TheRaggedFlygon

An Easy Girl, for the most part, is a well crafted film. It (like essentially anything set in Southern France) is a treat to look at. The sets are pleasant to look at and at times the cinematography is used to enhance the magical surroundings. However, this film suffers from a great deal of problems that end up making the film feel like nothing short of another pretentious art-house film that thinks it has a lot to say but actually doesn't. First and foremost, this film is incredibly predictable. The story presented here is a tried and true one. A character being torn between the innocence of childhood and obscenity of adulthood is a tried and true formula that has been the basis for countless coming of age films. Yet, in this film in particular, it does not deviate from that narrative nearly enough to make this film memorable in the slightest. There are minor quirks that make this film semi-unique, but it ultimately ends up feeling extremely samey compared to a lot of other films. The messages and plot presented in this film are by no means bad or illogical, but they are extremely cliche and thus forgettable. The true tragedy of this film is that it has interesting characters. The standouts for me are Lakdhar Dridi's Dodo and Benoit Magimel's Phillipe. Their characters are well written and are the most interesting parts of any scenes that they are in. In contrast the protagonist, Naima (played by Mina Farid) and Andres (played by Nuno Lopes) are not poorly acted per se, but they are poorly written to be nothing more than a collection of cliches. The only character who is poorly acted is Zahia Dehar's Sofia. As arguably the most important character in this film, she gives a performance that is passable to watch without cringing, but at the same time, does not make the character memorable in the slightest. All in all, An Easy Girl is a well produced film with a plot and message that would be interesting enough were it not done to death already. The performances and writing are both underwhelming, while the artistic direction of this film shines, but as mentioned before, that is not hard when you are set in Southern France. There are better French films you can watch than this one that are much more well rounded (see last year's Portrait of a Lady on Fire and Les Miserables).

Welcome to Chechnya is a harrowing documentary concerning a network of LGBTQ+ activists who make it their mission to help **** refugees from the Russian republic of Chechnya escape the grasps of a regime hell bent on cleansing individuals who do not identify as heterosexual from the Chechen population. The film utilizes CGI distortion to alter the appearance of many of the refugees out of the interest for their safety as many of them continue to be hunted by authorities. As one may expect the messages of this film are extremely inspiring and brave, but at the same time, the content of the film is equally gruesome and terrifying. Rather than focus on the actions taken by the Chechen government, as well as the Russian Federal Government under Vladimir Putin, the film instead focuses on the individual stories of refugees and those who aid them throughout their journey, resulting in a much more personal feel. Rather than feeling like an elongated news story, Welcome to Chechnya instead feels like a series of personal narratives. This complements the gruesome nature of the content of this documentary as you see the victims tell their stories with them facing the camera rather than a filmmaker simply commentating over news footage. All in all, Welcome to Chechnya is an extremely powerful film that serves as a stern reminder how far some regions of the world still have to come with regards to LGBTQ+ rights and in addition how the world as a whole needs to be more supportive of the assistance of these refugees who are running for their lives.

The Godfather is, without a doubt, one of the greatest films to have ever been made. The acting by all characters is superb. The plot is convoluted and twisting enough to keep you interested, but not until the point that it becomes too hard to follow. The cinematography and visual effects are equally impressive. While much of this movie is grounded in reality and thus the visual effects are usually pretty standard, there are a couple of shots that are absolutely amazing for the time. Brando and Pacino's performances of this movie steal the show and both help make this film the masterpiece that it is. In addition, the screenplay is one of the best I have ever seen. Oftentimes, in these crime/mafia films, they tend to run on for too long and the viewer becomes bored. Despite being a three hour movie, not only was I glued to the edge of my seat each time, but each scene felt integral to the story and themes that the film is trying to tell. Further, it feels as if every single *action* taken by a character has an impact on either a theme or the outcome of the movie. This level of screenplay has not been matched by another film that I have seen. In addition the cinematography of this film has resulted in several of the most iconic scenes in all of cinema being brought to the big screen. The number of quotes, iconic scenes, jokes, and memes that came from this film is absolutely amazing. Whether it is the greatest movie of all time or not, The Godfather is a must see film that has had one of the greatest impacts on modern society and popular culture out of all the films that have ever been made. This is a must see for anyone who enjoys cinema.

