Cinema

Wonder (2017): Face the Facts

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5byjfhowy0otgtndkzmc00ywjkltk1ngetywuxnjhmmmq5zjyyxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymjmxote0oda-_v1_sy1000_cr006481000_al_

“Wonder” is directed by Stephen Chbosky, and stars Jacob Tremblay (Room, The Smurfs 2), Julia Roberts (Pretty Woman, Ocean’s Eleven), Owen Wilson (Wedding Crashers, Cars), Izabela Vidovic (About a Boy, The Fosters), and the movie revolves around a young boy named August Pullman. He is what one would consider unique, and if you watch this film and observe his face, you’d understand why. The movie covers what’s going on as this boy enters the fifth grade and goes to a regular elementary school for the first time.

This movie is based on a New York Times Bestselling Novel. Now, I’m gonna restate something I said about books in a review I made prior to this one, specifically in my review for “The Firm.”

“…movies are more fun! Sorry, books!”

As a movie reviewing moron, you might already know I enjoy watching movies as opposed to reading books. Even though I imagine this book is very good, I just haven’t gotten around to reading it. Although as for the movie, I’d say it was enjoyable, but not perfect. It has a great cast, I like Owen Wilson in a lot of the stuff he’s in and he’s great here. In fact when it comes to casting, the resemblance between him and the young main character is hard to top! Just look at their hairstyles! Julia Roberts was also on her A-game, I haven’t really seen much of her work, but I know how much others praise her. Jacob Tremblay proves that he means business. I honestly think he’s one of the best child actors working today. Months before going to see this, I’ll have you know I watched “Room” and I thought that was one of the best movies of 2015. It’s in my top 3 with “The Martian” and “Star Wars Episode VII.” That movie had one of the best screenplays of the decade, Brie Larson and Jacob Tremblay had some of the greatest chemistry in a movie released that year, and there’s a part of me that wants to talk about it with everybody. Seriously! If you haven’t watched “Room,” see it now! If you have Amazon Prime then it’s free to watch!

This movie also has an intriguing screenplay that offers moments of happiness, sadness, and laughs. However, it also offers moments that I just want written off entirely. I remember having my verdict in mind as the movie was coming to an end and I hear this one line given by Owen Wilson’s character given to Jacob Tremblay’s character and it took that grade I had and I shrunk it down. I won’t say what it is, but it made me think of the line as unrealistic not only by the standards of what’s happening in the film but it also made me think that if I were the age of Jacob Tremblay’s character, I’d go through the scene reacting in a much different way. Let’s just say it starts with Jacob Tremblay freaking out over something and then he suddenly is calmed down by a line I assume that was supposed to get the audience to remember what this movie’s main point is. Speaking of Jacob Tremblay, let’s move onto him.

Jacob Tremblay plays the film’s main character, August Pullman. He has a facial deformity, which triggers a bunch of reactions from various characters. While his family seems to understand what happened to his face, after all, it’s his family I’m talking about, I don’t know why they wouldn’t understand, other people are either freaked out by it, think he’s a loser, or simply different. I honestly don’t know many people with facial deformities, but I’d say for younger viewers watching, this character can be important for those who have deformities or even if they don’t, regardless of whether or not they know someone with deformities. Luckily this movie is PG, so I’d say parents would be more likely to bring their kid to the movie theater to see this than some other films. I will also say I can relate to this character, and it kind of has to do with the part that makes him a kid. I say this because legally speaking, I’m an adult, but simultaneously, I still have childish traits, mainly the fact that I have a deep fanaticism for “Star Wars.” Yes, many adults enjoy “Star Wars,” but George Lucas, director of several installments of the “Star Wars” saga once said “it’s a film for 12-year-olds.”

Speaking of “Star Wars,” this film also interjects brief appearances from multiple “Star Wars” characters, including Darth Sidious and Chewbacca. I can only wonder how much this cost because this film is from Lionsgate, and “Star Wars” is owned by Disney. I never read the book, and it’s possible that this is faithful to the source material, maybe it cost nothing and Disney thought this was cool. By the way, the guy who plays Chewbacca (Michael Alan Healy) actually pretty much only plays him and nobody else. I checked his IMDb and that’s the only character that would show up on his page. He played Chewbacca on the “Today” show, he was on two “Nickelodeon Kids Choice Awards” shows as the character, he was Chewie on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!,” and he was even on “Deal or no Deal” as the same wookie. In fact, I remember the episode he was on because I’ve seen it, and it was a special episode with a “Star Wars” theme where it was a “Winner Take All” match between two contestants. Chewbacca appeared alongside R2-D2 to support the contestant. Also, the other contestant actually had Carrie Fisher rooting for her! Not only that, but for the Carrie Fisher contestant, she was playing a game where the models were Stormtroopers. And Darth Vader was the banker for both contestants!

Alright, those are my “Star Wars” and “Deal or no Deal” rants for now, sorry if those inconvenienced you. Anyway, back to business.

As far as the parents go in this movie, I already said a few things about them, but in all seriousness, their chemistry with each other was completely believable. I also bought into the chemistry between them and August. This is an interesting moment when you have a child actor playing a major character in the movie and instead of the traditional situation where the child can’t act and the adults can, the adults tend to be more of a highlight than a downfall, everyone here however tends to shine. It doesn’t really surprise me. All of these people have received positive criticism as time passed, and honestly, Jacob Tremblay might even be a better actor than a lot of adults. Although to be fair you can put any kid up against Tommy Wiseau from “The Room” and consider them to be a better actor.

JOHNNY (played by Tommy Wiseau): (GOING THROUGH DOOR ONTO ROOFTOP) I did not hit her, it’s not true! It’s bulls*it! I did not hit her! (WHILE THROWING WATER BOTTLE ONTO GROUND) I did *not*. Oh hi, Mark.

August also has a sister in this movie named Olivia, or Via for short. There weren’t too many good images I could find of this character, so I hope this poster isn’t too bad. What kind of surprised me about her character is how nice and considerate she was to others, even to her own brother. I often come across and imagine many relationships where siblings fight each other. In reality, this would be rather odd considering Via’s age, but still. I liked her story, for the most part. I say for the most part because she does interact someone in the movie and at times I felt that the way their relationship was going just came off as a bit forced. Not to mention, some of the dialogue regarding this relationship was rather cheesy, not as bad as say “Star Wars Episode II” but it felt like I was reading some crappy fanfiction written on someone’s Blackberry. No, not “Fifty Shades of Grey,” I’m thinking of something imaginary and a lot less on the mature side of the spectrum.

There are a number of kids August meets in the movie, one of the first ones he talks to when he enters school goes by the name of Julian, who you may know as Herman from “Walk the Prank,” and there was one moment of the movie that just caught my eye. There was a point where the film basically villainized him and he was talking with the school’s principal. Speaking of the principal, his character goes by the name of Mr. Tushman, played by Mandy Patinkin, who you may know from “The Princess Bride” and “Homeland.” His character honestly brought some very forced humor that just didn’t land. Going back to Julian, he was talking with the principal and his parents are there. The focal point of the conversation is August, and Julian is basically saying that he is against August and his parents side with him. They even say there’s a reason to be against him just because of the way he looks. It just makes me wonder, how many people are like this? It might as well show that either parents will defend their children no matter what, maybe they think their kid is “always right,” the parents might have a bias because their kid says something, and not everyone has the same experiences with certain people. It also sometimes just goes to show how people will judge you based on your appearance. I can’t really say I’m male model material, but I imagine some people think I look presentable. How often do people get past what they see and just focus on what they learn through basic conversation? What if Meg from “Family Guy,” a character usually considered ugly not only by society, but also by her own family, had more friends just because they were interested in what she had to say? By the way, it’s always interested me she’s that way because she’s played by Mila Kunis and she’s f*cking gorgeous!

In the end, “Wonder” is a film that I believe many people wouldn’t mind watching at least once. I’d say it’s got problems, but at the same time, I don’t think people should stay away from it completely because it is a good story for families and children. I really do think that younger audiences can enjoy and take something from this movie, and not just because it partially involves “Star Wars” but because the movie’s about inclusion, fitting in, and how certain friends can surprise you in both pleasant and unfortunate ways. Upon looking at his IMDb, this is the third thing I’ve seen featuring Jacob Tremblay, the other two things were “Room” and one episode of “American Dad!,” I can’t wait to see him in future works if I get the chance. I’m gonna give “Wonder” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review, I just want you to know if you haven’t already, you should try checking out Stardust.

Stardust is a free app you can download on the App Store and Google Play. It can be used by people to provide reactions to movies and TV shows. Let’s say you finished watching the latest episode of “Game of Thrones,” you can record a thirty second video (at maximum) where you reveal your thoughts and you can provide a rating from 1-5 stars towards the episode you’re focusing on. Worried about revealing spoilers? Keep those worries away! Stardust has an option that can warn others that your video contains spoilers! In fact, you don’t even have to see whatever it is you’re watching. If you haven’t seen “Revenge of the Nerds,” by the way, watch it, you can still talk about it. Maybe you’re about to watch it and you decide to give your thoughts going into it, or maybe you’ve seen the trailer or something, I don’t know. You can do all of that and you can also follow other people to see their latest reactions, by the way, follow my handle, JackDrees! Be sure to download the app, I recommend it, the app’s free, which makes it even better, and I hope to see you there!

I just want you to know that I’m a nerd, I might even be king of the nerds, and as the possible ruler, I want you to know that I recently posted a piece of nerdy material, otherwise known as my post documenting my time at 2017’s Rhode Island Comic Con. I went there, met more people than I’ve met at any other con I went to. I met someone who I’ve met in the past, and I even confused one guest for another! So if you’re interested in reading that post, I’ll have the link down below, that way you can go to the post and enjoy it! Stay tuned for more great content! Also, I want to know, what are your thoughts on Jacob Tremblay? Do you like him as an actor? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

RHODE ISLAND COMIC CON 2017 REVIEW AND HAUL: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/11/15/rhode-island-comic-con-2017-review-and-haul/

Justice League (2017): What Does This Mean for the DCEU? (PLUS TALK ABOUT THE MOVIE’S BOX OFFICE RETURN)

Posted on by Jack Drees

Before we get into my review for “Justice League,” let me remind you that the buildup for this movie has been objectively crazy. Regardless of whether you’re a fan of DC, you’re anti-DC, you’re a fan of Marvel, or you just aren’t into movies based on comic books, you might as well agree with me on how bonkers this movie’s buildup truly is. I cover all of that including the director change, the sexually suggestive events, the date of the review embargo lift, all in another post I’ve done titled “What the Heck is Up with Justice League (2017)?” If you want to check that out, click the link down below and that’ll take you to that post and you can discover the complete insanity of “Justice League’s” buildup.

WHAT THE HECK IS UP WITH JUSTICE LEAGUE (2017)?: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/11/09/what-the-heck-is-up-with-justice-league-2017/

mv5bmji2nji2mdq0nv5bml5banbnxkftztgwmtc1mjawmji-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Justice League” is directed Zack Snyder (300, Watchman) and stars Ben Affleck (The Town, Argo), Gal Gadot (Fast Five, Criminal), Jason Momoa (Game of Thrones, Conan the Barbarian), Ezra Miller (Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, The Perks of Being a Wallflower), and Ray Fisher as the members of the league established in the title. Batman and Wonder Woman try to unite a bunch of beings with superpowers in order to defeat the evil Steppenwolf.

*MAJOR BOX OFFICE RANT AHEAD, IF UNINTERESTED, GO TO NEXT PARAGRAPH*

Before we actually go any further, part of me is glad that I’m not seeing this film on opening weekend. This is because I can now make a portion of this post dedicated to how nobody went to see this on opening weekend. If I were to see this on opening weekend, I would have. However it didn’t fit into the schedule of those who I was going to see this with. I will say this, if you have read the post I recently mentioned, you may recall I said essentially Marvel does better at the box office compared to DC, and to show that, I went through the results of 2016 comparing DC’s “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice” with Marvel’s “Captain America: Civil War.” To be fair, those movies had somewhat similar concepts, although “Batman v. Superman” is something that comic book junkies have been waiting to see on the big screen for years. Not to mention, “Batman v. Superman” released first. The thing I said must have brought more people into the theater has to have been the difference in tone and the reviews regarding the movie. Just look at Rotten Tomatoes! The box office results for both movies ended up being pretty high. I wouldn’t say they’re close, but it doesn’t mean they’re not high. Although I will say “Batman v. Superman” failed to make over $1 billion overall unlike “Captain America: Civil War.” Now fast forward to November 2017. This month, two big superhero movies come out. “Thor: Ragnarok” is scheduled to come out November 3rd, two weeks prior to “Justice League,” which comes out November 17th. So “Thor: Ragnarok” releases, and as expected, it won the box office on its opening weekend. The total “Thor: Ragnarok” earned on said weekend is around $427 million. In just a week, the movie has flown past $500 million. This is over $50 million greater than the combined total the original “Thor” made DURING ITS ENTIRE RUN! Also, just recently, specifically November 19th, reports came in that “Thor: Ragnarok” has now reached $739.2 million at the box office! This report suggests that “Thor: Ragnarok” has also made more money than “Thor: The Dark World” in just a couple of weeks! Also a little thing to keep in mind, the budget for “Thor: Ragnarok” was estimated to be $180 million. Suggesting that “Thor: Ragnarok” made its budget back on opening weekend. As for “Justice League,” that movie had an estimated budget of $300 million. Unfortunately, they couldn’t make it back. Some of you might be thinking, did they at least make as much as “Thor: Ragnarok?” Hate to point this out to you, but if you’ve been reading this whole paragraph, that’s a stupid question, because I said “I can now make a portion of this post dedicated to how nobody went to see this on opening weekend,” so if that doesn’t give you any hints I don’t know what will. Overall, the box office total is considerably high, but comparing it to a film like “The Avengers” would be like comparing the heights of the Statue of Liberty and the Empire State Building. Both are high when you look at them, but compared to the Statue of Liberty, the Empire State is a whole new level of high. The specific worldwide total for “The Avengers” turned out to be $392.5 million dollars on the first weekend whereas this year’s “Justice League” came out to $278.8 million. “The Avengers,” a movie whose budget is estimated to have been $220 million, made its budget back on its opening weekend. Yes, that’s a shorter total, but I’m leaving that in. Interestingly, “Justice League” happened to make more overseas than “The Avengers” ($185.5 million vs. $185.1 million). Going off of “The Avengers,” just think about this. A technical action-comedy starring Chris Hemsworth as a short haired Thor, made more on opening weekend than “Justice League,” which has Batman, Wonder Woman, Cyborg, Aquaman, and The Flash. Strange, isn’t it? When it comes to international openings, this takes the #20 spot for the top openings in that category and when it comes to the worldwide rankings, this happens to be in the top 25 worldwide openings of all time. In reality, $278.8 million is a lot of money for a movie to make over a single weekend, although with a movie like this, it’s a tad odd that it wouldn’t end up making more.

