Soul (2020): Pete Docter’s Latest Attempt at Making You Cry

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Soul” is directed by Pete Docter (Up, Inside Out) alongside first timer for feature-length directing, Kemp Powers. This film stars Jamie Foxx (Ray, The Amazing Spider-Man 2), Tina Fey (30 Rock, Saturday Night Live), Questlove (The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon, Late Night with Jimmy Fallon), Phylicia Rashad (The Cosby Show, Creed), Daveed Digs (Snowpiercer, Black-ish), and Angela Bassett (What’s Love Got to Do with It, Black Panther). This film centers around a middle school jazz teacher who often tries to find music gigs. He gets transported out of his body and must find his way back with the assistance of an infant soul.

Like many movies this year including “Scoob!,” “Trolls: World Tour,” “Greenland,” and “Mulan,” “Soul” joins the list of films that were once slated to have a big theatrical debut, but due to COVID-19, that became an impossibility. Therefore, Disney decided to put the film on their own streaming service, much like the just recently mentioned “Mulan.” However, unlike “Mulan,” to watch “Soul,” you did not have to pay an extra fee. You had to be a subscriber, but the one time fee of $29.99 was nonexistent. Yay!

Regardless of “Soul’s” fate, this was on my list of films to anticipate. After all, Pete Docter has directed three Pixar features, all of which by the way have been really good. “Monsters Inc.” puts a clever spin on the way we think about creatures that invade our nightmares. “Up” is a fun adventure with arguably the greatest on-screen dog ever made. “Inside Out” is not only one of my favorite Pixar movies, but it is by far one of the best animated films I have ever watched, and really shows that the studio does not cater to kids, and respects its entire viewer base.

Speaking of Pixar, they’ve yet to have a bad day at the office. Even a movie like “Cars 2,” which many people suggest lacks luster compared to many of Pixar’s other offerings, I would consider fun and thrilling all the way through. To be fair though, I have not seen all of Pixar’s work. I skipped “The Good Dinosaur” in the theater and I have yet to watch it at home. So who knows? Maybe that movie will disappoint me. So, does “Soul” keep up the positive streak Pixar has been hammering home by now?

Ehh… Kinda.

Let me say one thing about “Soul,” where there are positives, they are obvious. This film, much like all of Pixar’s recent work like “Incredibles 2” and “Toy Story 4” is beautifully animated. Even though I watched “Soul” on the small screen, New York looked as stunning as a snowfall on Christmas morning. I really like that Pete Docter decided to do another project where the main characters are not necessarily just humans, but little figments of ourselves. “Inside Out” is one of my favorite films of the past five to six years, and part of why I love that movie so much is because it takes emotions and utilizes them to make you feel emotions. Sort of in the same way, I kind of expected that going into “Soul.” In some ways, my expectations to such a matter were met. In others, not so much. The thing about “Inside Out” is that the movie managed to take characters, who in actuality are just parts of one humanized character, and turned them into something bigger, something bolder. In “Soul,” it kind of puts humans and souls in the same perspective and somewhat equalizes them despite their differences. This movie tries to do something with that, and there are a series of pros that come with the concept’s execution, but as the movie goes on, it becomes less interesting, especially towards the final few minutes.

“Soul” is by no means the worst movie of the year, however it may have the worst ending. I will not spoil anything, but this film does not exactly follow the structure of your traditional animation, and I think in some ways, that’s great. I love when films become experimental. But experiments are about trial and error. I think we’ve hit “error” territory with this vision. In a way, each character’s arch was fulfilled. All the actions lead to inevitable reactions. But I left the film feeling empty. I did not feel happy. I did not feel sad. I left not knowing what exactly to think. The usual thing about films is that they try to build up to an epic and satisfying climax. “Soul” has a climax, thankfully. However, as I watched the film, it did not feel climactic. It felt like we were somewhere in act two a little too long. I do not know why. When I watched “Inside Out,” it kind of felt like sex for your brain. You built up all this information, it’s all clogged in your mind, and when the big moments of the end come, I felt shook, it is a feeling that left me with a series of emotions. “Soul” left me with one question.

“Wait, that’s the movie?”

I felt like we’ve left the story unfinished, when in reality it wasn’t. Nothing really felt big or grand, and while I do not expect all my movies to feel like that, it feels weird to be saying that about a Pixar movie. The studio typically does a good job with scale and reminding you of the importance of its characters. “Soul” does that, but it couldn’t stick the landing.

However, speaking of characters, I admire the chemistry between our two leads. You have the main character, Joe Gardner (Jamie Foxx), who has to deal with his new normal after death. And you also have 22 (Tina Fey), who had a particular normal for centuries, and this movie presents the latest iteration of that normal. One of my favorite scenes of the film are the flashbacks of the past examples of what 22 is going through in the not the great beyond, but the great before, where souls remain before they journey to earth to live out their lives. I thought the duo were cast decently, and they had a couple funny lines here and there. Yes, “Soul” is funny, but I will not say it is as funny as other Pixar flicks including “Toy Story 2,” “Up,” and the incessantly mentioned “Inside Out.”

If anything, “Soul” is a movie that is probably going to be looked over by students. This is partially because it is a family friendly movie revolving around music, so this may be good for music classes of all ages. Also, the way it handles the afterlife (or the bare exposition to the afterlife) provides an intriguing peek at what may happen when we go bye bye. It is stunningly animated, and kind of creative. I wonder how other people are going to view “Soul” as far as the human condition message goes.

This movie is marketed to provide a message to remind people to follow their path, chase their dreams, achieve what they believe is their destiny. And the movie sort of dives into that, but it comes with a little more. And while “Soul” comes with a solid moral of the story, it almost feels inconsistent. Then again, the way this movie structures itself feels nearly inconsistent. At times it works, but if I had to give a percentage, it would not be 100%. Many movies have the neverending question, “What is human?” It is a great theme to dive into and can make for a terrific movie. “Soul,” much like how many of its characters are partial figments of ourselves in a way, has many of the positives of other Pixar films, but its positives do not stand out as much as other examples. The best phrase I can give to describe “Soul” is “partially positive.” “Soul” is emotional, but not “Toy Story 3” emotional. “Soul” is funny, but not “The Incredibles” funny. “Soul” is fun, but not “Ratatouille” fun. “Soul” is deep, but not “Inside Out” deep. Maybe it’s deeper, who knows? But regardless, “Soul” does not handle depth like “Inside Out” handles depth. “Soul” tries to encapsulate all these positive qualities, and it does to a degree, but it cannot do so all the way through. And that is really sad, because this film got me to subscribe to Disney+, and now I may be regretting my purchase. First impressions matter!

In the end, “Soul” may not be soulless, but it is also a far cry from what I expect from Pixar. Maybe my disappointment has to do with too much hype, because it’s the typical cycle. In addition to “Soul” having overwhelmingly positive reviews, with quite a few people I’ve come across suggesting it is a masterpiece, I went into the movie expecting one of the best things ever, only to be let down somewhat. That’s not the first time that’s happened to me with Pixar, because that happened to me with “Coco.” I was expecting an emotional thrill, but I left the film going “Okay, that happened. Next.” Again, this film looks great, even on a small screen where it was not originally meant to be seen, but as we progress through the second half of the film, it becomes progressively less fascinating, even with the whole links to what it means to be human. There’s good morals here, I just wish they were in a better movie. For those of you who have never seen a Siskel & Ebert review, their rating system is simple, thumbs up or thumbs down. If I had to give my thoughts on the animation and tech for this film, it is a definite thumbs up. The story, it depends on what we are talking about, but it is going to get the slightest of a thumbs up as I was entertained and hypnotized for a majority of the film. I’m going to give “Soul” a 7/10.

“Soul” is a positive movie, but as far as Pixar goes, it is not up to par with other films. It might even be my least favorite from the studio. When it comes to Pixar films from this year, I need time to marinate, but I might rather want to watch “Onward.” Just bein’ honest. And I will be fair to Pixar. To have a studio’s possibly worst movie get a 7/10 speaks volumes of its history. Just to be clear, Pixar has released feature films since the mid-1990s, and since then, they would put one or two out almost every year. I hope Pixar steps up from here, but I think they’ve created many great films and developed tons of memorable characters over the years. Here’s hoping they can conceptualize more.

“Soul” is exclusively available on Disney+ for all subscribers. And unlike one of the service’s other exclusives (for a limited time), “Mulan,” “Soul” is available at no extra cost.

Thanks for reading this review! Next week I will be reviewing “Wonder Woman 1984,” which is now in theaters wherever they are open. If your theaters are closed or you don’t feel safe going to a cinema right now, the film is also available on HBO Max to all subscribers for 31 days. I personally have my IMAX tickets ready for Sunday, and I cannot wait to watch the film! Also, at the start of 2021, I will be listing my top 10 BEST movies of 2020 and my top 10 WORST movies of 2020! These countdowns have been a tradition of mine for years, and I am glad to keep it going! Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Also, check out my Facebook page! …If you wanna keep your soul. I want to know, did you see “Soul?” What did you think about it? And what is your LEAST FAVORITE Pixar movie? Worst, not best! Just want to make sure we’re clear! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Wolfwalkers (2020): My Thoughts on Apple TV+’s First Animation

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Wolfwalkers” is directed by Tomm Moore and Ross Stewart, who worked together on 2014’s “Song of the Sea” and stars Honor Kneafsey (Our Zoo, A Christmas Prince), Sean Bean (Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The Martian), Simon McBurney (Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation, The Theory of Everything), Tommy Tiernan (Derry Girls, The Tommy Tiernan Show), Jon Kenny (Song of the Sea, Angela’s Ashes), John Morton (Lily’s Bad Day, Storyland), and Maria Doyle Kennedy (Orphan Black, Jupiter Ascending). This film is about a young girl named Robyn Goodfellowe who journeys with her father to hunt down wolves in Ireland. However, things change when another young girl, Mebh Óg MacTíre who can transform into a wolf becomes friends with her.