Midsommar was a film I went into excited for, wanting to see what twisted creation the mind of Ari Aster was able to put on screen and went into the film expecting to see a film in a style similar to his above-average directorial debut, Hereditary. This film, marketed as a horror film, turned out to be less horror and more of a drama about relationships and the difference of humanity. Parts of this film feel more like a black comedy and you never really feel all that scared. The acting is fine, but the dialogue is forgettable and some set pieces that are clearly trying to elicit emotions of terror and fear are instead met by feelings of comedy. The setup of this film is excruciating long and unnecessarily complex, with many of the more interesting plot points of the introduction being sidelined or not at all mentioned in the future. The pacing is also ridiculously slow resulting in me forgetting that it's a horror movie. In order to make up for the lack of truly horrific elements, this film instead chooses to go overboard on the gore, which honestly (while disgusting) has little effect. Gore does not equate to scary. The plot is extremely predictable and the character's are just as forgettable as this film's dialogue. Certain elements feel completely unneeded while others are drawn out too long. Hereditary was a great example of horror as it preyed on your expectations and subverted them. This film plays it safe and the plot could likely be predicted by anyone who knows anything about a stereotypical "cult horror" film. While it is easy to be harsh on this movie, there are certain elements that work nicely for it. Pugh's performance is the strongest out of all the characters, the soundtrack succeeds in creating the eerie mood this film aims to create, and the cinematography is absolutely brilliant. While these elements are most certainly impressive, they get weighed down by the criticisms above. Overall, Midsommar is nothing short of a disappointment, choosing to focus on boring plot points and forgettable characters while brushing the more interesting parts of the setup to the side. This film fails as a horror movie by being, in all areas save for gore, quite dull, and is quite a forgettable experience. It also fails as a drama or a comedy by doing neither one effectively. In total, what you get is a mediocre film that tries to convey a theme, but does so with varying levels of success.

Oftentimes science fiction movies have fantastic premises followed up by mediocre plot, acting, and direction. Snowpiercer, while not a perfect film or a modern masterpiece as some critics have called it, does a decent job of remedying the common errors made by scifi films. First the premise is most certainly unique and as a result, it is entertaining. While there are obvious questions about the entire premise of the film that aren't explained, if you allow yourself to suspend your disbelief you will have a much better time with this movie. Many other users on Metacritic have labelled these plotholes as the factors that led to this movie being ruined for them. I was personally able to suspend my disbelief, look past the plotholes, and enjoy this movie; however, I completely understand where such users are coming from with their opinions. The acting in this film, regardless of your belief in the film's premise is, for the most part good. Ed Harris and Octavia Spencer feel wasted and their characters are quite forgettable, but Chris Evans and Tilda Swenson, in addition to really solid performances by Kang-Ho Sang and Go Ah-Sung result in a, for the most part, well acted movie. The action and cinematography of several scenes are exciting, but the action does fall flat at times and the number of blurry action shots and quick cuts makes it hard to follow resulting in the end result of many of the fights feeling unconvincing. While at times the twists do excite in this film, many fall flat or are far too predictable. The ending also feels vague just for the sake of being vague and suffers from a lack of common sense. The lackluster plot and shaky action scenes are remedied (in addition to the good acting previously mentioned) by the impressive themes that exemplify history repeating itself. The themes of this film are able to be subvert enough to not feel forced, but they are present for those who are working. My final criticism of this film is that the CGI of the train is absolutely terrible and it looks like it was made in 2004, not 2014. In total, I am very conflicted about Snowpiercer. While the film left a positive taste in my mouth and overall I found myself enjoying it a lot, there are gaping plot holes that threaten the integrity of the themes and thus the movie as a whole. For me, I was able to overlook this film's flaws and have a truly enjoyable experience; however, I completely understand if you cannot.