Can somebody drop a coconut on my head? I think I’m going f*cking insane!

So, where was I? Oh yeah right, I have a whole review to do! This just goes to show you the absolute s*itshow this movie is regardless of my personal thoughts. Going into this film, I had similar feelings as I did with “Thor: Ragnarok.” Although with this particular movie there happened to be some differences. Like “Thor: Ragnarok,” “Justice League” had me going in with mixed thoughts. I honestly thought the trailers for this movie were better, although the TV spot marketing, at least from my memory, was barely noticeable. Visually, I thought this movie was somewhat superior, even though “Thor: Ragnarok” happened to be vivider. Based on this year’s movies released thus far from both DC and Marvel, you might as well say DC is kicking Marvel in the ass. “Wonder Woman” is currently at a spot somewhere as one of my top movies of the year. The other movies released in the MCU thus far, “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” and “Spider-Man: Homecoming,” underwhelmed me. OK, maybe “Spider-Man: Homecoming” didn’t underwhelm, after seeing the trailers, especially the one that revealed way too much about the movie, the hype I had for the movie was not as high as I hoped it would be. Nevertheless, that movie could have been better. Although despite “Wonder Woman” being one of my favorite DC films ever made, the reception for that movie regarding the DCEU, or the Detective Comics Extended Universe, is pretty much a fluke. “Man of Steel,” while not liked by everyone, did get a number of positive reviews from critics and audiences. “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice,” in terms of reception, was one of the most controversial movies of 2016. In fact, “Suicide Squad,” also released in 2016, happened to be met with the same results. I had at least one thing that I enjoyed about every DCEU movie thus far. As of now I think “Suicide Squad” sucks, but at least some of the action was cool, the visuals were stunning, and the casting for Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie) was stellar!

Screenshot (219)

Now we’re here, “Justice League” is out. While it currently has better results, at least according to Rotten Tomatoes, than “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice” and “Suicide Squad,” it’s not getting exactly what one would call positive reception. The big question is, does “Justice League” qualify as a film or not? I’d say it does. It’s got problems, but I’d say there’s still hope for the DCEU. It’s by no means as good as “Wonder Woman,” but I’d say it’s worth your money.

As mentioned, this movie has problems. So let’s begin our Negative Nancy segment of the post. This movie is an hour and fifty-nine minutes long. In all honesty, it could have been longer. I do believe this movie is going to get an extended cut for the home video release so my issue may be resolved there depending on what happens. The main reason why I wanted this to be longer is for characterization purposes. Let’s look at Cyborg in this movie.

Cyborg is played by Ray Fisher, who I imagine is a lovely guy. After all, while I never technically met him and shook his hand, I saw him at Comic Con as I was waiting in line for the person next to him. By the way, I’m referring to Gal Gadot, who’s also in this movie, and I’ll get to her later. While I did get some of his backstory, and I also happened to be introduced to a parent of his, I don’t really feel like I got to know Cyborg in full detail. If the movie was a bit longer much like some of the other installments in the DCEU then maybe we would have gotten a closer look at Cyborg. Also, this does bring one question to my mind. How long was this intended to be?

This film was directed by Zack Snyder, a man who had prior experience when it comes to films based on comic books or graphic novels. These films include “300,” “Watchman,” along with two movies in this film’s universe, “Man of Steel” and “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice.” However, he didn’t have complete control. For the record, that was his decision. An unexpected tragedy hit the Snyder family earlier this year when Zack’s daughter, Autumn, committed suicide. This caused Joss Whedon to take over.

Joss Whedon was added on in order to finish the movie and shoot some extra scenes. The movie also went through reshoots, which isn’t new for this universe considering “Suicide Squad” also went through reshoots which happened to be met with mixed opinions. Joss Whedon, much like Snyder, isn’t a stranger to comic book films. Whedon directed both “Avengers” 1 & 2 so as far as concept goes, this is almost like a trip down memory lane. I like Joss Whedon, but he almost might be a problem here. When it comes to directing, it might involve one person with a certain vision for their movie. It almost felt like Joss Whedon came in with a different vision and it kind of affected this particular movie. Part of that vision, from what I can tell, possibly came from a musical perspective. Snyder initially hired Junkie XL to do the movie’s music, but it turns out that he was eventually fired and replaced by Danny Elfman. After hearing Elfman’s score in this film, I wasn’t exactly impressed. Not only is it somewhat ordinary, but even borrowing themes from other superhero films with characters didn’t work out. I liked what he did with Wonder Woman’s theme, but that’s about it. This is rather unfortunate because I love Danny Elfman. Admittedly, I don’t think he’s the right guy for this project. Junkie XL was probably the better choice. I even saw a video on YouTube that showed Junkie XL’s real theme for this film, which was scrapped due to Elfman replacing him. After hearing that, I knew for sure Junkie XL was right for this. It’s not surprising Danny Elfman did the music if you think about it, because he worked with Joss Whedon in the past on “Avengers: Age of Ultron.” I didn’t even like the score for that film, maybe superhero crossover films aren’t for him. He did well on standalone superhero films though such as the “Spider-Man” trilogy, so if he were doing superhero films, that’s what he should be hired for. Who knows? It might not even be Whedon’s fault, because this movie, from a perspective regarding itself from a point of view that I imagine must be Zack Snyder’s, could have affected it as well.

I’ve seen news and trailers regarding this movie leading up to it. At times I heard this movie was going to have more humor than say, “Batman v. Superman.” Tell me guys, doesn’t that sound like Marvel to you? Maybe Zack Snyder thought if the movie was more like a Marvel movie, and by that I mean generally more comedic and happy go lucky, he’d receive more positive criticism. Granted, the movie was funny, and there were moments where the comedy happened to work. Although in general, let’s just say this. If a movie sets up a tone, it’s best that they stick with it. This movie starts out rather dark, in fact part of it has to do with the death of a major character in the DCEU. There’s still comedy throughout and it works. Some of the comedy, maybe not as much because I’ve seen it in the trailer, but overall it works. Then we progress throughout the movie, while some of the original vibe is still there, it’s starting to diminish. The movie’s getting tads lighter as we go. This may be due to the writing, the reshoots, anything. In fact, it could be Joss Whedon’s fault after all! He was credited for his work on the screenplay. Also when it comes to the screenplay, Whedon technically had possibly more credit than Snyder because while Snyder had a focus on the movie’s story, Whedon was given credit on the screenplay itself.

Some people might not notice this, but Whedon also likely decided on changing the climax of the movie. The idea is pretty much the same, there are scenes from multiple trailers (both before and after Snyder’s departure) that made it into the final cut, but you might notice the sky is red. I mentioned this in my “What the Heck is Up with Justice League (2017)” post comparing this result with one of the earlier trailers where we see identical moments with a dark blue sky. I thought the blue sky worked, the red was a little too much. I will give some credit because the sky wasn’t, say, pink, but I thought the dark blue was more fitting for the movie overall.

As far as the action goes in this movie, I’d say for the most part, it’s awesome. Zack Snyder has proven that he can direct great action scenes in previous movies and he just shows he’s not messing around in this one. There was one scene that for the most part, was great, but there was a time where I almost couldn’t tell what was happening. Just for the record, it wasn’t as bad as “Transformers 5.”

Another complaint I’ll give here is that Steppenwolf wasn’t exactly the strongest villain I’ve ever seen. Comic book movies in general, mainly the ones that have come out this decade, lack memorable villains. There are exceptions like “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” and “Spider-Man: Homecoming” but for the most part, they don’t exactly resemble greatness when it comes to antagonists. Steppenwolf was a serviceable villain with a somewhat clear motivation, however at the same time, he was rather cliche.

Now that that’s over, let’s move onto some positives. The cinematography in this movie is very solid for a comic book film. There are a number of scenes where it’s rather conventional, but at times, the camera is moving like crazy which goes along perfectly with the fast paced action. If you ask me, the DCEU’s best cinematography however comes from “Man of Steel.” Although that’s kind of a compliment since both movies were directed by Zack Snyder. At the same time however you can say I’m kind of insulting the cinematographer because the director of photography for “Justice League” and “Man of Steel” are two different people.

I also appreciated the film’s CGI. Did it go overboard? At times, but that’s not a first for comic book movies. Overall, you can say the effects were massive, somewhat colorful, and somewhat breathtaking. Seeing Aquaman stop water from reaching a further distance was spectacular to watch. Also, you might not know, but Cyborg’s costume is CGI, and I got to say it worked.

Speaking of things that are done digitally, Henry Cavill appeared in this movie. I won’t go into further detail about what he did, but he’s there. During the movie’s production, he had a mustache. Why was this? He was simultaneously working on “Mission: Impossible 6” where his role required him to have said mustache. Under regulation, Cavill couldn’t shave it off, so it was removed digitally. While you don’t really see much of it, it’s still visible. I don’t know how much of the movie-going population would catch something like this, but it caught my eye nevertheless.

Sticking with the topic of heroes and the actors who portray them, let’s talk about some in depth, except for Cyborg since we already went over him. Starting off with Batman, played by Ben Affleck, he’s basically one of the two people organizing the Justice League. Before “Batman v. Superman” I was somewhat skeptical about him as Batman but now that I’ve seen him multiple times as the Caped Crusader, I have to say he does a fine job portraying the character. As Bruce Wayne, Affleck seems to stay according to plan and as Batman he appears to remain deep voiced and alert.

The other person organizing the league is Wonder Woman, played by Gal Gadot. There is LITERALLY no other person that should be playing this role but Gal! I may be biased because I love Gal Gadot, I view her as my celebrity crush, I met her at Comic Con, but seriously! Just watch Gal Gadot in this movie and you’ll come to realize, she has this system down. Her battle cries are probably some of the best I’ve heard in a movie! The accent, which by the way, is actually the real way Gal talks, works for the character! Seeing her in action is such a treat! The list of positivity is extreme! Her character, once again, SHINES in this movie. I was able to buy into both Wonder Woman and Diana Prince. When a movie makes you do that, you know you have a great character. On a sidenote, there’s a point in the movie where Bruce and Diana are having a conversation and when “Steve Trevor” comes up, I was wowed. I can’t exactly recall the quote where Trevor’s name is mentioned, but it was a highlight in the movie’s screenplay for me.

This movie also has Barry Allen, AKA The Flash, played by Ezra Miller. Out of all the characters in the movie, this one was pretty much the comic relief. Sure, there’s funny lines given by multiple characters in the film, but if there was one person that stole scenes from a humor perspective, it had to have been The Flash. I didn’t really laugh as much as other people, but I did end up laughing. His character was hyperactive, excited, and rather fleshed out. I can also give kudos to Ezra Miller for giving a good performance.

The last hero I’ll bring up is Arthur Curry/Aquaman, played by Jason Momoa. If you have read the comic books and watched this movie, you may notice some differences when it comes to Aquaman here. His backstory is similar overall, but in terms of character traits, he’s not completely identical. One difference you may notice is the hair. When you compare the hairstyle to the comics, it’s similar to certain installments, signifying that the hair in the comics isn’t always the same. Although one thing you might notice here is that the hair isn’t blonde, it’s more on the darker side of the color spectrum. Overall, I bought into Aquaman, I enjoyed seeing him in Atlantis, and personality-wise, he’s kind of like a rockstar. That’s what I get from the way he talks. On a little sidenote, I made a post months back saying that footage was leaked for the upcoming “Aquaman” movie. Turns out that’s actually in this movie. If you want to read that, link’s down below.

https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/03/03/leaked-aquaman-footage-revealed-on-zack-snyders-twitter/

Speaking of characters in this movie, Commissioner Gordon also makes an appearance here. This is Gordon’s first appearance in the DCEU and the reason why I’m excited he’s here is not because I have a passion for the character but I have more of a passion towards the actor who plays him. That actor by the way is JK Simmons (Whiplash, Juno). When it comes to JK Simmons, if you put a picture down on a table with his face on it and do the same with other actors, there’s a good chance that I’m gonna tell you “Screw the others, this guy’s the man!” I say this because JK Simmons is probably my favorite actor when it comes to ability. There are actors who I personally idolize more, such as Curtis Armstrong, but JK Simmons usually never fails to impress me, and that continues in this movie. Granted it’s not his best performance, but it’s also not his worst. He convinces me as Commissioner Gordon and I hope to see more of him if this movie’s universe continues. One interesting fact you may or may not know, JK Simmons is also J Jonah Jameson in Sam Raimi’s “Spider-Man” trilogy. So basically he went from doing movies under one comic book company onto another. Whether you prefer Marvel or DC, let’s just agree that JK Simmons rules!