I saw the trailer for “Wolfwalkers” in the theater when I was seeing Netflix’s “Over the Moon,” which by the way, you should check out if you have not already. I thought I would check out the film when it came out wherever it was playing. Although, I was also aware of its Apple TV+ release as well. “Wolfwalkers” was one of those movies that sort of came for a short time, stayed for short time, then suddenly disappeared. I wanted to see this in the theater, but due to time, money, and the fact that my AMC A-List subscription does not count towards Fathom Events screenings, I decided to skip the film. Only problem, I do not use any Apple products other than a 4th generation iPod Touch from time to time, and I don’t get Apple TV+ where I traditionally watch television. …Or so I thought. Thankfully, I recently found out that the service was released onto the PS4 last month, thus opening the door to me being able to see this movie. So, what did I think?

Out of all the animations that have come out this year, “Wolfwalkers” is by far the most unique. This has the least involvement from people associated with the United States of the animated flicks I’ve seen in 2020, and that sort of helped. At times it didn’t feel very… I don’t usually use this term, but “Hollywood.” This is not to say the film is bad. In fact, it is quite marvelous. Of the animations I have seen this year, “Wolfwalkers” may be my runner up. My #1 animation is the recently mentioned “Over the Moon,” by the way. However, in a world where animations are often glossy, uber-detailed 3D adventures, it is somewhat refreshing to see something that feels more rustic. This feels kind of like looking at a children’s book at times. It sort of has that homey feel. When I watched the film I sort of compared the animation style to “Where’s Waldo?” meets “Paper Mario.” I don’t know why, those are just the images that popped into my head. A lot of frames are magnificently crafted, and I can only imagine how difficult it may have been to storyboard some of them.

However, with all this gloss and hooplah on the tech, the drawings, and the overall look of the film, this sort of dives into a minor problem. While the story is incessantly marvelous and enchanting from start to finish, there are a couple moments, particularly towards the beginning that feel a tad slow and out of proper pace. This pacing issue most certainly improves with time, but it is nevertheless there. This is not to suggest that the film provides a terrible story. It absolutely does not. It is a fantastic story that maybe is not handled to perfection all the way through. Although some of the moments with the wolfwalkers and what they are capable of towards the beginning provides for some eye-catching exposition.

Character-wise, this movie has a couple great relationships. You have the constantly developing relationship between Robyn and Mebh, while at the same time we have a relationship between Robyn and her father, Bill, that starts out kind of strong, but gets rockier as we go. Robyn’s handling between these two relationships makes the movie worth watching, because we get a glimpse of her dealing with a world that seems quite fantastical but to her, it is a reality that she just happened to step upon. It’s almost like if Dorothy from “The Wizard of Oz” were able to visit Oz anytime she wants, but everyone in her normal life refuses to acknowledge such a fantastical world could exist. From this notion, the movie brings a witchcraft element into the mix, putting a heavy target on our protagonist’s back, and I liked the way such a storyline was handled.

If there is something that “Wolfwalkers” got right that does not have to do with tech, it would be the buildup of conflict. By the end of the film, everything felt like it was reaching a tipping point, and the climax did not lack a single ounce of excitement. There were one or two predictable points, but it did not irritate me.

Although if I had to come up with a single character problem it would be that there is a particular scene where the father and daughter are at home together, and Robyn tries to explain about the wolf realm. Each time, she is interrupted. I get that this is a cartoon, but when it comes to suspense of disbelief, that may have been a tad too much.

Little sidenote, when it comes to the music in “Wolfwalkers,” it is not my favorite of the year. There’s nothing terrible about it, it’s just not a standout candidate for Best Score. Nothing against Bruno Coulais, who composed the film’s music. By the way, Coulais also composed the score for the 2009 animation “Coraline,” which makes a lot of sense. While the scores, based on my memory, do not sound exactly the same, I often got “Coraline” vibes upon reflecting on “Wolfwalkers” given the link between worlds, one world being fantasy and one reality. Both films also have a young girl going on a journey, a massive transformation, and there are occasionally some dark moments in the film. Both literally and figuratively. However, if you do watch the movie, there is a really good rendition of the song “Running with the Wolves,” sung by Norwegian artist Aurora, who already made the song in 2014, but she redid it specifically for this film. As far as alternate songs for films go, it is very well done, but it has nothing on the redo of “Holding Out for a Hero” in “Shrek 2.”

In the end, “Wolfwalkers” is a solid animation debut for Apple TV+ as a distribution outlet. A lot of time and care went into each frame, the characters are fun and joyful, and the colors are rustic yet vibrant. …If that makes any sense. This is good film to watch if you are with younger children. I can guarantee you that their intelligence (and yours) will not be insulted. Keep in mind, this blog is being written by a citizen of the United States, and as a citizen of the United States, I do have to remind some of my viewers that there may be some jumbly moments in “Wolfwalkers” in terms of accents, but if you can get past that, this film may be a win for you, and possibly the family. I am going to give “Wolfwalkers” an 8/10.

“Wolfwalkers” is now available exclusively on Apple TV+ for all subscribers. The service is $4.99/month, but if you buy an Apple device in the future such as an iPhone, you may be able to use Apple TV+ for free through one year if you wish to have the service.

Thanks for reading this review! Sticking on the topic of animated films, I have plans to watch Pixar’s “Soul” which is set to stream exclusively on Disney+ at no extra cost to subscribers on December 25th. I will also be watching “Wonder Woman 1984.” I have tickets to see the film in IMAX on December 27th. So if I play my cards right, I should have my “Soul” review up first, then my review for “Wonder Woman 1984.” We are getting down to the wire in terms of how many films I have left to watch this year. But as we get down that wire, I just want to remind you that this January I will be revealing my picks for my Top 10 BEST Movies of 2020 and my Top 10 WORST Movies of 2020. Stay tuned everyone! Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Also, check out my Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Wolfwalkers?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie with wolves in it? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Monster Hunter (2020): Paul W.S. Anderson and Milla Jovovich’s Latest Attempt at Alternating Video Game History

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Monster Hunter” is directed by Paul W.S. Anderson (Resident Evil, Mortal Kombat) and stars Milla Jovovich (The Fifth Element, The Fourth Kind), Tony Jaa (Ong-Bak: The Thai Warrior, xXx: Return of Xander Cage), Tip “T.I.” Harris (Ant-Man, Get Hard), Meagan Good (Think Like a Man, Shazam!), Diego Boneta (Terminator: Dark Fate, Scream Queens), John Helman (X-Men: Days of Future Past, Mad Max: Fury Road), Jin Au-Yeung (The Man with the Iron Fists, 2 Fast 2 Furious), and Ron Perlman (Sons of Anarchy, Hellboy). This film is based on the Capcom video game franchise of the same name, where you go on quests to slay or capture monsters. In this 2020 film adaptation, Lt. Artemis and her fellow soldiers transport themselves to an unfamiliar world where they meet The Hunter (Tony Jaa). Together, the crew must survive against giant monsters in an attempt to return home.

First off, I just want to say, just because this is being published on the week of Christmas, Merry Christmas to those who celebrate! Second, “Monster Hunter” is the latest film put out theatrically from Sony. From my experience, Sony has been one of the studios that has been rather reserved during the pandemic. They have yet to put many of their films straight to streaming, although “Greyhound” and “An American Pickle” stand out as a couple exceptions. Although, when “Tenet” came out to somewhat underwhelming statistics, most notably in the United States, which is usually a key market for film, they said they “won’t make the mistake” of releasing a film of that size during the pandemic.

For the record, “Tenet” cost $205 million to make. Box office-wise, the film did well financially given the circumstances of the pandemic, but in normal times, it would not have been considered a success. “Monster Hunter,” to Sony’s benefit, is much less expensive. That film in particular cost $60 million to make. While that is not necessarily the biggest budget in the world, especially compared to the latest Marvel and “Star Wars” fare we have been getting, it is still not exactly cheap. However, it is more expensive than what Sony has been putting out, “The Broken Hearts Gallery” as one such example, since most theatres have been allowed to reopen. This made me wonder… “Why?”

After all, even though I never saw Paul W.S. Anderson’s “Resident Evil,” I am familiar with many of the franchise’s entries being dishonored by critics and even fans of the games. Part of me wondered if Sony just wanted to dump this film into theaters just to get it off its back, and if “Monster Hunter” was just another video game adaptation that felt nothing like the game itself.

Having now seen the film, my expectations were kind of met. Although at the same time, it is still better than I anticipated. Unlike myself, my dad has seen the “Resident Evil” movies, so I figured for this circumstance, I’d invite him to this screening considering it is from the same people. According to him, this movie has a very similar vibe and structure to the “Resident Evil” films. They are not Shakespeare in the least, but they most certainly fall into the guilty pleasure category. It’s not all bad, but holy hell it is not good. Simultaneously, particular points of the film felt like a blast.

I am going to get some negative points out of the way. This movie is definitely not going to win an editing Oscar. Of all the films to have come out this year, this is by far the LEAST qualified to possibly win Best Film Editing. The film manages to revisit a lot of the common problems we face in action films today. Specifically, quick cutting, not being able to tell who is who, and there also seems to be a little more slow-mo than I’d prefer. It’s almost like watching “The Matrix” if they couldn’t tell a story. There is a scene in the film where two people are fighting, and while they do kind of look alike, there was a point where I wondered who was who. If we learned anything from… I dunno, “Taken 3,” it’s that quick cutting is headache-inducing and should be avoided at all costs!

Liam Neeson deserves better!