American Beauty is an incredibly complex film that is able to convey deep themes about conformity, imprisonment, and life. What begins almost as a Comedy, full of laughable moment and, to be quite honest, some equally laughable dialogue slowly devolves into a tragedy in which the themes that Mendes is going for become apparent. Kevin Spacey's character is the best acted of the film. Any scene he is in has him stealing the show. That being said the acting all around in this film is fantastic. Each character is written in such a way that aspects of them are likeable, but they all have tragic flaws. Perhaps they are angry at the world for existing, feel isolated by the families, or feel that the world revolves around them. The plot in general revolves around these flaws as they are exposed and concludes with all of the different threads converging together. The twists of that convergence is what truly makes this film remarkable. The cinematography in American Beauty is also superb with some of the best that I have ever seen in a motion picture. The manner in which several scenes are shot (but especially one scene in particular) help contribute to essential themes that Mendes is trying to show. Overall, American Beauty is a very unique film that I found to be through provoking throughout. The slow start that has one scene I found to be more cringy than either comedic or tragic is made up for the rest of the film, which is nothing short of a unique masterpiece.

Reservoir Dogs was a fantastic movie for two reasons: excellent, quippy dialogue and exciting crime story full of realistic violence and superb acting. Pulp Fiction best exemplifies the former while Jackie Brown instead embodies the latter. While much of the violence from Pulp Fiction plays into the humorous aspect of the movie, the violence in Jackie Brown feels far more authentic. The film revolves around a main group of six or so characters who each have their own motivations, their own aspirations, their own plans, and their own allegiances. This creates a brilliant plot in which throughout the audience is trying to figure out when/how each character's true nature will be revealed to the audience. Jackson, Grier, and Forster all particularly shine in this film. This film has a decently long runtime of about two and half hours, but throughout the entire film, I remained excited throughout as the plot continued to twist and turn. In standard Tarantino fashion, something in the plan goes wrong, and watching each character act accordingly was the most exciting part for me. The first half of this film is quite slow, but it contains some of Tarantino's best writing while the backhalf contains one of the most exciting third acts that I have seen in quite a while. This is a must watch for any fans to typical heist movies as it is sure to offer something different from the norm that will keep it exciting throughout a viewing.

Hell or High Water appears as another standard "rob the bank" movie while a policeman hunts them down, but as the movie progresses, you begin to see it as much more than that. Each of the three main actors give amazing performances. Ben Foster is the hardened criminal who is in this because it is fun and couldn't care less what happens to those who oppose him. Chris Pine is the brains of the operation who has, for the most parts, good intentions and just wants to get the job done. Jeff Bridges is a cop who is near retirement who is searching for one last catch to end his career. All three of these actors are absolutely fantastic and they carry this film. What this film gains in its character, it lacks in its plot. Its plot is quite simple, lacks few twists or turns, and ends just about exactly how you expect. The characters and dialogue are why you watch this film, not because its plot will keep you enticed throughout. That being said, this film does make a very interesting statement about capitalism by drawing comparisons between modern capitalistic practices and the mistreatment of American Indians. That, for me, was the most interesting part of this film plot-wise. The main storyline is still a bit lacking in terms of thrills, but it does succeed in clearly outlining its central theme. Overall, Hell or High Water is unlikely to be remembered by me as one of the greatest films of all time, it feels very similar to other movies that I have seen, however what it is is one of the greatest films of 2016 that contains some of Pine, Foster, and Bridges' best performances to date and for that reason, it is worth a watch.

