What movies have you seen recently?

[Armor and Sword]

Superman

This was pretty okay for me. Half of this movie really hit for me, and the other half I can really see hitting for others, but it wasn't so much my vibe.

I think part of it was that this was a movie called Superman. Not Superman: The Movie, not Superman Returns, not Man of Steel, not Superman: Legacy... Superman. Despite him very much being the main character in his own movie, I was really hoping for this version to be the defacto installment that all would always point to and lean on for future reference, and other heroes (such as Krypto and Mr. Terrific) wouldn't steal the show as much.

This was also kickstarting a brand new universe, so it was going to set the tone and it's often hard to de-escalate from here. Gunn made a choice to enter this universe with gods and monsters already among us, and it felt a little jarring that I felt like I should already know these characters and this universe. Not like I wasn't well introduced, but that I missed out on a lot, especially with the citizens who find anything which occurs as just another Tuesday.

When Gunn was slated to pen the script, my fear was how much silliness he'd bring on, and I was hoping that he would reserve himself for such an important movie. He is indeed a funny man and made me laugh, but not every character needs to be comic relief, and not every emotional beat needs to be immediately followed by a joke of some sort. I wasn't rolling my eyes, but the placement was also often incorrect, out of sorts, and frankly I felt a little disrespectful given the stakes of certain moments. I'm not asking at all for dark and gritty, not in the slightest. There is just time and place, some which were served well and others which are going to validate the concerns people had before this project took off.

Boy were there some wonderful moments, though. Any time that Corenswet and Brosnahan are on screen together was absolutely engrossing. Much more of that would've gone a long way. Krypto is also adorable (as a dog lover myself), and Holy plays a great Lex but he only has word vomit to let his motivations speak for him. Mr. Terrific has the best action scene of the movie, Guy Gardner wasn't intolerable, and Hawkgirl was absolutely unnecessary. I liked Jimmy Olsen, and wish that Parry White had more overall character. I do feel again that the mesh between ordinary citizens and metahumans was a bit too comfortable for a first film in the universe, and there were story elements that could've used a greater focus between their dichotomy that fell to the wayside.

This movie is absolute hate-fuel for Snyder Bros. Save some action moments, these couldn't be any further apart. I think Superman in a modern setting ultimately isn't my biggest vibe, but I think James Gunn really mortalized him better than I could ever imagine, perhaps to a fault but it is welcomed for the character. I had fun and am still hopeful for the universe, and personally am more excited about Supergirl than I ever was before. I also feel this movie hits those four quadrants in such a way that it is kind of one of those fresh superhero movies we need, even if it's not the best that they have to offer. Given the title and DCU introduction though, I would've gone for more Superman (and Lois with him) and less other metahumans and humor to avoid making this sometimes seem like a mess, but that doesn't take away from the entertainment that it does have to offer.

Unadulterated crap. A mockery of Superman and everything he meant to an entire Generation X.

Are you kidding me? I wanted to walk out 20 minutes into the movie. But it was me, my son and my wife and it was our Tuesday night movie (we have been doing this the past three summers since Tuesday night is $5 movies at the Paragon theater).

Fortunately I only burned $15 dollars total on this POS.

If this is the start to a new DC universe…..I am absolutely and completely out.

This was easily the worst and I mean worst Superman film ever made. Yeah it even surpasses Superman 4 and Superman Returns.

What a ****ing disgrace to the source material.

And what they did to Superman’s birth parents and his adopted parents???

Dear god shame on Hollywood. Absolute mockery.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Blzer]

Unadulterated crap. A mockery of Superman and everything he meant to an entire Generation X.

Are you kidding me? I wanted to walk out 20 minutes into the movie. But it was me, my son and my wife and it was our Tuesday night movie (we have been doing this the past three summers since Tuesday night is $5 movies at the Paragon theater).

Fortunately I only burned $15 dollars total on this POS.

If this is the start to a new DC universe…..I am absolutely and completely out.

This was easily the worst and I mean worst Superman film ever made. Yeah it even surpasses Superman 4 and Superman Returns.

