NBFC

Using fantasy stories to provide commentary on contemporary society is hardly a new concept, especially in regards to racism. Just look no further than Dr. Seuss’ short story The Sneetches or the whole Mud-bloods vs. Pure-blood theme of the Harry Potter series. However, if there is a comparison to be made with David Ayer’s latest creation that gives an End of Watch urban cop thriller spin to a Middle Earth-esque mythos; it would be Disney’s Zootopia. Both movies use odd else-where settings (Zootopia with anthropomorphic animals, Bright with orcs and elves) in order to examine racism and the wealth disparities that exist within our own. I certainly give Bright plenty of credit for it’s intriguing “Middle Earth in the modern day” concept and the large amount of money that was obviously put behind it (it’s the most expensive Netflix movie yet). From a visual effects and cinematograph perspective; it’s certainly the best-looking of the Netflix features that have been released thus far. With all it’s impressively thrilling action sequences that have all the blood and grit of those nostalgic R-rated 90’s action flicks and wild shenanigans courtesy of the MacGuffin magic wand; nothing here feels cheap or like a glorified TV movie as with some past Netflix features. But the film’s core strength is it’s two main leads. I’ve always loved Will Smith ever since he first stepped out of that rare cab on the popular tv show The Fresh Prince of Bel Air. Smith has a natural “adorkable” charisma that lighten up a room and posses solid acting chops to boot. Even if he may not always be in the best movies (Wild Wild West, Concussion), Smith always manages to elevate things somewhat and Bright is no exception. Smith, much like with his previous role of Deadshot from Suicide Squad, utters plenty of hilarious one-liners while also being a more morally grey character than his previous roles. Despite being despicably racist and mean towards his Orc partner, Smith brings a certain vulnerability and humanism to the role that gives the down-on-his-luck Daryl Ward compelling layers. Smith also shares great Bad Boys-like chemistry with co-star Joel Edgerton, who despite having to act with pounds of prosthetic Orc make-up, manages to still turn in a very solid performance. While I wish Nick Jakoby’s backstory was more thoroughly explored, Edgerton still manages to be compelling by playing up to the character’s innocence. Much like with Ayer’s and Smith’s previous heavy flawed but enjoyable Suicide Squad, if you can accept Bright on the level of being a B-level low fantasy action flick with solid action and funny dialogue; then it’s passably fun on that level. However, upon watching this I can’t help but feel that the concept presented would have been better served if it was a six part Netflix miniseries rather than a movie. The script is written by Max Landis; a screenwriter full of clever ideas but can’t coalesce them into a great screenplay to save his life (Ex. American Ultra, Mr. Right, Victor Frankenstein). In all honesty, the further away we get from Chronicle, the more that movie is starting to look like a fluke. Where the aforementioned Zootopia was able to deliver a surprisingly fair and balanced portrayal of societal racism and prejudice from all angles while still telling a compelling coherent story, Bright is not able to do the same. The first twenty minutes of this movie in particular lays the racism subtext on way too thick with particularly heavy-handed lines such as “Fairy Lives Don’t Matter”. Sheesh, and I thought Spike Lee lacks subtlety. Landis is also pedestrian when it comes to developing the backstory and fantasy LA setting, with the fantasy elements seemingly placed at pure random at times. For the most part Bright’s LA looks like normal LA with Orcs and Elves in it, but other times with little explanation there would be Guillermo del Toro-style magical trees, gothic seedy churches surrounded by normal square buildings, and a Dragon flying in the background (I bet a certain Dothrakian queen is worried sick right now). There is also a subplot involving an Orc gang and Nick that is very sloppily injected into the third act that honestly felt like padding and it’s made worse by the fact that it leads to a moment that is frustratingly ripped straight from Training Day!! I really liked the concept, the action, and the two main leads but it’s execution and attempts at world-building left much to be desired. There is a sequel currently in the works and despite my reservations, I am still personally interested enough to see what lies in store for Daryl and Nick next.

I don't know what was scarier: seeing Jo Nesbo's thrilling Norwegian detective noir get shredded into an baffling incoherent mess or Val Kilmer's sagging face and his jarring ADR'd voice. I'm not a book purist in the least, but this movie takes what was overall a pretty straightforward mystery tale and changes so much to the point that the story's connective tissue was completely eliminated. It also didn't help that given the tight shooting schedule, supposedly a good 15% of the script was never shot and boy does it really show. Characters and story threads are brought up and dropped with little to no explanation. What was the whole point of the Gert Rafto, Rakel Fauke and Arve Stop plot-line? As far as the movie is concerned, I don't know? The movie couldn't even nail down the Harry Hole character. Michael Fassbender tries his best, but despite Hole supposedly being a "great detective", he barely does any throughout. Heck, Rakel Fauke does most of the detective work here!! So much of what happens in this movie turns out to be completely meaningless once this mess reaches it's lame, stupid, and rushed conclusion. **** move not only rushes the pay-off but it just cuts off!! There are some gorgeous snow landscape and the music by Marco Beltrami should have been in a better movie. Outside of those things however, this was just a waste of such a prestigious cast and crew.