Another big problem, and I was kind of expecting this from the get go, characterization is not really put at the forefront. Not only do we have a bunch of military soldiers who have nothing to do with the source material at the center of the story, but nearly every character in this film felt disposable. I did not care about anyone, they could get massacred, lose everything and everyone they know, and I still wouldn’t give a crap. That may partially be because the movie does not give us time to get to know anyone. We have these generic soldiers on a mission together, but nobody has a personality, nobody has any special quirks. They all sing together from time to time, but they do not really do anything else that stands out. They’re just these generic soldiers with their generic dialogue in a movie with a world that really should not feel generic! This is a movie with a world where someone fights gigantic monsters as part of a quest! Or… At least that’s what should be happening according to the video games. I do not need all film adaptations to follow the source material 100%, but this almost goes too far away from the original material at times.

This film is 1 hour and 39 minutes long. Thankfully, I never once felt bored throughout that time. I will say though, one surprising critique I will give the film is that I wish it were a minute longer in the runtime. Maybe two or three, but still. I know it does not seem like much, but again, the film failed to impress me character-wise, but if it took just a few more minutes just to have us get to know something about some of the others in the film, “Monster Hunter” might just garner my interest more as it progressed.

Although, thankfully, there is one relationship that defined the film and made it worth my time, and that is the relationship between Lt. Artemis (Milla Jovovich) and the Hunter (Tony Jaa). What made their relationship intriguing is the foreign aspect that came with each side. For Lt. Artemis, she spends much of the film in a world she has never once thought would be possible. When she tries to adapt to this unusual reality, she comes across the Hunter, and she tries to befriend him. Granted, it is through blatantly obvious Hershey’s product placement, but it is true that chocolate wins people over, even if they have never seen or heard of it. Why do you think “The Big Bang Theory” made an entire episode revolving around chocolate being used as positive reinforcement?

If you are a fan of the “Monster Hunter” games, I cannot guarantee that you will walk out of this movie saying it is just like the games. This sort of feels like a Michael Bay “Transformers” movie, where it is less about Transformers and more about the military and the government and how they deal with Transformers. Granted, this has a significantly tinier budget, a smaller cast, and I would even say that the military emphasis in this film is greater, because it never cuts away from the military to average civilians to Transformers doing their own s*it. One positive about the film, even though the story and characterization is lackluster, is that the film does not convolute itself with too many things going on. There is a certain beauty in the simplicity, albeit small, but it is there. If anything, this feels like “Predator” meets “Pacific Rim.” You have two worlds, one side enters the other one, and you have these soldiers trying to survive against giant creatures. Granted, both of those movies are much more watchable, but I rest my case.

In the end, “Monster Hunter” just reinforces what we have learned from “Superintelligence,” directed by Ben Falcone and starring Melissa McCarthy. If a husband and wife team direct and star in a film. Maybe it is not worth watching. I have not seen this duo’s bunch of “Resident Evil” films they did together, but I have heard from my dad that “Monster Hunter” falls in the same realm. If you want big action that falls into the guilty pleasure category, “Monster Hunter” may be for you. If you like the games and expect this film to be a solid “adaptation” of the source material, I am not sure if you will be satisfied. Yes, the effects look nice. There is some cool action. But is not enough to make a good movie. If you want to have a good time at the movies, just wait for “Wonder Woman 1984.” I have not seen it, so I cannot confirm if it is good, but it sure looks it! I’m going to give “Monster Hunter” a 4/10.

“Monster Hunter” is now playing in theaters in 2D, and is also available in premium large formats including Dolby Cinema, Cinemark XD, and IMAX.

Thanks for reading this review! Next week I will have my review up for “Wonder Woman 1984,” which will be in theatres and on HBO Max this Christmas. I also plan to watch and review “Soul” on Disney+, but I also do not plan to leave out “I’m Your Woman” on Prime Video, and “Wolfwalkers” on Apple TV+. There are also films exclusively in theaters I want to tackle such as “News of the World” starring Tom Hanks. There is a lot to watch through the holiday season so I cannot guarantee I will get to everything. But we shall see! Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Also, check out my Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Monster Hunter?” What did you think about it? Or, have you seen any of the other video game to movie adaptations directed by Paul W.S. Anderson? Tell me your thoughts on those! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Greenland (2020): A Perfect Distraction From a Virus-Infused Reality: The End of the World

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Greenland” is directed by Ric Roman Waugh (Snitch, Angel Has Fallen) and stars Gerard Butler (300, How to Train Your Dragon), Morena Baccarin (Deadpool, Firefly), Roger Dale Floyd (Stargirl, Doctor Sleep), Scott Glenn (Daredevil, The Leftovers), David Denman (The Office, Parenthood), and Hope Davis (Captain America: Civil War, For the People). The film centers around a family who make up a fraction of the many observers of Clarke, a comet that enters the earth’s atmosphere, makes a rough landing, and all of a sudden we have a race against time to survive and get to safety.

I live in the state of Massachusetts, and our cinemas were allowed to reopen over the summer. Over the trips I took to the golden gates of film, one of the trailers that caught my attention, not to mention the attention of my dad, was “Greenland.” After all, we were sitting in a giant IMAX together waiting to watch “Tenet.” And on comes this constant outburst of CGI destruction and debris. The auditorium turned into a dying planet, essentially. We both agreed, this would be AWESOME in the theater. So I figured I would keep this film in mind for the day it finally arrives.

Well, it didn’t.

At the last minute, STX decided to release the film on VOD in the United States, where it is available right now for a $19.99 rental fee. I did not end up buying the film on VOD, mainly because I attended an early virtual screening of “Greenland” this past Tuesday. So I watched the film on my laptop, which was quite a downgrade from the theater, but I at the very least got to see it in the comfort of my bedroom.

As much as I would love to judge this film based on my experience of watching it in the theater, I can’t. So instead, allow me to declare that if you are watching “Greenland” on a phone, a laptop (like I did), or a tablet… What are you doing with yourself?! You’re wasting your time! Watch “Greenland” on the biggest screen you can! Get that 65″ 4K with HDR television set running! Hook up that mighty projector! Rent out a private screen somewhere where you can hook up your Roku! Just do it! This movie deserves the biggest screen and highest quality sound system possible, because it truly is an experience. While it is not the most Shakespearean film of the year in terms of concept, “Greenland” handles its simple story effectively, all the while delivering a technical blast from start to finish. There are a couple moments in this film that looked like “Blade Runner 2049” if Michael Bay stepped in and directed it.

Although, don’t take that Shakespearean comment too seriously, because speaking of not taking things too seriously, this movie went beyond my expectations. I was expecting “Greenland” to be your typical apocalyptic, end of the world disaster film where serious s*it goes down. The visual scope of the ruin and constant downturn of everything takes the front seat while story and characterization are pushed back to the bus. Nope! This movie is better than not only it deserves to be, it’s better than what we as a society deserve after this wreck of a year. I can tell you right now, this December could be a haven for film lovers. Between this, “Soul,” “Wonder Woman 1984,” “News of the World,” and more, we could have a great end to the year for film.

I really admired the chemistry between the main family. You have John Garrity (Gerard Butler), a Scottish structural engineer. His estranged wife, Allison Garrity (Morena Baccarin), who happens to live with her kid Nathan (Roger Dale Floyd). They’re all great as their respective characters and I liked them individually not to mention when they are all together. This film just came out, so I will not dive into spoilers, but one of the main continual conflicts that comes up between this trio feels like something that would happen during a disaster like the one presented in “Greenland.” Not to mention, the way they deal with said conflict feels natural, especially since the movie reveals that they are not the only ones dealing with said conflict. There is a moment when everything starts to unfold, just when these three begin to escape to safety, that sets the tone for what’s to come and it represents the everlasting desire to survive, to be safe. What exactly happens during this moment plays out during the movie multiple times, and is used to great effect. I will not say much, once again. But this is just part of why this movie is so well written, even if it may be marketed as a mindless, popcorn disaster film. It takes time to allow us to get to know our characters. It allows us be in the moment with them. It allows us to appreciate them. So every moment they are in peril, it sort of hits me.

While this movie has a terrific trio of protagonists, they say that stories are usually as good as its villains. Now, “Greenland” does not specifically contain one main antagonist or villain that our heroes must go up against. Instead, it’s more of a race against time. It’s a race against fragments of a comet. Although there are people along the way that do present themselves as a threat. And the way these people are handled within the script is marvelous. I say so because “Greenland” mainly focuses on these three people, but everyone else has the same motive. Specifically, to survive. They will literally do anything even if it means killing someone, harming someone else, affecting a certain portion of their lives. Every villain is the hero of their own story, and “Greenland” is a great encapsulation of such a statement.

This film cost $35 million to make, and I’d say that every penny was spent wisely. This movie did a great job at feeling like a bigger budget disaster flick that pulls no punches and unleashes mass destruction, but with a great emphasis on character development. The production value of the film is stunning and each frame does not disappoint. This should not surprise me as this film comes from STX Entertainment, and they do a lot of mid budget stuff. They have done “Hardcore Henry,” an immersive film that resembles a first person shooter. That cost $2 million to make, by the way! Admittedly, it could have been better, although I give it props for being unique. They did “Bad Moms,” a comedy starring Mila Kunis which… Yeah, that also could have been better. I also won’t leave out “Peppermint” starring Jennifer Garner, which… yes… That could have, just as well… been better. I think I’ve only seen a couple films from STX that I seriously admired, but that’s not the point. The point is, these movies typically utilize middle of the road or somewhat smaller budgets but still have plenty of production value intact. “Greenland,” given its subject matter, is no exception to this rule. At times it feels like it has the budget of a “John Wick” sequel, but in reality, it doesn’t. Although to be fair, this movie is from the same producer of the “John Wick” franchise, Basil Iwanyk. I’m glad that “Greenland” is willing to focus on its story instead of relying on constant special effects that slightly sacrifice characterization.

If I had any problems with “Greenland,” I will say that the best parts of the film are during the first and third acts. This is not a diss on the second act, which has some really solid moments, but there’s a point where we as an audience are perhaps allowed to breathe, and while that may have been the intention, I was a little bored at this point in the film. Other than that, “Greenland” is a great time. I’d say give it a watch. I know $19.99 is not the best price for renting a movie, but if you do ever get the chance to watch it, do so on the biggest screen you can.

