Wish (2023): The Stars Align in Disney’s Latest Animation

“Wish” is directed by Chris Buck (Frozen, Frozen II) and Fawn Veerasunthorn and stars Ariana DeBose (West Side Story, The Prom), Chris Pine (Star Trek, Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves), Alan Tudyk (Wreck-It Ralph, Rogue One: A Star Wars Story), Angelique Cabral (Life in Pieces, Enlisted), Victor Garber (The Orville, Alias), Natasha Rothwell (Sonic the Hedgehog, The White Lotus), Jennifer Kumiyaya (The Sessions, Awkward), Harvey Guillén (Blue Beetle, Puss in Boots: The Last Wish), Evan Peters (X-Men: Days of Future Past, Kick-Ass), Ramy Youssef (Mr. Robot, Ramy), and Jon Rudnitsky (Catch-22, Saturday Night Live). This film is about a young girl named Asha who wishes upon a star only to have said wish unleash complete and utter chaos on her homeland.

My history with Disney is not as prolific as some others. Of course, as they have bought various properties over the years like “Star Wars” and Marvel, I became more inclined with the company as they produced more things I’d be predisposed to enjoying. But I was born in 1999, and as a kid, I was not as into Disney’s projects as some other people. I am male, and therefore was not inclined to embracing princess leads or royal stories. Television-wise, I was more of a Nickelodeon kid than a Disney kid if you had to ask which of the cable channels I’d be more likely to torture my parents with. And even as I aged, most of the movies in my growing collection would come from other studios for certain periods of time. I did watch “Power Rangers,” which for a time aired on Disney-owned channels and was owned by them. But when it comes to the more historic Disney properties, I never bothered with them as a kid. I still haven’t bothered with a lot of them now. I still have not watched “Aladdin,” as much as I try to. I still have not seen “The Little Mermaid.” I have not watched “Dumbo.” Despite Studio Chizu’s “Belle” being my favorite film of the decade so far, I still have not gone back to watch Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast.” Maybe I had these titles on in the background somewhere as a kid and just don’t remember it, but I can never say I watched any of these films and had the urgency to call it a core memory. They were just never my thing. I watched game shows as a kid. When I was young, I did not want to fly like “Peter Pan,” I wanted to buy vowels on “Wheel of Fortune.”

But Disney is now a hundred years old, and their newest animated title, “Wish,” comes with an ooze of specialty attached. It is practically a celebration of a century of Disney as a brand. Now, this is its own story that introduces new characters, new places, new ideas, even if it does take inspiration from other stories. Though as I watched this movie, one thing I will say, as someone who knew the significance of sorts regarding it, is that the movie is an appropriate title to release to commemorate such an occasion. The movie is about wishes and sort of represents an idea that Disney has represented for decades. Taking wishes and dreams and making them come to life. If I were in a pitch meeting for a movie celebrating such an occasion, this would be a foundation I would emphasize. But the movie has to be as good as its backbone, and thankfully, I had a good time with it.

“Wish” is not the best not best Disney movie of all time, but if you ask me, I like it better than their previous couple of animated outings. As much as “Encanto” dominated a certain sphere of pop culture in recent years, I have had no urges to go back to it after one viewing. As for “Strange World,” I would say that film did not even deserve one viewing. It was easily one of the biggest bores and wastes of time I had in that year of moviegoing. “Wish” is a film that works because of its characters, specifically its relationship between the protagonist and antagonist.

Asha wants to be the apprentice for King Magnifico, the most revered of her land’s people as he is able to grant wishes. I thought the way this movie starts off the relationship between these two, as they conduct an interview, unleashes some phenomenal chemistry between them. Ariana DeBose and Chris Pine work well together. But when their relationship goes awry, we continue to see a divide in their personalities and thoughts, which in the case of Chris Pine’s character, Magnifico, brings forth one of my favorite antagonists of the year. The reason why I love Magnifico as an antagonist is the same reason why as much as I rooted for the Avengers in “Infinity War” and “Endgame,” I understood, and sometimes agreed, with where Thanos was coming from in those movies. Magnifico, as mentioned, grants wishes. It’s his thing. But Magnifico refuses to grant every single wish that is given to him, including one given by Asha’s grandfather that I probably would have granted if I were in that kind of position. The reason he gives for not granting it, specifically its elusiveness, is not one I necessarily would side with, but that’s his choice. But the reality is, even though this, in addition to a sudden revelation, understandably enrages Asha, I am on Magnifico’s side when it comes to wish granting. What if someone wished for world domination? What if someone wished for the extinction of bees? What if someone wished for the resurrection of Adolf Hitler? These are outright dangerous or terrible things that most sane people who have a knowledge of how things are supposed to work would tend to avoid desiring. But at the same time, from Asha’s point of view, her grandfather’s wish, while Magnifico may see it one way, she sees it another way that can only be described as positive. I understand where she is coming from. But this also results in a mixed message of the film. Sure, you should be able to follow your dreams, but you better make sure that dream is a good one. It is a bit of a coin toss of a message when broken down.

“Wish,” like many Disney titles over the years, is a musical, and I have to say some of the songs in this film are quite good. Not all of them stand out, but I cannot name one that I outright thought couldn’t even achieve mediocrity. Whether it was the song itself or the visuals that accompanied it, everything had a place in the film. My favorite of the film is the one that was often used in the advertising, specifically “This Wish.” And I should not be surprised that I am giving this much praise to the song, because it is sung by Ariana DeBose, who has a musical background, including an Oscar-winning (and Jack Award-winning) role in Steven Spielberg’s “West Side Story.” Her singing power is marvelous and instantly emits classic Disney vibes. It is perfect. Speaking of incredible songs, my runner-up for this category would have to be the villain song, “This Is the Thanks I Get?!.” Not only does it encapsulate a particular spiral into madness Magnifico experiences, but Pine’s range in his voice throughout the song is a standout. This is not Pine’s first time singing in a Disney movie, as he previously did so in 2014’s “Into the Woods.” I have not seen “Into the Woods,” but I was delightfully surprised here at Pine’s singing abilities. He’s not the best I’ve heard, but he is much better than I could have imagined him being. But then again, having seen him in other roles, I often get the sense that Pine easily oozes charisma. So maybe I shouldn’t be surprised.

If I have to note one thing in the movie that is kind of hit or miss, it is the humor. Now, maybe if I were a kid it would land with me better, but there are jokes in this film that are probably going to hit more with younger viewers. That said, it is less insulting than some other jokes I have seen in some animated movies in recent years so it gets points there. There’s not much, if anything, that made me roll my eyes. Some jokes just stuck the landing better than others. Although my favorite exchange in the movie comes about thirty, forty minutes in where Asha explains the cause behind everything that is going on. She says “I wished upon a star.” In response, her friend, Gabo, asks, “What are you five?” Between the brief pause, the context of the scene, and the line delivery, this could not have been more perfect. I loved this moment. Speaking of voices, most of the cast of this film does a good job, but Alan Tudyk is a standout as Valentino the goat. I think his voice, no matter the role, is a thing of beauty. Here, he tends to use the same voice he uses as Clayface in Max’s “Harley Quinn” series, which if you have not watched, you absolutely should. Despite the similarity, the voice is appropriate for the character and adds a comedic edge for his lines. His lines are not laugh out loud funny, but they do deliver a chuckle here and there. I am not going to go into detail, but I have seen better, more satisfying climaxes out of Disney movies. Though if you recall certain details about this movie’s lesson I mentioned earlier, that is a partial reason why I find this climax to be inferior.

Sticking with the idea of Disney 100, this film’s animation style very much reflects the company’s history. It is a bit of a mish mash of what they have done over the years. The character designs reflect various eras of the company, and so do the minute little details surrounding the image. I do think there is an unfortunate shortage of 2D animated movies. If I had my way, we would more 2D animated movies, and fewer Disney live-action remakes. When it comes to this hybrid style, there are glimmers of beauty, but there is an obvious gimmicky feel to it. DreamWorks’s “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish,” which is much more 3D-esque than this movie on the surface, manages to pack a more palatable outlook when it tries to implement 2D tricks. It feels much more seamless. While there are a lot of good-looking shots in “Wish,” in fact there is one about 20 to 30 minutes in that is one of my favorite shots I have witnessed in any movie this year, the movie makes me think that the animation style should not be given any more attempts in the near future. But if I have to say one thing, between this, “The Mitchells vs. the Machines,” “Puss in Boots 2,” and the recent “Spider-Verse” movies, I am noticing more studios taking cracks at unique animation styles in recent years. I will give credit where it is due. I often say that having good animation is a requirement nowadays considering how much we have evolved over the years, but I am glad that when it comes to style, even if it emits inferior results, that we are seeing more unique projects being made.

In the end, “Wish” is not the brightest star of this year’s animated slate. But it comes packed with plenty of glowing qualities. “Wish” has the significance of doubling as a 100 year celebration of Disney, and I think it is a lovely tribute to the company, but it pales compared to a ton of their newer animated fare like “Wreck-it Ralph” and “Zootopia.” I am admittedly probably on an island of a lonely opinions because when I look back at Pixar’s release this year, “Elemental,” I think Disney proper’s “Wish” is the better of the two films. But if you look at Rotten Tomatoes, the scores for both critics and audiences are higher for “Elemental.” It goes to show the subjectivity of art. I think visually, the film works. Sound-wise, it packs a punch. The music puts its best foot forward. But what makes me want to go back to this movie despite its technical beauty is its two leads, because both of them are compelling. Earlier in this review, I said I never once had any urges to go back and watch “Encanto” a second time. I cannot say the same about “Wish.” I might even buy it on 4K Blu-ray if I had the chance. I am going to give “Wish” a 7/10.

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

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for Taika Waititi’s latest directorial effort, “Next Goal Wins.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will have my thoughts on “The Holdovers,” “Napoleon,” “Godzilla Minus One,” and “Ferrari!” If you want to see this 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 “Wish?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Disney animation? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves (2023): A Solid Roll of the D20

“Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves” is directed by John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein (Game Night, Vacation) and stars Chris Pine (Wonder Woman, Star Trek), Michelle Rodriguez (The Fast and the Furious, Widows), Regé-Jean Page (Bridgerton, The Gray Man), Justice Smith (Pokemon: Detective Pikachu, Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom), Sophia Lillis (It, Gretel & Hansel), and Hugh Grant (Four Weddings and Funeral, Bridget Jones’s Diary). This is film is inspired by the popular role-playing game Dungeons & Dragons and follows four individuals who join forces and embark on a quest to find a lost relic.

I have never played Dungeons & Dragons. I know relatives who have previously partaken in the game in their youth, I have friends who enjoy the game, and I am well aware of certain aspects of it in our current culture. That said, I have never sat down to play it. Despite this notion, I nevertheless had some excitement for “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves.” Chris Pine is a charming actor, the trailers looked promising, and I thought this could be an enjoyable, lighthearted time. Now that I have seen the movie, I can confirm that is exactly what I got. No more, no less.

This movie does not reinvent the cinematic wheel, nor does it flatten any cinematic tires. It is just a plain good time that feels reminiscent of a modern Marvel movie if it had a baby with “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” and “Game Night.” This comparison should not surprise me, nor some other people for that matter. After all, John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein, who in addition to directing this movie, also wrote the screenplay. If you seen “Spider-Man: Homecoming,” you have these two to partially thank. After all, they wrote that screenplay too, which had its fair share of wit and charm. Like “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle,” this film is a quickly-paced quest through outlandish, attractive environments with four main cast members. As for the “Game Night” comparison, this film, albeit in a much different manner, revolves around a game played amongst friends. For “Game Night” it is a murder mystery, while “Dungeons & Dragons” takes inspiration from source material of the same name. Additionally, John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein directed both films.

This movie is led by Chris Pine (center left), who in addition to having an advantage as to being one of the chosen few talented, hunky, lightly-colored-haired dudes named Chris in Hollywood, is exactly the kind of star a movie like this needed. Sure, on the surface, there is the name recognition, but beyond that, Pine masterfully executes some of the movie’s standout humor. He has a presence to him, much like Chris Hemsworth, where he simply induces charm just by letting himself be in front of the camera and utter a few magic words. If “Wonder Woman” has shown anything, Chris Pine can be funny. If “Dungeons & Dragons” has shown anything, Chris Pine can be very funny. There are some great lines out of Pine in this film. One of my particular favorite moments involving his character is, believe it or not, in the trailer. He is talking about one of his strengths, specifically making plans. And if the plan fails, he comes up with a new one, and the same thing would happen there if that backup plan does not work out. Therefore, Doric (Sophia Lillis), a tiefling druid, pipes in and says, “So you make plans that fail?”. Nothing like savagery to lighten the mood.

My favorite scene in “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves” takes place about a third of the way in, where we have already established our main cast, and they have started their quest. One of their stops is a cemetery. Courtesy of wizard Simon Aumar (Justice Smith), the ensemble takes the moments they have to speak to the dead to help them find out what they need to know. Not only is it an effective way to deliver exposition, but some of the lines are hilarious. Every inkling of this scene is gold. I found myself occasionally laughing like a maniac during this portion of the film.