No matter how much critical praise and award nominations Ridley Scott’s latest crime thriller may receive, it’s become increasingly likely that the film will forever be remembered as “the movie that replaced Kevin Spacey very quickly”. Which is a shame but completely understandable. Unless you have been hiding out in the Italian country side for the past three months, it’s likely you’ve heard that House of Card’s Kevin Spacey originally played J. Paul Getty (he even appeared in the first trailer) but due to being hit with multiple sexual harassment and assault allegations, TriStar Pictures and Scott decided back in November to completely reshoot all of JP Getty’s scenes with Captain von Trap himself, Christopher Plummer, in Spacey’s stead. Now let’s take this into context for a second, with only a month left until release, Ridley had to completely reshoot almost half a movie and not only did he still complete it all in time for it’s December release (Plummer’s scenes were all shot over the course of an 8 day period), not an ounce of wear and tear is present in the final cut. Sure there is some slightly obvious green screen going on in a flashback sequence depicting the Plummer Getty meeting with the Saudis in the desert, but it all turned out so impressively seamless. This certainly not a Justice League situation where that film was littered with awkward editing with the new scenes sticking out like a sore thumb. Say what you will about how hit (Alien, Blade Runner) or miss (Alien Covenant, A Good Year) Ridley Scott can be, I got to admire his versatility as a director. In a way, his latest crime thriller falls into that category of Ridley flicks like Body of Lies and American Gangster where they feel like more art-house versions of the type of movies his brother (Tony Scott) used to make. As far as the story is concerned, it’s a pretty straightforward but intense kidnapping tale that somewhat has an over-arching theme regarding how “money can’t buy happiness” but nothing too profound as far as Scott is concerned. Scott is very much pulled back this time around with nothing too flashy but what really elevates the proceedings is the incredible ensemble cast and some really sharp dialogue. The obvious main attraction is Christopher Plummer playing the notoriously frugal JP Getty. It’s not exactly a stretch for Plummer since he played a similarly greedy character in Spike Lee’s Inside Man but despite the quick shooting schedule, he delivers a pleasantly nuanced performance. You will be continuously shocked by how greedy Getty can be but at the same time, but Plummer instills enough of a warm human side to the rich billionaire that you end up pitying him at times. In a way, Getty Senior is a prime example that getting rich tends to reveal precisely who your true friends are. However our two main leads are Michelle Williams, playing the worried mother to Getty III, and Mark Wahlberg as Getty’s advisor and former CIA operative. Williams is great as a worrying mother and I can’t help but be impressed by how un-Mark Wahlberg Mark Wahlberg is in this movie. Despite being a former CIA agent, Wahlberg very much plays a mild-mannered business type and never turns into an action hero stereotype. Heck, he even manages to successfully hold back his signature Boston accent for the most part. However, I think the real show-stealing performance was provided by French actor Romain Duris who plays Cinquanta, one of Getty III’s abductors. Despite being a kidnapper, Cinquanta sincerely wants to see Getty III survive through his ordeal. Duris and Charlie Plummer (Getty III) share a great fascinating poignant chemistry with each other and despite Cinquanta being a kidnaper, Duris instills so much charisma into the role that you can’t help but like him. There are certainly flaws that prevent this from being a great film. Outside of his scenes with Duris, Charlie Plummer is unfortunately given the shaft when it comes to screen time. He does have one awesome scene, but for the most part we never really get to know Getty III too much outside of being the McGuffin. The movie also left a particularly bad taste in my mouth by having possibly one of the most cliche death scenes ever. It’s far from one of Scott’s best films and one could argue the production history is probably more interesting than the film itself, but ATMITW remains a solid, classy, and exciting thriller that will make for great rainy afternoon viewing. Although one day I would like to see the Kevin Spacey cut of the film just to compare the two performances.

Loved the art direction and the Edo Japan setting. There are also some genuinely touching moments between Oei and her younger blind sister. But....that's kinda it. The plot mostly boils down to an incoherent series of vignettes that never really build up to a story. I usually love it when animation takes the slice-of-life approach (Ex. Only Yesterday), which is something the film appears to be aiming for but it constantly undermines itself by placing odd supernatural elements in way that felt completely random. As a historical biopic, it's very shallow and not very insightful when it comes to the art or the historical figures in question. It also commits the immortal sin of having the ending be one long exposition dumb about what happened to everybody. This movie also has one of the most scatter-brained soundtracks I've ever heard in a feature film. It opens with Rolling Stones-esque rock tune....okay. Now it's traditional Japanese oriental music....okay. Now it's acoustic guitar.....MAKE UP YOUR MIND ALREADY!!!!! I don't mind the movie taking "A Knight's Tale" approach of placing modern rock music to a period piece setting (it actually would have been something kinda fresh and different). But if you are gonna take this approach, you better commit! Instead, the choice of soundtrack feels just as random as the story. During one particular downbeat sequence they play a really out-of-place piece of loud high-squealing guitar music that completely undermines the emotion of the scene. It's a shame because I was really looking forward to this one but outside of a few poignant moments, Miss Hokusai ended just being heartbreakingly lackluster.

Some okay action, chuckle-worthy moments, and the cast give it their best shot but at the end of the day, JL is crushingly average with some baffling creative choices. I just had trouble caring about what was going on in the plot. It felt very choppy and rushed in the first 3/4 with bland exposition heavy dialogue. There are some moments of humanity througout (mostly from Cyborg and Wonder Woman) but they are few and far between. I found Barry Allen annoying as hell and while Jason Momoa is charismatic as Aquaman, his character didn't really serve much purpose to the plot outside of being brute comic relief. What is kinda weird is that Zack Snyder films are usually blessed with grade A visuals but JL was surprisingly weak in this department. Most of the action fails to excite and is un-inventive. There are also plenty of shockingly artificial-looking CGI and green screen effects shots that looked like they needed another rendering pass. Let's not even get into Henry Cavill's uncanny-valley stiff upper lip. The villain Steppenwolf also looked terrible (in addition to just being a bland villain on the whole) and reminded me of the Enchantress' brother from Suicide Squad. I didn't come out necessarily disliking JL, but given this is the first live-action rendition of the first superhero team, this should have been so much more better and eventful. Instead it's draggy, anti-climactic and forgettable.

Love the alternate history angle, the gothic Tim Burton-esque post-apocalyptic visuals, and the action sequences are creative and well-executed. Wished I cared more for the characters and the plot really doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