What a ****ing disgrace to the source material.

And what they did to Superman’s birth parents and his adopted parents???

Dear god shame on Hollywood. Absolute mockery.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have a lot more to say on the movie that would echo your sentiments, but I just don't feel them as strongly as you do to dislike the film as a whole. I just think that buried within the extra plots, characters, and silliness is a fine Superman film and kickoff to the universe, even if it means keeping both sets of parents as they are.

That being said, I'm about to defend both of those choices.

James Gunn specifically worked with Richard Christy (Howard Stern Show personality and Kansas native) to get authentic Kansas accents. Christy's parents, who are Kansas farmers, left voicemails that the actors studied for hours. It was definitely heavy and they were seen as a bit "simple," but by the time Clark goes to see them I accepted it. At the beginning though, I literally thought that Ma Kent was pulling an accent as some sort of cover while she was on the phone with him or something.

As for the El's:

Spoiler

I for one am not married to any original or popular lore about them needing to be good people toward Earthlings. Their characters are dead and therefore will not be important to Clark's future, and unlike Man of Steel they won't be an AI, but rather just a video recording that he heard the half of which inspired him to do good. That's good enough for me.

As for the last half, I like it as a means of building Clark's character to not succumb to his wishes, and of course it builds up the Kent's when Jonathan talks with him outside.

However, if you don't like that, there can still be some outs. My personal favorite is that perhaps that was not Jor in the holograph, but instead it was Zod. Rebuilding Krypton on Earth is a staple of his character, it would make sense for Clark to not know what Joe and Lara look like, and it gives Bradley Cooper an in to the DCU. Perhaps Kara sees the footage later, and says: "That's not Uncle Jor. He is not your father."

Other outs could include Earth's linguists not being compatible for the recording or the message still somehow being doctored, despite the numerous repeated statements that it was legit.

Even still, that should've really been the main storyline for this movie, not everything else around it regarding Baravia, the Justice Gang, pocket universes, etc.

I'm lukewarm to this movie starting the universe, but I am happy for its success and hopeful for its future.

[Armor and Sword]

I have a lot more to say on the movie that would echo your sentiments, but I just don't feel them as strongly as you do to dislike the film as a whole. I just think that buried within the extra plots, characters, and silliness is a fine Superman film and kickoff to the universe, even if it means keeping both sets of parents as they are.

That being said, I'm about to defend both of those choices.

James Gunn specifically worked with Richard Christy (Howard Stern Show personality and Kansas native) to get authentic Kansas accents. Christy's parents, who are Kansas farmers, left voicemails that the actors studied for hours. It was definitely heavy and they were seen as a bit "simple," but by the time Clark goes to see them I accepted it. At the beginning though, I literally thought that Ma Kent was pulling an accent as some sort of cover while she was on the phone with him or something.

As for the El's:

Spoiler

I for one am not married to any original or popular lore about them needing to be good people toward Earthlings. Their characters are dead and therefore will not be important to Clark's future, and unlike Man of Steel they won't be an AI, but rather just a video recording that he heard the half of which inspired him to do good. That's good enough for me.

As for the last half, I like it as a means of building Clark's character to not succumb to his wishes, and of course it builds up the Kent's when Jonathan talks with him outside.

However, if you don't like that, there can still be some outs. My personal favorite is that perhaps that was not Jor in the holograph, but instead it was Zod. Rebuilding Krypton on Earth is a staple of his character, it would make sense for Clark to not know what Joe and Lara look like, and it gives Bradley Cooper an in to the DCU. Perhaps Kara sees the footage later, and says: "That's not Uncle Jor. He is not your father."

Other outs could include Earth's linguists not being compatible for the recording or the message still somehow being doctored, despite the numerous repeated statements that it was legit.

Even still, that should've really been the main storyline for this movie, not everything else around it regarding Baravia, the Justice Gang, pocket universes, etc.

I'm lukewarm to this movie starting the universe, but I am happy for its success and hopeful for its future.

Great follow up post.