Vol 2 has the colossal task of following up Vol 1, which was full of top tier action sequences. This half of Kill Bill instead is a lot more focused on the trademark Tarantino dialogue and drama. While Vol 1's story felt very shallow, Vol 2 instead expands the depth of the story significantly but does so at the expense of the action that made me fall in love with Vol 1. Vol 2 is likewise much harder to act as a stand-alone than Vol 1 (as could be expected) since things pick up in media res and a lot of the storylines in this film are dependent on one being familiar with the first one. This is a good choice by Tarantino as it helps justify that these two films are in reality one super-long film. While some people enjoy the sharp contrast between the contents of Vol 1 and Vol 2, I happen to find Vol 2 lacking as a result. Expecting another action-packed joyride, I was slightly disappointed to find a more dialogue and plot heavy part 2. That is not to say that the dialogue, writing, acting, or direction in Vol 2 is worse or better than Vol 1, it's just different. Vol 2 gives Thurman a better opportunity to showcase her talents as an actress, but that is compromised with the fact that this film is a bit more sleepy than Vol 1. In addition to Thurman, the acting of David Carradine is fantastic as he plays one of the most convincing cinematic villains in recent memory. He is a complex villain that torn between the past and present and is forced to make a decision with which one he should align himself with. The performances of Madsen and Hannah also add to this film's incredible cast and villains. Volume 2 gives its actors a better chance to showcase their opportunities, but with that increase in opportunity comes a decrease in the action that made Vol 1 such an amazing film. The gore gets turned down slightly in this one in the sense that there is less of it, but the action that is present is still amazing. The reason that this one comes up slightly short of its predecessor is that Vol 1 was simply iconic while this one fails to have any super memorable scenes that I haven't seen anywhere else. Certain moments come close, but I feel that Vol 1 is overall the better made and more memorable film, however it is quite close between the two. Overall, Vol 2 is a satisfying conclusion to the two part Kill Bill storyline and gives Thurman a chance to really shine. The action is a bit lacking, but this is made up for by superior writing, dialogue, and plot elements not found in Vol 1. This film is a must watch if you enjoyed Vol 1 or if you desired less action and more drama in the first installment.

Kill Bill Vol 1 was a deviation from the films that Tarantino had been making up to this point. This film is not a piece of crime cinema about some elaborate heist, but rather a pure action movie. Tarantino places us in a seemingly simple revenge story, but due to the stellar performances of his actors and the non-linear story-telling structure that he has arranged, he is able to create a piece that feels unique compared to any other action movie that I have seen. This movie certainly feels like a part 1 **** story (as it is obviously meant to be), but it comes to a fitting enough conclusion and has enough of the puzzle pieces to make this film feel like it can stand on its own. Thurman's performance is fantastic throughout. Other highlights include Lucy Liu as O-Ren Ishii and Sunny Chiba as Hattori Hanzo. Overall, it is very clear that Tarantino set out to capture the mood of a classic kung-fu movie and for the most part I believe that he succeeds. The fight scenes in this film are fantastic and his choice of music is nothing short of iconic. The violence in this film at times feels a tad bit over the top, but that only adds to its charm. However, I will note that this film is not for the feint of heart. If you cannot tolerate the site of blood, this is not the film for you. On its own, this film lacks many of the twists and turns that highlight its successor, however, in total, this film still has a plot that is just complex enough to keep one interested. Don't be fooled though, this half of the two-part Kill Bill saga is far more action/violence first, plot second. This movie is thoroughly entertaining and contains many brilliant aspects, but at the same time, it doesn't do enough that is revolutionary or completely stellar to warrant a higher score. Overall, if you are a fan of action movies, revenge flicks, kung-fu movies, the grindhouse genre, Uma Thurman, or Tarantino, you will enjoy this movie. What's more likely is that if you are a fan of any of those, you have already seen this.