“Water is like love, it has no shape. It takes the shape of whatever it inhabits. It’s the most powerful element in the universe. It’s gentle, flexible, but breaks through every barrier.”-Guillermo del Toro Despite del Toro’s love for comics, gothic visuals, giant mechs, and practical monster effects; the famous Spanish director has always been a bit of a romantic at heart as demonstrated by the above quote. From his more artsy Spanish films (Devil’s Backbone, Pan’s Labyrinth) to the more mainstream efforts (Hellboy and Pacific Rim), there is a touching reoccurring theme concerning the idea of societal outsiders and marginalized individuals finding solace within each other’s company. With his fascination with fairy tales, it seemed only a matter of time before del Toro took a stab at creating a straight-out romance tale, which comes in the form of his latest feature that gives a great twist to the “Beauty and the Beast” concept. What makes TSOW probably one of del Toro’s best films since The Devil’s Backbone is that taken on a pure conceptual level, the inter-species romance angle could have easily been awkward and almost kitschy if done by lesser hands. But del Toro’s mathematical but delicate storytelling, impressive set designs, and the incredibly layered performances from the silent Sally Hawkins and Doug Jones, despite wearing a thick rubber monster costume, turns TSOW into one of the most touching and honest romance tales in quite a while. The performances in general are incredible across the board, arguably the best when it comes to del Toro’s English-language movie canon. Hawkins is obviously magnetic in the lead but Michael Shannon as the openly racist research team leader Richard Strickland easily joins the canon of Jacinto (The Devil’s Backbone) and Captain Vidal (Pan’s Labyrinth) in del Toro’s brand of genuinely terrifying but tragic human villains. But the person that I feel really stole the show was Richard Jenkins, playing Elisa’s down-on-his-luck friend/neighbor and closeted commercial artist Giles. Giles by far feels like the most down-to-earth character in this fantastical tale and you really do feel sorry for his plight in life. For most of the movie Giles and Elisa’s coworker Zelda (Octavia Spencer) have to verbalize the mute Elisa’s sign language; giving way to some unique interactions. Giles also provides some great subtle moments of comic relief. Praise should also be level at the spell-binding score by Alexandre Desplat (The Grand Budapest Hotel, The Imitation Game, Argo), giving a film with admittedly strange subject manner a timeless classy atmosphere that further contributes to the fairy tale quality. The accordion and whistle-heavy music that plays over the film’s mesmerizing opening underwater dream sequence was the first sign that I was watching something truly special. The movie on the whole has a magical Old Hollywood feel to the whole thing, which is something different compared to del Toro’s previous efforts. It’s not the type of Old Hollywood tribute that feels pandering either (Ex. La La Land), it all feels born out of genuine affection and is completely at the service of painting the film’s intoxicating atmosphere. TSOW on the whole is a pretty unconventional movie that is hard to pigeonhole into a single genre. It’s part “Beauty Meets Beast” romance, part creature-feature, part period piece, part fairy tale, part science fiction and part spy thriller. There is also the fact that this is an R-rated del Toro flick and while it’s not nearly as violent as Pan’s Labyrinth, there are a few scenes that will make you wince or shiver in uncomfortableness. Even with the trailers it’s obvious the distributor’s Fox Searchlight Pictures could not crack the egg on how to market the movie. Hopefully it will continue to get more attention due to it’s appearance on many critic’s “best of” lists and with award season underway; but regardless del Toro’s latest masterwork is one of the 2017’s best.

Cheesy and dated but nonetheless remains a solid action-packed vampire slaying epic with a kick-ass soundtrack. Wesley Snipes brings a memorable Clint Eastwood-style gruffness to the title character but Stephen Dorff is also a joy to watch, making for a fun villain. Although I will admit Deacon Frosts evil plan made absolutely no sense and the third act felt very baggy in it's pacing.

I am not a big fan of the Star Wars (SW) movies. That’s not to say I don’t find the original SW trilogy fun, but it’s mostly from a visual effects and action standpoint. However, from a storytelling and character perspective; SW was always lacking for me. These same issues carried over to the J.J. Abrams-directed soft reboot The Force Awakens where despite grade-A action and visuals effects; suffered from an overly-formulaic plot that felt more like a glorified teaser for future movies than a real story. That and the Mary Sue protagonist, a disappointing villain in the form of Kylo Ren, and ANOTHER rehash of the Death Star plot. I felt very divided as I was watching LJ. Rarely have I watched a movie where moments of sheer awesomeness are intermixed with moments that made me want to smack the upside of my head! LJ carries over the tradition of the last two SW entries by being some of the most gorgeously executed special effects extravaganzas of the modern age. I also really liked the sequences in which Rey is exploring the Force as well as her own emotional insecurities stemming from her uncertainty to her place in the universe. I also liked how Johnson gives these sequences a slightly surreal and psychological portrayal, much like how it was in the original trilogy. There were also admittedly plenty of laugh-out-loud moments throughout too, in fact, it maybe the funniest SW movie to date. From a filmmaking and cinematography standpoint, SW has really never looked better! It’s when we get into discussions about the actual plot and story that LJ causes major disturbances. Johnson is credited as the sole writer and I give him plenty of credit with being bold enough try new things with the Star Wars formula. Johnson is hardly a “safe” filmmaker like J.J. Abrams. The storyline involving Rey, Luke, and Ren is by far the most interesting stuff. Luke’s character is taken in a very unexpected direction and Mark Hamill is more than capable of pulling off a more weary, vulnerable, and morally-greyed version of the iconic space hero. Rey still remains over-powered but she did feel less like a Mary Sue this time around due to the focus on her emotional insecurities. That and the fascinating new layer given to the dynamic between Rey and Ren. Speaking of Ren, I’ve always liked Adam Driver and it was nice to see him being given better material to work with this time around. If Johnson succeeded at anything, it was turning Ren from a overgrown pathetic whiny brat to the complicated lost soul that FA attempted to portray him as but failed. If anything Ren is by far the best character now because he is the only one that goes through any real arc in LJ outside of Luke. Because outside of the Rey, Luke and Ren storyline; everything else about the plot is an under explained and baffling mess with so-many questionable creative choices. Like with Alien Covenant, if you are hoping for any answers to the questions posed by FA, then you are going to be severely disappointed. Instead of being given more backstory that would help contextualize the drama and make us more invested in the plot; signifiant time is wasted following Finn (Boyega) and Rose Tico (Tran) on a planet straight from The Fifth Element in search of a codebreaker that I swear was ENTIRELY POINTLESS!!! Who is Rose Tico? Probably the most blatant example of adding an unnecessary character to a movie in a predictable attempt to appeal to Asian markets since Angelababy from Independence Day: Resurgence. It also doesn’t help that Tran is given some of the worst dialogue in the movie. The First Order also continues it’s tradition of being the most incompetent evil oppressive empire since…well…the Empire. The Resistance also showcases baffling levels of incompetence. While I really enjoy Poe as a character due to Isaac’s effortlessly charismatic portrayal, his continuous unruly attitude and disregard for chain of command severely makes you question the quality of Leia’s judgement. Laura Dern also randomly shows up in the movie as a supposed “legendary” Resistance leader although with that stupid purple wig she looks more like a hipster college professor if anything. I love Dern but she was simply wasted in this despite having one admittedly awesome scene, a literal non-character. It’s not like I didn’t have some fun watching LJ, heck I think it is a slight step above FA, but I simply can’t ignore the questionable script on display. I personally can’t understand how anybody, critics or otherwise, can watch this and FA and tell me with a straight face they are examples of quality writing. It’s far from the worst Star Wars movie, that honor goes to Attack of the Clones and it’s “worse than Twilight” chemistry-free love story between Anakin Skywalker and Padme, but it’s certainly not one of the best.

