YellowKirby

I... AM... GROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOT!!!!! If you don't speak Groot, that means this is Marvel's best movie yet and also their funniest. It has good acting, great direction, wonderful CGI effects and of course all the charm you can expect from a Marvel movie.

The merc with a mouth finally stars in his own movie, with gruesome fights, lots of language and a script riddled with sex jokes. However, aside from these characteristics, 'Deadpool' is an over-the-top, vulgar and disappointing superhero movie. It loses momentum after the first act, and has an inconsistent tone. Aside from Deadpool (portrayed well by Ryan Reynolds) and Weasel (T.J. Miller), all the characters are one dimensional and forgettable. At the movie's start, the cast credits the characters as, 'A Hot Chick', 'A British Villain' and 'A CGI Character'. These are the only traits these characters exhibit, and parody or not, we want to at least root for the characters and relate to them, not forget about them immediately after watching. The movie forces in some overly vulgar moments, including an entire montage devoted to sex scenes. The movie also becomes what it is meant to parody in the final act, which is an over the top fight scene on a Helicarrier. In short, 'Deadpool' is a messy, bloated and disappointing comic book adaptation.

'Captain America: Civil War' is by far the best movie in the Captain America trilogy, and certainly one of the MCU's greatest entries. It is well acted and brilliantly directed, and shows a more human side to Iron Man, Captain America, and the entire Avengers team. The action sequences were brilliantly done, most notably the Airport Battle, where both Iron Man's and Captain America's teams clash, and the final battle between the titular hero and Iron Man. There was (mostly) good chemistry between the actors, with one or two awkward and overly long sequences between Elizabeth Olsen and Paul Bettany. Daniel Brühl portrayed Zemo, the movie's villain, well, but the character was unnecessary and ultimately disappointing. But cons aside, this movie also features the best on-screen portrayal of Spider-Man, and finds a great new hero in Black Panther. This is also a hugely important movie in the MCU; this is what it has been building up to - other heroes joining the cast not in an Avengers movie, but in a standalone superhero movie, in this case a Captain America movie. Next year, we will have Hulk in 'Thor: Ragnorok', and Tony Stark 'Spider-Man: Homecoming' - all these superheroes now co-starring in one another's movies, not a crossover or a team-up movie.

X-Men is fun and enjoyable, with a great cast (Especially Hugh Jackman, Ian McKellen and Patrick Stewart), although its visuals haven't aged well and the fight scenes aren't the most exciting. Although this is made up for with good, memorable characters and a decent plot.

While not as good as the 1967 original, Jon Favreau's 'The Jungle Book' manages to flesh out the characters more so than the original did, and improves vastly on both the story and the action sequences. The only thing bringing it down is the comparison between the voice acting from both versions, and of course, the singing too. But apart from that, this is a well acted, beautifully animated film.

Sing Street is one of the best Irish films ever made. While it does favour style over substance at times, and features some clichés, it makes up for this with a great cast and music.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

'The Dark Knight' is easily the best 'Batman' story ever told, with stunning performances from all its cast, a dark and intriguing story, and the best incarnation of the Joker on the big screen. Obviously, the movie does have its flaws, like Christan Bale's gravelly Batman voice, and that some of the plot points aren't very well thought out. All in all, I think 'The Dark Knight' is the best Christopher Nolan 'Batman' movie, and one of the best comic book movies of all time.

'Zoolander No. 2' is many things: its stupid, boring, repetitive, lazy, a cash grab... but it is not funny. Not even Will Ferrel can carry Ben Stiller's disappointing mess of a sequel.

While certainly enjoyable, 'Hail, Caesar!' failed to live up to my expectations, as it not only produced less laughs than I expected, but also underused some of its greatest and most interesting characters and set-pieces. The plot seemed lazy and wore thin after a while, and the best scenes are those on the sets of the movies within the movie.

Alejandro González Iñárritu's brilliant direction, Emmanuel Lubezki's wonderful cinematography and, of course, Michael Keaton's superb acting make Birdman one of the best movies of 2014, certainly deserving of all the Oscars it won.

Spotlight is a powerful drama with brilliant performances from Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo and Rachel McAdams, a well-written script by Tom McCarthy and Josh Singer, and a message that is still relevant today.

Before I get started with the review, I just want to say I really, really, really like the books. But the movie? Pfft, where do I begin? It has terribly wooden acting, ignores its source material, has terrible usage of terrible CGI, and almost ruins Percy Jackson. It is a complete and utter disgrace of a film, and should never have been made.

While a marginal improvement on its predecessor, Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters still fails to become a worthy adaptation of its source material, with wooden acting and poor special effects; using cheesy plot devices to rush the plot along. In short, you'll be better off reading the books and staying away from this terrible and disappointing franchise.

Room is by far one of the best and most powerful movies I've seen in the past few years. From Lenny Abrahamson's fabulous directing to the acting talents of both Brie Larson and Jacob Tremblay, this movie is bound to movie you to tears and is destined to become a classic and remembered by movie-goers years in the future. A pure masterpiece.