That said, this film, as mentioned before, is not the most revolutionary addition to the halls of cinematic history. Although given the track record of adapting D&D, this is actually a pleasant surprise of a win given how the IP was adapted before in 2000 and that movie currently has a 9% critic score on Rotten Tomatoes. Although despite this film being a victory for those who made it and the audience, it is probably not going to be nominated for any Oscars. The look of the film is passable, but I have seen better. There are also some predictable moments, but at the same time, the script, based on what was brought to screen, never had any real significant flaws that stood out, so I can forgive some predictability here and there.

Although what I did not predict is for some of the camerawork to stand out as much as it does. This should not have been a huge surprise given this is the duo who did “Game Night,” but there are one or two, extended takes that took my breath away. Much like “Game Night’s” egg-throwing extended take, there is a scene early on where we see Doric’s abilities in the spotlight that had my attention. If I were to watch some behind the scenes on the movie, that is one of the things I would like to see how they did.

This is the best compliment I can give to “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves.” As cool of a concept as I find Dungeons & Dragons to be, I have never played the game because I do not know what time I have, who to play with, and where to start. After seeing this movie, those concerns have not been resolved. That said, I was not expecting them to be. Although having never played the game, I found this movie quite entertaining. I never felt lost. And as a movie, it was worth my time. It is one thing for someone to say that they are a D&D aficionado and say they love this movie. This might not always be the case, but there is some potential predisposal in play. If you can take a D&D know-it-nothing and give them a great cinematic experience, that’s another thing. That is what this movie did. I recommend this movie for those who enjoy playing D&D and even those who have shied away from the game. D&D fans may be attracted by the preexisiting IP, but they might as well stay for the lighthearted and thumbs up-worthy adventure.

In the end, “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves” is a magical, finely realized blast of an adventure. I had a great time with it, and I would definitely recommend seeing this by yourself or with friends and family. As I have said, there is a hint of a “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle”-like flair in this film, so if you like that film or its sequel, “The Next Level,” this could be another fun film to add to your watchlist. The characters are likable. The story is simple but effective. The humor stands out. And as someone who has never played D&D, I never felt alienated. I had a great time with “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves,” and I have a feeling some of you reading this will do the same. I am going to give “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves” a 7/10.

“Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! As much as I recommend “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves,” it is extremely likely going to get blue shelled at the box office this weekend by possibly the most prominent video game-based project in cinematic history, “The Super Mario Bros. Movie.” By the way, that is going to be my next review! Stay tuned! Speaking of “Super Mario Bros.,” I will also soon be reviewing the 1993 “Super Mario Bros.” film, which is probably going to be more fun for you guys than it is for me… 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 “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves?” What did you think about it? Or, have you played D&D? What did you do while playing the game? Or, if you are playing it, what are you doing now? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Don’t Worry Darling (2022): Olivia Wilde Delivers a Dose of Harry Styles Over Any and All Substance

“Don’t Worry Darling” is directed by Olivia Wilde (Booksmart, Tron: Legacy), who also stars in the film as Bunny. This film also stars Florence Pugh (Midsommar, Black Widow), Harry Styles (Dunkirk, Eternals), Gemma Chan (Eternals, Raya and the Last Dragon), KiKi Layne (If Beale Street Could Talk, The Old Guard), Nick Kroll (Big Mouth, Sausage Party), and Chris Pine (Wonder Woman, Star Trek). “Don’t Worry Darling” follows a 1950s housewife who becomes worried about her loving husband, or more specifically, his company, that could hiding disturbing secrets.

“Don’t Worry Darling” is Olivia Wilde’s sophomore outing as a feature director. Wilde previously directed “Booksmart,” which in addition to receiving positive feedback from moviegoers and critics, did a fine job at the box office with a $25 million return against a $6 million budget. Wilde showcased her ability to make a laugh-inducing comedy while not breaking the bank. As for my thoughts on the movie, I liked it. I do not think it is the funniest movie of its respective year, but it gave me some decent laughs. Based on her experience of making a funny movie, it made me curious as to what she could do next.

Now that the next thing is here, I cannot stop thinking about it. It bogs my mind like I would not believe!

No, not the movie! The press for the movie! Why is everyone so hyped up about it? Well, everyone likes drama. If reality television and gossip has continued to prove it over the years, people like drama. And the buildup to “Don’t Worry Darling” has provided plenty of it. Between Shia LeBeouf once being attached to the movie, Florence Pugh not promoting the film, and a whole charade between Harry Styles and Chris Pine over spit, “Don’t Worry Darling” was shaping up to be this year’s most entertaining story. Except it was not the story written for the screen. Regardless, I planned on seeing this movie. The marketing was creepy yet interesting enough to keep my attention. The cinematography looked really good. And for the most part, the cast was good. Florence Pugh, Chris Pine, Nick Kroll. There are some good names in here.

As for my thoughts on “Don’t Worry Darling,” the first two acts are delightfully charming and kept me intrigued throughout. Harry Styles has a ways to go as an actor, but it is a great setup for this movie’s world.

Then the turd– Sorry, THIRD act happened.

I cannot fully go into why I despise the third act and how this movie concludes because I would ultimately be spoiling the movie. That said, how these things go down are ridiculous to say the least. Does it involve something that could potentially be out of left field? You could say that. Was that the point? Perhaps. Does it change the fact that what happened felt ridiculous? Absolutely not. I do not mind out of left field scenarios if said scenario is executed well. This one is the exact opposite. Around the 60 to 90 minute mark, this movie went in one direction, and that is down.

This movie is like ordering a pizza that you will never eat. The first act is like opening up Uber Eats and getting excited over the pizza you want for dinner. Solid setup, this may be going somewhere swell… The second act is the equivalent of placing your order. You’re intrigued, you’re excited, what could go wrong? Except for absolutely everything! Because we get to the third act, where something completely unexpected happens! The restaurant blew up, and now you have no pizza! Only disappointment and frustration.

“Don’t Worry Darling” is certainly one of the better looking films of the year. The color palette of the 1950s suburban setting is poppy and felt like a pure escape. I thought the cinematography would look good based on the trailer and I would say I was not disappointed. Matthew Libatique deserves a pat on the back at the least. Everything from the costumes to the sets to the overall aesthetic of the film is top notch. It felt like another world at times. While this movie nails its looks, its story leaves much to be desired.

The cast of “Don’t Worry Darling” all deliver solid performances. This should not come as a surprise as the movie contains a fair number of big name actors, and Olivia Wilde even does a good job as her respective character. The only actor who I think struggled in terms of how seriously I could take him is Harry Styles (left). Maybe it is because of his recognizability in pop culture, regardless of how little I care for his music. Styles is not the worst actor of all time. If last year’s “Space Jam: A New Legacy” showcases anything, he is better than LeBron James. Plus he once had a supporting role in Christopher Nolan’s “Dunkirk” that served its purpose. Although every scene he is in, I would hear a line out of someone like Florence Pugh or Chris Pine, I feel like they are in the moment, whereas Styles is trying to keep up but he does not quite have it. When it comes to recognizable actors giving corny performances, Styles is thankfully less infuriating than say Tom Hanks as Tom Parker in “Elvis,” a laughable, yet terrifyingly annoying performance I have still yet to get out of my head. Speaking of “Elvis,” “Don’t Worry Darling” feels like another version of that film. Both are from Warner Bros., both are released in 2022, and both have a lead actor that could almost be considered the saving grace.

Whereas Harry Styles may not be the hot ticket this awards season, Florence Pugh is certainly a contender for the upcoming mounds of gold. Given this movie’s controversy, who knows what will happen? But if the Oscars were tomorrow, I would debatably cast a vote for Pugh. I liked her previously in movies like “Black Widow,” “Little Women,” and the significantly underappreciated “Fighting with My Family,” but “Don’t Worry Darling” may be the best performance of Pugh’s career so far. Pugh is still young, so there is a good chance she could eventually deliver an even better performance than this one, but to have this great of a performance now is incredible, especially when I am thinking about it more than almost any other one I have seen this year.

“Don’t Worry Darling” comes with a fairly unique setting and cast of characters, and its concept is certainly one of the quirkier I have seen in a movie this year. Although as I watched this movie and heard certain lines and witnessed particular happenings, it weirdly, of all things, reminded me of Disney+’s “WandaVision.” This feels weird to say, but when it comes to this type of plot, a Marvel miniseries somehow did this better. It had its flaws, but unlike “Don’t Worry Darling,” the positives outweighed the negatives.

Much like “Morbius,” and “Jurassic World: Dominion,” if you go on the Rotten Tomatoes page for “Don’t Worry Darling,” you will notice a humungous divide between the critic and audience scores. Also much like “Morbius” and “Jurassic World: Dominion,” as I watched “Don’t Worry Darling,” I felt myself leaning towards the side of the critics. But unlike those other two films, I felt like there was a recipe for something grand when the movie started. Again, if Harry Styles were not in this movie, I would have taken it a tad more seriously. Although when the movie started, I reminisced over the low Rotten Tomatoes score I recall this movie having, and I thought, “Are these critics on drugs?!”. Despite everything I said about Harry Styles, I should not underestimate his fanbase, because my theater had plenty of young women inside. Unfortunately though, this movie is not that great, and by the third act, it is ultimately a case of Harry Styles over substance.

In the end, “Don’t Worry Darling” is quite worrisome. For those of you who have not seen “Booksmart,” I do recommend you give it a watch at some point. It is funny, raunchy, but also heartfelt. Kaitlyn Dever and Beanie Feldstein play a likable duo. If you want a showcase of what Olivia Wilde could bring to the table as a filmmaker, “Booksmart” is a better case of her talent. I do not have plans to watch “Don’t Worry Darling” a second time. This movie is like a slot machine. Two reels spin and land on the bonus symbol, there’s a big tease for the third reel to land a bonus, only to land on a 7. Florence Pugh gives an Oscar-worthy performance that made me look forward to her future roles as an actress. The film looks pretty and there clever concepts in it, but they were not well executed. For these reasons, in addition to having the one of the most jaw-droppingly bewildering and unsatisfying endings of the year, I am going to give “Don’t Worry Darling” a 4/10.

Although before we move on, the public drama behind “Don’t Worry Darling” and its crew seems to work in the film’s favor, whether Warner Bros. or Olivia Wilde chooses to admit it or not. Because at my screening, I sat next to two older women. When the movie ended, the woman next to me said she came to this movie with someone else because of the drama surrounding it. The drama had her curiosity, and now the movie had her attention. So, for Warner Bros., this could be a happy accident. It is unfortunate that this movie, at least when it first releases, will likely be associated with said drama regardless of its quality. The question is, how will it be viewed years from now? That remains a mystery.

“Don’t Worry Darling” is now playing in theatres everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, stay tuned because I have more coming! Pretty soon I will be sharing my thoughts on the brand new murder mystery, “See How They Run!” Stay tuned for that, and also stay tuned for the movies I will be reviewing for my official Steven Spielberg Month! This week we will be talking about “Close Encounters of the Third Kind!” If you want to see this 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 “Don’t Worry Darling?” What did you think about it? Or, did you see “Booksmart?” Tell me your thoughts on that! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Wonder Woman 1984 (2020): Gal Gadot and Patty Jenkins Return to the Big (and Small) Screen

“Wonder Woman 1984” is directed by Patty Jenkins, who also directed the first “Wonder Woman” film starring Gal Gadot (Keeping Up with the Joneses, Fast Five) back in 2017. Gadot returns to play the iconic heroine alongside a cast including Pedro Pascal (The Mandalorian, Game of Thrones), Chris Pine (Star Trek, This Means War), Kristen Wiig (Saturday Night Live, Ghostbusters), Robin Wright (House of Cards, Forrest Gump), and Connie Nielsen (Gladiator, One Hour Photo). This film takes place many years after the original, which was set in World War I. This time, we journey to 1984, where Wonder Woman has to take on two new foes, Max Lord and the Cheetah. Also, Steve Trevor, reprised by Chris Pine, comes along for the ride.

It has been three and a half years since I first watched “Wonder Woman,” which I originally gave a 10/10. By the way, that 10/10 still stands. The film is somewhat cliché. It contains things that have been done before, there is no denying that. But it does so with excellence and in a way that feels fresh and exciting. Plus, you can also add on that we have not had many successes with comic book movies specifically centered around characters portrayed by women. This felt like not just a proper, but a *massive* step in the right direction. It was also my favorite film in the DCEU at the time. In my review for the original film, I go onto mention that when it comes to “origin stories,” “Wonder Woman” may be my all time favorite in regards to movies. Part of it has to do with the singular and stellar vision provided by director Patty Jenkins and all the performances from cast members including Gal Gadot and Chris Pine. The villians were… okay. However, each action sequence, even those that others say are heavy in CGI, are exciting and heart-pumping. I know some people find the final act to be clunky, I had a great time with it. Plus, Wonder Woman’s theme music, which was first introduced in “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice” is arguably my favorite superhero theme of all time. Maybe except the one created for Tobey Maguire’s Spider-Man.

