Comedy

Logan Lucky (2017): A Very Unlucky Movie

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmtyyodg0ndu1ov5bml5banbnxkftztgwnjcxmzu0mji-_v1_

“Logan Lucky” is directed by Steven Soderbergh who also directed “Ocean’s Eleven” and “Magic Mike.” This movie stars Channing Tatum (Magic Mike, 21 Jump Street), Adam Driver (Girls, Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens), and Daniel Craig (Casino Royale, Cowboys & Aliens) and is about two brothers who try to pull of a heist while a NASCAR race in North Carolina is going down.

Going into this movie, I’ve had some experience with Steven Soderbergh. And by some, I mean not much at all. I’ve watched part of “Ocean’s Eleven,” which is a heist movie that takes place in Vegas, I fell asleep. For the record, I wasn’t bored, it was late. I was at my grandparents and I was in a sofa bed with my father, we were watching this at one point during the night. I haven’t watched it again since, but I know a lot of people like it. “Ocean’s Twelve” and “Ocean’s Thirteen” from what I heard aren’t as good as “Ocean’s Eleven.” This guy also did “Magic Mike,” which I haven’t seen, but from what I gathered, the movie might as well be called “Look at Channing’s Gigantic Tatum!”, which saying that now, is kind of interesting considering how Channing Tatum is in this movie, who we will get into in just a moment.

Here’s something I just want to get out about “Ocean’s Eleven,” while I recall it putting me to sleep, what I witnessed on screen wasn’t all that boring.. I’ll tell you guys, and a lot of people are gonna probably call me a nincompoop, type comments in all capitals or comments suggesting that you want me to die, or simply say I have the brain capacity of Patrick Star from “Spongebob Squarepants,” despite what I said, I’ll get something off my chest. …This movie was BORING. This is probably the most dull movie I’ve seen since “The Girl on the Train” which came out last year! What was boring about it? Well, let’s start with the basics, and by the basics I mean just about everything the movie has to offer!

When it comes to the pacing, it almost felt like it was a bunch of different movies crammed into one. There was the meat of the film, which was the heist, then you have this drama involving a couple of exes, then you have this father-daughter relationship film which felt like “Gifted,” a movie that a lot of people ended up enjoying but I couldn’t, you know, kind of like this movie. Part of the movie also felt like it had part of the finale of “Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues,” with less humor, which actually does fit in terms of tone, although it took place in the middle of the movie as opposed to the end.

I also have to say that as far as character motivation goes, it really could have been improved. I like the cast, but the characters which the cast ended up playing were not that well written or executed. You have characters you either don’t give a s*it about, you have forgettable characters, and you also have one character that’s a little too cartoony for the movie he’s in. In terms of his looks and attitude, he reminded me of Nux in “Mad Max: Fury Road,” a character who works in “Mad Max: Fury Road,” but when it comes to “Logan Lucky,” this isn’t really the adequate time to yell about how lovely your day is. If you witness Daniel Craig, there’s a scene where he laughs and it’s kind of embarrassing.

The first character I’m gonna talk about in depth is played by Channing Tatum, he’s known in the movie as Jimmy Logan, and while he may have been fired at the beginning of the movie because of a preexisting condition, I didn’t feel any sort of connection to his character. This is partially due to how, as mentioned, the movie jumped back and forth between too many subplots and tons of exposition. I mean, getting fired from your job and not earning as much money as you once did is one reason that one would like to go on a heist, but I just didn’t care, something REALLY felt off. The other characters didn’t really seem to have much of a motivation, Daniel Craig’s character probably wanted to get away from jail, but that’s probably the only hint of motivation that I recall from this movie if it was even there.

Adam Driver was also in this movie as Jimmy’s brother, Clyde. The only quality that was even the least bit redeeming about the character was probably his fake arm. Clyde’s fake arm probably had more of a story that I cared about than Clyde himself. One of the movie’s best parts actually involved the arm. There was one scene where the characters were using a vacuum, and it ends up sucking the arm.

Now let’s dive into a character I thought would be interesting, but turned out to be lackluster. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you, Daniel Craig’s Joe Bang. Walking out of the movie, I don’t recall much of anything from his character, for the most part, Daniel Craig gave a good performance, but there was one moment that took me out of the film, which was his cartoony laugh I was talking about earlier.

And that’s the thing about this movie, it has a stellar cast, it has likable performances, including one from a child actress that wasn’t bad at all. Everyone sounded like they were from the south. In terms of costumes, yeah, technically these aren’t costumes but you get my point, it all suited the characters quite well. When it comes to aspects of the movie itself, it feels like the right vibe is there, but overall you have this s*itpile of a movie so it doesn’t feel like everything is being hit in the sweet spot.

Also, you can kind of say this is somewhat like “The Hunger Games” because I remember it taking it forever in those movies to actually get to the Hunger Games. This is said to be a heist movie, but this feels more like an exposition movie with a heist somewhere in the mix. This may have worked if I cared about the characters a bit more, but I basically said what I needed to say about them. Oh yeah, I forgot, there were a lot of other characters, including some played by big names such as Seth MacFarlane (Family Guy, American Dad!), Hilary Swank (Insomnia, Boys Don’t Cry), and Katie Holmes (Batman Begins, Dawson’s Creek), those characters aren’t worth talking about all that much. I mean, I didn’t care for just about anyone in this movie, the characters are basically random people with names inserted into a script and then transferred into something that might qualify as a film.