Knives Out is a well directed movie that falls short of being a masterpiece because it thinks it is more clever than it is. This modern take on the class whodunit genre is refreshing and risky. By playing with a well established format, Johnson is able to create a film that kept me interested and entertained throughout. That is not to say that this a film for everyone. Members of the party I saw this film with found it to be inferior to past works in the genre. Where the film falls short for me is, as mentioned above, this movie thinks that it is very clever when in reality, it is not nearly as clever as it thinks it is. The twists are a bit predictable and that made for an underwhelming third act. Johnson's directing is for the most part great, but at times it feels like the film is giving the audience too many clues as to what is going on exactly. The biggest strength of this movie is its acting. Its ensemble cast makes for several great performances. Craig's and de Armas' in particular stand out to me. Johnson's script is serious when it needs to be while at the same time having comical elements that do not feel out of place. Having been disappointed by the way humor was implemented into Johnson's last film, The Last Jedi, I was very pleased to see a far more effective use of it in this film. Overall, I found Knives Out to be a very entertaining mystery film that was not afraid to play with the format of the class whodunit. The twists are a bit too obvious and the movie is not nearly as clever as it seems to think it is, but both of those factors did little to true damper by enjoyment of this film. While certain moviegoers may have problems with the writing or directing of this film, I would recommend it on the strength of the acting alone.

The Two Popes is a fine biopic that is well written and well acted. Hopkins and Pryce both deliver fantastic performances and the writing is able to strike a nice balance between comical and serious. The chemistry between the two actors makes for an overall entertaining movie that I can appreciate. Where this movie falls short for me is the "Why should I care?" aspect. This movie fails to take any risks and follows a very predictable progression. That is not to say this film is bad by any means, I just believe that it will fail to make a lasting impression on me. McCarten clearly knows how to write a solid biopic, but I fear that this might be his weakest work in the genre yet. Nevertheless, The Two Popes is an enjoyable film that anyone with two free hours and a Netflix subscription should consider checking out--just manage expectations accordingly.

First Man is a good movie, especially for those that enjoy learning about space travel and its history. I think that Chazelle's direction and Gosling's acting are both solid throughout this film. The tone accurately reflects the danger associated with the early Apollo missions. As we continue to follow Armstrong's journey leading up to the Apollo 11 mission we are given a glimpse into how it affects his familial relationships and how following the various other tragedies within NASA, the situation tenses as time goes on. The writing is consistent throughout, although I personally would have preferred a bit of a lighter tone at times, and the acting is believable. Where my problem with this film comes is that I feel that while it checks the boxes of what makes it a "good film" in terms of the quality of its production and acting, the film falls short on the story that it is trying to tell. The film builds up to a climax that the audience already knows what is going to happen (the title of the film essentially "spoils" the result of the film for those unfamiliar with American history). This resulted in me not really caring about what was going to happen since I already knew. I had not emotional investment with the characters. I think that First Man is a fine, watchable movie. Those interested will probably learn something about NASA's early days, but many will leave the theater wondering why they were supposed to care about what happens.

The Farewell is a powerful film that demonstrates a side of Awkwafina's repertoire that we do not often see-her more dramatic, serious side. She plays the lead role fantastically and is supported by quality performances from the rest of the cast. While this film's tone is for the most part serious, it does have good comedic beats that are truly funny rather than just your average slapstick comedy. Overall, Lulu Wang is able to carefully walk the fine line between making the movie flat out depressing and making the audience unable to take it seriously through her clever blend of drama and comedy. The plot of this film ultimately takes a unique approach into investigating cultural differences and how said differences affect our familial relationships. This film at the end of the day is about those familial relationships and how they can be strained during times of sadness. You don't have to be Asian or Asian American to find this film relatable or enjoyable. My criticisms of this film are brief and mainly amount to: this film didn't do a whole lot that I haven't seen before. This film is very well crafted from start to finish. The direction, writing, cinematography, and acting are all superb, but at the end of the day I feel that a lot of the messages that this film tries to get across can be found in very similar ways in other films. This film is a must see, but in my opinion is not as revolutionary as some might say.