Going into “Wonder Woman 1984,” it was hard to imagine that such a movie could surpass the original. However, based on early reviews, it seemed as if such a thing would be possible. After all, we’ve already gotten the been there done that origin story out of the way, if you want to call it that. It was time for something new, innovative. Going in, I already had my expectations blown away. I did not expect Chris Pine to return. Like, literally. At all. Then again, this takes place in a comic book universe where anything is possible. There were also some new things in regards to tech. Not that they haven’t been done before, just not in the original “Wonder Woman,” because this new flick was partially shot on IMAX film. And if you have read a number of my posts, you know I rave about IMAX film. By the way, while the movie is shot in the heavy duty format, there is barely any footage that will expand the frame in IMAX. However, it may be worth the extra few bucks if those theaters are open near you.

But is “Wonder Woman 1984” worth the hype? Absolutely not.

Well! Well! Well! 2020 strikes again! “Wonder Woman 1984” is not only a massive disappointment to one of the most anticipated films of the year. “Wonder Woman 1984” is not only a step down from the original 2017 film. “Wonder Woman 1984” is not only the worst comic book movie of the year. Yes, more than “Bloodshot” for crying out loud! But it is also the worst entry to DCEU thus far.

Now, let me just get one thing out of the way. I am a straight white male in his early twenties. I am not one of those people that is trying cancel Gal Gadot. After all, I met her in person, I have her autograph, and she is a decent actress. I am also not trying to cancel Patty Jenkins, which the Internet seems to be doing according to many people. If they come out with a “Wonder Woman 3” with these two at the front lines, I am there. Their work on the original film justifies such a thing, and Jenkins is a director that is completely capable of making something magical. In fact, most of the problems of the film do not have to do with how the movie is made. It instead has to do with the pacing, the editing, the way everything plays out, the characters, and the writing. Admittedly, Jenkins is responsible for that last mistake, given how she has a screenplay credit. I don’t know if I should blame her entirely given how she wrote the script with a couple other people, but I should also point out that she did not have a screenplay credit for the previous “Wonder Woman” installment. This time around, Jenkins collaborates with Dave Callaham, who wrote the script for one of last year’s best comedies, “Zombieland: Double Tap.” Also along for the ride is Geoff Johns who has plenty of experience of creating DC content. So, what went wrong? Was there not enough time to draft everything out? Were there so many ideas colliding from three different minds? I don’t know. Patty Jenkins seems very passionate about the Wonder Woman character. In fact, throughout the movie, Jenkins properly visualizes the character as a beacon of hope and inspiration for people, especially women.

This movie starts off pretty great. By the way, for those who want to see the film in IMAX, this is one of the two scenes that were actually filmed in the IMAX format. The scene not only looked articulate and felt immersive, but it may have ended up being the best part of the movie. It is action-packed, exciting, and lets you escape into the world Themyscira. Sadly, the movie kind of blows its load in the first ten minutes. Because it spends time showing you young Diana Prince (Lilly Aspell), progresses to a time where we see a matured Diana Prince (Gal Gadot), and in these initial scenes, the action never stops whether Diana is trying to win an athletic event for herself, or she saves the lives of others. Even so, it does kind of feel like action that does belong in the beginning of a superhero sequel. The main character kicks ass while you get reintroduced to them, and the movie sets a footprint for where the story is going to go. “Wonder Woman 1984” sets up a vibe that fits the title. You see people walking around in eccentric clothing, there’s record stores, CRT television sets, and a multi-story colorful mall. When it comes to the first hour of “Wonder Woman 1984,” these scenes were fine. What wasn’t fine in the first hour is perhaps just about everything else.

What do I mean? Let’s take a moment to talk about the worst “Lord of the Rings” film. “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.” I’ll be fair. I did have fun with the movie, but one of the worst things about “An Unexpected Journey” was the pacing. This may partially be due to the need to adapt one book into three parts, but the evidence comes in towards the beginning where we see the 13 dwarves coming into Bilbo Baggins’s home. A lot of the screentime almost feels extended and nearly tiresome. There are some decent moments, but it does not always make for a good time. It takes like 45 minutes to an hour to actually get the movie going. With “Wonder Woman 1984,” I got the same feeling. It just took forever to actually get into gear. Mainly because this film feels like a stockpile of exposition. “Batman v. Superman” sort of felt the same way, but I think I had more fun watching that, exposition included, than I did sitting through whatever the hell “Wonder Woman 1984” turned out to be. To add onto that, you have some cringe-worthy lines, less than stellar characters, and a surprisingly boring storyline, part of which includes a role reversal.

Chris Pine is back as Steve Trevor in this movie. I will not go into detail of his return, but this was heavily marketed, so if you’re considering this a spoiler, I’m sorry. In the 2017 “Wonder Woman” film, Gal Gadot’s character has to deal with the new sights of earth and learn the normalcies within. To do so, she had the assistance of Steve Trevor along the way. Diana Prince came off occasionally as eccentric, she said certain things that maybe would be better left unsaid, and there’s a montage where she’s trying on unfamiliar apparel. This time around, Diana assists Steve in 1984, because now he’s the fish out of water. Much like the last movie, there is a reversal where Steve is trying on different clothes that defined the 1980s. He occasionally had a fanny pack, “parachute pants,” and so on. That scene kind of entertained me. However, the rest of this storyline was mostly either boring or impractical. There is a scene where Diana and Steve are flying through the sky looking at fireworks. And sure, fireworks are a sight to be seen. There is reason why Disney World charges you your entire blood supply to see them up close. But this movie made me ask if Steve has never actually seen fireworks in his life. The way I viewed the scene made me wonder why he was actually as amazed as he was in those exact moments. Fireworks have been around for a long time. Many years, centuries even! Why is Chris Pine acting like he’s never seen fireworks before?

This movie features a couple respectable actors, you have Pedro Pascal who I liked in “Kingsman: The Golden Circle,” he’s also in hit TV shows including “Game of Thrones” and “The Mandalorian.” The guy has been certain cores of nerd culture over the years. You also have Kristen Wiig, who I have rather mixed feelings on. I was not a fan of her in the 2016 “Ghostbusters” reboot. I don’t think I find her as funny as other people do. But I also am a fan her in other regards. I think she did a fine job in “The Martian” and her voiceover work in projects like “Sausage Party” and the “How to Train Your Dragon” franchise are highlights in her career. Sadly, their performances are very on and off here. I would not ease myself into saying that the actors themselves are specifically at fault, but these two portray their characters to a degree that feels cartoony and off-putting. “Wonder Woman 1984” gets into the problem that people have criticized movies like “Batman & Robin,” “Spider-Man 3,” and “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” for realizing. MULTIPLE MAJOR THREATS.

I am not saying you cannot make a movie with more than one villain. It has been done before with “Return of the Jedi,” “The Dark Knight,” and if you really think this counts, “Back to the Future Part II.” But the beauty of having one major threat in your movie is that you get to make them the source of everyone’s struggle. Time is taken to specifically focus on that one character and why they must stopped. We somewhat get that in “Wonder Woman 1984” with Max Lord (Pascal), but when it comes to Barbara Minerva (Wiig), the way she is handled is sort of similar to how they handled Eddie Brock in “Spider-Man 3.” Only thing is, I was actually entertained whenever Eddie Brock had a scene in “Spider-Man 3.” Topher Grace played the part well, even during lines that were not up to par. Wiig tries, but the problem is that some of the writing in “Wonder Woman 1984” makes some of the writing in “Spider-Man 3” look like Shakespeare. Maybe that’s not the best comparison, mainly because I am one of the few people who genuinely enjoyed “Spider-Man 3.” However, there are a few lines and storytelling methods in that film that do not fall into place.

But if you want me to compare “Wonder Woman 1984” to another film I did not enjoy, let’s use “The Amazing Spider-Man 2.” In that film, you have Electro and the Green Goblin. There’s also the Rhino, but we’re gonna leave him out for this. The two major threats in “Wonder Woman 1984” are basically just like Electro and the Green Goblin in “The Amazing Spider-Man 2,” but instead of being exact carbon copies, they take various qualities of each character, but they are switched around to make something new. Like Electro, Barbara is eccentric, kind of shy, almost a nobody. But kind of like the Green Goblin, she barely has any screentime as Cheetah. And whatever screentime there is almost feels forced or nearly unmemorable. As for Max Lord, he’s got funky hair like Harry Osborn, he’s affiliated with a big company. And like Electro, he has a more significant screen presence when it comes to dealing with our main hero. This all adds up to an underwhelming evil duo in an underwhelming movie. But I do have to say one thing about Max Lord, and it kind of turned me off. He’s basically Donald Trump.

Think about it! This movie is painting a picture of an obsessive, failed businessman and kinda sorta television personality who has little time for their kids. In fact, my first impression of his son was that he was sort of a spoiled brat, which does not always seem to stick for the rest of the movie. Again, the hairstyle feels like something out of a meme. There is even a scene, and you saw this in the main trailer for this film, where he stands in front of a background representing the White House Press Room! Granted, having compared Pedro Pascal to his comic book counterpart, the casting and makeup departments did a good job at being faithful to the source material. But knowing that this was made in the late 2010s, and originally supposed to release in 2019, I could not help but make this comparison. And part of why I did not like this is because, and this may be a personal thing, it slightly ruined the escapism factor of the film. I’m not going to say whether I like Donald Trump, whether I dislike him. I am not here to get into politics. But Max Lord in “Wonder Woman 1984” feels like a Trump parody. The makeup department could have easily sprayed orange spray paint onto Pascal’s face and boom! Donald Trump impersonation!

I will say, there is one thing about “Wonder Woman 1984” that could be an improvement over the first one, and that is Gal Gadot’s performance. Gal Gadot, as much as I adore her as a person, as good-looking as she is, is not Meryl Streep. When it comes to “Wonder Woman,” she’s always looked the part, and she’s had good moments since her inception. Even though her character was the best part of “Batman v. Superman” for me, her acting ability was a far cry from what I saw out of Ben Affleck or Henry Cavill or Laurence Fishburne. When she shows up alongside the two titular characters in “Batman v. Superman,” she comes off as a badass, but there’s a line that she releases out of her mouth that feels like a first take. In “Wonder Woman 1984,” Gal Gadot has a commanding presence, she is charismatic, she is emotional, and occasionally witty. I liked Gadot’s performance in the original “Wonder Woman” because she did a good job at interpreting a goddess who has to adapt to a new normal, embracing the ups and downs along the way. But there were also signs that Gadot needed to work more on her craft and do a little more than be a pretty face in armor who can say words here and there. I will admit, her acting towards the end of “Wonder Woman” occasionally gave me chills, but I could tell that there was still work that needed to be done. “Wonder Woman 1984” is a sign that Gal Gadot is getting better, she deals with dialogue better than she used to, and her range is improving. I am looking forward to seeing Gal Gadot in “Death on the Nile” and if they come out with a “Wonder Woman 3,” count me in.

Gal Gadot’s performance is not the only positive here, because I will admit, even though I think Patty Jenkins and the other writers could have done a better job with the screenplay, she did alright with crafting the film. When it comes to her vision, I do not think it was as well represented as the original, but a crappy script can make that happen. Some of the cinematography is marvelous to look at. The visuals are just as good as the original film. Many scenes felt big and grand, and while I imagine some people will stick to watching “Wonder Woman 1984” on HBO Max for now, if you feel safe going to a theater right now, do not rule that option out. There are some cool scenes that look great on the big screen. Speaking of things that feel grand, they got Hans Zimmer to do the score, which I was onboard with from the beginning. I saw the first few minutes of “Wonder Woman 1984” on YouTube, and from that moment, I was excited to hear the rest of the score, and it is really good. There was a scene where I was completely taken out of the movie and I almost did not care about what would happen, but the one saving grace in that moment was the music composed by Hans Zimmer. Gal Gadot’s Wonder Woman has one of the best themes for an on-screen superhero, and I am glad that Zimmer got to work his magic to carry out his singular vision regarding it. I will likely listen to the soundtrack sometime in the future. The film had a passable ending. Granted there was some cringe surrounding it, but it good parts.

Too bad the movie’s boring, forgettable, and another big blow in 2020. F*ck. This. Year.

In the end, “Wonder Woman 1984” is a visually grand mess. Am I looking forward to what Patty Jenkins and Gal Gadot have in store in the future? Yes. But does my anticipation take away from my thoughts on “Wonder Woman 1984?” No. I think “Wonder Woman 1984” is a gigantic misstep of a film. And the worst part is that it was not worth all the waits from the delays. I’ll be honest, and some of you may find this surprising, I would rather watch the live-action version of Disney’s “Mulan” again! Just to paint a picture of how much I did not like this film, let me just boil it down to a simple sentence. I did not have fun. Ironically, 2017’s “Wonder Woman” took place in World War I, where people are fighting, people are dying, times are desperate, but I managed to have fun. This sequel takes place in 1984. In real life, that year was much more lighthearted, at least from the perspective of the United States. Yes, there was the War on Drugs. AIDS broke out. Indira Gandhi was murdered. But there were plenty of big songs and movies that came out like “Jump” by Van Halen or “Ghostbusters.” People were having fun! “Wonder Woman 1984” manages to take a time that is significantly more fun than World War I, and makes it the most boring thing imaginable. The action sequences don’t save this movie. Gal Gadot’s improved performance doesn’t save this movie. A couple new and talented faces do not even save this travesty. “Wonder Woman 1984” is a gigantic disappointment, the worst film in the Detective Comics Extended Universe, and I am going to give it a 3/10.