Gerwig’s directorial debut is an extremely confident and poignant tale of a teenage girl as she navigates through one year of her life as a Catholic school student in Sacramento, California. Stylistically this independent feature is very reminiscent of the understated documentary vibe of Richard Linklator’s Boyhood with it’s impressionistic editing and willingness to just…..well…show a life (Ex. teenagers hanging out, practicing for a lame school play, first dates, being away from home at college). So I guess an alternative title for this would be Girlhood? Actually, I think LB manages to surpass Boyhood because it makes it’s points regarding life and growing pains in a more efficient and energetic way in it’s ninety minute runtime than Boyhood in nearly three hours thanks to it’s disciplined editing and sharp dialogue. But by far the highlight of the film is the tumultuous dynamic between Christine and her mother (Metcalf), especially one particularly uncomfortable but funny sequence involving something as timeless as shopping for a prom dress. The acting by both Ronan and Metcalf is more than deserving of the accolades. Anybody who has ever had a difficult relationship with their mother will find a lot of moments in this movie that will hit close to home. Even though there is plenty of drama to go around, there are also a lot of laugh-out-loud moments, especially between Christine and her friend Julie (Beanie Feldstein). Probably my favorite little moment was a scene in which Christine and Julie are goofing around in a church that exhibits some very cute bonding moments presented in a hilariously unconventional manner. It all feels very down-to-earth, personal and…well….real. That is almost the key word here: real. Everything about this movie feels true to life. There are no big moral speeches, no over-the-top melodrama, no sense of self-importance, or calculated soundtrack inserts. If I had any complaint about this film it’s regarding Father Leviatch, Christine’s theater instructor played by Stephen McKinley Henderson. There is a certain reveal regarding his character about halfway through that never really ends up having a pay-off. I know the movie is called LB, so in the end it is about Christine journey but I wouldn’t be surprised if something significant got left in the editing room because Leviatch just kinda disappears after a while.

I love the original Blade Runner, it's one of my personal favorite films. I was excited that Denis Villeneuve was directing this and not the notoriously hit-or-miss Ridley Scott. Villeneuve always had a great sweeping visual eye, which was showcased in his previous sci-fi outing Arrival and that quality continues to be on display in this sequel. Right off the bat it feels like you are transported back into the rainy, dreary and mysterious world that Scott first introduced to audiences back in 1982. Adjusted for inflation, this sequel has more than twice the budget of the original and not a single dime was wasted as far as the visuals are concerned. Everything from the rainy LA streets, to Joe’s (Gosling) apartment, to Wallace’s (Leto) baroque-style lair, to the almost apocalyptic junkyard and the eerie abandoned Las Vegas look absolutely gorgeous. This is by far one of the most beautiful-looking movies to have come out all year. The storyline (conceived by original BR writer Hampton Fancher) also consists of a few intriguing ideas that are prime ready for a hard science-fiction affair such as this. Despite what the trailers may have you believe, this is not an action film but an atmospheric methodically paced piece of philosophical examination (which is keeping true to the style of the original). Having said that, there is a particularly great un-conventional action set-piece in the third act involving a fight scene on a beach while a downed flying car is being washed away by the heavy tide. While there are some great ideas, scenes and brilliant visuals; I still can't help but feel a bit underwhelmed. I think it comes down to three issues: 1. The score, provided this time by Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch, is very underwhelming. Now I like the work of Hans Zimmer (even if I admit he is over-exposed) and absolutely loved his work on this year’s Dunkirk but the dark drum-heavy ambience he provides to accompany Villeneuve visuals is lacking the sheer adventure and memorable cues of Vangelis. 2. The the pacing to feel rather baggy. Now the original movie had a slow methodical pace too but it was also tight at two hours and focused on a handful of characters. The whole affair has a very Tarkovsky-like pacing to it, and I personally can't stand how slow Tarkovsky paces his films. The storyline just feels bloated. BB 2049 nearly clocks in at three hours but outside of Joe, Joi and Luv (Hoeks), all the other characters are given all-too brief screen time in order to make an impact. Wallace, the Steve Jobs-like main villain, is only in the movie for two scenes and Deckard (Ford) doesn’t comes into the narrative until 3/4 of the way through. Most of the movie is taken up by Joe’s search for Deckard, which goes by way too slow and most of the third act is spent setting up for possible sequels/spin-offs. BR 2049 may have taken measures to expand the universe only hinted at in the original, but it was done in a way that felt banal and removed from the personal more soulful approach in Scott’s masterpiece. 3. The acting. Dave Bautista (aka. Drax the Destroyer) impresses in his one scene with Ryan Gosling, showcasing an emotional range previously unseen. There is also an intense and thought-provoking dialogue exchange between Deckard and Wallace that showcases Harrison Ford sincerely ACTING instead of just growling his lines like he has been doing too often as of late. But on the whole, the acting quality is okay but un-spectacular. Ryan Gosling is essentially giving the same stoic performance he did in Drive and I couldn’t get past Armas’ perplexing accent. Robin Wright gives another under-whelming performance like she did in this year’s Wonder Woman and Jared Leto is in the movie far too little to make an impression. Probably the most baffling performance was Lennie James, who literally disappears from the movie after just three minutes of screen time!! I wish I can give more praise and I am aware that this movie has been getting great write-ups from critics and audiences alike, so I do seem to be in a minority here. There is plenty to like but at the end of the day watching BR 2049 was the equivalent to walking through an expensive art gallery. It all looks gorgeous but not much in the way of emotional impact.

The plot follows a rural village that is experiencing an epidemic of savage murders committed by people who have contracted a mysterious disease. While the police claim it is all due to toxic mushrooms, rumors start to float around that a Japanese hermit is somehow the cause. Our protagonist, officer Jong-goo, teams up a shaman after his daughter starts showing the same symptoms as the other perpetrators. Meanwhile, there is a mysterious white-robbed woman who keeps giving him cryptic clues concerning the true nature of the danger that our protagonist and his family are in. A fascinating combination of Korean spiritual and Christian themes, this horror flick from director Na Hong-jin manages to keep up the chills, tension, and memorable scenes coming throughout it’s two and a half hour runtime. To give anymore away would ruin the surprises that this movie has in store!