In the end, “Logan Lucky” was a HARD movie to review. This is partially because of my unpopular opinion and the fact that I actually did experience glimmers of enjoyment during segments of the film. I wanted to like this movie, especially because the rest of the Internet does. This has a 92% on Rotten Tomatoes as of now, which is higher than “Interstellar,” one of my favorite movies of all time. If you like this movie I really don’t blame you, we all have our own thoughts, I’ve met people who actually enjoyed watching “Gods of Egypt.” You know the movie featuring a bunch of Egyptians played by non-Egyptian actors? Yeah, that one. For me, this movie was boring, I had no interest while watching the movie, I just wanted to leave the auditorium. If you like the movie, that’s fine, but that just means we don’t have the same tastes when it comes to film. I’m gonna give “Logan Lucky” a 4/10. Thanks for reading this review, pretty soon I’m gonna go see “The Glass Castle” and review it for you all, and also stay tuned for my series of Tom Cruise movie reviews, I’ll be reviewing three movies in this category, so stay tuned for those! Also, I want to know, what is a movie that you think is bad that everyone else thinks is good? For me, that’s this movie. OR what is a movie that you think is good that everyone else thinks is bad? For me, that’s “Spider-Man 3.” Leave your thoughts in the comments! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Marvel Cinematic Universe Will Continue For Decades, Not Surprising, Although Slightly Concerning

Posted on by Jack Drees

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! I have to say right now, this week may be the craziest I’ve ever witnessed when it comes to comic book movie news. Nothing new is coming out this weekend, however when it comes to news, it’s absolutely insane. I’m actually gonna cover multiple segments here, however only one portion here matters more than others. I love the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It’s an idea, when introduced at the time, seemed original by the standards of film. It has now inspired other cinematic universes such as the “Dark Universe” from Universal, the DCEU (Detective Comics Extended Universe), and the Monsterverse Warner is focusing on at the moment. “Thor: Ragnarok,” which will be released in November, is going to be the seventeenth movie in the universe. That’s not the only future movie planned, there’s gonna be a couple of “Avengers” sequels coming up, “Ant-Man” is getting another standalone film, Captain Marvel is gonna have a movie, “Spider-Man: Homecoming” is gonna have a sequel, and “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3” will be happening. Speaking of “Guardians of the Galaxy,” let’s talk about that.

If you don’t know me personally, I enjoyed the first “Guardians of the Galaxy” movie. The vibe worked perfectly, the comedy landed for the most part, and it took characters that not many people, including some people who read comic books out of enthusiasm, didn’t know much about. Not many folks, until 2014, heard about Starlord, not many people knew about Gamora, they weren’t aware of Groot, they didn’t ever think about Drax, nobody traditionally thought of Rocket as a badass raccoon. What Marvel was able to do with these characters kind of amazes me. As far as their movies go, this might be their most family friendly one yet.

As much as I enjoyed the first “Guardians,” the sequel was big letdown for me. It may have been due to my hype for the film, but then again, I anticipated “Wonder Woman” and “Dunkirk” to death and look how those movies turned out. It’s by no means a bad movie, nor is it the worst in the MCU, but it is not a great movie either, it’s just passable. The humor didn’t land as much, although some worked, like the Taserface gag and the Mary Poppins joke. Some of the characters were not as cool as they were in the first movie, although the movie did get a better villain and they did improve the character of Drax in some ways.

*UNPOPULAR OPINION WARNING, FLAME SHIELD READY*

Baby Groot is by far one of the single most annoying characters I’ve seen in anything! I get he’s small, and supposed to be cute, but this film literally tries to force it down your throat! It almost reminds me of the stupid kid the lead characters have from the piece of crap they call “Sharknado!” It’s like watching YouTube, you’re watching cat videos, and the person taking the video is constantly saying look at this cat playing the piano! YOU MADE YOUR F*CKING POINT! YOU SAID IT ONCE! YOU ALREADY TOLD ME! I ALREADY KNOW! It’s like if BB-8 from “Star Wars Episode VII” was constantly shoved into random scenes just because he’s cute. And granted, the cuteness factor was there, and a lot of people see him as a cute droid, but he’s there when the plot needs him, he’s not randomly in shots just shoving jelly beans down his gullet. Wait a minute that makes no sense, droids can’t eat or drink. Also now that I think about it, trees don’t eat jelly beans either. Whatever, you probably get my point! I’m sorry if you hate me, but this is how I feel.

If you are a mega fan of the “Guardians of the Galaxy” movies, both 1 & 2, and you don’t know the main man to thank, I’ll have you know the man you probably should be thanking is James Gunn, he directed and wrote the first and second films which are out right now, and he’s also working on the third one. The man definitely knows how to direct and write these movies based on how the actors deliver their lines and how well the humor plays out. Recently, he did a stream on Facebook Live, and something… …interesting came up. When he was on the livestream, a bunch of users asked some questions, and one user asked if Richard Rider/Nova would ever be put in the MCU films. At one point when answering the question, Gunn uttered this: “One of the things I’m doing with creating “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3,” it will take place after the next two “Avengers” movies and it will help to set up the next 10, 20 years of Marvel movies. It’s going to really expand the cosmic universe.”

That’s right, you’re probably getting at least a decade’s worth of Marvel Cinematic Universe films. How do I feel about this? While I love Marvel and I’m excited to what they have in store, I’m simultaneously worried. The Marvel Cinematic Universe began back in 2008 with “Iron Man,” since then it has expanded with many films loved by audiences everywhere. Some people still say they prefer superhero films outside the MCU such as the older “Spider-Man” films, Nolan’s “Batman” trilogy, Donner’s “Superman,” or movies in the “X-Men” franchise. We’ve had film franchises go on longer than the MCU, such as the “Bourne” series, “James Bond,” “Fast & Furious,” and “Star Wars.” Although I’m noticing that compared to these franchises, the MCU is producing movies more rapidly and when it is compared to a franchise like “Bourne,” you can tell that “Bourne” might have an intended stopping point. The MCU is basically the cinematic universe version of “The Neverending Story.” Me personally, if I had a cinematic universe, and I actually do have one in mind if I ever have the opportunity to make films in Hollywood, I would end it at a point. I’d give it a sense of finality, but I only wonder if the folks behind the MCU will ever feel the same way.

While I am concerned about the franchise going on forever and ever, allow me to address some positives. Starting off the positives, this isn’t Michael Bay’s “Transformers” nor is it “Sharknado.” Also, Marvel has clearly shown how it can make stellar movies that people want to see. A lot of their flicks have been well received by both average moviegoers and critics. When it comes to comic book fans, they do a fine job appreciating that particular audience for the most part. Some notable mistakes they made over the years has usually been with the villains. With the exception of villains like Ego from “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” or the Vulture from “Spider-Man: Homecoming,” the MCU hasn’t really featured terrific villains in their films. This is why I love “Captain America: Civil War” so much, it didn’t have a villain, it had sides, neither good or evil. Another notable flaw many people have with the MCU is in “Doctor Strange.” You may remember the Ancient One in that movie, she was played by Tilda Swinton because it’s an example of whitewashing. While the MCU may not be perfect, it certainly has a lot of likability to it. Despite saying that, I wonder how much it has left.

