Aquaman, movie review

I was curious if “Aquaman” the most mocked superhero, was going to get a decent movie. So I headed to the theater opening day to check it out.

I’m pretty sure when the group of writers sat down, they had one goal, “Let’s create a story where being able to talk to fish is pivotal and makes a person a hero.” And that is exactly what they did. This kind of story does not exist naturally. Those writers had to force it to happen.

Basically, when Atlantis fell, the occupants mutated. Some turned into crab people, or fish people, others got weird powers. Turns out the best power to have, and the one the original King had was… yup, talking to fish. So to be the new king, guess what? Ya need to be able to talk to fish. Specifically, talk to the sea monster that is protecting the former king’s trident. There was a lot of talk about how Aquaman would be the true king because he was half human and half altantian, but that really had nothing to do with it. It was literally because he could talk to the sea monster. So… the writers accomplished their goal, but threw a bunch of distractions and nonsense at the audience along the way.

Overall, yes, it is a good action movie. But its one of those movies that is more an array of fun scenes based around a weak plot that falls apart the moment you ask a question. I mean, I was annoyed from the start with the submarine scene. None of the submarine scene obeyed the laws of science.

Advertisements

The Mule, movie review

After seeing Clint Eastwood’s last movie, “The 15:17 to Paris” and discovering it was a horribly done movie, I began to doubt his current movie making skills. I know Clint Eastwood has a great record for film making. And “The 15:17 to Paris” was viewed as an experiment since he cast the real life characters to play themselves. So, I decided to give his new movie a chance. The recipe for the plot held potential. An elderly white man becoming a drug mule for the Mexican Cartel. Seems more a comedy than drama, but if anyone could pull it off I figured Eastwood could.

Sadly, I was wrong. Eastwood’s days of movie making are over, at least his days of making good movies. The show contained a handful of well known actors that have performed great in other films but in this movie it seemed like they were in it just so they could say they were in an Eastwood movie. Get to shake the hand of a great before they die and all that. Their hearts were not in it, and it very much had a “be nice and cater to the old guy” feel.

Aside from that, the plot exaggerated racial tension to a degree that I don’t think we really see today. People don’t generally stare when Mexicans eat a diner that is full of all white people. I mean, if they looked super gangster and about rob the place, maybe, but not if they were just normal Hispanic folks. Same for the aggression shown by police toward certain races. That’s changing now, and would have worked in an 80s movie, but not in a 2018 movie set in current day.

I feel the same toward Eastwood’s character saying inappropriate things, like calling black people negros. Unless the elderly person is senile, I don’t think anyone can claim to not know that is a negative word. Especially not Eastwood’s character who claimed to have traveled to 41 states. Its not like he was living in some small town all his life and wasn’t exposed to things.

It was obvious the movie was trying to spread awareness, but it was a few decades behind, in my opinion.

Lastly, the audience. I think most there were like me, the dire hard Eastwood fans hoping this movie would redeem him from the fumble of “The 15:17 to Paris.” I was sitting there laughing at the stupidity of the film, and most were politely attempting to force themselves to like it. But then his character did something Eastwood’s character’s never do. He slept with prostitutes. Yup. We even get to see a shirtless old ass Eastwood, making out with with young women, paying for it, boozing it up, and so forth. Several people gasped and uttered, “What?” And right there, I saw the last of his fan club losing their faith in him as a director. I get it, he thought that fit the character for the movie. But Eastwood seemed to forget that his fans have certain expectations for his characters. They are supposed to have some virtue.

Overall, I’d say skip it in theaters. If you’re curious about it, wait until it’s on tv. It belongs on cable way more than it does in a movie theater.


Cost Effective, movie review

Film festival movies, and really any low budget movie made with a smaller crew and less oversight from the big budget companies, tend to have a very unique feel to them. Such is true for “Cost Effective.”

The theme for the movie is simple. Exaggerate common stereotypes to a point where it’s so overdone, it’s funny. From the guard who is obsessed with his donuts, to the nutty black gangster who can’t stop grabbing his crotch, the movie holds firm to not showing originally. But if this is truly a comedy, sometimes the classics hold true, so I get why they chose that direction.