Imagine the fast fire-ant-like zombies of World War Z combined with the Die Hard-on-a-train setting of Under Siege 2: Dark Territory and the grittiness of The Walking Dead. Except you know, actually good unlike WWZ and without the non-acting of Steven Seagal…. Horror and action can be very tricky genres to mesh together since the former is reliant on tension from the protagonist being powerless and the latter draws thrills from showcasing a protagonist being powerFULLY triumphant over an obstacle. Probably one of the best example of action-horror that immediately comes to my mind is Zack Snyder’s 2004 remake of Dawn of the Dead. However, this South Korean entry in the over-crowded zombie apocalypse genre manages to stand out with it’s lean-mean pacing, diverse cast of characters, committed performances and nail-biting intense sequences while still managing to have a touching emotional core. There is also a clever subtle subtext of class warfare in the vein of another train-centric action film (Snowpiecer). This is literally one of the best zombie movies I’ve seen in quite a while and I couldn’t recommend it more highly!!

While I don’t love this movie as much as the critics do, I would still recommend IF because of it’s highly original plot and subversion of the “sex = death” horror cliche (this time the characters MUST have sex to stay alive). The plot is pretty simple, it (no pun intended) follows a young woman who is being followed by an unknown supernatural entity after a sexual encounter, but the true attraction here is the retro-atmosphere. Director David Robert Mitchell obviously loves the 80’s, particularly the cinema of John Carpenter, which is ever present in the icy synthwave score composed by chiptune artist Disasterpeace. Heck, there is even a young Johnny Depp look-alike in this movie!! Very methodical and minimalistic in it’s approach but always intriguing, IF is certainly a unique specimen that should not be missed.

A low budget but well-crafted and intense horror thriller can be best described as Home Alone but with a deaf protagonist. Not to be confused with the Deep Purple song of the same name.

A 2014 Australian psychological horror film that concerns a grief-stricken widow as she battles her son’s fear of a monster lurking in the house born out of probably one of the scariest pop-up books ever made!! The best way to describe this low-budget gem is Eraserhead-lite due to it’s trippy visuals and the fact that we are stuck in a very-unreliable protagonist’s point of view. At it’s heart, however, the story is really about the emotional journey of a woman learning to deal with her grief while also being a single parent. If you are a fan of the more artsy spectrum of horror, then check it out!!

The original Steven Spielberg killer shark movie that not only took a huge bite out of the box office but also established the modern Hollywood blockbuster business model as we know it today (simple high-concept action adventure flick released during the summer with heavy advertising). Based on the 1974 novel of the same name and notorious for it’s troubled production history, the movie remains as effective as ever due to it’s adherence to the philosophy that “it’s what you don’t see that scares you”. Spielberg’s minimalistic Hitchockian approach (mostly born out of necessity due to the fact that the mechanical shark barely worked), John Williams iconic score and the fantastic cast are key ingredients in elevating the campy B-movie premise into one of the most iconic movies ever made.

Revolutionary for it’s combination of traditional cel-animation and CGI graphics (Ex. The opening green radar screen was homaged in The Matrix), Mamoru Oshii’s 1995 cyberpunk masterpiece concerns a public security agency known as Section 9 who are on the hunt for a mysterious hacker known as The Puppet Master. With the assistance of her team, Motoko Kusanagi tracks and finds the suspect only to get drawn into a complex web of political intrigue and cover-ups. Much like Blade Runner, GITS has an over-arching philosophical theme throughout it’s narrative concerning self-identify. In BR case it’s the question of what does the word “human” mean in a world were the difference between human and robot has all but disappeared. In the case of GITS, this question is taken deeper with the character of Motoko because she is a cyborg, so everything about her is artificial except her brain. If every part of your body can be replaced, then what room is there for a soul (aka. a ghost), hence the title? It is also scary given how this movie covers the issues of hackers and corporate blackmail, which have become all too real in this day and age. Part action-thriller, part sci-fi, and part art film; GITS is a movie that seems to only get better and better as I get older. Even though the movie has some great action scenes (Ex. Invisible Motoko vs. a henchman) and thought-provoking dialogue, my personal favorite parts are whenever the film slows down to silently showcase the cityscape. The futuristic Tokyo presented in GITS differs from Akira in which it is not nearly as flashy and chaotic, but instead has a sense of surreal foreboding and alienation. Everything seems to look fine, but it all seems empty and the eerie artful score by Kenji Kawai is the icing on the cake. It can be argued that this movie is just as influential as Blade Runner given it’s impact on modern-day science fiction (Ex. The Matrix, Avatar, A.I. Artificial Intelligence). It may come off as cold for some, but the deep philosophical subject manner and artful execution are what elevate this film to being one of my personal favorite films. And if you like this movie, then check out the underrated sequel, Ghost in the Shell: Innocence.

It’s hard to believe the director (Alex Proyas) of this and The Crow would go on to deliver drek such as the Nicolas Cage disaster Knowing and Gods of Egypt!! Starring Rufus Sewell, Kiefer Sutherland (who gives one of his oddest but best performances), Jennifer Connolly and William Hurt, DC follows an amnesiac man named John Murdoch (Sewell) who wakes up to find himself the suspect of a murder. Not only does Murdoch have to evade the the police in order to discover his true identity and clear his name, but he also has to evade a mysterious group of bald-headed men known as “The Strangers”. Most often drawing comparisons to The Matrix (which came out a year later and over-shadowed this flick) due to it’s central themes of identity and memories, this imaginative retelling of Plato’s Allegory of the Cave is certainly not lacking in atmosphere. The murky post-WWII dark and nightmarish cityscape feels almost like another character on it’s own and is truly a marvel in production design. Wonderfully weird, creepy, but also heart-warming; DC more than deserves it’s strong cult following all these years later. Oh and one piece of advise….please make sure to watch the director’s cut because the original theatrical version contains an opening narration by Kiefer Sutherland (which was added in by the studio on Proyas’ behest) that gives away the big twist of the movie.