The MCU has been around for nine years and people still enjoy it, but what if it goes on forever and ever to a point where people begin to become tired of it? If you ask me, I’m not exactly tired of it, but I am starting to think the series might go on longer than it should. Keep in mind, Marvel is owned by Disney, the Bill Gates of movie studios. Disney basically owns us now since they have Marvel, Lucasfilm, Pixar, and their own animations along with those animations that are being remade into live-action form. The top 5 films of 2016 in terms of box office performance are all Disney films. “Captain America: Civil War,” “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story,” “Finding Dory,” “Zootopia,” and “The Jungle Book.” Right now, three of this year’s films owned by Disney are in the top 10 in terms of box office performance. Those films are “Beauty and the Beast,” “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2,” and “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales.” I’m not counting “Spider-Man: Homecoming” here because despite how it is in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Sony distributed the movie. Disney has also had successes with 2015 films like “Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens,” “Avengers: Age of Ultron,” and “Inside Out.” If you look at what Disney is doing, you may see that they’re making buttloads of money. They now own all of these things we, as viewers, know about. Although I want to make a comparison to this and a popular video game franchise you guys may know about.

Have you guys ever played the “Call of Duty” games? I don’t play as much as other people do, but I know people who play the games. If you know a bit about them, you may know that they do this thing where they release a new game every year. We’re getting Marvel movies, quicker than we’re getting “Call of Duty” games. Keep in mind, many people say that some of the older games like “Modern Warfare” and “Modern Warfare 2” rock whereas newer games like “Advanced Warfare” and “Infinite Warfare” suck. If there’s one thing I noticed, personally, it’s that I thought Marvel movies got better as they went on. the oldest Marvel Cinematic Universe movie I currently have a 10/10 for is “Iron Man 3” which was released on May 3, 2013. Then there was “Captain America: The Winter Soldier,” “Ant-Man,” and “Captain America: Civil War,” which is currently my favorite movie in the MCU. Also, you have to keep in mind, I don’t witness many people talking about the first “Call of Duty,” the second “Call of Duty,” anything along those lines. While it seems that a lot of the Marvel Cinematic Universe films are widely talked about today, I could tell you that when “The Avengers” came out, this is when a majority of people flocked to the theater to see these movies. Also keep in mind, this came out in 2012, the same year that “The Amazing Spider-Man” and “The Dark Knight Rises” came out. Both “The Amazing Spider-Man” and “The Dark Knight Rises” were successful at the box office, in fact in some cases, “The Dark Knight Rises” may have gotten more positive reception than “The Avengers,” the case isn’t really the same for “The Amazing Spider-Man.” Spider-Man and Batman are both argued among nerds all over the world between which is the better hero, they both get their own movie in the same year, and they are beat by “The Avengers.” Although when you think about it, it makes sense, you get more superheroes, some you may know, some you may not know, and the idea of “The Avengers,” unlike “Batman” and “Spider-Man,” hasn’t really been done much on screen. Although the “Fantastic Four” movies have more than one superhero and look how those movies turned out. However when you look back before and realize what “Spider-Man” did in terms of box office performance in 2002, such as being the only film to make $100 million in its opening weekend at the time, and how “The Dark Knight” not only won the box office in 2008, but avoided a comic book movie from having the slightest bit of childishness, this is kind of interesting to think about. The Marvel Cinematic Universe did have some successes before “The Avengers” like with the first two “Iron Man” films, and while 2011 brought “Thor” and “Captain America: The First Avenger,” they didn’t quite reach the top 10, making them get a lower score in the box office than “The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1…” (sigh). Right now, if you can’t tell already, the box office isn’t a problem for the MCU, and I don’t think it will be in the future. However, I wonder about their movies in terms of quality.

There’s a saying that all good things come to an end. We all know we are going to die one day. OK, I’m not saying all people are good, just look at Adolf Hitler! You know movie franchises that have technically come to conclusions in the past? Just look at “Back to the Future,” “Jaws,” or “Revenge of the Nerds.” The people behind these movies knew when to stop, “Back to the Future” stopped at three movies suggesting that the characters’ futures are what they make them, and all three franchises according to popular opinion have never made a movie better than their first installment. You know what’s still going today? “Transformers,” “Sharknado,” “Diary of a Wimpy Kid,” and “Fifty Shades.” Traditionally, these movies are not well received, however they are popular over a certain demographic. “Transformers” continues to make lots of money even though people are literally paying to see the same thing every time, “Sharknado” is on TV, but people watch it because it’s “so bad it’s good,” which I thought at first with the original, but upon rewatch it became worse, and the later installments are just plain awful, “Diary of a Wimpy Kid” is popular among families and kids, including some who know about the books, and while it was fun to watch as a kid, it became worse the more I thought about it. Not to mention their newest installment, if you haven’t heard about it, may be one of the most forced sequels in movie history, and for “Fifty Shades,” while it may be popular among women and those who have read the books, it wasn’t well received because of its characters, along with the fact that it is technically “porn” and yet the movie fails to deliver on that for a lot of people. Also ladies, for those of you crushing on Jamie Dornan, who plays Christian Grey in the series, the actor says he didn’t want himself nude in the movie. If you’re gonna make a movie for women, that’s technically a porno, KNOW YOUR TARGET AUDIENCE! If you ask me, I haven’t seen any of the “Fifty Shades” movies, nor have I read the books, so I can’t really say my true thoughts about it, but I honestly don’t want to see or read it unless I have a girlfriend who wants to watch it and she feels like watching it with me, if it means I get to go to a free screening, or if someone is paying me to watch the movie. With Marvel, I can enjoy myself throughout the process of watching one of their movies, but how much longer will it take for me to not enjoy myself?