Where do I begin... Oscar Isaac was amazing, Domhnall Gleeson was amazing, Alicia Vikander was amazing... all the performances were award-worthy, I think. Another great thing was the way it built up tension so well, and how complex and slightly disturbing the story turned out in the end. It was amazing. One of the best films of 2015.

After all the hype, I was expecting a bit more. But nevertheless, I enjoyed the film. It had little substance, and was more of a spectacle, which I guess is good too. However, It thought because of this the character development was a little weak, and although fun, the action was relentless. Some of it was needlessly disgusting and unnecessary. In short, I thought the movie was fun and visually stunning, but not much to it, and it's not the film you come out of and talk/think about. Hard to believe it was directed by a seventy-year-old.

Although slightly disappointing, 'Zoolander' is still a fun comedy to watch in your spare time. It starts out a little slow, and most of the LOL jokes come in slightly later in the movie. Also, the story meandered from time to time, especially towards the end. In short, 'Zoolander' is a relatively funny flick to watch in your spare time, but not necessarily something to put a day aside for.

The Peanuts Movie manages to stay true to the classic comics by Shultz, while also giving us exciting and action packed scenes with Snoopy chasing down the Red Baron. It doesn't try to impress today's generation with explosions and giant killer robots, but instead intrigues the viewer with nostalgia, comedy and gentle storytelling. A masterpiece Shultz would be proud of.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

While Austin Powers and Dr. Evil are great characters, and the idea for the movie is brilliant, it isn't properly executed, I find, and shoves too much sex jokes and sex scenes in your face, and the story isn't always even. Mike Myers is great, as I said above, but over all, this isn't one of his best.

Way better than A New Hope. I'm sorry, dedicated fans, but this one just has MUCH more story, humour and focuses more on what the fans want to see, like Han Solo and Kylo Ren. What didn't work: While this was a fantastic movie, there was a scene or two I would cut out, such as Han Solo's introductory scene. I think Han needed a better introduction back into Star Wars. Also, Oscar Isaac's character Poe Dameron is great from what we see, but just doesn't get enough screen time. I look forward to seeing him in future films. It's also a little weird that Domhnall Gleeson has a British accent when he's Irish. Either get a real British actor or make him Irish. What's up with that? Finally, Gwendoline Christie's character Captain Phasma is very underdeveloped. She just kind of walks around and looks cool. What worked: This film is like a remake of A New Hope, but that's not a bad thing. In fact, it's like J.J. took A New Hope and emphasised all our favourite things, like Han Solo, the bad guys, and the quips, while also minimising the things that didn't work. Daisy Ridley's Rey is a brilliant character; the best Star Wars girl since Leia. She's got a career ahead of her! And Adam Driver's Kylo Ren is also brilliant. Andy Serkis portrays Supreme Leader Snoke superbly, and I certainly can't wait to see more of him in future episodes. In short, The Force Awakens is the best Star Wars film since Empire, and I would definitely recommend to all fans of the Star Wars saga, and indeed the sci-fi genre.

Like 'Phantom', this entry in the beloved 'Star Wars' saga is too much like a video game, and has a terrible script. Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman were wooden,and Ewan McGregor wasn't much better. The unnatural romance between Anakin and Padme is probably the film's biggest weakness. It portrays Anakin as a creepy stalker, and the script makes it worse. "I don't like sand." Finally, it's too goddamn long! The war scene at the end becomes so boring, it's easy to lose track of who the hell is who and where the hell they are. So, while defiantly an improvement on 'Phantom,' story-wise (but only marginally), Attack of the Clones doesn't do this beloved saga much justice.

A lot of people say this is boring and repetitive, but I think that people just don't understand the movie. It's not supposed like a big-budget blockbuster movie, it's just supposed to tell the story of three different moments in Jobs' life. It has a phenomenal cast and script, and the pacing was almost musical. One of the best movies of the year!

Ugh... this movie basically is all about the visuals. There's absolutely NO story whatsoever. It has too many CGI characters, and no REAL characters. Some of the acting is wooden, Darth Maul is only in it for like, ten seconds and there's a really, really, REALLY long and boring race. Absolutely terrible.

Lots of people either say this ****, or that this was only decent/okay. I thought it was great! It's bright, colourful and playful. Mike, Sully and Randall return, for more monster-sized fun. It obviously wasn't as good as the first one, but it has a good story and breath-taking animation, so I don't see where all the hate comes from.

It comes as a surprise that Pixar's "The Incredibles" is the greatest and most entertaining out of all the superhero movies made to date, as unlike Marvel and DC, Pixar have had no experience in the genre before 2004. It has an intriguing and well told story, as well as likeable main characters and a well-crafted villain.

I know this was only Pixar's second full-length movie, but after the height of Toy Story (their greatest film), A Bug's Life is, well, a bit unimpressive.

While probably Pixar's most visually stunning film to date, The Good Dinosaur is also one of Pixar's greatest disappointments and feels more like a Dreamworks film than a Pixar film.

Bridge of Spies excellently executed the height of the cold war, while also making an intriguing film starring Tom Hanks in the lead, who portrayed his character excellently.