“Wonder Woman 1984” is now playing in theaters wherever they are open. Due to the lockdown in the United Kingdom, the movie will debut on January 13th, 2021 on PVOD. If you live in the United States, you can also watch the film right now on HBO Max if you are a subscriber and it is available at no extra cost until the near end of January 2021, where it will finish it’s theatrical release, go to PVOD for a price, likely hit store shelves through DVD and Blu-ray, and eventually return to HBO and HBO Max sometime next year.

Thanks for reading this review! Who knew that in the SAME WEEKEND, we would get my least favorite Pixar film, and now, and perhaps on a more significant scale, my least favorite DCEU film! This year has kicked my ass, called me names, and made me eat dirt. We are approaching the end of 2020, THANK HEAVENS. So it is almost time for me to post my top 10 BEST movies of 2020 and my top 10 WORST movies of 2020. That will be up sometime early next year and I may have one or two more reviews coming your way if I can fit them in. 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 “Wonder Woman 1984?” What did you think about it? Also, did you watch the movie in the theater? At home? Or both? Tell me about your experience! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

CORRECTION: When I said, “There was a scene where I was completely taken out of the movie and I almost did not care about what would happen, but the one saving grace in that moment was the music composed by Hans Zimmer,” I was wrong. Turns out the music in that scene was Adagio in D Minor, originally composed by John Murphy for the film “Sunshine,” which has been used in several marketing pieces for “Ready Player One,” the “2010 Winter Olympics,” and “X-Men: Days of Future Past.” I will not spoil where it plays for those who have not seen the movie.

Top Movies of the 2010s (THE WORST 25)

Top Movies of the 2010s OFFICIAL POSTER

WARNING: This post is over 11,000 words long….

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Yes, for those of you have already seen my best list, that was the same intro I had on said list. The intro contains films of all kinds, including some that I don’t like, not to mention some on this upcoming countdown. To me, the intro is so nice that it must be played twice! Nevertheless, now that I have talked about my top 25 FAVORITE movies of the 2010s, now it is time to talk about my 25 LEAST FAVORITE movies of the 2010s! If you are new here, I will let you know that I do not normally do top 25 lists. It’s usually top 10s, nothing else. However, the end of the decade signifies a special occasion, therefore it is time for a special countdown. As I go down the list, I will provide an image signifying each movie, a video clip from said movie, and a description discussing in this particular case why I didn’t like the film. Again, I’ll mention that these are all films that *I* don’t like, all of the entries to this list are meant to reflect my personal opinions. I am not saying that you should dislike any of these films, I’m just letting you know that these are the films that did not end up working for ME. I would encourage you to hold your opinions, keep them close, and if you have not watched any of these films, maybe give them a gander and see how they pan out. Maybe you’ll end up liking one of these films, in which case that’s amazing, I wish I had the ability to do that. Also, speaking of not seeing films, I will remind you that I have not seen every single film that has come out in the 2010s. There was a lot crap dumped into the realm of cinema that I just did not have enough time to hit all of it. If you are curious about some of the films that won’t be on the list, I’m sorry to say, you won’t see me rage about “Vampires Suck” (2010), “Jack and Jill” (2011), “The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 2 (2012), “The Smurfs 2 (2013), “Left Behind” (2014), “Fifty Shades of Grey” (2015), “Masterminds” (2016), “Flatliners (2017), “The Nutcracker and the Four Realms” (2018)and “X-Men: Dark Phoenix.” Also, each entry to the list must have a theatrical release of any kind or else it does not make the list. With all of that out of the way, let’s release ten years worth of stress! These are my top 10 WORST movies of the 2010s!

#25: Aloha (2015)

Have you ever seen a movie that feels like nothing happens for the entire runtime? And if something does happen, you’re either bored or you just don’t care? That’s what watching “Aloha” feels like! And you know what? This just goes to show that Emma Stone is not the only big problem in this movie! Because in terms of pacing, this movie is dull, so dull that it must be the reason I happened to have been so sleepy-eyed during this film. This movie is an hour and forty-five minutes, which is surprising because the movie honestly feels like a day. The chemistry between pretty much a majority of the characters is awkward for a good portion of the runtime, it’s even more so with Emma Stone in the mix because she apparently plays a character who is part Asian. I’ll give credit to the director, Cameron Crowe, for at least apologizing about this casting choice, but nevertheless, it was awkward. By the way, if you are curious, the guy also directed 2011’s “We Bought a Zoo,” which BARELY missed the list. Speaking of apologies, you know who also apologized? Emma Stone! Yeah! During the 76th Golden Globes held last year, co-host Sandra Oh is in the middle of the opening monologue as she congratulates “Crazy Rich Asians” for its Best Picture- Musical Or Comedy nomination and calls it “the first studio film with an Asian-American lead since ‘Ghost in the Shell’ and ‘Aloha.’” Stone’s response, heard around the crowd, “I’M SORRY!” I’ll give credit where credit is due, even people behind the film are willing to talk about its imperfections. Because yeah, no movie’s perfect. A lot of movies suck, some more than others. But in all seriousness, don’t let this movie’s cast fool you. Some names include Bradley Cooper, he has been getting tons of award buzz before this movie! The recently mentioned Emma Stone, who I will point out just did “Birdman” before this film released! Bill f*cking Murray! He’s a major part of the Gopher Extermination Committee in “Caddyshack,” a guy who will eradicate all the strange somethings in your neighborhood in “Ghostbusters,” and lived the same day over and over again “Groundhog Day!” And you have President Donald J. Tr—err I mean Alec Baldwin. Sorry, I get those two confused sometimes. Great actors, but it’s not enough! Just… Ha-WHY was this made?! Mahalo for nothing!

#24: Cop Out (2010)

From the director of “Clerks,” comes a comedic cop film so bad that it leaves me silent all the way through, I’m talking about “Cop Out.” I admire Kevin Smith as a person. I think he is a charismatic and lovable dude, but it does not alter the reality that he did a movie as bad as this. Although I am pretty sure it’s not just him that’s to blame, I’d also say that when it comes to casting, that is one of the film’s bigger failures. Bruce Willis and Tracy Morgan just don’t work well as a duo. Plus, I should point out that Bruce Willis has been getting to the point around this time where he usually would pick bad scripts. This is why when I think of Bruce Willis, I would rather focus on some of his earlier work like “Die Hard” or “The Fifth Element” as opposed to this sack of malarkey. The main reason why this film is being put on the list is fairly simple. I didn’t laugh once. I will say, I did watch the film on a TV channel, so for all I know it could have been edited quite a bit, but even with the edits, the film is still dull and uninteresting. If Kevin Smith came up with the name “Cop Out,” I will give him some credit, because that is what this film feels like in the very end, a literal cop out. Again, I admire the dude, but your movie needs more work than a teenager’s teeth!

#23: This Means War (2012)

Up next is a steaming pile of garbage featuring a decent trio of actors, but just because you have decent actors, doesn’t mean you have a decent movie. “This Means War.” I actually remember first buying the movie on Blu-ray at Best Buy. When I bought it, I did so purely for the price. Heck, the thing was $5! How could I pass that up? I go to the cashier and he says that he likes the actors in the movie and somehow, he has never even seen it. I wish I could be that guy. Romantic comedies are not my goto genre for movies, but even if I were into those movies, chances are I would still give this a 1/10 because the characters suck, the writing sucks, and honestly, I’ve probably forgotten a good portion of the movie by now. I remember the opening action scene, the part in the video rental store, I know the main the plot involves a fight over a girl, but there’s not much else to point in terms of memorable moments from “This Means War.” It’s forgettable and boring, two of the worst adjectives you can ever give to a movie. $5 may be a good deal for a lot of movies when buying them on Blu-ray, but even if I had the opportunity to watch this for free, I’d be ripped off. And if the guy from Best Buy at Cambridgeside Galleria who checked my stuff out is reading this right now, Chris Pine, Tom Hardy, and Reese Witherspoon are respectable actors, but if you want a respectable movie, look elsewhere.

#22: The Hurricane Heist (2018)

Coming in at #22 is “The Hurricane Heist,” when it comes to disaster movies, this one’s, well, a disaster. And I mean that on every level from writing to characterization, and to my surprise, marketing. I say that because when I heard a title like “The Hurricane Heist” during ads for this film, and I saw what the commercials made this movie look like, I thought it could be the cheesiest fun bad movie of its year. It’s not even close to being fun in any way whatsoever! It’s just dumb! Not dumb good, in fact, if it makes sense, dumb ass! I am somewhat surprised that I am not making this up, but this is true, and it kind of makes me giggle, in a movie that heavily involves drastic, unfortunate weather, not to mention lots of wind, one of the characters’ names is BREEZE. One of the writers for this film has to have thought about inserting some joke name into the script at some point, so Breeze might have been one of the goofy ideas tossed around the table! I wasn’t there for the writing process, but I would not be surprised if this is literally what happened! Also, get this, apparently four people have some sort of writing credit for this! Just goes to show, when you have four people writing a film, it’s four times as awful! For the record, this film is directed by Rob Cohen, who also directed films like “The Fast and the Furious” and “xXx.” Both of those films were some of the finest guilty pleasure-esque material to have come out in their time, at least in my opinion. As for this piece of crap, not so much. I’d rather have a hurricane last forever than see this movie ever again!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8V7u7Cd7jE

#21: Seventh Son (2014)

I wonder if I ended up watching this movie somewhere else, I would have enjoyed it more, but the reality is, I think “Seventh Son” is one of the worst fantasy movies this world has ever witnessed. In fact, I was staying in Delray Beach, Florida when I saw this. There was a small fraction of time where I had nothing really better to do, so I went to the movie theater and saw this piece of s*it. It’s a film that feels sort of by the numbers, rather predictable, and saddest of all, boring. In fact, I saw this movie with somebody else and at some point in the runtime, perhaps thirty to forty-five minutes in, it could have been earlier for all I know, the person alongside me just happened to fall asleep! That’s how boring this movie is! I have never fallen asleep to a film in the theater, but I’m pretty sure my pal’s reaction, was pretty similar to my reaction. The only thing that seems to have worked at certain points during the film may have been the visuals. And part of me feels somewhat bad for putting this on the list because the sound during the movie was just horrible. I could not make out a good portion of the dialogue that was being uttered, and having seen this film only once, I don’t know who to blame. I saw it in a theater that I only visited for this movie in particular, and never went to again because I live all the way in Massachusetts. So if it’s not the sound system’s fault, I have to blame the people behind this movie. But even with the confusing sound problem, this film is poorly paced, cliché, and does not really add anything of value to its genre.

#20: Transcendence (2014)

One of my favorite genres is sci-fi, so if a sci-fi movie made this list, you’d KNOW it’s just plain bad. Case and point, “Transcendence.” I missed this in the theater, but I bought the DVD eventually and when I had the chance to watch the movie from beginning to end, I regretted every single moment of that process. The movie starts out halfway decent with its exposition. The buildup to the main events, overall, is relatively fine. As a concept, the film is at least intriguing. But the movie gets worse the longer I go through it. It’s almost astounding the transition that it makes! The pacing is piss-poor, the story becomes boring, and the really disappointing part, at least for me, is the fact that the film is directed by Wally Pfister, who did the cinematography for multiple Christopher Nolan-directed films including “The Dark Knight,” “Memento,” and “Inception.” This guy is one of the best cinematographers I have ever seen, and to see him in the director’s chair and make… well, THIS, is baffling to me. The actors are at very least, tolerable, but it didn’t make the movie any better. When this movie reached the end, I was bored out of my mind and questioning everything on screen. Speaking of which, I should point out that when I bought my DVD copy for this film, I popped it in and started watching it once, maybe twice, and I fell asleep before I could ultimately get through the whole thing. For the record, I remember watching at late hours, so I had a reason to fall asleep. But I was wise to do such a thing. So maybe, I would end up recommending this film if you all need some proper material to fall asleep to. “Transcendence” is one of the interesting cases of how bad sci-fi can be sometimes, even though it is perhaps my favorite genre. 

#19: Pitch Perfect (2012)

2012 is such a strange year, because I honestly had different opinions about a lot of the popular movies that came out that year. I liked “The Guilt Trip” even though a lot of people announced their displeasure with it on the Internet. I find “The Hunger Games” to be more overrated than McDonald’s. And when it comes to “Pitch Perfect,” I just want to die every time I hear that movie’s title. I was forced to watch this movie with my family when it came out on DVD. The advertising did not impress me because it didn’t look like my type of movie. Although cases have shown that I can be surprised at times (Saving Mr. Banks for example). When I saw the movie, I did not just feel unfortunate because I was watching it, but I also felt infuriated. Listen, I love movies, and I am a little biased here, but when was the last time that a major movie character makes “hating movies” a key plot point IN A MOVIE? Maybe there are some cases when it would work, but this movie FAILED on that. It’s like you’re going into a Little Caesars and finding out that the guy who runs the register hates pizza more than anything else. They’ve officially crossed a line and need to pay. Also, those acapella puns… F******************************************** ME! I mean, I kinda like Anna Kendrick, I think she has talent. But this movie sucks! Fun fact about this film, one of its big marketing taglines was “GET PITCH SLAPPED.” And you know what? That’s what this movie feels like! A pitch slap! I’m just glad the marketing team nailed the movie on the nose! Deception sucks sometimes.