Suicide Squad is a hodgepodge of ill-fated attempts to create a unique film that breaks the mold of the modern superhero movie formula. The writing is horrendous, several characters are brought in for no apparent reason (Katana and Killer Croc come to mind as both serve very little relevance to the plot), and the general plot of this movie has me questioning why I should care about it. While Smith and Robbie shine as making the most of their characters and delivering performances that have me excited for the future of their characters, the rest of the cast falls prey to poor writing and does little to try to make the most of it. In addition the third act of this film is a sequence of CGI fights that are immediately forgettable and nothing short of sheer disappointing. Following the criticism of Batman v Superman and Man of Steel for being "too dark", the producers of this film attempted to mimic Marvel's style of superhero film that is full of action and quips, but ultimately falls flat on its face. If any film in the DCEU is supposed to have a dark, grim tone, this is it, but reshoots and creative differences amongst the producers of this film create an inconsistent tone that makes it hard to follow. The soundtrack is random and rarely appropriate for the scene its matched with while the film feels like it is more about setting up the future of the DCEU (a future that is now just as muddy as the plot of this film) rather than telling a coherent story. Now to address the elephant in the room: the Joker. Jared Leto's Joker is far from the best representation of the Joker that we have seen on the screen and it might quite possibly be the worst. However I do believe that his iteration of the character is not complete trash as others would have you believe. Drawing from Golden Age source material (as opposed to Ledger's bronze/modern age interpretation), Leto's performance successfully portrays the "gangster" archetype of the Joker from that period. Nevertheless, this is not the correct version of the Joker and Leto does fail to deliver a praiseworthy performance. Suicide Squad is a mess. The DCEU is a mess. You're better off investing time in the MCU or rewatching the Dark Knight trilogy until the mess is cleaned up.

Rear Window is an absolute masterpiece. Alfred Hitchcock is well known for his ability to make entire films out of one room and no film exemplifies this better than Rear Window. Throughout the film there is a constant state of suspense that is aided by convincing performances from Jimmy Stewart, Grace Kelly, and Thelma Ritter. Although this film is often overshadowed by better known Hitchcock films such as Vertigo and Psycho, this film still remains a must see for anyone as an absolute classic that should be in consideration for the greatest film ever made.

Spider-Man: Far From Home is, on its own, a good superhero movie. It does nothing that the MCU franchise hasn't done before, but while that makes this film a bit disappointing, it is still a fun summer blockbuster. While Zendaya and Holland's performances in this film are once again good, following up their solid acting in Homecoming, the writing of this film leads to unexplained changes in Peter's character. His character is inconsistent with other versions that we have seen of this character and the lack of explanation leads me to feel that these changes only occur to service the plot of this movie, without keeping the larger scope of the franchise in mind. In addition, some of the dialogue is poorly written especially between Jake Gyllenhaal's Mysterio and Holland's Peter Parker (but nevertheless, the film does nail the writing regarding the interactions between Peter, Ned, and MJ). The end result of this inconsistent writing is that the twists and turns of this movie become extremely predictable especially for someone who is familiar with Spider-Man lore (although I do concede that any film is more predictable if you go in acquainted with the source material). In trying to not be too harsh on this film (which I actually found quite enjoyable), the quips are well written and the special effects are amazing (the best we have seen form an MCU film since Doctor Strange). Ultimately, Far From Home is another Spider-Man movie. Although I found the plot and pacing to be disappointing at times, I feel that this movie accomplishes what it sets out to do: make a fun summer blockbuster. The most important relationships in this movie are portrayed well and drown out the poor acting/writing that hurts others. If you enjoyed Homecoming, you will at the very least find this film enjoyable. It is far from a masterpiece and a bit disappointing, but it gets the job done and is worth a watch.

Iron Man, at the time of its release, was nothing revolutionary, however little did the world know that the strong foundation built by this film would directly lead to the expansive MCU franchise that is very prevalent in popular culture today. Iron Man finds itself as a fantastic example of the action/comedy blend. Tony Stark is a likable character full of personality, emotion, and quips. This film knows when it is okay to pop a joke and when it instead needs to be serious. It is through this blend that the movie becomes a re-watchable overall joyful film that still can be taken seriously. The characters are fantastic in this film and RDJ, Gweneyth Paltrow, and Jeff Bridges' performances both sell help sell the film and its "formula" as something that continues to work for Marvel (although the villain's motivations could have been elaborated on a bit more at the end). The pacing of the movie is also fantastic. The action set pieces (although now appearing a bit dated) are still enjoyable and they are spaced out throughout the film such that they allow for the characters and their personalities to really shine. As mentioned above, the characters and their flaws are what really sell this movie and that is in part due to the effective pacing by Jon Favreau and his team. Overall, while Iron Man by itself is nothing terribly revolutionary, its impact would be, all while the film still holds up to this day as an enjoyable standalone superhero film.