So far, two movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe have been released this year, “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” and “Spider-Man: Homecoming.” While I enjoyed parts of both movies, I thought both needed improvement. I said what I needed to about “Guardians 2,” but I didn’t really say much about “Spider-Man: Homecoming.” I thought they aced Peter Parker and Spider-Man for the most part, it could have been funnier, they had Iron Man in the movie but they played their cards right and kept the movie from turning into “Iron Man 4,” the AI annoyed me, and the villain was cool. I gave the movie a 7/10 in my review, and I said it would probably drop to a 6. For the record, I gave “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” a 6/10, which I also gave to “Avengers: Age of Ultron,” which was fun at times, but ultimately a disappointment. The only film I gave a lower score to in the MCU was for “Captain America: The First Avenger,” which was a 5/10. Based on this you can tell that Marvel is capable of making good movies, but every year since 2013, I’ve seen one Marvel film that is worthy of a 10/10 for me. In my top 10 MCU films, I have only one movie that is a 7/10 in my book, all the others are 8/10 at minimum. If “Thor: Ragnarok” isn’t a 10/10, then the streak I’m talking about is officially over. If you ask me, I’m somewhat excited as a Marvel movie lover for “Thor: Ragnarok,” but at the same time, worried. It looks like it could be a good movie, but the marketing makes it look like “Guardians of the Galaxy.” Now, I like “Guardians of the Galaxy,” but for a movie like this, I want a darker tone. You have Planet Hulk in this movie, it looks like there’s gonna be a lot of destruction on Asgard, and yet in the trailer they’re playing “Immigrant” by Led Zeppelin. Good song, but it makes me worried here. You can still have humor in the movie, you can still have flashy effects, and granted the effects look stunning in the trailers, but I want a darker vibe than what I’m getting when this movie comes out. Now, I’ll say if “Thor: Ragnarok” is a 9/10 or 8/10, that’d still be cool. Although if it’s a 7/10 or lower, I’d start to worry.

Also, you have to consider the fact that these movies are based on comic books, so they might be taking material from the comic books, and turning that into movie material. That’s fine, but part of me wonders, will we ever run out of good material to copy? I don’t read comic books all that much, but this is something I wonder similarly as a movie watcher. I wonder if we will stop seeing original material and start always seeing unoriginal material. Although comic books have been going on for years and we are still getting lots of new stuff, but they always do unoriginal stuff. They do stuff based on other sources, they do a new series or a spinoff with certain characters, or they might do gender or race swaps. If we want to keep these movies going, we either need to introduce new characters that haven’t been written in comic form or we need to get people writing new comic book material. This has been done before though, you guys know Harley Quinn? Her first appearance was actually in “Batman: The Animated Series.”

And if you think that comic book movies are stopping anytime soon, you’re completely under a rock. People continue to watch those movies, people keep making them, and they’re even making movies on villains, kind of like they did with “Suicide Squad.” That’s not all, Sony is coming out with a “Venom” movie in 2018 with Tom Hardy as the lead actor, and there’s also gonna be a “Joker” movie that I hear is gonna be in a different universe than the DCEU. In fact tonight, just when I thought I covered everything in this post, I took a break, thought I’d add some finishing touches a little later, ONLY TO FIND OUT MATT REEVES’S “BATMAN” MOVIE ISN’T GOING TO BE PART OF THE DCEU EITHER! What is happening? It’s becoming like “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs,” only instead of running out of food on an Island in the Atlantic, we’re running out of new and fresh movies quite possibly throughout the world, and instead of just having sardines to eliminate our hunger, we just have comic book films to fulfill our movie watching desires!

I love movies. I love comic book movies. I love Marvel Studios. Although at the same time, I’m concerned about its future. Maybe they’ll continue on creating original content and keep rocking it not only at the box office, not only on home video, but also in the minds of the viewers. As much as Marvel Studios makes good movies, there may be a day where it goes the way of McDonald’s, by that I mean there will be a MCU movie on every corner, and it may just be processed as opposed to crafted. Guys, I don’t think “Thor: Ragnarok” will be great, admittedly I’m excited for “Avengers: Infinity War” and “Ant-Man and the Wasp.” If “Thor: Ragnarok” is good, there’s less of a chance I have of going into these MCU films in the future with a bit of skepticism. So I want to know, what are your thoughts on this? Also, what is a movie you want to see from Marvel Studios, but hasn’t happened yet?

Also I want to break a little announcement to you all, while I still plan to do reviews of new movies, I also want to tackle some older ones too. If you recall me doing my “Spider-Man” review series along with my Christopher Nolan review series, I’d like to let you know I’m doing another one. If you think about big action stars, I’d traditionally think about Liam Neeson (Taken, Non-Stop), Jason Statham (The Transporter, Death Race), Keanu Reeves (John Wick, The Matrix), and Vin Diesel (xXx, The Fast and the Furious). Another one I think of is someone who I’m starting a series on, that my friends is Tom Cruise. Over the years, Cruise has proven himself to be a very talented actor in many ways, and I’m gonna talk about three movies he stars in. I’m gonna be starting off with “The Last Samurai.” At some point I will include a review for “Risky Business,” I’m not sure where I’ll put it, either as my second or third review, but that will be an intention in the future. I will also be reviewing another movie Cruise is in, but I’m not sure what it is yet, you’ll find out when the review comes around! Stay tuned for those reviews, and Marvel Studios, if you are planning on continuing the universe for another 10 or 20 years, focus on the movies first, and focus on the money later. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Emoji Movie (2017): A Literal Pile of Sir Patrick Stewart (WARNING: STRONG LANGUAGE)

Posted on by Jack Drees

20170802_133606_HDR

Before we begin this review of the piece of crap they call “The Emoji Movie” I would like to remind everyone that I’m not doing this for clicks, as you can see above, I have proof I saw this. I’m doing this review for a couple of reasons. 1: To give you a movie review. 2: I’ve gotten requests to do this. I would like to say to those people, thanks for the request and I’m happy to deliver on it, but at the same time, f*ck you. But seriously, who doesn’t love hearing a guy complain about a s*itty movie? If you have children, let them read at their own risk, and enjoy my review!

mv5bmtkzmzm3otm2ml5bml5banbnxkftztgwmdm0ndu3mji-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“The Emoji Movie,” AKA an animated s*itshow, is directed by Tony Leondis, who you may know for directing “Igor,” an animation from 2008, and it stars TJ Miller (Silicon Valley, Deadpool), James Corden (The Late Late Show with James Corden, Gavin and Stacey), Anna Faris (Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, Mom), Maya Rudolph (Bridesmaids, Grown Ups), Steven Wright (Mad About You, Son of the Mask), Jennifer Coolidge (Legally Blonde, 2 Broke Girls), and Patrick Stewart (Star Trek: The Next Generation, X-Men). This movie revolves around the Meh Emoji, played by TJ Miller, and if you know the Emojis and are familiar with them, you’d know they represent symbols and they can’t really change, so naturally in this movie about Emojis which actually live inside a person’s phone, each Emoji is only capable of making one expression. However, TJ Miller’s Meh is a bit more expressive, making him unique from other Emojis. However Meh isn’t intending on having that unique quality about him last so he sets out on a quest in order to make him a normal Emoji.