#18: Daddy’s Home 2 (2017)

When it comes to movies, one of my weaker areas is perhaps films associated with Christmas. But in 2015, I went out and saw “Daddy’s Home,” a film where Will Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg are trying to outdad each other if you will. Ferrell is a dad, Wahlberg is the visiting dad, and I’ll be honest. The movie sucked. It was off the rails, insane, and I couldn’t buy a number of the things that were going on. Then… I saw the sequel, “Daddy’s Home 2.” IT GOT WORSE. I watched it for free on Prime, but that was the only GOOD part! That and Mel Gibson, his character was actually terrifically written, but overall the movie is just BAD! The mile a minute humor just didn’t work. There are sideplots that I really didn’t care all that much about. The chemistry between John Lithgow and Will Ferrell is perhaps embarrassing. I guess it’s… GOOFY but… WHY?! Every time the two wanted to kiss each other on the lips I felt like another one of my precious IQ points just ceased to exist. Seriously guys, if I make a grammatical error during this countdown, I think part of the blame will end up going to “Daddy’s Home 2.” And part of me, admittedly, is ashamed to be putting this on the list because I know a guy who has a kid who is trying to become an actress, and props to her. I’m glad she’s trying to fulfill her dreams. But she was in “Daddy’s Home 2.” So… I don’t know who this person is, and I am rooting for you, 100%, but this movie… DANG. I created this blog to be honest reviewer, what can I say? This is why I call myself the Movie Reviewing Moron. You know, maybe I’m just a moron at this point, I dunno. But in all seriousness, this is one of those comedies that I just watched that started out bad, and just climbed up the ladder of pain for me. Then the end came, and it fell off the ladder and suffered severe damage.

#17: Sharknado (2013)

Syfy, I love your respect and catering to the geek community, but I f*cking hate you sometimes. Why? Because you’re responsible for “Sharknado.” Let’s be real, I could include all six of these abominations on the list, but I can’t because not all of them were in released theatrically. YES! The first movie had a theatrical run for ONE NIGHT. It counts! For the record, I actually did not go see the movie in theaters when it came out, but I sat down and watched it at home in 2016. It was bad but it was also so bad it was funny. Then I saw it again in 2017, where I lost my s*it in just about every single frame. Wait a minute, so let me do the math here. It’s conventional for a film to be shown in 24 frames per second. “Sharknado” is on TV, but it is still a “movie,” barely, so it qualifies. “Sharknado” has a runtime of 1 hour, 27 minutes, and 17 seconds. There are 60 seconds in a minute, which leads me to multiply 24 by 60, which comes out to 1,440 frames for every minute of the movie. There are 60 minutes in an hour, leading me to multiply 1,440 by 60, which equals to 86,400 frames in an hour. The movie, once again, does not go over two hours. 1,440*27=38,880, which gives the total number of frames presented in 27 minutes. 86,400+38,880=125,280, meaning in that hour and twenty-seven minutes, viewers would see 125,280 frames whizzing by on their screens in just one s*itshow. But wait! Because I didn’t add the 17 extra seconds! 24*17=408. Adding that 408 frames to 125,280, that adds up to 125,688 frames for just one motion picture! That’s MORE than enough to make someone like me debate over watching this movie or getting eaten by a shark! Is Tara Reid hot? Yes. But it does not make for a quality movie. Are there cameos all over the place? Yes. But it does not make for a quality movie. I remember the old days when movies were just watching people walk around town. How did we get to flying sharks that have the ability to breathe outside of water? Like, what the f*ck?! I get that this is a ridiculous concept that is made for TV, where there’s probably a greater excuse for poor production quality, but this movie is still irritating! And it also does not excuse the forgettable characters, I did this thing where I perhaps sacrificed my own soul and decided to livetweet to the premieres of the previous three “Sharknado” movies, and when you don’t remember any of the characters or their names from prior installments, that’s kind of a problem. “Sharknado,” what have you done to our society? Oh, I know! F*cking killed it, that’s what you did!

#16: Journey 2: The Mysterious Island (2012)

You know how The Rock may be the biggest badass in cinema right now? Well… Go watch “Journey 2: The Mysterious Island” and tell me you do not regret your decision. While Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson is charismatic in a lot of roles he’s in, here, he’s just surrounded by cringe. Utter cringe. He’s surrounded by green screen s*it, unrealistically colored s*it, and all sorts of other s*it. I watched this movie once when I was staying at somebody’s house overnight, I was not in control of the television, and let’s just say that I WISH I was in control of that television. This movie isn’t exactly the worst kids film I have seen, but it is one of those unbearably cringeworthy, cliché, and anger-inducing experiences. The screenplay feels like what would be that stereotypical “kids adventure film,” but the thing is, it feels rushed, lazy, and horribly executed. Will kids enjoy this movie? Probably, sure. But I don’t know how much more intelligent it will end up making them. If you had to ask me, this is probably the worst movie with The Rock in it. And this is coming from a guy who saw “Tooth Fairy.” If you are having a Dwayne Johnson themed family movie night, just stick to “Jumanji,” stick to “The Game Plan.” Both of those are better movies to watch with your family if you ask me. ALSO, HOW DID THEY GET MICHAEL CAINE TO BE IN THIS?! Seriously! Do not watch this movie! It’s a hell of a JOURNEY! Literally!

#15: Ice Age: Collision Course (2016)

Coming in at #15 is “Ice Age: Collision Course,” one of the worst animated films ever made. It honestly amazes me that “Ice Age” got to five films before “Blade Runner” got to two films. I adore “Ice Age,” it is one of the more nostalgic properties of my time, so I have a soft spot for it. But this movie is the literal definition of hell. A lot of cliché storytelling methods are brought into this film and do not work out at all, the Scrat cutaways go on to eventually become the worst in the franchise, and the jokes in this film are as dimwitted and dumbed down as my grandma after she got ran over by a reindeer. There is a scene in the film where the frame cuts to an actual turd. They even take time to point it out! THIS FILM! GAH! This piece of horses*it on a stick also contains one of the most disturbing and off-putting scenes I have ever witnessed in an animated film. It sort of mocks the idea of having a baby and becoming a parent, and I don’t even want to continue describing it otherwise I’d blow a F*CKING GASKET! I imagine actors like Ray Romano and Dennis Leary, who are very talented by the way, I should be nice and point out that I enjoy some of the things they do, were ultimately just happy to get the paycheck. I think they just needed some work to pass the time, so this movie fit in perfectly. After all, when you’re doing voiceovers and not physically acting, it’s a pretty simple job. The animation itself looks impressive, this might even be the prettiest “Ice Age” movie yet, but given how this movie came out in 2016, good animation is perhaps a requirement, especially considering how this is a fifth installment to a popular and respectable franchise that is also the original feature-length idea to have come out from the studio who made it, which in this case, is Blue Sky. Oddly enough, “Ice Age: Collision Course” came out in 2016, which is the same year another stinker that takes place in the cold came out, specifically “Norm of the North.” Now I have not seen “Norm of the North” from start to finish, so I cannot give any official thoughts on it. Having said that, and knowing what I already have acquired about “Norm of the North,” I am afraid I watch it, it would make this movie, “Ice Age: Collision Course,” look like “Coraline.” I love how the second “Ice Age” film is called “The Meltdown,” because that is also something I must have experienced internally as I watched the sack of crap some like to call “Ice Age: Collision Course.” If you have kids, don’t show them this. EVER!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkMSjF8yCWU

#14: Isn’t It Romantic? (2019)

You know what sucks? Stupid, half-assed parodies! Crappy, underwhelming scripts! Mixed, confusing messages that come out of nowhere! This movie has all three of those things! What movie do I speak of? I speak of “Isn’t It Romantic?.” I know I am not the target audience for romcoms, but having said that, this movie is just intolerable. This movie is self-aware, but when I say self-aware, I mean that in a way that feels practically insulting. The movie’s characters are often talking about how much they like going home, watching romantic comedies that someone like myself would never bother watching in the near future. Therefore, it should not be surprising that almost every element of the “cliche romcom” is explained to me, as an audience member, like I’m in pre-school. Even if this movie had one or two nifty ideas, they were not executed well at all! Most of the scenes in “Isn’t It Romantic?” just feel annoying, dull, or headache-inducing. And to make matters worse, this movie is pretty short. It’s an hour and twenty-nine minutes, and I STILL begged for the end! If anything, I think it’s amazing that this movie tries to make fun of a genre that I don’t traditionally enjoy watching and yet it still sucks ass! Also, who is Rebel Wilson’s agent? She needs better work! I don’t really like Wilson as an actress, but still!

#13: Cats (2019)

Oh, yay! “Cats” made the list! What other f*cking possibility did you expect? You know the YouTube channel Cinemasins? It would probably be awhile before they make an “Everything Wrong with Cats” video of some nature, but I would not be surprised if it ever happens as this movie has been universally mocked and panned by a large number of people. In my review for this film which I happened to have posted almost a month ago now, I originally given this a 2. This is one of the few movies I can think of in recent memory that has turned into a 1 overtime. I want to give credit for the visual effects in whatever way I can, because let’s face it, as creepy as everybody looks, there are a couple moments that make the visuals come off as the best part of the movie. But I would be lying if I didn’t confirm that the film’s visual appearance wasn’t unsatisfying to say the least. Speaking of that, I remember hearing that “Cats” was supposed to be redone visually in some way, kind of like what is happening with “Sonic the Hedgehog,” but honestly, I don’t see how that is going to help anything! The movie’s design will still supposedly look lackluster, the writing will still be piss-poor, and the singing sequences will still be boring for the most part! This is one of those films that I almost wonder how it even got made. It is a fine example of how not everything needs to be translated into a movie. I mean, if you want to see a movie where Sir Ian McKellan licks a plate, be my guest! But this is GANDALF we’re talking about! The guy deserves better than to be in this kitty litter! And worst of all, “Cats” is just… BOOOORRRRRRING! Did I mention Rebel Wilson needs a new agent? Yeah, I’m pretty sure I did! I am fairly certain that when it comes to all of the bad movies from 2019 in particular, this was perhaps the biggest CATatrophe.

*I apologize for the crappy clip, this movie barely has anything available and it just came out*

#12: Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019)

Oh my god. Zilla. This f*cking movie. “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” can go screw itself! Not only is this a bad film, but a disappointing one too. Why? I remember back in 2018 when they dropped the first trailer for this film at San Diego Comic-Con, and it made the movie look like it was going to be epic, it was going to be majestic, it was going to be heart-pumping. If anything, this film reminded me of the 2014 “Godzilla” movie. It had an excellent trailer, in fact multiple excellent trailers at that, and the movie was not exactly as good as those trailers. But at least that movie had some things to enjoy! Yes, you get more monsters and more Godzilla in this film. But it doesn’t make up for the crappy script. It doesn’t make up for the unlikable characters. It doesn’t make up for the occasionally lackluster cinematography (although certain shots were pretty neat). And without going into much context, I’m from the Boston area in Massachusetts, and based on how much I disliked this movie, this is a gigantic disservice to the city of Boston! I saw this film in IMAX and if you know me, you know much of an evangelical I am for large formats including IMAX, even smaller IMAX screens will do the trick for me. However, this may have been the one rare, out of nowhere occasion where I almost felt like I left the IMAX theater and almost received a headache. AND I DIDN’T EVEN WATCH THE FILM IN 3D! The sad part is, the film does come off like it’s trying to be the next big epic. It’s visually pleasing and the sound work is pretty good. But everything from the writing to the waste of a cast is beyond blasphemous. Despite the name, this movie is no king.

#11: Dirty Grandpa (2016)

You ever hear that phrase, “respect your elders?” Well I want to coin a new phrase, “Respect all elders that are not played by Robert De Niro.” “Dirty Grandpa” can suck it! Fun fact, my father actually once ran into Robert De Niro and they exchanged waves. From that I can assume that in person, he’s a rather friendly gentleman. Unfortunately, the character he plays in “Dirty Grandpa” is a complete dickhead. Granted, that was definitely the intention, but there’s a fine line between asshole and menace to society. He’s an incessant liar, he makes all of the world’s other perverts look datable, and even when the movie tries to get you to feel bad for him, they fail miserably because as a viewer, it has already been established that this guy is nobody but someone I just can’t help but scold! This character, at least to me, did not earn anything that he would probably consider of value that relates to the movie’s script and story. As a movie, the characters are bland and just plain terrible, and when it comes to comedy, it just feels tiring and anger-inducing. I get that the movie is about a crazy grandpa, not to mention a pervert grandpa, but as a person, he’s a complete ass! I’m a firm believer that age is just a number. If you want to date someone your age, go for it. If not, you do you. You could be sixty and the other person could be twenty-five. Whatever, it’s your life, not mine, I’m not here to judge your choices. I’m not saying a sixty-year-old should date a five-year-old or something along those lines, if there is a far line between “major” and “minor” ages, that’s when questioning begins from my perspective, but for the most part, you do you. I had no problem with the guy wanting to be around younger women, but the way he acts around not just those women, but a crapton of other characters made me wish I could do something more fun. Stepping on a freaking LEGO brick might as well be more fun than this movie for crying out loud!