Here’s a question you might be asking. Is this movie good enough for the DCEU to continue? Personally when it comes to watchability, yes. However, the critics seemed to give this mixed reviews, it did make tons of money despite how it could have made more, and I have a feeling that moviegoers will either compare it to Marvel saying it’s not as good or too much like Marvel. Do I think it’s like Marvel? In ways, but DC has seemed to develop it’s own characteristics that Marvel doesn’t traditionally use that makes it stand on its own. “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice,” another movie in the DCEU, was dark as hell. It could have worked if more character development came into play. If these movies find their own path in terms of vibe, whether it be light or dark, personally I prefer dark, depending on the movie, and they focus more on characterization, then this universe would be less flawed. My other suggestion is that they try to just release one cut in theaters and go with it. I don’t care if it’s long as long as it’s effective. The original cut for “Batman v. Superman” was 2 hours and 31 minutes and that didn’t work out. This is why audiences loved “Wonder Woman” when they saw it. It functioned as a story and it managed to work out as far as the runtime goes (2 hours 21 mins). If a movie doesn’t rush and makes sure it can tell its story in full detail, chances are it will be better. Also, it seems suspicious that they would make the runtime 1 hour and 59 minutes. It almost seems as if the movie happened to be longer, the studio would be worried about making less money. I don’t know, but I think it’s a good assumption. Although it’s not as suspicious as when a movie gets split into two parts (The Hunger Games, The Twilight Saga). But seriously, quality matters, not quantity.

In the end, I’d say “Justice League,” while not perfect, is an enjoyable ride and is certainly better than some of the other comic book films we’ve gotten this year. In fact, I’ll even go as far as to say, I’d rather watch this than “Thor: Ragnarok.” Am I a DC fanboy? Not really, I’m just a guy who likes good movies, and I had more fun watching this than I did watching “Thor: Ragnarok.” Is this movie as good as “Wonder Woman?” No, but I’d definitely say it’s worth watching if you’re into DC, you like action, and if you can get by the tones that clash throughout the film. I’m gonna give “Justice League” a 7/10. After watching a bunch of movies in both the Detective Comics Extended Universe and the Marvel Cinematic Universe, I’ve got to say that the Detective Comics Extended Universe is this year’s clear winner. While Marvel’s films had some neat effects, cool moments, and likable villains, they all tried to be funny, but ended up falling flat for me. The DCEU balanced heroism, action, and humor. “Wonder Woman” is one of the best directed superhero films I ever watched, “Justice League,” despite its imperfections, is a joyride. So I can’t wait to see what next year brings for both cinematic universes and find out which one comes out on top. Now I know I’ve been talking for awhile and believe it or not, I’m unfinished. Because I need to talk about Stardust!

Stardust is an app you can use to talk about movies and TV. I recently used this to talk about “Justice League” along with my quick thoughts on it and I recommend you do so as well. Although if you don’t want to talk about “Justice League,” you can choose from thousands of movies and TV shows to give your two cents towards. You talk about how much you like them, how much you hate them, you don’t even have to see them! Stardust also allows you to follow people and see what their latest reactions are. If you want to follow me, my handle is JackDrees. It’s kind of like Snapchat minus the risque elements of the app that Tinder is also known for. If you want to download Stardust go right ahead, I recommend doing so that way you can start sharing your thoughts on movies and TV shows.

Thanks for reading this extended review, I also hope you enjoyed the little piece I did on the movie’s box office return, I tried to put a good amount of effort into that. Part of me feels slightly crazier than I once was for doing it, but I also had some fun writing all of this s*it down. I’m going to see “Wonder” on Black Friday. I’ve heard great things about this movie so far, I loved Jacob Tremblay in “Room,” so I’m really looking forward to this. Stay tuned for my review for that, along with more reviews! I need to know, what is the best superhero movie you’ve seen this year? I can’t say I’ve seen “Logan” so I gotta go with “Wonder Woman.” Also what is the worst superhero movie you’ve seen this year? My pick would be “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2,” but each person will have their own opinion. Comment below, I’d love to hear your responses! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Thor: Ragnarok (2017): Guardians of Asgard

Posted on by Jack Drees

Before we begin my review for “Thor: Ragnarok,” I’d like to just take a moment and remind you that this upcoming weekend, I’ll be at Rhode Island Comic Con! Rhode Island Comic Con is a three day event which begins Friday, November 10, and ends Sunday, November 12. There will be tons of artists, vendors, panels, and oh yeah, they serve alcohol! So if that’s something that interests you, check that out! Celebrity guests typically have appeared in movies and TV shows ranging from “Star Wars,” “Lord of the Rings,” “Revenge of the Nerds,” “Boondock Saints,” “The Walking Dead,” “Power Rangers,” “Luke Cage,” and “Stranger Things.” In fact, since we’re on the topic of “Thor: Ragnarok,” Mark Ruffalo is actually showing up! If you are showing up to this event, don’t hesitate to say hi to me if you see me, which is probably gonna be hard considering the crowds this event can get. I will be there all three days so I’m sorry for stealing your ticket, but luckily there are tickets still available, and you can also buy special packages for individual or group celebrities, including a section that has little to do with the con itself, which is access to a Gene Simmons concert. Keep in mind, some of these don’t include admission tickets to the con. I’m going in as a patron, not as a guest, so if you see me walking around, I hope we can talk! Speaking of nerd things, let’s talk about “Thor: Ragnarok.”

mv5bmjmyndkzmzi1of5bml5banbnxkftztgwodcxodg5mji-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Thor: Ragnarok” is directed by Taika Waititi (Hunt for the Wilderpeople, What We Do in the Shadows) and stars Chris Hemsworth (Rush, Ghostbusters), Tom Hiddleston (The Night Manager, Kong: Skull Island), Cate Blanchett (Lord of the Rings, How to Train Your Dragon 2), Idris Elba (Pacific Rim, The Dark Tower), Jeff Goldblum (Independence Day, Jurassic Park), Tessa Thompson (Creed, Dear White People), Karl Urban (Dredd, The Bourne Supremacy), Mark Ruffalo (Now You See Me, Spotlight), and Anthony Hopkins (Beowulf, Hannibal). This movie revolves around Thor, who happens to be imprisoned. He soon finds himself in a gladiator battle, which is basically borrowed from the Planet Hulk storyline in the comics for “The Incredible Hulk.” Also, Thor must annihilate the evil Hela, the Goddess of Death, who set out to destroy Thor’s home and Asgardian civilization.

Going into this movie, my expectations weren’t all that high. I will admit, as time went on, they actually kind of increased. I say this because I watched the first trailer for this movie, the one that came out before “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” officially released in theaters. I just watched the trailer thinking that this will be alright for a Marvel movie, but it had too much of a “Guardians of the Galaxy” vibe, considering the fact that Led Zeppelin’s “Immigrant” was playing in the background as Asgard is being destroyed. “Immigrant” is a good song, in fact it’s also pretty catchy, but it just doesn’t work. Plus the whole fight between Thor and Hulk, or technically, the buildup to it, is basically played out like a comedy. Granted, Marvel has used comedy in its past movies and it worked. “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” has done a great job at balancing comedy and seriousness throughout the entire film. However when it comes to “Thor,” it always seems to have a less than pleasant storyline or tone, and by less than pleasant I mean dark. The first movie made it work, and there was comedy interjected there too which happened to work. Just watch the movie while it presents its version of the fish out of water cliche. Then we get to the second movie… Just, kill me. There were only one or two things I found funny in that film and after watching it recently, I almost hated my life. Then we get to the second trailer, which was pretty cool in ways. The song choice was slightly better, although the tone felt like it was meshed together properly, but it ultimately made me more interested in the movie. However to be fair I was gonna see this no matter how interested or disinterested I was, because this is part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and I gotta keep up with the timeline.

Another thing to consider towards my lack of expectations is the fact that Marvel has been declining in terms of likability with their recent releases. Both “Spider-Man: Homecoming” and “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” were not as good as I wanted them to be. They were good, but at the same time they were just movies that I particularly wouldn’t watch many times again. “Thor: Ragnarok,” ultimately, kind of belongs in the same category. It’s by no means a bad movie, but not as good as it could be. Let’s take it from the top.

First off, we have the vibe. This movie starts out in a way that’s kind of comedic, although at the same time it makes you wonder what’s about to come next. Then we get some light comedy throughout the picture, there was nothing really that stood out about it, it’s your typical comedy that you see in Marvel movies nowadays. Nothing really hit me. And that’s the thing, this movie, in terms of humor, is divided. At times, it’s hilarious, at other times, it just made me remain in silence. I will say though, this movie is actually funnier than “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2.” Not the first movie, but the second one. The first movie is a kneeslapper to the tenth degree, the second one was somewhat underwhelming. On the topic of “Guardians” and vibes, the whole vibe of the movie, just like the first trailer, reminded me of “Guardians of the Galaxy,” which to some people might be fine and dandy. For me, not so much. If you have seen “Guardians of the Galaxy,” you’d know that it’s a lot different compared to other movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it’s a lot more cartoon-like, a lot funkier, a lot lighter. OK, well, you can technically say the MCU as a whole is light, but “Guardians” definitely takes the cake as the MCU’s lightest film. This entire film we have here, is about the destruction of Asgard, and it’s all done by a being who’s referred to as the Goddess of Death, AKA Hela. I wanted this movie to be darker, I wanted it to be serious. Maybe it could interject tads of humor here and there, but nothing even close to the amount of humor given to us here. I may be biased, but this the seventeenth film in the MCU, not to mention the eleventh distributed by Walt Disney Studios, or as I like to call them, “GIVE US YOUR MONEY TO MAKE REPETITIVE CONTENT! Studios,” I would love it if we could see a really dark and gritty MCU film. Not like “Batman v. Superman,” it would have better characterization and casting put into it. “Captain America: Civil War” came really close, and I’ll have you know that it’s one of my favorite films of 2016, but what would put the cherry on the sundae is if someone from the Avengers died in the film. This as a whole just takes elements from the past “Thor” films, interjects part of the concept of “Captain America: Civil War,” and provides the mood of “Guardians of the Galaxy.” It just doesn’t feel original. Some might even say that there’s one reason specifically that this is like “Guardians of the Galaxy,” and before I actually tell you that reason, let me just say, it made the movie remind me of “Pixels.”

Before “Pixels” came out in theaters, one trailer was released and the music behind it happened to be Queen’s “We Will Rock You,” which was eventually used in the movie, not once, but twice. The first time was during the introduction when the kids are in the arcade playing “Donkey Kong” and the second time was throughout the climax when the adults are actually inside the game “Donkey Kong.” This movie isn’t beat for beat on all of those things. However, you may recall I mentioned a trailer that played Led Zeppelin’s “Immigrant Song.” That song is in this movie as well, which I will say this movie gets some credit for unlike “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2,” which had Sweet’s “Fox on the Run” in a trailer, but it never made it into the movie. This is a great and catchy song but just like “Pixels,” the song is played at the beginning of the movie, and at the end of the movie. Reminder, by the end of the movie I don’t mean during the credits. I’d be fine if the song were used once, but twice? Given what this movie has to offer, it just kind of didn’t fit. It’s not like “Inception” where a song literally had a purpose throughout the film. Remember how in that movie, they had a song to signify whenever there was a kick? Yeah, it was Edith Piaf’s “Non, Je Ne Regrette Rien,” which is French for “No Regrets.” I’ve never been a big fan of the MCU’s music as a whole, because it all sounds rather forgettable or generic, but I want some variety here!

I just want to say, to those of you who say that this movie is actually different compared to the other MCU films, you’re wrong. I will tell you something that is different though, and that’s Thor’s hair. During the movie it actually gets cut off and I got to say, going into this film, I’ve seen it cut off on posters, and it just simply reminded me of Channing Tatum’s character from “Jupiter Ascending.” Thor is shown to be the same charismatic dude we’ve come to know over the movies we’ve seen him in during the MCU thus far. He brings out a charm that’s extremely admirable, and he seems to be unbelievably joyous, and this is surprisingly also executed during the Planet Hulk fight scene. As far as Thor’s new look goes, I was a little skeptical at first, but in the end, I do think that it’s a good look for him.

Thor’s brother, Loki, also makes a return here. Loki has always been an interesting character to me. As far as this universe is concerned, sometimes he’s the antagonist, other times he’s a protagonist. Here, he’s helping out Thor on his mission, and at other times, the two are separated and doing their own thing. By that I mean, Thor’s doing his own thing and Loki is just watching. Loki also has one of the funniest parts of the movie, which involves a character whose name I won’t mention.

This movie is also the return of the strong monster-like Avenger and Jolly Green Giant impersonator, the Hulk. His last appearance in the MCU where he got some significant screentime was in “Avengers: Age of Ultron.” Neither Thor or the Hulk were in “Captain America: Civil War,” so there’s a good chance they don’t even know the whole controversy which arose in that movie. It’s nice to see the Hulk here, and his character, appeared to be a bit different than how I’ve seen him in previous movies in this particular universe, which I kind of liked. Seeing Hulk and Thor talk throughout the movie, kind of reminded me of George and Lennie from “Of Mice and Men” because of how one character’s language is structured compared to the other.

Speaking of the Hulk and Thor, the two had a fight, as mentioned recently. While heroes have fought each other before, I have to say this fight was pretty awesome. This fight, in terms of action, engaged me more than the fight in “Batman v. Superman.” I personally felt there was more at stake in that movie, but in reality, in terms of action, this fight was better. I will say though, the whole “friend from work” thing, was kind of cringeworthy. Still, the fight’s awesome!

Another character I want to bring up is the character of Hela, the movie’s main antagonist. As much as the Marvel movies have not been as good as usual, the villains have been becoming increasingly more likable. Another interesting thing about this villain, this is the first of the MCU’s main antagonists to be a woman. She’s played by Cate Blanchett, who you may know as Galadriel from the “Lord of the Rings” movies. In terms of mannerisms, Blanchett’s interpretation of Hela made her look like a cliche villain. Although at the same time, she was a very powerful being and the movie makes this case very convincing. The one thing that she did to drag down the movie more than anything else though is that she was very expositional at times, which helped you understand the history of Asgard, but at the same time, it just felt like a random monologue that could have been done in a lair but it was just done somewhere else. It’s the same thing, only different.