I bet you’re asking, “Jack! What the f*ck are you doing?! This movie has no potential! Why are you seeing this?!” My answer to you is, I don’t know. Going in, I expected this movie to make me want to kill myself. On opening night, “The Emoji Movie” was leaked to have gotten a 0% on Rotten Tomatoes. Granted the rating has gone up since I found out about that, but it’s worth pointing out. If I weren’t doing this blog, I’d probably ignore this movie, but the thing is, quite a few people have requested that I’d do this. I made a Twitter poll not long ago and when the results came in, it turned out more people wanted me to review “The Emoji Movie” than not review it. So ultimately, I wanted to see how deplorable this movie actually was. And trust me fellas, this movie was crap! This is probably the worst animation I’ve ever seen. This movie copypastes elements from other animations which have been released over the years but has none of the charm, heart, humor, or likability needed to make a good product. This movie makes “Ice Age: Collision Course” look like “How to Train Your Dragon.” This movie makes “Transformers: The Last Knight” look like “Pacific Rim.” This movie makes “Terminator: Salvation” look like “TRON.” This movie makes “Battlefield Earth” look like “Interstellar.” This movie makes “Fant4stic” look like “Spider-Man 2.” “The Emoji Movie” is so bad that it doesn’t come as much of a shock when you think about it, it’s a movie about Emojis! A concept which on paper, sounds dumb as s*it and is also dumb as s*it in reality. When I talked about the first teaser trailer for this atrocity, I knew something bad was going to happen, and damn I turned out to be right!

Let’s talk about TJ Miller’s character of Meh in depth. If you ask me, I like TJ Miller, I enjoy him in “Silicon Valley,” I appreciated his character in “Deadpool,” and I also like his voice. Even if he’s doing crap, he still does a fine job. For example, he was in “Transformers: Age of Extinction,” which in my book is mediocre at best. He played a character named Lucas Flannery and at one point while watching that character, he might as well come off as some sex pervert or something. Granted he’s not on screen as long as other characters, but this is something many people saw in that character. If you watch him in the beginning of the film, you’d probably have a good guess as to what I’m talking about. TJ Miller wasn’t terrible casting-wise for Meh, which utterly surprised me, he also isn’t TERRIBLE as a character, but the thing that this movie was trying to do with a lot of the characters, this one included, was make them funny, although the movie failed to deliever on that. Although I will say, one thing that’s kind of funny about TJ Miller being cast in this movie, is that in “Deadpool,” another movie he’s in, he has to explain to the main character of Wade Wilson, what the poop Emoji is.

WADE WILSON (Ryan Reynolds): (Looking at a text from Ajax) What is that?

WEASEL (TJ Miller): That’s the s*it Emoji. You know the turd with the smiley face and eyes. I thought it was chocolate yogurt for so long.

Along Meh’s journey over the course of the runtime, we meet a couple supporting characters. Hi-Five (James Corden) and Jailbreak (Anna Faris). This is part of where the elements from other animations come into play. Hi-Five is basically the comic relief of the film, it’s almost like your typical “scene stealer” you’ve seen in movies like “Up” (Dug), “The Secret Life of Pets” (Snowball), or “Frozen” (Olaf). I’m fine with this movie having a character like that, but the big problem I have with the character has to do with the most basic quality a comic relief character needs, which is humor! I don’t recall any funny moments from the character, same for the movie itself. I wanted this character to literally DIE. There was one moment where there was some sort of giggle coming out of my mouth, but I need more than a giggle! In fact there were actually kids in this theater with me, they almost didn’t utter a sound. I actually was in the second upper row in the theater, there was barely anyone in my row, but one row above me, there was a family. I don’t know what their final thoughts are on this movie, but I remember one part of the movie scaring a kid, and I recall that more than making them laugh. By the way, the character who caused the kid to get terrified was Smiler, played by Maya Rudolph, we’ll get to her in a bit, but let’s talk about Jailbreak for now. Jailbreak wasn’t the worst character on screen, although there were some things I didn’t like about her for sure. One thing that was noticeable was how much she was like Wyldstyle (Yes, that’s how her name is spelled) from “The LEGO Movie.” The only difference between her and Wyldstyle is that Jailbreak doesn’t have a boyfriend when we first meet her, and she’s basically displayed as some sort of feminist. I don’t have too big of a problem with that, but still. Not only do we get a rather cliche character, but as she develops during the film, she just becomes more and more cringeworthy! Oh yeah, speaking of cliche characters from animations, TJ Miller’s Meh, who we recently talked about, actually is kind of stock too! In a way, he’s almost like Emmett from “The LEGO Movie” and Ralph from “Wreck-It Ralph!” I imagine some of the people imagined this is part of went on behind the scenes. Some dumbasses watched some animations and said “Oh yeah, that was the s*it!,” and thought “Let’s try to recreate those, but with Emojis!” So they went to Sony Pictures Animation and suggested this s*itshow of an idea to them and Sony Pictures Animation told them, “Welcome aboard! Time to capitalize on the name “Emoji!” Who cares if it’s s*it? We decided that “The Angry Birds Movie” was a good idea so let’s become known as the phone movie gods!” My response to that is, thanks Sony Animation! Thanks for being a bunch of f*cking twerps that don’t understand the concepts of art and storytelling (flips two birds)!

