Antonio Banderas

Paddington in Peru (2024): This Bear’s Still Got It

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Paddington in Peru” is directed by Dougal Wilson and this is his feature film debut. The film stars Hugh Bonneville (The Monuments Men, Downton Abbey), Emily Mortimer (The Pink Panther, The Newsroom), Julie Waters (Mamma Mia!, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone), Jim Broadbent (Bridget Jones’s Diary, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince), Carla Tous (30 Coins, El hombre del saco), Olivia Colman (The Favourite, The Mitchells vs. the Machines), Antonio Banderas (Shrek 2, The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard), and Ben Whislaw (Skyfall, Fargo). This film is the third installment to the “Paddington” film franchise, where Ben Whislaw once again voices the title character. The film dives into Paddington’s adventurous journey to reunite with his Aunt Lucy, who now lives at the home for retired bears in Peru.

Two similar phrases I notice myself use sometimes as a film fan are “better than it should be” or “better than it has any right being.” Those two phrases very much apply to the current “Paddington” movies. Sure, these movies might appeal to kids, but just like I often say about Pixar titles, they are presented in such a way where they also have a lot for adults to enjoy. I watched both “Paddington” titles leading up to this one earlier this year. I have heard nothing but good things about both, and boy do they live up to the hype. Ben Whislaw adorably voices the lead role. The rest of the cast has perfect chemistry and all play their parts well. The atmosphere of these films do a great job at adding an enhanced otherworldliness to real life locations. The films somehow get you to buy that an animated bear lives with a large human family.

That said, I did maintain a notable nerve with “Paddington in Peru.” The director of the past couple movies, Paul King, is not in the chair this time around. Dougal Wilson is helming this project instead. As someone who is sometimes resistant to change, it was something lingering in my mind upon this film’s release. Thankfully, my nerves were rid of by the time the film got into gear because this film maintains the tone, atmosphere, and therapeutic nature of the previous “Paddington” installments. I did not know this was Wilson’s first film. But having seen it, I would love to see more from work from him. Heck, if he wanted to do a sequel to this movie, I would not be against it.

Is “Paddington in Peru” as good as the Paul King installments? No. It is a step down. But it is a step down in the same way that I see “Inside Out 2” as a step down from its predecessor. “Inside Out” is so masterfully made that whatever came after it had big shoes to fill. While “Inside Out 2” was good, it was nowhere near the level of the original. In fact, one similarity I will note between these sequels is that these latest films do not pack as much emotional weight as their predecessors. I will forever cherish the ending to “Paddington 2.” It has become a new favorite of mine because not only is it earned, but it almost broke me. There is nothing in this film as emotionally charging as that scene. This does not mean the film itself lacks emotion, it just does not have as much.

In addition to emotion, the film has laughs and adventure. This is a great watch for the entire family, but also maintains a balance between being overly mature and overly childish. Pardon the incoming bear pun, but when it comes to finding a balance for all audiences. The film is “just right.”

“Paddington in Peru” is a solid trilogy capper that understands its characters, its vibes, and successfully progresses the universe into a direction that is bigger than what came before. Bigger does not necessarily mean better in this case, but this film in terms of scope, sometimes feels more epic than the last two. At times, the film has an “Indiana Jones” feel. Not only because of the adventurous structure, but also likely because the film mainly takes place in the jungle. As a bonus, there is a scene involving a giant boulder.

One of the most crucial aspects many movies must balance is a sense of realism combined with suspension of disbelief. The “Paddington” movies do a great job at this, and this one is no exception. One example of this involves Olivia Colman’s character, the Reverend Mother, a happy go lucky, singing, guitar-playing nun who lives in the middle of the Peruvian Jungle. Unsurprisingly, Colman kills it here. She is so dynamic and hyperactive to the point where every scene of hers is a highlight. She makes you believe that someone as over the top like her can exist in a world much like ours.

Going back to what I said about change, turns out the director was not the only change behind the scenes. While Mary Brown (right) from the previous movies does return here, Sally Hawkins has been replaced with another actor, Emily Mortimer. While watching the film, I did not know Hawkins was replaced, but when I look at the two actors side by side I could barely see a difference. Mortimer maintains the welcoming, calm feel Hawkins previously brought to the role and gives a solid performance in her own right. I would love to watch all three of these movies back to back one day and see how these two performances compare as a whole. Although upon my first impression, I have no complaints regarding Emily Mortimer’s portrayal of Mary Brown.

That said, Hugh Bonneville does come back as Henry Brown (right center), and while I think his presence here is probably the weakest of the three movies, I still think Bonneville himself plays the role nicely. I am glad to see him come back. The film tends to dive into Henry’s risk aversion. I thought that was handled well and brought a decent load of conflict into the character’s path.

I see this franchise in the same way that I see some of my favorite sitcoms like “Seinfeld” or “The Big Bang Theory.” Story is arguably the most important aspect of any movie. But even if the story comes off as an afterthought, which for the record, it does not here, I would keep coming back to the “Paddington” movies just to hang out with the characters. Paddington himself is a bundle of joy. The supporting human characters are all likable. The antagonistic roles in this film are some of the best parts of the movie. I would watch a fourth “Paddington” film just to see where these characters go next. If you are under a lot of stress or you want to forget about the troubles of the world, the “Paddington” movies, including this one, are a solid option to pass the time.

The film also looks beautiful. This should not come as a major surprise considering a lot of it takes place in the Peruvian jungle, but the color palette, much like the last two films, has this slight homey gloss to it. Many of the river shots, the tree shots, and anything else related to the jungle environment are pleasing to the eyes. Erik Wilson, who shot the last two “Paddington” movies, comes back to shoot this one, and he follows up those two with another gorgeously framed spectacle.

Also, when the credits roll, do not get out of your chair. There is an extra scene. If you are familiar with these movies, it is a nice little addition that would be worth your time.

STUDIOCANAL – © STUDIOCANAL SAS

In the end, “Paddington in Peru” is the worst of the “Paddington” movies. But like the “Toy Story” franchise, even the weakest film, in my case the fourth one, is worth a watch. The film is a fine-looking, exquisitely presented, well-oiled machine of happiness. Feeling down? Watch this movie. I am not a doctor, but I watch a lot of movies. This is simply my professional advice. The film has the vibe of a glorified Saturday morning cartoon that also feels down to earth. I am looking forward to seeing what Dougal Wilson does next as a director. If “Paddington” continues, I will go to the cinema to support it. The franchise is 3 for 3 so far. I am going to give “Paddington in Peru” a 7/10.