Starts off great with a fantastic car chase that involves Eggsy (Egerton) fighting a Winter Solider-ized Charlie Hesketh (the explanation for how he survived the first movie admittedly makes no sense) soundtracked to Let’s Go Crazy by Prince. But sadly, the rest of the sequel to Matthew Vaughn's surprise R-rated action hit never hits the same high note. On the whole, The Golden Circle is a typical average sequel. There are also some fun action and humor-filled banter with Eggsy and an eye-patched Galahad (resurrected through the power of deus ex machina) at the end too. There are also plenty of damn funny moments too, including one involving a GPS tracker that literally had everybody in the audience rolling on the floor. Even though this sequel is far from devoid of entertainment value, it disappointingly suffers from typical sequelitis problems and it is all rooted in the script, which essentially boils down to a bloated re-tread of the first movie. The movie suffers from severe pacing issues due to too many uninteresting plot threads (Ex. Eggsy's relationship trouble) and ultimately pointless characters. Even the Statesman, which were a centerpiece in the film’s marketing, end up being completely superfluous to the plot. Channing Tatum fans will be severely disappointed because he only has a total of 10 minutes of total screen time before being unceremoniously removed from the plot. Even Halle Berry and Jeff Bridges are barely in the movie and thus do not make much of an impression. The only Statesman to receive any significant screen-time is Pedro Pascal, who plays Jack Daniels (aka. the one with the whip). Now I really like Pascal, especially on Narcos, and he does a good job with the role and has a good chemistry with main trio of Kingsman. But as with the case with most things with this movie, Jack Daniels doesn’t really add much to the narrative and mostly exists to squeeze in more action sequences. Probably the biggest weakness of this movie is surprisingly it’s main villain. Despite a solid introduction (you will not look at a hamburger the same way again), the 50’s obsessed drug lord Poppy Adams (Moore) comes off as more of an annoyance to our heroes than an actual threat. She lacks that seamless balance of odd humor and sincere menace that Samuel L. Jackson brought in the first one. Her obsession with the 50’s is never given a satisfying explanation outside of “she’s crazy” and her scheme is simply idiotic. Moore’s overly ernest dialogue delivery and just the fact that most of the jokes written for her are lame contribute to her character getting annoying and old VERY fast. Moore is a very good actress but her performance was simply terrible!!

A loose remake of the 1932 film of the same name, Brian De Palma’s epic chronicle of the violent rise and fall of Cuban drug kingpin Tony Montana (Al Pacino) garnered mix reception from critics upon release due to it’s violence, profanity, and graphic drug use. Since it’s release the movie has gone through extensive revaluation, now regarded as one of the best mob movies ever made and has been extensively referenced in pop culture (especially in hip-hop and most visibly in Grand Theft Auto: Vice City). Seeming to take a break from ripping off Hitchcock, De Palma ultra-stylized direction gives way to a lot of memorable sequences such as the infamous “chainsaw” sequence and the climactic assault on Tony’s mansion (SAY HELLO TO MY LITTLE FRIEND!!). Not only that, but the screenplay written by Oliver Stone (which was written while battling his own cocaine addiction) is littered with endless quotable dialogue and elevates the sleazy gangster affair into an almost Greek tragedy level of high-art. Al Pacino’s over-the-top accent can get a little grating at times but even though it clocks in at nearly three hours, it never stops being ferociously entertaining.

A film similar in style to Crash and Babel that uses many intertwining storylines to give multiple perspectives (users, enforcers, politicians and traffickers) on the illegal drug trade. Based on the 1989 television series Traffik, director Steven Soderbergh (Ocean’s Eleven, Magic Mike, Logan Lucky) is a seasoned veteran in creating star-studded ensemble pieces. The use of different color grades to visually distinguish each of the different stories goes a long way in helping the audience keep track. It is easily one of the best-looking of Soderbergh’s movies and there is some very well-done acting from Michael Douglas, Don Cheadle and Benicio del Toro. Admittedly it’s far from perfect, it can get dam preachy (the subplot with Erika Christensen plays out like an After School Special) at times and the length (147 min.) does cause the movie to drag at times. And even though it’s a bit over-simplified, the movie nonetheless does a very good job of offering a wide-scale overview of it’s subject manner. With Soderbergh’s tight editing and a good number of tense sequences, this 2000 War on Drugs epic is worth the watch.

Taking it’s title from the Spanish word for “hitman”, this riveting crime-thriller directed by Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners, Arrival, Blade Runner 2049) follows an FBI agent (Emily Blunt) who is enlisted by a government task force (headed by Josh Brolin) to bring down the leader of a powerful and brutal Mexican drug cartel. Equal parts police-procedural and action-thriller, Villeneuve (one of the best directors working in Hollywood today) Hurt Locker-style ultra-realistic but artful approach gives way to some of the most intense scenes in recent memory from the opening raid to the masterful almost **** border-crossing sequence. And lets not forget that dope night-vision sequence!!! All three main leads give excellent performances, especially Emily Blunt and Benicio del Toro.

Even though I really like this movie, I will fully admit (hopefully this isn’t going to sound pretentious) that it is not for everybody. Aronofsky is not exactly known for making uplifting films and mother! is no exception. None of the characters are straight-up likable and the narrative deals with very disturbing subject manner (human cruelty, abusive relationships, environmentalism, the divine problem of evil). This is arthouse horror to the max in which nothing presented through the lens of our protagonist should be taken as objective fact (think Eraserhead, Lost Highway or even 2014’s Babadook) and EVERYTHING is a metaphor meant to represent something else. If you thought the third act of Black Swan was insane….well Aronofsky somehow manages to top even THAT with unexpected apocalyptic imagery, cannibalism and a very surreal cameo by a certain SNL alumni. Obviously, there is a lot to un-pack with this film, but even without the multi-leveled allegorical narrative, there is a whole lot more artistic merit that oozes from the screen. Aronofsky keeps the camera very tight and claustrophobic, creating a suffocating atmosphere of unease. The cinematography alone does a great job in establishing the geography of the couple’s house and making it seem almost like another character. And even the movie’s worst critics have to **** performances are incredible across the board. Both Jennifer Lawrence and Javier Bardem are absolutely fantastic in their roles, especially Lawrence in capturing the intense paranoia and agony that her character is going through due to the increasing amount of strange individuals that populate her husband’s house. Outside of the two main leads props should also be given to Michelle Pfeiffer; who delivers some really intense and un-nerving words towards Lawrence’s character throughout the story. Whether you love it or hate it, mother! is a viewing experience that you will no sooner forget.

