https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog daily 0.75 2025-12-30 https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2025/12/26/thoughts-on-novocaine-2025 monthly 0.5 2025-12-30 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/63033d42-0eb8-4ec9-ac54-83afd4549553/%28Thoughts+On%29+Novocaine.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Novocaine (2025) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. For my Christmas review this year, I decided to cover what ended up being one of my new favorite Christmas action movies, and it came out in the first half of the year. As for what makes this a Christmas movie, we’ll get to that, folks, don’t worry. For now, though, let’s go over one of the most overlooked movies of the year, and that is Novocaine. The story follows Nathan Caine, the assistant manager at a bank. He may seem like a regular guy, but he has the inability to feel pain*. His coworker, Sherry, becomes attracted to him, but he’s initially hesitant due to both his condition and not having been in a relationship before. That night, they go to a bar together, and then Nathan takes Sherry home with him, so all seems to go well for him. Unfortunately, the following morning, a group of robbers dressed up as Santa break in and kidnap Sherry, prompting Nathan to go after them. What Worked: First of all, what works right off the bat is the concept itself: A regular guy who can’t feel pain going after kidnappers to get his girlfriend back. The story itself may not be original, but the concept around it is. What also makes it work is the cast, with three cast members in particular being noteworthy. Our protagonist is played by the always charismatic Jack Quaid, who chances are a fair amount of my readers may recognize from Scream 5, Companion, or even The Boys. In fact, his condition here makes him seem like he would fit right in on that show. The love interest here is played by the equally excellent Amber Midthunder, who is very quickly starting to prove herself following the success of Prey, the best Predator movie since the original… up to that point, anyway. Here, she has very believable chemistry with Jack Quaid, and she’s also very sympathetic on her own, especially later on in the movie. For an action movie like this, what can make it really stand out even more is having a compelling antagonist to match the protagonist. Here, we have Ray Nicholson for that, and much like Jack Quaid, he has so much charisma as well. You can tell he definitely got that from his Dad. After making a name for himself with Smile 2**, his next big movie is an action movie. For me, you can’t really go wrong with that. The other standout was Jacob Batalon, best known from the MCU Spider-Man films, as Nathan’s friend Roscoe. Simply put, he is hilarious in this. Now for the main thing that I was eager to talk about when I got to covering this movie. Even with a protagonist who can’t feel pain, there are still some very brutal moments in this. With those come very creative kills, some of which were shown in the trailer, like the kitchen fight. It’s not quite as insane as the one in something like The Raid 2, but it still doesn’t hold back. You’ll probably never look at deep fryers the same way again, I’ll put it that way. The craziest one comes at the end of the movie, and I obviously won’t spoil it, you just need to see it for yourself. I guarantee that every time you see it, it’ll make you wince. I would know from experience. The first time, I saw it at an early screening (one of the most fun ones I’ve been to), and then the second time was rewatching it for this review. Before I get to my issues (I really only have two big ones), it’s time to address what makes this a Christmas movie to me. For example, Christmas trees show up several times in the movie. Christmas miracles are mentioned. “Merry Christmas” is spoken. Nathan wears a Christmas-themed tie at one point. They also play “Silver Bells” in one scene. For me, as long as they have at least one Christmas song, it qualifies. I could go on, but for my readers, I’ll continue on to the issues I have, as much as I love this movie. What Didn’t Work: There are at least a couple predictable moments, for one thing. The bigger one I have, though, is that this is yet another movie with the most unsubtle song choices ever***. For example, they play “Everybody Hurts” by R.E.M. at the beginning of the movie. I’m not saying this for every song in the movie, I’m giving the Christmas music a pass, considering the setting. The song choices are so blatant that they somewhat overwhelm the score, co-composed by Lorne Balfe, who gave us the best rendition of the Mission: Impossible theme with Mission: Impossible - Fallout. Overall: Despite those couple issues, Novocaine is so much fun to where the thing you’ll mainly feel is pure joy from such an adrenaline rush of a movie. It has so much rewatchability thanks to the performances and the action alone. On top of that, upon watching it again for this review, I found it to be a satisfying Christmas-themed action movie to where I feel it’s sufficient enough to hold me over for Violent Night 2 next year. Speaking of which… Great offerings came this year But upon us are new flicks So I hope to see you here In 2026. *This is also a real thing, by the way. For evidence of that, among the screenings they held for the movie before it came out, they had some for people with this condition. I have to give them respect for going the extra mile to do that. **Full Disclosure: I have not seen either of those two movies, but I hear surprisingly good things about them, especially the second one. ***That’s not the first time I can say that for a movie from this year. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2025/10/31/thoughts-on-sinners-2025 monthly 0.5 2025-12-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/9d7ec0a2-d216-4fb7-b68c-0555b43b76e7/%28Thoughts+On%29+Sinners.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Sinners (2025) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. For this review, we’re sticking with horror, but for a very special occasion (and not just the obvious one). Much like the subject of the previous review, it deals with a type of infection. Thankfully, it’s not a real one, so it’s a threat people are long familiar with, and it’s one that can more easily be handled. We’re going from viruses to vampires, as I present my review of what is currently my favorite film of the year, which is Ryan Coogler’s Sinners. Set in 1932, the story follows the Smokestack Twins (aptly named Smoke and Stack), who, upon serving in the mob for seven years in Chicago, come home to Mississippi to establish a juke joint (basically a blues club) for their community. While they manage to do so, it isn’t long before their big night is put in jeopardy. What Worked: The cast is phenomenal. It goes without saying that’s how you can describe Michael B. Jordan’s performances in this movie. No, that wasn’t a typo. He plays both twins in the movie, and not once does it feel like novelty being phoned in*. They each have their own distinct personality: Smoke is cautious, whereas Stack is confident. The same can be said for Hailee Steinfeld, and while she is among a predominantly Black cast, she does not feel out of place, nor does her character Mary. Before getting back to the established actors, I’m going to take a moment to address the other standout in the movie, and that is newcomer Miles Caton as the Twins’ cousin Sammie. He is so excellent in his debut performance that right off the bat (no pun intended), you’ll be eager to see him in more projects. The best performance for me other than him and of course Michael B. Jordan was Delroy Lindo as Delta Slim, who they recruit as their pianist. There are times where he is hilarious. There are three others worth noting here. The first is Wunmi Mosaku (Deadpool & Wolverine) as Annie, Smoke’s ex-wife, and the second is Jayme Lawson (The Batman**) as Pearline, a singer who Sammie falls in love with. They each get at least one brilliant moment in this, but I can’t really go into them. The last one worth noting is Jack O’Connell as the main vampire Remmick. He is easily the best villain so far this year, because not only is he intimidating, but he has an understandable motivation. Now for the technical aspects, which can also each be viewed as characters in their own right, even down to a compelling story. This is one of the most gorgeously shot movies I have seen all year, if not the most. There are even sequences that were done in IMAX, and you can tell watching it (especially now that it’s on home media, as they did retain those aspect ratio changes). You actually see the screen expand at least twice, but it mainly changes from one ratio to the other. What is easily the best part of the movie is a sequence where Sammie is on stage, and he does this one particular song. This moment is so impactful it transcends time (both figuratively and literally). It’s so powerful that if there’s one part that really sticks with you, it’s that. What’s even better is that it’s done in one shot. Speaking of the music, it’s not just the songs that are great. Ludwig Göransson’s score is excellent, and it’s probably the best since he won his Oscar for Oppenheimer. It gets even greater once the third act kicks in, and that’s when the vampire lore really comes into play, even if you noticed hints at it prior to that. The biggest thing that makes this whole movie work is the pacing. It takes the first 40 minutes to establish all the characters, and not one moment of it feels wasted. You grow to care about these people, and so you feel the impact when one of them doesn’t make it out alive. You also feel the tension, like in one scene reminiscent of a certain John Carpenter movie. Needless to say, this feels like Ryan Coogler’s most personal project yet, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a crowd-pleaser, it absolutely is, with one of the most satisfying third acts ever. Overall: Sinners is a perfect example of a “Lightning in a Bottle” movie, as I like to call it, where it has so many things in one movie, and yet all of them work and feel completely organic. From a perfect cast to a compelling story, and everything in between, this proves that original movies can draw crowds to see them, as long as every part of it is on point, both in front of the camera and behind the scenes. It accomplished something that very rarely happens even now: Even the word of mouth was there to give it staying power, and it was a huge hit, when not everyone thought it would be. I’m not the only one who would take vampire twins over a Chicken Jockey any day, I’ll tell you that***. One more thing: Be sure to stay through the credits. Next time, we’ll be going from a comic book movie director’s latest project to a movie where its main character sounds like he belongs in one. Happy Halloween, everyone! *As for how they pulled this off, I’m not going to go into it here to preserve the experience for the readers. Trust me, folks, you’ll want to look it up later, and it’ll blow your mind. In fact, you’d likely want to immediately watch it again, and I wouldn’t blame you. **Another Halloween choice, ironically enough. I’ll get to that and The Penguin before Part II comes out, don’t worry. ***Yes, folks. You heard me right. It even beat Minecraft in that movie’s third weekend. Everyone thought it would be in first place again, and yet this still beat it. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2025/3/11/thoughts-on-sick-2023 monthly 0.5 2025-10-31 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/01bed22c-e26c-40a6-9b51-545ffb897b04/%28Thoughts+On%29+Sick+%282023%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Sick (2023) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. For this review, we’re taking a look at a horror movie about an actual horrific event. For those who have been following my blog long enough, you would know that this event had a pretty significant impact on me (and not in a good way, to put it lightly). In fact, it impacted me so much (particularly on here, because it caused so much to be delayed left and right) that while I initially intended to track it and keep everyone up to date as new developments came in, I ended up falling too far behind doing it. It ultimately proved completely pointless, as most if not all of what I would cover eventually did end up coming out. Even so, this has been a long time coming for me, as I finally get some payback. Folks, even if you hated having to get them (I did, too, don’t get me wrong), it’s time to bust out your face masks, gloves, hand sanitizer, or what have you, as we take a look at a horror comedy that deserves more attention, since it didn’t go to theaters, but rather straight to Peacock. However, it has since been released on Digital and on physical media, including 4K, and that is Sick. Before I get started, I have to mention something here that’s a pet peeve of mine, and this happens a lot. If you look this movie up (on Wikipedia, IMDb, or anything like that), it says it’s a 2022 movie*. Just because it premiered at a film festival in 2022, that means it is considered to have been released that year. Not for me, it isn’t. My rule is if it gets a general release in a different year compared to a festival release, I go by the former. Thus, I consider this a 2023 movie, because that’s when everyone else would be able to see it, whether it goes to theaters or not. There is only one exception I make to this: If both releases happen in the same year, then it counts. For anyone who would be confused by the differing dates, I wanted to take a moment to get that out of the way. Having done that, let’s continue. Set during the beginning of the worldwide Hell known as COVID (particularly April 2020), the story follows two best friends, Parker and Miri, as they decide to go to a lake house owned by Parker’s family for quarantine. Unfortunately, Parker begins receiving mysterious texts from an unknown number, which ends up becoming the least of their problems. What Worked: For a movie set during COVID, it benefits from having a small cast, even if there aren’t really any big names in it. However, there are some people I did recognize, but I’ll get to a couple of them in a moment. First, our main character is played by Gideon Adlon, who more recently was in Terminator Zero last year, where she voiced the main character’s daughter. As great as she was in that, I may have liked her even more in this**. Parker is very sympathetic, as is Miri, played by Beth Million. Their friendship feels authentic, and they have some good banter between them. In fact, Miri had some of the funnier lines. I’ll get to the script momentarily. There are two other names I can really go into here, the first of which being Dylan Sprayberry (who played the younger Clark Kent in Man of Steel) as a friend of theirs, DJ, who decides to quarantine with them. He’s really good for the time he’s in it. The second it took me a bit to recognize, and that is Joel Courtney from Super 8. Even though he’s basically a cameo, his character does end up having greater significance to the main plot. I considered mentioning two additional names, but I decided against it, because it would come dangerously close to spoilers. I can say this: One of them is mainly known for independent work, and the other you may recognize among the supporting cast of Companion, which is one of my favorite movies of the year. As mentioned earlier, I didn’t have a lot to go by on this one. However, the subject of my next review (which is currently my favorite of the year) will more than make up for that. Now for the technical aspects. The biggest name in that regard I would argue is Kevin Williamson, best known as one of the driving forces behind the Scream franchise (to the point where he’s directing and cowriting the next one). This very much has his stamp on it, because it feels like a Scream movie at times, to the point where at its core, it’s a horror mystery. The script itself is very clever with how it takes stabs (no pun intended) at COVID and all the things that come with it, from quarantine to the home tests, right down to even the toilet paper hysteria that kicked everything off. I was surprised they even addressed that. It also has characters making smart decisions. In fact, one of which is actually a character addressing a stupid decision that another just made, which I thought was hilarious. It’s not entirely on point, but I’ll get to that later. For now, I’ll say that for me, at least, it did stick the landing in terms of the reveal because it ultimately makes sense. Not only that, it also doesn’t make characters we’ve come to know and love look like complete idiots, but I digress. They did express how I felt at one point near the end of the movie, though, so there is that (thank you, Kevin; it’s getting bonus points from me just for that). As a result, you can relate to the characters here because they had to deal with as much pain as everyone else. The other somewhat recognizable name behind the camera is John Hyams. That’s mainly because he’s the son of director Peter Hyams, who was particularly big in the 90s, ranging from his collaborations with Jean-Claude Van Damme such as Timecop and Sudden Death to his horror films The Relic and End of Days***. I mention some of his work for one particular reason, and it does somewhat carry over to John’s work on this. In terms of the direction here, though, it is pretty well done. The same goes for the cinematography, for the most part. What Didn’t Work: There are a couple times where the cinematography is too dark. It felt like John was following in Peter’s footsteps and shooting his own movie. I was surprised to discover that this wasn’t the case, so it’s not as distracting as when his father would do it… and he had a habit of doing that. It’s not Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem-levels bad, is what I’m saying. By comparison alone, it’s not even close. This might be a nitpick compared to my biggest issue, but the score here is good, but not that memorable. My biggest issue is that while the reveal, which I of course will not spoil, was effective, it’s not the most brilliant one Kevin’s done in his scripts (it’s no Scream 2), but I will say that it’s way better than the main one in Scream 4. However, that’s not his fault. You should always blame Harvey Weinstein for that, even if it wasn’t as severe as an occasion involving Bob, but both are different stories. One thing I do have an issue with regarding that, though, is a certain aspect of those characters that is not subtle at all, especially if you love horror movies. Let’s just say it’s about as subtle as playing “Raindrops Keep Fallin’ on My Head” in the opening premonition of a Final Destination movie… oh wait, they did do that. Overall: While not quite as good as some of Kevin Williamson’s other work, Sick is still a really good movie. For a movie that takes a jab at COVID (which I had been waiting for ever since Day One, really) and does it in entertaining ways, this movie really surprises me even now that someone managed to pull it off. They did it better than even I could’ve. Even though this wasn’t an issue for me, I should forewarn you, though, before I close this out: If anyone out there is considering watching this based on my recommendation, if you think you’ll feel uncomfortable from being reminded of what you may have gone through during this time, even with that, it might not be the best idea unless/until you think you can handle it. For everyone else, especially if you felt the same way I did during the whole thing, this’ll be a delight for you. They were able to look back on it and laugh, and hopefully, so can you. Next time, we go from a horror movie parodying newer tropes to a new take on established ones. *Actually, YouTube does have it right. **Even in saying that, yes, I am still a big Terminator fan. ***AKA the one where Arnold fights the Devil. I don’t need to say anything else. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2025/3/11/thoughts-on-wolf-man-2025 monthly 0.5 2025-10-31 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/fb0d0613-8157-4878-9231-4a6362b4b9c6/%28Thoughts+On%29+Wolf+Man+%282025%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Wolf Man (2025) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. For this review, we go from one of the best horror remakes of the past few years to the first of what may end up being several movies I end up finding underrated*. Ironically, both come from the same director. Even more ironically, he goes from directing a movie about a monster that can turn invisible to a monster movie where the audience did**. Though the movie’s reception did hurt, its fate was sealed long before that of the main character, but we’ll get to that later. For now, let’s just say I’ve been waiting to go into that when talking about this. Folks, you won’t need silver bullets, but you will still need to watch out for the full moon, as I present my review of Leigh Whannell’s latest modern update of a classic monster, Wolf Man. The story follows Blake Lovell, who decides to vacation in his childhood home in Oregon with his wife Charlotte and their daughter Ginger upon hearing news that his estranged father has gone missing. On their way to the house, they’re suddenly attacked and driven off the road by a mysterious creature. Despite being scratched, Blake manages to get his family safely inside the house. Unfortunately, his family still has to contend with a monster both inside and out. What Worked: Similar to The Invisible Man (and even Upgrade before it), this one doesn’t have huge names in it***. It has some that you might recognize, but this may have the least amount of such names of the three. We have Christopher Abbott (coming off of Kraven the Hunter) as Blake, and for a lesser known actor, he’s still really good at showing his character’s vulnerable side. He cares about his family, and wants what’s best for everyone while doing all he can to protect them. Therefore, you do feel for him even in knowing his fate is sealed. In saying that, there is a big parallel to two other creature features, both of which served as huge inspirations for Leigh Whannell when making the movie. Ironically enough, both are also beloved remakes from the 80s: John Carpenter’s The Thing and David Cronenberg’s The Fly. It’s mainly noticeable when it comes to The Fly, but we’ll get to that. There are two performances that really shine, though, those being from Julia Garner as Blake’s wife Charlotte and Matilda Firth as their daughter Ginger. While not quite as excellent as it was with The Invisible Man, Leigh Whannell’s direction is still solid here. He creates an effectively unsettling atmosphere, and it complements the themes of isolation, dread, and anxiety really well. This particularly applies when you consider that in reality, we had similar feelings not too long ago, something that I’ll tackle (in more ways than one) in the next review. I felt similarly about Benjamin Wallfisch’s score, which is still excellent, and one of the best parts of the movie for me. Another one of the best parts is actually the sound design. You really notice it in one particular scene in the middle of the movie. Be on the lookout for it. What Didn’t Work: The biggest thing that bothered me is actually not anything that happens in the movie itself. Universal made a really boneheaded decision by doing this… they started their marketing by revealing what everyone thought would be the look of the monster (which isn’t actually the final look, but anyway) as part of a Halloween Horror Nights event last year. Then two days later, they put up the teaser for the movie, which some viewed as damage control, and at least part of me couldn’t help but agree with that. What made the whole situation worse was that it turned out they didn’t run it by everyone involved with the movie first. Yes, folks, you’re reading that right. Because they showed that off, it affected something that happens in the movie, which is one of several predictable moments (and that’s where you really notice the aforementioned parallels). There is one thing that actually made it even worse, and this you could argue was the final nail in the coffin… they thought it was a smart idea to put the scene where he finishes turning online ten days before the movie came out. Thankfully, I just waited to see it in the movie. Aside from Universal basically stabbing Leigh Whannell in the back after he made so much for them last time, I have two other issues. The song choice in the first half of the main credits felt out of place to me. I would’ve stuck with the score all the way through the credits. Plus, when you have someone like Benjamin Wallfisch on board, you make the most of his talents. The last thing you wouldn’t notice unless you have seen The Invisible Man, in which case you’ll notice this right away: They have an establishing shot from it in this movie. It’s early on, too. What Might Not Work For Everyone: There are two big things in this case that worked for me, but I recognize that others might not feel the same way. The slow burn approach is the first thing, where it mainly focuses on the transition from man to monster (which is an example of the parallels, especially when compared to The Fly). The biggest thing is that the creature design might not work for everyone, either. However, I get what they were trying to do here. Plus, they used practical effects and took it in a different direction rather than trying to copy what came before with the original or even the 2010 remake, let alone An American Werewolf in London, the latter two of which were done by makeup legend Rick Baker. They very easily could’ve done that, but they chose to go the extra mile, so they get bonus points from me just for that. Overall: While I still really liked it, Wolf Man is not as great as it could’ve been. At the same time, I wasn’t expecting it to top The Invisible Man anyway, but it’s still a solid movie. While I do commend them for going the extra mile with the effects, there are still some aspects that could’ve been improved a bit more (even more so if the studio just let them do their thing). However, the great performances and direction, effectively creepy atmosphere, and excellent score and sound design were more than enough to make up for that. Even so, it does hurt that this didn’t go as well as that movie did, because I was looking forward to Leigh Whannell giving me a new take on another iconic monster. With the resurgence of movie monsters as of late, I would love to see him get to do another one (like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, which he himself actually said he wants to do, ironically enough). Unfortunately, it’s less likely to happen now, even with how this really could’ve benefitted even further from coming out during said resurgence than it already did. If you’re willing to check it out despite it not following the typical werewolf lore, I’d say give it a chance. You might not be howling with excitement, but you might still enjoy it. Where You Can Find It: At the time of this writing, it’s set to arrive on home media later this month. If you still want to see it, but ultimately decided to wait, you don’t have to wait too much longer. However, it has also been released on Digital, so if you want something to hold you over, you can watch it there. As for streaming, I don’t have any information yet. Next time, we go from a story with themes of isolation to a story about actual isolation. *To put it into perspective, we’re not even three months in, and already I have three. **In saying that, I’m more stating facts than just saying it to make a joke. ***Although it almost did, as Ryan Gosling was attached to star at one point. He does still retain an executive producer credit, though. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2025/2/27/thoughts-on-the-invisible-man-2020 monthly 0.5 2025-10-31 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/cfd247a5-13e9-4f75-9cca-a2d8e1540a6d/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Invisible+Man+%282020%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Invisible Man (2020) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. For this review, we’re taking a look at one of the best horror remakes of the past few years*. This one is going to take some backstory, so we have to start there. Originally, this was going to be part of Universal’s planned Dark Universe (basically, their answer to the MCU), with Johnny Depp already cast in the role. The series was set to begin with The Mummy, featuring Tom Cruise, Russell Crowe, and Sofia Boutella of Kingsman fame as the titular monster. In reality, the series began and ended with that movie when it was eviscerated by critics and bombed at the box office. The shared universe concept was then abandoned in favor of standalone stories featuring the classic monsters. As for what I thought of it… here’s the short version: I thought it was okay. It’s actually one of the earliest reviews I ever did, so for those who want to learn more, feel free to go check out that one. Flash forward to 2019. Leigh Whannell gets brought on to write and direct a new version of the story, a reboot of the original 1933 film, but much like that one, it would also be loosely based on the original 1897 novel by H.G. Wells. One year later, the movie gets released to great reviews and box office success… and then its theatrical release gets cut short due to COVID plunging the world into Hell. Three weeks later, it’s made available to rent on Digital for those who weren’t initially able to see it. Now, five years since its release, he’s released his latest project, and I rewatch this to get ready for it. Folks, let’s see if this still holds up, as I present my review of what is inarguably Leigh Whannell’s best movie up to this point, The Invisible Man. The story follows Cecilia Kass, who’s been trying to escape an abusive relationship with scientist Adrian Griffin, who specializes in optical engineering. One night, she’s able to escape, but even then, he still haunts her. Two weeks later, while staying with her childhood friend and his daughter, she hears that Adrian has apparently killed himself and left $5 million to her. After making arrangements with his brother Tom, strange things start happening, and this leads Cecilia to believe that Adrian didn’t really commit suicide, and has found a way to become invisible. What Worked: First of all, the performances are fantastic across the board. Elisabeth Moss is outstanding in this movie. She brings a realistic sense of vulnerability to Cecilia, so you genuinely feel her plight. Aldis Hodge (the new Alex Cross) plays her friend, Detective James Lanier, and Storm Reid plays his daughter Sydney. Reid in particular is great. She’s one of the best young actresses working today, as anyone who’s seen Missing will attest, though I would also recommend Sleight as well. Though Harriet Dyer and Michael Dorman (who play Cecilia’s younger sister Emily and Tom, respectively) are both really good, I actually thought Oliver Jackson-Cohen (Mike Flanagan’s Haunting series**) was just as excellent as Elisabeth Moss in this movie. His version of Adrian is one of the best horror villains of the decade so far. He toys with Cecilia at every turn, and he is so unsettling, even when you do see him***. Any characteristic of abusers, he has, from gaslighting to victim blaming to lying. Without giving too much away, she gets to confront him, and what happens is nothing short of satisfying, given everything he had put her through. Where the movie really shines, though, is with the technical aspects. Up to this point (which isn’t saying much, because I haven’t seen all of his movies), I had viewed this as Leigh Whannell’s best movie, both in terms of direction and writing. It’s also well paced and has some of the best cinematography you can see in a horror movie this decade so far. You’re constantly on edge throughout the movie, and you never know where the Invisible Man could be. You know you’re doing something right when you can linger on inanimate objects for a few seconds and it makes sense for the movie. The technique for how the Invisible Man is done here is from a more logical perspective, so it’s also realistically plausible. Instead of drinking a potion or taking a serum, this version of Adrian is still a genius scientist, and because he specializes in optical technology, it makes sense. In this version, he wears a suit fitted with hundreds of cameras that reflect the light around him to make him invisible. It looks so cool in action. The best scene in the movie involves him and a bunch of people in a hallway. Be on the lookout for it. If you thought the sound design in Upgrade was excellent, you’ll love it as much if not even more here. The best aspect of the movie, though, is Benjamin Wallfisch’s phenomenal score. The final track alone makes it stand out. What Didn’t Work: There are some plot points that seem a bit excessive, namely parts of Adrian’s grand plan to ruin Cecilia’s life, which I won’t go into. Some of those plot points are a bit predictable as well, but other than those two things, that’s really it. Overall: The Invisible Man is one of the best modern horror remakes out there, one of the best horror movies so far this decade, and quite possibly Leigh Whannell’s best movie to date (his latest, though, I’ll get to soon, don’t worry). With a realistic depiction of a very sensitive topic, a solid script and direction, fantastic sound design, a phenomenal score, excellent performances (particularly Elisabeth Moss and Oliver Jackson-Cohen; Moss especially should’ve at least been nominated), it also provides a surprisingly sensible way of taking an iconic monster’s story in a different direction, and it really works. Acknowledging what came before also helps, and this even does that in a clever way in one scene****. What makes it even more impressive is something I alluded to in the Upgrade review: The fact that it looks as great as it does on a minimal budget. Though slightly higher than Upgrade (which cost $3 million), this still looks impressive. This cost $7 million, and it looks more like $10-12 million. It’s just as effective a commentary on abusive relationships as it is a horror movie. You may not be able to see the villain, but this movie, it must be seen. Where You Can Find It: At the time of this writing, you can find it on Freevee. Unfortunately, that means you’ll have to deal with ad interruptions, so if you can handle that, you should be fine. Next time, we go from witnessing one monster’s psychological transformation to witnessing another monster’s physical one. *It won’t be the last time we’re looking at this concept this year, but we’ll get to that later. **The Haunting of Hill House and The Haunting of Bly Manor. ***Speaking of people you can’t see, if you manipulate the letters of his name enough, you get the name of another… I couldn’t resist on that one. ****If you’ve ever seen any previous depictions wearing bandages, they do that here. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2025/1/26/thoughts-on-upgrade-2018 monthly 0.5 2025-01-26 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/f4806f94-b939-4942-9bea-da4accf77e49/%28Thoughts+On%29+Upgrade.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Upgrade (2018) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. Following my reviews for both Den of Thieves movies, there was the first big 2025 movie I was looking forward to that I knew I had to get ready for, the latest project from James Wan’s collaborator from Saw, Leigh Whannell*. Though I had not seen the first movie he directed (that being Insidious: Chapter 3), I had seen the two movies that followed, the first of which was this. Much like the first Den of Thieves, I hadn’t seen these two since they came out, but I remembered more that happened in these than I did from that. With all the hype that was there (at first; it seemed to have diminished more and more closer to release for reasons I’ll get to later), I knew I had to rewatch these, and I was so excited to do so, because I loved both. For now, though, let’s get to where my history with his directorial efforts started. Folks, we’re taking a look at one of the most overlooked sci-fi action movies of the past decade, with possibly the best performance to date from the lead. If you were to take John Wick and mix it with elements of RoboCop**, you’d have this movie. If that’s not enough, it did Venom better before Venom even came out***, and this better version is a gem known as Upgrade. Set in the year 2046, the movie follows auto mechanic Grey Trace and his wife Asha. Asha works for a company called Cobalt, which specializes in cybernetic enhancements. While returning a car to the home of one of Grey’s clients, tech genius Eron Keen, he shows them his newest project, a chip that can take control of one’s motor functions called STEM. On their way back, they get in a car accident, and get attacked by four men, which results in Asha getting killed and Grey being rendered quadriplegic. Grey then feels like he’s lost everything, but after a visit from Eron, he accepts his offer to have STEM implanted in him. Though there is a catch, Grey is able to walk again, determined to find the men responsible for the attack. What Worked: The cast, while not made up entirely of big names, has some people you might recognize. The biggest name, of course, is Logan Marshall-Green, who plays our main protagonist. If that name sounds familiar, it may be because of foreshadowing I provided when mentioning him in my Carry-On review. Here, though, he looks more like you’d usually see him. You may also recognize him from his small role in Spider-Man: Homecoming or more easily from his role in Prometheus. This is probably his most likable character to date, because he’s vulnerable, so you sympathize with him even before he gets STEM implanted. Then we have Betty Gabriel (Get Out, the upcoming Novocaine) as Detective Cortez, who is assigned to investigate the attack, and even though she becomes suspicious of Grey throughout the movie, I still really liked her. Then there’s Harrison Gilbertson (Need for Speed, Oppenheimer) as Eron Keen, and it says something when he’s more convincing as a tech genius than Elon Musk is in real life. I’ll put it that way. The other two most noteworthy are Benedict Hardie as the main villain, Fisk Brantner, and he’s perhaps the most interesting character in the movie. He’s also worth noting because starting with this movie, he’s appeared in every movie Leigh Whannell has directed. The last one worth noting is Simon Maiden as the voice of STEM. He has this calm demeanor throughout the movie, which makes him all the more intimidating as a presence. It also goes to show how unnerving the presence of AI can be. Now for the technical aspects. The look of the movie feels so slick for the budget it has, particularly with the effects. It’s one of the more recent examples of low budget movies that look more than they cost. Other examples include The Terminator (6.4 million, looks like (for the time) maybe 10 million), District 9 (30 million, looks like 100 million if not more), and the subject of my next review (I’ll go into it there). The settings and vehicles alone look like they could’ve cost more to make. This is something I’ll definitely be bringing up in the next two reviews: The sound design is excellent, because in every one of his movies I’ve seen so far, Leigh Whannell always has it on full display. When STEM takes over or gives Grey full control again, you hear a very mechanical sound effect, and it’s always satisfying whenever you do. It’s hard to describe, so I’ll just say you’ll know when you hear it. It even catches you off guard with how they open the movie. Normally, you’d sometimes see opening credits before the title card comes up. They turn that on its head by actually just vocalizing it, and it’s brilliant. They do the production company credits, and then the title. There’s no actual credits accompanying it or anything like that, and they don’t do that for the end credits, because it would’ve been excessive to do that. It’s done just enough to where it works. It helps sell the futuristic setting, so I appreciate the attention to detail, which also shows in the gorgeous cinematography, Whannell’s direction and even his script. Speaking of the script, even the occasional dark humor works, providing a nice break in between the outright insane action sequences. It’s also a nice touch with a couple Easter Eggs that show up. One of them is a Saw reference. The other is in a scene where Grey is taking an elevator, and the camera focuses on some names next to the buttons. One of them is a reference to James Wan, so be on the lookout for it****. In describing the action like that, I’m not exaggerating. Examples range from someone getting a kitchen knife put to their mouth and then pushed back to one person with a weapon implant having it turned against them in a pretty mind-blowing way. Both of these are cases where it’s even more brutal than it already sounds. What Didn’t Work: I don’t really have many issues here. At most, I have maybe two, and they’re more like nitpicks. One of them is how some of the character arcs are predictable. The other one is how it just kind of ends. It also doesn’t help that for the poster and even the home media release (Digital and physical both have this), they used a shot from the last scene. I’ll say this: Compared to some other movies (this especially happens with horror movies), they don’t outright spoil the ending here. The shot they use may not be a spoiler in this case, but it’s dangerously close to one. It’s not the worst case of this happening with these three movies in particular (the most egregious is coming later, and egregious might even be understating it). Other than that, that’s really it. Overall: For my first time seeing a Leigh Whannell film, I couldn’t have picked a better one to start with than Upgrade. I felt that way when it came out, and I feel that way now after rewatching it. By the time I finished rewatching it, I realized how much I loved it even more than I already did when it came out. It’s among the best movies I saw in 2018, and it remains one of the most overlooked ones of the past decade in general. With an impressive and visually stunning setting on a minimal budget, excellent sound design and action, some solid direction, writing, and humor, and great performances led by what is Logan Marshall-Green’s best to date, I don’t know what else I can say other than, simply put, this movie is awesome. It also goes without saying that because of how unique it is alone, I can’t recommend it highly enough. Where You Can Find It: At the time of this writing, you can find it on Netflix. It’s absolutely worth checking out, because it’s one of those that deserves your attention. Regardless of how you seek it out, it’s more important that you do. Next time, we take a look at the first of his two most recent projects… and let’s just say that it’ll likely have many more puns than that (intended or not). *Fun Fact: Though the spelling of his last name was slightly off in the credits, he had a small role in The Matrix Reloaded. Look out for Axel, a character wearing a leg brace; that’s him. He would also appear in Enter the Matrix, which came out the same day the movie opened in theaters. **It was also described as a mix between The Six Million Dollar Man and Death Wish, which is also pretty accurate. That’s also foreshadowing something that’ll come around again two reviews from now. I’ll leave it at that. ***It also did it with a significantly smaller budget of $3 million, and ultimately made $17 million, almost 6 times that, back. ****This probably led to James returning the favor by giving Leigh a cameo in Aquaman. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2025/1/25/thoughts-on-den-of-thieves-2-pantera-2025 monthly 0.5 2025-01-25 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/0aaba4d2-85f7-47ca-9c0f-4f40149daf06/%28Thoughts+On%29+Den+of+Thieves+2+-+Pantera.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Den of Thieves 2: Pantera (2025) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. In my previous review, I didn’t need to tease the next one like the first movie itself did. More than likely, you already knew this one was coming. For this one, we enter the panther’s den, as I present my review of Den of Thieves 2: Pantera… and no, that doesn’t mean you should expect the band to show up. I should forewarn you, though, that there will be some spoilers for the first movie here, so if you haven’t seen the first movie, go watch it and then read my review, and (despite doing my best to refrain from spoilers for the latest release) I think it would help if you’ve seen this one as well before coming back. I should also note that I’ll be comparing and contrasting both (and especially considering I watched them so close to each other, there’s no way around that). For those who have seen both, let’s continue. The story begins with Donnie Wilson (O’Shea Jackson Jr.) joining a crew known as the Panthers for a heist at an airport hangar in Antwerp, Belgium. A red diamond and files are taken, and they make their escape disguised as a SWAT team. Back in Los Angeles, Nick O’Brien (Gerard Butler), now divorced and on leave, is looking for answers as to how Donnie was involved with the previous crew as this new one is planning their next big heist: the World Diamond Center in Nice, France. Nick discovers Donnie is involved here, and after meeting up, Nick tells him he wants in. Unfortunately, with a new ally comes a new enemy, as the Italian mafia is after them for stealing the red diamond. What Worked: A lot of what worked in the first movie is retained here. Gerard Butler and O’Shea Jackson Jr. still play off of each other very well. Also returning from the first movie are Meadow Williams as Holly, Merrimen’s widow, and Michael Bisping as Connor (who appeared at the end of the first movie to tell Donnie about the diamond exchange across from the bar he was working at). Williams is good for the time she’s in it, but Bisping has the more interesting character. The biggest of the new cast members is Evin Ahmad (best known as the title character on Netflix’s Who Is Erin Carter?) as the leader of the Panther crew. She’s also one of the most interesting of the new characters. I also appreciated that they escalated the threat from a group of thieves to the Mafia. They also added a bit of humor here, which the first one didn’t really have, and it still worked for me. The biggest surprise was the fact that 50 Cent came back to produce this movie, considering what happened before. Though not quite as great as it was in the first movie, the action here is still really good, particularly the big heist here and the car chase, both of which you may have seen parts of in the trailer. If there are two scenes with big stakes, it’s those. You still feel tense (particularly during the heist scene) to where you’re thinking at any moment, any one member of the crew could die. The sound design is as much of a highlight as before. One thing I can mention is more of a standout here is the cinematography. Because the scale here is more global (outside of Los Angeles, it’s more Europe-centric this time around), it gives this movie a huge advantage. Speaking of advantages, while the direction and script are as solid as before (Nick even gets a similar line that’s the selling point here, and it’s just as awesome), another improvement this has is that it’s inspired by an actual heist. There was a diamond heist in Antwerp back in 2003. Having a heist that really happened as a template is a huge benefit here, and it might not be the last time they’re doing it. I’ll come back to that in the Outro. While still not perfect, the pacing is better. What Didn’t Work: The conveniences of the heists themselves are definitely more obvious here, and the same goes for the plot holes. The stakes aren’t as consistent, and though we do see them escalate for the crew, we don’t really get to see that regarding others. While still good, the score and editing don’t stand out as much. Going back to the pacing, this unfortunately has the same issue as the first movie. It actually felt more prominent here. Both are close to 2 and a half hours, and both could’ve been trimmed by maybe 10-20 minutes. This is more of a narrative issue for me, but while there was a diamond heist hinted at, I was expecting this to immediately follow up on that. While they did to an extent, it was not in the way they hinted at. It may sound like I thought the first one was better because I’m comparing them so much, but again, I can’t help but do that. If anything, they both have their advantages and disadvantages, some of which I didn’t even point out last time. Overall: Even with its problems, much like the first one, I thought Den of Thieves 2: Pantera was still a lot of fun. A large amount of what worked in the first one still works here, with some aspects of this one standing out more, but, again, there remains room for improvement. I will say, though, that this sets up a third one in a clever way, and I have no doubt there’ll be more, because after how long it took between these first two movies, they’re more determined to not take nearly as long. Plus, ideas are already being pitched and other heists are being considered to use for more stories. So far, people like these movies, as evidenced by the fact that they do really well (especially for January releases, and they’re both among the better ones). This has given Lionsgate* a much needed #1 hit after 14 months of bomb after bomb after bomb, as their last hit was The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes… which came out in November of 2023. As it is, I’ve really liked what we’ve gotten so far, and after hearing they’re planning more, I would conclude with shockingly the only other joke I’ve managed to incorporate into the review: Much like Chris Rock with G.I. Jane 2, I can’t wait to see it**. Where You Can Find It: At the time of this writing, though there probably aren’t as many showtimes that would be convenient for you as there may have been opening weekend (if there are any left now), it’s still currently in theaters. Whether you’re able to right now or having to wait for streaming or home media, it’s still worth checking out. Next time, we look at the first of three movies with various levels of enhancements… all from the same director. *I should note that though STX Entertainment released the first movie, and were supposed to release this one, they ultimately picked it up. **And yes, even though people have largely forgiven Will Smith with Bad Boys: Ride or Die doing so well last year, they also can’t help but find new ways to make those jokes. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2025/1/25/thoughts-on-den-of-thieves-2018 monthly 0.5 2025-01-25 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/77744fd9-c8c7-45fd-9df8-dbe38ea5d261/%28Thoughts+On%29+Den+of+Thieves.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Den of Thieves (2018) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. It’s a new year, and with it comes a new slate of movies (and maybe even more than that on here…). Anyway, I hope to be more consistent going forward, but to do that, I’ll also need to be steadier with my output rather than try to rush something out just to cover the latest project when it’s released. Thankfully, this is one of those times where it’ll be easier. For my first review of this year, I’ll be covering a pretty overlooked action thriller, and one where the scenario at play seemed largely realistic at that. It has some people you may recognize in it, too. Folks, instead of lions*, we’ll be entering a different kind of den, as I present my review of Den of Thieves. The story begins with a group of ex-Marines hijacking an armored truck in Los Angeles. Unfortunately, the heist not only ends with a shootout with the police resulting in several casualties (including one of the crew), but also with the truck being empty. A team of Sheriff’s Department officers, led by Detective Nick “Big Nick” O’Brien (Gerard Butler), starts their investigation, with his prime suspect being recently parolee Ray Merrimen (Pablo Schreiber, who ended up being one of the better parts of the Halo series**). They start by interrogating bartender Donnie Wilson (O’Shea Jackson Jr.). Though he tells them he was their getaway driver and he knows of a sizable amount of money they stole, he also says he is unaware of their ultimate goal. Despite releasing him, they still track him, discovering that they plan to steal from the Federal Reserve… but not for the reasons you may expect. What Worked: As simple as it may sound, the plot is still very engaging throughout, and how it progresses makes it feel like you’re witnessing them plan something bigger, and then in the third act, you get to see it actually play out. Plus, the main heist itself feels largely realistic. It feels like these guys really thought everything out. Normally, some of it would be elaborate, but it makes sense here. A good example would be that at one point, once everyone else has left the room, an EMP is used to take out the cameras to buy time for the next part of the heist to be executed. As convenient as it may seem with how many close calls there ultimately are, you’re still tense throughout it, because you feel at any moment, someone could get caught, and yet they never do. The cast’s performances are really good, particularly from Gerard Butler and O’Shea Jackson Jr. On both sides, everyone plays off of each other very well. Even Pablo Schreiber and 50 Cent make for pretty good villains. A couple other people worth noting are Brian Van Holt*** as one of the members of O’Brien’s team and Lewis Tan (who would be in Deadpool 2 a few months later) in a small role as one of the guards at the Federal Reserve. The action is great, particularly the big shootout in the third act. That sequence alone feels like the one in Heat at times, so it’s understandable that it would be one of the influences. There are genuine stakes during those scenes, and you know before anything happens that people on both sides are more than likely going to die. Sure enough, a lot of people die, innocent or not (even if they don’t always show it). That leads me to my next point. The sound design is a standout here. The third act is one where you want to make some noise. Further evidence of that comes with Cliff Martinez’s score and the editors, one of whom is Joel Cox, best known for his collaborations with Clint Eastwood, including the recently released Juror No. 2. Much like the thieves and their plans, you can also tell with the amount of detail and effort put into this movie that writer and director Christian Gudegast was passionate about getting it made and released. The direction is so solid that you wouldn’t know this had been in development for around 14 years, because you wouldn’t be able to tell. The script is pretty good, too. Even if some of the dialogue is typical of cop and robber characters, there are some great lines in this, particularly one during the interrogation scene with Donnie: “You’re not the bad guys. We are.” That line is so good it was basically the selling point in the trailer, and it’s just as satisfying in the movie. There are also some surprises here, the biggest of which sets up the second one in a really good way. What Didn’t Work: There is a small pacing issue in the middle, so they could’ve trimmed it down a bit. Some may find the aforementioned conveniences with the main heist to be too absurd for them, but they made sense for me. There is also a subplot that while I get why it was there, I don’t think it may have ultimately been needed. In fact, one could argue that it felt like something out of a different movie, and I would understand. There are occasional plot holes as well as somewhat predictable moments. In terms of issues, though, that’s really it for me. Overall: Den of Thieves is one of those movies where I hadn’t seen it since it came out, and there wasn’t a lot I had remembered from it because it had been so long, but then upon rewatching it, it ended up being better than I remembered. From the cast to the action, a lot of it ended up really working for me, though there is room for improvement in some areas. Even so, it’s a very entertaining action movie, and a solid crime thriller as well. I would go so far as to say I find this to be one of the better January movies. Starting this year, I’ll be adding a new section. Even though I’ve done this sort of thing before, starting here, it’ll be official. Where You Can Find It: At the time of this writing, you can find it on Max (through Prime Video or on the service itself), but if you want to watch it and then catch the second one while it’s in theaters, you have to do it within the next week, because after that, they’ll remove it. In terms of when they’ll bring it back, my best guess would be in time for the home media release. For alternative options, it seems to be popular on TBS and TNT, probably because of the timing with the release of the second one. Regardless of how or when you check it out, it’s definitely worth it. I would tease the next review, but it’s pretty obvious what it’ll be on this one. *It’ll take time for me to get to it, of course, but I do have Mufasa: The Lion King on the List, don’t worry. **I thought he did a pretty good job as Master Chief (at least in Season 1, I haven’t seen Season 2 yet). ***The main reason I wanted to mention him was because he happened to be in the feature directorial debut of Jaume Collet-Serra (who just directed Carry-On, the subject of my previous review), which was the House of Wax remake in which he played two roles (yes, the same version with Paris Hilton). https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2024/12/25/thoughts-on-carry-on-2024-2 monthly 0.5 2025-01-11 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/41826af7-4a6a-475d-8cfc-9b243cc983d6/%28Thoughts+On%29+Carry-On+%282024%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Carry-On (2024) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. I know it’s been a little while (once again), but I had to get a Christmas review out before too long. Regardless, this marks another first, as it’ll be my first time covering a Netflix movie (or streaming release in general). Though they don’t always have the best quality product (particularly in terms of their original films), there have been exceptions, and this is one of them. I was interested in this not just because of the plot or setting, but because of the talent involved. Without further ado, let’s get to it, as I present my review of Carry-On. The story follows Ethan Kopek, a TSA officer working at LAX who is aspiring to become a cop. Since failing the academy, however, he has been disillusioned. On Christmas Eve, his girlfriend Nora encourages him to keep going. Despite that, Ethan gets his supervisor to assign him to baggage scanning, in the hopes that he can prove himself for a promotion. All seems normal enough, until at one point during his shift, he is given an earpiece, and then contacted by a ruthless mercenary who merely calls himself the Traveler. The Traveler then gives him an ultimatum: allow a case containing a deadly nerve agent to go through the scanner, or people start dying. What Worked: As simplistic as the plot is, it works for action thrillers like this. It’s really effective here, in fact. For a movie that’s just under 2 hours, it goes by at a very fast pace, like some of the best action thrillers, set at Christmas or otherwise. Some of them even come from the same director as this film, the underrated Jaume Collet-Serra*. For example, when this wasn’t reminding me of movies like Die Hard or Speed (the parallels are there, which I’ll get to later), this did remind me of Non-Stop a couple times. Now, I’m not knocking it for that, because it does feel almost like a throwback to 90s action movies, like the aforementioned Speed. Plus, with someone like him onboard (no pun intended), you can expect the sense of fun you’d get from watching those movies. If there’s one consistency with him, it’s that. He has one of the most varied filmographies you can see today. A lot of his work I’ve at least liked, but some of which I’ve loved, like The Shallows. I even really liked Jungle Cruise and enjoyed Black Adam. He’s one of those directors today where whenever I hear what their next project is, I’m at least interested to see it, even if I’m not instantly hyped for it. Therefore, the plot had me intrigued, but his involvement is where it had my attention. Then when some of the cast was announced, my interest piqued even further. Our hero is played by Taron Egerton, who you may recognize from the Kingsman films or from his fantastic portrayal of Elton John in Rocketman. He’s one of those characters where he gets in over his head while just doing his job, and Egerton makes him so likable to where you root for him due to the sense of urgency on display. The most surprising aspect of the cast is the one credited last, so I’ll save him for last. Next up, we have Sofia Carson, who’s mostly known for family friendly projects from earlier on in her career, as Nora, and for her first big thriller**, she did a really good job here. Then we have Danielle Deadwyler (who had just recently garnered critical acclaim for her role in another Netflix film, The Piano Lesson) as Elena Cole, the detective investigating the weapon. Similarly to Carson, she’s mostly known for one genre, that being dramas in this case, but I still found her very convincing as a figure of higher authority, especially considering this is her first big action movie. However, aside from dramas, she has done thrillers and horror to a degree, and her next movie (where she’ll be working with Collet-Serra again) you could say is a bit of both. Speaking of actors who are convincing at playing figures of higher authority, we then get to someone who has a thing for doing it, as we have Dean Norris (who a lot of people recognize from Breaking Bad) as Ethan’s supervisor. When I say he has a thing for doing it, I’m not exaggerating. Most of his filmography consists of either cop or military roles. For evidence of that, he’s led a SWAT Team at least twice, technically three times if you count The One. It goes without saying that he’s good at it, and this is no exception, difference in authority type notwithstanding. The last two cast members that are most noteworthy are the ones that I had no idea were in this until I saw it, and didn’t even recognize them as I was watching it. The first is Theo Rossi (who was most recently seen on The Penguin), as the Watcher***, the Traveler’s partner who tracks Ethan’s every move to make sure he doesn’t make even a single wrong one. He’s definitely good at playing henchmen for the main villain, as evidenced by his role on Luke Cage. He’s one of those actors that when he has that role, he’s so unsettling doing it. The one that caught me off guard the most of the two was actually Logan Marshall-Green (Prometheus, Spider-Man: Homecoming) as a Homeland Security agent who’s also part of the investigation. There were ultimately three reasons I knew I had to mention him, and I’ve already established the first two, the second being that he was in two movies I’ve previously covered. The third reason was that he happens to be in one movie that I’ve been eager to cover since it came out, but just haven’t yet****. Now for perhaps the biggest surprise of them all. He’s mainly known for playing it straight, with either a know-it-all or constantly stressed demeanor, but with a deadpan way of going about it. He doesn’t just play it straight here, it’s completely serious. For the Traveler himself, we get Jason Bateman going against type. His performance and the character are actually all the better for it. This is a cold and calculated villain who will not let anyone get in his way. When they do, he doesn’t hesitate to have them taken out, even when he has to do it himself. He’s almost always one step ahead, and you’re tense the whole way to see how Ethan’s going to figure a way out of his situation. There are times where you do see him, and he’s great in those scenes, yet I thought the most effective parts of his performance were when you were just hearing him. He and Taron Egerton both had the best performances to me. Now for the technical aspects. The script, while not perfect, is decent enough on its own, as you can tell effort was put into it to combine the advice he was given on TSA guidelines with creative liberties taken for the sake of the narrative. I will say this regarding it: It does have characters making largely smart and sometimes even clever decisions. Lorne Balfe’s score, while not one of his best, is still pretty good. Even the song choices work for the most part. The action, though, is where it really delivers, particularly in the third act. For a PG-13 rating, there are some moments where it does get relatively graphic, but not to where it’s pushing the rating to its absolute limit (like to where it’s about to push over into an R). It’s just enough to show that there are consequences for every decision you do or don’t make. What Didn’t Work: Going back to the script, its faults are not just the parallels to movies like Die Hard or Speed, which I’ll get to momentarily. For example, there are small amounts of humor. Some of it works, some of it doesn’t. The same can be said for the song choices to an extent. As previously stated, they work for the most part. There is one where it felt like it was meant to be played for laughs (“Last Christmas” by George Michael), and yet it feels so out of place in that scene. It’s played during a scene with two characters in a car. It starts with something that I won’t spoil, it leads to a fight in the car, and then the car crashes, and the song is playing throughout that whole moment. Not only is it not subtle at all, it feels unintentionally hilarious. I’m not exaggerating here, either, when I say this has one of the fakest looking car crashes I’ve ever seen in a movie. I thought the one from In Time was bad, and I’m still going back and forth on whether this is close to that. In regards to topping it, though, I’d say not quite. Aside from that, what effects they do have are at least decent. Now for my two biggest issues (besides the obvious). The first is there are some plot holes in here. There are a couple of examples I can give without giving too much away. 1: Whenever the villains take people out, not once do they get caught or found out. There would be security cameras everywhere. And 2: Not once do they consider the option of tracing the Traveler’s own calls. It is true that Ethan would disobey his orders by contacting them himself, which he does try to do a couple times, but it’s also possible for the authorities to trace his calls and Ethan still would not need to do anything. My point is this: The villains were good enough with the material provided, but the material itself could’ve been stronger. Then again, we probably wouldn’t have a movie if they considered everything. Plus, even the movies this is meant to be a throwback to have those aspects to them. My other issue is that there are some points that are very predictable, including the Traveler’s motivation, ultimately. Now we get to the elephant in the room… the parallels. Though this is trying to be its own thing, and it largely is, there’s no way around noticing parallels to those other movies, particularly Speed and of course Die Hard. With Die Hard, the Christmas setting is a given. Ethan is a bit like John McClane, and Nora is his wife Holly. Elena Cole is basically Sergeant Al Powell to where both come in halfway into the movie. In a way, it has some parallels to Die Hard 2 as well, mainly with being set at an airport on Christmas Eve. With Speed, Ethan’s more like Jack Traven than John McClane in that he’s younger. The villain directly talks to the hero with specific instructions. He has a weapon at his disposal that can cause significant damage. With both, they’re good men who are both good at their jobs and just want to help, but they’re caught in a situation they have to figure a way out of without getting themselves or others killed. I could go on, but we’d be here all day if not longer. Plus, I’m trying to keep spoilers to a minimum. I will finish with this one, though: They all conclude in satisfying ways. Overall: With a solid cast, particularly Taron Egerton and Jason Bateman being a surprisingly good villain, Carry-On, while not the least bit original, does have enough going for it throughout its runtime that it’s still very entertaining for a Netflix movie, especially for those looking for something to watch for Christmas or even New Year’s. It has engaging yet occasionally elaborate sequences, and a constant sense of tension, thanks to an equally solid director and a decent enough script to still make it all work. Even with the amount of problems I had with it, especially the parallels to other movies, as blatantly obvious as they were, they weren’t distracting me from enjoying the movie on its own. In fact, I had a fun enough time watching it to where after I finished it, I was thinking that if it weren’t for the competition that would’ve come its way (particularly with the likes of Mufasa and Sonic), it might’ve had a chance of doing well had it been released in theaters. With a $47 million budget, which is very modest even today, a theatrical release could’ve drawn more attention to it. Even without that, though, how it performed seemed to have done that enough for being released on streaming, earning more views in the week of its debut on Netflix than any of their other movies released this year. I would say it justified that, because of just how fun it is. I considered having my next review be the one I would’ve done after Van Helsing, but I’ll more than likely have to hold off on that, so we’ll have to wait and see what it’ll actually be. For now, though: We had a better year Where entertainment could thrive So I hope to see you here In 2025. *I believe it’s pronounced “Jah-muh” (I’d heard different ones for years, but it wasn’t until when Black Adam was coming out that I had heard what seemed to be the official one). As soon as I had an opportunity to start covering his movies, I knew I had to address that. **The last movie she was in that I was even aware of was 2020’s Songbird, which, despite having a bigger cast, was slammed by critics for not taking advantage of the established premise. Spoiler Alert: It came out during (and was based on) the most recent time where the world went to Hell. Those who have been following the site long enough will immediately know where I’m going with this, so I don’t need to say anything else. ***Insert What If…? jokes here. ****Its director also happens to have a movie about to come out. I’ll put it this way: He saved one of Universal’s most iconic properties from itself by putting his own spin on it. Hopefully, he’ll end up pulling that off twice. Basically, that’s two or three shameless plugs in one review. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2024/10/31/thoughts-on-van-helsing-2004 monthly 0.5 2024-12-24 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/da3f929e-6f8d-49bc-b71e-20bcca28885f/%28Thoughts+On%29+Van+Helsing.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Van Helsing (2004) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. I know I’ve been absent for some time now (again), but I was determined to come back for my Halloween review, and after some consideration, I decided to settle on this one. It celebrated its 20th Anniversary earlier in the year (the same day as the 25th Anniversary of a previous project from the same director), so I figured why not do it for Halloween. As I hinted at in my previous review, this is a tribute to a more well known portion of Universal’s catalog. Any horror fans or fellow film enthusiasts will immediately get where I’m going with this. This serves as a tribute to their era of classic monsters, some of which show up here (namely vampires, werewolves, and mad scientists and their experiments). Folks, we’re going monster hunting with Wol- I mean Hugh Jackman, as I present my review of Van Helsing. The story follows Gabriel Van Helsing as he goes about on his mission of eliminating evil from the world on behalf of the Vatican*. After encountering Mr. Hyde in Paris, he is assigned to protect the last two surviving members of a gypsy family** from Count Dracula and kill him before he can kill them. If he does, they will forever be in Purgatory. Not only that, he also seeks world domination. However, to do that, he has thousands of undead offspring that can only be brought to life through experiments formerly conducted by Dr. Victor Frankenstein, thereby making Frankenstein’s Monster the key to achieving his goal. What Worked: The cast largely give solid performances (the biggest exception I’ll get to momentarily). Hugh Jackman has some of the charm he brought to Wolverine here, particularly with some of the banter he has with his companion***, a friar named Carl (played by David Wenham, who had just appeared in The Lord of the Rings and would gain further recognition upon appearing in 300). It does feel like some of the exchanges you’d hear between James Bond and Q (fitting, because Hugh was apparently in the running to take over from Pierce Brosnan at the time). However, that’s an aspect of another issue I’ll get to later. Kate Beckinsale seems to be having fun with the material as Princess Anna, especially considering she was able to fight vampires and werewolves again so soon after Underworld came out. Will Kemp, who plays her brother, Prince Velkan, also gets some good moments (most of which I can’t spoil due to a huge plot point). There are two performances that genuinely stand out. The first is David Wenham as Carl, who is the comic relief character. He doesn’t make jokes for the sake of making jokes, he does them at times where it fits the character. It’s also mostly banter between him and other characters, which is where it’s most effective. The best performance in the movie comes from Shuler Hensley as Frankenstein’s Monster. He has a genuine motivation, and is the most sympathetic character. It’s worth noting that he also served as the body double for Mr. Hyde for the sequences with him (accompanied by the vocal talents of Robbie Coltrane). Speaking of that, the technical aspects are where this movie makes up for its shortcomings. There are a lot of fun action sequences (especially considering Chad Stahelski and David Leitch contributed to the stunt work here), but the production design, cinematography, and score hold up the most. Most of the effects have aged well, and it also helps that Industrial Light & Magic was the main effects house utilized. I do also appreciate that they went practical whenever they could by using techniques like makeup and miniatures. When it comes to the production design and cinematography, this movie is visually stunning, particularly the opening, which is shot in black and white. The score, though, is one of the best parts, and it’s also among the best work of one of my favorite composers, Alan Silvestri. It’s also largely consistent in terms of pacing. What Didn’t Work: I’ll get my biggest issue out of the way first (well, one of them). Richard Roxburgh is a good actor when given the right material. This was during the time when he was given the weakest scripts to work with. It started with Mission: Impossible II and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen****, and then he went from this to Stealth, which an argument could be made had the worst dialogue of them all for him. While I am saying this is better than his performance in Stealth, the majority of his performance here as Count Dracula is unintentionally hilarious. His delivery here is so laughably bad that you could put Nicolas Cage (who would later end up playing Dracula in Renfield) or Tommy Wiseau in his spot, and it wouldn’t make a difference. I will give his version this: How he shows up in the third act is awesome, and I do appreciate that they saved showing it for that. His brides (one of whom is played by Elena Anaya, who you may recognize as Doctor Poison from Wonder Woman) are hardly given anything to do except attack people and die. When it comes to the effects that haven’t aged well, those in two of the three brides’ death scenes really have not. They’ve aged so poorly that I can’t decide whether or not they’re worse than the dated effects in the original Blade. The same goes for the look of the offspring when they show up. I can say that they’ve aged better than the look of the Scorpion King at the end of The Mummy Returns, but only slightly. The worst effect, though, is actually at the very end of the movie. Going back to most of the characters, they’re among the bigger casualties of the script. The brides, Anna, and Velkan barely have anything to do. Though I do admire that Stephen Sommers wanted to show respect to a beloved era from Universal’s history while also putting his own spin on it, it doesn’t completely show. As I just stated, the script is one of the biggest reasons why. Not only are the characters largely sidelined from a narrative perspective, but there are also two other things that drag the movie down. The first is a thing he has a habit of doing, which is over-exposition. He tells more than he shows. There are times where you really notice it, like when Van Helsing is sent to find Anna and Velkan. The second is a result of that, which is the fact that there are big plot holes here. For example, in that same scene, he’s being told the purpose of his superiors, which is information he should already know. This is also an example of the fact that one of two things needed to happen. This could’ve benefitted more from having a cowriter or bring someone in for rewrites to punch it up. His direction is fine, and I do like his sense of scale. However, as a result of that, there is one other big issue that I have, and he also tends to do this: The runtime. At 2 hours and 11 minutes, it does feel a bit long. I did feel the length a couple times. Overall: While it does have its share of problems (and it may have sounded like I hate this movie, which I don’t), Van Helsing does also have a lot going for it. It has a solid cast, very fun action, effects that largely hold up, excellent production value, a phenomenal score, and decent pacing, which make up for the weaker effects and the narrative and script setbacks. To be fair, there’s really two ways you can view this movie, and I’ve just provided the objective version for review purposes. There’s also the subjective version, which is looking at it from the perspective of viewing it as an over the top, campy, fun monster movie (and which works better, and mainly how I saw it). In fact, there’s one movie I very much view from that mindset, which I hope to cover pretty soon. In closing, while I don’t love this movie as much as some others do, I do appreciate what it set out to do, and it largely does succeed at that. There are people who view this as a Guilty Pleasure movie, and to a degree, it is, I just don’t have as big of an attachment to it. If you can forgive the tricks that are thrown your way here (and I can), then the movie itself is a treat to watch, and I ultimately still found it to be an at least decent choice for this year’s October review. Next time, we’ll look at a Halloween movie that’s a bit more recent, and features someone who has also fought Count Dracula… once I’ve put up my Christmas review. Happy Halloween, everyone! *In a manner of speaking, unlike Charlie Sheen, he’s an actual Vatican assassin. **Ironically enough, one of the other movies I had considered also involved a gypsy at the center of the conflict. ***I almost said “sidekick,” but then I realized I didn’t want to be on the receiving end of an F-bomb from Bela Lugosi. ****That, from what I’ve heard, has similar issues to this. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2024/6/2/thoughts-on-the-fall-guy-2024 monthly 0.5 2024-10-27 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/acc0e4f7-9afe-4592-8904-f16dfab9e60f/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Fall+Guy+%282024%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Fall Guy (2024) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. For this review, we go into the subject of what is actually a first on here: An adaptation of a TV show. Not only that, this serves as a love letter to a division of Hollywood that doesn’t get nearly enough recognition: stunts. This comes to us from David Leitch, a former stuntman turned director. He made a name for himself by co-directing the original John Wick (though only Chad Stahelski received credit). He then made his solo debut with Atomic Blonde, which happened to be the subject of one of my earliest reviews. He followed that up by taking over for Tim Miller as director for Deadpool 2, and directing the Fast & Furious spinoff Hobbs & Shaw as well as Bullet Train (from which one cast member appears here, but more on that later). Now here he is directing an adaptation of an 80s TV show that happens to focus on the profession he started in. Folks, grab your crash pads, air bags, fireproof suits, or really any stunt gear you can find, as I present my review of The Fall Guy. The story here follows Ryan Gosling’s character Colt Seavers, who has been the longtime stunt double for renowned action star Tom Ryder (played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson). After a stunt goes wrong, Colt is left with severe injuries, and he leaves both his career and girlfriend, camerawoman Jody Moreno (played by Emily Blunt), behind. Flash forward 18 months, and Colt is now working as a valet, while Jody is working on her directorial debut. Colt gets a call from the producer that Jody wants him, only to find out that she’s still mad with him. He is then informed that he was brought in because Tom has gone missing, despite being the lead actor for the movie. With Jody’s film (and possibly her career) on the line, Colt sets out to make things right, no matter how many crazy shenanigans may come his way. What Worked: Even for an action comedy, this has one of the best casts I’ve seen so far this year. Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt have great chemistry, and despite mounting pressure, you want everything to work out for them. Aaron Taylor-Johnson gives another great performance, despite not being in the movie as much. The supporting cast, though, had some of the bigger highlights for me. I really liked Stephanie Hsu (Everything Everywhere All at Once*) as Tom’s assistant Alma, and Hannah Waddingham as Gail, the producer of Jody’s movie, I thought was hilarious**. The biggest surprise (and a welcome one at that) was actually Teresa Palmer as Tom’s girlfriend and costar. I didn’t realize that was her until I saw her name in the credits, and this ended up being the first movie I’ve seen her in since Hacksaw Ridge. As for my favorite performance in the movie, the best one to me was Winston Duke (Us, Black Panther) as Colt’s best friend Dan, who’s the stunt coordinator. Not only is he hilarious, but he also has a lot of charisma. David Leitch’s direction here puts this at least on par with Bullet Train as his best-directed movie so far, and I’ve at least really liked all of his movies, and even loved some of them. It’s also benefited by the excellent cinematography from Jonathan Sela, who’s worked with David Leitch ever since he co-directed the original John Wick. The stunts themselves, the biggest selling point of the movie, are very impressive. They even set a Guinness World Record, which is actually addressed at one point in the movie that I’ll get to later (and don’t worry, it’s not a spoiler). Drew Pearce’s script is also very solid, and really funny, particularly with the references and the meta jokes***. I’m glad they didn’t go too on the nose and have a psychotic studio executive (like in Tropic Thunder) or a CEO who wouldn’t know a megaphone from a saxophone. I felt they very easily could’ve done that, and I actually appreciated that they didn’t. What Didn’t Work: I really only have two issues, and they’re more like nitpicks. The main one is that some plot points are predictable, but the other one is that it’s 2 hours and 6 minutes, and I felt they could’ve shortened it a little bit. However, they didn’t bother me that much. Overall: The Fall Guy is the perfect kind of movie to kick off the Summer Movie Season. It promises a fun time, and it absolutely delivers, and then some, particularly for action fans or just film fans in general. It still delivers for general audience members, even if not as many turned up for it as expected (and I’ll get to that in a moment), and even if they don’t automatically get all of the references and jokes. With great performances, solid direction, writing, and cinematography, and some of the best stunt work you can see right now (and fittingly enough, in a movie about stunts), it serves as a love letter to those who risk their lives for our entertainment. Not only that, it also serves as a call to action for the higher-ups in the industry they serve to give them bigger recognition. As it is, and right now continues to be, they don’t get nearly enough. Action fans, and film fans in general, have been clamoring for this for years, and it continues to be long overdue. If the first half of the credits (where they show a behind the scenes montage of how they did the stunts in this, and even mention the record they set) does not convince them enough, I and so many others at this point more than likely don’t know what will. The Summer Movie Season kicked off with a bang with this movie, at least from a critical standpoint. From a financial standpoint, though, not so much. Even though it opened atop the box office, it still underperformed (so basically, it’s bombing), and it recently arrived on Digital due to how Universal’s release policy works now. If one of their movies doesn’t open to at least $50 million, they release it on Digital two weeks later. This opened to a little over half. It really is a shame, so if it’s still in a theater in your area, I would say go check it out. Even if you want to just check it out on Digital, or wait for streaming or physical media, regardless of how and when you see it, this deserves way more attention than it’s gotten. Be sure to stay through at least the first half of the credits, as there is also a hilarious mid-credits scene. Next time, we go from a tribute to stunts to a tribute to something a little more well-known from Universal’s catalog. *Let’s just say I have a lot to go into on certain aspects of that. Some of them I considered mentioning here in the Side Notes, but they ultimately would’ve distracted from the review already in progress. **She’s also getting more work, as she was just in The Garfield Movie (which has now come out, since this review was so late) and she’s about to be in the next Mission: Impossible film (which has its own share of problems going on (including the title, which shouldn’t have been one to begin with), but I digress). ***That’s another way of saying self-aware or self-referential. It’s the type of humor that Scream in particular is known for. Basically, it’s the type of humor that’s just short of breaking the fourth wall like Deadpool is known for. They don’t stop the movie to make a joke like he would, and then go back to the narrative. It’s not like that, as there is a difference. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2024/3/9/thoughts-on-dune-part-two-2024 monthly 0.5 2024-10-31 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/6c16315e-7ec4-41a4-b78d-cb46a5f4423b/%28Thoughts+On%29+Dune+-+Part+Two.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Dune: Part Two (2024) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. In the previous review, we looked at the first part of a modern adaptation of the classic sci-fi novel by Frank Herbert, which may have influenced Hollywood to take us to a galaxy far, far away. For this review, we’ll be looking at the second, which not only expands on the world established in the first movie, but it also gives you more of what you wanted from the first movie. Part One focused on the world-building, with some action here and there, but this has more of the epic scale and especially more action. Folks, we go back to the sands of Arrakis, as I present my review of Dune: Part Two. Before I get started, I have to provide a warning. While I will do my best to not give too much away in reviewing Part Two, in order to provide proper context, I will have to go into some spoilers for Part One. Therefore, if you haven’t seen Part One, go watch it, read my review of it, and then come back. For those who have done so already, and want to jump right in, let’s get started. Picking up right where Part One left off, Paul Atreides has joined with the native Fremen with the intent of helping them take back Arrakis. In order to do so, he must learn their ways, from how they speak and move to riding the Sandworms… all while on his own personal quest for vengeance against the Harkonnens for wiping out his family. He is also still having visions, though they’re even darker than before, yet are all part of a greater prophecy. Meanwhile, Lady Jessica has become the new Reverend Mother for the Fremen, and sets out to convince the more skeptical side that the prophecy is true. While all that’s going on, the Harkonnens are losing their grip on the spice fields, so the Baron chooses his younger nephew Feyd-Rautha to take over from his older nephew Rabban. However, they may not be the only threat standing in everyone’s way. What Worked: As I stated last time, the performances are top-notch across the board. Even the new additions get time to shine, but I’ll get to them momentarily. The returning cast (basically everyone who survived the last movie*) all get great moments and some character development that I didn’t see coming. It takes time for some to show up, but when they come in, they’re used in very satisfying ways. A great example is when Josh Brolin’s character, Gurney Halleck, comes in. There’s even some humor to that moment. Speaking of humor, there’s a lot more of it in this one compared to Part One. The majority of it comes from Stilgar, portrayed again by Javier Bardem. In my review of Part One, I said that he was basically an extended cameo. I also meant to mention that he was pretty much playing it straight whenever he was in it. In Part Two, he has much more to do, and the humor that does come from him is mainly deadpan, though there are times where he does show expressions. I was really surprised how much it was actually effective. Chani definitely has more to do, because she has a much bigger role in the story this time. Zendaya and Timothée Chalamet have fantastic chemistry with each other, and you really want things to work out for them. You also get more character development from Rebecca Ferguson as Lady Jessica and Charlotte Rampling as Gaius Helen Mohiam (the Reverend Mother of the Bene Gesserit who tested Paul)**. If you thought the Baron and Rabban were despicable in Part One, even more so here. Stellan Skarsgård and Dave Bautista (especially the latter) are unsettling in this one. Shockingly, the most unsettling performance comes from one of the new additions, and he was the biggest standout for me. Austin Butler (yes, the very same one who played Elvis) comes in as the Baron’s youngest nephew, Feyd-Rautha. To say he is intimidating is an understatement. He’s that and so much more. He’s vicious, he’s brutal, and he is scary. Not only that, he is unrecognizable. He’s basically the sci-fi equivalent of Heath Ledger’s portrayal of The Joker in The Dark Knight. Ironically enough, that was one of the influences, and while watching the movie, it’s easy to see why. He stood out so much in this movie that it’ll be difficult for any other villain to top him as the Best Villain of the Year. Now for the rest of the new additions. First we have Christopher Walken as Emperor Shaddam IV, who rules both the Known Universe and House Corrino, which was at least mentioned in Part One. He is fantastic here, and it surprised me how he played it completely straight rather than over the top like he usually does. Then we have Florence Pugh as his daughter, Princess Irulan, and Léa Seydoux as Lady Margot Fenring, another Bene Gesserit character who’s brought in when we first meet Feyd-Rautha. They’re both excellent… for the time they’re in it, and I’ll get more into that later. In the meantime, I’ll go into the technical aspects. Although the world-building was largely used for Part One, there is some expansion done, and I really appreciated how some of the storytelling that was mentioned there is actually shown here. For example, the parts with the Emperor and House Corrino, they were mostly mentioned by name, and this time we actually see them. The parts that were not mentioned in Part One were saved for Part Two, and I did also appreciate that sense of balance that comes from that. You mention and show some parts and then save others for later. If you want to bring a story with such an epic scale to life, that’s how you do it. Speaking of which, the epic scale in Part One was merely a taste of what was to come. It’s on full display in Part Two, particularly with the visual effects, the direction from Denis Villeneuve and the cinematography from Greig Fraser. It shows in the action, and there’s much more of it here, particularly in the third act. The big fight between Paul and Feyd-Rautha alone is worth the price of admission. You’ll be on the edge of your seat for that whole fight. The thing most noteworthy about that fight goes to show how epic a moment it is. The same thing was done in the first encounter between Batman and Bane in The Dark Knight Rises, for example. Listen for this when you see it if you haven’t already. The moment the fight starts to the moment it ends, there is no music. The only sounds you hear are of them trying to kill each other. That’s it. That scene is therefore also evident that the sound design throughout the whole movie is handled way better than it was in Part One, probably because there was a lot more action. It’s also paced way better. The visual effects, direction, and cinematography make for some gorgeous shots in this. Other than the third act, whenever we go to different worlds like Corrino and especially Giedi Prime (the Harkonnen homeworld), it really stands out. The score even benefits this time. Last time, my biggest issue was with the score, where within the movie, it was so overwhelming at times to where you could barely hear the dialogue, especially with the background vocals. Thankfully, the background vocals are dialed back this time. They’re still there, of course, but they’re not nearly as loud. The track that’s used more prominently is actually the love theme for Paul and Chani, which they even play in the credits. The last thing I wanted to mention that really impressed me is how they managed to tackle two otherwise very touchy subjects, one of which was even difficult for me in my Escape From New York review. It tackles politics and religion, and it’s actually interesting and makes sense within the context of the movie. What Didn’t Work: I really only have one minor issue here. I briefly mentioned Florence Pugh and Léa Seydoux, and even Christopher Walken, and that’s because as great as all of them are in this movie, they’re barely in it. It’s the same issue with Chani and Stilgar in Part One. Princess Irulan, Lady Margot, and the Emperor are barely in this. If this was to build them up for the adaptation of Dune Messiah that Denis wants to do, I can understand that. As it is right now, with how successful these adaptations have been so far, particularly this one, only time will tell when we’ll be able to know for sure. Overall: As excellent as Part One was, Dune: Part Two not only expands upon what it established, but improves upon it in practically every way. Whether you liked Part One or not, Part Two is still a more satisfying experience, so hopefully you’ll get some enjoyment out of it. It gives you more of what you wanted from Part One, and then some. With the best cast, the best direction, the best visual effects, the best action (really the best of everything) so far this year, Dune: Part Two is the definition of an epic sci-fi blockbuster, and you should see it as soon as you can. I would recommend watching Part One before you see Part Two, because it makes it even more satisfying. Of course, I highly recommend seeing this on the biggest screen you can, but if you’re unable to see it in theaters and have to wait to see it at home, the only advice I could give is to make sure you have the best quality TV and sound system. It’s one of those movies you watch for when you want to really make some noise. It’s made for that. After this movie, Denis Villeneuve wants to do one more movie, which is an adaptation of the second book, Dune Messiah, but he wants to wait until the right time to do it. With how popular this is, people want to see more, and I’ll just say this: Take all the time you need, and then bring it all home. Next time, we go from a modern book adaptation to a new TV adaptation. *Well, almost everyone. There was one cast member that (along with one new addition, that being Tim Blake Nelson) filmed scenes, but they ended up being cut. As for who the missing returning cast member is, I’ll just say this. He’s in a movie I’m looking forward to talking about once it comes out in a few weeks, so I’ll mention him there. **I didn’t mention her last time because I knew she would have more significance here. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2024/3/9/thoughts-on-dune-2021 monthly 0.5 2024-03-23 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/94e3f016-39ae-431e-8cc9-3ac7ee4964ed/%28Thoughts+On%29+Dune+%282021%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Dune (2021) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com Hello, everyone. For this review, we’ll be looking at the first part of a modern adaptation of the classic sci-fi novel by Frank Herbert. It was so influential, in fact, that an argument could be made that it inspired Hollywood to take us to a galaxy far, far away. Folks, get ready for a modern epic (even more so in the next review), as I present my review of Dune*. The story is set far into the future, where for the longest time, the brutal House Harkonnen has been controlling the desert planet known as Arrakis. The planet is home to a resource called “Spice”, which allows for quick and safe travel through space. One day, the Emperor appoints Duke Leto Atreides, the ruler of House Atreides, to take over for Baron Vladimir Harkonnen. Leto accepts, finding more benefit in having full control over Arrakis and having its natives, the Fremen, on their side. Unbeknownst to him, the Emperor has lured him into a trap. Meanwhile, Leto’s son Paul has been having horrifying visions of the future, and not only does the only way to conquer his fear lie on Arrakis, but also something greater he doesn’t yet fully understand. What Worked: The performances are top notch across the board. Timothée Chalamet shows how vulnerable Paul really is without going into over the top territory. It may seem subdued, sure, but you do still get that sense of vulnerability and overwhelming responsibility that lies ahead of him. His father understands that feeling, and Oscar Isaac does a great job selling that. The same is true for Rebecca Ferguson as Lady Jessica, Paul’s mother. When you also factor in that she’s a member of a group that has very powerful mental capabilities, she feels the most vulnerable out of anyone in House Atreides. For the heroes, the best performances in the movie for me were actually Paul’s mentors, Gurney Halleck and Duncan Idaho, played respectively by Josh Brolin and Jason Momoa. Duncan in particular gets some great moments, and with the small amount of humor here, most of it comes from him. For the villains, we have three major members here, and I’ll go from the one with the least screentime and work my way up. We have David Dastmalchian (who’s getting even bigger now; he even had a small role in Oppenheimer last year) as Piter De Vries, their Mentat**. He’s unrecognizable when you see him, and he is very unsettling. Then we have Dave Bautista as Glossu Rabban, the Baron’s nephew. He’s the most brutal one, and not just because it’s him in the role, but this is Dave’s best performance outside of Guardians of the Galaxy (yes, even more so than something like Knock at the Cabin, and he was great in that). Now we get to the Baron himself. Not only is this Stellan Skarsgård’s best performance in years, but the Baron is one of the coldest, most calculating villains in a long time. Just his voice alone will unnerve you. He was one of the best performances in the movie in general for me. Now we get to the technical aspects. Even though this is half a story, the storytelling we do get is very effective. It establishes the lore that Frank Herbert created (and his son Brian and Kevin J. Anderson later expanded upon following his passing), and it provides a sense of world-building on such an epic scale. I always appreciate when movies go the extra mile to do that, whether they’re adaptations (examples of that being this and The Lord of the Rings) or not (examples of that being Star Wars (the Original Trilogy), The Matrix, and John Wick). Speaking of Star Wars, there are some parallels in here, but given the fact that Frank Herbert’s novel was a huge inspiration, it makes sense for them to be there. Some would even argue that this is the modern day equivalent of what the Original Trilogy was then. You can also tell that director Denis Villeneuve had passion in making this movie, as he was a huge fan of the book and this was always a dream of his when he became a filmmaker. The same can be said for Hans Zimmer in providing the score. Being a huge fan of the book as well, when he heard about this adaptation, he jumped at the opportunity to do it. On its own, the score is really good. In the movie itself, it works for the aforementioned epic scale, but there’s an issue with it that I’ll get to momentarily. The last two technical aspects to talk about basically go hand-in-hand with each other: The visual effects and the cinematography by Greig Fraser. With all the recognition it got at the Oscars that year (10 Nominations (including Best Picture) and 6 Wins), those two awards were rightfully earned, and Best Visual Effects in particular usually has some stiff competition***. As much as I loved all of the competition it had as well, I understand them giving Best Visual Effects to this (even more so now upon rewatching it to get ready for Part Two). These effects and the cinematography make the scale feel even more epic than it already is. Ever since he shot Rogue One, Greig Fraser is proving himself to be among the best cinematographers working today. He’s also shown that in TV as well, as following Rogue One, he worked on three episodes of the first season of The Mandalorian, including the pilot. Then following that, he did this, won an Oscar, and did even bigger projects. What Didn’t Work: While I do still really like this first part of a two-part story, I do also have some issues with it. For one thing, there’s a pacing issue here and there, but because world-building is a key aspect of this first part, I understand that there might be more downtime and quiet moments than action. That is the case here, so there’s a sense of imbalance from a narrative perspective. Some characters are also not given much to do, the biggest examples being Javier Bardem’s character Stilgar, who leads the Fremen tribe, and Zendaya’s character Chani, who Paul has also been seeing in his visions. With someone like Javier Bardem, you’d think he’d have a big part in the movie. You’d also think that with how big of a personality Zendaya is now, she would have one of the most significant parts in the movie. Then you see the movie, and they’re barely in it. Stilgar is basically an extended cameo, and Chani is only in the movie for seven minutes. My biggest issue with the movie, though, is actually with the score. As legendary a composer as Hans Zimmer is, my problem with the score here is that it can be so overwhelming at times to where you can barely hear the dialogue, especially with the background vocals. Though I stated it’s fine listening to it on its own, it’s regarding that aspect of it. Within the movie, though, aside from it being occasionally overwhelming, it does work for the type of movie it is, and the last time the main theme was used was effective for me. It was used properly there, in that it gets you excited to see more. Overall: Dune does for epic sci-fi what The Lord of the Rings did for epic fantasy. It takes its time with world-building, gives you a compelling narrative and equally compelling characters brought to life through fantastic performances. It’s gorgeously shot, and has some of the best visual effects in recent memory. Though it is lacking in the action department, and some characters are sidelined, the dedication to properly translating such a legendary novel is very much on display, even if this only covers the first half of it. Speaking of that, I also give them credit for not outright greenlighting Part Two to capitalize on the decade-old trend of adapting one book across two movies. They waited until they were able to ensure they could, and then once they knew it was successful enough, they did. This made people excited to see more, and then almost three years later, they got it. Next time, the Spice will continue to flow. *Yes, I know there was an adaptation in 1984 by David Lynch, and I’m sure there are some who want me to cover that, and some who prefer sticking to this newer version. I’ve seen parts of it before, and what I saw didn’t really do much for me at the time. However, after having seen the whole story for this new version, I’m slightly interested to check it out (slightly being the key word here). **In the Dune universe, they’re basically human computers, as actual machines (computers, robots, AI, or what have you) have been forbidden ever since a machine uprising happened. If that sounds familiar, let’s just say that it’s in something that started in 1984. I hope to at least start covering that pretty soon, if not still at some point this year. ***And also, keep this in mind: Its competition was Free Guy, No Time to Die, Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, and Spider-Man: No Way Home. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2024/3/9/thoughts-on-escape-from-new-york-1981 monthly 0.5 2024-03-09 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/4dab46d3-376c-4d90-ab90-ea7aae00e1da/%28Thoughts+On%29+Escape+From+New+York+%281981%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Escape From New York (1981) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. For this review, I cover the subject of my first Flashback Cinema Screening of the year, and I picked a great one to start with. This comes to us from John Carpenter, and has Kurt Russell as one of the most iconic action heroes of the 80s* with a very straightforward plot. For those reasons alone, I had been interested to see this one for a long time, and when I heard it was being shown in my area, I knew I had to go see it. Folks, for the second review in a row, we’re going to a very contained space, except the people here are more dangerous. Thankfully, we have a badass hero to help us out, as I present my review of Escape From New York. In 1988, while fighting against a collaboration of the Chinese and the Soviets, the U.S. government turns Manhattan into a maximum security prison in the hopes of also combatting the 400% rise of crime. Once you get in, you can’t get out, as not only is the island walled off, but it is also heavily guarded. Flash forward to 1997. The President is being flown to a peace summit when Air Force One is hijacked. With a briefcase cuffed to his wrist, he is put into an escape pod that lands in Manhattan as the plane crashes. After the crash, police are sent in for a rescue attempt. Unfortunately, they are warned that the Duke of New York has captured him and will kill him if they try any further attempts. Meanwhile, ex-Special Forces Lieutenant Snake Plissken is actually about to be sent to the island for robbing the Federal Reserve. However, Police Commissioner Bob Hauk gives him an offer: Successfully rescue the President within 24 hours and he will be granted a presidential pardon. What Worked: In addition to Kurt Russell, you have a great supporting cast. You have Lee Van Cleef as Hauk, and it’s surprising to not have him as a villain, as he commonly portrayed villains, particularly in Westerns. You also have Ernest Borgnine (yes, Mermaid Man himself is in this) as a taxi driver named “Cabbie,” who was not only funny, but I also thought he was the best character in the movie. Then there’s the Duke, who is an excellent villain brought to life through an equally excellent performance from Isaac Hayes**. Though Cabbie was the best character for me, Isaac Hayes was the best performance for me. He’s awesome in this movie. Though he’s not in it as much, Harry Dean Stanton (who you may remember as Brett from Alien) is really good as “Brain,” the Duke’s adviser who once worked with Snake. We also have several actors who would collaborate with Carpenter in some capacity. The ones most noteworthy are Adrienne Barbeau (The Fog) as Brain’s girlfriend Maggie, Charles Cyphers (Sheriff Brackett from Halloween) as the Secretary of State, and the two biggest ones who also worked with him on Halloween: Donald Pleasence (Dr. Sam Loomis) as the President and, though uncredited, Jamie Lee Curtis (who provides the narration that opens the movie). Donald Pleasence was another big standout for me. As iconic as Loomis is, he’s still great here. Now for the technical aspects. It goes without saying that John Carpenter’s direction is excellent. The same can also be said for the very tight script that he cowrote with Nick Castle (the original Michael Myers himself), and the cinematography by Dean Cundey, who also shot Halloween. The things that stand out the most, though, are the score (composed by John Carpenter and Alan Howarth, who worked on the Halloween franchise even after Carpenter left), the sound design, and the production design. They all really enhance the action. Then when the theme kicks on to close out the movie, it makes the experience all the more satisfying. In fact, the theme stood out so much that it was still playing in my head even as I wrote the review. It might be one of my new favorite 80s action themes now, it’s that good. The sound design is really good, especially in the second half. It stands out most in a scene where Snake has to fight in a death match with one of the Duke’s men, and then in the third act where it goes pretty much all out. The production design in particular holds up very well. For a movie that cost 6 million, it looks like at least 20 million, which ironically enough, is around how much it’d be worth now. It may look like New York, but for the majority of the movie, it’s actually miniatures and matte paintings***. When you see the streets and bridges, though, it’s in different areas. They even had to improvise for the displays of the environments to keep it within the budget. Rather than using computers, they still found a way to do it practically. What Didn’t Work: Granted, these may be nitpicks, but at the same time, they can’t go unaddressed, either. I’ll get the biggest one out of the way first. While as a whole, the movie itself does hold up, you still can’t help but acknowledge how it’s a product of the time. For example, the plot itself is absurd and of course it totally would not happen. However, 80s and 90s action movies had a thing for that, and I knew that going in, being so accustomed to seeing that. You also can’t help but notice a couple real world parallels, one of which is political. Now, I hardly delve into politics in movies unless either: A: It’s a political thriller, B: It has political satire, or C: It’s based on real world political events, true story or not. Other than that, I don’t touch it at all. This is a rare case of that third exception. John Carpenter’s script first came about in the aftermath of Watergate, and on occasion, you can tell, and yet the movie around it is still entertaining. As long as you do it like that, then I’m fine with it. The other parallel is from a purely cinematic standpoint. It’s the irony in the sense that in this movie, Air Force One is hijacked in 1997, and then in the actual 1997, Air Force One came out, and that was the conflict of the whole movie. However, if you can at least go into this knowing that it’s a product of the time and yet it’s held up pretty well, you should have a fun time. Overall: Escape From New York is an excellent action movie, and while its plot is certainly not believable (especially now), it’s still compelling. With a well crafted script, great performances, exciting action, and a very clever use of practical effects, it really shows how John Carpenter is more than capable of branching out beyond horror even if he’s mainly known for it. This shows that he can do action and sci-fi, too. It also shows that Kurt Russell was capable of branching out from comedy, which he was mostly known for at the time. Snake Plissken alone made him an action icon to where he’s his favorite role, and it’s easy to see why. He even brings a bit of humor to the character, and it really works. If you haven’t seen Escape From New York, go check it out however you can, especially if you love 80s action movies. Having also grown up on 90s action movies, it made me interested to see if my area will eventually have the sequel, Escape From L.A., even if I’ve heard it’s not as good. Although, speaking of sequels… Next time, we go back to this decade for a more modern adaptation of a classic sci-fi novel, the second part of which recently came out. *He’s so iconic, in fact, that he basically inspired another icon of pop culture in Solid Snake from Metal Gear Solid. **Therefore, the fact that we have Mermaid Man and Chef from South Park in the same movie made me more eager to see it, having been born in the 90s. ***Fun Fact: A director I’m planning to cover at least a couple movies for this year (one being one of my favorites) worked on the matte paintings. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2024/2/3/thoughts-on-iss-2024 monthly 0.5 2024-02-03 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/a58f0d69-b602-422d-9b3b-9d2ec4bdc16f/%28Thoughts+On%29+I.S.S.+%282024%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on I.S.S. (2024) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. For this review, we look at our first sci-fi movie of the year*. This interested me because of two things: The plot and the cast. Now, I’ve seen movies with scenes set in this location, but it’s a very rare occasion where it’s set there for the whole movie. The last time I saw this happen in a movie was 2017 with the sci-fi horror film Life (with Jake Gyllenhaal, Rebecca Ferguson, and Ryan Reynolds, among others) and before that it played a significant part in 2013’s Gravity. Now, we’re going there again, as I review I.S.S., and where I stand on this one… let’s just say this is going to be interesting, especially given the response (particularly from audiences) that I’ve seen so far. The story follows a team of astronauts and cosmonauts that are living on the International Space Station. Unfortunately, after receiving word that global chaos has broken out, they now have one simple order: Protect the station however they can so what’s happening on the ground stays on the ground. What Worked: The cast is really good. Our main character, Dr. Kira Foster, is played by Ariana DeBose (who was just in Wish, and will next be in Matthew Vaughn’s latest film Argylle), and though everyone else plays off of each other very well, she gave the best performance in the movie for me. Plus, her character is the most consistent at making smarter decisions, and throughout the movie, she’s the most compelling because of that. Chris Messina (The Boogeyman, Birds of Prey) plays Gordon Barrett, the Commander of the team, and though he’s not in it much, I thought performance-wise, he was just as good. The same can overall be said for John Gallagher Jr. (10 Cloverfield Lane, Underwater) as the other American astronaut, Christian Campbell. There are times where you don’t like him, but you understand why. Then we have the Russian cosmonauts, one of whom was my second favorite character in the movie. Their side of the team is led by Weronika Vetrov, who is basically their counterpart of Kira. She makes mostly smart decisions, and there is a particular aspect to her part in the story that I won’t go into here. Even so, Masha Mashkova (who made her American debut in For All Mankind) does a great job conveying both those aspects. Though I really liked her, my second favorite performance in the movie was actually Pilou Asbæk (who was just in Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom, and can also be seen in Overlord and Ghost in the Shell (the latter of which he was the best part of)). He plays Alexey Pulov, who is the most sensible of their side of the mission, especially compared to his brother Nicholai, played by Costa Ronin (Once Upon a Time in Hollywood). Before I go on, I should also say that how I just described Nicholai was the best way I could without giving too much away. For the technical aspects, we have Gabriela Cowperthwaite (best known for the documentary Blackfish) directing and Nick Remy Matthews (best known for Hotel Mumbai) as cinematographer. They give us a gorgeous looking movie here. The production value is one of the strongest parts. I also loved how it was set aboard the titular location throughout the whole movie. For me, it’s very rare for it to have such prominence in a movie, even if it’s merely for a large portion of it. The music reflects the sense of paranoia and isolation of being in such a contained area very well. What Didn’t Work: My main issue is with the pacing. To put this into perspective for you, this movie is 95 minutes (including 6 minutes of credits, so really 89 minutes). The first act is very strong, it sets everything up very nicely. The second act is fine, but it feels a bit off. However, when the third act hits, it feels so rushed, and you can really tell. If this had another half hour or so, it would’ve flowed more smoothly in order to more properly develop the narrative and the characters. In other words, it wasn’t too long, and yet it wasn’t long enough at the same time. Overall: I really enjoyed I.S.S. despite its issues, so this ended up being another January surprise for me. With good to great performances and excellent production value, it’s an effective thriller that doesn’t overstay its welcome with what time was given to tell the story (even if it wasn’t enough). Ultimately, after seeing it, I find it pretty underrated. While I wouldn’t put it on the level of something like, say, Underwater, I still think it deserves a bit more credit because of what it does succeed at, much like how I felt that movie did and still does. Since it’s pretty much on its way out of theaters now, I’d say when it hits streaming, feel free to check it out. If nothing else, see it for the look of the movie and the cast. Next time, we go back to Earth… only a conflict has already happened, with the President caught in the crossfire, but thankfully, we also have Kurt Russell being a badass. *This is the first case of an occasion I’ve been meaning to talk about in a review. Despite the fact that the pages for it on sources like Wikipedia and IMDb say this is a 2023 movie, even though general audiences ultimately get it in 2024, this’ll more than likely lead to some confusion for anyone reading this, so I wanted to clear this up for you. If this isn’t a rule I’ve previously established, I’m establishing it now. If a movie premieres at a festival one year (the reason why it says 2023 is because of that; this premiered at Tribeca in June of 2023), but gets a wide release at least one year later (as is the case here, having been released in January of 2024), then the year of its wide release is how I will count it. Now, if it premieres at a festival and gets a wide release the same year, then I will count it as having come out during that year. There is at least one exception to that, but when a more fitting subject comes, I’ll mention it there. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2024/1/20/thoughts-on-the-beekeeper-2024 monthly 0.5 2024-02-03 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/b0b5517c-d585-41de-85e3-dac30de89eef/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Beekeeper+%282024%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Beekeeper (2024) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. As was the case last year, the first two movies I review this year end up being a horror movie and an action movie. Much like Plane last year, this one ended up being surprisingly good. However, this has one edge over that: It has a better known director behind it with David Ayer, who gave us End of Watch and Fury*. He’s also known for writing Training Day and cowriting The Fast and the Furious. Here, we get Jason Statham doing his version of John Wick (minus the gun fu, though there is still a connection involving that, which I’ll get to later). He’s not doing jobs no questions asked, fighting sharks, being part of an 80s action tribute, or even working against (nor ultimately with) Dominic Toretto and his family**. This time, he’s handling hives and taking lives, as I review The Beekeeper. The story here follows Adam Clay, a beekeeper working for Eloise Parker, a retired teacher who has been taking care of him for a long time on the Massachusetts countryside. One day, everything seems fine, until Eloise falls for a phishing scam, which affects her so much she commits suicide. Clay finds the body, and is at first arrested by an FBI agent who also happens to be Eloise’s daughter Verona, but later released. Though she tells him that the scammers responsible have been difficult for the FBI to track down, he still wants to go after them, so he calls for help from an organization called the Beekeepers. What Worked: The acting is very solid. Of the five movies that he’s been in over the span of a year (counting this one), this is a step up for Jason Statham, particularly from the last one, which was The Expendables 4***. This felt like he got to be the type of character he’s known for and people love him for (gruff demeanor, but determined nonetheless to make things right), so it was refreshing to see that again here. It was equally refreshing to see that sense of self-awareness he occasionally brings to his roles. This feels like he somewhat knows the plot is absurd, and he’s just having fun with it, complete with one-liners. Emmy Raver-Lampman, who plays Verona, is believable as an FBI agent and as Phylicia Rashad’s daughter. You can tell at times she has as much determination as Clay in bringing these scammers to justice. Phylicia Rashad, though she is not in it much for obvious reasons, is still good for the time that she’s in it. It was nice to see Jeremy Irons in an action movie again, and it was surprising that he wasn’t the villain in it this time. The villain here is Josh Hutcherson of Hunger Games fame. He was good at playing a scammer, but as a main villain… I’ll get more into that later, I’ll put it that way. The last one I can really talk about without giving too much away is someone I was really surprised to be able to see in a movie again (nostalgia for Tarzan notwithstanding), and that’s Minnie Driver as the Director of the CIA. Though she’s not in it much, either, she does have some significance from a narrative standpoint, and I like that. She’s there to help provide the backstory of who the Beekeepers are and what they do. David Ayer’s direction is really good, and he definitely knows how to film action. The bigger surprise from a technical perspective, though, was actually the script from Kurt Wimmer (who also produced alongside Ayer and Statham). The script, while by no means groundbreaking, is easily among his better scripts, and definitely the best project he’s worked on in a long time. This is a huge step up from The Expendables 4, but in terms of what he has contributed to, this might be my second favorite, behind Equilibrium, which he wrote and directed****. It goes without saying at this point, but the plot here is simple, but effective. I also thought that the title ultimately has more than one meaning within the context of the movie. Though it was an action movie trope, I still found it to be pretty clever. The action is a lot of fun, and there are some satisfying kills, including one that they unfortunately gave away in the trailer. It stings when they do that (sorry, I had to fit in at least one pun). Speaking of that… What Didn’t Work: I don’t really have much in terms of issues, but there were still some things that really stuck out to me. There is a plot twist here, but it doesn’t feel like anything new. In the context of the story itself, it makes sense, but it’s so absurd by that point that you have to just go along with it. While I did say that Josh Hutcherson was good at playing a scammer, I couldn’t really buy him as a main villain. It didn’t take me out of the movie because I was having so much fun with it already, but what I just stated about the plot twist can be applied to that as well. The biggest issue I have is how I mentioned that there was one kill they gave away in the trailer. That’s really the only creative kill in the movie, and they show it in the trailer. If you’re going to do that, at least have a good amount of them in the movie. Some can be shown in the trailer, but the rest have to be saved for the movie. As it stands, nothing since Violent Night has done that. Though it sounds like I’m not giving it credit for having a creative kill because it was spoiled, I’m giving it credit for still managing to have one. The reason why is it did what Night Swim did not: It took advantage of the opportunity to have them. If the movie has at least one (in spite of what I just stated), I’ll still give it credit as long as it’s in the marketing and carries over into the movie. I would’ve loved to see more, but I do think overloading it with them might’ve detracted from the overall plot and tone, so since it’s not that kind of movie, I can understand and let it slide. Overall: The Beekeeper is a lot of fun, especially for a January action movie. You get to see Jason Statham tear people apart in ultimately satisfying ways, and a very good supporting cast, with a very straightforward plot, solid direction from David Ayer, and a surprisingly decent script. Though it doesn’t have much in the way of creative kills (let alone a better villain), it makes up for it by still being fun. It’s one of Jason Statham’s better action movies in a long time, so if nothing else, see it for him and the action. You’ll more than likely get your money’s worth, regardless of when or where you see it. Next time, we witness Americans and Russians going at each other on the ground… but from space. *Yes, he also gave us the first big-screen adaptation of Suicide Squad, but what we ended up with was not his fault. **I would add “helping track down Gabriel Yulaw,” but I already covered that. ***I’m not calling it by how they marketed it (number within the title). For me, at least, it’s lazy, it’s annoying, and it’s stupid when they do that. It was like that last decade when they were doing it quite a bit, and it still is now. Plus, it’s really only worked once for me, because one movie last year did it in a way that was subtle and clever. Even so, both that and The Expendables 4 (which is another movie I didn’t completely hate like a lot of people did) are each for their own review. ****That movie has gun fu in it (also known as gun kata, even in the movie), and the style used in it is actually one he created. In a way, without that movie, we wouldn’t have ones like John Wick. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2024/1/13/thoughts-on-night-swim-2024 monthly 0.5 2024-01-14 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/20778553-6ed9-4fb6-a47a-72a717099cdd/%28Thoughts+On%29+Night+Swim+%282024%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Night Swim (2024) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. I am back with my first review of 2024, and as was the case last year, it’s for a horror movie (and with the same distributor and production companies involved, too). This is an interesting case, though, as it’s the first time that I’ll actually be covering a horror movie adapted from a short. As I hinted at last time, this comes to us from Universal, who managed to make the ocean scarier than we already believed it to be back in 1975*. This time, they aim to make a swimming pool scary. Before I get started, I will be mentioning the short here and there for context purposes, as I did see it before the movie. However, you don’t have to worry so much about spoilers for the short, because it is only 3 minutes long, and there’s not much to go by there compared to the movie. Though pools are not as unsettling as the ocean can be, there are still some potentially frightening aspects to being near them or in them. Folks, you might want to have some gear ready anyway, as we dive into my review of Night Swim. The story follows the Waller family as they move into a new house with a pool in the backyard. The father, Ray, is a baseball player forced into an early retirement due to illness, and so he hopes that the pool will help with physical therapy in addition to being something fun for his children. Unfortunately, the pool harbors a terrifying past, and then something deeper comes back to haunt them. What Worked: Given how this is the first horror movie of the year**, I went in with minimal expectations. The trailer looked interesting, and it had at least a couple people I recognized in it. The biggest name is Wyatt Russell (Kurt Russell’s son) as Ray, and for me, he had the best performance in the movie. He does really well at showing his character’s plight, and at showing concern for himself and his family. As his wife, Eve, we have Kerry Condon (who you may recognize as the voice of F.R.I.D.A.Y., the second AI assistant of Tony Stark, as well as from shows like Rome and Better Call Saul). I also really liked her here, and the children I didn’t mind, either. Basically, the acting was fine, and the cast made the most of the material they were given. There were two things that stood out to me. The first is Bryce McGuire’s direction. For his feature debut (he also wrote and directed the short), there were some very impressive shots here. I did also like how the lights would go off and back on as a sign that what’s in the pool is coming for you. It worked in the short, and I thought they did fine enough expanding upon it a bit here. The second thing is Mark Korven’s score. While not as good as his score for The Black Phone, it is still very effective. What Didn’t Work: The plot, while interesting, isn’t given potential to have more done with it. The biggest example of this is what makes the pool here so frightening. Now, of course, I will not give away the twist. I’ll just say this: There’s a frightening concept behind it, which I felt could’ve worked if there was better execution. In fact, they could’ve hinted at it in its entirety in the marketing, and it wouldn’t have made any difference. I’ll get back to that towards the end. With the big reveal that we do get, though, the biggest issue is that it doesn’t make sense. Again, I can’t go into it, but in addition to not making sense, it felt like one of the easiest ways to get out of a corner they wrote themselves into. When it happened, I thought, “That’s the best you came up with?”. After that, it also felt rushed. In other words, the script itself needed more work, particularly the third act and the dialogue. Though there were a couple instances where the dialogue is just shockingly bad, it’s mostly generic horror movie dialogue. The twist wasn’t predictable, because they kind of foreshadowed it with a character who’s only in one scene early on in the movie. The thing that was most predictable, if anything, was the ending. Now for what horror fans would come to see… I’m going to have to disappoint you. In terms of scares, this does not stick the landing. The first two acts had some moments I thought were fine, but the third act deflates all of that. As with M3GAN, this is PG-13, and as I said with that, it holds it back from going all the way. If this was R, it more than likely would’ve. Plus, if it was R, it could’ve taken advantage of the biggest opportunity a plot like this could offer, which is have creative kills in it. Even if some were so absurd that they made me laugh, I still would’ve given them credit for that. For example, if they did something like use the Polaris cleaner as a weapon, there’s a few ways they could’ve done that. Unfortunately, because it’s PG-13, this doesn’t have that. For horror movies, being PG-13 can work (the Quiet Place films and Lights Out (which was also based on a short), for example), but this is further evidence that it doesn’t always work. It also could’ve benefitted from having an original idea for what’s beneath the pool, or something familiar with a unique spin on it. Not only is what we get unoriginal and not scary, but I’m not exaggerating when I say this: I’ve had a pool before, and I’ve seen scarier things while cleaning the skimmers than what you see in this movie. It doesn’t help that they decided to give some of it away in the second trailer (not all of it, thankfully; I was also expecting that going in***). They did this with M3GAN’s second trailer, where a lot of the third act was given away, and they did a similar thing here. Basically, this is another case of how marketing largely still goes unevaluated, despite constant, neverending complaints that trailers now keep spoiling the movie more often than not. Overall: While it sounds like I despised Night Swim (like a lot of people have), given the positives I do have, I didn’t. If nothing else, it’s more wasted potential than something that I would have as an easy contender for a Worst Of List. As a movie, I thought it was okay, but when I see potential for a movie to do more, and it’s not fully reached, I have to address as much as I can without going into spoilers. Therefore, I ultimately felt more let down than outright angry coming home from the theater. As mentioned earlier, there are some things I would say to see it for, provided you were actually going to. If anyone reading this was (and still is) interested to see it, if you really have to go to the theater, go ahead, but for everyone else, you’re better off waiting for it to hit streaming. Next time, we see Jason Statham performing a different kind of sting operation… one that puts even Nicolas Cage to shame. *In a sense of irony, Jaws served as one of the inspirations for this, as did at least one other movie… that I will get to later. **January’s almost always like this. There’s hardly any instances where the year starts right off the bat with something good. While I could go on, I don’t want to repeat myself. Otherwise, I would be making the same points I pretty much established when I reviewed M3GAN last year, so for anyone unfamiliar on why January is often not a great month for movies (particularly with horror movies), just go to that review for those points, and then come back. ***There were at least a couple other things I was expecting going in, but I would have to go into spoilers for that. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2023/12/31/thoughts-on-silent-night-2023 monthly 0.5 2024-05-25 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/06bf4c56-390c-4f8f-8563-6fc0baa63865/%28Thoughts+On%29+Silent+Night+%282023%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Silent Night (2023) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. While I had planned to get this up before Christmas, I ultimately was not able to. Even so, I was still very much eager to do this one, for several reasons. The first was that it was the first Hollywood movie for prominent action director John Woo in almost 20 years (the 20 year mark came on Christmas Day, as that’s when his last Hollywood movie, Paycheck, came out). The second was that it had a lot of the stunt team from John Wick: Chapter 4 working on it, who mainly joined because they wanted to work with him. The third was actually the part that intrigued me the most about it, and it was that it would have no spoken dialogue in it (you’d hear radio signals and things like that, but that’s really it). When I first heard that, I thought that while it did intrigue me, at the same time, I thought this could either make or break the movie. Judging by how it ultimately turned out, it did not work out for a lot of people. However, the fact that it was set around Christmas was a bonus for me. Santa gave us a Violent Night, and now it’s time for a Silent Night. The story starts in 2021, and we follow electrician Brian Godlock (Joel Kinnaman) as he lives a peaceful life in Texas with his wife Saya and son Taylor. However, on Christmas Eve, a gang war has erupted, they’re caught in the crossfire of a drive-by, and Taylor is killed. Brian immediately tries to go after them, but this results in a gang leader shooting him in the neck and leaving him to die. While he does survive, his vocal cords are damaged, and though Saya tries to support him, Brian’s only focus is avenging their son. Brian’s ultimate goal: Train himself to fight so he can go after the gang members responsible on Christmas Eve the following year. What Worked: Though there are hardly any big names in this, there are at least a couple you might recognize. As mentioned earlier, Joel Kinnaman is the lead here, and I appreciated that he wasn’t playing a character with a position of authority again in this. In the RoboCop remake (which I actually find pretty underrated, by the way) he was a cop, and in the Suicide Squad films, he led the titular teams. Here, he’s just a normal guy that gets caught in a bad situation, and I like that. The other somewhat recognizable name here is Scott Mescudi, better known as Kid Cudi. Though you may know him more for his music (particularly his debut single “Day ’n’ Nite”*), he has also had some film roles in recent years, like Need for Speed and Bill & Ted Face the Music (where he played himself), and I really liked him in both. Here, he plays Detective Dennis Vassel, who wants to help in the murder case, but Brian ultimately chooses to do things his own way. While Harold Torres does a great job as the villain, Playa, there is one other name worth noting, and that is Catalina Sandino Moreno, who plays Saya. Between her and Brian, you feel vulnerability the most with her, because she understands her husband’s motivation, and she feels more concerned for him as a person, and she conveys that really well. Though she’s not as big a name as Kinnaman or Cudi, she could certainly make a name for herself given her next project also has a John Wick connection, albeit a more direct one. She’s among the cast of the upcoming spinoff, Ballerina, and of course I’m looking forward to that. The biggest name of everyone involved, however, is John Woo himself. While he may not be as prominent now, he was in the 90s and the early 2000s, so he did make a name for himself by the time he did Paycheck. He’s made quite a few Hollywood movies you might at least be familiar with, namely Face/Off and of course Mission: Impossible 2 (the weakest of the series, but I don’t think that’s his fault so much as I think it’s the script, but I digress). In regards to the lack of spoken dialogue, in a way, it’s following the biggest rule of storytelling (“Show, Don’t Tell”) in the literal sense. The music is used to help tell the story instead, and the action sequences shown to the audience help represent it. The score, courtesy of Marco Beltrami, is pretty good, as while it’s not remarkable, it is very effective in the action sequences and the more dramatic moments. Speaking of which, the action sequences are a lot of fun, and you can tell they’re very much inspired by the John Wick films, even if they’re not quite as brutal as those can get. It also shows in the editing from Zach Staenberg, who is no stranger to working with Keanu Reeves, either, as he also edited one of my favorite movies, The Matrix, and in fact edited all of the first three films. One more thing worth noting: About halfway through, I realized what this felt more like to me, but I’ll get to that at the end. What Didn’t Work: The biggest issue comes with the big selling point of the movie: The fact that there is no spoken dialogue. While I appreciate wanting to have it be distinct from the other films in the style of John Wick, like Atomic Blonde, Extraction, Nobody, and even Bullet Train, there is a huge consequence that comes with the execution here. It ends up being somewhat mixed. There are times where it does work (like in a scene early on where Vassel visits Brian in the hospital, and leaves his card; I did like it in scenes like that), and then there are times where it doesn’t (like in a scene where a nurse is speaking to Saya; in fact, you can very clearly see their mouths are moving). It could’ve worked better if there was dialogue here and there. You can have silence, sure, but in the scenes where it worked. If it was only Brian who didn’t speak, I would’ve been fine with that. At least he had a reason for not speaking, and that’s because he couldn’t, which makes sense. Other than that, it could’ve benefited from having at least some dialogue throughout the movie. Overall: Though it’s pretty much come and gone from theaters now, I would say give Silent Night a chance. I should forewarn you: Do not expect an all-out action movie like you might get from John Woo’s previous films. There’s a little more to it than just action. Sure, you get plenty of it, and it is very satisfying to watch, but here’s how I ultimately felt it’s best viewed as, and therefore what I feel is the best way to look at it. If you view it as a Christmas revenge film, it’s more effective in that sense. Though the cast do fine without dialogue, they could’ve stood out more with at least a little bit, because you can only take a novelty so far before it starts wearing thin on the audience. If you’re aiming to go all the way, you have to really know what you’re doing with it. If you do view it as an action movie, however, and you go into it with that forewarning having been provided, it’s entertaining enough, particularly for a Friday night viewing. It also does work as a Christmas movie, but it doesn’t quite reach the level of Violent Night or of course Die Hard. It might’ve had those issues been worked out. I can definitely say two things: 1: If you want to see the phrase “Actions speak louder than words” on display, this is your movie, and 2: While some may not agree, for me, this is a satisfying enough comeback for John Woo to American audiences, and I hope we get to see more from him again. Next Time: Universal makes going in the water frightening again. In the meantime: Entertainment had it rough this year But we always look forward to more So I hope to see everyone back here In 2024. *Which you may remember from either Watch Dogs or more likely the Moon Knight trailer. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2023/12/31/thoughts-on-elemental-2023 monthly 0.5 2024-05-25 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/f8d36696-cb6b-4017-88e3-6ed2af5d992e/%28Thoughts+On%29+Elemental.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Elemental (2023) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. I know this is pretty much last-minute, but there were a couple more reviews I wanted to put up before the end of the year, and this was one of them. I had been looking forward to this going into this year. Unfortunately, I was unable to fit it in while it was in theaters, something I regret even more now. Even so, I knew I had to fit it in before the year ended, so I fired up Disney+ (no pun intended, and this movie has a fair amount of them) and I finally saw it… and I am so glad I did. It also turns out this is my first time reviewing a Pixar movie, which happens to be their latest. If you couldn’t tell by the hint I gave last time, this does indeed do something better than M. Night Shyamalan ever did, and that is portray the elements in a believable way. Folks, prepare for something that while it’s not quite groundbreaking, it is still a solid choice for a family movie night, as I present my review of Elemental... and try to keep my puns to a minimum while doing it. The story is set in Element City, which inhabits different areas occupied by the four elements: Fire, Water, Air, and Earth. Ember Lumen is a fire element that works at her family’s shop in Fire Town. Her father Bernie is planning to retire and pass ownership to her once she’s ready. One day, he gives her that chance, but her temper flares up so much that she breaks a water pipe. The basement begins flooding, and water element Wade Ripple arrives. Unfortunately for the Lumens, he’s a city inspector, and it’s not long before the order is sent off to shut them down. It’s also not long before a bigger conflict emerges, but in between, Ember and Wade slowly discover they have more in common than they thought. What Worked: First of all, it being Pixar, one thing to expect right off the bat is for the animation to be great. This is some of the best animation from them I’ve seen in years. This is one of those movies that has “visually stunning” all over it. Not only is it elaborately bright and colorful, it is gorgeous. Every area of Element City feels distinct, and there are some very clever ways they address the properties and weaknesses of each element. It also benefits from the humor. While there are puns, it’s the overall charm of the movie that makes them work. With a lesser script, they would’ve been obnoxious and lazy. The funniest parts for me were actually how it utilizes the rom-com tropes (this is partially a romantic comedy), and even though I personally am not a fan of that genre as a whole, it worked because it felt so organic to me. The heart of the movie, however, comes from the voice acting. The chemistry feels genuine between Leah Lewis and Mamoudou Athie, who voice Ember and Wade, respectively. Another standout was Ronnie del Carmen*, who voices Bernie. You don’t like his demeanor at first, but you understand why he feels the way he does (more on that in a second), and del Carmen conveys that very well. You also get some great performances from Wendi McLendon-Covey as Gale (an air element serving as Wade’s boss) and Catherine O’Hara as Brook Ripple, Wade’s Mom. There are at least two scenes where you notice another thing Pixar is known for. They’re known for incorporating heavy themes in their films, and you definitely feel that here. The biggest one is how it touches on xenophobia and racism, and it’s not a heavy-handed message, it’s subtle. It’s part of the narrative, and that’s it. Everything is elevated through Peter Sohn’s direction and especially Thomas Newman’s fantastic score**. You definitely feel Sohn’s passion for this in his direction, because this was also somewhat personal to him. What Didn’t Work: This was more of a nitpick for me, but it does a couple of rom-com tropes that I’m really not a fan of, and those moments were kind of predictable, but that’s really it. Overall: Elemental is an animated movie that I’m glad actually did get more attention while it was in theaters, and I’m just as glad that I saw it before the year ended. With top-notch animation, fantastic voice acting, and great storytelling, it’s some of the best animation I saw this year. While not quite as good as Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (in time, that review will come), I did like it more than Wish (which as divisive as it unfortunately was, I personally loved; I also plan to review that sometime), and it’s still among my favorites of 2023. If you missed out on this while it was in theaters like I did, it’s on physical media, Digital, and on Disney+, so either way, it’s right there for you, and absolutely give it a watch. Next time, we go from a movie where elements come alive to a movie that literally shows how actions really do speak louder than words. *Who has actually worked with Pixar in some capacity since Finding Nemo. **I also wanted to mention that the song “Steal the Show” by Lauv is really good as well, I just couldn’t find a way to incorporate it within the review. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2023/12/13/thoughts-on-hours-2013 monthly 0.5 2023-12-14 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/e82dfe28-118a-46f8-9951-369dcd4369c7/%28Thoughts+On%29+Hours.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Hours (2013) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com Hello, everyone. Though I meant to upload this review (or at least watch the movie) after Thanksgiving (the 30th, to be specific), I knew I had to get started within the next two weeks, as December 13th of this year had some significance to it as well. Ten years ago, on November 30th, the lead of this movie tragically passed away. Then two weeks later, on December 13th, the movie itself was released in theaters, although it didn’t receive a wide release. Therefore, I was not able to see it until it hit DVD a few months later. This movie ended up being one of his last, and I felt like now was the perfect time to pay tribute to him, especially given how in the years since, I had heard stories about how he was one of the nicest guys in real life. After hearing one particular story that a scene in this reminded me of, it made the fact that he was no longer with us hurt even more. As if the franchise he was known for wasn’t proof enough that there’s no greater theme than family, this proves it even more. Ladies and gentlemen, today, we’ll be looking at one of the best performances from Paul Walker with Hours. Set in the backdrop of Hurricane Katrina, the story follows Nolan Hayes, a father whose wife Abigail is expecting. Before the storm hits, she goes into labor five weeks early. Unfortunately, she dies in childbirth. The doctor tells Nolan that the baby is in a ventilator, but she has to be in it for two days before she can breathe on her own. Further complicating the situation is the fact that the hospital has started flooding and the ventilator is not portable. As a result, he and the baby cannot be evacuated. Making matters even worse, once the power has gone out, after finding an old generator, Nolan can charge it, but the battery only lasts for three minutes… and the problems only escalate from there. What Worked: While there are other people in the movie, there are only two major names in this. This feels almost like a one-man show kind of movie, so it’s all on Paul Walker to carry the movie, and he does. His character is very sympathetic, and you really want to root for him to get through the predicament. While Genesis Rodriguez is really good as Abigail, almost all of her performance is within flashbacks (other than the opening and what’s probably my favorite scene in the movie; I won’t say what it is, but you’ll know when you see it). However, within those moments, you do get to know the relationship Nolan had with her, and I do appreciate that it’s mostly shown rather than used for exposition. The plot is very compelling, brought to life through really good writing and direction from Eric Heisserer, who would go on to receive a Best Adapted Screenplay nomination for Arrival. One thing that I can definitely give this credit for is the fact that it incorporates a natural disaster that actually happened, but it does so in a way that doesn’t feel manipulative. In other words, it does it right: It uses it as the backdrop for the story (as mentioned earlier), and that is it. It doesn’t exploit a disaster like a more recent movie I reviewed did*. For a thriller, it’s very effective. You can view this as a drama, sure, but if you look at it as a thriller, it works better. It’s also paced very well for a movie that’s a little over an hour and a half. What Didn’t Work: While it made sense to have the flashbacks in there, I think it would’ve been more effective to have a little bit more time spent with Abigail before she’s rushed into the hospital and ultimately dies. It goes right into that after the title comes up following the opening credits (which are very brief, I should add). It felt very rushed in doing that, and it can seem very confusing to be thrown right into the situation without at least getting to know the characters. While I do really like Benjamin Wallfisch’s score, it doesn’t stand out among his best, especially compared to some of his later works, particularly the work he did on Blade Runner 2049, Shazam!, and The Invisible Man (which I do think is his best to date), and I even liked his score for The Flash. In saying that, though, there are moments where it really works, particularly in the tense and emotional moments. Overall: Hours is not only a great drama, it’s a great thriller as well, and one that really does deserve more attention. If you want an excellent performance from Paul Walker, you’ll definitely find it here. You can also view this as a disaster movie to an extent, since it is set around one. However, while it is set around one, it’s one that actually happened, but thankfully, it handles that setting properly, and I respect that. While it’s not a perfect movie, this certainly has one of Paul Walker’s best performances, so if nothing else, see it for that. Next time, we go from a movie about a disaster to a movie with certain aspects to it that M. Night turned into one. In the Intro, I began the tribute, and so I will conclude it to close it out. Paul Walker may have been known for Brian O’Conner, but there was so much more to him than just that character. It’s a shame that it took until after his passing for people to slowly start to realize that. For evidence of that, other than Hours, I would also suggest Joy Ride, which came out the same year Fast & Furious started. He’s also great in that, and I’ve been hearing good things about his performance in Running Scared (which I hear is very underrated as well). There’s another one I’ve been meaning to check out for sometime, but I won’t say what it is… for now. Regardless of what you see, I not only wanted to review this for its Anniversary and to pay my respects, but I also wanted to show that he had more to him than people may realize. In closing… Dominic Toretto may live his life a quarter mile at a time, but Paul Walker made his roles last a lifetime. Paul Walker 9/12/1973 - 11/30/2013 *David Gordon Green, take notes. It’s one thing to use archive footage (which this does, and that’s fine), but it’s quite another to actually use it as the catalyst for the events to follow over the course of the movie (no joke, folks; his movie did that, I just didn’t put it in the review because that could have been considered a spoiler at the time). https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2023/12/13/thoughts-on-the-hunger-games-the-ballad-of-songbirds-amp-snakes-2023 monthly 0.5 2023-12-20 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/4d5984ac-2a11-465c-9afe-751c1f6d8531/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Hunger+Games+-+The+Ballad+of+Songbirds+%26+Snakes.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes (2023) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. For the longest time, I’ve gone without covering either a prequel or a reboot*, but my rule for them still applies. If it’s a prequel (as the case is here) or a reboot that has a franchise of its own, then I can cover them without needing to cover any other movies first. Today, we witness the rise of a President with an aptly cold-hearted name, as I present my review of The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes. The story is set 64 years before the events of the first film. We see a young Coriolanus Snow become a mentor to a young woman named Lucy Gray Baird, who has been chosen as a Tribute (participant) in the 10th Annual Hunger Games, where she has to literally fight to survive. What Worked: I thought Tom Blyth did a really good job playing a younger version of the series’ main villain. In fact, what really surprised me is how Snow was portrayed from a narrative standpoint here. He wasn’t a monster from the beginning like the main series would have you believe. For the majority of the movie, you actually sympathize with him, and so it’s all the more tragic as he slowly begins his descent into madness. It’s even more evident with how he bonds with Lucy Gray, played by Rachel Zegler of West Side Story fame, who’s great in this. As controversial as she’s become in recent months for reasons I won’t go into here**, at the same time, I cannot deny her onscreen talent. Not only is Lucy Gray charismatic, but she’s also compassionate and (mostly) pure hearted***. Other than her, the people he’s closest to are his cousin Tigris (who later appeared in the main series as a stylist and ally to Katniss) and their grandmother. In contrast, the people who are perhaps the most cold-hearted throughout the movie are Dr. Volumnia Gaul (the Head Gamemaker) and Casca Highbottom (the Dean of the Academy that Snow attends), played respectively by Viola Davis and Peter Dinklage. Going in, I thought Viola Davis would be just a mad scientist type and play it up to where she seemed out of place. Shockingly, she’s not. Other than a moment or two where she goes up a couple notches (but no further than that), she’s cold and calculated, so she does play it straight. As for Peter Dinklage, he’s mostly at odds with our main protagonist. Those are among the more compelling moments of the movie when there’s not any action going on. He’s particularly great in those scenes. The one that stood out to me as the best supporting character in the movie was Jason Schwartzman as Lucretius “Lucky” Flickerman, the TV host for the Games, presumed to be an ancestor of Stanley Tucci’s character from the main series, Caesar Flickerman, who would have the same position much later. Plus, after hearing him give such an unsettling performance as The Spot in Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse earlier this year, a character like this was a welcome surprise. He was charismatic, and he was the main source of humor, which really worked for me. The rest of the cast is really good, even though most of them aren’t in it much (though it was nice to see Burn Gorman from Pacific Rim in this; he plays the leader of the Peacekeepers, who are basically the military). As for the technical aspects, Francis Lawrence (who has directed every installment since Catching Fire) has great direction again here. In fact, this probably has the best action since Catching Fire. Outside of this franchise, he has shown a sense of scale with his other films, namely I Am Legend and especially Constantine. It’s further complemented by Jo Willems’ cinematography, which is also the best since Catching Fire (he’s worked on every installment since as well). The script, written by Michael Lesslie and Michael Arndt, is solid. Where this movie really shines, though, aside from the action, is the score composed by James Newton Howard, who has worked on the whole franchise. For me, it stood out the most in the action sequences and the third act. There is music outside of the score, of course. The fact that Lucy Gray was the one who first sang “The Hanging Tree” was a nice touch. As for the one I’m sure everyone is waiting for, I’ll get to that in a moment. There were a couple other references, and the one that stood out to me was how they ended the movie, which was something I didn’t think would be in it. What Didn’t Work: I’ll get the biggest point of contention out of the way first. That would be the runtime. This is over 2 and a half hours, close to 2 hours and 45 minutes. I get that there was a lot in this story, but I think there is only one reason why they chose to have it be as long as it was. It would be so they didn’t have to split it into two movies again. At the same time, I appreciated that they did not do that. This was paced so well for the first two acts… and then came the third act, which is where my problems mostly come from. The third act, up until the last couple minutes, feels like a different movie. It made it feel narratively inconsistent. The tone remained intact, but the narrative progression was impacted more anyway. Other than that, there was one character that’s barely in the movie, and after something happens, they’re never shown again. They’re addressed in a line of dialogue later, and that’s it. My other issue is going back to the music. Rachel Zegler’s songs were good. However, Olivia Rodrigo’s song “Can’t Catch Me Now” is okay, but forgettable compared to some of the songs made for the other movies. Then again, I don’t really follow modern music, so that’s probably why. Overall: For a prequel and a villain origin story, The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes is a satisfying one in both regards. While not as good as Catching Fire, I did like it more than the first one and both Parts of Mockingjay (I do still like them, though, despite their problems). Though my issues with this one didn’t take me out of the movie, they stood out so much to where they held it back from being the best one of the series. Ultimately, however, I would say that if you really like these movies, you might really like this one. Next time, we go to a different kind of Tribute. *For those wondering, I’m not counting The Exorcist: Believer, because legacy sequels don’t count. If the movie in question is a direct sequel to the original installment in the franchise and negates everything in between, I treat it as such. **It’s mainly because they don’t relate to this movie, but one of her upcoming projects. ***Though I had heard this was quite faithful to the book going in, I hadn’t read it, and I’m just going by the movie here. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2023/12/13/thoughts-on-the-one-2001 monthly 0.5 2024-11-20 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/2e32c9c1-5a4d-4ce1-b67e-b61b2976f76d/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+One+%282001%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The One (2001) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. In my last review, I closed by stating that the next would more than likely be a treat in one form or another rather than hinting at what it would be. If you couldn’t tell by the subject, I actually was still hinting at it, albeit indirectly. Today, we see the concept of the Multiverse over two decades before it became a trend. Here, it’s more simplistic, as we have one character on a quest for power, and another being the only one left in his way before he can achieve it. There’s a first time for everything, and it turns out this is such an occasion. This is the first time where I’ll be covering what film enthusiasts like myself call a Guilty Pleasure, which is essentially a term for a movie being dubbed “So Bad It’s Good” (a prime example being The Room), and this movie has unintentional hilarity all over it. If you’re interested upon reading this review, I’ll also mention where you can find it at the end. For times like this, I’ll be adding a new section to the review, and you’ll see what it is when I get to that. Folks, you are indeed in for a treat with this movie, as I present my review of The One. For those unfamiliar, a Multiverse is composed of multiple parallel universes, where there are more versions of you than you know. You’re who you are in your own, while there are many different versions of you that each occupy their own. You can open and close wormholes to travel to them, but this is monitored by the Multiverse Authority, who can only use them for procedure purposes. Gabriel Yulaw is an MVA agent who goes rogue and starts hunting down every other variation of him in order to absorb their energy and be “The One”, where he’s essentially an unstoppable being with godlike capabilities. Upon taking out Lawless (the 123rd), Yulaw is taken into custody and sentenced to life. However, he escapes and travels to the universe where the last variation is. That variation is Gabe Law, a deputy sheriff who has been experiencing strange and sudden increases in strength, speed, and mentality. He discovers that he and Yulaw are equal in every way, and though two MVA agents are also there to help, Gabe is the only one who can face him and keep the multiverse balanced. What Worked: Jet Li does a great job at conveying the duality between Gabe and Yulaw*. Not only that, the fights between the two of them do look quite convincing and don’t come across as unintentionally hilarious (though a fair amount of other aspects do, but I’ll get to that). His love interest is played by Carla Gugino (who you may remember as the Mom from Spy Kids or the original Silk Spectre from Watchmen). Though she has multiple versions as well, she does best as T.K., Gabe’s wife. You can tell she’s as concerned as he is about what’s happening. The two agents, Harry Roedecker and Evan Funsch, are played respectively by Delroy Lindo and Jason Statham. They’re the ones playing it somewhat straight, particularly Lindo. As for Statham, he’s great at playing the “hot shot, loose cannon” type, and the two of them do get some good moments, as they play off of each other really well. The action, as elaborate as it is, is a lot of fun, and James Wong’s direction (not James Wan; totally different) is solid even outside of those moments. It’s very effective when there are breaks from the action. I appreciated how this pretty much went right into the action, and I knew what I was in for within the first five minutes… because it’s already gotten to it within the first five minutes. The choreography was good**, even with the cheesy sound effects added onto them. I also did like the distinction between universes, as much as we don’t get to see a lot of that. The biggest example is early on in the movie, we’re at a universe where Al Gore became President, and then later we get to one where the real outcome still happened. What Didn’t Work: My main issue (legitimate, anyway) is that there was at least one plot hole that I noticed. When Carla Gugino first shows up as Yulaw’s girlfriend***, she isn’t really given anything to do other than break him out. After that happens, she’s never shown again for the rest of the movie. While most of the story is predictable, that didn’t really bother me as much. What’s A Bit Of Both: Now we get to the part I’ve been waiting for. There’s so much in this that’s unintentionally hilarious. I’ll actually start with the dialogue. A lot of it is laughably bad. Early on in the movie, Yulaw starts running and a cop goes, “He’s going O.J.!” and the cops start chasing him. Out of context, it’s bad, but in context it’s so bad you can’t help but laugh at it. There are two examples I especially wanted to highlight in reviewing this movie. The first is a scene where Yulaw has stolen a van, and he’s playing with the radio, not knowing Roedecker is in there with him. The timing of when Roedecker reveals himself and Yulaw’s reaction is priceless. The funniest one is actually at the very end of the movie. The last line of the movie is one of the funniest final lines in any movie ever. If you thought the sound effects were cheesy throughout the whole movie, it’s most evident there. One other thing before I move on to my next point: Not only is it jarring to see Jason Statham with hair in this, but he also has a hilariously bad American accent. The visual effects have not aged well at all, to the point where you also can’t help but laugh at those moments. The funniest thing in terms of the action is shortly after the radio scene. Yulaw is confronted by the cops, including two motorcycle cops. I’m not making a word of this up: He takes their motorcycles and basically swings them around like nunchucks as he’s taking them out. One that’s also hilarious is the escape scene. An explosion happens to shatter the glass in the walls of the room he’s in, and as it goes off, “Down with the Sickness” by Disturbed starts playing. At one point, he grabs a gun as two guards come in, and not only does it look like they’re entering to the beat, but the same goes for when he shoots them. Speaking of that, we now get to the portion of the movie I was most eager to talk about when I got to reviewing it. If there’s one thing I genuinely love about this movie, it’s the music. Trevor Rabin’s score is really good, but the soundtrack is even better. The first action sequence kicks off with “Bodies” by Drowning Pool. Not only is it their best known song (and one of my favorites), but those who grew up in the 2000s like myself will remember how often they used it. During that time, they used it a lot, especially in trailers. There were mostly times where they’d use this in the trailer, but have them on the soundtrack with a different song usually made for the movie (such as Daredevil and The Punisher). Instead of doing that, they just use songs off their debut album “Sinner”. They use this in the opening, and then they play the title song twice, the second time being in the first half of the credits. They also play Papa Roach three times, with “Blood Brothers” for the final battle (and the second half of the credits) and “Last Resort” for the end of the movie. The latter is worth noting because it’s one of those times where you can say it both does and doesn’t fit the movie. It does in the sense that it’s a rock song in an action scene. It doesn’t in the sense of what the song is really about, and due to it being a heavy and sensitive subject matter, I won’t go into it here. One last thing, and this is practically a nitpick on my part. Though no soundtrack album was ever released (yet the score was), no matter what the Internet may tell you, there aren’t any other songs used in the movie besides what’s listed in the credits. I know because it tricked me into believing that, and it’s a shame it wasn’t true. There were three other songs that were claimed to have been used in the movie, all of which I like: “Awake” by Godsmack and “Papercut” and “One Step Closer” by Linkin Park. The latter was used in another movie, but that’s for another review. If you can’t tell, this is mainly a nitpick for me because of the missed opportunities right there. Overall: Since this is my first time doing a Guilty Pleasure movie, I need to address something. In terms of what makes a movie a Guilty Pleasure, there’s two things that you need to do before watching it. You need to know what you’re in for, and you especially need to have the right mindset. Otherwise, you won’t be able to enjoy it the way I and so many others do. Now, if you want a Multiverse movie that isn’t too complex to follow, or an action movie that you just want to laugh at, look no further than The One. When there’s some good aspects and some bad ones, yet it’s mostly in between, you know you’re in for a treat. It’s not a great movie, but it’s dumb and fun at the same time, which is another way to put it when describing this particular type of movie. With solid performances, elaborate but still fun action, competent direction, and of course great music, it’s the cheesiness around it that makes it fun to watch because of how dumb it is. If you’re interested in checking it out, it’s on Netflix at the time of this writing. Next time, we go from the Multiverse to a post-apocalyptic setting that still involves a fight for survival. *He also briefly appears as each of seven of Yulaw’s victims shown in photographs during the trial scene. **Fun Fact: Ke Huy Quan (Short Round himself) assisted with that for both this movie and the first X-Men. He had been doing that for the most part up until last year when he came back to acting (fittingly with another Multiverse movie, which won him an Oscar). ***She isn’t addressed by name in the movie, and as for why T.K. doesn’t have a name for those initials to stand for, I have no idea. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2023/10/31/thoughts-on-the-exorcist-believer-2023 monthly 0.5 2023-12-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/6f588418-6a57-481d-83b2-8589cb8f0793/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Exorcist+-+Believer.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Exorcist: Believer (2023) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. It’s that time of year again. I not only cover a newer release (and a legacy sequel at that) again, but we also go to the latest attempt (attempt being the key word this time) at following up a classic 70s horror film, again brought to us by David Gordon Green. Now, before I begin, I’ll provide a little backstory on my history covering his horror movies (and the classics they’re connected to) thus far. Back in 2018, courtesy of Flashback Cinema*, I was able to see the original 1978 classic, Halloween. I knew I needed to at least see that before the 2018 film. I completely understood the impact it had on horror and its legacy. Not long after, the 2018 film came out. It was brought to us by David Gordon Green, of all people, who was previously known for mostly comedy, but had done some drama as well. He also brought Danny McBride, a frequent collaborator, on board to executive produce and cowrite. They were both huge fans of the 70s classic, and put forth a lot of effort into getting it right, and in the movie, it not only showed, it paid off. They treated it with the utmost respect and brought something new to the table. I was genuinely impressed, and was eager to see where they’d take the story next. Both sequels were each delayed by a year when COVID hit, so flash forward to 2021, when Halloween Kills comes out. While it did prove to be divisive, I personally liked it. It was flawed, sure, but I found more that I liked than I didn’t. Then the following year, Halloween Ends comes out. The divisiveness was worse. Even I knew I had to be very careful in giving my thoughts on it to the point where for some, spoilers were the least of anyone’s problems. It’s been a year, and I’m still surprised I managed to figure out a way around that. Ironically, I ended up being mixed on it anyway. Now we come to this year, and David Gordon Green has started a new trilogy, this time following up on The Exorcist, but thankfully, with a subtitle. I now present my review of The Exorcist: Believer, but what you should believe is that I have quite a bit to say, and I thought Halloween Ends was difficult to maneuver around spoilers for. The story follows Victor Fielding, a photographer and single Dad who’s lost his faith in God since his wife died on their honeymoon 13 years prior. Though he’s been doing all he can to look after his daughter Angela, she and her best friend Katherine go into the woods one day after school to conduct a ritual in the hopes of contacting Angela’s Mom. Upon realizing both girls have gone missing, Victor gets Katherine’s parents to help him find them. After three days, the girls are found, seemingly normal and unable to recall what had happened. However, it isn’t long before they begin showing signs of demonic possession, but Victor finds out about someone who had this sort of experience before: Chris MacNeil, who 50 years earlier had this happen to her daughter Regan. Folks… even though there are at least two things I would want to go into on this one, I’m going to do my best to work around spoiling them, both for review purposes and to keep to my own rules. What Worked: The cast does fine with what they’re given, especially in the first half. Although I did like the performances from the two girls (played respectively by Lidya Jewett and Olivia O’Neill in her debut performance**), Leslie Odom Jr. and Ann Dowd were the highlights for me. Ellen Burstyn was good for the time she was in it (more on that later). For the first half of the movie, David Gordon Green’s direction I thought was okay, as there were some shots and scenes there that worked for me. There was at least one good scare in this movie, and it is during the search for the girls. I can also give them credit for doing something different with the demon at the center of the story this time. Pazuzu was the center of the story in the first one. This time, it’s Lamashtu, his rival, and she’s actually known for more heinous acts than him. The biggest thing I can give them credit for is this: While I obviously won’t spoil it, there’s a twist in the third act that I thought was very creative. What Didn’t Work: The cast members I didn’t mention were pretty unmemorable. Therefore, that balance in the first one, where everyone felt on equal footing, was practically absent here. With Ellen Burstyn, the cardinal sin (no pun intended) is that how they use her, especially compared to how Jamie Lee Curtis was used in the 2018 Halloween film (and the sequels to an extent), is insulting. I’m not joking when I say this. If you’ve seen the marketing, almost all her scenes are in there. The ones that aren’t mostly involve a huge spoiler that I had to refrain from including here. The other big thing that I had to refrain from outright spoiling is a result of that. They reference one particular aspect of the first movie, and while it does have a payoff, it doesn’t feel earned. It feels more forced than anything else. It not only happens at the very end of the movie, it is the very end of the movie. It could’ve been a post-credits scene, and it would’ve made no difference. I’ll leave it at that. I did say that David Gordon Green’s direction was okay in the first half. That was because it felt like it was doing something different, so it was starting off fine. I mean no disrespect to Ellen Burstyn nor her character with what I’m about to say, I’m merely trying to make a point and nothing more. The moment we meet back up with Chris, it feels like he rushed the rest of the movie and tried to recapture that goodwill that his first Halloween film received, but didn’t even come close. Other than that one scare I liked, every other scare was the cheap jump scare that people hate. The score is forgettable, other than the main theme. The new rendition of the main theme was solid. The last issue I have is with the twist. While I did think it was creative, they didn’t do enough with it to make it stand out as the best part of the movie. There is one more thing I need to warn you about. In the second half, they do have a flashing light effect here and there (although it’s not like strobe lights), so make sure to look away if you’re very sensitive to that***. Overall: I didn’t outright despise The Exorcist: Believer as a whole like a lot of people have. It has a sizable amount of issues, but I can’t quite call it the worst film of the year, either (it’s very rare for a movie to have that distinction for me). Yes, those couple things I barely avoided spoiling were infuriating in how they were done, but there are a few things I did like that prevented the rest of the movie from being the same way for me. Leslie Odom Jr. and Ann Dowd give the best performances in the movie. It has some okay direction at first, as well as some good ideas, and a pretty solid rendition of the main theme. While Ellen Burstyn is good in it, unfortunately, she’s barely in it, and the problems only get worse from there. It mostly feels like the same creative team that are coming off of one trilogy are trying to replicate that promising start they had last time. If they had nailed it all three times, and both critics and fans loved all three movies, there would’ve been practically no problem at all with having them do this. As it is, it really shows when after this movie’s reception blew up in their face, people were already reporting that some degree of creative evaluation can potentially happen for the sequels. Not only that, the studio paid 400 million for the rights to the franchise itself, so basically, the next two movies have to be made, whether the same team is involved or not. It’s probably for the best that they get someone else to take over, rather than have the same team risk the same results for a fourth and fifth time (I’m not counting their first Halloween, because that one was great). As for David Gordon Green himself, he and Danny McBride should step away from horror and go back to comedy and other genres, like drama or in his case animation (Danny’s done several projects there that I like). I admire that they wanted to branch out into horror, but it’s really only worked once, and it’s better to go back to what they’re best known for. All I can say for now, though, is that in order to keep this franchise going properly, they need to take their time to evaluate what made the first one work, so they can exorcise the demons of the past. However, the studio is overconfident, so there’s every reason for us to worry about where they go from here****. Again, though I didn’t completely hate it, I can’t really recommend it, because you’ll just be mad by the end of it, especially if you love the first one. My closing advice would be to stick with the first one, although I hear the third one is actually not bad, and the TV series I’ve heard is pretty good, too. Leave the two sequels to this (the first of which, Deceiver, is set to be released in 2025) to me. Rather than give you a hint at what my next review will be this time, I’ll say that it’ll more than likely be a treat in one form or another. Happy Halloween, everyone! *An event at two of the three theaters in my area where they show older movies a couple times a week; I’ve been to quite a few since (the other one has Fathom Events for that, and I’ve been to a few of those as well, the most recent of which was the first Exorcist, and I went to that to get ready for this) **I’ve seen better and worse acting debuts. She’s in the middle, leaning towards the better half, but almost reaching it. ***As if the marketing didn’t do that enough (including the main poster, which I had no choice but to use for this review), they do it in the movie. Therefore, I have to also warn you that for those reading this, especially on your computer (since your phones may do it for you), you might want to adjust the brightness. ****I felt like I had to work that in there somewhere while obviously paraphrasing. It was either that or an Imagine Dragons reference, which would’ve been too easy. That, and I knew it was better to leave Smash Mouth out of this. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2023/10/31/thoughts-on-the-exorcist-1973 monthly 0.5 2023-10-31 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/6f0db4e8-a308-4933-a2ac-e7eff7e2b7d4/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Exorcist.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Exorcist (1973) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. It seems history is repeating itself, as my first new review in months is for a horror movie again (and much like it was five years ago, it is a case of a legacy sequel to a beloved movie from the 70s, the start of a new trilogy, and with director David Gordon Green at the helm, but we’ll get to that later*). For now, though, we’re on the original movie itself. Fresh off The French Connection**, director William Friedkin brought us what many consider to be the scariest movie of all time back in 1973. With author William Peter Blatty adapting his own novel for the screen, we face a different kind of horror: demonic possession. To start off the month, I actually got to see an Anniversary Screening of this before seeing the latest installment a few days later, so I’ll be factoring some of that in as well. Folks, for this review, I’ll be covering a classic horror film where I completely understood its significance in both the genre itself and cinema as a whole, as we celebrate the 50th Anniversary of The Exorcist. The story is set in Georgetown, Washington, D.C., where actress Chris MacNeil (portrayed by Ellen Burstyn) is filming a movie. She and her 12-year-old daughter Regan (portrayed by Linda Blair in an equally outstanding performance) rent a house with servants. Not long after, Regan begins exhibiting increasingly bizarre behavior and undergoing unnerving physical changes. It slowly escalates to where it goes beyond merely seeking therapy or psychological evaluation. Ultimately, Chris has to turn to two Catholic priests for help: Father Damien Karras and Father Lankester Merrin, who come to the conclusion that the Devil has possessed Regan, and they have to resort to an exorcism. Now, before I go into my thoughts on the movie, I must forewarn you of two things. 1: If anything you’ve heard about regarding this movie unnerves you or makes you sensitive (whether it’s pertaining to religion, the possession itself, flashing lights (though it’s not as bad as some instances now, especially strobe light effects, they come up on occasion here), or otherwise), I suggest you turn back now for both this review and the next, and come back when I’m doing another review. For those who don’t get easily affected by those aspects, you should be fine. And 2: I’m going to have to mention some significant moments here for context and perspective purposes, so if you don’t want spoilers and want to see the movie first, hold off on reading until you have. Besides, it’s going to be more difficult to avoid them in the next review anyway. For everyone else, let’s continue. What Worked: The acting is fantastic across the board. As mentioned earlier, Linda Blair’s performance feels equal to Ellen Burstyn’s performance. They really come across as authentic. You buy the mother and daughter relationship between them, and you feel horrified about their situation, especially as it unfolds. Equally effective is the partnership between Karras and Merrin. Karras has something personal happen prior to the main events of the story, and Jason Miller does a great job conveying that crisis of faith he has for most of the movie. It makes it all the more satisfying that he has a sort of redemption arc to him. The legendary Max von Sydow also does just as good a job selling how Merrin has experience with this sort of scenario. For evidence of that, look at his first scene in the movie. Even the minor characters have significance to them. Blatty’s script effectively builds tension and suspense throughout, and it shows in Friedkin’s direction. It feels like they go hand-in-hand with each other. What stood out to me in terms of technical aspects aside from that were the atmosphere, the effects, the sound design, and the score. The sense of atmosphere shows in the locations immediately. In fact, before the movie started, there was a promo informing the audience to stay until the end. Then right after the movie ended, they showed a featurette on the locations, which was very fascinating. I appreciate when these screenings go the extra mile to show something from the home media release either before or after the movie. It allows the audience to see certain aspects from different perspectives, and this is no exception. Speaking of home media releases, it’s also worth noting that there are two versions of this (even the recent 4K that came out has them). There’s the Theatrical Cut, and then the Director’s Cut, also called The Version You’ve Never Seen. You can tell which version it is mainly by whether the famous spider walk scene is in it. Going in, I was expecting the former, but shockingly, it was the latter, because that scene was in there. That scene works because it’s never set up as a jump scare, and the same goes for the rest of the frightening imagery here, including the Devil’s appearance. They never stop the music and pause for a scare, which is what we often see now. Not only that, the scares feel very practical; in fact, some of them actually are, like the puking scene and the bed shaking scene. The former was done in one take. Despite not being filmed as intended (it was supposed to hit Jason Miller’s chest, rather than his face as you see in the movie), that’s the take you see in the movie, and his reaction is genuine as a result. For the bed shaking scene, it was shaken so much that it hurt Linda Blair’s back, and those screams of pain you hear from her were real. The sound design itself is some of the most effective I’ve seen in a horror movie, modern or classic. It adds to the aforementioned atmosphere, tension and suspense, as does the score, particularly the main theme. The main theme reminded me a bit of the themes for Jaws and especially Halloween. It’s the simple, but effective approach that those had, only this was more than merely a few notes. However, the first few notes here will stick with you, like those would. I have one very minor nitpick: There was a small pacing issue for me at first, but once the possession started, it kept going from there. Other than that, that’s really it. Overall: The Exorcist is as iconic as a horror movie can get. With outstanding performances, a perfect sense of atmosphere, phenomenal use of tension and suspense, effects that still hold up very well so many years later, unsettling sound design, a haunting score (no pun intended), and so much more, you can see and completely understand why it’s held in such high regard by film enthusiasts, critics, and horror fans alike. In fact, this was so beloved it received ten Oscar nominations, and became the first horror film to be nominated for Best Picture. The fact that it apparently was not enough to help draw more attention to horror films is a shame, because that alone is enough to justify its cultural significance. Even so, it’s still rare even now for that to happen. I’m very glad I got a chance to see this before the newest one came out, because I figured it would help. It certainly did with Halloween. Whether I’m right in this case, you’ll find out more next time. For now, though, I’ll put it this way: I’ll have quite a bit to say on that one. *The only difference is that this time, it’s not using the same title as the original movie. There is a subtitle to it this time. **Which received 8 Oscar Nominations, and won 5: Best Picture, Best Actor for Gene Hackman, Best Director, Best Film Editing and Best Adapted Screenplay. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2023/2/14/thoughts-on-daredevil-2003 monthly 0.5 2023-10-29 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/458a08bd-a768-4062-a715-da62520199f2/%28Thoughts+On%29+Daredevil+%282003%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Daredevil (2003) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of moviemania.io Hello, everyone. For the first time this year, I’m doing an Anniversary Review, and it’s one that while it did do well when it came out, what we got from a critical and audience perspective was not what we deserved to see. As it turned out, it wasn’t what we were meant to get, either. Folks, for this review, I’ll be covering the first adaptation of a certain Marvel Comics character, before Netflix came along and perfected it. At some point I do hope to cover the show. For right now, though, I’m just covering the movie. I had seen the Theatrical Cut many times since it came out back in 2003, but up until 2020, I had never seen the Director’s Cut, which I had heard was the superior version. Thus, this review will mainly focus on the Director’s Cut, so I will be doing a different format. Like the hero upon losing his sight, we ultimately did get something back in return. His remaining senses became enhanced, while we received the version initially intended for theaters when it hit DVD, even though it wouldn’t be for another year. Ladies and gentlemen, I present my review of Daredevil. In his home of Hell’s Kitchen in New York City, 12-year-old Matt Murdock loses his sight after toxic waste splashes into his eyes. However, not only are his remaining senses sharpened, but he also gains a radar sense that allows him to see better than anyone. Not long after, tragedy strikes when his father is killed. Matt vows to stop all crime in Hell’s Kitchen from then on. Years later, Matt has become a lawyer, running a firm with his best friend Franklin “Foggy” Nelson. Fighting crime doesn’t stop in the courtroom for him, as at night, he hunts down criminals as Daredevil, the Man Without Fear. He will have to rely on more than just his senses to take down the biggest crime boss in the city, Wilson Fisk, also known as the Kingpin, whose influence runs rampant. Before I go over my thoughts on the cast and the performances, they basically can all be summed up like this: In the Theatrical Cut, I thought they were fine. In this version, they’re better for reasons I will get to in a moment. I’ll get the biggest point of contention out of the way now, and this is one of many casting choices in general that proved to be controversial (even critics were divided on this), but more often than not, they ended up working out. Our protagonist is played by Ben Affleck, who would go on to face similar backlash when he was cast as Batman. The main reason is that he had already played a superhero before with this movie, and it didn’t go over well for a lot of people. My previous point of saying that the cast were better here is definitely true for him, because the balance between when he’s Matt Murdock and when he’s Daredevil is more fleshed out. He ultimately feels like a good choice for the character. The reason for that is in this version, there’s some material that they had to cut out that’s put back in, and it allows for more proper character development. The next one to mention is Jennifer Garner as Elektra Natchios, who is the love interest of the movie. Her chemistry with Ben Affleck does feel genuine, so it probably comes as no surprise that they met on the set of the movie. Before I go on with the rest of the cast, there’s something I need to bring up: The playground fight shortly after they first meet. Some people may compare this to a similar scene in the following year’s Catwoman, but here’s the difference. In that movie, it’s just a throwaway scene, whereas here, he’s just trying to get to know her, and she’s playing hard to get. You kind of feel that in the Theatrical Cut, but more so in this one. With that out of the way, let’s continue. The two other main cast members are the villains. I’ll start with Kingpin, because he’s the main villain of the movie, as he’s pretty much the catalyst for everything that happened in Matt’s life. As if his presence wasn’t menacing enough, let alone his height, you can definitely tell from his voice that he is just merciless. He may not resemble the Kingpin from the comics, but as long as you get someone who’s intimidating to play him, in the end it doesn’t even matter.* You definitely get that here with the late, great Michael Clarke Duncan. I personally loved him in this, especially in this version. Whenever I saw (or even heard) him in something, he was awesome. It holds true here, as he shows he could actually make for a great villain. The character himself is very imposing, because he won’t just have you killed. He’ll go after your family, too. Then we have the secondary antagonist of the movie, a hitman with perfect aim known as Bullseye, played by Colin Farrell. He’s just as unsettling as Kingpin, if not even more so, due to what he’s capable of. He can use literally any object at his disposal to kill you, and no matter what it is, he doesn’t miss. You can tell they’re both having fun in their roles, as they play off each other very well in plotting to take Daredevil down. Plus, they both have understandable motivations. Now for the two standout supporting characters. The first is Joe Pantoliano (The Matrix, Bad Boys) as Ben Urich, an investigative journalist with particular interest in Daredevil and Kingpin. He’s very good in this, and his character is very interesting, particularly in the Director’s Cut. The second is Jon Favreau, who plays Foggy. I really liked him in this, and he’s actually pretty funny, especially with the banter he has with Ben Affleck. Although they aren’t in either version that much, I should also mention that Erick Avari (The Mummy (the 1999 version with Brendan Fraser)) and David Keith (not to be confused with Keith David; totally different) who play Elektra’s father Nikolas Natchios and Matt’s father Jack Murdock, respectively, are good, too, since they do have some importance to key portions of the plot. Speaking of the plot, there is one thing I will give the Theatrical Cut credit for as well as this one. Neither Cut of this movie spends that much of the runtime focusing on the origin story for Daredevil himself. It’s really just in the first act, and then you get to see more of Daredevil in action for the rest of the movie. This applies to both versions. They both are paced pretty well, too, but how the plot progresses in the Theatrical Cut feels very jarring at points, as there are some things that don’t make sense. One example of this you’ll notice upon having seen both Cuts. In the Theatrical Cut, there’s a mid-credits scene, while here, it’s cut back into the movie. In the Director’s Cut, it feels more consistent, with a more natural narrative flow. A particular example is a very crucial subplot involving a case that Matt takes up, and it develops over the course of the movie. As a result, it’s very compelling, and it has a satisfying payoff. In the Theatrical Cut, that whole portion is nowhere to be found. In its place is an expansion of the romance between Matt and Elektra. In this one, some of it is there, but it’s mostly dialed back. The movie is actually better for it, because that’s not the focal point of it. Rather, it’s Matt trying to balance his day job with his alter-ego, and a little moral dilemma comes in between. They cut a lot of the more interesting material out to give it a shorter runtime so it could make as much as possible in theaters. That, and it was also so they could get a PG-13 rating, since the version they intended to release was rated R. In being cut down for PG-13, the movie feels less like its own thing and more like Fox was trying to replicate Sony’s success with Spider-Man the previous year. It’s especially true with the amount of CGI in this movie. Yes, it is still present in the Director’s Cut, and even while I was watching it, it did feel like they were copying Spider-Man. It’s not just that, but I also felt some serious parallels story-wise. It’s not so obvious in this one, but it’s there. Neither of these bothered me that much, though, since everything else was so good. Besides, I’ll go a bit more into them later anyway. You also get more action in this one, as it’s more brutal and more violent with a darker tone, closer to the comics. Speaking of which, you also get references to and cameos from some people who worked on the comics, including a pre-MCU cameo from Stan Lee and a cameo from Frank Miller as one of Bullseye’s victims. In both versions, the action is really good, but it’s even better in the Director’s Cut. One thing that is still good in regards to the movie in general is the music. The music is awesome. Graeme Revell’s score is still excellent, especially the theme. I particularly love how they use it in the opening credits, which themselves really stand out for something like this. There’s actually two versions of the theme. There’s that one, and a remix. Then we get to something this definitely does better than Spider-Man: The soundtrack. It introduced everyone to Evanescence, whose song “Bring Me to Life” is featured very prominently in the third act (and was even used in the trailer). They also have another song, “My Immortal”, featured earlier in the movie. Since it was the 2000s, it was common for movies to have both a score and a soundtrack to accompany them. One thing that rarely happened, though, was a fair amount of the songs on the soundtrack being used in the movie. A majority of the songs on the soundtrack are used here. In addition to Evanescence, you get the likes of Fuel, The Calling, Hoobastank**, Seether, and even a collaboration between Drowning Pool and Rob Zombie, among others. The songs that are used in the movie are incorporated very well. Something else that’s solid about this is the direction from Mark Steven Johnson, but even more so his script. You can tell at times he wanted to stay as true to the comics as he could, as some shots and dialogue are very reminiscent of them. Two big examples worth highlighting are one where Daredevil is clutching the cross on the roof of a church, and another is a moment in the third act where Bullseye has a monologue. How the latter in particular is written and shot is almost exactly like how it happened there. Bullseye’s monologue is almost word for word identical to it. Although they aren’t so much issues for me, there are a few things that might be for others, the first two of which I mentioned earlier. The first thing is the CGI. There are some points here where it’s really good (meaning it’s necessary, like when Daredevil uses his radar sense), and then there are others where it does not hold up as well (and that is usually when Daredevil is swinging around or fighting someone). During the action, they could’ve used more practical stunt work for that, although they probably didn’t have the budget for that. Plus, given the fact that it was mandated that it have more CGI so it would look more like Spider-Man (I’m not making that up), and the narrative similarities regardless of which Cut you watch, there was really no way around that even in putting the Director’s Cut together. Basically, I don’t think it’s really fair to criticize them for something they had no way around. If there had been an easier solution that they just didn’t take advantage of, it’d be a different story. The second thing, which was the one thing they could work around, is the half hour of footage for which its removal prior to the theatrical release was also mandated. The reason for that is the studio wanted a shorter runtime to allow for more showings, which would also explain the PG-13 rating. The downside to that is very simple: Had they not done that, and released it as intended, people would’ve wanted to come back for more anyway because the word of mouth would’ve actually been great. Even so, I’m just glad we even have it. Now for the other two things that might be issues for others. Even with the restored footage, some may find the Director’s Cut too long, and there’s another well known character, Karen Page (played by Ellen Pompeo), who works with Matt and Foggy. Though she does help them out, she’s still barely in the movie. She has one scene in the Theatrical Cut, and an additional one in the Director’s Cut. Basically, she’s almost an afterthought. However, the bigger focus was on Elektra, so I can understand that, and plus, her additional scene in the Director’s Cut does contribute to the larger narrative in a major way. As previously stated, though, none of these bothered me too much, because everything else about the Director’s Cut made it as great as I had heard for so long. Overall: While it does still have its faults (especially in the Theatrical Cut), Daredevil is one of those superhero movies from the 2000s that does get a lot more right, and you’ll see why upon seeing the Director’s Cut. With a lead performance from Ben Affleck that deserves way more credit than it gets (along with a strong supporting cast), a far more compelling story than what we initially got, awesome action and an equally awesome soundtrack, the Director’s Cut turns a generally not well liked comic book movie into a much better one (which would not end up being the first time that happened, but that’s for another review***). Regardless of how you feel about the Theatrical Cut, if you haven’t seen the Director’s Cut, I would highly recommend giving it a chance. Simply put, it’s the version we deserved to begin with. It goes to show that justice may be blind, but studios can also be. *No, Linkin Park is not on the soundtrack for this movie… although that would have been awesome. Neither is “Blind” by Korn, although I can understand that for two reasons: 1: Another awesome movie already used it (twice, I should add), and 2: The soundtrack here is comprised completely of songs made for the movie anyway. **Who would later perform “Did You”, which is my personal favorite of theirs, on the soundtrack for Spider-Man 2. ***Ironically, both cases involve Ben Affleck. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2023/2/14/thoughts-on-plane-2023 monthly 0.5 2023-03-05 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/0be475c0-6a23-482f-b448-82ca6b25eab1/%28Thoughts+On%29+Plane.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Plane (2023) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. For this review, I’ll be covering the first action movie of the year. Despite being a few plot twists short of a Lost episode*, it still has a few recognizable names in it (the biggest of course being Gerard Butler), and that is Plane. The film follows Captain Brodie Torrance, a former military pilot turned commercial airline pilot. His latest flight is set to take the passengers to Honolulu from Singapore. Among the passengers is Louis Gaspare, a former member of the French Foreign Legion who is now a fugitive being extradited for homicide. Unfortunately, the fact that a criminal is being brought onboard is the least of Torrance’s problems. During the flight, they’re caught in a storm, leaving Captain Torrance and his copilot no other choice but to land their badly damaged plane on an island in the Philippines. Making matters worse, it happens to be an island overrun by a group of rebels, who do not hesitate to hold them captive. The conflict is so bad that the airline board’s only option is to send a private rescue team in to get everyone out. In the meantime, Torrance can really only rely on Gaspare for help, but Gaspare might just actually be more useful than he was initially led to believe. What Worked: The acting is very solid. Gerard Butler gives a great performance, as he shows that his character values everyone’s safety. He’s very determined to not only get himself home, but also everyone else. Plus, with his military background, he’s also capable of handling himself in a fight. This in turn also shows that Gerard Butler as an actor still has what it takes to do action-oriented roles, like Mike Banning in Olympus Has Fallen and its two (for now, soon to be three) sequels and to an extent King Leonidas in 300. Aside from Gerard Butler, the biggest standouts for me were Mike Colter and Tony Goldwyn. Mike Colter shows he still has the charisma he brought to the role of Luke Cage, as he has great chemistry/banter with Gerard Butler here. Not only that, he gets some great moments throughout the movie, especially when it comes to how the rebels are being taken out. He’s very capable with guns and knives. At one point (and this isn’t a spoiler, by the way, as they showed a glimpse of this in the trailer), Gaspare even wields a sledgehammer in this movie**. Some of those moments were actually during the breaks from the action. When it gets to them, it allows for some character development, and you get to learn more about him at the same time Torrance is. As for Tony Goldwyn, if there’s one character who’s perhaps more determined to get everyone out than Torrance himself, it’s his character, Scarsdale (the airline company’s crisis manager). In addition to getting some genuinely hilarious dialogue (an example of which is in the trailer), most of the decisions made in the movie are from him. Besides showing his character is good at his job, the decisions themselves, even the ones that aren’t from him, do actually make sense within the context of the story. That was nice to see, because so often we get characters in action movies that make stupid decisions which only work because of plot convenience. Some other actors worth noting are Yoson An (who was previously in the Mulan remake) as Torrance’s copilot, Daniella Pineda (the Jurassic World sequels) as the main flight attendant, and Joey Slotnick (Hollow Man) as a businessman that’s one of the passengers. For a January action movie, this is actually very well directed. This comes from Jean-François Richet, who directed the Assault on Precinct 13 remake, which I’ve heard is also quite good. Also surprising for a January action movie is that it has editing that’s at least decent. There aren’t cuts every two seconds, and there isn’t shaky cam that more often than not is used nowadays to hide poor stunt work. It’s very competently edited***. The action benefits greatly from that. They don’t hold anything back here, and since this is rated R, more graphic moments can be shown. Then again, this comes from Lionsgate, who brought us John Wick, The Expendables (even though the third one was PG-13 when it came out), the last two Rambo films, the last two Punisher films (the ones with Thomas Jane and Ray Stevenson), the list goes on. Since this came from them, and they usually do R-rated action movies, I was somewhat expecting this would be the case, and sure enough, it was. If this was PG-13, that would’ve given them no choice but to use shaky cam and only show the aftermath of someone getting killed. It would’ve really hurt the movie. One other thing that could’ve hurt the movie, even if it was PG-13, was that having a bunch of one-liners would’ve detracted from the overall tone (as this is a more serious action movie), so I was fine without them here. As it is, the script isn’t great, but it’s serviceable for the kind of movie this is. What Didn’t Work: I really only have two major issues here. The first is that although the score itself is pretty good, it doesn’t really stand out. It pains me to even say that, because it was co-composed by Marco Beltrami, who has so many great scores to his name, as I’ve mentioned in a couple reviews in the past. With this, the only track that comes close to being somewhat memorable is the one in the credits, yet even there, it won’t be long before you can hardly remember any of the music. It’s a similar issue with the villains. Though they’re fine for the type of movie this is, the villains stand out a little more, but not by much. Now, I’m not saying every villain should be complex with an equally complex motivation (although it helps when a villain does have that). I’m saying they should have distinct character traits that justify why they’re as evil as they’re made out to be. Here, it’s the typical action movie villain: Whenever it’s a terrorist or a drug lord or anything like that, chances are their motivation is just as typical (usually money). However, at least with someone like me who loves action movies, as long as the villains are still entertaining and it’s satisfying to see them get taken out in awesome ways, I can forgive that. They’re fine enough for something like this to meet both of those criteria for me. Overall: While it does have some problems, Plane is a very entertaining action movie, and for January, much like M3GAN was for horror, this was also a welcome surprise for action. Sometimes January action movies do fare better than horror movies released there, and sometimes they don’t. Thankfully, this is one of the better ones out there. It’s well directed, well acted, and well edited, with an actually decent script. It was most surprising to me how much effort was put into those departments, because from the trailer, it didn’t look like it would have that much, and that the acting would be at least decent compared to everything else. It gives you some great action with genuine character development in between, and it’s the performances of Gerard Butler and Mike Colter that really sell that. Even though it’s likely on its way out of theaters now, and has already arrived on Digital, either way, I would still suggest checking this one out, too, folks. It’s a lot of fun, and if you're looking for something to watch on a Friday night or even on a Saturday, it’s perfect for that. With two surprises in a row so far this year that I’ve covered (and ultimately a third for new releases not long after, but we’ll get to that later), this year could have potential. However, I’m only cautiously optimistic, given this decade’s track record so far, and I also don’t want to have too much hope so early in the year. As it is, though, we’ll have to wait and see. Next time, we go to my first Anniversary Review of the year, and it’s something that’s been a long time coming, folks. *I felt like I had to make a Lost joke somewhere, since the event that kicks off both plots is a plane crash. **This moment made me believe he could be a good choice to play Steel, should James Gunn ever decide to use him for his vision for DC. That, and the character himself deserves a second chance on the big screen anyway. ***Fun Fact: The editor, David Rosenbloom, previously edited The Way Back (one of the last movies to come out before COVID hit) and Deep Impact (one of the first movies I covered after COVID hit). https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2023/2/4/thoughts-on-m3gan-2023 monthly 0.5 2023-02-04 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/66c9b3c7-52cd-4182-b284-a3d5748442f6/%28Thoughts+On%29+M3GAN.jpg Blog - Thoughts on M3GAN (2023) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. Though Malignant may have been my first review in general for 2023, this one is my first review for a major theatrical release in 2023 (the first, in fact). Before I get started, allow me to provide some backstory. Though James Wan did not direct this one, he did produce it, and both movies at least share the same writer in Akela Cooper. Even with those two names right there, this had several things going against it. Red Flag #1: It was released in January, which is usually considered the dumping ground for movies. Red Flag #2: It was released the first week of January. Red Flag #3: It was a horror movie, and horror movies released in January (especially the first week) always turn out so well. Two other things also didn’t help: It was PG-13, and the first trailer didn’t do much for me (there’s something regarding the second trailer, but I’ll get to that when I close the review out). All of those factors gave it an uphill battle with me, but I was still willing to give it a chance. Then I started hearing high praise for this, and I became a bit more interested, and thinking, “Could this be? A January horror movie that’s actually really good?”