The only positives I pulled from the movie:

Music - Top notch

FX - Top Notch

Superman, Jimmy and Mr Terrific and Lex were well acted.

Lois.....meh.

[Blzer]

Great follow up post.

The only positives I pulled from the movie:

Music - Top notch

FX - Top Notch

Superman, Jimmy and Mr Terrific and Lex were well acted.

Lois.....meh.

Interestingly, the only time I liked the score was when it played off the John Williams theme. I was fine with the soundtrack choices, though.

And the CGI was very hit and miss for me. It was great for Krypto (though sometimes a bit floaty, and I don't just mean because he flies), and the wide-angle camera lens made shots probably look worse than they were supposed to (same happened in GOTG 3 and The Flash). The first shot right after the Superman title card was of the Hammer of Baravia, and it looked like a video game. Other shots were undeniably impressive though.

And I liked Lois, or moreso Rachel Brosnahan as Lois. I didn't like that she was piloting for the last half of the movie, but I look forward to seeing more of her.

[Armor and Sword]

Watched Man of Steel with the family last night. It's been a while since I have watched the Zach Snyder 's Justice League trilogy (MOS, BVS, JL Directors Cut).

I wanted a point of comparison to this new relaunch of the DCU with the 1 star outta 5 rated Superman (my rating as it was dreadful).

Lord man....depsite the flaws of Man of Steel (yes it has a few warts and the next two films even more so) it is a 180 in terms of telling Superman's Origin story.

The new films CLUNKY first act glosses over his entire homeworld's plight, Jorel and Lara....I mean man it was a hack job. Pure junk.

And then there is Cavill as Superman who is outstanding. A total bad ***. That is what Superman is.....The Man of Steel.

Superman The Movie and Superman II are forever etched into my 8 and 11 year old soul.......the standard. And this new Superman can't even shine Christopher Reeve's shoes and forget carrying Cavill's jock....LOL.

I stand by my opinion. A total mockery of the source material and the cannon.

Warner Brothers only cares about maximum profit.....they have stooped to the lowest common denominator with this so called reboot of the DCU with hot garbage. Count me out and I am sure millions of other loyal DC guys and gals like myself. Feel bad for the new generation if this is their first Superman movie......OOOOOOOF.

[Armor and Sword]

Finally watched Sinners.

It was good. Not great but definitely good. The music was awesome. And Michael B Jordan gave a great performance.

[Blzer]

Together

Despite me not ever really seeing Dave Franco as a lead, as always he understands the assignment and is strong in what the film asks him to do. Alison Brie very much held her own as well. Their chemistry is good, and definitely believable enough to serve the story, which was a crucial factor for this one (EDIT: I just found out they are married in real life, which makes much more sense given what they go through).

The interesting thing for this movie though is that I didn't see any trailers, posters, or even know what this movie was about, but given the title and some early opening bits, I felt I could play out everywhere the movie wanted to go, and that I wanted to go along with it. That seems like more a good thing than a bad thing, especially since specific moments within the film veered unpredictably, but I think it makes it hard to disappoint.

This movie had some awesome nightmarish scenes. Like many horror movies, it still has its share of levity and spends a lot of time with the characters to elevate beyond its gratuity, and it didn't overstay its welcome so it was an easy, brisk viewing. Probably not my favorite horror movie of the year (I ain't counting Sinners which sits atop all lists), but it's the best one of the year to bring your date to, and I think it had a lot of my favorite horror scenes of the year as well.

Oh, and bless their use of practical effects as often as possible.

[Ghost Of The Year]

Just got back from Fantastic Four. It was slow starting but it wound up being pretty good. It seems like this story should have been part two of a trilogy, instead of act one.

Off topic, I noticed I know what you did last summer was also playing at the theater I was at, but I would be more impressed if they know what I'm doing next summer.

[Blzer]

I saw Fantastic Four yesterday, but I need to see it again before leaving impressions.