“Paddington in Peru” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Love Hurts,” “The Brutalist,” and “I’m Still Here.” Stay tuned! If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Paddington in Peru?” What did you think about it? Or, which is your favorite of the “Paddington” movies? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Babygirl (2024): “That’s Magic.” – Nicole Kidman

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Babygirl” is written and directed by Halina Reijn (Bodies Bodies Bodies, Instinct) and stars Nicole Kidman (Being the Ricardos, The Northman), Harris Dickinson (Beach Rats, Trust), Sophie Wilde (Everything Now, Boy Swallows Universe), and Antonio Banderas (Shrek 2, The Mask of Zorro). This film is about a CEO who puts her career and family on the line when she has an affair with a much younger intern.

I saw “Babygirl” at an AMC Theatres location. If you have been to an AMC in the past few years, you may know that Nicole Kidman has served as a bit of a mascot for the brand. I am not completely in love with this, as her spots make up part of the reason why the previews at AMC are so neverendingly long. Honestly, I would be happy if they get rid of the AMC spots containing Kidman altogether. Some see these spots as an anthem, but I find them to be an annoyance. Amazingly, during my screening of “Babygirl,” they did not play one of the Nicole Kidman spots on top of the other 26 or so minutes of theatre promotion and trailers and such. I was a bit perplexed. As much as I hate those ads, I think seeing one of them play before this film in particular would have set the mood.

That said, it does not change the fact that I was rather excited for “Babygirl.” The trailers I have seen for the film are well produced, and allowed me to have high expectations for what was to come. I had a sense of what the movie was about before going in. I think if anything, the trailers did a great job at letting the audience know what the vibe was going to be. The marketing looked fun, compelling, and perhaps most importantly, sexy. After all, desire plays a major part in this film’s narrative, particularly when it comes to the state of our protagonist, Romy.

“Babygirl” is going to end up being one of the more memorable movie experiences I have had this year. It is not my favorite movie of the year, but it is an experiential event. And it all starts at the beginning of the film when we see Romy’s major problem. The film impressively highlights Romy’s lack of desires with her husband (Banderas) and her struggle to fulfill herself in her sex life. We see this part of the story flesh itself out over time and it unleashes some great acting from both Kidman and Banderas. The two perfectly portray a couple who happen to be on a bit of a decline.

“Babygirl” delivers the vibes I was hoping I would get out of “Challengers.” A lot of people love “Challengers,” but I was not one of them. “Babygirl” is easily the steamiest film I have seen this year. This is a film that I would recommend watching, but I would think twice before putting it on when your parents, or especially your grandparents are in the same room. I think this could make for a hot movie to set the mood on date night. This is especially noticeable with the fiery chemistry between Nicole Kidman’s Romy and Harris Dickinson’s Samuel. Their boss/intern connection eventually develops into something not as necessarily safe for work. Several scenes between these two do much more than satisfy. They also beautifully fit within the context of the story. They help us get to know each of the characters. They remind the audience of Romy’s internal struggle. Both actors are completely believable as said scenes play out. Harris Dickinson was not on my radar previously. Although he had a role in 2022’s “See How They Run,” which I gave a positive review. Dickinson is not just good in this movie, I cannot see anyone else playing his specific character. I left this film wanting to see more of his work. If there is another Harris Dickinson movie coming out, consider me interested.

Now judging by what has been said so far, you might think that I will remember this movie for its eroticism. While that is definitely this movie’s top selling point, the film is layered when it comes to fleshing out its protagonist. I must reiterate, Nicole Kidman is a knockout in this film. She gives a powerful performance that I hope gets plenty of buzz in the coming months. But I love how this film manages to make its main character a CEO. We see Romy in a position of power at work. At home, she is busy raising a family and pleasing her husband to the point where she forgets to take care of herself. Additionally, this film is set around the holidays, which is traditionally a hectic time of year. Romy is busy being this wise, helpful presence in other people’s lives that when all of a sudden Samuel enters her own life, she cannot help but submit to him. I mentioned this film is steamy, but sex is just a selling point. As a character piece, “Babygirl” sings.

Though in more ways than one, “Babygirl” is easy on the eyes. The film has a clean look to it. The color palette looks like something out of an insurance commercial, but I mean that as a compliment. The film is certainly picturesque with some vibrant locations and sets. The camerawork is also very good. The shot choices consistently deliver on immersion. Select shots go on for extended periods of time, allowing me to take in and digest the actions of said shots. There is also one shot in the film that starts in the air and slowly navigates down to several of the characters as they walk through a yard. It is a breathtaking series of images.

Again this movie is set around the holidays, and it does maintain a joyful look to it, even if a good portion of it is spent inside a corporate office. In a sense, kind of like the holidays, the movie has a vibe that meets somewhere in the middle of noticeable stress and occasional happiness. Every moment in this film maintains a brisk pace and there are scenes I practically leapt into the screen. There is one scene at a rave that is arguably worth the price of admission. Although fair warning, if you have trouble with flashing lights, I recommend maybe sitting this movie out. For all I know, “Babygirl” could become a Christmas tradition for some people. Maybe not with the family. But I think if you are either by yourself or with your partner, this could make for a great watch around the holidays. While the films have their notable differences, I think “Babygirl” could even serve as part of a double feature with “Eyes Wide Shut.” After all, both films are associated with sexuality, feature Nicole Kidman, and are set around Christmas! It’s perfect! Also, as the Movie Reviewing Moron, I do not endorse watching “Eyes Wide Shut” with the family either. That’s a no-no.

Courtesy of A24 – © A24

In the end, “Babygirl” is 2024’s sexiest movie. Nicole Kidman gives a standout performance as Romy. The rest of the cast is also quite solid. Harris Dickinson also notably plays his role to perfection. The film is a great balance between vibes and characterization. I do recommend this film under the right circumstances. Again, do not watch if your parents or grandparents are in the room. Same goes if you have kids. But if you are in the right place at the right time, “Babygirl” is a must see. I am going to give “Babygirl” an 8/10.