. To say it’s rare for that to happen is an understatement, folks. It is extremely rare for a horror movie or thriller released in January (or movies in general released in January) to be at least decent, let alone really good. However, in recent years, there have been some exceptions, like Underwater and more recently one that I will be covering later. So… is this as good as I was led to believe? Let’s find out as I present my review of M3GAN*. The film follows Gemma, a roboticist at a toy company. She’s trying to balance work and family upon taking in her niece Cady, who had just lost her parents in a car crash. Her latest project, the Model 3 Generative Android (M3GAN for short), is a life-sized doll controlled by AI and designed to assist parents in taking care of their children while also serving as the child’s best friend. One day, Gemma introduces Cady to M3GAN, and everything seems to be working out well. Gemma can get more work done to satisfy her boss, Cady has a friend, and the company is confident they have a product that their rivals would have a difficult time trying to replicate. However, it isn't long before everything starts going haywire. What Worked: For a movie that's very self-aware (no pun intended) that its premise is silly, it balances the campy tone and the serious elements quite well. The fact that it embraced it was ultimately the best direction to take it in, particularly for those who were skeptical going in like myself. It surprised me that it even had that, because the first trailer did a pretty good job at hiding that. It made it look silly, and it seemed like it would be unintentionally hilarious. Little did we know they were aware of that, and the tongue-in-cheek approach was actually what we would be seeing. I thought that was a very clever idea, but the most brilliant idea was something you come to realize over the course of the movie. It’s a satire of how a business or industry can value profit over product, and how even with one mistake, it can blow up in their face. I felt it worked even more not just because of Akela Cooper’s script, but also because of Gerard Johnstone’s direction. Even with the campy tone, the cast still play it straight for the most part. Gemma is played by Allison Williams, who first ventured into horror with Get Out. She’s certainly more relatable than her character in that movie, Rose. With Gemma, her main character trait (workaholic but still loving aunt) is something any family member can connect with. Cady is played by Violet McGraw, who for such a young age, conveys the attachment to her new friend very well, which any family member can also relate to. People have become so reliant on technology today, particularly children, and they think it can solve every problem, when in reality, it can’t. With this performance, I believe this could give Violet and her older sister Madeleine (who stole the show in The Black Phone last year) even bigger work. For child actors especially, that’s very impressive. The biggest noteworthy supporting performance is Ronnie Chieng as Gemma’s boss, David. He embodies that “greedy CEO” type of character just the right amount without going too overboard with it. He gets some funny moments, but he still takes his job seriously (perhaps a bit too much, as those types of characters tend to do). Although Gemma’s colleagues do seem like they know the type of movie they’re in, the one that comes the closest to representing the campy tone is M3GAN herself. M3GAN is actually played by two people: Amie Donald, who does the physical performance, and Jenna Davis, who provides the voice. The two performances blend together to where it felt like it was still one person doing both, especially when she starts acting independently. Of the two, the former was the one that surprised me the most. You’d think someone her age would not be able to pull off some of the elaborate movements M3GAN does at times, but when you take her dancing background into consideration, you then realize she does have the physicality needed to do them. With the latter’s performance, that’s where the character leans the closest towards being over the top. Jenna Davis sounded like she was having a lot of fun doing it, but going into it, I had some concern that she’d be showing it too much. Thankfully, she doesn’t. It was just enough to get it across, and it felt like she was the most expressive when it was the most fitting. There was one thing about her performance, though, that genuinely shocked me. In fact, it surprised me so much to where I would love to go into it. At the same time, I don’t feel like I can because if I did, some might consider it a spoiler (even though it’s not a major one), and I try my best not to do that. The best way I can put it is this: Leave it to Akela Cooper to do a crazy third act (and not just because of the kills). Now for what is perhaps the biggest concern some may have, and that is the fact that this is PG-13 rather than R. The question is: Did it work out? For me, it ultimately did. Yes, it’s jarring that after how something like Malignant did not hold back, this kind of does. However, in cases like this, implication that something crazy just happened is enough, and even they realized that**. That doesn’t mean it’s less shocking for the audience, because there are setup moments that are shown, even if the kills themselves are not. The most unsettling one for me was one that occurs halfway into the movie, and when you see it, you’ll know. What Didn’t Work: Though the horror and comedy are balanced very well overall, there were a couple moments where it felt like they were leaning too much into the comedic side of it, and it’s very easy to tell. Since it goes back to that balance almost immediately, though, they weren’t so bad they took me out of the movie, because as a result, it brought me back into it. Overall: M3GAN is one of the most surprising horror movies I have seen in a long time, and the fact that it’s a horror comedy was a welcome addition to that surprise, especially for a January release. With January itself showing some improvement in recent years, this is further evidence that people are actually putting more effort into what gets released there. By horror comedy standards, it’s not trying to raise a bar set by others, most notably The Cabin in the Woods and of course Scream. It’s not even trying to be them, either, and I like that. I appreciate that it knows what it is, it embraces it, and yet it still feels like its own thing. It may not have the same level of shock as Malignant, but I wasn’t expecting this to top that. It’ll take more time for something to come along that’s on that level (although last year, Barbarian came close for me) or even manages to surpass it. With great performances that counter the tone in a surprisingly well done way, a sense of self-awareness that actually makes sense within the context of the plot, and very effective kills even for a PG-13 horror movie, it also serves as a cautionary tale of how you shouldn’t get too attached to technology, because it can’t do everything, as much as we’d like for it to. One more thing before I close this out (which I was alluding to earlier): If you are going to see this, DO NOT watch the second trailer, as it gives away quite a bit, a fair amount of which is from the third act. You can watch the first trailer if you want, but only that before you go in. With that out of the way… Next time, we go from the first horror movie of the year to the first action movie of the year. *The 3 is silent, which is another way of saying that you pronounce it the same as if it were an E, for those who have not seen any promotional material. **Plus, it came out that the original cut was far more violent, and now people seem to be enjoying what they get so much that they actually want to see it. I would welcome that myself, even if I have a feeling that it’ll be on the Blu-Ray when it comes out. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2023/1/14/thoughts-on-malignant-2021 monthly 0.5 2023-01-14 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/f1b25bbc-27b5-49cc-94b5-1df62bc263aa/%28Thoughts+On%29+Malignant.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Malignant (2021) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. For my first review of 2023, this is one of those times where I decided to review one movie I have really wanted to cover ever since it came out. I figured what better time to do so than now, since this shares the same writer as the first major release of the new year, that being M3GAN. I have decided to start the year off with a horror movie, much like the release slate itself usually does. After branching out into action movies with Furious 7 and comic book movies with Aquaman, director James Wan returned to his roots with a bang, and what a bang it was. Folks, I finally bring to you my review of his most ambitious horror movie to date, and that is Malignant. Before I get started, I must forewarn you of a few things. 1: Though I of course will not divulge why, if you’re expecting or planning to be, I would strongly advise against seeing this anytime soon (otherwise, you’ll never look at pregnancy the same way ever again). 2: If you’re squeamish, this is not for you. 3: If you’re sensitive to flashing or flickering lights, or anything else, this is definitely not for you. Granted, it’s not as bad as how it was in, say, Halloween Ends where it’s a strobe light effect. It’s not like that at all; I’m mainly talking about lights being blown out and some flickering. Therefore, for any horror or non-horror fans where any or all of the above apply, I would suggest reading with caution (though I usually do my best to avoid going into spoilers anyway) or turning back now and waiting for when I’m not covering a horror movie or even certain types of thrillers. With that out of the way, on with the review. The film follows a woman named Madison, and she seems to be living a normal life in Seattle with her abusive husband Derek, and she’s wanting to have a child. Unfortunately, an altercation occurs that results in her being hospitalized and Derek being killed. After coming home, Madison begins experiencing visions of gruesome murders as they happen. As she comes to realize these are occurring in real life, a more shocking truth slowly begins to unravel. What Worked: While the cast all give great performances, it’s the lead performance from Annabelle Wallis (the 2017 Mummy reboot*) as Madison herself that really sells it. She is outstanding in this. This is a character that while you obviously can’t relate to her situation, you certainly can relate to her. No matter how hard you may try to live a normal life, how reality plays out in front of you is unpredictable, and it can spiral out of control at any time, sometimes to where you can’t do anything to resolve it, even if you have people to try to help you. She does a fantastic job conveying that, and throughout the movie, you feel her pain. You also get some great supporting performances from Maddie Hasson as Madison’s sister Sydney, George Young as Detective Kekoa Shaw (yes, that’s his name), Michole Briana White as his partner Detective Regina Moss, and even Jake Abel as Derek (as brief as his screen time is) and Jacqueline McKenzie (who you may remember from Deep Blue Sea). Of course, there are others, but with one exception that I’ll get to later, those are the main ones I can mention without giving too much away. What I can say is that the story itself is brilliant. Even if you set Madison’s situation aside, which in reality can be pretty frightening, as mentioned earlier, putting a supernatural or psychological spin on it just elevates it that much more. That’s one reason why James Wan is such an icon in terms of modern day horror filmmakers. I thought that was such a great idea for him to bring to the table here, with the help of his wife, Ingrid Bisu (who also has a small supporting role in the movie), and especially up-and-coming screenwriter Akela Cooper. Speaking of the latter, it says something when a horror newcomer can make a twist so good it puts even M. Night Shyamalan’s best twists to shame. Even if you think you can figure it out, it’ll still catch you off guard with how shocking it is. It’s also surprising when you realize she did so on her second film. Even leading up to said twist, James Wan’s direction on its own is so unsettling in its own right. Not only that, there are some really cool shots in this. One particular sequence involves Madison running down a hallway, and it’s shot from above her in a tracking shot, and how he pulled it off is very impressive. Also, without giving too much away, there’s a sequence in the third act set at a police station. If you thought the police station assault in The Terminator was crazy, the one in this movie might top it for you, as it’s done all in one take. Be on the lookout for moments like those. The biggest things that stood out to me aside from the twist were the music and the level of violence in this. Joseph Bishara’s score is really good, but there are two separate tracks in particular that will really stick with you. One is “When Your Walls Fall” by Celldweller, whose music was very popular trailer music in the 2000s, most notably “Switchback”. When this song kicks in, it hits hard, and in saying James Wan came back to horror with a bang with this movie, that statement especially applies there. The opening scene is shocking enough, and then the song slowly builds up into the excellent opening credits sequence, and then it really kicks in and doesn’t stop until the sequence ends. It’s not the only time, either. It comes back again later and it feels like the unofficial main theme of the movie. The other one is a cover of Pixies’ “Where Is My Mind?”, which even thematically is a perfect fit. For those who remember Fight Club, which made that song more popular, you might like the cover here. Now for the violence, to say this is brutal is an understatement. This does not hold back with the kills. This is a bloodbath. The killer will not let anyone get in his way. If the deaths alone don’t get you, his look, weapon, and voice certainly will. Other than the blood and gore and the transitions to each murder scene (which are among some CGI courtesy of Industrial Light & Magic), the effects are mainly practical, particularly his appearance. Simply put, every aspect of how they brought him to life is brilliant. There are a couple other things I will mention before I go into the biggest aspect I wanted to address and then close this out. While very consistent in tone, it does have some humor, usually from the police. However, it never goes to where it detracts from the overall very serious tone. The other thing I can mention is that there are some genuinely effective scares in this. Usually in horror movies, especially now, they rely on cheap jump scares for the sake of having them in the movie. That’s not the case here, because James Wan knows how to do it right. He builds up tension, and then gets you when you least expect it. He definitely showed that in the first two Conjuring films**. Before I close this out, here’s the biggest thing I wanted to address. There’s an argument that I had seen some make that this is an absurd, over the top, cheesy horror movie, with aspects that are meant to be taken as such. Sure, there are some things that can be viewed in that context, but for me, it didn’t feel like that. It felt more like a flat-out insane horror movie with a supernatural or psychological twist to it (no pun intended). Overall: Malignant is a triumphant return to horror for James Wan as a director, and it feels like he’s still got it. It also shows he’s willing to take risks, because he presents an original idea, which can go either way for anyone no matter what genre it is, and he still manages to pull it off. As a result, this turned out to not only be one of the most unique horror movies I have seen in a long time, but also one of the craziest. Usually when others try to do that, it’s shock value for the sake of shock value with no real purpose to it. Here, it feels genuine, and it has a purpose with actual buildup to it, which is how it should be done, but in reality not always is, especially in recent years.*** The real surprise of the movie comes from how well crafted its story is and how well executed it is, while delivering great performances and compelling characters through a brilliant script from a very promising writer in Akela Cooper. Despite Malignant not doing too well on release, it does have an audience. Give it a few more years, and it’ll have a following that it rightfully earned. With how this turned out so early in her career, though, I’m glad she’s been getting more work, and it seems to be paying off with the success of M3GAN, so she did bounce back by making a movie that felt more mainstream. Now, with that having been said, I’m even more excited to bring you my review of M3GAN, which I hope to put up very soon. *Speaking of The Mummy, if you remember the 1999 version with Brendan Fraser and its sequel The Mummy Returns, Patricia Velásquez makes an appearance at the beginning of this movie. **I know that it’ll seem odd having done this before any of his previous horror films like those, especially given the Intro and Outro of this review, but again, the main reason I chose to cover this now is more so because of the writer, who happens to have her latest project out right now in theaters. ***What I mean by that, folks, is something that’ll be elaborated further in a type of post I haven’t done before, but have wanted to do for some time. As for what that is, you’ll have to wait and see while I’m working on it. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2022/12/24/thoughts-on-violent-night-2022 monthly 0.5 2022-12-24 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/8a8ce636-573f-49d5-9132-e4477841651a/%28Thoughts+On%29+Violent+Night.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Violent Night (2022) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. In what is likely the last review for this year (sorry, guys, for it not being the two Avatar movies or Top Gun and Top Gun: Maverick*), we revisit another classic story that’s had its share of different versions. However, for this one, it’s the first time since that story’s first sequel to be set around Christmas. The main difference here is that instead of a New York cop visiting his wife in L.A. on Christmas Eve, it’s Santa Claus trying to make his rounds when he gets caught in the middle of a hostage situation. That, and Santa happens to be more brutal than John McClane. Folks, for this review, we’re going to witness Santa dish out some Season’s Beatings on some bad guys, as I bring to you my review of Violent Night. The movie follows the Lightstone family, who are visiting matriarch Gertrude for Christmas at her mansion. Joining Jason (the father), his estranged wife Linda, and their 7-year-old daughter Trudy are Jason’s sister Alva, her new boyfriend Morgan Steel, and Alva’s son Bertrude (no, I’m not making that up). With it being Christmas Eve, Jason and Linda decide to give Trudy one gift early: an old walkie-talkie to allow Trudy to talk to Santa. Her parents overhear her Christmas wish, and shortly after, Santa arrives to deliver presents. Unfortunately, he arrives as the mansion is being overrun by a group of mercenaries looking for $300 million in cash stored in their vault. Making matters worse, his reindeer get spooked away, leaving Santa behind. With no other options, he decides to help the family out. What Worked: The performances are all excellent. First of all, David Harbour is fantastic as Santa. This is the best movie Santa I have seen in a long time, if not ever. He is not only perfectly cast for the type of movie this is (an action comedy), but how he’s written is a perfect fit for that. This Santa has an interesting backstory that I won’t go into here, and he has an understandable motivation even prior to when he decides to help the family out. Plus, you can tell he was having so much fun playing Santa. Though the portrayal of the family is absurd, it feels like a parody of the dysfunctional family stereotype, to where you have the one person trying to hold everything together as best they can. Here, that’s Trudy trying to keep everyone in the Christmas spirit. She’s very sweet, and has the purest heart of everyone. Leah Brady’s performance really sells not only that, but also her belief in Santa. Aside from her parents, played respectively by Alex Hassell and Alexis Louder, the rest of the family are very much dysfunctional in every sense of the word. You have Edi Patterson (Knives Out) as Alva, who’s a drinker, Cam Gigandet (Pandorum, The Magnificent Seven) as her boyfriend Morgan Steel, who’s an action star wanting Gertrude to fund his next movie, and Alexander Elliot as Bertrude, who’s basically the modern influencer type that we see now. Though they all have their share of funny moments (Morgan gets quite a few of them), there’s Beverly D’Angelo of Vacation fame as Gertrude herself. She gets some of the funniest lines in the movie. In fact, she’s so vulgar she puts even Deadpool to shame. If you think I’m exaggerating, I am not. Then we have the villains, led by John Leguizamo in what is easily his best villain role. It’s also ironic when you consider that he was in Die Hard 2 and John Wick, and then he goes on to be in a Die Hard movie in the style of John Wick with this. However, as with David Harbour’s performance as Santa, you can tell he’s having a lot of fun as the main villain, who calls himself Mr. Scrooge. You can also tell that this is a self-aware action comedy when the villains have Christmas-themed codenames, such as Gingerbread, Candy Cane, and even Krampus. You also know it doesn’t take itself too seriously when they outright reference Die Hard and Home Alone in addition to parodying them (they even parody Die Hard 2 at one point). The biggest reference to Home Alone is especially brilliant. The movie also excels at being very brutal. It lives up to the title, because Santa gets to kill people in insanely brutal, yet hilariously awesome and very creative ways. I also thought it was a nice touch to actually modernize Santa’s Nice and Naughty Lists, and incorporate Christmas music into the score. This all benefits from having solid direction from Tommy Wirkola (who previously did Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters) and a very clever script from Pat Casey and Josh Miller, who are coming off of writing two well-received hit video game adaptations with Sonic the Hedgehog and its sequel. The biggest thing that makes this so much fun is that it’s produced by David Leitch, who co-directed the first John Wick film with Chad Stahelski before going on to direct Atomic Blonde, Deadpool 2, the Fast & Furious spinoff Hobbs & Shaw, and Bullet Train, which came out earlier this year. This has the same kind of fast-paced action and great humor as Bullet Train in particular, in addition to Nobody, which he also produced. What Didn’t Work: There was a very minor pacing issue early on, but that’s more of a nitpick compared to everything else. Overall: Violent Night has everything you could want in a holiday movie, and then some. In a year of divisiveness (especially in film), this is the kind of movie we need right now. It’s a time of celebration, and what better way for them to deliver the goods than a Christmas-themed action comedy? It’s the kind of action movie that knows what it is. You have David Harbour as Santa unleashing some Christmas carnage on a band of mercenaries led by John Leguizamo. What more could you possibly want? It’s fun, it’s brutal, it’s hilarious, and overall, it’s a very satisfying experience. For John Wick fans, this is your kind of movie. For action fans in general, like myself, you are in for a welcome holiday treat. I had heard some say two things. The first is that they want more movies like this with holiday icons being action heroes, and the second is that this could be a new Christmas classic. I totally agree with both. Folks, if you’re looking for something to do this holiday season (besides see Avatar in theaters (which I would highly recommend you do so in 3D, of course) or see anything on streaming (like Glass Onion, which also arrived this month)), I would highly suggest you go watch Violent Night and hope you get a good amount of people in the theater, even if it’s not entirely packed. I guarantee you and your audience will come out of it having had a great time yourselves. One more thing worth noting for when you do see it: There is a mid-credits scene, and despite being brief, it’s also hilarious. With all that having been said… Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good (and hopefully not actually violent) night. Next Time: My next review or post will likely be once we’ve entered the new year. For now, though: I capped off this year With a movie that I left with glee And I hope to see everyone here In 2023. Merry Christmas, and Happy New Year, everyone! *This one felt easier to do, and it came out at a more fitting time anyway for the reviews I was able to do for this year to go out. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/8/21/thoughts-on-treasure-planet-2002 monthly 0.5 2022-12-21 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1566434305084-HLMU6LH8RY7GZ3DOIP6W/%28Thoughts+On%29+Treasure+Planet.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Treasure Planet (2002) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com Hello, everyone. With this review, we go from the end of an official trilogy to the end of an unofficial one. For those who don’t know, this is the third year where I cover an overlooked animated sci-fi movie from the early 2000s that should be held in much higher regard than it is for its 20th Anniversary. It started in 2020 with Titan A.E., then continued in 2021 with Atlantis: The Lost Empire, and now, in 2022, it concludes with this movie. Like Atlantis (and, technically, Titan A.E.*) before it, this comes to us from Disney. The only real difference is that Atlantis more underperformed than outright bombed, whereas the bookending movies did**. Even so, they each deserve their own following, and hopefully, these reviews can help in some way to give them more attention. The biggest thing they have in common is the cores of their stories, which is our protagonists going on their own adventures to achieve their main goals, whether it’s finding a new home (like in Titan A.E.) or looking for the stuff of legends (like in Atlantis and this movie). Before I continue, I want to clarify one thing: This of course does not mean I will no longer cover animated sci-fi movies or movies I consider to be overlooked gems (far from it, especially in the case of the latter; there are plenty more examples of that). It’s just that this movie was the last big example from the early 2000s that I could remember. I am aware that there are likely more, but these were the three from that time that have really stood out to me. Folks, for this review, we’re returning to the futuristic type of setting, as we set course for Treasure Planet. The film serves as a reimagining of Robert Louis Stevenson’s novel Treasure Island, which was a major influence on how we see and read about pirates in our popular culture even today (with one big example even being referenced here, which I will get to later in more ways than one). Even with the difference in settings and the majority of the characters also being reimagined into aliens, robots, and in one case a cyborg, the main plot points are largely the same with some changes here and there. The story follows a rebellious teenager named Jim Hawkins, who has been seeking adventure ever since he was a kid, when he read about the story of Captain Flint, a pirate who is said to have hidden his loot on what came to be known as Treasure Planet. Ever since Jim’s father left when he was young, he has been trying to help his mother make ends meet working at her inn. One day, a pirate named Billy Bones crashes nearby. When Jim goes to investigate, he discovers Billy is dying, and before he dies, he gives Jim a map, and warns him to “beware the cyborg”. Shortly after, the cyborg arrives with his own band of pirates, raiding and burning the inn to the ground in search of the map. Jim then vows to make it up to his mother. Their friend and financier, Dr. Delbert Doppler, accompanies him on the RLS Legacy, which is under the command of Captain Amelia and her first mate Mr. Arrow. However, their crew is led by John Silver, who Jim believes is the cyborg Billy warned him about. Jim is then assigned to work with him. Although the two of them slowly begin to bond, Silver may have different motivations for being on the voyage in search of the planet. What Worked: As with Atlantis and Titan A.E., there is a lot to like here as well. For starters, the voice cast is amazing. Jim Hawkins is voiced by Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who gives a fantastic performance for someone who would go on to be an A-lister with movies like Inception. He embodies Jim’s personality in a similar manner to how Michael J. Fox portrayed Milo Thatch in Atlantis. You can feel Jim’s determination through his performance, too. South African actor Brian Murray (not to be confused with Brian Doyle-Murray, although he has also voiced a pirate) voices Silver, and he brings a lot of charm and charisma to the role to where even if you don’t agree with his methods, you still like him as a character. In fact, as he bonds with Jim over the course of the movie, you feel that he’s kind of a father figure to him. At times, you do feel like Silver’s a villain, but there’s someone I will get to momentarily that feels like even more of a villain than he does. Next, we have David Hyde Pierce as Doppler, and he’s no stranger to voice acting for Disney, having worked with Pixar by voicing Slim in A Bug’s Life. Of the characters you can say provide comic relief, he’s the one of three here that’s in the movie the most. As one of the more comedic actors in this, he does get some good moments, and his delivery suits his character very well, especially in those moments. Though he’s in the movie the most, he didn’t provide the best comic relief in the movie, at least to me. As for the one who does, I’ll get to him later. We then have Emma Thompson as Captain Amelia, who in a way is a parallel to Jim with her desire for adventure. She also gives one of the best supporting performances in the movie, which in turn makes her one of the best supporting characters. Even though neither are in the movie that much, Laurie Metcalf (who many may recognize as the voice of Andy’s Mom in the Toy Story franchise) and Roscoe Lee Browne are both really good as Jim’s mother Sarah and Mr. Arrow, respectively. Browne in particular gives a very commanding and intimidating presence to Mr. Arrow. Before I get to the two performances that stand out the most, the smaller roles most worth noting are Patrick McGoohan as Billy Bones, Corey Burton (Mole from Atlantis) as Onus, the Legacy’s lookout, Tony Jay (who you may remember as Judge Claude Frollo from The Hunchback of Notre Dame) as the narrator in the beginning of the movie, and an uncredited Peter Cullen as Captain Flint himself. Now for the two standouts. The most intimidating presence hands down is given to the character of Scroop. As alluded to earlier, he’s the one who feels more like a villain than Silver. This is thanks in no small part to the fact that he’s voiced by Michael Wincott, who is perhaps best known for his portrayal of Top Dollar in The Crow. Even outside of the two movies, his voice is still pretty menacing, whether it’s a main character or a supporting one. The best character in the movie is also the best comic relief, and that is Silver’s pet, Morph, voiced by sound editor Dane Davis, who is otherwise best known as the sound editor for the Matrix franchise. Simply put, every comedic moment they give to Morph is hilarious. You could say he’s kind of like The Genie from Aladdin, which, fittingly enough, also shares the same directors in John Musker and Ron Clements (who also cowrote it). Though they only received story credit here, Aladdin writers Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio were also involved in this.*** The comedic timing itself is overall pretty good. For example, when used during the action sequences, it doesn’t feel like it stops for a moment to make a joke and then get back to the action. Speaking of the action, it’s very intense when it does happen, most notably a sequence involving a star going supernova and then forming into a black hole. Both the comedy and the action also help enhance the story, which makes this feel distinct from its source material while still acknowledging it. They also provide a sense of adventure and excitement, and that is further conveyed by James Newton Howard’s amazing score. To me, it felt reminiscent of Alan Silvestri’s score for Back to the Future and John Williams’s scores for Indiana Jones at times, particularly in the theme. It may be the main music of the movie, but it’s not the only music. John Rzeznik of The Goo Goo Dolls did two songs for this, the most famous being “I’m Still Here”, which serves as Jim’s central theme. It’s not only a really good song, but it’s also one of those Disney songs that is effective when you hear it in the movie and on its own. It fits the scene it’s used in, which itself is actually very well done. To me, it felt like the “Strangers Like Me” sequence from Tarzan, which was my personal favorite scene in that movie. The other song, “Always Know Where You Are”, is good, but what’s surprising about it is that there were ultimately two versions made. John’s version can only be heard in the credits, and yet the other version (a cover by BBMak) is the one on the album. One thing that I felt both worked and didn’t work was the pacing. Narrative-wise, it goes by pretty quickly. However, it goes by so quickly that it feels like one character almost gets the shaft in this movie. What Didn’t Work: I really only have one major issue. Although Martin Short is really good in the movie, his character, a robot named B.E.N., is barely in it. He comes in at the end of the second act going into the third act. Because he’s only in the second half, he feels almost like an afterthought, as his character arc gets resolved so fast that you could be wondering why he was even in the movie, and I wouldn’t blame you. Now, that doesn’t mean he’s not useful. He is, and also, as the third comic relief character, he does get some good dialogue. I just felt he could’ve been brought in a bit sooner, and had more screen time to make him stand out more. Overall: Like Titan A.E. and Atlantis before it, Treasure Planet is another overlooked animated sci-fi gem that deserves way more attention than it initially got. Thankfully, in the years since its release, it has received a well deserved cult following. It also gets a lot right in terms of both acknowledging its source material and putting its own unique spin on it. The core story beats are largely intact, and really the main differences are in the character designs. Even on its own, it still gets a lot right. It’s funny when it needs to be, it’s intense when it needs to be, and it’s even heartwarming when it needs to be. All of those moments are really sold based on the performances (even with Martin Short’s performance as B.E.N., despite him having minimal screen time), the action, the overall pacing, the humor and writing as a whole, and especially the music. Not only that, it has compelling characters, including a very sympathetic and likable protagonist in Jim Hawkins, the morally gray Silver, the always hilarious Morph, the always determined Doppler and Amelia, and an outright psychopath in Scroop, among others. As the old saying goes, it’s not about the destination, it’s about the journey. It holds true for all three of these movies, and then when you see them get to where they need to go, it always feels earned. To paraphrase another saying, a studio’s trash is an audience’s treasure. These three are treasures certainly worth seeking out, and I hope the reviews for each have helped draw more attention to them. Next time, we go from facing pirates seeking loot to facing mercenaries seeking money. Only this time, we have Santa on our side instead of John McClane. To close out this review, similar to Atlantis, this is actually another remake I would love to see. My only problem is it seems even riskier to do this than that. With something like this, it’s more likely to go either way. It could either be a hit or it could bomb harder than the original. Even so, I’d still love to see it, but it’d probably be best to do Atlantis first, should they decide to go through with doing them. *It was initially released by Fox when it came out, but is now technically owned by Disney since they bought Fox. **They didn’t just bomb, they bombed so hard that any future plans were scrapped, including a planned sequel to this movie that would’ve had Willem Dafoe voice Ironbeard, the main villain of the movie, which of course I would’ve loved to see. The planned story was very interesting, too. ***One of their other famous works is also referenced here, so it wouldn’t be that surprising if it turns out they themselves put that in, as a bit of foreshadowing for what they would do later. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2022/7/31/thoughts-on-halloween-ends-2022 monthly 0.5 2022-12-21 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/5827f482-284b-4540-b610-e6e30f30dc7a/%28Thoughts+On%29+Halloween+Ends.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Halloween Ends (2022) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. Although it has been a few months since the Transformers review, and of course there were some movies I wanted to cover in between that movie and this one, there were also some that I was determined to cover as intended. This was one of them. As I mentioned in the review for the previous installment, what affected its release date in turn affected this one’s. With that, it was initially set for release two years after this new trilogy started, but it became three due to the pandemic, and for this third entry, it became four. That four year gap ultimately seemed rather fitting, due to the gap in between the beginning and the end. From a narrative standpoint, though, that’s where a difference comes in, which I will get to in a second. Before I go on with the plot, I have to say something I did last time, and I should probably establish it going forward. This applies to franchises in particular (whether they primarily consist of movies (an example being the Bond franchise) or have even expanded into shows (major examples being the Marvel Cinematic Universe and especially Star Wars))*: For those who have not seen what came before the newest installment in a franchise (whatever said franchise may be), and are interested in reading what I have to say about it, I highly suggest you go check those out, read my thoughts on them, and then come back, as it is very likely I will have to go into spoilers. Now, when I do have to resort to that, they are very minor spoilers for the latest installment, and what major spoilers there are will be for the previous ones. Regardless, I do it when necessary. Folks, for this review, we go back to Haddonfield, Illinois, one last time (at least in this timeline**), as we see how Halloween Ends. The story is set four years after the events of Halloween Kills. Michael Myers has not been seen since his previous rampage through Haddonfield. Laurie Strode is in the process of finishing her memoir while living with her granddaughter Allyson, and is finally able to start having a proper life. That is, until a young man named Corey Cunningham is accused of murdering a child he was babysitting, and is ostracized for what was clearly an accident. This slowly begins a resurgence of chaos in town, enough to bring Laurie out for one last confrontation with Michael. Now, for this movie, especially given how it’s being received, even with that forewarning, I have to be very (and I mean very) careful with what I say here, as this is going to prove to be one of the most divisive movies I have ever reviewed. This is not the first time, nor the last. In fact, going forward, having to tread lightly while still trying to give well thought out points may prove more difficult than ever, even for me. One could say that divisiveness in the world of entertainment runs more rampant than Michael did in the last movie alone. Having established that, on with the review. What Worked: As usual, I’ll start with the performances. Even with very glaring issues in terms of characterization that I will get to later, the cast do fine with what they’re given, although it isn’t much in some cases. Jamie Lee Curtis, in her final performance as Laurie Strode, shows dedication in making it count. She’s very protective of Allyson, especially after what happened to her parents over the course of this trilogy. I appreciated that they kept that intact here. Andi Matichak is still good as Allyson. While she recognizes that Laurie is trying to look out for her even more now, she, too, is also trying to move on since the events of the last movie. Also returning are Will Patton as Frank Hawkins, and Kyle Richards as Lindsey Wallace. Despite not being in the movie that much (more so with Lindsey), they are good for the time they’re in it. Of course, we have James Jude Courtney once again as Michael Myers himself. Whenever Michael Myers shows up, he doesn’t hold back. Although he’s not quite as brutal as he was in the last movie, he does get some good kills in. For those wondering, yes, they do also bring back Nick Castle in some capacity, but it’s best I leave it at that. As for my thoughts on Corey Cunningham, I’ll say this for now: Rohan Campbell does a fine job playing him. The character himself, however, I’m saving for the next segment, which is something I haven’t done since the Halloween Kills review. The only difference is that I’m sticking with my positives this time before going into it. With the technical aspects, the standout one is the score, which again brings back John Carpenter, his son Cody, and Daniel Davies. Something that at this point goes hand in hand with that is how they do the opening credits. I’ve come to appreciate how the openings of these movies are done. It really stands out in this movie because it comes back around to kick off the closing credits as well. Speaking of that, there is something else I can say that I actually haven’t gone into with the others besides the original. These newer ones are all very well shot, but to varying degrees, with the 2018 film being the best looking one. They’re not quite up to the standards of the cinematography of the original, sure, but they all have some moments that do look very good. The last major positive I have leads right into the return of the extra segment from the Halloween Kills review. This is the biggest part where I have to be careful with what I say, because if I spoil anything major, people will likely be madder than they already are with the movie itself. I thought this movie had some interesting ideas (ideas being the key word here). Although most of the time, using a time jump can be considered a cheap way to move the plot along, I did like the idea of showing Laurie and Allyson try to move on since the last movie, so it made sense here, at least for me. Since they do use a time jump here, you’d expect there to be a “calm before the storm” type of thing that would allow for narrative progression, and they would address certain elements that have not been touched on that much, if at all. An example would be how other residents have been affected by these events, only perhaps exploring it even more. They actually do just that here. I also thought that was a very clever idea. Halloween Kills did have a little of that, but they expanded upon it even further in this, and it was nice how they did it. Without giving too much away, the majority of the third act is really good. All I can really say is this: You do still get what you came to see, but I have an issue even with that. What Might Not Work For Everyone: Now we come to the one major character that is going to be an issue for a lot of people, and that is Corey Cunningham. As mentioned earlier, I thought Rohan Campbell did a fine job playing him, but one of the biggest issues in terms of characterization is with him. I do get what they were trying to do, it’s more so how it plays out that is not going to work for everyone, and it didn’t entirely work for me, either. What Didn’t Work: The biggest issue for me with this movie as a whole was in terms of overall writing. There are major narrative inconsistencies in this. One example is how I just said that Corey was one of the biggest issues with the characterization here. He actually wasn’t the biggest for me. Some could argue for Laurie as well, but for me, she wasn’t, either. Her development across the trilogy was mostly consistent. The biggest victim of it was actually Allyson. It’s a similar case to someone in the 2018 film, and those who have seen that and read my review will know what I’m talking about. There were opportunities to allow for character growth, but because of how they chose to do the overall story here, there aren’t nearly enough. This is particularly evident within the script, which sees David Gordon Green collaborating with Danny McBride again, and it disappoints me to even say that, because I do love what they had contributed to this franchise prior, especially with the 2018 film. It felt like they put a lot of passion into that one because they had set a very clear goal, they had their focus entirely on trying to achieve it, and they did. I even really like, if not love, some of Danny McBride’s work outside of the franchise, because he can also be really funny. Shockingly, there’s little to no humor in this one, even with him still among the writers. As a result of all that, the script (and by extension, since he was also among the writers, David Gordon Green’s direction) is the weakest of the three, because it feels so much like the opposite of what they set out to do. Not only that, it feels like they wrote themselves into a corner after Halloween Kills, especially regarding the kills, and had to find a way out of it. Although what kills we get here were good, I couldn’t help but notice throughout how it felt like they held themselves back with them compared to that. My point is there are so many things here that could’ve (and should’ve) been given more attention and more time. One more thing I should mention before I give my overall thoughts: There are strobe lights in one scene, so if you are sensitive to that, look away until they stop. Overall: Despite my numerous problems with it, I didn’t hate Halloween Ends like a lot of people have. If anything, I’m very much mixed on it. There are things that work really well, and then there are things that had potential, but weren’t utilized properly, weren’t utilized enough, or even a bit of both. I appreciated that they wanted to go in a different direction in this, but with this being the epic finale, so to speak, it was the wrong time to do it. It gets to the point where the story felt so inconsistent because of so many ideas.*** With this trilogy, and therefore this timeline, having come to its conclusion, I can now say this: I had a fun time watching each entry, and while the very end of this one I felt was a good enough note to end it on, I can’t say the same for the rest of it. Although I did have fun while I was watching this one, I still couldn’t help but feel this could’ve been so much more to make this trilogy go out on a genuine high note. Next time, we go from the end of an official trilogy to the end of an unofficial one. *Yes, I know those examples have been expanded further to include stuff like novels, comics, and video games. A lot of franchises have and still are. It was just better to address this here. **There’s multiple ones. For those wondering why I haven’t covered the entries in between the original and the 2018 film, there’s three reasons for that: 1: The 2018 film was said to be a direct sequel to the original that negated everything in between, and it was, thus making this timeline easier to follow for everyone. 2: I knew I wouldn’t have time to find the rest and review them because I didn’t have access to them. And 3: I also knew I wouldn’t have time to look into where I could access them. ***As disappointed and outright mad as people are with how this ultimately did turn out, I feel it’s also worth noting that this could’ve been a whole lot worse. The biggest evidence of that is how there was something that was revealed publicly while they were still working on the movie, and that was a setting they actually did consider, but ultimately did not use (thankfully). One version of the plot would have had it set during COVID… and no, I am not making that up. I don’t even wish I was, either. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/8/16/thoughts-on-transformers-2007 monthly 0.5 2022-10-11 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1566008650893-7C4PLM7X8N5YFNWZK3NV/%28Thoughts+On%29+Transformers.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Transformers (2007) Image courtesy of moviemania.io Hello, everyone. As I hinted at in my previous review, we would be going from Reapers to Robots for the next one. This one is another Anniversary Review, ironically enough. It is also one I’ve wanted to do for so long. I had the opportunity to see this at my local Regal for a 15th Anniversary screening last week. Upon going to it, I knew this would be the subject of my next review. Given the timing of the screening, I also felt like this would be the right time for another reason that I will go into towards the end. For now, though, let’s roll out for my review of one of Michael Bay’s best movies as we celebrate the 15th Anniversary of Transformers. The story follows a teenager named Sam Witwicky, who’s wanting to get his first car to impress his crush, Mikaela. After going to a used car lot, he gets a yellow Camaro. He later discovers that his new car is actually Bumblebee, an alien robot sent to protect him long enough for him to summon more allies, including Optimus Prime, leader of the Autobots. They have come to Earth to search for a cube-like artifact known as the AllSpark, which can help revitalize their home planet of Cybertron. Sam also happens to have something that could help lead them to it. Meanwhile, their enemies, the Decepticons, are searching for the Cube as well. During their search, they uncover files on “Project Iceman”, which is actually their leader, Megatron, who crash landed in the Arctic Circle before he could get his hands on the Cube. Humanity is now caught in the middle of their fight to find it first. What Worked: For the most part, the acting works. Shia LaBeouf gives a solid performance as Sam, and he conveys the varying reactions people would have to giant robots interacting with humans very well. Aside from that, in the more humorous moments, his delivery is effective to where some of his dialogue is genuinely funny. Megan Fox does a pretty good job as Mikaela. Her relationship with Sam is hard to accept at first, but she does have good enough chemistry with Shia to where it does work. The best thing I can do for review purposes is leave it at that. Contrary to “popular belief” (and by that I mean what most other guys may tell you), she is not the main reason to see this movie. Yes, this movie was serious business when it came out, but that was because there was genuine hype for it, and it showed in the marketing and even the merchandise. The one actress who has some importance to the bigger plot is Rachael Taylor (perhaps best known for her role as Trish Walker, the best friend on Jessica Jones) as Maggie, a data analyst recruited by the Department of Defense to help interpret a signal they picked up from the base attack by Blackout that opens the movie. I actually really liked her in this, although there is one minor issue with her character that I’ll get to later. In regards to humor, the one cast member that is easily the funniest one in the movie is actually Anthony Anderson as her friend Glen, who is a skilled hacker she goes to for further assistance. It’s not only his dialogue, but also his delivery that’s hilarious. One other humorous moment worth noting comes earlier in the movie. Although he’s pretty much a cameo, Bernie Mac is great for the brief time he’s in it as the owner of the car lot. Then we have two other aspects of the human cast to talk about before I go into the things I love most about this. Those would be the military and the government. The military scenes mainly involve a small Special Ops team that survives the base attack, led by Josh Duhamel as Captain Lennox and Tyrese Gibson as Sergeant Epps. Their scenes are among the ones I really liked, because they do get some humor, but they mostly involve tension that is genuinely effective. Plus, they do feel like soldiers, and are very convincing in those types of roles. It’s especially surprising to get that from someone like Tyrese, who I can easily buy as a soldier or as a smart mouth racer, compared to a detective, but that’s for another review altogether. Then we get to the government, where the two major characters here are John Turturro as Agent Simmons (leader of Sector 7, a special division dedicated to keeping anything pertaining to Transformers classified), and Secretary of Defense John Keller, played by Jon Voight. I’ll put it this way for now: Similar to Maggie, I enjoyed their characters, but they have a similar issue as well. Before I continue, for those wondering, I did not overlook Sam’s parents. I didn’t mention them yet because one of my bigger issues does involve them, and I’m sure a lot of people are going to agree. For the Transformers themselves, there are also some notable names, particularly when it comes to voice acting. The ones that stand out the most among the supporting ones are Jess Harnell (best known as the voice of Crash Bandicoot), Mark Ryan, Reno Wilson, and Charlie Adler. Harnell has two voice roles here, first coming in as the voice of the Decepticon scout and interrogator, Barricade, and then later in a more significant role as the Autobot weapons specialist and bonafide badass, Ironhide. Adler is the voice of the second-in-command of the Decepticons, Starscream. Much like one of the two biggest names in the voice cast, he is actually a franchise veteran, having voiced several characters in the original series back in the 80s. Ryan and Wilson are the voices of Bumblebee and Barricade’s minion Frenzy, respectively. They would later go on to have several more voice roles in the franchise. For the voices of the leaders themselves, while Frank Welker doesn’t reprise his role as Megatron (although he would in the fourth and fifth installments), we did get the one back that people wanted perhaps even more, and that is Peter Cullen as the voice of Optimus Prime*. He is so iconic that he has continued to voice Optimus for the majority of Transformers projects that have come since, including but not limited to: the games based on the movies, the Cybertron game trilogy (the first two parts of which are really good), Transformers Prime (which was a solid show), and even the subsequent installments themselves. He’s really the only one who’s maintained the same role across the franchise, even including Bumblebee. He is also set to reprise the role once more in the upcoming Rise of the Beasts, which is scheduled for release next year. As for Megatron himself, we have the one major celebrity voice, who I have mentioned before as pretty much becoming one of the go-to actors for villains following his role as Agent Smith in The Matrix. I even mentioned Megatron as an example in that review. In place of Frank Welker, we have Hugo Weaving. I personally think that’s an excellent choice. Although it can be hard to tell it’s him at times compared to the second and third movies where it’s much easier because it sounds more like it’s just him, if you know it’s him with a more mechanical aesthetic given to his voice, you can somewhat tell. Now let’s get into what I love most about this movie in particular. For one thing, the plot is straightforward to where even the subplots are key parts of the main story rather than detracting from it, which is what not only affected the subsequent installments in this franchise (at least the ones Michael Bay directed), but can also even affect other sequels (an example being one that also came out in 2007). Thankfully, the script from Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman (who would successfully revive Star Trek two years later) is tightly focused on the main story first, uses subplots that serve a purpose, and incorporates humor only when necessary, even if it doesn’t always land. What actually gives this first installment a huge advantage is that even though he was an executive producer on the first three movies, this is the one where Steven Spielberg had the most input. You can tell he was heavily involved at times here. There are some moments where this feels like it could’ve been from his production company, Amblin Entertainment. However, it’s mostly felt in the tone. Where this movie really works is with the effects and the sound design. They still hold up today, but the Academy apparently didn’t think so. This was nominated in three categories: Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, and of course Best Visual Effects. It didn’t win once. It lost those first two to The Bourne Ultimatum, but as much as I’m willing to let that slide because of how great the sound design is in that, at the same time, for the sound team on this, I feel like these were their awards. Further evidence of that comes with the fact that they had very clear attention to detail, as they had Cybertronian subtitles that translate into English whenever the robots speak (which are always Decepticons in that case). As someone who has a thing for attention to detail myself, I appreciate that they went the extra mile to do that for at least some of the robots. The biggest snub of them all, though, and this is unforgivable: This lost Best Visual Effects to The Golden Compass, which unlike this, does not hold up very well. In fact, now, those effects look like a video game by comparison. This wasn’t the last time a huge effects driven movie was robbed, but that’s for a later review. The fact that this didn’t even get at least that is criminal. It’s pretty sad when MTV gave it more recognition than the Academy did. Plus, a lot of the effects were mostly practical, which always helps. Even the explosions were done for real, most notably the ones in the battle with Blackout’s minion Scorponok.** Speaking of explosions, compared to the sequels, they’re used sparingly here, and this is the best directed of the original movies, and easily the best shot. That’s high praise for a Michael Bay movie, I know, but it’s true. One more awesome thing about this movie, and I have to give them major props here: The music. The score and especially the soundtrack are really good. There are some tracks, namely “Arrival To Earth”, where the rest of the Autobots come down, that really stand out. The score is courtesy of Steve Jablonsky, a frequent collaborator of Michael Bay, who started out doing additional music for Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, and Bad Boys II (and later 6 Underground, his most recent film prior to Ambulance earlier this year) before serving as the composer on The Island, this movie, its four sequels, and Pain & Gain. His score for this movie even on its own is really good, because you can tell there are distinctions in the music for both factions. The Autobots have a more hopeful set of tracks, whereas the Decepticons have a more dramatic set, complete with choir. The soundtrack, though, I think might be even better. This was still during the time when movies often had a soundtrack album and a separate album for the score. For the soundtrack, we have artists like The Goo Goo Dolls (who would go on to reappear on the soundtrack for the third movie), Disturbed, Smashing Pumpkins, and the best one I’m saving for near the end of the review. What Didn’t Work: Where most of the humor falls flat, and a lot of people agree on this, is in the scenes with Sam’s parents. His Dad is tolerable. His Mom, however, is obnoxious beyond belief. It says something when at one point, even Ironhide gets fed up with them. There is humor that doesn’t involve them, and even that for the most part is weak. There are references to bodily functions and occasional sexual innuendos, and those are completely cringeworthy. The other issues I have are more like nitpicks on my part, but they’re still things I noticed that seemed a bit jarring. In regards to Rachael Taylor, I did find it odd that while Maggie I’m sure was supposed to be American (though that isn’t made clear, so don’t quote me on that), in the movie itself, she’s using her natural Australian accent. The bigger issue is with Simmons and Keller. It felt like, especially with Jon Voight, that he and John Turturro were acting as if the movie was more serious than it actually is. Those don’t bother me as much as the scenes with Sam’s parents, though. Other than that, I didn’t really have any issues here. Overall: With a mostly solid human cast and a very solid voice cast led by Peter Cullen, Transformers knows what it is and doesn’t go any further than that: A really fun movie with great effects and equally elaborate action sequences that still hold up 15 years later. There are so many awesome moments here where you’ll be impressed how they managed to pull them off. Even with its problems, as an adaptation, it’s a decent movie. In fact, where I think it’s most effective is if you want to watch it as an action movie. It definitely succeeds at that, because it’s a lot of fun. It’s even more effective from that mindset if you watch it as an action movie to make some noise. Much like I said in my review of Independence Day, I think this could also work as a good way to test your new sound system. The sound design is that good here, too. When you put everything that’s great about it together, you get a satisfying experience and one of Michael Bay’s best movies.*** Next time, we’ll be going from the start of a franchise… to the End of one. To close out this review, there is one big thing I wanted to address, which is the reason why rather than putting it up earlier this month, as initially intended, I am putting it up now. Five years ago today, we lost a phenomenal talent in the world of music. It was thanks in part to this movie that I was introduced to the band who would later become one of my personal favorites: Linkin Park, who made an even bigger impact through the voice of their lead singer, Chester Bennington. The day he passed away, to say I was at a loss for words would be an understatement. Then upon hearing that they would be showing this in my area for its 15th Anniversary around this time, I realized now would be the perfect time to put up this review. In addition to that, I had extra motivation to do so. I felt like it would be meaningful to dedicate this review to him. I am forever grateful to have discovered so many great songs. Thank you, Chester. You are, were, and always will be, a legend. Chester Bennington 3/20/1976 - 7/20/2017 *For those who have been reading these reviews for a long time, you may remember I acknowledged that in my Predator review, where he also provided the voice for the Predator himself. **Fun Fact: At the screening, they actually showed the featurette on how they did that scene before the movie. Getting to see that sequence again from that perspective in a theater was so cool to see. ***One more Side Note: There are some mid-credits scenes. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/8/16/thoughts-on-blade-ii-2002 monthly 0.5 2022-07-16 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1566010224294-T29IUSDUVV4HFOBTK8LH/%28Thoughts+On%29+Blade+II.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Blade II (2002) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com Hello, everyone. Before I start this review, I would like to apologize for the wait on this one and so many others that have yet to happen. Ones like these usually take more time because there’s so much that I want to say in them. This is the main reason why sometimes they take longer than planned. One big example is an Anniversary Review I would’ve done following this one, because not only is it an even bigger movie that came out the same year, but there’s also so much to cover because it’s one of those that left an impact on so many people in so many ways when it came out. I decided in advance to bump that review back, and you’ll know why once I get to it. For this review, I am going to cover one of my personal favorite superhero sequels, and this is the best movie to feature the title character (hopefully, for now, provided the upcoming reboot (set within the Marvel Cinematic Universe) is good). Even before I covered the original, and especially after, I had been waiting for the perfect opportunity to cover its sequel. Folks, at long last, I finally get that chance, as I will be covering the movie where an argument could be made that it introduced its director to domestic audiences, and that is Blade II. Before pressing on, I would advise you to check out the original and my review of it first, as this review may contain spoilers for it. The story picks up two years after the events of the original. This time around, we have Blade investigating a new strain of the vampire virus. Dubbed the Reaper strain, it's even worse than normal vampirism, as it can not only affect humans, but even other vampires. Even with the help of his friend Whistler, and the accompaniment of a group known as the Bloodpack, their combined efforts may not be enough. What Worked: The cast is excellent. Wesley Snipes gives his best performance of the trilogy here, as does Kris Kristofferson as Whistler (which isn’t saying much, because he’s barely in Blade: Trinity, but we’ll get to that later). Those are the only two returning from the first one. The supporting cast here is one aspect of this movie that stands out the most of the trilogy. Starting off, we have a pre-Walking Dead Norman Reedus as Scud, who’s been filling in for Whistler during his absence. One of many awesome moments involves him and Whistler giving everyone their weapons before they go into a nightclub. The moment is made even cooler as Blade and the Bloodpack are walking in slow motion as Massive Attack & Mos Def’s “I Against I” is playing. That is one of three of my favorite tracks from the movie, two of which are on the soundtrack itself, while the third is only a carryover from the trailer. The soundtrack (and by extension, the score) I will get to in a little bit. Going back to the cast, in regards to the Bloodpack themselves, there are some names you may recognize, the best known of which I’m saving for last. We have Matt Schulze (best known as Vince from the Fast & Furious franchise) as Chupa, who has a bone to pick with Whistler. What’s also worth noting is that this is actually not his first time being in the Blade franchise, as he made his film debut with a minor role in the first movie. Next, we have Donnie Yen (Rogue One, xXx: Return of Xander Cage, the upcoming John Wick: Chapter 4) as Snowman, and while he doesn’t actually speak, in a way, his sword does the talking for him. Even when he doesn’t use it, he still knows how to fight. He gets at least one awesome moment here where you do get to see some of his martial arts moves on display. The one who gets the most development is Leonor Varela’s character Nyssa. She becomes one of the more interesting new characters from the moment she’s introduced. There is a big reason for that, but it’s best you see it for yourself. The biggest name out of all the members, though, is Ron Perlman, a frequent collaborator of Guillermo Del Toro, who gave him a career-defining role with Hellboy. He’s not the only actor here who would go on to feature in the Hellboy movies, however. Just when you think Chupa had a problem with Whistler, from a narrative standpoint, the grudges escalate from there. Ron Perlman’s character, Reinhardt, really has it out for Blade, and yet Blade takes this new rivalry pretty well. Going by Wesley Snipes’ performance alone, it shows that whatever issue Reinhardt may have with Blade does not faze him at all. In fact, at least a couple times, he toys with him, and it’s awesome. As for his performance, Ron Perlman is actually one of my favorites in this. He is fantastic here. Reinhardt is not only a great rival for Blade, but you can also tell Ron is having fun playing him. As evidenced by their collaborations, you can also tell he and Guillermo Del Toro have a great working relationship with each other. Speaking of rivals, one major improvement this makes over the first one is with the villains. Deacon Frost was good, but the villains here are much better. They have more compelling character arcs and more interesting motivations. Frost and his crew wanted to be gods, which is a solid enough goal for the antagonist of a first installment. However, to be able to connect with future villains, the stakes need to be raised and their motivations need to be more understandable. This absolutely succeeds at both. Here, we have vampire overlord Eli Damaskinos (played by Thomas Kretschmann), who wants to create a new breed of vampires to carry on his legacy. That’s not only much more interesting, but his reasoning is also something people can identify with. People want to be remembered for what they accomplished in life, which makes sense. This is also one of those cases that comes with a bonus: He has a reason for crossing paths with both the hero and the main villain, and for both sides, it’s more personal. One of the standouts here is Luke Goss as the main villain, Jared Nomak. He bears the biggest grudge out of everyone, because he happens to be Patient Zero and the carrier of the Reaper strain as a result of Eli’s goal. That’s one of the reasons why he’s the best villain of the series. Now for everything else that makes this the best installment of the series. This is easily the best directed and best paced of the three, and I do feel like this helped put Guillermo Del Toro on the map for domestic audiences. His sense of atmosphere and style are all over this movie. His style definitely shows in the look of the locations, and especially the creature designs. The effects are mostly practical, and they do hold up really well. Where this movie really shines is with two things: the action and the music. The action is excellent in this, and when it’s accompanied by the music, it gets you hyped for what’s about to come. As mentioned earlier, there are three tracks I particularly love. “I Against I” is one of them, and they actually use that twice. The first time is in the scene I mentioned, and then it comes back again to kick off the closing credits. The second one is the main theme, courtesy of Marco Beltrami, who provides one of my personal favorites of his scores with this. The theme is used perfectly: Blade narrates a recap of the first movie, and the theme is playing in the background as the opening credits come up, then the title card comes up, and then the movie really starts. Then we get to my favorite, and it’s also one of my favorite songs of all time: The Crystal Method’s “Name of the Game”. It was awesome enough to hear in the trailer, and it comes as a huge surprise when an awesome song choice for a trailer actually does carry over into the movie. This is one of my favorite examples of that, and it comes in at the right time. What Didn’t Work: While I do still absolutely love this movie, there are a couple issues here. One of them is that while the CGI here is way better than that in the first one, and it isn’t used nearly as much this time, when it is used, it does not hold up well at all. It’s mainly present during the fights and whenever a Reaper’s jaws open up to infect someone. My biggest issue I have is that because there are so many characters this time, some of them get sidelined and aren’t really given much, if anything to do. Half of the Bloodpack get some good moments, whereas the other half (Lighthammer, Verlaine, Priest, and Asad) feel like they’re just there, and hardly have anything memorable about them. For example, with Lighthammer and Verlaine, it’s established that they’re both a couple. All we get with Lighthammer is a character with an awesome name and a weapon to match. There is somewhat of a missed opportunity with Verlaine in particular, because at one point, she was going to be the sister of Racquel, the vampire woman from the beginning of the first movie. That would’ve been much more interesting. However, with so many characters having issues with each other, had they gone with that, that probably would’ve been one conflict too many, so I can understand why they ultimately didn’t. With Priest, as well as Asad, it almost feels like they’re barely in it. Priest could’ve used more screen time, especially considering he’s played by Tony Curran, one of the lesser known names here. With Asad, although he's in it a sizable amount, he could’ve been like Sergeant Apone from Aliens as more of an authority figure type of character. As for the villains, while the performances are all really good in the movie, only Nomak is given any real development, although Eli does get some as well, albeit to a lesser extent. The one with the least development is Karel Roden (who would later play Grigori Rasputin, a major antagonist of the original Hellboy) as Eli’s lawyer. That is all we know about him. Everything he does is on Eli’s behalf. He doesn’t get a standout moment of his own or anything like that. Basically, what I’m saying is that had there been a little bit more in terms of character development, or at the very least given those that don’t have much some cool moments that define them, I think this could’ve elevated the movie’s status to being held in a much higher regard than it is. Overall: Blade II is not just an awesome movie, it’s also a great sequel. With excellent performances, improved effects, Guillermo Del Toro’s distinct visual style and direction, the most compelling villain of the trilogy, great action, and an awesome soundtrack, it’s also the most entertaining of the three movies because it’s paced so well. It also has what is easily the best performance Wesley Snipes gives to Blade himself, and the best supporting cast of the series to back him up. While the CGI still could have used some work, and more so the character development, the fact that the majority of the effects are practical here and the performances given to the lesser developed characters are still really good does make up for that, especially when everything else is so good. Even with the majority of my issues regarding how the characters are utilized within the bigger narrative, Blade II is still an overall satisfying experience. Sadly, for those who end up being hopeful for the conclusion upon seeing so much buildup that thus far had been really good, you might want to lower those expectations almost to the point of the potential to exceed them being between slim and none. Even in saying that, though, that might be a bit too generous on my part. That was not the first time people have had to do that for not only movies, but in general, nor will it be the last. However, as stated earlier, that comes later, as numerous other reviews will be coming first. What you can be hopeful for is the subject of one such review, which in fact is what I ultimately settled on being next. Next time, we go from Reapers… to Robots. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2022/3/26/2022-review-schedule-1 monthly 0.5 2022-07-11 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/dc1acd19-da22-42f2-b393-953164f41a9f/%28Temporary%29+Logo.jpg Blog - 2022 Review Schedule - Make it stand out Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that. Hello, everyone. It’s a new year, which means new possibilities. For the first time in three years, I feel like I can do a Review Schedule post again. In my previous post, there were a couple things I had to address first, so I would suggest checking that out first prior to this one. Since I addressed those couple things separately rather than start here with them, I felt it’d be more fun if I just jumped right into what I have planned. Now, these are not in any particular order, as I cannot always promise that these reviews come out as planned, similar to how these movies and shows have had to be adjusted. However, some of these actually follow up on movies I have already covered. First on the List is one of many things that’s been a long time coming, as I have planned to get these out before a couple times, and they ultimately did not happen. Now it seems like the perfect time to do it, as not only does this franchise celebrate its 45th Anniversary this year, but we also had one show finish airing a few weeks ago, and it was announced shortly after that the next one starts airing 45 years to the day we first witnessed these immortalized words pop up on the screen: “A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away…”. That’s right, everyone, I hope to finally get to covering Star Wars this year. Even though its 20th Anniversary passed, I do still plan on starting with The Phantom Menace (AKA Episode I). The plan for that will be as follows: The Phantom Menace (Episode I), Attack of the Clones (Episode II), and Revenge of the Sith (Episode III) leading up to the next spinoff series, which is set 10 years after the events of Episode III… Obi-Wan Kenobi. Then next up will be the two “A Star Wars Story” movies, those being Rogue One and Solo (but with the order swapped, as Solo is apparently set after Episode III, and before Rogue One, which leads into the Original Trilogy). Then we go to Episodes IV-VI, which are mainly referred to by the original titles they used (which is just Star Wars (in the case of Episode IV, rather than Episode IV: A New Hope), The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi). Then, despite it being an ongoing series (with an upcoming third Season), next up will be Seasons 1 & 2 of The Mandalorian, followed by The Book of Boba Fett, which finished a few weeks ago. Then finally, we get to Episodes VII-IX, which consist of The Force Awakens, The Last Jedi, and The Rise of Skywalker, which conclude the main saga, or The Skywalker Saga, as it’s commonly referred as. However, this applies to at least the movies. The shows will be included once they finish, whether it’s a miniseries or the latest Season if it’s an ongoing series. While that does mean that it will not be chronologically (let alone canonically) accurate, it’s better for consistency. The same applies to the Middle-Earth Saga, where I’ll be starting with The Hobbit before going into The Lord of the Rings, leading up to the Amazon series, The Rings of Power. Next on the List is something I had also meant to do at least one for last year, which is an Anniversary Review for Aliens, but it’s one of at least two franchises that I had a backup plan in place for. As it turns out, the flip side, the Predator franchise, is getting a new entry this year with a prequel called Prey, which is also supposed to be an origin story for the Predators. Now, I won’t actually need to start these, as I already covered the original Alien and the original Predator in their respective Anniversary years, so feel free to go check those out before the remaining ones in the series go up. Therefore, my backup plan I had in mind was to actually cover the remaining entries of both franchises starting with Aliens. For the Alien franchise, that consists of Aliens, Alien 3, and Alien: Resurrection. For the Predator franchise, that consists of Predator 2, Predators, and The Predator. In between will be the two Alien vs. Predator films. The sequel, Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem, might be the most difficult to cover, the main reason actually not being how the movie is shot (although that is one of them). The real main reason for me is because there aren’t really any even remotely noteworthy cast members in that one compared to the rest, including its immediate predecessor. Any huge fans of the Alien franchise in particular may have noticed I did not include the prequels, Prometheus and Alien: Covenant, on this List. I don’t need to, because I also already covered them. Next up we have some Anniversary Reviews that I put on the List simply because I wanted to do them. In no particular order, we have what will actually be one of the first to go up, and that is one of my personal favorite superhero sequels, and still as of right now the best movie featuring the character: Blade II. I also already covered the first one, and I’ve been waiting to be able to do this one anyway. As for Blade: Trinity, that comes later. The best I can say is this: It will be covered before the MCU reboot comes out with Mahershala Ali taking up the mantle from Wesley Snipes, and as a result, we go from one perfect Blade casting to another. For those wondering what was initially planned to be the first Anniversary Review for this year, but will now have to come later this year, it was what I consider to be the best found footage movie ever, which is a superhero movie done in that style, called Chronicle. It could likely be the next Anniversary Review, as it’s actually already in progress at the time of this post going up. Before I come back to franchises and close this post out, I also plan to do the two TRON films, The Thing (both the classic John Carpenter version and the prequel (and yes, it is a prequel))*, the two Blade Runner films (the original and Blade Runner 2049), and potentially numerous others. There is one other that I can mention, and this will be the conclusion of the Trilogy of criminally underrated animated sci-fi movies. I started this with Titan A.E., then most recently I continued with Atlantis: The Lost Empire, and now I get to announce what the third one will be. Much like Titan A.E., this one also catastrophically bombed. Unlike that, but like Atlantis, this was from Disney since Day One (Titan A.E. was initially Fox, but now technically Disney owns it ever since they bought Fox). This one is Treasure Planet. Even though that’ll be close to the end of the year, I still cannot wait to get to this one. Now for the last few franchises I want to mention here, because going forward with these Review Schedule posts, I want to try my best to not overload them. Doing so ultimately leads to a lot of those I announce not happening as planned. Therefore, starting this year, I want to try breaking that habit. That pun is the perfect segue to the next franchise I want to do this year. Without this franchise, even more so with the first movie, I probably wouldn’t be as eager to cover this one. The first movie alone got me into two things, and the brand itself was one of them. Despite its soon to be newest installment being bumped, and therefore covering this franchise next year for that was a backup plan, I want to at least cover what we have already, and that is Transformers. Either way, it’ll consist of the original five movies from Michael Bay, and then what is easily the best one since the first one: Bumblebee. Before that will be two franchises that each celebrate their 20th Anniversaries this year. One I absolutely hope to do this year is the one that got me into superheroes to begin with. This one started two years after X-Men, and it also started the superhero movie boom that continues today, and helped pave the way for the MCU even more than Blade or X-Men did. Even though he didn’t start out in the MCU, this might be the best way to lead up to one particular review in that series, and that is Spider-Man. Similarly, to lead up to a newer review, I’ll be covering the Batman franchise, from Michael Keaton through Christian Bale, and maybe even The LEGO Batman Movie, leading up to my review of The Batman. Rather than leading up to the movie itself, as I ultimately was not able to do it in time, this’ll be leading up to my review of it, because it may end up being more convenient to do it once it arrives on Blu-Ray. In this series, do not expect Ben Affleck’s Batman to be featured here, as that is part of the DC Extended Universe, which will be a review series of its own. Anyone wanting me to cover both Cuts of Batman v Superman and both Cuts of Justice League, they will be, just not here. Also, do not expect Adam West, either. Around the time of the Batman series, I hope to cover one of two spy franchises that celebrate an Anniversary this year, with this one having its 20th Anniversary, which would be the Bourne franchise. The other one, which I chose to close this post out with for a reason, is not only another one that’s been a long time coming, but it is also one of the longest running franchises ever, and it celebrates its 60th Anniversary this year. With its 25th installment having concluded its most recent lead’s run, now is the perfect time to finally do it. The last one I’m going to mention here… is the Bond franchise. It may seem like a tall order, even with these other ones I have planned, but I think it’ll be worth it, because I get to do more content, and everyone gets to see more content. One more thing: There might just be some surprises in between these, both newer and older alike. In the meantime, I’ll see you guys next time with my Blade II review. *There is a slight downside to that: I may have to do a comparison post where I go in depth in order to definitively end the debate once and for all (at least for me) as to why the 2011 movie is a prequel and not a remake (which the original actually was). The downside to that is that it would involve going into spoilers as I talk about the actual movies in question. The only times I usually go into spoilers in my reviews is to help explain the plot of a sequel, which may consist of huge spoilers for the previous movie, like more recently my review of Halloween Kills. Other than that, I try to do my reviews with as few spoilers as possible. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2022/3/12/schedule-update monthly 0.5 2022-03-13 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/53e9761c-cf93-4353-941b-c38216cba99a/%28Temporary%29+Logo.jpg Blog - Schedule Update - Make it stand out Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that. Hello, everyone. Much like last time I did one of these, this was not the first post of the new year that I had planned to put out, but I had to do something, as more updates have continued to happen. The pandemic may be starting to wind down, but a new problem has emerged in its place, with the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Now, I don’t know how this’ll affect the world of entertainment, let alone if it’ll be as bad as how COVID did, but should delays start to occur as badly as they did two years ago, or even if they do happen but not nearly as often as that, as was the case last year, you can still count on me to keep tracking them, folks. I do have some good news, though, on my end. Before I get to that, there are two things I need to address. 1: As I just stated, in regards to delays, this year, they could go either way. They could go the way of 2020 (where they were so sporadic that it would’ve been hard to keep track of them all had I not decided to do so) or they could go the way of 2021 (where they did still happen, but not nearly as much). For anyone wondering my stance on that, I’ll just put it this way: Expect the worst, hope for the best. Given that we are still in an ongoing global crisis (it may be winding down, but it also has not officially been declared to be over), even though some regions have it better than others, the current status of the release schedules remains unpredictable. Even so, my own schedule will be adjusted accordingly if and/or when necessary. 2: Yes, I will be continuing to make (and add to) the Schedule Update posts, as I have been doing since Day One. Speaking of which, I know I said I was thinking of doing these in three Parts, but at this point, I think it’s best I just end them with the post where I go over everything that was delayed, which includes movies or even shows I did not initially mention. This means that rather than have it be Part 3 (as this one is), it’ll be “Part (*Insert Number Here*): The Epic Finale”. This is simply because we don’t know how long this situation will last. Now for the good news: I will be bringing back my Review Schedule posts, as for the first time in three years, I feel like I can do one again. I am currently working on that as we speak, so be on the lookout for that soon, along with a couple or even a few reviews that might have actually been on it. As always, check back here for more updates, and the first few for this year will also be arriving fairly soon as well. Aside from that, I’ll see you guys on the post for my Review Schedule. ———————————————————- https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/8/21/thoughts-on-atlantis-the-lost-empire-2001 monthly 0.5 2021-12-30 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1566434268422-5FBUC58QRUFT8XSFLPO8/%28Thoughts+On%29+Atlantis+-+The+Lost+Empire.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com Hello, everyone. This review has been a long time coming. I had planned this since I did my Titan A.E. review last year, where for each of their respective years, I would commemorate the 20th Anniversaries of three criminally overlooked animated sci-fi movies. Therefore, Titan A.E. was first. The subject of this review is the second, and next year will be the third. I will reveal what that one is in an upcoming review plan post, for which I hope to have sufficient enough material. Now, I recognize that in order to keep to this plan, I had to do this one soon, even more so if I still wanted to get at least one Anniversary Review out in general for this year. Although in my previous review, I stated that I would consider following that up with a certain other big horror sequel for this year, this one I ultimately decided should take precedence, now that I have covered at least one new release. Unfortunately, that review, along with numerous others I had intended to do for this year (including several Anniversary Reviews*), are going to have to wait. However, rest assured, I do plan to increase my output going forward so I can publish new reviews more consistently and as intended. I will bring this up in more detail in the post on my review plans, so keep that in mind, folks. Before we get started, I need to provide a brief backstory for this one, since a fair amount of readers may be unfamiliar with this. After the Disney Renaissance ended with the release of Tarzan in 1999 up until 2008 (the “Post-Renaissance Era,” if you will), the studio did not have the best track record at the box office, regardless of critical reception. Even if the reviews were decent to very positive, as they were in some cases, it was rare when the box office reflected that, the biggest example perhaps being Lilo & Stitch. Aside from that, no matter which sides critics and audiences were on, the majority of their slate during this time either underperformed or outright bombed (as was the case with next year’s movie). In the case of this movie, it was more of a disappointment, because despite mixed reviews, it still did alright. There is something positive that came out of this era, though. A fair amount of underrated movies were released that have drawn enough attention to gain a following. This one is one of them. Much like our main protagonist setting out to discover an ancient civilization believed to be lost to time, for this review, I am here to help you uncover another hidden sci-fi gem. Ladies and gentlemen, I present my review of Atlantis: The Lost Empire. Set in 1914, 8,000 years after the continent of Atlantis sunk (for reasons it’s best I not go into here, as they are addressed later), the story follows Milo James Thatch, a linguist and cartographer working at the Smithsonian Institution. Through the inspiration of his grandfather Thaddeus, who often spoke of finding Atlantis, Milo is determined to finish what he started. He first discovers that a book called The Shepherd’s Journal has somehow survived, and that in order to find Atlantis, the Journal must be retrieved, as it is said to contain directions that lead right to it. However, he meets eccentric millionaire Preston B. Whitmore, an old friend of Thaddeus who helped find the Journal. Upon giving it to him, he tells Milo that the expedition to find Atlantis has already been funded and the team is already in place, which consists of the best in their fields. Although Milo agrees to be their guide, the journey is not a smooth one, and they may discover more secrets than why it was believed to be lost. What Worked: There is a lot to like here. Though I will start with the voice acting, there are some performances that I have to go into here, but I will try my best to not give too much away. There are a couple newer movies that just came out where that’ll be even harder, but that’s a different story for later reviews. Our protagonist, Milo, is voiced by Michael J. Fox, who conveys his personality very well. In fact, you can feel some parallels between Milo and his iconic role as Marty McFly in Back to the Future, especially in regards to that aspect. His determination to achieving his goal is also something anyone can get behind. In the role of the antagonist, we have Commander Lyle Tiberius Rourke, voiced by acting legend James Garner. In saying he’s the antagonist, you can tell from his demeanor that his main focus is not so much the mission, but what he plans to get in return from it. Even so, it shows that he had a lot of fun playing a villain here. One reason would be because he had prior experience within the action genre, namely with war films and Westerns. Some of his dialogue even reflects that. It brings a commanding presence (no pun intended) to Rourke. Because of this, Rourke became one of Disney’s most overlooked villains. The other main character is Kida, voiced by Cree Summer, one of two very prolific voice actors featured here. Summer technically has two roles (one of which is as Kida’s mother in the beginning of the movie), but even with the extensive list of roles she has done in her career, Kida is one that really stands out. When you also consider the fact that she once said that Kida is her favorite role she’s ever done, it’s easy to see why. She’s a compelling female character. The relationship she comes to develop with Milo is equally compelling, because she helps Milo learn more about Atlantean society beyond their language. The same can be said for the relationship between Kida and her father, the Atlantean King. Not only does Cree Summer give a great performance as Kida, but the King is also a standout supporting character, thanks in no small part to a fantastic performance from sci-fi icon Leonard Nimoy. One particular scene with him carries some emotional weight, and it is one of several scenes that leave an impact. It’s also worth noting that aside from him and the fact that Rourke shares his middle name with Captain Kirk, there is another significant Star Trek connection, but I’ll get to that when I talk about the technical aspects. Before I go into that, there is something that goes hand in hand with both the acting and said technical aspects here. Much like other Disney movies, this one also has its fair share of humor. A lot of it comes from the team, particularly the characters of demolitions expert Vinny (voiced by Saturday Night Live alum Don Novello) and geologist Mole (voiced by Corey Burton, the other well known voice actor I was alluding to). With Vinny, all of his dialogue was improvised, which was something Don Novello was known for. While other team members like medic Dr. Joshua Sweet (voiced by Phil Morris) and chef Cookie (voiced by the late Jim Varney, who you may also remember as the original voice of Slinky from the first two Toy Story movies) get some funny lines, Mole was the funniest character in the movie for me. The main reason why the humor works so well here is because of the solid writing. Despite only receiving a story credit, unlike Titan A.E., where he cowrote it, there are still moments where it does feel like Joss Whedon’s style. One thing that definitely has that is how the characters are so well developed to where even their own backstories are interesting, something that would later be done to perfection when he first assembled The Avengers. The humor also comes in at the right times. It never feels out of place. It’s used whenever the characters have a moment of downtime, which allows for them to be further developed. When the action does kick in, it’s very tense and occasionally pretty dark. It goes right into it by opening with the downfall of Atlantis. Both of these aspects are a huge benefit to the pacing. For 95 minutes, it goes by really fast. For evidence of that, the first big action sequence involving the creature known as the Leviathan, which one might expect to come in the middle, starts just 20 minutes in. It’s scenes like that and the finale where the score from James Newton Howard, who had scored Dinosaur and Unbreakable the previous year, really shines**. He would go on to score next year’s underrated sci-fi gem, as well as one of the best films of 2021 in Raya and the Last Dragon. The most notable aspect of this movie is what led to this movie rightfully earning its following, and that is the art style, especially the character design. This is because a very prominent artist in the world of comics worked on this: Mike Mignola, best known as the creator of Hellboy. In fact, as a result of his art style being used, you kind of also get a sense of the creative visions of Guillermo Del Toro in this. Even some of the symbols and inscriptions you see here somewhat convey that vibe as well, as well as those you may occasionally see in Star Trek. The Star Trek connection is much more apparent due to having Marc Okrand, himself a linguist, create the Atlantean language here after having had sci-fi experience working on Star Trek, which also happened to have a similar central theme of exploration on top of that. What Didn’t Work: The issues I have are more like small nitpicks, because they didn’t stick out to where they took me out of the movie. From a narrative perspective, the plot is not wholly original, as there are parallels to other movies here, one being that major plot points are somewhat predictable as well. The reason why I didn’t mention certain characters earlier, like Whitmore (voiced by John Mahoney, who previously voiced the General in The Iron Giant) and Packard, for example, is because they aren’t in the movie that much. Therefore, in that regard, it does feel slightly rushed, namely with Packard. One scene involves her talking with someone, although it is used for a humorous moment, but it’s not really followed up on after that. While I do get that this was probably not featured for runtime purposes, I feel this movie could’ve used a brief epilogue of sorts with text beside character photos to more fully realize their backstories. It could’ve worked really well as Mýa’s “Where the Dream Takes You” gradually plays over the credits. Then again, this isn’t exactly historically accurate, so there is that. As it is, the ending itself is satisfying enough on its own and what we do get of the characters’ backstories is sufficient enough to where I can forgive that when everything else around it is so good. Overall: Atlantis: The Lost Empire is another Disney movie that should get way more attention than it initially received at the time, and it rightfully has at least started to, having begun to develop a following of its own in recent years. As mentioned in the intro, the 2000s had no shortage of that for them. With great performances (especially from the likes of Michael J. Fox, James Garner, and Cree Summer), fantastic action sequences, perfect pacing, another excellent score from James Newton Howard, solid writing and humor, and the distinctive art style of Mike Mignola, this is one that should not be missed. Despite some familiar plot elements from other movies and some predictable moments, this actually does them better than some of those other movies by providing a different take on them. For fans of sci-fi and/or action adventure films, this is one that you should absolutely check out if you haven’t already, even more so for fans of Mike Mignola and his work. This is a journey well worth taking. To close out this review, there is one more thing that needs to be said. Given Disney’s slate of remakes as of late, this should be one that everyone would welcome a remake for, rather than another classic held to higher standards. If it were to happen someday, and hopefully it will, in the event that the studio plays their cards right, audiences very well might just turn up for it. It could even lead to more people discovering the original. There are two ways to do a remake that they would be interested in. The first way is to choose a movie where enough time has passed since the release of the original to where audiences might actually want to see it. The second way is to choose a movie that not as many people talk about, yet more people should be talking about. Either way, what’s most important is that it’s done right. This is one example of a Disney remake that I would love to see, for it could be very cool to see in live-action to take that journey all over again. *There were a couple of said Anniversary Reviews in particular that I had really wanted to do because one would be for another one of my favorite movies. **It also is another example of a movie where the score can stand out after having had a couple tracks used in the trailer. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2021/7/4/thoughts-on-halloween-kills-2021 monthly 0.5 2022-01-29 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1625416986578-SJB3GME0CWCQZXGD5O1E/%28Thoughts+On%29+Halloween+Kills.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Halloween Kills (2021) - Make it stand out Image courtesy of themoviedb.org Hello, everyone. I know it has been a long time since I put up my Tremors review, and there were a couple other movies that I had planned to come back with, but ultimately, given the timing of this review, this one I felt should come out first. However, with one of those actually being a horror movie, I might put that one up next. There are four things this has in common with that: They’re both horror sequels, they’re sequels to horror movies I’ve already covered, they were affected by delays (the other more so than this one), and those involved were determined to keep them on the schedule for a theatrical release.* This being the newest of the two, I’ll start here. Despite this movie being one of many affected by delays, this was among a few that actually had the least amount of them, as it was really only delayed once. It was originally set for an October 2020 release, but was bumped back to October 2021, which in turn caused the conclusion of this planned trilogy to be bumped back to October 2022. Now, after what was going to be two years since the previous installment, but ultimately became three years due to the pandemic**, we venture back to the town of Haddonfield, Illinois, for this review. We also witness the return of slasher icon Michael Myers, as I present my review of Halloween Kills. I will preface this one with a disclaimer, because there are a couple things I need to address. The first is that there may be some of what could be considered very minor spoilers for this movie, but they’re more like huge spoilers for the last movie. Therefore, I highly suggest the following: Watch the original 1978 film and definitely watch the 2018 sequel (in both regards, you’ll know why in a moment), read and keep my reviews in mind, watch this one, and then come back. Then you should be good. The second thing is that this has become somewhat controversial due to a few aspects, one in particular I will try to tread lightly on, even if others might not be so courteous and spoil it anyway. With that out of the way, on with the review. Immediately following the events of the 2018 film, Laurie Strode, her daughter Karen, and her granddaughter Allyson, believe they’ve finished Michael Myers once and for all by setting the basement on fire. They rush Laurie to the hospital to recover from her injuries. Little do they know that not only has Michael escaped again, but also that Laurie has motivated the rest of the town, including fellow survivors of Michael’s original killing spree, to rally together in the hopes that they’ll bring him down for good this time. What Worked: As always, I will start with the cast. The three leads in particular (Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie, Judy Greer as Karen, and Andi Matichak as Allyson, respectively) are still really good here. Also returning from the previous film is Will Patton as Deputy Frank Hawkins, who is revealed to have also survived. One of my problems with the 2018 film was not being able to see at least a little bit more of him. Thankfully, that is rectified here. One thing I actually loved here was how they reveal a little more about him. There, it was revealed that he was the deputy that recaptured Michael at the end of the original. Here, they expand upon that. There is also a flashback sequence to those events involving him and Loomis that ended up leaving him with his own trauma. As a result, he has his own reason to want to end Michael as well. We also have more returning cast members from the original as well, along with new cast members playing characters last seen in the original. We have Charles Cyphers returning as Leigh Brackett, the original Sheriff. Even though he’s not in it much, it is nice that they brought him back. The same can be said for Nancy Stephens as Nurse Marion Chambers, who was Loomis’s assistant in the original. Even so, they’re still good for the time they’re in it. There is one other returning cast member from the original to mention, and that is Kyle Richards as Lindsey Wallace, who was one of the children Laurie babysat in the original. I was surprised with how much she was in it, because she ended up having a lot more to do than those two. Now for my favorite of the new additions. Despite not playing the character in the original, the standout for me was Anthony Michael Hall as Tommy Doyle, who was the other child Laurie babysat that fateful night. I actually really liked him in this. Plus, he looked like he was having a lot of fun playing Tommy. Similarly, James Jude Courtney looks like he was having fun playing Michael again, especially when he gets to go ballistic with the kills this time. I’ll get to the kills momentarily. Not only did they bring him back, of course, but they did also bring back Nick Castle for a few scenes. For this review, I’ll have to do something a little different with the format. I’m adding an extra segment. I’ll be delving into some of the divisive elements here, starting with one involving Tommy. What Might Not Work For Everyone: For some, Anthony Michael Hall’s portrayal of Tommy may seem a bit exaggerated and over the top compared to how survivors of traumatic events would really act. However, for others, like myself, it makes sense that he would want to confront the source of his trauma. Going back to the kills, this movie is nothing short of a bloodbath. It’s not quite the craziest horror movie of the year in terms of kills, because that would go to another horror movie that came out not too long ago, which I also want to review pretty soon. The kills are another point of contention. Some think it’s excessive with how brutal they are, but it’s another thing that makes sense. Michael can never truly be contained, because he is the embodiment of evil. He doesn’t care what type of person you are; if you get in his way, it’s your funeral. That is particularly true for one moment with a couple of characters. Without giving too much away, there’s a certain aspect to these two characters that resulted in controversy claiming Michael is against that type of person. While I can understand the reason for it, it is kind of blown out of proportion as well, because the reason why it’s there is what I just said. There was also another motivation for why Michael kills them, and if you have seen the original and the 2018 movie, you’ll have a pretty good idea what it is. The two biggest complaints a lot of people may have aside from that are why Laurie is sidelined for the majority of the movie and the mob mentality that comes into play here (both of which were mentioned in the marketing, so it’s not a spoiler). The reason why Laurie is on the sidelines is because she was injured in her previous encounter with Michael, and she needs time to recover before she can have another chance at bringing him down. As for the mob mentality part, it shows how Michael’s killing spree affected everyone else. They chant “Evil Dies Tonight!” to show they’ve had enough of Michael as much as Laurie has. Therefore, it makes sense to have them more at the forefront this time. In summary, what others may have issues with actually made sense for me. There are a few more positives, so I’ll go back to them. The aforementioned flashback sequence is really good. It stands out because of the attention to detail given to it, as it has that 70s feel to it. I also really liked how they did the opening credits, too. The score is still fantastic, having had John Carpenter contribute to it once again, and the changes made to it are pretty good. What Didn’t Work: The humor here is not as strong as it was last time, but it still worked for me when it was utilized. David Gordon Green’s direction and Danny McBride’s writing are not as strong as last time, either, but they do fine at keeping consistency with the tone set by the 2018 film. My biggest issue with this was actually the ending. The best way I can sum up my thoughts on it is this: The problem wasn’t so much what they chose to end it with, but more so that they chose to end it with that. Narratively, it makes sense because the stakes need to be raised higher. However, I feel it would have been more suitable to use that as the opening of the concluding chapter of this trilogy, appropriately titled Halloween Ends. It would have allowed the stakes raised in this movie to be raised even further right there. Overall: Halloween Kills is not so much a step backwards from what preceded it, especially when what preceded it was so good, as it is a decent middle chapter to a story we don’t fully know just yet. For all its faults, and some understandably divisive aspects, it was still a solid sequel for me. If you want a fun time with a horror movie in theaters right now, you’re bound to get that. If you want to see an even bigger kill count, you’ll definitely get that. Regardless of where you stand on this movie, you’ll likely still be eager to see how Halloween Ends. You’ll get that chance soon enough, you just have some waiting to do. You still have two good movies prior to this to hold you over. *They also received a streaming release in some way, but that’s a different story. For more information, look at the Schedule Update posts where I’ve been tracking the delays and release strategy adjustments. **Same with the other sequel I’m alluding to; the previous installments both came out the same year. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2021/3/13/schedule-update monthly 0.5 2022-04-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1615644868030-ZM59OZMV1IT3C9DX0V3G/%28Temporary%29+Logo.jpg Blog - Schedule Update Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that. Hello, everyone. This may not be the first post of 2020 2.0 (as it is right now, anyway) that I had planned to put out, but I had to make the best of the situation that carried over into 2021 on here. A lot has happened since the previous update, so I will provide a brief epilogue of sorts to Part 1 before moving on to Part 2. Even though the vaccine did start arriving before 2021 officially began, that did not stop the delays from happening. Before I get to that, there is one that I forgot to mention last time. Back in Update #6, I mentioned Soul had been set for a theatrical release on November 20th, 2020, and they had planned to go through with it. I realize I forgot to mention this in Update #7. They changed the plan, and put it straight on Disney+ instead. You may remember that I’ve mentioned the Premier Access thing with that where they charge you 30 bucks to watch a movie on Disney+. They did this with Mulan because they didn’t have a choice in the matter. I had believed that they’d kept their word on it being a one-off thing. It seemed to be a one-off thing in regards to strictly putting it on Disney+ and charging you an additional price on top of that of the service itself. That was only temporary, as they eventually did make it available for free three months later. Surprisingly, they also gave it a Blu-Ray release, which I don’t think anyone was expecting. It was a welcome surprise, though. With Soul, even though they chose to forego a theatrical release for that as well, they did not do the Premier Access approach they did with Mulan. Instead, they put Soul up on Disney+ on Christmas Day… for free. On top of that, it’s getting a Blu-Ray release as well. Now, they’ve decided to try something a little different. They’re doing Premier Access alongside a theatrical release, and they’re not the only ones doing this sort of thing, but I’ll get back to that in just a moment. The one they’re trying this approach with is their latest animated film, called Raya and the Last Dragon, which was just recently released. This was actually another one originally set for 2020 (five days after the last planned theatrical release date for Soul, in fact). They then originally bumped it back to March 12th, 2021, but then on December 10th, 2020, Disney’s Investor Day event happened, and a lot of big news came out of it. One of the announcements was that it was bumped up a week to the date that ultimately stuck, along with them trying the simultaneous release strategy. Anyone who wants to pay an additional 30 bucks just so they can see it right away in the comfort of their home, you can do that. Anyone who wants to go to a theater to see it (which I’ll see if I can do), you can do that. It does ultimately go the same way it did with Mulan, though: It’s available for Premier Access for two months before being made free the following month, with a Blu-Ray release to follow sometime later. Before we go to Part 2, there are two more that need to be mentioned. The last two noteworthy movies originally set for a theatrical release in 2020 (that weren’t previously bumped out) were Free Guy and Death on the Nile, the latter of which was mentioned last time on a couple occasions. Originally scheduled for July 3rd, 2020, Free Guy (starring Ryan Reynolds as a non-playable character (NPC for short) who discovers he’s in a video game and wants to do something more than what he was programmed to do) was bumped to December 11th, 2020. Then back in November, both that and Death on the Nile (which by that point had been scheduled for the following week on December 18th, 2020) were pulled until further notice. However, they did receive new dates a few weeks later. Free Guy is now set for May 21st, 2021, and Death on the Nile is now set for September 17th, 2021. Now on to Part 2. Around that same time, something that you could say would have been at the very least an Honorable Mention on my Most Anticipated List of 2021, if not actually made the list, was also pulled until being rescheduled not long after. It is currently slated for release on April 16th, 2021, and is the latest video game adaptation. After the trailer that recently dropped, I think this absolutely could have had a chance of making the list, and that is Mortal Kombat. This is where it gets interesting, but also a little bit complicated for those who might not be following this as much as I have. Warner Bros., the studio behind Mortal Kombat and several others I have mentioned previously, like Dune for example, had announced around that time that for pretty much their entire slate for 2021, they would be releasing their films on the dates they currently have set for them in theaters, but they’ll also be made available simultaneously on the streaming service HBO Max that same day. They actually started this with Wonder Woman 1984 on Christmas Day, and it worked out really well for them. There is a catch, though: They give you a month to watch it before they remove it. Obviously, it’s not permanent. They just want to strictly focus on a theatrical run after that. Their movies will still receive a traditional home media release, upon which they will add them back. It’s just that not all theaters have reopened yet, but the ones that are they’ll put them in, so those who feel safe going back to a theater can watch one there, and those who don’t quite feel safe yet can watch it at home, so it’s a win-win situation for those interested. As long as you get HBO, you should have access to HBO Max already. A couple weeks ago, it was announced that Paramount would be doing a similar thing with their streaming service, formerly known as CBS All Access, which has now been rebranded as Paramount+. Back in Part 1, I had originally mentioned that The SpongeBob Movie: Sponge on the Run would be on that service, but now it seems to be coming to VOD as well after all. I had mentioned that at the time, but now it seems to have been made official. In other words, it will actually be getting a Blu-Ray release later, which is indeed a “Sweet Victory” for me. Longtime SpongeBob fans will appreciate that reference. It wasn’t much longer before the release happened, either; the service itself launched a little over a week ago on March 4th.* Now, that movie received a theatrical release in Canada, as well as an international Netflix release, but it will be on the same streaming service as bigger movies that will receive a theatrical release here. I felt like mentioning that first since this news came out around the same time. That, and it was a sigh of relief for me. Now on to the bigger news surrounding Paramount+. The approach they’re taking is similar to Warner’s, except Paramount is putting their movies out in theaters first. After a certain period of time, though, then they’ll put them on the service. After 30 days, they’ll put less high-profile movies on there. As for the bigger ones (examples being Mission: Impossible 7 and A Quiet Place Part II), it’s 45 days. For the home media release period, though, at this time, I do not know how that factors in, but I will be sure to elaborate in a later update once I do. One more thing before I close this portion out before updating further below. This regards a change of plans on my part. This was something I also originally mentioned in Update #6. I had announced that I would be expanding to shows as well. That part has not changed, only the one I have decided to start with. I mentioned I had initially felt like waiting until the shows from Marvel Studios started rolling out before deciding to start covering shows in addition to movies, the first of their shows being WandaVision. At the time I made the initial announcement, I had changed my mind upon seeing Season 1 of The Mandalorian, as Season 2 was about to premiere a few weeks later at the end of October, whereas WandaVision had been scheduled for December. Ultimately, they bumped WandaVision into January, which of course made 2020 the first year where Marvel Studios was unable to put out anything, especially after their Phase Four slate of movies had been pushed out to hopefully kick off this year. In general and on the TV side of things, however, Phase Four did officially kick off with this show. Only in terms of movies has it not, although the date for Black Widow has not been affected further. Even so, rest assured, I will continue to monitor it and I will mention it if it is.** I have now decided to go back to the initial plan of having WandaVision be the first show I cover after all. This is for a few reasons. The first is that at the time of this new update post going up, they’ve given us a break for a week, as WandaVision has officially finished, and their next show in this initial lineup is upon us: The Falcon and the Winter Soldier. The second reason is because it doesn’t feel like the right time for me to cover The Mandalorian, especially given recent events. Let me put it this way: The relationship between the Star Wars fanbase and Disney has been fractured yet again, as everyone associated with Lucasfilm or Disney is being slammed over what happened… and saying fractured rather than shattered may sound generous. However, it is somewhat true, because The Mandalorian was the one thing that allowed any goodwill to be given to Disney in regards to Star Wars. That’s the furthest I’m willing to go into that here, so in regards to controversies, I have spoken. The third reason, and this is for scheduling purposes, is that it might be easier to start with something like WandaVision anyway, because it’s a miniseries, rather than an ongoing one like The Mandalorian. Plus, with it being a series set within the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and the start of Phase Four, I’ll be able to cover it sooner, but I still have a few movies to review first to wrap up my reviews of The Infinity Saga. In closing, folks… Rather than do a post regarding a review schedule for this year, since the release schedule could change at any moment, I may do something a little different, at least for the next post (not counting Part 3 of this saga or any reviews). The next post might be a little bit of a review schedule and a little bit of a Catch-Up List, because there are quite a few 2020 movies I had intended to see and review, but did not initially get to. As for being a review schedule, while it will still include franchises, for the time being, it’s more to ensure that I’ve covered them, regardless of whether or not the new installments in those franchises are released as planned. Near, if not at the top of the list, are the aforementioned Infinity Saga reviews, which are as follows: Avengers: Infinity War, Ant-Man and the Wasp, Captain Marvel, Avengers: Endgame, and Spider-Man: Far From Home. I hope to get those out in the very near future, because the pandemic has put me on hiatus long enough. So expect those reviews soon, folks, and I’ll see you there. *The way they announced that date was perfect. Two words: Super Bowl. **Should that happen yet again, this means a domino effect will have happened three times. This basically means that with it being the first movie in Phase Four, whenever it’s been bumped further out, so has every movie following it. It could even lead to a date swap, which happened last time. ——————————————————————————————————————— UPDATE #1 (March 27th, 2021): As of today, it has now been a month since the beginning of Part 2 went up. As usual, quite a bit has happened in between updates, but some of it is actually good this time, some of it you could say is good, bad, or neutral (depending on perspective), and then we get to the usual bad part. I will go over the good part first, because I’ve been waiting for this moment to happen for so long. For the second time, Regal is coming back. It is re-reopening, if you will. Starting this Friday, April 2nd, they’ll slowly start coming back (hopefully for real this time). They announced that they would reopen for the release of Godzilla vs. Kong, which arrives this coming Wednesday, March 31st. They also stated that by a couple Fridays later (meaning April 16th), they should have more locations opened back up in time for Mortal Kombat, which is set to open that same week. Unfortunately, the Regal in my area was not on the initial lineup. Hopefully, mine is by the time Mortal Kombat comes out. While we’re on the subject of the theaters themselves, with movies like those two and going through the rest of their slate this year, as mentioned previously, Warner Bros. has a plan in place for next year. Their intention is two-fold. In 2022, they plan to strictly return to theaters, but then have an exclusivity window of 45 days from the theatrical release. If you feel that gives you mixed signals, I understand, because it was confusing for me at first as well. How I look at it is this: They plan to put their movies out in theaters first, and then put them up on HBO Max (I presume; I don’t believe they mentioned that last part, but considering their strategy for their 2021 slate is to put them up on HBO Max the same day as the theatrical release, it wouldn’t be surprising if it turns out they are). Basically, I view these approaches as a response to those of their competition. Their 2021 slate having a simultaneous release is a response to Disney+ doing it, except the main difference is that Disney+ isn’t doing it for everything like they are. Disney has only moved a few of theirs to Disney+ for free, and some they’re doing the simultaneous release tactic for as well. This leads to my next two points, and we’ll come back around to another, so keep these next couple parts in mind, folks. For the longest time, Kevin Feige of Marvel Studios was fighting to keep a theatrical release for the first movie in Phase Four of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which is Black Widow. Ultimately, he persisted for as long as he could… but alas, it is now among those being given a simultaneous release. Not only that, it was bumped another couple months. Most recently set for May 7th, it has now been bumped to July 9th. For those who feel safe going out to a theater, you can. For those who don’t quite feel ready yet, but still intend to see it as soon as possible, you have Disney+ for that. The only downside for the latter is if you are already subscribed to Disney+, you’ll have to pay an extra 30 bucks to watch it on top of the subscription fee. There is one part to this tactic that I’ve managed to overlook whenever I’ve had to bring it up: For those who choose Premier Access, once you pay that extra 30 bucks, you have access to the movie as long as you remain a subscriber. Otherwise, it’ll initially be on there for two months (example: Mulan was put up on there in September, and stayed there until November), and then once it hits home media (which in that case, was December), it won’t be long before it’s added back. In the case of Black Widow, however… I am doing what I usually do for the movies: See it in theaters as soon as possible, and then do the same for getting the Blu-Ray when it comes out. I haven’t missed a single MCU movie in theaters, and I am not starting now. There is something else regarding these movies, but I’ll get back to that in just a moment. However, we are still on the subject of Disney for what’s in between, starting with another simultaneous release, so Disney does still have something coming out in theaters in May. That would be Cruella, which is set for May 28th, but there is one problem: It’s set to open against A Quiet Place Part II. Regardless, this was probably a safer bet for them if they wanted to even have a chance of competing with Paramount. There is one other noteworthy announcement in regards to Disney+ for this update, but it is one that will actually be going straight to Disney+ for free. If that sounds familiar, it’s because another division of Disney has had to do this once before: They had to forego a theatrical release and send it to streaming. This is now the second movie in a row that they’ve had to do this with. They did it with Soul a few months ago, and now their latest project as well. That would be Pixar’s Luca. Originally set for a theatrical release on June 18th, it is still arriving on that date, but on Disney+ instead. The best part of this is that it’ll be on there for free. Now back to those that are still currently set for a theatrical release, starting with July. Since Black Widow was bumped to the 9th, the next MCU installment, Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, which had most recently been set for that date, has now been bumped to September 3rd. Surprisingly, only half a domino effect happened this time. At this moment, Eternals (which prior to switching places in the Phase Four movie lineup was set to open after Black Widow, followed by Shang-Chi) is still set for release on November 5th. The next one in line following these two, even before they switched, was the third Spider-Man movie, now titled Spider-Man: No Way Home. Speaking of which, the reason why I never mentioned that during Part 1 is because of this (as mentioned when I closed out Part 1): Because its original date was still set during 2021, everything originally scheduled for as early as 2021 would be covered in Part 2. Even though it did have its date bumped throughout 2020, it was being saved for Part 2. Now that we are on Part 2, I can go into it here. While that technically applied to Shang-Chi as well, in order for the domino effects that happened to be explained more easily, I felt like I had to mention it. There was one other exception (but I mentioned this towards the end of Part 1). It originally had two dates in 2020, before being bumped into this year. That would be The King’s Man. I felt like I had to acknowledge that before moving on further, but I'll get back to that movie to close out this update. However, before we do, on to August. This is one of two that had actually been pulled back in November, then they received new dates a few weeks later, and recently they were bumped again. Previously set for May 21st, Free Guy (Ryan Reynolds’s new movie) is now set for August 13th. The other one was previously set for September 17th, 2021, that being Death on the Nile, but was bumped further out into early 2022. There is one that I haven’t mentioned yet that actually had a date originally scheduled for November 13th, 2020, before being bumped to Free Guy’s current date, only to then be bumped to a little over a month before Death on the Nile’s new date. This new one was announced a few days ago. Death on the Nile is set for February 11th, and this one, called Deep Water, is set for January 14th. Having been bumped out into 2022, this will be director Adrian Lyne’s return to filmmaking after what will soon be a 20-year hiatus. Up until now, he hadn’t directed one movie since Unfaithful back in 2002. It seems he found the perfect project for him to come back with: An erotic thriller, which will hopefully be way better than the last one I saw, which came out the same year as that movie.* With this one, however, it’s being described as an erotic psychological thriller. His filmography has a bit of both, with films like 9 1/2 Weeks, Fatal Attraction, and Jacob’s Ladder. Therefore, I can see why he chose something like this. Since I’ve seen quite a few psychological thrillers, this shouldn’t be a problem for me. I’ll be sure to update further on this one if and/or when necessary. But before we get to those two thrillers that kick off next year, we go back around to the last noteworthy movie of this year, which hopefully comes out this time. Back to The King’s Man, it is currently set for December 22nd. Here’s the thing… Spider-Man: No Way Home is also set for close to Christmas, being set for December 17th. There are two things worth mentioning, one for each. Once I go over these, I will go over what I believe should happen in order for them to have a chance of doing well. With The King’s Man, this delay will place it over two years since its original date, which came a few months before the pandemic even started. As for Spider-Man: No Way Home, it was originally set for July 16th, then was bumped to November 5th (which is where Eternals is currently set to open, as mentioned earlier), before being bumped to where it is now. Although it was bumped out of the date ultimately given to Eternals, it has some breathing room, but not nearly enough. Compare that to the space between Shang-Chi and Eternals, which is close to two months. That is a decent enough amount. Unless Spider-Man is bumped a bit further out, Eternals will overwhelm it, which is the last thing Kevin Feige and Marvel Studios want to happen, let alone Sony. While it is true that there is precedent for that (having Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk open a few weeks apart), I highly doubt that would work out twice. So here’s what I would do. I would keep The King’s Man (it’s been delayed long enough), but bump out Spider-Man. Yes, a domino effect would be inevitable, but Eternals needs some space between it and Spider-Man, and so do audiences who have been following the franchise since the beginning. Because said domino effect would affect Phase Four of the MCU even further (minus the shows on Disney+), the rest of the film slate after Spider-Man begins in 2022, so I’ll be saving that for Part 3 where I go over everything. That includes everything scheduled for even further out. The time will come for that, folks, so bear with me. In the meantime, check back here for further updates as Part 2 continues. *That being Femme Fatale from Brian De Palma. For me personally, the less said about that movie, the better. ——————————————————————————————————————— UPDATE #2 (April 9th, 2021): Almost two weeks later, and I have enough material for another update, folks. Since the first two things I will be going over here follow up from where I started last time, I’ll just go right into this one. Last time, I mentioned how Regal was coming back for the second time (and hopefully for real this time). Godzilla vs. Kong was set to open four days later on March 31st. Regal had announced that they would reopen for its release two days later on April 2nd. Unfortunately, my local Regal was not on that list. However, the company had also said that by the 16th (so next Friday), they should have more opened back up in time for Mortal Kombat, which at that time, was also set for release next Friday. On March 30th, the day before Godzilla vs. Kong was released, these first two points were announced. First, my local Regal’s reopening date was bumped back a week. Originally set for next Friday, April 16th, it has been bumped to the following Friday, April 23rd. Then that same day, Mortal Kombat’s release date was also bumped back a week. Ironically enough, its original date was also April 16th, and so it was moved to the same date as my Regal’s reopening. It may not be as big a movie as something like Godzilla vs. Kong, but it’s still a good choice that people would still turn up for. Plus, by the time it comes out, Regal would still gradually announce more reopening dates, as is to be expected for the next few weeks. Next we have updates for three major releases from Paramount, all of which were just announced today: The G.I. Joe prequel Snake Eyes, the long-awaited Top Gun: Maverick (again), and Mission: Impossible 7. I will start with the more positive one, which surprisingly, is actually Snake Eyes. It’s the latest case of a movie being bumped up for once, which has been a rare occurrence compared to one being bumped back. Back in July, this one had been pulled from the schedule while the studio looked for a new date. The following month, they reached one, and it was rescheduled for October 22nd, 2021. Flash forward to today, and it was actually bumped up to July 23rd, 2021, with confirmation for a theatrical release, though it is certainly possible that it could see a Paramount+ release as well, given their streaming tactic I mentioned last time. Now for the ones being bumped back. With Top Gun: Maverick, which was most recently scheduled for July 2nd, 2021, it has now been bumped to November 19th, 2021. Given how it’s one of those that’s possibly been delayed the most times, don’t expect this one to hold for very long, either, folks. Regardless of when it ultimately arrives in theaters, one thing is for certain. It will receive a Paramount+ release, and with it being a bigger release, it will be made available on the service 45 days later. As for Mission: Impossible 7, this one actually has something in common with the other two. It was originally planned for release on July 23rd, 2021, where Snake Eyes ultimately ended up. Then it was given the aforementioned November date now assigned to Top Gun: Maverick. It has now been moved to May 27th, 2022, thus giving it a Memorial Day Weekend release. Compared to Top Gun: Maverick, this date feels more likely to hold, but not by much. However, as with that, it’ll be made available on Paramount+ following its first 45 days in theaters. To close out this update, we go to a different studio and a different streaming service. Starting with their 2022 release slate, Sony has partnered up with Netflix for a five-year deal. How the deal works is as follows: Sony will put their movies out in theaters first. Then once they arrive on home media, they’ll premiere on Netflix, which will be the official streaming home of Sony’s feature films from 2022 through 2026. What happens from there remains to be seen*. As always, check back here for further details on that and more. *At the moment, anyway. ——————————————————————————————————————— Schedule Update #2, Update #3 (May 16th, 2021): A little over a month later, and I have material for yet another update. Last time, I closed the update out with some streaming news. Fittingly enough, said material for this one will focus pretty much exclusively on that. My first point and my final point for this update both tie back to my second-to-last point in the previous update. The first point here focuses on something actually being moved to Paramount+, thus foregoing a theatrical release entirely (this sort of thing is nothing new at this point, and will probably continue to happen with how long our predicament persists). The final point here is something I view as a sort of response to their 45-day theatrical window strategy, but more on that later. Now, folks, let’s start with what we have here. Our latest victim of the theatrical release cancellation is something that chances are a majority of you are perhaps unfamiliar with. This is something that I was genuinely looking forward to for quite some time, for two reasons. The first and main one is actually the premise, and the second is the talent involved. The movie, titled Infinite, is a sci-fi action thriller directed by Antoine Fuqua (Training Day, Olympus Has Fallen, the Equalizer films) and starring Mark Wahlberg as a man who has hallucinations that he discovers are actually visions that he’s had in various past lives. More often than not, the main thing that’s a deciding factor of whether or not a movie piques my interest is actually the premise, followed by who’s involved with it. Whether it’s the director, the writer, or the cast is interchangeable from there, as it depends on whose names I hear about first. Although there are exceptions (like, say, if someone like Arnold Schwarzenegger is involved, that’s a case where anyone involved gets me interested first), as previously stated, it’s usually the premise. So with this one, I really was looking forward to Infinite because of that. Unfortunately, it was bumped to Paramount+, with a release date set for June 10th. Sadly this is also the latest case of there being cause for concern as well, because with less than a month before it’s released, the marketing has been virtually nonexistent for this, which can be viewed as a big red flag that the studio practically had no faith in the movie. That being said, I’m still interested to see what it has to offer, because Mark Wahlberg has a solid supporting cast to back him up. However, when I eventually do get around to seeing it, it’s better I go into more detail with them in the review. Moving on from Paramount+ to Disney+ for my next point, we have another case of their simultaneous release strategy, where the movie in question gets released in theaters and on Disney+ (with Premier Access, of course) on the same day. For this one, we have Jungle Cruise. The reason why this approach was taken again here is because theaters in other countries like Brazil and other international markets remain closed due to the Delta variant running rampant in said markets. It seems to have not been as severe for the domestic markets, so it looks like the release date of July 30th is going to hold for this one, only there’s an additional option now to watch it for those who don’t feel safe going back to the theaters yet. To bring this update full circle, we go back to both services for my final point. As I alluded to earlier, Disney announced something that I viewed as a response to Paramount putting their movies out in theaters first, and then making them available on Paramount+ after 45 days. That announcement was that they’re basically doing the same thing with two other upcoming movies, those being Free Guy and Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings. They stated that they’re committing to having them in theaters only for 45 days, and then put them out on Disney+ afterwards. Given how predictable it is at this point for studios to try each others’ strategies, it would not be surprising in the least if everyone decides to try this, so whether or not that does indeed happen, check back here for further updates. ——————————————————————————————————————— https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2020/6/21/thoughts-on-tremors-1990 monthly 0.5 2020-11-29 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1592760321463-HBXIZFI9EYS5AP0M4X6T/%28Thoughts+On%29+Tremors.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Tremors (1990) Image courtesy of moviemania.io Hello, everyone. As I hinted at in the previous review, where I covered The Prestige, there were two movies I added to the list at the last minute due to the fact that they were about to be removed from the streaming services they were on. Therefore, I decided to cover them first. Now that I've reviewed the first one with The Prestige, here’s the other one. This one is actually a creature feature, as is the subject of at least one review coming very soon. You can probably guess what one of them is if you go by the poster, which feels like a parody of it.* It also feels like it’s honoring 50s and 60s B-movies. That should also tell you that this movie in a way is a horror comedy. It has a mostly lighthearted tone, with some dark moments here and there. However, although it is bloody at points, you don’t see most of the kills themselves, but just the aftermath. Ladies and gentlemen, let’s dig in, as I present my review of Tremors. The story is set in the fictional small desert town of Perfection, Nevada. Two handymen, Val and Earl, grow tired of constantly getting jobs that provide minimal money and decide to head to Bixby, the closest town over. They ultimately have no choice but to head back when they discover that some mysterious creature has started picking off the residents. On top of that, their only way out of town is cut off, along with their phone lines. With the help of a graduate student studying seismology, they realize that there’s more than one of these monsters, and that they hunt by movement. They can burst from the ground at any moment to attack their prey and drag them under. While fighting to save their town from these monsters, which come to be dubbed “Graboids,” they have to outsmart them however they can. What Worked: The acting is really good. For obvious reasons, I’ll start with the biggest name first,** and that is Mr. Six Degrees himself, Kevin Bacon, as Val. With everything I’d seen him in prior to this, I did not expect him to be as funny as he was at times. He genuinely surprised me, especially considering this is one of the rare times where he doesn’t play a villain. He also gets one of the best PG-13 F-bombs ever, but I’ll get more into that in a moment. Then we have Fred Ward (The Right Stuff) as Earl. While he does give a very solid performance on his own, I particularly enjoyed his chemistry with Kevin Bacon. They really felt like friends to me. Then there’s Finn Carter as Rhonda, in what would be her best known role within a career which, aside from five movies (including this one), mostly consisted of television work before she retired in 2005. It’s easy to see why this was ultimately the role that she became best known for. The presence of her character (a seismologist) may seem like a plot convenience at first, but then over the course of the movie, she ends up being very crucial in fighting back against the Graboids. There are three members of the supporting cast here that are most noteworthy. The first two play the Gummers, a married couple who happen to be survivalists. The husband, Burt, is played by Michael Gross (who was known at the time for playing the Dad on Family Ties), and he is also the only actor to be in all seven movies*** plus the TV series. His wife, Heather, is played by Reba McEntire in her film debut. In terms of singer-turned-actors, she’s actually pretty good in this. These two were the highlight of the movie because they get one of the best scenes. It involves them getting to exercise their Second Amendment rights. Seriously, they have so many guns that I was surprised this movie wasn’t set in Texas. She also contributes the song “Why Not Tonight,” which plays over the credits. Though I’m not into country music myself, the song does fit the movie quite well. As for the rest of the music, I’ll delve more into that a little bit later. The other one worth noting is someone I did not expect to see in this. That would be Ariana Richards; if that name sounds familiar, that’s because she would go on to play Lex in Jurassic Park. The script is solid, balancing the comedy and horror enough to where one doesn’t overwhelm the other. It really shows in the tone, which, as mentioned in the intro, is mostly lighthearted, with some occasionally dark moments. However, those moments still don’t detract from the tone, because they’re meant to show how much of a threat these creatures are. With the overall consistency of the tone, it makes the pace consistent as well. It doesn’t slow down once the characters know what they’re up against, and it just gets more intense from there. Where this movie really stands out is with the effects. They’re very practical, because they use the techniques that were common back then, namely animatronics, puppets, and miniatures. They feel that much more authentic as a result. What makes this more impressive is that they were done by ADI (Amalgamated Dynamics, Inc.) when they were just starting out. The company would later go on to create more creature effects for films like Mars Attacks! and the two Alien vs. Predator movies. The designs of the Graboids here look really good, even if one can easily be reminded of the Sandworms from Dune in regards to their appearance. Thus, this is one of those times where a low-budget movie looks like it cost more than it did. A more recent example came out earlier this year… back when we still had the theaters. That one was within the same range as this. This one was budgeted at just 10 million, yet it feels like double, if not triple that. What Didn’t Work: My only real issue with this is with the score. As a whole, it’s fine, but it feels like two different composers worked on it. Ironically, that kind of was the case here. There are some Western beats to it, which come from Ernest Troost, whose score for the most part ended up not being used. Aside from that, he did also provide the score for some of the darker moments early on. Then there are some intense pieces of music to fit those moments in the rest of the movie, which come from Robert Folk, although he ended up being uncredited. Throughout the movie, you can tell which is which. It doesn’t feel like one type of music naturally transitions into another like it would if it were the same composer for the whole movie. It didn’t take me out of the movie, but it’s worth mentioning nonetheless. A similar case can be made for some of the language in this. It’s not as noticeable, but you can also tell that what were supposed to be F-bombs were dubbed over in post in order to bump this up from an R to a PG-13. This is a case of a movie being only allowed one, although this technically got away with two, since one is hard to make out. The one that they did keep intact is the one I mentioned earlier, and it actually works because it’s one that’s meant to be funny, and of course it is. Overall: Tremors is a fun tribute to B-movies from the old days, and at times it even feels like one. It has just the right balance of both frightening and funny, solid performances, an equally solid script, and a consistent tone and pace to match. Yes, it does have an absurd premise, with worm-like creatures that pop out of the ground when you least expect it. However, that’s also what makes the movie as fun as it is, because it just takes that absurdity, and runs with it. It’s just as fun if you watch it as a monster movie on its own, and it can also work if you watch it as a horror comedy. Regardless of which mindset you have in deciding to watch it, it’s still very entertaining. In fact, the excellent visual effects alone, which hold up very well today, are worth the price of admission. *I’m not the only one who picked up on that. Also, that movie was one of the Fourth of July-themed movies I had planned to cover. **He’s in a couple other movies I plan to review very soon as well. One of them I definitely cannot wait to do, and I’m just going to leave it at that. ***This one is the only one to receive a theatrical release, as the subsequent installments have all been direct-to-video. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2020/6/21/thoughts-on-the-prestige-2006 monthly 0.5 2020-07-12 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1592760029691-YIWCF0OSOJG8MHJCSUJY/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Prestige.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Prestige (2006) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com Hello, everyone. Although I did plan to cover at least one Fourth of July-themed movie next, the subjects of both this review and the next one I had to add to the list at the last minute, as they were about to be removed from the services they were on, and I felt like it’d be better that I cover them now. These two had been among the endless list of movies I’ve been meaning to see, but haven’t gotten around to yet. I’d definitely been meaning to see this one, as it comes from the director of my Most Anticipated Movie of 2020 (which hopefully still comes out this year), that being Tenet. With this one, not only had it been among the few movies of his that I hadn’t seen, but it also is actually the first of his movies to be covered here. Ladies and gentlemen, I present my review of one of his more overlooked films, and that is Christopher Nolan’s The Prestige. Set in 19th Century London, Robert Angier and Alfred Borden assist in a magic trick that results in personal tragedy. One blames the other for what happened, and upon starting their own careers as magicians, they become bitter rivals both professionally and personally. Borden develops a particular trick that becomes so famous that Angier grows obsessed with discovering how he does it, and is determined to do it better. In doing so, their rivalry drives them to one-up each other as they begin to slowly ruin their careers and even their lives. What Worked: First of all, there is a great cast in this movie, all of whom give performances that, much like the movie itself, are often overlooked. Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale play Angier and Borden, respectively. In a way, it feels like they’re trying to one-up each other in terms of performances with these characters. They are both outstanding in this movie. Frequent Nolan collaborator Michael Caine* plays their mentor, John Cutter, who engineers stage tricks. He is also fantastic in this. The same is definitely true for Scarlett Johansson as Olivia Wenscombe, who becomes Angier’s assistant. It also is not their first time being in a movie about magicians. In her case, this was one of two in the same year she was in, and both times she worked with Hugh Jackman.** Someone who is often overlooked in general is Rebecca Hall, who made her breakthrough with this movie. She plays Borden’s wife Sarah, and although she’s not in it that much, a lot of the key dramatic aspects of the story involve her. There are two more actors who also play an important part in the narrative. Only one of them I can really talk about, though, because the other might be a bit of a spoiler. Even though both are only in the movie for a few minutes, they’re still really good in it. I’ll just say this for the actor I’m refraining from bringing up here. He’s also a famous musician. I’m leaving it at that because for those who are interested upon reading this review, it’s best you go into this not knowing who it is. Now for the one I can talk about, and that is Andy Serkis as Mr. Alley, who works for one of the other characters. Along with Rebecca Hall, I did not know he was in this going in, so it surprised me to see him. I also really liked him in this movie. He’s actually pretty funny. Anyone familiar with his more famous roles, such as Caesar and Gollum, might be surprised to see him outside of a motion capture suit. He does show up physically on occasion, like when he played Ulysses Klaue in Avengers: Age of Ultron and Black Panther. This is another example. Then there’s the script, written by Christopher Nolan himself, along with his brother Jonathan (who in addition to co-writing a few of his movies, also created the TV series Person of Interest and most recently Westworld). It’s nothing short of brilliant. It presents a very compelling story in a manner similar to how a magic act is performed. There are three parts: The Pledge (where you’re presented with an ordinary object or even a person), The Turn (where you see something extraordinary happen, and you’re trying to figure out how it happened), and then The Prestige (the hardest part, which is where you bring everything back around). I thought that was very clever, because you’re also shown three different points in time, with each representing each part of an act. Much like an act, it brings everything full circle, and how it does so is just as remarkable. There are so many twists and turns in this movie that you can’t wait to see what surprises come next. Then comes the biggest twist of all. It’s one of those twists that makes the movie more impactful if you go into it not knowing what it is. You won’t see it coming. The brilliance of the script also shows in Nolan’s direction, and it feels like he started to cement his status as one of the best filmmakers working today, but we just didn’t know it yet. The experience is enhanced further through the gorgeous cinematography from Wally Pfister, a frequent collaborator of Nolan's at the time; one of several, in fact, that worked on this. Not only that, but also the production design is equally stunning. What Didn’t Work: I only have a couple issues. Although it is very well edited for the most part, I did feel there was a small pacing issue, particularly in the beginning of the movie. However, once the conflict starts, it really gets going and doesn’t let up. The score from composer David Julyan, who worked with Christopher Nolan early on in his career on films like Memento, is not that memorable. It’s a shame, because he also scored The Descent (an excellent horror movie) and its sequel, and went on to score one of my favorite movies of the 2010s: The Cabin in the Woods. Aside from those, that’s really it. Overall: The Prestige is an excellent movie that sticks with you long after you see it, and it’s also one of those that really makes you think. I had heard that it is very overlooked when it comes to Christopher Nolan’s filmography, and now having finally seen it for myself, I completely understand. It’s not just the movie itself that not many people talk about, either, as both Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman deliver fantastic performances that also don’t get much attention. Although they are the standouts, the performances all around are very good. The story itself is compelling throughout, and seeing the conflict between Angier and Borden escalate over the course of the movie is just as engaging. This is evidence that even with his earlier work, Christopher Nolan is a genius when it comes to creating the perfect balance between entertaining and thought provoking. This is indeed one of his more complex films, so it may require multiple viewings to be able to catch some things you missed before. Though Inception might be more complicated because of how deep the story really goes, The Prestige isn’t too far off from that. The main reason why something like this takes more than one viewing is because of how it is structured. As mentioned earlier, there are three different points in time, and it goes through each one. However, it’s not shown in the way you might expect, because it uses a nonlinear narrative approach. Memento and Dunkirk used this, too, but in different ways. Having said that, it’s still entertaining enough to where you’ll want to revisit it because of how satisfying the experience is. In recent years, it has received more attention, and it absolutely deserves to. *They’ve worked on every film Christopher Nolan has directed since Batman Begins, which consist of: That movie, this one, The Dark Knight, Inception, The Dark Knight Rises, Interstellar, Dunkirk (in which he had an uncredited role; you only hear his voice, and it’s very brief), and he’s also about to be in Tenet. **And 2006 had three magician movies in one year. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/8/21/thoughts-on-titan-ae-2000 monthly 0.5 2020-06-14 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567988528076-SXPOK4OLR38HK5BGK12Q/%28Thoughts+On%29+Titan+A.E..jpg Blog - Thoughts on Titan A.E. (2000) Image courtesy of amazon.com Hello, everyone. Around this time last year, I covered a childhood favorite of mine with Tarzan for its 20th Anniversary. In my previous review, I covered another one, Dinosaur, for the same reason. The subject of this review is slightly different from those. It, too, is an animated movie, but rather than being animated in one format or another (be it hand-drawn like Tarzan was, or CGI like Dinosaur was), it’s a mix of both. Whereas Dinosaur was a combination of both live-action environments and CGI characters to inhabit them (thus giving it a photorealistic feel), this is a combination of mostly CGI animation with the main characters and a few environments being hand-drawn. There is one other huge similarity, though, particularly with Dinosaur: It deserves way more attention than it initially received. While I do maintain that those two movies should be held in much higher regard than they are (although Tarzan kind of is, but not by much), something I maintain even more is that the subject of this review is one of three animated sci-fi movies by Disney* that are criminally underrated. Coincidentally, they all came out just one year apart, too. Speaking of coincidence, this movie also focuses on survivors trying to find a new home. Instead of an area, it’s an entire planet. Folks, for this one, we’re going into the future, where Earth is taken away by a threat that almost demolishes our entire society along with it... and no, it’s not the coronavirus. As one of the taglines stated, “After Earth ends… the adventure begins.” Now, so does my review of Titan A.E., brought to us by animation icons Don Bluth and Gary Goldman. The story begins in the year 3028, where the human race has perfected deep space travel and encountered a variety of different aliens. One species composed of pure energy, known as the Drej, discovers our latest creation called “Project Titan,” which is actually a spacecraft. They then begin attacking Earth. However, Professor Sam Tucker, the head of the research team, is able to say goodbye to his son, Cale, before boarding the ship and making the jump to hyperspace. Meanwhile, Cale is on a separate ship. As humanity is evacuating, the mothership reaches Earth and with just one energy blast, the Drej not only completely obliterate Earth, but also the Moon. 15 years later, Cale, now a salvage worker, is found by Joseph Korso, captain of a ship known as the Valkyrie and an old friend of his father’s. Korso informs Cale that Sam encoded a map to the Titan into his ring before handing it down to him. The fate of humanity depends on the ship being found, as it might just hold the key to a new home. What Worked: I’ll start with the voice acting here, like I did with Dinosaur. Whereas that one didn’t really have any big names in it, this one does, with at least one A-lister, and he’s playing the hero, appropriately enough. Cale is voiced by Matt Damon, who by this time had established himself as an actor with Good Will Hunting** and Saving Private Ryan, and would go on to have many more high-profile projects, such as the Ocean’s Trilogy, the Bourne franchise, The Martian, and most recently Ford v Ferrari. With his performance in this, he brings his own natural likable personality to Cale, making you sympathize with him as a character in addition to his motivation. You see this in The Martian as well, where he gives one of his best performances in recent years. Another actor who is no stranger to sci-fi is Bill Pullman, who gave one of the best movie speeches ever as one of the best movie Presidents ever in Independence Day, as well as play Lone Starr (the parody of Han Solo) in one of his first movies: Spaceballs. Even though you don’t get an awesome speech from him here, he still plays the authority figure very well, as evidenced by Independence Day. However, you can also tell Korso doesn’t have the best intentions. He’s not so much a villain, although at points you do feel like he is. Going back to Bill Pullman’s performance, how he and Matt Damon convey their characters’ moral conflict actually feels genuine. Then we have the crew of the Valkyrie. The biggest name of the bunch is perhaps Drew Barrymore, who voices Akima Kunimoto, the pilot who also comes to be Cale’s love interest over the course of the movie. This would be one of two great female characters she would play that year, as the movie she did right after this featured another. She also plays off of Matt Damon really well, because they do have legitimate chemistry with each other. Speaking of chemistry, the next recognizable talent in this plays Gune, the chief scientist, and that is John Leguizamo. You may be more familiar with him from voicing Sid in the Ice Age franchise, or even more recent work like John Wick. For a lesser known role, he’s still really good here. In fact, one of the best scenes actually involves him, which is in the finale. Be on the lookout for it. I’ll just say this: It has a very subtle, but clever, setup courtesy of solid writing, which I will get to in a moment. The next one is the voice of Korso’s first mate, Preed, which is a slightly darker, but still relatively comedic, role than a more iconic character he voiced prior. That would be Nathan Lane, who you may instantly recognize as the voice of Timon in the original version of The Lion King. He still has that level of comedic timing here, and several humorous moments in this come from him. Then we have Janeane Garofalo as Stith, the munitions officer. This wouldn’t be the last time she’d venture into animation, as she would go on to voice Colette, the female chef, in Ratatouille. The last relatively well-known actor in the movie is also very prolific as a voice actor, and that is Ron Perlman as Sam. He has a great scene in the beginning of the movie, which is the one where he says goodbye to a 5-year-old Cale***. It’s not just the cast that’s solid. As hinted at earlier, it’s the script. It has three writers, all of whom went on to have greater success. Although he’s second-billed, I’ll start with John August, who right after this, would go on to co-write two surprisingly good action movies, also starring Drew Barrymore. His most recent project was co-writing Aladdin with director Guy Ritchie, which ended up being another huge surprise for me. The other two writers would collaborate on a sci-fi series which was short-lived, but went on to achieve cult status, called Firefly. The first writer credited is Ben Edlund, who was the producer on the show, and then the biggest name credited as a writer would go on to create it… Joss Whedon, who then went on to direct Serenity, the movie that followed the series. Of course, he would also direct The Avengers and its first sequel, Age of Ultron (both of which I have reviewed). In hearing some of the dialogue, it does sound like something that would come from them, an example being the scene with Gune mentioned previously. The two biggest things that stand out here are the same ones I said stood out with Dinosaur: The animation and the music. The animation style is stunning here, especially in a scene in a ring of ice. It’s one of the two most visually impressive scenes in the movie. The hand-drawn animation holds up really well, and you can tell it’s in the style of Don Bluth and Gary Goldman if you’ve seen any of their previous work. Examples such as The Secret of NIMH, All Dogs Go to Heaven, and Anastasia (the latter of which they did before this) come to mind. Of course, there’s also An American Tail and especially The Land Before Time. The animation for some of the characters, like Preed, is fantastic. It feels like something out of those movies. Some other highlights with the hand-drawn animation include other environments, like a scene on Sesharrim, home of a bat-like species called the Gaoul. This includes another great action scene involving a chase through a forest of hydrogen trees. It’s also intense, because they have to avoid touching the trees, as they explode if you do. The CGI animation is pretty solid, too, for the most part. The other visually impressive scene is not long before the ice ring scene. It involves creatures dubbed “space angels,” set to The Urge’s “It’s My Turn to Fly.” It’s another great scene because the creatures themselves look excellent, and the song, in addition to fitting the scene, is quite good. The music itself as a whole is really good, especially the score from Graeme Revell. Having heard it in the movie while watching it again after so long, I found this to be a pretty underrated score from him. As for the soundtrack, while it could have used some bigger names on it, it’s not bad. It does have some groups who might be familiar. One of them is the band Lit; you might not know the name, but maybe you know the song “My Own Worst Enemy.” They have a song on here. The biggest name on the soundtrack is Powerman 5000, who have had their songs featured in a lot of movies and video games, and still perform to this day. In fact, a fair amount of the groups on the soundtrack are still performing. Some even have a new album coming this year, and Powerman 5000 is one of them. What Didn’t Work: There are some plot points that are kind of predictable, and some CGI shots that may not look great now. However, that’s not to say they were so jarring they took me out of the movie; they didn’t, because everything else still held my attention. There is one other thing, but it can be considered a slight nitpick on my part. I haven’t really mentioned this before, so now’s the perfect time for me to establish it: Whenever I hear an awesome song in a trailer, I appreciate it even more when it’s used in the movie, so that way I can discover the song for myself upon seeing the title in the credits. Having seen this movie for the first time since it initially came out, I can confirm that this does not do that, unfortunately. It’s especially sad because there were three songs they used in the marketing, one very prominently, so you’d think they’d use it in the movie... but they don’t. For those who grew up in the 90s and early 2000s like myself, you may have fond memories of the song “Higher” by Creed. They used this song a lot in promoting this, only to not use it in the movie or even at least put it on the soundtrack. The latter would have been understandable, because they can’t use every song on the soundtrack in the movie. In fact, sometimes a song they still want to use they have no choice but to put in the credits. The other two songs were used in a different trailer, but both in the same one. I actually first discovered one of them because of it being used there. The first of the two is “We Are” by Vertical Horizon, and the second is “Leave You Far Behind” by Lunatic Calm, which would be used prominently in the marketing for Spider-Man, and was also on the soundtrack for The Matrix. Although it would have been nice to have at least the first two songs featured on the soundtrack, I can understand why they chose to use them in the promotional material. However, as awesome as these songs are, they did not really fit the marketing all that well here. They used the first two to try to establish the plot, and the third for an action scene. That’s what they were trying to do, but here is the problem: the trailers they’re used in give off two somewhat conflicting tones. The one with “Higher” feels like it was trying to sell this as a sci-fi movie about exploration and trying to find a new home, though it does have that to a degree. The one with “We Are” and “Leave You Far Behind,” on the other hand, feels like it was trying to sell this as a sci-fi action/adventure movie, which it also kind of is. In some cases, they also used the trailer voiceover that was common around that time in addition to the music. The only thing that really succeeded at was making the conflicting tones that much more obvious. In other words, it felt like the marketing team was not properly guided on how to promote this movie. It even applies to merchandise, too, because there was hardly any aside from novels and comics, and would have included a tie-in video game that was ultimately cancelled. It shows in how catastrophically this movie bombed, and it’s really unfortunate, considering how surprisingly good the movie itself is and how much it actually holds up. It just goes to show that marketing and merchandise, like a movie’s runtime, are more essential to proper execution than one may realize, and should be commended when done right, because the final product ends up benefiting greatly from it. Sadly, this is a case study for “How NOT to Market a Movie,” or “Marketing a Good Movie Gone Wrong.” Overall: Titan A.E. is one of those movies that flew under the radar, but didn’t deserve to. All these years later, it’s still criminally overlooked. It’s better than it’s given credit for, which is evident in the talent behind it. From a cast led by an A-lister like Matt Damon and a script co-written by Joss Whedon, to an impressive blend of hand-drawn animation and CGI animation from legends of the genre and very good music, this is something that should have a following. How and/or why it doesn’t, I have no idea. If you’re a fan of sci-fi, action, animation, or even any of the particular talent involved, this should be right up your alley. For example, Joss Whedon alone has a fanbase of his own, particularly for his work in TV, like the aforementioned Firefly. For anyone interested in checking this out that missed out on it the first time, it is worth a look. While it is a case of not being sold properly, it’s also a case of “Don’t Judge a Movie By Its Trailer.” There have been, and continue to be, movies that had marketing which was subpar at best and flat-out terrible at worst, but then they ended up being really good, and this one is no different. It’s one of the main reasons why the movie came and went upon release, and as a result, a main reason for it becoming so underrated, hence why it felt important to mention it. Had it played out differently, whether it did well or still bombed, it might have garnered more attention, perhaps enough to gain a following. *This one was originally Fox, but now technically Disney owns it, too, ever since they bought them. **For which he, along with co-star Ben Affleck, would win an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay. ***Fun Fact: Young Cale is voiced by Alex D. Linz, who also voiced Young Tarzan. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/1/27/thoughts-on-dinosaur-2000 monthly 0.5 2020-06-14 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1548617296901-VN7AR8CUBC3U81RZJHUJ/%28Thoughts+On%29+Dinosaur.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Dinosaur (2000) Image courtesy of moviemania.io Hello, everyone. In keeping with the subject of the last review, Deep Impact, I am continuing to cover good movies for now. Deciding to start now proved to be perfect timing, because it coincided with the 20th Anniversary of another childhood favorite of mine. It’s also the same timeframe as the previous one. Speaking of which, for the first time since then, we go to the Wonderful World of Disney. Last year, I covered Tarzan, which was one of two Disney movies I grew up with the most. This year, I can finally cover the other one. This, too, has been one that I would always hold close to my heart. Whereas Tarzan was set in the 1890s, for this one, we go back much further… around 65 million years. Tarzan may have marked the end of an era (that being the Disney Renaissance), but this one was right in the middle of one. This came out at a time in the 1990s going into the 2000s where whenever children saw these creatures in something, they ate it up… and I would know, because I was one of them. Folks, I finally bring you a review I’ve been waiting to do, and that is for Disney’s Dinosaur. Following an attack by a vicious Carnotaurus where an Iguanodon mother had to abandon her nest, only one egg remains. The egg travels* across several different areas before finally ending up on an island populated by a family of lemurs. The matriarch of the family, Plio, witnesses the egg hatch. She names the baby Aladar, and takes him in as her adopted son, the initial vehement objections from her father Yar notwithstanding. Many years later, Aladar has grown up, and it’s the night of the annual mating ritual for the lemurs. All seems peaceful once the ritual is over, but it is not to be. Not long after, a meteor shower occurs, during which a giant one impacts Earth. The ensuing shockwave destroys their home. The only ones who manage to escape are Aladar, Yar, Plio, her brother Zini, and her daughter Suri. Upon making it to the mainland, they set out in search of their new home. During their journey, they encounter a herd already on a journey of their own, looking for a place known as the Nesting Grounds, which should provide enough food for them to thrive, as well as sanctuary from what predators may be in their way. What Worked: Much like Tarzan, the animation is phenomenal in this movie, too. If you want an example of CGI animation done right, look no further than this. There is some live-action animation as well, which is basically the environments around the characters. You could say it’s photorealistic in a sense, then, because how they complement each other is excellent. This goes to show that CGI animation can work just as well as hand-drawn animation. What’s equally as important as having the animation stand out is having it benefit the story and characters. The characters genuinely feel like they have personality and life to them. It therefore allows you to see them express emotion. There are some scenes where you might just feel something, too, especially if you’ve seen this before, but not in a long time. Aside from the animation, the thing that makes this movie stand out the most is the music. There may not be any Phil Collins here, but you don’t need it. Sometimes a score is enough to suffice. In fact, the closest you get to actual lyrics is the background choir at certain points, most notably in the opening sequence that was used very prominently in the initial batch of marketing. In fact, the whole opening sequence was used as the teaser trailer. Something you’ll be surprised to know about the music, because you wouldn’t know it from hearing it in the movie, is this: The conductor of the choir famously heard in both versions of The Lion King’s opening sequence also worked on the music here. He would later reunite with James Newton Howard on Atlantis: The Lost Empire, an underrated Disney movie. Even when the choir is not heard, James Newton Howard’s score is fantastic. He’s done so many great scores, this being among my favorites. Following this, he would go on to score Unbreakable, and collaborate with Hans Zimmer on Batman Begins, thus giving us the theme for The Dark Knight Trilogy. His score here, though, is one that hits all the right notes (no pun intended). There are some cues that leave you in shock and awe at what you’re seeing, some that are kind of depressing, some that are frightening, and some that just have a triumphant feel. Now let’s get to the characters themselves, starting with the voice acting. This was a point of contention when this movie came out, because it was during a time when dinosaurs were popular, but people were mostly used to them being vocalized through growls and roars, with The Land Before Time being a notable exception. One example that was particularly popular around the time of this movie’s release was Walking with Dinosaurs, a series which only had narration. This movie has legitimate voice acting in it, however, which was and still is Disney’s thing. For some, it may have been jarring to include it here, but I believe it helped distinguish it from the rest by solidifying that this is a Disney movie. The voice acting here is really good. It doesn’t have nearly as many big names as Tarzan did, but it has some definitely worth mentioning. Aladar is voiced by D.B. Sweeney, who would go on to voice a certain Airbender in The Legend of Korra**. He brings a sense of charisma and charm to Aladar, and certainly one of determination to keep everyone safe. That alone makes you want to root for him. One of the bigger names in this is Alfre Woodard, who voices Plio. She’s had more high-profile work as of late, most recently voicing Simba’s mother Sarabi in last year’s live-action version of The Lion King. She conveys the motherly love and compassion aspects of Plio very well. Another one is Ossie Davis (the voice of Yar), who had earlier played Eddie Murphy’s father in Dr. Dolittle. Yar is very compassionate on the inside, but prefers not to show it through a gruff demeanor. He and Alfre Woodard have very genuine chemistry as father and daughter. Then we get to one of my two favorite characters in the movie: Zini, voiced by Max Casella, perhaps best known for voicing Daxter in the Jak and Daxter games. In addition to being Plio’s brother, he’s also Aladar’s best friend. He and D.B. Sweeney are great at playing off each other, as they do deliver some solid banter between their characters, and it’s often pretty funny. Someone from the mid-to-late 2000s whose name you might recognize is Hayden Panettiere (yes, the same one who played the cheerleader from Heroes) as Suri. Even though she was younger at the time, she’s still good here, especially for a voice acting performance. One of the other relatively recognizable names here is Julianna Margulies as Neera, a female Iguanodon who takes an interest in Aladar. Prior to this, she was best known for ER, and would go on to bear witness to the famous line in Snakes on a Plane. She gives a very calm and gentle performance, which in turn gives Neera a very civil demeanor, especially compared to her brother, Kron***. Kron, by contrast, is ruthless, selfish, and very short-tempered. He’s also the dictator (I mean, leader) of the herd. If anything, you feel bad that Neera is related to him because of how unlikable he really is. There’s even one shot of him looking out at Aladar and Neera where it feels like he’s the embodiment of a character that doesn’t take too kindly to a loved one being in a relationship. It’s really surprising that they got Samuel E. Wright, the same voice actor as Sebastian from The Little Mermaid, to voice him. In other words, if Kron doesn’t frighten you, the Carnotaurs (as they’re called in the movie) and Raptors will. I’ll get to them in a second. The last two voice actors worth mentioning are Joan Plowright (who had a minor role in Last Action Hero) as Baylene and Della Reese (Touched by an Angel) as Eema. They’re both elderly, and yet you still care for them. Baylene is the last Brachiosaurus, and Eema is a slow mover for a Styracosaurus, which was similar to a Triceratops. Another reason to care for them is that they both feel like old friends. There is one more character, which is Kron’s lieutenant, Bruton, but he isn’t in the movie that much. However, he is more likable compared to him. Then we get to the best character in the movie: an Ankylosaurus named Url, who’s basically Eema’s pet, as he’s pretty much the dinosaur equivalent of a dog in this movie. There’s a running gag of sorts with him holding something in his mouth, wanting to play Fetch, and it’s hilarious. Dog lovers will most likely love him. Url is really the only one of the main characters who doesn’t speak. The rest are either background characters or the evil ones. There are some scary moments in this. Whenever the Carnotaurs show up, their presence alone is frightening. Then we get to the Raptors, who are less prominent, but their appearance still leaves an impact. There are two particular shots of them that stand out. One is a shot of a Raptor's eye, the other is when you get a good look at a Raptor’s mouth. The most intense scene doesn’t involve them. It’s actually the meteor shower scene. In a way, it’s also the saddest scene. At first, it has a gorgeous display across the night sky, but then it isn’t long before you realize something’s about to happen. If you thought the characters in Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom had it rough with their island being destroyed, you haven’t seen rough until you’ve seen this. There is one thing this movie does that I really appreciate. It goes full circle over the course of its runtime, which is rare. Usually, it takes multiple movies to tie up loose ends in a satisfying way. It’s unbelievable that they were able to pull it off over the course of just one here. All I’ll say is this: Keep the first few minutes in mind. A couple more things to mention: This movie’s cinematography is fantastic. It still looks great today. It’s also edited very well. For a movie that’s only 82 minutes, it goes by quickly, and doesn’t feel rushed once. In fact, the runtime it has is actually perfect. It allows the story to be told properly, and keep the tone and pace consistent. Overall: Dinosaur, like Tarzan before it, holds up remarkably well for a movie that’s now 20 years old. Prior to watching it for the first time in so long, I was unsure if it would hold up and be as great as I remember. Having seen it after all this time for this review, I can gladly say that even now, I love this movie. The animation still looks great, especially by photorealistic standards. The voice acting is really good, with some genuine chemistry and occasional banter between the characters, who for the most part you can get behind. It has a compelling story with the right amount of humor and emotion to carry it, with some suspense along the way whenever the Carnotaurs and the Raptors show up. The score hits all the right beats, making it one of James Newton Howard’s finest works, and one of my personal favorites (“The Egg Travels” alone makes it worth a listen). It’s one of the best shot, as well as best edited, movies when it comes to family films. It may be short, but it takes the time it has to tell its story and uses it perfectly. It never feels rushed, it just naturally progresses from beginning to end, with both one of the best opening sequences I’ve seen in an animated movie and one of the best endings to one. The experience of watching it is something I’ll never forget, and I guarantee that neither will you, whether it’s your first time or not. *Which is the name of what you could say is the theme for this movie. **Yes, folks, he was the voice of the adult version of Aang. I’m just as surprised as you are. ***Pronounced “Krone.” https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2020/2/2/thoughts-on-deep-impact-1998 monthly 0.5 2020-05-17 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1580688632685-GR7DVD7H5YK1PBN34TYQ/%28Thoughts+On%29+Deep+Impact.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Deep Impact (1998) Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. Having gone in-depth on a cinematic abomination last time, it’s back to the usual format on this one… for now. This time, we go from one disaster to another, except one is a disaster, while the other features one. This one came during a time where studios would release two competing movies (which does still happen now, but not as often), sometimes in the same year. This one also came at a time where for two years in a row, competing studios released their own movie about the same disaster. In 1997, it was Volcano and Dante’s Peak. Then in 1998, it happened again, with Armageddon and the subject of this review. Although these two have a slight difference (one being about asteroids, the other being about a comet), they’re still more or less the same plot. Ladies and gentlemen, brace for impact… or rather, Deep Impact. On the night of May 8th, 1998 (which, ironically, is the very same day the movie came out), teenager Leo Biederman is with the school astronomy club when he spots something that is unlike anything known to be in the solar system. The group sends a photo to their adviser, who immediately knows what the object is, but is unable to warn them. The following year, a news team over at MSNBC is investigating what at first seems to be completely unrelated news: The sudden resignation of Alan Rittenhouse, the Secretary of the Treasury. However, while chasing this story, reporter Jenny Lerner is given information about a woman named “Ellie,” which could merely be the name of a mistress. Even more suspicious is the fact that the name was also brought to the President’s attention, but upon meeting with the President himself, it’s revealed that the name is an acronym: “E.L.E.” (Extinction Level Event). As it turns out, Leo had discovered such an event that night. A comet is hurtling towards Earth, which the President declares could hit within a year. Despite this, the President has assembled a team of astronauts that will take the shuttle Messiah to the comet in the hopes of destroying it. What Worked: Aside from the plot similarities, one big thing this has in common with Armageddon is the ensemble cast. With Armageddon, you had names like Bruce Willis, Billy Bob Thornton, Ben Affleck, Liv Tyler*, Will Patton, Steve Buscemi, William Fichtner, Owen Wilson, Michael Clarke Duncan, Peter Stormare, and Keith David.** You have a fair amount of well known actors here, too, and also some where you might not know their name, but you know you’ve seen them before. I’ll start with the one who is hands down the best actor in the movie… Morgan Freeman as the President. All I’ll say is this: When you have someone like him as the President, what more could you possibly want? It may also have proven to be ironic with the subtle Biblical references here, considering he did play God five years later in Bruce Almighty, and then again in Evan Almighty. There are a few other screen legends here in addition to him, the main one being Robert Duvall. He plays Captain Spurgeon “Fish” Tanner, the veteran astronaut who leads the team. He has a scene with Ron Eldard’s character after something happens to him, where they have a conversation about how he got his nickname. In addition to having a bit of humor to it, it’s also one of a few touching scenes here, and he is fantastic in this scene alone. The other notable ones I will get to in a moment, as their characters have more minor roles in the story. For now, let’s go over some of the main cast, starting with the main character. Leo is played by Elijah Wood, and this is one of two movies he was in that year, the other being the underrated sci-fi teen horror film The Faculty, which also had an ensemble cast. I felt he really started to establish himself around this time, because you do see hints of the personality he brought to Frodo here, particularly in his determination to protect his loved ones. This brings about some genuine chemistry with Leelee Sobieski, who plays his girlfriend Sarah Hotchner. For an actress who sadly didn’t get to have much of a career, she’s quite good here. The same can be said for Téa Leoni as Jenny. She gives a good performance, and has some of the personality and determination, similar to Elijah Wood’s performance as Leo. With her, though, it’s more of those aspects that you’ve seen in other portrayals of reporters chasing a story, which isn’t a bad thing. In fact, it actually helps develop her character’s arc in a way. This is evident in her scenes with James Cromwell and Vanessa Redgrave (who plays her mother). They’re really good for the time they’re in it, despite having only around a couple minutes of screen time each. The thing that really makes her character arc stand out is that we get to see how learning about the event impacts her professionally and personally at the same time. In the case of the latter, she already has enough personal problems, and then this event comes along to make things worse. She doesn’t have the best relationship with her mother, and especially her father (played by character actor Maximilian Schell, who is also really good in this movie). The most touching scenes involve her and her father, especially towards the end of the movie. The personal relationships in this movie feel genuine as a result, and so does the relationship between Captain Tanner and his crew, among whom are Blair Underwood and Jon Favreau. They’re developed more naturally here than in Armageddon, but that leads to a problem I have with this movie, which I will get to later. You even get Kurtwood Smith of That 70’s Show and RoboCop fame in this, and not only that, the biggest surprise for me among the cast was that Dougray Scott (everyone’s favorite Mission: Impossible villain) is in this, and despite his minor role, I actually liked him***. He plays Jenny’s cameraman, and you’ll easily spot him in a couple scenes. It’s also a surprise that so many of these aspects work so well for a disaster movie, considering the script is from two writers who had done vastly different movies, one having written Ghost and Jacob’s Ladder. The direction from Mimi Leder, who prior to this was perhaps best known for her work on ER (of which a couple cast members also show up in this movie), is equally solid. It says something when a director who hasn’t done nearly as many action movies or effects-heavy movies as Michael Bay does it better than Michael Bay. There are four things I can say are evenly matched between this and Armageddon: The effects, the cinematography, the score, and the pacing. The effects in this, by 1998 standards, actually look really good. It does better wave effects than the last movie I reviewed, I’ll put it that way. Between this and Armageddon, they both hold up in this regard. They’re both shot really well, and their respective scores are very good (this one being by James Horner, that one by Trevor Rabin, who scored Deep Blue Sea the following year). In terms of pacing, they both go by pretty quickly, despite the half-hour runtime difference. They’re also both really intense. What Didn’t Work: There are really only two big issues that I have here. The first is that this does use disaster movie tropes. Examples include: world landmarks getting destroyed, New York City being destroyed (both of which kind of go hand-in-hand here), and of course the President giving a speech. There’s also foreshadowing in one scene here, but it can be easy to miss. The last one I can really mention without going into spoilers is a scientist being a hero, which you do sort of get here with Leo discovering the comet at the beginning of the movie. It also leads to the funniest line in the movie, to which the reactions are just as hilarious. The fact that they’re genuine reactions makes them even funnier in that scene. Basically, it uses some of them, but not really all of them. The biggest issue, though, goes back to a point I made a moment ago: The character development. Armageddon gets a slight edge on this as a result. Here’s why: I did say the characters were developed more naturally here, but you don’t really get time to get to know a fair amount of them. In Armageddon, however, you did. Sure, they were ultimately just put in suits and shot up into space, thus not allowing for much in the way of developing them, but there was enough time for you to get to know them. That’s really it in terms of issues, though. Overall: Deep Impact is a very entertaining disaster movie. Even though this and Armageddon have similarities to each other, I’d actually say they serve as good companion pieces to each other, and I can even see this being a solid double feature for whenever you have a Movie Night. You have a more scientifically accurate movie with this, and a pure popcorn flick with Armageddon. On its own, however, Deep Impact is still so much fun. You have great performances, solid direction and writing, and a consistent pace accompanied by some very intense scenes and effects that hold up really well. While you may not get to know a fair amount of the characters, you still care about them because they are developed well enough for that. It may have some disaster movie tropes in it, but the way they’re incorporated does benefit the story here. Plus, they also add to the entertainment of watching them, and even now, they can still do that as long as everything around the clichés works, and Deep Impact succeeds at that. If you can at least make the movie itself fun to watch, people will eat it up. If it’s a disaster movie, a sci-fi movie, or even a flat-out action movie, if you also get one of the best movie Presidents ever, that’s a bonus. *In saying that, there’s another thing they both have in common right there: They each have a cast member from The Lord of the Rings in them. There are numerous other movie connections between these two movies alone, but it’ll take forever to go through all of them. **There were a few others worth noting, but I decided it’s best to save those for when I eventually review it. ***Then again, I didn’t mind Mission: Impossible 2, either, so there’s that. I’m saying that, and even I think he’s the weakest villain in the series. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2020/4/11/thoughts-on-the-last-airbender-2010-aka-everything-it-did-wrong monthly 0.5 2023-06-17 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1586635470400-N5ZJ65HHKR1IH3HSUFX3/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Last+Airbender+%28AKA+Everything+It+Did+Wrong%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Last Airbender (2010) (AKA Everything It Did Wrong) Image courtesy of moviemania.io Hello, everyone. Rather than reviewing another movie that has similarities to what’s going on right now, I felt like doing something a little different. As it turns out, I’ll be doing that in more ways than one with this review. Since it happened to drop on Netflix a few weeks ago, I figured now would be the perfect time to start doing this. This review marks the first time I’ll be covering a movie that I outright despise. It takes a lot for a movie to completely infuriate me, which is why I haven’t really done any reviews for movies that people generally hate that I seem to find some things to give credit for.* Aside from maybe King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, which was heavily criticized by others while I thought it was okay, the movies I’ve reviewed up to now have at worst been polarizing. However, I still found some level of enjoyment in them. That is far from the case this time. This movie was also heavily criticized, but unlike King Arthur, I only thought it was okay initially. Over time, though, I came to realize, “No, this really is awful.” Last year, I covered a trilogy of movies from the director that I liked, the Eastrail 177 Trilogy. This trilogy consisted of Unbreakable (his best movie), Split (which I really liked), and Glass (which, despite its flaws, I also really liked). In fact, I actually foreshadowed this review in the side note of my Unbreakable review, so this one was a long time coming. This year marks 10 years since one of the worst movies ever was released. Last year, I covered the director’s best movie… and now this year, I cover his worst. Folks, the time has come for me to review… M. Night Shyamalan’s The Last Airbender. Even though I usually never do this, I have to for the purpose of this review. There will be some minor spoilers for both the show and the movie here. However, I will only go over the details in the show that are necessary to bring up in order to give a proper context as to why the movie fails hard to live up to the high standard set by the show. For those who want to hold off, the show comes on Netflix next weekend, so wait for that, watch it, and then come back. Only watch the movie if you feel like you must. You really shouldn’t, but if you insist, then go right ahead. All I can tell you is you’ve been warned. As for the rest of you, stick around, and fasten your seatbelts for the bumpy ride we’re about to endure… because I have a lot to say about this one, folks. Based on the beloved Nickelodeon series Avatar: The Last Airbender, the story is set in a world where people of a particular nation can manipulate, or “bend,” each of the four natural elements: Water, Earth, Fire, and Air. Long ago, they lived together in peace. Everything went south when the Fire Nation started a war. There was only one person who could stop them, known as the Avatar, who was also the only one capable of bending all four elements. Unfortunately, he disappeared when everyone needed him most. A hundred years later, two siblings from the Southern Water Tribe, named Katara and Sokka, come across a giant iceberg containing a young boy named Aang. The boy is said to be the new Avatar, this time an Airbender. He has to learn the remaining elements in order to stop the Fire Nation and end the war, starting with Water. While searching for a Waterbending teacher, however, they are being hunted by a Fire Nation Prince who will stop at nothing to regain his honor by capturing the Avatar. Now, before I go over everything this movie did wrong, there are some things I’m willing to give a little bit of credit, but they’re still not enough to elevate it above my stance on the movie itself. Some of the effects were okay to decent, and the production design was also okay, but the only real positive I can give is that James Newton Howard’s score is really good. However, none of these things can save it, and it’s especially a shame in regards to the score because of how good it is, but it’s too good for this movie. It felt like it was made for what could have been a much better movie.** Besides, a score is meant to enhance a movie, not carry it, which it feels like it’s trying to do here. It’s particularly evident in the music towards the end when they use the same music from the teaser trailer, which is the best part of the movie, and yet the music is the only thing that carries over from it. None of the footage you see there is in the movie. The only thing that this movie even comes close to getting right is the intro. It does look like the very beginning of the intro for the show. The most accurate thing this movie has in regards to adapting the first season is the plot summary on Wikipedia. There are two more things I’d like to touch on before we dive in. No, the casting and the title being shortened to The Last Airbender are not among the problems I have with the movie. The main reason they took the “Avatar” portion of the original title out was to avoid confusion with James Cameron’s movie, which came out a few months prior. It was a wise, yet obvious choice, but here’s the problem: You’ll wish you were watching that instead anyway. Regardless of whether you like it or not, it is much better than this. As for the casting, despite how controversial it was, I understood what M. Night was trying to do by having a diverse cast. The show somewhat had that as well with its characters, so I get that. The difference is that in the show, it wasn’t so much of a focal point of the characters and their development. It was just among their character traits and that was it. It just showed you what they looked like and went from there. Here, it rubbed so many people the wrong way that it became a major point of criticism well before the movie was even released, and to some extent it carried over to its release. This is not the first time there’s been casting controversy, but it is one of the more prominent ones. That’s basically what it boils down to, so I didn’t need to go into more detail on this one. There will be other times where I have to touch on controversies. However, they usually end up being around when those respective movies came out, and they’re brought up to make a point; most of the time, they’re blown out of proportion to where they’re ultimately unwarranted. Besides, there are so many other issues here already that addressing it is enough. Now let’s get into this, shall we? Let’s go over all the things this movie did wrong, both as a movie and as an adaptation of a beloved show. Here’s how it’ll go for movies like this. I’m mainly doing this so it’s easier to follow, because as previously stated, there’s so much to go over that this format is really the only way I can do it. It’s fitting here, then, because the movie, along with the first season, is called Book One: Water. They thought they were going to make a trilogy out of this. Anyway, each season was named for each of the other three elements that Aang had to learn in order to fulfill his destiny as the Avatar. Book One was Water, Book Two was Earth, and Book Three was Fire. Thus, each episode was called a Chapter. ————————————————————————————————————— CHAPTER ONE: THE OPENING The first thing this movie gets wrong is how it opens, which has so many problems on its own. It’s a text crawl, like the ones you see in Star Wars, except it’s accompanied by unnecessary narration. It can’t make up its mind on how to do world building. Even if they did try one or the other, the movie still would have failed. In saying that, there’s a difference between how the show did it and how this movie does it. The reason it worked in the show was because the text in the crawl was used as the narration in the intro. As the intro played, you heard this narration, and it was brilliant. There’s one thing that this movie mentions in the text crawl that the show’s opening narration does not: The mention that the Avatar could communicate with the Spirit World. It’s pointless here because while it was a crucial detail in the show, it was only shown to us, which allowed for buildup to it. Here, it’s like that investment in said buildup was just swept under the rug. However, following this, it closes with mentioning the hundred-year absence of the Avatar. It was part of the narration in the show as well, except this one was important to mention because it was vital in establishing the story that so many people loved. Here’s another reason why the intro of the show works so well. Yes, it has two methods of doing world building, too, but they accompany each other perfectly rather than conflict with one another. There, it is both mentioned and shown that Katara and Sokka discovered the new Avatar. It’s only mentioned to help with the world building and character development, and up until they show it to us, a mere mention was enough to inform us that it was part of the story. Not only that, but also when they discover Aang, we first learn his name in that same scene when he wakes up in front of them and tells them himself. The worst thing about this narration is that it’s throughout the rest of the movie, so once you’re past the opening, be prepared for a lot of it. You’ll be subjected to a lot of over-exposition in this, with 90-95% Telling, and the remaining 5-10% Showing. It causes the whole movie to fall apart by breaking the #1 rule of bringing your story to life with a movie, or even a TV series: Show, Don’t Tell. ————————————————————————————————————— CHAPTER TWO: THE NAMES The one thing this movie is perhaps most notorious for also occurs throughout the movie. Some of the names are pronounced differently compared to the versions in the show. M. Night wanted to honor the source material and use the Asian pronunciations. Not only is that very statement contradictory, but also the definitive pronunciations were pretty much already established in the show. Here, they pronounce “Avatar” “AH-VATAR”. This one in particular actually goes back and forth, so even the biggest insult in regards to this is more consistent. This one is not. There are some scenes where it seems it’s pronounced right, and then they go back to pronouncing it wrong. The three most notable ones are the ones that particularly aggravated the fans: “Sokka” is pronounced “SOH-KA,” “Iroh” is pronounced “EE-ROH,” and the biggest one in the movie… “Aang” is pronounced “ONG.” I was going to mention this part last, but I decided to go over it as soon as I could because as a movie in general, that’s actually the least of its problems compared to everything else. ————————————————————————————————————— CHAPTER THREE: THE ACTING & THE SCRIPT The narration and mispronunciations are made even worse because the acting is terrible. The only actors that I thought were trying were Dev Patel as Zuko, the Fire Nation Prince, and Shaun Toub as his uncle, Iroh. They weren’t necessarily good, but I felt they were giving some effort with what they were given. By comparison, everyone else in the movie felt like they were given nothing to work with. The line delivery is so wooden, the performances are lifeless, and the script itself, even if you push the mispronunciations aside for a second, is still atrocious. These are some of the lines in the movie: When Aang is asked how he got trapped in the ice, he responds with this: “I ran away from home. We got in a storm. We were forced under the water of the ocean.” During an action scene in the middle, Aang says, “This was their practice area.” Lastly, the biggest one: “It’s time we show the Fire Nation that we believe in our beliefs as much as they believe in theirs.” That was the point where I realized I owed Anakin and Padmé an apology. There are even some parts of this movie that are so bad that they’re unintentionally hilarious, so there is something to make you laugh here, but for the wrong reasons. ————————————————————————————————————— CHAPTER FOUR: THE CHARACTERS Not only are the performances lifeless, but also all of the characters themselves. Sometimes, they even come across as complete morons. There are several occasions where characters ask multiple questions at once without allowing the chance for at least one to be answered first. There are other times where they state the obvious out loud. They make the cheesy dialogue in the Prequels look smart, particularly Episode II. The biggest example is actually the Fire Nation troops themselves. By the end of the movie, they end up being bigger idiots than the Stormtroopers. I’m not kidding. They’re not threatening or intimidating in the slightest. In the show, they were, like with Commander Zhao, who was practically a rival to Zuko. This allowed for a compelling inner conflict within the Fire Nation itself. He kept getting in Zuko’s way at every turn as he sought to redeem himself for his father. It also benefitted from Jason Isaacs’s performance, because he’s an intimidating presence himself. In the movie, they have Aasif Mandvi from The Daily Show (back when Jon Stewart hosted it, anyway), and it’s fitting that he’s more comedic, because you can’t take him seriously at all. When he has a better performance as a minor character with only a couple minutes of screentime in Spider-Man 2 than as the main antagonist in this movie, there’s a problem. The villains could have been more threatening if their leader also was, but another epic fail is how they translate Fire Lord Ozai, Zuko’s father, to the screen. The only thing they have in common is that they’re both played by great actors, except one is intimidating, and the other is not. In the show, they didn’t unveil him until the last season, because his voice was enough to let you know that he posed a threat. This is mainly because it was Mark Hamill playing him, who has one of those voices that can send chills down anyone’s spine. Plus, he has experience with playing villains, most notably the numerous times he’s voiced The Joker. A far cry from that is how they do it here. In his first scene they automatically show him, which negates his threat level immediately. Cliff Curtis, as talented as he is, does great with supporting roles, but a villain is not among them. He, like everyone else, has such a stoic and blank faced demeanor in this movie that he comes across as overly dramatic. Showing Ozai right away is like showing James Bond’s nemesis Blofeld right away in From Russia with Love. It takes all the mystery of his appearance and throws it right out the window. There are even scenes where he’s looking away and it feels more like something out of Shakespeare. I kept expecting him to pull out a skull and recite the opening lines of Hamlet. He’s only the second worst misrepresentation of a character in the movie, though. The worst character assassination in this movie is Sokka. He was made to come across as not very bright in the show, but that’s what made him lovable and such a great character, and a great comic relief as well. He, along with everyone else, had personality and charisma to him. They felt like they had life to them. This is a bigger mistreatment of a comic relief character than how X-Men Origins: Wolverine handled Deadpool, because at least he was done justice the second time. It doesn’t help that they cast someone like Jackson Rathbone, who was in a franchise full of characters with a sense of personality called Twilight, to play a character like him.*** Speaking of which, there are some shots here that look like something pulled right out of it. This leads me to my next point. ————————————————————————————————————— CHAPTER FIVE: THE VISUAL PRESENTATION Another huge failure on this movie’s part is how it looks. I mentioned how the characters had so much life to them. It’s also reflected through the tone, which is very lighthearted for the most part. It has some dark moments, sure, but it’s mostly lighthearted with some humor thrown in for good measure. The only things resembling humor sometimes come from the dialogue, but even more so the things you see the characters do here that their superior animated counterparts would never do. With the movie, it does have something that’s dark, but it sure isn’t the tone. It’s how it’s shot. Sometimes, you can hardly see what’s going on. M. Night’s direction is the least of its problems here, even though it’s still terrible. It’s also a shame because the cinematographer is the late Andrew Lesnie, who also shot the Lord of the Rings and Hobbit trilogies. Having just mentioned that, whereas the cinematography complements the visual effects in those movies perfectly, it doesn’t do them any favors here. Some of the effects looked okay to decent. For example, when you see one of the main animal characters, Appa, from a distance, he looks okay, and a shot of him in the water looks decent, but when you get a good look at him, the effects on him are awful. The other main one, Momo, doesn’t look much better. The only thing they did get right was getting the voice actor for them back, but that only goes so far. The worst effects in the movie are early on when Katara and Sokka first appear. When you see Sokka’s coat blowing in the wind, you can’t look away from it because it’s so painfully obvious that they’re standing around a green screen. Even worse are some of the narrative choices, not counting the numerous plot holes in this movie. ————————————————————————————————————— CHAPTER SIX: THE NARRATIVE CHOICES The most infamous scene involves an Earthbender “prison.” In the show, they’re on a metal ship, where they can’t bend, which leaves them vulnerable. Here, they’re being held captive on the very element they can manipulate, and they don’t fight back anyway until they’re motivated to when Aang goes so far as to basically say even he knows this idea is stupid. They don’t fight back just because they only say there was nothing they could do once the Fire Nation brought their machines, so metal is actually mentioned here. What makes this scene so infamous is when they do fight. I’m not making this up: At one point, six Earthbenders take a page out of the Step Up movies and start breakdancing to levitate a rock, and it takes a seventh to throw it. They also occasionally use montages rather than have the sequences just play out naturally. The worst thing about that goes back to the narration: They use it to gloss over a very crucial subplot, and you’re basically told to care about what happens without really being given a chance to. You’ll know what it is if you just watch the show, and because of how much of a major plot point it is, I won’t spoil it for you. All you need to know is that they completely botched it. This all leads me to the cardinal narrative sin of this movie. I was going to save this for my review of The Rhythm Section when I get to that, since that movie is a huge example of this, too, but this ended up being even bigger, so I’m mentioning it here. ————————————————————————————————————— CHAPTER SEVEN: THE RUNTIME My biggest gripe with this movie is actually the runtime. Now, the runtime is something that might easily be taken for granted. However, there’s one thing that should not be when considering the best length for a movie: It should be as long as you need to tell your story. Regardless of how long you intend it to be, whether it's 30 minutes or 3 hours, it should be that exact length; nothing more, nothing less. If it’s even a fraction of a second off either way, you risk everything else suffering for it, so make every second of every moment count. You also need to have enough material to justify it. An example of a movie that accomplished all of that and then some would be what was both my favorite movie of 2019 and my Best Movie of the Decade: a little movie called Avengers: Endgame. That movie is 181 minutes (3 hours and 1 minute) long. It had enough material to justify that monumental runtime, and not one moment of it was wasted. Now compare that runtime to this. M. Night is used to his movies being around 90 minutes, but this should not have been one of them. This is actually a little bit over, at 103 minutes. Either way, he chose to condense the first season, which is 20 episodes worth of story, into 1 hour and 43 minutes. In doing so, it wasn’t going to be anything other than a disaster, and sure enough, that’s what happened. If anything, this should have been 2 hours and 15 minutes or so at minimum. Even 2 and a half hours might have been passable. At worst, he could have decided to expand the trilogy plans into 2 trilogies’ worth of movies, because there would have been enough material for them. As it is, though, he still royally messed up here. I’m not the only one saying that, either. There are plenty of others who will tell you the same thing. Whether it’s critics, fans, or even those involved with the series, chances are they share the same sentiment you do: That this movie is a total dumpster fire. This movie is so awful that even the creators have stated that they like to pretend it never happened. There are two reasons for this. The first is that they stated the project was greenlit without their approval. The second is that when they tried to provide input, it was ignored. They even went so far as to tell Dante Basco, the original voice actor for Zuko, not to see it; he would later mention that in an interview when asked what his thoughts were on the movie. Having now just seen this for the first time in years for this review, I can’t blame them one bit. ————————————————————————————————————— CHAPTER EIGHT: THE CONCLUSION In summary, here’s what I recommend, although it’s pretty obvious at this point: Skip this movie, and watch the show when it arrives on Netflix next weekend. I also suggest you then seek out the sequel series, The Legend of Korra, which aired a couple years or so after this movie came out. However, you may have to look elsewhere for that, as I don’t believe they have that on the schedule for this month as well. I especially advise you not to watch this movie once you’ve seen at least the original series, because you’ll just be infuriated by the time it’s over. In retrospect, there is actually one thing we can thank this movie for. It allowed two shows to happen to help the fans wash the taste out of their mouths. The first is The Legend of Korra, as mentioned a moment ago, and the second is a live-action adaptation of the whole series. You may be worried that they’re just trying to take this same approach again, and it’ll be even worse. They’re actually not, and there’s potential for it. Here’s why: The creators are more involved with this new version, and they’re just adapting the series for live-action. That’s it. They’re not doing anything else with it, like they did here. They’re doing it as an actual series this time, and they’ve partnered with Netflix for it. Plus, we do have a first look at it (which, at the time of this review, still remains the only look we have at it), which is a photo of Aang with Appa, and it looks really good. Even though you pretty much only see Aang’s silhouette and mainly see Appa, it looks very spot on. You can say that’s the movie’s version of M. Night’s signature twist, but I have a better one. For all the criticism I’ve thrown at this movie, this was ultimately not my Worst Movie of the Decade. It was my second Worst. Flash forward to November of 2019, and a movie that proved to be even worse came out of nowhere to take its title. What would that be, you may ask? You’ll find out eventually, I’ll put it that way. *In other words, I may come across as more lenient than most. It is mainly for this reason why I prefer to get my thoughts out there rather than close it out with a rating. I found that over time as I did more of these, it was the style that worked best for me. **Oh, wait, he did score a much better movie, for which a review can be expected very soon, so look out for that. ***SPOILER ALERT: I’m still not reviewing The Twilight Saga. I’m still not breaking my rule. UPDATE #1: Since this review’s upload, the original creators have left the Netflix series over creative differences. Upon hearing that, many of you may have decided to write it off immediately, which I understand. However, I would still say give it a chance. Besides, as long as M. Night is nowhere near it, we should be good. I just figured I’d take a moment to address that. And since I suggested checking out the original series on Netflix, I should also mention that a few weeks later, The Legend of Korra did go up on there after all, so you can watch them both on Netflix now. UPDATE #2: The original creators have now formed their own studio, appropriately named Avatar Studios, where they will focus on creating more stories for the big and small screens set within the universe going forward, meaning the Netflix adaptation has most likely been shelved. UPDATE #3: The Netflix adaptation is now picking back up, as they have announced the cast for the leads. As for the new animated Avatar projects, they will be using CG animation, which is interesting. