an A-!

Sadly, this was the weakest Hunger Games film to date, but there are still things to enjoy about this film. I really loved all the performances! The action scenes (while very few) were so cool to watch. But the ending is what really shocked me! Don't worry, I won't spoil anything just in case you haven't seen it. But the isn't without its flaws. Some people really dug the propaganda story element. Personally, it felt over-used and felt like a gimmick throughout the film. That was probably the biggest problem with the entire film, the propaganda stuff felt like it loss sight of the character of Katniss. I couldn't root for this character because she's basically being used to promote great propaganda messages when in reality she doesn't even want a war. It didn't even feel like a big war was going on. In the end, propaganda flooded this entire film, the first act of the film was slow and un-engaging, but eventually picks itself right back up about halfway through the film and delivered an awesome climax that took me by surprise. Overall, I'm going to give Mockingjay Part 1 a B!

Even with some of its flaws. Interstellar is an engaging work of sci-fi art. Christopher Nolan is usually known for such big and complex stories like "Inception" "The Prestige" and "Memento". He is currently the most ambitious director working today. Ambition can lie between being a great pro towards a film like this, or be a big con! The first time I saw it, it felt that the film was too ambitious in which it took over from the overall experience/pure enjoyment of the film. There was just too much to take in. But that's why the film is so watchable in my opinion. Christopher Nolan keeps you wanting more with a film like this. That's why the second time was a charm for me. I delved deeper into the film unlike the first and truly got an overall enjoyment out it. I love the space mission aspect of the film. I love the story behind this. I love the characters, especially Matthew McConaughay (Cooper). I love Zimmer's score. And I truly love Nolan's ambition! However Some characters felt completely under-used, like Cooper's son played by Casey Affleck. I love how they set up this character throughout the film, but I wish they could have used him more as a big character throughout the entire film. They just gloss over an interesting story element in which I think could have helped build the film especially for the theme of the movie. Also, Wes Bentley's character felt completely wasted and somewhat unneeded. Alongside that, the first 40 minutes of the film felt a little too slow to me. But once it gets into its space exploration, the film soars all the way up to its last 10 minutes (which I enjoyed more than most but still felt something missing). Other than that, I highly recommend this film for all film-lovers/film-goers! I know this review may sound a little too negative, but trust me, it's one hell of a ride that won't be soon forgotten! I give "Interstellar" and A!

Ah, a fun graphic novel/neon noir film at its finest. "Sin City" is filled with 3 interesting stories of revenge, vengeance and all in between. While some of the stories were better than others, the entertaining factor still remains throughout the whole film. The characters are not only great, but present great narratives as well. Bruce Willis, Mickey Rourke and Clive Owen really hold their own ground in each of their stories. Even the visuals are a marvel to watch. It's just like reading the pages from the graphic novel. Even though the multiple credits annoyed me and some parts of some of the stories were lacking, it's still a bloody good time! I give it an A-!

God's Not Dead may indeed satisfy strong Christians, but as a movie critic there are too many sub-plots/side-stories that (for the most part) have nothing to do with the overall story and is filled with propaganda in which there's hardly anything to say about the Christian faith. As far as the unnecessary side characters, some are just horrible human beings. I can't even call one in particular a real character. It is filled with some of the worst blatant stereotypes in the history of mankind. It's also a product placement scheme for Newsboys and Duck Dynasty, which once again serve no purpose. I will give credit to Shane Harper (Josh) who gives a fine performance as well as the pastor and his friend. Even though they don't really have any to truly do with the movie as well, those two are literally the only characters that truly get the message around about God and the christian faith. And I actually kind of like them. Other than that, the movie is just a mess! I give it a D+!

I can't believe what I had been missing! This movie is a great and powerful film. The performances are spot on, especially Matt Damon and Robin Williams. And the chemistry between those two were dynamite! I completely understand why this is Williams and Damon's best film. The screenplay is refreshing the characters have you put on an emotional journey through oneself. Easily now one of my all-time favorites! I give this masterpiece an A+!

Quite possibly the funnest movie all summer, Guardians of the Galaxy is a surprisingly funny and action-packed thrill ride that never lets up and knows what it is from start to finish. It's a zany but marvelous take on an unknown comic book (At least until now). The characters are funny, quirky as hell, and also have strong heart to them. Initially, I thought the humor would weigh the movie down at some point. However, it never relinquishes it's zany feel, which not only feels fresh to the story but doesn't feel forced. It's really the only marvel movie that has used tons of humor to its advantage and makes it truly special. Overall, it's a hilarious fun time at the movies. I give this an A!

This is truly one of the first comedies this year I've seen that not only made me laugh hysterically (for the most part), but made me appreciate the art of film making. Surprisingly enough, the humor is very vulgar and sometimes even dark, but it's funny never the less. But it wouldn't be the way it is without the help of its wonderful script, stylistic film-making, and amazing characters! It's a wonderfully funny and stylistic film you shouldn't miss. But honestly you can skip the first and last minute or two. Other than that, still watch it. I give it an A!