In the end, “Greenland” is a welcome surprise that deserves the best picture and audio quality possible. It’s a disaster. People run. Things fall from the sky. Civilians die. That’s what I expected, and that’s what I got. However, this film amazingly offers more substance than I anticipated. STX is admittedly not my favorite studio working today, but this may be their best film. Either this or “The Edge of Seventeen,” I need some time to think. Gerard Butler and the rest of the cast sell their roles, the film makes a disaster look pretty, and if you are tired of your current reality where a virus is constantly spiraling. Why not watch the end of the world? Sounds like fun, right? I’m going to give “Greenland” an 8/10.

“Greenland” is now available on premium VOD services. Examples include Xfinity On Demand, Google Play, AMC Theatres On Demand, and Prime Video where you can rent it for $19.99.

Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon I’m going to have my review up for “Monster Hunter.” That will be available next week, that is if I have any brain cells left. Only time will tell. I also want to remind you that I bought tickets to see “Wonder Woman 1984” in the theater on December 27th. I will not be reviewing the movie right away when it comes on HBO Max, because I want to see it with my dad and sister, and I want to go in with a fresh perspective. I also want to remind you that we are quickly approaching the end of the year, and I want to publicly announce that two of the first posts you’re getting next year are my annual countdowns for the best and worst films of the year! So on the first day, you’ll be getting my top 10 BEST movies of 2020. And on the second day, you’ll be getting my top 10 WORST movies of 2020. Yes, those are coming! The year is not over yet, I still have some films to watch. So the lists are not final. But I cannot wait to share those lists with you all, I enjoy doing them. If you want to see those lists and other great content, follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out my Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Greenland?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Gerard Butler movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Midnight Sky (2020): George Clooney Helms a Visually Stunning Journey Through Space and Ground

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Midnight Sky” is directed by George Clooney (Gravity, Batman & Robin) and he also stars in the film as Augustine Lofthouse. Clooney is surrounded by a cast of characters played by Felicity Jones (The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Rogue One: A Star Wars Story), David Oyelowo (Gringo, Selma), Tiffany Boone (The Chi, Hunters), Demián Bichir (Grand Hotel, The Hateful Eight), Kyle Chandler (Game Night, Godzilla: King of the Monsters), and Caoilinn Springall in her film debut. This film is based on the novel “Good Morning, Midnight,” by Lily Brooks-Dalton and takes place in post-apocalyptic times as Augustine, a scientist, attempts to bring a group of astronauts home while also avoiding unfortunate events.

LOS ANGELES, CA – JANUARY 29: Actor George Clooney arrives at The 18th Annual Screen Actors Guild Awards broadcast on TNT/TBS at The Shrine Auditorium on January 29, 2012 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by Jordan Strauss/WireImage) 22005_012_JS2_0735.JPG

George Clooney has directed a few films so far including “The Ides of March,” which I have not seen. “The Monuments Men,” which I have also not seen despite owning it on Blu-ray. And let’s not forget “Suburbicon,” which seems to have a cool concept, but having seen poor verdicts from others, I wonder if it is even worth checking out at this point. Nevertheless, George Clooney’s latest directorial effort is the first one I’ve had the opportunity to check out. Before I went to the theater to see this film, I saw a trailer for it somewhere else, and I was immediately in just from knowing this was a space film, and those have been some of my favorites over the years. This was also my first Cinemark XD experience, so I was getting a unique flavor alongside the film. Without going into much detail, this movie was worth the extra few bucks on the ticket, and I will probably be back for that specific auditorium soon. But how was the movie itself?

First and foremost, “The Midnight Sky” is a visually stunning adventure. This movie is distributed by Netflix, which as many of you may know, traditionally releases their content for the small screen. However, in recent years with movies like “Mudbound,” “Roma,” and “The Irishman,” they have been stepping up their theatrical efforts, perhaps mainly to outline themselves as a major force during the Oscars. If I were a voting member of the Academy and I had the opportunity to nominate a film for the Best Visual Effects category, “The Midnight Sky” would be a contender. Although at the same time, there are some points in the film where the effects look obviously artificial and less than realistic. Even with that in mind, it did not take away from the film’s flair. “The Midnight Sky” is easy on the eyes, and at various times, it’s the same on the ears. Like many other space films, the sound in this movie is magic. Although I will say compared to movies like “Gravity,” “First Man,” and even ones I did not enjoy such as “Ad Astra,” it is not as memorable in the sound department as those.

Story-wise, “The Midnight Sky” kicks off rather slow. I do not mind slow movies. Some of my favorite movies are slow. However, “The Midnight Sky” sort of failed to keep me at a proper pace during certain points. I have no idea why, but for whatever reason, this movie did not click with me instantaneously. As for later points, those were the definite highlights.

This film takes place both on earth and in outer space, and we see the two alternate perspectives and the people within them as they go about their ways and goals. The story on earth shows a bearded George Clooney trekking through the ice and bonding with a young girl. In space, there is a crew attempting to make their way home from Jupiter and we see these two stories play out and how they connect with one another. I liked certain fragments of both stories, but if you told me before I saw this movie that I’d end up digging the story on earth a little more, I’d be surprised.

My favorite parts of the movie are between George Clooney’s character, Augustine Lofthouse, and a young girl he meets by the name of Iris, played by first time actress Caoilinn Springall. First off, sticking on the topic of Caolinn Springall, I think she is going to have a very bright future ahead of her. This first role of hers has minimal dialogue, which makes it a good pick for a first time actress, but what sold this role more than anything else is the physicality aspect. Films are all about visual storytelling, and when you can use the visual movements of a person as much as possible to heighten the story, your film is guaranteed to work. Springall gives one of the most visually competent performances of the year, regardless of age. Plus, the journey between her and Clooney make for some of the grittier moments of the movie. The duo’s trek through the stormy snow makes for a definite highlight.

I will say, if there is a flaw that I have picked up, it’s that the side characters of the film do not really leave me with much to write home about. While there are only a couple of characters on earth, there are a few more in space. Some highlights include Sully Rembshire (Felicity Jones) and Commander Gordon Adewole (David Oyelowo). However, when it comes to these characters in space, it was a little bit harder for me to get attached to them compared to those remaining on earth. Maybe it is because of a matter of quantity and quality. There are more characters in space, but fewer on earth, so the time spent with those on earth maybe feels more intimate and special. Although I will say, kind of like the story on earth, the story in space got better with time. The pacing went faster, the stakes went higher, and the Movie Reviewing Moron ended up being happier!

Speaking of quick pace and high stakes, the way this film ends makes for one of my favorite climaxes of the year. It feels so somber yet so relaxing. With a film maintaining the tone it has, it is a perfect way for everything to go down. I do not think George Clooney is up there with the greats in regards to filmmakers, but “The Midnight Sky” proves itself to be a watchable space to ground drama with a series of heavy visual effects, despite a feeling of intimacy here and there. I will say, I do not watch Netflix, but I would not mind if I started to use Netflix to watch this film again, because it sort of does play out like a puzzle, and maybe a second watch will allow me to appreciate it more. I am curious to see if Clooney wants to continue his directing career, because if he keeps making movies like this, he could be well-rounded amongst his Hollywood peers.

In the end, “The Midnight Sky” is a wonderous trip through a post-apocalypse. George Clooney gives it his all as a performer and behind the scenes. I do need some time to process the film, but I would not mind it contending during awards season for the visual effects category. If anything else, I really like the way they do the credits. It is vastly different from many other films you see, and it kept me around for a few minutes. I recommend this film, give it a watch! I’m going to give “The Midnight Sky” a 7/10.

“The Midnight Sky” is now playing in theaters and will stream on Netflix for subscribers starting Wednesday December 23rd.

Thanks for reading this review! Just want to let you all know that my next review is going to be for the STX movie “Greenland,” which premieres on VOD services starting December 18th. Also, this Sunday, I’m going to see Sony’s latest attempt at a video game film… “Monster Hunter.”

Don’t cry Jack, don’t cry. You’re gonna get through this! Big monsters cannot hurt anyone! That review will be up next week. Stay tuned! Speaking of staying tuned for more great content, be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out my Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Midnight Sky?” What did you think about it? Or, have you seen any of the other films George Clooney directed? Tell me your thoughts! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Mank (2020): Yeah, Mank Almost Stank…

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Mank” is directed by David Fincher (Fight Club, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button) and stars Gary Oldman (The Darkest Hour, The Dark Knight), Amanda Seyfried (Ted 2, First Reformed), Lily Collins (Mirror Mirror, Abduction), Arliss Howard (Medium, True Blood), Tom Pelphrey (Guiding Light, Iron Fist), Sam Troughton (Alien vs. Predator, Chernobyl), Ferdinand Kingsley (Victoria, Dracula Untold), Tuppence Middleton (Jupiter Ascending, Sense8), Tom Burke (Only God Forgives, The Musketeers), Joseph Cross (Running with Scissors, Big Little Lies), Jamie McShane (Sons of Anarchy, Bloodline), Tony Leonard Moore (Daredevil, Billions), Monika Gossman (Maximum Impact, Iron Sky), and Charles Dance (Godzilla: King of the Monsters, Game of Thrones). Holy CRAP that’s a lot of people! This film takes place in 1930s Hollywood as we see a manipulative and striking piece of history play out all the while screenwriter Herman J. Mankiewicz tries to finish the screenplay for “Citizen Kane.”

David Fincher - IMDb

I’m gonna let you guys in on a little truth I need to spit out. I have not seen any of David Fincher’s films. Not “Fight Club,” not “Gone Girl,” not even “Alien 3.” Therefore, “Mank” is officially taking my David Fincher virginity. I have seen a lot of the work from heavy hitters over the years. Christopher Nolan, Quentin Tarantino, Steven Spielberg, and Guillermo Del Toro. David Fincher for whatever reason was just one of those names I continued to avoid. So, what are my thoughts on my first encounter with David Fincher’s work?