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/6/7/thoughts-on-a-quiet-place-2018 monthly 0.5 2021-04-03 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1617456708655-Q3QYRW9CPBHL13CKZMR9/%28Thoughts+On%29+A+Quiet+Place.jpg Blog - Thoughts on A Quiet Place (2018) Image courtesy of wallpaperaccess.com Hello, everyone. As I mentioned in both posts regarding the schedule, the subject of this review was among those I had planned. It not only has a sequel set for release in the near future, but this review is also long overdue anyway. Despite the fact that the sequel was delayed another few months, it was originally set to come out around the same time the original did, hence why I am reviewing it now. Much like 12 Monkeys focusing on a virus, this one has a theme that’s very topical right now as well, this being isolation. However, unlike 12 Monkeys, the threat here is not a virus. It’s not something you can stop, but rather something where you have to adapt to what’s around you with how the world has changed in order to survive. Folks, I finally present my review of one of my favorite horror movies in recent years… and that is A Quiet Place. How poetic that I’m reviewing this in the new decade, then, because that’s when the movie is set. During the year that in reality would come to be ravaged by something far worse, much of humanity has been taken out by mysterious creatures that hunt you down if you make any noise. Over the course of a year, one family, the Abbotts, is trying to survive the best they can while staying completely silent. What Worked: The plot is very engaging, and very straightforward. The world has been overwhelmed by creatures that track their prey by the sounds they make, and so we see how the remnants of humanity struggle to endure through the eyes of the family we follow here, the Abbotts. You see that in the performances, which are excellent. Even the child actors are fantastic in this. The parents, Lee and Evelyn, are played by John Krasinski and Emily Blunt, who are also a couple in real life. That’s one of two things that bring a level of authenticity to the cast. Their relationship in the movie feels much more genuine because of it. The other thing that brings authenticity here is with their daughter Regan, played by Millicent Simmonds. Both the character and the actress are hearing-impaired. The fact that they have an actress with the same disability as her character is reflected in the dialogue. The majority of the dialogue here is sign language, and she was actually able to teach them. It shows in the movie because one way the family has adapted is by communicating through signing. It even brings out some emotion, too, which I will get a little more into later. The latter aspect in particular benefits the movie further because it was John Krasinski’s intention to have that, and he made the right call. This is worth noting because he not only acted in this, but he also co-wrote and directed it. It may not be his first movie (it’s actually the third movie he directed), but it feels like it is his directorial debut because of all the effort he put in behind the camera. It seems this is his first mainstream movie, though, so there is that. It’s also because of his direction and the script that you are given a chance to connect with the characters through tension and intrigue. There are times where you’re really on edge because the creatures could be anywhere, and you want the family to survive. At the same time, though, you’re presented with some very memorable scenes, which are some of the most intensely nerve-wracking scenes when it comes to modern horror. Throughout the whole movie, whether it’s in a suspenseful scene or a scene of downtime, you gradually learn more about the creatures, but not everything. You learn what the characters already know: The creatures are capable of running extremely fast, and they have hypersensitive hearing, despite being blind. Any sounds we would otherwise be used to, like creaking floorboards, for example, we have to be careful not to make, because they can pick that up in a second. What makes these creatures scarier is the fact that neither us nor the characters know the bigger picture yet. We don’t know what they are, where they are from, or how (and to some extent why) they’re here. We don’t even know how to beat them. However, this is one of those cases where we don’t necessarily need to know everything right away, as I’m sure the sequel will both expand upon what we learned here and give us new information. Even so, it does provide enough details without slowing down just to make sure you’re caught up, as the story does that for you. It’s not set on Day 1, but rather well into the conflict already in progress. I actually thought that was more effective, because it just shows us what the situation is and how the survivors are dealing with it, and then goes from there while giving us all we need to know for now along the way. Plus, it’s also very well shot, and the cinematography really conveys how bleak the atmosphere and tone are. In addition to that, it keeps everything going at such a fast pace. When it does have calmer moments, it never detracts from the rest of the movie at all. The same goes for the more emotional scenes, which are genuinely touching, if not because of the accompaniment of Marco Beltrami’s score alone. Among his recent work, this is one of his best scores. Now for the three things that stood out to me the most with this movie. The first thing is the very menacing look of the creatures. The scenes where you see them more close up are some of the scariest scenes in the movie. For me, it felt like they took notes on what made the Alien’s look as scary as it was, and they definitely pulled it off. The second thing is the most unsettling aspect of the creatures, and really the whole movie, and that is the sound design. For a movie that relies on silence, this still has some phenomenal sound design. It’s some of the best you’ll witness in what modern horror has to offer, and it rightfully deserved to at least be nominated. The sounds the creatures make are like the modern version of a certain other creature known for hunting…!* The third (and biggest) thing is the message of the movie. Isolation may be a theme, but it’s more about how to adjust to it while keeping those close to you safe. As for issues, when I first saw this movie, I had two. The first was a very minimal number of jump scares, of which I noticed at least one. The biggest one was that I felt there were some moments involving characters making stupid decisions. Having watched it again, however, I realized what I initially believed to be issues actually served a purpose within the context of the story. There weren’t really any jump scares that were just there for the sake of being in the movie. The decisions I initially thought were stupid were either more natural or had a very important role in establishing certain scenes. Compared to all the smart decisions made throughout the movie, maybe those can be considered stupid, but on their own, they deserve more credit than I initially gave them. Overall: A Quiet Place is one of the best horror movies in years. It has a compelling and original plot, constant tension, likable characters, great performances, and a very relevant message and theme with everything going on right now. It is a bit of a survival thriller as well, and it has some sci-fi elements here and there with the creatures having come from somewhere else. This is also one of the best recent examples of a horror movie that focuses more on its story and characters rather than jump scares and shock value. It shows that sometimes getting right into the story by showing the audience what the characters have been going through rather than what led to that point is better. For those who are put off by blood and gore, there’s hardly any in this movie. It’s only in maybe one or two scenes, but that’s it. For those who feel like getting into horror, you should be fine if you choose to get started with something like this. It’s one of the more accessible ones out there in both regards due to being PG-13 rather than R, which shows that your movie doesn’t have to be rated R to be scary. It’s the story and the visual presentation that matter most, and A Quiet Place nails it, from the cinematography and direction to the creature designs, all accompanied by some of the best sound design you'll find in a horror movie. *There’s your Predator reference for this review. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2020/3/29/thoughts-on-12-monkeys-1995 monthly 0.5 2020-04-05 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1585505986056-ZHOU1K9XLYZWOGVVNAZ5/%28Thoughts+On%29+12+Monkeys.jpg Blog - Thoughts on 12 Monkeys (1995) Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. In my previous post, I provided an update on the changes that had to be made to the schedule due to current events. I have since had to amend it with further updates, the first of which I closed out by hinting at the possibility of surprise reviews in between that I ultimately decided to add to the list. The subject of this review is one such occasion. Given the circumstances, I decided to start catching up by seeing what was On Demand for free. I saw that they had just added this one, so I figured I’d start here. Clearly by total coincidence, I picked a movie that focuses on a virus. There’s actually more to it than that. It’s not just about a virus, but it’s also about someone trying to prevent the outbreak before it happens, so it’s made more interesting with a time travel aspect added to the plot. Ladies and gentlemen, I present my review of the sci-fi thriller 12 Monkeys. The story is set in 2035. The majority of the human race had been decimated by a plague in 1996, and those that remained had no choice but to go underground in order to survive. The ones responsible for the chaos are believed to be part of a group called the Army of the Twelve Monkeys. In the present, a prisoner named James Cole is chosen to be sent back to 1996 to not only locate the virus, but also provide information that could prove vital in developing a cure. Initially, he is sent back too early, arriving in 1990. Upon being arrested and put in a mental hospital under the care of Dr. Kathryn Railly, he also meets fellow patient Jeffrey Goines, who has a very radical outlook on certain aspects of society. Upon being brought back and giving the scientists the information he gathered, Cole is then sent to the correct time. When he arrives, however, he slowly discovers that Dr. Railly and Jeffrey each play an important part in the events that are about to transpire. What Worked: First of all, the acting is fantastic in this movie. Bruce Willis gives one of his best performances as James Cole, showing that he can play a more serious role outside of his action hero persona. He had that in Unbreakable, but even more so here. Madeleine Stowe (The Last of the Mohicans) is really good as Dr. Railly, playing off of him very well. She shows commitment to helping him when we first meet her, and then gradually comes to realize what’s at stake when he needs her help. David Morse (who, following this, would be in another movie I intend to cover very soon) plays a character named Dr. Peters, who we’re first introduced to in 1996 when we see Dr. Railly again. He’s not in it that much, but the scenes he is in I recommend keeping in mind, particularly that scene. Christopher Plummer also has a small role in this as Dr. Leland Goines, Jeffrey’s father and a virologist. I saved the best for last for a reason. He also ends up being very crucial to the plot in ways that I won’t get into. The best performance in the movie for me was actually Brad Pitt as Jeffrey himself. When he first showed up in the mental hospital, from that moment on, I loved him in this. Not only does Bruce Willis give one of his best performances, but also Brad Pitt gives one of his. He is excellent in this movie. He was nominated for Best Supporting Actor, and he may not have won, but he at least deserved that nomination. The great performances are accompanied by a smart script from duo David and Janet Peoples. David in particular has done some pretty well known work, having also written Unforgiven and co-written Blade Runner. What really makes this movie as unique as it is comes in three aspects. The first is the score from composer Paul Buckmaster. Although he didn’t do much in the way of film composing, he was very prominent in the music industry nonetheless, having worked with the likes of David Bowie and Elton John, along with numerous others. Even so, he brings a very distinct style to his score here. It sounds like something out of a French movie. Now, this may seem baffling at first. However, once you see that this was inspired by the 1962 French short titled La Jetée (or “The Jetty”*), it makes sense, as it feels like it’s their way of honoring the source material in some capacity other than acknowledging it in the opening credits. The second aspect is Roger Pratt’s gorgeous cinematography. He frequently collaborates with director Terry Gilliam (of Monty Python fame), and it shows, because their particular visual techniques complement each other perfectly. Outside of working with Terry Gilliam, he has also shot such films as Tim Burton’s Batman, Troy, and two installments of Harry Potter (those being Chamber of Secrets and Goblet of Fire). The third aspect is the production design. This movie cost nearly 30 million dollars, and it looks like it was more in the range of 40-50 million. I similarly praised Underwater for this in my review. Whenever a movie looks like it cost more than it actually did, that’s never a bad thing for me. I give credit where credit is due if they manage to pull it off by creating something that impressive with the very modest amount given to them. Underwater was one such example, as is this, and there are plenty of others, one of which is another 2020 release that will be covered in the near future. The biggest praise I can give to this is how they approach time travel here. Instead of trying to change the past, the protagonist is merely observing it in order to help make a better future. I thought that was very clever. It also benefits the story structure, because it makes you want to see what happens next even more. It all culminates in a brilliant twist, and that alone is something you need to see for yourself. At first I thought I predicted how it would play out, having been accustomed to how it’s been done in other time travel stories. Then I realized that there had been details leading up to it which are very easy to overlook. This is one of those movies that upon first viewing, you may have some questions about certain things. With multiple viewings, you might actually catch some of those details you initially missed. Once you’ve pieced everything together, though, you see how shocking the twist really is. What Didn’t Work: My only flaw is that there are a couple pacing issues. It’s a little slow in the first act, but then it picks up once Cole is brought back to 2035 and sent to the correct time and the second act begins. Shortly after the second act begins, there’s another pacing issue, but then after a few minutes, it picks back up again and doesn’t stop. Overall: 12 Monkeys is an excellent sci-fi thriller with equally excellent performances (particularly from Bruce Willis and especially Brad Pitt), a captivating and thought provoking story, and a fantastic variation on the time travel formula with a unique visual style to accompany it. Although it does center around a virus, it’s not so much an outbreak movie with time travel in it as it is the other way around. Rather than showing the cause and effects of the virus or even the aftermath, it focuses more on trying to prevent it, which also makes it a clever variation on the genre of outbreak movies by having it be a “What If?” scenario. In saying that, it’s both straightforward and complex at the same time. The plot is easy to follow, but how it unfolds requires your utmost attention. It may take multiple viewings, but it rightfully earns its rewatchability because on the first viewing alone it’s as great as it is, and then it gets even better upon revisiting it. Regardless of whether you’re viewing it for the first time or revisiting it, it’s always entertaining from start to finish, and will stick with you long afterwards. *As for what a jetty is, it’s part of a building that ties to a certain character trait given to James Cole. All I can say is this building ultimately ends up having major significance throughout the movie. In fact, it’s one of the key elements of the short that inspired its use in this movie, so it actually factors heavily into both of them. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2020/3/14/schedule-update monthly 0.5 2021-06-27 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1584198845813-76PIJG84G67NGIVFYAW9/%28Temporary%29+Logo.jpg Blog - Schedule Update Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that. Hello, everyone. I am aware that it’s been a few weeks since the Underwater review, but I have decided to change the original plan a little bit to make some of the newer reviews come sooner so you are still being given some new content. Unfortunately, given how the events of the past several days have affected the world of entertainment, I have to make changes anyway. Several movies that I had been looking forward to reviewing for you have been delayed due to the events of the coronavirus pandemic that continues to spread as we speak. I will recap the original plans for them so you know some of what’s been delayed. The first planned reviews I mentioned were of every DC Extended Universe movie up to this point. The series consists of Man of Steel, Batman v Superman, Suicide Squad, Wonder Woman, Justice League, Aquaman, and Shazam!. At the time of the original post being made, Shazam! was the most recent release. As mentioned there, I had originally intended to do it for Birds of Prey, but it has now been included in this series of reviews before the release of Wonder Woman 1984. This was for two reasons: 1: It ensures I have more time to cover these properly rather than rush them out just to be sure I’m able to see it as soon as I can. And 2: It was also because of what I had thought might be best to start with, which was one of the longest-running film franchises ever. Even if Wonder Woman 1984 is delayed, this plan will hold, and in the event that it is indeed delayed, that, too, will be included for when the next installment, The Batman, arrives next year. The aforementioned long-running franchise is of course the James Bond franchise. The plan is still to cover the previous ones, from Dr. No all the way up to Spectre. There are benefits to this one, which is really the only case in regards to all the delays announced so far. We do have a new date, and it is still coming out this year. Around Thanksgiving, we can expect to see James Bond in action with No Time to Die. Plus, this may ultimately prove to be the right call, as Bond has done pretty well opening in November anyway, compared to the second weekend of April as originally scheduled. Following that delay, there was one delayed almost a whole year, but since it’s the biggest one by far, I’ll go over that one last. The next delay that happened was a movie that was going to come out in just under a week at the time of this writing, which was A Quiet Place Part II. The only thing we know so far is that it is still scheduled for later this year. As for when, no new date has been set for that or any of the others I am about to mention, which were originally scheduled to open as far out as just around a month later. Then we get to the three most recent delays for other well known movies. The first was supposed to come out at the end of this month, which was the remake of Mulan. However, considering how big it was going to be, particularly in China, it was inevitable that this would happen. The one that surprised me was Antlers, a new horror movie produced by Guillermo Del Toro. That was set to come out around this time next month. I did not think they would pull that. The one that didn’t surprise me, because it’s been delayed before, was The New Mutants, which is something I’ve really been looking forward to. It was so close to coming out this time, too, having been set to open the weekend after Mulan. This is the one that I really hope they find a date for within the rest of the year so it can finally come out, and I can finally see it and review it for you. Of course, I still hope it’s good, and it looks like it will be, as the newer footage that’s been released of it certainly shows promise that it hopefully lives up to. Although the reason for it being delayed (which is hopefully the last) is understandable this time, it still disappoints me that they had to delay it again. There are so many reasons why I hope this overcomes its unfortunate reputation that they deserve a post of their own. For now, though, it all comes down to this: I hope it comes out so it can help the Fox era of X-Men movies go out with some dignity and allow us to have even more hope for when the characters we know and love make their Marvel Cinematic Universe debut. There is something else pertaining to that franchise, but first, I’ll go over the biggest delay. The biggest delay came after the announcement for No Time to Die. I had originally stated that the reviews for this franchise would most likely happen this year, but would be a certainty for next year if they didn’t, as that was supposedly when it would end. Now, it sounds like it’s no longer the case, as the latest installment of the main series was delayed by close to a year. These reviews would be for the Fast and the Furious franchise (or The Fast Saga, as it’s apparently called now), because the ninth main installment, titled F9, would have come out towards the end of May. This and No Time to Die are the only movies that were delayed but had new dates planned. Since this has been bumped to next April (when the supposed final installment in the main series was set to come out), we’ll have to wait for that finale a little bit longer, too. These delays most likely will not be the last. In the days and weeks to come, there are guaranteed to be more. What makes these delays worse is that since most, if not all, of these movies might end up being bumped to (at the very latest) the fall and winter season, some of the ones that had been scheduled will be pushed back to sometime next year just to accommodate these. On a side note, for the time being, Onward will probably be my last review of a newly released movie until this whole situation is under control. The main reason I say that is because theaters have been closing down with all of these delays happening, and it won’t be long before it affects every theater in America, including the ones in my area. I was hoping to have my last review of a new release be for Bloodshot, but as it is right now, Onward is still the most recent movie I was able to see in theaters. I do still plan on seeing Bloodshot, of course, but it likely won’t be in theaters. Once this situation has improved enough, I will get back to newer releases as soon as I can. In the meantime, I can catch up with ones I haven’t gotten to yet, and I have quite a few. There are even some that I had planned for this year that won’t be affected by this situation at all. I’ll get to the ones that can still be expected first. The DC Extended Universe reviews, from Man of Steel up to Birds of Prey (or up to Wonder Woman 1984, provided it’s not delayed first). The Bond franchise, from Dr. No up to Spectre, since I now have more time to do this one. A Quiet Place, which is long overdue anyway. The Marvel Cinematic Universe Catch-Up Reviews, from Avengers: Infinity War up to Spider-Man: Far From Home. Hopefully, Phase Four still kicks off this year with the releases of both Black Widow and The Eternals. These ones can now be added to the list: The Fast Saga up to this point, from the original up to Hobbs & Shaw (and yes, even though it’s a spin-off, it’s still part of the franchise, so I’m counting it). I can officially announce a review of the original Mulan is coming, despite being among those I wanted to be a surprise, alongside a review of the remake. The X-Men franchise can be added as well, which goes from the original up to Dark Phoenix (and yes, I am including both Deadpool movies). Numerous other catch-up reviews, as well as some very special reviews. With our current situation being bleak and dire, and the current output of new offerings looking barren, as new content gets put out here, there is one thing we can do. The best we can do is hope and pray that the release schedule for the rest of the year can at least somewhat be saved. Even with that, at the moment, it’ll be a miracle if it can, folks. That being said, no matter which review comes next, I’ll see you there. ——————————————————————————————————————— UPDATE #1 (March 26th, 2020): Since this post’s upload, both Black Widow and Wonder Woman 1984 have been delayed. Unfortunately, no new release date has been set for Black Widow. Although it’ll more than likely still come out later this year, this means that The Eternals will possibly get bumped to around this time next year at the earliest. Thus, this also means that the rest of Marvel Studios’ entire slate for Phase Four, and possibly even beyond that, depending on how long this crisis persists, will be affected. It’s not just the movies that’ll be affected, either. Their first few shows for Disney+ have been postponed, too. However, there is a bright spot to these two announcements: Wonder Woman 1984 did receive a new release date, which ended up not being as far out as I thought. I thought it would have been bumped similarly to No Time to Die, if not F9. It turns out that was actually not the case. It was only bumped back a couple months. Instead of the first weekend of June as originally planned, it has been bumped to the middle of August. The wait may be a little bit longer, but it’s not by that much. So as I said when mentioning Birds of Prey, the plan still holds. I will cover it prior to this. If need be, I will be providing further updates if they affect the schedule in any way. On a side note, pretty much the majority of theaters across America have been closed down, save for maybe drive-ins in a couple areas. Among that majority of theater closures for the time being are indeed the theaters in my area, which didn’t surprise me, because it was inevitable. However, as stated in the original post, I do have a plan in place during this time. Once everything is back to normal (or at least as close to that as it was), the same case will apply to the schedule. There might even be some surprise reviews in between that were not originally planned that I later ended up deciding to add. ——————————————————————————————————————— UPDATE #2 (April 4th, 2020): Over the course of the past week, since the previous update, several more movies have been delayed, and some of the ones that were previously delayed have now found new dates. This means my reviews of both the original Mulan and the remake are not the only reviews I intended to keep a surprise until I uploaded them. Therefore, now I have to spoil even more surprises, only this time, it’s beyond my control. At least in the reviews themselves, I am capable of trying my best to do them with as few spoilers as possible. Since this is a schedule for reviews to come, though (which more than likely will have no surprises left in regards to new releases by the time this is all over), the only thing I can do is adjust my schedule to match the actual one. Now, without further ado, let’s dive into the biggest announcements as we did last time. I’m going by the original list of what I had planned based on the schedule as it was before all of this went down to keep it consistent. The first on the list was actually one of the first to be delayed, but has now found a new date. This one is A Quiet Place Part II. Originally, it was scheduled to come out just under a week after the original post was made. It has now been rescheduled for Labor Day weekend. Even though I have plenty of time to review the first one anyway, I’ve decided when to upload that review. I plan on it being at least sometime this month, but a perfect time would be within the next few days to match the timeframe of both when the first one came out and when the sequel was set to come out. The next one is Mulan. As mentioned in the original post, that was supposed to come out the week after A Quiet Place Part II. With this latest update coming more than a week after its initial release date, a new one has been announced. Mulan is now slated to open towards the end of July. It was actually among the most recent bunch of delays, which come from Disney. Also among them was a new release date for Black Widow. Originally scheduled to open at the beginning of May, Black Widow has been moved to the November spot previously occupied by Eternals. I stated in the previous update that should this indeed happen, the latter would possibly get bumped to the beginning of next year at the earliest. That also meant that the rest of the entire slate of Phase Four would be affected, and I was right. The way in which that would happen I also predicted: Each movie following Eternals would take the date originally occupied by the one that followed it. Basically, a domino effect happened here. Several of the new dates announced by Disney were for those, in fact. There were some others, but the only huge one worth noting outside of them was Mulan. Another huge one that has been highly anticipated is Top Gun: Maverick. I can now announce plans for a review of the original alongside this one. This one was delayed, but also given a new date. Instead of close to the Fourth of July, it’s now opening close to Christmas. In the “Schedule Adjustment” post I made at the beginning of the year, I mentioned Ghostbusters as a possibility. I can now fit that series in, as Ghostbusters: Afterlife has been bumped from mid-July to early March of next year. There were more than just these (and there will continue to be more), of course, but some I can still keep a surprise. Plus, there were some others I mentioned in the original post that had been delayed, but as of this update, no new dates have been set for them. ——————————————————————————————————————— UPDATE #3 (June 27th, 2020): A couple months have passed since the last update, and everything seemed to be smoothening out. We had some delays here and there, but nothing really worth noting for another update… until now. I’ll start with the one that was the deciding factor for me on whether or not to do another one. If it happened, I’d feel I would then have enough material. If it didn’t, I probably wouldn’t. I’m also starting with the most recent ones, as these were just announced earlier this week. Shockingly, this one is the least bad of the bunch for this update, as it was only pushed back by a few weeks. That would be my most anticipated movie of the entire year (as I established in the original schedule): Christopher Nolan’s Tenet. This was originally set to come out on July 17th, but was then bumped back two weeks to July 31st. Then a couple days ago, it was bumped by almost another two weeks. At the time of this update, it is now set for release on August 12th, a Wednesday. This is probably to give it more of an advantage to hopefully do well. Now we get to the ones that have not only made things worse, but also more confusing for everyone, especially me, despite my best efforts to piece everything together for you. One of the other most recent ones is actually Wonder Woman 1984. A lot of you may be wondering why this one is being mentioned here when I already covered it in a previous update. Yes, folks, this one was indeed delayed again as well. It is now set for release on October 2nd. The most recent one that’s noteworthy was set to come out on November 20th, which up until now had it set to open against Pixar’s latest movie Soul (currently set to open that same day) and No Time to Die, the new James Bond movie (which was set to open five days later). It has now been bumped to towards the end of May. That would be the culmination of the MonsterVerse so far (and hopefully, there are more after this, because I for one have really liked all of the previous entries), a new Clash of the Titans, if you will… known as Godzilla vs. Kong. I’m actually fine with this one, for two reasons: 1: I was somewhat expecting it. And 2: May is a better spot for it anyway, because had this stayed in November, both of the aforementioned movies would have more than likely crushed it. Speaking of which, what was more concerning for me and now even more so, was where they originally placed Tenet. Its original date was a week before Mulan’s first rescheduled date. Then Tenet was set for the week right after it. Here’s why: There was always a possibility Mulan would annihilate it either way. Then around the same time Tenet was moved, Mulan followed. As mentioned earlier, Tenet was slated for the 17th, with Mulan set to open the following week. Then Tenet was moved to the week after Mulan, which still hadn’t moved yet. This resulted in Wonder Woman 1984 having to be bumped again, but I’ll get back to that in a second. Now Mulan is set to open after Tenet again. However, there is a bit of breathing room in between this time. Mulan is set for August 21st. A newer one, which is one of two surprises I now have to spoil (again; thanks a lot, COVID, for making me spoil my plans!), would be Bill & Ted Face the Music. Up until recently, that was one of the few movies left that had not been affected, as it was scheduled to open towards the end of the summer, on August 21st, which of course would have placed it against Mulan. They then bumped it up a week to August 14th, which was where Wonder Woman 1984 had been slated to open upon being moved from June. However, when that was moved to October, they put Bill & Ted there. Then with the new date for Tenet, they bumped it back to August 28th to avoid competition with it. Thus, another surprise I had planned was reviewing Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure and Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey to prepare for this one. I considered mentioning one that had also been moved to that date a few months ago, but with how everything’s going right now, I don’t want to end up getting everyone excited for something that could very well be delayed yet again. All I’ll say is this in regards to that one: I still want to see it and hopefully be able to own it to complete my collection for that particular series. With that out of the way, and having established that it’s not that one (since I was planning on covering that series anyway; I still won’t mention the name, but some of you may have figured it out since I mentioned it in the original update), I unfortunately have to mention one that kind of broke my heart, because it was part of my childhood. Oddly enough, both of these surprises feature Keanu Reeves, except in this one, he has a smaller part. With how they decided to approach this one, Tenet being moved may have been what made me decide whether or not to provide a further update, but the way they decided to handle this one is actually what solidified it for me. This is the one that made me feel I had enough material to do one. For those who are very nostalgic for a particular Nickelodeon cartoon, like myself (something about a pineapple under the sea…), you may have been looking forward to heading out to the theater a third time to see him on the big screen again. I was hoping to, because I had done so for the first two movies. The animation style they decided to go with for this one had me interested, and then a few weeks ago, I heard that the director of this one (as with the director of the second one) was among the original writers for the show. In other words, he gave the fans some of the most quotable lines in numerous iconic episodes. It gave me a little bit of hope, since it felt like they knew the source material, so I was genuinely looking forward to this, because it’s always nice to look back on fond memories of something you grew up on. Folks… we are still getting the movie, don’t worry. However, it still hurts that I have to disappoint you with how we’re getting it. This sort of thing is nothing new, as it’s happened with several others, but this is the first time I’ve felt it was worth mentioning. This is the latest movie to have its theatrical release cancelled, and be put on streaming instead. The subtitle has a whole new meaning, then, because The SpongeBob Movie: Sponge on the Run is no longer coming to theaters. Instead, it will be put on VOD and CBS All Access early next year. Hopefully, it’ll eventually find its way to home media, as most of the others put on streaming ultimately did. Even if it doesn’t mean a Blu-Ray release (as much as I’d love that), if I have to resort to Digital, then I’ll take it. The best I can say about that one is that at least we’re still getting the movie. Since we have to wait a little bit longer, there is something positive that came out of this: The same week this announcement was made, the remaster of Battle for Bikini Bottom (the best, and possibly definitive, SpongeBob game) also came out. So for those who want to relive their childhood, particularly that part of it, you at least have that to hold you over. If any further announcements and delays are made, and they more than likely will be at this point, I will gladly provide the updates. ——————————————————————————————————————— UPDATE #4 (July 25th, 2020): Well… it’s happened, folks. Even more delays have occurred, a couple even being pulled indefinitely until they know when it’s safer to put them out. I’ll just say a couple things before we get started in going over this new batch. The first is that I will do a separate post where I go over the list of every delay that has happened so far, including those that were not originally scheduled to come out for at least another year. Besides, there might be some who are interested in hearing what might have been delayed beyond next year. I am also planning on doing another one going over one particular movie that was delayed even before the pandemic started, but its status at the moment I felt it’s probably best that I save for that. All I’ll say is this: I’ll be doing something a little different with this one. The second is that at least a couple of the ones I will be going over in this update are sequels to which I’ve already covered everything I needed to that came before. I’ll get to those momentarily. With that out of the way, let’s go over these. I’ll start with the ones that I’m sure will infuriate quite a few of you if they haven’t already. These two were delayed indefinitely. There are so many people I know who have been looking forward to them. The moment this first one was announced to have been pulled indefinitely, I had a feeling I would end up having enough material for another update. Flash forward to now, and evidenced by the fact that I’m doing one, I was right. This was my Most Anticipated of the entire year, and now it might end up dethroning The Batman as my Most Anticipated of 2021*, if the pandemic persists hard enough to where they end up being unable to release it before the end of 2020. If you’ve been following these updates, and recently saw my review of The Prestige, you would know that it was Tenet. As mentioned earlier, this was originally set to come out just last week. Then I mentioned in the previous update that it was bumped back twice, first to the 31st, and then again to August 12th. Now it has been pulled indefinitely. I believe other than the pandemic, there’s another reason why they decided to pull this one: The movie that was bumped to around this time. It was originally scheduled to open towards the end of March, but then after Tenet was delayed, this one followed. At the time, Tenet was still set to open on the 17th. This one was delayed to the week after it (meaning it would have opened this weekend, and more than likely crushed Tenet). Then Tenet was delayed to the week after it, in which case it still probably would have been overwhelmed by this one, as at the time it had not moved yet. Then they were bumped to just a few days apart in August: Tenet on the 12th, and this one on the 21st. Now, this, too, has been pulled indefinitely. That would be the remake of Mulan. As for the ones that have been delayed to next year, I’ll start with one of the first to be delayed because of the pandemic. That would be A Quiet Place Part II. Originally set to open a few days following the upload of the original post back in March, it was rescheduled for Labor Day weekend a few weeks later. Earlier this week, however, it was bumped back to April of 2021, which is around the time the original came out. There’s one that up until now had not been affected, and it would have come out the week after A Quiet Place Part II. Originally set for September 11th, this has now been rescheduled for June 4th, 2021. This does give me more time to cover everything that came before, though, so there is that. It’s another horror sequel, ironically enough, and that would be The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It**. It does make sense why they would put it there, however, as the first two Conjuring movies came out during the summer anyway. A couple more horror sequels were delayed. The first one is Halloween Kills, the sequel to the 2018 film, which in turn was a direct sequel to the 1978 original. As you would probably expect, this one was supposed to open this October, but was bumped to next October (and by extension, the sequel to this one, Halloween Ends, was bumped back to the following year). However, another one took its place. Originally set for release on June 12th, but then bumped to September 25th before being bumped back three weeks to October 16th, which was the original date for Halloween Kills, we have Candyman. This one, oddly enough, shares the same name as the original, much like Halloween did. It also takes the same approach as Halloween by being a direct sequel, despite being a further installment in the franchise. The delay for Candyman is actually one of the few to be mentioned on this one that are the least bad. There are a couple more positive things, but I’ll get to that in a second. Now for the latest ones that are not horror movies. Another one that’s not too bad is Death on the Nile, which was bumped back a couple weeks from October 9th to October 23rd. The biggest one to note is another one that was delayed a few months. It took a similar approach as A Quiet Place Part II by going back around to the time it was supposed to come out. This one was originally scheduled for June 26th of this year, but then was bumped close to Christmas, only to just recently be bumped back to near the Fourth of July again. The highly-anticipated sequel Top Gun: Maverick has been moved to July 2nd of next year, which was actually partially due to a different reason than you may think. I will go more into that in the post about the delays themselves. One more thing, and this is a rather interesting approach, especially for a sequel that people have wanted for so long. This one is Bill & Ted Face the Music. It was previously slated for August 28th, but was bumped back a few days to September 1st, and this is how they’re doing it with this one. They’re releasing it in select theaters (as there are a few that are open) and on VOD that same day. That’s probably the best way to see if it’s safe for people to slowly start flocking back out to the theaters once again. They take a movie that isn’t huge like Tenet, Mulan or even Top Gun, but people are still looking forward to it nonetheless, and try that with it. I wanted to end this one on a slightly brighter note, so here we go. Another one of the first to be delayed was another horror movie, Antlers. Up until recently, it had not received a new date. Now it does have one. We can expect to see it in February, which I for one am happy about, because I’ve been looking forward to this. I’ll also have a few less reviews to do with some of these, and here’s why: I’ll ultimately have already covered what I needed to prior to them. Even at least one that will be mentioned in the upcoming post applies to this. There are three among the ones mentioned at the time of this writing, with more likely to follow sometime later. The three that apply are: A Quiet Place Part II (as I reviewed the first one earlier this year) Halloween Kills (I reviewed the original and the 2018 sequel when the latter came out) and Death on the Nile (I have reviewed Murder on the Orient Express). So if there’s one good thing to take away from this update, folks, it’s that for once, I am actually free to review some newer movies when they’re released. Even with that having been said, I will provide further updates when necessary (not if… when), and be on the lookout for the couple other posts to come later. If the pandemic’s not over, you can guarantee that these updates are not over. *Apologies for having to spoil that, by the way, but blame COVID for that, not me. **Why they couldn’t just call it The Conjuring 3, I have no idea. If they were going to use a subtitle, it could have used some work. The same can be said for another sequel that I didn’t originally mention, but I digress. ——————————————————————————————————————— UPDATE #5 (September 5th, 2020): Another day, another update, folks. With the previous update coming nearly a week after uploading the Tremors review, I have some more news in regards to schedule changes, both for my own and for the release slate itself. Some good, some bad, and some in between. I won’t just start with the bad news this time. I’ll be going into the worst of the worst, and go up from there. So two updates ago, I mentioned that The SpongeBob Movie: Sponge on the Run was no longer coming to theaters. This actually applies to the US. The streaming plans for it here are still happening, but it does still have a theatrical release somewhere, as it recently opened in Canada. Not only that, but there’s also this: A mere ten days before the last update was made, Netflix acquired the international distribution rights outside of three territories: The US, Canada, and China. A similar thing happened to another movie, and at first, I felt it was actually worse up until some new information about it came to my attention just a couple days ago, which I will get to in a moment. Mulan is now being shown in some areas where theaters are open, China being one of them. America has also now received it, but on Disney+. The reason why I initially thought this was even worse was because it would be available for those who are both subscribed and willing to pay an extra 30 bucks to watch it through Premier Access. A lot of people were not happy to hear this, myself included, and for good reason. Then just a couple days ago, some more news came out about it. It turns out this is temporary, as it’s only set to go through November. Once that time is up, it’ll be available for everyone in December for free, so the only thing you’ll be having to pay for is the service itself. A lot of people are jumping at the chance to watch it now, which I understand, because they were as interested in this as I was. As for me personally, I actually feel waiting is a better idea, because on top of saving 30 bucks, I still get a chance to see the movie regardless. They stated this is supposed to be a one-off thing, so let’s just hope they meant it. There is another positive to Mulan ultimately being sent to streaming instead of in theaters: They no longer have to risk directly competing with Tenet in theaters yet again. Speaking of which, now we start getting to the good news. In between the previous update and this one, a plan was ultimately put in place for Tenet. Early screenings were held from August 31st through September 2nd, and then the release itself followed on September 3rd. September 3rd also had some significance for me, because up until then, two of the three theaters in my area had opened back up.* Now the moment has come where I can finally say this. I did not think I’d be able to do so before the end of the year... but this is one of those times where I’m glad I was wrong for once. Folks… I have all my theaters back now… and I could not be happier. If you either follow the site (particularly these updates), know me in general, or both, you have a pretty good idea how long I’ve been waiting for this. The first one to reopen was my local Regal just a little over two weeks ago. I took full advantage of celebrating it by seeing the first new movie to open in six months. I am working on the review right now as we speak, along with several others, but I might start with that. Not long after that, one of the other two theaters in town had reopened, and now both of them are back in business, and I can get back to reviewing new releases again. In the previous update, I mentioned doing two separate posts, one going over every delay we’ve had thus far, and one going over one particular movie that had faced several delays well before the pandemic for numerous reasons. In fact, only the last delay was due to the pandemic. I held off on revealing what it was because I didn’t want to hold out hope for it, only for it to be delayed yet again. The date held this time, and it has finally been released, so I can say this: I won’t have to do the latter post now. I’ll go over the delays in the review. However, while I plan on seeing it within the next couple days or so, I have to go by one of my rules before I can review it. Whenever a new release is part of a franchise, I feel like it’s best to have covered everything that came before in order to provide a proper context. There are a couple more I have planned to see, so I will go into at least one in the next update, so stay tuned for that. *Technically, four, but the other one is a dollar theater for movies that are on their way out before they hit home media, and that’s usually a last resort for me (plus, that one is the only one in my area that is still closed anyway). The three I’m mentioning here I’ve been waiting to reopen because I usually go as soon as I can the moment a movie I’m interested in is released. ——————————————————————————————————————— UPDATE #6 (September 25th, 2020): Well… this was unexpected. I’m having to do two updates in the span of a month. There have been more delays that happened in between, folks. Before we get to that, however, I do have some good news. I have seen three movies since the previous update. The first one came the day it went up. This is the first time in as long as I can remember where I was equally looking forward to both seeing the movie itself and doing the review of it, and for those who have been following these updates especially, you’ll probably know what it is. The second I saw a few days later. I hinted at it in the previous update, even though everyone probably already knows what that one is, too. The third was one of the surprises I had to spoil back in Update #3. The first of these three is an original movie, while the other two are both new entries in a franchise, so I still have to follow my franchise rule for them. Now on to the new delays. We’ve had quite a few on this one, folks, as they’ve started picking back up again. There was one that happened just last week, and we were so close to receiving another new release. They first pulled this with A Quiet Place Part II when they initially delayed it a few days before its original release date back in March. Since it has now happened again, I’m starting with this one. The new Gerard Butler movie, the disaster film Greenland, we would have received this weekend. The reason we didn’t is because they bumped it before we could. It’s now been bumped to Winter of this year, with a new date currently unspecified, as this is now the fourth time it’s been delayed. Speaking of unspecified, there was one set for this weekend, but had been bumped prior. Oddly enough, it’s been the fourth time here as well, which is one short of how many times you say his name before he appears. That’s right, folks. Candyman has been delayed again… and I had actually watched the original again for both my review of it and to prepare for this one, too. This has been moved to next year, with no specific date announced yet here, either. To make matters even worse, there are more we were so close to getting, and I’ll start with the one that was set to open following Greenland. This one would have come out next week. It’s been delayed a couple times already. That would be Wonder Woman 1984, which has now been bumped back to Christmas Day. That’s good for it that it still gets released this year (for now). However, this creates a problem: Warner Bros. is now more or less competing against themselves, as they have had Dune set for the week of December 18th. I have predicted pretty much since Day One that that movie would likely get bumped, and as much as they plan to keep it there (which they do, by the way), they’re going to have to bump it if they want it to have a chance, and if they want to be able to make the second part.* This is especially true now, since another movie was recently bumped back to its spot. This one was originally set to open the week of October 9th, and then was bumped back a couple weeks to the 23rd, as mentioned in Update #4. That would be Death on the Nile, which now gives Dune competition again. The first time it didn’t seem like too much of a problem, but then Top Gun: Maverick was bumped back to around Christmas before that was bumped back again to pretty much its original placement, just a year later. As for what was originally placed near Dune, that would be Steven Spielberg’s latest project: His version of West Side Story. This has been bumped back by almost a year, to next December (only a week off from its original date). So for those who still have nightmares about Cats, you’ll have to wait a little bit longer before you can get rid of them. I’m just going to move on from that so I am not deemed liable for any potential PTSD flashbacks from any poor souls out there who sat through it so I don’t have to. Speaking of nightmares, we get to the biggest one of this new batch. I thought the domino effect from last time was bad… this time was worse, because we also had a date swap. The entire slate of movies in Phase Four of the Marvel Cinematic Universe has been moved further out. With shows set in said universe, that’s a different story. We are still getting one of them this year, but more on that in a moment. As a fair amount of you may be well aware of by now, Black Widow was set to kick this Phase off back on May 1st, before being bumped to November 6th. It has now been bumped back to May 7th, 2021. It’s still set as the first entry of Phase Four, but then this is where the date swap also comes in. The original plan was to have Eternals follow that up, with Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings in turn following that. When the pandemic first hit, Eternals was set for November 6th, with Shang-Chi to follow on February 12th to coincide with the first day of the Chinese New Year (keep that date in mind, folks). Then when Black Widow was moved, everything else followed suit. Then just recently, it happened again, except this time, Black Widow has the May date that Shang-Chi had. That movie is now set for July, but now Eternals is following it, having been scheduled for next November. In other words, 2020 will be the first year since 2009 with no new installment in the MCU arriving in theaters (Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk kicked it off in 2008, but it wouldn’t be until 2010 onwards that we’d get at least one a year, starting that summer with Iron Man 2). I’m going to try to end this one on a more positive note. We are still getting something in February, as it turns out. The King’s Man, the latest installment in the Kingsman franchise, was bumped back once again a couple weeks ago to February 26th, but then something good happened. They bumped it up a couple weeks to February 12th (see?), so we might just have something to do for Valentine’s Day Weekend. In regards to the Disney ones, none of the aforementioned MCU films were announced as going straight to Disney+ instead. Thus, it seems they not only stated the Premier Access experiment with Mulan would be a one-off thing, but they actually kept their word. We are still set to get at least one Disney movie before the end of the year, that being the other Pixar film this year, Soul, which was confirmed to still have a theatrical release on November 20th as planned. Although Black Widow was bumped out, leaving us without an MCU movie for this year, we are still getting one of the Disney+ shows this year, with WandaVision set for a debut in December. So even though fans of that franchise, especially huge ones like myself, won’t be able to get their fix for the year in the way they hoped with at least one movie and maybe a show, at least we’re still getting something with that. Now for the one to cap this one off. If there is one good thing that we’ve known all year we would certainly be getting, that would be Season 2 of The Mandalorian, which starts in just a few weeks. Thus, I can announce something new to come in terms of reviews. Though my main focus is of course on movies, I never left shows out of the question, and in fact I had been considering it for some time. I can announce the first one I plan to cover, and I knew from the moment I finished it that I would want to start here. I have of course decided to start with Season 1 of The Mandalorian. As for when the review of Season 1 will be up, I don’t know. I just felt it was more important to announce it anyway. I initially felt like waiting until the shows from Marvel Studios themselves started before I decided to go ahead and expand to TV reviews (since they do tie in with the movies), but then I saw that, and I changed it to that. Having announced that, I will incorporate them when I can, and do ones that won’t cause me to shift the review schedule around too much, especially when there might be some that I really want to do. I’ll start with shorter shows first, and maybe somewhere down the line, I’ll expand into longer-running ones. *For those who don’t know, this new version of Dune is set to be a two-part adaptation of Frank Herbert’s iconic sci-fi novel, with this movie set to cover roughly the first half, and a planned followup to cover the second. ——————————————————————————————————————— Update #7 (October 6th, 2020): Not even two weeks later, and I already have more material for another update, folks. This actually began with the same movie I started with last time, which was Greenland. Five days after the last update (the same day it was originally set for a theatrical release), it was announced that Greenland would be going straight to streaming. Those who happen to have HBO Max, you’ll be receiving it there if you’re in the US, while internationally (namely the UK, Canada, and Australia), those interested can see it if they happen to have Amazon Prime. While we’re on the subject of streaming, one movie I was interested in, Run (the followup of Indian-American director Aneesh Chaganty, who made one of my favorite movies of 2018 with Searching) was also moved to a streaming service. It was originally set to open back in May right on time for Mother’s Day Weekend. You’ll be able to finally see it on Hulu starting November 20th. The next two are ironically the first two that were affected when all this chaos started: No Time to Die and F9. The former was most recently set to open on November 25th, just in time for Thanksgiving. However, October 1st came and denied us of that yet again, as it was announced that they had decided to bump the movie back to April 2nd, 2021, and then another domino effect happened. That slot was originally placed for F9 after being originally scheduled for release back in May. It has now been bumped to May 28th, 2021 in order to give the April slot to No Time to Die. Making matters worse is this: The moment they heard that No Time to Die had been bumped back again, Regal decided to close a lot of their locations… including my own. It’ll only be a matter of time before my two local theaters are affected as well. I’ll close this update out with something that I had predicted pretty much since Day One. I mentioned this last time, too. It had been set for the week before Christmas, but then it had direct competition when Wonder Woman 1984 was moved to Christmas Day, thus making Warner Bros. compete with themselves. I had a feeling that they would have to bump it if they wanted it to have a chance of both doing well on its own and doing well enough so they can make the second part. And I was right. Ladies and gentlemen, you’ll have to wait 10 more months before you can see Dune. It has been bumped to October 1st, 2021. This in turn caused them to bump what was inarguably my Most Anticipated Movie of 2021 out into 2022, a few weeks after they released the trailer promoting a 2021 release date: The Batman. I’ll be going more into that in the next update, because I said it before, and I’ll say it again: Until the delays stop and everything goes back to normal (or rather as close to normal as it was), the updates will not. We might be approaching the point where there’s hardly anything left to come out in 2020, and I’ll have to move on to the second post I hinted at doing back in Update #4. Yes, I mentioned originally doing two posts, one going over everything in regards to these delays, and the other going over the delays for one particular movie which had been delayed multiple times already, with only the last one being due to the pandemic. However, as mentioned in Update #5, I ultimately scrapped having to do that second one, because I didn’t need to. I have now decided to still do a second post, but in regards to these delays. What was originally going to be two parts has now been expanded to three. Part 1 is where I cover everything delayed from this year, as I’ve been doing for a good portion of it, which is also the reason why I haven’t been able to do as many reviews as intended. The pandemic resulted in me not having nearly enough new material to work with. Part 2, which I’ll be moving on to next following this update, is where I cover everything originally scheduled for as early as next year. Then Part 3 is where I just go over literally everything, and although I’ll be recapping everything from Parts 1 and 2, that’s necessary because it will also include every date change anyway, even some scheduled beyond next year. That’s right, folks; even ones scheduled further out have been affected, too. So I’ll be back soon with another Schedule Update post that can be considered Part 2 of the “Delay Dissection” Saga. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2020/1/18/thoughts-on-underwater-2020 monthly 0.5 2020-04-15 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1579379197873-IJCFIH45J8L1XPII9T99/%28Thoughts+On%29+Underwater.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Underwater (2020) Image courtesy of wallpapersafari.com Hello, everyone. As I promised in the post regarding the new schedule, my next review would be coming soon. Now, here it is. You might be surprised by this one, as much as I was with the movie itself, so let’s dive in with my first review of both 2020 and the new decade. Folks, I present to you my review of Underwater. The story follows a team of scientists tasked with drilling for resources at the bottom of the ocean. However, during their mission, part of their station, the Kepler 822, is hit by a massive earthquake. Upon regrouping, they realize that the longer they stay there, the more the rest of the Kepler will succumb to the pressure. They decide that their best chance of surviving is to suit up and go to another station, the Roebuck 641, that’s more stable, despite being a mile away. Unfortunately, the slowly increasing pressure is the least of their problems... because once they set out to find the Roebuck, they not only have to face total darkness, but also what dangers might be lurking within it. On top of that, what seemed to be just a natural disaster may be something much more frightening. Before I get into my thoughts on this, there is something that needs to be addressed: I am aware of the criticism stating this is just another Alien clone, and therefore I am aware of some parallels between that movie and this one. However, if I go over them here, it’ll more than likely involve major spoilers, and I usually try my best not to do that. Now, do I share that same sentiment that it’s just another knockoff of Alien with a different coat of paint? No, because there are several things that stood out to me with this that gave it a slight edge. That doesn’t mean I consider it better than Alien as an overall movie, let alone as a sci-fi horror movie (it’s not). Thus, it also doesn’t mean that I felt it was a beat-for-beat remake of it. If anything, I felt it was more inspired by Alien and trying to be its own thing. I’ll go more in depth on that in a moment, but for now, let’s get to my thoughts. What Worked: Although the majority of the time I usually start with the cast anyway, there’s a particular reason why it’s important that I go over the lead right away on this one. Our main protagonist, Norah Price, is played by Kristen Stewart. Some of you may instantly be hesitant to see this movie upon hearing she’s even in it at all. While I can certainly agree that her character could have been played by anyone else, the fact that she was in it didn’t make me all of a sudden not want to see it. The premise alone was enough to keep me interested. Plus, you’ll be surprised in hearing this as much as I was while watching it… I honestly kind of liked her in this. It may take some time for you to buy her as a mechanical engineer, sure, but ultimately, you grow to like her character over the course of the movie, mainly because she puts everyone else before herself. The fact that I liked her in this was a more than welcome surprise for me, especially after the last movie she was in, Charlie’s Angels In Name Only*. Therefore, to say I needed that would be an understatement. As for the rest of the cast, there’s Vincent Cassel (Black Swan, Jason Bourne) as Captain Lucien, who suggests that they walk the mile over to the Roebuck. He’s the rational one of the group, trying to keep everyone calm and focused, yet also keeping something from them. He balanced those aspects very well in his performance, and I really liked his character. What also genuinely surprised me is how his secret was handled within the context of the story. It’s mostly kept in mystery as to what he knew, what he experienced, etc., because it’s after a certain thing happens in the middle of the movie, which leads everyone else to discover it for themselves. Then we have John Gallagher Jr. (10 Cloverfield Lane, The Belko Experiment**) as Liam Smith, a fellow engineer, and Jessica Henwick (Marvel’s Iron Fist, the upcoming Godzilla vs. Kong) as Emily Haversham, a biologist. Even though Smith doesn’t really get to do much, there’s a reason for that; besides, I still felt John Gallagher Jr.’s performance was solid enough, despite probably being the weakest out of everyone. As for Jessica Henwick, I thought she was awesome in this. Emily’s actions ultimately make her another strong female character. There are two other scientists in the group. The first is Rodrigo Nagenda, played by Mamoudou Athie. Although he’s only in it for a few minutes, I still really liked him for the time he was in it. I also think he will get more attention with a more high-profile project coming out next summer that’s part of an established franchise. The second is the comic relief for this movie: Paul Abel, played by T.J. Miller (perhaps best known as Weasel, the sidekick from Deadpool). Then again, really any movie he’s given a supporting role in has him as the comic relief, and this one is no exception. However, he’s not the type of comic relief that ends up being more obnoxious than hilarious. He’s genuinely funny in this, and most of his jokes are in the first few minutes of his screen time early on in the movie. Aside from that, he uses them sparingly, and they never feel out of place. The last major cast member listed for this movie is worth noting for one reason. For any gamers out there reading this review, particularly those who happen to be fans of the Dead Space series, Gunner Wright, the voice of main protagonist Isaac Clarke himself, is also in this. Look out for a scene involving a transmission being played back for the crew, and you’ll hear him. Now for the technical aspects. I still found the plot very interesting, despite it appearing as inspired by Alien. Here’s where the several things that give this a slight edge over it come in. The first is the setting: Instead of a ship, this is set at the bottom of the ocean, which is a bigger environment with pretty much the only contained environments being the stations themselves. Therefore, rather than the creature attacking us in our own territory, they’re attacking us in theirs. On top of that, it’s as dark as you can possibly go, so since the surroundings are bigger, when the creatures strike, it’s more unpredictable. They can literally be anywhere, and you won’t see them coming. Being in an environment like that is genuinely scary. With that being said, this doesn’t mean that the scares are jump scares you can see coming a mile away. They’re still jump scares, but they’re genuinely effective ones here. Then there’s the time it takes for the chaos to begin. Buildup may be more suspenseful, but sometimes just getting right into it helps. If you’ve seen the trailer, it actually fools you into thinking it builds up. Where you see the station start to become unstable… it opens with that, and doesn’t let up. It’s literally one of the first scenes in the movie, and it just gets more unsettling and more intense from there. Of course, when you have a creature feature, you’re bound to have some brutal kills in it. This is where it also doesn’t hold anything back. For a PG-13 movie, it felt like it was a hard PG-13 to where it was right on the cusp of being an R, particularly with one death scene halfway into the movie. All I’ll say is this: you’ll probably never look at diving suits the same way ever again. The last thing that stood out to me and made this feel like its own thing is the main reason why I definitely didn’t want to go into spoilers on this one, because in this case, it would be a huge spoiler. This would be the ending. How it plays out is insane, because it has this big reveal that I did not see coming. That last part is where I get to what automatically piqued my interest in this up a couple notches: The director, William Eubank. This isn’t the first time he’s had a big reveal like that in a movie. I first saw that in his last movie, The Signal, which I loved, and that was only his second movie. Having now seen his third, his style is really starting to impress me. Even though I haven’t seen his first movie, titled Love (another sci-fi movie), with The Signal and now this, I believe he’s becoming one of the most underrated directors working today. I not only want to seek out his first movie, but after this, he has two projects lined up next. Whenever they come out, I will definitely be looking forward to them. One of them is an action movie, so being the fan of action movies that I am already, I’m absolutely in for that. The other one is similar to this, and it’ll of course have a sci-fi twist on it, and I’m intrigued to see what that’ll have to offer. It’s also worth noting that Marco Beltrami is one of the composers. His score here is really good, although with a composer of his caliber, that can be expected. For evidence of that, he has a very wide range of various genre experiences from his early work in the 90s up to now. Some of his most recent work prior to this includes Ford v Ferrari, A Quiet Place, and Logan. One more excellent thing on display here is the cinematography. Simply put, this movie looks fantastic. In regards to flaws, I would say the creature effects could have used a little work, but the designs themselves make up for that. Something that could have used some tweaking was the writing. It needed to make this feel more like its own thing in terms of the characters and their traits in addition to the narrative rather than mainly in the narrative. That’s really my main flaw, but I’m still willing to give it a pass because everything around it is so surprisingly good. Overall: While not original, Underwater still has a lot going for it to make it stand out up against what came before. It’s not as scary as Alien, but it does have some elements that are scarier. Did I expect it to be better than a sci-fi classic? Of course not. Was I expecting a fun time with a sci-fi thriller that’s like it, but kind of its own thing, yet still entertaining from start to finish? Yes, and it’s exactly that. What’s most impressive with this is all the production value that went into it. You’d think the budget was higher than it is, like maybe 100-120 million dollars, to warrant something of this quality. However, it looks really good for a movie budgeted at only 50-80 million. The acting is solid, even from Kristen Stewart. It’s shot very well, it’s intense throughout, and the creatures, in both design and effects, are as frightening as the environment they inhabit. The score is great, as you’d expect from someone like Marco Beltrami. It's so brutal in terms of deaths that you really would feel like it was rated R. All of this comes together in one of my biggest surprises of the year so far. It’s definitely the most underrated so far for me. It makes it all the more sad that it didn’t do well, because it really does deserve more attention. For a January movie, a surprise such as this is a more than welcome one, especially from a director who hopefully gets more recognition in the future. It’s one of the better January movies in recent memory for sure. We have two other surprisingly good ones that I’ll be reviewing soon. But in addition to those, see Underwater when you can. It’s better than the trailer made it out to be. Much like in the movie, there’s so much more underneath the surface. *Yes, I’ve seen it. Just you wait, folks… because when the time comes (and it will), I have something very special planned for that, which you can consider my review of it; doing it in my usual format is barely scratching the surface, and you’ll know why. I may at least do reviews of the original two movies (AKA the ones that were actually good; seriously, they’re a lot better than people give them credit for). **The latter in particular is an underrated movie. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/12/24/schedule-adjustment monthly 0.5 2020-03-29 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1577207683191-LMHCEWRE6EV7YHIXMB55/%28Temporary%29+Logo.jpg Blog - Schedule Adjustment Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that. Hello, everyone. With both the 2010s having just concluded, and a new decade having just begun, there’s some adjustments to the schedule that I would like to make. For those eager to see what’s on the schedule for 2020 going forward, I will get to it, but first, there’s something that needs to be addressed. Since I started, and especially over the course of last year, I’ve realized that I’ve made a habit of overloading the schedule with reviews I hoped to do. As a result, this led to a lot of them not coming as planned. That does not mean that they won’t ever be made (of course they will), just much later than initially intended. From now on, I have decided to only announce what is either most likely or definitely expected, and any others I plan to do will be done in between and on my own time, including some long-overdue ones to make up for that. Now, on to the schedule itself. As such, here’s what I plan to review for the first year of the new decade: Every DC Extended Universe movie up to this point (Man of Steel, Batman v Superman, Suicide Squad, Wonder Woman, Justice League, Aquaman, and Shazam!). This was originally intended to be leading up to Birds of Prey*, but considering what I might start with, I may end up having to include that in the lead-up to Wonder Woman 1984 instead, since that comes out later in the year. One of the long-overdue reviews: A Quiet Place, since the sequel is coming out this year. The Bond franchise, with No Time to Die (the 25th Bond movie) coming out this year as well. In regards to these scheduled reviews, I’ll most likely start with that, since it’s one of the longest-running film franchises ever. The Marvel Cinematic Universe Catch-Up Reviews I promised last year, which, to recap, are the following movies: Avengers: Infinity War, Ant-Man and the Wasp, Captain Marvel, Avengers: Endgame, and Spider-Man: Far From Home. These are not only the concluding chapters of what we now know as The Infinity Saga, but also the stepping stones for a new beginning, as Phase Four kicks off this year with the release of both Black Widow and The Eternals. The Fast and the Furious franchise reviews will most likely also happen this year since the ninth installment in the main series is coming out. If not, it will be a certainty for next year because that’s apparently when the franchise will end. I might also do Ghostbusters this year, since Ghostbusters: Afterlife, which is being touted as the proper third installment everyone wanted, releases this year. Having just said that, I should probably include the most recent attempt at reviving the franchise as well. That way, a proper context as to why they’re trying again so soon will have been established. An absolute certainty is my most anticipated movie of the entire year: Christopher Nolan’s Tenet. If you thought something like Inception played mind tricks on you, judging by the first trailer for this alone, this might actually top it. However, it won’t stop there. There are plenty others I haven’t mentioned, and since it’s the beginning of a new decade, I figured why not just surprise everyone with the rest, and so starting this year, I’ll do just that. With all that having been said, I’ll be back with my next review. What might that be? You’ll just have to wait and see, folks, so look forward to that soon, and I’ll see you there! *I will just call it Birds of Prey throughout the review, including in the title. The full title is really only worth mentioning once, similar to how it’s been promoted, particularly in the TV spots. The full title is shown because it’s the logo, but only Birds of Prey is stated out loud in voiceover; I will take that same approach in reviewing it. I will even reiterate that when the time comes for me to do the review. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/3/2/thoughts-on-the-crow-1994 monthly 0.5 2020-03-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1551561021943-V4LASAXAIMYMXC5MI9B3/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Crow.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Crow (1994) Image courtesy of getwallpapers.com Hello, everyone. Long time, no see. I realize that, again, I haven’t been posting much this year, but I’ve been trying my best to make up for that. I had several ideas for what to come back with, but I decided that with the holiday featured here, I figured, “Why not come back with this?”, and so I am. I also figured it’d be the perfect time to do it, since it’d not only be around the holiday itself, but also since this year marks the 25th Anniversary of the movie. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you my review of one of the best comic book movies out there (and one that isn’t from Marvel nor DC, I should add), and that is… The Crow. The story follows Eric Draven, a rock star who was supposed to get married on Halloween. Unfortunately, the night before, known as Devil’s Night (an infamous occasion in Detroit), a gang broke into their apartment and trashed the place, resulting in both he and his fiancée Shelly Webster dead, with Shelly having also been beaten and raped. However, legend has it that if the conditions of your death are bad enough to where your soul can’t be at peace, a crow will bring your soul back to right the wrongs. One year after he and Shelly were killed, a crow taps on Eric’s grave, bringing him back. Upon revival, Eric goes after all of the gang members, picking them off one by one to reach the boss responsible for everything that happened. What Worked: The acting across the board is fantastic. Brandon Lee (Bruce’s son), who tragically passed away during filming as a result of an accident on set, gives a phenomenal performance as Eric Draven. You feel his pain to where you’re rooting for him immediately to take the gang down, and every time he goes after one of the members, it’s satisfying to see them get what’s coming to them. Brandon Lee has some great, and quite emotional, scenes with Rochelle Davis, who plays Sarah, a friend of Eric and Shelly. Sarah provides narration that bookends the movie, and the moment her opening narration ends, you’re in for a gratifying experience. Despite the dark tone and the Gothic look for Detroit, the movie does have some humorous moments with Sergeant Albrecht, played by Ernie Hudson of Ghostbusters fame. He has a snarky personality, but the humor mainly comes from banter in scenes with Sarah or Eric, and, on at least one occasion, both. There are two scenes where it’s particularly funny. One is where Eric pops in and Albrecht still has his hat on, which Eric notices almost immediately. The other is basically where there’s a Batman-Gordon dynamic between Eric and Albrecht, where Albrecht turns around and Eric is gone, similar to how Batman does it after he’s done speaking with Commissioner Gordon. Speaking of which, there are several times where you can tell this likely influenced The Dark Knight. There’s that dynamic, a scene where Eric disappears and Albrecht turns to Sarah, telling her, “He does that a lot.” (similar to how Batman did it with Gordon and Harvey Dent, to which Gordon tells Dent, “He does that.”), and perhaps the most famous one is a scene involving a meeting. This movie also has some of the most despicable villains you’ll ever see. The gang members (Tin-Tin, Funboy, T-Bird, and Skank) may be psychotic, but the most evil of them all is their boss Top Dollar, played by Michael Wincott (Treasure Planet*). He is just insane, and his voice is menacing. Then you get to his henchman, Grange, played by Tony Todd (Final Destination), whose voice is deep enough to intimidate anyone. Every time I see him, he’s awesome, and it holds true here. Everyone else is really good, even if they’re not in it that much, aside from maybe David Patrick Kelly (Sully from Commando) as T-Bird and Angel David as Skank, who get the most screentime of the four gang members. In addition to the performances, especially that of Brandon Lee, where this movie really stands out is the visual style, along with the surprising amount of emotion for a revenge movie. It may be grim and gritty, but it also has some excellent cinematography from Dariusz Wolski, who would go on to shoot the first four installments of the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, as well as a few of Sir Ridley Scott’s more recent projects like Prometheus, The Martian, and Alien: Covenant. It accompanies Alex Proyas’s direction perfectly, which I will cover momentarily. As if certain scenes between Eric and Sarah weren’t emotional enough, the score from Graeme Revell (known for scoring the Riddick franchise, Daredevil, and Sin City, among numerous others) really brings it home, namely the theme. Aside from Daredevil, this has probably his best theme. I will say this, though: Something else that the two movies share is that the soundtrack is awesome, featuring songs from Rage Against the Machine, The Cure, and even Nine Inch Nails. When it’s not emotional, the movie delivers great action sequences. The best ones are Eric’s fight with Tin-Tin, the aforementioned meeting scene, and the finale. The excitement and emotion are very well-balanced through the direction of Alex Proyas, who brings a clear sense of bleakness to his style, which is evident in the look of his follow-up, Dark City, the disaster-centric plot of Knowing, and to an extent, the tone of I, Robot. However, I still think this is his best movie. The premise of this movie is also great, and it has some of the best story structure you can see. From the first frame, you know how dark the setting is, you’re instantly engaged in the story, and you care about the characters. You want to root for the hero throughout, and you can’t wait for the villains to be taken down. It may be fast-paced, but not once does it feel rushed. It flows very naturally, and as a result, the ending and all of the emotional and exciting story beats building up to it are earned. Overall: The Crow is not only a great comic book movie, but it’s a great movie period that needs to be seen at least once, even if the dark and gritty approach isn’t your thing overall. While it does have a dark appearance, it’s not overly dark, as it does have its share of humor. It has just the right amount of emotional depth for both the story and characters mixed in with some fantastic action. It’s very well shot, well directed, and especially well acted. It makes it all the more sad that a star died doing what he loved while making this, because Brandon Lee really could have had his big break here, and gone on to have many more defining roles for years to come, establishing a legacy of his own like his father did. Because of what happened, it’s nothing short of a miracle that they were able to finish it and release it, but because they did, everyone was better for it, being able to experience something awesome. Although its star didn’t really get to have a legacy, the movie itself certainly has, becoming a huge hit and a cult classic, and for good reason: It rightfully earned it. I remembered really liking this movie the last time I saw it, but having seen it again, both for myself and for this review, it ended up being even better than I remembered. Words cannot describe how much I love this movie. If you haven’t seen it, be prepared for some heavy stuff, but once you do see it, I guarantee that you’ll be glad you did. *Criminally underrated animated movie, by the way, and I cannot wait to get to that, along with a couple other ones I feel similarly about (one of which was also scored by Graeme Revell). https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/9/1/thoughts-on-ready-or-not-2019 monthly 0.5 2020-03-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567353258415-UICF1IVLGFE8MU7B12M3/%28Thoughts+On%29+Ready+or+Not.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Ready or Not (2019) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com Since the summer is about to end with Labor Day Weekend, and the year’s offerings of horror movies are only about to get bigger with the release of It: Chapter Two, it was about time I reviewed another horror movie or thriller. As with Crawl a few weeks ago, with this one, the marketing also made it look at least okay… but then I started hearing the word of mouth for it was actually really good, and it was another one of the biggest surprises of the year. To start off the long weekend, I decided to check it out for myself, and everything I had heard was true. This really is one of the biggest surprises of the year. So here I come… with my review for Ready or Not. The story follows the Le Domas family, who are not only rich, but have a particular tradition. Any time someone in the family gets married, on the night of the wedding, they play a game. One of the sons, Alex, marries a young woman named Grace, thus allowing for the tradition to continue. When the clock strikes midnight, Grace learns how the tradition works: The newest addition to the family draws a card from a wooden box and whatever game was put on the card is the game they play. This time, the game is Hide and Seek. She has to hide, and the rest of the family has to find her. However, it turns out that there’s a catch to the game which is also part of the tradition: The family has to hunt down their newest member before dawn. What Worked: The main thing that makes this movie so surprising is the tone. It may have been sold as just another horror movie with a ridiculous premise, but what wasn’t revealed well in advance is this: There’s a sense of self-awareness to it. It knows its premise is ridiculous, and just runs with it. As a result, it becomes more of a horror comedy*. I had heard a little bit about the self-awareness going in, but what really caught me off guard while watching it was how funny it was. When there’s either a witty line of dialogue, a kill that comes out of nowhere (the latter of which does happen a couple times), or even a moment of downtime, it’s hilarious, and sometimes it’s all three. Both the movie and the experience become that much more fun because of it. The mix of horror and humor benefit from a clever script, as there are some intense moments here with some comedy thrown in. The biggest example for me was a scene set in the kitchen; for anyone interested in checking this movie out, look out for that. All of this especially shows in the performances, particularly Samara Weaving as Grace. She’s fantastic in this movie. In fact, everyone is really good, even Henry Czerny as the father Tony, and Andie MacDowell as the mother Becky. They all play off of each other very well with their performances, which in turn shows in the interaction between the characters. There are four other things that stand out here: The set design, the cinematography, the direction and the score. I mentioned the kitchen scene, but the set design throughout the whole movie is excellent. The same goes for the cinematography and the direction, because this movie is well shot throughout. It’s also moments like the kitchen scene and the ones that focus on scares**, regardless of whether or not they set up a comedic moment, where Brian Tyler’s score really shines. One more thing that’s worth noting: It’s fast-paced. The movie is only a little over an hour and a half, and it does go by quickly, but not once does it feel like it’s going by too quickly. What Didn’t Work: I do have a couple minor flaws. There are some questionable decisions, an example being how something is established with one of the women in the family, and yet one of the men gives her his weapon. The moment that happens, you just know it’s clearly going to go well. However, it does lead to a running gag and one of the funniest moments of the movie, which involves that character and weapon. The reason why the family is trying to hunt Grace down is brought up several times, which makes the ending kind of predictable because of it. It does build up to an ultimately very satisfying payoff, though. What happens is predictable, but how it happens is not. I honestly thought it was going to happen in one of several different ways, and that was not the first one that came to mind for me. Plus, it’s so unexpected that it becomes another hilarious moment. Otherwise, that’s really it. Overall: Ready or Not is the latest example of taking a horror movie or thriller that at first glance sounds ridiculous, and then revealing that there’s more to it than you thought. As with Crawl, this is another case of “Looks can be deceiving” or “Don’t judge a book by its cover” (or rather a movie by its trailer; same difference), because you never really know what you might be in for until you see it for yourself. It’s also a movie that uses the absurdity of its story to its advantage by playing it silly rather than straight, and it’s much better for it. With just the right balance of horrific and hilarious moments, a great score, smart writing, terrific set design, cinematography and direction, and fantastic acting featuring an excellent lead performance from Samara Weaving, Ready or Not is one of the biggest surprises of both the summer and of the whole year. If you’re looking for a movie to see before you start your Fall Movie Season off, be it with something like It: Chapter Two or even Rambo: Last Blood, I’d say give this one a shot, especially if you’re someone who feels horror movies are best experienced at night and with as big a crowd as possible. You might just end up having one of the most fun experiences you’ve had all year, as I did. *Yes, horror comedy is an actual sub-genre of horror (Scream, need I say more). **Including a scene involving a nail, which is so unsettling… even if it’s not quite as unsettling as the nail scene in A Quiet Place. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/7/5/thoughts-on-crawl-2019 monthly 0.5 2020-03-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1562343323235-2PGWX3NLN41ZLMRYXK9S/%28Thoughts+On%29+Crawl.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Crawl (2019) Image courtesy of wallpapersden.com As I mentioned in the intro of the Deep Blue Sea review, there is another movie that came out the same month of its Anniversary. It’s another creature feature, albeit a more recent one, but it does the same thing that made Deep Blue Sea so effective: Build up the scares, and have creatures that are scary enough already to encounter in real life just pop out when you least expect it in ways that actually work. With Deep Blue Sea, it was sharks. This time it’s alligators, in the best thriller of the year by far: Crawl. The story follows a woman named Haley Keller who hasn’t heard from her father Dave for sometime. To make matters worse, a Category 5 hurricane hits Florida, so she goes to the family’s old house to try to find him and get him out. However, while she does manage to find him in the crawl space, the area is not only slowly flooding… vicious alligators have found their way in. What Worked: The acting is really good, especially from Kaya Scodelario and Barry Pepper*. They have great chemistry as father and daughter, too, and there are also some moments that make you really feel for them. There’s that sense of dread and you want to see them make it out alive. The creature effects are fantastic in this movie, particularly this one shot involving a close-up of a gator’s eye. Whenever the gators show up, they look great, and there’s one part that looks as excellent as the aforementioned eye shot. It involves one corner of the crawl space, which is as best I can put it without giving too much away. It also involves something else crawling on, rather than in, someone’s skin. It’s one of the most unsettling scenes here aside from the gator attacks and kills. Also, Alexandre Aja ends up being the perfect choice to direct this movie, as he’s had experience with creature features before, and ones that embrace their crazy stories; for evidence of that, look at his version of Piranha. Now let’s get to the meat of this movie (no pun intended). The gator attack scenes are so brutal, and I don’t just mean the kills. You see people get thrashed around like rag dolls, with Haley’s first gator encounter being the most intense one, as well as bone fractures. If those don’t make you wince, the kills certainly will. Be on the lookout for one involving a cop… not the one in the trailer, but one shortly after that. This leads me to another thing that Aja did so well with Piranha that he does again here: He knows how to do shock value, and especially gore, properly. Unlike most other horror directors who tend to put them in for the sake of having them in the movie, he builds them up, and then uses them when you least expect it. As a result, you’re constantly on edge. He handles the scares in the same way. Yes, there are jump scares, but they all felt genuine to me. I did not spot a single false alarm** jump scare. Even the background scares will have you on edge, like one in the same scene with the goriest death in the movie. The score and cinematography are also very good. What Didn’t Work: Some of the scares you may see coming, where you can call who’s going to die in those scenes almost immediately. There are some stupid decisions here as well, but they’re minimal at best. I also had a minor issue with how it ended. It was satisfying, but then it just cut to black when it did and the credits began rolling. I would have liked for it to go on for maybe another couple minutes or so. That’s really it in terms of flaws, though. Overall: If you’re looking for something to see on Friday night, with as big an audience as possible, Crawl is the movie for you. It’s intense, it’s scary, it’s gory as can be, but it’s also a lot of fun. Besides, while you may see some of the scares coming… how they happen, you definitely won’t, and the characters are very resourceful for the most part. It’s easily one of the year’s biggest surprises, and it might be my pick for Best Thriller by the end of the year, unless another thriller somehow finds a way to top it. *In a Maze Runner reunion, by the way. **That’s the term used to describe cheap jump scares, the biggest example being whenever an animal (usually a cat) jumps out from the shadows and runs across the room. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/1/27/thoughts-on-deep-blue-sea-1999 monthly 0.5 2020-03-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1548617408314-EO5W8AKA9D2Z6QB7MW7U/%28Thoughts+On%29+Deep+Blue+Sea.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Deep Blue Sea (1999) Image courtesy of moviemania.io It’s that time again, everyone: Another month, another Anniversary post… and coincidentally, right in the middle of Shark Week. That’s right, folks: This one is for a shark movie (no, not that one; that’s next year, although it is referenced here at least once, and the influence it had on this one is there to some extent). It’s a very intense thriller, and my personal favorite shark movie that isn’t Jaws. It’s very scary at points, but it does what would be done to equally great effect in the recently-released Crawl: Build up the scares, and have creatures that are scary enough already to encounter in real life just pop out when you least expect it in ways that actually work. That movie, ladies and gentlemen, is Deep Blue Sea. The story follows a group of researchers conducting an experiment using sharks in the hopes of reactivating human brain cells, and ultimately, finding a cure for Alzheimer’s Disease. However, things go haywire when several genetically engineered sharks break free and flood the facility. What Worked: The acting is overall very good. There were three standouts for me. The first one is Thomas Jane (The Punisher, and I even liked him in The Predator*), who plays Carter Blake, the team’s shark wrangler. Not only is he an awesome character, but it’s also pretty smart for them to have someone that can restrain the sharks when necessary. The decisions they make are more smart than stupid, but I’ll delve deeper into that in a moment. The one cast member who’s probably the biggest name out of all of them was actually the second standout for me, and that is Samuel L. Jackson, who plays Russell Franklin, the executive sent to the facility after an incident in the beginning of the movie. When you have someone like him, you’re bound to get some great quotes and moments. You definitely get at least one of the two here. The biggest standout for me is of course the best character in the movie: Sherman “Preacher” Dudley, the team’s cook, portrayed by LL Cool J. One could say he’s the comic relief, and to an extent, he is. He gets some of the best lines because his delivery is so hilarious. Since I’m giving my thoughts on the performances, this leads to my point on the characters. I briefly mentioned how having a shark wrangler is a smart decision. A lot of the decisions made here are actually smart. Two examples come from Preacher; one is when he’s backed into a corner (so to speak), and the other is a “last resort” type thing, which is another great moment in this movie. Even though the majority of her decisions are stupid rather than smart, Saffron Burrows’s character Dr. Susan McAlester does make at least one smart one. It’s in a scene where she has her own “backed into a corner” scenario, and it involves the best shot of a shark’s fin in the movie, and one of the better shark shots. Whenever you see the sharks in more contained areas, like in that scene, or in close-up, they look really good. They used both animatronic sharks (as was famously done with Jaws) and computer-generated sharks for this movie, so the more close-up shots of the sharks look like they were animatronic. The effects there hold up very well 20 years later. Trevor Rabin’s score is really good, particularly the theme; you get cues of it throughout the movie following the opening, and it’s so unsettling. The score accompanies a great use of tension, which results in some very effective scares, including the one death scene that this movie is known for; even though I won’t spoil it, you probably already know what it is. Through his direction, Renny Harlin (Die Hard 2, Cliffhanger) manages to pull that off quite well. Aside from Cliffhanger, this might be his best movie. As a result, the movie is not only intense, but also very fast-paced. There are some fantastic shots, a couple of which are aerial shots, so it has some excellent cinematography on display as well. What surprised me is that this was shot by Stephen F. Windon, who would go on to shoot most of the Fast and the Furious films, starting with Tokyo Drift**. Then there’s the thing that stands out other than “that scene”: The soundtrack, which includes not one, but two songs from LL Cool J, one of which I find to be among the greatest songs for a movie to come out of the 90s… “Deepest Bluest (My Hat Is Like A Shark’s Fin)”. What Didn’t Work: Even though there aren’t as many stupid decisions as one might expect, they need to be addressed regardless. There are two examples that really stand out. The first one involves Dr. Jim Whitlock, played by Stellan Skarsgård (Thor, Pirates of the Caribbean), who does still give a good performance despite being only in the movie for a few minutes. You’ll know when you see it. The other, more prominent example involves Susan, which is basically the reason why everything went wrong; in fact, it involved both her and Jim. It’s made very evident that everything is more or less her fault when Carter and Russell display some of the most rational thinking out of everyone by trying to talk some sense into her. At that point, it really shows that Susan has very noble intentions, but has been very misguided in going through with them. Aside from those two particular examples, these types of decisions are present, but don’t stand out nearly as much because they only happen occasionally. While the moments with the animatronic sharks look really good, the effects are very noticeable for the most part whenever the sharks are out in the open. Even by 1999 standards, the CGI here hasn’t really aged well; plus, we had some phenomenal visual effects at the time, including one particular movie I reviewed earlier this year. The somewhat dated appearance of the CGI doesn’t just apply to the sharks, because some of the deaths also have it. There’s even some fire and explosion effects that don’t really hold up, either. Now, granted, the CGI here is not laughably bad like the effects in the last 20 minutes of Species (which I need to review), but they’re still noticeable when you see them. Overall: Deep Blue Sea is a shark movie that may not be as impactful as Jaws, but it doesn’t try to be, although I do appreciate the ways they honor it. It’s only trying to stand out as its own thing, and it really succeeds at that. It keeps you constantly on edge, and when the sharks come out, they really catch you off guard. Some of the deaths are pretty brutal to watch as a result, and while the scares are jump scares, they’re actually done right. The performances are really good, and despite most of their decisions being questionable at best, you still at one point or another feel invested in seeing as many of the characters survive as possible. Even with the few flaws I have, I still love this movie. Plus, there’s something about them that makes them part of the fun. For example, you know they’re not all going to make the best choices, but sometimes, it helps move the story along, and you get to see how they play out either way. Deep Blue Sea may not try to surpass Jaws as the better shark movie, but it does have one edge over it: You get to see more than one shark tear people apart in this movie. That, and you get an iconic 90s song in the credits. *That reminds me… I have a lot of catching up to do, which will likely include quite a few movies that I’m in the minority on, and that is one of them (and once I’ve reviewed that, I might just be introducing a new editorial that I’ve had in mind for some time now, and let’s just say I’ve known the perfect way to start). **I’ll be reviewing those very soon. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/7/9/thoughts-on-independence-day-1996 monthly 0.5 2021-07-04 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567976861310-CFTE31ZMLLDIGIV8DD02/%28Thoughts+On%29+Independence+Day.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Independence Day (1996) Image courtesy of moviemania.io Since the 4th of July has arrived, I figured why not do another holiday review… by celebrating Independence Day with a review of Independence Day. On July 2nd, 1996, a large mothership enters Earth’s orbit and launches a worldwide attack by sending saucers to major cities, three of which are ultimately decimated. On July 3rd, world leaders begin attempting counterstrikes of their own, to no avail. However, the Americans do discover why they’re here. When July 4th hits, people around the world come together for what may be either a triumphant victory… or their last stand. What Worked: The cast is really good. The standouts are Will Smith, Bill Pullman, and Jeff Goldblum, with some highlights also coming from Judd Hirsch, Randy Quaid, Brent Spiner, and to some extent, Harvey Fierstein and Harry Connick Jr. in what are basically extended cameos since both of them are only in the movie for a few minutes. The script, written by Roland Emmerich himself alongside his producing partner Dean Devlin, is actually pretty good for a disaster movie. It does what a disaster movie should: take the absurdity of the story and embrace it. It shows that everyone involved had fun making it, and in turn it helps show that you are having fun watching it. It also provides some memorable and quotable lines, as well as one of the best speeches in a movie ever. Emmerich’s direction isn’t bad, either. In fact, this is probably his best movie. When it comes to the effects, the first question that will likely be asked is: Do they hold up now over 20 years later? For the most part, yes… or at least the majority of them do (examples being the designs of the aliens, and how they move around; they looked very practical). I don’t normally mention this, but it stood out to me here: I really liked the structure of the movie. It takes place over the course of three days: from July 2nd up until July 4th. This timeframe not only shows how the conflict escalates, but it also allows for progression of the narrative. July 2nd - the aliens arrive and three major cities are destroyed. July 3rd - the Americans discover the aliens’ motive. July 4th - you can probably figure out what happens from there. This means the clichés are there, and yet, that’s another result of the absurdity: it becomes more fun to watch because they’re there. It happened in a lot of movies in the 90s (especially in sci-fi and action movies), and this one is no exception, so it gets a pass because it acknowledges them. It may be a predictable pattern you may have seen done before and done better, but it’s still fun to see how it plays out here nonetheless. Even if it’s more of a sci-fi action movie, it does have some moments that feel like a sci-fi horror movie that are pretty creepy, especially a lab scene, where nothing could possibly go wrong. What Didn’t Work: Although the majority of the effects on display here still hold up, the rest don’t really stand out. For me, it was some laser effects and some of the fire and explosion effects. Though they are great for the time, the moment I saw the visuals in those scenes, I realized they did not hold up well at all. Also, speaking of the lab scene, while it is creepy, it is one of those scenes you can’t help but predict what’s going to happen. Overall: Independence Day is a prime example of a blockbuster that accomplished what rarely happens now: get the moviegoing audience interested, and let the hype build up from there. It’s one of those movies where people were actually excited to go see it to the point that it became an event, and ultimately delivered on the hype. It also helped bring large-scale disaster movies back, leading to several being released throughout the rest of the 90s, and garner renewed interest in sci-fi as a whole. On top of that, it serves as a prime example of what popcorn entertainment should be: fun. The movie in question may not be perfect and have some cheesy moments here and there. However, as long as it shows that it can be self-aware about it and just run with it, it’s done its job, because what’s most important is that the movie ends up being a lot of fun. Independence Day does exactly that. Even if it’s not a perfect movie, it is still solid in the action, sci-fi, and especially disaster movie departments, and it does hold up really well today. One thing it is perfect for, though, is your collection, as it’s definitely one to pop in for when you feel like making some noise. For those looking for a movie to watch this Fourth of July weekend, this is a good one to celebrate the occasion. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/1/27/thoughts-on-tarzan-1999-9s5hk monthly 0.5 2020-03-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1548617254410-W2RDN443YAH0DF9WFZ2B/%28Thoughts+On%29+Tarzan.