“Babygirl” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “A Complete Unknown,” the brand new movie starring Timothée Chalamet as Bob Dylan. If you want to see this review and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Babygirl?” What did you think about it? Or, what movie do you watch every year around the holidays? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (2023): Far from Spielberg, But Not Offensive

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” is directed by James Mangold (Ford v Ferrari, Logan) and stars Harrison Ford (Star Wars, Blade Runner), Phoebe Waller-Bridge (Fleabag, Solo: A Star Wars Story), Antonio Banderas (Puss in Boots, The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard), John Rhys-Davies (SpongeBob SquarePants, The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring), Toby Jones (Wayward Pines, The Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance), Boyd Holbrook (Narcos, The Sandman), Ethann Isidore (Sam, Mortel), and Mads Mikkelsen (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, Chaos Walking). This film is the latest installment of the “Indiana Jones” franchise. This time around, the title character is done with adventures, and he is just about done with teaching. But when the opportunity to retrieve a time-spanning artifact strikes, Jones, with the assistance of his goddaughter Helena (Waller-Bridge), goes on one last adventure to acquire the object.

My dad introduced me to “Raiders of the Lost Ark” when I was eight years old. Back when Blockbuster Video was a thing. My dad picked up a copy of “Raiders of the Lost Ark” from my local Blockbuster Video and presented to it me. He said it was like “Star Wars,” an integral part of my childhood that I have carried to my adulthood. Safe to say, when he said that, my first thought was that I should just go watch “Star Wars,” so I ended up never watching the film before it was returned. Though I did eventually watch it with him when I was 13 years old because I recorded it on the DVR. I thought it was a really solid movie. For years, it was the only one I fully watched. With “Dial of Destiny” now out, I went back and revisited the first film, and watched the sequels for the first time. Despite a major hole regarding Jones’s actions towards the climax that “The Big Bang Theory” ruined for me, “Raiders” still held up nicely. “Temple of Doom” had its moments, but was not without its camp and flaws. “Last Crusade” is a contender to be one of the greatest adventure films ever made. Among other things, the film had rambunctious action scenes, great dialogue, dynamite chemistry between Harrison Ford and Sean Connery. If this were the finale of the “Indiana Jones” franchise, I would have been fine with it. Especially considering the massive downgrade that came with “Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.” With that came iffy at best CGI, a lack of verisimilitude compared to the other installments, haphazard characters, possibly Cate Blanchett’s career worst performance, and an underwhelming climax. The film had its moments, but they were few and far between.

Basically, the “Indiana Jones” franchise is like a see saw. One moment it is up, the next it is down. Then it goes back up, and suddenly back down. If we are going by statistics, this should mean that “Dial of Destiny” should be a step up from the franchise worst “Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.” Thankfully, that is the case. But that is not saying much.

I had some excitement for “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny,” but I am not going to pretend I was bouncing off the walls about it. In addition to my long-standing indifference about “Indiana Jones” compared to other franchises, part of it might be because of how long this movie took to make since it was announced. They kept talking about the movie with little action to back it up. Also, this time around, Steven Spielberg is not at the helm. This time, the director’s chair has been given to James Mangold, whose recent “Ford v Ferrari” stands as one of the greatest car-related films of all time. When it comes to Mangold’s direction, it is not bad. The film looks good from a production standpoint. Many of the performances fit the characters. When it comes to basics, nothing stands out as a revolting negative.

That said, while the film does look good to a degree, I think it is still the worst-looking film of the “Indiana Jones” movies. Part of it has to do with how the movie is shot, specifically on digital, whereas all the previous installments were shot on film. I understand times change and digital is easier to handle. But when it comes to the look of “Indiana Jones,” it always had this dirty aesthetic to it. While it is here in parts, it is a far cry from its predecessors. With film you typically get more detail and there is a less artificial vibe to the image than digital. If I were behind the film, that is a change I would have made. As much as I knock “Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” for its bad effects, everything from the sets to the framing to the grading looks a tad better. Just a little.

But if I have to point out one set piece I really liked, a lot of the moments in New York City are eye candy. I have always thought of “Indiana Jones” as a larger than life franchise, where everything has this huge scale to it. Thankfully, the Big Apple lives up to its name. There is a chase through the city during a parade that was worth watching on the big screen.

Though, per usual, Harrison Ford puts in a good performance as the title character. While I will always think of Harrison Ford as Han Solo before anyone else, I can probably gather that Indiana Jones may have been his favorite character to play all these years later. In recent years, Ford has come back to revisit a series of characters he played throughout his career. The recently mentioned Han Solo, Rick Deckard, and now Indiana Jones for the second time this century. Of these kinds of roles, I still think Ford’s outing as Rick Deckard in “Blade Runner 2049” unleashed his best chops, but it is undeniable that this outing as Indy gave him a lot more to do, and he does it all nicely. I think Ford carries the film with excellence.

Speaking of Harrison Ford, the opening scene features Indiana Jones in his prime, and in doing so, this required artists to de-age him. I have seen a mix of face alterations and instances of de-aging on film to a mix of results. Thankfully, I can say much of the de-aging in this film is more on the positive end. There is one moment where Ford tilts at a 90 degree angle that took me out of the scene, but it is so minor that it fails to ruin the big picture.

Phoebe Waller-Bridge also appears in this film, and while her performance may be great, her character is not. When I watch movies, I do not ask characters to be perfect individuals, but I want a reason to root for them. In Waller-Bridge’s case, she plays Helena, Indy’s goddaughter. The best way I can describe this character is money-hungry. Do not get me wrong, money talks. But in the case of Helena, it is practically all she thinks about and all she seeks. She is nearly the most one-dimensional character of the film by the end of it. I will admit, there is one action towards the end she did that I could get behind, but for the most part, I was not fond of her. Her chemistry with Indy is okay at best and some scenes between them are better than others.

But if I have to be real, a lot of the film’s cast is surprisingly unmemorable. When I look back on “Dial of Destiny,” Helena and Indy are the only two characters that stand out. Maybe Mads Mikkelsen, who plays Jürgen Voller, an okay antagonist, adds something to the table, but other than these three, I cannot say I outright loved any of the other characters in this film. While I did not like the characters in “Kingdom of the Crystal Skull,” I will admit they at least stood out. Maybe not in the best light, but still.

I do not want to spoil the climax for this movie, but all I will say about it for those who have not seen it, there is a scene that goes on for an extended time that introduces a never before seen, but totally fitting concept to the “Indiana Jones” franchise. As much as it fits, I wish it could have been explored more. So much to the point that I would have been happy had they made a whole movie about what was happening in the climax, instead of the one we got. I am not going to pretend what happens in the climax is the best thing the franchise has ever done. But if they turned that into a 2 hour movie with the title character, or heck, even a Disney+ or Paramount+ series, I think it has the potential to be really good. It would catch a lot of eyeballs. The climax had some good ideas, but it did not do enough to make the rest of the movie worth my time. This is the longest “Indiana Jones” installment yet, and I occasionally felt that runtime.