#10: Life of the Party (2018)

Coming in at #10, is the film that I put down as my least favorite of 2018, and if you know the lead actress and director, this next entry should not be all that surprising. “Life of the Party.” This was the first 1/10 I gave during the year and I believe a small part of me wondered when it would become dethroned. Granted, 2018 has had its fair share of stinkers, a few other 1/10s as well, but none of them outranked this pile of s*it. This movie stars Melissa McCarthy and is directed by her husband, Ben Falcone, which automatically makes this a lose-lose situation. MY GOSH! Granted, there are various scenes that look like they belong in a comedy. But over the years, having seen tons of movies, there are many films that just feel like they will be made for a short-lived audience experience, maybe they’ll get rentals eventually, but they won’t often be quoted down the road. This feels like one of those forgettable, disposable, not to mention irritating studio comedies. Melissa McCarthy plays this over the top, unrealistically goofy mother, wife type character that feels like a humanized character out of a bad “SpongeBob” episode. There is a point that I remember watching this film in the theater, there were a lot of people there, most likely because it was Mother’s Day, and as we were in the climax, incident upon incident kept happening to the point where I just stopped caring. Everyone was gasping, oohing, aahing, and I just couldn’t join in. There was a point during such moments in the film where I just muttered to myself, “Yeah.” In fact, you want to get into specifics regarding that moment? SPOILERS! Who cares? This movie sucks! It’s not like I’m revealing spoilers for “Back to the Future” or something! This movie has a cameo from Christina Aguilera. Apparently, she’s cousins with one of the characters who is trying to get a party thrown! This sounds like something I would have written if I was four! IN-SULTING! “Life of the Party” reminded me that despite how it may be fun to make movies with your spouse, you’re supposed to make it good. Work first, play later.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqE-fFQkShI

#9: New Year’s Eve (2011)

This next entry to the list, quite honestly, as one who admires the holiday, hurt me. “New Year’s Eve” dropped the ball and based on how terrible the movie is, it must have dropped on my balls. This film is directed by Garry Marshall, who unfortunately passed away, but in his final days of directing, he apparently resorted to some half-assed holiday movies that probably should have ended up going straight to Lifetime. But because these movies score big name actors like Halle Berry (Catwoman, Monster’s Ball), Hilary Swank (Boys Don’t Cry, Insomnia), Sofia Vergara (Modern Family, Happy Feet 2), Katherine Heigel (27 Dresses, Knocked Up), Ashton Kutcher (That 70s Show, Dude, Where’s My Car?), Zac Efron (High School Musical, Hairspray), Michelle Pfeiffer (Batman Returns, One Fine Day), Josh Duhamel (Transformers, When in Rome), and get this! ROBERT F*CKING DE NIRO (The Godfather, Goodfellas)! “New Year’s Eve” is just one of those movies that really just gets the big screen treatment when I cannot help but ask, “Why?” Granted, there is a sense of spectacle with New Year’s Eve, because there’s a lot of partying, a lot of noise, a lot of chaos that ultimately goes down. Plus, even though I have not been to the ball drop in New York myself, or any of the other big firework shows or celebrations around the world to ring in the new year, I have a built-in sense that these events are almost life-altering, even if it is something as simple as waiting for time to change. It is the ultimate definition of turning nothing into something. New Year’s Eve is almost the “Seinfeld” of holidays. No, Festivus does not count. The problem with “New Year’s Eve” is that it has too many storylines meshed into one, so there’s no real main conflict that I have to care about. Too many things rise as problems, therefore there are too many solutions. This movie has more problems than an advanced placement math class. Don’t watch this at the end or beginning of the year, otherwise you’ll probably be having a crappy new year.

#8: Point Break (2015)

Ever since my first visit to it in 2017, I have watched the original “Point Break” once every summer. This past year, I ordered the 4K Blu-ray for the “Point Break” remake online. Two weeks after my annual “Point Break” viewing, I thought to myself: “Why not check out the new one?” Granted, I was not expecting much, because I know of numerous online critics who have slammed this thing to the ground. Guess what? As of now, I am no exception because the “Point Break” remake broke me! It is the literal definition of when Hollywood studios become lazy and try to recreate something that has already been done well, and perhaps seems irreplaceable. This remake just feels rushed. We barely get to know the characters, none of them seem like they have charisma or chemistry, and it is just an insult to the “Point Break” name! And you know what? Before this film even came out, original actress Lori Petty was outspoken in terms of how infuriated she was to see this happen. And having seen the movie, I applaud her. The original “Point Break,” directed by Kathryn Bigelow, is an interesting film because of how the characters of Johnny Utah, the FBI agent lawman, and Bodhi, the criminal who really enjoys surfing interact with each other, become friends, and play off each other. I felt the comradery between the duo. Here? Absolutely nothing! Also, the color grading for a good portion of the film looks like a depressingly serious installment to the “James Bond” franchise. It’s freaking awful! And I bet the studio behind this film, Warner Brothers, who by the way did not make the original “Point Break” (20th Century Fox did), lacked any faith they could have had in this film at some point in time. Why? Because it released the week after “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” and the same day as a Quentin Tarantino film! Warner Brothers must have been like… Let’s just put it out! Who cares? We might as well hide it, but we’ll get some money once “Star Wars” sells out! Let’s just see what happens!

#7: Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day (2014)

I’m pretty sure this picture above suggests what I want to happen to every copy of the script for this film… As much as I love Marvel, as much as I love “Star Wars,” as much as I love Pixar, Disney itself is perhaps an evil corporation. And if I’m the hero of this story, I have to remind all of you to simply avoid watching my least favorite movie of 2014, “Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day.” This is a family comedy at its worst! It tries to be goofy, it tries to be silly, it tries to be whimsical, it tries to be heartwarming at a particular point. NONE OF IT worked. In fact, this feels like something that I probably would have written at the age of five. A number of the jokes were predictable, unfunny, and just plain unbearable. I never felt offended by anything, which isn’t too surprising for a Disney movie at this point, but there is one thing I did feel after watching this movie. STUPID. If I had to be honest with you, there is a good chance that as much as Steve Carell tries his best with his performance in this movie, I think he was ultimately just happy to receive a paycheck and move on with life. In fact, this may be his worst movie! If I had to say anything else, this may have also been a reminder from Disney that they made the movie “Peter Pan.” They had a whole side story about one of the characters being part of a “Peter Pan” play, which may have only been in the movie because, you know, Disney! If anything, they should change this film’s name to “Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Movie.” The only positive thing I was able to get from this movie was to realize that the very next day I was going to see “Interstellar.” And if you have seen my Best of the Decade countdown, you’d know I LOVE that movie.

#6: The Space Between Us (2017)

One of the significant types of films I’ve witnessed during the 2010s that have stood out, at least to me, have something to do with outer space. Films like “The Martian,” “First Man,” and “Gravity.” Unfortunately, I saw one particular science fiction film that does not rank up there with such titles. Specifically, 2017’s “The Space Between Us.” Films like this is why I continuously lose faith in the human race. Will we go to Mars? Will we travel to alternate universes? Will we elect THE PERFECT PRESIDENT? Who knows? I think we’re all just going to die a horrible death one day and part of the blame will have to go to the making of this movie. In fact, this movie stars Asa Butterfield, who seems to be doing what he can with a rather clunky script, but I seriously wonder if this is what he would have wanted to do with his acting career. In fact, I remember back in the middle of the decade when he was one of the top candidates to become the MCU’s “Spider-Man.” As much as I love Tom Holland right now, part of me wonders if Asa Butterfield actually turned out to be the next Spider-Man, if this movie would even exist right now. OR, if it did exist, would they make it ten times better? I dunno. It’s hard to tell. I mean, I’m not hating on Butterfield, because I did like him in “Ender’s Game” which came out in 2013. I think he was pretty decent there and the movie overall worked. THIS ON THE OTHER HAND, IS PURE MALARKEY! As for his chemistry with Britt Robertson, it could arguably be the chemistry between a set characters in a sci-fi film ever. The characters are disposable, lack charisma, and there are several lines that feel like they would almost be too stupid to put in even a first draft! The film does like somewhat nice at times, it some cool shots, but much like with “Ice Age: Collision Course,” which is a somewhat pretty animated movie, looks are not everything. I need some time away from this movie. I need… SPACE.

#5: Mother’s Day (2016)

Ah… “Mother’s Day,” that one day of year to remind yourself of everything that your mom has done for you. It’s a day of appreciation, love, and BAD MOVIES. Case and point, “Mother’s Day,” directed by Garry Marshall. What really makes this movie so insufferable is the obnoxious ad campaign it seems to present for the Home Shopping Network, and that’s just a tiny little taste of it! Product placement is something I understand, something I completely get. Movies are not cheap to make. But it is difficult to do without making me roll my eyes. This movie should really not be called “Mother’s Day,” but based on its obnoxious fetish for the Home Shopping Network, it should be retitled, “Home Shopping Network: The Movie.” There’s even this one scene that takes place in front of a vending machine where I ENDLESSLY was on the brink of full-blown anger of despair. I want to watch a movie, NOT a commercial! In fact, the only thing that could make this the most commercialized Mother’s Day film possible is by having every other scene be a Hallmark card reading session. As for the characters, they are disposable, boring, and overall, just pains to watch! Yes, the cast is fairly recognizable from Jennifer Aniston, Jason Sudeikis, and Julia Roberts, but that just makes the movie worse considering how these talented, well-known people are being wasted through a boring-ass commercialized script! Once again, this was directed by Garry Marshall, who also directed the monstrously bad “New Year’s Eve,” another film that ruins the spirit of its own holiday. I said earlier that “New Year’s Eve” hurt me. “Mother’s Day” on the other hand, killed me. And this movie’s just worse because while both films come close to meaning something in regards their specific holiday spirit, this one just fails on seemingly every level. I will point out, it has been awhile since watching “Mother’s Day” and this movie is unfathomably forgettable. Plus, I can assure you that if there was any blatantly obvious product placement in 2011’s “New Year’s Eve,” it would be somewhat forgiven because how can you not have Times Square be full of advertising in real life? Even if you have the worst mother in the world who never gave you any love, respect, or time, I will assure you, your mother is much more admirable than this sack of garbage they call a film!

#4: The Emoji Movie (2017)

Here’s the thing about being a kid. As a kid, I’d watch anything as long as it was on a screen, but luckily, one of those things was not “The Emoji Movie,” I first watched that at 17-years old. Why did I watch this movie? To be completely truthful, it was because I wanted to prove to the universe that I have the balls to go see any movie ever made, even if it looks like it is gonna suck ass. And “ass” is the perfect way to describe “The Emoji Movie” if you ask me. But I survived! I guess! This is without a doubt, proof, of how not to make an animated movie. Marketing-wise, I can see where Sony is coming from, but it does not mean it is a genius concept! Granted, if you take something like “The LEGO Movie” when it was on paper, that didn’t sound like a genius concept, but Phil Lord and Christopher Miller took that abnormal and seemingly stale concept and turned it into magic. This movie just sucks! In fact, speaking of “The LEGO Movie,” it rips off elements of that, and it also injects the core parts that make up “Inside Out” and “Wreck-It Ralph.” Not even Patrick Stewart can save the movie! If you are a “Star Trek” fan and prefer Picard over Kirk, I’d wonder if this film will make you change your mind. The worst part about this film is that it is literally built around advertising and product placement. I don’t want to blame the director for this mess. If anything, I think the writers, or whoever pitched this movie needs a good talking to. I almost wonder if Sony just came up with this idea because they were running out of juice. Seriously! If I were making a movie about Emojis, which I would probably NEVER do, it’s a STUPID idea anyway, I would do my best to not let children remember this movie for highlights such as when random noname characters watch cat videos on YouTube! As if the movie was not insulting enough, to save the day, the heroes need to go somewhere, and they fly there on a Twitter bird! This is a crime and unholy sin against not just humanity, but technological faces and images! If you are a parent, do yourself a favor, if you want a movie to put on for a couple of hours just to shut your kid up, just stick with “How To Train Your Dragon” or something. If you’re doing errands at Walmart and find this on DVD, run, don’t walk, away as fast as possible.