Although the Boxtrolls is visually stunning and funny at times, it is still quite forgettable, with some unlikeable characters and a few unnecessarily random jokes. And, like most movies nowadays, Boxtrolls has the need to get all loud and noisy like some superhero movie towards the end.

While certainly enjoyable, most of this movie is quite forgettable, and Jim Carrey was the only thing really carrying the movie (and of course, the few minutes we got of Meryl Streep).

One of the reasons this was so good was because it was so much better than the disastrous Shrek 3. Obviously, it's not as good as the series' first two entries, but, unlike it's predecessor, Shrek Forever After manages to retain the fun and wit of 1 and 2.

This movie is brilliant! Saoirse Ronan was spectacular, as was Emory Cohen. Their acting was much better than most acting you see in modern action movies. The story was brilliant, also. All in all, this is a spectacular little production that fans of Suffragette and Testament of Youth will love!

While not mind-blowing, Gulliver's Travels is still a very funny and enjoyable movie, as long as your into this kind of genre (as in the Jack-Black style of humour).

This movie is so bad, that it's... bad. There is literally nothing I can enjoy about this movie. It had horrible special effects and cringe-worthy acting. It's a real letdown after the fantastic show.

I love Shrek. I think he's a great character, and his film series is excellent and witty. But Shrek the Turd – oops, I mean Third – is an unnecessary sequel that fails to reach the height of the first two. It lacks the wit and comedy that made the first entries comical, and the story feels lazy, and more like a direct to video cash-grab Disney sequel than a Shrek movie. It also had too many characters; too many to keep track of. However, it DID have its redeeming qualities, such as the character of Merlin (excellently voiced by Eric Idle). In short, this bland threequel should have been better developed, or, better yet, never made.

OBNOXIOUS SINGING CHIPMUNKS. If that's not bad enough for you, how about OBNOXIOUS SINGING CHIPMUNKS AND THEIR OBNOXIOUS SINGING GIRLFRIENDS. Coz that's basically what this crap squeakquel is. *shudders*

Okay, I'd precisely give this about a 68/100, but since that isn't an option I'll just go 7. The movie isn't very original, and the music is overrated, but the animation is wonderful to look at, it's colourful, and there are likeable characters, especially Olaf the snowman. Although not as good as many people say, Frozen is still enjoyable and fun for kids.

Wreck-it-Ralph is fun, colourful and well made. The characters are developed nicely, the storyline is original (something we rarely get nowadays in Disney films) and the animation is top notch. Although quite a large portion of the movie is set in one of the less-interesting arcade worlds, Wreck-it-Ralph is still an entertaining heartfelt story about a villain who wants to become a good guy. Tops Frozen, if you ask me!

Unlike most superhero films, which are usually all the same, Captain America: The First Avenger goes in a different direction; instead of making an over-the-top CGI blockbuster filled with explosions and cars being hurled across the street, it takes us back to the days of World War II, and lessens the typical super-hero action considerably, replacing it with more old-fashioned gun-fights and car chases. But that doesn't make the movie any less enjoyable, but instead makes it fun and memorable, more so than your normal every-day action flick. Although not as good as Guardians of the Galaxy, The First Avenger proves to be one of the better Marvel movies.

Mel Brooks' hilariously quirky Spaceballs is everything you expect (and want) in a Star Wars spoof: it's funny, it's random, it's weird, and it's fun!

Okay, I rarely EVER give a movie a zero. I only do so when I can't enjoy ANYTHING about the movie. This is one of those cases. The story is rushed, and so fast paced it's hard to keep track of all the characters and what the hell is even going on. Secondly, the target audience is unclear. Sometimes, the humour is overly juvenile, and sometimes, it seems Disney are tying to make a serious or emotional scene for the adults to enjoy (although I seriously doubt they would enjoy it). In short, this is one of the (if not the absolute) worst animated movies I have ever seen, and definitely one of Disney's worst. The plot is dull, and there are too many unnecessary and unlikable characters. Honestly, had Lilo and Stitch not come out after this, I would have lost hope in Disney.

I liked this movie when I first saw it, but It's quite forgettable, really. Andrew Garfield really isn't as good a Spider-Man as Tobey Maguire, and Rhys Ifans' Lizard isn't as interesting as Willem Dafoe's Green Goblin. All in all, it's an alright movie, but it's no match for the original trilogy.

Okay, so I enjoyed the first Thor film. I thought the way they executed Thor's fish-out-of-water story was very well done, and Tom Hiddleston's Loki was excellent as a villain. but this forced sequel had some enjoyable moments (mainly from Loki, again), but also a slightly underdeveloped villain and a strange, confusing premise.

Iron Man is a great way to kick start the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Robert Downy Jr. gave a really god performance as Iron Man, and the movie had witty jokes and good quips. This certainly is one of the better Marvel films.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

I have to admit, the '7' rating is mainly because of the spectacular performance from Michael Keaton. For me, he made the movie worthwhile during otherwise slightly boring or uninteresting scenes. It's a pity he's only in it for like, thirty minutes!