Interesting and engaging from a political stand point, "Snowpiercer" provides a well-meshed combination of action, political structures and even ways we view society. The premise is such a unique gem in that it throws in quite a bit of twist and turns. That's what makes the movie so interesting and even elevates the film to a bigger standard. I will say that some of the characters serve more of a purpose than others, especially Curtis (Chris Evans). His performance was probably the most real and awkwardly enough true to the American dream (if I may use that term properly). It does however suffer from a not so great pace at first, but once the action picks up, you're completely invested in this movie. Overall, it's a great action film with a very engaging premise. I give it an A-!

Wow, what a total letdown! I thought this movie could be at least entertaining in that typical Michael Bay fashion. However, even Bay's love for over the top explosions has officially went sour. Not even the brand new cast could have saved any redeeming quality about this crap fest of explosions and **** story telling. Literally the only good thing about the movie was the first 3 minutes or so. After that, it all went down from there. If your a film lover, SAVE YOURSELF from this embarrassment! Overall, it's one of the worst if not the worst in the franchise thus far! I'm still debating between this and the second one! Either way, it gets an F for FAILURE!

This film is nothing like you would have expected. It takes the concept of re-living every single day every time Cruise dies and presents itself in a way that doesn't feel repetitive! That's the best compliment about the movie, even though the know the storyline, it's not all predictable! The only big flaw I had was that at about the last 30 minutes or so it feels rushed and didn't present a fulfilling finale that I would really wanted, even feeling a little forced. Overall, the film was a total surprise thanks to a surprisingly smart story full of not so black and white characters, especially from Tom Cruise. I give this an A-!

Wholly crap! What an amazing film! The visuals were FANTASTIC, the characters were well realized, especially the apes, and the story is for the most part unpredictable and takes some not so heavy twists and turns that still present a strong effect on the movie itself. There are really no plain and simple, black and white characters. As for the main characters (Caesar, Koba, Malcom and his family, even Dreyfus) present such three dimensional characters. Even for the supporting characters, they don't fully present three dimensional characters, but more of representations of different themes of characters that were used to see in movies. For example, you have a character that despises Apes for everything that's happened to the world when really he's afraid of this new world. Essentially, all the characters serve a purposeful role, three dimensional or not. In the end, it's a beautifully dark and exciting installment filled with beautiful cinematography, set pieces and fascinating characters (mainly Caesar and Koba). Overall, it's one of the greatest sequels of all time! I give this masterpiece an A+!

While I wasn't really hyped about this movie like everyone else, I gotta say I was surprisingly very impressed with this reinvention. For the most part, the action sequences were magnificently well shot and Bryan Cranston rocked it in the film. Some flaws i had was that some of the characters didn't really matter to the story. It felt like the characters were shoe-horned to fit in this cinematic universe. Also, some of the story arcs while meaningful at times don't really work with this movie is really trying/needs to be. I know people also had problems about not seeing enough Godzilla, but honestly with all the monster madness going on throughout the movie, it didn't really bother me. Overall, I was still very entertained by this monster flick. I give it a B+!

Not only is this one of the best movies of the year so far, it's one of the best superhero movies I've ever witnessed. The combination of both "First Class" and the original X-Men cast worked out so perfectly! The time-travel aspect and story arc worked out so well. Plus, James Mcavoy's performance as younger Professor X was the best part of the movie. Even Quicksilver was one of the best parts of the movie. Overall, everything meshed incredibly well and every character (for the most part) had their moments and were at their dynamic best! I don't care what others think, this is the best one in the series. This is truly worthy of an A+! Go see it!

I don't know why, but I get a real kick out of this movie. I've literally watched this movie a million times and it never gets old. I guess I can easily say that this movie has really grown on me. The humor hits me hard with its great combination of slapstick comedy and relate able scenarios. For me, it's just one of those comedies that holds a special place in my heart that I never thought would be possible. If you haven't seen this movie, you really should. You may not love it as much as I do, but you'll still get some great laughs. Either way, I give this funny film my highest rating of an A+!

This is the first marvel film after "The Avengers" that actually brings in excitement and thrills. The action is much is bigger, the story is much better/more engaging and the characters are more alive! This is truly a sequel that delivers. Overall, it's marvel's best film since "The Avengers". I give it a solid A!

This is one outrageously well acted and violent Scorsese flick (like usual). It really shows gangs back in the mid 1800s in comparison to gangs that we've seen in other Scorsese films. The movie is just an old fashioned revenge film, but done with more style. In terms of the great performances by Leonardo DiCaprio, Camren Diaz, John C. Reilly, etc, Daniel-Day Lewis really stands out and gives a tremendous oscar nominated performace. This performance of Lewis' is for sure in my top 3 performances from him. He was absolutely incredible and the best thing about this movie. Overall, it's an old fashioned revenge film, with Scorsese's take on old fashioned gangs and will be remembered as one of my favorite Scorsese films. I give it an A+!