One of the movie’s biggest standouts for not just myself, but I imagine a lot of other people, is Jeff Goldblum’s character known as the Grandmaster. He’s basically this one dude who looks incredibly wacky, sounds incredibly wacky, and if there ever happened to be a commercial for makeup directed towards men, he would probably be  spokesperson presented in the ad. I have to give kudos to whoever did the makeup on Jeff Goldblum, it looked stellar!

One last plus I’ll give before I deliver my final verdict to you all, I noticed this in the trailer, but some of the shots in this movie are some of the best I’ve seen in the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe. There are various shots that probably looked great on a storyboard, and I wouldn’t be surprised if that were the case. The movie has shots that almost look like they were copied exactly from a comic book, which I admire wholeheartedly since this is a comic book movie after all. I will say there’s one scene that in terms of colors, could have been graded better. Let’s just say it takes place on grass. This may be a personal thing, but I still feel I should unleash this thought.

In the end, “Thor: Ragnarok” is a very weird movie to judge. I had fun with it, but fun isn’t really the word I want to be using in a circumstance like this. I get it, it’s Marvel, it’s Disney, it’s a similar formula we’ve witnessed in past movies carried over to this one, but it really should have been darker. I will say these movies do feel consistent, and in a way, that’s a good thing, but at times, you need to know what kind of stories you’re putting into certain movies. When you have a character referred to as “the Goddess of Death” in your movie, it’s kind of odd to fill the entire runtime with jokes. I don’t know how well “Justice League” will turn out, but I think ultimately, DC is gonna end up biting Marvel in the balls just because of how I gave all the DC films I’ve seen this year perfect scores and I’ve yet to do that with Marvel. Reminder, I’ve still yet to see “Logan.” I’m gonna give “Thor: Ragnarok” a 7/10. I will say though, if you’re gonna go see this movie, just prepare yourself for the “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory” reference. I won’t go into detail, but it was freaking hysterical! Speaking of movies, there’s a line in the film that mentions the title “Point Break.” I won’t go into detail there either. But in all seriousness, next year better be good for Marvel. After seeing the trailers, nothing looks all that amazing about “Black Panther,” “Ant Man and the Wasp” is something I’m excited for though, but my biggest request is to make “Avengers: Infinity War” a slightly serious movie at the very least. Thanks for reading this review, I hope to see you all at Rhode Island Comic Con this upcoming weekend! Just go, you’ll be glad you did, and you’ll thank me later. Also, if you feel you are worthy enough to read these, I’ll have my previous “Thor” reviews listed down below if you want to check them out. I’d say please do so, I think you’ll enjoy them. Stay tuned for more reviews! Also, out of the three “Thor” installments we’ve gotten thus far, which one’s your favorite? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

“THOR” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/10/23/thor-2011-you-wont-need-to-be-hammered-to-watch-this-spoilers-for-the-marvel-cinematic-universe-movies/

“THOR: THE DARK WORLD” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/10/30/thor-the-dark-world-2013-why-is-kat-dennings-in-this-movie-spoilers/

Thor: The Dark World (2013): Why Is Kat Dennings In This Movie? *SPOILERS*

Posted on by Jack Drees

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! This week is a pretty big week for movies as far as this year goes because “Thor: Ragnarok” comes out this Friday, November 3. If you have seen my reviews for the other films from the Marvel Cinematic Universe to be released this year, you may know I wasn’t a huge fan of those. Hopefully things will turn around with “Thor: Ragnarok,” but only time will tell. Although before I go see “Thor: Ragnarok,” I wanted to go back, watch the other “Thor” movies the MCU has to offer, and review them here. Last week, I reviewed the movie with Thor’s first MCU appearance, “Thor.” This week, we’ll be looking at the sequel, which is “Thor: The Dark World.” So let’s get going people!

mv5bngizm2ixmdetnjrioc00y2zllwe5ztytzwq3yzu1otvhmgqwxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymzexmty0mju-_v1_

“Thor: The Dark World” is directed by Alan Taylor, who directed various episodes of TV shows including “The Sopranos” and “Game of Thrones.” The movie stars Chris Hemsworth (Star Trek, Rush), Natalie Portman (V For Vendetta, Black Swan), Tom Hiddleston (Midnight in Paris, War Horse), Anthony Hopkins (Beowulf, Hannibal), and Christopher Eccleston (Doctor Who, G.I. Joe: Rise of the Cobra). When it comes to the story of the film, Dr. Jane Foster, who you may remember as the love interest to Thor if you’ve seen the first movie, has been cursed by an entity known as the Aether. Thor is also heralded by a cosmic event called the Convergence, which is simpler of way saying that nine realms will collide with each other.

As far as the movie leading up to this one goes, I think it’s probably the most underrated of the MCU movies. Like every movie in the MCU’s first phase, I don’t think it’s perfect, although at the same time I wouldn’t say it’s all that bad. In fact, it’s actually my personal favorite in the first phase. It contains a solid story, most of the characters are completely admirable, and the visual effects are stunning. As far as this sequel goes, do I think it’s as good as the first movie? No. This is a movie that has been doing what the MCU has usually been doing, but has grown tremendously in recent years, which is making several attempts at humor throughout the script. Now, are a lot of the MCU movies funny? Sure, but in recent films I think they’ve been trying way too hard with it, which is something I’m worrying about when it comes to “Thor: Ragnarok.” There are movies in the MCU that use humor as a signature part of the vibe, specifically “Guardians of the Galaxy.” This movie came out before that, and this is funny but also feels like it’s trying a little harder than it should. Although since we’re on the topic of humor, I have to say the one of most hysterical parts of the movie is probably the moment when Loki turns into Captain America for some time.

 

LOKI: (TURNS THOR INTO SIF) Mmm, brother, you look ravishing!

THOR: It will hurt no less when I kill you in this form.

LOKI: Very well. Perhaps you prefer one of your new companions, given that you seem to like them so much. (TURNS INTO CAPTAIN AMERICA) Oh, this is much better. Costume’s a bit much… so tight. But the confidence, I can feel the righteousness surging. Hey, you wanna have a rousing discussion about truth, honor, patriotism? God bless America…

 

The only thing I have to say about this, is… Why can’t we get more moments as funny as that?! Whenever a line that was uttered that was supposed to be funny I was as silent as I was during “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” and the case I have here with “Thor: The Dark World” may have been worse than that movie because I laughed more while watching that! Not to mention, that movie even had more entertainment value, plus a better villain. Speaking of which…

The main villain of “Thor: The Dark World” goes by the name of Malekith the Accursed. What can I tell you about him? Not much. Upon rewatch of this movie, I’m starting to wonder if I was wrong when I said Ronan’s the absolute worst of the Marvel villains, because at least Ronan was a tad menacing. This guy here, he was kept mysterious in ways throughout the picture, but the mystery of the man was super uninteresting! He comes off as a very cliche “thing,” not the one from “Fantastic Four,” instead he comes off one that just wants to destroy the universe for the sake of destroying it. If you want to make a motivation like that work, make the villain worth appreciating! At least after watching “Guardians of the Galaxy,” I remember the name Ronan. I don’t think I’ll remember the name Malekith in t-minus a couple days.

Let’s talk about Thor in this movie. His character is a bit different than the previous movie now that he’s experienced Earth for awhile. He’s also currently in a relationship with Natalie Portman’s character who you may recall from the first movie. We’ll get to her in a few seconds. Thor is very charismatic in this movie, but based on how much I wasn’t really able to care about the movie as a whole, I can’t really remember much about Thor himself. He just had a job to do and he was supposed to do it. I’m sorry, but Thor from the last movie, was a thousand miles better than Thor in this movie.

Natalie Portman returns as Thor’s love interest, Jane Foster. Her character was, alright, I guess. If you recall my review for the first “Thor,” I said it basically forced the relationship between Thor and Jane. I don’t mind them being together, but it was ultimately forced. In fact, Thor left her alone for two years, which lead to a scene that I don’t think was as funny as it was trying to be. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, it involves slapping. She was in a good portion of the movie, and she even goes with Thor to Asgard which took up a lot of the runtime. Regardless of whether Jane went to Asgard or not, there is one character I’m glad didn’t go with them, but am still disappointed that they put her in this movie.

Who am I talking about here? Well ladies and gentlemen, that would be Kat Dennings. Let me just say this first as a positive, if she wasn’t in the movie, it would have probably been different, so I wouldn’t call her character useless, but MY GOSH! She is annoying! If you don’t know who Kat Dennings plays she plays Darcy Lewis. She was also in the first movie and she displays a similar attitude here to how she displays herself in that movie, but come on, this is bulls*it! She’s basically the same annoying character that we saw in the last movie, except in that film, she was slightly annoying. Here, she is, if not almost, extremely annoying! This movie came out a couple years after the CBS sitcom “2 Broke Girls” premiered. That show began in 2011 months after the release of the original “Thor.” I say this considering the fact that Kat Dennings is one of the two stars on the show. The show was recently canceled after six seasons, but I once talked with my mother and she said this is probably the worst sitcom she’s ever watched. I honestly imagine that Kat Dennings might be funnier on “2 Broke Girls” because here the writing basically suggests she’s trying to do stuff in order to be hilarious, but it just comes off as ridiculous.

Loki returns in this movie, which makes this the third MCU movie which he appears. Although there’s something different about him here than the other times you see his character in these movies. Unlike “Thor” and “The Avengers,” he’s not the main antagonist. As mentioned recently, Malekith, AKA What’s His Name, is the antagonist of the film. But if you have seen the film’s marketing, you’d know going in, that Loki isn’t like that. He’s a character that is more than just that, and watching this movie, you’d realize that. That’s pretty much all I have to say. Also another character that returns here is Odin, but he’s not really worth talking about.

A big positive for this movie is one that to me, was also enormous for the last movie, and I’m talking about the visual effects. Everything just had a huge scope, it was bright, colorful, neat looking, whatever positive connotation you can put in for them. In fact, you might even say that the visual effects have improved for me since the last movie because I didn’t really notice any bad ones. Although at the same time, I will say my favorite visual effects from the “Thor” movies have to be in the first one, so deciding which movie is ultimately better from a visual perspective is kind of a challenge.

Now this movie is called “Thor: The Dark World,” and yes, there are moments in this movie which do live up to the name. There are Dark Elves for one thing, but that’s not the point. There’s one moment where something happens that is supposed to be this dark moment, but guess what? I DIDN’T CARE ABOUT IT! I’m gonna spoil this and I don’t freaking give a crap, Thor’s mother dies! She goes by the name of Frigga, and apparently she appeared in the original “Thor” but the main question I had about her when she died was this: WHAT THE F*CK DID SHE DO AND WHO THE FLYING S*IT IS HER CHARACTER?! We barely even seen this character, and I don’t even remember her from the first movie. If Odin died, I would have cared! He had a major role in “Thor!” He was the one that cast Thor out of Asgard! He told Thor and Loki that both are worthy to rule but one would rise to the Throne! What did Thor’s mother do?! Throughout her funeral, I just yelled at my screen saying “We get it! Thor’s mother died!”

Also, speaking of things that are forgettable, the scenes don’t really have much of anything to say that’s outstanding about them. Sure, they look nice, the ships shown on screen are rather unique, and seeing Thor flying around with his hammer can be considered a treat. Although there was nothing that kept me wanting more. I was just like, oh yeah, fight scenes, they’re here. The first movie shows Thor occasionally kicking some ass, but not as much as this. However the first movie played their cards right when it came to the fight scenes. The fight scenes were played out when it was needed for storytelling, here it was also necessary at times, but at least the first movie kept me glued to the screen. The first “Thor” was like the first “Star Wars” whereas “Thor: The Dark World” was like “The Phantom Menace.”

In the end, “Thor: The Dark World” is one of the MCU’s worst movies. When I first saw this movie, I gave it a 7/10. That’s not the case anymore. The comedy is shoved down your throat harder than pills inside an angry hospital patient, the action was well shot and fun at times, but ultimately rather bland and forgettable, and f*cking Kat Dennings. Just… WHY IS SHE HERE?! It’s really hard to decide whether or not this is the worst movie in the MCU, but this was a bad movie according to my recent watch. I’m gonna give “Thor: The Dark World” a 4/10. This is one of the hardest movies I ever had to rate in my life. I’m not even sure if the 4/10 will stick. It might increase as time goes on, but I’ll remind you, it’ll be a 6/10 at most, 4/10 at least. If you enjoy this blog but usually hate reading, I have a solution for you. Watching videos. No, I don’t post on YouTube, but I do post somewhere else, and that somewhere else is Stardust.

Stardust is an app where you can post short reaction videos to movies and TV shows. Let’s say you just went to the movies and went to see “Jigsaw” or just want to talk about other movies in the “Saw” franchise you watched in the past, you can post a video where you state some thoughts on the movie, what you liked or didn’t like about what you witnessed, all of that in a bag of chips. You can even do this with TV shows. Let’s say that a new episode of show such as “The Orville” comes out, you can sum up your thoughts on it, and it’ll then be shown to everyone on the app. You don’t even have to see the episode, because there is an option suggesting that you don’t have to see it, the same goes for movies too! There’s also a community of users on Stardust, so you can follow them to get updates on their latest reactions to movies and TV. If you want to follow me, my handle is JackDrees. Go download the app now on wherever its available and enjoy! Also, follow me!

Thanks for reading this review, I hope to have my review for “Thor: Ragnarok” as soon as possible, and if I see any other relevant movies, I’ll review those too. If you want to get more preparation for “Thor: Ragnarok” unleashed from your system, click the link below and that’ll take you to my review for the first “Thor” movie. Stay tuned for more reviews! Also, I want to ask, is Marvel trying to hard with comedy nowadays? or does it work? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

“THOR” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/10/23/thor-2011-you-wont-need-to-be-hammered-to-watch-this-spoilers-for-the-marvel-cinematic-universe-movies/

Why Is A Bad Moms Christmas Happening?