If you want the truth, “Mank” is marvelous to the naked eye. Granted, this is a less than traditional looking film for the modern age. It’s presented in black and white, there are several scenes that are presented back and forth in time, and to establish such time frames, the film gives you a screenplay perspective where it tells you whether the scene takes place inside or outside, where specifically the scene is located, and when. I think that is a nice quirk that I have not seen in any other film. The cinematography is breathtaking and if it were not for “Tenet,” it could arguably be top dog for the year. The film has this throwback feel and there’s some echo-like sounds you can hear from one moment to the next. Fincher directs the crap out of this thing and each scene feels like it could only be put together by a true craftsman. There are a diverse amount of appealing sets that enlightened me as a viewer and allowed me to keep my eyes on the screen.

If only the story were significantly more interesting. Because “Mank” is forgettable, kind of a blur at this point, and certainly… BORING!

Now, let me just say, I like the concept of this movie. For starters, I am a lover of film history, which “Mank” centers around. And there have been examples of movies about film history that have been done well. A few recent examples include Disney’s “Saving Mr. Banks,” which dives into the production of “Mary Poppins,” and A24’s “The Disaster Artist,” which goes over the production and release of Tommy Wiseau’s “The Room,” one of the most hilariously awful movies to ever exist. In the case of “Mank,” part of what this film is about is the making of “Citizen Kane,” which many consider to be the most important film ever made. Although unlike those previous two examples, which go over the production of the film, this film centers a lot around pre-production and little bit more. There is so much to tackle and analyze in a couple of hours.

If 2020 has taught us anything just with the release of HBO Max’s “Superintelligence,” created by husband and wife team Ben Falcone and Melissa McCarthy, it’s that family projects do not always work. “Mank” is directed by David Fincher and written by his father, Jack Fincher, who passed away in 2003. Said father wrote the script in the 1990s but it never came into fruition until today. As happy as I am to see a family dream fulfilled, my time was nevertheless wasted.

Much of this film involves an election, which sort of makes today the perfect time to release this film considering how we just had a presidential election in the United States. I will say that such a part of film intrigued me, and that is somewhat surprising because as a film buff, that is not really what I was going into “Mank” to see. Even so, it delves into the concept of fake news, which is a relevant term nowadays, and if you think Hollywood is political today, as some people claim it to be, this movie paints a picture of Hollywood perhaps slightly manipulating the minds of people to have an election go their way. I just wish the impact of this subject matter, along with the rest of the movie hit me a tad more. I did not really feel anything except for my reclined seat throughout the film.

Although, some of the performances in “Mank” makes the feature worth the watch. For example, Arliss Howard does a fantastic job playing Louis B. Mayer, and I would not mind seeing him receive a Best Supporting Actor nomination in the future for the role. Although my favorite performance in “Mank” is from Amanda Seyfried. Prior to watching “Mank,” I liked Amanda Seyfried. That’s the case even in movies that I did not necessarily enjoy like “You Should Have Left.” Regardless of how much I wanted that movie to end as I watched it, I still think Seyfried gives it her all each time she performs. When it comes to her performance in “Mank,” this is easily her best yet. Part of it may have to do with the efforts from the costuming and makeup department, because whenever I am looking at her character, I do not feel like I am looking at Seyfried herself. On that note, she, along with “Mank” itself, does an alright job at providing a sense of immersion. I wish I left this film with a sense of being able to remember everything within a few days, but still.

And of course, you have Gary Oldman, who gives another great performance here. Oldman is a fine actor, although he is not my favorite of all time. Even so, I respect the man because he traditionally commits to his craft. While I would not consider his performance as Mankiewicz to be his best, Oldman does a great job in “Mank,” he has solid chemistry with Lily Collins during scenes they’re in together, and I do think he will be in a number of conversations during the awards season.

There are many films like “Dunkirk,” “Blade Runner,” and “Tenet” that I have been willing to give more than one watch because for all I know maybe I missed something the first time, or maybe my appreciation for those films could grow with each watch. I do not think “Mank,” as attractive as it is to the pupil, will end up being one of those films. It feels like a one and done deal. That’s really sad because I feel like this is the film, more than any other, that Netflix is going to hype up for the awards season. And it is deserving of nominations in a number of regards. Unfortunately, story and characterization might not be one of them, at least for me.

In the end, “Mank” almost stank. It was halfway decent, but could not quite stick the landing. If you want my recommendation, I will say as someone who has watched “Citizen Kane,” I think that it would be a better idea to watch that film, which “Mank” sort of bases its story around, instead of David Fincher’s latest directorial effort. I hope to maybe watch some of Fincher’s other films in the future when I have the motivation, but I do not know if I will have the motivation to watch “Mank” anytime soon. I’m going to give “Mank” a 5/10.

“Mank” is now playing in select theaters and is available on Netflix for all subscribers.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for another Netflix original film, “The Midnight Sky,” directed by George Clooney. Before I saw this film, I was pretty excited to watch it as I am a sucker for space movies. As for my final thoughts, you’ll have to wait on those. Stay tuned! Speaking of staying tuned, if you want to stay tuned for more great content, follow Scene Before either with an email or a WordPress account! Also, check out my Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Mank?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite David Fincher movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Half Brothers (2020): Jack Gives His Brotherly Hate

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Half Brothers” is directed by Luke Greenfield (The Girl Next Door, Let’s Be Cops) and stars Luis Gerardo Méndez and Connor Del Rio in a film where an aviation exec named Renato comes to find out he has an American half-brother named Asher. The two are forced on a road trip together from the United States to Mexico to learn more about their father as that just so happens to be his dying wish.

“Half Brothers” is amongst the group of films that studios just so have the balls to release in theaters during the pandemic. As far as new releases go, this is not the worst possible candidate for today’s times. The film is not that expensive to make, it is marketable, and to Focus Features’ advantage, they are owned by Comcast, which owns Universal. What I mean by that is Universal made an agreement specifically with the AMC theatre chain that’ll allow them to make their films accessible for home viewing after a minimum of 17 days. So this film will be available to watch at home soon through various premium VOD options. However, since I attended an advance virtual screening for the film, I got to watch “Half Brothers” a few days prior to release. Oddly, I decided to wait over a week after it came out to talk about it, but I have school and duty calls.

This movie starts off nicely. The film begins introducing this father son dynamic that sort of ties much of the journey together. I thought it was well done and sort of reminded me of the relationship I have with my own father, even though we never flown planes together. That was a genuinely fun to watch moment.

Now if only the rest of the film were as compelling, enjoyable, and not even the least bit annoying.

This movie stars Luis Gerardo Méndez and Connor Del Rio as our half-brother pair, and they make up for some of the most awkward and anger-inducing moments I have seen in a road trip movie. Remember “Thelma & Louise” and their great chemistry while blazing down concrete? Yeah, you’re not getting that here. Instead you get a Mexican smartass and an American dumbbell who don’t like each other, they have no chemistry, they feel almost randomly placed together (because well, they kinda sorta are), and they offer little to no entertainment value whatsoever. And sure, I guess both people happen to be expressive, but if I were placed on this trip as the third wheel, I would want to slit my throat in front of this duo. I’m getting off this ride! I’m nauseous! I’m angry! I’m mad! I’m irritated! I’m gonna throw up! No other offers are hopefully up on the table! And for those reasons, I’m out!

Sorry, this movie is so bad that I just want to think about “Shark Tank.” Sounds so much better.

Let’s talk about Renato. From scene one, I was somewhat connected by his story. But from scene two, three, four, whatever, I became increasingly disinterested. Now I know that it is traditional in a story for a protagonist to have something he or she wants, and maybe something holds them back, and maybe that is revealed emotionally. In “Half Brothers,” this stands true for Renato, but almost anytime he happens to be vocally against something, he makes it noticeable, maybe a little too much. He never feels upbeat, never excited, rarely calm. Now if our main characters eternally remained silent and calm, they might be boring, but in the case of “Half Brothers,” Renato is just agonizing to watch because he never feels happy. My early impressions managed to carry through to the point where I never really cared about him.

As for his Renato’s partner through the film, Asher, he is not much better. Oh my gosh, this guy even looks like an utter goofball. I mean, wow! I get that this is a comedy, therefore there will be some moments that are either out of this world or impractical, and over the years, I have come to accept that. I am not going to pretend that such a thing goes right all the time, but this is where I have to calmly step in, be rational, and DECLARE THAT THIS MOVIE IS KILLING MY BRAIN! One of the things that quickly got on my nerve as soon as it started was the massive stereotyping these characters happened to face. For Renato, he entered the United States, and as soon as he is picked up at the airport, he is greeted by a lady who emphasizes her English for the guy, even though he can clearly speak the language. She even throws in the notion of “not wanting to be in Mexico.” …Cause ya know… Bad things… Happen there.

Merica’.

Now what does this have to do with Asher? Because he too, despite being a white U.S. citizen, which in many people’s eyes would equate to guaranteed privilege, is not vulnerable to stereotypes, pretty much all of which are outspoken by Renato himself. As the writer of this post, I recognize the privilege that I have. I’m white, a male, straight, and I come from a U.S. state that has a good reputation in regards to higher education. We have Harvard, MIT, Northeastern, Boston University, and so on. I am not going to deny what I have. But when it comes to how this movie handles the way Renato sees the typical white man of the United States, I could not help but roll my eyes. Here’s the thing about the way other countries see the United States. They see us as fat and stupid. And to some extent, they are not wrong. I am not a hunk, and I cannot speak a foreign language. I’ve tried learning a few over the years, but nothing stuck. Asher does not really embody that vision with his weight, but he sort of does with his personality and arguably his IQ. Look, there’s stupid, there’s being nowhere near as smart as a fifth grader, there’s Patrick Star, but Asher occasionally feels too dumb for words.