On a different subject, let’s talk about Maya Rudolph’s character of Smiler, she was the film’s main antagonist. I find this character to be one of the most annoying villains I’ve seen in my life. And by annoying, she didn’t exactly annoy any of the movie’s characters, she annoyed me. I HATED her voice. She’s basically what would happen if Joy from “Inside Out” went insane. I despised this character! As a villain, her motivation was clear, but as a character, her personality didn’t make me smile, IT MADE ME RAGE! Speaking of things that made me rage, we get ANOTHER similarity to “The LEGO Movie” when it comes to the villain! She has these minions that are supposed to look menacing, you know how in “The LEGO Movie” they have these characters referred to as Micromanagers? They’re all black and red and they essentially, well, micromanage stuff. Guess what’s in this piece of crap?! MORE BLACK AND RED MINIONS! They look different and they don’t exactly do the same thing the Micromanagers do, but it just comes off as unoriginal especially when you keep a lot of the other elements from this film in mind. What are the names of the minions? I don’t know and I don’t give a f*ck!

One of my absolute biggest disappointments concerning “The Emoji Movie” is Sir Patrick Stewart. Now keep in mind, when say Patrick Stewart is a disappointment, I didn’t hate him in this movie, it’s just that I wanted to see more of him. He plays the Poop Emoji, and I think it’s a superb casting choice, by far the best one in the movie. Who doesn’t want to see a British piece of s*it walking around with a remarkably soothing voice? I will say, regardless of what you think of Patrick Stewart in this film, there’s one interview where Stewart is talking about the movie, it’s on “Conan.” The interview was meant to promote “Logan,” but Patrick Stewart and Conan O’Brien talked about “The Emoji Movie” at one point. I don’t know, I just love it. The video’s down below if you want to watch it.

Although one of the biggest flaws when it comes to this character, is something concerning him and his son, Poop Jr., or PJ. There’s this one scene from the trailer containing a poop joke, you know what I’m talking about if you’ve seen it. Before that even happens, Patrick Stewart comes out of a stall with his son, who is established to be ten years old. I’d be OK with this if the son was like, I don’t know, three and he wasn’t toilet trained, or if he was puking at one point or had diarrhea or something, but the problem here is, he’s toilet trained, shouldn’t he be in his own stall? Does he or his father have some sort of fetish with watching people eliminate waste? OK, no, that’s probably not the case, this is a kids movie, but still. In fact, during the same scene, TJ Miller’s Meh is in the bathroom too, he’s actually in there with his mother and father. One thing I want to know, is this a unisex public restroom? Because if it isn’t, this would be really awkward. Also the record, it’s easy to tell based on the qualities of the characters that none of the Mehs are transgender or anything. Just put the father Meh in the bathroom without the mother and you would avoid me questioning this scene! Speaking of which, let’s talk about Meh’s parents.

The parents of Meh are referred to as Mel Meh (Steven Wright) and Mary Meh (Jennifer Coolidge), and they serve their purpose. They’re there when they need to be, but my biggest problem with them is that maybe they’re in the movie a little too much. OUT OF THE MOTHERF*CKING BLUE, some subplot comes up that has to do with them separating, which basically does nothing for the film as a whole! You may as well consider this the opposite of “Seinfeld” because “Seinfeld” is a show about nothing and yet it turned out to be something, and here, you get something, but it turns out to be nothing! By the way, there’s a f*cking “Casablanca” reference thrown in somewhere into this subplot. THIS MOVIE TRIED TO REFERENCE “CASABLANCA!” A critically acclaimed, black and white film, was referenced, in this movie! I’m a sucker for references, but movies, TV shows, video games, whatever it may be, in my book, have to make sure these references are utilized properly and doesn’t end up feeling forced! I haven’t seen “Casablanca,” but this reminds me of the “Ghostbusters” remake when they try to reference “Scarface!”

Now part of movie takes place in this inside a real world and another part of it is in a virtual world. Does it sound like something that’s been done before? If you said yes, I’m with you because this idea has been done before. Three movies that pop in my mind when it comes to this are “Wreck-it Ralph,” “The LEGO Movie,” and “Inside Out,” all of which I consider to be great. You can also say this was done in 2011’s “The Smurfs,” but you’d be wrong, that has transporting between dimensions, not to mention it’s just hilarious to call “The Smurfs” a MOVIE. Here, the virtual world is inside a cell phone with all of these apps and Emojis and all sorts of other s*it. The real world is basically during present day, and we see a teenage boy who has a crush on a girl. While they did happen to exchange phone numbers, he’s still a little apprehensive towards the status between him and the girl because he’s having trouble deciding what to say to her and what Emoji to send to her. Now one movie reviewer whose content I frequently check out is Jeremy Jahns, he has an “awesometacular” YouTube channel. He mentions in his review that this makes no sense because the boy and the girl already has given out phone numbers to each other so the boy should have no problem contacting this girl. Believe it or not, I don’t use Emojis quite often, but I am in high school, and IF I have a crush on a girl, I might sometimes not know what to say or type, or if I know there’s something I know I want to say or type, I might not know exactly when I want to say or type it. The boy in this movie, the one who owns the phone all of these Emojis are in, wasn’t a horrible character, but watching him at times in this movie was just weird. His role in the movie involves trying to ask out Addie, the girl he has a crush on to what is referred to as the “Fall Dance.” That’s a pretty cliche dance name if you ask me, but that’s not important. He also is trying to take his phone to tech support because it’s starting to go crazy due to all the activity going on in there with the Emojis. He certainly moved the plot along, but when you combine the world of the Emojis with reality, it suddenly becomes cringeworthy. This is especially noticeable during the “Candy Crush” segment of the movie. In fact, let’s compare this to two other animations, “Wreck-It Ralph” and “Inside Out.” This also just goes to show you how much this movie is like those!