Not because of the movie itself, but because of my personal experience. My theater's sound was quiet and slightly ahead of the picture, the crowd was not at all responsive to any funny moments that I was chuckling at, and I hit a lull in the afternoon where I was a bit tired, and might've missed some of the middle in ever so slight ways (like a part of Silver Surfer's origin, which I caught some wind of).

I'd like to see an IMAX screening on Sunday when I'm fully alert, but I can say that I did enjoy it, and personally I found the first half hour the most engaging (besides the one space sequence, of course).


I Know What You Did Last Summer

I didn't post this earlier, because I normally don't post spoiler-heavy reviews. But now that I started the post with other stuff, I might as well get it out there.

I saw this and didn't mind it one bit. Outside of this I've only seen the original, which wasn't very good but at least it was nineties. This one certainly felt a little throwback as well. Some editing quips here and there during the attacks, but otherwise it was a solid viewing.

However, I have some major problems with it.

Spoiler

I just could not get past this catalyst. I'm not saying Teddy inherently did nothing wrong, but they absolutely could have written it off like he didn't. They can still say they were pulled over at the side of the road when the car overreacted turning into that blind side and swerved out of the way. I don't see where they will be painting this thing as manslaughter, ain't no way.

Then there's the matter of his shirt. You'd think that if they didn't want to be thought of as present during the incident that they'd make a bigger deal about him losing his shirt. I thought that would be what would keep them there or have them go to the police, to explain they tried to help Sam. Not only that, but that never even figures as a plot point! I thought for sure it would come back, but nope.

Honestly, in my mind I worked out that Teddy's dad was the killer, trying to keep the town as it was and not have anybody mess with it. That changed in the scene when he and his son were killed, and that's not a terrible version of a killer except then it would very much mimic another horror movie that came out this year (for spoiler purposes I won't say which one).

I was going to come in here and ***** about the reason for Stevie's inclusion in the movie because it seemed senseless (besides working with Ray), only to find out she was the killer. Suddenly it made sense, and it worked for me. She spoke a little quickly at the end, but she was fun in her exposition dump.

As a whole, I'm mixed on Ray being a killer, or more so likely the main one doing the killing. I'm not one of those that will say the series is dead to me or anything, but I also fully don't see the motive for a good guy to break bad like that. But what I really don't get is him killing Tyler. If part of his motive was to keep their story and lore in the fold of the town's history, Tyler literally has a renowned true crime podcast and was going to cover the story! That goes well against Ray's motives.

Admittedly I went into this movie blind, so I didn't know whether this was a reboot, remake, sequel or requel (looks like it was that one!) and I didn't know anybody would return, so they were all a surprise to be. Freddie himself is looking pretty old these days! It's hard to recognize JLH due to all her plastic surgeries sadly. But damn, de-aging or not, SMG looked so good. Bless her genes.

As for the mid credits scene, honestly because of JLH's overall appearance change a sequel with her doesn't excite me that much, but I'll see it regardless. However, I have to ask: I remember the college roommate quickly popping up on the first film, but it sounds like they went through some stuff in a sequel. Is that true, and would it be worth checking out if so?

[Blzer]

Coherence

89-minute runtime, $50k budget, lesser-known cast and crew, five-day shooting schedule, mostly improvised (and unintelligible) dialogue, and a straight to streaming release.

If all of those sounds like deterrents to see this movie, I feel you on that. However, I am providing context so you can enter it with a certain mindset when I provide the testimonial that you should see this movie.

This released in 2013, but I hadn't ever heard of it. Like most of my viewing experiences, I went into it blind and am better off for it. There is a charm to its cheap production (for comparison, The Blair Witch Project had a $60k budget in 1999) especially in finding creative ways to shoot it, but that's not to say that it didn't feel cheap and a bit restrained. I think the cast worked well with each other and understood what was asked of them. I also think it may have decent replay value (or at the very least open up the forums to future discourse), but the first viewing will be most effective.