Now my griveances of the film could be forgiven if it was funny, but it is not! Sometimes it just feels incredibly frustrating! Maybe I had a few laughs every once in a while, but for the most part, this was nearly resemblant of a blood pressure examination. I did not watch this film in the theater, so I do not know how good or bad it is in a theatrical environment, but if you choose to go to the theater, I would say to go watch something else. Go watch “Freaky!” It’s scary, it’s violent, but most importantly, it’s FUNNY. Watch it!

In the end, “Half Brothers” is certainly not even halfway to being perfect. If you are looking for something to watch in order to escape the horrors of 2020, skip this movie. There are plenty of other options out there. There are better buddy movies, better road trip movies, and this film overall made me dumber. I almost do not even know how to conclude this review other than saying that this movie can go jump off a cliff. The guy who directed this film, Luke Greenfield, directed two episodes of the ABC sitcom “The Neighbors,” which I wish got more than a couple seasons, therefore I have some respect for him. Sadly, I wish that respect could have also been given to him here. I am going to give “Half Brothers” a 3/10. This is not the worst comedy of the year for me, but it is one that I highly recommend you avoid for your sanity. Do not watch this movie. Again, “Freaky” is out in theaters and at home. Go support it!

“Half Brothers” is in theaters now and will be available on premium VOD soon.

Thanks for reading this review! I have plenty more content coming including my review for the all new Netflix film “Mank,” directed by David Fincher. I will have my thoughts on that very soon, and stay tuned for my reviews on “The Midnight Sky” and “Greenland.” I’ll have my thoughts on all those movies hopefully by the end of next week. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Half Brothers?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your worst comedy of the year so far? For me, that would have to be “Superintelligence.” It’s exclusively on HBO Max, which… Yeah, it feels like it was literally dumped on there. Leave your thoughts and opinions down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Last Vermeer (2019): A Carefully Crafted, Yet Forgettable Portrait of an Artistic WWII Conspiracy

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Last Vermeer” is directed by Dan Friedkin, a producer of films including “The Mule,” “Hot Summer Nights,” and “All the Money in the World.” This film in particular is Friedkin’s directorial debut. It received positive reactions at festivals, and now it is getting a long-awaited theatrical release.

“The Last Vermeer” stars Guy Pearce (Memento, Iron Man 3) and Claes Bang (The Girl in the Spider’s Web, The Square) in a story about an artist who is suspected of selling a valuable painting to the Nazis during World War II.

Going into this movie, this was a rare case where I was fairly blind in regard to the goings on. I did watch a trailer prior to leaving my house, and I do think I have caught said trailer at the theater once or twice during other presentations. But this is a film that I went into knowing very little. One of the questions I am constantly asking myself as I type this review is how vague I should be in regard to my overall thoughts. I will do my best to give a summary of my experience.

Let’s start with the easy part. This movie kicks off and maintains a pace that does not feel quite satisfying. However, it is also a story that becomes more investing of my time and attention as it progresses. It has been some time since I watched this movie, but I would not be surprised if this goes down the route of say “Bloodshot,” which coincidentally also has Guy Pearce playing a character, to become one of my most forgotten movies of 2020. Although based on how it concludes, it is not all bad.

They say that bad endings can ruin good movies. Personally, that is a phrase that I have not continuously realized myself. Whenever I watch a good movie, it is usually consistent from start to finish. This year however, I will admit that I did catch one movie that started horribly but ended up being one of the most charming experiences I have sat through in recent memory. That movie by the way, is “Summerland,” starring Gemma Arterton, and it is available on DVD and for rent. While “The Last Vermeer” is not on the same level of “Summerland” in terms of quality for me, it plays out in a similar manner. “The Last Vermeer” starts off rather dull. In fact, as of writing this review, it has almost been a couple weeks since first experiencing “The Last Vermeer” and I almost barely even remember the beginning. Where it picks up is around the second half, because we get into the nitty gritty of the story and we get to witness quite the court case. Towards the end of the film, I was hooked, and it made this true event worth telling on the screen. The journey to get there however might end up being forgotten.

Let’s talk about Claes Bang (left). Claes Bang is not the most well known actor working today, but I want to emphasize him in this review partially because he’s one of the two leads, and this movie may signify a rabbit hole for the actor. One of the concerns I have for this movie is how it could outline Bang’s future. Claes Bang is not a bad actor by any means. I say this despite having only seen him in one other project aside from this one, specifically “The Burnt Orange Heresy.” Now, “The Burnt Orange Heresy” for those of you who do not know is a film about an art critic (Bang) recruited by a dealer to steal a painting. Now I do not know Claes Bang personally, and maybe he enjoys doing these art-centered movies, but I feel like if he continues having roles like the ones he’s getting, he could risk getting typecast in the future. Granted, we have examples of typecasting that work. Samuel L. Jackson often gets cast in roles that encourage him to shout the word “motherf*cker” so all the people of Uranus can hear it. Maybe I am overreacting, but as solid of an actor I think Claes Bang is, I think it would be interesting to see him take in another type of project. Yes, he’s done stuff like “The Girl in the Spider’s Web” in the past, and he’s even played Dracula in the BBC/Netflix series “Dracula.” I just wonder what Bang’s future holds because for all I know, it could continuously involve art movies. But if you want me to be frank about Bang’s performance in “The Last Vermeer,” I liked his character at times, I think he did a good job as his respective role, and he has great chemistry with Guy Pearce.

Speaking of Guy Pearce, I think the makeup and costuming department did a phenomenal job at making Pearce’s character jump off the screen. I have not seen all of Guy Pearce’s work, but I have witnessed some of it like “Memento,” “Iron Man 3,” and “Bedtime Stories.” This is not Guy Pearce, it is another… guy.

*rimshot*

Guy Pearce in this film feels less like Guy Pearce and more like an artist trying to pull of a lifelong Albert Einstein impression, and he does a pretty good job with it. Again, major props have to go to the costuming and makeup departments for pulling off how the character looks. Guy Pearce portrays the art dealer known as Han van Meegeren, and having searched for older photos of him, he looks the part. The Oscars, should they happen next year, is probably going to take place during April. We still have some time to determine whether this performance will hold up, but I would not mind seeing Pearce get an acting nomination.

Unfortunately, however, this movie is probably going to suffer from a lack of replay value, at least from me. It will probably get more than one watch from others, but this feels like a one and done flick, despite how there are some good things in it. But a barely investing beginning and exciting climax did not do it for me. I will say, this is a fascinating story, but I wonder if I would have had more fun researching it through Google as opposed to watching it in a film like this. This is Dan Friedkin’s directorial debut, so I am curious to see what he does in the future in regards to directing, but I just hope it has a greater oomph factor than “The Last Vermeer.”

In the end, “The Last Vermeer” is not half bad. You can watch it, but I would say there are better options out there if a theater is open near you. Go watch “Freaky.” Go watch “Honest Thief.” These may not be the best movies ever, but they are fun times. I liked “The Last Vermeer,” but I just wish it had a greater impact on me. Pearce and Bang are great actors and I would not mind seeing them collaborate on another project in the future, but I hope it is more investing than this one. I am going to give “The Last Vermeer” a 6/10.

“The Last Vermeer” is now playing exclusively in theaters wherever they are open.

Thanks for reading this review! I have some more reviews coming your way including for “Half Brothers,” now playing in theaters, and “Mank,” which is available in select cinemas and Netflix. I am also planning on watching “The Midnight Sky,” directed by George Clooney, which is now in theaters, but will be available on Netflix starting December 23rd. Also, I have obtained a pass to an online screening of STX’s upcoming film, “Greenland,” starring Gerard Butler. That film will be available on premium VOD starting December 18th, and I plan to have my review up sometime around the film’s release. If you want to see all this content and more, follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account, and give my Facebook page a like! I want to know, did you see “The Last Vermeer?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite example of typecasting? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Warner Bros.’ Entire 2021 Lineup Going to HBO Max: My Thoughts

Posted on by Jack Drees

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! As of right now, I am working on a couple reviews for Scene Before, but I had to make this because it is too important of a topic to ignore. But before we get on with this, I have two new reviews coming soon. My first review will be for “The Last Vermeer,” starring Guy Pearce which is in theaters now. Also, I will be reviewing “Half Brothers,” which opens this weekend. I saw the film early, so look forward to my reviews on those two films.

One of the few streaming services I have chosen to invest time and money into is AT&T’s HBO Max. Said investment has been… okay. Despite a decent lineup, things did not get off to a great start. But when I saw one of the service’s first exclusive films, “An American Pickle,” I could tell that movie-wise, this service had potential.

…Then we got “The Witches.”

And “Superintelligence.” Oh, please die.

Although one hint of news that shocked the world back in November is that “Wonder Woman 1984” would come out this Christmas both in theaters and HBO Max at no additional cost to subscribers. While I would have loved for this film to get a traditional theatrical run, where it joins HBO Max a little less than a year after its release, I am personally glad we are getting the film to begin with, and that it is going to theaters at all. In a year where every other blockbuster aside from “Tenet” got delayed, it is nice to see a true experiential film come to the big screen wherever these screens are open. I was fine with this, because a lot of people are going to stay home for Christmas because they might think it is safe from bad weather and conditions, not to mention COVID-19, but you also have families and individuals who may want an excuse to leave the house. In fact, I’m a part of one of those families, because I already scored IMAX tickets to see “Wonder Woman 1984” with my father and sister on December 27th, two days after Christmas. There is no way that this new technique will stop me from going to the theater.

But now… We have an expansion of this idea.

What was going to be a one-time thing, is now going to be a repeated effort. Because throughout 2021, the entire Warner Brothers lineup will premiere in theaters and on HBO Max on the same day. Now, keep in mind, if you plan to watch these movies on HBO Max, read the fine print.