When it comes to both of these movies, both of those take place in two different dimensions which can’t be crossed. In Wreck-It Ralph, you have the real world, which is basically inside an arcade, and for the virtual world, it’s inside the games which make up the arcade. In “Inside Out,” the movie took place in the real world, where we see the life of Riley, the film’s main character who moves to San Francisco with her parents, along with the virtual world, which is inside Riley’s head and we get to look at all of the emotions such as Joy, Fear, and Anger. What makes “Wreck-It Ralph” and “Inside Out” great is that they focus a lot on their story and happen to remain smart, which is kind of funny because this movie takes place in a “smartphone.” Also, “Wreck-It Ralph” was a fun ride for kids and adults alike, “Inside Out,” wowed me and almost made me cry at the end. Another similarity is that these three films contain a character going on an adventure away from where they primarily belong, which is fine, I don’t mind that, but the other movies did it better. Also, the inclusion of “Candy Crush” kind of reminded me of “Sugar Rush” from “Wreck-It Ralph.” The way the characters and apps are in “The Emoji Movie” remind me of “Wreck-It Ralph” too because in “Wreck-It Ralph” you’ve got all of these iconic video game characters like Pac-Man, Q*bert, Bowser, Zangief, and Sonic the Hedgehog, who actually was played by the same guy who did the voice for him in “Sonic Free Riders” and “Sonic Generations.” In this movie, it’s kind of hard not to include these characters, after all, this is “The Emoji Movie,” but “Wreck-It Ralph” did a better job at including those characters by not including anything that would be considered forced or cringeworthy. Not to mention, the characters that are all in the Wreck-It Ralph video game are exclusive to this movie, they aren’t based off of any sort of video game, they were made up for the “Wreck-It Ralph” movie. When I first heard about “The Emoji Movie,” I thought this movie wasn’t necessary. I gave kudos to the animators for making it look good, but then again you can look at an animation like “Ice Age: Collision Course” and say it looks good. Also, in “Wreck-It Ralph,” the video game the main character belongs in goes out of order due to “technical difficulties,” and in “The Emoji Movie,” the phone might not have much time left because of its own technical difficulties. And there’s one moment in this movie, specifically towards the end, which reminded me of a flashback that occurred in “Wreck-It Ralph” in Sugar Rush.

One thing I DETESTED in this movie is the obnoxious product placement! This movie has more product placement than a Michael Bay “Transformers” film! You can argue that “The LEGO Movie” was a commercial, but here’s the thing, the story came first. It almost felt like Sony Animation or someone else behind this film thought about contacting a bunch of companies who make apps and say “Hey, you want to be in our s*itf*ck in the ass?” and they somehow put them all in there so they can just make s*itloads of money! “The LEGO Movie” utilized product placement to a certain degree and there’s only one moment in the movie that feels commercial-esque (the moment that talks about a bunch of LEGO sets) but not only does it fly by, it’s kind of makes me laugh. This movie has an entire segment inside “Candy Crush” that moved the plot along, and when it comes to other stuff, it’s almost like this: “You guys know Facebook? Oh look, here’s Facebook!” “You guys know YouTube? Here’s YouTube!” “You guys know Instagram? Oh look, there’s Instagram!” There’s also a segment containing a dance sequence which was PAINFUL to watch. Guess where it takes place? “Just Dance!” There’s even a moment where our heroes have to get to Dropbox! Not only that, but guess how they get there? Twitter! No, they don’t go through the app, instead, the Twitter bird mascot shows up! What the f*ck?!

I want to ask something, were you expecting a good movie out of this? Because I sure wasn’t. This was one of my least anticipated films of the year, and the reason why I saw it is basically people wanted me to go see it. I’m doing this for others, not myself. “The Emoji Movie” is nothing but a rip off of better animations, a s*itty idea which became a s*itty movie, and a poorly written, anger-inducing f*ckpile of a film created by a bunch of c*cksucking jackasses that just want to capitialize on a trend! If this movie makes enough money, there’s a slight chance that some motherf*cker might make a “Fidget Spinner” movie! I have a good idea for one, but we DON’T NEED ONE! If you bring your family to this film, you’d all probably be bored. If you bring your boyfriend or girlfriend to this film, they’ll dump you. If you bring your husband or wife to this film, they’ll divorce you. If you bring your best friend to this film, they’ll call the friendship off. If you bring your boss to this movie, they’ll fire you. If you bring a celebrity or someone like that whom you admire because they like you well enough and want to hang out with you, they’ll need a restraining order in order to protect themselves from you. “The Emoji Movie” is a quality example of a s*itty Hollywood movie that f*cks up people’s minds and makes them all explode. I’m gonna give “The Emoji Movie” a Sir Patrick Stewart/10, which can translate to 💩/🔟 if you speak Emoji, which can also mean s*it/10, although if you’re a kid it would be better for you to say poop/10, which in plain English, comes out to 1/10. There’s no reason for this movie to exist, I’ve only seen a few movies in my life that are worse than this damn pile of holy s*itness. I would probably much rather go back in time and f*ck Adolf Hitler in the ass than watch this movie again. Also for the record, I’m heterosexual so that makes it extra embarrassing. Thanks for reading this rant–err–I mean, review. Please don’t see this movie. You’re better off watching “Dunkirk” with your kids. Sure, it may be a war film with scary events happening, but at least you’ll be watching art. Speaking of which, check out my review for “Dunkirk,” the link is down below, it’s a good read, I highly suggest you check it out. Stay tuned for more reviews! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

“DUNKIRK” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/07/26/dunkirk-2017-a-bloodless-yet-realistic-depiction-of-war/

The Big Sick (2017): Kumail Nanjiani Plays Himself for Two Hours, and It’s Not Bad

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bzwm4yzzjotetzmu5zs00ztrklwfinjatztewnzizmdm5mjdmxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyndg2mjuxnjm-_v1_sy1000_sx675_al_

“The Big Sick” is directed by Michael Showalter and stars Kumail Nanjiani (Silicon Valley, Central Intelligence), Zoe Kazan (What If, Ruby Sparks), Holly Hunter (The Incredibles, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice), and Ray Romano (Everybody Loves Raymond, Ice Age) in a movie which is marketed stating that it’s based on “an awkward true story.” This movie, starring Kumail Nanjiani, as actually about Kumail himself, and this is actually based on the relationship between Kumail and the movie’s love interest, Emily, whose relationship has some blunders having to do with their cultural differences.

Going into this film, I didn’t really know what to think, I believe I do remember seeing ads for this film on TV, and I like Kumail Nanjiani. I’m also a huge fan of Ray Romano, even though in my book he hasn’t really done much of anything worth remembering in recent years. And if you know me well enough in real life, I’m not the type of person who flocks to the theater for rom-coms, although I did see something special in this movie considering it’s based on a true story involving one of the movie’s stars, producers, and writers, not to mention it has excellent scores given by Rotten Tomatoes, IMDb users, Metacritic, etc.