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Tarzan (1999) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com Following the revisiting of two sci-fi classics (including one of my favorite movies of all time), I figured why not do another Anniversary post where I cover something a little lighter, and something that also happens to be a childhood favorite of mine. This month marks the 20th Anniversary of the movie that marked the end of the Disney Renaissance of the 90s, and one of two Disney movies I grew up with the most*, and that movie is Tarzan, one of numerous adaptations of the works of Edgar Rice Burroughs. In this version, set in the 1890s, an English couple, along with their infant son, end up in a jungle off the coast of Africa after escaping a shipwreck. They use what they can gather from the wreckage to build a treehouse, but not long after, the couple is killed by a leopard named Sabor. The baby survives, and is later found by a female gorilla named Kala, who lost her own son to the leopard. She brings him back to her clan, where her mate (and the clan leader), Kerchak, allows her to keep the baby but will not call him his son. Kala names the baby Tarzan and begins raising him, and Tarzan in turn views the gorillas as his family. Upon encountering a group of explorers, however, Tarzan, now an adult, starts learning about his humanity, and only he can decide where he really belongs: with his own kind or with the one he grew up with. What Worked: The animation is fantastic in this movie. It’s one of the best examples of 2D/hand-drawn animation I’ve ever seen that honestly, I feel is often overlooked compared to some that came before, yet are still classics in their own right**. Plus, it really brings the story and characters to life, which is further enhanced through the music and voice acting. With the story, and this being an adaptation, changes have to be made in order to fit within the context of the narrative in question. This is a prime example of an adaptation where the changes are made in ways that make sense while still respecting the source material by keeping the majority of its key plot points intact. They allow you to be invested in the characters, and occasionally even feel for them. This version has some dark moments, some very emotional ones, and some action scenes, but also a few funny ones, because the humor works very well. They balance so perfectly that the tone remains consistent throughout, and as a result, so does the pace, especially in the action scenes involving Sabor and Clayton. Now for what really makes this version stand out in addition to the animation: the music and the voice acting. The music consists of both an excellent score by Mark Mancina (whose prior work included Speed, Bad Boys, Twister, and Con Air) and the iconic soundtrack from Phil Collins. The songs in particular suit crucial parts of the story, and give those scenes a greater impact, especially the more emotional moments. The song “You’ll Be In My Heart” alone is sad enough on its own, but just wait until you hear it in the movie. It’s so powerful that it won the Oscar for Best Original Song, and absolutely deserved it. It shows in the scenes where Kala and Tarzan are bonding that feature that song, and the closing moments of the scene featuring my personal favorite song in the movie, “Strangers Like Me,” where Tarzan is learning human culture from Jane. Even if it’s voice acting, Tony Goldwyn as Tarzan has great chemistry with both Glenn Close as Kala and Minnie Driver as Jane in those scenes. He even gets some heartfelt moments with Kerchak (voiced by Lance Henriksen of Aliens fame), as well as some humorous ones with his friends Terk (voiced by Rosie O’Donnell) and Tantor (an elephant voiced by Wayne Knight). There’s also some humor from Jane’s father, Professor Porter, voiced by Nigel Hawthorne. Then there are the villains of this movie. The first is Sabor, who makes the action scenes she’s in even more intense just by her presence alone, particularly her fight with Tarzan in the middle of the movie. The other villain is Clayton, voiced by Brian Blessed, a hunter looking for the gorillas for his own agenda, unbeknownst to everyone else. He may seem just determined at first, but you know he’s up to something, which makes him not only such a great Disney villain, but also a great villain period. Overall: Tarzan is an animated masterpiece, with the perfect balance of humor and heart, top-notch animation and voice acting, some of the best music an animated movie has to offer, and memorable characters, all of which come together into what I consider to be the definitive Tarzan movie, one of my personal favorite Disney movies, and one of my personal favorite animated movies in general. To close this review out, I will say this: This movie will be in my heart, from this day on, now and forever more. It’ll be in my heart, no matter what they say. It’ll be here in my heart. Always. *Keep that in mind, folks. By this time next year (which is that movie’s 20th Anniversary), you’ll know the other one. I know it’s a long wait, but ultimately, it’ll be more than worth it. **One such classic is even referenced here with an Easter Egg that’s pretty easy to spot. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/1/27/thoughts-on-alien-1979 monthly 0.5 2019-09-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1548617482313-8IZ57MEPKA34TMD85ZGB/%28Thoughts+On%29+Alien.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Alien (1979) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com Hello, everyone. For this review, we’re going from one anniversary to another. It’s still sci-fi, but whereas the last one was a sci-fi action classic, this one is a sci-fi horror classic. It elevated that genre to a new level, and this year marks the 40th Anniversary of such an achievement, and that is Alien. The story follows a crew of seven aboard a vessel called the Nostromo, which is on its way back to Earth when they are awakened to a distress signal from a nearby planet. While investigating, one of the crew members, Kane, makes contact with an egg-like pod, which then opens up. The creature within jumps out and wraps around his face. He becomes the unfortunate host for a monstrous Alien, which upon bursting from his chest, begins picking off the rest of the crew one by one. What Worked: The cast give great performances, and they play off of each other very well. It’s particularly evident in two scenes: their discussion over the situation at hand (being woken up to investigate a distress signal), and especially the mess hall scene. It’s most noticeable with the characters of Parker and Brett, played respectively by Yaphet Kotto (Live and Let Die) and Harry Dean Stanton, who was mostly cast in supporting roles throughout his career, examples being Escape From New York, Christine, and The Green Mile. You also see a little bit of it earlier on between Ellen Ripley, the main protagonist, and Veronica Cartwright’s character Lambert, the navigator, as they’re headed to the planet. The standout, though, is of course Sigourney Weaver as Ellen Ripley herself in what would become her first major role in a movie*. Not only that, it’d become the role that would define her career, as before this movie, she wasn’t as big a name as people like Tom Skerritt, who plays Dallas (the Captain), or even John Hurt, who plays Kane. The next positive is the production value that went into this. They use miniatures for the scale of the ship’s exterior, which had similarly been done two years prior with Star Wars, as well as matte paintings for the look of space. The matte paintings are fantastic at conveying how scary it can appear. Much like in Star Wars, the miniatures hold up really well even today. This also applies to the set design, the effects, and the sound design. The sets, namely the look of the Derelict ship that sent the signal, the Space Jockey inside of it, and the interior of the Nostromo itself, hold up just as much. The effects are where this movie really established its legacy both in horror and in sci-fi, from the Eggs to the Facehugger to the Chestburster to the Alien itself. The Chestburster scene alone is iconic for several reasons, and the fact that the effects still look as great as they do 40 years later is one of them. The practical effects on display here look excellent; for example, in scenes like that, they used puppets. It was a few years before CGI would start being used, so when not using puppets, creatures were still portrayed by people in suits, and this is no exception. In this case, it’s similar to Predator, where they got someone very tall to be in the suit, that being Nigerian visual artist Bolaji Badejo. Despite his height at 7’2”, he was still able to capture the movement of the Alien from within the suit, which is surprising when you consider the creature design. All of these achievements in visual effects proved worthy of an Oscar. The sound design is so unnerving. When you hear the Egg open up, you know what’s about to happen, and the sound of the Facehugger popping out of it is even scarier. Then comes the Chestburster scene, and it only escalates from there. The suspense is built up really well, and it has some very effective scares. Most of them may be jump scares, but they’re examples of when they’re done right. The highlights for me were actually background scares. One of them is where Brett is looking for Jonesy (the cat), and you think you see something behind him that might be just pipes… and then seconds later, you realize you were totally wrong. That’s the best scene where the Alien pops up in the movie. The other one is in the last few minutes. Be sure to look out for it. Another terrifying scene takes place in the vents. When you see the Alien pop up there, that’s when you realize how big of a threat it really is. Plus, you get another great look at it, which also shows how eerie the atmosphere (no pun intended) is. Even if you set the scares aside, this movie still has some very frightening scenes. The aforementioned Chestburster scene again comes to mind. It earns its status as one of the scariest scenes in horror and sci-fi history because of how suddenly it happens. Even though you know something’s about to go horribly wrong, and even if you’re at least familiar with this scene, you won’t see it coming. You’ll feel terrified at what you just witnessed, much like how the other crew members react. How I just worded that is coincidentally how it was when they did that: The cast members knew it would happen because it was in the script, but then their reactions came… and the characters’ reactions are also their own. As you watch that scene, watch their reactions. That is genuine fear you’re seeing from them. What’s even more impressive is that they managed to do all of that in one take. The moment the Chestburster escapes, the only thing you know for sure is that it eventually becomes a fully-grown Alien. You’ll be constantly on edge, not knowing where the Alien could be, let alone when it’s going to show up. Why it’s so unpredictable is that it’s shown sparingly, much like the shark in Jaws**. You get teases of it, so you know it could be anywhere, and then it pops out when you least expect it. However, I’d say it works even better here, because it’s in a contained environment, the Alien uses every open space it can to its advantage, and its appearance allows it to hide in the shadows. All of that is accompanied perfectly with Jerry Goldsmith’s score and Ridley Scott’s direction, where at first you get a sense of astonishment at what you’re seeing, and then it goes into very terrifying, very fast. While the characters grow increasingly overwhelmed about their predicament, unlike most horror movies, the majority of them don’t let it get the better of them. Quite a few smart decisions are made here, which is something you don’t really see a lot of these days. For example, you have Dallas, who’s mostly laidback, which does lead to some questionable actions, but he comes to make more responsible decisions later. As for someone like Lambert, she’s very nervous at points, which ultimately causes her to want to evacuate immediately. She becomes one of those characters in a horror movie who always makes stupid decisions, and in a movie full of smart ones, it does make sense to have that one character to balance things out. The character who has the most rational thinking is Ripley herself, because her strictly “by-the-book” attitude kicks in when attempts are made to bring Kane back on board after he’s attacked. She knows the potential risks that come with that, and tries her best not to let them in. Of course, it wouldn’t be a movie if it actually worked, but it’s not her fault it happened anyway. It also has a surprising twist that’s set up really well, involving Ian Holm’s character Ash, who gets some unsettling moments of his own, and a very satisfying (and even more surprising) ending. With the ending, it’s something that at the time wasn’t really seen all that often in horror movies. That’s the best way I can put it without going too much into it. When it comes to problems, I would say that it’s a bit slow at first, but once they land on the planet, it really gets going and doesn’t let up. However, because it’s all about tension and building up its scares, it’s understandable that it would have a slow start, and so I’m willing to overlook that. Overall: Alien is an important piece of sci-fi and horror cinema, with its legendary effects, an iconic creature design, a protagonist that would become one of the prime examples of a strong female character, and its excellent use of gradual buildup to produce scares that have a lasting impression on the viewer. Even with the legacy it’s garnered so many years later, spawning a franchise that’s also included comics, novels, games, and crossovers, it still works as a self-contained story. Whether you’re a sci-fi fan, a horror fan, or both, and especially if you love movies in general, this is something that you need to see at least once. *No, I am not making that up. **An approach also taken in another, albeit more recent, monster movie, yet not as effective… but that’s for another upcoming review. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/1/27/thoughts-on-the-matrix-1999 monthly 0.5 2020-03-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567975857210-82I5ZMTU5PG78PRWNWQ1/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Matrix.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Matrix (1999) Image courtesy of IMDb Hello, everyone. For this review, I’m going to do something a little different. It marks the triumphant return of the retrospective review. This one will focus on what is easily one of my favorite movies of all time. It’s not just one of the best action movies for me (where something like Predator would be), but it really is one of the best movies period. This year, this month, and today, in fact, marks the 20th Anniversary of a sci-fi classic, and that movie is known as The Matrix. The story follows computer programmer Thomas A. Anderson, better known under his hacker persona, Neo, who discovers that the world he knows is not as real as it seems. Instead, it is part of the Matrix, a system created to resemble the world he’s familiar with. The question of “What is the Matrix?” leads him to meeting the man who has been searching for him his entire life: Morpheus, the leader of a human resistance waging a war against the machines*. Morpheus believes that Neo is “The One,” a savior that will free humanity and end the war once and for all. What Worked: One thing that still hasn’t changed since the last time I did a retrospective review is that, with a few exceptions, the cast and performances are usually discussed first. Keanu Reeves gives an excellent performance as Neo. His range as an actor really began to show throughout this movie alone. He goes from initially being soft-spoken and subdued to being in denial of the truth before then accepting and ultimately embracing it. That narrative arc is just one of many things here that are so satisfying. Laurence Fishburne is great as Morpheus. He’s kind of like the “wise mentor” type of character, except only the “Zen” personality is all that’s needed with him. It’s evident in his voice and especially his dialogue. As a result, he gets some of the best lines in the movie because of how quotable, yet also insightful, they are. Then we have Carrie-Anne Moss as the love interest, Trinity. This character basically made her career, and rightfully so, because she is awesome in this movie. The personality she gives Trinity makes her a great example of a strong female character in an action movie. She’s very committed to her cause, is very loyal to her fellow rebels, and will not let anything stand in her way. She will not hesitate to take people down, as shown in the opening scene. That along with her skills in combat earn Trinity the same iconic status in regards to strong movie heroines as Ellen Ripley in Aliens and Sarah Connor in Terminator 2: Judgment Day. Next is the best villain of the 90s other than the T-1000: Hugo Weaving as Agent Smith. He’s among the Agent programs in the Matrix, who are designed to protect it from anything they deem a threat to the system. To say that Agent Smith is intimidating would be an understatement. He is unrelenting and ruthless, and although he does have backup, it’s the scenes that mainly focus on him where he stands out. Plus, he has a clear motivation, which is dedicated to a completely different agenda outside of his duties, and I thought that was clever because it fleshed him out as a character more. On top of all that, Hugo Weaving’s voice is so unsettling, and that might be what led him to become one of the “go-to” actors for villains, particularly the voice of Megatron in the first three Transformers movies and the Red Skull in Captain America: The First Avenger. The supporting cast are really good as well, even if a majority of them don’t have much screentime. The biggest one to mention is Joe Pantoliano as Cypher, because he’s in the movie the most of all of them, going so far as getting the first line of dialogue. He’s similar to the character of Obadiah Stane in Iron Man, where you like him at first, and then something happens where you may end up feeling it was wrong to do so. Although some of the cast have smaller roles, their characters certainly do leave an impact regardless. The highlights of the supporting characters for me were Tank (who’s probably my favorite), his brother Dozer, and Mouse. The other two, Apoc and Switch, are in it the least of the bunch, but they’re worth mentioning due to having a couple significant moments of their own. There’s one other character in this movie that’s part of a key plot point. However, since they’re present in the sequels as well, I’ll save mentioning them for those reviews for two reasons: 1: They’re more prominent in the sequels, particularly the third movie, and 2: Going into it now would be a bit of a spoiler. This movie would not only make several actors more well known, but it would do the same for writers/directors The Wachowski Brothers**. Although they hadn’t done anything of this scale before, while watching it, you can’t really tell because of how amazing it looks. Despite not having more flashy and stylistic approaches to things such as cinematography or set design, within the context of the story, the bleak setting and occasional green tint make sense here. Their direction is great, but it’s the story and script that really shine. They managed to create a fascinating world to expand upon later, craft a very complex story around it, and incorporate equally thought-provoking themes. Now here’s what really defines this movie. The visual effects are so outstanding and would prove to be legendary, especially by 1999 standards (and for good reason). It made such an impact on the entertainment industry as a whole that it became both a landmark on how far we had come with visual effects at that time and a turning point for how further we could take them in the future. The main thing in regards to the effects is called “bullet time,” where a particular scene is in slow motion, but the camera moves normally at the same time. For a movie that’s now 20 years old, the effects still hold up remarkably well. To put all of that into perspective, all of the effort that went into these effects earned all of the recognition it received. It was nominated for four Oscars, and won every single one, even Best Visual Effects. The action is just as revolutionary even today, because it’s incredible how action sequences and effects as phenomenal as these, which you’d think by now we’d have just been able to perfect, we were somehow able to accomplish in 1999. There are so many action scenes that stand out, but there are two that this movie is mostly known for. There’s the rooftop scene with Neo and Trinity fighting off Agents, which includes that shot of Neo dodging the bullets that was famously used in the trailer and parodied numerous times since. Then there’s the most well known one, which is the lobby shootout sequence leading up to that. It’s easy to see why, because for one thing, the buildup to that is great: Neo and Trinity get “Guns. Lots of guns.”, arm themselves, and make their entrance. Then the scene really kicks into high gear when they both look at each other before facing their enemies, and the moment they do, Propellerheads’s “Spybreak!” starts playing. The song fits the scene really well, so the excitement you feel from watching it is enhanced even more. That, and it’s one of several awesome songs on the soundtrack. Speaking of the soundtrack, you also get songs from artists such as Rammstein, Rob Zombie, The Prodigy, and Rob Dougan. It most notably features Rage Against the Machine and Marilyn Manson as well. Their songs might be the two best ones for me, although I do like the Propellerheads and Rob Dougan songs, too. This was during the time when it was common for certain movies to have popular artists featured on the soundtrack, but this is one of the best examples of a soundtrack being used to fit the scenes in question. Don Davis’s score, however, accompanies the movie perfectly. The best track comes after Morpheus tells Neo, “Welcome to the real world.” Right after that, the track of the same name starts playing, and how it flows throughout the scene is fantastic. It’s also great in the action scenes, and especially by the end of the movie. Overall: The Matrix is a sci-fi classic that came ahead of its time, yet at the right time. You’d think at first glance that it looks like something we’d be more easily capable of pulling off now, with the look, the effects, the action, and everything in between, and that the technology we had then was not advanced enough for that. Then you watch it, and you come to realize it also came at the time when we were starting to use our technology more. It’s the best of both worlds: Smart sci-fi and exciting action at their finest. It’s an experience that will blow you away with everything that went into it. Even now, it’s still astounding how it was done. From the outside, no one knew the cultural phenomenon it would become, let alone the legacy it would have, until they saw it. Without this movie, we wouldn’t have this decade’s version in the form of Inception, nor would we have its version of a Keanu Reeves action franchise in the form of John Wick, or the underrated sci-fi action movie known as Equilibrium. As Morpheus would say, “Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.” Even the marketing was done right. They used the “What is the Matrix?” scene, and then concluded with that quote in the trailer, making it look like he’s speaking to the audience when he’s actually speaking to Neo, and that is brilliant. It garnered hype for the movie, people wanted to know what it was, they saw it, and it lived up to the hype by delivering an awesome movie where the overall experience is very satisfying from start to finish. Not only is it a sci-fi classic, it’s also an action classic. However, as a movie in general, The Matrix is a cinematic masterpiece. Although I described what it is in the movie as vaguely as I could, this is something that you really do have to see for yourself. For those that somehow still haven’t seen it, instead of saying “What are you doing? Go out and watch it!”, I’m going to do a different version of it for you: You take the blue pill, you miss out on something incredible, unlike anything that you’ve ever seen before. You take the red pill, you get to witness it, and I guarantee you’ll be glad you did. Where we go from there… is a choice I leave to you. *No, not that one. This is much different from that, and I’ll get to that franchise later. **Yes, I know that they use a different directorial credit now compared to this Trilogy and everything associated with it, but I’m using it as listed in the credits for consistency purposes, and because the reason for the difference is complicated for me to go into, although it was important that I at least acknowledge it. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/1/27/thoughts-on-how-to-train-your-dragon-the-hidden-world-2019 monthly 0.5 2020-03-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1548618208025-LC4WE7PZSGKY7Y6VT1LA/%28Thoughts+On%29+How+to+Train+Your+Dragon+-+The+Hidden+World.jpg Blog - Thoughts on How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World (2019) Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com It’s all come to this. We have reached the end of a very special journey. Most trilogies cap off on a disappointing note, but this is a very rare case where not only does every installment end on a satisfying note, but so does the entire trilogy itself. It’s an equally rare occasion when said trilogy happens to also be animated, and now we have come to the moment of truth, the movie that might just have stuck the landing, and that is How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World. The story picks up one year after the events of the second movie. Hiccup, Toothless and the gang have been rescuing dragons for some time to bring them back to Berk. However, there is an unfortunate consequence to this: It’s led to dragon overpopulation. Hiccup then realizes that there is a solution. He remembers being told as a child by his father Stoick the Vast about the Hidden World, a place where dragons can live in peace and be safe from those hunting them. During their quest, they encounter a white dragon, a female known as a Light Fury, and Toothless instantly falls for her. In order to find the Hidden World, and ensure the dragons are safe, though, they have to stop a notorious dragon hunter known as Grimmel the Grisly, who has a particular interest in the two Furies. What Worked: The voice acting is the first of many things that are the best the trilogy has to offer here.* By this point, you really feel that the cast have grown into these characters. The core cast members are excellent across the board. There are two returning actors from the previous movie who also give great performances. The one I mentioned in that review was Kit Harington as Eret, and he’s still an awesome character whose part in the series makes him one of its most interesting by the end of this movie due to his backstory alone. Now for the character I can mention in this review that I couldn’t in that one, and that is Valka, voiced by Cate Blanchett. The reason why I couldn’t mention her there is because of who she is. In the last movie, she was revealed to be Hiccup’s long-lost mother, and there was an emotional moment between the two of them and Stoick upon discovering his wife was still alive. Her reveal in the previous movie was so impactful because it was built up so well. Hiccup encountered a mysterious dragon rider and it was intriguing to both him and the audience. Then she found him and revealed herself to him, and it turned out she was trying to do what Hiccup managed to do in her absence: convince Stoick and everyone else that they could live in peace with dragons. Her good-hearted demeanor and compassion towards the dragons came through perfectly in Cate Blanchett’s performance, and it carries over into this movie. Then there’s the villain, Grimmel the Grisly. He’s the baddest dragon hunter there is, and how he earned that reputation makes him the best villain in the trilogy, both of which are even more well-realized in a fantastic performance by F. Murray Abraham. What makes him a better villain than Djimon Hounsou’s character from the last movie, Drago Bludvist, is his motivation. Drago’s motivation was a little bit personal, but more out of madness. With Grimmel, it’s very much personal because he made a name for himself with his methods of dragon hunting, which involves an important plot point established in the first movie. I thought that was a nice touch, as I appreciate when trilogies or even franchises bring something full circle. There are other references to the previous movies, and a few of them are part of the humor here. This movie is actually really funny at times, and might have some of the best jokes in the series. At other times, the moments of downtime in between the action sequences can be outright charming. The scenes with Toothless trying to woo the Light Fury are genuinely sweet and his failed attempts are hilarious. The relationship between the two of them is a great addition to the story. When the action does come in, it delivers on every level. Some of the sequences here are the most intense in the series. However, they’re not as dark as a few in the second one were, but for a story like this following that up, they don’t need to be. They have some of the intensity, but also more of the exciting feel of the ones from the first movie. Where this movie really shines, though, is in the animation. It’s the best looking the series has ever been. It shows in the character designs as well. The characters have evolved over the course of all three movies, and their designs having gotten progressively better reflects that. The animation is so outstanding and so gorgeous here that I would go so far as to say that this is the best animation DreamWorks has done this side of Pixar. The looks of the Hidden World and the Light Fury alone are worth the price of admission. It’s all encompassed in the best type of story that could be given to something like this. For every exciting moment, there’s a calm one, and for every sweet or funny moment, there’s a moment that’s just gut wrenching. It hits all the right notes in terms of great storytelling, which is also evident in what is easily John Powell’s best score for the series. One more thing before I close out this review: If you thought the second movie had emotional moments, just wait until you get to the ending of this movie. When all is said and done, it’ll probably go down as one of the best endings of the decade. Overall: How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World is the perfect ending to DreamWorks’s franchise masterpiece. It makes the journey with all of these characters that you’ve come to know and love throughout these movies having been well worth taking. It ends the trilogy on an ultimately very satisfying note, bringing everything together and tying up any loose ends in the best way possible. This movie has stuck the landing, and with it, in terms of great trilogies, we have been given something truly special. *It’s so flawless that there was a recasting in this movie, and I didn’t even notice it. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/1/27/thoughts-on-how-to-train-your-dragon-2-2014 monthly 0.5 2019-09-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1548618157593-WT7EHBKVA85J7SPC9JC7/%28Thoughts+On%29+How+to+Train+Your+Dragon+2.jpg Blog - Thoughts on How to Train Your Dragon 2 (2014) Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com Continuing on with this latest trilogy, we get to the chapter where most usually peak. Will this follow suit? You’ll find out soon enough. It does have one thing in common with most other middle chapters in trilogies: This one does go bigger and darker, and so the stakes do get even higher. One thing it probably doesn’t: This one happens to also be animated, and that is How to Train Your Dragon 2. The story picks up five years after the events of the first movie. Hiccup and his friends are now young adults, and all seems to be peaceful in their village of Berk ever since Hiccup brought the townsfolk and the dragons together. That is, until they come across a group of dragon trappers working for a psychopathic warlord named Drago Bludvist, who seeks to use his army of dragons to conquer the world. Along the way, they encounter another dragon rider, who may have ties to Hiccup’s past. What Worked: The voice acting continues to be top notch here, with new cast members giving great performances and returning cast members expanding their characters’ developments from the first movie. For example, Jay Baruchel’s performance as Hiccup transitions flawlessly from the awkward teenager in the first movie to a more mature young adult in this movie. He retains the good heart and determination to try to avoid violence whenever possible, but there are some moments this time around where it can only go so far, and others where taking the pacifist approach is either not enough to overcome the current predicament or just not an option. He really does begin to feel the pressure of having to make harder decisions in life. Gerard Butler is still excellent as Stoick the Vast, Hiccup’s father, who wants his son to succeed him as the chieftain of Berk, even though he doesn’t feel ready for that level of responsibility. Much like in the first movie, they have very heartfelt moments in this one and there’s one in particular in the second half that’s genuinely emotional for both of them. This one does have humorous scenes in between the drama. Craig Ferguson is still hilarious as the voice of Gobber, Stoick’s lieutenant. He has great comedic timing, an example being during that emotional moment with Hiccup and Stoick. Hiccup’s friends also provide enough humor to lighten the mood, and they have moments that stand out because they’re on their own, and they prove more than capable of handling themselves. The one that stands out the most of all of them, and probably gets the most development, is of course Astrid, voiced again by America Ferrera. She has gone from being Hiccup’s crush who didn’t really like him at first but gradually came to respect him more over the course of the first movie to Hiccup’s girlfriend in this one. She remains a strong female character here, with the same traits from before (tough, determined, skilled in combat) carrying over, and loyalty can now be added to the list. As with the first movie, the best character here is Toothless. His relationship with Hiccup has grown even more. Because Hiccup is more experienced in flying, he’s enhanced the gear for both of them, like a wingsuit that allows him the freedom to fly alongside Toothless rather than always having to be on him. However, there are some scenes with them that are among the most emotional ones in the movie. There are three new additions to the cast, but I can really only talk about two of them in regards to their characters, as the third one, at this time in my coverage of the trilogy, may be considered a spoiler. The first one I can talk about is Kit Harington (who a lot of people will know from Game of Thrones) as Eret, leader of the dragon trappers. He’s really good in this movie, and his character is awesome. Eret’s narrative arc is very satisfying, too. The other one is Djimon Hounsou as Drago Bludvist. He plays a lot of villains, but while he’s really good at it, this might be his best one to date. He is very angry for something that happened in the past, and he is also very ruthless as a result of it. However, when you see what happened, you completely understand why. Unlike most of his other villain roles where anger is mainly part of the character’s personality to show that they mean business, it’s a key trait of the character. He really leaves an impact as a villain because aside from the rage that an actor like him can channel into their characters very well, there’s one thing that he brings to Drago that you don’t really see in those other villains: a sense of pain. Speaking of pain, this movie has a lot of emotional moments, not just for the characters as mentioned earlier, but in terms of the story. The first movie had mostly heartfelt moments, but that was due to a more lighthearted tone. This one also has a few of them, but since the stakes are even higher this time around, the tone has to be even deeper for the emotional moments to be more impactful. It doesn’t just go deeper, but there are some scenes that are really dark. The shift in tone makes sense, though, because it matches the progression of character development: They are now more mature, and so the tone has to be more serious. This is also evident in John Powell’s score, which is still fantastic. It conveys excitement or intensity depending on the tone during the action sequences, deepens when the story gets dark and somber, or softens for the lighthearted moments. It’s not just the tone that gets bigger. Some of the dragons they add here are huge. The biggest one by far is known as the Bewilderbeast, also referred to as the Alpha. If you thought the Red Death from the first movie was big, that’s the dragon equivalent of a T-Rex by comparison. The Bewilderbeast, on the other hand, is so enormous it might be the dragon equivalent of Godzilla. There might even be a parallel or two to the King of the Monsters himself*. I have two big positives with this one. The first is the animation. It’s been improved in every way from the already phenomenal animation in the first movie. You can especially tell in the new designs of the main characters and the looks of the dragons, like with the new flight gear that Hiccup uses to ride Toothless, as well as his friends and their dragons. The other big positive is that the scale and the world building are both expanded upon here, which makes the story of the series very satisfying so far. Overall: How to Train Your Dragon 2 is everything a sequel should be: bigger, better, and darker. The stakes are even higher, and there are some very emotional moments. It all culminates in a bittersweet ending to where you feel like what you just witnessed was rough to watch, and yet still glad that you got to see this story continue. Much like how the first movie left you wanting to see more, this movie leaves you wanting to see how it concludes. *You’ll know them when you see them. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/1/27/thoughts-on-how-to-train-your-dragon-2010 monthly 0.5 2020-03-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1548618111516-L1FMXI4NTJ6E9BXDRNME/%28Thoughts+On%29+How+to+Train+Your+Dragon.jpg Blog - Thoughts on How to Train Your Dragon (2010) Image courtesy of wallpapershdnow.com After the Eastrail 177 Trilogy’s conclusion arrived with Glass, there was another trilogy about to receive its closing chapter shortly after it, and so I decided that would be perfect. It was something a bit more lighthearted, of course, but it’s one of those times where after seeing something as dark as those movies, you’d kind of need that*. This is a trilogy that would prove to be something special, especially in terms of family friendly movies and animation as a whole. In this review, I’ll be covering the first installment of one of the best trilogies of the decade, and the one that may stand out the most out of all of the franchises DreamWorks has made (yes, even more so than Shrek), and that is How to Train Your Dragon. The story is set in Berk, a small Viking town on an island often targeted by dragons, where the Vikings have been at war with the dragons for a long time. A 15-year-old named Hiccup wants to help fight, but the chieftain (and his father), Stoick the Vast, believes he’s too young, so he works as an apprentice to the local blacksmith Gobber to make weapons. Though his inventions usually fail, he actually manages to shoot a dragon down. It’s not just any dragon, though: It’s a Night Fury, the most dangerous, but also rarest, type. Despite his claims, no one else believes him. Upon finding it, Hiccup has his chance to prove himself and finally be accepted by his tribe. However, he can’t bring himself to finish it off, so he frees and ultimately befriends it. He also learns through his own interactions with the Night Fury (which he names Toothless because of his ability to retract his teeth) that the dragons are harmless and sets out to show everyone else that there’s a better way to solve their dragon problem than violence. What Worked: First of all, the voice acting is fantastic in this movie. Jay Baruchel is excellent as Hiccup, really bringing his own awkward personality into the character, and it works perfectly. You also genuinely feel Hiccup’s compassion through his performance in the more dramatic and heartfelt moments. He has great chemistry with everyone else, from his father to his friends and especially with Toothless himself. Gerard Butler gives what might be his best performance that isn’t Leonidas as Stoick the Vast. His scenes with Hiccup are among the aforementioned dramatic and heartfelt moments, where in addition to Hiccup’s compassion, you also feel Stoick’s empathy, and occasionally pain, at the same time. The movie has its share of humor. One example is the character of Gobber, voiced by Craig Ferguson. He’s hilarious in this. There’s some really good banter between the other characters, like Christopher Mintz-Plasse (McLovin from Superbad) as Fishlegs, Jonah Hill as Snotlout, and the Twins Ruffnut and Tuffnut, voiced respectively by Kristen Wiig and T.J. Miller (Weasel from Deadpool). It’s not just moments with them that are hilarious. Quite a few scenes with Hiccup and Toothless have that, but they’re set up brilliantly with some charming development in their relationship. Then there’s the best (human) character in the movie: Astrid, voiced by America Ferrera. She’s a great example of a strong female character: She’s tough, determined, and capable of handling herself in a fight. She also has an excellent relationship with Hiccup. Over the course of the movie, she gradually begins to see past his awkwardness, learning how kind-hearted he really is underneath, and starts to respect him more. Now for the best character in the movie: Toothless. Not only does he look awesome, he’s just so lovable. He’s like if your dog or cat could fly and breathe fire. You’ll definitely feel as if his bond with Hiccup resembles your bond with your own pets at least once. I even saw some mannerisms of Stitch from Lilo & Stitch in him. When you take the fact that Chris Sanders, the voice actor for Stitch, also worked on this movie into consideration, it makes perfect sense. The looks of each of the other dragons and their distinct capabilities are very interesting, and it makes the action even more fun to watch. The scale of the movie, particularly in the action sequences, really shows how gorgeous it all looks. The epic feel this type of story is expected to convey (it is a fantasy movie) is done wonderfully through John Powell’s score. It gives you that feeling of excitement you’d similarly get with something like the more triumphant beats of Howard Shore’s score for The Lord of the Rings. There is some great world building in this, too, and a perfect story structure. The narrative is handled so brilliantly that it provides both a satisfying resolution for this story on its own and a well-earned feeling of wanting to see more. Overall: How to Train Your Dragon is one of those animated movies that does everything right. It has the right balance of humor and heart with regards to both the story and the characters. It introduces a fascinating world and sets up very interesting character arcs that you’ll want to see be further developed, because the stakes they end up facing over the course of this movie alone are just the beginning. The same is true for the movie itself: It’s just the beginning of something special. *That’s not to say that this trilogy doesn’t have its share of dark moments, it does, except those don’t really come into play until a little later. However, this movie still has a few of them, even with the overall lighthearted tone, but they’re just not as dark as what happens during the events following this movie. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/1/27/thoughts-on-glass-2019 monthly 0.5 2020-03-07 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567891938870-II74GT0WIF2TBDGOVGNN/%28Thoughts+On%29+Glass.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Glass (2019) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com Following my revisits of Unbreakable and Split, we now come to the movie that both of those have been building towards, and the review to accompany it where I hinted at something bigger to come in those reviews. Now, we get to that something bigger: The conclusion to the Eastrail 177 Trilogy, and that is Glass. Three weeks after the events of Split, David Dunn has been tracking down Kevin Wendell Crumb (who had been dubbed “The Horde” by the media because of his multiple personalities). After their encounter, David and Kevin are sent to a facility run by a psychiatrist trying to convince them that they are regular people who merely claim to be superhuman. Not only that, but they happen to be in the same facility as David’s nemesis, Elijah Price, also known as “Mr. Glass.” David knows that Elijah has a plan to prove that people like them really do exist, and it may just involve him having some help. David has to stop them before they can do any real damage, but Elijah might just know something that ties all of them together... What Worked: First of all, the cast is very good here, even if it’s mostly a reunion. Reprising their roles from Unbreakable are Bruce Willis as David Dunn, Samuel L. Jackson as Elijah Price, Spencer Treat Clark as David’s now-adult son Joseph, and Charlayne Woodard as Elijah’s Mom. Reprising their roles from Split are James McAvoy as Kevin Wendell Crumb and Anya Taylor-Joy as Casey Cooke (the “final girl”*, so to speak). So the question is… does this crossover work? Yes. They’re all really good here, and they do work off of each other very well. The pre-established dynamics in their relationships (David’s relationships with Elijah and Joseph, Elijah’s relationship with his Mom, and Kevin’s relationship with Casey) are given a nice continuation here, and it feels like a natural narrative flow, even up to the resolution. The best one, though, is the one that sells the movie: Kevin and Elijah. When they finally meet, it’s both genuinely chilling and so much fun to watch. Jackson and McAvoy’s team-up is fantastic in this movie, and they have the best performances. You even get to see more personality (no pun intended) from Kevin. M. Night Shyamalan himself does make a cameo. For those who remember from the Unbreakable review when I said to keep his cameo from that movie in mind for when you get to this one, you’ll realize it applied to Split as well once you discover the first of several shocking revelations that this movie has to offer, and that one is in the first few minutes. Speaking of M. Night Shyamalan, his writing this time around is very good… for the most part. There were moments that I really liked where they’re in the facility, and it turns out they know what makes each of them tick. I thought that was very clever. There was also a twist in this movie (not the main one; there’s several leading up to it) that was very good. It’s one of those “full circle” type moments in a trilogy or franchise that ties back to a key moment from the first movie, which is another thing I appreciate when movies go the extra mile to do. This one caught me by surprise with how well done it was, and it ties all three men together in a way that I did not expect. I’ll just say this: Elijah is a mastermind for a reason. If you thought he was evil in Unbreakable, just wait until you see him in this movie. M. Night Shyamalan’s direction here, while not quite as great as it was in Unbreakable, is still as solid as it was in Split. He even brings over a couple more collaborators from Split: Michael Gioulakis as the cinematographer and West Dylan Thordsen as the composer. Because of this, it’s just as well-shot, and the score is just as eerie, especially in the opening. However, the score is also really good in the dramatic scenes. What Didn’t Work: The one issue I had character-wise is actually the new addition: Dr. Ellie Staple, the psychiatrist, played by Sarah Paulson. Her performance is good, but the character could have been written better. The issues with the writing come mostly in the third act. As mentioned before, there are several twists in this movie. The first one was really good, and the main one was decent. The ones in between are okay, but they felt like they belonged in a different movie. Here, it’s just all over the place. They were interesting, but still excessive. If it stuck to those two twists, it would have flowed better. While those are my main issues, there is something that is very divisive and I completely understand why: The finale. I personally thought it could have been better, but as it was, it was okay. The very end of the movie (the main twist) was fine, though. Overall: Glass is a decent ending to a trilogy, and while it has a few cracks here and there, the movie doesn’t completely shatter because of them. It’s still very entertaining in spite of its flaws. It’s very well shot and has an excellent score to accompany it. It also has some great performances, especially from Samuel L. Jackson and James McAvoy, and a great resolution to the whole story that brought everyone together, thus bringing the Eastrail 177 Trilogy to a pretty satisfying close. It doesn’t quite stick the landing in terms of trilogies (the next one I’ll be covering excels at that), but as far as unconventional ones go, I’m ultimately glad that we have something like this. *A trope commonly seen in horror movies, it applied to thrillers as well with Split. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/1/27/thoughts-on-split-2017 monthly 0.5 2019-09-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1548615014667-A4YCB8HLH0L8O2CYOXX5/%28Thoughts+On%29+Split.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Split (2017) Image courtesy of hdwallsource.com After revisiting Unbreakable, it was time to rewatch the second installment in the Eastrail 177 Trilogy. This one serves as a parallel to that, and when you get to the twist, you’ll know what it is*. However, prior to that, it also works as a self-contained thriller, in more ways than one, and that movie is Split. Three teenage girls are kidnapped and wake up in an isolated area underground, with only a man named Kevin and 23 distinct personalities within him to keep them company. This proves the least of their problems, as another personality dubbed “The Beast” is emerging, just waiting to be let out. What Worked: As with Unbreakable, and in fact the majority of these reviews, I’ll start with the cast, but not with who you expect. I’m saving the standout for last. The first one to talk about here is the lead protagonist, Casey Cooke, played by Anya Taylor-Joy (The Witch, Morgan). As much as I liked Morgan (The Witch I did at first, but now I just think it’s okay), this is her best movie by far. Casey you might not like initially, but as the movie progresses, you understand why she’s so distant from everyone else. She shows that really well in her performance. The same can be said for Haley Lu Richardson (The Edge of Seventeen) as Claire Benoit, who’s basically the voice of reason of the group, and the most likable because she tries to get through to Casey how serious their situation is. Not only that, but she’s also the smart one, showing a sense of rationality in figuring out ways to escape. The other one is Claire’s friend Marcia, portrayed by Jessica Sula, who aside from this movie works mostly on TV. Her performance is good, despite not being in it as much. She serves as the scared one in the group to balance it out. You have the calm and reserved character with Casey, the rational one with Claire, and then the frightened one with Marcia. They all pull off their respective character traits very well. The main supporting character to talk about is Dr. Karen Fletcher, Kevin’s psychologist. She’s played by Betty Buckley, an actress who’s worked with M. Night Shyamalan before with The Happening. Suffice it to say, she’s much better here, and you do understand her concerns with Kevin’s condition. Last, but certainly not least, is the main character of this movie: James McAvoy as Kevin himself, and the other personalities that reside within him. He is fantastic in this. In a way, it’s a one-man show for him, and everyone else is watching. Although they don’t show all the personalities, the ones they do show have their own share of memorable moments, and it’s because of his performance in these scenes that really makes them stand out as much as they do. Much like Unbreakable, the direction from M. Night Shyamalan I found very solid here… and yes, as with that movie, he does have a cameo here as well. Unlike Unbreakable, for these next two movies, James Newton Howard does not return to compose the score. Instead, it’s West Dylan Thordson, who is best known for scoring Joy (starring Jennifer Lawrence) and Foxcatcher (starring Steve Carrell). His score for this, accompanied by excellent cinematography courtesy of Michael Gioulakis, best known for his work on a very good horror movie called It Follows, makes for a haunting combination. A highlight in that regard is the theme during the opening credits. As I said in the intro of the review, this movie also works as a self-contained thriller. In addition to the eeriness of the score and the cinematography, it’s the aforementioned scenes with the various personalities within Kevin put on display here that really gives it a sense of paranoia, and a really effective one at that. What Didn’t Work: While I did really like M. Night Shyamalan’s writing for Unbreakable, it’s not as strong this time around. There are some plot holes, and it also does kind of portray the condition Kevin has in a negative connotation, so for those who happen to have that while still being interested, this may be a major dealbreaker for you. Those are my only real flaws with this movie. Other than that, I really enjoyed this movie when I first saw it in theaters, and it surprised me just as much if not a little bit more upon rewatching it for this series of reviews. Overall: Split shows that M. Night Shyamalan has still got it as a director after so many years of so many misfires (and one absolute disaster, but we’re getting ahead of ourselves… for now). He goes back to his roots in psychological thrillers, and in fact this movie feels like he never left the genre in which he made a name for himself. While not perfect in the writing department, everything else just works so well for me that I can overlook it. With an excellent performance from James McAvoy, a solid supporting cast, a great score and cinematography, and good direction from M. Night Shyamalan, Split is an unconventional thriller in an already unconventional trilogy, and so it fits right in with the bookending movies in ways you wouldn’t expect. The icing on the cake comes with the twist, and a cameo a little bit into the credits which builds up to something bigger just makes the overall surprise of the movie itself that much sweeter to where you’ll want to see how it all comes together, which I will get into in the next review. *I’ll say this: Take the underlying theme of the story from Unbreakable, and flip it. All will be revealed in the review for Movie #3, much like the Trilogy does with the movie itself. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/1/27/thoughts-on-unbreakable-2000 monthly 0.5 2019-09-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1548614939355-MUKJP64P0PR5629A406H/%28Thoughts+On%29+Unbreakable.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Unbreakable (2000) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com While working on my review of The Butterfly Effect, I was in the middle of visiting a rather unconventional trilogy, for which the final installment was recently released. Its nickname is the Eastrail 177 Trilogy, after the event that started it all in the movie that started it all, and that movie is known as Unbreakable. Following a devastating train crash in which he is the sole survivor (and emerges unscathed), security guard David Dunn crosses paths with a comic book art dealer named Elijah Price, who has been suffering his whole life from a condition in which his bones are very fragile, and many fractures as a result. While in the hospital, he developed a theory based on the comics he read: He is the embodiment of human frailty, so there must be someone out there who’s the complete opposite (someone who’s “unbreakable,” so to speak). This leads him to David and his having recently survived the train crash… and a series of mind games as to whether or not Elijah’s theory is true. What Worked: First of all, the cast is excellent in this. Bruce Willis is great as David Dunn, showing that he can embody the character’s vulnerability not just mentally, but physically as well, and both aspects are really put to the test in this movie, and they each have their share of shocking revelations. The most shocking one comes with the twist, and believe me, you won’t see it coming. Then there’s Samuel L. Jackson as Elijah Price, who also goes by the nickname “Mr. Glass” because of his condition. Even though you don’t know it right off the bat as you would in any other superhero movie, he’s still more or less the villain here, and he makes for a really good villain at that. He’s the “charming on the outside, crazy on the inside” or the “methodical maniac” type of villain. He doesn’t play it over the top, he plays it straight, and that keeps with the movie’s “grounded in reality” feel. That’s just one of many examples of breaking convention (not the kind you’re probably thinking of) here. There’s also Robin Wright (Wonder Woman) as David’s wife Audrey, and she’s really good here as well, having a smaller but still significant role in the story. Then there’s Spencer Treat Clark as their son Joseph, who believes his Dad is a superhero, and Charlayne Woodard as Elijah’s Mom. They, too, are the same way, but those two you’ll want to keep in mind for later. It’s also worth noting that the director of the movie himself, M. Night Shyamalan, makes a cameo. You’ll definitely want to keep his character in mind in addition to them, as it might just go full circle by the time I get to Movie #3. Speaking of M. Night Shyamalan, his direction is very good, and this was during the time when he was just getting started, because this was the movie he did following the enormous popularity of The Sixth Sense. His writing isn’t bad, either. One more thing to mention: James Newton Howard’s score is fantastic, and there’s great cinematography on display here as well. What Didn’t Work: There’s maybe some minor (and I mean very minor) pacing issues, but honestly, that’s really it. Overall: Unbreakable is a great movie, and it’s often considered one of the best superhero movies of all time now, because of how it approaches the genre in such a unique way. As much as I really enjoyed the follow-ups to this one, I still think this is probably M. Night Shyamalan’s best movie*. Out of all superhero movies, it’s definitely among the more underrated ones. It has a fascinating premise, a great cast of both characters and actors, some very tense moments as well as some very emotional ones, and a twist that is still mindblowing even today. If you haven’t seen it yet, I highly recommend you do so, especially if you want to see how it all comes together in the end. *His worst is kind of obvious for the vast majority, including myself… and the time will inevitably come where I end up having to cover it. Here’s the twist: I’ve seen it more times than The Butterfly Effect, yet that’ll ultimately feel less painful. That’s how bad his worst movie is (and I’m barely scratching the surface). https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/12/27/thoughts-on-the-butterfly-effect-2004 monthly 0.5 2020-03-07 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1545968854107-Y40T494WGKW6DCPBP1GR/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Butterfly+Effect.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Butterfly Effect (2004) Image courtesy of moviemania.io Hello, everyone. For those who read my schedule post, you may remember that while I was going through the plans I had for this year, I hinted at another special review towards the end… but not for the reasons you may think. It’s a thriller, and while you could say it’s a sci-fi thriller, it is, but it’s more of a psychological one. I normally never really do this unless it relates to something like spoilers, but I need to do it this time because it’s important for something like this. Before I continue on with the review, I need to forewarn anyone who’s interested upon reading it: If you’re squeamish, there are some moments in this movie that are startling (as in things like loud bang sounds and shocking events that are kind of “out there,” for lack of a better phrase), dark and at times depressing (like a tragic event in the main character’s childhood, and those who have seen the movie will know what I’m talking about; all I’ll say about it is that in the parts of this movie where it does happen, you don’t see it, but you do see the aftermath, and I can completely understand people being affected by it), and pretty deep at times, too (especially one line in the middle of the movie), and they’re all still pretty messed up either way. This goes for both Cuts: The Theatrical Cut and especially the Director’s Cut. Suffice it to say, if you’re hoping to be the same type of person when you finish watching it as you were when you started, I wish you the best of luck. You’ll know why I say that in the outro, but for now, and with the reader discretion having been strongly advised, on with this review. The subject here is named for a concept in chaos theory where one small change under any circumstances can massively alter the outcome. In the case of time travel, any alteration to the past will impact the future. This concept, and the movie named after it celebrating its 15th Anniversary this year, is best known as… The Butterfly Effect. The story here follows college student Evan Treborn and his friends Lenny Kagan, Tommy Miller and his sister Kayleigh, who was also his childhood crush. They had numerous traumatic experiences growing up, and to make matters worse, they would often result in Evan having blackouts. Whenever Evan woke up, he would do something he didn’t remember, and so he was tasked with keeping a journal of everything that went on. Seven years after his last blackout, Evan is in his dorm room when he discovers that by reading his journals, he can go back in time to certain parts of his past. He also discovers that the parts of his life where he blacked out were actually moments where his adult self took over his mind. However, he slowly comes to realize that the different choices he makes in the past have drastic consequences in the present. What Worked: The first thing I’ll get into here is actually the plot. The concept itself is very fascinating, and as with any time travel movie (or show, the most recent example being NBC’s excellent series Timeless), it has to have something about it that makes it distinct from the rest, even if it doesn’t necessarily make sense. The thing about time travel is that whenever and wherever you see it, it provides some interesting “What If?” scenarios, regardless of plausibility. The way this movie puts it on display I think is very clever, and it actually shows how time travel both figuratively and literally can mess with your mind. The aforementioned “What If?” scenarios here may not be relatable, but the main character certainly is. You do actually feel Evan’s pain at times, and for a comedic actor in a dramatic role, Ashton Kutcher gives a really good performance. He really committed to it, too; he even studied chaos theory itself, as well as psychology and mental disorders. It shows that he did his homework for this (no pun intended). Everyone else is very good, too. Amy Smart provides the perfect counterbalance to Ashton Kutcher, and it feels like they do have genuine chemistry with each other. The close relationship between Kayleigh and Evan feels very believable because of it. It feels that much more tragic when you realize that while everyone else, such as Tommy and Lenny and even Evan’s mom Andrea, played by Melora Walters*, is certainly vulnerable because of what Evan has been doing, it’s an even bigger case between the two of them since they’ve been in love for so long. It also brings a sense of urgency for Evan to want to make everything right. Although he’s not in it as much, William Lee Scott is still good as Tommy. He’s the character you hate for most of the movie, but at one point it pulls a 180 and you end up liking him, which is genuinely surprising for both the viewer and Evan in one line of dialogue there. There’s also a small, but significant role in some of the events here, and that is Kayleigh and Tommy’s dad George, played by Eric Stoltz (Anaconda). It’s the same case with him: He’s good for the time he’s in it, even though you despise his character. He’s more despicable than Tommy because he’s responsible for the rough life that his children had, and basically how Tommy is in most of the movie. In fact, the two of them are each responsible for one of the dark, depressing, and pretty messed up moments mentioned earlier. I’ll leave it at that because seeing them is shocking enough as it is. Why I mention him here even with how his character is, aside from his performance, is that there’s a reason for it, which you come to realize close to the third act. The best character in the movie is Lenny, because you really feel sorry for him the most, as he usually appears the most affected by Evan’s actions, and Elden Henson does a great job showing that in his performance. His experience here in playing the friend carrying the burden of having to deal with the main character’s actions is something that would carry over into a later role, and his best one by far: that of Matt Murdock’s best friend Foggy Nelson on Marvel’s Daredevil. He shows here that he can play that type of character really well, and it’s just as nice to see that he was able to perfect that later on. The direction and script come from Eric Bress & J. Mackye Gruber, who previously wrote Final Destination 2. This has a similarly somewhat saturated look to it, and if that is any indication, they don’t hold back in terms of creating shocking moments. They had guts there with the kills (again, no pun intended), but here, they go even deeper, so why some scenes are as messed up as they are is understandable given that context. That applies to some of the dialogue as well. The movie is also well-shot and paced in regards to both Cuts. The visuals are surprisingly really good for this type of movie, like the effects used for whenever Evan is reading his journals and whenever the timeline is altered and his memories along with them. What Didn’t Work: Some moments may be a little too much for certain viewers (especially with the ending, regardless of which Cut you watch), although unlike other movies where it may be nothing but shock value, it actually makes sense. There are also plot holes here and there in the Theatrical Cut, but they are pretty much resolved in the Director’s Cut. However, the Director’s Cut becomes even more messed up with some of the events, particularly when you get to the ending. The dialogue is like that on occasion as well. Overall: The Butterfly Effect is one of those movies where it’s so messed up to where you can’t take your eyes (and ultimately your mind) off of it. It’s not as deeply complex as, say, Inception or The Matrix, or even more recent sci-fi like Ex Machina or Annihilation, but one thing it does have in common with movies such as those is that it’s the kind of sci-fi that messes with your mind, mainly when it comes to the premise itself and how it’s presented on screen. The thing that distinguishes it from those in terms of how exactly it plays with your mind is not necessarily through playing mind games or mind tricks. It’s much deeper, and perhaps more personal, than that, hence why I said I wish the best of luck to those hoping to be the same person when you finish it as you were when you started. Chances are you won’t be. Some of the moments that are tough to watch in particular will more than likely make you look back on the parts of your life that you felt could have been better and reflect on them because of how tough they are to watch**; you may end up thinking you probably didn’t have it as badly as the characters themselves do, or maybe even the other way around. If it’s those moments that have made people end up not liking this movie (and there are many who don’t), then I completely understand. For me, though, I found more to like about this one than not, and for those who are interested, I’d say check it out, but keep the warning in the beginning of the review in mind if you do. Also, if you are interested in checking it out, and you don’t already have a copy of it, it’s not hard to find elsewhere at the time of doing this review… and I don’t mean on TV, I’ll put it that way. *She does still show up in a lot of movies, but when it comes to more mainstream ones, that’s more rare. The most recent example is something I’ll hint at until I get to the review for it: It’s based on a character who was previously played by an actor who co-starred on That 70’s Show with Ashton Kutcher. **I would know. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2019/1/1/2019-review-schedule monthly 0.5 2020-03-07 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567990160437-I1JN9OAXJ2UY2SKL54D9/%28Temporary%29+Logo.jpg Blog - 2019 Review Schedule Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that. Hello, everyone. We are now in 2019, which means new movies and a new schedule for what the year has to offer. Before I get started on what I have planned for 2019, there is something that needs to be addressed first: I am aware that I did not get to do a lot of the reviews I had on the schedule for 2018, and I do sincerely apologize for that. Most of them were franchises that received new installments, and while I do stand by my franchise rules*, at the same time, I realized that what’s more important is not that I’m able to cover them, but rather that I’m able to watch the movies themselves in decent enough time to ensure I can cover them as well as the new installments. I was able to do at least that, so I know I’m able to cover them. As for what’s on the schedule… First we have Glass about to come out, so the first new series of reviews will focus on M. Night Shyamalan’s superhero trilogy, which started with Unbreakable and continued with Split, and then I can cover Glass once I’ve seen it. Then I’ll do the first of a few catch-up reviews I didn’t get to do when they first came out, but it’s only the two most recent movies in this franchise, so a “Mini-Marvel-thon,” if you will. That’s right, everyone: The Marvel Cinematic Universe has a new movie early on in the year (keyword on this one: Marvel). In other words, these reviews will be leading up to Captain Marvel, and those are Avengers: Infinity War and Ant-Man and the Wasp. Then there’s Marvel’s rival, DC, with the DC Extended Universe (as they call it). Around the same time, they have a new movie as well, focusing on a hero who also went by Captain Marvel at one point, and that is Shazam!. Leading up to that, I’ll be covering what came before: Man of Steel, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, Suicide Squad, Wonder Woman, Justice League, and Aquaman, the latter of which I at least did the marathon in time for. The next franchise planned for this year is likely a conclusion to a trilogy of some of the best action movies the decade has had to offer: John Wick. Following that is probably one of the only other successful Cinematic Universes out there aside from Marvel: The MonsterVerse. I’ll be covering Godzilla and Kong: Skull Island for Godzilla: King of the Monsters. Then there’s another carryover from last year: The X-Men franchise for Dark Phoenix and The New Mutants. Then there’s Men in Black, followed by Spider-Man (possibly), the Fast and the Furious franchise, Terminator, Star Wars (another carryover from last year), and Rambo, among others. Anniversary posts that can be expected for this year are The Matrix (20th Anniversary of the original, but I’ll cover all of them since technically it’s also the 20th Anniversary of the franchise), the 20th Anniversaries of Tarzan, a childhood favorite of mine, and the best shark movie other than Jaws and The Shallows: Deep Blue Sea. 2019 also marks the 30th Anniversary of Tim Burton’s Batman and the 80th Anniversary of the character himself, so every live-action Batman movie from then until The Dark Knight Trilogy will be covered there. Then there’s the 40th Anniversary** of Alien, so I’ll be covering at least that and Aliens, but I might as well throw in Alien 3 and Alien: Resurrection, and possibly the crossovers, since the original AVP celebrates its 15th Anniversary this year as well. I’ll likely also be doing the 10th Anniversary of J.J. Abrams’s Star Trek, so I’m including those movies as well, but as a strong possibility for now. There is also a very special one, but not for the reasons you may think. All I’ll say for now is this: It’s coming very soon, so stay tuned for that. There are tons of other possibilities for those, so I’ll see what I can do. One more thing I’m considering doing for this year: A new editorial called Fixin’ Flix, where I take a franchise and evaluate where it has gone wrong in the past before giving some ideas on how to improve it from there. Regardless of when I decide to introduce it, I know of the perfect one to start with. The other reviews I didn’t get to do last year I’m sure I’ll be able to fit in there in some capacity. Those are the main ones I have planned for this year, along with plenty of others, so I’ll see you soon with either the first new series, that special Anniversary post, or something else. With that being said, I look forward to bringing new reviews, and Happy New Year, everyone! *For those who are unfamiliar, here are my rules when it comes to covering franchises: 1. If a new installment is coming out, I feel it’s only fair to have covered the previous ones first so those eager to hear what I have to say about the new one will already know my thoughts on them. 2. If the new movie in question happens to be a prequel or a reboot, then that’s an exception, and I will go ahead and cover that. 3. If it’s set in a new continuity, like for example, it’s a direct sequel to the original that ignores everything else in between (like most recently with Halloween), then that is also okay because I don’t have to deal with any potential inconsistencies or plot holes. 4. If the franchise itself has an Anniversary, then I cover at least the first movie regardless, like I did with Predator, and most recently Die Hard and Blade. **There is another 40th Anniversary, which would be for Mad Max, but that’s a possibility at the moment. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/12/27/thoughts-on-blade-1998 monthly 0.5 2020-03-07 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1545968596889-CDZ32JO78JO6CN3P42MM/%28Thoughts+On%29+Blade.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Blade (1998) Image courtesy of moviemania.io Hello, everyone. I realize this may be very last-minute, but I wanted to get both this and the Die Hard review out before the end of the year so they would still count as Anniversary posts. With that out of the way, on to the review. Like how Die Hard celebrated its 30th Anniversary this year, this one celebrated its 20th Anniversary. This is also a particularly special movie: It showed that superhero movies could actually be serious and still work, specifically ones centered around Marvel characters. It did what franchises like the Marvel Cinematic Universe would occasionally do (like with Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant-Man) and make lesser-known characters popular. It was the first Marvel movie to feature an African-American protagonist*. Basically, without this movie, you wouldn’t have X-Men, Spider-Man, and you especially wouldn’t have the MCU (meaning we wouldn’t have gotten Black Panther). It is this movie that paved the way for the superhero genre as we know it today. 20 years ago, superhero movie history was made… with Blade. The story begins in 1967, where a pregnant woman named Vanessa Brooks is in childbirth when she is attacked by a vampire and later dies, although her baby, Eric, survives the ordeal. It then picks up 30 years later, and Eric now goes by the name Blade, hunting the creatures that killed his mother, despite being half-vampire himself. Even with the thirst for blood, he’s well-known in the vampire community as “The Daywalker,” because he ended up gaining all of their strengths, but none of their weaknesses. He’s been using that to his advantage ever since, incorporating their weaknesses into weapons built by his friend Abraham Whistler. When a group of younger vampires led by Deacon Frost intend to rule the world by summoning the vampire blood god known as La Magra, Blade will need more than just his weapons. What Worked: The performances are (for the most part) really good. With this movie, Wesley Snipes becomes the first of many perfect castings for Marvel characters. He makes the character of Blade his own, bringing a sense of charisma to him. He also shows a sense of vulnerability at points, especially in two scenes in the second half of the movie, one of which is a twist. Without spoiling it, it gives you a definite reason to root for him, and you will be after that. Kris Kristofferson is great as Whistler, and he and Wesley Snipes work off of each other really well. They have some genuine chemistry, and they feel like they’re old friends who have been on a mission for a long time. Whistler also gets a few great moments. There is another character named Dr. Karen Jenson, played by N’Bushe Wright. She is a hematologist who gets caught in the crossfire (so to speak) following the opening action scene and taken in by Blade. Like I mentioned in the Die Hard review, this movie also has a smart female character. The main difference here is that she is actually able to help the heroes out because of her line of work: She’s a doctor who specializes in studying blood. She also gives a solid performance, and she even gets in on the action at one point, and it is pretty satisfying. Now for the villain in this movie: Deacon Frost, played by Stephen Dorff. I mentioned that he leads a group of younger vampires, but for those wondering, this movie was still at a time when vampire movies were awesome because vampires could actually be taken seriously, so they still had some dignity. Therefore, no, Frost is not even remotely like the one that set vampires back to the Stone Age for five years. His group of vampires make for really good villains, and Frost himself is a great main antagonist. I did also like Donal Logue’s character Quinn, who’s basically Frost’s right-hand man (no pun intended, for those who have seen the movie). He’s the crazy one, but he’s the “fun and hyper” kind of crazy, and he does get a few funny lines. There’s some interesting world-building here. As mentioned earlier, Blade uses weapons that incorporate vampire weaknesses, but the thing is that doesn’t apply to all of them. For example, this movie establishes that crosses and holy water are not effective, but wooden stakes, silver and sunlight are. He even uses garlic for good measure. He also states that they can only be killed if you hit the head or the heart. In regards to the vampires themselves, they have slaves called “Familiars,” which are humans who side with them and in return gain wealth, protection, and the potential to be turned should they prove their worth. A small tattoo on their body of a vampire symbol (usually on their neck or wrist) is an indication to humans and a warning to rival vampires. However, they prefer to expand their influence more carefully in order to blend into society, a belief that ends up conflicting with those of Frost and his group. The action is great**. It opens with a scene set in a vampire rave, and the moment Blade shows up, you know something’s about to go down. It’s one of the best entrances in superhero movies, and for good reason: He doesn’t just make an entrance, he makes an impact. The action just gets crazier from there, especially in the final fight between Blade and Frost. The vast majority of the effects still hold up 20 years later. A lot of them are very practical, and they still look really good. There’s some CGI, but it’s mostly in the third act, which I will get to in a moment. There’s a lot of memorable moments and quotable lines. Aside from the action scenes, some of the highlights come with the kills in this movie. There are also some scares on occasion, because while this movie may be centered around a Marvel superhero, it’s centered around one of their more supernatural-themed ones. For a movie like this, though, it does make sense for the darkness of the tone. The soundtrack is also really good, especially the track in the opening. The songs in the credits are pretty solid, too. However, it’s just the beginning in terms of this series having awesome music. The best is yet to come. What Didn’t Work: There are some predictable moments here and there. For those who have seen a lot of superhero movies and/or action movies in general, chances are you’ve seen those types of moments before. Although I did say the performances are really good, the reason why I say for the most part is because there is one that stands out… and not in a good way. The character of Mercury, Deacon Frost’s lover, is played by Spanish model-turned-actress Arly Jover in her American debut. This is one of those times where it’s their first movie, but it shows in their acting. The biggest issue here, though, is some of the effects you can tell are dated. Those are great for the time, but watching them now, they do not hold up at all. However, those are mainly in the third act. Overall: Blade is significant for the superhero genre. It was the first time Marvel had a successful movie, and ironically, it was the one based on a lesser-known character that actually worked. It does the character of Blade justice, and it shows both that writer David S. Goyer (who would go on to write The Dark Knight Trilogy) knows the character and that Wesley Snipes himself embodies him. If it weren’t for this movie, and had it failed, we wouldn’t have had so many more iconic characters, both good and evil, brought to life. We wouldn’t have had the big superhero movie boom that we have today. This laid the groundwork for it, and it didn’t take long for Marvel to improve upon it, let alone for DC and other comic book companies to take notice. You can also thank this movie for showing that R-rated superhero movies can work, because that superhero movie boom also led to us getting Deadpool and especially Logan. In the grand scheme of things, though, Blade I think is actually a pretty underrated superhero movie. Aside from being an essential superhero movie to watch for those who want to get into them (and to an extent, a good choice to show that there was a time when vampire movies could actually be good), Blade is a fun action movie, too. For those who aren’t fans of them, yes, there are some corny lines and cartoonish sound effects in here, but those didn’t just make 80s and 90s action movies so much fun to watch… they defined them. Now, as a movie in and of itself, Blade is not perfect. It has effects that don’t completely hold up well, not the best acting or dialogue at times, etc. However, it seems like they were aware of that, and just wanted to make an entertaining movie for fans and audiences alike, and on that level, it works. It has an interesting world and rules established within it, a lead protagonist that’s perfectly cast and that you can get behind, a good choice of antagonist to go up against him, a strong female character, great action, very good music, and a story that works in establishing Blade himself as a character. On top of that, it’s paced really well: It’s 2 hours, but it goes by pretty quickly. While not one of my absolute favorites, Blade is still something I suggest that anyone starting to get into superheroes and want to start getting into the movies should have among the first ones to watch. For those accustomed to hearing whether these movies have them or not, this is one of the few Marvel movies to not have a Stan Lee cameo. He did have one, but it was cut. There is also no mid-credits scene nor post-credits scene, because it wasn’t really a thing yet to have either or both of them. R.I.P. Stan Lee (1922-2018) Everyone, I hope you enjoyed these reviews, and plenty more (mostly catch-ups I didn’t get to do as planned) are near. I hope you all had a Merry Christmas, and I’ll see you shortly next year! *Prior to this, when superhero movies hadn’t quite been perfected yet, we got not one, but two African-American superhero movies in the same year, neither of which focused on Marvel characters: Steel, starring Shaquille O’Neal (no, I am not making that up; it’s basically DC trying to do their version of Iron Man) and Spawn, the latter of which is getting a reboot. It’s also the year that brought us Batman & Robin, but we’re getting ahead of ourselves… for now. **Speaking of action, here’s an interesting fact for you: One of the members of the stunt crew is David Leitch, who would go on to collaborate with Keanu Reeves on The Matrix and John Wick, and most recently directed Atomic Blonde and Deadpool 2. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/12/27/thoughts-on-die-hard-1988 monthly 0.5 2019-09-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567970023666-GL2DDR2BIXG5KPD8QWYH/%28Thoughts+On%29+Die+Hard.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Die Hard (1988) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com Hello, everyone. I’m back with another holiday themed movie review. It’s for the most wonderful time of the year: Christmas. This year also marks the 30th Anniversary of an action classic, and one of, if not the definitive Christmas movie. It comes from John McTiernan, the director of another iconic 80s action movie, Predator (which celebrated its 30th Anniversary last year, and I in turn honored it with my review). As I alluded to in my review of that movie, we go from one action classic to another… with Die Hard. On Christmas Eve, New York police detective John McClane has come to see his estranged wife Holly in Los Angeles in the hopes of reconnecting with her during the Christmas party at the Nakatomi Plaza where she works. However, the celebration is cut short when a group of German terrorists storm the building and take everyone in the room hostage… except for one: John himself. The terrorists want $640 million from the vault, and they will do whatever they can to get it. John has only his wits to rely on if he has a chance of stopping them and freeing the hostages. What Worked: The premise is timeless, and has inspired countless knockoffs for a reason, including two this year; some of them are still fun to watch, while others are just flat-out great movies in their own right. I mean, this decade has two prime examples, both of which also came out in the same year: The Raid and Dredd. The cast is fantastic, particularly Bruce Willis as John McClane and Alan Rickman (in his first movie) as Hans Gruber. Their performances alone make this movie, because they bring an iconic hero and an equally iconic villain to life. John McClane is more than just a cop and a family man; he’s a good person who just wants to help, but ends up in the wrong place at the wrong time, something he’d end up having a knack for. As for Hans Gruber, he has a clear motivation and will not let anything, or anyone, get in his way. The supporting cast are really good as well, with Bonnie Bedelia as John’s wife Holly, and Reginald VelJohnson as Sgt. Al Powell, an LAPD officer sent to investigate the situation. The relationship between John and Holly feels genuine, and on top of that, Bonnie Bedelia doesn’t portray Holly as a damsel-in-distress, but as a smart character. She knows the type of person her husband is, and rather than intervene, she lets him do his thing while she stays put. As for Powell, he’s the perfect counterpart to John McClane. He, too, is a cop who wants to help. He doesn’t know what the situation is at first because he’s on the outside, so he uses the necessary police procedures. John, being on the inside and knowing the terrorists’ plan, has to improvise on the spot if he has a chance of beating them. Despite that, Powell does gradually get to know who John is and that they’re on the same side, and he ends up having proven a worthy ally by the end of the movie. They also have some good banter with each other. The movie is full of tension, and you’re constantly wondering how John is going to be able to outsmart Hans and his gang. Michael Kamen’s score also adds to the tension at points, and it’s actually even more effective because of it. You’re also constantly on the edge of your seat, because the action is so relentless here. It shows why John McTiernan became a go-to action director during that time, especially after this. If Predator wasn’t evidence enough of that, this certainly is. Much like in Predator, this also has some quotable lines aside from John McClane’s signature catchphrase. There’s some humor as well, which provides a nice little break in the tension before going right back into it. In addition to the aforementioned banter between McClane and Powell, the humor mostly comes from the limo driver Argyle, who is the best character in the movie. What Didn’t Work: There’s one minor character named Harry Ellis (one of Holly’s co-workers) who’s not only cocky and sleazy, but he makes some of the stupidest decisions to where it’s not long before you want him out of the movie. What makes it worse is that he’s in the movie for a good portion of it. However, everything else is so good that by the time it’s over, you barely remember he was in it. Overall: Die Hard is an action classic on so many levels. It defines what make action movies in general so enjoyable to watch: memorable characters, quotable lines (including one of the most iconic catchphrases in cinematic history), constantly building tension, and yes, great sequences filled with gunfire, explosions (before they became mostly associated with Michael Bay), property damage, and a rising body count galore. Having a great story and the right amount of humor to balance it out also helps. When you have those as well, you know you’re in for something special, a gift that keeps on giving, if you will. So yes, contrary to what Bruce Willis himself may tell you, Die Hard is, in fact, a Christmas movie. If it’s set around Christmas and has Christmas references throughout the movie, it counts. There’s plenty of other evidence aside from that, including people making it a holiday tradition by having it among the movies they watch for Christmas. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/10/30/thoughts-on-halloween-2018 monthly 0.5 2020-03-07 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1540933461679-N4GH9IO0BZ5Y3XY3S1CV/%28Thoughts+On%29+Halloween+%282018%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Halloween (2018) Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com Hello, everyone. This is the second of two special holiday-themed reviews, so if you haven’t read the first, go ahead and do so, and then come back. Before I get started here, I’ll need to clear a few things up surrounding the subject of this review. Even though it has the same title as the previous one, it is not a remake, but a sequel. Those who are at least familiar with the Halloween franchise may be wondering why I am jumping right to covering this movie when there are so many others in between, and therefore think I am breaking my franchise rule*. That’s because this new movie is a direct sequel to the original that ignores everything else, meaning the timeline of events is easier to follow and any inconsistencies or plot holes from those previous movies are now gone. In fact, the most you’ll get here regarding any of those are references. Other than that, story-wise, it’s just the first one and this one. Now, on to the review. Upon barely surviving her first encounter with Michael Myers, Laurie Strode believed he was dead, only to discover that Michael’s body had disappeared. His psychiatrist, Dr. Loomis, would then reveal to her that she essentially was dealing with The Boogeyman the whole time, despite not having been convinced otherwise prior. It has now been 40 years since the ordeal. Dr. Loomis has since passed away, but Michael has been locked back up. Meanwhile, Laurie, knowing Michael’s return is inevitable, has been preparing for him during that time. However, that first encounter took a huge psychological toll on her to where it’s been affecting her family. When history starts to repeat itself, Laurie now has her chance to finish Michael once and for all. What Worked: First of all, the performances are excellent. Jamie Lee Curtis really sells how Laurie’s trauma has affected her, as well as her dedication to conquering the source of that trauma. She is fantastic in this movie. For those who remember from the previous review, I compared her to Linda Hamilton’s original portrayal of Sarah Connor in The Terminator, and hinted at another parallel, which is in this movie. Like Sarah in between the first two movies of that franchise, Laurie Strode is basically the same way here. She also goes from being a reluctant protagonist who doesn’t realize that what they’re up against isn’t human into a strong female character with a survival instinct preparing for the event that the threat comes back. In addition to Jamie Lee Curtis, they also brought back Nick Castle to portray Michael Myers again, which I felt was another nice touch in keeping with continuity (it’s more than just him, though; I’ll get to that in a moment). There is another one, but it’s more of a cameo. It’s also not in the way you would usually expect when I mention cameos. I’ll say where to look for it: After Laurie is reintroduced here, a couple scenes later, listen closely. They also do something similar in the movie to reference Loomis in a way that pays tribute to both him and Donald Pleasence, the actor who played him. As for the new characters, there’s Judy Greer as Laurie’s daughter Karen, who has had a rough relationship with her, but tried her best to move on from it. Although she has played these types of characters in the past (Ant-Man, Jurassic World), the "strained relationship” aspect was not as significant. Then you get to this movie, where it goes much deeper, being part of both the main narrative arc and the characters’ own personal ones. Because of its importance here, you not only see and understand how well their family dynamic works, but there are times where you may actually feel it. I also really liked Allyson, Karen’s daughter, played by newcomer Andi Matichak. Whereas Karen thinks Laurie is just paranoid, Allyson is the kind of family member that is a bit more compassionate. She recognizes that her grandmother has been through a lot, but focuses on her own problems more. All three of them have great chemistry with each other, and you do feel like they’re a genuine family (maybe slightly dysfunctional at points, but a family). What’s even more impressive with her is that (as the original was for Jamie Lee Curtis) this is her first movie, and she’s still great. I enjoyed the friend characters more this time around, too. While Laurie’s friends Annie and Lynda were good performance-wise, character-wise, they were okay, but not entirely likable. Here, Allyson’s friends are more likable because they feel more charismatic, and some of them are actually funny. The other new addition worth mentioning is Will Patton as Frank Hawkins, who, as it turns out, is the deputy who recaptured Michael following the events of the original. He isn’t in it that much, but he is good for the time he is in it. He does have several interesting scenes, including some great banter with Laurie. Now to get back to Michael himself. The reason why he’s kind of a gray area here is while they did bring back Nick Castle, there are only a few scenes where it actually is him under the mask again. For the most part, though, it’s an actor and stuntman by the name of James Jude Courtney. However, he manages to emulate the way Nick Castle’s original Michael would move to where it still feels like it’s him. They also brought a particular crew member back: John Carpenter himself. Now, he didn’t write nor direct this one, but he did come back to do the score for it. Of course, it has been updated somewhat, but it is more or less the score everyone knows and loves, including the theme. As for the director and the writer, it’s a case of "the last people you’d expect to make this type of movie work somehow actually did": The director is David Gordon Green, and he co-wrote it with Danny McBride (whose previous association with horror was Alien: Covenant, which was among the first reviews I ever did). The surprising part is that they’re doing a horror movie, and a new installment in a franchise, no less. However, they’re mostly known for comedies, the best known of which is probably Pineapple Express. How did it turn out? Shockingly, they knocked it out of the park. They happen to be huge fans of the original, and the amount of effort put forth into getting it right shows in the movie. On top of that, they do have humor, but it's just the right amount needed if you’re going to use it in a horror movie that isn’t also comedic. What Didn’t Work: I would have liked to have seen a bit more of Will Patton’s character Hawkins. To me, he ended up being an interesting character with a very clever connection to the ending of the original. My main issue, though, is with the character who’s replacing Loomis. I liked the character and the performance, and I also liked where they were going with him… at first. My issue with him is where his part in the story ended up going. He’s supposed to be a replacement for Loomis, and he does have an obsession with Michael to about the same degree that he did. Without giving too much away, he ends up being the complete opposite, mainly by doing things that Loomis would never do (there is something else, but it’d likely be a spoiler). Overall: This Halloween isn’t just a solid sequel in general, it’s one that treats the original with the utmost respect while bringing something new to the table. It also reflects how times have changed since then in regards to how violent you could get with a horror movie. For those who wanted the kills in the original to be more bloody and gory, this more than makes up for that. The best way I can put it is this: you’re going to see some crazy stuff go down in this movie, especially with one kill near the end. It is balanced out by having some welcomed humor, including one particular moment in the middle. Even looking at it on its own, it’s still entertaining. Those who haven’t seen the original, but are interested in this one, it’s understandable if you’re wanting to have this be your first time seeing a Halloween movie. You’ll just be wanting to have a fun time, and you’ll definitely get it with this. In fact, you might have so much fun, you’ll want to watch the original as well. I would say see the original first, and then as soon as you can afterwards, see this one. It helps even more if you go at night (which is what I usually do for horror movies), and since it’s been out for a couple weeks, although you may not get as packed an audience now, just hope it’s close enough to that, and that you get an audience who knows what they’re in for. One thing worth mentioning: There is something at the very end of the credits (but like with cameos, not what you usually expect when I bring this up). All I’ll say is this: keep a significant moment in mind when it gets to what I am alluding to. *For those who are new here, one of my rules for reviewing new releases is this: if it’s part of an established franchise, having already covered the previous installments is the best way for me to review the latest one properly. The original exceptions were for prequels or reboots that have franchises of their own, but now, I can add “direct sequels to the original that negate everything that came in between.” This is probably a big reason for my absence these past few months: so many franchises receiving new installments this year that I may have been able to marathon them, but not immediately get to covering those newer movies, although it’s more important that I was able to ensure that I could. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/10/30/thoughts-on-halloween-1978 monthly 0.5 2020-03-07 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567955245414-31A7D60B1S5QSPR7IF08/%28Thoughts+On%29+Halloween+%281978%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Halloween (1978) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com Hello, everyone. Guess who’s back… I may not have been able to do a holiday-themed review for Independence Day with Independence Day, but since the chance will come again, I figured to make up for that (and since it’d been a long time without any reviews), I would come back with not one, but two holiday-themed reviews. With said holiday upon us, I figured what better time to come back than with these? So, without further ado, here’s the first of the two… the slasher classic known as Halloween. On Halloween night in 1963, in the town of Haddonfield, Illinois, a six-year-old Michael Myers, wearing a clown costume, picks up a kitchen knife and stabs his older sister Judith to death, after which he is locked up in Smith’s Grove Sanitarium. Fifteen years pass, but on October 30, 1978, Dr. Sam Loomis, the psychiatrist assigned to Michael, has come with Nurse Marion Chambers to take him to court. However, it turns out that Michael escaped as he proceeds to then take their car and head back home to Haddonfield, with Loomis in pursuit. Loomis tries to warn the police about Michael’s arrival and that they have to be prepared for him. The following day, Halloween has arrived once again… and so has Michael. His target is Laurie Strode, who he spotted outside his old home. She sees that he’s stalking her, although her friends Lynda and Annie don’t believe her. When Loomis arrives, he realizes that Michael is just getting started, and even with the help of Sheriff Leigh Brackett, he can only hope he’s not too late to stop him. What Worked: The performances are really good, with the standouts being Nick Castle as Michael Myers (or “The Shape,” as listed in the credits), Donald Pleasence as Dr. Loomis, and of course Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode. Nick Castle really leaves an impact with how menacingly he portrays Michael Myers. You know he could be anywhere, but you don’t know when he’ll show up. With Donald Pleasence and Jamie Lee Curtis, their performances make their characters just as iconic. Loomis’s determination to stopping Michael really comes across in Donald Pleasence’s performance to where it not only brings a sense of urgency to his character and therefore the movie, but also to where it leads to one of the highlights of the movie. There’s a pivotal scene when he has to explain to Sheriff Brackett that what they’re dealing with is the embodiment of pure evil that has a constant desire to kill, and, despite having been locked up for fifteen years, can never truly be contained. Then there’s Jamie Lee Curtis, who gives an equally great performance as Laurie Strode in what was actually her first movie, which makes it even more impressive. It’s her first movie, and she still does a really good job. In a way, it’s kind of like how Linda Hamilton portrayed Sarah Connor in the original Terminator: the reluctant protagonist who doesn’t realize that what they’re up against isn’t human*. Charles Cyphers, who plays Sheriff Leigh Brackett, is also really good here, as he does come to have a very significant part by the end of the movie. He also proves to be a good foil for Loomis, where Loomis is really the only one who knows what Michael’s capable of, and Brackett is the one who takes his word for it and hopes he’s right, even in deciding to help. The supporting cast (like P.J. Soles as Lynda, Nancy Kyes (or “Nancy Loomis,” as listed in the credits) as Annie, and Nancy Stephens as Nurse Marion Chambers), while they aren’t in it that much, still give good performances, and some of those characters do have more significance within the story than others. For example, there are certain scenes with Lynda and Annie that would become a common trope in horror movies, even going so far as being parodied in Scream. Not only that, but there’s a scene towards the end with another character that would ultimately become a common trope as well. However, it’s more than just the performances here that stand out. Everything that went into making them work stands out just as much. One such example is through the multiple contributions from John Carpenter. In addition to directing the movie, he co-wrote the script and composed the score. His direction definitely shows that he had a clear vision for how he wanted to bring this story to life. That approach is also evident within the script. Since both go hand-in-hand, the result is a movie with an unsettling atmosphere, unpredictability of when the villain will appear from being hidden in the shadows (which also shows with its utilization of lighting and a distinct visual style), and a sense of ambiguity with Michael’s motives and his backstory. It’s all accompanied through excellent cinematography by Dean Cundey, who went on to do it for Jurassic Park. As for John Carpenter’s score, it may sound simple, particularly with the theme, but it is effective when used in the movie, often whenever Michael shows up, which leads to yet another trope: the killer having their own theme. Its use in his appearances works since it’s not used for shock value from cheap jump scares such as loud noises or cats jumping out, but rather to make his sudden appearance a jump scare. Aside from not really having any jump scares, there’s actually very little blood and gore here. This proves that not all horror movies need to rely on blood, gore or jump scares to get a reaction from an audience, and that sometimes, it’s better to build up the tension and suspense and then surprise them because it’s that style that leaves much more of an impact. There aren’t really any legitimate issues here, because for every detail that could be considered a problem, there’s actually a purpose to each of them. While it is slow at first, when it does get going, it doesn’t let up (it’s really fast-paced from that point on, and it goes by quick). There are some questionable decisions, but they either are for the purpose of building up to something later on or lead to what would become common horror movie tropes. While the score may sound simple, it still leaves an impact when heard in the movie. Overall: While everything within Halloween would become iconic in its own right, it’s the impact the movie itself had on the horror genre as a whole that really gave Halloween its legacy. It was a huge influence for what made slasher movies so popular in the 80s, including the clichés that they would use, like a theme that would prove as iconic as the villain it’s associated with. Those movies would also gain their popularity by using Halloween as a template for how to make an effective horror movie, and just followed that. If it weren’t for Halloween’s success, we wouldn’t have gotten equally popular horror movies (let alone franchises) like Friday the 13th and A Nightmare on Elm Street. In other words, without Michael Myers, we wouldn’t have Jason Voorhees or Freddy Krueger. We also wouldn’t have gotten Scream to spoof them because it wouldn’t have had the material to work with. Even if you’re not much of a horror fan, but you’re aware of the tropes, you should still experience it for yourself at least once. You’ll discover a lot of them originated here while you’re watching it, perhaps without realizing it, which is just one of many reasons why Halloween is the classic it is. *There’s another parallel, but that’s a different story… for now. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/10/30/schedule-update monthly 0.5 2019-09-09 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567990265375-FOGXWUTA04CCZJF8J4WC/%28Temporary%29+Logo.jpg Blog - Schedule Update Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that. Hello, everyone. I know it’s been a long time since the last review, and that I haven’t put up a new one in four months. I recognize that I had a pretty big schedule planned early on in the year, and it does seem unlikely for me to stick to it now, but I do think it could still be done, as I am currently working on the notes for each of them, which will allow me to do the reviews themselves more quickly and maybe work on several at once. With that in mind, the planned reviews are still coming, but since we have a particular holiday about to arrive, there are two movies surrounding it that I think would be a perfect way for me to make a comeback. I may not have been able to do it this year for Independence Day, but that doesn’t mean I can’t still work on it, I just need to wait a little bit longer for the opportunity to present itself to release it. Hopefully, these two can make up for it, since they do have the same plan as that one: release the review around or on a particular holiday, and then get back to the ones already in progress. Speaking of the ones already in progress, I will be sticking to the overall plan. In fact, after some consideration, the planned schedule will actually be adjusted. For example, I had initially intended to do reviews for the Transformers franchise, but upon realizing the next installment, Bumblebee, is a prequel, that meant I didn’t need to have covered the rest prior, so I could just review that. I had also mentioned the Harry Potter franchise was a possibility because a new Fantastic Beasts movie is coming out, but the same thing applies for that. All I actually need to do is cover the first Fantastic Beasts and then I can cover the new one. Another possibility I had mentioned was the remaining Predator movies (which likely included the crossovers*). However, while I do intend to cover the crossovers at some point, I have decided to hold off on those for now, but the Predator reviews are coming. For Anniversary posts, at least the first installments of Die Hard and Blade will be covered. One that I may not get to this year, despite it being part of the plan, is Star Wars (since Solo came out this year). If it turns out I am not able to do it this year, those movies (including Solo) will be covered next year for Episode IX. I am also considering bumping the X-Men reviews to next year as well for similar reasons, since there are two new X-Men movies, both of which will have been released around this time next year. I know it’s a lot to take in, but considering how long it’s been, there was a lot I had to address. Now that I have done so, expect the two surprise reviews to arrive very soon. As for what they are, you’ll just have to wait and see. *Those crossovers being the AVP movies, which involve the Predator and the Alien going from their respective franchises and squaring off against each other. Speaking of Alien, I do have some plans involving that, but that is for another update. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/5/13/thoughts-on-tomb-raider-2018 monthly 0.5 2021-03-28 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1616906922952-8VU1JOHLG21PJHCYOHPQ/%28Thoughts+On%29+Tomb+Raider.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Tomb Raider (2018) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com Next up in the series of catch-up reviews is Tomb Raider, one of two video game adaptations to hit theaters in 2018. This one is particularly based on the 2013 game that rebooted the series, also called Tomb Raider. Not only that, it serves as a reboot of the film franchise that came before, which starred Angelina Jolie as series protagonist Lara Croft*. For those mostly unfamiliar aside from the name and lead character, Lara Croft (minus gender and age differences, of course) is basically the British Indiana Jones. The game was awesome, but is the movie at least decent? You'll find out soon enough. The story follows a younger Lara Croft trying to make ends meet since her father, Lord Richard Croft, disappeared seven years prior. Determined to find the truth, she learns that he had been researching the Japanese island of Yamatai, the final resting place of its Queen: the sorceress Himiko. An organization known as Trinity plans to use his work to locate the tomb and unleash its power upon the world. This leads to an adventure where Lara might not only find the answers she seeks, but also her true calling. What Worked: The majority of the cast is really good. Alicia Vikander (Ex Machina) proves to be an excellent choice for Lara. She looks the part, commits to it, and conveys the character's dedication very well. Dominic West (300, Punisher: War Zone) as Lord Richard is another good choice. He shows that sense of urgency and genuine sorrow a parent may feel when having to make the hard decision to leave a loved one. Then there's Daniel Wu (currently known for "Into the Badlands") as Lu Ren, the ship captain Lara hires. He becomes an interesting character because he has a purpose aside from her means of getting there. He can handle himself in a fight, which is shown particularly in the third act, and has some humorous moments. Nick Frost (Shaun of the Dead) also has a small, but enjoyable, part here. His scenes do have some significance, so it's not necessarily a cameo**. Now for the technical aspects. This is the first studio project from Norwegian director Roar Uthaug, and for a first effort with such a high-profile film, he does a very solid job. He manages to capture the game's look and tone and make the action feel just as intense, because it does not let up; it's even suspenseful at times. The action also has an authentic feel to it because Alicia Vikander actually did most of her own stunts. Therefore, you feel as if you're seeing Lara herself risking her life whenever danger comes her way. The movie goes along at a nice pace because of that, especially when the action starts. There are some references to the game itself, its 2015 follow-up Rise of the Tomb Raider (of which a few aspects are present here as well), and even to the previous movies. However, it uses them either to add to the humor or when it may be necessary for the story. The humor, for the most part, works and helps give the audience some breathing room in between the action sequences. The score is really good, especially during the action and some of the more dramatic moments. I also enjoyed the song played in the credits. What Didn't Work: Although this version does get a fair amount of things right, there are still some that could have been done better. Some of the dialogue makes it seem like it's trying too much to be both an all-out action movie and self-aware with the clichés commonly found in them. Particular examples are one-liners, and the protagonist surviving so many situations where they otherwise would have died, even acknowledging it on one occasion. There are several predictable moments, a few of which involve Mathias Vogel, the villain played by Walton Goggins. His performance is good, but he's not that memorable of a villain, let alone a character. The same goes for the rest of the supporting cast, including Derek Jacobi (Murder on the Orient Express): good, but not much of an impact. The one thing that really did not work for me, though, is some of the sound. It's whenever Lara has to exert herself, is in pain, etc. It does not sound like Alicia Vikander at all, but more like it was dubbed. Every time it happened, it was so jarring that it took me out of the movie. Overall: Compared to the majority of video game movies before it, Tomb Raider ends up being among the more faithful ones, and probably the best one so far. Both fans and general audiences might enjoy this version quite a bit. Regardless of which group you're in, you get a likable protagonist, entertaining action sequences, and some very intense moments. Even looking at this version just as a movie, it's still a lot of fun. In summary, to answer the question in the intro, is this at least decent? Yes; in fact, it's actually pretty good, so this may be a sign that the genre of video game adaptations may be heading in the right direction. I also mentioned that this is one of two being released in 2018, so the question now is: can the same be said for the other one? It won't be too long before that one is answered. For those interested in checking this out, there's one more thing I have to mention: there is a mid-credits scene. *Those being 2001's Lara Croft: Tomb Raider and 2003's Lara Croft: Tomb Raider - The Cradle of Life, respectively. I'll say this about them for now, because I actually did watch them prior: they have their fun moments even with how dumb and especially dated they are. Because of that, I can see them being in Guilty Pleasure territory. **That part is not a spoiler, because he is shown at least once in the trailer. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/4/20/thoughts-on-game-night-2018 monthly 0.5 2021-03-28 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1616903697316-O2TJF563ET53MCYIYVTU/%28Thoughts+On%29+Game+Night.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Game Night (2018) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com Hello, everyone. I realize it's been at least a month and a half (coming up on two months) since I posted something, as well as since the last review, which was for Annihilation. The reason why I'm behind is something I mentioned in the previous post, but for those who came in late, I'll mention it here as well, because it started the day after I saw the subject of this review. I had been having some medical issues for almost a month, and it got to where I ended up having surgery. Since coming home, I have needed time to recover from it. Now, I think I'm in good enough condition to where I can get back to the reviews. As the first of several catch-up ones, this review will be covering Game Night. The plot follows several couples who have a game night every weekend, among which are hosts Max (Jason Bateman) and Annie (Rachel McAdams). However, on one such occasion, Max's more successful brother Brooks (Kyle Chandler) arrives, and he decides to change things up: this time, the game centers around a murder-mystery, and each couple has to work as a team to solve it. What Worked: As always, the first thing to talk about is the cast. They all have excellent chemistry with each other, especially Jason Bateman and Rachel McAdams. It's surprising how Rachel McAdams is able to figure out how to retort to Jason Bateman's comedic timing as quickly as she does. There were three standouts for me, and she was one of them. The other two were Lamorne Morris (primarily known for "New Girl") as Kevin, one of their friends, and the best character in the movie: Jesse Plemons as Gary, the neighbor. Although one could argue that Rachel McAdams steals the show here, he ultimately does. He's hilarious in this. Also, Kyle Chandler is really good, too, selling how Brooks may have been more successful than Max, but that doesn't mean he's smarter than him. He does make some very irrational choices, but that aspect of his character has a legitimate purpose and drives the plot along in a way that makes sense. The plot is actually an interesting idea, even more so for a comedy. How it's executed works very well, because it goes so far as to have transitions (look out for this as you watch the movie) where the camera is panned out, and the setting's appearance is similar to that of a game board, and the people and cars are the pieces. I thought that was a nice touch, as well as very clever. They make the direction, which is already really good, stand out that much more. The direction comes courtesy of John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein, who, aside from previously directing Vacation, are primarily writers, having contributed to writing Spider-Man: Homecoming. Most notably, however, they wrote Horrible Bosses. This movie has that feel to it at points with the tone, because both are dark comedies; the concept you'd least expect to be really funny actually is. Speaking of funny, the majority of the humor works here. The directors did not also write this, but as with the tone, it feels like they did. It also applies to the cast's comedic timing because it's similar to how Jason Bateman, Jason Sudeikis, and Charlie Day were able to play off each other so well in Horrible Bosses. The small amount of humor that didn't work is something that I will get to in a moment. Now for the biggest positive for me before I do: the music. The score here is great, incorporating synth that makes it feel quite similar to 80s music, like the score for Thor: Ragnarok did. What made the music the biggest positive for me with that movie is overall the same case here: using a song from an iconic rock band at the beginning and at the end. The only differences are which band, and that this one uses two different songs. The one used in the beginning stood out to me because as soon as I heard it, the movie automatically started on a high note* by using one of my all-time favorites**, a song where you can use it for anything and it still works, and that is Queen's "Don't Stop Me Now." If nothing else, the music was my biggest positive because of that song alone. What Didn't Work: There were a couple issues I had. The main one is that as much as I love making references, of which there are plenty here (especially movie references), I did feel like the amount they had could have been slightly dialed back. They were still funny, but there were times where it became a bit excessive. Aside from that, the only real issue is that in the third act, it gets a little too absurd, but then by the end, it balances back out. Overall: Game Night is a rare example of an R-rated comedy that's actually good, especially considering how the majority of recent ones have not even been sub-par. It's one that takes a similar approach to Horrible Bosses, because it feels as if genuine effort was put into it, like presenting an interesting new concept. It also helps that the cast have perfect comedic timing with each other. It's not groundbreaking or anything, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be more of a fun comedy that'll actually give you more than a few laughs, especially if you're into certain aspects of popular culture like I am. Because of how good it actually is, Game Night is one of the biggest surprises of 2018. It may not end up being the best comedy of the year (we'll just have to wait and see on that one), but it certainly is so far. One more thing: there is a post-credits scene that ties back to something mentioned earlier in the movie. Since it's a comedy, expect it to be more of an amusing one. *No pun intended. **Also used in Shaun of the Dead and Hardcore Henry; while not quite as effectively incorporated as in those two movies, the fact that it was used here I still count as a positive. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/4/18/schedule-update monthly 0.5 2019-09-09 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567990294010-32E7NGS56SJBUAF778TS/%28Temporary%29+Logo.jpg Blog - Schedule Update Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that. Hello, everyone. I realize it's been almost a month since the last post, but the reason I feel like I can divulge now before I get to the update. I stated in the previous post that the next few reviews would be delayed due to medical reasons. Specifically, I had surgery the following week, and have needed time to recover from it. For the most part, I think I'm in good enough condition to where I can get back to the reviews. Now for the update. The aforementioned next few reviews (or at least most of them) are still coming. The next one will still be for Game Night, and the ones for Tomb Raider and the two Pacific Rim movies can be expected as well. I'll see if I can still cover Red Sparrow. If not, I may postpone it for now. Since coming home from the surgery, I was able to see A Quiet Place and Ready Player One, so those are also on the list. In addition to those, I will be seeing Rampage next week. Hopefully, I can get a few of these out before I've seen Avengers: Infinity War*. After the Avengers review, I may do the Star Wars reviews now that I have a copy of The Last Jedi (either that or X-Men; either way, both will be covered soon, considering Solo and Deadpool 2 are about to come out). I will do my best to get caught up as quickly as possible, so with that in mind, I will be back in the Game Night review. *Rest assured, when I do get to that, there will be no spoilers. While I usually try to do a review with as few spoilers as possible, with that one, I will try to do it with no spoilers, considering how huge the movie is. It's going to be hard, but I will do my best. I just figured I'd mention that. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/3/23/update monthly 0.5 2019-09-09 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567990317945-25UEAQN23IQBDYHHFQI9/%28Temporary%29+Logo.jpg Blog - Blog Update Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that. Hello, everyone. I'm back with another update. This is an important one, and I wanted to provide it as soon as I could. I realize that I have not been getting reviews out as often as before (putting the Ex Machina and Annihilation reviews out a couple weeks following the Black Panther one, for example), but there's a reason for that where otherwise they would have been out sooner. Due to medical reasons, I will likely not be able to see, let alone review, any movies next week (at least not in regards to new releases). This means that unfortunately, I will not be able to see Ready Player One or A Quiet Place right away. At best, I will probably not be able to get back to watching new releases until Rampage comes out, and then hopefully get to those two. That's not to say I won't be able to watch any movies period during that time; I will, just not in theaters. Also, because of this, the reviews of Game Night, Red Sparrow, Tomb Raider, Pacific Rim and its sequel will be delayed. Until when, I don't know. I will try my best to at least do the notes for them, though, and get to them as soon as I can when I'm able to cover them. In addition to that, I haven't had time to figure out how to approach the logo yet. I apologize for having to delay newer reviews, but I won't have time to do them for a few days at minimum due to what's going on. However, I do have some good news: I was able to get one more review out earlier today. The Annihilation review is up right now, so feel free to check that out. I'll likely be back with either an update on when I can get back to newer movies, with the aforementioned reviews, or something else. Whichever it ends up being, I'll see you there. If you have any questions, leave them in the comments. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/2/25/thoughts-on-annihilation-2018 monthly 0.5 2019-09-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1519611952484-24K76V9X3MFLLH72RGU6/%28Thoughts+On%29+Annihilation.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Annihilation (2018) Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com In the previous review, I covered Ex Machina to prepare for Annihilation, the new film from its director, Alex Garland. Now it's time for me to review it. The story follows Lena, a biologist and former soldier whose husband Kane (a soldier himself) suddenly reappears from inside The Shimmer, a zone where everything changes and those who go in usually never come out. Since Kane managed to make it back, Lena joins a team of fellow scientists to find the source of The Shimmer (a lighthouse) and what happened to the previous team searching for it. Before I get into my thoughts on this one, I must address something. This is a very polarizing movie, so in regards to what worked or didn't work for me, you may not share the same sentiments. With that having been said, on with the review. I realize it's been a month since it came out, but for those who still haven't seen it and are interested in doing so: other than what was in the trailer, there will be no spoilers, or at least no major ones. What Worked: One of the biggest subjects of debate is something I usually start with: the performances. I actually enjoyed them. Natalie Portman's portrayal of Lena I found believable; a woman trying to find out what happened to her husband is something that I can see an actress like her playing. You can see her determination. She ends up being the most interesting character in the movie, but considering she's the main one, that probably doesn't say much. Then there's the rest of the team, consisting of Jennifer Jason Leigh as Dr. Ventress (the psychologist who leads them), Gina Rodriguez as Anya Thorensen (the medic), Tessa Thompson as Josie Radek (the physicist), and Tuva Novotny as Cass Sheppard (the anthropologist). Their performances were also really good, but their characters I'll get to later. In the review for Ex Machina, I mentioned how Oscar Isaac was in this movie as well. Although he's not in it that much, he is good for the time he's in it. Kane ends up being the second most interesting character because in a way you do actually see the events from his perspective. If I go any further into it, it'd be a huge spoiler. Another supporting character I liked was Benedict Wong (Wong from Doctor Strange) as Lomax, the scientist in the hazmat suit who's questioning Lena that you see in the trailer. Those scenes looked similar to The Signal (a sci-fi movie I really enjoyed), even from the trailers for both movies. Speaking of looks, the biggest positives for me were the same ones I had with Ex Machina: the technical aspects. The one thing I'm sure everyone will agree on for this movie is that it looks great. The visuals are excellent, particularly the appearance of The Shimmer, the creatures, and basically the entirety of the third act. The creatures are in some of the most intense parts of the movie. There's a scene with a gator that's even creepier in the movie, but it's not the most unsettling one for me. That would be a scene with a bear that does something similar to the Predator. I also really liked a portion of the score, which, oddly enough, is the same music you hear in the trailer, so I was surprised that carried over into the movie. What Didn't Work: Although I did enjoy the performances of the supporting cast, I felt their characters could have been written better. They are supposed to be smart, and yet a common cliché returns in this movie that appeared in the first few movies I reviewed. They make stupid decisions. You also don't really have a chance to get to know them, aside from perhaps Ventress, and that's in the second half of the movie. The problem I had with most of the score is that it felt inconsistent. At least to me, it sounded like it belonged in a different movie, and then when it got to the song from the trailer, it sounded more like something that belonged here. The main issue for me was the transitions. Ex Machina did have them, but it was more concise there because of the story structure. Here, it goes back and forth between settings when you least expect it, and not only is it jarring at times, but it also affects the pacing, which is another subject of debate. I found it slow on occasion, though the visuals alone held my attention. There is also a subplot where I get the purpose behind it, but it just felt out of place. Overall: Annihilation is one of those movies that's not for everyone. As stated prior to my positives, this is very polarizing: people either love or hate this movie. It's also one of those movies where seeing it once may not be enough. It does encourage you to think, especially with the ending, which will stick with you regardless of where you stand on the movie as a whole. I'm more on the side of those who love it, because I really enjoyed it. However, I can't quite say I loved it outright like I did with Ex Machina. With that movie, you could see the passion Alex Garland had in being able to make it. Here, the ambition is present, but not everything works. With this being his second movie as a director, it may have been too early to take the leap into the territory of bigger budget and scale. Ex Machina is a stronger movie, but that's not to say Annihilation doesn't have its own share of good qualities. The visuals look fantastic, and there are some tense moments. If nothing else, see it for those, but go into it knowing it's not for everyone. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/2/25/thoughts-on-ex-machina-2015 monthly 0.5 2020-03-07 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1519612133301-OS5QUBHOOWMIWV47KW4Y/%28Thoughts+On%29+Ex+Machina.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Ex Machina (2015) Image courtesy of all4desktop.com The next new release was Annihilation; however, before I cover that, I decided to review the previous work of its director, Alex Garland: his directorial debut, Ex Machina. The story follows Caleb, a programmer and employee of a widely popular search engine company. He is selected for what he believes is a week-long visit to the home of the CEO, Nathan. When he arrives, Nathan informs him that he's in a research facility specializing in artificial intelligence. In addition to that, he's built an AI (a female named Ava), and chosen Caleb to be the human component in a Turing test. His objective is to analyze her and see if she has any humanity. What follows may be more than just mere conversations; they might just be a series of mind games. What Worked: Despite not having much in the way of cast, that limitation actually works here because the plot is built around it. What benefits it further is the fact that the three main characters are all played by good actors. Caleb, the protagonist, is played by Domhnall Gleeson (Bill Weasley from Harry Potter). He's great in this, showing legitimate astonishment at what he learns from Nathan and while interacting with Ava. Nathan is played by Oscar Isaac (Annihilation, Star Wars*), who is very believable at conveying the Steve Jobs-type qualities of his character, as well as a laid-back personality. He also shows that he can have some fun in one scene. The one that stands out the most, however, is Ava herself, played by Alicia Vikander (Tomb Raider, Jason Bourne). This movie gave her recognition, and for good reason; she's fantastic in this. Every time she's on screen, especially when interacting with Caleb, it's hard not to be invested. It's not just her performance that gives you that feeling. This movie looks gorgeous in its cinematography and production design, from the environment around the building to the building itself. If the look of the setting alone doesn't grab your attention, just wait until you see the visuals. They are that good to where they even won Best Visual Effects (and I was actually fine with that). The score is also very solid. All of that shows in Alex Garland's direction, and in his script to an extent. There are some interesting ideas presented through the dialogue, along with a bit of humor. What Didn't Work: A minor issue I had is that while the pacing is overall very good, there were times where it felt slightly uneven when going from one session to another. Overall: Ex Machina is a great example of both an original and clever sci-fi story and an excellent directorial debut. It shows that Alex Garland can be a solid director in addition to a solid writer who has experience in the genre itself. While not as thought-provoking, it's similar to The Matrix in that it poses intriguing questions and opens the door for the audience to interpret its themes, particularly through a very unsettling ending. It also allows them to view how we interact with our technology from both perspectives and what could happen if we underestimate it. Ex Machina is proof that even on a smaller scale and with a smaller budget, a sci-fi story can work if it justifies them enough to still be interesting. *He and Domhnall Gleeson would go on to be in Star Wars following this movie. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/2/25/thoughts-on-black-panther-2018 monthly 0.5 2020-03-07 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567889837018-JJ2E30QXNES4KG8O5RTT/%28Thoughts+On%29+Black+Panther.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Black Panther (2018) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com The newest installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe is finally out. The "Marvel-thon" posts have been building up to this. Now I can give my thoughts... on Black Panther. Following the events of Captain America: Civil War, T'Challa has come home to Wakanda, a nation in Africa that's isolated from the rest of the world. However, his status as King is challenged when old enemies resurface. As both the new King and the Black Panther, he must not only protect his people, but also the outside world. What Worked: There are many positives here. First of all, the performances are very good. After being introduced in Civil War, Black Panther has his time to shine. The performance by Chadwick Boseman there was more about setting the character up. In this, you see how the events of that movie affected him and Wakanda itself. He makes the character his own, and he's only shown up in two movies so far. There are two other characters to talk about that return from previous movies. The first one is Everett K. Ross, played by Martin Freeman, who also returns from Civil War. You get to learn more about him in this as well, and Freeman does get some funny lines. The other one is Ulysses Klaue, played by Andy Serkis, who returns from Age of Ultron. He had a small role there, which I thought was to set up a larger role in this. Oddly enough, he's not in this movie that much, either. However, some of the events from Age of Ultron are addressed (including one involving him), and like that movie, Andy Serkis is good for the time he's in it. Now for the new characters. There's Lupita Nyong'o (The Jungle Book, the Star Wars sequel trilogy) as Nakia, who has past history with T'Challa. There's also Daniel Kaluuya (Get Out) as W'Kabi, T'Challa's best friend. In supporting roles are Angela Bassett as Ramonda, the Queen of Wakanda, and Forest Whitaker as Zuri, one of the elders. They all get some interesting development. There are three standouts in the supporting cast, and either of them could be considered the best character in the movie. One of them is Danai Gurira as Okoye, leader of the Dora Milaje (an all-female group of warriors who are fiercely loyal to the nation and its protector). The second one is Letitia Wright (The Commuter) as T'Challa's younger sister Shuri, who was probably my favorite. If T'Challa is Marvel's James Bond, Shuri is their Q; she is responsible for designing tech not only for Wakanda itself, but also for her brother. The other standout is Winston Duke as M'Baku, who leads a tribe distant from those in support of T'Challa being King. Although Shuri has some of the funniest lines in the movie, M'Baku gets one as well. Last but not least is the villain, Erik Killmonger, played by Michael B. Jordan. He's a great actor (for evidence of that, go watch Creed), and he ends up being a great villain. Similar to Vulture in Spider-Man: Homecoming, you see where he's coming from, perhaps even more so than with Vulture. Is he the best villain since Loki as some have been saying? For me, no... he's the best villain since Zemo in Civil War. As if the villain's motivations were not brutal enough, at least a couple of the fights in this get pretty visceral, too. The best way to describe them is if you take the fight scenes in Creed and the Bane fight from The Dark Knight Rises and put them together. Speaking of Creed, Michael B. Jordan's collaborator from that movie, Ryan Coogler, directs this movie. He proves to be an excellent choice not only because he knows how to film fight scenes and hold nothing back, but also because he's known for using certain cultural aspects that do not get much attention as a key part of the story, particularly the Black culture. I will get more into that in the outro. As for how he films fight scenes, it was very impressive in Creed, and this manages to top it. A great example is a casino fight that looks like it's all one take. The biggest positives are the production design and the music. The costumes, sets, and especially the cinematography are amazing here. With the music, I'm not just talking about the score. There is a soundtrack in this, produced by Kendrick Lamar. In hearing that, you might be concerned that the songs may distract from the movie. If it were any other movie, maybe, considering those try to incorporate as many as they can for the duration of the runtime. Here, having a soundtrack by a popular artist actually works because they're used sparingly. I only noticed three used throughout the movie (counting the credits). The soundtrack for this is very good, and so is the score. There's also a reference to an old favorite of mine during a scene with Andy Serkis. There is humor, but it's spread out, like with some references and particularly the dialogue. What Didn't Work: While a vast majority of the visuals are excellent, there are some that you can tell are CGI, especially in the third act. The beginning is a little slow, but it's not long before it picks up. Overall: Black Panther is not only among the very best installments of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (might be high up for me; I'll have to think about that), but also will likely be among the very best movies of the year. Like with Thor: Ragnarok, it has another great villain. However, whereas that was the best MCU movie since Civil War, this has the best action since Civil War. What makes this stand out that much more, though, is its cultural relevance. It's like a mix between Wonder Woman and Get Out. This and Wonder Woman give a particular demographic a hero of their own. This leads to the similarities with Get Out. They both bring to light issues faced by Black culture, except Get Out was a social commentary on that culture, while this takes that culture and embraces it. For those reasons, both also feel like a movie they needed, while being one everyone else can enjoy with them. Expect a Stan Lee cameo (the best one since Spider-Man: Homecoming), as well as a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/2/14/2018-review-schedule monthly 0.5 2019-09-09 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567990342666-11G306TZIK9671YFQ7B1/%28Temporary%29+Logo.jpg Blog - 2018 Review Schedule Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that. Hello, everyone. I just wanted to provide an update regarding the schedule. I have been trying to do some catch-up reviews, like Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, The Commuter, 12 Strong, The Shape of Water, and most recently Winchester. I know I said I would do Star Wars, but I have decided to hold off on that for now. Unless I can do maybe 1-2 of those prior, the next review will definitely be for Black Panther, so at least look forward to that. For the schedule itself, a lot of franchises receive new installments every year, and this year is no exception. In 2018, reviews can be expected for... Pacific Rim, X-Men, Star Wars, The Incredibles, Jurassic Park, Mission: Impossible (I absolutely plan to do those two franchises), Spider-Man, the DC Extended Universe, and Transformers. Possibilities are Cloverfield, the remaining Predator movies (which likely includes the crossovers), and Harry Potter/Fantastic Beasts. That's not to say these will be the only franchises I plan to cover; if an opportunity presents itself with a certain one I didn't mention, I can cover that even if it doesn't have a new movie this year. For example, another one that can be expected, but for a different reason, is Die Hard; since the first one celebrates its 30th Anniversary this year, I thought why not incorporate that. A similar case can be made for the 20th Anniversary of Blade. I would also like to announce new segments. There's "Trash Tuesday"* where I cover bad movies ("so bad they're good" or otherwise; Guilty Pleasures are debatable), "Thriller Thursday" where I cover different types of thrillers (be they sci-fi, action, horror, etc.), and "Favorite Friday" where I cover some of my personal favorite movies. As for when I intend to start them, I do not know yet, although I do have some ideas. One more thing: I don't have a proper logo for the site, so the image you see above will serve as a temporary one. I may also use that (and eventually the logo) if I can't quite find a good enough quality image of the poster for the corresponding movie while preparing a review. I figured I'd forewarn you if you happen to see a logo instead. That pretty much sums it up for the plans for 2018. I will also be gladly taking requests for future reviews, and I'll see what I can do. One rule for doing so: it has to be something I'd even remotely be interested in, so nothing like Twilight or Fifty Shades. It has to be something I'd enjoy watching willingly. With all of that in mind, if I'm not back in a catch-up review, I definitely will be with my thoughts on Black Panther, so either way, you'll be seeing another post very soon on something. If you have any questions or suggestions, leave them in the comments. *I may need a better name for that, as well as names for the other days, although that could vary depending on the genre or even a franchise. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/2/12/thoughts-on-maze-runner-the-death-cure-2018 monthly 0.5 2020-02-23 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1518461116018-9KCDDRRW32QOZRCWEOGL/%28Thoughts+On%29+Maze+Runner+-+The+Death+Cure.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Maze Runner: The Death Cure (2018) Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com This is the second of two posts focusing on the sequels to the first movie I ever reviewed, The Maze Runner. In the previous one, I covered The Scorch Trials, and in this one, I will be covering the finale, The Death Cure. After surviving the Scorch, Thomas and his group must now conquer their biggest obstacle yet. One city still stands, but it is under the control of WCKD. They must find a way in, rescue their friends, and find a way out. While in the Last City, they may also find the answers they have sought from the very beginning. What Worked: While I will start off with the acting (as I often do), there is something I noticed in regards to the characters here: there is only one new character in the entire movie. The rest of them are either in the main cast or returning from the second one. The main cast themselves are still very good here, especially with Dylan O'Brien as Thomas. This is his best performance in the franchise, showing his determination and some genuine emotion in a couple scenes. Returning from the second one are Giancarlo Esposito as Jorge, Aidan Gillen as Janson, Barry Pepper as Vince, and Rosa Salazar as Brenda. With Giancarlo Esposito and Barry Pepper, they continue to be awesome. Although Jorge is involved in the action, Vince is given more to do here. Brenda is definitely given more to do compared to last time, even having a significant part in the third act. Rosa Salazar's performance is pretty good, particularly in her scenes with Esposito. The second movie established that their characters were close, and that relationship continues to an extent here. Another character worth mentioning is Dr. Ava Paige, played by Patricia Clarkson. She did show up in the previous two movies, but it was more of a cameo. Why I mention it now is because she has a bigger part in this one. With all of that setup, it seems like she's the villain, and yet Janson is more of a villain than she is. If you thought Aidan Gillen made Janson appear evil in the second movie, wait until you see him in this. With the action, its purpose has at least been consistent, even if the style hasn't. The purpose has been to build up to the bigger picture by escalating the conflict the heroes face. They went from isolation to the outside world and now to the source. There are huge improvements from the previous film. In that movie, there was a small amount of shaky cam during tense moments and action scenes. This might still have some, but it's minimal and not noticeable. Therefore, the action in this looks more like it was in the first movie. The same can be said for the effects. The moments of tension work very well because of these improvements. My two biggest positives are the third act and the ending. Everything that has led to this more than pays off in the third act. The heroes' last stand feels like it should in an action movie: it goes all-out, sometimes beyond that. With the ending, it's actually very satisfying in the ways you'd think. It also wraps everything up quite nicely. What Didn't Work: There are some predictable moments throughout this movie, although not as much as last time. My main issue here is that the third act is a little long, so it could have been paced better. Overall: Maze Runner: The Death Cure is a solid and satisfying conclusion to what is ultimately an enjoyable young-adult sci-fi action franchise. This might be even better than The Hunger Games, and not just because this didn't stretch one book into two movies (although that helps). It's also been more consistent throughout the series, showing that not every franchise has to go darker in tone with each installment and that sometimes it's okay to keep the same tone while adding darker elements along the way. This movie answers any remaining questions from the previous installments, and ends the series on a bittersweet yet hopeful note, and in a brilliant way. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/2/9/thoughts-on-maze-runner-the-scorch-trials-2015 monthly 0.5 2020-02-23 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567893507926-AQKY24T1C0Z20W803J51/%28Thoughts+On%29+Maze+Runner+-+The+Scorch+Trials.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials (2015) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com The focus of the next two posts will be on the sequels to the first movie I ever reviewed, The Maze Runner. In this one, I will be covering The Scorch Trials. Having escaped the Maze, Thomas and his fellow surviving Gladers now find themselves in a facility that will protect them from the deadly Flare virus. It turns out this is a test facility to see who is immune to it, as it was previously thought incurable. Thomas thinks the staff is up to something, and that they may in fact have been captured by WCKD (the World Catastrophe Killzone Department). However, after Thomas manages to gather his friends and escape, they have to deal with something worse: Cranks (the Infected) and the environment they inhabit. What was once our world is now a desolate wasteland known as "The Scorch." What Worked: The acting is still really good. The returning cast continue to have great chemistry with each other. I especially enjoyed most of the new characters. The ones that stood out to me were Jorge, Vince, and Janson. They are played respectively by Giancarlo Esposito, Barry Pepper, and Aidan Gillen. Jorge gets in on the action quite a bit here, and he's awesome whenever he does. Vince, although he doesn't come in until basically the entire third act, is an interesting character because he has leader-like qualities to him, similar to Jorge, but even more so. It's also nice to see Barry Pepper in a good sci-fi movie. As for Janson, this is one of those times where if you see Aidan Gillen in something, you know he's bad news the moment he first shows up. He's very good here, and he is a better villain than he was in 12 Rounds where he went up against a certain wrestler who isn't The Rock or Dave Bautista*. The action works here because it's amped up from the first movie, which also helps the story of the bigger picture progress. In the first one, there was action, but it was more about the group trying to find a way out of the Maze; the action provided the conflict throughout the movie. Here, it's in a larger setting, so you don't know what could be out there. In addition to helping with story progression, the action sets up several moments of tension. A good example is one scene (part of which was in the trailer) where Thomas and another character are being chased by a Crank in a building, and one of them lands on glass, which slowly starts cracking. For those who have read my review of the first one, my main issue with it was that some of the characters' decisions might not make sense. Thankfully, the amount of questionable decisions has been dialed back this time. What Didn't Work: Something that seems to have also been dialed back is a fair amount of the effects. In the first one, they looked practical. Here, some of them look like they were done with CGI. My problem with that is not the fact that they might have used it, but rather that at times, it looks obvious if they did. The amount of questionable decisions may have been reduced, but this one has something similar: predictable actions and lines. If you've seen any post-apocalyptic zombie movie (which you could argue this is to an extent) or any sci-fi action movie, chances are you know what I'm referring to. While there is tension, and the action is still good, for some reason it's accompanied with a little bit of shaky cam. It didn't bother me too much, but it's there. I understand that there had to be a way to convey a sense of urgency with the group trying to find someone to protect them, but there had to have been a better way of doing it. My main issue this time is with some pacing in the middle. It's after the building scene I mentioned. The problem is that it had been going at such a consistently fast pace prior to that, and then that scene happens, and it takes some time to get going again. It just felt very jarring. Overall: Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials still has a lot of good parts, even with its problems. It does answer some questions posed in the first movie while building towards the answers for others. It also continues to build upon the world established there. It's still fun to watch because it's interesting to see how the story picks up and progresses. Then when all is said and done for the events of this movie, you want to see how it will be for the events of the franchise. *I know the joke is coming. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/12/thoughts-on-thor-ragnarok-2017 monthly 0.5 2020-02-23 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1515796104095-F4H3O77PF1BJB5KPBGB7/%28Thoughts+On%29+Thor+-+Ragnarok.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Thor: Ragnarok (2017) Image courtesy of wallpapersden.com The conclusion of the "Marvel-thon" is the latest installment of the Marvel Cinematic Universe leading up to Black Panther, and that is Thor: Ragnarok. Thor has been searching for the Infinity Stones since the Battle of Sokovia, to no avail. This leads to him being captured and brought before Surtur, a fire demon destined to cause Ragnarok, the end of Asgard. After defeating him, Thor thinks he has prevented it, but it had already begun. The Goddess of Death, Hela, emerges while Thor finds himself on Sakaar, a planet ruled by The Grandmaster. If he has a chance of making it back to Asgard in time to stop Hela, he has to fight the reigning champion: the Hulk. What Worked: I will start with the approach to the movie this time as well. It's much different from the previous two movies. The serious tone is now more comedic. Unlike Iron Man 3, which at times felt like it was trying to be more of a comedy than a superhero movie, the comedic tone actually works here because the two genres have more of a balance. With that tonal shift, it feels more fun. This is something that director Taika Waititi intended to convey to the audience, and it shows while watching the movie. He's also known for having a lot of humor. This has more subtle humor than quirky, though; the quirkiness shows more in the look of the movie. The humor is still very clever, as evidenced by a couple moments that involve monologuing, and especially the scenes with a certain character. Now for the cast. This is Chris Hemsworth's best portrayal of Thor, and you can tell he's having fun. It also shows that he can be hilarious. The same goes for two other returning characters. The first one is Tom Hiddleston as Loki, who has one of the funniest lines. The second one is Mark Ruffalo, returning as Bruce Banner / Hulk. Some of the best scenes in the movie involve Hulk, and Banner has a relationship with Thor that might be better than that of Tony Stark and James Rhodes. Then there are the new characters, starting with the villain. Hela, played by Cate Blanchett, is easily the best villain in the Thor trilogy, as well as another example of a great MCU villain. Loki was able to make his mark across two movies; Hela does so over the course of one. Plus, Blanchett's performance makes her even more menacing. Someone else who can be both menacing and funny is Skurge, Hela's executioner. He is played by Karl Urban, who's no stranger to appearing in franchises like The Lord of the Rings and Star Trek. He's not in the movie that much, but he does get a couple good moments. The same goes for Heimdall, but there's a reason for it with him, which helps develop him. With the characters on Sakaar, the first one to mention is The Grandmaster, played by Jeff Goldblum. He's like The Collector from Guardians of the Galaxy, except he's more of a villain. The Collector was somewhat quirky, whereas The Grandmaster definitely is. He's great in this, and it feels like he's playing himself in a way with how eccentric the character is. Before I get to the best character in the movie, there is one more to mention. This movie brings in another strong female character with Tessa Thompson (Creed*) as Valkyrie. She's independent and can handle herself in a fight. As great as she was in that movie, I might have enjoyed her even more here. The best character in the movie is actually played by Taika Waititi himself. It's a fellow gladiator Thor meets, a Kronan (rock creature) named Korg. What's hilarious about him is that you hear "rock creature" and you'd think he has a tough voice to accompany that, and then he ends up being so casually soft-spoken. Every scene he's in, he's awesome. Some of the funniest dialogue comes from him. Waititi even references one of his previous movies as the character; all I'll say is that it involves a pitchfork. For the technical aspects, this has the best action of the three Thor films. I can actually mention the "Rule of Threes" again, because this absolutely follows it. First is the fight with Surtur, then the fight between Thor and Hulk, and then the finale. Those two bookending fights in particular stand out because of the soundtrack. Let me put it this way: within the first five minutes, I knew I'd love this movie. When the finale came, I knew I'd love it even more. This has the best use of a classic song since Hardcore Henry and/or Shaun of the Dead; in fact, this might have actually topped both of them, and those two used the same song. I always love it when a movie takes the song from the trailer and still manages to incorporate it. In addition to that one song, the score is also great, with Mark Mothersbaugh of Devo and Rugrats fame composing it. It has a very "synth" feel to it, like something that came out of the 80s. When it comes to the visual effects and the look of the movie, this has the best since Doctor Strange on both counts. What Didn't Work: There are times where Jeff Goldblum does play up the eccentricity a little too much. That's more of a nitpick for me, though. Overall: Thor: Ragnarok is hands-down the best Thor movie. It's also the funniest Marvel Cinematic Universe movie to date, showing that Marvel can actually balance compelling and comedic while still keeping to a consistent tone. With another great villain and exciting action (with a little help from an iconic rock band), among other things, it ends up being the most fun installment of the trilogy. This is the best MCU movie since Captain America: Civil War, in that it escalates the conflict to even greater heights. There are quite a few cameos here, including the Stan Lee one, as well as a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene. *Obviously, not the band. Excellent movie, though. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/12/thoughts-on-spider-man-homecoming-2017 monthly 0.5 2021-03-28 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1616905707930-HKGCLAJ7YMXYV88LC7HP/%28Thoughts+On%29+Spider-Man+-+Homecoming.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the first solo movie for a character introduced in Captain America: Civil War, and that is Spider-Man: Homecoming. After aiding Tony Stark in the fight against Captain America, Peter Parker returns to Queens. He's trying to balance being a high school student and a crime fighter. Under Tony's guidance, he wants to prove that he is worthy of becoming an Avenger. Tony suggests he stay close to the ground and be a friendly neighborhood Spider-Man. Meanwhile, a cleanup crew has been using Chitauri scraps from the Battle of New York to build and sell weapons so they can provide for their families. As Peter tries to prepare for Homecoming, this new threat escalates to where he will be pushed to his limits. What Worked: The majority of the cast is really good. Tom Holland continues to be the best Spider-Man to date, showing that he feels the conflict of having a double life. He looks like a kid who still has a lot to learn. The conflict not only takes a toll on him, but also on his Aunt May, who is often concerned for him. This version of her is portrayed by Marisa Tomei. Although she is younger than previous actresses who have played Aunt May, considering Peter is 15 this time and in high school, casting someone her age makes sense. She ends up being an excellent choice because she is able to show that concern on a fair, but firm, level with Peter. She also gets one of the funniest lines in the movie. Tony Stark, being the mentor-type character here, has that same amount of concern, but on a stricter level. He realizes Peter has a lot to learn, and sometimes, that means he has to intervene. He's in the movie enough to where he comes in when necessary. Making him that type of character actually works, and Robert Downey Jr. by this point is Tony Stark. This movie also has one of the better MCU villains: Adrian Toomes / Vulture, played by Michael Keaton. You can actually connect with him because he's not trying to destroy the city or take over the world, but rather trying to help his family however he can. He makes for a pretty awesome villain. There are more villains aside from him, but they do not try to overshadow him. They are part of his crew, with the same motivation, and that's it. Now for some of the supporting cast. Jon Favreau returns as Happy Hogan, and he has some funny moments. Then there's Laura Harrier as the love interest Liz, who has good chemistry with Tom Holland. There is one character that people may find annoying, and that is Jacob Batalon as Ned, Peter's best friend. He's a better comic relief character than Darcy Lewis from the first two Thor movies. However, I can understand if some find him annoying more than funny. He at least has a purpose, though. For the technical aspects, one of the biggest positives is the approach to the movie. Since this focuses more on Peter's time in high school, the best way to make it believable was to have it feel like a high school movie, particularly those John Hughes would do. There's even a reference to one of his films in here. The humor works very well. It's not rapid-fire where you might be laughing so hard you miss a line of dialogue; it's more spread out. The effects are great here, especially with Vulture's look and some of the new implementations into Spider-Man's suit. This also has some of the best action in the MCU, like the ferry scene that's reminiscent of the iconic train scene from Spider-Man 2. Aside from those, the standout is the score, like it was with Doctor Strange. Coincidentally, both were scored by Michael Giacchino. As if the references to Spider-Man lore weren't fan service enough, the score manages to have a certain Spider-Man theme in it. Listen closely as the Marvel Studios logo is coming up at the beginning of the movie. What Didn't Work: I really only have two major issues, both of which involve characters. One is Zendaya's character, Michelle. Her performance is fine, but the character does not have much significance. The other is one where I can see why the changes were made, but they just do not work at all. That character is Flash Thompson, played by Tony Revolori. Rather than being the jock that Flash is typically depicted as (which is how bullies were often portrayed in older media), this Flash is based more on how bullies are depicted now. That change I can understand, but it is not executed well, and his dialogue just makes it worse to where it's cringeworthy at times. They don't impact the story too much to where it hurts the movie, but they could have been developed better. Aside from that, I don't have any problems. Overall: Spider-Man: Homecoming shows that re-introducing a superhero that has been on the big screen before can work with just mentioning the origin story and focusing on something else. It has a fresh feel to it with a lighthearted tone (and humor to match), a hero and a villain that are both relatable, and great action. This is easily the best Spider-Man movie since Spider-Man 2. Spider-Man: Homecoming may not be a perfect movie, but it does live up to its title. Spider-Man has been done justice, and he's back where he belongs: within the greater Marvel Cinematic Universe. There is a Stan Lee cameo (probably the funniest one in the MCU since Ant-Man), as well as a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/12/thoughts-on-guardians-of-the-galaxy-vol-2-2017 monthly 0.5 2021-05-30 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1516511953324-IC01OHD7450KZA37ICN1/%28Thoughts+On%29+Guardians+of+the+Galaxy+Vol.+2.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017) Image courtesy of hdwallpapers.in Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the sequel that goes bigger and better in some ways while also playing it safe in other ways, and that is Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2. Not long after the events of the previous film, the Guardians have become heroes. This time, they have been tasked by the Sovereign with protecting batteries. When they succeed, they exchange the batteries for Nebula so her bounty can be collected. After it's discovered that Rocket took a few of them for himself, the Sovereign go after them and cause them to crash onto another planet. While all of this is going on, Peter Quill / Star-Lord is trying to find out who his father really is. The Guardians encounter a being known as Ego who might have the answers. What Worked: The Guardians themselves continue to have excellent chemistry. They feel even more like a dysfunctional family in this one. Each member gets their own progression in character development, particularly Star-Lord and Gamora. The latter still has a sibling rivalry with Nebula. Rocket also has some development, and Groot does to an extent. Before I get to the new characters, the best returning character (and the best character in the movie) is Yondu, played by Michael Rooker. He has four standout moments, three of which I can mention: one is basically a Cliffhanger reunion*, one involves his arrow, and one involves the best line in the movie, which references a Disney classic. For the one I can't get into, it stands out not so much because of what happens, but because of how it's done. Now for the new characters. There are two really good ones. The first one is Mantis, who upon touching someone, can sense what they're feeling. She's very naive, which leads to some good moments, especially with Drax. The most interesting one is Ego, played by Kurt Russell. He's great in this, and the dynamic he has with Peter feels genuinely touching at times. It's nice that this had a personal story on the side, with Peter Quill wanting to learn more about himself. The question of who his father is was implied in the first movie, and it does get answered here, but not in the way you think. The soundtrack is also very good, as are the visuals and a majority of the humor. Aside from the moments with Yondu, the best parts of the movie are the first 10 minutes and the last 20 minutes, especially the ending. It is bigger and better than the first one in that regard, which results in it being paced better. What Didn't Work: With the development of the characters, I said Groot had it to an extent. You get to see at least one different version of him here, but that's really it; aside from that, he has pretty much the same arc as he did in the first one. Two supporting characters stand out (and not in a good way), both of whom are villains. The first one is a character named (and I'm not making this up) Taserface. The majority of his scenes involve his name being exploited for the sake of a joke. The other one is Ayesha, the High Priestess of the Sovereign. She ends up being a forgettable antagonist because she doesn't have much of a motivation; she really wants to just get the batteries back. There isn't as tight a balance between drama and humor as the first one. Some of the humor falls flat here, an example being the name jokes with Taserface. Drax also is used more for humor this time rather than fighting other than the opening action scene. The humor in this feels more like they were playing it safe. My biggest issue is with the soundtrack. While the song choices are really good, a fair amount of them are not as memorable as those in the first one were. Overall: Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 is a decent sequel, but one of the weaker films within the Marvel Cinematic Universe at the same time. It does answer some questions posed in the first one, as well as set up interesting new characters. Though not entirely as good as the first one, it still has its moments that feel like this tops it. This manages to have a strong antagonist (as to who that is, it might be a spoiler) and a weak one within the same movie, so there's that. It also has a surprising ending and clever buildup for Vol. 3. There is a Stan Lee cameo, and this movie does something different in regards to additional scenes. There are scenes throughout the credits. Also, near the end of the credits, look out for a brief appearance of a character that has a significant part in the latest movie (at the time of this writing, anyway). *It's with an iconic action star. All I'll say is this: it's not Arnold, but close. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/12/thoughts-on-doctor-strange-2016 monthly 0.5 2021-03-28 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1616902979432-8G74HJ7LMZ2Q02CPXYIV/%28Thoughts+On%29+Doctor+Strange.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Doctor Strange (2016) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the installment that has the best visuals in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and that is Doctor Strange. Following a car accident that badly injured his hands, neurosurgeon Dr. Stephen Strange is incapable of doing his job. Desperately seeking to restore them and failing to find any surgeries that would, he is informed of Kamar-Taj, a sanctuary that specializes in the mystic arts under a sorceress known as The Ancient One. He is skeptical and arrogant, but with no other options, he has to learn their ways to protect the world and time itself. What Worked: The MCU brings in another excellent casting choice, with Benedict Cumberbatch as Doctor Strange himself. He's the medic equivalent of Tony Stark; he has an ego problem, but then something happens to him where he wants to make things right. This is his best performance in regards to movies based on a work of fiction. He actually works better as a hero than as a villain, although he's awesome at it (for evidence of that, go watch The Hobbit or Star Trek Into Darkness). Someone else who works better as a good character than an evil one is Tilda Swinton, who plays The Ancient One herself. Her performance is really good, because casting her as the mentor-type character is more believable. She also gets some good moments. Then there's Chiwetel Ejiofor as Mordo, a fellow sorcerer. The character is normally known for being a villain, but I really liked how they made him more sympathetic rather than jump right into that. He needed development that could potentially lead up to it. He's a more interesting character as a result, and it shows. The best character in the movie is Wong, played by Benedict Wong. It may seem odd that his name is just Wong, but the movie acknowledges it in a pretty hilarious way (on one occasion, it's even referenced; all I'll say is it involves music). He's so deadpan about everything that most of the humor comes from that. There is another character to mention before delving into the villain, and that is Christine Palmer, played by Rachel McAdams. She's one of the better female characters in the MCU because she's an example of the "audience avatar" character, where she feels what the audience probably does. Her performance is really good, too. She's also not technically a love interest; it's used as part of Strange's backstory, and that's it. The villain here is Kaecilius, a former student of the Ancient One who leads a group of zealots trying to bring the Dark Dimension and its ruler Dormammu to our world. He's played by Mads Mikkelsen (Rogue One, Casino Royale). My main issue is with this character, but I'll get to that later. The supporting cast is also really good; here it has Michael Stuhlbarg (The Shape of Water, which I hope to review soon) as Strange's rival Dr. Nicodemus West, Benjamin Bratt (who makes up for Catwoman here*) as a fellow sorcerer, and Scott Adkins as one of the zealots. Now for the technical aspects. When it comes to directors, this is another example where Marvel knows who to pick for a project, as evidenced by James Gunn with Guardians of the Galaxy. In this case, they chose Scott Derrickson, known primarily for horror films like Sinister. Since this does have some supernatural elements, it makes sense, and it works very well. That's not to say it's entirely dark; there is some humor, and it's among Marvel's best, which includes the Stan Lee cameo. There are two great examples aside from that and the singular name jokes. The first is with the Cloak of Levitation, one of many relics on display in the Sanctum here. It's like the Magic Carpet from Aladdin; it has a mind of its own, and it's actually hilarious. The funniest one is when Doctor Strange and Kaecilius first meet. The thing that stands out most aside from the visuals is the score by Michael Giacchino. This is one of his best scores in recent memory, another example being Star Trek; in fact, if you listen closely, you'll hear similarities to that score here. As for the visuals themselves, they are so excellent they might be better than those in Inception. They are accompanied by gorgeous cinematography as well, which makes them stand out that much more. The finale is also very clever; it's a rather unconventional fight. What Didn't Work: My main issue is basically the same as my main issue with Ant-Man: the villain. Mads Mikkelsen's performance is good, but the character does not leave much of an impact. Overall: Doctor Strange is not just a prime example of Marvel presenting other territories of the franchise... it is the prime example. I previously said Ant-Man was because of its incorporation; it's done the same way, and yet actually even better here. It may have another weak villain, but the focus is more about developing the hero and world building anyway. It has the best effects in the Marvel Cinematic Universe to date, with some of the most inventive action sequences as a result. It also makes you think to an extent: What if our reality is one of many? The best way to do that, as stated in the movie, is "Forget everything you think you know." The movie itself might surprise you even more if you go into it with that approach. As stated earlier, there is a Stan Lee cameo. There is also a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene. *And yes, I've seen Catwoman. The only way to watch that is as a comedy, as will be explained when I get to cover it. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/12/thoughts-on-captain-america-civil-war-2016 monthly 0.5 2020-02-23 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567953968350-VLFL6P1RIUKITW5XRD2N/%28Thoughts+On%29+Captain+America+-+Civil+War.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Captain America: Civil War (2016) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the start of Phase Three of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and the franchise's turning point, and that is Captain America: Civil War. After a mission in Lagos results in civilian casualties, the Avengers receive news that the UN intends to pass the Sokovia Accords, which will allow a group of UN officials to control what they do. This fractures the team, where Tony Stark is in favor of it due to what happened with Ultron and Steve Rogers is against it because he believes they work best independently. To make matters worse, the ratification conference is bombed, and Steve's best friend Bucky Barnes (AKA The Winter Soldier*) is framed, further dividing them as to what to do with him. Cap and his group go on the run in order to find the real culprit, while Tony gets his group together to apprehend them. Neither side realizes that their division was a means to an end. What Worked: Similar to the Ant-Man review, I will delve into the plot first, but for a different reason this time. The plot here takes the structure of the "Civil War" story, but applies aspects from The First Avenger and The Winter Soldier to it. As a result, it not only feels like a proper way to conclude a trilogy, but at the same time, it feels like a sequel to both The Winter Soldier and Age of Ultron in one. With how it's put together, that combination actually works. Now for the cast. Chris Evans gives his best performance as Captain America, showing that he feels his burden. He does what he thinks is right, even if that means breaking the law to protect his friend. He has excellent chemistry with Sebastian Stan, who also gives his best performance as Bucky. It's a similar case with him: he shows Bucky's pain and vulnerability, wanting to be free of his past yet having no choice but to submit when it comes back to haunt him. He also has moments where he genuinely feels like Cap's friend, recalling some memories from their time. The best performance in the movie is Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark. He receives a reality check early on in the movie: the team's actions do have consequences. Cap believes continuing to operate on their own is the best way of preventing collateral damage, but Tony believes regulation is the only real option where they can. He may have been responsible for what happened, but now he feels it. His development as a character only gets darker from there in this. The first supporting cast member to talk about is Anthony Mackie as Falcon. In addition to being very charismatic, he continues to have hilarious dialogue here, including some banter with Paul Rudd, who returns as Scott Lang / Ant-Man. Paul Rudd is actually better in this, showing that he is excited to be working with the Avengers, especially Cap. He also gets a fair amount of great lines and especially moments. Another character who is better here is Wanda Maximoff / Scarlet Witch, played by Elizabeth Olsen. In this, something happens that affects her more than a particular event from Age of Ultron. While that was personal, she only felt it; here, she actually sees the result and feels like people are afraid of her. There is one character trying to show that she shouldn't be feared: Vision, played by Paul Bettany. They have started a relationship where he's trying to protect her, and she's trying to help him learn how to blend in. They, too, have very good chemistry. Then there is Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow. The best way to describe her here is this: the further developed the character is, the better the performance. She's actually conflicted within herself in this one. She feels closer to Cap, but sides with Iron Man because he has the better reasoning. Don Cheadle returns as James Rhodes / War Machine. This is the franchise's best use of the character because aside from being Tony Stark's best friend, he sides with him because he shares the same sentiment, even going so far as having dialogue that Tony would likely have. His best scene is where he shows that during a debate with some of the other characters. There are two new characters introduced here. The first one will soon have the latest movie in the MCU, and that is Chadwick Boseman as T'Challa / Black Panther. Simply put, to say he's awesome in this is an understatement. He gets some of the best moments in the movie, and upon seeing him here, you'll want to see more and learn more about him. It won't be much longer until we get to. The other character is someone who nobody thought would get to appear within the MCU, and that is Tom Holland as Spider-Man. This is easily the best Spider-Man period, and that's coming from someone who grew up with the Tobey Maguire version. He looks like he does in the comics to where the eyes in his mask are finally capable of moving to show his expressions. As awesome as Black Panther is, Spider-Man is the best character in the movie. Tom Holland doesn't just nail the character; he embodies him. One more before I get to the villain (this isn't a spoiler because he is shown in the trailer): Hawkeye does show up in the movie, but pretty much not until the third act. Jeremy Renner still gives a good performance despite that, and he gets some one-liners in there. Daniel Brühl plays Helmut Zemo, the villain of the movie. He's one of the reasons why this feels like a sequel to Age of Ultron; he has a connection to what happened in Sokovia. His plan makes him stand out as one of the best villains in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. He's better than Loki, but I won't say he's the best since Loki because at least one of the villains in the two newest installments is right up there with him. Even though the conflict is between two heroes, it's his plan that doesn't make it go the way you think. Now for the technical aspects. The visuals, like Black Panther and Spider-Man's suits, look excellent. Some of the other heroes have received upgrades as well, like Falcon now having a drone. The action is the biggest positive here, particularly the fight near the end. Some of the highlights are from that scene alone. One of the reasons why the action looks as great as it does here is the fact that the duo behind John Wick (Chad Stahelski and David Leitch) helped with the stunts. The Russo Brothers return to direct following The Winter Soldier, and they have managed to top it. As if the cast of characters here wasn't large enough, they are doing Avengers: Infinity War and its sequel next. If The Winter Soldier and this are any indication, those movies are in good hands. What Didn't Work: This is another occasion where I have a minor nitpick. There are times throughout the movie where location names are on the screen, and they are blown up to where you're looking more at them than the location itself for the few seconds they're on. Using location names on the corners is fine, but the technique here makes it feel less like a transition in a movie and more like the start of a commercial. Overall: Much like War for the Planet of the Apes, Captain America: Civil War is another example of the third movie in a trilogy being the best when each installment gets better. As mentioned in the reviews for The First Avenger and The Winter Soldier, not only would these movies get better, but also the villains. It held true last time, but does it continue this time? Yes. The movie stands out as one of the best in the Marvel Cinematic Universe because it breaks convention in regards to how the conflict is resolved, and it has the best action sequence of the entire franchise. It brings in two characters that audiences have been waiting to see, and uses them to where said audiences want to see more of them. After this, it isn't long before they do. There is a Stan Lee cameo here, as well as a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene. Also, a supporting character from The Incredible Hulk has a significant role, as does a character last seen in The Winter Soldier. *At this point, it's probably fine I mention that. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/12/thoughts-on-ant-man-2015 monthly 0.5 2021-03-27 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1616888634456-WG0MXOFKQ4OXMZ190XD2/%28Thoughts+On%29+Ant-Man.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Ant-Man (2015) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the conclusion to Phase Two of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and another movie that approaches a different genre while still sharing that connection, and that is Ant-Man. After being released from prison, small-time thief Scott Lang wants to change his ways. He can't find a job or support his daughter Cassie due to his record. Despite wanting to go straight, he reluctantly agrees to help in a burglary, where he finds a peculiar looking suit inside the safe. Upon discovering it has shrinking capabilities and trying to return it, he ends up in custody again, only to be visited by the suit's creator, Dr. Hank Pym. Pym understands his good intentions, informing Scott he wanted him to take the suit he once used under the name "Ant-Man." Now, he wants Scott to succeed him because only he has the skills to prevent a former associate from recreating his technology and selling it. What Worked: I will actually start with the approach to the movie first, similar to the Baby Driver review. This is not only to change things up, but also because this movie has a few things in common with Baby Driver, despite this coming out first and being part of a franchise. This is similar to Captain America: The Winter Soldier in that it approaches a different genre in addition to being a superhero movie. Whereas that had the look and feel of a spy movie, this has the look and feel of a heist movie. This makes it one of the more unique entries in the MCU because it's on a smaller scale. I'll delve further into this in a little bit when I get to the technical aspects. Now for the cast. This is one of those cases where the last person you'd think could pull off being a superhero actually does, especially when it's a character who's probably lesser known than most. With this, it's Paul Rudd as Scott Lang. The charm he's known for having in comedies like Anchorman (one of my favorites) works surprisingly well here, even when he's playing it straight in some scenes. This is also a case where Marvel manages to bring in an iconic actor and it still works, an example being Robert Redford in Captain America: The Winter Soldier. Here, it's Michael Douglas as Dr. Hank Pym. He's believable as a mentor-type character who's had a rough past. Then there is Evangeline Lilly (The Hobbit, Real Steel) as Hank's daughter, Hope, who has somewhat of a strained relationship with him. Part of that is Hope thinks she should do the job instead of Scott, but Hank thinks it's too risky. Because of her relationship issues, you may think she's hard to latch onto, but they help develop her and come across quite well in Lilly's performance. There are reasons the two characters don't see eye to eye, and they make sense. One of those reasons is why she works with Hank's former associate Darren Cross, played by Corey Stoll (Non-Stop). He's basically the opposite of Hank. Hank knew when enough was enough with using the tech he had designed. Darren is focused on progression, but is going about it the wrong way. Hank knows it, but Darren doesn't care. Stoll's performance is good, but as for the character, I'll get to him later. The members of Scott's crew also have great chemistry with each other. The one that may stand out most aside from Luis is Dave, played by T.I. He's actually really good in this. Similar to the Guardians of the Galaxy review where I said that wrestlers like Dave Bautista can be good actors if given the right material, that point also applies to musicians. Then there is the best character in the movie: Michael Peña as Luis, Scott's cellmate. He has several moments where he tells stories that are some of the funniest parts of the movie. He's always so cheerful when he does it, too. Besides Michael Peña, there are three things that stand out most here: the humor, the score, and the effects. Not only does this movie have the look and feel of a heist movie like Baby Driver, but it also has the style of humor that comes with it. This is because Edgar Wright was involved here, but only as a writer. Regardless, even with someone else behind the camera (Peyton Reed, who does a solid job), it feels like Edgar Wright. The score further contributes to that, especially the theme, part of which is played at least once in the movie, and then in the credits. It starts gently before hitting hard, similar to the Mission: Impossible theme*. It's among the more memorable MCU themes because of that. It also sums up the movie perfectly: the sense of scale doesn't matter when the threat has the same level of consequence. The effects are the biggest standout. Similar to Thor and Guardians of the Galaxy, they introduce another aspect of the Marvel Universe to the big screen. This is the best example of it so far, because they're incorporated into the action sequences very well, and used for some pretty hilarious gags. What Didn't Work: The main problem is, once again, the villain. Corey Stoll gives a good performance, but Darren Cross as a character does not leave much of an impact on the bigger picture the franchise has been building towards. He's really just a threat for this movie and that's it. For comparison purposes, look at Ultron in the previous movie. As a result of his plan, the Avengers' actions end up having repercussions that will be addressed following this movie; in fact, the events are even mentioned at one point here. Overall: Ant-Man shows that superhero movies don't always need an epic feel to them in order to make them stand out. They can be dialed back and still succeed at that. Either way, what's more important is that they need to be at least fun, and Ant-Man excels there. It once again presents variety for the superhero genre itself by expanding into others, with this becoming a solid heist movie. It has likable characters, including the funniest side character in the Marvel Cinematic Universe by far. It may have a weak villain, but there is room for improvement. Plus, the movie is so much fun, having great action and humor, as well as probably the best effects in Phase Two and the best pace. Ant-Man proves to be another risk that pays off, because Marvel has done it again. First they manage to make audiences care about a gun-wielding raccoon and a walking tree, and now they do the same for ants. Phase Two of the Marvel Cinematic Universe has gone out with a bang... not a big bang, but a bang nonetheless. Despite Avengers: Age of Ultron breaking away from the formula of having at least a post-credits scene, this one goes back to it. There is both a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene. It's actually done the other way around this time, with the post-credits scene tying into a future movie, and the mid-credits scene tying back to this movie. This also has what is easily Phase Two's best Stan Lee cameo. *That is one of the franchises I plan to cover later this year. In addition to starting a new editorial, I may do a bonus post focusing more on that. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/12/thoughts-on-avengers-age-of-ultron-2015 monthly 0.5 2021-03-27 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1616889110313-XTQNPXXGXMXB0E6IDEEZ/%28Thoughts+On%29+Avengers+-+Age+of+Ultron.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the second best sequel in Phase Two of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and that is Avengers: Age of Ultron. Following a mission in Eastern Europe where the Avengers retrieve Loki's scepter from an enemy lab, Tony Stark and Bruce Banner examine the stone powering it. They find that it contains artificial intelligence, which they use to create Ultron, an intended worldwide peacekeeping program. Ultron gains sentience and steals the scepter, believing his purpose can only be achieved through destroying humanity. The Avengers must reassemble in order to stop him. What Worked: The returning cast continue to play off each other very well. One thing that is done better than the first movie is the development of Hawkeye. He even addresses something that involved him in the first movie in one of several great quotes. As for the new characters, the first ones to mention are Pietro and Wanda Maximoff, twins subjected to experiments using the scepter that the Avengers discover in the opening. Pietro has super speed, and Wanda is a telekinetic who can also use mind control. They are played respectively by Aaron Taylor-Johnson (Kick-Ass) and Elizabeth Olsen. They feel like siblings because they look after and help each other. Then there is Andy Serkis in a small role as Ulysses Klaue, an arms dealer who has history with Tony Stark back when he was making weapons. Even though he's not in the movie that much, he's really good here. The reason for his small role in this: setting up a larger part in the MCU's soon-to-be-latest movie. Before I get to Ultron himself, this movie has a grey area, like Captain America: The Winter Soldier did. There's a character here that is familiar, but gains a new identity. The only difference is that here, it takes place over the course of one movie, rather than having happened in between two. As for Ultron, he may actually be a better villain than Loki. They both have an army, but with Ultron and his army of robots, he can just copy himself into the body of a drone, so he presents more of a challenge. No matter how many drones the Avengers take out, as long as he's around to control them, there's no chance of stopping him. Plus, James Spader's performance makes Ultron one of the highlights here*. Outside of the cast, another positive for me is the visuals, an example being the new tech some of the Avengers have. Iron Man uses a specialized suit in what's possibly the best action scene in the movie. Captain America's shield is now magnetically linked to his gauntlets, so he can throw it and summon it back to him. Black Widow has upgrades to her suit, and Hawkeye has a new cartridge that loads multiple arrows. The action is also very good here, with even the new characters having some satisfying moments. The sequences here show that the villain's plan is not the only thing they have to prevent. The next positive is the tone. The movie may have some lighthearted scenes, but there are a fair amount where it gets dark, like with Ultron's introduction; it feels somewhat creepy. Other examples include some characters' backstories being addressed, as well as potential foreshadowing of bigger things to come. I also liked how Ultron was chosen to be the villain in this movie. He's a good example of what I call a "second-movie villain." Loki didn't seem too overpowering, so he was a threat the heroes could easily handle. With Ultron, his plan will really test the heroes' ability to overcome him. Then the stakes will get even higher with a villain where the heroes may have just met their match, and with that the tone gets even darker. What Didn't Work: There is a subplot that comes out of nowhere, having not been hinted at in any previous movie at all. I understand what its purpose is, but there were probably more effective ways of approaching it. The writing and direction by Joss Whedon aren't as strong as in the first movie. Sometimes the humor, while it does work, can distract from the tone. The score by Brian Tyler (this time accompanied by Danny Elfman) is good, but doesn't feel as impactful as the score by Alan Silvestri in the first one. Overall: In spite of its flaws, Avengers: Age of Ultron is still a very good movie. It's not as good as the first one, but that's a tough act to follow, considering how much of a landmark in the superhero genre it was. However, it does have a better villain and better character development. It also sets up some interesting new characters and foreshadows a turning point for the Marvel Cinematic Universe. While there is still a Stan Lee cameo in this movie, there is only a mid-credits scene this time. All I'll say is this: it continues to build towards something big. *The same can be said for another movie I hope to talk about soon as part of a new editorial, so look out for that. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/12/thoughts-on-guardians-of-the-galaxy-2014 monthly 0.5 2020-02-23 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1516228638353-X2VOK5RP15YCRHT10EOU/%28Thoughts+On%29+Guardians+of+the+Galaxy.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) Image courtesy of theartmad.com Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the first movie to show that Marvel truly can take risks, and that is Guardians of the Galaxy. While on the planet Morag, scavenger Peter Quill takes a mysterious Orb, but upon learning of its discovery, a bounty is placed on him by Yondu Udonta, leader of a band of space pirates called the Ravagers, and a radical member of the Kree named Ronan sends an assassin named Gamora after it. That's the least of Quill's problems, because while trying to sell it, he's spotted by two bounty hunters, an enhanced raccoon named Rocket and his partner: a tree-like creature named Groot. After the four of them are sent to the Kyln and encounter Drax (one of the more powerful prisoners), they realize they have to work together to stop Ronan, despite their differences... and their motives. What Worked: One of the first highlights to talk about is the cast, as usual, but for an ensemble piece such as this (especially centering on a more obscure group), the chemistry definitely works between the main five. There's Chris Pratt as Peter Quill, who insists everyone call him Star-Lord. He's basically Marvel's version of Han Solo, with hints of Indiana Jones in there. This movie proves that Chris Pratt can be capable of more than comedy, and that he could be a legitimate action star for our generation*. He has the charisma you'd expect from both Han Solo and a character like Iron Man. Then there's Zoe Saldana as Gamora. It shows here that she has probably become accustomed to being in sci-fi movies at this point, having been in the reboot of Star Trek as Uhura, and Avatar as the love interest Neytiri. With this, she brings a bit of both to Gamora, having a "take no nonsense" attitude like Uhura, and the aspect of Neytiri where she doesn't quite understand certain parts of human culture, like figures of speech. With Gamora, she's kind of a slow learner and a bit naive about it. That is, when compared to someone like Drax the Destroyer, at least. Professional wrestler Dave Bautista plays Drax, and this movie is proof that if given the right material, wrestlers can be good actors. I remember watching one review of this when it first came out, and he was described as the best wrestler-turned-actor since The Rock. Since I saw the movie, I've believed that to be true. He's awesome in this. Drax is the comic relief at points, because he gets some of the funniest lines. Whereas Gamora is somewhat naive to how parts of our language work, Drax is so stoic and deadpan he takes them literally, and it's hilarious. Then there are two voice performances with Rocket and Groot. Rocket is voiced by Bradley Cooper, and Groot is voiced by Vin Diesel. The best way to describe them is that while Star-Lord has the personality of Han Solo, they have a relationship similar to Han and Chewbacca. Groot has his own version of Chewbacca's speech where all he says is, "I am Groot." Despite his limitations in vocabulary, Rocket is still able to understand him. Bradley Cooper is really good at showing Rocket's personality: he can be full of himself, but is also skilled with planning and weapons. With Groot, Vin Diesel may have another iconic role. Even though he has the same line, his voice makes him intimidating in addition to his height. In regards to the chemistry they all have, it works because they feel like a dysfunctional family. They bicker occasionally, but find a way to compromise. They also have a connection to either the Orb or anyone else who wants it. For the supporting cast, this movie has Michael Rooker as Yondu, Karen Gillan as Nebula, Djimon Hounsou (King Arthur: Legend of the Sword) as Korath (one of Ronan's allies), Benicio del Toro as The Collector, and the last one I can really talk about, Lee Pace as Ronan himself. With Korath and Ronan, I'll get to them later. Yondu has kind of a "love/hate" relationship with Peter Quill; he leads a group of pirates, yet he has a father figure quality to him, hence why he wants him taken alive. Through Michael Rooker's performance, he feels like that type of father figure where they do something that's not quite right, but it's done out of love. He's probably the best supporting character in the movie for both his performance and one scene in particular where it's him against an army of bad guys. With Nebula, she has an interesting relationship with Gamora; she goes after her out of loyalty for Ronan, but more because it feels personal. Karen Gillan channels that aggression really well, making Nebula seem more threatening than Ronan. For a supporting villain, she's very good. The Collector is not necessarily a villain here, but rather more of a somewhat quirky character. Benicio del Toro embraces that, and plays it up to where his personality makes sense without detracting from what is a very important scene. The Guardians go to him so they (and the audience) can find out why the Orb is so valuable to everyone. All I'll say is this: it ties back to the mid-credits scene of Thor: The Dark World. Now for the positives aside from the cast. Much like Captain America: The Winter Soldier and so many previous MCU installments, this movie proves once again that Marvel knows what they're doing when it comes to picking directors for their projects. Here, they picked James Gunn, who's known for doing B-movie-style work: the material won't win any awards or anything, but it's made more for the purpose of being fun to watch anyway. This is like that, except with the effects and makeup, it's more likely to be nominated there. His direction shows that the material here blends perfectly, as does the script, which he also contributed to. The script makes this one of the funniest installments in the MCU. Where this movie really shines, though, comes with the effects, the cinematography, and the music. I'll also mention the action here. The effects are some of the best the MCU has to offer. They make this feel like the franchise equivalent of Star Wars even more than the story and tone already do. It has the tone of a space opera like that, and you can even see parallels to Star Wars. Of course, a lot of the effects had to be CGI, like the ships, locations, or even characters like Groot and Rocket that would also use motion-capture. However, anything that did not require it would use practical effects and makeup, like Gamora and Drax, for example. The cinematography is excellent because it visually conveys the tone. This is one of the best-looking movies in the franchise. The biggest positive here aside from the effects is the music. Similar to Baby Driver, the soundtrack is a character to where it has a certain significance. It features music from the 60s and 70s, and also like Baby Driver, it's set to specific scenes, rather than the other way around. The same can be said for the score, because that's how James Gunn chose to direct it. All of these contribute to the action sequences, which feel fresh and fun as a result. Some of them have become franchise highlights, like the prison scene and the aforementioned scene with Yondu. What Didn't Work: There's one major issue here. I mentioned that Nebula feels like more of a threat than Ronan, which is an issue because she's not the main villain. Developing the main characters may be more important since it focuses on them, but a compelling villain helps. Ronan doesn't have much of a motivation other than he wants to get the Orb and be all-powerful. Lee Pace does make a good villain, but he could have had stronger material to work with. Also, Korath is an interesting character, and Djimon Hounsou is great at playing villains, yet he's not really impactful either because he's not in the movie that much. This means the movie goes back to the villain problem. Aside from that, there is a slight, but very minor, pacing issue. That can be overlooked. Overall: Guardians of the Galaxy does what the original Thor did: show that Marvel is capable of going into territories within their universe that could not possibly translate well to the big screen, even more so here. With Thor it was mythological, but here the intention was to introduce the audience to the cosmic perspective with a property that they had likely never heard of prior to seeing it. Plus, Thor was in the middle of the setup for The Avengers, whereas this is placed front and center. However, it somehow manages to get the audience invested in the characters much sooner than in The Avengers, as they are each developed enough by the halfway point. This movie feels like its own story even with some minor connections to previous installments in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It takes an obscure property that shouldn't have worked, and makes it work. It's lighthearted, fun, hilarious, and full of great action and music with a cast to suit the material. Not only does Marvel know who to choose to adapt one of their properties, they know when the right time would be to do so and how to approach it. Guardians of the Galaxy is evidence that some risks are well worth taking. As with the previous two movies, there is both a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene. This also has Phase Two's second-best Stan Lee cameo so far. *A few movies from now, you might just see an action star that will bring both a sense of nostalgia and a smile on your face. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/12/thoughts-on-captain-america-the-winter-soldier-2014 monthly 0.5 2020-02-23 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567890818712-M7F7K418EDND13XB714D/%28Thoughts+On%29+Captain+America+-+The+Winter+Soldier.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the second installment in perhaps the only trilogy so far in the Marvel Cinematic Universe where it gets better with each one, and that is Captain America: The Winter Soldier. It has been two years since the Battle of New York, and Steve Rogers is working in D.C. under Nick Fury for S.H.I.E.L.D. At the same time, he has continued to adjust to present-day by making a list of what he's missed through the decades, with his new friend Sam Wilson helping him catch up. After a mission to rescue fellow Agents from pirates where he is accompanied by Natasha Romanoff / Black Widow, Cap goes to the Triskelion (S.H.I.E.L.D. HQ) to speak with Fury. He is simply told not to trust anyone. Not long after that, he discovers that S.H.I.E.L.D. has been compromised, and figures from his past have begun to emerge, with himself on the run and at the center of a conspiracy. What Worked: While I do usually talk about the cast first, I have to make a couple exceptions this time in doing so. There are at least three returning characters from The First Avenger I cannot talk about because of spoilers, as well as one from The Avengers who shows up for basically the entire third act. Also, like the Iron Man 3 review where I could vaguely get into Ben Kingsley's character, I kind of have to do the same with who portrays the Winter Soldier in this movie. For the cast members I can talk about, the one to start with is of course Chris Evans as Cap himself. This is his best portrayal of the character so far, and he has been developed even further as well. He still symbolizes freedom, but he has come to realize that freedom means something different now. It shows when he is told by Fury not to trust anyone; Fury not only tells him that, but how S.H.I.E.L.D. has chosen to react to the Battle of New York. He responds with, "This isn't freedom, this is fear." I'll get more into that later. Those statements can also be applied to Scarlett Johansson as the Black Widow. She contrasts with Cap, because she can have an agenda of her own, whereas Cap sticks solely to the one given to him. Nick Fury, played once again by Samuel L. Jackson, has a similar characterization in that he actually does have his own agenda, but his comes with consequences. The two of them thus morally conflict with Cap: they both think he should accept how S.H.I.E.L.D. operates now, while Cap thinks keeping it that way is wrong. Having gotten the only returning characters I can really describe out of the way, on to the new characters. The first one to talk about is the first one introduced in the movie: Anthony Mackie as Sam Wilson (AKA The Falcon). He's very likable, actually very funny when he needs to be, and also proves to be quite a useful partner for Cap. Then there is Frank Grillo (The Grey) as Agent Brock Rumlow, who leads the rescue mission at the beginning of the movie. He's great in this, even though he's not in it that much. Regardless, the time he's in it does allow for some good moments, and yes, he comes into play later. There is also Emily VanCamp, whose character is tasked with protecting Cap. She has two different names, similar to Natasha, but going into either of them might be a spoiler. One she reveals to him, and the other is revealed by Natasha and connecting to one of the other three characters from the first movie. Even so, she gives a good performance and introduces the audience to an interesting new female character, and a strong one at that. The last new one to talk about is Robert Redford as Alexander Pierce, an older member of S.H.I.E.L.D. and a friend of Nick Fury. He is excellent in this, and he brings about a side you perhaps never thought you'd see from him. Then there is the Winter Soldier himself, the character who's a bit of a grey area; considering his ties to the first movie, he's an older character but reintroduced under a new identity. He is a fantastic villain, with a shroud of mystery surrounding him, and you never know when or where he'll show up. There are two great examples: one takes place on the highway, and the other is a scene similar to one in The Accountant (they're both in the dark). When I closed out the review for The First Avenger, I said that each Captain America movie would prove to be better than the previous one, and so would the villains. It holds true here. Will it continue with the third movie? You'll find out soon enough. Now let’s get into the technical aspects. This movie is directed by Joe and Anthony Russo, whose work includes shows like Community and Arrested Development, as well as films like You, Me and Dupree. You wouldn't know that from watching this movie; you'd think someone with more experience in the superhero genre (or at the very least the action genre) directed it. With this being their first superhero movie, they knocked it out of the park. Then there is the tone. Whereas The First Avenger was more of a war film, this is absolutely a spy film. It feels like an older James Bond film mixed with the conspiracy aspects of the Bourne franchise. Even the closing credits look like something you'd see in the opening credits of a Bond movie. The action is some of the best in the MCU. Whenever the Winter Soldier comes in, he is just relentless. He will not let anything stand in his way. The most intense sequences are his first fight with Cap, the highway fight, and a chase scene with Nick Fury. The visuals are very impressive. There may be some CGI, but it's not really noticeable for the most part, as the more realistic tone meant leaning towards practical effects and stunts. What Didn't Work: I did have a couple minor nitpicks. The main one is that sometimes, the pace slows down a little bit. For me, it actually wasn't because of a certain moment in the middle. It was just in general. The other one is that the score, while really good, doesn't stand out as much as it did in the first movie. However, this is like The Avengers where it has some minor flaws that I would be more than willing to overlook. Overall: Captain America: The Winter Soldier is the best movie in the MCU since The Avengers, the best sequel so far, and the best solo movie since the original Iron Man. It's right in between those two for me. In addition to breaking away from the villain problem, it serves as a commentary on whether or not people can trust their own government, and if not, who can they trust. If there is one thing this movie proves, it's that by this point, you can tell that Marvel knows what they're doing: continue to surprise their audiences by choosing directors you would not consider pulling off a superhero movie, and yet somehow, they manage to do it. This applies to the weaker installments to an extent because while some aspects of them don't quite work, it's still interesting to see what the director can bring to the table. Like with Thor: The Dark World, there is a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene, even done the same way as they were there. The former gains further significance two movies from now, while the latter ties back to this movie. This one also has the best Stan Lee cameo in Phase Two so far. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/11/thoughts-on-thor-the-dark-world-2013 monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1515729632253-L09VJLMSSUIWZSOV1FAC/%28Thoughts+On%29+Thor+-+The+Dark+World.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Thor: The Dark World (2013) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com The next movie in the "Marvel-thon" is the follow-up to the last present-day Phase One solo movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and that is Thor: The Dark World. It has been two years since the events of the first Thor, and Loki has been jailed for his involvement in the Battle of New York. Thor and his friends are working to bring peace to the Nine Realms, and it is during their latest battle where they learn that the Convergence, an event that aligns the Nine Realms, is coming again. Portals begin appearing out of nowhere, including one in London where Jane Foster and company are. After Jane comes in contact with an ancient weapon known as the Aether, Thor brings her to Asgard. This reawakens Malekith and his Dark Elves, who seek to use the Aether during the Convergence and destroy all Nine Realms at once. What Worked: Most of the returning cast are really good. Chris Hemsworth continues to be excellent as Thor, as does Tom Hiddleston as Loki, who is more of an antihero this time around because he still finds ways to irritate Thor. The same also goes for Anthony Hopkins as Odin, showing here that he can be very apprehensive about bringing outsiders into his home. The Warriors Three still get some good moments, and even Jaimie Alexander as Lady Sif gets some of her own, as does Idris Elba as Heimdall. The action is better here than it was in the first one, and as a result, it's paced better. The tone is more consistent here. While there are scenes that take place on Earth, more take place on Asgard this time, and even some on other realms here and there. The Earth scenes feel more important here. The effects look better here, as well as the appearances of the Dark Elves. The direction by Alan Taylor, who replaces Kenneth Branagh from the first one, is pretty good. It shows that he's accustomed to doing a fantasy setting, as he's worked on Game of Thrones. What Didn't Work: First of all, the Earth characters, while their performances are still good, don't have much significance other than Jane. Of course, Darcy, played by Kat Dennings, may have come across as annoying in the first one, and she may even more so here for those who didn't like her in the first one. She didn't bother me too much in either case, but it's still worth addressing. The score by Brian Tyler (who previously scored Iron Man 3) is decent, but for the most part, not all that memorable, aside from one track in the middle of the movie. It comes after a significant event happens, which if I delve into it, would be a huge spoiler. Much like Iron Man 3, this also has a problem with the villains. Malekith, played by Christopher Eccleston, is the main villain here, and while he does have a purpose, the only real significance involving him is the object he's after, which becomes very important (only much, much later). He ends up being kind of a forgettable villain. His performance is fine, but the character should have been developed better. I will give him this: how the movie gives him the appearance his face has in the comics was a nice touch. Aside from that, when the main villain's lieutenant is more interesting than him, there's a problem. His lieutenant comes in the form of Algrim / Kurse. The best way I can describe him is this: look out for a creature that looks like the Predator. He's a more interesting character because he is sent to go after Thor physically, and when he becomes Kurse, he does inflict quite a bit of damage. Even with the balance of one forgettable villain and one interesting villain, in the grand scheme of things, they don't leave much of an impact other than what they're after. Overall: Thor: The Dark World is one of the weaker movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, like Iron Man 3. It's basically in the territory of "good, but not great." Both movies have their moments, but this one has an edge over Iron Man 3 because its plot centers around something that becomes important later, so keep that in mind. This is especially true when you get to the mid-credits scene*, which ties back to that object and sets up a character who gets his time to shine two movies from now. Also, it does have a better post-credits scene than Iron Man 3 did because it also ties into part of this movie in an amusing way. It still could have been stronger, but it is better than that one. (And yes, there is "that cameo.") After two still decent movies, Phase Two does get better from here, starting with the next movie. *That's right, it's like The Avengers; it has both a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/11/thoughts-on-iron-man-3-2013 monthly 0.5 2021-03-28 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1616903970246-U8ZA24IW4DSLXFEOONC6/%28Thoughts+On%29+Iron+Man+3.