I admire the vision of writer-director James Ward Byrkit, but am saddened that he hasn't really done anything since. These are the kinds of creators you encourage to make more (preferably in theaters), but maybe it takes spreading their previous work more to get them back on the saddle. I am spreading this to you guys. Again, I think entering this with the right frame of mind from how I presented it to you is how you'll buy in, but I feel the movie will pull you into its world if you give it that chance.

[Blzer]

Sketch

Despite what can run across as imaginarily creative fun-fare and thrilling shlock that will undeniably be compared to IF, this upcoming PG-rated flick is centered with powerful messaging for kids, and some home-hitting messaging for people who have experienced significant loss.

These added layers really brought this project together with a tight script and competent acting. Comedy when it was supposed to be and emotional when it had the opportunity, I think there is something for all family members to get out of this and even have a conversation with your children about afterward.

I did find one character to not belong with my own demographic when it comes to attempting to entertain, and having less of him would've probably tightened the narrative even more, but I understand their inclusion and think it helps restore balance for the younger audience. Also, having a rather quick acceptance of the call after an initial refusal helped move the story along.

If you stick around about a minute after the end credits, there is a QR code for an app that you can download that is actually wicked interactive and fun to play with (you're given some app credits upfront, but would have to pay to earn more).

EDIT: You can earn extra app credits by watching trailer and sneak peak videos on the app.

[Blzer]

I caught a theatrical double-feature of two films that take place in New Mexico, Eddington and She Rides Shotgun.

Both movies are great and are well acted, but I think Eddington stuck its own landing a bit more. She Rides Shotgun is absolute peak when it plays smaller (with lesser characters, specifically the two leads). Eddington has a great "small town" feel of everybody knowing everybody and connecting to some part of the film in some way. Both have their equal bouts of levity and tension where needed, and both kept me leaning forward as the movies progressed.

[Majingir]

Jurassic World: Rebirth

Some of the corniest dialogue and delivery that I've seen in a while. It was almost painful. The opening scene has a pretty silly catalyst, and yeah...painful.

Jurassic World Rebirth

I have a soft spot for sequels that have "return to form" elements that some other installments lose, and most of that is based around tone and feel. I might rate a film higher just because of that (Jason Bourne and Rings both come immediately to mind). After the sour taste of some of the previous Jurassic World films, I probably feel this same with Rebirth.

What Rebirth did right was it tried to ground the franchise again. We just came off of Chris Pratt being an ***-kicking dino wrangler, and this franchise had to put the monster back into these creatures without losing too much focus on B-storylines (like a dino auction or locusts). There is scale in the mayhem, and characters are mostly treated with care that make you fearful and hopeful for their safety. When the previous trilogy was filled with "action" scenes, these were more "survival" scenes, and that's the feeling that the original Park trilogy had.

There's a lot of modernization here, though. Thankfully it was shot on film, but I was extremely sensitive to the use of green screening whenever it popped up. Every actor/actress cast has a model physique and flash some skin, curves, or muscles when they could. Animatronics were left to the wayside, minus one or two instances. Thankfully, Gareth Edwards has a keen eye for blending CGI in the environments and shot selections, but unlike Fallen Kingdom the majority of scenes take place under sunny daylight.

I haven't seen the trailers, but I'm certain it will reveal the mutated creature designs that this movie offered. I have to say that I found the majority of them to be a bit jarring and freakish. Ever since Jurassic World, there has been this meta running theme that people are bored by conventional dinosaurs and they have to keep doing different things to bring excitement to the table. I disagree with this notion, and when I see this as a response to it I wish they didn't have that mantra. I found the Indominous species' to be fun in the World trilogy, but Rexy was always the alpha in our eyes still. Speaking of which, I'm glad they brought back the OG T-Rex roar, and I'm also relieved they didn't continue feathering dinosaurs like Dominion did, even if it's more scientifically accurate. It could be because the story brought us back to beginning creations, but it's a relief nonetheless.

Though to hit a previous point home, if it wasn't for the T-Rex inclusion and the film's score, this could really have been any other monster movie and been Jurassic World in name only. I think some of the franchise's identity has waned despite returning to form in its groundedness, so it's not going to get the highest of marks that Jurassic Park and The Lost World have earned (yes, TLW is great to me). In a scene that obviously replaced raptors for another mutant dinosaur, I was hoping that they would simplify things a little more. They made excellent use of water in this movie though no matter the encounter, and I think you needed some mutants for that to be effective.