Usually when I talk about characters in a movie, the traditional thing I do is find an image of them related to the movie they’re in. For Kumail Nanjiani’s character, you may notice I’m doing something a little different. Why? Well, as I mentioned earlier, Kumail is playing himself in this movie. In other movies, this would usually be a complaint from some people, like how Melissa McCarthy, Ed Helms, or Adam Sandler might play the same character from movie to movie in some way, shape, or form. Although here, since it’s based on a true story involving an actor playing a past version of himself, this should be the one of the easiest acting gigs in the entire universe. So how does Nanjiani do? He does quite well, I didn’t like him as a character at first, but watching him in this movie, it felt nice seeing him grow as a person. His character was a shining star through this movie, and at times I felt his pain. There’s also one action that happens just about a quarter of the way through the movie as the main plot is developing that took this movie from being good to great.

While we’re on the topic of actors playing themselves, we can’t say the same for the actress playing Emily in this film, however this is Emily in real life. In the movie, she’s played by Zoe Kazan, although I couldn’t find a picture of her in this movie where she’s alone, so this is what you’re gonna have to settle for. Anyways, Emily in this film had some of the funniest lines, I thought she was a truly compelling character, and I thought she brought a lot to the table, although when I say that, consider how she’s a main character in this movie.

As much as this is ultimately Kumail Nanjiani’s movie, he’s one of the people that came up with an idea for it as a whole, I gotta say that in terms of aspects I thought were compelling throughout the movie, Holly Hunter is probably at the top of my list. Casting, GREAT JOB! I have no idea how much this character relates to the actual story, but nevertheless, seeing Holly Hunter as Beth at several points of the runtime just made me want to see more of her. If this were a film released during the fall, Hunter would have a higher chance of being up for an Oscar in my book.

Also, let’s not forget, Ray Romano. As mentioned, this guy hasn’t really done much of anything worth mentioning, and by that, I mean anything relatively acceptable, since “Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs” back in 2009. He was on Parenthood, which I heard was good, although it’s not aimed at my demographic and I never watched it. I saw him as a guest on an episode of “Kevin Can Wait,” but I completely forgot about it because the show was barely watchable. I can officially say, Ray’s back! I thought he aced his role, I was able to buy into his character, and he played a really good older dad character.

The chemistry shown between Kumail and Emily throughout this movie was believable, and if it wasn’t believable I probably would have taken major points off of this movie’s score, because this is based on true events involving the film’s main character, who is being played by the same person who experienced said events, not to mention that guy wrote and produced the movie with someone else who’s crucial to the film itself. I can’t exactly tell you I’m a guru who oversees every single detail of every person’s life and confirm that what is being shown on screen is entirely true, because I don’t know everything. There’s a good chance that someone could be reading this right now and I don’t know who it is. Granted since WordPress allows you to view what country a reader is from, or the name of the source they found this post, or perhaps a search term somebody used, I might get to know something about a certain reader, but not every detail is revealed. All I can say is, this movie set a very believable mood throughout. Some of the dialogue almost crossed the border to cheesy but it doesn’t go overboard with it and who knows, maybe those cheesy words were spoken.

As far as other complaints in this movie go, I do have a couple. First off, let’s talk about the editing. Overall this movie is well crafted and doesn’t have many flaws when it comes to editing. Although just because it doesn’t have many flaws, doesn’t mean it can’t have a few. There’s one scene in this movie which we see Kumail on a cell phone, it just cuts randomly a couple times, and yet we’re still looking at the same subject, the subject being Kumail in the same situation. It almost reminded me of “You Can’t Have It,” a movie that only 23 users on IMDb gave a verdict to, including me, only that movie had a s*itton more jumpcuts than this movie did, by the way don’t watch “You Can’t Have It.” That’s just a minor problem I have and on the subject of minor problems, is the product placement. I get it, films need product placement sometimes. But I remember seeing numerous scenes with a laptop in it, and just about every time, there was a MacBook. Oh yeah, the same goes with an IPhone. I remember seeing an IPhone in a lot of this movie’s scenes as well. Granted I recall seeing a Dell laptop too, but I think that was only one time. I might be somewhat OK with this if every single product shown here is true to the story, although it might remain as an issue. Although I don’t think something like this would be true because I’m looking at the technology and from my memory, the technology probably looked a little too futuristic. There’s a black IPhone in the movie and I believe it’s a newer model because I RECALL seeing the home button not having a square on it, which is a flaw for this movie because in real life, this movie takes place in the 2000s based on research, and the first IPhone with a home button to not have a square on it was the IPhone 5S which was released to the public in 2013. MAYBE I’M WRONG, MAYBE I’M IMAGINING THINGS, BUT THIS COMPLAINT STANDS *FOR NOW.* However, this movie is from Amazon Studios and when it releases on home video, it’s very likely that this movie won’t take a long time to become free on Amazon so I could probably watch it again and see if I was imagining things or not.

In the end, “The Big Sick” is worth seeing. I thought the performances all around were excellent, I thought this movie was well written, and there were little to no issues overall when it comes to this movie. Admittedly, it starts off rather slow, but it didn’t take much longer until my eyes were glued to the screen. I’m gonna give “The Big Sick” an 8/10. Thanks for reading this review. This Tuesday, I’m going to see the movie, “Dunkirk” in IMAX 70mm, words can’t describe my excitement! Also, I just want everyone to know, in case it actually interests you, “The Emoji Movie” comes out this upcoming Friday, July 28th. I have no intentions to see it, but, I would imagine a lot of you would want me to see it because of how atrocious this movie looks, so I DON’T KNOW if I’ll deliver on this, we’ll see what happens. But, if you want me to see “The Emoji Movie,” and I’m also not saying I’ll do this opening weekend if this manages to be a common request, leave a comment to this post with the following hashtag, you can include it by itself or in a comment with other words in it: #GOSCREWYOURSELFEMOJIMOVIE. I’m not saying it has to be all capital letters, but you get my point. I interacted with some people in my school, and they want me to see this movie. I’m wondering if I’ll even do that, but I might do this movie review for you if I get enough requests. And besides, “Atomic Blonde” is coming out the same weekend and I kinda wanna see that, not to mention “Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets” is out now too. Anyway, stay tuned for more reviews, and if you want to increase the chances of a review for “The Emoji Movie,” get cracking in the comments section. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!