Captain Marvel is an okay movie. It fails to add anything to the MCU and given the massive amount of hype leading up to this film, the word that best describes it is disappointing. Brie Larson fails to give an enticing performance (albeit the writing does her few favors) and the character of Carol Danvers is unrelatable. Danvers experiences no real conflict or challenge throughout the film. She is just as much, if not more, of a "Mary Sue" as Rey is in the Star Wars Sequel trilogy. Furthermore this film feels like it should have been the second or third film in the Captain Marvel storyline, yet Marvel chooses to rush it out in time for Infinity War. Not to mention that Marvel completely wastes the Secret Invasion storyline. The movie is not without some good points (however sparse). Jackson and Mendelsohn's performances are noteworthy, though not revolutionary. The buddy cop dynamic is somewhat satisfying, yet still disappointing. In addition, this movie has no subtlety. Guardians of the Galaxy's 70s soundtrack was explained and made sense in the storyline. This film just throws in 90s songs to remind you that the film takes place in 1995. Furthermore, while this film should not be directly compared to Wonder Woman, comparisons will obviously be drawn since they are the first films in their respective franchises to star women. While Patty Jenkins had Wonder Woman tackle gender stereotypes and injustices in subtle, clever ways, Captain Marvel does it too loudly in ways that feel shoehorned in. Overall, Captain Marvel has some exciting plot pieces, but its protagonist lacks any form of emotion or relatability. Overall, for the first time, I have my doubts about the future of the MCU after endgame if Captain Marvel is still to become a leader in the franchise.

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-verse is the biggest surprise in cinema of 2018 for me. This film is the product of Sony Pictures Animation-- the same studio behind the Emoji Movie. The creators of this film make it feel like an actual comic book movie and it plays fun with the idea that superhero origin stories are drawn out. The voice acting is great as are the interactions between characters. Miles still has both his parents alive and that makes this story different than that of Peter Parker because of how much this film focuses on relationships between family members. The villains are interested and have not been portrayed in a cinematic Spider-Man movie in their current forms. Furthermore the film is full of twists that will keep you guessing even if you have engaged in a wide array of Spider-Man media in the past. The writing is more on the humorous side, but unlike many films that have tried that approach recently, this film's humor doesn't subtract from the overall experience, rather it enhances it. The film is not so full of one-liners that subsequent watches will be lessened. In addition, the unique animation in this film is superb and is complimented by an amazing soundtrack that manages to fit the themes of the film even if you are not the biggest fan of the genre (rap/hip-hop). The only downside to the film is that while making fun of the drawn out super hero origin stories, the movie becomes one by basically setting up the Spider-verse for future installments in this series that will likely continue sovereign from the MCU. This film is a must see for fans of Spider-Man, comic books, animation, or anyone who wants to see one of the best films of 2018.

The care that Peter Jackson and Co. put into this movie is incredible. From readjusting each clip's frame speed to taking great care to match the silent film with incredible audio. We have loads of documentaries about the importance of Verdun and the Somme, but very few about the actual stories of soldiers from the war. By having only veterans used for voice overs Jackson has created a picture unlike any other that will likely go down as one of the greatest documentaries in history. The film is around 100 minutes and when it came to its closure, I felt like I could easily sit through another two hours. The stories feel personal and genuine. While the film will offer very few "historical facts" for history enthusiasts and the general public alike to pick up on, the audience is able to understand what it was like to be a soldier. This film is a masterpiece and is a must see for anyone remotely interested in the subject.