In the end, “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” is not the worst film in the series, but also far from the best. This film tends to stick to the franchise’s admirable roots to some degree, but it is not enough to recapture the success of films like “Raiders of the Lost Ark.” Although on the topic of roots, it is not hard to appreciate any film placed in front of you when the music is scored by John Williams. If you are a fan of the “Indiana Jones” franchise, I think there is some precedent to checking out this film. I like the franchise, though it is, as discussed, something I never grew up with. Some of you reading this, should you check out this film, may have a greater attachment to it than I did. It is by no means the worst tentpole of the year. It has a long way to go to compete with the atrociousness of “Fast X.” I just think there are better movies you can watch right now. I am going to give “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” a 5/10.

“Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the brand new comedy “Joy Ride.” Also stay tuned for my reviews for “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One,” “Oppenheimer,” and “Haunted Mansion.” I also have plans to watch the brand new anime “The First Slam Dunk” this Saturday, so that will be added to the list as well. Though I imagine some of you are wondering, when will I review “Barbie?” The world needs to know. Well, world, I should have you know that I have not watched it yet, but I have tickets for Sunday. If everything proceeds accordingly, I will be watching the all new blockbuster this weekend, so I will have a review for that coming soon. If you want to see more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Indiana Jones” film? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Puss in Boots: The Last Wish (2022): Animated Purr-fection

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” is directed by Joel Crawford and co-directed by Januel Mercado. This film stars Antonio Banderas (The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard, Uncharted), Salma Hayek (Grown Ups, Eternals), Harvey Guillén (What We Do in the Shadows, The Magicians), Florence Pugh (Black Widow, Don’t Worry Darling), Olivia Colman (The Mitchells vs. the Machines, Empire of Light), Ray Winstone (Point Break, Beowulf), Samson Kayo (Our Flag Means Death, Famalam), John Mulaney (Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, Chip ‘n Dale: Rescue Rangers), Wagner Moura (Brazil, Narcos), Da’Vine Joy Randolph (Selfie, People of Earth), and Anthony Mendez (Jane the Virgin, Foodtastic). In this sequel to the 2011 spinoff film “Puss in Boots,” the title character is down to his ninth and last life. Carrying his hopes to recover his past lives, Puss sets out on a journey to find a Wishing Star.

2011’s “Puss in Boots” is a surprisingly good movie. I think it is a bit rushed, but it has its pros. The characters are likable. The voice performances are solid. The music is catchy as well. I did not think it was as memorable as say “Shrek” and “Shrek 2,” the latter of which introduced Puss to the iconic DreamWorks franchise. Nevertheless, the movie was solid despite being a quick ride. “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” is a follow-up part of me never thought we would get. The spinoff seemed like a one-off. But, someone, somewhere wanted to make this sequel. After all, in an age where “Star Wars” is still relevant, it is evident that nostalgia sells. The last major “Shrek”-related project to release in theaters was in fact the 2011 “Puss in Boots” movie. As to whether this would be a great sequel or a cheap nostalgia bomb was a mystery. The trailers looked good, but so did the trailers to “Avatar: The Way of Water,” which did not mean much when I saw the movie.

Ladies and gentlemen, if there is any indication that you should see this movie, here are some bold statements. First off, “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” is better than the original. Not bold enough? Okay, let me take it a step further. Not only is it better than its 11-year-old predecessor, I would say it is superior to all of the “Shrek” installments. This includes the original, and my personal favorite, “Shrek 2.” Is this a case of recency bias? Possibly. It has been awhile since I have seen the “Shrek” films. But it does not change the fact that I was smiling the entire time this movie was playing. And when I was not smiling, I was either laughing or dropping my jaw.

The first ten minutes of this movie is some of the most bonkers, ridiculous, unhinged stuff I have witnessed on a screen this year. There is a moment where Puss is taking down a beast and goes towards it by catapulting himself into the air via a stringed instrument. How cool is that?! Meanwhile he has time to sing a song and brag about himself. This is not only a fitting introduction to this movie and the character, it is some of the most fun I had at the movies this year. I have not felt this giddy at the start of an animation since maybe “The LEGO Batman Movie.”

“Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” blends 2D and 3D animation elements to make a movie that is wonderfully stylized and perfectly realized. Few movies released in 2022 look as visually striking as this one. At times, this movie has the tone of previous material featuring the Puss character, including the “Shrek” installments, while also inserting a style that reminded me of “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.” Select scenes felt like a graphic novel coming to life. To say I was struck with awe might be an understatement. And when I say awe, I am not just talking about big eyes. Although those do, coincidentally, make an appearance in the movie.

Puss in Boots is a role Antonio Banderas is practically born to play. His voice is absolutely perfect as the iconic feline and I was somewhat worried after all these years it might not be the same. Nope, he still has the goods! There is a certain hyperactivity Banderas commits to with the role that I think few actors would be able to encapsulate. There is a saying that actors are replaceable, and I would agree with this philosophy. However, I think if somebody else were to play the Puss in Boots role in the future, they have massive shoes, or boots in this case, to fill.

The film has multiple threats including Goldi and the Three Bears, Jack Horner, and a wolf bounty hunter. Having seen a couple “Spider-Man” films butcher themselves by poorly utilizing multiple threats at once, it might as well be easy to worry that this movie could lose control. Thankfully, it does not. Each antagonist has a purpose and place in the story. In addition to all of these antagonists opposing themselves to Puss and his crew, some want to use the Wishing Star to fulfill their own desires. This adds threats not only to Puss’s life, but his past lives as well. Without giving much away, one of these mentioned antagonists might be the creepiest DreamWorks animation villain ever put to screen. Both in terms of looks and motivation. If I were a young child watching this movie, I would quiver upon first sight of this fiend.

“Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” is a quickly paced, action-packed thrill ride of a film that while I will say is okay for children to watch, impressed me because of its tendency to go full throttle with certain action elements. This movie even has blood in it, which I do not often see in PG films. The action sequences in “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” are my favorite DreamWorks action scenes since “Kung Fu Panda 3.” There is little shortage of color, wacky effects, and pizazz. Again, it was like watching a graphic novel come to life. It almost felt like a flashy video game. I would go see this movie a second time for the action alone. “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” has action that reminds me of “Everything Everywhere All at Once,” which this movie nearly rivals in terms of flashiness. Another movie the action reminds me of is “Bullet Train,” which has a series of creative sequences and fights with impressive choreography. Simply put, “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” contains my favorite action sequences from any movie released this year.

If I had any flaws with “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish,” they would be hard to come by. Although if I had to come up with one it would be that while the humor is solid for the most part, there are one or two jokes that fall flat, including one that was probably just inserted to get a laugh out of the younger audiences. This may be a personal thing, but for those who remember the 2011 “Puss in Boots,” there is an oohing cat that is constantly used as a gag during the film. I did not find it funny the first time, nor did I find it funny the third or fourth time. But for some reason the cat finds his way back to this sequel. Thankfully it was only in one scene, but still.

In the end, “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” is a great spinoff, a stellar sequel, and a smile-inducing time at the movies. This movie was so good that I am surprised to say that I want a third installment. This movie is up there with “Turning Red” and “Marcel the Shell with Shoes On” as one of the best animations of 2022. Packed with ridiculously enthralling action sequences, unbelievably eye-popping animation, and a shockingly emotional ending, this film is perfect for all audiences. Take it from someone who is not much of a cat person. Or even a pet person in general. I loved “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” and I am going to give it a 9/10.

“Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” releases in theaters everywhere Wednesday, December 21st. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, I have more coming soon! The 2022 reviews are likely coming to an end, but I do plan to see another movie this week. My next review is likely going to either be for “Babylon” or “The Whale.” I have not decided yet. That said, if you want to see more animated movie reviews, check out my thoughts on “Strange World,” “DC League of Super-Pets,” and “Luck!” If you want to see more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish?” What did you think about it? Or, now that we have four “Shrek” movies and a couple of “Puss in Boots” spinoff titles, which movie in the “Shrek” universe would you say is the best one? Honestly, “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” might take the cake. Let me know your picks down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Uncharted (2022): The Fast and the Furious with Treasure Hunting

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Uncharted” is directed by Ruben Fleischer (Venom, Zombieland) and stars Tom Holland (Spider-Man: No Way Home, Chaos Walking), Mark Wahlberg (Transformers: Age of Extinction, Deepwater Horizon), Antonio Banderas (Shrek 2, Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard), Sophia Ali (Grey’s Anatomy, The Wilds), and Tati Gabrielle (The Owl House, The 100). This film is based on the video game franchise of the same name and is about Nathan Drake who sets out on an adventure alongside Victor “Sully” Sullivan to find a fortune that has been lost for five centuries.

I have never played the “Uncharted” games. I know of them. I’ve seen particular images and cutscenes from them. I’ve just never had the time to sit down to play them. And it kind of ticks me off saying that because while I never had a PS3, when it comes to my consoles, I managed to acquire a PS4 several years ago as a Christmas gift, and I even just recently got a PS5. So despite my commitment to Sony over the years, I haven’t popped in “Uncharted” yet. But I also will note that I’m a busy man, I do not have time for video games. It’s the same thing with books. It’s not that I don’t like video games, but I sort of see video games the same way as television shows. If you want me to sit down and play one, there needs to be a real commitment factor. Again, I am amazingly committed to film, making other mediums feel less important. Since I mentioned books, I will have to make my usual apology to them. Movies are more fun! Sorry, books!

But with movie theaters trying to prove themselves as a reasonable escape within the confines of the pandemic era, it only seems appropriate that Sony would release a movie like this at this time. The little that I have seen of the “Uncharted” games did feel rather cinematic. And the very first scene of the film, which has Tom Holland flying in the air, did remind me of the little that I did see in the games. It had this extreme vibe that set the tone for everything going forward. Kind of like a video game. So the movie already kicked off to a positive start.

But this positive start doesn’t last long because when it comes to introducing the main characters, the setup feels rather clunky, and borderline unreal. Kind of like a video game.

If any of you remember the movie “Hardcore Henry,” I praised the movie for having a feel that I could probably experience only in a few cases. Video games being one of them. After all, it is set in the first person point of view. And when I was younger, I always wanted to adapt a particular video game into a film (I won’t say which one in case it ever ACTUALLY DOES HAPPEN). But looking back, I had all these ideas for camera techniques that would be reminiscent of the games, and I wonder if that’s now all a gimmick. Looking at “Uncharted,” I admire its efforts to bring a massively immersive, and I do mean immersive, experience. There are scenes in this film that are best experienced on the biggest screen you can find, and for that alone, you should shell out a few bucks to see it in the theater if interested, but maybe not above matinee price, or a subscription like A-List, which is what I previously used.

Sticking to that, much like a video game vibe, the climax is probably one of the most immersive and inviting I have seen in recent film. I’ve seen a number of climaxes recently that fit the material in which it tries to attach itself, but this is one that not only puts its characters in the most dangerous of situations, but also embraces what I hoped this movie would go for. A bit of far-fetchedness, but also enough to ensure your brain is still attached. But at the same time, there is also some moments where they jump the shark and my brain gets a bit cracked. You may have seen the part in the trailers where Tom Holland gets hit by a red car, it’s a bit over the top.

I feel like this film’s immersion factor is an enormous reason as to why it sometimes works. Because let’s be real, I am not going to claim that Nathan Drake is one of my favorite film characters. I like the guy playing him. I think Tom Holland has talent. But when translated to the final product, the film struggles to get me attached to its characters as much as it puts into its respective environments.

If I had to point out a favorite scene in the film, it’s actually one that appears in the trailers. Basically, Nathan Drake is in the middle of a mission, and out comes this heavier man, portrayed by Steven Waddington, who scares Drake s*itless. Then we get… This exchange. Well, maybe this exchange. Pardon me, I’m just a dumb American.

THE SCOTSMAN: “You shouldn’t have come out to play with the big boys wee in because you’re about to get a proper Scottish welcome.”

NATHAN: “What?”

I lost it when first hearing this. Again, I’m just a dumb American, but as a dumb American, I acknowledge that the English language is understood in a variety of ways. From the perspective of my tiny little American brain, the Scottish accent is first off, hard to understand, and second, occasionally funny. So, I’ll give credit to the writers for nailing that aspect and Waddington for providing a seemingly over the top accent that had me laughing. I wanted to see more of him. Although I do want to know what Scottish people think of this. Is this humorous? Accurate? Offensive, maybe? I want to know.