About as anti-James Bond as you can get for a British spy thriller, which is based on the 1974 novel of the same name by John le Carre. Taking place in early 1970’s London, espionage veteran George Smiley (Gary Oldman who was nominated for an Oscar for this role) is forced from semi-retirement in order to uncover the identity of a Soviet double agent at the top of MI6. A deliberate and clinical look into the paranoia and anxiety-filled world of espionage. Features about every one of your favorite British actors from Kingsman’s Colin Firth, Tom Hardy, John Hurt, Mark Strong and Benedict Cumberbatch.

The first and best of the films based on Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan novels. Directed by John McTiernan (Die Hard, Last Action Hero), this Cold War-era submarine-based espionage thriller revolves a rogue Soviet naval captain (Sean Connery) and his crew attempting to defect to the United States with the Red October, the latest and most advanced nuclear submarine. It is up to CIA analyst Jack Ryan (Alec Baldwin) to deduce his motives and prove his theory to the US Navy before a violent confrontation takes place between the Soviets and Americans. Also features awesome supporting performances by James Earl Jones, Sam Neil and Scott Glen.

This underrated spy thriller by Tony Scott (Top Gun, Man on Fire) follows retiring CIA agent Nathan Muir (Robert Redford) as he recalls his training of Tom Bishop (Brad Pitt) while working against agency politics to release him from his Chinese captors. Not high on action but never lacking in tension thanks to Scott’s ever-tight direction. This is a movie about mind-games and sharp dialogue with both Redford and Pitt delivering knockout performances. Worth checking out if you are a fan of more realistic spy movies that dwell on the moral ambiguities involved with espionage.

I am the furthest from a Melissa McCarthy fan (I didn’t even care for Bridesmaids) as you can get, but even I enjoyed this better-than-expected spy parody. McCarthy plays a desk-bound CIA analyst who volunteers to go undercover to infiltrate the world of a deadly arms dealer and prevent a diabolical global disaster. Manages to be a hilarious R-rated broad comedy while also being a decent spy thriller in it’s own right and Jason Statham is simply a riot in this!!

A loose remake of the 1991 French comedy La Totale, the final collaboration between James Cameron and Arnold Schwarzenegger follows a U.S. government agent named Harry Tasker (Schwarzenegger) as he tries to balance his life as super spy and with his family, who are under the impression that Harry is a boring computer salesman. Arguably better than most of the James Bond and Mission Impossible flicks, TL is one of those films that effortlessly blends action and comedy. It also features great comedic performances from Jamie Lee Curtis and Bill Paxton (RIP) and possibly THE GREATEST VILLAIN DEATH EVER!!!

There are certainly a few flaws such as Mike Hanlon disappointingly given the shaft when it came to character development and dialogue as well as a couple of scare scenes suffering from less-than-optimal CGI. But everything else was absolutely top-notch from the acting, the directing, to the forbidding atmosphere. If I had to describe this movie, it would probably be a combination of the demonic spook-house thrills of The Conjuring series combined with the setting of Stranger Things and the antics found in 80’s nostalgic classics such as The Goonies. Even though the trailers have sold It as a horror film and while it is indeed a solid horror film, this is not the movie’s strongest attribute. That is because at it’s heart the movie is a touching coming-of-age story with Pennywise serving more as a metaphor for the traumas and personal issues that each of the members of the Loser’s club must overcome. I think it’s due to this reason that the movie not only ends up being one of the best King adaptations ever, but possibly one of the best movies of the year period.

For a filmmaker known for art films such as American Beauty and Road to Perdition, Sam Mendes directs his first full-blown action picture like a seasoned pro. Marking the 50th anniversary of the characters cinematic debut, Skyfall takes on a much more contemplative approach to it’s story by examining the question of what place does a character like Bond have in the modern era. It’s a question that was brought up before in Goldeneye but personally, I feel this movie’s execution of that theme was much more satisfying. From the great opening motor bike chase on the rooftops of Istanbul followed by the visually arresting title sequence, I knew sitting in the theater that I was in for something special. Everything about this movie was lighting captured in a bottle. It’s by far the most gorgeous-looking of the Bond films, there is sincere thematic depth, and the acting is spot on with Judi Dench giving her best performance as M. Javier Bardem’s turn as the devious Raoul Silva is literally one of the best villains in cinematic history. Not much more to say **** is the crowning jewel that perfectly encapsulates everything I love about this franchise.

After the embarrassing fiasco of Brosnan’s final entry Die Another Day, Bond was thankfully given a much deserved reboot that went back to the Ian Fleming source material. In this case, it was adapting the first novel to feature the character, Casino Royale. Moving the character into the post-9/11 era and taking notes from the Bourne franchise, CR follows a younger, more vulnerable, and less experienced Bond as we see him develop into the badass spy we know and love. Previous unknown and blonde Daniel Craig proved to be the right person to portray a much more gritty and hitman-like interpretation of the character. It also helps that the narrative adds unique twists and subversions to the typical “Bond formula” (having most of the second act be taken up by a slow-burn poker game was a gutsy move on the part of the filmmakers) while also having some refreshing emotional weight. It should also be mentioned how great the cinematography and action are, provided by none other than Goldeneye’s Martin Campell. From the parkour chase in Africa to the chase sequence in Venice, Italy, the action has just the right amount of over-the-top escapism and realism. The fact that Bond sweats and gets hurt multiple times throughout was also a much needed change of pace after Brosnan’s Bond was made out to be too much of an untouchable Superman.

I know this tends to be the most divisive entry in the series but it is my personal favorite of the classic series because it’s James Bond out for REVENGE!!! Darker and more violent than previous entries, the stakes are smaller than by the franchises’ usual (Bond going all Narcos attempting to take down a drug lords empire) but it arguably feels more like a James Bond films than ever before. It’s such a shame that this ended up being Dalton’s second and last stint as the character because it really felt like he was really nailing down his own unique interpretation of the character. He delivers every line in this movie with the right amount of gravitas with dashes of dark humor (Ex. letting a traitorous friend “keep” the bribe money). I am also gonna say it right now….Robert Davi’s Franz Sanchez is the second best Bond villain ever!! Not only is the climactic tanker truck sequence probably my favorite action sequence in the whole franchise with countless great moments, the way Sanchez is finally defeated has to rank up there as one of the greatest villain deaths of all time.