#3: The Haunting of Sharon Tate (2019)

We are getting to the bottom of the barrel, guys, and I mean that in every sense of the word. This is one of the most boring, unlikable, distasteful, and incompetently made films I have seen in my entire life. “The Haunting of Sharon Tate.” This is one of those films that I knew how bad it was going to be from the very first scene. The editing and cinematography of this bitch make this garbage look more a music video as opposed to a film! Based on what I have read, this seems to have barely gotten any sort of theatrical release in the US. It got released in theaters, but who knows how many? But according to Box Office Mojo, it has a release in countries like Russia and Portugal, therefore it had a slight taste of that theatrical flavor. Combing the totals of both countries’ theatrical runs, the film made a total just short of $20,000! I don’t know how much it cost to make “The Haunting of Sharon Tate,” but if you told me this movie made a profit with a $20,000+ worldwide return, I’d probably smack you over the head! And I’m glad it didn’t release in too many theaters where I live because I would have probably demanded a refund! This movie is based on the Manson Murders from 1969, and focuses mainly around Sharon Tate. Not only that, and this is one of the reasons why I hate this movie so much, they bring a half-assed supernatural plot into the mix! There are a few BARELY interesting conversations about fate. That’s the only redeeming quality of the film. Other than that, I think the performances, maybe across the board, are abominable. The directing is perhaps cringeworthy. The camerawork and color scheme of the film are both almost off-putting. I think the way Sharon Tate was written was terrible as well, because even though I don’t know much about her in real life, this movie seems to present a version of Tate that often breaks down in tears every other microsecond, she’s depressed, and it’s like she can’t even function in everyday society. And I get that this is a horror movie, and I want my horror movies to be scary, I want them to literally eat me. There is a scene in this film that is the stuff of nightmares, but not in the way that would allow me to respect the people who made this piece of crap. It’s rare for me to feel personally offended by media, and “The Haunting of Sharon Tate” did not offend me, just so we’re clear here. But I wonder if Sharon Tate herself would be offended by this disaster! What makes this even more unbearable is the fact that in just the same year, we got a fantastic movie with Sharon Tate in it, “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.” That made me want to live in 1969. This movie made me just want to die.

#2: The Smurfs (2011)

Up next, is one of the worst family films I have seen in the entirety of the time that I’ve been alive, “The Smurfs.” I! HATE! EVERYTHING! ABOUT! THIS! MOVIE! I saw this movie before I was a teenager, and even then I knew how bad it was. I have no memory of watching any of the earlier “Smurfs” material growing up, so I had nothing ruined for me, but I wonder what would have happened if I did watch any of that earlier material. I have seen this film twice, both times were probably not my choice, and it did not get any better the second time. This is the kind of movie that you SHOULD NOT show your kids. Not because it’s inappropriate, too edgy, or anything like that, but because it just almost feels mindless. Between the product placement, the unbelievably annoying screenplay, and beyond lifeless performances from actors including Neil Patrick Harris, it all adds up to one of the most insulting movies of the past ten years. You know those times when you watch a movie and think to yourself, “This was written by a four-year-old for crying out loud!” If you ask me, I think that’s the case for “The Smurfs,” a four-year-old could have written this on a random piece of paper and somehow know how to get this pitched. And another four-year-old executive who just started their new job because they have connections with a parent who works at the studio looked at the script and said, “We’ll take it! Because let’s face it, four-year-olds will watch anything on a screen and call it the greatest masterpiece in all of history! Let’s Smurf this thing up!” In fact, you know how this movie is called “The Smurfs?” Yeah, they suck. THEY JUST SUCK! There is a scene in the movie where the Smurfs are doing their trademarked “Happy Song” and what happens next reminded me of exactly what I’m feeling as an audience member. When Neil Patrick Harris yells, “STOP!” and asks the Smurfs if they find the song the least bit annoying, I cannot believe how much I wanted to side with this dude. Seriously, some of those Smurfs really got on my nerves as the movie progressed. The only person in this movie who looks like he’s having fun with it is Hank Azaria as Gargamel. He’s written with tons of cliches behind him, but based on the supposed charisma Azaria must have behind him, he makes it work! Other than that, the movie is just S*IT! This is the kind of family movie I don’t want in my life. It’s too dumbed-down for kids, too cheesy and cringeworthy for adults, and it just makes me feel blue. To this day I still have not seen the second one. I’m not wasting my time. 

#1: ??? (2016)

After 24 movies, one more lies ahead. This is a film that I admittedly knew would be bad just from seeing the first trailer. In fact, without saying the actual title, if you have followed me for a long time, you’d know that this film has some sort of significance to this blog, and in a way, has been part of its ongoing history. I’ve mentioned it a number of times, I’ve bashed it from occasion after another, and I’ve even done a couple dedicated posts on it, including a review. Take a look at my #1 worst movie of the 2010s.

Call me an asshole, call me a buffoon, call me a sexist even, but my #1 worst film of the 2010s is “Ghostbusters.” Specifically, “Ghostbusters” 2016. Never in the history of my adventures at the movies have I been more immensely shell-shocked, and I don’t mean that in a good way. I don’t mean that as in, I just saw the best, most realistic war film of all time, I mean that I somehow went into this movie, my friend and I paid EXTRA money for it to see it in 3D, with the lowest expectations possible, and I still walked out disappointed! This is a film that could have been alright, but I think there are a ton of problems with it. Look, I am all for female empowerment, but I think the main problem with this film is that it erases the legacy of which it established decades prior. Ray, Egon, Peter, and Winston have formed something made of gold. Keep in mind, I am not a mega-fanatic of the “Ghostbusters” franchise. I like “Ghostbusters,” but to this day, I still haven’t seen the cartoons, I do not have a lot of “Ghostbusters” toys or merch, although I do have a pretty cool shirt, I still have yet to see “Ghostbusters II,” but even I think that rebooting, or in this case, remaking “Ghostbusters” with women was a step in the wrong direction. I think this movie could have been slightly more interesting with a similar plot, the same cast, but without a popular IP name attached to it. Just call it “Spooky Bitches” or something else that sounds pretty badass! You’ll probably get me in the theater! And you know how I mentioned that I saw this film in 3D? I think that’s the only positive element of the film, because I noticed they use a technology called frame break, where certain effects not only appear as if they pop off the screen, but the way the cinema set up the screen left two black bars on the top and bottom, so the effects take up space on those black bars. It’s gimmicky, but cool. Other than that, the only other positive I can come up with, which doesn’t really make the movie all that much better, is one chuckle-worthy line out of Leslie Jones’ mouth. As for everything else, it’s s*it!

The reality of the situation is this… “Ghostbusters” 2016 has a talented cast. I think Kristen Wiig has acting chops and I liked a couple of other things she was in. Kate McKinnon is pretty funny and I usually find her to be a card on “Saturday Night Live.” I admittedly have not seen much of Leslie Jones before “Ghostbusters,” but in person, she comes off as pretty funny. In fact, I am rooting for her at this point, because “Supermarket Sweep” is coming back and apparently, she’s hosting, so I wish her luck! The only person in the cast who I never tend to associate with anything all that great is Melissa McCarthy, and maybe it’s because she never gets the right roles. She just always comes off like she needs to step in as that one chubby lady with an obnoxious voice. Plus, Chris Hemsworth is in this movie, but I would be lying to you if I told you he played a good character, because HE DID NOT! He plays a secretary and he makes Patrck Star look like Sheldon Cooper! There’s dumb, and then there’s cringeworthy dumb! Based on everything I’ve stated so far, I think you all know what kind of dumb I feel this movie presents from Hemsworth’s character. And that’s another thing that I almost completely forgot about, THANKFULLY, but now I am officially in hell once more, so I gotta deal with it… Every man in this film is an idiot.

I get it, this film is trying to present these women who come, see, and kick something’s ass, and I don’t really see a problem with female empowerment, but pretty much every man felt either disposable or idiotic. There’s a Chinese delivery guy who always delivers the wrong thing, there’s a guy who in a situation of terror is more concerned with his own theater than the lives of those in his theater, there’s a forgettable male antagonist named Rowan, and that’s just scratching the surface of this unbelievable f*cking turd of a film! This movie, and this could be COMPLETELY unintentional, almost seems to demonize men as an entire gender. There’s even a scene where the girls have to bust a giant ghost, and to do that, they have to shoot it in it’s crotch! I should point out, this film is written and directed by Paul Feig, who to be fair, is a guy who has received acclaim for films like “Bridesmaids.” He also created “Freaks and Geeks,” which is a really good show! But he also wrote a guest column years back titled “Why Men Aren’t Funny.” It does make me a little suspicious if you ask me. Maybe a little too much.

This film, even though it has often marketed as an empowerment message of some sorts to women, it is also, at least from my point of view, an attack on men. Do I think men are funny? Yes. Do I think women are funny? Absolutely! But NOBODY is funny in “Ghostbusters!” And that’s the thing about the original 1984 film, it’s not the funniest movie I have ever seen to be completely honest, but it is well-written and handles dry humor very well. In the original film, the four main guys have terrific chemistry with one another, they felt like a proper team. This 2016 remake lacks the same oomph in the chemistry that the original managed to have. Plus the jokes in general, across the board, make me think that Red Bull will no longer give me wings.

This movie is full of problems, ranging from bad characters to some ridiculously cartoony visuals, but one thing I think about often is how these women essentially become superheroes by the end of the movie. You can make the argument that the film is hiding a deleted scene where they all get bitten by a radioactive ghost whose teeth still work! The beauty of the original “Ghostbusters,” including in the climax is that the guys are always adapting to new situations. When they use their proton packs, it shows that they lack experience with busting the paranormal. But as I showed in the clip above, these four women can wield proton packs towards the end of the film as if they’ve become powerful Jedi or something of that nature! This is “Ghostbusters,” not the MCU! THERE’S A F*CKING DIFFERENCE!

One more thing, and that should be all… I mentioned that this is a reboot of the 1984 film. Having said that, it pretty much ignores previously established characters and lore that fans and audiences have come to know and creates something new. But the movie also has cameos from the original cast… AND IT ALL SUCKS!

Dan Aykroyd plays a cab driver who can’t help Kristen Wiig’s character get to Chinatown… For… NO REASON AT ALL?! Son of a bitch! Ernie Hudson makes a cameo by the end of the movie that is perhaps… tolerable? Maybe? Maybe because the movie’s over, that’s why. Apparently Sigourney Weaver made a cameo that I do not remember at all. But by far the most insulting cameo is from Bill Murray, who I could probably tell DID NOT want to be in this movie! But he must be a classy dude for doing it, and I’m sure whatever paycheck he got was going to help him overtime. Maybe he did want to do it, but the way his lines are delivered are almost robotic. It doesn’t feel raw!

And I do believe that the cast themselves got a little too much unnecessary hate for being in this movie, but it does not change the fact that THE MOVIE IS JUST!!! …GARRRRBAGE! Never have I watched a film in the theater and felt more surprisingly let down. If you like this film, that’s fine, you’re allowed to like it, but I thought it was one of the most insulting, bottom of the barrel, stupid, not to mention perhaps offensive films I have witnessed in my life. I just hope that 2020’s “Ghostbusters: Afterlife” will steer the ship in the proper direction. The first trailer for that film looks better than ANYTHING that has come out of “Ghostbusters” 2016 marketing-wise or the movie itself.

While we’re on this topic, this is a weird way to end the decade, because I started this blog back in 2016 as part of a high school project, the first post I ever did is titled “Ghostbusters (2016) Trailer 1 Review: Most Poorly Received Trailer Ever?” and now here we are, talking about my #1 worst film of 2010s, and it is literally about the movie I mainly talked about in my first post. This feels like a perfect culmination for Scene Before. The decade all started with “Ghostbusters,” and thus the decade shall end with “Ghostbusters!” The saga is complete. If you ask me, I think “Ghostbusters” 2016 should be avoided at all costs, just go back and watch the original, I think that would make for a more pleasant movie night, maybe it’ll make you feel like you have less strange somethings in the neighborhood. “Ghostbusters” 2016 can rot, I don’t want to watch it ever again, and it is the worst movie of the 2010s!

Thanks for reading this countdown! I just want to thank each and every one of you who has tuned in, read, or simply glanced at my material during the 2010s. I know not all of it is great. There’s a lot of work to this day that I am truly proud of, but there is some that I admittedly look back upon and cringe over. But that’s part of the journey, admitting your mistakes and learning from them. I will say, I did market this as a “countdown event,” so even though this is the proper conclusion to the series, maybe I’ll insert a spinoff here and there every once in awhile. I want to know in the comments down below, is there a new addition to this countdown event series that you would want to see? Maybe a most disappointing list? Overrated movies list? Underrated movies list? Let me know down below!