Although going back to what I said earlier, there is one scene that the more I think about it, kind of irritates me. Because I understand that movies and their studios are supposed to pay the bills. But what irritates me is that this movie ends up using a forced, randomly placed instance of product placement within its main story. I was engaged during said scene, but I do not think this is the time to sell me “Papa John’s.” It does not go as extreme as the “Power Rangers” movie we got a few years ago with Krispy Kreme (although I like the money shot it brought), but the more I think about it, the more it distracts me.

“Uncharted” feels like “Raiders of the Lost Ark.”

…At times.

“Uncharted” is a fun adventure with characters that have their own quirks. But relatively speaking, this ain’t no “Raiders.” Tom Holland and Mark Wahlberg do their best with the material given to them, but their chemistry feels very off and on. There are a couple scenes where I can tell that these two have probably developed a friendship per se. But there are also other scenes where I don’t sense much realism between them.

In the end, “Uncharted” is a film that is good enough to please me for one or two viewings, but maybe not more. I heard that Tom Holland is a fan of the video games, therefore I am happy to know that he is playing a character that he possibly admires. But I can see why this film suffered as many delays as it did. It’s a film that feels like was made for the 21st century 3D era, in fact ideas for it were developed during that time, but it ends up coming out in 2022. I feel like Sony just wanted this movie to get out sooner than later because it’s practically been in development since 2008. Directors like David O. Russell (Three Kings, American Hustle), Neil Burger (The Illusionist, Divergent), Seth Gordon (Horrible Bosses, Baywatch), Shawn Levy (Night at the Museum, Free Guy), and Dan Trachtenberg (Portal: No Escape, The Boys) were originally attached to helm the picture. Unfortunately these did not last, so we ended up with “Zombieland” director Ruben Fleischer. I also think the decision to get Tom Holland to play Nathan Drake was solid. As mentioned, he’s played the games, so he’s familiar with the material. But he also is on the younger side, so unlike say Nathan Fillion, who ended up appearing in an “Uncharted” fan film and is about twice the age of Tom Holland, Sony made a decision they thought was good for business. If “Uncharted” is successful, Tom Holland is young enough to keep playing the role should there be sequels. And would I want a sequel to “Uncharted?” Sure. I could watch another film in this franchise. But I would recommend maybe getting a different writing team. I’m going to give “Uncharted” a bare maximum 5/10, and I feel like that’s generous. I was genuinely entertained, but I also recognize that this movie was very clunky and could have done more, and that’s why I’m giving it the score it gets.

“Uncharted” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! Next Sunday, March 13th, I am going to be sharing an all new first look at the upcoming 4th Annual Jackoffs! I am going to be announcing the nominations, and I’ll be dropping a trailer as to what you can expect for this grand, majestic awards ceremony! The ceremony itself is happening on March 27th, therefore it will be held the same day as the Oscars! So that’s another three hours of your life taken away! But I will still have content in between the announcement and ceremony such as upcoming movie reviews! Speaking of which, my next review is going to be for Netflix’s new movie, “The Adam Project,” which coincidentally, is directed by one of the folks I mentioned who was once attached to “Uncharted,” Shawn Levy! I already saw the film through a virtual screening, and it arrives on Netflix soon. I will have my full-fledged thoughts as soon as possible. If you want to see this and more on Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Uncharted?” What did you think about it? Or, have you played any of the “Uncharted” games? Tell me your thoughts on those! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard (2021): I Want a Bodyguard Divorce

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard” is directed by Patrick Hughes, who also directed this film’s predecessor, “The Hitman’s Bodyguard.” This film once again stars Ryan Reynolds (Deadpool, Green Lantern), Samuel L. Jackson (The Avengers, Pulp Fiction), Salma Hayek (Grown Ups, Sausage Party), and alongside them are actors including Frank Grillo (Captain America: The Winter Soldier, The Purge: Anarchy), Richard E. Grant (Logan, Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker), Antonio Banderas (Shrek 2, The Laundromat), and Morgan Freeman (The Shawshank Redemption, The Dark Knight). This film follows Michael Bryce (Ryan Reynolds), the bodyguard who helped protect Darius Kincaid (Samuel L. Jackson) as he is told to take a break from bodyguarding. That break will have to wait however because Bryce and Kincaid are on another mission together where this time they have save Sonia (Salma Hayek), Darius’s wife, from danger.

I liked “The Hitman’s Bodyguard” when I first saw it. I missed it in the theaters, but I did get it on 4K Blu-ray for Christmas in 2017 and I did watch it a day or two afterwards. “The Hitman’s Bodyguard” is nothing too special, it’s really kind of disposable, but if you want a fun action flick that can entertain you for a couple of hours, you cannot go wrong. I also really like the film’s use of the song “Black Betty.” I think that was a really fun scene. The film also had an extended shot that kind of reminded me of “Kingsman: The Secret Service” a little bit. Remember the scene from “Kingsman: The Secret Service” where Colin Firth basically annihilates an entire crowd of hate supporters in a church? Between story, music, and action, that scene was outright perfection. Now I am not saying the “one-shot” take in “The Hitman’s Bodyguard” is as good as the one in “Kingsman: The Secret Service,” but it is still fun. But the biggest standout from “The Hitman’s Bodyguard” is the chemistry between Ryan Reynolds and Samuel L. Jackson. Their characters clearly hate each other, but it never feels off-putting. It adds to the fun of the movie. It was a fun little action film that apparently did well enough at the box office. And of course as pointed out with “Star Wars,” “Fast & Furious,” “The Simpsons,” and “The Bachelor,” you gotta make more of it! No matter how good it is! This is where “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard” comes in.

When I think of the “big” studios that stand out the most today, I usually think of Disney (Star Wars, Marvel), Warner Bros. (DC, Harry Potter), and Universal (Despicable Me, Jurassic Park). These studios have staying power and tons of properties they continue to utilize until the end of time. Lionsgate almost had that chance with “Knives Out,” but they sold it to Netflix. They used to be a force in the market with “The Hunger Games” and since the studio was affiliated with Summit, they also did “Divergent.” So they were big for awhile in the young adult adaptation game. They had “Now You See Me,” which paused. “Gods of Egypt” never did too well. “Twilight” is over. Just wait until they remake that eventually. I feel like the one big franchise that Lionsgate has that is the perfect mix of financial success, critical acclaim, and staying power, is “John Wick.” In fact they are coming out with a fourth movie pretty soon. I feel like “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard,” even though it is directed by Patrick Hughes once again, is Lionsgate making it known that they want this to be a serious franchise. And honestly, if it does become as big as say “Fast & Furious,” they need to do much better. This film was NOT good.