These films, and this also includes “Wonder Woman 1984,” will stream on HBO Max for 31 days after its debut, at which point it disappears, finishes its run in theaters, goes to PVOD and physical media, and eventually returns to HBO Max and related channels. So just because these movies will come to HBO Max, does not automatically mean they will stay on HBO Max. Also, like “Wonder Woman 1984,” the Warner Bros. 2021 films will not supply an additional charge. If you are a subscriber, you do not have to pay extra.

Again, this is for the entire 2021 lineup, so this is a lot of films. Part of the list includes “Tom & Jerry,” “The Suicide Squad,” “Matrix 4,” Lin-Manuel Miranda’s “In the Heights,” and Denis Villeneuve’s “Dune.”

A lot of people who follow the industry claim that this is the nail in the coffin for movie theaters. As one who unapologetically loves the movie theater industry, that is a sentiment I have never wanted to hear. It is still only hours after this news, it is not even a full day yet, but I have had some time to gather my thoughts on this.

There is a part of me that absolutely loves this idea, and there’s a part of me that absolutely hates this idea. But just like certain events in “Tenet,” this full love or hate has not happened yet. Right now, my mind is MOST LIKELY somewhere in the middle.

For starters, we are in the middle of a pandemic. Whether you believe it or not, it is the truth. Yes, I continue to go to the movie theater during a pandemic. Some people may question why I do that. That is a personal choice, and I will say that if I were not doing this blog, I may not stop going, but I’d probably go less. But for those people who want to stay home, they have likely been in front of their television for extended periods watching content like “Tiger King,” “The Boys,” “Raised by Wolves,” “The Mandalorian,” and “The Queen’s Gambit.” There have been several television programs watched throughout this pandemic, because people have been stuck at home in need of something to do. There has been plenty of television, but the same cannot be said for movies. Early on we got animations like “Trolls: World Tour” and “Scoob!” on premium video on demand services. These were serviceable options for families. And yes, we’ve gotten more options like “The Witches” and “Borat Subsequent Moviefilm” but if you looked at the 2020 cinematic calendar pre-pandemic, you’d know that these two films probably would not crack the top 10 biggest films of 2020 list. “Wonder Woman 1984” is a perfect example of a big movie that will reach a wide audience. Comic book fans, families, women, and people who want to gaze at Gal Gadot for a couple hours. Admit it, come on.

HOLLYWOOD, CA – MARCH 04: Gal Gadot attends the 90th Annual Academy Awards at Hollywood & Highland Center on March 4, 2018 in Hollywood, California. (Photo by Kevin Mazur/WireImage)

You know you love her.

It’s Christmastime, families are together, even if it is in smaller groups, and they might want something to do. This is a great idea for consumer choice. If you want to stay home, or if regulations require you to remain at home, HBO Max is a great idea. Otherwise, it would not be a bad idea to experience “Wonder Woman 1984” the way in which director Patty Jenkins likely intended.

One reality that is becoming increasingly likely is that there is a light at the end of the tunnel regarding COVID-19. The answer as to when precisely the COVID-19 pandemic will end is a different story. We already have multiple vaccine candidates from outlets including Pfizer and Moderna. As to when they will be distributed to everyone, that is a mystery. Cases around the world are spiraling out of control, and humanity’s habits over the winter will likely determine whether we see a sharp increase or decrease in cases and deaths. So in a way, I understand Warner Brothers for wanting to cater to all markets at this time. But at this point, I think they are putting a lot of eggs into the HBO Max basket, and I honestly wonder if their investment will pay off. Having “Wonder Woman 1984” on the HBO Max service is a great way to get a bunch of new subscribers, and having new big movies every other week will only keep said subscriber base growing. However, this is only me theorizing at this point, because we have not seen how “Wonder Woman 1984” has done yet. Because I believe it is inevitable that “Wonder Woman 1984” will make less money at the box office than its predecessor. But how much less is another question. I do believe it will make at least $100 million worldwide. There are enough theaters open to warrant such returns, even with major areas such as Los Angeles county in California unlikely to fully reopen anytime soon. Despite how some will claim that “Tenet” is a movie *made for theaters*, which having seen it, it definitely is, “Wonder Woman 1984” is likely going to reach a wider demographic.

I should also point out, that even if the movie does not do well in the United States for whatever reason, not every country has HBO Max, so that might prompt more people to go the theater. But let’s talk about that. Because when this unprecedented release idea was announced solely for “Wonder Woman 1984,” chains like AMC, Regal, and Cinemark announced they were onboard. This is despite some outrage at a deal made earlier this year between AMC and Universal Pictures that allow their movies to play within a shortened theatrical window, at which point they make an early streaming debut.

Guess what? AMC does not approve. Here’s some words from the current CEO of AMC Theatres, Adam Aron.

“These coronavirus-impacted times are uncharted waters for all of us, which is why AMC signed on to an HBO Max exception to customary practices for one film only, Wonder Woman 1984, being released by Warner Brothers at Christmas when the pandemic appears that it will be at its height. However, Warner now hopes to do this for all their 2021 theatrical movies, despite the likelihood that with vaccines right around the corner the theatre business is expected to recover. Clearly, Warner Media intends to sacrifice a considerable portion of the profitability of its movie studio division, and that of its production partners and filmmakers, to subsidize its HBO Max start up. As for AMC, we will do all in our power to ensure that Warner does not do so at our expense. We will aggressively pursue economic terms that preserve our business.

We have already commenced an immediate and urgent dialogue with the leadership of Warner on this subject. As this issue gets sorted out, we are nonetheless encouraged that vaccines protecting society at large against the coronavirus are very much at hand. So, it is our expectation that moviegoers soon will be able once again to delight in coming to our theatres without any worry — viewing the world’s best movies safely in our big seats, with our big sound and on our big screens.“

Just to remind you, this is the same company that less than half a year ago made an asinine deal allowing Universal to avoid following the 90 day theatrical window. And sure, this deal may work right now with everything going on, but if we are to return to normalcy, this may not be finest policy to put in place. At this point I applaud AMC because not only does this go against the terms of the deal they made, but this new deal could take away a lot of money that could potentially go towards ticket sales that benefit both the studio and the theater to a degree. This will take away sales on concessions like popcorn and soda, which is where cinemas typically make their profits. In a way, I am a bit infuriated that despite Warnermedia’s previously announced commitment to theaters, they are more concerned about getting numbers on HBO Max.

And I get it, HBO Max, while its launch was not a complete failure, said launch was not necessarily a success either. The service was a bit laggy, they could not get the “Friends” reunion going, in fact they still have not been able to. I’ll also mention that it started off without being available on two of the main platforms, Amazon Fire and Roku, which by the way, IT IS STILL NOT AVAILABLE ON ROKU! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?! GET A DEAL STRAIGHTENED OUT! I do not use Roku that much, but a lot of people do! Do the deal for them!

Right now, HBO Max has 38 million subscribers. While that is more than Hulu and Peacock, it is significantly less than Disney+, which honestly shocks me to no end. Because all Disney+ has done for main content since launch is “The Mandalorian” and almost nothing else! Right now, Disney+, which has turned a year old recently, has 73.7 million subscribers. One thing HBO Max has been doing right is delivering a bunch of new content both from the HBO channel and Max’s personal library. Apparently that might not be enough. Maybe bringing big movies like “Wonder Woman 1984” is going to help the service get a boost. Plus, unlike Disney’s previous effort with “Mulan,” HBO Max will not charge $29.99 to watch the film.

In the short term, increased subscriptions sound amazing. Bigger followings are always better. And while it is highly unlikely that “Wonder Woman 1984” will make $1 billion at the box office, imagine if this sticks around. Do you think we will ever see a billion dollar film ever again? I almost wonder if we’ll even see a film make half as much as that. This may start a slippery slope where movies are cheapened and less experiential. In a way, they become more like television. In this supposed future, movies are not made for theaters, they’re made for home. To me, movies are experiences. Some of my most iconic memories have been through watching movies at the theater, and even though I can have fun watching a movie at home, the experience of doing so will likely fail to have a lasting impact. I may have dreaded every moment of watching “The Emoji Movie” in a theater, but at least some of the other people’s reactions were something to remember it by. I now get to remember just how much I hated that movie. Another good example, “Ghostbusters” 2016. I despise that film. More than most films if I have to be quite honest. But the 3D was incredible and even though the film itself was terrible, I at least still have the memory of going. If we have a future where all Warner Bros. movies go to HBO Max, we may simultaneously have a future where we watch one movie, digest it, then forget about it until we move onto the next thing.

So now I ask the big question, does this equate to the death of movie theaters? I cannot say yes. But I also cannot say no. I’ll bring in the overused phrase, it’s 2020, anything can happen. But more importantly, I do not know whether Warner Bros. is going to stick to this plan. After all, when the biggest movie theater chain in the United States arrogantly refuses these terms, that may be a sign that Warner Bros. may want to reconsider their actions.

Also, let me just say on a personal note, that one of my biggest aspirations in my life is to make a film for everyone to see together on the big screen. Either as a writer, director, producer, or a combination of those things. With an uncertain future ahead, if more people continue to stay home, and there is a greater studio effort to do duel releases or skip theaters, my dream may be dead. This is a personal aspiration, but I thought I would let you all know. The COVID-19 pandemic has canceled a lot. But I outright refuse to let it cancel my dreams.

Homer At The Movies GIF - Movie MovieTheater Sexting - Discover & Share GIFs

But hey, if this new deal potentially means less people in theaters… That means less morons on their phones! There’s a silver lining to everything!

Let me be frank here, of all the studios operating today, Warner Brothers is arguably my favorite. When it comes to their older content, their library is enormous, while also maintaining a sense of quality. They have a steady relationship with some talented directors including Christopher Nolan, Patty Jenkins, Zack Snyder, and Todd Phillips. They own some of my favorite properties such as the DC Comics library, the LEGO movies, the “Lord of the Rings” saga, and “The Matrix.” Another reason why I love them is because they have shown they are committed to the theatrical experience, and when this pandemic started, I got a sense that they wanted to keep things the way they were when we had a return to normal, or at least a semblance of that.