Speaking of being in the know, I have an announcement to make. Some of you may have seen this coming, but I do want to let everyone know, that one of the most experimental and one of a kind posts I made last year was The 1st Annual JACKOFF Awards. This year, I have decided to continue the tradition. I am planning on announcing the nominees on Sunday, February 2nd, and holding the awards two weeks after, Sunday, February 16th. I have no idea if I am going to go through with this, but I’m thinking of changing the name. I’m not too sure Meryl Streep will be bragging about winning a Jackoff, but this is something I still need to think about. Nevertheless, stay tuned for more information, and until then, have a happy new decade! Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Be sure to like this post and leave a comment, it really helps me out! Speaking of which, check out my Facebook page and spread the word regarding Scene Before and Flicknerd.com on social! If you guys want to check out my Top BEST Movies of the 2010s, there’s a box down below that will take you to that post, just click on it and you’re good to go! If you’re reading it, enjoy it! Go nuts! I want to know, what are your least favorite movies of the 2010s? Do you have a list? Name the films! Do you think I missed an entry from this list? There are so many movies to choose from that maybe I forgot one along the way! Leave your thoughts and opinions down below and let’s make the 2020s a blast that’s stronger than a bolt of lightning! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

A Wrinkle In Time (2018): 2018’s Most Ambitious Flop?

mv5bmjmxnjq5mti3mv5bml5banbnxkftztgwmjq2mtayndm-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

Before we get into my thoughts about “A Wrinkle In Time,” I just want to say that this movie is distributed and produced by Disney. This company, as you may know, relies a lot on making entertainment catered towards a family-friendly demographic. Pretty soon, a couple will probably be going to see more of these movies. After all, they are having a kid. This couple by the way goes by the names of Paul and Genevieve. Their journey to conception, while extended, may have been worth the time in the long run. This is all explained… in “What the IVF?!”

“What the IVF?” is a new series on YouTube currently cranking out short videos starring the recently mentioned couple. This goes over the two’s miseries and joys of having a baby, that is, before actually having a baby. The two encounter struggles in sex, exams, decisions, money, math, and how many needles was that again? Oh, right, too many! You can find the latest episodes from “WTIVF?” on their YouTube channel, such as the one above! This latest episode starts off from where the last one ends, and it explains the couple’s PGD results. Not only that, but it also goes into a mystical way to break a curse the couple assumes is upon them. Be sure to subscribe to the “What the IVF?” YouTube and ring the bell! Also, be sure to check out these two on other forms of social media, along with the show’s very own website! All of the links are below, and be sure to tell them that Jack Drees sent ya over!

WTIVF? WEBSITE: http://www.whattheivf.com/

WTIVF? YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCILXSidkzWgwrQ5Oa1py78w/featured?disable_polymer=1

WTIVF? TWITTER: https://twitter.com/WTivF

WTIVF? INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/wtivf/

WTIVF? FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/What-The-IVF-288868031634125/

mv5bnje4odi4nzcymv5bml5banbnxkftztgwmzy0nje5mji-_v1_

“A Wrinkle In Time” is directed by Ava DuVernay (Selma, Middle of Nowhere) and stars Storm Reid (12 Years A Slave, Sleight), Oprah Winfrey (The Oprah Winfrey Show, Lee Daniels’ The Butler), Reese Witherspoon (Big Little Lies, Wild), Mindy Kaling (The Mindy Project, The Office), with Zach Galifianakis (The Hangover, The LEGO Batman Movie), and Chris Pine (Star Trek, Wonder Woman). This movie is based on a book of the same name written by Madeleine L’Engle and revolves around a girl by the name of Meg Murry. She and her brother are one day sent into space by three odd life forms on a journey to find their father (Chris Pine) through a CGI infested adventure.

When it comes to most of the movies I’m reviewing in 2018 that are listed as official movies to have come out in that particular year, there is a good chance that I’ve seen that specific movie in theaters. As far as “A Wrinkle In Time” goes, that’s not the case. In fact, since I’ve seen this as late as I have, that will probably make this review a lot more interesting. Upon some research, this movie has some interesting history. This is the second attempt Disney is making of creating their own version of “A Wrinkle In Time.” The first attempt didn’t work out so well, and apparently neither did this one. According to Wikipedia, this movie is labeled as a “box office bomb” while at the same time, being the first film directed by an African-American woman to earn a total of over $100 million domestically. Unfortunately for the movie, it couldn’t even make its $250 million budget back because it ended up earning $132 million worldwide. And you know what? This movie should have been better than it was. Because everybody’s raving about female empowerment nowadays, which is something some praise “A Wrinkle In Time” for, but to me, it’s all surrounded in one gigantic CGI mess of a movie.

Now with that being said, I will give some credit and say that the CGI in this movie for the most part is not half bad. There are times where I really feel like I’m looking at a super obvious green screen, but for the most part, I can’t complain. It’s colorful, and it works. A little over-saturated at times, but nevertheless, it works. In fact, in some ways, this might be the CGI that some would come to expect for a movie whose target audience is in the family and children demographic. Did I mention the word colorful?

As much as this movie may look good on a screen, in fact, this is one of the only real compliments I can give to “A Wrinkle In Time,” the real problems come with some of the writing, sometimes the directing, and the acting.

As I watched this film, I gave credit to some of the neat shots that line up all of what’s fresh and necessary in the frame. If this film were silent, I may have enjoyed it more, but if you consider maybe some of the music or characters talking, that enjoyment would have ultimately been taken away. There is one shot and scene that lines up together that could have totally worked, but it’s ultimately ruined by some f*cking pop song. I suddenly go from watching this movie that’s supposed to have an interesting story, and now I’ve suddenly transitioned into a music video. What the f*ck?!

I mean, seriously! This is an adventure movie! I don’t even think I can come up with one single place that even requires a pop song that would add more value to the film as a whole! Can you seriously imagine what would happen if “Harry Potter” were playing some song like Lady Gaga’s “Poker Face” during a Quidditch match? People would riot! I may be cheating here with this comment, only because this regards a franchise whose books I haven’t read, not to mention whose movies I haven’t watched, but I felt like I was watching “Fifty Shades of Grey” because I hear those movies are full of random pop songs everywhere!

Let’s talk about the writing in this film. While this screenplay definitely progresses from the beginning point to the final point, it’s just a bit predictable. Sure, it’s a movie for kids and families, so maybe that’s a somewhat forgivable statement. Although having seen the trailers, I could almost predict where this movie was going to go from start to finish. While I wasn’t entirely right, I certainly had the proper ideas. And I feel like part of why this movie may have been on the more predictable or formulaic side is because it just has that Disney sort of flair to it. It’s a Disney movie! It has to be kid friendly! It has to have that chart used for all of the recent films made by Disney! In fact one of the writers for this movie goes by the name of Jennifer Lee, whose writing credits on IMDb are all for Disney products, including one of my least favorite animations of the decade, “Frozen.” Granted, she wrote “Zootopia” and “Wreck it Ralph,” I gotta give her credit where it’s due. But it just felt like this product from her just comes off as a studio film. As I saw this name attached to this project, it made the film feel a tad less inspired. Then again I wasn’t there, so I may be jumping to conclusions too quickly. Ava DuVernay, the director behind this film, is a competent director. She did a great job on “Selma.” Although I think she could have done better here. Although one of the faults of the movie is that Duvernay has to work on a script that just didn’t really seem that interesting. I was kinda bored at times, I’ll be honest. Maybe it was because I watched this movie on a plane, but still.

Speaking of writing problems, as I watched this film on the plane, I turned on closed captioning in order to fully grasp what was being said. I wouldn’t have done the same at home because there I would probably get more peace and quiet, you have a lot of noise on the plane that could potentially ruin the experience. This allowed me to see something… interesting to say the least.

The movie’s lead character, Meg Murry, has a mother who possesses a Doctorate. When I watched this movie I put on closed captioning to enhance the experience and suddenly I hear Reese Witherspoon’s character refer to Meg’s mother as Dr. Murry, which according to Wikipedia, is the correct way to refer to that particular character. But in the closed captioning, I actually rewound the footage to make sure I wasn’t seeing things, it apparently refers to the character as Mrs. Murry.

OK? Is this is Disney’s fault? A screenwriter’s fault? Someone who was a major part of post-production’s fault? Maybe it’s JetBlue’s fault? I don’t really know. But I’m just glad to say that this isn’t Spirit Airlines’s fault. I’m kinda curious to buy the DVD or wait for this to become free on Amazon Prime or something to know if this is a JetBlue thing or a movie thing. And if it’s a movie thing, that’s not even my biggest problem with it, I gotta say the pop music takes the cake for that.

Let’s talk about the characters in “A Wrinkle In Time,” starting with our main hero, Storm Reid’s Meg Murry. I honestly can’t really say that Meg was that interesting of a character. Sure, she’s kinda smart and all, but there are some times where I just felt like I checked out for a minute because she didn’t seem to pop or she’d make a choice that I’d think would feel out of place for a main hero. Honestly, at this point, I’m starting to forget a lot about this movie. Part of it has to do with having to make two other movie reviews recently and putting one special post I’ve been making on hiatus. Did I not mention it was just uninteresting to watch? I didn’t hate Meg Murry in this movie, but nothing stood out about her except maybe her intelligence. I mean, I guess for this movie and character, that’s better than saying her body, but she wasn’t really that interesting.

When it comes to Meg’s kinda sorta brother (he’s adopted), nothing really stood out about him either. I SORT OF bought the chemistry between Meg and Charles Wallace (middle), which if you watch the movie, that’s the way he’s referred to. His character probably had the same dimension as Meg, however he’s just a bit more quirky. There’s not even much of anything I’m really enthusiastic about when it comes to him. Although there’s one time where he says “Shut up, Meg,” which made me think of “Family Guy.”

Moving onto our weirdos in the movie, we have Mrs. Whatsit (Reese Witherspoon), Mrs. Who (Mindy Kaling) and Mrs. Which (Oprah Winfrey). These names don’t even justify the weirdness of some of these characters, which I can tell is something that the movie was going for. After all, just look at them! They all look like what would happen when aliens try to dress themselves up as female versions of… uh… I dunno, let’s go with… Elvis Presley… Michael Jackson… and… I’m not even sure at this point, let’s just go with Forest Whitaker. Out of these three characters/mentors, the one I found most interesting was probably Oprah’s character of Mrs. Which. I say that because these are all supposed to be some sort of mentor figure, and Mrs. Which was probably the most mentor-like out of all of them. She tries to empower the heroes in a way that you may expect, and it works. Mrs. Who speaks only in quotes, which kind of got on my nerves after a while. But then again, it’s probably because I didn’t like Mindy Kaling in that one Xfinity commercial she did so maybe I’m overreacting. I’ll be honest though, and I say this personally, if I were to have a mentor who only spoke in quotes from other people, that would be diminishing overall, because that mentor would only be speaking another person’s words. Sure, we have tons of great people in our society that may have been built off of the shoulders of giants, but the important thing about becoming a better person is being yourself. You know, unless you’re an asshole. And honestly, when it comes to Reese Witherspoon’s character of Mrs. Whatsit, I think this was a waste of her talent, not to mention my time. Witherspoon won an Oscar, a Golden Globe, a Primetime Emmy, and has taken on a wide range of roles in both film and television. Taking all of that into consideration, it just made me go crazy. I wonder if Witherspoon was even trying, maybe it’s a result of bad directing that probably went more towards trying to get the best shots as opposed to the best performances. After all, it’s a Disney movie set for a late Winter release, who f*cking cares about “A Wrinkle In Time?”

The best character in the movie to me however has to be Meg’s father, Dr. Alexander Murry, played by Chris Pine. I haven’t seen all of Chris Pine’s work, but this to me definitely showcases his talent. In fact, in a movie that’s full of uninteresting characters and somewhat tolerable (maybe) performances, Chris Pine is a bright spot here. In fact, that’s why his character is my favorite, because out of everyone in this movie, maybe except Charles Wallace, he shows the most emotion. I doubt “A Wrinkle In Time” is gonna get any kind of recognition at the Academy Awards, but Chris Pine definitely gave the best performance in this movie, and made me care slightly more about what was going on.

I haven’t even gotten into the worst character of the movie though. Out of everyone, I gotta say that the thing that made this movie the biggest waste of my time is the character of Calvin, played by Levi Miller. I found him to be rather cliche, much like a lot of the other characters, and nothing was a shining star when it came to Calvin. But the worst thing to me about Calvin is the chemistry (or lack thereof) between him and Meg. I’m not gonna go into too much detail, but this is one of those connections that just feels forced and has no reason to exist other than spice things up, which ultimately doesn’t end up happening on my end because I never asked for this.

In the end, I wasted my time watching “A Wrinkle In Time.” I will say that the experience could have definitely been worse… I could have had to pay for it. I will say again, I watched the movie on a plane, and this was one of the free movies I was able to choose from. But if I were to watch this movie again, that would be amazing. I never read the book to “A Wrinkle In Time.” Maybe the book is better than the movie, but nevertheless, I just found myself uninterested, bored, and going through something that seemed somewhat familiar. I’m gonna give “A Wrinkle In Time” a 5/10. Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon I’ll have my review up for “Ant Man and the Wasp,” be sure to stay tuned for that, and if you want to know how you might be able to save some money at the movies, you’re in luck! Be sure to click the link down below to find out more about AMC’s new A-List program exclusively for Stubs members! Also, be sure to follow me here on Scene Before through WordPress or through your email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “A Wrinkle In Time?” What did you think about it? Did you read the book? Tell me what you thought about that! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

AMC Introduces A-List Program For Stubs Members: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/06/25/amc-introduces-a-list-program-for-stubs-members-is-this-a-good-deal/