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmtuwnta4mdmxnl5bml5banbnxkftztgwmje4njq0mzi-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! If you have been looking at the movies that have come out during the year of 2016, you may have come across one titled “Bad Moms.” I actually saw that in the theater, enjoyed it for what it was, but considering the audience that was there, I clearly wasn’t the target demographic, the amount of times I laughed were much fewer than the majority of attendees, and I clearly don’t laugh at swear words as much as other people. Maybe I’ve watched too many movies with foul language to know what I’m getting into. I’m not saying that other people are stupid for liking this film, we all have our personal tastes. Although then again I’m kinda pissed it made more than “Kubo and the Two Strings.” Sure it’s an animation so I imagine some people might not like the idea, but MY GOSH that was a masterpiece. At least we have “Sausage Party.” Right? Anyway, “Bad Moms” was relatively successful when it came out. It never hit the #1 spot on any of its weekends in theaters, although to be fair it was competing against movies like “Jason Bourne,” “Star Trek: Beyond,” and “Suicide Squad.” So at some point, a sequel goes into production. What’s the difference this time around? Well, it’s a Christmas movie.

For those who want to know the cast of the upcoming “Bad Moms” sequel, the movie will star Mila Kunis (Family Guy, Black Swan), Kristen Bell (The Good Place, Frozen), Kathryn Hahn (I Love Dick, Tomorrowland), Cheryl Hines (Curb Your Enthusiasm, Son of Zorn), Christine Baranski (The Good Wife, The Big Bang Theory), and Susan Sarandon (James and the Giant Peach, Thelma & Louise). The movie is basically a follow-up revolving around the characters played by Mila Kunis, Kristen Bell, and Kathryn Hahn as they try to rebel against the expectations laid upon them concerning Christmas.

Now, on paper, I wasn’t thrilled that this was happening. Sure, I enjoyed the first movie, but it’s not even that great. Plus, the more I think about it, I may have just been in a particular mood that day and I was trying to put my mind in another person’s shoes. I’m not a mother, nor am I a girl. I’m a teenage boy, there’s not many people I PERSONALLY can relate to when watching this movie. Then again this is why they make different movies for different people. This is why they make “Sharknado” and its sequels for stupid people. I’m not saying only stupid people enjoy “Sharknado” but keep in mind their movies are OBJECTIVELY DUMB. So what did I do to verify my interest or lack of interest in this movie? I watched the trailer. I didn’t laugh once, but then again, I go to the movies and see funny trailers which nobody laughs at. Although consider this, usually when there’s a trailer for a comedy, all the funny parts are shown in the trailer.

Let’s also consider the fact that this is a Christmas movie. What was the first movie? It was it’s own thing! There was no particular holiday on the rise, it was just a simple movie. Sure, Christmas might be a less than pleasant holiday for a number of mothers, but at the same time, I don’t see a Christmas theme fitting in the “Bad Moms” universe. If “Bad Moms” had a sequel that focused less on the Christmas theme, maybe someone has a birthday, maybe a number of children have birthdays coming up, something like that, a situation such as that might work out. In fact, you don’t even have to eliminate Christmas entirely, maybe you can make it subtle and not have all of this holiday theme strip club s*it. Besides, there are movies which happen to be sequels that take place during Christmas time that I enjoy despite the previous movies having no relation to that holiday. Just look at “Iron Man 3!” By the way, that movie was released in May, so that’s saying something.

Now there is another movie that’s actually coming out the week after this one comes out, which is “Daddy’s Home 2.” That movie is also going to have a Christmas theme, and a similar layout in terms of plot. “A Bad Moms Christmas” is going to have the mothers of the main characters coming for Christmas and “Daddy’s Home 2” is going to have the fathers of the main characters coming for Christmas. I saw both the original “Daddy’s Home” and “Bad Moms” movies, but if you had to ask me which was better as a movie, I’d say it would be “Bad Moms.” I’d honestly rather watch “Daddy’s Home” the more I think about it, but I found more things wrong with it and part of the illogical humor got into my head that it made me nearly frustrated. Plus I also found something that bothered me with the whole cones thing in the movie. I feel like “Daddy’s Home 2’s” Christmas theme is a little more appropriate for the film partially considering the last one came out in December and mainly considering that part of the last one took place on Christmas Day.

Another thing I had in the back of my mind is the wonder of repetition we’ll be seeing in this sequel. This may be judging a book by its cover, just like how watching a trailer might be judging a book by its cover, but just check out the posters. The poster for the original movie said “Party like a mother.” That slogan is also on the Blu-ray and DVD for the film. On the poster for this new movie, the slogan is “Celebrate the holidays like a mother.” Comedies and sequels can get some slack for repetition in full-length movies, but I don’t usually recall seeing repetition like this on many posters!

If you ask me, if I were making executive decisions, I’d say “A Bad Moms Christmas” sounds more like a straight to TV or straight to DVD film as opposed to a theatrical film. The first movie may have been fit for theaters, but this just feels out of place. I feel like the fact that it’s a sequel to a previous successful movie and the people starring in it are at least two reasons why this is getting a theatrical release. Moms will go see it, girls who want to see men without clothes on will go see it, heck, part of me even thinks teenage boys might even want to see this. Just think about it, Mila Kunis is the star of the movie!

On a little sidenote, a hint of dialogue was uttered in the trailer that caught my attention. Mila Kunis’s character is communicating with her mother, played by Cheryl Hines, and Mila Kunis tells Cheryl Hines that she just wanted to enjoy Christmas this year. Cheryl Hines replies saying “You are a mom. Moms don’t enjoy Christmas they give joy.” I understand what she meant there, but let me just have you know that I try to pay back my mother on Christmas Day. I understand it’s hard for mothers to cope with this holiday. This involves spending tons of money, buying gifts, preparing food, decorating, wrapping, possibly meeting in-laws that they may consider crazy, etc. I do try to help whenever I can, and you know what I gave to my mother last Christmas? I gave her a Roku! I try to put tons of thought in what to give to people, sometimes it’s hard. This is why I make lists for what I want. Some people I imagine don’t do that. I help in any way I can. Cooking’s a bit of stretch for me, I’m not the greatest at cooking, but I try to help buy gifts, wrap them, those sorts of things. So yeah, moms give joy for Christmas, but it doesn’t mean they can’t get it in return. Just thought I’d say that.

“A Bad Moms Christmas” comes out November 1, which is two days before “Thor: Ragnarok.” I personally don’t think that’s the best business decision possible, but let’s see how it plays out. I don’t know how much of the world will go see “A Bad Moms Christmas” when it comes out, but then again I’m talking about the same world containing millions that decided to skip out on seeing “Blade Runner 2049.” By the way, f*ck you, that movie was amazing, it should have made more money! I’m willing to bet this could break soon, but as of right now, “THE EMOJI MOVIE” HAS MADE MORE MONEY OVERALL THAN THIS PIECE OF WORK! Thanks for reading this post, tomorrow I will have my review for “Thor: The Dark World,” so look forward to that! Stay tuned for more posts and I’ll ask you a question. Are you going to see “A Bad Moms Christmas?” What are your thoughts on the original? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Wall (2017): Wait, Where’s John Cena? *STRONG LANGUAGE IN OPENING PARAGRAPH*

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmtc5odmynze4of5bml5banbnxkftztgwntm0mzc4mti-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

The f*cking movie known as “The Wall” is f*cking directed by the motherf*cker known as Doug f*cking Liman (The Bourne Identity, Jumper), stars Aaron f*cking Taylor-Johnson (Godzilla, Nocturnal Animals) and f*cking John Cena (American Grit, Trainwreck), and is f*cking about two American f*cking soldiers, there’s a lethal f*cker, err I mean sniper that is standing in their f*cking way, but the two are divided by a f*cking wall. …Now I could make a f*cking paragraph, illustrating my motherf*cking point that the movie is full of f*cking language, especially f*cking f-bombs that are f*cking shoved down your throat as f*ck. To be extra clear, this paragraph had fifteen f-bombs. “The Wall” had more, in fact, the exact total came out to 185 in the whole movie. Can you f*cking believe that?! And there’s sixteen!

The word f*ck can associate with this movie significantly. In fact, I’d personally go as far to say that the word can associate with more than just the screenplay which has the word bloated all over. I’d even say the movie in general can associate with it. One of my biggest problems with the movie is the marketing, specifically, the poster.

According to the poster, John Cena is in this movie as one of the starring roles. Well guess what? He’s barely in it! Now, I don’t know how much people appreciate John Cena as an actor. I know he gets plenty of appreciation as a wrestler and a prank call meme. He’s also going to be in the “Bumblebee” movie which is scheduled to come out next year. Speaking of sports stars who also do acting on the side, I’d also like to say this isn’t the first time I’ve seen something like this happen this year. There was this movie that came out in select theaters and digital services in March called “You Can’t Have It.” On the main poster for the film, the one that’s actually the only image of the movie on IMDb, and the poster you’d find for the movie when searching for it on Amazon, Rob Gronkowski, tight end of the New England Patriots, was in the center of the poster. This pretty much suggests that Gronk’s character would have a big role in the movie. His character however, didn’t even come in until the end. In fact, when he came in, I felt like I was watching something that was very tacked on. Now, this movie was not as bad when it came to this, but Cena’s barely in this movie, and there’s one guy that should have been on the poster as opposed to John Cena, and that is Laith Nakli. Now, his face isn’t really shown all that much in the film so I wouldn’t really put it in the poster. Just put Taylor-Johnson’s character in the poster by himself, or make a silhouette of Nakli’s character, any of that would have worked in my book!

This movie’s directed by Doug Liman (left), a director who I personally like. He’s done some movies I’ve seen before, including a movie that came out this year, in fact it came out months after this one, and that’s “American Made.” That’s a better movie in my opinion, but let’s not get into that. Regardless of how this movie in particular is, Liman’s vision is not a bad one. The location which this film was shot is Antelope Valley, which is in Lancaster, CA. By the way, if you are wondering where that is it’s in a spot between Los Angeles and Bakersfield. This location gave me a feeling of silence but the silence wasn’t peaceful, it was completely deadly. It almost reminds me of “No Country for Old Men,” which is kind of funny because both this and that movie barely have any music. Speaking of things that I find amusing, this movie was shot on 16mm film. This format was also used to shoot “The Hurt Locker,” which is interesting considering the locations where the films take place and how similar they look. Also if it means anything, I have yet to watch “The Hurt Locker.” This fact amuses me because when it comes to shooting movies, it’s either usually digital nowadays or if a movie is shot on film, it would be 35mm.

Let’s talk about Aaron Taylor-Johnson, who plays a character named Isaac. I thought his performance was very well done in this movie given the script, which again, is f*cking full of f*cks. Also I didn’t really find the movie as a whole, all that interesting. It was mostly boring, I tuned out for part of it, I was making fun of how much it wanted to “f*ck” with the audience. Some of you reading this might think that my opinion should be adjusted because this movie comes off as slow and it’s just how it is. I’m not saying the movie should be fast, but I just want it to be interesting. And it wasn’t interesting in this circumstance.

I will say though that the slow pace of the film, might add a bit to the movie in terms of realism. However despite the realism, I still wasn’t able to appreciate the movie. Also, you may be aware of another war movie, specifically one that came out months after this one. The movie I’m talking about is “Dunkirk.” Now I consider “Dunkirk” to be one of my favorite movies of the year and part of it was due to how realistic it was as far as war goes. And keep in mind, this movie was PG-13. If it added in blood then it would have been just slightly realer, however it’s pretty realistic already. Although one thing I consider great about “Dunkirk” that I found to be missing from “The Wall” was investment in the story. I could have been invested in the story here, but little problems came up as the movie went on, which bogged down my interest for the movie on a complete scale. Now I saw “Dunkirk” in theaters, I saw “The Wall” at home. Maybe if I saw “The Wall” in theaters I would probably not be talking about this all that much, but I made a choice to wait on this movie because I’m an Amazon Prime member and I figured this movie in particular would be free for Prime members by the end of the year.

In the end, I’d say that I need a wall to separate me from the pile of boredom known as “The Wall.” This is a movie that looks great, has a talented director, and a good performance by Aaron Taylor-Johnson despite the fact that the script is f*cked up in a bad way. I don’t mind when the word f*ck is used in movies or TV, but part of me wondered if the amount of f*cks given in this film was even f*cking possible. I’m gonna give “The Wall” a 4/10. Thanks for reading this review, next Monday I will have my review for “Thor: The Dark World,” so stay tuned for that, along with more reviews coming soon! Speaking of which, this is not official, but on November 5th, I’m thinking of posting a review for “V for Vendetta,” and if you ever seen the movie you’d understand why. Also, I have a question. If you could magically create a wall to separate yourself from something for the rest of your life, what would it be? Keep in mind, I mean literally separate yourself. Just imagine that this thing can’t climb the wall or go around it. Let me know about that down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Thor (2011): You Won’t Need To Be Hammered To Watch This! *SPOILERS FOR THE MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE MOVIES*

Posted on by Jack Drees

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! I gotta ask you, are you excited for “Thor: Ragnarok?” If you are, great! I personally am somewhat excited, although slightly worried. However the reviews for what I’m aware of, have been outstanding thus far, so you never know what could happen. In preparation for that, I figured it would be appropriate to go back a number of years and review the “Thor” movies prior to “Ragnarok” in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Today, I’m starting off the series by reviewing the original installment, “Thor.” It came out in 2011, it received decent ratings, however it doesn’t mean some people don’t have issues with it. Without further ado, let’s start the review!

mv5boge4nzu1ytatnza3mi00zta2ltg2ymytmdjmmthimjlkyjg2xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyntgzmdmzmtg-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Thor” is directed by Kenneth Branagh (Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Henry V) and stars Chris Hemsworth (Rush, Star Trek), Anthony Hopkins (The Silence of the Lambs, Red Dragon), Natalie Portman (Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones, V for Vendetta), Kat Dennings (2 Broke Girls, The 40-Year-Old Virgin), and Tom Hiddleston (The Night Manager, Kong: Skull Island) and is the story of a god, Thor, who lives in the world of Asgard. He and his brother, Loki, were told when they were young that only one of them would ascend to a rightful place on their own throne. Later on, he’s cast out of Asgard and forced to live with humanity on Earth, or as Asgardians call it, Midgard.