The sad thing is, this film starts off fine. It’s a little absurd, but it’s fine. “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard” starts off with of all things, an awards show for bodyguarding. The film continues as Michael Bryce goes to therapy as he is told to stop bodyguarding, and I’ll admit the scene ends with a couple lines that did get a laugh out of me. But as soon as the real action starts, where we see Ryan Reynolds and Salma Hayek in the middle of a fast-paced bike chase, the movie switches its goofiness into high gear. One of the first lines from Samuel L. Jackson’s character and how it is handled is something that I think could be taken in a couple manners. It’s either so goofy that it’s funny. Or, it is incredibly idiotic that the line was executed the way it was.

Apparently, Michael and Darius still hate each other, …I guess? So apparently they have not developed at all since the last movie. Just a reminder, Michael took a bullet for Darius in the last movie. And now apparently they still don’t like each other or barely show respect for each other. I don’t know! It feels forced! It feels like they’re just trying to copy the success of the first movie while lazily inserting something new. In fact there is a new subplot where apparently Darius and his wife, Sonia are trying to have a kid. Let’s just say that it barely adds anything to the movie until say the second half. There’s a point that feels as if Michael says something negative regarding this new reality almost forcibly just to keep said plot going along. It just feels so out of the blue. There are a lot of things that feel offish or out of the blue in this movie. I barely cared about the nearly one-dimensional characters who almost face no noticeable changes by the end. I barely cared about Antonio Banderas on the antagonistic side. I barely cared about anything! The action is not even as good as the original. The bike chase scene was good, there was one moment where Reynolds wielded a pool cue that was pretty funny, but that’s about it. The action overall just did not have the same flair that the original movie gave. This is not to say “The Hitman’s Bodyguard” was a masterpiece, but compared to the sequel, it was a good time.

This movie honestly feels like it is on ADHD. One moment it is here, one moment it is there, the next moment it is everywhere! I am not fully against unpredictable movies that go in weird directions, that is what makes stories interesting, the fact that you don’t know where they’re going. This movie was fairly predictable, but the moments that occurred almost every other minute regardless of predictability just came flying in my face and it is was just too much to take in, especially the bad moments. At times, this movie feels like it could work better as an action-based Fox Animation Domination cartoon. It is so hyperactive and non-stop that it barely gives me a needed moment to breathe, even in parts that are supposedly meant to be slower.

I also really hate the ending, because they supposedly “resolve” an extended plot line in the film in the most off-putting way possible. It’s honestly just weird to think about. I almost want to say what exactly happens in this moment, but I can’t because it is literally the last moment of the movie and if I spoiled it, I might be a jerk. Unfortunately, “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard” was a jerk to me in the process. You how I mentioned this movie can be predictable? Well, this was an out of left field, outlandish, unpredictable moment, but it is so unpredictable and batcrap crazy that thinking about it makes me want to throw up.

I’ll also add a positive before we go any further. The actors do a fine job with their performances. They are fine, but the sad thing is that the writing is just plain bad. It feels like they just whipped up this sequel in an hour! Apparently, this film was written by three people, including the sole writer of the original film, Tom O’Connor. I was not behind the scenes and I do not know any of these people personally, but if they do a third movie, I wonder if they should just let Tom O’Connor do the work himself because he could arguably be the butter that is woven so perfectly onto the bread that is the “Hitman’s Bodyguard” franchise. But seriously, Ryan Reynolds and Samuel L. Jackson are good actors, they play their parts well here. Although I will give extra praise to Salma Hayek, because judging by the title, she has a greater presence in this movie compared to the original, and she solidifies her presence from start to finish. I’ll also add, she seems to swear as much as, if not more than Samuel L. Jackson which says a lot as he is supposedly the guy who “single-handly ruined the word motherf*cker.”

In the end, “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard” almost feels like it purely exists to make money. Now, just about every movie ever made exists for that reason, but I think that some do a better job at hiding that reason than others. This honestly just feels like a cash grab that exists to capitalize on something that quite honestly, even though the original movie was good, I did not think would become a franchise. Could “The Hitman’s Bodyguard” become say the next “Fast & Furious” or something close to it? Maybe. “Fast & Furious” had some off days too. I think “The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift” is one of my least favorite movies to this day. That franchise is still kickin’! “F9” literally comes out this week! I honestly at this point do not want to see a third movie in this franchise. Maybe I’ll warm up to it over time, but this kind of left a toxic taste in my mouth that is hard to eliminate. You know that phrase “sequels are not as good as the original”? Well, “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard” is exhibit A. I’m going to give “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard” a 3/10.

This movie kind of reminded me of “Venom” because this was a movie that the audience I was with seemed to be fairly invested in for the most part, I felt like a good number of the people in the room enjoyed the movie more than me. I just couldn’t connect with them. More power to them, but for me, I think “The Hitman’s Bodyguard” feels better at this point as a one-off. This sequel should not have happened. I like the actors, I wish them well in their future roles, but this was a bad day at the office.

“The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! Later this week I will be sharing a brand new review for the Pixar animated movie “Luca.” Also, tomorrow I will be going to see “F9: The Fast Saga,” so look forward to my review for that as well. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account, and be sure to like the Facebook page so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard?” What did you think about it? Or, what movie is better? Do you prefer “The Hitman’s Bodyguard?” Or do you prefer “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Dolittle (2020): Why, Downey? Why?

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmdnkoda5zgqtodczos00otqxlthhmtitmjk0zmnhmdm0yjnmxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymdm2ndm2mq4040._v1_sy1000_sx675_al_

“Dolittle” is directed by Stephen Gaghan (Gold, Syriana) and stars Robert Downey Jr. (Iron Man, Chaplin), Antonio Banderas (Interview with the Vampire, Shrek 2), Michael Sheen (Frost/Nixon, Masters of Sex), Emma Thompson (Saving Mr. Banks, Late Night), Rami Malek (Bohemian Rhapsody, Night at the Museum), John Cena (Trainwreck, Playing with Fire), Kumail Nanjiani (Men in Black: International, Silicon Valley), Octavia Spencer (Gifted, Hidden Figures), Tom Holland (Spies in Disguise, Captain America: Civil War), Craig Robinson (Last Comic Standing, Knocked Up), Ralph Fiennes (The LEGO Batman Movie, Skyfall), Selena Gomez (Monte Carlo, Wizards of Waverly Place), and Marion Cotillard (Allied, Inception).