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Iron Man 3 (2013) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com Phase Two of the Marvel Cinematic Universe begins with the next movie in the "Marvel-thon": Iron Man 3. Some time has passed since the Battle of New York, and Tony Stark has never been the same. He can't sleep, he's been constantly building new Iron Man suits, and to make matters worse, the events of that day (one in particular) have caused him to suffer panic attacks. His problems don't stop there: a series of bombings, courtesy of the Mandarin (leader of the Ten Rings terrorist group*), has left evidence untraceable for the government, but not for Tony. This ultimately leads Tony to a conspiracy where perhaps these bombings, and the man behind them, are something more. What Worked: The first thing to talk about is the cast. Robert Downey Jr. continues to be excellent as Tony Stark. Here, what he's going through brings about a different side to Tony. At some times, he's the Tony Stark that everyone knows and loves, and then at other times, he'll be the Tony Stark that's facing enormous amounts of pressure. The balance between the two works very well. Gwyneth Paltrow is still really good as Pepper Potts, and she shows that she is concerned for Tony, perhaps even more so than in the first movie. Don Cheadle returns as Rhodey, who has a new armor in this movie: the Iron Patriot. The relationship he has with Tony is given an interesting new dynamic here, having a "buddy-cop movie" feel to it in a few moments. It shows through their banter and even through providing some moments of action for him. The other returning characters are Jon Favreau as Happy Hogan and Paul Bettany as the voice of J.A.R.V.I.S. Jon Favreau is just playing Happy this time around; he didn't also direct this one. While he's not in the movie that much, there's a reason for that which also ties into Tony going on the warpath to find the Mandarin, but going into what that reason is would likely be a spoiler. As for Paul Bettany, he's still good as J.A.R.V.I.S., but he's more of a supporting character here, considering how sometimes Tony doesn't even need to be in a suit to control it. Then there are the new characters: Guy Pearce as Aldrich Killian, Rebecca Hall as Maya Hansen, and Ben Kingsley as someone significant to the plot (revealing his name would potentially be a huge spoiler). Guy Pearce is very good here; at first, he seems like a nice guy, but there comes a point where you can tell he's bad news. Rebecca Hall is good as Maya Hansen, a scientist who works with Killian on experiments with her technology. She really sells that she has good intentions that may have consequences. As for Ben Kingsley, I'll mention him in a little bit. For the other positives, the first is the direction by Shane Black. I previously mentioned the "buddy-cop movie" feel in some parts of this, and he's known for applying that to his work, having written the script for Lethal Weapon and directing Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, which also had Robert Downey Jr., and, following this, The Nice Guys. His skill with that genre shows in those particular parts of this. Another positive is the story. It's more concise here than it was in Iron Man 2. It's more straightforward: the Battle of New York affected Tony, and the pressure mounts when new threats emerge. It leaves him at his most vulnerable because his past comes back to haunt him in several ways. The structure is also better here. The first half is especially really good, because it feels like it's keeping with the tone of the previous two movies. The third act follows up on that by going all-out and delivering a payoff for certain plot points established early on in the movie. The action sequences are very tense, and there are three standouts, one being the finale. It does follow "that rule," in other words. The score by Brian Tyler is pretty good, but the standout in regards to the music for me is a song played in the opening as the Marvel Studios logo is coming up. Those who grew up in the 90s like myself will be blown away by the use of that song, as if the fact that the movie opens differently from other MCU movies didn't catch them off guard enough. The effects, as always, are great here, especially in the third act, since they help serve the purpose of that third act. What Didn't Work: There are a fair amount of problems here. I will get the biggest one out of the way first, which is one a lot of people have: there's a big reveal involving Ben Kingsley's character that is ultimately very polarizing. Some people love it, and some people hate it. I'm mixed on it, because I get what they were trying to do with it and appreciate the effort. At the same time, if it kept to the tone of the previous two movies (and the first half of this one) which were building up to something big, or at least took its execution and switched it, then the whole movie could have been on par with the first one, if not better. Plus, the conspiracy aspect would have been done better. Considering Shane Black's direction, another thing he's known for is having quite a bit of humor. The problem with that is in the script. Sometimes, it feels like it's trying to be more of a comedy and less of a superhero movie. On occasion, even the effects are used for the purpose of a joke. It would have worked better if it were dialed back a bit or perhaps kept to a minimum and used when necessary. I also mentioned how the action does follow a certain rule, but the problem with it here is that the transition from one sequence to the next does not feel as smooth as it did in the first one. The biggest problem aside from the reveal results from the amount of humor and structure of the action: the tone, the same main issue I had with Thor. It's basically done the same way; it's compelling in some parts, and comedic in others. It even affects the pacing, but to a much more severe degree here. The entire first half is really good, but then it halts right in the middle of the movie before picking back up in the third act, whereas with Thor, that happened when it would go back and forth between the settings. Overall: Iron Man 3 is like the second one where it still has its moments, although the first one remains the best of the three. However, it does get closer to being at least as good as the first one. It just has a few things holding it back. It could have been a stronger movie had it developed the villains more. With that issue being present here, it unfortunately begins the villain problem the MCU would have in several later movies. At the same time, though, it feels like further developing the hero is sometimes meant to take precedence over having a good villain, even if that means the threat they are currently dealing with may not be as impactful as a previous one. Speaking of not as impactful, there is an additional issue here: this does contain one of the MCU's weaker post-credits scenes... and yes, where there's a post-credits scene, there is a Stan Lee cameo. *That is one of several nods to the first movie; there was one in the second movie as well that foreshadowed the first big action sequence there. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/11/t3awyipob2ya0chlpeuyhiifduwgit monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567897311335-MC8I6BCL6VOUSLVCRYM5/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Avengers.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Avengers (2012) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com The next installment in the "Marvel-thon" is the conclusion to Phase One of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the one built up over the course of five movies, the one that for the longest time I thought I had found my definitive all-time favorite movie upon seeing it in theaters, and that is... The Avengers. While experimenting with the Tesseract, S.H.I.E.L.D. is attacked by Loki, who then takes control of several characters, a couple of which were introduced two movies ago in Thor. As a result, S.H.I.E.L.D. Director Nick Fury declares that they are at war, and that the "Avengers Initiative" is now in effect. This means he, along with Agents Romanoff and Coulson, must recruit Steve Rogers, Bruce Banner, and Tony Stark to their cause. What Worked: I would say everything, and for the vast majority of it, it does. Now let’s get into why. Of course, the cast is where it starts. First is Robert Downey Jr. once again playing Tony Stark / Iron Man. If either of his two solo movies so far didn't prove that he's a prime example of perfect casting (especially the first one), this movie certainly did. For example, in a callback to Iron Man 2, he mentions that one of his personality traits is that he doesn't play well with others. When watching this movie, he evolves as a character to where it seems like that at first, but by the big battle at the end, he somewhat does. Even so, he still has his moments of conflict with other team members here and there. As for when he's Iron Man, he's always awesome, and he gets a new suit here. The way it comes to him is one of many, many highlights to be found here. Then there's Chris Evans as Steve Rogers / Captain America. He still shows his patriotic side and leadership skills here. He also has to show how Cap is adjusting to our time, like when someone references a certain movie that was out during his time, he responds with, "I understood that reference." Needless to say, he nails it. It's even established that he's had a bit of an impact on at least one other character. The next one to talk about before going back to returning cast members is this: Much like with the part of Rhodey going from Terrence Howard to Don Cheadle in the first two Iron Man movies, there's been a recasting here. This time, it's with Bruce Banner / Hulk. He was portrayed by Edward Norton in The Incredible Hulk, but, for reasons similar to Terrence Howard, was recast with Mark Ruffalo. Ironically, he was considered for that movie, and then ended up getting the part anyway here. Despite Norton doing an incredible job last time*, Ruffalo is actually even better. His version of Bruce Banner is actually more charismatic and laid back, and there's a reason for that here. Not only does he play Banner, he physically plays the Hulk, which is why his face actually looks like the actor playing Banner this time. Now back to the returning cast members. Chris Hemsworth returns as Thor, and evidenced by the plot of this movie, he has a legitimate reason for coming back to Earth: his brother is the one causing the problem. Some of the conflict with other members not caused by Tony stems from that. At first, he simply wants to find Loki and the Tesseract and go home, but by the end he is used to working with others, and it does feel like he's started to bond with them. Hemsworth has managed to take the part and make it his own, showing that he is Thor. Then there is Scarlett Johansson returning as Natasha Romanoff / Black Widow, neither name I could reveal in the Iron Man 2 review because then it would have been a huge spoiler, but this time it seems fine to say it. She shows that she is very resourceful, despite having gadgets in place of superpowers, and of course can hold her own in a fight. Then there is Jeremy Renner as Clint Barton / Hawkeye, which I could not mention in the Thor review because he was only in one scene. Here, like Black Widow, he has gadgets, namely in his bow and his arrows, and he does get some awesome moments. The two of them also get some banter in there. Before I get to Loki, there is one last character to talk about here, and that is another prime example of perfect casting: Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury. Much like with Robert Downey Jr., it feels like his role was made for him. You don't just see an actor playing a character; you feel like you're seeing their character. Yes, even he gets some good moments in here. Lastly, there is Loki, played by Tom Hiddleston. He is another example of a great casting choice; Hiddleston shows that Loki is full of himself, and does not anticipate when things don't go his way. While in Thor, he proved to be a legitimate threat on his own, that was just the beginning. With an army of Chitauri, the threat escalates. He knows it, and it's not long before the Avengers know it. For the action, I would mention a certain rule here, but there's so much of it that in the end, does it even matter? You'll probably lose count anyway. The effects are also amazing** here, but that's to be expected. Then there's the script and direction by Joss Whedon, and he ends up being another excellent pick for a Marvel movie. The reason for that is he can take a bunch of characters and give each of them enough screen time to where they're relevant. He's also very good at humor, as there are some subtle references, like to other films. The biggest positive for me is actually the music. Alan Silvestri returns as composer from Captain America: The First Avenger. For those who have read the Predator review, I mentioned that two of his movie themes are among my favorites, the main theme to that being one of them. I can finally reveal the other one, and that is the main theme to this movie. It comes up several times, and its use in the credits is what solidified it for me. Much like with Predator, the excellent score is not the only music here, either. The difference here is that there is a soundtrack, the main song being "Live to Rise" by Soundgarden, making this one of two awesome movies the late Chris Cornell would be associated with. What Didn't Work: There are more cast members, like Cobie Smulders as Agent Maria Hill (a new character), but the reason why I didn't mention them is a similar reason from the Captain America: The First Avenger review. Their performances are still excellent, but they're not in the movie that much. Also, there is a certain character that kind of gets the short end of the stick for most of the movie, but there is a reason for it. However, these are nitpicks, and ones that I am more than willing to overlook at that. Overall: The Avengers is everything one could want in a superhero movie, and then some. It does something never thought possible before: take the heroes developed over the course of five movies, put them together, balance them to where one's screen time does not overshadow everyone else's, and make them even more relevant to the extent that several characters from past movies make at least a cameo. It sets a bar for not only how to do a cinematic universe, but also for how to do it right. In the intro, I mentioned that for the longest time I thought I had found my definitive all-time favorite movie upon seeing it in theaters. As time went on, I realized it wasn't my definitive all-time favorite movie... but rather part of it. That's right; the Marvel Cinematic Universe is not just my favorite franchise, but I consider it all one movie because of how it all comes together in ways that make sense. Of course, expect a Stan Lee cameo (watch very closely for this one), and there is not just a post-credits scene. There is also a mid-credits scene that sets up something bigger than it took five movies alone for this one. It's taking all of them to set that up. *No pun intended... or was it? (When talking about the action, the same goes for that reference.) **I'll get to that character's movie soon. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/11/thoughts-on-captain-america-the-first-avenger-2011 monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567890527674-4P5OQ7R6OIJ0CTEJ942Q/%28Thoughts+On%29+Captain+America+-+The+First+Avenger.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Captain America: The First Avenger (2011) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com Next up is another introductory movie, this time for the leader of the Avengers... Captain America: The First Avenger. While wanting to enlist in the Army so he can join his best friend James Buchanan "Bucky" Barnes, Steve Rogers is unfortunately rejected 5 times due to concerns for his health and physicality. However, a scientist named Dr. Abraham Erskine is willing to help him. He recruits Rogers in an experiment that will give him the strength and stature of a soldier. Meanwhile, HYDRA, the Nazi science division led by Johann Schmidt, are in possession of an ancient relic known as the Tesseract, which can turn the tides of the war in their favor. It's up to Steve Rogers, now known as Captain America, his love interest Agent Peggy Carter, Bucky, and a small group of soldiers known as the "Howling Commandos," to stop them. What Worked: As always, the cast comes first. In what had perhaps become a custom for Marvel at this point, this movie also has some brilliant casting choices. This will actually start with the one that so many people were skeptical about: Chris Evans as Captain America. One of the main reasons why is because he had played a superhero before; in the Tim Story-directed Fantastic Four films, he was the Human Torch. Even if he was one of the highlights of those two movies, he still makes a better Captain America. He shows that Cap is a good soldier and overall a good man because he is dedicated to protecting his country and its people. Another great casting choice here is Tommy Lee Jones as Col. Chester Phillips, the head of the "Super-Soldier" Project. He brings the commanding personality he had in films like The Fugitive over into this, and it works perfectly. Then there is Hayley Atwell as Peggy, an agent of the Strategic Scientific Reserve who also takes part in that project, later becoming Cap's love interest. She is another female character who can handle herself in a fight and look good doing it, and it shows in her performance. She even looks like a woman from that time. Someone else who looks like they could be from that time is Dominic Cooper, playing a young Howard Stark (Tony's father). His personality and skill you can tell Tony would inherit from him. Even his relationship with Cap would become significant in Cap's eventual relationship with Tony. Now for the best villain casting so far: Hugo Weaving as Johann Schmidt. Short version: whenever he's a villain, he's awesome. For evidence of that, go watch the Matrix trilogy. When he's a good guy, he's not too bad, either, but he's one of those actors where you get used to seeing him as a villain more. Here, his performance brings to life one of the MCU's more underrated villains. Then there are four standouts here in regards to the technical aspects. The first is the direction by Joe Johnston, who has previous experience doing a period piece akin to this one with The Rocketeer. He also has experience working on films heavy on effects, like Jurassic Park III. Since this is a period piece (set during World War II, much like Cap's story in the comics), his experience shows. The second standout is the score by Alan Silvestri. It has that patriotic feel to it; the theme is also really good. The third is the tone. It is consistent, and it also comes across more like Indiana Jones mixed with James Bond than a period piece. The fourth standout has two parts: production design and visuals. The production design feels like the 40s, and the visuals appear as if they could be considered modern during that time, like how Cap's shield is introduced. This is mainly because the surrounding story makes sense, which allows for those to also make sense. What Didn't Work: There were some cast members I didn't mention, like Sebastian Stan as Bucky, Stanley Tucci as Dr. Erskine, Toby Jones as Schmidt's assistant Dr. Arnim Zola, and the actors who play the Howling Commandos. The performances are still good, but most of those characters don't have much significance to the story here outside of when they're needed. Some of them become more significant in a later movie. While the effects are overall really good, there are some that might not hold up well. Overall: When it comes to the movies that make up Phase One of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Captain America: The First Avenger is the best solo movie since Iron Man. It even has parallels to Iron Man at points. It has the best villain so far aside from Loki. This is a rare case where using perhaps the hero's most iconic enemy in the first movie actually makes sense. The reason for that is because each Captain America movie would prove to be better than the previous one, and so would the villains. The action would also get better, because this has really good sequences, but the best has yet to come there. However, if there is one thing this movie shows most, it's that Marvel knows the best ways to approach certain characters. It's actually for the best that the leader was set up last because the audience knows the other team members connect to his story. Seeing his story last shows them how, which makes them want to see everyone assemble even more. As usual, a certain cameo and a post-credits scene are present here. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/9/thoughts-on-thor-2011 monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567953046198-AJAJIDD9AEAE3Y18E0A5/%28Thoughts+On%29+Thor.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Thor (2011) Image courtesy of getwallpapers.com The next movie in the "Marvel-thon" is the introduction of the character that also had the most recent entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe at the time of this writing: Thor. Just when Thor is about to be sworn in as King by his father Odin, their home world of Asgard is attacked by Frost Giants from the realm of Jotunheim seeking to reclaim a relic from the vault. Thor believes they should pay for this, and decides to retaliate. After his plan goes horribly wrong and Odin intervenes, his power is taken from him and he is exiled to Earth (or "Midgard," as they call it) to learn humility. What Worked: This has three examples of perfect casting in it: Chris Hemsworth as Thor, Tom Hiddleston as his brother Loki, and Sir Anthony Hopkins as Odin. As with Robert Downey Jr. in Iron Man, they look and act like their characters. Even the supporting cast is really good for the most part. There's Idris Elba (Prometheus) as Heimdall the gatekeeper, Rene Russo as Odin's wife Frigga, Jaimie Alexander as Thor's friend Sif, etc. This is actually a case where the choice of director was perfect as well. Here, the director is Kenneth Branagh, a name that might sound very familiar from the review prior to Iron Man. The only difference is here, he's not also starring in the movie. The reason why having him direct this was a perfect choice is because he has experience with Shakespearean material, and the comics are like that, particularly with the dialogue. The movie doesn't necessarily have that in regards to the dialogue, but rather the look and feel of it, at least with the parts on Asgard. The effects are also really good, examples being the makeup on the Frost Giants and the production design of Asgard itself. One visual that is really nice is the Destroyer; you'll know when you see it. Speaking of the Destroyer, there is a very brief reference when it first shows up to something that is addressed in Ragnarok. If you miss it, you can look it up later. There is humor here, and for the most part, it works. Also, for those who remember the mention of a sub-plot from the Iron Man review involving Pepper and another character, his significance basically starts here, so I might as well say it. It's Agent Phil Coulson of S.H.I.E.L.D., played by Clark Gregg. He's kind of like an Agent from Men in Black, and whenever he's appeared in these films so far, he has provided some humor here and there. The significance of another character starts here, but it's in the form of a cameo, so I won't spoil it. What Didn't Work: In regards to the characters Thor meets on Earth (namely Jane Foster, her assistant Darcy Lewis, and Dr. Erik Selvig, who works with them, played by Natalie Portman, Kat Dennings, and Stellan Skarsgård, respectively), the performances were fine. The characters themselves could have been written better, though. Selvig is probably the more interesting one of the three. Jane Foster, an important aspect of Thor's story in Marvel, feels somewhat miscast with Natalie Portman, even if she did fine. While I didn't mind Kat Dennings as Darcy, who along with Selvig is a character made up for the movie, I can totally understand people who think she's annoying (like Jar Jar annoying*). Some of the humor comes from her, and I can also understand those who think some of it falls flat. The action is also good, but some of it is dark, and in those scenes in particular, there might be a little bit of shaky cam. The biggest problem, though, is the tone. It's more compelling in the Asgard parts, and then when it cuts back to the events on Earth, it feels more comedic, save for part of the third act. The pacing is also affected because of it. Overall: Thor is a good introductory movie for a signature member of an iconic superhero team. It's not the best one (so far, Iron Man still takes the cake), but it's still good. Plus, it has a great villain in Loki, who leaves the most impact out of all the villains so far in this series, because he comes into play again very soon. It's also one of those Marvel movies that shows how they are capable of going into certain territories that might have previously been impossible, like mythological in this case, and it would be further proven in future installments in the MCU. As always, expect a certain cameo and a post-credits scene, which hints at both the next movie and the one following it at the same time. *Don't worry... I'll get to that series soon enough. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/9/thoughts-on-iron-man-2-2010 monthly 0.5 2021-03-28 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1616903904456-SGAPSW6LLXTEU9UKB3IO/%28Thoughts+On%29+Iron+Man+2.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Iron Man 2 (2010) Image courtesy of wallpaperaccess.com Next in the "Marvel-thon" is the first sequel in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and that is Iron Man 2. It has been six months since what happened at the end of the first film (before the post-credits scene). The government believes Tony Stark's Iron Man suit is a weapon rather than a peacekeeper, for which Tony has been using it. Thus, they have been requesting for some time that he hand it over. Not only that, the element powering the core of the arc reactor in his chest is slowly killing him. To make matters even worse, someone who has history with his family is on a path of revenge. What Worked: The performances are still really good. Robert Downey Jr. again embodies Tony Stark. Something in the first one carries over into this one: his occasional vulnerability (which actually was not mentioned in that review). He shows it even more so here, for obvious reasons. It's exploited in several ways, but I can really only mention one here, as at least a few of them could be reaching spoiler territory. Something I did mention in the review of the first one (briefly) was the recasting of Rhodey, Tony's best friend. He was portrayed by Terrence Howard there, and while I thought he was really good, I also thought he wasn't quite as charismatic as Tony was, and especially not as much as the character himself would become. That aspect of him starts here, as the role was recast with Don Cheadle. He's more levelheaded, like Pepper, where he vouches for Tony whenever he can, but sometimes has to get in the way in order to bring him back to reality. He's also more likable here because of both that and the sense of humor that Cheadle brings to him. Speaking of Pepper, Gwyneth Paltrow is another returning cast member. Like Rhodey in this movie, she also has to deal with a certain amount of pressure, which allows for some character development. There are some scenes where she shows concern for Tony, which additionally contributes to that. The only other returning cast members that can be discussed here are Paul Bettany as J.A.R.V.I.S. and Jon Favreau (returning to direct) as Happy Hogan. They are still really good here, and are given more to do. For the new characters, Scarlett Johansson is a character whose significance is revealed by the third act. She's one of the highlights when it comes to the new characters. Sam Rockwell plays Justin Hammer, a business rival of Tony. For a supporting villain, who is also the "anti-Tony Stark," his performance is good. The main villain here is Ivan Vanko, played by Mickey Rourke. He is also a highlight for two reasons: 1: his involvement in the first major action scene, and 2: the scene that follows it. That scene, for me, is his best scene in the movie. He mentions his motive there; he wanted to show that Iron Man can be vulnerable, and before the scene ends, he mentions that he knows Tony is. Some of the other characters know it, too, but at different points in the movie. The story, for the most part, works. It involves the repercussions of what happened in the previous film, and how everyone goes about trying to address them while having other conflicts along the way. There is more action here, and it does follow the "Rule of Threes," but to a bit of a lesser extent, because there's the first major action scene, a fight that lasts maybe a couple minutes, and then basically the entire third act. Even so, it does follow it. The effects are still great here. The suits look even better. There are also other designs that are shown (and sometimes used) throughout the movie that look very good. What Didn't Work: Unlike the first one, this one does have a fair amount of problems, even though I do still like this one. One of the biggest problems is that it doesn't primarily feel like its own story like the first one did. It does what the reboot of The Mummy would ultimately do: focus on setting up something bigger. The only difference is that here, there was at least precedence for that with the post-credits scene in the first film. However, despite that, it still feels like half the movie focuses on that. There are even at least two characters (one being introduced here) that are part of that "something bigger." There are also several sub-plots, which don't completely connect significantly to the main story. The main thing they have in common is that they all provide conflict, just from different perspectives. If it had been written better, this could have worked better. This is especially true of developing the new characters, examples being Ivan Vanko and Justin Hammer. While Sam Rockwell was good performance-wise, the problem is his character, Justin Hammer, feels more like a main villain than the actual one, Ivan Vanko. It also feels like it relies a little too much on humor at times. It's not the fault of Jon Favreau's direction, which is still good here (but not as good as with the first one), but rather weaknesses in the script. The script is okay, but you can tell that the first one was more tightly written and even paced better. Overall: Iron Man 2 is not as good as the first movie, but it is still fun to watch, even with the problems it has. It does a decent job at developing returning characters and setting up new ones. It has an interesting main villain with an understandable motive, and great action. While I do think the first one may be the better movie, this one has its share of good moments as well. Of course, expect a Stan Lee cameo and a post-credits scene. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2018/1/7/thoughts-on-the-incredible-hulk-2008 monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567898209633-PFZ26W9OTTN7ESC2F36D/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Incredible+Hulk.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Incredible Hulk (2008) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com Continuing with the "Marvel-thon" is the movie that not only followed Iron Man in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it did so by even following it to theaters a month later. That movie is The Incredible Hulk, the second big-screen adaptation of the Hulk after the 2003 version*. After exposing himself to gamma radiation, Dr. Bruce Banner is on the run from the military in search of a cure for his condition: you won't like him when he's angry. Although he is close to ridding himself of the Hulk, the military seek to use it as a weapon. In his search, he finds his old girlfriend Betty Ross and needs her help. Unfortunately, the leader of her father's team not only wants Banner... he wants what's inside him. Before I get started with my positives, I'm going to try to not compare this version and the 2003 one here, and save it for when I eventually get around to reviewing that. This one has precedence for a reason mentioned in the Iron Man review. Now let’s get to the positives. What Worked: The cast is really good. Edward Norton is believable as Bruce Banner, displaying his sense of urgency and desperation quite well. The same goes for the physicality and ferocity of the Hulk. Then there is Liv Tyler (The Lord of the Rings, Armageddon) as Betty Ross, who genuinely cares for him, and it's easy to tell that the emotion is there. William Hurt, another good choice, plays her father, General Thaddeus “Thunderbolt” Ross. He's very forceful and physical, and feels like a general type of character. There are a couple other characters to mention: Tim Blake Nelson as Samuel Sterns, who works with Betty, and Tim Roth as Emil Blonsky, the leader of General Ross's team. Nelson is very good here, playing an eccentric scientist who's more than willing to help after meeting Bruce. As for Roth, much like Jeff Bridges in Iron Man, he makes for a great villain. Similar to that, the name for his character's alter ego is foreshadowed at one point, but there are two differences here: 1: it's not him who does it, and 2: it's mentioned shortly before he becomes that villain. For the technical aspects, the direction is actually pretty good. The director here is Louis Leterrier, a French director who has done several films I find underrated: the first two Transporter films with Jason Statham (2 being my favorite) and Now You See Me, which was a surprise for me that year. For a superhero film, he does a solid job. You can tell he's giving not only fans of the character what they want, but also fans of the 70s TV show, as there are quite a few references to it (examples being the use of "The Lonely Man" theme within the score, and at least one use of Lou Ferrigno). The score fits the tone: it's tense and exciting when it needs to be. The visuals for the Hulk are really good, because he looks and feels like how one may picture him. The same goes for the villain, who looks different than he does in the comics, but it distinguishes him from the Hulk more here and the changes to his abilities make sense. Out of all of the MCU's villains, he is ultimately an underrated one. The biggest positive here is the action. Again, it follows the "Rule of Threes," where every sequence must get bigger and better. Compared to Iron Man, it's not until at least the second one where you begin to realize that, whereas there, you could tell right away. The finale is not only the biggest action sequence here, but it's also the best one. It gets brutal at times. There's even a reference to a popular Hulk video game at one point. What Didn't Work: While Liv Tyler is very good as Betty Ross, and she does show emotion, there are a couple times where it seems like it's there a little too much. Those parts are near the end, though, and one in particular that just doesn't work you'll know when you see it. Also, when Tim Roth is slowly becoming the villain, it's not as subtle as it was with Jeff Bridges in Iron Man. Overall: The Incredible Hulk, while not one of the best MCU films, nor the best that features the Hulk (that comes later), is one that a lot of fans are likely to overlook when talking about their favorites in the franchise. Be they fans of the franchise itself, fans with a sense of nostalgia for the show, or otherwise, they get what they want: a Hulk movie that just lets him loose to smash anything and everything in his way. For some, it may even feel like an episode of the show that features an actual villain from the comics. Either way, there is plenty of fan service here. Side Note: While it is a staple of MCU films for there to be a mid-credits scene, a post-credits scene, or both, this one has neither, as the final scene is basically what would have served as one. Another staple of them is to have a Stan Lee cameo, so one can be expected here as well. *There are very loose connections to it here (an example being how he's in the same location at the end of that version and the start of this one); aside from that, this version continues the formula set forth by Iron Man. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/12/4/thoughts-on-iron-man-2008 monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567892884804-VVU6XVPBS718SAAXZ5T5/%28Thoughts+On%29+Iron+Man.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Iron Man (2008) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com This post will be bringing back the "consecutive coverage"* format, only it won't just be a trilogy like last time. It'll be much more than that, for I have decided to cover every single installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, including Thor: Ragnarok, the latest at the time of this writing. While the franchise has expanded into comic book tie-ins, short films, and shows, I will strictly focus on the movies for both consistency purposes and the fact that they're easier to discuss without having to delve into heavy spoilers. With that being said, time to start what I call the "Marvel-thon"** with the one that started it all: Iron Man. After demonstrating a missile called "Jericho" for the troops in Afghanistan, billionaire industrialist and weapons manufacturer Tony Stark and his convoy are ambushed. The attack leaves the troops dead and Tony wounded by one of his own designs. A terrorist group known as the Ten Rings captures him, but keep him alive because they want him to build the missile. Instead, he discreetly builds a suit of armor that allows him to escape. He has a change of heart upon his return to America, and decides manufacturing weapons does more harm than good, wanting to redeem himself by protecting the people he put in harm's way. What Worked: The cast is brilliant. Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark is a prime example of perfect casting. He looks and acts like Tony as seen in the comics, displaying his arrogance and how he does what he feels is right, even if his method isn't. He adds a sense of humor to Tony, which makes him more likable throughout the movie. For the supporting cast, there is Terrence Howard as Lt. Col. James Rhodes (AKA "Rhodey"), Tony's best friend. For what would be his only time in the role, he is really good. However, he is not quite as charismatic as Robert Downey Jr.'s portrayal of Tony, let alone as much as Rhodey would become later on with Don Cheadle. Then there is the love interest and Tony's assistant, Pepper Potts, played by Gwyneth Paltrow. As with Tony, she looks and acts the part, showing how intelligent the character is. In fact, when his methods don't work, she's one of the first to make him realize that, thus bringing him down to her level. In being the love interest, she's actually not the damsel-in-distress type one would come to expect in a superhero movie. There is also a sub-plot between her and another character that becomes important later. A superhero movie is not complete without an interesting villain. That's where Jeff Bridges comes in, playing Obadiah Stane, Tony's business partner and mentor. He may seem like the "nice guy" type at first, but about halfway through, you can tell he is bad news. He even foreshadows the name of his character's alter ego at one point. Jeff Bridges actually makes for a menacing villain, especially in the third act. There are two more I can mention here without going too deep into spoilers. One of them is Jon Favreau, who also directed, as Happy Hogan, Tony's bodyguard. He can be pretty funny at times. The other is Paul Bettany as the voice of the AI, J.A.R.V.I.S., who serves as his butler-like advisor when he controls the systems in his mansion and his upgraded suits. He also shows concern for Tony and his actions. Even though he is just doing voiceover work, Paul Bettany conveys those qualities perfectly. With the technical aspects, Jon Favreau's direction is excellent. For some, it may even feel as if someone with more experience in blockbusters had directed it, particularly through the visual effects. Here, the visuals for Iron Man himself were a mix of both practical effects done by Stan Winston (who I mentioned in the Predator review) and then digital. The suits look mostly practical, so it looks like you are actually seeing a character. The score is also really good because not only does it sound awesome, but it's also one of those scores that allow for audience excitement, with Predator being a great example. It even helps the story move along at a solid pace. The action contributes to that because it follows what is known as "The Rule of Threes," where every action sequence must be bigger and better than the last one to keep the audience invested. What Didn't Work: The fight at the end may seem short, but there are two reasons for that: 1: its length makes sense, and 2: it's set up very well. Therefore, it's more of a nitpick. Overall: Iron Man is an excellent superhero movie, as well as a great action movie. It has a likable hero with an origin story that is not only faithfully brought to the big screen, but can also stand on its own in addition to starting something special. It may have begun the cinematic universe craze, but this is one of two movies that managed to be successful in building their franchises up. It feels like its own story first and foremost, and because the main story works, the franchise setup feels earned. Speaking of franchise setup, the primary aspect of that is in the form of a post-credits scene. Also, look out for a fair amount of references (including a particular song in the credits), and of course, a Stan Lee cameo (if you've seen at least one Marvel movie, MCU or otherwise, you can probably expect that more often than not). *I realize I might need a catchier name. **Like that one. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/11/16/thoughts-on-murder-on-the-orient-express monthly 0.5 2019-09-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1515274031863-C1CBDKNB5SIIRC0PJ4KF/%28Thoughts+On%29+Murder+on+the+Orient+Express.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Murder on the Orient Express (2017) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com After solving a case in Jerusalem, Detective Hercule Poirot is nearing a holiday break from work when he receives another. He travels on the Orient Express, a train headed from Istanbul to France, with several passengers. At one point along the route, the train is derailed and one of the passengers is murdered. Only Poirot can find out who did it. Despite normally starting with the cast, I will provide a brief backstory for those who might not be familiar enough with the plot on this one. This is based on a famous novel by Agatha Christie, and one of many stories following the cases of Hercule Poirot. It was also adapted several times before, so this is just the latest version of it. What Worked: The cast is one of the biggest positives. First, there is Kenneth Branagh (who also directed this version) as Hercule Poirot himself, and he is great here. The passengers are played by Johnny Depp, Penelope Cruz, Willem Dafoe, Judi Dench, Josh Gad (Disney's Frozen, 2017's Beauty and the Beast), Derek Jacobi, Leslie Odom, Jr., Michelle Pfeiffer, and Daisy Ridley (Rey from Star Wars*). This being an ensemble piece, one might think there would be an imbalance in screen time, and therefore, character development. Actually, everyone gets just enough of both here, and their performances are also really good. The cinematography is excellent in this. There are two shots in particular that stand out. The first is when Poirot is being led to his cabin, which appears to be a tracking shot. The camera is outside the train, but it follows him from when he gets on to when he gets there without breaking away to focus on another character. The second shot is when the victim is being examined, and the camera is above them. With this being a mystery/crime thriller, there are a fair amount of twists and turns. They keep the plot going, and keep you interested. What Didn't Work: There are a couple problems here. The first is the resolution of the mystery; how it happens is surprising, yet somewhat predictable, which is the best way I can put it without even implying it. Either way, you'll be half-right. The other problem is the pacing. Some may find it slow on occasion, especially those who are used to faster-paced movies. Here, it's more about buildup; sometimes, a slow pace is one of the things that's needed in order for the mystery to be effective. While not an issue I had, some may also find the ending slightly abrupt. Overall: Murder on the Orient Express is a very good mystery movie. It has great performances and cinematography that get the audience's attention. The amount of characters will have them guessing throughout. While some may find the ending abrupt, others may be interested enough to where they want to see more with Poirot. That leads to the best way to experience it: watch it with at least one person who has read the stories and one who hasn't, but may at least be familiar with them, so you view it from different perspectives. *I plan to cover Star Wars (including The Last Jedi), by the way, but considering the series starting with the next review, I might not be able to get to it immediately. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/11/3/thoughts-on-atomic-blonde monthly 0.5 2021-03-27 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1616888945107-SJABD21MGOR65UV9C3OD/%28Thoughts+On%29+Atomic+Blonde.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Atomic Blonde (2017) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com After seeing War for the Planet of the Apes, the next new release was Dunkirk. However, for now, I have decided to postpone that one, as I do not think I have enough material to properly cover it yet, so it may require a second viewing. Despite that, I do think I have enough to cover the one following that, which was Atomic Blonde. The story is set in 1989, shortly before the fall of the Berlin Wall. MI6 agent Lorraine Broughton is sent in to recover a watch that contains the List, a microfilm with the names of all agents in the Soviet Union. She also has to find an agent codenamed "Satchel," who murdered the MI6 operative protecting it, and eliminate him. Considering both MI6 and the KGB are after it, Lorraine needs to figure out who to trust. What Worked: The plot, while not original, is still interesting because of two things. The first is a difference in protagonist, and the second is that the movie around it this time is a period piece, where it takes place around an event that actually did happen. Those two things are what make the plot interesting. The cast and the technical aspects are what keep it interesting. For the cast, there are several actors to discuss here. First is Charlize Theron as Lorraine, a high-ranking MI6 agent. She shows that her character is tough, committed to the mission, and capable of holding her own, especially in a fight. The other main actor in the movie is James McAvoy as David Percival, a station chief in Berlin who is tasked with helping her. He's eccentric to where he's actually hilarious. For that reason alone, he's the best character in the movie. There is some humor here, most of which comes from him. The rest of the cast includes John Goodman as a CIA agent, Toby Jones as Lorraine's superior at MI6, Sofia Boutella as a French agent who Lorraine meets at one point, and Eddie Marsan as a character codenamed "Spyglass," who originally had the List. They are all really good in the movie, and their characters each have a purpose in the story. There's even a moment with John Goodman's character that's hilarious; it's something Lorraine says in the beginning, and it comes back around at the end. Aside from Charlize Theron, the two biggest stars of the movie come from behind the scenes: director David Leitch and the soundtrack. David Leitch is a stuntman whose directorial debut came with the original John Wick. His experience and direction both show he's capable of handling action sequences. There is one sequence in particular that stands out: a scene in an apartment that results in a car chase. Watch closely during that one because it looks like it's all one take. There might have been some cuts, but they are so cleverly masked it's hard to tell whether or not there are any. For those who remember when I covered Baby Driver, I said that even the soundtrack was a character in that movie. To an extent, it is here as well, but mostly because the songs were both from the 80s and used to make the setting feel like the 80s. Despite this soundtrack not being used as brilliantly as the one in Baby Driver was, it's still a great one, and it's the second best soundtrack of the year. What Didn't Work: The plot centering around a list of every agent has been used before. Another problem is with the reveal of who "Satchel" is. It's narrowed down to two characters, with one of them somewhat implying themselves. While clever in execution since it is surprising, it is also somewhat predictable. Both of these issues could be attributed to the writing, although I thought it was fine. A minor problem is with the pacing. Its inconsistencies are occasional, but noticeable. Overall: Atomic Blonde may not quite reinvent the spy genre, but it does bring a few new things to the table, particularly a female protagonist. While it does have some similarities to John Wick with the action and James Bond with certain other aspects, aside from that, it's completely different. The plot may not be original, but that might have been the best way to go about introducing Lorraine Broughton, should there be plans for a potential franchise: use something familiar, and then something new. Even with its share of problems, there's still more to enjoy here. Atomic Blonde is not a perfect spy movie, but it is a lot of fun. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/10/28/thoughts-on-war-for-the-planet-of-the-apes monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1509209650867-2MXCNGA90J68O9V7ELWB/%28Thoughts+On%29+War+for+the+Planet+of+the+Apes.jpg Blog - Thoughts on War for the Planet of the Apes (2017) Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com In the intro for the previous post, which focused on Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, I briefly mentioned that I decided to prepare for the latest installment. Much like the previous two movies themselves, the previous two posts that covered them have been building up to this. Here are my thoughts on War for the Planet of the Apes. The story picks up two years after the events of Dawn, with Caesar and his followers being hunted by a military group called Alpha-Omega, led by a Colonel determined to ensure humanity’s survival. The conflict escalates when the Colonel makes Caesar vulnerable, and Caesar wants to go after him, yet the Colonel is not his only problem. His intention of achieving peace between both humans and apes persists, but his past may come back to haunt him. What Worked: The first cast member worth talking about is actually an up-and-comer, named Amiah Miller. She portrays Nova, a little girl who is befriended and looked after by Maurice. She is also mute due to a side effect of the Simian Flu (which has evolved by this point), and has a connection to a character from the original movies. As for her performance, she is excellent here, especially considering she has to rely more on her actions anyway. The other human actor is perhaps the most well known one, and that is Woody Harrelson as the Colonel. Much like Dreyfus in the previous movie, his motivation is understandable. The main difference is Dreyfus wasn't necessarily a villain in that one, but the Colonel absolutely is here. This is also the first time where the main human character is actually an antagonist, and Caesar might have met his match with him. They have the same motivations with differing ideologies to go along with them. The Colonel is such a great villain that he might at least tie with Koba as the best villain of the trilogy, and it may take more thought to decide whether or not he managed to top him. That even applies to Woody Harrelson's performance when compared to that of Toby Kebbell as Koba. As for the apes, the one actor aside from Andy Serkis who can be discussed without delving too much into spoilers is Steve Zahn as another new character: the comic relief known as "Bad Ape." There are some humorous moments with him, but they are at the level of "just enough"; the humor balances out with the tone. The placements of those moments in the story make sense, and because of that, Bad Ape is hilarious. He has an interesting backstory, and he's actually useful when the situation calls for it. He's one of the best characters in the movie because he's a great example of comic relief characters done right. For the technical aspects, they will be discussed like in the previous post because it's basically the same case here. The story picks up some time after the events of the previous movie (except two years instead of ten). Despite that shorter timespan between movies, it works because it provides a sense of urgency in that there is very little downtime here. The story of the franchise itself has been expanded upon even further, like with the mention of the Simian Flu's evolution. The characters are developed to where even the new ones are interesting. The returning ones have satisfying conclusions to their stories, if this is indeed the final movie. The apes may have looked good in Rise and great in Dawn, but here, they look flawless, especially Caesar. The effects are the best of the year. The performance by Andy Serkis is certainly a contender for best leading actor. Much like with Dawn, his performance, the effects, and the advancement in the story show that Caesar has grown from a rebel in Rise to a warrior in Dawn into a hardened leader here. The direction and cinematography also make this movie somehow manage to be the best in the series, just when it might not have been possible to top the second one. With the cinematography in particular, there is a sense of scale due to how gorgeous it is. Overall: War for the Planet of the Apes is a perfect example of a third installment that does everything right. It takes everything that made the first two movies work, and improves upon it in a way that tops them. As stated in the post on Rise, this series gets better with each installment. In fact, watching them all together makes it feel like one story, which allows the viewer to appreciate them that much more. It culminates in an ending that will leave them in shock and awe at how perfect it is. Simply put, there are no flaws with this one. War for the Planet of the Apes (as of right now) is the best movie of 2017, and despite being a fan, I am unsure if Star Wars: The Last Jedi can top it. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/10/12/thoughts-on-dawn-of-the-planet-of-the-apes monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567891231355-19PQ0UD7LQNLX6X5I0Z2/%28Thoughts+On%29+Dawn+of+the+Planet+of+the+Apes.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com Since War for the Planet of the Apes was the next new release, I decided to watch the previous movies. Having covered the first movie, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, here are my thoughts on Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. The story picks up ten years after the events of Rise, where the human population has been greatly reduced by the Simian Flu pandemic. Only 1 out of every 500 is immune to it. Meanwhile, the apes have begun setting up a society of their own, with Caesar leading a colony near San Francisco. However, their society happens to have a dam within it that the humans want to work on in order to bring power to the city. The apes will stand their ground if they have to, but do not want to resort to violence. They allow the humans through, something Caesar's lieutenant Koba does not take too kindly to, considering what humans had done to him. This culminates in a battle only one species can win. What Worked: In regards to the cast, there are four noteworthy human characters. First is Jason Clarke as Malcolm, who leads the group sent on behalf of the survivors. Much like James Franco's character Will from the first movie, he's very compassionate and wants to help the apes in addition to his family. As the movie progresses, he also gets to know Caesar. Then there's Malcolm's wife, Ellie, played by Keri Russell. She's like Freida Pinto's character Caroline from Rise, but she's given more to do. There's also Malcolm's son Alexander, played by Kodi Smit-McPhee. He, too, is really good, especially in one particular scene that will be mentioned later. These three are the human characters to get invested in, because they're likable, and throughout the movie, they prove to Caesar and the apes that not all humans are bad. The other human character worth mentioning is Dreyfus (Gary Oldman), who leads the survivors. He is hesitant in sending Malcolm's group out because he doesn't trust the apes. He's not necessarily a villain, nor is he entirely likable, but where he's coming from is still understandable. Out of all of the characters Gary Oldman has portrayed, Dreyfus is one of his more underrated ones; he's excellent in this. Like the humans, there are at least two actors on the apes' side other than Andy Serkis as Caesar that might not be big names, but at least familiar to some. For example, Judy Greer (Cheryl from Archer) is in this as Caesar's wife, Cornelia. She's not in the movie that much; Cornelia was also a character in the first one, but she's an extended cameo even if she's more established here. The other actor also portrays a character from the first movie, and that is Toby Kebbell as Koba. Aside from Caesar and Maurice, he's the best character in the movie. There's something he does that easily makes him the trilogy's best villain. It provides even more reason to root for Caesar. As for the technical aspects, the performance by Andy Serkis goes hand-in-hand with at least a couple of them. First, there's the story, which picks up some time after the events of the previous movie, as stated earlier. However, the script expands upon the story of the first movie in general as well as those of the characters. Even when there's downtime instead of action, some of those moments help develop them. An excellent example is a scene with Alexander interacting with Maurice. They both learn something about each other, and Maurice begins to understand that they want to help. This is one of the best scenes in the movie because of how both characters are developed in one scene and how peaceful it is. It also provides some emotion. Not only has the development of the characters grown since Rise, but also the effects. This is especially true of Caesar and the performance by Andy Serkis. Even through the motion-capture technology, the viewer won't just see an actor portraying a character; they will see that character. This is something that he is known for. His performance, the effects, and the story all convey one thing: that Caesar has grown from a rebel into a warrior. What Didn't Work: The main minor issue is with pacing. This is not a major problem, though, because there are none with this one, either. Overall: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is a fantastic sequel. It is right up there with sequels such as The Empire Strikes Back, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, or even The Dark Knight (just to name a few). In fact, as I said in my overall thoughts on Rise of the Planet of the Apes, that felt like the Batman Begins of this franchise. If that's the case, this is The Dark Knight. Side Note: Keep the finale in mind, and listen closely for something at the very end of the credits. It may hint at something. If I go any further into it, it might be reaching spoiler territory, and I prefer to get my thoughts out with as few spoilers as possible (and mild ones at that). https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/9/28/thoughts-on-rise-of-the-planet-of-the-apes monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567899991835-JE24PIO33HL2J0FHWUOE/%28Thoughts+On%29+Rise+of+the+Planet+of+the+Apes.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com This will be the first time I cover each installment in a certain franchise consecutively. The subject of this series will be the Planet of the Apes reboot trilogy, which started with Rise of the Planet of the Apes. The story follows scientist Will Rodman (James Franco) attempting to find a cure for Alzheimer's, as his father Charles (John Lithgow) suffers from it. The company he works for is conducting tests on chimps. While their drug does lead to increased intelligence, one chimp in particular named Bright Eyes goes crazy during a presentation of the drug. It is later discovered that she was trying to protect her newborn baby, who Will brings home and raises. The chimp, named Caesar, has inherited his mother's intellect, which ultimately becomes an advantage after an unfortunate incident lands him in a shelter with other apes. However, in seeing the cruelty they have suffered, he decides to lead a rebellion against humanity. What Worked: While I usually cover the cast first, I will save the best for last in regards to that. Ironically, the humans have more well known actors on their side than the apes do, despite the movie focusing on them. Even though Caesar is the character to get invested in both on the apes’ side and throughout the movie, there has to be a balance, and Will provides it. He not only wants to cure his father and everyone else afflicted with Alzheimer’s, but he also knows the potential consequences of what he’s doing, and does what he can to help Caesar in addition to his father. He becomes very sympathetic, and shows that he’s a good man with good intentions. Through his performance, James Franco conveys all of that and even great chemistry between Will and Caesar. John Lithgow is also really good as Charles, although he’s not in the movie that much. Another sympathetic character aside from Will and Caesar is Caroline, played by Freida Pinto. There are two characters here who address the consequences with Will; she's the good one, in that she is compassionate in doing so while also questioning the ethical side of what he's doing, particularly concerning Caesar. Much like James Franco, it shows in her performance. Whereas Caroline is the good character who addresses the consequences with Will, the bad one is his boss, Jacobs. He cares about what's best for the company, but for the sake of money more so than his employees, and can be considered the antagonist because of that. A secondary antagonist is a caretaker at the shelter Caesar is placed in. His actions make him one of three catalysts for the apes' rebellion. The humans may have more well known actors on their side, but the apes have more memorable characters on theirs. There's another chimp named Rocket, a gorilla named Buck, a bonobo named Koba (keep him in mind for later), an orangutan named Maurice, and of course Caesar himself. The best characters in the movie aside from Caesar are Maurice and Buck, the latter of whom gets a big moment during the finale. Maurice is another ape you get interested in besides Caesar. He befriends him and becomes very close to him throughout both this movie and the trilogy as a whole. However, the standout character is Caesar himself, and Andy Serkis is the main reason why. He put motion-capture performances on the map with Gollum in The Lord of the Rings, King Kong in Peter Jackson's remake, and even more so with Caesar here. His performance alone gives enough reason to root for him. In regards to the technical aspects, the script, the editing, and the effects are most noteworthy. The script gives the characters equal and proper development. For fans of the original movies, there are plenty of references here. One in particular involves Caesar, and it's very satisfying. If the performance by Andy Serkis isn't enough of a reason to root for Caesar, that one reference certainly is. The editing makes the movie very well paced. The effects may evolve throughout the sequels, but the work on display here should be given credit because the apes start out looking and feeling like real apes, and they look more and more seamless as the trilogy progresses. Also worth noting is the score. Similar to Prometheus, it has its own way of standing out: it has a certain track throughout, which could be considered the theme. What Didn't Work: These are more of nitpicks than actual negatives. While the direction and cinematography are still really good, they stand out more in the sequels. There are also characters that the audience may not get to know all that well here, but they get further development later. Aside from those nitpicks, there are no major problems. Overall: Rise of the Planet of the Apes is an excellent example, like Batman Begins, of how a reboot can actually be really good. It even feels like the Batman Begins of this particular franchise, because much like that, it provides a foundation for something special: another great trilogy that gets better with each installment. Here, there's more than just that: it has likable characters on both sides of an eventual conflict, amazing story progression and pacing, and of course some fan service as a bonus. It serves as another landmark for advancement in effects that also get better with each installment, as well as a great starting point for anyone interested in checking the series out. Side Note: Stay through the credits. There's a mid-credits scene, and then it shows the aftermath of that. All I'll say is this: a caretaker serves as one of the three catalysts for the apes' rebellion. The main one is in that scene, and it's a result of something that happened earlier in the movie. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/9/9/thoughts-on-baby-driver monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1504980827981-R5NZC3HVMWVUDEQ8TUXE/%28Thoughts+On%29+Baby+Driver.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Baby Driver (2017) Image courtesy of hdwallpapers.in The next movie I saw was something truly unique: an original action comedy that even makes the soundtrack a character. It comes from Edgar Wright, director of such films as Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz, and The World's End. This post will focus on his latest film, Baby Driver. The story follows a getaway driver named Baby, who, as a child, lost his parents in a car accident that also gave him tinnitus. However, he blocks it out by listening to music, which allows him to stay focused during a job. He works for Doc, a crime boss who plans the heists and gets the crew together. When Baby thinks he is free and capable of having a new life, Doc wants him to do one last job. Unfortunately, the crew he's given may have an agenda of their own. What Worked: To start, this movie has an amazing plot. It's a very clever and ultimately well-executed idea, and as a result, it has a great cast surrounding it, who all give great performances. Ansel Elgort portrays Baby, and his performance is one of the things that make him an interesting character to get behind. He sells Baby's commitment to his work, his focus when he's driving, etc. Then there's Kevin Spacey as Doc. Out of the supporting cast, he's one of the best characters in the movie. He also gets one of the funniest lines. On the other side of the conflict is Debora, a waitress and Baby's love interest, played by Lily James. They have great chemistry together. There are several other big names in this aside from Kevin Spacey, all as various crewmembers; these include Jon Hamm and Jamie Foxx. The rest of the positives involve the technical aspects. First, Edgar Wright's script is brilliant. One particular moment that's so cleverly written is actually in the trailer (it involves masks), and the setup for it in the movie makes it even better. Aside from hilarious moments like that, another thing that makes the script work is how the majority of the characters are established, especially Baby himself. The performance by Ansel Elgort may be one of the things that make Baby interesting; how he's handled is the other, which allows for development through his actions as well. It's done in a similar way with Doc. With the crew, Debora, and other supporting characters, it's also through personality since it is more noticeable with them; Baby and Doc don't really show it that much. With those characteristics incorporated into Edgar Wright's script and put on display through his direction, it's easy to notice his style of filmmaking and humor. If not that, then it will definitely show in the perfectly timed editing, especially with the action sequences and the music. The editing of the action sequences makes them even more fun to watch. It shows what's happening and how, thus keeping the viewer's interest, but not just because of the editing. As stated in the intro, even the soundtrack is a character here. Because of how it's utilized alone, this is the best soundtrack of 2017. For example, on occasion, the action is timed to the music, and it's done very well. This also has one of the cleverest choices for a credits song in recent memory. Overall: Those who have been clamoring for a great comedy might just get that with Baby Driver. It's also a solid heist movie, with interesting characters, clever dialogue and humor, and amazing action, along with an intriguing plot, great performances, and an excellent soundtrack. This movie ended up being one of the most fun theater experiences, and is easily among the best movies of 2017. It's even more surprising to go into it not knowing what to expect. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/8/28/thoughts-on-predator monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567895348925-MTWV0L3IJ8QADKSPN3JV/%28Thoughts+On%29+Predator.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Predator (1987) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com After seeing The Mummy, I revisited another classic. Like Airplane!, this one came from the 80s. Like The Mummy, it’s also a creature feature. It’s one of the best action movies ever made, and one of my favorite movies period. Since 2017 marks the 30th Anniversary, and it gets another sequel in 2018, this post will be on Predator. The story follows a rescue team sent into the Central American jungle to recover hostages from a guerrilla camp. Though they eventually discover the mission was a setup, they decide to continue to the extraction point, bringing a female guerrilla with them. The team slowly comes to realize that they are not alone, as they are being hunted down one at a time by something they cannot see. What Worked: Much like the post on Airplane!, this one can be considered a retrospective. In saying this is a creature feature, those who haven’t seen it may think it’s a horror movie, especially a slasher movie. The plot may sound like one for a slasher movie, but it works well for an action movie. It’s very simple, and it kicks in right from the opening. The Predator’s ship lands, then it goes immediately into introducing the team and their mission, and then the conflict starts when they arrive: the team discovers that there was another before them (which is addressed at least once in the trailer, so it's not a huge spoiler). Speaking of the team, the next positive is the cast. It’s hard not to start with the best character here: the leader, Major Alan “Dutch” Schaefer, portrayed by Arnold Schwarzenegger. Dutch shows that he is a great team leader because he is determined to get the job done, even with the odds stacked against him. This in turn makes him a great character, and Arnold’s performance is excellent. Despite the fact that Dutch is the team leader, he has to contend with having his old friend Dillon supervising them. Dillon is played by Carl Weathers, who was already known for his role as Apollo Creed in the Rocky franchise prior to this. With Dillon, he not only gives a great performance, but he brings a stern personality to him. Even though the team doesn’t like being supervised, he doesn’t care. The other team members are Mac, Blain, Billy, Poncho, and Hawkins. Mac is the medic, Blain the weapons expert, Billy the tracker, Poncho the demolitions expert, and Hawkins is the operator. Bill Duke, reteaming with Arnold after Commando, portrays Mac. While his character in that film, Cooke, is enjoyable, he isn't given that much to do. Mac is more developed to where he's like Dillon in personality, but later on in the movie, he shows some sensitivity. As a result, he gets several good moments, including one line early on that comes up again later. Blain (former professional wrestler Jesse Ventura) is another great character. He's probably the most like the "tough guy" type aside from Dutch, going so far as nicknaming his minigun "Ol' Painless." He doesn't even let getting hit faze him, as is pointed out in one of the many quotable lines here. Someone who has perhaps the most memorable moment out of all of them is Billy, played by Sonny Landham, in what would become his best-known role. He's a character that you can definitely latch onto, and when he gets his moment, not only is it surprising when it happens, it's also surprising how it happens. Some may have a problem with the latter, but it's actually more suspenseful. Poncho (Richard Chaves) also gets one. His comes out of nowhere, though, which makes it even more effective. Hawkins is the comic relief to an extent, having a couple of hilarious moments between him and Billy. The second one in particular is great because Billy even acknowledges it, which should be kept in mind for later. After that one, there's not enough of Hawkins, but there's a reason for it. It's worth noting that Shane Black, the actor who plays him, is actually going full circle: he's going from playing a character in this movie to directing the new one. There are two other characters to talk about: the female guerrilla and the Predator itself. The female guerrilla, named Anna, has her own unique development. During one scene of downtime in the middle, she reveals that she is familiar with the Predator. She even addresses a possible weakness, which leads to another quotable line. The Predator is one of the best sci-fi villains. It has an intimidating design and interesting technology. It may not have much in the way of weapons (shoulder-mounted plasma caster, wrist blades), but later films, including the crossovers with Alien, would resolve that. Here, it really only relies on its weapons when necessary. Otherwise, it taunts its prey by using their own voices against them while tracking them through thermal sensors. On top of that, it can also cloak. It has its own voice, which is mostly a mix between a clicking sound and a growl. The rest of the positives consist of the effects, the action, the direction, the script, and the score. I will mention the actors who brought the Predator to life here because it's more of a physical performance with someone else providing the voice. With the physical performance, the intent was to make the Predator seem bigger than its prey. It works with the actor they ultimately had: Kevin Peter Hall, who, at 7'2", was often chosen for monsters because of his height anyway. In addition to portraying the Predator, he also makes a cameo. The voice was done by Peter Cullen, best known as the voice of Optimus Prime. The combination of his work with Hall's physicality is perfect, and it doesn't even feel like two performances combined into one character. The Predator also became iconic because of its design, created by special effects legend Stan Winston. His work here was ultimately nominated for an Oscar, after winning one prior for Aliens. Since they are that amazing, the effects still hold up, and even though most of them involved computers, it's hard to tell while watching the movie. The action sequences are memorable as well. They are filled with perfectly built-up suspense, and it's clear what's going on. This is something that director John McTiernan excels at, and it's also benefitted by the script, which would be proven even further in his follow-up: another action classic called Die Hard. With Predator, the script doesn't just work because of quotable lines. It develops the characters to where they feel like a team, and the lines become quotable because you care about them. It also provides suspense through not only the action, but throughout the rest of the movie, allowing you to fear for them as well. The suspense is elevated by the brilliant score from Alan Silvestri, who had achieved prior success with Back to the Future. Two of his movie themes are among my favorites; the main theme to Predator is one of them. However, the score is not the only music, as Little Richard's "Long Tall Sally" comes up in the beginning, and is referenced later. This movie is so good even that would come back into the franchise at one point. Overall: Predator is a prime example of an action classic. It has a great cast of characters, a villain so amazing it has a well-deserved franchise, effects that hold up, quotable lines, one of the best themes ever, and a plot so simple even the trailer can summarize it*. It gets better with every viewing, and it shows that action movies can be fun. For those who haven't seen it, "get to the chopper" and go watch it. In fact, as implied in the intro, now would be a perfect time to do so. *It even has an amazing trailer; look it up on YouTube, and look at the first one you see. Watch the movie first, though, so you won't have to deal with potential spoilers. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/8/25/thoughts-on-the-mummy-2017 monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567898354809-3GRELT22055M1IU8F56R/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Mummy+%282017%29.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Mummy (2017) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com The movie being covered here is the latest attempt to jump on the "Shared Universe" bandwagon. However, it has a very respectable purpose behind it: bring a series of classic monster movies to a new generation. Here, I will be covering the reboot of The Mummy, the first installment in what has been dubbed the "Dark Universe." The story of this version follows a new Mummy, Princess Ahmanet, who almost inherits rule over Egypt from her father when he has a son. After making a deal with the god Set and murdering her family, she tries to get him a body, but she is caught and condemned to eternal mummification. She is then taken to Mesopotamia and buried to ensure she never escapes. In present-day, two Army soldiers, Sergeant Nick Morton and Corporal Chris Vail, along with archaeologist Jenny Halsey, find her tomb. Sure enough, they awaken Ahmanet from her ancient prison, and unleash her wrath upon the world. What Worked: With the cast, the main selling point is Tom Cruise, who portrays Nick. In regards to his performance, he is at least decent here. He does have some charisma, but not as much as in some of his other roles. The other two main characters are Jake Johnson as Nick's friend Chris and Annabelle Wallis as Jenny, both of whom also give decent performances. However, with Jenny, she is given an interesting bit of development later on in the movie; going any further would be a huge spoiler. There were two standouts: Russell Crowe and Sofia Boutella. With Russell Crowe, his character is perhaps the most interesting one in the movie, and his performance is really good as well. Those who know their monsters will be surprised at his character. Sofia Boutella gives the best performance in the movie as Princess Ahmanet. She is great as the new Mummy, and the fact that she looks menacing helps. As for the rest of the positives, the effects work looks really frightening, which can be attributed to the production design. The tone was consistent for the most part. The moments of tension and suspense were very effective. The scene that's most memorable in that aspect is the plane crash scene, parts of which were in the trailer. It's even more tense in the movie, and the fact that Tom Cruise is still capable of doing his own stunts definitely contributes to that. The moments of suspense come mostly whenever Ahmanet attacks, and there are some creepy parts to those scenes. There are a couple bonuses here: for those who have a certain nostalgia for the 1999 version with Brendan Fraser, there is a reference to it in a scene with Russell Crowe. The other bonus is the references to other monsters. Even with this movie's problems, there is room for improvement, so it will be interesting to see how future installments in the Dark Universe pan out. What Didn't Work: Though some of the cast give decent performances, their characters are not that memorable. For example, Jenny is mostly the "damsel in distress" type of character. Aside from the interesting bit of development later on, the only other thing revealed about her is a history with Nick. That issue, along with the tone and story structure, can be attributed to the script, where the inconsistencies show. The tone changed a couple times, and it felt slightly jarring when it did. The biggest issue is an inconsistency with the story structure. At first, it feels like its own story, but then from the introduction of Russell Crowe's character onward, it focuses more on setting up future installments. Therefore, this movie's entire purpose is more front and center at that point than the story already in progress. It's made obvious that Universal is trying to respond to Marvel and create a shared universe to bring their monsters to a new generation, and that I respect. It's understandable how they would want their own version of that franchise and found the easiest way to do it. However, it does not help that their intention is shown or told rather than implied. The most glaring example is the references to other monsters because they not only do that, but are also the main reason for the structure issue. While it may feel like an attempt to provide something new, it doesn't have the novelty feel to it. This may also come across as a remake of the 1999 version with elements similar to that, despite some tweaks here and there. Overall: The Mummy is not nearly as bad as it has been made out to be. While some remakes/reboots may be considered unnecessary, this is not one of them because of the intention behind it: take a classic franchise and modernize it for new audiences. It's just that not everything worked out the way the studio hoped, but there is room for improvement. In fact, if it had a more reasonable budget and a better team behind it, it could have been something really good. As it is, it's a decent effort at starting a franchise, and I am interested to see where said franchise goes. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/8/16/thoughts-on-airplane monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1502902648938-YEMG3QUC8F5HGSVY9BW2/image-asset.jpeg Blog - Thoughts on Airplane! (1980) Image courtesy of fanart.tv The night after watching The Accountant, the next movie I watched was a classic spoof comedy known as Airplane!. It particularly parodies older disaster movies, so this was still a few years before directors like Roland Emmerich came along and popularized the genre with films like Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow. The story of Airplane! follows Ted Striker, a former fighter pilot from an event simply referred to as "The War" (it's never specified as to which one). This event traumatized him to where he's afraid to fly ever again. His problems only get worse as he can't keep a job and Elaine Dickinson, his girlfriend from during the War and now a flight attendant, leaves him. Hoping to get her back, he boards the flight she happens to be on. Unfortunately, many passengers on board, as well as the pilots, become ill after dinner, and it's up to Ted to conquer his fear and save the day. Something readers may be shocked to hear: this is the first post without a "What Didn't Work" section, because there's simply nothing wrong with this at all. It's difficult to find any flaws here. This may also be more of a retrospective. What Worked: The two biggest positives with Airplane! are the cast and the script. With the cast, there's Robert Hays as Ted Striker, who delivers his lines in a deadpan manner, something another actor in this excelled at. It's easy to tell he's having fun portraying his character, but so committed to playing it straight at the same time that showing it would be too obvious. This is perhaps Hays's most iconic role in regards to film, as he would parody it later. In addition to him, there's Julie Hagerty as Elaine, a naive flight attendant who seems completely oblivious to everything around her, a character trait that would be present in other roles. Someone else who often had a common character type is Robert Stack as Striker's former commanding officer Rex Kramer, with whom Striker does not have the best relationship. Unlike the two aforementioned actors, who would go on to parody their roles here, it's actually the other way around with him. He was known for portraying the "tough guy" type of character prior to starring in this movie, and then he parodies it. Some of the supporting cast receive a few of the best lines. Examples include Peter Graves as the pilot, Lloyd Bridges as the control tower supervisor, and Stephen Stucker as the air traffic controller Johnny. The best character in the movie is Dr. Rumack, portrayed by the great Leslie Nielsen. Like Julie Hagerty, his character is completely oblivious to the scenario surrounding him, except he doesn't show it. While Robert Hays's approach to deadpan comedy is really good, Leslie Nielsen is a prime example of someone who perfected it. This is also evident through his portrayal of Lt. Frank Drebin in the Naked Gun films. The other reason Airplane! is such a classic comedy is also why it's a good example of a parody film done right: the script. It works because it knows what the intent is: simply make fun of that era's disaster movies. Like more recent parody films, there are some references. However, they are used sparingly, make sense within a larger context, and allow the audience to figure them out. Plus, they don't feel dated. There are also clever types of humor, like visual gags, puns, and slapstick done right. The fact that the dialogue consists of what would ultimately become quotable lines is a bonus. If the characters are memorable, their dialogue may also be. This even applies to a few cameos here. Overall: Airplane! does everything right. It has a simple purpose that makes the plot easy to follow. It has a great cast of characters, well developed through clever writing. It has numerous memorable moments with either perfectly used references, brilliant wordplay, or quotable lines. For those concerned that the parody genre is dead, there just haven't been any newer ones that are actually good yet. All that's needed is a team of people who know a certain genre well enough to understand a proper approach to parodying it. Airplane! is one such example. I guarantee that there will not be one moment where you're not laughing. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/8/10/thoughts-on-the-accountant monthly 0.5 2019-09-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567896445012-H1GIPDQ6ZYQDM8BPKUQB/%28Thoughts+On%29+The+Accountant.jpg Blog - Thoughts on The Accountant (2016) Image courtesy of tokkoro.com The weekend after seeing Alien: Covenant, I was able to experience one of 2016's biggest surprises for the first time since seeing it in theaters, and that is an action-thriller called The Accountant. The story follows Christian Wolff, an accountant who also discreetly uncovers financial misdeeds, usually for criminal and terrorist clients. While investigating a robotics company, he has to deal with people who could prevent him from discovering the truth, from the federal authorities already after him to numerous killers to a hitman with personal ties... and his own team of mercenaries. Now for my thoughts: What Worked: The Accountant has a lot to enjoy about it. Considering the movie has quite the cast behind it, I will start with that. Ben Affleck is excellent as Christian. His character is not only interesting because of his backstory, but also the traits that make his backstory interesting. He may be skilled with numbers and weapons, but he is also proficient in hand-to-hand combat. He may be stoic and not quite a people person, but there’s a reason behind him showing it: he is very focused on his work, and he has a certain vulnerability to him that affects it. As for the rest of the cast, there are two characters that are perhaps the most interesting aside from Christian himself. The first is the hitman, portrayed by Jon Bernthal. His character not only serves as a great opponent to Christian, but he is also intimidating. He plays “tough guy” characters really well, if his character here is any indication. The other character is the director of FinCEN (the Department of Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network), portrayed by J.K. Simmons. He is great at playing the “commanding” type of character, as evidenced by his performance as J. Jonah Jameson in the original Spider-Man trilogy. The last two characters that can be fully described within the positives are the accountant for the robotics company and the CEO, played respectively by Anna Kendrick and John Lithgow. Anna Kendrick, who usually plays characters with a sense of quirkiness, shows more curiosity here, wanting to learn more about Christian and what makes him tick. Without spoiling anything, there are consequences that come with that. With John Lithgow, his character seems to be going against a particular Hollywood stereotype: the CEO who usually cares more about his power and his money than his employees, company morale, and maybe even his relationships outside of that. It is more like the other way around with him; he shows that he does care more about the company's problems, as well as his employees. Other aspects to enjoy here are the action and several twists. In regards to the action, it can be brutal at times, but if you've seen movies like The Equalizer starring Denzel Washington (which is probably the one it'll remind you of the most, if anything) or even the John Wick films, then you should be fine. The twists are also effective. What Didn’t Work: There are a couple of characters not previously mentioned. Although they are still important to the story in their own way, at times, you're so invested in some of the other characters that you may even forget about them. Also, how you may feel about the twists depends on perspective. Most may find them effective, with some finding them obvious as well. Others may find them obvious and nothing else. Overall: The Accountant as a whole is a lot of fun. It's not a perfect action-thriller, but it definitely is one of the better ones out there, as well as an underrated one. There are two huge comparisons that can be made to John Wick. One is that the story, the characters and the action are more the main focus here than the technical aspects, as good as those are. The other, and biggest, comparison is that both have franchise potential. Evidenced by its sequel, John Wick is starting to live up to it. With The Accountant, it will be interesting to see where it goes from here. It, too, is getting a sequel, so it might not be long before the answer is given. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/6/21/thoughts-on-alien-covenant monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567906116106-8LLVWQ23KVKV13V99XQD/%28Thoughts+On%29+Alien+-+Covenant.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Alien: Covenant (2017) Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com As stated in the previous post, where I covered Prometheus, I re-watched it to prepare for Alien: Covenant. Now I will give my (albeit extremely belated) thoughts on it. Along with Prometheus, go into Alien: Covenant knowing the overall consensus is quite polarizing. Starting with the plot summary, there will be very mild spoilers. The story of Alien: Covenant takes place 10 years after the events of Prometheus. During a voyage to a remote planet in the hopes of colonizing it, disaster strikes the crew of the Covenant. Following that, they discover another planet close by and instead head there. Of course, things are not what they seem. My thoughts? What Worked: Some of what worked about Prometheus applies here as well. The production design and cinematography are great, especially the latter. The effects are really good, particularly the new Alien type introduced: the Neomorph, which stands out because of its introduction alone. The Xenomorph, the signature creature of the franchise, also shows up near the third act. A surprising approach to the crew's dynamic is that they are made up entirely of couples. Despite knowing that a majority of them are going to die, you still feel a sense of dread for them. There are three standout performances: Katherine Waterston as Daniels, Danny McBride as Tennessee, and Michael Fassbender as Walter. With Daniels, comparisons to Ellen Ripley are understandable, but as a character on her own, she's still interesting. Danny McBride, usually known for comedies, is actually great in a serious role like Tennessee. Michael Fassbender is excellent as Walter, but his performance doesn't stop there. Some references to Prometheus are present here. There are two particular ones that do not go into heavy spoiler territory. The first is that the theme to Prometheus comes up at least once. The second is that some of the events are addressed as well, and thus some questions are answered here. An improvement is where the tension starts. In Prometheus, it starts as soon as the ship lands on the planet. Here, it starts even before the other planet is discovered. It begins in the first ten minutes with the disaster sequence, and how it plays out is something surprising. What Didn't Work: The direction and score, while good, don't stand out as much as they did in Prometheus. This unfortunately means that the sense of scale conveyed through basically all of that movie's technical aspects is pretty much absent here aside from the cinematography. There is an issue with the tension as well. While its start in the first ten minutes was effective, it resulted in not getting to know a certain character. As for the biggest issue, this is yet another movie where characters make stupid decisions. However, at first, their possible consequences are actually addressed beforehand, like when they decide to head to the other planet. The outcomes are also predictable. While not an issue for me, the ending is one of the things that make this movie so polarizing. Some may not see it coming, others may. It depends on perspective. Overall: While Alien: Covenant is another solid entry in the franchise, like Prometheus, it has its fair share of problems. It feels like a reaction to Prometheus, where the filmmakers knew what the audience wanted and decided to provide it here. However, it also feels sadly ironic that this ended up being polarizing as well. Regardless of your thoughts on Prometheus, give this a chance, as they somewhat go hand-in-hand with each other. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/6/2/thoughts-on-prometheus monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1567965474086-531LRIF4B9IX85MLUA29/%28Thoughts+On%29+Prometheus.jpg Blog - Thoughts on Prometheus (2012) Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com The day after I saw King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, I re-watched Prometheus in preparation for its sequel, Alien: Covenant. There will be two types of warnings for this one. The first is the obvious one concerning mild spoilers. The second is one that applies to Alien: Covenant as well. Before I get started, my warning is this: for both movies, go in knowing the overall consensus is quite polarizing. The story starts in 2089 where archaeologists Elizabeth Shaw and Charlie Holloway are in Scotland and find a star map. Later, onboard the Prometheus exploration vessel, they explain to the crew that the pictogram in the map is the same one as those in other maps from unrelated civilizations. Thus, they believe it is an invitation from our supposed creators, referred to as "Engineers." An expedition led by Shaw and Holloway is funded. Four years later, in December of 2093, they find a structure on a moon and begin exploring, unaware of what could possibly go wrong in searching for answers. My thoughts? What Worked: There are definitely more positives than negatives here. The first I will delve into is actually the production design, namely the looks of both the structure and the ship; the movie looks gorgeous. The cinematography and direction show a sense of scale, while the score helps convey it. The first track in the score may stand out the most since it comes up a few times, so it can be considered the theme. Another contribution to the look and feel is through the effects. The majority of them are practical. Two examples used here are prosthetic makeup and the creature designs. The makeup is used primarily for another character that shows up briefly in the beginning and then in a key moment towards the third act. The creature designs look very terrifying and add to some intense scenes. As for the performances, some noteworthy ones are Noomi Rapace (the original Girl with the Dragon Tattoo) as Shaw, Charlize Theron as mission director Meredith Vickers, and Idris Elba as Captain Janek. The standout here is Michael Fassbender as David because while you are interested to learn more about Shaw, you may feel more interested in him. Fassbender really sells it as a different type of crew member; fans of sci-fi and of the Alien franchise in particular will understand. What Didn't Work: The biggest issue is that this is another movie where characters make stupid decisions. There are some obvious ones in the middle and at least one in the third act. This issue may come from the writing, which leads to an inconsistent tone. In the first two acts, it feels like a sci-fi horror movie. Then in the third act, it suddenly feels more like a thought-provoking sci-fi movie with a few horror elements in it. Before I go into my overall thoughts, here is an advisory for those who may be interested. If you get scared easily, prepare yourself because there are at least four moments like that here: two startle scares and two genuine jump scares. Some of the more tense parts (including a storm scene, a surgery scene, and the ending) may affect you even more. Overall: Prometheus is one of the better entries in the Alien franchise. While this is a prequel of sorts to the original Alien, don't expect all questions to be answered here. Don't expect a flat-out horror movie, either. It's more sci-fi, despite having its share of creepy moments. Even if you look at Prometheus on its own, it is still a very good movie. Whether you want to watch it prior to seeing Alien: Covenant or not is up to you, but doing it might help. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/5/31/thoughts-on-king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword monthly 0.5 2019-09-08 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1502312317986-ZU3U86QXWM9P27D3AD94/image-asset.jpeg Blog - Thoughts on King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017) Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com I recognize that this is a little bit late, but I have been busy during the past couple weeks. Having said that, on with the first of several new posts. After I posted my thoughts on The Maze Runner, I saw King Arthur: Legend of the Sword the following weekend. This is the latest adaptation of the King Arthur story. Warning: As with The Maze Runner, this post will contain as few spoilers as possible, and what spoilers there are will be mild ones. In this version, directed by Guy Ritchie, Vortigern (brother of Uther, king of the Britons) plans a coup, which results in Uther's son, later named Arthur, being orphaned. As an adult, Arthur has learned to fend for himself. Meanwhile, Vortigern sends a group of his henchmen (known as the Blacklegs) to gather all men similar in age to Arthur himself and force them to try to extract Excalibur, a powerful sword, from a stone near his castle. When Arthur tries it, he succeeds. Uther's general, Sir Bedivere, has organized a band of rebels hoping to stop Vortigern from taking over all of England. After Arthur has extracted Excalibur, Bedivere believes he can help their cause. Arthur will soon come to realize that a mere band of rebels is not enough. Here are my thoughts: What Worked: I thought the cast was believable. Charlie Hunnam looks like how one may picture Arthur, as does Eric Bana with Uther. Some casting choices really surprised me, namely Djimon Hounsou as Sir Bedivere and Aidan Gillen as his friend, Sir William "Goosefat Bill" Wilson. The main reason is because they usually play villains, and here they're good guys. Another surprise is Jude Law as Vortigern, who is usually a good guy (example: Watson in Sherlock Holmes), and yet here he's the villain. The majority of the visuals look convincing here, and the action works. With the action, there is slow motion, but it served as a benefit, especially since Guy Ritchie has used it before with Sherlock Holmes. His direction also works since his style of humor is present here and is effective, so they can be seen as going hand-in-hand. There is one thing I loved: it had an awesome song ("The Devil and the Huntsman") that played in both the third act and the credits. In a fantasy movie such as this, whether it's a portion of the score or a song with actual vocals, its key purpose is to get you excited. With this song, it not only does that, but it also sounds like you could set something like Conan to it and it would work. What Didn't Work: The opening has the backstory explained in a block of borderline unreadable text also applied to the opening credits. Because of this, it's hard to see what you should be looking at in the first few minutes. While the intention of making stylistically appropriate font is understandable, a narration akin to the one by Charlie Hunnam that opened Pacific Rim would have sufficed. Some of the alterations to the King Arthur story here may not make sense. On top of that, people may think this version is trying so hard to be like The Lord of the Rings in some parts (namely the first few minutes, as well as some of the music and visuals) and different movies in others, like The Lion King, 300, and to an extent Thor. At least one very unwise decision is made, and this is one of those movies where the outcome of said decision is predictable. Overall: King Arthur: Legend of the Sword is a fun movie and an interesting take on the King Arthur story. Most of the story's key aspects are there and others are at least mentioned. Those who know it but can accept a fair amount of changes should give this version a chance. Those who were unsure from the trailer might also be surprised upon watching the movie. See this in theaters if you can, but if you end up having to wait for rental or Netflix, that's also fine. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/blog/2017/5/12/pm9nz5d2cnmt4sup4qwvxrw5c1b58v monthly 0.5 2020-02-22 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1502312033357-QF69NYR5VJ6NR3ZYCPPA/image-asset.jpeg Blog - Thoughts on The Maze Runner (2014) Image courtesy of emaze.com Warning: Mild spoilers ahead. I watched The Maze Runner on TV last night. For those who are unfamiliar, here is the plot: A young man named Thomas wakes up with no memory of who he is. He has been sent to the Glade, a place that is basically a small society made up of other young men, which is surrounded by walls. It turns out the walls actually are part of a maze, and the others have built their society while trying to find a way out and discover why they were put there. Here are my thoughts: What Worked: I found more positives than negatives with The Maze Runner. Since the performances are a key aspect of any movie, the first question to answer is whether or not they work. In this case, yes they do. The actors show they can convey what the characters are feeling at certain points. The setting also works because it looks like something that could exist rather than a backdrop on a green screen. The editing is effective overall. There are two things I especially enjoyed here. The first is the effects, specifically the design of the maze itself and the creatures inside. They looked very practical to me. The second is one thing that I love in movies: it sets rules. Whenever a movie decides to do that, I am always interested to see how the characters deal with the limitations placed upon them. I appreciate the decision to set rules even more if they are followed the entire time. However, I am fine with them being broken at any point, provided the way in which they're broken is clever. In this movie, more rules are broken than followed, but they are broken in clever ways and for good reason, yet there are still consequences. Finally, there are so many twists and turns that by the end, you want to learn more. What Didn't Work: My main issue was that some of the characters' decisions may not make sense. There are two things I can especially understand being major issues for those who are themselves interested. The first thing is that in the first few minutes, key parts are being set up left and right with no room to think about the information you have just been given. The second thing is that a certain part of the last 20 minutes, which is briefly addressed in the ending, may leave them confused. However, while I will not spoil it here, those particular viewers will understand what I am referring to when they watch the movie for themselves. Before I get into my overall thoughts, there is something to address. Unless they know it's a different story prior to watching it, people are likely going to end up comparing The Maze Runner to The Hunger Games (an example being they are both based on a popular series of young-adult novels). I recognize that some similarities are there, but it's how each movie presents those parts that show the differences. A prime example of this is the bigger picture: with The Hunger Games, it was rebellion against the system. With The Maze Runner, it might actually be more intriguing, as it feels like a mystery with a conspiracy. Overall: The Maze Runner was actually a surprise for me when I first saw it in theaters, and since then (especially after seeing it again last night), I can say this: out of all of the young-adult novel adaptations out there, this, like The Hunger Games, is one of the better ones. It's a very fun movie that also is great at world-building. You want to know what's beyond the maze, which is one of a few questions both asked and answered here, with many more to be answered later. https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/work-avenue daily 1.0 2025-05-12 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1494374434294-B5NXLVZYFU6ALK5ISXU7/maxresdefault.jpg Work https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1494378259971-2LI86ZKVQDVOKJKWZ9Q5/ironn+swim+2014+12.jpg Work https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1494378306781-ATRJRNHYRA89CLHZTY1H/tumblr_lzsx789jxl1qbotogo5_1280.jpg Work https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1494378385796-HPO39Q69F0NIDAQF62YT/16546091210_99279fd110_z-640x468.jpg Work https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1494378461962-IK13ZQX7ZDBPZSIEU945/Doctor-or-nurse-administers-vaccine-Shutterstock-800x430.png Work https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/about daily 0.75 2017-05-14 https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59123c2603596e4dfb104ee2/1494464001713-GDO5U4NN2Z9SIXUPHTLC/image-asset.jpeg About https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/contact daily 0.75 2017-05-14 https://www.hunterhughes-media.com/search-blog daily 0.75 2020-07-16