In terms of the lead roles, Jonathan Bailey was my favorite, followed by Scarlett Johansson and then Mahershela Ali. There were some characters which were immediately seen as expendable dinosaur food, and other characters that were protected with a giant suit of plot armor. Ultimately though, I find it hilariously ironic that while I like these characters more and the mutants less, you'll leave this film remembering a dinosaur's name more than any human's name.

This is a great summer blockbuster that knew what to dial back, and I think Rebirth does right in respecting both the horror and magic that seeing a dinosaur on the big screen will bring, fascinating audiences enough for yet another billion dollar return. Admittedly it does play things rather safely, but until they go full R-rated mode with the franchise (which I don't think is a bad idea), they might feel a need to protect the IP to keep all venues open in future sequels. I don't know where they go next in this trilogy, save for one mutation that they teased next time around, but I hope they maintain these same sensibilities (with more animatronics) and I will be there for it.

This movie didn't really stand out to me. Didn't feel to attached to any character so much and if they did a sequel of this one with a whole new cast again, I wouldn't really mind it either. This just felt like 2 movies going on at once. Not that I think it needs a sequel, but it'll probably get one if it hasn't already been announced.

[Gotmadskillzson]

War of The Worlds, the Ice Cube version on Amazon Prime Video. It is definitely not the worse movie I ever seen, even for this year so I don't know why it had a 0% rotten. Plot holes, yeah. But the movie was made in 2020, the height of Covid so I am sure that had hindered a lot of things. I did like the modern approach to the movie. In todays modern world, a ton of people get their news via their cell phones and PC. A lot of people communicate via Face Time and Zoom Calls, so yeah they captured it perfectly.

So for me it was a 6 out of 10. I enjoyed it better than the Tom Cruise version.

[Blzer]

Here are a couple of movies I saw at two recent mystery screenings. Both come out this weekend.


Relay

Clever writing, more than I could do anyway. I was extremely positive on it for most of my viewing experience, but I was heavily soured on a story element that I really could've done without.

Avoid watching its trailer, if possible. It shows way too much of the second half, and it is also not indicative of the kind of movie this is. To me, this had a mix of feeling a bit like a Bourne film (cat & mouse pursuit) and The Adjustment Bureau (fixing behind the scenes), so maybe Matt Damon should've played the lead (kidding, Riz Ahmed was great). Around its intense moments, it is certainly not without its own wit and charm. It has strong caper vibes, and isn't just a rampant action thriller.

With certain reservations at play, I would definitely recommend it. This definitely has sexual potential, too.

EDIT: Clearly I meant to say sequel, but that autocorrect is so funny I'm just going to leave it in.


Eden

This was fine. Acting, filmmaking, and characterization were all on point. I don't think it had much narrative flow, though. Or rather, there wasn't a direction that you could see it going at any time (especially when it decidedly jumps to a new season), and you don't really know what the end result is supposed to be aiming toward. Sometimes it's also difficult to identify protagonists and antagonists. I guess telling events inspired by a true story can be a cause of that.

I liked that as I was watching it though that I had no idea what it was even called until a minute into the credits. I suppose you can't do that unless you're watching a mystery screening, but these really do add value of literally going in with no expectation. I hadn't ever even heard of the project before, much less seen a trailer. It's also something I wouldn't have actively pursued had I done either, but with the mystery screening at play it was perfect fodder for that engagement. Speaking of which, the audience was engaged, and nobody got up until the title appeared.

In an irksome way, although Vanessa Kirby looked absolutely stunning without makeup (obviously she is caked up for the camera, but I mean with more of a natural state), I don't think that face could've existed in 1930s America with all of those fillers. Even if Sydney Sweeney or Ana de Armas have had any cosmetics done, they didn't stand out as unnatural in the movie.