I have an unusual confession….Timothy Dalton is my favorite actor to have played James Bond. I don’t quite know why but this and License to Kill strike that right balance for me between the gritty nature of the Craig films while still adhering to the “Bond Formula”. I personally love the intensity Dalton brought to the role and he was prime ready for a movie such as TLD, which dials the camp back in order deliver a sincerely good spy thriller. The plot is intricate and intelligent, the romance between Bond and Kara Milvoy feels refreshingly credible for once, and the ensemble of villains is great. The fight between Bond and the token henchman Necros on a cargo plane is one of the franchises best action sequences. It was also the last to feature a score from the great John Barry and boy is it stellar!!

I don’t know what it means to “strike like thunderball” but when it comes from the pipes of someone like Tom Jones…it sure sound badass!! My personal favorite of the Connery flicks due to it’s gorgeous underwater sequences and Fiona is probably my favorite villainous Bond girl. I also think this movie contains John Barry’s finest score for the series. Even though the previous year’s Goldfinger set the standard for the “Bond formula”, this one and the sequel You Only Live Twice are the entries that are often the source of parody for the Austin Powers series.

An improved sequel to Dr. No, FRWL plays out much more like a **** thriller with some brief moments of big-budget action (Ex. Boat chase, the helicopter chase), especially during the slow-burn scene where Bond tricks Red Grant (played wonderfully by Robert Shaw) into opening a booby-trapped brief case. I also always loved the exotic locale of Istanbul and Karen Bay is probably one of my favorite Bond supporting characters.

While it may seem a bit lacking now compared to later larger-than-life adventures, there is something charming about this more lean and gritty affair that made then-unknown Scottish actor and King of Cool Sean Connery into an international celebrity. The whole affair moves at a nice leisurely pace and the plot is more character-driven compared to other entries. The Jamaican local is always gorgeous to look at as well as the first Bond girl ever…Honey Rider. Plus, it also gave us one of the most iconic theme tunes in cinematic history courtesy of one of my favorite film composers of all time…John Barry.

After two mediocre debut entries (Live and Let Die, The Man With The Golden Gun), TSWLM is where the Moore 007 tenure finally found it’s footing. Features the iconic Lotus Esprit that changes into a submarine, the fantastic pre-title sequence in which Bond skies off a cliff (done for real) and arguably Bond’s most famous 7’2” henchman with metal teeth…Jaws. The movie also benefits from great set designs (Ex. Stromberg’s supertanker) provided by Ken Adams, whose work on the Connery and Moore films defined the 007 aesthetic. I also would argue that the theme song "Nobody Does It Better" performed by Carly Simon is the absolute best of the franchise. TSWLM remains not only the best of the Moore Bond films but one of the best in the franchise in general.

aka. The only GOOD Bond film to star Pierce Brosnan I will always have a soft spot for this particular entry because it is the first 007 film I ever saw and there is also the added nostalgia of the then revolutionary N64 video game. While the script is far from the greatest, the tight glossy direction provided by Martin Campell (Casino Royale, The Mask of Zorro) and abundance of great action sequences (Ex. Bond bungie-jumping off a dam, the tank chase) more than make up for it. This particular entry also has arguably the best group of villains out of all the Bond films that includes the S&M-obssessed Xenia Onatopp (greatest…name….ever), the hilariously over-confident computer hacker Boris Grishenko and the always awesome “dies in almost every movie” Sean Bean as the treacherous 006. Although the video game admittedly had a WAY better soundtrack than the one provided by Eric Serra (The Fifth Element, Leon: The Professional) for the film.

After the fantastical gadgets and space spectacle of Moonraker, FYEO goes for a much more gritty and back-to-basics approach in the vein of From Russia with Love where the plot is about Bond and the villains chasing after a MacGuffin. Moore was always great with the comedy, but I feel he tends to be underrated in terms of how versatile he can be. Moore more than delivers the darker and edgy gravitas, especially during the scene where Bond avenges the death of a friend by kicking a car down the cliff with the assassin still inside. Where the film may lack in gadgets, it more than makes up for in action. There is a great car chase in a very non-typical Bond vehicle, a ski chase, an intense underwater brawl and a heart-stopping sequence where Bond tries to climb the side of a tall cliff. Now…even though I said this movie is more “serious”, some camp still remains like the hilarious scene where Bond fights a hockey team. I also really like the funky score provided by Bill Conti (Rocky, The Right Stuff).

Coming out the same year as the non-Eon produced Never Say Never Again, this sixth entry to star the always reliably entertaining Roger Moore is a movie I can’t help but enjoy. It is a prime example of the silly action-comedy tone that dominated most of Moore’s tenure as 007. There tends to be two camps when it comes to the James Bond fandom, those who prefer their Bond to be serious and down-to-earth like the Daniel Craig entries or those who like their Bond fantastical and light-hearted like with Moore and the later Connery affairs. I am personally partial to both approaches and **** takes the campy tone up to 11. This is a movie where James Bond disguises himself as a clown, swings on vines while yelling like Tarzan and there is even a moment of meta-comedy when a snake charmer plays the Bond theme on a flute. It is all very much a tongue-in-cheek action-comedy with Moore’s comic delivery always on-point and the action sequences electrifying (Ex. The train scene).

Darren Aronofsky downward spiral tale of four drug addicted New Yorkers is far from uplifting film and is easily up there with Grave of the Fireflies as being one of the saddest films I’ve ever seen. However, it’s also a great Greek tragedy-style psychological character study pursuing a hollow-version of the American Dream that isn’t afraid to show the ugly side of humanity. Worth seeing for Ellen Burnstyn's stunningly transformative performance alone.

It’s a comic-book-like revenge caper and a tragic love story with a healthy dose of Evil Dead-like insanity thrown in for good measure. What could have been a Z-grade formulaic revenge plot is elevated thanks to Raimi’s energetic filmmaking, some well-executed action, creative special effects, an awesome score by Danny Elfman, and a talented cast with a great central performance by Neeson. If you are a Raimi fan, an Evil Dead fan, or just love watching Liam Neeson being a badass; then you owe it to yourself to check out this underrated gem.