Just because I unapologetically adore Warner Brothers, does not mean I cannot be honest. This HBO Max move is kind of scary. Movie theaters have shown they have taken enough pain in the last number of months. I see a recovery in 2021, but there is also a chance that the results of this deal, if it continues, could be cataclysmic for the exhibition industry. This eliminates many jobs, ends livelihoods, and destroys the fabric of many communities. I would love to see a future where moviegoing returns and we can enjoy it the way we did in 2019, but I do not think we can get there if we put a bunch of big movies onto streaming, even if they are in theaters. Admittedly, this is better than what Disney+ is doing with “Soul,” which is making it an exclusive on their service and nowhere else, but it is still kind of frightening as one who hopes to make movies one day.

Movies are not dead, nor are cinemas. But we live in a world where people are itching to get back to concerts, comedy clubs, and sporting events. If we can get those back with enough positive progress, I hope we can do the same for the moviegoing experience. When I saw “Wonder Woman” at a local AMC cinema back on opening Thursday in 2017, I was floored by the fact that Gal Gadot was able to carry such a big, epic, and most importantly, theatrical adventure from start to finish. That memory will stay with me until the end of time, and as we approach “Wonder Woman 1984,” I hope I will have an experience similar to three years ago, and I hope other viewers will get a significant feeling out of their experience as well.

Thanks for reading this post! By the way, just a reminder that “Wonder Woman 1984” will be available on HBO Max for free as long as you’re subscribed starting Christmas Day. However, if you want to leave the house, the film will be available wherever theaters are open. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Also, check out my Facebook page! I want to know, what are your thoughts on the HBO Max and theatrical duel release idea for the entirety of Warner Brothers’ 2021 lineup? Mine are quite mixed, but I am also curious to see how “Wonder Woman 1984” will do on HBO Max and the box office, as it may play a factor into making up my mind. Are you planning to watch “Wonder Woman 1984?” If so, where? At home? At the cinema? If you are watching at the cinema, which one are you going to? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Mulan (2020): A Slight Dishonor

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Mulan” is directed by Niki Caro (Whale Rider, The Zookeeper’s Wife) and stars Yiefi Liu (The Forbidden Kingdom, Tong que tai), Donnie Yen (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, xXx: Return of Xander Cage), Tzi Ma (The Man in the High Castle, 24), Jason Scott Lee (Hawaii Five-0, Lilo & Stitch), Yoson An (Mortal Engines, Dead Lucky), Ron Yuan (CSI: NY, Golden Boy), Gong Li (The Monkey King 2, Memoirs of a Geisha), and Jet Li (The Expendables, The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor).

This film is another telling of the Mulan legend. This time around, Disney executes its live-action version of the tale. Their original attempt at creating a story on the character was in the studio’s 1998 animation, which has become a fan favorite.

For those who do not know the story, Mulan disguises herself as a boy and joins fellow warriors in battle.

Say what you want about this notion, but I have not dedicated much of my childhood to watching Disney films. Why is that? I’ve just had other priorities when it comes to media. Although prior to watching the 2020 version of “Mulan,” I popped in the 1998 edition to see if it is worth the hype. Having seen “Mulan,” it is a good movie, but I don’t find myself remembering as one of the most iconic animations of all time.

The Lion King (2019) - Photo Gallery - IMDb

I skipped on most of the Disney live-action remakes because I have either not seen the original counterpart, they did not interest me, or in the case of 2019’s “The Lion King,” I could literally watch the same film at home, but in animated form. Unless you count parts of “Alice in Wonderland,” the only one of these films that I have watched is 2016’s “The Jungle Book.” At the time, it was a visual work of art. And I will defend it for that. But as one who wants original stories, I had no desire to watch any others. One of the few reasons why I am watching 2020’s “Mulan” is because it is one of the few big movies we’re actually getting this year. But another reason is that the trailers at least made it look cool. Plus, unlike “The Lion King” for example, this seemed like a completely different take on the story, it actually felt like Disney took some semblance of a risk with this project. This had no songs, no Mushu, and a PG-13 rating! I understand that some people are upset that on the surface, this film is vastly different from the 1998 version. But this felt like a take that could stand on its own. This looked like a legit, “Lord of the Rings” style epic, not to mention a flick that would definitely be worth seeing in the theater!

Disney+ - D23

…Unnntil it hit Disney+. F*ck you and your $30 on top of a subscription. Not everyone is a family of four.

I skipped the Disney+ bulls*it, not only because I thought this was a greedy move, but because I didn’t have Disney+ to begin with. So I waited for physical media! Was it worth the wait?

Not really.

I will say though, going back to the whole “epic movie” thing, there are several shots in “Mulan” that look breathtaking. The movie occasionally manages to become a display of Asian beauty. I still have that first shot of the film in my head because it is that beautiful! It is going to be tough to tell because we still have some time left in this year, I would not be surprised if “Mulan” is a Best Cinematography contender. Although it is no “Tenet,” which coincidentally released the same day in the United States. Just about every shot in this film matches with the vibe they were going for. A serious epic, with a little spark of badass fun sprinkled in.

Now, if only that fun actually existed.

I did not want to go into this review comparing one movie to the other, but I have no choice here. One of the advantages of “Mulan” from 1998 is that aside from being a big adventure kind of like this new vision, is that the animation provided some genuinely fun touches. I knew that going into this new interpretation that it was going to be more serious, but that also meant, to my lack of expectations, that it would be more boring.

If there were one word I would have to give to describe “Mulan” as a film it would be “soulless.” This movie lacks any of the luster that I have seen from the 1998 effort, and it really shows in its characters. Mulan, while technically badass, is already shown to be who she is for the rest of the film from a young age. We see less of a struggle from her. Yes, she struggles to be an honor to her family, but she’s already proven to be a warrior. In fact, her father already acknowledges Mulan’s skills. Now, I know that part of why Mulan cannot fight in battle is because she is a girl, and girls cannot fight. However, looking back at the first few minutes of the film, this transition of the father feels a tad forced and out of character.

Stylistically, this take on “Mulan” sounds like something that can work, but when it comes to getting from point A to point B, the writing and motivations sometimes feel out of place.

If anything, this new take on “Mulan” reminds of “The Great Wall,” starring Matt Damon. Why does that movie exist? It takes a historical moment from Chinese culture, visually makes it interesting, but writes it as the most boring event in history.

There were times where I just wondered when exactly this film was going to end. This film just felt longer than it needed to be. You have these sort of fast-paced battle sequences but there are various segments of the film where everything drags on. While it does allow some further taking in of the amazing visuals, it almost feels like a distraction from what must truly be an uninteresting story. Except that this isn’t an uninteresting story. It’s been done before, and done better!

One last thing, this film starts off in a stale manner. Again, I’ll reference the scene where Mulan shows off her badass skills. To reiterate, she is a badass. But if you watch this movie, specifically the first few minutes, pay attention to every time the father says “no,” it doesn’t feel natural. It feels like the director just wanted to finish the scene and move on. I know film is a visual medium, and visually, “Mulan” looks pretty. But looks should not be the defining factor of all movies. Movies are not supermodels. They have to do more than please the eyes.

Disney’s MULAN Mulan (Yifei Liu) Photo: Stephen Tilley © 2018 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

In the end, “Mulan” is forgettable, dull, and dishonorable. Dishonor on Disney! Dishonor on your cash cow! And dishonor on 2020! While this is nowhere near as bad as say “Superintelligence,” this was not worth my time. I am curious as to what would have happened if I saw this in a theater. Would I have liked it better? Some might argue that it is the same movie either way, and they aren’t wrong. But they’re different experiences. Sometimes a bad movie can get a few points for the experiential factor. I did not like “Moana” but I will not deny that it is pleasing for my pupils. The animators did an excellent job with that film. I gave it a 5/10 after watching it at home, but who knows? Maybe I would have liked it better in a theatrical environment. Nevertheless, this vision of “Mulan” takes a classic tale and makes it boring. I didn’t even get into the controversies surrounding this film, that’s a subject I did not even have time for. But my head is already spinning enough that I cannot even touch upon that matter! Instead, I’m going to give “Mulan” a 4/10.

On another note, if you want a really good film that centers around Asian culture, which by the way, is animated. Go watch “Over the Moon!” It’s streaming right now on Netflix and I guarantee you, it is one of most magical experiences I had watching a film this year. In fact, while I was not of this mindset, I will say, if you are of the mindset that you want a film that is more reflective of what Disney is, what it stands for, and what they’ve done, this might be for you. Check that movie out, and skip the new “Mulan” adaptation! Your brain will thank you.

“Mulan” is now available physically on DVD, Blu-ray, and 4K Blu-ray. The film is also available on premium VOD services such as Prime Video, VUDU, and Xfinity On Demand. The film is still available on Disney+ with premier access at an extra charge of $29.99, but starting on Friday, December 4th, it will be available on Disney+ for free as long as you’re a subscriber.

Thanks for reading this review! I just want to remind everyone that December is just around the corner, and we are nearing the end of one of the most unprecedented years in history. In other years, December has occasionally been a month where I catch up on a lot of movies, and this month does not appear to be an exception. And if all goes according to plan, I will not be reviewing a lot of the movies I am “catching up” on. Although that depends on the release schedule panning out as expected and whether I am forced to go back into shutdown mode. Cases are going up in my area, but at the same time, we are also doing more testing. We’ll have to see what happens. I cannot promise anything this December, maybe except a review for “Wonder Woman 1984,” but other than that, my schedule is not to be disclosed. Only time will tell. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Also, check out my Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Mulan” 2020? What did you think about it? Or, what are your thoughts on the premier access deal on Disney+? Personally, I think it is ridiculous, and honestly, I could have gone to theater for a cheaper experience under some cases. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!