This film is the latest reboot to the “Doctor Dolittle” intellectual property. This time around, Robert Downey Jr. plays the man who can talk to animals and it follows him in a story where a Queen is dying and the only way to save her is to go on a journey to find a healing tree. On said journey, he is joined by his fellow animal friends and a new human apprentice (Harry Collett).

I have no memory of watching any previous material from the “Doctor Dolittle” franchise from beginning to end, so this was sort of my introduction to this world on film. Granted, I knew about about the character, I knew the whole thing about how the character can talk to animals and said animals do not spend too little time making a presence for themselves. I had the basics down, but for this movie, I was getting a new experience, one I never really had before.

But just because my experience was new, does not mean it was enjoyable. If “Cats” made me never want to ever interact with a feline ever again, then “Dolittle” has officially destroyed any chance I previously had of wanting to so much as think about any animal in existence. Thankfully, unlike “Cats,” which I praised for the CGI *at times*, the effects in “Dolittle” are a lot less unsettling, and a bit more satisfying to look at. But if Robert Downey Jr. is going to continue doing films like this after throwing in the towel with the MCU, movie audiences everywhere are in for a world of pain.

Granted, I will say, one of the interesting things about this film is that Robert Downey Jr.’s wife, Susan Downey, is a producer on the film. Plus, the two have kids, and it was just revealed on a clip of “Today” that this was the first premiere that they were taken to. After all, unlike most of the movies that Downey Jr. has done recently, which have been PG-13, “Dolittle” is PG. If “Dolittle” was a chance for two related people to work together, it may sound sweet, but quality should ALWAYS come first. This is why I get worried whenever Melissa McCarthy and her husband, Ben Falcone, are doing a project together, because statistically speaking, they are not usually that well-received. Granted, maybe I am getting a little bit more apprehensive than I really should because the Downey team are also working on a film together to be directed by Richard Linklater, who also directed “Boyhood,” which even though I have not seen the film itself, I know enough about it to realize how innovative and groundbreaking of a film it really is.

As for Robert Downey Jr.’s performance, I could tell that maybe there was some effort put into it, but holy mackerel, that accent sounds like crap! It almost sounds as if Downey was doing a really bad impression of Bilbo Baggins from “The Hobbit!” It’s overemphasizing in how bold it is supposed to come off and unfortunately, it makes me think Robert Downey Jr. at one point must have gotten acting lessons from a ship-sailing pirate.

Speaking of Robert Downey Jr., there is a point in this movie where he says a line where he basically invaded my mind and snatched an idea out of it. Now I know this is a kids movie, I know it is a family movie, some people will tend to say that these types of movies can get away with a few things here and there, cause ya know, kids just want to be entertained. I think that is a cop out of an excuse for a least a good portion of how many times such a thought is uttered. But what I find hilarious about this movie’s script is that there is a point where a bunch of characters are in a room together and Dolittle is basically providing a blueprint of his plan to save the Queen, and there is a point where he has to point out how preposterous his plan sounds.

Shut up, movie. Shut up.

The CGI in this film is not half bad, but that’s something I’d come to expect at this point, I’m willing to bet that maybe if this came out in the past decade or maybe sometime prior to say 2016’s “The Jungle Book,” this could be like another “Avatar.” Granted, if it came out in 2009, which is when “Avatar” came out, it probably would be just another movie, but this feels like a movie that would have probably worked as an experiential technological achievement from the 2000s, but since it came out in 2020, it needed something more.

I do not want to provide too many spoilers for this film, for one thing it just came out, and I imagine there are some people, not everybody, but some, who may have sort of a nostalgic attachment to the “Doctor Dolittle” IP. Out of respect for those people, this review is as spoiler-free as I could possibly make it. With that being said, the climax of this movie delivers one of the most infuriatingly off-putting gags ever put in a kids movie. There is a scene that I imagine young kids will probably get a kick out of, but I thought was the dumbest thing on the face of the earth. It involves farting. That is all I will say. Oh, and speaking of which, the humor in this film is as stale as whatever the latest pop song that always plays radio happens to be! Not all the jokes stood out, but when a joke did, it made me hate my life and everything in it. I am a bit young to have kids, but if I ever did have kids, this movie would probably be banned from movie night. If a find a DVD copy of this thing in the house, chances are I’m going to throw it through the window and break the glass. Any movie that has a scene containing a barely understandable human being playing chess with a gorilla who shows his ass as a way of insulting his opponent is officially on my eradication list.

Ironically, there is a song at the end of the film by Sia. I do not have all that much to say about the song itself, but apparently, in this attempt to recreate “Doctor Dolittle,” the song that plays is called “Original.” This world is becoming increasingly dumber, and there needs to be a cure for this combined dumbassery.

In the end, “Dolittle” just… did little to leave me happy. Will kids like it? Probably if they’re under maybe 10 years old. But I don’t think that this will be a film that families will go to and endlessly remember and quote for the rest of their lives. If anything, this is going to be a film that kids will watch, enjoy, and either move onto the next thing or continue watching until they grow out of it. “Dolittle” as a whole is just boring, formulaic, and none of the iconic names in the cast can save this mess! Robert Downey Jr. in this movie may not be a people person, but now after coming out of “Dolittle,” I have reevaluate my respect for the art of film and ask myself whether or not I am a movie person at this point. I am going to give “Dolittle” a 2/10. Now while I don’t see Universal Pictures dying a horrible death these next few months or anything, this is not the best of times for them. They just did “Cats,” which was awful, and apparently this is one of their next big releases! As one who enjoys Universal’s movies, I wish them luck during this dire time.

Thanks for reading this review! I just want everyone to know that my next review is going to be for Guy Ritchie’s “The Gentlemen,” which I just saw at an advance screening aaaaaaannnnnd… There’s too much to talk about. I’ll save my thoughts for the review. That’s all I’ll say. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! If you want to leave a like or comment, make sure you have the proper account credentials, and speaking of liking, why not hop over to my Facebook page and give that a like too? I don’t see any reason not to! I want to know, did you see “Dolittle?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Doctor Dolittle” movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!