The story line focuses on a hold up gone wrong, with a twist. If you put more thought than that into it, the entire plot falls apart. So don’t think when you see it. Just watch.

Overall, it’s a good film if you are into exaggerated comedy that’s teetering between slapstick and ironic.

Cost Effective (Amazon Link)


The Crimes of Grindelwald, movie review

I was hoping I could see this movie without needing to rewatch Fantastic Beasts or any of the Harry Potter movies. I’m going to advise anyone who hasn’t seen these movies in a while, to at least go rewatch Fantastic Beasts, because I was a bit lost. Watching all the movies again, would have really helped me, but mostly the Fantastic Beasts is needed. The story takes place directly after it and most of the characters are in both films.

So me, not remembering the other movies well, and not having read ANY of the books, was more than a little lost on the plot. It seemed overly complicated with all the baby swapping and who is blood related to who and has a blood contract with who. There’s conspiracies all over and people whose names get mentioned like they should have some special meaning to me, and I’m like, what? Who is that? What does everyone keep acting like these people are as popular as Micheal Jackson or the Beetles?

So… the plot was lost on me. Reviewing the rest of the movie, well, the acting was good, the effects were good, just like any other movie. I mean, everyone acted like they usually do in these movies. Nothing all that new.

In the end, I think this movie is good for Harry Potter fans and people who have read the book. There wasn’t enough basic stuff to keep a casual viewer like myself engaged. Like, there was no simple plot that existed just in this movie, if that makes sense. If you don’t know everything, you don’t know anything.

So fans, go see it, you’ll love it. Everyone else… see something else.


The Grinch, movie review

So for anyone who might be confused, this movie is a remake of the original. Not a prequel or anything.

Going into it with a fresh set of eyes and not comparing it to any of the other remakes, or the book, is best. Just watch it for what it is. The movie adds in some new content, letting the Grinch actually find a reindeer and attempt to use him for the sleigh. Max is basically a servant now, and the Grinch is an inventor on a higher level than seen before.

The town and little girl get bigger roles. I enjoyed her role and thought it was creative to have her catch Santa, who turns out to be the Grinch. It’s a much funnier way for them to meet than her just waking up.

The jokes are good and entertaining. The target audience is obviously kids, and I think it works. It’s a new classic to update the old one and hopefully get a new generation interested in Dr Seuess books.

If you have kids, def take them to see it.


Instant Family, movie review

I was expecting this movie to be more funny and less of a drama than it turned out to be. Yes, it has lots of comedic moments, but the meaning behind the movie is not being advertised. There are a lot of special messages and negative stigmas related to adoption covered in this film.

I myself felt more educated about the whole adoption/foster parent ordeal than ever before. I didn’t know there were adoption fairs to help parents meet available kids. Or that there is an orientation course foster parents must attend, which can then be followed by a support group. The span of problems a couple can encounter when adopting a child is far reaching, and this movie did a good job, in my opinion, of covering as many as possible.

From the teen wanting to be with her real mom, to the younger siblings taking to the foster parents and not wanting to see the real mom. It all felt “real” and anyone who has been around adopted kids, or even blended households with step children, can relate to issues seen in this film.

The acting from all the people involved, child and adult is right on par. Great casting job. The movie keeps things light, but isn’t afraid to touch on the dark-emotional issues too. It kept everyone feeling human and real. I dare anyone to see this movie and not find a character or scene relate to their life.

So I give the movie a must see now review! It has something for everyone.


Edge of Tomorrow, movie review

I avoided this movie when it first came out, due to the main actor and the plethora of science fiction movies he was doing at this time. However, while trapped on a long flight, I found myself with nothing better to do than watch it.

And I am glad I did. It’s not every day you get to see Tom Cruise act like a coward and attempt to defect from the military. I quite enjoyed this new side of him and got to experience a refreshing taste of his true acting potential.

The plot is also highly original. I can’t say much about it without giving it all away. But it’s interesting to see how a person copes when forced to relive the day of their death over and over. And then add in aliens invading earth and you def have a hit.

So if you were like me and were avoiding this film, take my advice and go see it!