If you have been following this blog for awhile now, you may be aware I did a countdown on my top 10 favorite films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. “Thor” was on that list as #5. By the way, out of all the films in the MCU’s first phase, I considered this one my favorite. So I bet you could imagine I was ready to watch this movie again. So I rewatched the movie for the second time, and upon this watch, I can’t really say the second time was as entertaining as the first, but I’m still going to give the same rating I gave the first time I watched the film. I won’t say it now, but you’ll hear it later on.

mv5byme1yzuyn2mtzdmwnc00ztawltg1mzgtywzjytdhzdniyte4xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynjuxmjc1otm-_v1_sx1777_cr001777755_al_

Since there are more positives than negatives in this movie, I’ll bring up some negatives first. The first negative I have is Kat Dennings’s character of Darcy Lewis. In the movie she had nothing really striking about her. She was just there with Natalie Portman and her character didn’t really add much to the story. Although based on my memory, I thought she was worse in “Thor: The Dark World,” a review which you’ll be able to read a week after this one you’re currently reading is published, so stay tuned! Despite how this is supposed to be a section where I display myself as a negative Nancy, I’ll bring a positive here and say that the CGI in this movie is glorious! As far as phase 1 of the MCU goes, this is the best CGI of all the movies released in said phase. It’s colorful, it’s fluid, it’s vivid! I love it! BUT… there is bad CGI that stands out. Now I will say, if that CGI was from a video game, then I’d say this would be understandable, but this is a movie. Nevertheless, it looks great!

Now let’s talk about the man who plays Thor himself, Chris Hemsworth. Out of all the Australian actors working today, Chris Hemsworth is the one who is probably the most talked about of all them as far as this decade goes. Part of that is due to the fact that he’s in this movie as the starring role, the fact that he’s in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the fact that he’s proven to be a good actor, and according to many opinions, his good looks. Now, I’m a straight male, so I don’t really have much to say about attraction as far as myself goes, but I imagine chicks dig him. I mean, he was the secretary, ahem sorry, the object in “Ghostf*ckers” 2016. To avoid going on a tangent, let’s stay focused on the character of Thor. At one point, this character was chosen to rule Asgard, but due to his arrogance, he was cast out of the realm. The way this was set up was smart. You see Thor as a kid, he’s with his brother and his father, the two are aspiring to rise to the throne. One gets the rightful place as time passes, then Thor goes with other Asgardians into battle, and he’s basically gone from being a guy named Thor, which is already a killer name, to Superduperkickassthunderdomeonastick. Yes, that’s one word, and I don’t care! While we watch Thor beat the hell out of some Frost Giants and it does come off as pure fun, Thor’s father, Odin, doesn’t approve of his actions because Thor is being too arrogant. Due to this, Loki has taken Thor’s place. While I will say I can understand Thor’s father for casting him out because of how he handled the situation which was upon him, I will also say I felt sorry for Thor not just because of the situation at hand itself, but also the fact that he was trying to preserve peace. Sure, he did it violently, but at the same time, you can get why Thor did what he did.

Now let’s talk about Thor’s brother, Loki. When it comes to Marvel villains, they’re usually not great for one reason or another. When I say that, I mean they either just don’t unleash much of anything interesting or they’re forgettable. This is the case I found with MCU movies like “Doctor Strange,” “Captain America: The First Avenger,” and “The Incredible Hulk.” Loki, is not one of those villains. I will say he has been in multiple movies both as hero and as a villain and I believe he shines best in “The Avengers,” where he appears as the main antagonist. Here, he was effective. Part of what makes him a great villain is not just simply the fact that he’s Thor’s brother, but some basic elements of how his character is written. Also, I’ll bring it up again, they kind of had a sibling rivalry when they were younger, because one was destined to be king.

“Thor” happens to have a cliche that ultimately works. That my friends, is the fish out of water story. Now when I say that, I don’t think it’s a horrible cliche, it’s just there. When Thor arrives on Earth, he is not familiar with how its folks behave. This brought some moments of humor into the mix. For example there’s one scene in a cafe when Thor is with characters he met on Earth and he drinks coffee for the first time.

 

THOR: (tasting coffee for the first time) This drink… I like it!

DARCY: I know, it’s great right?

THOR: ANOTHER! (throws coffee mug on ground, shattering it)

 

Another funny moment is when Thor walks into a pet store.

 

THOR: I need a horse!

PET STORE CLERK: We don’t have horses. Just dogs, cats, birds.

THOR: Then give me one of those large enough to ride.

 

Throughout this story Thor meets characters like Darcy Lewis, who I recently brought up. However let’s talk about her friend, Jane Foster, played by Natalie Portman. In this movie, Foster is an astrophysicist, unlike the comic books where she’s mainly known by a number of readers to be a nurse and a doctor. Out of all the characters he met on Earth, Thor had the strongest connection with Jane. Portman’s character is the love interest, she slept with Thor, and no, the movie doesn’t contain a sex scene for those who are wondering. In fact, I could be wrong, but I believe the only movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe that has something resembling a sex scene is the first “Iron Man.” Even though Jane may have stood out amongst the Earthlings here, there is another one that intrigued me.

Who was I intrigued by? Well, that would be Erik Selvig, played by Stellan Skarsgård. The thing that intrigued me about him the most is actually something I constantly think about. Selvig is a very science based person, which does make sense given how his character is an astrophysicist, but based on the writing, his personality, and the lines the character gives, his character is probably the most scientific of everyone written in the script. It’s almost to the point where he’s closed minded. I’m a little bit different in this aspect, because while I do follow science, and I actually follow whatever science tells me (OK, maybe not everything, some people might just make up something and call it science) I do try to keep myth and legend in mind. Although I will say when it comes to religion, that’s something that I personally am conflicted on. There’s a part of me that wants to follow certain religious teachings but at the same time some of them are either outdated, unscientific, or crazy. You can believe in it if you want, you have your own life and you can do what you want with it, but I’m just saying. Although I don’t want to go into it, this is a MOVIE BLOG, where I talk about MOVIES, not RELIGION.

Much like this movie’s effects, I gotta say the film’s action is probably the best as far as the MCU’s first phase goes. It’s shot well enough for you to be able to tell what’s going on, it’s immersive at times, it’s got great sound effects accompanied to it, and you can even say that the effects enhance the experience. This is shown in the climactic sequence with Thor and Loki on the Rainbow bridge, or moments featuring the robot Loki’s controlling. By the way, that robot sounds AMAZING on a Blu-Ray disc. Every single action sequence was either entertaining, fun, or meant something, which made the movie more interesting in the long run. This is also probably the most investing climax in the Marvel Cinematic Universe since “Iron Man.” The movie ends with the brothers fighting each other, Odin, the father of the brothers, who died partway into the movie, comes back to life, and eventually Loki sacrifices himself. It’s a great death, or was it? Because if you stick around for the end of the credits, Loki’s actually still alive!

In the end, “Thor” is probably the most underrated movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I don’t have many problems with it, there are some nitpicks, but it’s nothing colossal. Chris Hemsworth is great as Thor, it has beautiful CGI, the camerawork is not bad, the Earthlings for the most part are interesting. The romance, while somewhat forced, was believable. It’s not to say the romance wasn’t intriguing, but it was somewhat forced. Overall, if you’re looking for a superhero movie to watch on a movie night, I’d say give this one a shot. I’m gonna give “Thor” a 9/10. The review’s technically over, but I still have one more thing to do. Ladies and gentlemen, allow me to introduce you to Stardust!

I would like to take this time to let you know about this cool new app called “Stardust.” It’s a nifty little app that basically combines elements of IMDb and Snapchat. What you do on “Stardust” is you can find a movie or an episode of a TV show, record a video of yourself talking about it, and let the world see it! In fact, one neat thing about Stardust is that you don’t even have to say you witnessed the episode or movie because “Stardust” allows you to confirm whether or not you’ve watched something. You can also follow other people who have the app to see their latest reactions and thoughts in the realm of TV and movies. By the way, if you’re interested, find my Stardust handle, JackDrees, follow me, and you’ll get to see reactions to movies you’ll find reviews on for this blog like “Blade Runner 2049” and you’ll also get to see reactions to movies I never get to talk about like “Sucker Punch.” Thanks for reading this review, since we’re on the topic of “Thor,” I will say that “Thor: Ragnarok” comes out on November 3rd, which is the weekend of my birthday, so I don’t know whether or not I’ll actually go see it right away, although the weekend after is Veteran’s Day weekend, and I’ll be at Rhode Island Comic-Con, so if I have some free time on my hands during my visit, I’ll go see it then. I mean, I’d rather see “Thor: Ragnarok” as opposed to “A Bad Moms Christmas,” which comes out the same weekend as “Thor: Ragnarok.” WHY THE F*CK WOULD THEY MAKE THAT S*IT?! Nevertheless, stay tuned for more reviews! So I’ll ask you right now, what are your thoughts on “Thor?” Are you excited for the upcoming installment? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi is Getting the IMAX 70mm Treatment and a History of Star Wars in IMAX!

Posted on by Jack Drees

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! If you read my blog, you may already know I loved the movie “Dunkirk” when I saw it. And I did a few posts on it, not just a review, but mainly posts dedicated to how it was presented. You may also know I went to see the movie in IMAX 70mm film. The clearest format a movie’s ever been presented in. There were 37 locations presenting the film in this format as a special engagement. There was also IMAX laser, which is a high quality digital experience, but it’s still not as clear as IMAX 70mm. I went to the one in Providence, RI, and for what I can tell, that projection probably won’t be used for awhile for feature length films. After all, I checked the Wikipedia page labeled “List of IMAX DMR films” and none of them say that any of the future films on there are shot with IMAX cameras, which plays a prime factor into which IMAX movies get to be played in the 70mm format. Now, there are ones that are being shot with IMAX digital cameras such as “Avengers: Infinity War” and “Mission: Impossible 6,” but those, based on experience, won’t be in 70mm. If it weren’t for one other movie, “Dunkirk” would have been the only feature length film released in 2017 to get the 70mm treatment. That other movie by the way, is the upcoming “Star Wars.”

mv5bmjq1mzcxnjg4n15bml5banbnxkftztgwnzgwmjy4mzi-_v1_sy1000_cr006751000_al_

Before going any further with this 70mm IMAX mumbo jumbo, let’s talk about the movie itself. You may already be aware this is the eighth installment in the main saga of “Star Wars” movies, based on what I’ve seen, this takes place after “The Force Awakens” and I’m willing to bet it starts off right where that movie stopped, on the island where Luke and Rey are standing in front of each other as Rey is holding Luke’s lightsaber. This is supposed to be the second installment of the latest trilogy of “Star Wars” films, which is supposed to bridge the gap between “The Force Awakens” and the untitled “Episode IX,” which will be released in 2019. As this episode bridges the gap, Rey continues her adventure as she receives training from Luke Skywalker, and others give it their all, continuing to take down the First Order.

For the record, this is not the first time a “Star Wars” movie has been shown in the IMAX format. In the main saga, episodes II and VII have both been in the format, and the spinoff, “Rogue One” has also been presented in IMAX. Also, every single one of these movies has been shown in IMAX 70mm, which was the only option for “Episode II” because that’s the only projection technology IMAX used until 2008, although there was a projector that was used for some time that supported the format (first used after Episode II), but the screen was smaller and different. Fun little fact about “Episode II,” this was the second movie to be shown in IMAX as a film to go through IMAX’s DMR process, which is the process that pretty much every feature film goes through before it’s released in IMAX. Also it was first shown in IMAX starting November 1, 2002, which is months after the movie’s official release in theaters. “Episode VII” was shown in IMAX, including a limited number of locations that played it in 70mm. It was even one of the earliest films to be shown in IMAX laser. “Rogue One” was shown in IMAX too. Fun fact about that, for those who went to see it in IMAX 15/70mm or IMAX laser, they got to see a 6 minute preview of “Dunkirk” which covered the entire screen. Part of me wonders if that was an intention someone thought of long ago or an ultimate afterthought, and you’ll understand why I say that in a second.

When it comes to “Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones,” that was shot digitally, shooting IMAX footage in movies wasn’t even a thing yet. By the way, that started in 2008 with “The Dark Knight.” Digital does have some perks when it comes to shooting, for example, the storage for your video isn’t as tacky because instead of film, you have a memory card. Although certain directors prefer film. Directors like Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction, The Hateful Eight), Paul Thomas Anderson (Boogie Nights, The Master), and Christopher Nolan (Interstellar, Inception). Also, George Lucas, director of “Attack of the Clones” along with the other two prequels actually pretty much kicked off the rise of digital projection with “Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace,” one of my least favorite movies of all time. People thought it was amazing at the time, but looking back, the world is increasingly becoming more into film, which I find amazing because digital is at pretty much every theater now.

“Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens” was the first movie in the series since “Episode I” to be shot on film. This was shot in three formats, digital (aerial plates) 35mm film and IMAX film. Most of the movie was presented in 35mm, which was in an aspect ratio of 2.39:1. Also if you saw the movie in a format that wasn’t IMAX, the aspect ratio would remain that way for the entire picture. This was also how the DVD/Blu-Ray release played out as well. In IMAX 70mm and laser, the aspect ratio would change to 1.43:1 for some time, or if you’re watching in IMAX digital, the aspect ratio would change to 1.90:1. Although this was for one scene only, specifically the scene where Rey, Finn, and BB-8 escape from Jakku. Due to this the total time spent showing IMAX footage ultimately came out to 5 minutes, which is significantly lower than other films shot in the IMAX format.

“Rogue One: A Star Wars Story” was the first live-action spinoff in the franchise released in theaters, and one thing I noticed is that when it comes to movies released in IMAX 15/70mm, this one is different than other ones released over the past few years. Aside from “A Beautiful Planet,” this is the first movie since “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug” to be released in IMAX 70mm that wasn’t shot with IMAX cameras. Although UNLIKE “A Beautiful Planet” and LIKE “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug,” this movie didn’t cover the entire screen. However, I will say the screen was fully covered before the movie. That’s because, as mentioned before, there was an extended preview for “Dunkirk” shown exclusively in IMAX 70mm and laser. Also from what I gathered, “Rogue One” was shot using an Arri Alexa 65, which is a digital camera, but it’s also one that is higher in terms of quality than other digital cameras used in certain movies including the one George Lucas wanted to use in the prequels.

Now with this out of the way, let me just blurt something at you here. I don’t know how much footage was shot in the IMAX format for this movie. Wikipedia suggests that the IMAX camera was used for certain scenes. As for the rest of the scenes, the same camera used for “Rogue One,” the Arri Alexa 65, is used here, and you also have a Panavision film camera which shoots in 35mm film. I’ve seen many films in IMAX, in 70mm, digital, and laser, and I usually have an enjoyable experience, some better than others, but still. When it comes to IMAX 70mm film, I’d say that it’s worth the ticket price just for getting the highest quality image possible. Based on what I’m hearing, I don’t think it’ll be as worth it as “Dunkirk” was but I’d still say go for it, after all, “Star Wars” is a movie that’s made for audiences to go see together, and I think the best way to do that is by going to an IMAX 70mm theater. If I were a filmmaker, I would, depending on the movie I’m making, want it to be IMAX 70mm friendly. I want it to be big, bold, beautiful, the three b’s.

Another thing you should consider is the 2D vs. 3D option. If you ask me, I usually don’t care, 2D is cheaper, but 3D at times can be a fun ride. If you choose to see the new “Star Wars” in IMAX 70mm, 2D is going to be your only option. I don’t really think that’s a bad idea considering the size the movie is when projected on film and having to deal with what technically qualifies as two movies can be a hassle. Not to mention, there are IMAX film projectors that can’t even do 3D. I even looked at a website called lfexaminer.com, and there are only two theaters this is playing at in the IMAX 70mm format that can handle 3D.

One more thing to keep in mind that a good number of these locations are IMAX domes. These are also referred to as Omni Theaters and OMNIMAX. These theaters usually never play feature films, you’re more likely to find those on straight IMAX screens. OK, not completely straight, they do have an intentional slight curve, but you get my point. I have never seen a feature film in an IMAX dome so I don’t know what it’s like, however I have watched IMAX documentaries there, which were fun experiences that covered the whole screen. And keep that in mind, while IMAX often plays movies that will make you see black bars on the screen, kind of like some stuff you might watch at home, it might be weird in an IMAX dome. This is because the dome is basically a fish eye, making the curve a lot less slight than other IMAX screens. You’ll still get amazing sound and clear projection, but it’s something to keep in mind. Also, if you don’t like looking up at screens instead of directly at one, this isn’t your theater.

Also, I’ll restate the fact that when “Dunkirk” came out, it was playing at 37 locations in IMAX 15/70mm. That is rather small, and believe it or not, it is more than the total locations playing the movie in laser, which happened to be 25 by the way according to IMAX’s website. I’m not sure how many laser locations have been established since July, but the amount of laser locations playing this movie is likely to be small. Guess what? The 70mm locations are smaller than what “Dunkirk” had! When “Dunkirk” was available for the IMAX 70mm treatment, people from multiple countries such as the US, the UK, Australia, and Thailand could view it the way director Christopher Nolan intended. According to IMAX, “The Last Jedi” will be available in 11 theaters in the 15/70mm format, and if I feel the need to, I’ll give you some information as to what type of theater it is if you’re interested. Just a hint, if you see me listing whether the theater is capable of 2D or 3D, the theater has a flat screen.

US THEATERS:

ALABAMA:
IMAX Dome, McWane Center: Birmingham
IMAX, US Space & Rocket Center: Huntsville (Dome)

CALIFORNIA:
Hackworth IMAX Dome, The Tech Museum: San Jose

CONNECTICUT:
IMAX, Maritime Aquarium: Norwalk (2D)

INDIANA:
IMAX, Indianapolis State Museum: Indianapolis (3D, also does certain films in IMAX digital)

IOWA:
Blank IMAX Dome, Science Center of Iowa: Des Moines

MISSOURI:
OMNIMAX, St. Louis Science Center: St. Louis

NORTH CAROLINA:
The Charlotte Observer IMAX Dome, Discovery Place: Charlotte

PENNSYLVANIA:
Tuttleman IMAX, The Franklin Institute: Philadelphia (Dome)

TEXAS:
Omnitheatre, Fort Worth Museum of Science & History: Fort Worth

UK THEATERS:
London Science Museum: London (3D)

As you can see, not only do we have a small amount of theaters listed here, but there’s only one outside the US! Just like I said before, the total number of theaters listed here in fact comes out to 11. So the number of IMAX 70mm presentations for “The Last Jedi” is less than the number of seasons of shows like “Criminal Minds,” “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Supernatural,” and “NCIS.” By the way, all of those shows are still on! If you live close to one of these theaters, I gotta say, you’re so lucky. The closest one to me is the at Maritime Aquarium, which is almost 3 hours away from my house in Massachusetts. Just for the lack of theaters available, I’d say this is worth experiencing just to say you saw the movie in this format. Now I’m going to see this movie opening night in standard 3D, if I like this movie enough, I’d probably make an attempt to go to Maritime. Also, if you are a movie buff, depending on what you’ve done under said label, you might be interested to know there’s a restaurant right near the theater called Johnny Utah’s. Why do I bring this up? Well if you ever viewed the movie “Point Break” which came out in 1991 starring Patrick Swayze and Keanu Reeves, that was the name of the character played by Keanu Reeves. Just to clarify, when I say restaurant, I actually mean club. They have a mechanical bull, it’s very loud, and it’s not exactly kid friendly. Oh yeah, and it has two stars on Yelp, totally worth a trip amirite!

Will I see “Star Wars Episode VIII” in IMAX 70mm? I’m not sure yet. I’ve got to consider the time it takes to get to the theater it’s playing at and how much I even like the movie upon first watch since I already have tickets for it at another theater. Nevertheless, if you do plan to see “The Last Jedi” in the clearest way possible, consider this post a recommendation. Also, if you missed “Dunkirk” in IMAX 70mm I’m willing to bet this will absolutely make up for it. Thanks for reading this post! Next Monday, I’m going to have my review for “Thor,” which is going to start off my series of “Thor” reviews leading up to “Thor: Ragnarok.” Not really much else is happening, I might watch something and if it has some significance I’ll review it. So stay tuned for more great content! Also, I have a few questions. Are you planning to see “The Last Jedi” in IMAX 70mm? Are you seeing “The Last Jedi” in general? If you are seeing “The Last Jedi,” where are you seeing it? Leave your responses in the comments! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Blade Runner 2049 (2017): Is the 35 Years Worth the Wait?

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmjm3njcxndm4ml5bml5banbnxkftztgwmji4ndizmzi-_v1_sy1000_cr006481000_al_

“Blade Runner 2049” is directed by Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners, Arrival), stars Ryan Gosling (La La Land, Crazy Stupid Love) and Harrison Ford (Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark), and is the sequel to 1982’s “Blade Runner” which was directed by Ridley Scott (Gladiator, The Martian), a movie considered by many people to be one of the greatest sci-fi films, if not one of the greatest films, ever made. “Blade Runner 2049” takes place in the year of 2049 in the US state of California, the plot is that there’s a young blade runner (Ryan Gosling) who discovers a long-kept secret which leads him into tracking down former blade runner Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), who’s been out of sight for three decades.

When it comes to the original “Blade Runner,” it’s a movie I haven’t actually watched until fairly recently. For the record, when I say that, I’ll have you know I didn’t even watch the original version of the film, which by the way the version I watched which isn’t original, is the one I viewed five times at this point. I say that because if you know this movie’s history, you’d be aware of how it has received endless cuts. In 1982, they started out with a movie that not many people saw but was on the rise to prove its influence to film. I mean, seriously! If you look at films and material which came out after it, you’ll understand what I’m talking about. Just check out “Ghost in the Shell,” “The Matrix,” the “Star Wars” prequels, “The Fifth Element,” all of these just look at them and don’t tell me you don’t see a bit of “Blade Runner” in them. The redo of the TV series “Battlestar Galactica,” according to the producers, cited “Blade Runner” was a major source of influence to the series. It has also been parodied in material such as the British science fiction TV show “Red Dwarf.” Based on what I have told you, it’s not surprising that people revere this movie. Overtime it has gained a cult following, and has been considered one of the greatest science fiction films, not to mention one of the greatest films in general, ever made. It was nominated for two Oscars (Best Effects, Visual Effects, Best Art Decoration-Set Decoration), it was also nominated for a Golden Globe (Best Original Score-Motion Picture), which I wholeheartedly approve of because the score is probably one of my favorites in movie history. BAFTA also praised the score by nominating it, which was one of the eight nominations the movie received in that particular show. By the way, it won three. It currently has a spot on the IMDb top 250, it’s on AFI’s 10 Top 10 as the #6 science fiction film, and IGN put it as the #1 spot in its “Top 25 Sci-Fi Films of All Time.” I watched the film multiple times now, specifically “The Final Cut,” and it gets better with multiple watches. So, how is “Blade Runner 2049?” Holy crap, this movie was an experience. I went to see this movie in IMAX, and I don’t regret it, because this is one of those films that MUST be seen in a theater! You know how I kept talking about “Dunkirk” and what an amazing experience that was? This was just as great! And with that I’m gonna give you guys a little sidenote…

I don’t use Netflix, in fact, I’d go as far as to say that Netflix is slightly overrated. I may be biased because they killed Blockbuster Video, a significant memory from my childhood, but I’m gonna let you know a little information about them that you may or may not be aware of at the moment. Netflix may be known for its selection of movies and TV programs to watch which are available at your fingertips, but they’ve also done original content. They’ve done TV shows such as “House of Cards,” “Orange is the New Black,” and “Stranger Things,” all of which received positive reviews and a following by many people. That’s not to say all Netflix shows were considered watchable, there are disliked ones such as “Iron Fist” despite it having a following. They’ve also done movies such as “Gerald’s Game,” “The Ridiculous Six,” and “Beasts of No Nation.” What I’m going to say next is rather unnecessary for their TV shows, but can fit for their movies. When it comes to Netflix movies, they go straight to the streaming service. There’s no theatrical release for it, it just hops straight on over to the service, so people might get a theatrical experience depending on their setup, but chances are someone might end up watching the movie on their laptop without headphones, or heck, even their phone! Critically acclaimed director Christopher Nolan agrees with me when say that this is bullcrap, because Netflix is missing out on a opportunity for their movies to be shown in theaters, where audiences pay money to go see it in an immersive setting. Want to know something else? There’s an event called Cinemacon, which is a convention dedicated to film, it shows off what upcoming movies have in store, it also does screenings for flicks, stars show up, and it also has has a focus on cinemas themselves and technologies related to them. When “Blade Runner 2049” footage was being presented to attendees at the show, Sony chairman Tom Rothman said this…

“Netflix, my ass.”

Well said, Tom. For the record, Netflix has never presented at Cinemacon, so that shows what they stand for in the realm of cinema. At least Amazon releases content in theaters!

If this movie were released on Netflix, I would have been outraged, partially because I don’t use the service, but having seen this movie, this movie looked and sounded SPECTACULAR! Yeah, that was a long point, but I felt it had to be made. This movie was directed by Denis Villenevue, who also directed “Arrival,” one of my favorite movies from last year. I think he’s a great director, and his vision for this movie was brilliant. Every single frame had something worth appreciating. I can only imagine the detail that went into storyboarding this thing! Although, I can’t exactly say that he’s only in this fest of praise, because I gotta give kudos to Roger Deakins, the cinematographer of the film. For the record, this isn’t the first time Deakins and Villenevue worked together. They’ve also collaborated in “Sicario” and “Prisoners.” I haven’t seen those films, but I will say that Deakins is a fine cinematographer, just watch “No Country for Old Men” to see what I mean.

The original “Blade Runner” came out in 1982, and when it comes to movies with great lighting, as of right now, it’s probably the first movie that comes to my mind. The lighting in “Blade Runner 2049” personally isn’t as great as the original, but that doesn’t mean the lighting’s bad. However, from an overall perspective, much like its three decade old predecessor, “Blade Runner 2049” has terrific effects. Every single effect in the movie felt realistic. Sure, there are moments of the movie containing visuals that probably would be impractical (the giant sex doll with blue hair for example), but in all reality, even those felt like they actually existed for the universe this movie was presenting.

Speaking of things that aren’t as good as the original, I gotta say the music isn’t as great. Once again, this doesn’t mean the music was bad, the music was almost as brilliant as the 1982 film. But the thing about the 1982 film, is that it was unique. The music by the way in that film was done by Vangelis, who also did the score for “Chariots of Fire.” Also, Vangelis did not return for this movie, and yes, he’s still alive. The guy doing the score this time around is one of my favorite composers. I’ve brought him up in a number of posts this year, Hans Zimmer. Like the original score, it’s techno, and at times you do hear booms, which is pretty much the first thing you hear in the original movie when the titles show up. By the way, those booms sound amazing in IMAX. Also, this score at times felt a little more traditional than the original “Blade Runner.” The “Blade Runner” score is something you’d rarely hear, and while this newer film does have qualities of the older score, the new doesn’t have the absolute uniqueness of the old. I say that because I remember the original having moments that almost sounded like chimes, it was different. You could also hear vocalizing in the score, and I mentioned how much of an influence this had on “Ghost in the Shell” and I wouldn’t be surprised if the original movie’s score was partially influential. The vocalizing, the more I think about it, reminds me of “Ghost of the Shell’s” intro music. “Blade Runner 2049” was just released, so only time will tell how much the music, plus the rest of the movie will influence future products. Nevertheless, “Blade Runner 2049” had a GREAT score and I’d love to listen to it again and again.

Let’s talk about one of the leads in the film, specifically Ryan Gosling. This fellow has proven to be an excellent actor. By the way, there’s a couple scenes in this movie where Ryan Gosling is in front of a piano, and that’s not the only film where Gosling is in front of a piano, just watch “La La Land” to see what I mean. Gosling plays K and he’s basically this movie’s young Blade Runner. He’s given a mission at the beginning of the film, and seeing his character progress throughout the picture was entertaining and very moving. At times, Gosling’s acting chops were unleashed to full potential, which happened to be prominent during the movie’s emotional scenes which I won’t get into to avoid spoiler territory. K also had some qualities which were noticeable that could be compared to Harrison Ford’s character of Rick Deckard, who we’ll get to momentarily. K starts off in the movie as being directed by Lieutenant Joshi, a character played by Robin Wright, who in terms of looks and attitude, almost reminds me of your typical Charlize Theron role such as the ones she’s done in “A Million Ways to Die in the West” and “Hancock.” Anyway, seeing Gosling focus on his objectives was fascinating and despite this movie, like the original, appearing to be a slow burr, my eyes were never taken off the screen. Yes, this applies to more than Ryan Gosling in all technicality, but I’m just making a point. There’s also a spouse Ryan Gosling has, by that I mean a futuristic spouse, and by THAT I mean a spouse that is basically holographic, oh yeah, and she can change form. I can’t even get into the mission Ryan Gosling does in the film because I have a feeling this is something the trailers are hiding. I’ve seen all the main trailers, but it’s been awhile since I’ve seen one in particular, and I’m not sure if the hidden details are there, but for the sake of keeping some information a secret to possibly have some folks savor the movie’s flavor, I’m going to ignore uttering these details.

Now let’s talk about Harrison Ford. If you remember the original “Blade Runner,” Harrison Ford played Rick Deckard, the main character of the film. He was hunting down replicants just because he had a job to do. Speaking of the original film, we do get some callbacks. As mentioned recently, the music can qualify as a callback, but we do get some audio from the first film. During the film I heard Harrison Ford’s voice as it was in 1982, and I remember hearing Sean Young’s voice too. The origami unicorn makes a return here, which has brought up an interesting theory of whether Deckard’s actually a human or a replicant. By the way, I’d say he’s human. Also, I may have said that Ryan Gosling did a great job, but in all reality, Harrison Ford probably did better. By the way, out of all the performances I’ve seen Ford do, this might be his best one. Also, Deckard’s introduction is definitely one of the best scenes in the entire flick. You may have gotten a glimpse at it in the trailers, but there is more to it then what was there. I won’t go into detail though.

As much as I praise this movie, it’s not perfect. For example, some characters didn’t stand out as much as others, and speaking of characters, there’s one character who goes by the name of Mariette. She’s not unlikable, but she didn’t really add much of anything to the movie in terms of story except for maybe one part where she and K’s holographic wife are shown to have no clothes on. Also, this isn’t really a complaint but it’s mainly something I noticed, Jared Leto is barely in this movie. In fact I think he may have spent less time here than “Suicide Squad,” although I liked Leto better here than “Suicide Squad.” I may be nitpicking, and from experience, this is probably one of those movies I have to watch more than once to fully appreciate, so maybe I’m just imagining things. Other than what I mentioned, this movie’s pretty much a masterpiece, which is saying something considering what many people say about 1982’s “Blade Runner.”

Now I just mentioned this could take multiple watches to fully appreciate. And I’ll have you know I watched the original “Blade Runner” four times from start to finish since early September. I also saw it not long ago and I fell asleep to it, but to be fair, it was late. This is one of those movies, like the original “Blade Runner” that I’m probably gonna watch over and over.

In the end, “Blade Runner 2049” is a movie that defines how sequels should be made. This to me is 2017’s “Tron: Legacy,” by that I mean you’ve got this film which came out a long time ago, in fact the original “Blade Runner” actually came out the same year as the original “Tron.” The film now has a sequel, years in the making, and people enjoy it. Granted “Blade Runner 2049” has gotten more positive reception, but it doesn’t mean people didn’t appreciate “Tron: Legacy.” I love the film from a technical perspective, this movie and “Dunkirk,” so far, have been my two favorite cinematic experiences of 2017. Hans Zimmer created a great score, the screenplay hit every necessary emotion, the direction and cinematography are stellar, I’m glad to see Harrison Ford return as Rick, Ryan Gosling was great as well. Overall, this movie did what it needed to do. I’m gonna give “Blade Runner 2049” a 9/10. If you saw “Blade Runner” thinking that this movie could never be recreated, chances are you’ve just been proven wrong. This is a sequel worth remembering, and as far as sequels go, this is probably the best one I’ve seen so far this year. I can’t wait to buy this movie when it comes to home video, I want to see it again, possibly pick up on some details I missed, we’ll see what happens. Thanks for reading this review! As far as upcoming reviews go, I hope to see “Stronger” starring Jake Gyllenhaal, which is about a guy who manages to survive the Boston Marathon bombing, and I also am planning on reviewing “Thor” and “Thor: The Dark World” in preparation for “Thor: Ragnarok.” Stay tuned for those reviews, and more reviews! Also, if you’re into “Blade Runner,” you might be interested in checking out my post dedicated to things “Blade Runner” got right about the future. Here’s a question, which “Blade Runner” was better? The first one or the second one? Also, one more question, what is a movie that gets better the more you watch it? Let me know down below in the comments! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

WHAT “BLADE RUNNER” GOT RIGHT ABOUT THE FUTURE: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/10/06/what-blade-runner-got-right-about-the-future/

Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi (2017) OFFICIAL TRAILER: Lightsabers! Space Battles! Training! …Possible Ripoff…

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmjq1mzcxnjg4n15bml5banbnxkftztgwnzgwmjy4mzi-_v1_sy1000_cr006751000_al_

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Tonight I was doing something rather strange for me. I was watching football. Yeah, it was a game between the Minnesota Vikings and the Chicago Bears, and I’ll have you know I’m from Massachusetts so you can probably tell I don’t care about either of those teams. Oh yeah, and when I said I was watching the game, I wasn’t even technically watching it, I had it on mute. However, I watched the game for one reason and one reason only, which is to catch the new trailer for “Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi.” Having seen it now, I will say this. As a trailer, it’s better than the teaser we got in April, not to mention this trailer got me more hyped up for the film as opposed to that teaser. If you remember my review for the teaser, I said it made me afraid of what the movie is going to be like. Now that I’ve seen this trailer for the film, do those fears still exist? I guess you can say so, but this trailer does convince me that this movie has a tone that might be consistent throughout, and it might be at the very least, entertaining. So let’s break it down and analyze it.

The first voice we hear in the entire trailer is Snoke’s, and if you don’t know who Snoke is, he’s basically the giant in “The Force Awakens” who was in a number of scenes with General Hux and Kylo Ren. By the way, for those who don’t know, he’s played by Andy Serkis, who you may know as Gollum in “Lord of the Rings” and Caesar in the recent “Planet of the Apes” reboot installments including “Rise of the Planet of the Apes,” “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes,” and the recent “War for the Planet of the Apes.” He says “When I found you, I saw raw, untamed power, and beyond that, something truly special.” Throughout we get various shots, and based on a number of shots presented throughout this voiceover, I believe he’s talking about Kylo Ren. In fact according to “Episode VII” Kylo still had training left to do, so he could be training under Snoke’s wing and somewhere in the process, this is uttered. Afterwards, we get our last shot before the Lucasfilm logo appears, which is Rey unleashing a lightsaber.

We then cut to what seems to be early on in the movie, where we see the island Rey and Luke met. Rey’s telling Luke that something’s inside her, going by what I know, that’s undoubtedly the force, unless of course it’s the desire to save the galaxy. We get to see some shots that were shown in the teaser, including a shot of Rey training, followed by some shots we haven’t seen before, which by the way, makes her look like a badass. Speaking of badassery, Rey’s using the force, which makes the ground crack, kind of like what the acorn from “Ice Age” does. Luke then says “I’ve seen this raw strength once before, it didn’t scare me enough then, it does now.” This brings up two things. First of all, I have a question, how many times will the word “raw” be used in the movie? Second, I have a feeling that out of every performance Mark Hamill has given in this franchise thus far, this might end up being his best. That’s the assumption going into my mind after hearing that line.

We soon see Kylo Ren again, he’s in an elevator, and he’s doing what he does best, complaining. For some characters, you might think of this as a quality that makes them horrible to watch. But based on my experience of watching “The Force Awakens” and seeing Kylo Ren in that movie, this is something that has been proven to be funny. Not to mention, it shows how Kylo Ren is human. Let me ask you something, did Darth Vader rage out like this? No. That’s not to say that Darth Vader’s a bad character, I think he’s one of the greatest villains of all time, but this is what makes Kylo Ren, Kylo Ren. Oh yeah, and we also see him in is own ship which looks kinda cool. The best part of this montage has to be the final shots there, we hear Kylo’s voice, he’s talking in an evil manner and we see shots back and forth between him and Leia, who you may know is his mother. There’s a huge part of me that thinks that this could turn into an amazing part of the story where Kylo is terrified within his own boundaries, but at the same time, I wonder if it would be out of character for him, because he did kill his dad and he seemed not to have much of a problem with it. Maybe he’s developed since the last movie, who knows? I love the idea, but I’m skeptical towards the execution.

In the next montage, we’ve got shots of the Millennium Falcon, and one thing you may notice is the bird next to Chewbacca. That creature by the way is referred to as a Porg, and I honestly think he’s gonna be this movie’s best-selling toy. I mean, look at him! I think many kids will want that! I just really hope that he won’t turn into this movie’s version of Baby Groot, which in “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2,” only came off to me as a toy, nothing more. I’m just hoping for at least a bit of substance with this Porg. We also get our first shots of Poe and Finn, who both seem to be in explosive situations. Oh yeah, and Finn’s facing off against Captain Phasma. In the shots showcasing the two duking it out, Phasma seems to be handling some beam or a generic sword and Finn is holding onto what appears to be a sparkly lightsaber. Also this begs the question, does Finn really have the force in him? Because the last movie says otherwise. He almost got slaughtered in the last movie in a lightsaber duel! I hope he makes it!

Next we get into a sign of my fear of the movie just being a ripoff of “The Empire Strikes Back,” which happen to be some shots that take place in what looks like a cave. You know how in “The Empire Strikes Back” Luke is training and he goes into this cave, he finds Darth Vader and there’s this very short duel between them, it’s in slow motion? Yeah, it reminds me of that. I just hope this isn’t a carbon copy or an in your face homage. If it is a homage, I personally hope it’s rather subtle. Another part that could be ripping off “Empire” is when Luke says “This is not going to go the way you think.” It almost reminds me of when Luke goes off from Dagobah to Cloud City and he hasn’t completed his training. You know, after he had a force vision, which quite honestly, is something I wouldn’t be surprised seeing Rey have in this movie. After all, the first moment of the teaser which came out in April gave me the assumption that was going to happen. We soon hear Snoke speak as we see certain shots including some containing action. He says “Fulfill your destiny,” which I can tell he’s probably saying to Kylo Ren, although the next shot of Rey might say otherwise. I personally think he’s saying something else in that circumstance and they’re hiding it. By the way, Rey looks like she’s DOOMED in that shot. If they damage her all over in that shot, I’d say this could be worth your money. I can tell she’s gonna make it, but still.

The last words we hear in the trailer comes from Rey, she says “I need someone to show me my place in all of this.” We then cut to a shot of Kylo Ren’s face, then he casts his hand out. Is he done being evil here? First off, why would the trailer show this? This seems like a little bit too much information revealed in just a number of seconds. Second, this could be really compelling and it would be interesting to see the two band together. Also, speaking of evil, I want to talk about Snoke. I have a feeling that Snoke is going to be this trilogy’s version of The Emperor. You’ve already seen him in hologram form from what it looked like, now you seen him here, he looks smaller, not to mention damaged. He’s kind of similar in terms of attitude with the exception of how he lacks a maniacal laugh. Only time will tell for sure. The trailer then ends suggesting that TICKETS HAVE NOW GONE ON SALE! Woo! Although if I can get invited to a press screening I’d love that. Hey, I review movies! Where’s my press screening?!

After seeing this trailer I do have to say that I’m a little more excited than I originally was. I still think I will end up enjoying certain movies more this year, both movies I already saw such as “Colossal” and “Dunkirk,” along with those I’ve yet to see such as “Blade Runner 2049” and “The Disaster Artist,” however I will say that this movie does look good. I still think it might rip off “Empire,” but maybe it can take certain elements, which I personally consider fine, and make something new out of it. This is also going to be the longest movie in the “Star Wars” saga, at a total of 150 minutes, which I personally find interesting because this installment has the least wipe transitions. If you ask me, I probably will be seeing this opening night, after all I’m a fan so I personally feel it’s my duty. I hope the movie’s good and I don’t think we’ll be seeing many more trailers before this film’s release. December 14th can’t come soon enough!

Having soon both trailers now, my combined excitement received from both trailers, isn’t exactly all that high, however that doesn’t stop me from thinking that “The Last Jedi” will be good. Will it be good? Who knows? We’ve got a couple months to fully determine that. As far as upcoming content goes, I am planning on seeing “Blade Runner 2049” over the upcoming weekend, and I also have a mini series of reviews coming up soon and it’s gonna be for the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s “Thor” installments, which I plan to review in preparation for “Thor: Ragnarok,” which comes out November 3. Stay tuned for more great content, and if you have any thoughts on the new “Star Wars” trailer, tell me what they are. Also, I want to know if you’re planning on seeing “Star Wars Episode VIII.” Are you? Are you not? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks, and may the force be with you!